All required texts will be available on Canvas, provided by the instructor.

1. Gaining an understanding and appreciation for the breadth and depth of psychological research over the past 160 years through an examination of primary source literature that composes the history of psychology.
2. Becoming familiar with the issues of historiography so that you can use that knowledge when evaluating historical research. Exposing you to the extant scholarship in the history of psychology, that is, the work being done by contemporary historians of psychology.
3. Developing an understanding of the continuity of ideas in the history of psychology from the past to the present day.
4. Become aware of the role of Zeitgeist in history through an examination of the social and cultural contexts in the generation of psychological systems.
5. Execute meaningful and significant research and writing experiences.

This course is worth 100 points total.

Assignment Descriptions

Weekly Reading Notes and Discussion | 28 points | 7 sessions × 4 points each | Completion and engagement-based

Each week you will post reading notes on each assigned text and respond to your peers' notes. This is not a traditional discussion post; these are real-time reading reactions written while you read or immediately after. For each assigned reading, post a separate set of notes containing a minimum of 3–5 genuine intellectual reactions to that specific text: questions you cannot answer, confusions about what the author means or assumes, connections to your clinical training or other readings, moments of disagreement or surprise, observations about what the text takes for granted. These notes do not need to be polished. They should not read like a paper or a formal response. They should read like the notes of someone actively thinking. That said, they must be readable and relatively grammatical. Notes are grounded in specific arguments, passages, or claims, not general reflections on the week's topic. Notes (aka the Discussion Post) are due Thursdays by 11:59 PM MST. By Sunday at 11:59 PM MST, respond substantively to at least one peer's notes, engaging with at least two different readings. A good peer response picks up a specific observation or question and does something with it; pushes back, extends the idea, shares a different reading of the same passage, or takes a genuine stab at answering a question your peer couldn't resolve. Each session is worth 4 points: 3 points for notes, 1 point for peer responses.

Supports LOs 1, 2, 3, and 4. Contributes to DSK: History and Systems of Psychology and PWC v (Communication and Interpersonal Skills).

Philosophical-Historical Genealogy Project

You are training to be a clinical psychologist. You are learning to work within a theoretical orientation. But where did that orientation come from? What philosophical assumptions does it carry? Who built it, and in what historical moment, and for whom? This project asks you to find out.

By the end of Week 7 you will submit a 10-page paper tracing the philosophical and historical roots of your primary theoretical orientation. That paper will argue something specific: here is where this framework came from, here is what it inherited, here is what it takes for granted, and here is what knowing all of that means for me as a clinician in training. It is not a report. It is a reasoned argument about the intellectual genealogy of a framework you are being trained to use on real people.

You will build toward it in four stages across the semester. Milestone 1 asks where you think you stand before we begin. Milestones 2 and 3 build the philosophical and historical sections you will revise and synthesize into the final paper. Each stage is graded on its own terms, but each one feeds the next. This should be approached with genuine curiosity about your own orientation rather than a conclusion to defend.

Milestone 1: Theoretical Orientation Memo | 10 points | 1-2 pages, double-spaced

Before we trace where psychology came from, be explicit about where you stand. Identify the theoretical orientation you currently hold or are most drawn to in your clinical training. Explain briefly why this orientation resonates with you. Then write 2–3 genuine questions about where it came from; not questions you could easily look up, but questions you are honestly uncertain about. Finally, offer a tentative hypothesis: what philosophical tradition or historical moment do you suspect your orientation is most indebted to, and why? There are no wrong answers, as this is an exploration. The goal is to make your starting assumptions visible so we can examine them as the course progresses. Due end of Week 1.

Supports LOs 3 and 5. Contributes to DSK: History and Systems of Psychology and PWC iv (Professional Values and Attitudes).

Milestone 2: Philosophical Roots Section | 12 points | 2-3 pages, double-spaced

Identify 2-3 specific philosophical ideas that your orientation depends on, often without acknowledging it. These might be ideas about how the mind works, how knowledge is acquired, what causes human behavior, or what it means to be a person. For each idea, do three things: name it and explain it in your own words, trace it to a specific philosopher and text (drawing on at least two primary sources from the course), and explain specifically how it shows up in your orientation's assumptions or clinical practices. The goal is not to list influences but to make an argument: this orientation inherited these specific ideas, and here is the evidence. Go back at least to the 17th or 18th century, and ideally to ancient philosophy where relevant; you will address more modern development in your next paper. Due end of Week 3. Graded on philosophical rigor (6 pts), historical accuracy (4 pts), scholarly craft (2 pts).

Supports LOs 1, 3, and 5. Contributes to DSK: History and Systems of Psychology.

Milestone 3: Historical Development Section | 12 points | 3-4 pages, double-spaced

This section has two parts that must work together. The first part traces the formal development of your orientation in the 20th century: who founded or formalized it, what problem they were trying to solve, what the social and cultural moment made their solution feel necessary or compelling, and what the major internal debates were as the orientation developed. The second part engages seriously with one critique from a feminist, multicultural, or critical theory perspective. Engaging seriously means more than acknowledging the critique exists. It means explaining what the critic actually argues, what evidence they offer, and what that critique reveals about who the orientation was built for and who it may not serve well. Minimum 3 primary sources; minimum 1 critical source. Due end of Week 5. Graded on historical rigor (4 pts), critical analysis (4 pts), philosophical consistency with Milestone 2 (2 pts), scholarly craft (2 pts).

Supports LOs 1, 3, 4, and 5. Contributes to DSK: History and Systems of Psychology and PWC iii (Individual and Cultural Diversity).

Final Paper: Philosophical-Historical Genealogy | 38 points | Maximum 10 pages, double-spaced | APA required

Your genealogy is not the sum of your milestone sections. It is a synthesis, and synthesis means making a new argument that could not have been made from either section alone.

The paper must include five sections:

1. Revised philosophical roots section (developed from Milestone 2). This is not simply a polished version of what you submitted before. Revision means reconsidering it in light of everything you have read and thought across the full course, as needed.
2. Revised historical development section (developed from Milestone 3). Same as above.
3. A synthesis section. This is the intellectual core of the paper. Show how the specific philosophical ideas you identified in Milestone 2 traveled forward into the clinical practices you described in Milestone 3. Do not assert the connection; trace it. How did a philosophical claim about the nature of mind become a theory of psychopathology, and then a clinical technique? Where in the history of your orientation are the original philosophical assumptions most visibly at work?
4. A critical analysis. What does your orientation treat as obvious that is actually contestable? What kinds of clients, presenting problems, or cultural contexts does it handle poorly or not at all, and why? What would it have to change about its own assumptions to address those gaps?
5. A personal reflection. This is where first person is not just allowed but expected. What does knowing this history actually change for you? Not what you learned in the abstract, but what it means for you specifically as a clinician in training. If nothing changed or got more complicated, that is worth examining too. A reflection that could have been written by any student in the cohort has not done its job.

First person is welcome throughout the paper, not just in the reflection. Writing from your own perspective does not exempt you from making claims and supporting them. "I argue that..." requires the same rigor as any scholarly assertion.

The 10-page maximum is a feature, not a limitation. Minimum 7 sources, majority primary. Due end of Week 7.

Supports all five Learning Outcomes. Contributes to DSK: History and Systems of Psychology, PWC iii (Individual and Cultural Diversity), and PWC iv (Professional Values and Attitudes).

For most assignments on Canvas, I will allow late submissions with an automatic 10% deduction per each day it is late. Once an assignment reaches zero points due to late penalties (after 10 days), I will no longer accept it.

This class is fully asynchronous; below is the general attendance policy for the PsyD program.

Attendance and participation in all class activities is required and helps solidify students' identities as an entry level professional psychologist. Documented medical emergencies, illnesses, and other unavoidable circumstances that may require absence will be taken under consideration in students' annual evaluations. Other situations (e.g., work conflicts, family vacations, or other matters of personal business) are not considered to be excused absences and may result in informal or formal review proceedings. Students should consult the academic course calendar, course syllabi, and clinical placement site schedules before planning activities.

If a student misses more than 20% of an academic course (excused or unexcused), they cannot be considered to have gained the necessary competencies and knowledge needed to fulfill that area of their training. They will receive a failing or incomplete grade (at the faculty's discretion), receive a Remediation Plan or be put on Formal Probation, and need to work with the faculty member and Psy.D. Executive Team to establish next steps.

With respect to practicum courses and placements, there is less flexibility on absences in order to protect clients from harm as well as ensure students have adequate opportunity to achieve fundamental competencies. The extent of allowed absences depends on requirements for individual practicum placements. Repeated absences (excused or unexcused) are grounds for Improvement or Remediation Plan with the student, supervisor, and Psy.D. Executive Team included; failure to remediate identified competencies and improve attendance will result in Formal Probation and review for dismissal from the Program.

Due to the nature of seminar graduate training and consistent with APA and other graduate programs, attendance in-person is expected. Limited accommodations can be made for acute concerns, but extended participation via Zoom is considered a fundamental alteration to the program. When a faculty does accommodate Zoom participation in limited circumstances, the faculty determines whether it counts towards the required 80% minimum attendance based on whether the student can reasonably meet the required activities in the class during that time period via zoom (for example, Zoom attendance is almost always a fundamental alteration to the core activities in practicum and applied classes, but based on semester timing it may count as regular attendance in a course that had a faculty lecture that day). In cases where interference with attendance will be unavoidable, students may petition a full or partial Leave of Absence.

None.

Per SUU Policy 6.27, one credit hour requires a minimum of 45 hours of student work per unit of credit. This 3-credit-hour course requires a minimum of 135 hours of student work across the 7-week term, approximately 19 hours per week. This time is distributed approximately as follows:

• Required reading of primary sources and peer-reviewed articles, including note-taking: 10-12 hours per week
• Posting reading notes and responding to peers: 2-3 hours per week
• Genealogy project research and writing, averaged across the term: 5-6 hours per week

Important: This class uses POINTS, not percentages.

Canvas will automatically show you a percentage, but that percentage is NOT your actual grade because it calculates based on assignments graded so far, not the total possible points in the class (100 points).

To see your grade:

1. Go to your Grades page in Canvas
2. Look at the top right where it shows your total points
3. Uncheck the box that says "Calculate based only on graded assignments"
4. Now you'll see your actual points out of 100

Example: If you see "45.00 / 100.00," you have 45 points so far toward your final grade.

Why points instead of percentages? I specifically structure this as a 100-point class so you never have to do math to figure out what your grade is. If you have 90 points out of 100 total class points, that's an 90%, which is an A- per the scale below.

Here's how your points convert to letter grades:

AI tools are permitted in this course in limited circumstances and must always be cited if used.

Acceptable uses include using AI to clarify an unfamiliar concept from the readings, check grammar or sentence-level clarity in a draft you have already written, or assist with translation. These uses are acceptable with a brief disclosure note in your submission.

The following uses are not acceptable and constitute academic dishonesty: using AI to draft or generate any portion of a reading note, peer response, milestone section, or final paper; using AI to summarize readings in place of reading them yourself; and using AI to generate or check citations.

AI tools routinely produce citations with fabricated journal volumes, incorrect page numbers, missing authors, and non-existent DOIs. These errors are recognizable. Any citation in your submitted work should be one you have verified against the actual source.

A note specific to this course: the genealogy project is built around your developing clinical identity, your genuine uncertainty, and your personal intellectual history across the semester. AI cannot do that work for you, and work that reads like it was generated rather than thought will be obvious in a cohort this small. The milestone structure exists in part because a paper trail of developing thought is very difficult to fake.

If you are unsure whether a particular use of AI is acceptable, ask before submitting. Use of generative AI without permission or citation is academic dishonesty.