Dear John Cromby,
Thank you for your reply.  I think it is only when the objections to  
the role of the BPS are stated clearly that it is possible to think  
about how it might be preferred and why it is as it is.

The professions and indeed everyone else are influenced by government  
policies.  As I read it, the BPS  fought very hard precisely NOT to  
come under the umbrella of the HPC, and it seems to me unfortunate  
that it failed.   And it does require now sideways approaches, and I  
wish I could remember the relevant military term for this.

As to the emphasis on the individual in teaching psychology itself,  
this is also a reflection of general historical trends and is  
something to be worked upon steadily.   It seems to me very marked in  
education generally, for instance in a negative way, that is to say  
not using techniques which would encourage the individual who is  
lagging to be engaged more fully.

I am very interested in the way assumptions of shared knowledge which  
does not have to be specified,  seems to emerge in discussions on the  
list.   I certainly did not say that the BPS might not have a dark  
side, and I am surprised that you suggest that I did.  I think you  
have read that into my query.   I am interested in getting people to  
stop generalising and be specific.   What you write about as  
negatives may well be common knowledge,  but it may NOT  be common  
knowledge.  For instance, it is likely to be academic staff primarily  
who are aware of a policy of bias towards the individual in teaching  
psychology, and exclusion of some other topics and I was not aware  
that this was an issue - other than that one of the correspondents  
mentioned to me privately that there had been a problem with a course  
in community psychology.

The issue of the charitable status of the BPS is difficult, and I  
think I have raised it myself in an earlier post, in that so-called  
political activities are prescribed - what is "political".?

However, as I am wont to do, I will point out to you that there has  
also been a problem in the field of community psychology also,  and  
not only in the BPS, about individualism, since it is only now that a  
collective has been under discussion.   I would also like to state  
for the record that when I took my undergraduate degree in  
psychology, I also took subsidiaries in sociology and anthropology,  
so I am not an apologist for the BPS, and I am not trying to needle  
people, but get down to brass tacks, so that the situation may be  
improved.

Thank you for your helpful reply.
Erica

___________________________________
The Community Psychology List has a new website/blog at:
http://www.communitypsychology.co.uk/
There is a threaded discussion forum:
http://www.communitypsychology.co.uk/cgi-bin/discus/discus.cgi
There is a twitter feed:
http://twitter.com/CommPsychUK
To post on the website blog, forum or twitter feed, contact Grant or David at the email addresses below.
David Fryer ([log in to unmask]) or Grant Jeffrey ([log in to unmask])
To unsubscribe or to change your details on this COMMUNITYPSYCHUK list, visit the website:
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=COMMUNITYPSYCHUK