65° - 01.11.1969, Side 23

The Psychology Gap in Our Schools
Interview with
JONAS PALSSON
In view of the fact that you have been writing
so many articles lately urging increased and
better organized counseling in the Icelandic
schools, we feel that our English-speaking readers
would also like to know something about the
present situation and your attitude toward it.
Would you say that there is a psychology gap in
our schools?
To say that there is a psychology gap in our
schools may actually be rather misleading, but
when the relationship is seen between the schools,
their teachers, the educational authorities at the
ministerial and communal level and throughout
the public and back again to the schools, it is
obvious that the acceptance of psychology both
as a professional field and as an educational sub-
ject is quite limited. A change in this regard will
finally depend on the acceptance of psychology
on all levels and in all divisions of society.
In looking back on our recent history, we can
see that it was not until 1930—40 that psycho-
logists began to teach at the Teachers Training
College. Before then, the stress was understanda-
bly on theory or history of education and on in-
structional methods rather than on psychology
itself. Our University was founded in 1911, and
according to Scandinavian precedent has always
offered an introductory course in philosophy or,
depending on the instructor, in general psycho-
logy. This course is compulsory for all students
studying for degrees. In 1957 a chair in Educa-
tion was set up at the University. Its holder is a
Jonas Palsson received his M.A. ord. from
Edinburgh University in 1952, studied and work-
ed at the psychological center in Oslo in 1961,
then took an M.A. in psychology from Columbia
University. From 1956—60 he was guidance
counselor in the Kopavogur schools and since
then has been head of the school psychological
services in Reykjavik.
psychologist. The courses are especially for those
students planning to become teachers in secondary
schools. For the last twenty years or so, I believe,
there has been some basic instruction in some of
the vocational schools, but to my knowledge there
has been no teaching of psychology on the gym-
nasium level.
This limited teaching of psychology has, in my
opinion, had little effect on the school system,
teaching methods or general work of the schools.
It might even be said that the influence of educa-
tional psychology on the schools was relatively
greater before 1945. Considering the isolation of
Iceland, the fact that educational psychology
occupied the place it did showed quite a pro-
gressive outlook. But compared to the widespread
interest that developed in other lands, after the
second world war we began to fall behind.
In the postwar boom in Iceland, all the em-
phasis and interest were on material things, mak-
ing money and making buildings. Perhaps it is tru
that a people turn more to education during hard
times than during good times; certainly we were
eager for knowledge during our long history of
hardship. Even if our learning was of limited
scope, it was an important factor in keeping the
nation culturally if not literally alive. In the easier
years after 1945, everything was being built,
seemingly, except the institutions of education.
The Teachers Training College Was erected in
1908, a remarkable achievement for the times,
began to be rebuilt in 1958 and is still Waiting
completion. I think it fair to say that there was
a very limited interest in the improvement of
teachers’ education and consequently no stress on
the psychology of education, which is, after all,
the main function of teachers’ education along
with practice-teaching.
What is the public reaction to psychology?
Icelanders, like most people of the western
world, have always been a little afraid of psycho-
logy. There are those, perhaps not a large group,
65 DEGREES
21