Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 7 (2014), 15–84.Copyright © 2014 Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology. 1754-9426/14

COMMENTARIES

A Good GraduateIndustrial–Organizational EducationBegins in Undergraduate Classrooms

NICHOLAS P. SALTERRamapo College of New Jersey

ALISON L. O’MALLEYButler University

Due to current market trends and theincreasing competitiveness of the job mar-ket, the focal authors suggested we mustproactively address how we educate gradu-ate students in our field (Byrne et al., 2014).One way to ensure that our graduatesare as prepared as possible is to focus ondeveloping skills as well as their knowledgebase. Requiring students (either graduateor undergraduate) to memorize facts is notsufficient to ensure a quality education andto guarantee they are competitive in thejob market. Employers want to hire peoplewho possess more than knowledge; theywant people who are knowledgeable andhave a wide array of skills from whichthey can draw on the job. Although thesestatements may strike readers as patentlyobvious, this dual focus on knowledge andskills is often at odds with how we teach,particularly at the undergraduate level. Inour response, we focus on how instructorscan build pathways for success beginningin undergraduate industrial–organizational(I–O) courses. We contend that I–Oeducators should provide some skill-basedtraining at the undergraduate level that canthen be built upon at the graduate levelin order to develop satisfied, effective I–Oprofessionals.

Correspondence concerning this article should beaddressed to Nicholas P. Salter.E-mail: nsalter@ramapo.edu

Address: Social Sciences and Human Services,Ramapo College of New Jersey, Mahwah, NJ 07430

We are not alone in calling for adual focus on knowledge and skills. TheSIOP Guidelines for Education and Training(SIOP, 1999), the focal authors (Byrne et al.,2014), and Campion et al. (2011) all arguefor knowledge and skill-based education.However, their explicit focus is at the grad-uate level; we want to extend this discussionto undergraduate classrooms. Undergradu-ate students may at times see their educationas requiring no more than memorizing facts,but this mindset will not prepare them prop-erly for graduate training in I–O psychol-ogy. These students need to understand thata graduate education in I–O will requirethem to be skilled at what they do; we doa disservice to our undergraduate studentsif we do not give them a ‘‘realistic job pre-view’’ of what they should expect once theyenter an I–O graduate program. Changinghow we teach undergraduate students willprovide them with a better education anda better foundation from which to view thefield of I–O and begin a graduate education.

Competencies to Target inUndergraduate I–O Courses

The focal authors discuss a number ofcompetencies and skills1 that we argue canalso be taught in undergraduate classes.

1. Consistent with Byrne et al., we use both ‘‘compe-tency’’ and ‘‘skills’’ language, and recognize thatcompetencies consist of bundles of related KSAOs.

15

16 N.P. Salter and A.L. O’Malley

Some skills mentioned by Byrne et al. arealready taught at the undergraduate level;generally, it depends on the individualinstitution and/or instructor. We do notargue that these skills can be taught at thesame level of depth and sophistication thatthey can be covered at the graduate level.However, we do suggest that they can betaught at a foundational level that can bebuilt upon in graduate school.

One competency discussed by the SIOPGuidelines (1999) that could be incor-porated into undergraduate education isconsulting and business skills. At the grad-uate level, Tett, Walser, Brown, Simonet,and Tonidandel (2013) found this to beunderrepresented in classes, but this is animportant competency for I–O profession-als to master. I–O psychology overlaps withthe field of business, but our students arenot often trained in the language of thecorporate world as business graduate stu-dents typically are. Therefore, learning tostrategically communicate in both oral andwritten forums is beneficial to I–O psychol-ogists. Although at the graduate level thisis highly technical (e.g., how to commu-nicate statistical information to managers),undergraduate students can hone their basiccommunication skills, which can then bedeveloped into I–O-specific communica-tion skills later in graduate school. Similarly,consulting and business skills entails projectmanagement. Although graduate level I–Ostudents will be involved with large-scale,long-term projects, undergraduate studentscan learn basic project management skills tobetter prepare them for advanced learningas graduate students.

In addition to communication andproject management, the focal authorsrecommended adding interpersonal skillsto the list of consulting and business skills.As applied psychologists, I–O professionalsmust be able to work with people fromother fields. For instance, academics mayneed to work with government agenciesto secure grants, and practitioners mayneed to work with managers to explainthe importance of a new training program.Knowing the theories and concepts is not

enough if one cannot work with othersto use this knowledge. Undergraduatestudents often interact with others incocurricular activities and general socialexchanges. However, these interactionsdo not necessarily ensure the studentsare good at interacting with others; all itensures is that students have experienceat it. In addition, these interactions donot ensure that students are skilled atinteracting with others in a professionalcontext. The norms and expectations of theworkplace are different than those of a partyor student organization, and undergraduatestudents may not intuitively understand thedifference. Therefore, an explicit focus onteaching interpersonal skills in undergradu-ate classes rather than assuming they learnthese skills elsewhere can be beneficial.

The focal authors also recommendedadding avoiding counterproductivebehaviors to the list of important I–O com-petencies. Though this may seem intuitive,it is more complicated than simply saying,‘‘don’t do bad things.’’ For instance, theycite examples of counterproductive studentbehaviors such as plagiarism and postinginappropriate context to Facebook—all ofwhich apply to both graduate and under-graduate students. Two of the referencesthey cite explicitly discuss counterpro-ductive behaviors among undergraduatestudents (i.e., Park, 2003; Peluchette &Karl, 2009). Instead of waiting to begin thisdiscussion in graduate school when manystudents may have already engaged incounterproductive behaviors, it would behelpful for future I–O psychologists (andprofessionals in general) to encounter thistraining in the course of their undergraduateeducation.

Incorporating Skills IntoUndergraduate I–O Education

To begin developing these competenciesamong undergraduate students, we suggestexplicitly making undergraduate I–Oclasses knowledge and skill based. Often-times, assessment in undergraduate classesis composed primarily of multiple-choice

I–O education commentary 17

tests. Though these can be useful inassessing if the students posses the requisiteknowledge, they cannot easily measure ifstudents have learned skills from the class,and they certainly are not representativeof what students will encounter in I–Ograduate training. Therefore, undergraduateI–O classes should also incorporate groupprojects, presentations, and papers intothe course requirements and have oppor-tunities for students to receive peer andinstructor feedback on their performancein relevant skill domains. These types ofassignments will require students to learnhow to communicate, manage large-scaleprojects, and work with others in additionto building their knowledge base. Thougha concurrent focus on knowledge and skillsdevelopment would be valuable acrossthe curriculum, particular emphasis shouldbe placed on these competencies in I–Oundergraduate classes because that is whatthe field requires at both a graduate andpostgraduate level.

Emphasizing knowledge and skill devel-opment may require a fundamental shift inhow undergraduate classes are taught formany instructors. Rather than a traditionallecture-and-multiple-choice-exam struc-ture, this requires more innovative teachingand authentic assessment techniques(Mueller, 2008). In general, skills are moredifficult to teach and assess than knowledge,but there are many resources available toI–O instructors (e.g., Fink, 2003; Suskie,2009). This emphasis may also require ashift in how the students view the class;learning skills is more challenging thanlearning knowledge, and students may balkat this requirement (i.e., ‘‘none of my otherteachers make me do this—why are you?’’).Explaining the rationale for and value ofa knowledge-and-skills-based class couldhelp alleviate students’ displeasure anddiscomfort.

The call for a dual knowledge-and-skills-based education is not unique to I–Opsychology; others in the broader field ofpsychology and beyond have addressedthis need (e.g., Bensley, Crowe, Bernhardt,Buckner, & Allman, 2010; Luttrell, Bufkin,

Eastman, & Miller, 2010; Schonrock-Adema, Van der Molen, & van der Zee,2009). For instance, the Lumina Founda-tion’s Degree Qualifications Profile (LuminaFoundation, 2011) seeks to clarify and stan-dardize the meaning of a college degree byproposing sets of competencies for studentlearning. The DQP, currently in beta testingat over 200 universities, reinforces the fun-damental notion that foundational skills andbroad, integrative knowledge are critical forstudent success. The Association of Amer-ican Colleges and Universities (AAC&U,2002) also created a list of ‘‘EssentialLearning Outcomes’’ for undergraduateeducation that includes both knowledgeand skills. Thus, infusing skill develop-ment into undergraduate I–O courseworkcoincides with a shift in higher educationpractices.

Infusing skills into undergraduate I–Oclasses also benefits career advising andcounseling. As stated, we do not bestprepare our undergraduate students forgraduate education in the field if weimplicitly lead them to believe that successlies in memorizing facts. As early as theirfirst semester in graduate school, they willbe required to work with others and writepapers specific to I–O—both of whichrequire skills as well as knowledge. Thistransition may be challenging if studentsare not adequately prepared. Beginningto develop these skills in undergraduateclasses will help students understand whatthey will encounter when they attendgraduate school in I–O psychology aswell as determine if I–O is a good fit forthem. Instructors can also identify studentswho may be particularly strong in or areparticularly motivated to master these skillsand counsel them toward a career in I–O.

Conclusion

As Byrne et al. assert, I–O psychologistsneed both knowledge and skills to be effec-tive. Knowledge that cannot be translatedinto action is of little utility. However, I–Opsychologists in training need not wait untilgraduate school to begin developing their

18 F.D. Golom and D.A. Noumair

skills; the foundation for strong skills can beestablished in undergraduate classrooms.Traditionally, we have done well at teach-ing knowledge to our undergraduate andgraduate students. Reframing undergradu-ate I–O courses to also include a skills com-ponent will acquaint students with key I–Ocompetencies, ultimately enabling under-graduate students to more clearly envisiona career as an I–O professional. Those stu-dents who decide to pursue graduate train-ing will then be better poised to develop intocapable I–O professionals of the future.

ReferencesAssociation of American Colleges and Universities

(2002). Greater expectations: A new vision forlearning as a nation goes to college. Washington,DC: Author.

Bensley, D. A., Crowe, D. S., Bernhardt, P., Buckner,C., & Allman, A. L. (2010). Teaching and assessingcritical thinking skills for argument analysis inpsychology. Teaching of Psychology, 37, 91–96.

Byrne, Z. S., Hayes, T. L., McPhail, S. M., Hakel,M. D., Cortina, J. M., & McHenry, J. J. (2014).Educating industrial–organizational psychologistsfor science and practice: Where do we go fromhere? Industrial and Organizational Psychology:Perspectives on Science and Practice, 7(1), 2–14.

Campion, M. A., Fink, A. A., Ruggeberg, B. J., Carr,L., Phillips, G. M., & Odman, R. B. (2011). Doing

competencies well: Best practices in competencymodeling. Personnel Psychology, 64, 225–262.

Fink, L. D. (2003). Creating significant learningexperiences: An integrated approach to designingcollege courses. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Lumina Foundation. (2011). The degree qualificationsprofile. Indianapolis, IN: Author.

Luttrell, V. R., Bufkin, J. L., Eastman, V. J., & Miller,R. (2010). Teaching scientific writing: Measuringstudent learning in an intensive APA skills course.Teaching of Psychology, 37, 193–195.

Mueller, J. (2008). Assessing critical skills. Columbus,OH: Linworth.

Park, C. (2003). In other (people’s) words: Plagiarismby university students—Literature and lessons.Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 28,471–488.

Peluchette, J., & Karl, K. (2009). Examining students’intended image on Facebook: ‘‘What were theythinking?!’’ Journal of Education for Business, 85,30–37.

Schonrock-Adema, J., Van der Molen, H. T., &van der Zee, K. I. (2009). Effectiveness of aself-instruction program for microcounseling skillstraining. Teaching of Psychology, 36, 246–252.

Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology.(1999). Guidelines for education and trainingat the doctoral level in industrial-organizationalpsychology. Bowling Green, OH: Author.

Suskie, L. (2009). Assessing student learning: Acommon sense guide. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Tett, R. P., Walser, B., Brown, C., Simonet, D. V., &Tonidandel, S. (2013). The 2011 SIOP graduateprogram benchmarking survey part 3: Curriculumand competencies. The Industrial OrganizationalPsychologist, 50(4), 69–89.