Psychology departments are responding to the growing calls for curriculum decolonisation. Despite numerous initiatives, there remains limited dialogue and sharing of best practices among them. This co-production study aimed to catalyse discussion among key people involved in curriculum decolonisation, learn from their experiences of undertaking decolonisation work, and collaboratively develop some recommendations for decolonising the psychology curriculum. Eleven contributors (including one Head of department and ten decolonisation leads from UK universities) shared their insights and experiences regarding their departments' decolonisation efforts and how they navigated various challenges. Reflexive thematic analysis was employed to generate five themes. Motivation to Decolonise the Curriculum highlighted the student-centric, institutional, and ethical reasons driving curriculum decolonisation within psychology departments. Approaches to Curriculum Decolonisation described the varied ways in which curriculum decolonisation is being envisioned among departments. Efforts towards Decolonising the Curriculum included two sub-themes: Review, Revise, and Reform which discussed the initiatives for decolonising the content-related aspects of the curriculum (such as reading lists and lectures), and Train, Collaborate, and Empower which highlighted other efforts (e.g., anti-racism training) that complemented these initiatives. Supporting Curriculum Decolonisation explained how decolonisation work could be sustained, and Creating a Conducive Ecosystem discussed the need to foster a supportive environment for effective curriculum decolonisation. Our findings led to the development of some recommendations that can help initiate or advance curriculum decolonisation in psychology. These recommendations include the potential of collaborative efforts, institutional support, critical reflection, and inclusive dialogue to reimagine, restructure, and decolonise curricula.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Saxena et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: