Depending on your frame of reference, it has been a seismic shift that has turned communication, socialization, and family life upside down. Or it has been progress at its best, the least to be expected from a new millennium.

Technology. It has redefined the way we learn, the way we think, and the way we live. And it has changed us—for the worse or for the better. Or both.

Dr. Larry Rosen, a psychologist at California State University- Dominguez Hills, sees both sides of the coin. He will play devil’s advocate when others claim that a generation immersed in an unceasing barrage of text messages, Facebook status updates, and tweets have become antisocial beings with serious interpersonal deficits. But he also points to research that links media consumption to physical and psychological health problems.

“We know that this generation sleeps less than any generation before, and we also know that media use leads to unhealthy eating, which leads to all forms of ill-being—including psychological problems, behavioral problems, attention difficulties, and physical symptomology,” Dr. Rosen says. Citing his own research studies, he specifically addresses the issue of multi-tasking—using or viewing several media simultaneously—and its impact on the Millennial Generation, or “the Net Generation,” as he calls it.

“It’s an issue that transcends junk food and lack of sleep,” he says. “In the simplest terms, we could say that when multi-tasking is taking place, more neurons are firing, taking oxygen away from the brain, which results in a negative impact on health in general.”

Digital multitasking has been widely associated with today’s youth and college students, and has produced a deluge of research on the implications and consequences. A 2006 study by the Kaiser Family Foundation showed that the average 8-to-18-year-old spends more than eight hours a day using digital media. Dr. Rosen found that when multitasking is taken into consideration and time spent using each distinct medium is collectively tallied—even though many took place concurrently—Millennials log more than 20 digital hours a day, almost triple the time spent by Baby Boomers. True, that may include passive activities such as listening to music and watching television, but it also represents hefty doses of interactive communication— texting, IM chatting, emailing, and social networking. Add to that the occasional (or not so occasional) video game or charting a virtual path through the glut of information available on the Internet. Dr. Rosen found that Baby Boomers, by contrast, put in only seven collective digital hours a day, with television and music accounting for half of that.

One concern that has surfaced is the effect that heavy technology use has on the still-developing brain. In his book, iBrain: Surviving the Technological Alteration of the Modern Mind, Dr. Gary Small, a University of California-Los Angeles neuroscientist claims that the neurological pathways used in face-to-face communication are not developing in today’s young people the way they developed in previous generations.

Without eye contact, you can miss so many of the subtleties that are a part of interpersonal communication.

“The empathic skills that come from receiving an affirmative nod or an encouraging smile are just not being formed,” he says. “Without eye contact, you can miss so many of the subtleties that are part of interpersonal communication. We can only speculate what this might mean 10 and 20 years down the road. Will digital natives— young people who only know Facebook-to-Facebook communication rather than face-to-face communication—lack the social skills they need?”

Dr. Lukasz Konopka, a Chicago School neuropsychologist, agrees that technology overuse is likely to impact brain development.

“People who use technology as a primary source of communication have very different expectations for their social relationships,” he says. “If they don’t learn to read facial cues, that can translate into poor relationships and make it harder to develop dependency and trust. We have yet to discover what the longterm consequences will be.”

The link between the increasing use of online communication and its psychological ramifications has been the subject of exploration for several years now. In a 2005 survey completed by more than 1,000 mental health professionals and reported in the Monitor on Psychology, isolative-avoidant use of the Internet was identified as a diagnosis in 15 percent of youth clients. Psychologists echoed concerns expressed by Dr. Small and Dr. Konopka, citing an inability by Millennials to read body language and facial cues.

Some researchers also attribute a recent rise in diagnoses of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder—a 3 percent annual jump between 1997 and 2006, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)—to increased media exposure by children whose brains are not yet capable of processing a lightening-fast parade of visual images. The experience, they say, may train young brains to become dependent on excessive stimulation, to become bored with the pace of real life, and to rapidly shift from one stimulus to another. This could explain the propensity of Millennials—who often grew up in front of Sesame Street and animated television programming— to multitask. With an explanation about the plasticity of children’s brains, the American Academy of Pediatrics has recommended not exposing babies under 2 to television.

Although Dr. Rosen refers frequently to the “techno-cocoons” that he says shroud heavy media consumers—particularly this generation— he also disputes the ill effects of too much online communication.

“I would argue that this generation is connecting more and not less, although they may be connecting in a way that Baby Boomers like me don’t think is communication,” he says. “They have an incredible opportunity behind the safety of a computer screen, and are able to say things that they are not sure will be accepted.” He adds that technologies such as ichats and cell phone cameras also mitigate the effect of cyber-communication, actually offering users a chance to view others’ reactions.

Dr. Dave Verhaagen, a North Carolina psychologist who wrote Parenting the Millennial Generation, agrees.

“Technology is part of their DNA—they use it to facilitate relationships,” he says. “When you look at the big picture, you see that they’re pretty relationally skilled. We have to get past the speculation that their use of technology is hurtful to their ability to have relationships.”

Technology is part of [Millennials’] DNA—they use it to faciltate relationships. When you look at the big picture, you see that they’re pretty relationally skilled.

At the other end of the digital comfort spectrum is technophobia, most often associated with the older generations—Traditionalists and Baby Boomers. A decade ago, Dr. Rosen wrote TechnoStress, a book that addresses the overwhelmed feeling that users—especially technology newcomers—get when dealing with the digital overload that was nonexistent a few years ago. Many experts call for strategies to bridge the brain gap that emerges between the older and younger generations. Dr. Small provides a technology toolkit that can bring Traditionalists and Boomers up to speed with their children’s generations, and also puts his UCLA students through a series of empathic listening exercises to help them rebuild the face-to-face skills that have fallen between the cracks of their smartphone key boards.

Consequences of excessive media exposure do not appear to be confined to Millennials. The excessive use of video games—frequently fingered as the culprit in diagnoses that range from ADHD to aggressive behavior—affects a broad age span. While under-30s have distinguished themselves as the masters of multitasking, their use of video games can be matched by Generation X. A new study from the CDC has placed the average age of the adult video gamer at 35, higher than previously believed. But the emerging classification of Internet addiction can also be found among Baby Boom shoppers who frequent E-bay and Traditionalists who take their poker games online.

Although not yet recognized as an official diagnosis, this new form of addiction is receiving attention around the world and especially in Asia, where Internet rehabilitation centers have begun to spring up. Here in the United Stated, the first such facility opened in July in Fall City, Wash., and the diagnosis is being considered for inclusion in the 2012 edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, published by the American Psychiatric Association.

“Everything that is human can be acted out using technology,” Dr. Small says. “Whether it’s shopping or gambling or social networking, technology is just another pathway to addiction.”

“The fact is that expectations have outpaced reality,” Dr. Twenge says. “Young people today are expected to achieve the extraordinary but it’s getting harder and harder to do. It takes more than it used to to get into a good college, get a good job, or buy a good house.” All too often, she adds, the result is “crippling anxiety and crushing depression.”

To reach her conclusions, she studied decades of results from university-administered personality inventories, and examined research that traced the rising demand for depression treatment on college campuses and that documented marked increases in panic attacks and suicide ideation among teens and young adults. She acknowledges that the trends have been accompanied by a greater acceptance of mental health issues and a growing receptiveness to treatment, but contends that those factors have not been significant enough to account for the dramatic rise in anxiety and depression in recent and current college students. “

Even when controlled for socially desirable responses, there is more anxiety and depression in this group than there was in earlier birth cohorts,” she says.

The Millennial Generation, which comprises some 78 million Americans born between 1983 and 2000, isn’t the only one with its own sociological persona or unique psychological challenges. Social scientists have portrayed Generation X as skeptical risk-takers, resourceful and independent individualists who have charted their own paths to success and their own rules for getting there. Baby Boomers, on the other hand, are known for the tight grasp they have maintained on the post–World War II idealism that saw them through the civil rights and women’s movements. They have been characterized by optimism and ambition, work has always been central to their lives and, unlike the “Xers” who followed, they have played by the rules rather than creating their own. It is this cohort—the largest ever born in the United States—that is changing the role that mental health plays in the aging process.

“Of all the Americans who have ever lived to 65, two-thirds are alive right now,” says Dr. Donald Schultz, a California psychologist specializing in geriatric issues and an affiliate faculty member in The Chicago School’s Marital and Family Therapy program.

That percentage will continue to grow as Boomers—the first of whom will reach 65 in 2011— continue to age. Eighty million strong, this generation has in recent years commandeered the public spotlight as they march steadily toward retirement, a progression that—because of their sheer numbers—threatens to drain the Medicare and Social Security coffers and dramatically increase the need for medical and psychological health care tailored to the needs of senior citizenry.

That concern—of insufficient resources to see them through their golden years—heads the list of psychological burdens that Boomers carry. Loneliness—the consequence of the divorce upsurge and geographically scattered families—registers as a close second. And not to be overlooked, there is the pressure to resist aging more adamantly than their parents or grandparents.

“They consider themselves the timeless generation, often unwilling to let go of their youth,” says Dr. Daniela Schreier, assistant professor of clinical counseling at The Chicago School. “It’s a lingering characterization of their idealism and may account for trends like Botox and plastic surgery.”

“Sixty is the new 40,” she says.

Dr. Schultz notes that, in many ways, Boomers are better equipped to handle psychological challenges than the generations that came before.

“They have seen a lot in their lives,” he says, ticking off events that range from assassinations and the unrest of the ’60s to the increased threats of terrorism today. “As a result, they have developed better coping styles, they’re less likely to be overwhelmed, and they are the first generation really willing to consider psychotherapy.”

Going a step further, Dr. Schultz suggests a correlation between the lower incidence of depression that Boomers experienced when they were younger and the fact that they continue to be less depressed than either Generation X or the Millennials today.

“The best predictor of a person during the aging years is how they were when they were younger,” he says.

The Latchkey Generation

Sometimes referred to as the Sandwich Generation because of their positioning between two much larger cohorts and the expectation that they eventually will have to care for members of both simultaneously, many in Generation X grew up as “latchkey kids.” Their mothers were the first to return to the workplace in droves, leaving them to develop a sense of independence unmatched by children who came before and after.

Young people today are expected to achieve the extraordinary but it’s getting harder and harder to do. It takes more than it used to to get into a good college, get a good job, or buy a good house.

“We are a generation that has always been in the shadow of the Baby Boom,” says Dr. Schreier, who identifies herself as an Xer. “They saw things that we never saw—things like civil rights demonstrations and campus sitins— and I think we have always felt we had missed out on that.”

But their refusal to live by rules they deem irrelevant and their insistence on a balanced lifestyle—a marked departure from the workaholic mentality of the Boomers—has established this generation as one that charts its own path. Their skepticism of everything from marriage to the rigidity of Corporate America has left an indelible mark on the household and the workplace alike. A relentless determination to do it “their way” has resulted in delaying marriage and children and then, when they decide the time for a family is right, rethinking their professional aspirations—tailoring them to meet their expectations rather than their employers’— so that they can have it all.

Having it all can be stressful, however. The American Psychological Association’s 2008 Stress in America survey found that no group feels as much stress as the Sandwich Generation, typically ages 35–54. The demands of balancing the care of growing children and aging parents while pursuing professional and personal fulfillment often takes its toll on relationships and emotional well-being. Nearly 40 percent of Gen Xers surveyed reported “extreme levels of stress,” compared with 29 percent of Millennials and 25 percent of those older than 55, an age bracket that includes both Boomers and the World War II-era “Traditionals.”

Dr. Schreier contends that the flexibility and adaptability that are hallmarks of her generation also manifest themselves in a tendency to move around—from location to location and from partner to partner.

“It is a generation of nomads,” Dr. Schreier says. “Many never settle down into a job or a relationship. They adapt easily to new situations, but they also feel torn, like they are always floating and wondering ‘where do I belong’?”

Generation Y

But it is the Millennials—aka Generation Y or the Net Generation— who have dominated headlines, blog traffic, and water-cooler conversation since they began coming of age in the last decade. Terms used to define them range from “entitled” and “narcissistic” in Dr. Twenge’s books to “overprotected, overscheduled, and socially conscious” by psychologists such as Dr. Dave Verhaagen, author of Parenting the Millennial Generation.

Parents today feel uncomfortable in their roles as authority figures. They want to be their kids’ friends and have their kids’ approval rather than the other way around. They have brought the ‘everybody-is-equal’ philosophy of their youth to their roles as parents.

While narcissism, which Dr. Twenge references loosely as too much self esteem, may seem a heavy—if not downright judgmental— label to pin on today’s teens and twenties, she grounds her assertion in data collected for a 25-year time span, evidence she considers so compelling that it led to her most recent book, The Narcissism Epidemic.

“When looking at the incidence of Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD), you would expect to find higher rates in those who have lived longer and had more time to experience episodes of NPD, but that’s not what the research shows,” she says. She cites a 2005 National Institutes of Mental Health study of 35,000 respondents that reports that people in their 20s were three times as likely to have experienced an episode of NPD than people over 65.

“I was blown away by the fact that the prevalence was tripled in a group that had only lived one-third as long,” she says. To further prove her point, she points to evidence gathered from decades of Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) results. In the 1950s, only 12 percent of respondents agreed with the statement “I am an important person.” By the late 1980s, more than 80 percent agreed.

Many psychologists and parenting experts attribute the trend to the fact that Millennials have often been treated more like partners than children as they were growing up. They cite families who allow a 6-year-old to choose the family car and pre-teens to decide where to go—or even whether to go— on vacation. It is a phenomenon spawned by the Baby Boomers who are doing much of the parenting today, they claim. As a generation that identifies strongly with the equal-rights marches and antiestablishment protests that defined their seminal years, they can find it hard to deal with the hierarchy of the “traditional” family that assumes parents make the rules and children follow them.

“Parents today feel uncomfortable in their roles as authority figures,” Dr. Twenge says. “They want to be their kids’ friends and have their kids’ approval rather than the other way around. They have brought the ‘everybody-isequal’ philosophy of their youth to their roles as parents. The downside comes when kids grow up and realize they are not the center of the universe.”

Dr. Verhaagen, who has spent much of his career providing mental health services for children and adolescents and is currently a managing partner at Southeast Psychological Services in Charlotte, N.C., agrees.

“Is this generation more narcissistic? Probably. After all, they’ve been raised by parents who taught them that they can do anything,” Dr. Verhaagen says. “It’s both good and bad. It’s great to believe in yourself, but not so great if problems have always been solved for you and you haven’t been given the opportunity to fail.”

The problem solvers that he references—“helicopter parents” as they are known in 21st-century lexicon—are mothers and fathers who “hover” over their children, serving as ubiquitous buffers between them and the occasional hard knocks that life has to offer.

“The notion of the helicopter parent is not made up and not over-blown,” Dr. Verhaagen says. “Everyone who works in academia has stories about the father who calls the professor to question a grade or the grandmother who is on the phone with the registrar’s office about the registration process.”

The result is a generation that lacks the ardent independence of Generation X’s latchkey kids yet struggles continuously to live up to their parents’ expectations. Add to that the dependence on the technology and social media that have revolutionized their communication channels and turned them into achievement-oriented multi-taskers.

“One thing that is clear and is that this generation is more stressed than any previous generation,” Dr. Verhaagen says. In contrast to Dr. Twenge’s assertions, however, he believes that Millennials are handling this pressure. He points to data produced by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) that track trends in youth risk behaviors associated with stress, including the use of alcohol and illegal drugs and suicide related behavior.

“There are lower rates of drug use, lower rates of pregnancy and STD (sexually transmitted diseases). Most of the indicators for high-risk behavior are either trending down or holding steady.”

The reason? Dr. Verhaagen offers several: goals, family values, and a determination to do meaningful work. Despite frequent declarations that this generation is the “most coddled” in history, he contends the very actions cited for creating entitled, narcissistic youth have also built up a degree of resilience. They may be stressed but they have goals to work toward. They may be overscheduled, but they’re not idle.

“They might be our next generation of heroes,” he says. “They’re a good generation—well nurtured, able to relate well to others, and with a strong sense of the future. They have the potential to be great. Time will tell.”

Left to Right: Mr. Hablutzel, Dr. Grip, Dr. Horowitz

This year, The Chicago School hit the Big 3-0. As part of the celebration, we pulled together a panel of Chicago School presidents to share and compare recollections that span the three decades. Joining Dr. Horowitz for the October 9 event were Phil Hablutzel, J.D., the founding president, and Dr. Jeffrey Grip, who served as the school’s third president. Thus, Presidents’ Reflections replace our standing President’s Letter in this issue of INSIGHT. Happy Birthday, Chicago School!

Click on the play button to listen to the entire presidents’ panel discussion:
Listen to the entire presidents’ panel discussion

Phil Hablutzel, J.D.—President, 1979-1983

On The Chicago School’s earliest days In those days, we were a shoestring operation. We began at the Lawson YMCA in four rooms, but the administration at the Y decided we had fixed up the place so nicely, they wanted it for their offices. So we had to move. We found a place on Michigan Avenue; it was built as a showroom for the Studebaker automobile and then remodeled into the Fine Arts Building. Next to my office was the first tuba player of the Chicago Symphony. He would have students sit next to my office and practice tuba. Everybody thought that was terrible, but since I was a tuba player, I loved it.

Dr. Jeffrey Grip—President, 1985-1995

On the Emergence of Diversity as a Distinctive Focus I think it was in 1986 that I hired a woman for the faculty by the name of Elizabeth Davis Russell. Elizabeth was born in Liberia and was very low-key, persistent, visionary. She talked to me about creating a center for intercultural clinical psychology. The board approved it and a year later, she came to me and said ‘let’s have an intercultural psychology conference.’ That was really the emerging of the intercultural focus. It became an identity of The Chicago School that was distinctive.

Dr. Michael Horowitz—President, 2000-present

On Beginning the Expansion Beyond a Single-Program School When we developed the I/O (Industrial and Organizational Psychology) Program, we didn’t have resources for a lot of outside people. And so I turned to Nancy Newton (long-time faculty member), who through her career had gone into organizational consulting, and didn’t want to be an administrator again. I went to her house and I said ‘You’re Plan A for continuing The Chicago School as an independent school. And Plan B is that there is no Plan B.’ And she said she’d do it for a year. We discussed what number of students would be needed to start a new program with. We said if we get six students, we will start this new degree program. We got 15 and never looked back.

Fueled by grants from highly competitive public and private funding sources, The Chicago School has taken major strides in its commitment to addressing the needs of marginalized populations. Three recently announced awards will increase the school’s outreach exponentially, supporting projects to prepare culturally competent mental health practitioners for Chicago’s rapidly growing Latino population, dramatically expand the school’s model of communityengaged education, and provide outreach to returning veterans and their families.

Latino Mental Health
The vision that led to the 2008 establishment of The Chicago School’s Center for Latino Mental Health (CLMH) took a step closer to realization with a grant from the Chicago Community Trust that will fund the creation of a Latino Mental Health Providers Network. In implementing the initiative, CMLH will collaborate with Latinoserving community agencies and healthcare professionals to develop workshops and mentoring opportunities, and to assist a cadre of mental health professionals in meeting the unique needs of Latinos.

“Studies have shown that therapists who participate in cultural sensitivity training provide more effective treatment to ethnic minority populations,” said Dr. Hector Torres, CLMH coordinator and assistant professor of clinical counseling. “The better the experience Latinos have with mental health care, the more likely the population is to benefit from the services that are available.”

Last year the Surgeon General reported that fewer than one in 20 Latino immigrants with mental disorders contact mental health specialists for care. Exacerbating the issue— and underscoring the need for practitioners who are sensitive to the unique needs and concerns of Latino immigrants—the National Council for LaRaza has reported that even when Latinos do access services, 70 percent never return after the first visit.

In addition to building a pipeline for professionals who understand and can address the reluctance of many Latinos to seek or accept psychological services, the network will place Chicago School clinical counseling interns and at least 75 student volunteers in agencies that serve the Latino community. Together they will deliver more than 8,000 service hours working with clients and staff. The project will also engage in public awareness, research, and outreach to coordinate and strengthen efforts of grassroots agencies with limited staff and capacity.

The network responds to a critical shortage of psychology and counseling professionals qualified to meet the needs of a population considered at high risk for depression, anxiety, and substance abuse. Experts estimate that there are only 29 Latino mental health providers for every 100,000 Latinos in the United States. Few areas could benefit more from this initiative than Chicago, which counts Latinos as its fastest-growing population, representing one of every four Chicagoland residents.

Working closely with Dr. Torres on project implementation will be Roberto Lopez-Tamayo, a 2009 graduate of the Clinical Counseling program who will assume the role of Latino mental health network coordinator. Lopez-Tamayo has already begun reaching out to area nonprofit agencies, with the goal of recruiting a minimum of 30 members to the project.

“I’m sure we’re going to have many more than 30,” Dr. Torres said. “There is no other network like this in the area that specifically meets this need.”

Community Partnerships

The first position to go when budgets get cut is the volunteer coordinator. These organizations rely heavily on volunteers but need someone to oversee their efforts.

The model of community-engaged scholarship that has twice landed The Chicago School on the President’s Community Service Honor Roll received a financial shot in the arm in September when the Corporation for National and Community Service (CNCS) awarded the school a $581,884 Learn and Serve America grant. The funding— which comes at a critical time for Chicago’s underserved populations—will allow The Chicago School to extend community engagement opportunities to more than 1,100 graduate psychology students and directly impact the service gaps left by recent cuts to nonprofit agency budgets.

The grant will provide the resources to significantly increase the number of service hours provided by Chicago School students through course-based service-learning projects, community- based research, and community service activities. It also will expand the number of local organizations that benefit from community engaged scholarship activities overseen by the Office of Community Partnerships (OCP). Currently, OCP partners with about 70 agencies and businesses to fulfill service needs, evaluate the effectiveness of organizational initiatives, and build the capacity of human service agencies throughout the Chicago area.

Community service volunteers work as tutors, mentors, and psychoeducational group leaders, while students engaged in community-based research collaborate with partner agencies to analyze service delivery issues, research potential solutions, and develop plans for evaluating implementation. Service-learning courses— another OCP initiative that will expand with the help of the federal grant—incorporate outreach into the curriculum. Through existing courses, students work with parents involved in child malpractice situations, counsel ex-offenders as they reintegrate into the community, and assist teachers in underserved schools. Fifty new service-learning courses and 24 student-led initiatives—all aimed at helping social service agencies better serve their clients—will be implemented with the grant.

The project will also focus on leadership development, identifying a cohort of students to organize and manage volunteer activities at targeted agencies.

“The first position to go when budgets get cut is the volunteer coordinator,” Dr. Sayaka Machizawa, assistant director of community partnerships,” said. “These organizations rely heavily on volunteers but need someone to oversee their efforts.” To address this issue, the grant includes stipends for eight student leaders, each of whom will organize and manage volunteer activities at a partner agency. Dr. Machizawa emphasizes the systems focus of grant activities, which will result in being more than a “band-aid” solution.

“Traditionally, psychology has had a tendency to focus on an individual level of intervention,” said Dr. Machizawa.“Our engagement model aims higher. It takes a more systems and community-oriented approach to solving problems. Our goal is that the activities will have a long-term impact.”

The new project dovetails with The Chicago School’s long-held mission of training extraordinary psychology professionals while providing service to the community. Its history of community partnerships dates back to 1995 when it established a collaboration with Erie Neighborhood House, a joint venture that to date has provided training opportunities for dozens of Chicago School students and dramatically increased Erie’s service delivery capacity.

Family Reintegration
A third grant, the Yellow Ribbon Project funded by the Michael Reese Health Trust, is described in the Giving Back section of this issue.

As the newly appointed U.S. assistant secretary of veterans affairs, Duckworth addressed the Class of 2009 after receiving an honorary Doctor of Psychology degree.

By 2010, the number of wounded veterans from the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts will exceed 419,000, a 61 percent increase over 2008, she told the audience of more than 3,000 graduates and guests that filled the Civic Opera House in downtown Chicago.

“With 6.1 million veteran patients in our country, there is a critical need for mental health services for them,” Duckworth said. She challenged the newly minted psychology professionals to offer the “fragile thread of hope” that could make the pivotal difference in their recovery. “When I reached the bottoming out point in my own recovery, it was a health professional who offered me that fragile thread of hope,” she said.

As a captain in the Illinois National Guard flying combat missions during Operation Iraqi Freedom, Duckworth sustained grave injuries when her helicopter was struck by a rocketpropelled grenade, resulting in the loss of both of her legs and partial use of one arm. Her arduous recovery culminated in her becoming a voice of veterans throughout the country. She served as director of the Illinois Department of Veterans Affairs until her nomination by President Obama—and her subsequent confirmation by the U.S. Senate—as assistant secretary in the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs.

Her work heralds initiatives underway at The Chicago School to address the critical shortage of mental health services for returning veterans.

This year’s graduating class marked the largest one yet, with 394 receiving doctoral, master’s and education specialist diplomas. The first class of 25 School Psychology graduates and the first 31 graduates from the Online Campus were among those who participated.

The new partnership brings the Platt Retail Institute’s (PRI) research, data analysis, academic publishing, and consulting work to the Chicago Campus, where faculty and students will have the opportunity to participate in projects, publications, internships, and dissertation and thesis work with the institute. The affiliation is expected to particularly benefit students interested in consumer psychology, and give them hands-on experience with retail analytics.

“This new relationship greatly expands our ability to undertake the research necessary to understand the impact of emerging digital technologies on consumer behavior,” said Steven Keith Platt, PRI’s director and research fellow. Coursework will cover the areas of in-store marketing, consumer-interaction technology, and other business psychology topics.

Currently in development is an M.A. in Police Psychology that will provide participants with a broad understanding of psychology as well as the skills to recognize symptoms of mental illness, provide psychological interventions, and deal with job-related trauma and stress. The new program builds on a history of collaboration that has already resulted in a series of workshops and training sessions for LAPD officers, city attorneys and social service providers throughout the city.

“This is a program that our police officers need, and that our community needs,” said Dr. Debra Warner, lead faculty for the Southern California Campuses’ Forensic Psychology Program, who has been instrumental in the development of both the partnership and the training programs. “LAPD’s current focus is on providing its officers with the education and skills to bring about significant community reform. In Skid Row alone, there is so much going on—an almost constant need for crisis intervention.”

According to LAPD data, 30 percent of its 9,200 officers have bachelor’s degrees when entering the Police Academy and very few have completed graduate study. Soon after opening its doors in April 2008, the Los Angeles Campus began discussions with the department about offering professional development opportunities for officers. The 36-credit master’s degree will meet criteria outlined in the Joint Committee on Police Psychology Competencies, and will be available in a blended format that allows participants to complete most coursework online and to integrate assignments into existing job duties. Law enforcement officers with a bachelor’s degree and at least two years of work experience may apply.

SBGI provides its leading-edge programs in unique low-residence and distance learning formats. These flexible-scheduling options allow students to access graduate programs in highly specialized fields from all over the world, resulting in a culturally diverse educational community.

“This is an unprecedented event for both of our schools and an exciting opportunity for all involved,” said TCS Southern California President Michele Nealon-Woods and SBGI Campus Dean Marti Glenn, in a joint letter posted on the SBGI website. “By coming together, The Chicago School and SBGI are embarking on an exciting, purposeful journey: to advance innovative approaches to psychology training in Southern California built on a commitment to service and community engagement.”

A transition team comprising individuals from both organizations is working together to integrate the various academic, business, and employment-related areas.

New presidents include:

Dr. Carroll Cradock, Chicago Campus, who joined The Chicago School in April. A licensed professional psychologist, Dr. Cradock brings to the institution more than 30 years of service and experience in the mental health field. Her previous post was an eight-year stint as director of behavior health services at Advocate Illinois Masonic Medical Center. Dr. Cradock will oversee the operations of the Chicago Campus, TCS programs offered at the University Center of Lake County, and the newly opened Garfield Park Preparatory Academy.

Dr. Michele Nealon-Woods (Psy.D.‘00), Southern California Campus, who has been with TCS for 15 years—as a student, a faculty member, and chair of the Clinical Psy.D. Department. She oversees the two Los Angeles campuses— downtown and Westwood—an Irvine Campus, two counseling centers, and Santa Barbara Graduate Institute, which affiliated with The Chicago School earlier this year.

Dr. Darcy Tannehill, Online Campus. Dr. Tannehill has been with The Chicago School since 2007 and has been instrumental in building a wide variety of online degree programs. She oversees an array of programs including M.A. and certificate programs, as well as the school’s first Ph.D. programs—in International Psychology and Organizational Leadership. She came to TCS from Argosy University in 2007.

This allows our campuses to have more autonomy, a focused attention on enhancing and preserving quality, and a platform for each president to become an acknowledged leader in the community.

Dr. Orlando L. Taylor, planned Washington, D.C. Campus. A higher education veteran with more than 35 years as a faculty member and senior administrator, Dr. Taylor comes from Howard University. While there, he played a significant role in ensuring the university’s national leadership as a diverse institution that produces more African-American on-campus Ph.D. recipients that any research university in the United States. He will be the inaugural president of the planned East Coast Campus, which will open in 2010, pending approval by the Higher Learning Commission.

“What is exciting about watching the evolution of our campuses is how each was shaped by its own culture, unique projects, and connections to the community—yet linked by The Chicago School Model of Education,” President Horowitz said. “Because of this dynamic, we recognized that a new title was in order for our campus leaders: campus president. This localized approach allows our campuses to have more autonomy, a focused attention on enhancing and preserving quality, and a platform for each campus president to become an acknowledged leader in the surrounding community.”

Dr. Connie Fuller, Assistant Professor, Industrial and Organizational and Business Psychology

As Catherine reviewed her calendar, she realized that her new intern was due for a six-week review. This was one review she was looking forward to! Jesse had been an excellent addition to the team so far, contributing actively in team meetings and always completing assignments on time and correctly. With a smile on her face, Catherine pulled out a pad of paper to capture her thoughts for Jesse’s review.

Out in the office, Jesse was frustrated. He had been in this internship for over a month and had been given no feedback whatsoever. He had repeatedly asked Catherine for feedback on his work, only to be told he was doing fine. “Fine” didn’t help him know what to do better, or even what to continue doing to keep his manager happy. This internship was important to Jesse. He wanted to do well, and he simply couldn’t do well if he didn’t get frequent and meaningful feedback from his manager.

Age won’t matter. But character will.

What’s happening here? Both Catherine and Jesse are doing what seems to them to be the “right” thing to do. Problem is, each has a different definition of “right.”

The challenges of a multi-generational workforce are only now beginning to appear as businesses face, for the first time, four fully functional generations in the workplace. These challenges will only increase as Gen-Y continues its march into the workforce of tomorrow. Four areas in particular will see significant change in the years ahead.

Who’s the Boss?

The roles of Traditionalists and Baby Boomers are evolving as these generations age and continue in the workforce. Neither generation wants, nor can afford, to retire and live a life of leisure. However, they are not necessarily interested in maintaining their previous roles of command and control. They are ready to hand over the reins to a younger generation and trade money and position for flexible hours and less stress. This is good news for younger workers who are more than ready to move into positions of power and influence. More than at any time in the past, we see older employees working for younger bosses, sometimes bosses half their age. This challenges younger leaders to motivate and satisfy workers whose values and norms are very different from their own. It also creates a challenge for older workers whose younger bosses are not likely to manage them in the way to which they have become accustomed.

Independence and Direction

Gen Xers, those most likely to move into leadership positions vacated by Traditionalists and Boomers, are fiercely independent. They hate being micromanaged. Just give them a job to do and let them do it. A hands-off approach will work fine with experienced Gen Xers. However, Gen-Y employees will need more direction. This younger cohort has been over-programmed since grammar school so they have not had as much experience figuring things out for themselves. They will work, and work hard, but they need a roadmap to show them the way. This is not to be confused with micro-management. Rather, it is coaching that includes feedback—early and often. Annual, bi-annual or even quarterly feedback sessions will not suffice. Daily feedback, formal and informal, is in order to bring out the best in Gen Y and to help them learn the independence and decisionmaking ability taken for granted by older generations.

Reward and Recognition

Traditionalists found reward in a job well done. Boomers sought recognition through power and influence. Both believed that there was a need to pay your dues and earn your way to the top. Gen X and Gen Y believe that reward and recognition should be based on the quality of your work. Period. In a multi-generational workplace, employees will compete on the value of what they contribute to the workplace, not on length of time they are there. Goals and timeframes will need to be clearly communicated, and accountability for achieving goals should be unwavering; how the goals are accomplished, however, may be very different for each worker. The nature of rewards will also shift. While sufficient income to support a desired lifestyle will still be important, time for a personal life is fast becoming the currency of choice.

Leadership

Traditional command and control leadership is dead. The hierarchy continues to flatten. The successful multi-generational workplace of the future will be an egalitarian organization that honors the individual strengths. It will provide resources to enhance those strengths for the good of both employees and the organization. Successful leaders will be teachers and coaches. Leaders will be effective communicators. Leaders will earn the respect of their employees through their actions. Age won’t matter, but character will. This type of organization and leadership has been discussed for years, but the mix of generations in the workplace today mandates an egalitarian organization and authentic leadership for tomorrow. Members of a multi-generational workforce will co-create the leadership model of the future.

The world of work is changing. Our generational differences provide us a wealth of opportunity to share what we know, to clarify what we need, to learn from one another, to grow, and to make the future of work what we need it to be for personal and organizational success.