A Discussion of the Ecological Indigenous, Organisational, Mental Health, Social Action and Liberatory Models of Community Psychology Stanley Arumugam Ph.D. AEC 801 (Prof. S.D. Edwards) 2001 _____________________________________________ Abstract This essay explores the various models of community psychology as expressed in the mental health model, the indigenous-ecological model, the organisational model, the social action model and the social communityliberatory model. Throughout this critical survey, it becomes clear that the underlying ideological assumptions of each model dictate the theory, method and practice. Implications and applications of the various models of community psychology are examined as they relate to the South African context. History of Community Psychology If community psychology is a psychology by the people, for the people and with the people as Edwards (1999) observes, then we have been practicing this discipline since the beginning of time. However, we need to recognise that the science of psychology is only a recent phenomenon and that community psychology, as we understand it from a western academic perspective is a much more recent phenomenon, emerging as a response to the positivist models of psychology in the 60's. Seedat (2001, p.21) notes that psychology has a short history, but a long past. Mainstream psychology with its focus on curing the individual is just about a hundred years old. This traditional model of psychology does not give adequate attention to the contextual nature of health and wellbeing. Community psychology emerged in America in the 60's, at a time when there was a greater awareness of the power of collective social action in response to 3 broad demands: 1) a demand for appropriate services for people who could benefit from psychological intervention; 2) a sociopolitical demand for the effective use of psychology in the fight against oppression and 3) a demand from the body of psychology for a more relevant psychology at the levels of application, theory and research. In South Africa, psychologists dissatisfied with mainstream psychology in the context of apartheid attempted to develop a more "relevant" psychology during the 1980's and early 1990's. This movement resulted in some psychologists overtly opposing apartheid whilst others attempted to develop a theory and practice relevant to the oppressed and exploited masses. Despite these contributions to "relevance," Seedat (1990) argues that most of the psychologists involved during this time were middle class whites who he criticizes for being silent around issues of racism, political violence and collective action, which he considers to be critical issues in the pursuit of a "relevant psychology." Although there is a growing interest in community psychology around the world, this discipline still does not enjoy widespread professional and academic support. As an example, in the United States, the division for community psychology is only one of forty-seven other APA divisions. In South Africa the situation is even worse. PsySSA recently re-constituted claims to be a more relevant society, yet none of their 9 divisions of psychology is representative of community psychology as a professional discipline. There is also a scarcity of psychology departments offering community psychology as a professional qualification. A solitary exception to this status quo is the University of Zululand, which offers the country's only community psychology programme professionally accredited by the Health Professions Council of South Africa. The Power of Paradigms Since its adoption as a professional discipline community psychology has been under pressure to become more mainstream and less politically involved. One of the major criticisms of community psychology is its unscientific nature. This criticism assumes the pre-eminence of the scientific model without giving due consideration to the contextual nature of community psychology. Thomas Kuhn (1970) challenged social scientists awareness of scientific inquiry in his work on paradigms. A paradigm refers to the way we see the world and is based on shared assumptions or rules of the world. He observed that in times of paradigm shift there is a tension between the existing and the evolving paradigm. The conflict between mainstream and community psychology appears to be in this phase of evolution. Perhaps the issue is not one of dichotomous opposition between the two paradigms but one of finding a paradigm that works for a given need in a given context. This approach does not assume that one paradigm is better than the other. The ultimate test of the value of the paradigm is the people it seeks to serve. Five popular models of community psychology will be critically discussed with a view to understanding the different underlying philosophies, theory and practice. COMPARISON OF COMMUNITY PSYCHOLOGY MODELS Model 1. Mainstream model of psychology 2. Mental health model 3. Social Action model 4. Indigenous Ecological Model 5. Organisational Model 6. Social Community Liberatory Model Target Group Purpose Paradigm Role of Psychologist Individual intrapsychic Curing and preventing illness in the individual Positivist Mental health expert Individuals in Groups in community Treatment and Prevention of illness in community settings Positivist Communities Sociopolitical empowerment of disenfranchised communities Humanism Illness Illness Social change facilitator Empowerment Individuals on Re-integrating earth individuals and communities with the universe Universalism Organisations Improving organisational effectiveness Humanism Social Structures Marxist Changing unjust social structures Mental health expert Community member Balance Organisational expert Transformation Social Change Figure 1: Comparison of Community Psychology Models Social change agent The Mental Health Model of Community Psychology History of the Mental Health Model This model attempts to improve the mental health of communities living within a defined geographic catchment area. The provision of mental health services is part of a larger primary health care programme. While direct service delivery is a part of the model, the primary aim of this model is that of prevention. The mental health model of community psychology is a response to the growing demands for mental health provision and the recognition that the service provision is inadequate given the needs. Reeler (1993) states that the need for mental health services in South Africa is similar to that of the United States. This would mean that at least eighteen million South Africans would be in need of mental health care at any one time based on American epidemiological studies. Description of the Mental Health Model The mental health model has a clear socioeconomic agenda. One of the primary assumptions of this model is that the earlier and larger the scale of intervention the likelihood of reducing the incidence of mental health problems is that much greater. This model assumes the availability of funding and a service delivery infrastructure, which if in place makes sense in addressing mass community needs. However, the sociopolitical reality of South African health service delivery bears testimony to the fact that the rural masses are still neglected as the government attempts to catch up with the existing and more politically visible urban backlogs. Edwards (1999) reviewing the work of several mainstream and community psychologists identifies 6 intervention types in the mental health model: 1) Primary prevention is aimed at reducing incidence of illness. These are more universal intervention such as safe sex campaigns or smoking cessation programmes. 2) Secondary prevention is aimed at reducing the prevalence and incidence of symptoms occurring in persons at risk. This may include interventions such as education of pregnant women of the risk of drugs or the training of teachers in the early detection of child abuse or learning disorders. 3) Tertiary prevention is aimed at reducing the impact of illness on the individuals life thus preventing relapse into the acute phase, especially in high risk disorders such as bipolar mood disorder or patients who are reintroduced into the community. 4) Primary promotions are more universal interventions aimed at promoting and improving health. Examples are the run and walk for life programme, life skills training in schools, health education programmes. 5) Secondary promotions refer to interventions to improve human rights, empowerment and health promotion advocacy for all persons but especially those that have been institutionally disempowered. Examples could include training of community health care workers. 6) Tertiary promotion refers to interventions aimed at self-actualisation. This level of intervention could include personal growth groups and encounter groups. Critique of the Mental Health Model Despite the socio-economic relevance of the mental health model, i.e., in making health care more community based, this model still deos not effectively address the far reaching needs of the communities it claims to serve. One such issue is the social and political factors that prevent the majority of these people seeking out and getting treatment at any given time. PretoriusHeuchert and Ahmed (2001) identified obstacles in this regard. In the rural areas where the need appears to be greatest there are very few black psychologists; language and cultural barriers and societal norms make the utilisation of psychological services irrelevant or inappropriate. Another inhibiting factor is the practice of the traditional medical model in communities where mental health professionals operate on the "waiting mode," expecting their patients to come to them. A "seeking mode" of service delivery takes the services to the people that need them. Additionally, this mode also identifies potential problems to service delivery and takes responsibility for preventative action initiatives. This mode of service delivery is especially relevant given the highly traumatic experiences of whole communities in the South African apartheid era. Disempowered communities need to be reached out to before they can trust institutional mental health providers to meet their needs. This mistrust is probably also compounded by the lack of awareness of available mental health services. A more fundamental criticism of the mental model is its roots in mainstream medical discourse. In this model mental illness is a disease that can be treated or prevented. The responsibility for treatment and/or prevention lies in the hands of the mental health expert thus perpetuating the power dynamics in the domain of mental health. Such a model is not appropriately sensitive to the indigenous beliefs of Africans as relates to their holistic understanding of illness and health. Related to this issue of expert power is the incidental focus of social change in this model of mental health. The focus of change despite reaching masses is still based on an individual perspective. Very little if any attention is deliberately given to sociopolitical and structural forces. Ahmed and PretoriusHeuchert, 2001) argue that in the mental health model "traditional systems of skills, power and knowledge are retained and there is no explicit commitment to transforming oppressive and exploitative social conditions." To conclude, the mental health model does well in extending its focus from a psychology limited to the elite minorities who can afford high cost professional care to a psychology that seeks to pragmatically address the needs of masses through the provision of more affordable mental health services. Despite this pragmatic response, the major criticism of the mental health model is that it transfers the mainstream medical model of individual treatment to a mainstream medical model treatment of groups of individuals. The model gives little if any deliberate attention to social change accepting the status quo as the given context within which it needs to operate. This approach is limiting even to practitioners of this model given the fact that service provision to the masses is more an issue of structural inequalities than it is of individual accessibility to the system of health care. The mental health model is dependent on the expert political and professional systems to function effectively, yet it does not adopt a critical social change position of the very institutions that minimize its effectiveness. The Ecological Indigenous Model This model focuses on the interdependence and evolving relationship between the person and environment. This interdependence is aptly described in Bishop (et al., 2001) statement that in the Australian conception of society, individuals exist at all levels and the levels exist in humans" (Bishop, et al., 2001). In this paradigm we are all participants in a socially constructed reality. The ecological indigenous model seeks to contextualise the practice of psychology in the locally defined reality of communities and in so doing attempts to address one of the criticisms levied against the mental health model, i.e., that it is based on a western mainstream medical model. James Kelly (1981, p.248) notes that "we and our settings are interdependent" Pretorious-Heuchert and Ahmed (2001) also pointed out that the rural communities of South Africa often experience the traditional practice of psychology in the mental health as inappropriate and irrelevant. This position is confirmed by Holdstock (1979) who argues that Western techniques are generally culturally too different to offer a psychological approach towards healing that would be meaningful for the majority of South Africans. From mainstream evaluations of psychotherapy, we have learned that cultural similarities are critical factors for therapeutic effectiveness. The ecological model of community psychology takes these cultural and contextual issues seriously. This is a psychology by the people and with the people in that it is locally constructed according to the meanings and belief systems of the indigenous communities within which it operates. Not much is written about the practice of ecological models of community psychology. Indigenous or traditional healers best represent this model of community psychology in practice. From an African indigenous perspective, the traditional Zulu communal ways of living is described as an example of this model. Edwards, Makunga and Nzima, 1997) articulate the following concepts in their paper: 1. Communal psyche. This model shifts from the individual intrapsychic perspective of mainstream models of psychology to a psychology located in the communal psyche. Perhaps Jung was describing this model in his thinking about the collective unconscious, which he used to understand individual behaviour. The ecological model addresses this collective unconscious from a community-based perspective. Related concepts include intersubjectivity, mutuality, humanization, socialization and interdependence all aptly expressed in the Zulu idiom: "umumtu umuntu ngabantu." This can be interpreted to mean I am a person through others. This is a community psychology in, of, with, by the people and for the people. 2. Communalism and/or collectivism. Such conceptions are described in the recognition of a lifestyle of interdependence as expressed in Zulu idioms such as ubunye, simunye, and ubudlelwane. 3. Humanism. The philosophy of humanism elevates the value of the human being in the world. Concepts such as ubuntu, which implies caring relationships and respect have become the buzzwords of the corporate world as business consultants seek to motivate a sense of communalism amongst the predominantly African workforce. This humanistic ideal is often misunderstood and applied out of context rendering its meaning invalid, especially in the business community. 4. Spirituality. Individual and communal spirituality is an extension of one into the other in the Zulu culture. There is no boundary between the material and spiritual worlds in faith and spiritual expression. The practice of Zulu spirituality is an integral component of their holistic healing paradigm. 5. Ecology. The unity of the universe is central to this indigenous model of community psychology. Traditional Zulu cosmology is permeated with ideas of ecological influences on community health and illness. "Ukulingisa" is concerned with the promotion of order and balance in the natural and spiritual environments, where all elements of an undivided universe can co-exist. The indigenous - ecological model is concerned with the contextualised world. Edwards (1999) identifies this ecosystemic perspective as expressed in the following concepts: 1. 2. 3. 4. Succession through constant change dynamics of communities. Adaptation as shaped by the environment. Recycling resources including community energy Interdependence of community levels and groups Traditional or indigenous healers are responsible for the most of everyday community psychology in Zululand. Gumede (1990) estimates that traditional healers cater for 80% of the health needs of the African population. The "abathandazi" are an increasingly popular group of faith healers belonging to the African Indigenous Churches. The church itself acts as an indigenous healing community of caring people focused on healing and community development. "This is a marvelous form of community psychology where community development, healing and education are harmoniously integrated (Edwards, 2001, p4) Critique of the Indigenous-Ecological Model of Community Psychology The indigenous ecological model of community psychology appears to provide the most contextually relevant model. The empowerment and recognition of traditional indigenous healers as equal practitioners of community psychology is central to the value of this model. This model of community psychology makes a radical departure from the mainstream model of psychology as well as the mental health model of psychology. This departure causes discomfort in professional circles which seek to professionalise the practice of traditional healers. This is a complex issue, which creates challenges for the training of community psychologists, which is based on mainstream academic models of practice despite the community-based slant. Should indigenous community psychologists be trained? If so, by who? Can professionally trained community psychologists ever claim to legitimately practice the indigenousecological model of community psychology considering that they are often not a member of the local indigenous community? This indigenous ecological model is also limited to specific community contexts by its very nature and is not transferable without critical evaluation of similarities with other communities. The Organisational Model of Community Psychology History and Background This model focuses on managing change in group processes and team building amongst stakeholders in an organizational setting. There is not much literature on this model of community psychology in the professional literature. Organisational Development is primarily an organisational model of community psychology as it is concerned with organisational transformation issues drawing from behavioral and social sciences. OD theory is heavily based in the discipline of psychology. Given this theoretical context, I will explore OD as an example of the practice of the organisational model of community psychology. OD initially transferred applications of the T-groups and encounter groups into organisational settings. Much of the earlier focus was on team building and group process. As the practice of OD developed, social structures and systems were recognised as critical factors in organisation change. The focus shifted from individual to group effectiveness. The current practice of OD is focused on meta theories and discourse analysis. Practice of the Organisational Model of Community Psychology Francescato (1992) describes a multidimensional model of organisational change, which she has used in work both in corporations as well as public institutions in Italy. The multidimensional model explores organisational effectiveness taking into account its strategic dimension, the functional dimension, psychodynamic and psychoenvironmental dimension. This model recognises the multiplicity of organisations, an understanding which is critical for any effective change initiative to take place. The Zululand Community Psychology Programme is an example of the practice of the organisational model of community psychology. The programme initiated by the University of Zululand comprises a network of collaborating community partnership that meet regularly for the purpose of assessing and implementing organisational initiatives. Local industries are active participants in the programme with mutual benefit to all stakeholders. The community psychology internships of the University of Zululand are conducted at the various partner companies, who are responsible for the internship funding. In turn they receive the services of an intern psychologist providing needs based counselling and mental health education programmes. Partnership centres have also contracted university psychologists and have also offered instruction at the university thus ensuring mutual transfer of knowledge and skills. Challenges for the Organisational Model of Community Psychology One of the major challenges of the organisational model of community psychology relates to the definition of the community in an organisational context. In terms of OD practice the client community is the team, group, division that seeks out the services of the OD practitioner. In this approach, other organisational systems may be neglected because of the definition of community based on the brief given to the OD/Community psychologist. Often the issue of organisational power becomes a critical factor in the implementation of organisational interventions. In many cases the management of the corporate organisation is the one that sources the community psychologist, pays them for the work done and can be quite strong about their interpretation of issues and that their agendas are realised through the interventions. This power dynamic places definite challenge to the community psychologist who is both dependent on management for organisational entry and yet realizes that satisfying management's agenda will be an unethical practice. The writer had a specific experience of this power dynamics in his role as OD Manager at a major company in Richards Bay. Being responsible for the implementation of employment equity practices, the writer was tasked by the companies employment equity committee to find a suitable external consultant to conduct an audit of the companies employment equity practice and implement a programme of training and awareness. The selected consultancy group was strongly opposed by the predominantly African shop steward constituency. Upon investigation it was found that the issue was not the credibility of the consultant but the sense that they were not party to the decision making process despite the mandate from the committee (of which they were a part of) to select a consultant on behalf of the committee. The credibility checking out of the consultancy, feedback sessions with their employee constituencies and a series of meetings dragged the decision to appoint the consultants for 3 months. During this time of "delay" other members of the committee representing the Indian, Coloured, Women and disabled groups were visibly agitated with the writer for the delayed implementation. At the end of the day, the greater challenge was to get the entire group to work towards a shared agenda and not operate in separate sub-groups. From a Marxist perspective, the community psychologist must deal with issues of worker alienation and the economic agendas of capitalistic driven organisations. In helping organisations become more effective, is this effectiveness not just furthering the economic ends of capitalist CEO's. The South African labour market bears testimony to the gross inequities in the workplace, which have made the implementation of the Employment Equity Act and the Skills Development Act necessary for influencing structural change in organisations. In this context does the community psychologist side with the cause of the disenfranchised masses in the workplace or does the community psychologist take on the "neutral expert role." The industrial psychologist tends to typically take on the professional neutral expert consultant role. It is the writer's position that the community psychologist without becoming biased does take on a more active advocacy role for wide-scale organisational change as he or she often has the organisational power to represent the interests of the disenfranchised. The Social Action Model In the USA as in South Africa mental health professionals are realizing that "no mass disorder afflicting humankind is ever eliminated by or brought under control by attempting to treat affected individuals, or by attempting to train individuals in large numbers" (Albee, 1983, p.4). This recognition underpins the attractiveness of community psychology, which focuses on mass preventative interventions. The social action model of community psychology has its roots in the war on poverty during the Kennedy and Johnson administrations of the United States in the 1960s (Mann, 1978). At this time the broader social context included the civil rights movement campaigning for black rights and protests against the Vietnam War. One of the main assumptions of this model is based on mainstream psychology's failure to appreciate the link between behaviour and social systems. As discussed earlier the intrapsychic focus of the mainstream approach neglects the material reality of communities deprived of housing, transportation, basic sanitation and medical care, all of which impact on mental health. The social action model focuses on structural inequalities as the root cause of community distress. It argues that the medical model of curing the individual is only a 'band aid' approach. The main aim of the social action model of community psychology is to mobilise communities to put pressure on institutions to bring about the necessary structural changes that will improve the quality of people’s lives. Notions of the individual as solely responsibility for their state of poverty, ill health and poor education are challenged. Maslow's heirachy of needs confirms that unless basic needs of safety, health and food are taken care of that higher levels of actualization become a 'pie in the sky' and escapist notions. The social action model argues that the provision of health care, basic security and food is the responsibility of a civic society. The reality in many societies is that the more economically active minorities own the means of production and dictate structural inequalities. Mental health enhancement in such a context is a limited pursuit given that real change is located not in the mass provision of mental health care but In the changing of social structures that create institutional inequity in the first place. The primary goal of this model is social change with a clear political commitment to transforming oppressive structures. In this model the community psychologist operating as activist taking responsibility to organise, activate, mobilise, empower, conscientize, and provides resources or make contacts that were not there before (Seedat, et al., 2001). Community in this context is defined as a political constituency in conflict with the dominant institutions of society. Community empowerment and visible changes in the material conditions of communities serve as signs of the effectiveness of this model of change. Applications of the Social Action Model of Community Psychology The Zululand Community Psychology programme responds to the social challenges that arise out an inequitable society living under apartheid. The programme is aimed at helping previously disadvantaged victims of political violence and trauma through the provision of psychological interventions. Some of the interventions involve stress management, conflict resolution, mediation and multicultural counselling workshops. Other interventions of the social action model focus on harmonizing old and new forms of community psychology. Through advocacy and networking projects there is a growing linkage between indigenous healing organizations and modern health care systems. New government policy has empowered previously marginalized traditional healers to become a legitimate role player in the health of the majority of South Africans. Throughout South Africa many mental health agencies are actively involved in community empowerment initiatives aimed at enabling communities to take responsibility for their futures. Mutual help groups, Christian social action groups and youth groups are some grassroots examples. Critique of the Social Action Model of Community Psychology Seedat (2001) argues that while the social action model has utility for people's daily struggles to bring about social change, there are two major problems. The first problem that he raises is that social change can become limited to the constituencies it seeks to address. This model identifies conditions of inequality but is unable to theorize or address them beyond a constituency level. The case for disenfranchised communities is made in the context of their specific issue and social action is conducted largely through social protest. Communities are empowered to challenge the specific institution seen to be the source of structural inequality through advocacy training, mediation and activist training. Based on these empowerment strategies such communities would address their specific issues with the respective institutional structure. The problem with this approach is that often, social action by constituency is limited in its effectiveness. Often the social problems although manifesting in specific institutions of society are elements of a larger system of structural inequity. An informed response to the global and national structural inequities requires a theory of macro social, political and economic integration. Second, there is a paradox in the model in that it assumes the capitalistic model is the dominant worldview. Despite the acknowledgement of the power and resource imbalance in society, the broader economic, political and ideological factors that relate to inequality are not sufficiently addressed. The primary intervention of social change is that of protest action, which assumes an adversarial position against institutions of society, governed by capitalistic dominance. The social action model does not allow communities to participate as co-creators of a new more equitable society. This notion of adversarialism based on social action in the South African context appears to be the stumbling block of black unionism that is still located in the era of social protest. As organisations in all institutions of society engage in transformation, trade unions appear to be limited in their ability to participate constructively and proactively with their previous adversaries. During the apartheid era, the social action of white middle class mental health professionals, theologians and academics was not enough. While they appear to have protested against inequalities in their respective disciplines, they continued to practice their disciplines without giving sufficient attention to challenging social institutions to co-create a new society. That apartheid was a moral unacceptable was acknowledged by South African academics, yet the power structures upholding such institutionalized inequity was supported through civil participation in a society that benefited white people. The Liberatory - Social Community Model of Community Psychology This model proposed by Serrano-Garcia et al. (1987) suggests that community psychology, as a solution to the inadequacy of mainstream psychology has been unsuccessful. In this model there is explicit commitment to social change in which the professional has responsibility for finding solutions to social problems and not merely protesting against the same. According to Serrano-Garcia (1994, p.2) "the main goal of community psychology is to promote social change to alter unjust and oppressive situations by generating knowledge, carrying out research and developing interventions". Seedat (1997) has advocated a liberatory psychology for South Africa in terms of four stages in the liberatory process: 1. 2. 3. 4. dissatisfaction with eurocentric, irrelevant, mainstream psychology reactive critical engagement constructive self definition emancipatory discourse, praxis and immersion This model is theoretically multidisciplinary drawing from different frameworks. Seedat (2001) identifies two key elements to this approach. First, there is an acknowledgement of the historically changing social reality. Second, the model incorporates an analysis of human subjectivity and agency that is grounded in social constructivism but one that acknowledges broader sociopolitical and ideological factors as well. At this level of involvement the community psychologist takes on a proactive role of social change agent as a co-creator of social reality. The community psychologist operates at different levels of society, using his or her knowledge and skills to facilitate an adaptation to prevailing values in society as well as attempting to change established structures. In terms of human subjectivity within a historical context humans are conceptualized as constructing social reality and acting as agents of social. In this model there is a legitimization of popular culture and consciousness. The dissemination of knowledge is considered essential for empowerment. The strength of the social community or liberatory model lies in the way it addresses a key issue with regard to social change, viz., human subjectivity or agency. Adopting a Marxist perspective, humans are seen to have the ability to construct and engage with social reality and in doing so shape social institutions and not merely react to them. This liberatory model of community psychology is open to the influence of post-modernism, which suggests a movement away from the Marxist ideology to one of relativism. This relativism does not change the social reality of communities as it tends to dwell in the domain of the intellectual and academic. Post-modernist notions also tend to underplay the value base that governs the reality of people. A community psychology by the people, for the people and with the people is one that is explicitly value based as it assimilates the context of locally constructed meaning. Summary of the Models of Community Psychology Community psychology tends to be defined by its philosophy, ideological assumptions and approaches. All models of community psychology are a direct response to mainstream models of psychology located in the medical illness paradigm. The mental health model aims to deal with the inadequacy of mainstream psychology in meeting the needs of the masses through the provision of community based services. The problem with this model is that it merely transfers the clinical individual medical model to a mass service delivery context. The indigenous-ecological model attempts to understand the diversity of contexts. In this model, there is a legitimization of indigenous forms of healing and the recognition that lay helpers are more effective than an elite minority of professional mental health practitioners. The organisational model attempts to improve organisational effectiveness through organisational development interventions. This multidimensional model recognises that members of organisations are also members of larger social systems that impact their organisational role. The challenge of this model is the capitalistic value base that could well be served by creating more productive employees who are still economically enslaved. The social action model seeks to empower communities to challenge the institutions of social oppression. The major problem with this model is that it does not adequately address broader social and political structures. Finally the social action-liberatory model recognises human agency as a social change agent that is a co-creator of social reality and not merely one of social protest. Conclusion If community psychology is indeed a psychology by the people, for the people and with the people, then it is imperative that people in specific contexts construct community psychology. At an meta-theoretical level, academics can engage in a different level of discourse as they attempt to critique and construct new models of community psychology. The practice of community psychology to be distinctive must be measured as a paradigm shift from mainstream medical models with recognition that it too is in a state of evolution and therefore cannot claim any supremacy to mainstream psychology, as appealing as this position might be. References Albee, G.W. (1983). Preventive psychology: Theory, research and practice. New York: Pergamon. Bishop, B.J., Sonn, C.C., Fisher, A.T. & Drew, N.M. (2001). Community-based community psychoogy: perspectives from Australia. In Seedat, M., (Ed)., Community Psychology Theory, Method and Practice. Cape Town: Oxford University Press. Edwards, S.D., Makunga, N.V. & Nzima, D.R. (1997). Harmonizing trdaitional forms of community psychology in Zululand, South Africa. In Madu, S. & Pritz, A. (Eds). In quest of psychotherapy for Africa. Sovenga: University of the North. Edwards, S.D. (1999). Community Psychology: A Zululand Perspective. KwaDlangezwa: University of Zululand Edwards, S.D. (2001). PhD Community Psychology Class of 2001 Papers. University of Zululand. Francescato, D. (1992). A multidimensional perspective on organization change. Systems Practice, 5, 129-146 Gumede, M.V. (1990). Traditional healers. A medical doctor's perspective. Braamfontein:Skotaville Holdstock, T.L. (1979). Indigenous healing in South Africa: A neglected potential. South African Journal of Psychology. 9, 118-124. Kelley, J. (1981). Tain't what you do, it's the way you do it. American Journal of Community Psychology, 9, 244-261. Kuhn, T.S. (1970). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. Mann, P.A. (1978). Community psychology: Concepts and applications. New York: Free Press. Seedat, M. (1997). The quest for liberatory psychology. South African Journal of Psychology, 27, 261-270. Seedat, M., Duncan, N., & Lazarus, S. (Eds). (2001). Community Psychology. Theory, method and practice. Cape Town: Oxford University Press. Serrano-Garcia, I., Lopez, M.M. and Rivera-Medina, E. (1987). Toward a social community psychology. Journal of Community Psychology, 15, 431446.
