While many undergraduate disciplines are revising curricula to address issues of diversity more effectively, it is commonly assumed that courses in cross-cultural psychology are less in need of revision due to their inherent multi-cultural focus. The field of cross-cultural psychology, however, is not immune to Eurocentric and androcentric biases. For example, cross-cultural research on women is often marginalized through its exclusion from key publications, while studies of males are frequently generalized to reflect characteristics of an entire culture. And cross-cultural research on gender and relationships is often based on an assumption of heterosexuality. Terminology in cross-cultural psychology can be changed to reduce inherent biases (e.g., the term "European American values" can replace "American values" when the values of minority groups are not included). In addition, research should endeavor not only to describe, but also to evaluate cultural differences, especially when segments of a study population possess differential access to power. Instructors should also emphasize the diversity within ethnic, class, and gender groups, so as not to stereotype individuals based on a single dimension of their appearance or orientation. In addition, teachers can consider more diverse learning styles; redefine student "participation" to include less verbal forms of participation; and utilize humanistic, activist, and feminist pedagogic approaches. The tools of the cross-cultural psychologist could potentially transform the entire discipline of psychology, but only if the biases and assumptions inherent in the cross-cultural approach, itself, are thoroughly examined first. (PAA)