Is It Bad That I Find Developmental Psychology To Be Intolerably Boring?

[JackD]

I'm in my first ever developmental psychology course and i strongly regret signing up for it. The teacher is dry and the book isn't much better. It seems that much of what the field is concerned with is trivial, such as how well can a two month old see or when children first learn how to count. Just a series of useless facts. Is it a bad sign for my career prospects if i find developmental psychology to be dry and tedious or would that only be a concern if i actually wanted to be a developmental psychologist?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Ollie123]

Psychology is a very broad field, I think most of us have found some aspect of it we don't like.

I wouldn't go so far as to call it trivial, since how we develop is useful information for determining how we can better detect abnormal development, and help us figure out the neurological bases for certain disorders. However its definitely an area of psychology I don't enjoy - I don't expect it will be a major problem at any point.

 

[JackD]

Psychology is a very broad field, I think most of us have found some aspect of it we don't like.

I wouldn't go so far as to call it trivial, since how we develop is useful information for determining how we can better detect abnormal development, and help us figure out the neurological bases for certain disorders. However its definitely an area of psychology I don't enjoy - I don't expect it will be a major problem at any point.

That's good. I don't remember why i signed up for it. There was a class i wanted, which was "Behavioral Disturbances in Children" but i couldn't get it to fit into my schedule, so i went i thought "why not developmental psychology?"

I see this class as potentially breaking my 4.0 psychology GPA, just because i can't get into it. I'm trying and i am studying it like crazy, along with everything else, but it is hard to get an A if you aren't drawn into a subject. Then again i got an A in community psychology 😴 and i found that to be less than captivating. I could see myself doing suprisingly well in it or getting my first dreaded B 😱

 

[Thrak]

I honestly find developmental psych of children to be quite uninteresting. It *should* be fascinating, all the learning and modeling and personality development and yadda yadda yadda. But no, it doesn't spark my interest.

The course I took in it was only child developmental for the first part... when we got to the adults and gerontology, now *that* was interesting stuff!

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

Many times undergrad courses don't give a great 'feel' for a topic area, as they can be very limited in the amount of information they teach. I've avoided teaching classes like that because they bore *me* to death, and they give me flashbacks to a couple intro courses I took as an undergrad. If you can stick it out, there are many more areas of psychology that you may find more interesting.

 

[biogirl215]

Also, keep in mind that there are many confounding factors---quality of the professor, for example, can be huge.

 

[JockNerd]

Also, keep in mind that there are many confounding factors---quality of the professor, for example, can be huge.

100% agree on that one. I know there's research for undergrad stats courses saying that the passion of the instructor for the subject is the single biggest influence on students' continued interest.

It seems that much of what the field is concerned with is trivial, such as how well can a two month old see or when children first learn how to count. Just a series of useless facts.

WHEN kids learn to count isn't especially interesting, but HOW they learn to count, acquire language, interact with others, etc. is really interesting to a lot of people, and a vital area of inquiry. After you're done the course, you don't have to ever touch it again if you don't want to though. 🙂

 

[Tritones]

Just to say, if you were interested in studying "behavioral disturbances in children" knowing developmental streams is highly helpful stuff. It really is possible that you just have a bad professor, because the process of development is fascinating. Further, developmental psychology is one of the things that psychological science has done best: it has provided facts on development that are generalizable and can be used to tell how well people are developing, where there may be delays and how to address them, as well as reveals features of the mind.

It may help to contextualize the knowledge in some good theory. Have you checked Daniel Stern's "The Interpersonal Life of the Infant"? You may find that that book helps make what seems like an endless stream of facts coalesce into a picture of a developing human. Also, take a look at Green and Peel's "Theories of Development." You will get a basic intro there to Vygotsky, Bandura, Freud, Erickson - a whole bunch of people who try to put the facts together into a coherent picture.

-dan

 

[JackD]

Confounding factors---quality of the professor

I think that is a huge factor. The guy just stands there and talks. He doesn't seem like a bad guy but he is dry and charisma free. Lectures basically go like this.

Quick introduction to particular subject matter--->a few vocabulary words---> important study 1--->important study 2--->important study 3--->important study 4, which is likely the only correct one--->class ends

The class consists of just study after study after study.

What i hate about this format is that the studies he talks about aren't in the book and they are like the only thing the tests are on, so if you miss some detail in the lecture, oh well. I'm going to probably spend this weekend looking up twenty or so 50 year old developmental psychology studies so that i actually do well on the test. Hopefully they are so well known that i won't have to dig too deep.

This class has been a disaster for so many reasons.

 

[joshie6891]

100% agree on that one. I know there's research for undergrad stats courses saying that the passion of the instructor for the subject is the single biggest influence on students' continued interest.

Yeah, I think it really can depend on the instructor. I've had the good fortune to have really passionate and interesting professors for my two stats classes. I liked both of them quite a bit. I think it would have been pretty boring otherwise... it's hard to present statistics in an interesting light, I think.

 

[JackD]

I have been studying for the test that is coming up for a few days in my developmental class and i would say that you guys are right when it comes to the teacher. I have been reading the book and it is far more fascinating than what he says in class. He beats around the bush too much. He basically has a debate with himself about the different views on various subjects and then after awhile gives up which side is right. The book just flat out tells you. It flows a lot better and it doesn't have you stuck on one, seemingly trivial subject. I wish i had picked a better teacher. Who knows how much i would have enjoyed this subject.