Teaching Intro to Psych

[psychstudent5]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

I need some assistance. I'm teaching an Intro to Psych course. I wanted to know if those of you who taught this course before or other psych courses, did you schedule review sessions before each test (mine are non-cumulative) or give study guides? I gave them their first test and the scores were not good. Before the test (3rd week of school), a couple of students were asking me to give them a study guide or to have a review session. I stated at the outset of the course that I do not do review sessions. I told them that the class lecture and the text will be on the test. I told them that the test will be mostly made-up of material we went over in class, but there will be questions from the text, which may not have gone over. I told them that they can schedule to meet after class if they have any questions or concerns. When I took Intro to Psych in undergrad, I did not have a review class nor a study guide, everything in the chapters were fair game. I wanted to know how you all approach your classes.

 

[cara susanna]

I haven't taught Intro, but I always give out a study guide before each exam to my Developmental class. I also go over quizzes with my class before each exam as a way to review.

 

[Pragma]

Just depends on your teaching philosophy. I don't provide study guides or have special review sessions. Sometimes we'll do a mini-review during class, but I usually direct students to meet with me individually to discuss questions otherwise.

Not giving a study guide is unpopular. But if you give them a study guide, most students will only study the study guide. That being the case (in my view), a study guide is really just a glorified homework assignment.

You can provide some guidance for students without giving a study guide. You can tell them what you don't expect from them (e.g., don't memorize all of the dates or the p value from Skinner's experiments), but that also depends on how you test. When students prepare for a test in my classes, I expect them to review all of their material (notes, readings, etc), but not memorize everything. I guess we generally make it clear (ideally) what concepts we emphasize in a course.

 

[Doctor Eliza]

I didn't teach intro, but I taught other classes. I usually gave study guides. I had two major reasons. 1. I would rather have them learn the most important aspects of the material than waste time studying things that were not as essential. 2. At that point in my career, it was more important to have good course evaluations than be a hard ass. It is worth considering. I'm not saying you just give in an give everyone an A, but on the other hand, you don't need to be the toughest instructor they ever had either (save that for when you have tenure and no one cares what you do to the students). It worked well for me. I enjoyed teaching and my students liked me and seemed to get something out of the class.

One thing to keep in mind is that you are likely teaching a lot of students who are um....lower caliber students than you are. Most UG's don't have the ability to make it into a psych PhD program. So setting your expectations super high is going to result in misery all around. It was an adjustment for me. I went to an UG where most of the students were very intense and academic. I went to a grad school with a greater range of undergrads. We had the intellectual sorts, but also a huge group who were there to drink and delay getting a real job for another 4-6 years.

My advice is that grad school is stressful enough, don't spend energy fighting undergrads.

Best,
Dr. E

 

[Pragma]

I didn't teach intro, but I taught other classes. I usually gave study guides. I had two major reasons. 1. I would rather have them learn the most important aspects of the material than waste time studying things that were not as essential. 2. At that point in my career, it was more important to have good course evaluations than be a hard ass. It is worth considering. I'm not saying you just give in an give everyone an A, but on the other hand, you don't need to be the toughest instructor they ever had either (save that for when you have tenure and no one cares what you do to the students). It worked well for me. I enjoyed teaching and my students liked me and seemed to get something out of the class.

One thing to keep in mind is that you are likely teaching a lot of students who are um....lower caliber students than you are. Most UG's don't have the ability to make it into a psych PhD program. So setting your expectations super high is going to result in misery all around. It was an adjustment for me. I went to an UG where most of the students were very intense and academic. I went to a grad school with a greater range of undergrads. We had the intellectual sorts, but also a huge group who were there to drink and delay getting a real job for another 4-6 years.

My advice is that grad school is stressful enough, don't spend energy fighting undergrads.

Best,
Dr. E

You make some good points, but I would argue it isn't black and white. You can set reasonable expectations for a range of students without being a "hardass" IMO 😀 and we don't all necessarily expect students to grasp material in the same way we did. I think there is a danger in setting the bar too low.

I will note however that with your bolded point, I think it is our job as instructors to put energy into teaching these courses. Otherwise, we aren't really much better than a tenured professor that is "checked-out" for other reasons.

 

[Doctor Eliza]

You make some good points, but I would argue it isn't black and white. You can set reasonable expectations for a range of students without being a "hardass" IMO 😀 and we don't all necessarily expect students to grasp material in the same way we did. I think there is a danger in setting the bar too low.

I will note however that with your bolded point, I think it is our job as instructors to put energy into teaching these courses. Otherwise, we aren't really much better than a tenured professor that is "checked-out" for other reasons.

I put a hell of a lot of energy into prepping and designing an engaging course. I did not, however, sweat the small stuff and set myself up for lots of complaints. I was far from checked out. That is not what I was suggesting.

 

[bmedclinic]

I taught intro last year. I hated it.
My perspective is that regardless of my time and effort, it was a thankless job. My class has 55 students in it, and maybe 4 or 5 took a special interest in psychology and "plugged in". I made sure to use standardized, MC tests and some students would get a 104 on the test and others would get a 34 and inevitably, email me complaining about how hard the test was. And yes, that was with a review. I very much doubt I was a hardass, but I left that course deciding that a) college isnt for everyone and b) I definitely do not want teaching undergrads to be a part of my career. Many, many times I've mulled over what I could have done differently to make it a rewarding experience for myself and moreso for the students than it was, and to be honest-- I've got nothing. I wonder if short essay tests would be better even though the grading would be more subjective? I got nothing for you.. but I'm hoping someone can read my poor experience and figure out what I was missing so as to keep you from having a poor experience.

 

[Pragma]

I put a hell of a lot of energy into prepping and designing an engaging course. I did not, however, sweat the small stuff and set myself up for lots of complaints. I was far from checked out. That is not what I was suggesting.

Oh I didn't mean it that way. But we might define "small stuff" differently and that is in part the beauty of teaching - we can have different philosophies that may or may not fit different institutions.

I generally found that setting very clear policies like these up front minimized later complaints and made things go very smoothly. But it does open you up to potential discussions with students, which I don't mind having because I feel very strongly about the criteria for student evaluation and that students should study material comprehensively.

FWIW, as a TT professor, I can say that student evaluations are viewed critically. Even though I'm generally popular with my students, tenure committees want to see that you aren't just being easy. I've even heard some people say that they view some student complaints/negative comments as a positive during the tenure process, as you aren't "selling out" by setting your expectations too low. What is very important is that you can articulate a rationale for why to have certain policies and that that rationale relates directly to the objectives of your program.

 

[Bex223]

I taught Intro for 6 semesters, and I really enjoyed it. I gave 3 exams throughout the semester (in addition to multiple written assignments), so there was a decent amount of material on each exam. I did give a "review" sheet, but basically it just listed overarching topics to be familiar with on the exam - still broad enough that they would have to read and study, but helped trim down some of the material that I found to be less important for them to spend time on. I then spent 1 class period (50 mins.) "reviewing", which basically entailed using that study guide as a jumping off point for having them verbally explain concepts, ask questions they had developed prior to that study session, etc. I felt this gave some guidance to those students who were invested and trying, but didn't make it so easy that those not invested could just memorize a study sheet and still pull off an A. I had students say that this "quick and dirty" review was helpful, but that they couldn't have relied just on that for success in the class. Hope this is at all helpful!

 

[Pragma]

I taught Intro for 6 semesters, and I really enjoyed it. I gave 3 exams throughout the semester (in addition to multiple written assignments), so there was a decent amount of material on each exam. I did give a "review" sheet, but basically it just listed overarching topics to be familiar with on the exam - still broad enough that they would have to read and study, but helped trim down some of the material that I found to be less important for them to spend time on. I then spent 1 class period (50 mins.) "reviewing", which basically entailed using that study guide as a jumping off point for having them verbally explain concepts, ask questions they had developed prior to that study session, etc. I felt this gave some guidance to those students who were invested and trying, but didn't make it so easy that those not invested could just memorize a study sheet and still pull off an A. I had students say that this "quick and dirty" review was helpful, but that they couldn't have relied just on that for success in the class. Hope this is at all helpful!

That sounds like a somewhat similar strategy to what I use. I also think it is a good idea that if you do give a review/study sheet, to be vague like you mentioned. 👍

 

[Ollie123]

I've even heard some people say that they view some student complaints/negative comments as a positive during the tenure process, as you aren't "selling out" by setting your expectations too low.

This gives me some hope our educational system. Its certainly not all, but I know many people who get good evals by being extremely lenient and focusing entirely on making class "fun". There is certainly a place for that and I use activities too, but I've seen some push it to the point where I'm doubtful the students are learning anything.

I think its a fine line to walk. I probably err a little on the "hardass" side, but have yet to anyone try and go over my head. I think many of them forget/don't fully understand in the first place I'm still a grad student and not faculty so they may be less inclined to try that. I've had the usual "I want to go to med school, I know I didn't earn an A but can I have one anyways?" stuff but usually no more than a couple email exchanges to convince them it ain't happening. I also have a supportive department, which helps my comfort level a great deal with those issues.

My reviews have generally been pretty solid overall (>4 out of 5 on the rating scale we use), but I'm always amazed at the variability. As with many things, for me the trick to teaching is figuring out when to call it complete. Just like papers, analysis, literature reviews, etc. you can always do more to make something better. Eventually you see diminishing returns and even before then you often have to make sacrifices for other things you consider more important (in my case, research). Learning when to stop is key.

 

[Pragma]

As with many things, for me the trick to teaching is figuring out when to call it complete. Just like papers, analysis, literature reviews, etc. you can always do more to make something better. Eventually you see diminishing returns and even before then you often have to make sacrifices for other things you consider more important (in my case, research). Learning when to stop is key.

👍

Absolutely. Without some kind of adequate boundary on any type of work, you can spend more time than you should.

I think teaching has its own unique set of parameters to get used to. You have to be able to keep in mind your schema for the whole semester as well as each course/week/module, learn how to be flexible within and between those frames of reference, and time-manage like crazy until you get used to what it is like. Personally, I find it very exciting because generally things are different each term, and the students bring in different experiences.

My general advice is that high expectations are not a bad thing at all as long as you also demonstrate respect and consideration for your students' lives and viewpoints. it isn't a matter of saying "because I said so" - it is a matter of treating people like adults and saying "because this is why it is important to you" and making those reasons applicable to their goals outside of the classroom. This is really what takes effort (not the study guide!), and I find the rapport with students/outcomes to be particularly rewarding.

Back to the OP - even though I may be a "hardass" and don't give a study guide, I may offer up an EC question or two on the exam as an olive branch of sorts 😀

 

[NotTheHoff]

I don't give detailed study guides but have a general review session. There are two key things I focus on: at the start of the course I offer a Rule of Thumb that the more I talk about something, the more likely it is critical to the course and, thus, the more likely they will be expected to understand it on a test. Then, in the review session I emphasize the difference between basic and applied questions, give general examples of these, and explain the test will be a mix of these.

The truth is there will be a few students that will do great no matter what you do, and there will be a few students who bomb no matter what you do. You can give them the tools, but if you're fair it's ultimately up to them.

 

[Bex223]

My department also provided me with prior years' grades (and overall distributions), so I could check my sections against the long-standing trends. Most sections (including mine) ended up with similar averages and bimodal distributions. Granted, there are differences in professors, teaching styles, etc., but it at least provided some basic comparison to see if my students were either grossly over- or under-performing compared to other semesters (and more importantly, if I was doing something that was impacting their grades - being too harsh, too lenient, etc.). Not sure if that is an option for you, but I found it helpful to put my students' grades into perspective compared to prior students' performances.

 

[HomeworkHelper]

I taught 3 different classes (Intro, Abnormal, and Research methods) over the course of 6 years, so here is my two cents in response to the OP. I typically did provide study guides that involved key terms and concepts for the MC questions. (If you have essay questions, I can tell you how I dealt with that on study guides as well). The study guide was thorough enough that they still had to do a lot of studying, but the students liked having a "checklist" of sorts. Now, this may go against other's strategies, but I would also tell students that if it wasn't on the study guide, it wasn't on the test. Otherwise, there would tend to be anxiety-prone individuals that would try to memorize as much of the book as possible. Now, I did not provide a separate review session prior to each test, but I would give out the study guide at least a week in advance and typically took 15-20 minutes of the class before the test to answer any questions people had. OP, when you mentioned that students didn't do well, I'm glad you're wondering about ways to change things up. I would maybe compare notes with others teaching the same class to see where their grade distributions fall. If your class is doing noticeably worse, the likelihood it has something to do with the way you are teaching the class or helping them prepare for the test is probably much higher.

 

[HomeworkHelper]

My department also provided me with prior years' grades (and overall distributions), so I could check my sections against the long-standing trends. Most sections (including mine) ended up with similar averages and bimodal distributions. Granted, there are differences in professors, teaching styles, etc., but it at least provided some basic comparison to see if my students were either grossly over- or under-performing compared to other semesters (and more importantly, if I was doing something that was impacting their grades - being too harsh, too lenient, etc.). Not sure if that is an option for you, but I found it helpful to put my students' grades into perspective compared to prior students' performances.

Great advice, Bex. I think I was composing my response when you posted, so I didn't see it until after I mentioned comparing grades with other courses as well. Much better than I could have said it!

 

[psychstudent5]

Thanks so much to everyone in this thread who offered advice.

I think my expectations may have been to high considering the students. For subsequent tests, I will give them a study guide and offer a 20-minute review session or something. I told them prior to their first test that they can email me or set up an appointment with me to clarify any information. For the first test, I told them that most of the test items will come from lecture and power point, but there will be items on the tests from the book, meaning things we did not cover in class. For future tests, I will just stick to what we went over in class. I am planning to hand them a tip sheet I created of how to take multiple choice tests (so many students left test items blank), how to take notes, and how to study. A part of me is concerned with "Am I challenging them or am I maintaining where they are at [in terms of their achievement expectations]?"

Thanks again to everyone

 

[dumbledoresgirl]

That's nice that you get to make up your own tests (aka cater them to what you teach in class). Our TAs all give out the same multiple-choice tests (which are created by the department), so they have no input as to what the students get tested on (and they don't see the tests before they administer them, so they can't even really tell students what to study). All the students get is "study the book and your notes." No study guide, no review session...maybe that's why the average is a C? 🙄

 

[Pragma]

That's nice that you get to make up your own tests (aka cater them to what you teach in class). Our TAs all give out the same multiple-choice tests (which are created by the department), so they have no input as to what the students get tested on (and they don't see the tests before they administer them, so they can't even really tell students what to study). All the students get is "study the book and your notes." No study guide, no review session...maybe that's why the average is a C? 🙄

Isn't a c supposed to be average? Just sayin 😉

It is really interesting to me how people consider their approach. Personally, I'd rather curve a test than make it easier. I am against study guides because I don't think they help students develop real world skills...and I am okay with them learning stuff that isn't on the test!

But I also think it is really important to use assignments that go beyond rote knowledge. Anything to connect things to the real world will probably stick with them longer than test knowledge, although both are important for an intro course 🙂

 

[EmotRegulation]

I always give a study guide that in my mind is completely useless (a listing of the topics that will be covered on the exam, usually a list of the major chapter sections of the textbook and additional stuff we talked about only in class) but it takes about 20 minutes to put together and makes the students feel better, so.....I keep doing it. There is no way that looking at the "study guide" will replace actual studying, and I'm not doing anything beyond organizing information the same way the textbook does. I'm on the "hardass" side of things, with high expectations for my students, and a heavy workload, so the small things that help me seem more benevolent and giving are worth it for me.

 

[PsychPhDone]

Just depends on your teaching philosophy. I don't provide study guides or have special review sessions. Sometimes we'll do a mini-review during class, but I usually direct students to meet with me individually to discuss questions otherwise.

Not giving a study guide is unpopular. But if you give them a study guide, most students will only study the study guide. That being the case (in my view), a study guide is really just a glorified homework assignment.

My philosophy is very similar. I don't do study guides. I get great evals. I do ofter a couple of "optional" segments of lecture prior to exams where we talk about study priorities, and I suggest how students can make their own study guides.

 

[cara susanna]

Part of my leniancy with exams is because I think that there's more to learning the material than rote memorization. Heck, I still have to look up the ages at which Piaget's stages start and end.

 

[Pragma]

Part of my leniancy with exams is because I think that there's more to learning the material than rote memorization. Heck, I still have to look up the ages at which Piaget's stages start and end.

With Intro, I used a lot of short answer type questions and MC. These days I haven't been teaching Intro, but I am doing more essay exams in other classes.

I think a good combo is best - some MC/short answer/essay exams, some papers, some assignments, and of course fun 😀

 

[Ollie123]

Out of curiosity Pragma - how many students do you have?

I'm just curious since I can't fathom doing anything but MC questions. Then again, my current 100-person class is on the "smaller" end for me so I can see how it might work if you are getting smaller classes.

I firmly believe that in an ideal world, MC exams would not exist and everything would be short answer/essay based. That is one of the things I've had to give up though given that grading (and dealing with the additional whining that goes along with any semi-subjective grading) was taking wayyyy more time than I could justify devoting to teaching duties at this stage in my career.

 

[Pragma]

Out of curiosity Pragma - how many students do you have?

I'm just curious since I can't fathom doing anything but MC questions. Then again, my current 100-person class is on the "smaller" end for me so I can see how it might work if you are getting smaller classes.

I firmly believe that in an ideal world, MC exams would not exist and everything would be short answer/essay based. That is one of the things I've had to give up though given that grading (and dealing with the additional whining that goes along with any semi-subjective grading) was taking wayyyy more time than I could justify devoting to teaching duties at this stage in my career.

My largest Intro class was 60, smallest about 25, and a fair amount in between. Yes, it is more time-consuming to do short answers (not sure I would have with 100 unless I had a TA helping). But considering that the only time it takes to grade a MC exam is how long it needs to go through the scanner, and how few exams there are per term, it seemed worth the extra effort (maybe 1/2 day of grading). But I also didn't load people up with a lot of assignments. Usually a couple of papers and maybe a group project, so it wasn't like I was grading every week.

I teach more graduate classes now - love the small seminars because it takes me back 🙂

I think it would be tough teaching at an R1. I actually don't mind having larger classes, but it just seems like any extra effort one could put into teaching would be better spent elsewhere if you want to advance your career at the institution.

 

[Ollie123]

Oh that's much more manageable. I did have one smaller class (30) and did two full-length papers and at least some short answer/essays on all exams. Felt like it was a much better experience for the students but when I had 250 students and no TA the next time around...something had to give. Now I do in-class reaction papers just to get them writing a little (pretty much graded as pass-fail) and an extra-credit written project but that is it.

Was a pretty easy sacrifice here (an R1) given most faculty just do MC and generally the only ones who don't are the folks who aren't doing as much research-wise. Still debating about how I will go about things in the future (or for that matter, what path I want to pursue). Always hard to find a balance!