On 26 Oct 2002 at 19:02, David Hogberg wrote:
Just between us, I'm rather embarrassed that Gazzaniga has been apprised
of this little tempest. The whole thread has been more than a little
shallow and trite, snip Surely there are more important aspects of this text (or
any other) that we
The suggestion that textbook cover art is a subject worthy of examination is
an interesting one, but it should be extended to the general question of
text art. I have been struck in recent years by the number of illustrations
that seem marginally related to the subject matter and are presumably
Title: Re: Gazzaniga's intro text
I agree. Gazzaniga would want to know. And while
we're on the topic of pictures, I'll mention that our department
dropped the use of a particular text based on the nature of its biased
coverage of race in the context of IQ and cognitive social
development, and
I agree with Stephen. I cannot tell you how many times my family has found me
rolling on the floor in tears (of laughter) at some of the clever, and
creative, albeit off-topics responses, on this list!
Keep 'em coming
annette
(and yes, I also subscribe to psychteacher for its pedagogical
I agree with Mark that it is the general question of text art
and illustration that should be examined. My impression from
casual conversations with authors of introductory textbooks is
that they have little control over the illustrations that
appear. These items are the products of
On Sun, 27 Oct 2002 10:46:13 -0500 Charlotte Manly
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I agree. Gazzaniga would want to know. And while we're on the topic
of pictures, I'll mention that our department dropped the use of a
particular text based on the nature of its biased coverage of race in
the
Ken Steele wrote:
If some
fairy [a good or bad fairy, depending on your druthers] were to
make your current intro psych textbook disappear, how much
impact would this have on your course? How difficult would it be
to continue with your course? I think of how many more
interesting books
I have used several different intro. textbooks and loved them. I'm stumped
trying to recall pictures or illustrations that were wrong. I can remember
some typos, even a couple of things I wished authors had included, but no
real goofs.
Anytime I find a textbook doesn't fit the type of class I'm
Well, I hate to be smug (no I don't!) but I have to say that Tricia
Keith-Spiegel's belly-dancing anecdote just posted together with
David Hogberg's story about Michael Gazzaniga being told to use his
right hemisphere, man! are alone worth the price of admission to
this thread. Eat your heart
Marcia:
I do this, although not in intro lately because I haven't been
teaching intro lately.
As to the coverage issue, I think there are two replies to this
concern. One point that has been made by other posters on TIPS
concerns the function of the intro course. The intro course
should
Well, mea culpa, but that (the objection) was quite early in the fray.
Maybe a little non-psychological levity is ok, but beyond that arbitrary
point, enough is enough.DKH
David K. Hogberg, PhD
Professor of Psychology, Emeritus
Albion College, Albion MI 49224
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 517/629-4834
All- Having sat back and listened for a while, I'd like to add this to the notes on
the Gazzaniga cover. While some may find it indicative of a conspiracy, I suspect the
cover shot was chosen at least in part because the publisher's already owned the
rights or it is public domain (or just old
12 matches
Mail list logo
