Doug,
As a fellow alum from Kansas State you probably know my answer to both questions. I,
myself, feel as though the preliminary exams are ridiculous! Not having taken them
too long ago ( a couple of years) this is probably a sore subject for me. :) I think
the idea of preliminary exams should be abolished all together. I always thought a
better idea would be to have students write a grant proposal and actually send it in.
This is the experience they will need after graduation, not who wrote which articles
on what date.
Nina
-----Original Message-----
From: Peterson, Douglas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wed 3/3/2004 10:27 PM
To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences
Cc:
Subject: Doctoral Preliminary Exams
We are currently struggling with revising the dreaded prelims (doctoral
preliminary examinations) process. It seems that our number one problem is lacking
ideas for alternatives to the status quo. So far the only thing the faculty are
unanimous on is that the current system needs to change, but all suggested changes
have failed to meet the required vote (2/3). I'm appealing to Tipsters in hopes of
getting some fresh ideas and thoughts on what prelims should be and why?
Question #1: Is the purpose of prelims to test competency in a solid knowledge
base (i.e., content exam) prior to doctoral work or in a general skill set (i.e. stats
and methods)?
Question #2: If it is content based should the content be broad (e.g., any
topic from PSYC 101) or narrow (in the test takers specialization).
Feel free to respond off list at [EMAIL PROTECTED] or on list - I'm curious to
see if the differences of opinion on this list are as great as they are in our
department.
Doug
Doug Peterson
Associate Professor of Psychology
The University of South Dakota
Vermillion SD 57069
(605) 677-5295
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
¢æ«yËéí—+.nÇ+‰·¶‹b¦Æj·!Š÷£iº+:.žË±Êâmë Ö•©äzf¢–Ú%y«Þ*lçÎôY§,ºwë¢Ë[º¸ v
