Gee, I'm going to use up my quota here. But that's exactly the point of having the sit-down exams, I believe, that we really had to KNOW the stuff; we didn't know exactly what would be asked of us so we had to know it all for each exam. As I recall, mine were in my concentration, outside my concentration, in statistics, and one more I must have repressed from my memory!
The one in my concentration, however, was unique in that I was handed a manuscript which my major prof had received for review for JEP and was asked to review it. It was a great way to challenge everything I knew that was done in the field but I suspect also helped him along with his review :-) Either way, though, while more stressful, I think I was forced to know more than I would have in just writing a paper......maybe???? Annette Quoting Nina Tarner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > 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 leave-tips- [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > b����.����\��� �&�v�-��������jwbz > v���{.n�+���zwZnV�����[h���z����|�������-n��y� Annette Kujawski Taylor, Ph. D. Department of Psychology University of San Diego 5998 Alcala Park San Diego, CA 92110 [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
