Here's the relevant statement from my own syllabus:

================
It should be noted that, as is common in many college level courses,
little time will be spent lecturing on topics adequately addressed by the
text. Students are expected to arrive at class meetings having already
read the material assigned, and to ask questions to clarify any areas that
remain unclear. While every attempt will be made to explain or expand upon
particularly difficult areas, the primary purpose of classroom lecture is
to enhance, rather than to duplicate, the textbook material. As a result,
it remains the responsibility of the student to insure that s/he does, in
fact, understand the material. Students who feel a need for greater
assistance in mastering the material than is implicit in such an approach
are strongly encouraged to contact the instructor as early as possible to
arrange for additional assistance. 
===============

The syllabus assigns specific chapters (normally the entire text is used,
sometimes with additional outside readings), so that statement combined
with the assignments should provide more than enough justification for
including material I don't specifically address in class on the quizzes.
For example, in three weeks (in my CRJ Psych course) the week's chapter is
titled "Homicide, Assault, and Family Violence," but except for some very
brief coverage of a couple points concerning homicide and assault that are
a bit vague in the text, my entire lecture will address the area of
Domestic Violence--a lecture I find far more important than one that
simply explains material that the book covers adequately. The quiz,
however, includes questions such as:

================
1.      The two categories of child-killing recommended by Resnick are:
a.      Infanticide and filicide.
b.      Infanticide and neonaticide.
c.      Neonaticide and filicide.
d.      Neonaticide and Naticide.

2.      The form of assault which involves "the intention to inflict
serious bodily injury," is called:
a.      Simple assault.
b.      Assault with intent to kill.
c.      Aggravated assault.
d.      Assault with a deadly weapon.

3.      The leading causes of death among African-American males in the
United States (in order of prevalence) are:
a.      Accidents; Suicide; Homicide.
b.      Suicide; Homicide; Accidents.
c.      Accidents; Homicide; Suicide.
d.      Homicide; Accidents; Suicide.

4.      The leading causes of death among White males in the United States
(in order of prevalence) are:
a.      Accidents; Suicide; Homicide.
b.      Suicide; Homicide; Accidents.
c.      Accidents; Homicide; Suicide.
d.      Homicide; Accidents; Suicide.
===============

None of these specific topics are discussed during lecture, but they are
very well addressed by the text itself.

Rick

--

Rick Adams
Capella University School of Technology
Grand Canyon University School of Social Sciences.
Jackson Community College Department of Social Sciences

[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

"... and the only measure of your worth and your deeds will be the love
you leave behind when you're gone." 
-Fred Small, J.D., "Everything Possible"

NOTICE: Any views expressed in this message are strictly my own and do not
necessarily represent the views of any organization or institution with
which I may be associated, nor do they necessarily represent the views or
values of the list or newsgroup in which they may appear.



-----Original Message-----
From: Christopher D. Green [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2004 8:50 AM
To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences
Subject: Re: is there a rule?

michael sylvester wrote:

> is there a rule somewhere that states that a prof must cover all the 
>parts of a chapter before giving a test on that chapter?
>My philosophy is that once a chapter is assigned students are 
>responsible for knowing it,even though I would not be able to cover it 
>all in class.
>
Indeed, when asked this question by students ("Do we have to know the
parts you didn't cover in lecture?") my standard response has become "You
are responsible for the material of the course. If I assigned it, you
might be examined on it (unless I specifically excluded certain
sections)." I have to say it so often that I should probably simply put a
statement to this effect on my outline.

When I'm feeling particularly puckish, though, I sometimes say, "You don't
have to know anything. You paid me thousands of dollars to teach it to
you. If you don't want to learn it, that's your business." 
Occasionally that clarifies the relationship that actually exists between
us. :-)

Regards,
--
Christopher D. Green
Department of Psychology
York University
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
M3J 1P3

e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
phone: 416-736-5115 ext. 66164
fax: 416-736-5814
http://www.yorku.ca/christo/


---
You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to