The problem is that all of this assumes the final measure of a students benefit from a class comes at the end of the class, and assumption I'm not willing to make.
WARNING anecdotal support ahead! Many students comment that because of my introductory psychology class they have decided to minor in psychology. I attribute this interest in psychology to "bringing the class to life" with these "seductive details" (this is not to say that there are not other means of bringing the class to life). Hopefully at the conclusion of the student's academic career they have net gain in understanding of psychology (not simply from the class in question but from the whole experience of several classes they would not have otherwise taken). But what of the student who never takes another class? The question becomes what is important. If 5 years from now a student remembers the Watson left academics and went into advertising and thus they recall that there is a connection between psychology and advertising. I do not realistically expect them to be able to recall everything they once studied about operant conditioning and how it might be used in some application. What I expect of my students is that they will know how to "relearn" that important content when they really need it. To do so requires that they remember having learned the material once, not that they remember it verbatim at that later point in time. I will say that this e-mail exchange is exactly the type of discussion and exchange I want my students to engage in, this with where growth occurs, and I'll honestly admit that I accept Chris's (do you prefer Christopher?) argument as a valid one and am not fully sure I believe my own, but this "debate" is simply too much fun and too important to ignore. I fear my students don't understand that you can have a disagreement about something without trying to "win the point" or making it personal. I also don't think many recognize that simply engaging in the discussion is beneficial whether it changes anyone's mind or not. I'm going to turn off me e-mail now because I expect a flurry of disagreement. Doug Doug Peterson, Ph.D. Director of the Honors Program Associate Professor of Psychology 414 E. Clark The University of South Dakota Vermillion SD 57069 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Honors Program: (605) 677-5223 Dept. of Psychology: (605) 677-5295 -----Original Message----- From: Christopher D. Green [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, August 13, 2005 10:17 AM To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences Subject: Re: 'seductive details' in lecture Don Allen wrote: > Show me a study that indicates that the inclusion of "seductive > details" makes students less interested in a course or less likely to > take future courses in that subject and I will be quite concerned. In > the meantime I will continue to spice up my lectures without fear. Responding to both Don Allen and Doug Peterson: I hate to get into a game of "burden tennis" here, but it seems to me that the study in question effectively undermines this common, but wholly undemonstrated assumption that "seductive details" really do increase student interest. If "seductive details" were really making students more interested in the topic, then they would be reading more closely and doing better on tests. But, apparentlly, they are not. In the face of that fact, it seems unlikely that they are craftily waiting until the exam is over to manifest their (hypothetical) increase in interest. 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] --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
