[email protected] wrote:
Let me re-focus this discussion:
Would one have different learning objectives for majors and for non-majors
taking the intro to psychology course.
This is one of the issues that has lead to debate.
The instructions to the departments were that the introductory
courses could not be just an introduction to the discipline but
had to be linked to other courses in other departments in a
manner that satisfied a general theme -- otherwise it was not a
*general* education course. The themes and their approval were
evaluated by another committee.
The requirement that departments provide a general education
experience devolved to the intro course because the course could
not have prerequisites in that discipline. (Otherwise, it is
just a course in the discipline.)
One can imagine many linkages that psychology could make with
other disciplines (sociology, biology, philosophy, ...).
But consider the case of the Chemistry department. It is being
asked to make the intro course something other than an
introduction to Chemistry.
The case of chemistry brought up another issue. We have several
professional-training programs (like Nursing). Their
certification requirements are specific on the courses and
contents of courses in allied disciplines. For the program to
receive national certification, course syllabi from chemistry
must be provided that demonstrate the student had certain
experiences in that class. Simultaneously, chemistry is being
told by the gen ed people that the course can't just be about
chemistry.
Ken
---------------------------------------------------------------
Kenneth M. Steele, Ph.D. [email protected]
Professor and Assistant Chairperson
Department of Psychology http://www.psych.appstate.edu
Appalachian State University
Boone, NC 28608
USA
---------------------------------------------------------------
---
To make changes to your subscription contact:
Bill Southerly ([email protected])
