After a limited trial of online evaluations, General Faculties Council approved the move to online-only evaluations on September 22, 2014. (That’s why my course outlines for this term still had a date set aside for evaluations to be completed in class. I created those syllabi in August. Warm, sweet August.) The trials took place in Spring, Summer, and Fall terms in 2013. The results are available at the VPIT's website.
This abrupt change caught a lot of people off guard--we were officially told only on October 7. Instructors received a curt email with a link to a very limited FAQ and an attached technical document that was of no use or information to anyone who does not have backend administrative access to IT systems. (No, most instructors do not get backdoor access to Bear Tracks, PeopleSoft, or any other system. I wouldn’t want it anyway--it smells like more work.)
So what’s driving this move to online evaluations? Although you won’t see it anywhere, the idea is to reduce costs. No more printing forms, scanning them, and (in some cases of very small classes) transcribing students’ written responses. The rumour mill has whispered that it’s actually costing more to do online evals this term; the software platform (CoursEval) isn’t free, and people have to be trained how to use and modify it.
The biggest downside to eUSRIs? Lower response rates. Online evaluations are notorious for having significantly lower uptake than paper forms that are distributed during class time. Which brings me to my point.
Please please please please please please please please please complete your eUSRIs! Please? The results of USRIs are important for things like promotion (of tenure-stream faculty) and rehiring (of contract academic staff). Written comments are tremendously useful feedback; I look forward to them every time. Plus, sometimes they’re, you know, interesting.
So won’t you take a few minutes to evaluate your instructors this term--please?
Here’s the link: eUSRIs. Thank you in advance.
Why aren’t you studying?
On the one hand, "intersession" courses are easier because they're smaller, and full of awfully motivated students. I mean, you've gotta be motivated if you're taking classes when the weather's great and you could be working to earn money for next year's tuition.
But on the other hand, they're also tougher to teach, because they're compressed into 6 weeks. That's why I decided not to teach my behaviour modification course--the self-management project I designed requires students to collect data for a total of 4 weeks, in addition to other assignments. Reducing the length of the observation period would decrease the likelihood of success of any behaviour change procedure.
Anyhow, on to the comments. As usual, sarcasm filters are off!
From PSYCO 258:
Dr Kloepelm is great =)
(Aw, thanks. You're great, too, pandasnuggles69!
I didn't have any problem with the course except I wished Dr. Loepelmann could speak a little louder.(YOU WANT LOUDER? HOW'S THIS? MAYBE YOU COULD TELL ME TO SPEAK LOUDER *BEFORE* THE CLASS IS OVER!)
This course was a pleasant surprise with how interesting and informative it is. The Instructor (Karsten L.) made this class! I have heard that it is a very difficult and dry class from others. He provided a lot of time to speak to him after class which was very appreciated!
Dr. Loepelmann was awesome as usual - passionate, clear, helpful and engaging. I really appreciated all of the engage activities throughout lecture.
Karsten explained everything very well, but his jokes made me angry. Best dressed prof for sure though.
Karsten is a great prof and obviously is very passionate about psychology. I would take another class with him. The only complaint I have about this course was the textbook. It is very dry and boring. Karsten is also very well dressed and I appreciate his shirt and tie combinations.(Hey, thanks, I really appreciate the--wait, what? You like my clothes? I'll be sure to tell my wife, who picks them out for me. My jokes made you angry? Which one? "A Jewish person, a Polish person, and a visible minority person walk into a bar..."? I must be telling it wrong.)
From PSYCO 367:
You're a gem
This is my 4th class w/ Lopelmann, by far my favourite prof so far in university!
(Take one more class, and maybe you'll be able to spell my name right!)
Teacher was enthusiastic but sometimes spoke to us like 5-year olds.
(Aww, what's wrong pumpkin? You wanna have a lollipop? Oops, sorry. Though I was speaking to my 5-year-old.)
- I like the practical case studies you presented (eg: colours of hockey jerseys or detergent colour)
- update on the McCollough Effect: 2 weeks and going strong
(Call me when you get to 2 years. Maybe we'll write a paper.)
You were a blast when I had you in into psych in like 2003. You are still a blast. Thanks for being so enthusiastic about teaching. It was swell.(2003? Whoa, that takes me back.Thanks for sticking with me for, er, 11 years. Are you going to graduate soon?)
Give the man a raise
(Hey, I do this for the love of it--not the money.)
Did a great job explaining concepts, but sometimes it is hard to hear him or he talks too fast.
I understand why you have fill in the blanks, but please explain + show them at the same time during lecture. Some people learn best with audio AND visual cues at the same time. I know you want people to pay attention but please consider this.(Thanks for the feedback.)
Thank you for taking your time to make the course interesting. Your efforts definitely made an impact on my motivation to learn and pay attention in this class (=(My pleasure.)
Why aren't you studying?
Still, it was fun to go to panels and meet some cool celebs. Like Kunal Nayyar and Simon Helberg. I had to get their autographs. No, really: I had to. My wife insisted. And seeing as how she was looking after the kids all weekend while her husband got to go to the Comic Expo, how could I say no? You can really judge the status of a celebrity by how much they charge you for their autograph. Each of these gentlemen charged $70. I guess when you're on the top TV show, you can do that. (I've heard that Sigourney Weaver was asking $175 in Calgary. Yikes!)
I also got a couple of Tiny Titans comics, that were autographed by Art Baltazar. No, he wasn't at the con; I scored these out of a bin--only $5 each.
Man, the Expo has grown. I've been going to it for a few years, and every time it's just bigger and bigger. More exhibitors, more fans, more costumes, more everything. (No, I don't dress up. What would I go as? No, really, I need suggestions. One person has suggested that I look Bruce Boxleitner-ish. Should I get a Tron costume? A skin-tight, body-hugging suit that lights up? See, this is why I don't dress up.)
Ooh, here's a cool thing (above). It's now one of my most prized nerd possessions. Anyone know what it is? (And do you get why there's a Superman logo on the box?) Hint: here's some info that comes with it:
Warning: Ring does not allow wearer to fly, does not protect wearer from adverse environmental conditions, provides no tracking or navigational aids, does not come with communication or recording capabilities
However, owning one does contribute to an enhanced sense of well-being, because, well, you have this awesome ring
Like last year, as a VIP I was lucky enough to get a bag of Expo merchandise, including an Edmonton Expo shoulder-strap bag, water-bottle thingy (never used), T-shirt (size medium, never worn), Telus World of Science drink holder, comic book, and blue dice (?). If you would like to win this package, leave a comment below describing your particular brand of nerdliness. I will pick one commenter on Thursday, October 9 at noon, and after successfully answering a skill-testing question, that person will be the proud owner of this cool swag.)
Why aren't you studying?
Last year, I worked on a research project in my PSYCO 104 classes. (I've referred to it as the "Secret Project", only because I didn't want to influence students too much.) One class was a control, the other was the experimental group. The latter group had to do a lot of extra work.
I made students go to a website (or two). Some websites had students do experiments online, like taking a left-brain/right-brain "test," or making judgments of stimuli that comprised a visual illusion. Next, students had to go online and discuss their findings with other members of their 5-person group. Finally, one person was chosen by the group to submit a summary of the discussion, which was marked. There were 10 of these assignments. These assignments were intended to foster greater engagement with the material: students didn't just go to class and read the textbook. Rather, they had to try and apply what they knew to these online examples, and compare and contrast their findings with that of other students.
The experimental class also used a different textbook that came with a rich set of online tools. The platform, from publisher McGraw-Hill, is called Connect. It included an adaptive testing tool called LearnSmart (which is also available as an app for iOS and Android). LearnSmart asks you questions about things you've read in the textbook, but it also asks you how confident you are before you answer. It's assessing your metacognition: your knowledge of how much you know. One of the things new learners have difficulty with is knowing that they don't know everything. That is, they are overconfident they know it all. LearnSmart was designed to give feedback on your actual learning--not just your perception of it. I chose these resources to make mobile learning easier. That is, you can pull out your phone and do a bunch of LearnSmart questions, which can help you identify the things that you need to work on understanding better.
At the end of the course, both the control and experimental classes were given questions about their experiences. The results are in--and they're posted on the APRIL website. You'll see that, on some questions, there were no differences between the classes. (For example, "Reviewed your notes prior to class" showed no difference--no surprise.) However, other questions related to engagement showed a statistically significant difference (e.g., "Discussed ideas based on your readings or classes with others outside of class (students, family members, co-workers, etc." increased in the experimental class).
I also looked to see if students in the experimental class fared better on exam questions based on my lecture notes. Nope, no difference. (There was a difference in exam means, but there was a confound: The control class used a different textbook than the experimental class. The experimental class's averages were higher, but many exam questions were drawn from the textbook, which was not as "high-level" as the book I used in the control class.)
It's important for me to send out a thank-you to all of the students in my classes who were involved in this project. It wouldn't have been possible without you! I'm still pondering the implications of the results. I think they may have led to one change already: the new textbook adopted by the Department of Psychology this year is published by McGraw-Hill, and includes Connect and LearnSmart. I found it to be very useful (and students have informally told me that they liked it, too.)
Why aren't you studying?
Both my girls played soccer this year, which meant that almost every evening from May to June was a mad rush to scarf down dinner and zip off to a game or practice.
It was worth it, though, to see my girls having fun on the pitch. (Full disclosure: Yeah, it's super fun for me too!) I’m especially proud of my elder daughter and her team, “Whiplash!” They won gold at the Slurpee Cup (U10 Girls Pool D), and went on to pick up a silver medal at the City Finals (U10 Girls Tier 5).
On a perfect evening at Commonwealth Stadium, the girls and us parents watched a couple of U-20 Women’s World Cup matches. My favourite was watching Germany beat the USA. (It was amazing to see Germany play and win the quarter final here, too! And then go on to win gold. But in Montréal, sigh.) I can’t wait to take my girls to the Women’s World Cup matches that are going to be played here next year.
But the highlight of the summer (of the year? of the past 24 years?) was watching the Men’s World Cup. I don’t watch much TV--except every 4 years. Then I go on a major soccer binge, with hope in my heart that Die Mannschaft will earn another star on their jerseys. Which, of course, they did. The day of the final, we were on a weekend beach vacation. But my eldest daughter and I went back to our hotel to watched the game. (I wonder if any other guests heard some insane cheering coming from one of the rooms during the game.)
So, yeah, I'm a big fan of Germany. But don't get me wrong: I'm Canadian, born and raised, and I do cheer for Canada first. (Do I cheer for German teams in hockey? Er, not so much. Let me put it this way: If Canada gets eliminated in a tournament, then I'll cheer on the German side. But hey, how often will that ever happen? *crickets chirping*)
Somewhere among all the soccer, I managed to win the Klawe prize (yay me!).
The family went to K-Days. Here, I’m about to enjoy a deep-fried Twinkie. (Hey, I only indulge like this once a year!) It was surprisingly good. I’m looking forward to having one again next year. Or maybe I’ll try the deep-fried Mars bar...
And we had the requisite beach vacations, at Aspen Beach on Gull Lake. We like it because it fulfills our three criteria: beach, playground, and ice cream. Check, check, check. Our usual destination has been Sylvan Lake, but sadly, the water level is so high there’s really no beach anymore. We did pass through, but we only stopped at the Big Moo for an ice cream.
After that, we visited Ellis Bird Farm, where we saw purple martins, mountain bluebirds, and baby ducks, and enjoyed a nice lunch at the teahouse when it started to rain.
I bought a new car--my first in over 10 years--this summer: a hybrid. It was an expensive buy; good thing I still have a job after what happened last year. So far, I like it a lot. It has all-wheel drive, so I'm expecting to like it even more when the snow falls and I don't get stuck in the snow outside of my house again. And miss a midterm. That was embarrassing.
And, of course, I spent every spare moment in between working. On what? Doing data entry/data analysis from my student engagement and mobile learning project. Writing lectures and going to team meetings for Science 100. Reading textbooks and going to meetings for the intro psych textbook committee. And updating the rest of my other courses.
What about you? What did you do on your summer vacation?
Why aren’t you studying?
Contrary to what you might think, we instructors do not love spending time reading through dozens of introductory psychology textbooks. In fact, the Associate Chair (Undergraduate) was having none of it; something to the effect of “over my dead body.” Yeah, no one loves doing a textbook review. However, there was growing sentiment in favour of looking at new textbooks; this included some pressure from the publishing company representatives (“textbook reps”) who we often deal with, and also their bosses. (There were Marketing Managers and Vice Presidents of publishing companies flying out from Toronto to talk to us.) Next thing I knew, an intro psych textbook review committee was struck, and I was on it. And the Associate Chair is (to the best of my knowledge) still alive.
Our first step was not to gather together every intro psych textbook that’s still in print. Over my dead body. No, literally--that would kill me. That many books would outweigh me by 10 times. And I’d probably retire before I finished reading all of them. (Hint: There are a lot of intro psych textbooks.) No, our first step was to figure out how to reduce the number of books to something manageable.
Plus, we were on a tight deadline. Our committee was put together in early March. Plenty of time to get ready for September, right? But consider this: How long does it take you to read a textbook? Exactly. And then, after the book has been chosen, many of us who teach intro psych change our lecture notes to reflect the content of the new book, make up new exams, and so on. That takes time. So: The sooner we could decide on a book, the better.
But could we even all agree on a single book? For the longest time, there have been two books used by intro psych instructors. It would be ideal if the decision were unanimous, but usually there has been a dissenter going his own way, picking the book he liked best, even if the rest of the committee didn’t. Um, that would be me.
Moving ahead, we decided to narrow the field by asking each major publisher for their best book. That means, among other things, their highest-level book. See, not all intro textbook are created equal. Some are aimed at the community college/high school market. (No, we’re not interested in that--UAlberta is one of the top “Medical Doctoral” universities in Canada.) There are also abbreviated textbooks that fit what we would teach in two single-term courses into one. (That’s not for us, either).
That left us with a shortlist of nine books, from McGraw-Hill Ryerson, Nelson/Cengage, Pearson, W. W. Norton, Wiley, and Worth. Wait, six publishers and nine books? Some publishers submitted multiple entries; some publishers had a new textbook written by American authors, but also a “Canadianized” version of the same book updated by Canadian authors. (A Canadian edition would be nice, but was not an absolute requirement for us.)
Armed with our stacks of books, we cracked them open and started to read. The books are provided to us for free, although many publishers encourage us to read their books online at CourseSmart (an online platform for ebooks).
This, we all decided, would be our criteria for selecting our textbook: The content. Not whizzy cool interactive online this, or shiny neat adaptive testing that, or pedagogically relevant student-tested learning management system the-other. Just the content. Books started to fall by the wayside. All things being equal, we do like to see Canadian content. Many committee members (myself included) required a chapter on genetic and evolutionary influences on behaviour. (Many American textbooks leave evolution out, for fear of alienating potential customers whose religious views would be offended by any mention of Darwin. Tsk.) One committee member made up a list of all the errors that one book had. Not typos, but egregious problems with the content. Yikes.
By early June, we had our list down to, well, one book. Yeah, for the first time since the late 1990s, we were unanimous. It’s a high-level, Canadianized book that’s been around a while. It’s got an interactive online platform (Connect), and an interactive study tool that uses adaptive testing (LearnSmart). The company has even done research to demonstrate the effectiveness of these tools. I’m really happy with our choice: Psychology: Frontiers and Applications (5th Canadian edition), by Michael Passer, Ronald Smith, Michael Atkinson, John Mitchell, and Darwin Muir, published by McGraw-Hill Ryerson. (See the custom edition covers at the top of the page.)
And price? Yeah, we got you covered. Instead of just ordering the hardcopy textbook (half of which is used in PSYCO 104, the other half in PSYCO 105), we asked for a custom edition that split the book in half and is softcover bound; this brings your on-the-shelf price down. In fact, it should be about $80 at the Bookstore, which is about half of what it would be for the full hardcover textbook.
Why aren’t you studying?
- ▼ 2014 (15)
- ► 2013 (26)
- ► 2012 (29)
- ► 2011 (34)
- ► 2010 (29)
- ► 2009 (41)