I asked for a lot of feedback in PSYCH 258: Cognitive Psychology in Fall term because I was using a new textbook so this one’s gonna be extra long--I got 13 pages of feedback comments. Here are some carefully selected ones. And ya know what? There may be some degree of sarcasm contained in my responses. Ya never know.
Kinda hated the whole second website thing for the extra steps that the students have to do.
(The extra step of clicking a link? That's nothing! You should see all the extra time and effort it takes me to maintain that whole second website! I hate that! Boo! Boo I say!.)
The discrepancy between the layout of the professor's fill-in-the-blank notes and the textbook was quite confusing, making it harder to know what information was important to learn for the exams.
(I literally rewrote all of my lecture notes over the summer during my holiday time so that they would match the chapters in the textbook. No, I didn’t lecture on every single thing in the textbook. Does anyone? Plus, sometimes learning is hard; it is effortful. That doesn’t mean it’s not working; in fact, the opposite is true.)
The textbook is expensive and it is impossible to get a good grade (above 60%) without it.
If the professor wanted to take at least 50% of the exam questions and lab readings from textbook-only materials, he should have had the tuition cover the textbook fee as well, rather than forcing students to purchase an expensive subscription to an online textbook. I should be using a textbook as a supplementary tool to help me understand lecture materials, not to learn new materials that the professor did not cover or mention during classes.
Not a fan of all the required readings, majority of which were in an online resource that cost 60+$, however if I didn't pay the money for it, I would be at a disadvantage on exams were part of the questions came directly from readings which weren't covered in class.
I just hate how the textbook was a big part of this class. It was so inconvenient.
Awesome textbook -- really appreciate the integrated practice questions
(As usual, I get a lot of complaints about having a required textbook. Firstly, not to put too fine a point on it: you signed up for this course. I can only assume that means you want to learn about cognitive psychology. So I want to do the best possible job teaching that. I can only present a very limited amount of the breadth and depth of the field in lectures. Textbooks provide a valuable second perspective on things. Please don’t ask me to teach everything that’s in the textbook. That is literally impossible--and would not be enjoyable for anyone.
But I get it: a textbook means that more work, time, effort, and “inconvenience” is required. If I didn’t have a textbook, boom, less work! But I think some students don’t consider why I have a textbook at all. To make your life harder? To make the course harder? Why on earth would I do that?
Could it be that there is some value in, say, reading a textbook? Maybe…developing your skill in reading long-form text? This is, after all, how psychologists communicate with each other. Research studies are written up into papers that are published as articles. Improving your ability to read complex material like a textbook is a scaffolding to reading actual scientific journal articles. This is something you will certainly do in higher-level courses. Do you just want your first experience reading about psychology to be an incredibly complicated, dense, technical article? You’ll probably look back and be pissed off that no one helped you get to this point.
Most university-level courses require a textbook, especially science courses (French et al., 2015);
OnCampusResearch has found that the majority of faculty require some kind of learning materials. This means that I am not an outlier.
The online textbook costs $83.50. This is one of the costs of attending university. It’s nothing new or different. I told you in the first class that if you are not able to afford that, you should talk to me and I’ll work something out. Exactly one person took me up on this offer. I was able to give them a free access code to the textbook. I know that textbook are expensive; I have been sensitive to this for a long, long time. (Check out
this post from 2013). The print textbooks that I used to use in this course costs over $200 for the print edition; the ebook is $75. I wanted to try something different and hopefully better when I switched to my current choice, TopHat. It includes an AI tutor, and dozens and dozens of interactive questions based on textbook content. (Retrieval practice FTW!) It’s also written at a lower level (read: easier) than the previous textbook, and it’s also shorter. I figured it was worth a try. I do not take these decisions lightly.
Maybe we should consider the counterfactual. That is, what if I did not have a required textbook? My exams would still be the same number of questions. Now I would have to drawn on more and more obscure and less and less relevant material as a basis for my exam questions. In other words, the exam would get harder. I don’t think anyone is asking for that--but that’s what the result would be.
I could (and probably should) also bring up the fact that I have oodles of data on the multiple-choice questions I use on my exams (
point-biserial correlation, anyone?). If I have to write a bunch of new exam questions, I don’t have any data on them. They may be especially difficult (newly written exam question tend to start out being too difficult, as opposed to too easy). Again, I know that no one wants to take a course in which the exams may be unreasonably hard (i.e., low averages).)
The tests were hard. I would not say they were unfair, but I get why the cutoff for an A in this class is so low.
The tests are difficult relative to Farley or any other instructor’s class, but it’s scaled accordingly such that an 83 is an A. That’s pretty fair. Loepelmann’s classes are for learning, not GPA padding, and despite the rigor I’m always pleased to retain more applicable knowledge.
The exams seemed far to hard for the students. The average was constantly in the 60’s. To compansate for this the grading scale was pushed down so far. Anything above a 87 was an A+.
Tests were difficult but fair. I think if you put in the study time, it is possible to do really well on them.
The exams helped me realize that I needed to change my studying strategies for this course.
I felt like Obi-Wan taking on a Sith Lord while writing the midterm exams. That may be a slight over exaggeration but what I am implying by saying that was that they felt challenging but in a satisfying way that really encouraged me to carefully think through the different possible answers instead of purely relying on rote memorization and regurgitating information.
(In the emergency remote teaching and learning during Covid, I restructured all of my exams according to best practices. I pared down the basic memorization questions and replaced them with more challenging application and conceptual questions. Yes, the exams are hard. They’re supposed to be. I’m teaching at one of the top-five universities in Canada. Should the exams be easy? (Have you had a lot of easy exams in your courses so far?) The exams are designed and structured to increase your learning. They do take effort to prepare for, and to write. But, fittingly, in this course I am giving you the tools you need to success: retrieval practice, spaced learning, interleaving, elaboration, generation, context effects. In this very class over 20% of students got a mark in the A-range. Less than 3% got an F (and that includes four students who just did not write the final exam).
Yes, I have adjusted the grade boundaries to ensure that my challenging exams are not punitive in terms of grades. You can get a D with a total of 40%. You can get an A-range grade with a weighted mean of 79%. You’re welcome.
You have much to learn, my young apprentice.)
I don't enjoy being tested on both the textbook and the lectures equally. Essentially this means that there isn't enough time to cover all the material in class, so the student has to learn the other portion by themselves, which takes up more time than is fair for this course.
Requiring a $80 textbook to be tested 50% on top of paying $800 for the course is extremely financially unfair.
(You’ve literally made me look up a definition for the word “fair”. Here it is: “based on or behaving according to the principles of equality and justice; kind, considerate, or reasonable.” You don’t enjoy being tested. My friend, here’s a secret: No One Does. Would the exam have been a joyful delight if it had tested on the lectures alone? And I’m sorry that tuition costs as much as it does. If tuition is high, there are a number of reasons for that. The UofA spends has a disproportionately high amount on salaries for administration, at the expense of paying front-line staff. (Faculty salaries at the UofA are at the
rock bottom of the
U15 comparators.) But I do what I can: I vote in every provincial election. The UCP government has choked off funding since 2019 to the tune of
$222 million and counting. So: I’m sorry about the tuition thing. One of my kids is in a post-secondary institution and another will be soon; I feel your pain.
But am I being “unfair”? Unreasonable? Inconsiderate? Unkind? What if I make you buy an $80 textbook and it was tested only 10%--is that unfair? What if it were 90%? Then you’d say that the lectures are not worth it for the money you’re paying. You may not like the way things are, but they are not “unfair.”)
I also found it astounding that a textbook I paid $80 could be filled with so many typos and errors. As someone who is not in Psychology it begs the question of how many content errors there were that I didn't notice if they couldn't catch these typos.
(I really hate to be a pedantic ass, but a leopard cannot change its spots. It’s actually “raises” the question, not “begs” the question; here's an explanation by an actual
book editor. Anywho, I agree with you completely. I mean, I give out a toonie for each error that a student finds. That book has nearly four dozen errors. That’s expensive for me, and embarrassing for the publisher. At least with this online textbook I can go in and make changes to almost everything, but still. My evaluation of the textbook is ongoing, and this factors into it prominently.)
Wish expectations were set more clearly for first midterm
(Like, what exactly? I told you how much time you would get; how many questions there were; that there was a 50/50 split between textbook and lecture; that I don’t favour memorization/name/date questions; and that the number of questions was proportional to the length of the corresponding lectures/chapters. The textbook contains embedded questions, and I did dozens of ePoll questions in class to direct your attention to important concepts. What, exactly, are you looking for? What was unclear or vague?)
It's preferable to not have a final exam on the whole course, which is hard and overwhelming with the lectures in class and the chapters of the book, and if that's the case, we should at least have access to a cheat sheet on the final exam.
(It’s preferable to get an automatic A+ without attending class, reading a textbook, or writing exams at all. But here we are.)
I think the labs could have been slightly more challenging.
The labs though? a bit insane. They are described to take "10 minutes of your time, they are not that hard" and then half the class struggles with them.
The online labs were marked hard. The TA's seemed to take off marks for things not included in the rubric and not stated clearly enough. There should really be a way to discuss with the professor or make it known if we are allowed to ask the TA's about the marks dropped. They were also not helpful during midterm reviews.
The labs were fun and really helped my understanding of some of the concepts.
(What’s wrong with struggling? That’s learning: “
Embrace the struggle.”
Here’s some objective data on the difficulty of the labs: the class mean was 78.5%. Over 13% of students in the class skipped doing one or more of the labs. So, if they had actually attempted them--even if they ended up doing poorly--the mean would be even higher, as it currently assigns a zero to missing labs. In my grading breakdown, 78.5% corresponds to A-. I don’t think that’s too low; the labs are increasing the grade of the vast majority of the class.
Um, yes, you can discuss things with me. There’s email, my weekly office hours, or talking with me after class. I am working on a comprehensive Teaching Assistant Manual than will help TAs be better prepared for exam viewings, and give better feedback on assignments. It’s just taking a really long time to write.)
I especially found ePolls to be beneficial and engaging, with explanations as to why each option was either correct, not fully applicable, or wrong, being given, further aiding in my deep understanding of course content.
(It’s good to hear that you see value in them.)
I felt that the assessments in the course served no purpose.
(I’m sorry--what? Exams, assignments, ePolls all…pointless? Really? FYI, they are how I assign final grades. Hope this clears that up.)
need midterms worth less
(No problem, I’ll just make the final worth more. Thanks for your feedback!)
[...] felt that the 133 pages of Google docs notes + the entire textbook is a bit excessive and think there could be some cutting down of the unnecessary material
(First, not the
entire textbook. I did not assign the chapter on language. But what is unnecessary? It really hurt to cut out that chapter. I do feel it’s valuable. Those who go on to take higher-level courses on psycholinguistics or the psychology of language may be at a disadvantage. I actually have
less content in my course now than I did six years ago: I had to cut a bunch of things out to make time for ePolls. As for what's left, again, what is "unnecessary"? Maybe material that doesn't overlap with the textbook. But I guarantee you, you don't want me to just lecture directly out of the textbook. What's the point of that?)
The lab due dates were spread out a few weeks apart from each other which gave plenty of time to complete them. The instructor was always well-prepared and started class promptly at the top of the hour. There was never a single occasion of there ever being a time where there was an extended period of silence or the Professor being flustered or incapable of explaining something. The ePolls presented at the end of every major topic kept motivation high and helped people stay present and attentive during lectures.
Karsten is an entertaining and excellent lecturer.
It was great! So fun I love all the in class examples/mini experiments!
Great lectures, I genuinely enjoyed them, some of the material was boring but he does try to keep the class engaged with jokes!
Love his classes and teaching style, sometimes moves in too quickly in slides
His genuine interest for the material was contagious. He’s also very witty and it’s just really mentally stimulating/lighthearted fun to attend class.
I appreciate the professor asking the student with the highest mark to give advice on studying, however I feel like there wasn't enough review and the style of note taking is very specific and may not work for everyone.
The single best prof I have had at U of A. Brilliant engagement with students, excellent comedic timing and so good at answering questions and maintaining student attention. I don't know how much Dr. Loepelmann makes, but he needs a raise. Also answered emails so fast and so thoroughly. Seriously, outstanding instructor!!!
Dr. Loepelmann is the greatest prof I have every had. He is so confident in the things he's teaching. His lectures are incredibly engaging and feels well planned and thought out. Very often profs feel like they just are reading from the slides. It never feels like he is just reading from the slides. I hope he gets to read this because he should be very proud of the effort that he has put into teaching. You can feel how much he cares in how organized and excited he is to teach this material. Thank you for being you Dr. Loepelmann!!
I really enjoyed being part of Professor Loepelmann's course this semester! He is a really amazing teacher and I find that he is very easy to listen to (which is surprisingly difficult to find). He explains things really well, allows us to do interactive activities in lecture, and has a great sense of humour. I always look forward to his lectures.
No surprises here. This is my second course with this instructor and will not be my last. His use of labs, tests, epolls, as well as the examples he puts together for lectures are so well done, it's rare that I don't understand a concept once he's explained it.
Professor Loepelmann is very diligent at answers questions and giving additional feedback when necessary. With the class sizes he instructs, this is impressive feat.
Approachable during office hours, and by email (even on weekends). Thank you!
He always answers my emails/questions with depth, even if the questions are a bit abstract and not directly in the course material. I enjoyed learning from him a lot. I’ve also noticed that whenever my peers ask questions, if he doesn’t know something, he acknowledges that and then will answer the question later in a discussion post on EClass. Just overall very respectful and level-headed—many professors get a complex when they don’t know something/make students feel out of place for asking a question that may go beyond course material. He’s very good at fostering intellectual curiosity.
Your method of teaching is absolutely amazing. I took a course with you last year, and am taking one with you next semester as well! Your way of teaching is incredibly insightful and you are clearly very knowledgeable in this field. My only suggestion, and I do not know if this is even applicable, is I think you would benefit from understanding the neuroanatomy and chemistry behind the field. Essentially, explaining the science behind why the brain works the way it does would be greatly beneficial to you as a professor and your students. Note that I am not saying you don't know theyinformation - I am just saying to include it in class more.
(Thanks for all the kind words and suggestions. I made the deliberate choice to teach this course based on a traditional approach to cognitive psychology. I have to be careful not to overlap too much with our PSYCH 375: Cognitive Neuroscience course.)
Why aren't you studying?
