Did you feel like Hermione et al. when Umbridge was telling them if they studied the theory hard enough they would be able to pass the practical exam?
I found that my Developmental Psych class was a lot of "watch the baby/child do all these new and novel things!" And I just sat there going, "okay, I just read that in my textbook. I don't need a 15 minute video clip to tell me that baby's can recognize their mother's voice. Thanks though." Seriously, I spent so much time in that class watching useless videos. I feel your pain.
Alcoholic Juice! (to get you through those kinds of days)
Just find yourself a good summary of Piaget. Constructivism and schemata. Ummm, object permanence and conservation. Those are the big words, I guess. Maybe some Freud/Jung although most cognitive people are with me in not being really interested in that stuff. Are you doing reading and memory at all? Those are cool. And speech/language development -- lots of intersting debate there. Kohlberg (or someone spelled something like that) has some interesting theories on moral development, but that might be outside your course. If you're having a hard time with the readings assigned, doing some Googling might help. Here, you don't have to be a rocket scientist to do psych like you do in Denmark, so we probably have a lot of resources summarizing stuff in simple English as opposed to dense jargon.
We're doing both reading, memory, and speech/language development. The memory stuff is mainly in CogPsych, though, not Cognitive Aspects of Developmental Psychology (CAD). We haven't read Kohlberg in this semester, and I don't know much about his theory on moral development, but I know a guy named Kohlberg (not sure if it's the same Kohlberg, Kohlberg sounds like a pretty common German surname) has written a lot about gender differences, and we used some of it for our project last semester...
Actually the CAD course doesn't focus as much on Piaget as I thought it would. We just went over his theory really quickly. I think we're pretty familiar with it by now, anyway, so it's okay. Freud and Jung aren't really relevant this semester as none of our courses focus on psychoanalysis at all. Actually Jung's theory isn't really considered sufficiently scientific or something like that, all they've said about him is pretty much that he's a no-go. We just don't talk about him, pretend he's not there. I'm not so sure why...
1. Warning: Sometimes when you think the prof is going on a stupid, minor-detail tangent, he comes back and puts that stupid stuff on a major test. Most professors do not put side-details on major tests, but the kind that go on about said details for entire classes are the kind who do. (I learned this the hard way
( ... )
1. I don't think the small seemingly unimportant details will show up in a test and if they do they're all written down in our texts, so if she does I'll just read what's actually written about it. No big deal. Which is why it was so pointless, it's relatively easy to achieve the information she spent the whole lesson giving us if you just read her research papers (yes, she was going on about her own research
( ... )
Comments 11
Did you feel like Hermione et al. when Umbridge was telling them if they studied the theory hard enough they would be able to pass the practical exam?
I found that my Developmental Psych class was a lot of "watch the baby/child do all these new and novel things!" And I just sat there going, "okay, I just read that in my textbook. I don't need a 15 minute video clip to tell me that baby's can recognize their mother's voice. Thanks though." Seriously, I spent so much time in that class watching useless videos. I feel your pain.
Alcoholic Juice! (to get you through those kinds of days)
Reply
I could use some alcoholic juice right now. lol, being drunk actually doesn't sound like such a bad idea.
Reply
Reply
Actually the CAD course doesn't focus as much on Piaget as I thought it would. We just went over his theory really quickly. I think we're pretty familiar with it by now, anyway, so it's okay. Freud and Jung aren't really relevant this semester as none of our courses focus on psychoanalysis at all. Actually Jung's theory isn't really considered sufficiently scientific or something like that, all they've said about him is pretty much that he's a no-go. We just don't talk about him, pretend he's not there. I'm not so sure why...
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Hi, Kat!
Reply
I'm over-using the smileys. I should stop doing that.
Reply
Leave a comment