How to write books

Published on February 2017 | Categories: Documents | Downloads: 43 | Comments: 0 | Views: 435
of 11
Download PDF   Embed   Report

Comments

Content

120PY
Psychology in Context

Module Leader
Dr. Tony Lawrence
Email: [email protected]

2

120PY
Psychology in Context
Table of Contents
Introduction...................................................................................................................2
Intended learning outcomes...................................................................................... 2
Organisation of the Module........................................................................................2
Recommended Reading.............................................................................................3
Lecture Timetable........................................................................................................4
Full-time Day Teaching...............................................................................................4
Assessment.................................................................................................................. 5
Referencing.................................................................................................................. 5
Coursework Submission (see Assessment section above for deadlines)..........6
Use of Moodle.............................................................................................................. 6
Important Issues.......................................................................................................... 6
Marking scheme for assignment and examination essays................................... 8

Introduction
The aim of the module is to introduce students to the historical, philosophical and
ethical issues which provide a context for the contemporary study of psychology, in
addition to providing an overview of the major contemporary areas of academic and
applied psychology. The module outlines the field of psychology from its origins in the
philosophy and the natural sciences of the 18th century through to the contemporary
perspectives and sub-disciplines of psychology as a modern, scientific and applied
discipline.

Intended learning outcomes
The intended learning outcomes are that on completion of this module the student
should be able to:
Demonstrate an understanding of the historical development of psychology as
the scientific investigation of human consciousness and behaviour.
Demonstrate an understanding of the philosophical issues underlying
psychological inquiry, from debates about the philosophy of science to perspectives
in the philosophy of mind.
Demonstrate an understanding of the ethical and cross-cultural issues
involved in academic and applied psychological research.
Demonstrate a clear understanding of the major divisions of modern
psychology as an organised, scientific, professional discipline applicable to a wide
range of real world problems individually and collectively.

Organisation of the Module

3

The module runs entirely in semester two. Each week students will attend two hours
of lectures and two hours of seminars.
Lectures: 22 hours, Seminars: 22 hours, Guided study 40, Independent study: 116
hours

Recommended Reading
The core text for this module is:
Benjamin, L.T. (2007). A Brief History of Modern Psychology. Blackwell: Oxford.
Much of the lecture content will be related to this book. However some lectures will
be on topics not covered in the book, in which case you should consult the
recommended reading sources given below.
You might also want to look at the following, especially in relation to the essay:
Fancher, R.E. (1996). Pioneers of Psychology. Norton: London.
Chalmers, D. (Ed.) (2002). Philosophy of Mind: Classical and Contemporary
Readings. Oxford: Oxford University Press. (For Lectures 3-6).
Harre, R. (2006). Key Thinkers in Psychology. London: Sage.
Mithen, S. (1996). The Prehistory of the Mind: A Search for the Origins of Art,
Religion and Science. London: Phoenix. (For lecture 2).
Okasha, S. (2002). Philosophy of Science: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.

4

Lecture Timetable
This year 120PY is taught entirely in the second semester every Thursday from
11am-1pm in ECG24.
The schedule of day time lectures is given below.

Full-time Day Teaching
DATE
23
January

LECTURER
Dr Tony
Lawrence
Dr Tony
Lawrence
Dr Tony
Lawrence
Dr Tony
Lawrence
Dr Tony
Lawrence
Dr Tony
Lawrence
Dr Tony
Lawrence
Dr Tony
Lawrence

LECTURE
Introduction to the module

Philosophy of Mind: Plato,
Descartes and Dualism
Philosophy of Mind: Democritus,
Locke and Materialism
Philosophy of Mind: Berkeley and
Idealism
Philosophy of Mind: Spinoza,
Russell and Neutral Monism
The Founders of Psychology:
Fechner, Wundt and James
Major Perspectives in Psychology:
Psychodynamic and Behavioural

Intro to Presentations on
Homo Species

Dr Tony
Lawrence
Dr Tony
Lawrence
Dr Tony
Lawrence
Hugh Coolican

Major Perspectives in Psychology:
Cognitivism and Humanism
A Modern Cognitive Philosophy of
Mind: Functionalism
Psychology and Philosophy of
Science
Cross Cultural Issues in Psychology

Gloria Video: Rogers
and Ellis

6 March

Dr. Tony
Lawrence
Dr. Tony
Lawrence

Modern Psychology: Cognitive and
Biological
Modern Psychology: Social and
Developmental

Debate: Is psychology a
science?

13 March

Dr. Tony
Lawrence
Dr Tony
Lawrence

Controversies in Psychology:
Parapsychology and ESP

Are you psychic?:
Testing for ESP Abilities

30
January
6
February
13
February

20
February
27
February

20 March

27 March

Dr. Tony
Lawrence
Dr. Tony
Lawrence
Dr. Tony
Lawrence
Dr. Tony
Lawrence

SEMINAR
No Seminar

Psychology and Human Origins

Controversies in Psychology: Drugs
and Religion – The Good Friday
Experiment
Applied Psychology: Positive
Psychology
Coursework 2 Essay Guidance
Applied Psychology: Clinical and
Counselling
Last Lecture: Modern Psychology in
Critical Perspective

Presentations on Homo
Species
Debate: Materialism v
Dualism v Idealism v
Monism

Special Seminar:
Exploring the Self –
The Watchword
Technique
(In lecture theatre
ECG-27)

Essay Preparation
Session for Essay 2

No Seminar

5

Assessment
The intended learning outcomes will be assessed as follows:
Coursework 1: 1500 word essay due on 14th March 2014.
This covers learning outcomes 1 and 2.
The essay title is;
Either:
1.
“Critically discuss the importance of an understanding of human evolution
and the history of psychology for the modern psychologist.”
Or:
2.
“Critically discuss the importance of an understanding of the philosophy of
mind for the modern psychologist.”
Coursework 2: 1500 word essay due on 17th April 2014.
This covers learning outcomes 3 and 4.
The coursework 2 essay title is;
“Critically evaluate the value of academic and applied psychology in facing the
challenges of life in the twenty-first century.”

Reassessment: Resit the failed component(s) N.B. Resit work needs to be
submitted in August 2014. Precise date to be notified later.
Prerequisites for this module:
None

Referencing
Coventry University and the Department of Psychology have adopted the Harvard
Referencing System as the standard format for citations and references. There is a
Centre for Academic Writing (located next to the library, also see the links on
CUOnline) who can provide detailed support on the Harvard System. There is also a
useful reference guide on the Harvard Style that we advise you to download and
keep. This can be found under the heading ‘The Harvard style to print and keep’ at:
http://home.ched.coventry.ac.uk/caw/harvard/downloads.htm

6

Coursework Submission (see Assessment section above for
deadlines)
For each coursework essay you are required to submit an electronic version of
your coursework through the CUOnline module web page (TURNITIN). You
need to submit your work through the respective Turnitin icon (no later than
11.55pm on the relevant submission deadline. The electronic versions need to be
submitted through Turnitin to guarantee against plagiarism and collusion.
Please note, failure to submit your report through Turnitin will result in failure
of the coursework.
If you are in any doubt regarding the correct referencing of sources or what
constitutes plagiarism or collusion, please consult the University’s General
Regulations Appendix 1. Please ensure that you are aware of the implications of
being found guilty of any form of cheating in any coursework. You will be given
further information on the Faculty’s Examination Investigatory Panel that deals with
cheating within the Faculty of Health and Life Sciences. If you still have any queries
or doubts regarding plagiarism or collusion please speak to the module leader or
your course director. Students found guilty of plagiarism or collusion face severe
penalties, so it is essential that you understand and follow standard procedures for
referencing other people’s work. For information on referencing formats, see
www.coventry.ac.uk/caw which outlines the Harvard system required by the
University.
In line with Faculty policy, we aim to have your essays marked and returned to you
no more than 3 weeks after the submission deadline. Essays will be returned to you
online via turnitin.

Use of Moodle
Materials essential to the delivery of lectures and workshops will be provided in
printed form by the lecturer concerned. This does not refer to copies of the
Powerpoint demonstration, OHTs or lecture notes. It refers to materials that are
essential but in addition to what is delivered (such as materials for practical work, a
handout containing additional information which could be assessed and so on).
Many other support materials will usually be provided by the Module Leader on
Moodle and students may choose to print these out but are not required to do so.

Important Issues
A number of procedures/policies are consistent across modules in Psychology but
the specifics of these may vary across Faculties or Departments. These are detailed
in your Course Handbooks (usually on the Programme Web) and/or module guides
and include (but are not necessarily limited to);
Plagiarism & collusion (see your handbook Essential Information insert)
Extension requests (refer to your Faculty or Department policy)

7

Penalties for the late submission of coursework (unauthorised late work receives 0%)
Coursework return
Additional Educational Requirements
Marking criteria for essays and reports (refer to those for Psychology)
Use of social networking sites (HLS policy is that staff do not invite or accept 'friend'
requests from students)
You need to ensure that you are familiar with these processes and how they apply to
each of the modules that you are studying. It is your responsibility to make sure that
you adhere to these policies.

8

Marking scheme for assignment and examination essays
Essay work in the Psychology group is marked according
to a fixed point scale shown opposite. The use of this
scale facilitates standardisation and should make clear to
students the ordinal position of their work.

Excellent

These fixed marks are for single pieces of work only.
When averaged, a module or component assessment
may take any intermediate value.
Marks within each degree classification category should
be interpreted as good, average or below average for that
category.
Marks in the compensatory band are fail marks but may
be allowed to stand without resit if they are compensated
by other marks which bring the average for the
assessment component to a mark above 40.
Marks in the lower (fail) bands may be awarded for good
psychology which is not directly relevant to the question
set.

88 +
85
82
78
75
72

First

Good
68
65
62

Upper second

58
55
52

Lower second

48
45
42

Passable
Third
Fail

38
35
30
20
10
0

Compensatory band
Clear fail

Essays are assessed on four major criteria. Aspects of these factors are of
course often more important than others but each piece of work can be
considered on all four factors. Where a piece comes in high on all four, as

9

described for a specific mark band, the piece of work will therefore be at the
top end of that band.
Answer:

The extent to which the answer addresses the question or
issue
Coherence: The extent to which each statement follows from previous
statements. The extent to which the structure overall is
coherent.
Argument: The extent to which there is a convincing line of argument
running throughout the work.
Evidence:
The extent to which claims are supported by relevant and
appropriate published research evidence and/or theoretical
argument.
Below are given typical profiles for each band of work. Where the category
criteria in a band are well met this would tend to indicate the highest mark if
not elevation to the band above.
Where there are several descriptive statements for one category (especially
for the Fail categories), the statements describe different sorts of work
characteristics which would meet the category criterion. All statements need
not apply. Where several negative statements do apply, this would tend to
lower the work down to the bottom of the mark band if not into the band below.
First class (70% +)
A first class answer would be exceptionally good, given a typical
undergraduate experience, with the better answers excelling on the criteria
listed below.
Answer:
Coherence:
Argument:
Evidence:

Answers question fully and explicitly, particularly, where
relevant, in the areas requiring greater analysis, synthesis and
evaluation.
(Almost) the entire work is clearly linked and structured.
Has a non-derivative line of argument that is clear and
convincing.
Gives thorough and extensive evidential support and/or
extensive critical knowledge of theoretical position(s).

To obtain marks in the 80s, in addition to these criteria, work would need to:
Be of near publishable quality
Be innovative by:
containing original insights
and/or
making unusual but valid observations
and/or
including creative, valid suggestions for further research and/or theory
and/or
showing evidence of discovery and understanding of latest research
and/or
other outstanding relevant merits

10

Upper second class (60% – 69%)
Upper second answers are clearly very competent. A typical answer would
meet the following criteria:
Answer:
Coherence:
Argument:
Evidence:

A substantial attempt to answer the question with, where
relevant, adequate emphasis on the more analytical
components.
Relationships between statements and sections are generally
easy to follow.
Has a clear line of argument.
The need for evidence and/or published theory is clearly
recognised. Most important claims are supported by such
relevant and clearly identified evidence.

Lower second (50% - 59%)
Lower second answers are at least basically competent in the area of the
topic set. A typical answer would meet the following criteria:
Answer:
Coherence:

Argument:
Evidence:

An answer which sometimes deviates from the question set
and or one which uses relevant material ineffectively.
Relationships between statements and sections are
sometimes hard to follow. The naïve reader would find
difficulty in appreciating the flow or sometimes the point of the
material.
The line of argument, though discernible, is unconvincing.
Provision of supporting evidence and/or published theory is
intermittent or spasmodic. The need to support all claims may
appear to be not fully recognised.

Third class (40% - 49%)
Third class answers demonstrate some relevant knowledge and
understanding in the topic area but have the following weaknesses:
Answer:

Coherence:

Argument:
Evidence:

Substantially fails to answer the question or address the topic.
Relevant material may be poorly presented or irrelevant
material, in the general topic area, might be accurately
presented.
Relationships between statements and sections are difficult to
recognise. Material may be list like. A basic structure or flow is
hard to discern even for the reader conversant with the topic
area.
The line of argument is unconvincing and minimal.
Use of evidence is weak and/or inappropriate much of the
time. Understanding of theoretical issues is weak, basic
and/or often inaccurate.

11

Fail (0% - 39%)
(includes a compensatory band of 35% to 39%)
Failing answers are, by definition, extremely weak and seriously inadequate in
all the criteria already listed. However, answers which fail but can be placed in
the compensatory band would possess the following characteristics:
Answer:

Coherence:
Argument:
Evidence:

Fails to answer the question or to address the topic directly.
Relevant material may be very poorly presented. Irrelevant
material may be included but at a basic level or with
omissions/inaccuracies. Good work on an unrelated but
psychological topic within the relevant module area.
There may be few clear links between statements or sections
if any and the whole work may be divided into discrete listed
items.
There may be little argument or a line which is illogical and/or
completely unconvincing.
Minimal reference is made to supportive evidence and/or
theory.

On first marking, only marks from the following set should be awarded
to a failed piece of work:
35 and 38 as described above
30%
20%
10%
0%

Very brief but reasonable; generally inadequate but a few relevant
points; answers less than half the question set adequately; good work
on an unrelated but psychological topic within the relevant module area.
Extremely brief but good in parts; very little accurate and relevant
psychological theory or research; mostly conjecture; very difficult to
follow.
Short very poor work; virtually no reference to psychology or to
question.
Absolutely no psychological relevance whatsoever,.

Sponsor Documents

Or use your account on DocShare.tips

Hide

Forgot your password?

Or register your new account on DocShare.tips

Hide

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link to create a new password.

Back to log-in

Close