If you have any questions, please send it to my email atqhteo@gmail.com, or leave a comment below. Don't worry, there are no stupid questions! I've received many emails asking me all sorts of questions. I reply all of them :)
The modules covered in this post:
PL4235 - Moral Psychology
PL4880I - Social Psychology of the Unconscious
(I only took 2 modules this semester as I'm working on my Honors Thesis, which is a year long project and worth 3 modules)
To see my writeup on whether you should do an Honors Thesis, click this link
If you want to see previous reviews for
[Update: Nina has left a long comment in the comments section below to address my review. My response to her comment can be found here]
Prof: Dr Jia Lile
What is it about?
You will learn about how our unconscious may influence our preferences, perceptions, decision making, etc.
How’s the workload?
About 1-2 readings a week (quite light for a level 4000), which you don't really need to read because Dr Jia goes through the readings as part of his lecture. Two tests, one final 15 page writeup on a research idea (intro + method + predicted results + discussion). Class part worth 10% which can be obtained by participating in forum or speaking in class.
Something I found strange was that the second test was on Week 9 - this means everything after Week 9 was not tested. You can think about what that means heh.
How difficult is it?
I may be biased because I've always liked social psychology, but I found the subject matter fairly straightforward and easy to understand. Dr Jia also structures his lectures well and explains concepts quite thoroughly and slowly with multiple studies, so it's not too difficult.
Any miscellaneous tips/How was the exam?
If you can understand the lectures, there really is no need to read the readings. I didn't read any readings past week 2 when I realized he covered everything in the readings in lecture. Just understand the main points of each study presented (Dr Jia summarizes them at the end of each lecture) and be able to think critically about them, you shouldn't have much problems with the tests
Should you take it?
Yes. Dr Jia is a great person who is very friendly and nice, replies emails very quickly too. He structures his lectures simply and clearly, and the assessment is rather forgiving ... except for the final paper perhaps, which some may struggle with (you are supposed to come up with an original research idea for the writeup. It's kinda like doing a thesis but without actually running any experiments haha)
Predicted Grade: B+/A-
Actual Grade: A
~~~
End of review post
~~~
Just a special note here to say that with the successful completion of this semester (I got an A- for my thesis), I have officially graduated! This brings mixed emotions for so many reasons, and one of the reasons why I'm sad is that I can't do reviews anymore :(
I've enjoyed writing reviews for these past 4 years, and I'll miss writing them. To those who have been following my reviews (or even my blog), a big THANK YOU! I derive great satisfaction in knowing I have helped juniors in making more informed choices.
I have also received many emails along the years asking me about NUS-related matters, and I've answered them all! So feel free to continue to email me (atqhteo@gmail.com) if you have any questions, I'll do my best to answer.
With that, goodbye and happy schooling! (while I'm off to miserable work-life)
- PL4880F, PL4880G, GEK1063, click this link
- PC1323/GEK1510, GEM2901, PL4207, LSM1303, PL3231, click this link
- PC1325/GEK1508, MKT1003X, PL3252, PL3234, PH2211, click this link.
- GEk1519, SE1101E, PL3236, PL3233, PL3240, click this link.
- PL1101E, NM1101E, PH1102E, LAF1201, PL2131, click this link.
- For PL2132, PL3232, SSB2216 , PL3235, PH2110, click this link.
Do note that modules do vary across semesters, depending on which professor is taking it, so I will include the name of the professor for your benefit.
PL4235 - Moral Psychology
Prof: Nina Powell
[Update: Nina has left a long comment in the comments section below to address my review. My response to her comment can be found here]
What is it about?
You learn about particular theories about what drives moral judgments. Is it intuition or reasoning? Do we judge whether something is good or bad based on a gut feeling or based on logical reasoning?
You learn about particular theories about what drives moral judgments. Is it intuition or reasoning? Do we judge whether something is good or bad based on a gut feeling or based on logical reasoning?
How’s the workload?
One 3-h seminar style lecture a week.15% class participation, 30% for 3 essays, 15% for 2 'moral fieldwork' assignments, and 40% finals.
One 3-h seminar style lecture a week.15% class participation, 30% for 3 essays, 15% for 2 'moral fieldwork' assignments, and 40% finals.
There are also about 120398 readings each week. Ok fine, I exaggerate. But there are way too many to be motivated to read them at all, so I began just reading abstracts after the first few weeks. It's about 5-7 each week.
UPDATE: I stopped reading readings after Week 4.
UPDATE: I stopped reading readings after Week 4.
Essays are short 500 word essays.
Fieldwork was really weird, just record instances of moral vice/virtue, and another one was present your friend with a moral situation and see how they react. She didn't define the assignment till like Week 11. May change again for future sems so no point elaborating.
How difficult is it?
It's probably easier if you are good at expressing your opinions on reasoning processes and articulating why you think something is good/bad, to do well in class participation. The prof doesn't strictly track the class part because she can't remember everyone's names so not sure how exactly she grades this.
Fieldwork was really weird, just record instances of moral vice/virtue, and another one was present your friend with a moral situation and see how they react. She didn't define the assignment till like Week 11. May change again for future sems so no point elaborating.
How difficult is it?
Update: Ok, apparently you just have to talk regularly so that at least she notices you. Then for class part, she gave out a piece of paper and told us to write the grade we thought we deserved. Whatever we wrote would be the grade we got - and if she finds out someone who didn't talk much and gave themselves a high grade she would give a 0 (I think no one got this).
This just demonstrates how lazy she was to even remember who said what. I bet she didn't even check it and just followed it. She can't pronounce Chinese names so gave up learning names after the first class.
This just demonstrates how lazy she was to even remember who said what. I bet she didn't even check it and just followed it. She can't pronounce Chinese names so gave up learning names after the first class.
The content is fairly understandable, but it's not as philosophical as you may think. Rather, it looks at WHY and HOW people make certain moral judgments, not which moral judgment is more accurate (as philosophy may do it).
The essays are weird, I've no idea what she wants even after completing two essays and receiving feedback. Her feedback makes no sense sometimes and seems slipshod. Don't bother staying back for the 'feedback sessions she gives after she returns your essays, she gives generic writing comments which don't help at all as it's not specific to what you wrote.
Miscellaneous Tips / Exam
The best tip I can give you is to not take this module.
Should you take it?
No. Unless a better professor takes it. Nina seems unprepared, unmotivated, and is not a good educator. She has very low EQ. For instance, there was one class where she said something like : " All of you wrote bad essays. They were ALL terrible, with bad writing, shallow arguments, and lacked depth, and were all terrible".
Miscellaneous Tips / Exam
The best tip I can give you is to not take this module.
Should you take it?
No. Unless a better professor takes it. Nina seems unprepared, unmotivated, and is not a good educator. She has very low EQ. For instance, there was one class where she said something like : " All of you wrote bad essays. They were ALL terrible, with bad writing, shallow arguments, and lacked depth, and were all terrible".
Way to motivate students! Woohoo!
She doesn't do much besides read off her slides, and when even so her slides aren't structured well such that sometimes she describes an entire experiment which only had a one line description in the slide, and you are frantically scribbling down the main points of the study.
She doesn't seem to prepare well for each lecture, sometimes she is reading off her slide and hits a point which she didn't know how to explain, and, I quote her: "ok nevermind skip that." ???
She did this multiple times. in one lecture.
She doesn't seem to prepare well for each lecture, sometimes she is reading off her slide and hits a point which she didn't know how to explain, and, I quote her: "ok nevermind skip that." ???
She did this multiple times. in one lecture.
She doesn't upload slides on time half the time, so often I was left with no lecture slides for lecture and had to copy notes on a blank piece of paper. This is after me personally emailing her to remind her to upload before class (because she promised she would, just that she sometimes forgot).
As mentioned, her comments for our essays made little sense, and the advice she gave was generic and not tailored to our individual essays. It feels like she has a list of 'Random bad feedback to give essays', and she rolls a dice to pick a random one and inserts it into our essays. Sometimes her comments directly contradict each other (e.g. Your intro was well written and concise. -one sentence later - need to elaborate more in your intro)
Her 'writing tips' were just strange writing stylistic matters she insisted we follow. Some examples:
- Don't start a sentence with 'However,', no matter what. 'It undermines your argument'. (?? That IS the point gosh.)
- Don't use flowery language, such as 'upon' (I swear, she said this). Use 'on' instead.
- Each paragraph must have at least 3 sentences
I haven't even begun to talk about how unstructured her entire module felt, how poorly defined the assignments were, how sloppily the syllabus was dealt with. These points can be mitigated by the fact that it's her first time I guess. But it's her poor attitude and inability to teach and weird writing idiosyncracies that were unpardonable and I had to list above.
Her 'writing tips' were just strange writing stylistic matters she insisted we follow. Some examples:
- Don't start a sentence with 'However,', no matter what. 'It undermines your argument'. (?? That IS the point gosh.)
- Don't use flowery language, such as 'upon' (I swear, she said this). Use 'on' instead.
- Each paragraph must have at least 3 sentences
I haven't even begun to talk about how unstructured her entire module felt, how poorly defined the assignments were, how sloppily the syllabus was dealt with. These points can be mitigated by the fact that it's her first time I guess. But it's her poor attitude and inability to teach and weird writing idiosyncracies that were unpardonable and I had to list above.
All in all a bad experience and I was extremely unmotivated to even try to do well in this module. Worst psych module ever.
Predicted Grade : B-
Predicted Grade : B-
Actual Grade: B
PL4880I - Social Psychology of the Unconscious
What is it about?
You will learn about how our unconscious may influence our preferences, perceptions, decision making, etc.
How’s the workload?
About 1-2 readings a week (quite light for a level 4000), which you don't really need to read because Dr Jia goes through the readings as part of his lecture. Two tests, one final 15 page writeup on a research idea (intro + method + predicted results + discussion). Class part worth 10% which can be obtained by participating in forum or speaking in class.
Something I found strange was that the second test was on Week 9 - this means everything after Week 9 was not tested. You can think about what that means heh.
How difficult is it?
I may be biased because I've always liked social psychology, but I found the subject matter fairly straightforward and easy to understand. Dr Jia also structures his lectures well and explains concepts quite thoroughly and slowly with multiple studies, so it's not too difficult.
Any miscellaneous tips/How was the exam?
If you can understand the lectures, there really is no need to read the readings. I didn't read any readings past week 2 when I realized he covered everything in the readings in lecture. Just understand the main points of each study presented (Dr Jia summarizes them at the end of each lecture) and be able to think critically about them, you shouldn't have much problems with the tests
Should you take it?
Yes. Dr Jia is a great person who is very friendly and nice, replies emails very quickly too. He structures his lectures simply and clearly, and the assessment is rather forgiving ... except for the final paper perhaps, which some may struggle with (you are supposed to come up with an original research idea for the writeup. It's kinda like doing a thesis but without actually running any experiments haha)
Predicted Grade: B+/A-
Actual Grade: A
~~~
End of review post
~~~
Just a special note here to say that with the successful completion of this semester (I got an A- for my thesis), I have officially graduated! This brings mixed emotions for so many reasons, and one of the reasons why I'm sad is that I can't do reviews anymore :(
I've enjoyed writing reviews for these past 4 years, and I'll miss writing them. To those who have been following my reviews (or even my blog), a big THANK YOU! I derive great satisfaction in knowing I have helped juniors in making more informed choices.
I have also received many emails along the years asking me about NUS-related matters, and I've answered them all! So feel free to continue to email me (atqhteo@gmail.com) if you have any questions, I'll do my best to answer.
With that, goodbye and happy schooling! (while I'm off to miserable work-life)
Dear Alan,
ReplyDeleteA colleague recently alerted me to the existence of your blog. I read it with increasing sadness and concern over the contents. It is normal for students to sometimes provide negative feedback. Many times the student-lecturer relationship is a little fraught because students simply dislike that lecturers have high expectations and demand excellence from their students. At other times, the zeal to provide a comprehensive understanding in a relatively short period can lead to mistakes that need addressing. Your blog, I think, is fairly typical in that the criticism contains a mix of both student dislike and identification of genuine mistakes. The intensity of your criticism, however, is very atypical and quite distressing. Nevertheless, I am pleased to have this opportunity to address your concerns and also assuage the concerns of any future potential students reading this blog.
The feedback that I received from your fellow students in that year (2013/14) was generally quite different from what you provide here. Your fellow students, for example, mentioned finding the course refreshing in its approach to moral psychology and they mentioned enjoying the depth and rigour of the lectures and the reading. Four students nominated me for best teaching, which I found particularly encouraging, thoughtful and kind, as that was the first time I had taught at NUS. That said, I did, of course, expect there to be some problems as I adapted to my new role at NUS, and I made significant changes to the moral psychology course after that first attempt. The course now includes a more clearly structured reading list with required and supplemental readings now directly identified. Assessment of the class participation is now more transparent and the fieldwork activity is now based on group rather than individual work. These changes were made in part following my own reflections on the course and in part following feedback from the student evaluation exercise. Some of the problems noted in the evaluation exercise are echoed in your blog here and so I expect you will be pleased with the changes. Obviously, however, your comments go much further than those in the official evaluation exercise, so I will offer more extensive comments to the specific points you make. There is, however, a comment limit of 4,000 characters, so I continue with further specific responses in multiple comments.
Dr. Nina Powell
National University of Singapore, Department of Psychology, June 2015
Part Two.
ReplyDeleteIn your blog, you state: There are also about 120398 readings each week. Ok fine, I exaggerate. But there are way too many to be motivated to read them at all, so I began just reading abstracts after the first few weeks. It's about 5-7 each week.
UPDATE: I stopped reading readings after Week 4
The reading list was extensive, but not unreasonably so. In general, you were expected to read one chapter of a book and five journal articles per week. At an average of an hour each, that is just six hours reading. For a module where you are expected to do ten hours of work a week, the reading list was, essentially, exactly correct. Moreover, the reading reflected that expected by other universities for students taking highly similar modules. The course on Moral Psychology offered at NYU, for example, requires the students to read 3-5 journal articles per week, plus an additional reading of 3-5 supplementary journal articles per week, and three supplementary books. You can download the syllabus here: http://www.psych.nyu.edu/vanbavel/lab/documents/MoralPsychologySyllabus.VanBavel.pdf
I think it is important that NUS students receive a similarly comprehensive education to students at other institutions because I want our students to be globally competitive. Similar to the syllabus at New York University, and many other institutions, my current syllabus for the course at NUS includes two books and 2-3 required journal articles each week and a further 3-5 recommended journal articles for those who are especially interested in that week’s topic.
I am saddened that you were not sufficiently interested or motivated to read for the course past week 4 and I am somewhat surprised, and concerned, that you did so well on so little reading. I do not think any student at degree level should expect to do well unless they put in substantial self-motivated work outside the seminar room.
Dr. Nina Powell
National University of Singapore, Department of Psychology, June 2015
Part Three.
ReplyDeleteContinuing through your blog:
The essays are weird, I've no idea what she wants even after completing two essays and receiving feedback. Her feedback makes no sense sometimes and seems slipshod. Don't bother staying back for the 'feedback sessions she gives after she returns your essays, she gives generic writing comments which don't help at all as it's not specific to what you wrote.
I am not sure why you found the essays “weird” because you offer no specific detail. That is exactly the kind of feedback I would have provided to you when assessing your written work. Your criticisms and comments must be sufficiently detailed so that the reader can understand your meaning. That said, I wuld guess that you found my essays “weird” in part because I asked open-ended questions and expected you to pursue your own thoughts and understanding of the topic. Students at NUS appear more familiar with, and more comfortable with, short answer questions that look for specific facts and details. An open-ended essay, in contrast, asks you to identify the relevant facts and details to wield an argument based on your understanding and your integration of those facts and details. It is more difficult, but it is exactly what is required of degree level students around the world. I want NUS students to be able to compete with those students equally, because NUS students are capable of that; they deserve an education that pushes them out of their comfort zone so that they may reach that competitive edge. Several students in your group recognised this effort, and made note of their appreciation of this exercise in their student evaluations.
I am sorry you found my feedback nonsensical, slipshod and generic. Again, it is difficult for me to address your comments because you provide no specific details or examples. It is possible that in my first year at NUS I did not quite connect with the particular difficulties NUS students have with their writing and so I provided comments that were difficult to understand and came across as generic. Nevertheless, I provided every student on the course repeated opportunities for one-to-one discussion and feedback, and I saw improvement in the writing of most of my students. If you felt my feedback was not helping you to improve your writing, you could have talked to me about that during one of your personal discussion slots.
Continuing from your blog:
She doesn't do much besides read off her slides, and when even so her slides aren't structured well such that sometimes she describes an entire experiment which only had a one line description in the slide, and you are frantically scribbling down the main points of the study.
I find it confusing as to how I both did little besides read off my slides and described an entire experiment from a one line description. Whatever may be true, at university, and especially in a final year seminar-style honours level module, it is not necessary to scribble anything down, frantically or otherwise. The point is to use the lecture to guide your reading and to guide your thoughts about the reading.
My thoughts continue in part four.
Dr. Nina Powell
National University of Singapore, Department of Psychology, June 2015
Part Four
ReplyDeleteContinuing:
As mentioned, her comments for our essays made little sense, and the advice she gave was generic and not tailored to our individual essays. It feels like she has a list of 'Random bad feedback to give essays', and she rolls a dice to pick a random one and inserts it into our essays. Sometimes her comments directly contradict each other (e.g. Your intro was well written and concise. -one sentence later - need to elaborate more in your intro)
The writing tips and feedback are not random, but come from many excellent sources on academic writing that were passed down to me from colleagues. See the following for examples:
http://www.amazon.com/The-Elements-Style-Fourth-Edition/dp/020530902X
http://www.amazon.com/How-Write-Lot-Practical-Productive/dp/1591477433
Good writing is difficult, and it takes a lot of practice. Sometimes it is the case that a paragraph can both be good (in terms of being well written and concise) but also bad (in terms of not containing enough content). Only with practice can writers become adept at both being concise, and being sufficiently detailed. It is unfortunate that talented students get frustrated with this difficult process and quit.
Her 'writing tips' were just strange writing stylistic matters she insisted we follow. Some examples:
- Don't start a sentence with 'However,', no matter what. 'It undermines your argument'. (?? That IS the point gosh.)
- Don't use flowery language, such as 'upon' (I swear, she said this). Use 'on' instead.
- Each paragraph must have at least 3 sentences
Those are standard rules. However, you are unerring in pointing out that these rules do not have to be obsequiously followed. However, when you are new to writing the rules can help an author better construct his writing.
Quite likely you struggled with reading those three sentences above, and yet there was nothing obviously gramatically incorrect. Starting those two sentences with however throws the reader from one position to another and it is difficult to work out what the author means – should a writer follow the rules or not?! And you probably tripped over “unerring” and “obsequiously”. Here is the same paragraph but written with the aim of it being easy for the reader:
Those are standard rules. You are correct, however, in pointing out that these rules do not have to be slavishly followed. When you are new to writing, however, the rules can help an author better construct his writing.
There are still problems in that rewrite. I would prefer not to repeat “however” even if it is now embedded in the sentence and thus less distracting. And I would prefer a different word to “slavish” but “unthinking,” or “compliantly” did not quite work for me either. Again, writing is difficult. Writing takes time and thought to find the right word and the right structure to convey exactly what you intend to say. I provide some rules and tips that I hope will help until each student starts to understand the process and can find their own style. Once a student understands the point of the rules, then they can break loose from rules and add their own “style” or “flair” to what they write.
My final thoughts continue in part five.
Dr. Nina Powell
National University of Singapore, Department of Psychology, June 2015
Part Five
ReplyDeleteI believe I have covered all the points of substance in your blog. I deliberately chose not to address the more personal comments in any detail. I am sorry you saw my work ethic as poor, and you considered me lazy with a low EQ. It is true that I found the course a definite challenge and I was unnerved at the prospect of stepping out of my comfort zone to teach in such a novel and demanding environment at NUS. I did struggle to remember everyone’s name in the seminars and I did find the Chines names hard to pronounce. I still find some names difficult, but I have been working to improve my pronunciation; I am gradually getting there. I am also improving with remembering names and did so even while I taught the seminar you were a part of. Within a few weeks, I remembered all of the students’ names who spoke during class, which was my primary concern.
Some of the students from your seminar group continued to work with me after the course, and two of the students still currently work with me. The others asked for letters of recommendation for excellent jobs in data collection and data analysis on other projects within NUS and beyond. One previous student from the same module you attended coauthored a paper with me.
I wish, Alan, that you might also have had a more enjoyable and beneficial experience from our encounter. That you did not is deeply regrettable.
Dr. Nina Powell
National University of Singapore, Department of Psychology, June 2015
I have read your article. very interesting and give me a lot of useful information.
ReplyDeleteCook at healthy smoothie recipes foods.