So You Want to Teach Less in Hopes of Teaching More

Teaching less material to students in an introductory psychology course may lead to greater depth in each topic and ideally, greater understanding (Wade, 1998). To explore this theory, 2 classes of introductory psychology students were administered a pretest consisting of basic concepts and ideas that are generally learned in an introductory psychology course. One class was then taught 8 chapters of the textbook, whereas the second class was taught all 16 chapters. Although a posttest administered at the end of the semester to assess the amount of knowledge retained failed to significantly differentiate between the two classes, students in the 8-chapter class expressed greater satisfaction with the instructor. Course planning is a difficult task for both novice and experienced instructors alike. Determining the pace of the course seems to be one of the most difficult challenges. Some teachers feel obligated to cover as much material as possible "to get the most from your academic buck," whereas other teachers find it almost impossible to reach any depth on any topic when they cover an entire textbook. The proverbial pendulum seems to have shifted to depth rather than breadth in planning courses. For example, Wade (1998) encouraged teachers to accentuate the "fundamentals" of psychology rather than lecture on every finding psychology has thus far uncovered. She believes that "teaching less is teaching more. " The issue of balancing depth versus breadth has had increasing coverage in the psychological and teaching literature (e.g., Brewer et al., 1993). The difficulty in determining "how much" to teach generally centers around time availability issues. Most teachers realize the difficulty of planning coverage of an entire textbook into the span of a 16-week semester; inevitably, some material is compromised. Rather than briefly touching on a comprehensive list of topics to cover (breadth), the current authors chose to selectively cover fewer topics on a much more detailed level (depth). This approach was intended to help address the time availability problem. When the instructor is freed from "getting through" the textbook from cover to cover, more time can be allocated for discussions, demonstrations, and videos. This use of multiple media not only helps students learn in different modalities, but it also makes for a more enjoyable class setting for students and teacher (Mathie et al., 1993). Having more time in the classroom allotted to "showing" the students the concepts rather than "telling" them about the concepts allows for a more active role for both teacher and students. Active learning (Mathie et al., 1.993) brings the concepts to life and, therefore, aids in retention of knowledge, which is arguably the end-goal of teaching. Teachers can also use other strategies to aid in retention: lessening anxiety levels (Naveh-Benjamin, Lavi, McKeachie, & Lin, 1997) and teaching concepts in the context of their practical applications in the world (Perkins, 1987). On the other hand, critics might be quick to ask what is lost by not covering all the material in a textbook. How much will it hurt students not learn every angle of Freud's theory? How much do psychology students need to know about personality? What is essential for the introductory course? Such considerations pose major challenges to teachers who plan to cover material in depth rather than breadth; determining which topics to omit is a difficult task, indeed. In perusing an introductory textbook (e.g., Davis & Palladino, 1997), it became evident that the chapters fell into either the natural science or social science categories. Because both natural and social science are important to psychology as a science, an even representation of each seemed necessary to provide "a broad and deep knowledge base" to the students (Brewer et al., 1993, p. 170). Brewer and his colleagues (1993) also suggested topics that may not be as necessary for the introductory level psychology course. …