Reply to comment

When discussing the issue of intro classes, including their structure, their goal, their efficacy at achieving the goal, I don't know if I can fully decide which side I come down on... On the one hand, I think that I remember very little detail from what I learned in introduction to biology. Yes, I was more interested in some parts than others, and I think that I have retained information from the sections I found to be more interesting. If i understand correctly, Leah and Moira believe more strongly than others that intro is intro, and we should just sit down and learn the facts. While it is true that introduction to bio at Bryn Mawr was (in our day), largely about memorization, I really don't think that that's the way it HAS to be. Just because it was structured like that then, didn't mean it was the most effective format/structure. I'm guessing that's why they changed the syllabus...

On the other hand, maybe the intro class equipped me with a subconscious knowledge bank that has helped me to perform better in my upper level classes? Who knows. However, I think an interesting point to make is that professors of upper level classes do not automatically assume that we remember certain things from intro. I feel as if I often hear the phrase "Do you guys remember covering X in intro?...OK, well lets review it quickly before we move on to Y..."

If professors are acknowledging our forgetfulness, and essentially re-teaching the material, did learning these basics in intro do any good?