The argument seems to be, I'm paraphrasing, "psych people can't deal with complex stuff" which really boils down to "I can't teach them complex stuff". Taken at face value the argument is psych researchers are not clever — reality of course is not aligned really with that view.
-
-
But surely the knowledge would trick down. Noone entering a UK university is unaware that physics has nontrivial quantitative skill requirements.
-
I have never met a UK psych undergrad who knew there was stats and they tend to think it's a huge shocking thing and initially (at least) dislike it and resent it.
-
Fair, but even though their precise knowledge is inaccurate they do have a correct understanding that the quant skill requirements in psych are << those in physics, maths.
-
My point was in the UK they have already done teaching coding to all years of undergrad — just like they go from t-test to linear regression and more over the 3 years in stats.
-
Basically my point boils down to: in the UK the tide has turned and we teach undergrads to code "against their will" just like we teach them research methods/stats "against their will".
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
