Course SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY

HCS6376
Term Fall 2007
Meetings Tuesdays 10:00 AM – 12:45 PM GR 4.208

PROFESSOR’S CONTACT INFORMATION

Dr. Candice Mills
candice.mills@utdallas.edu
972.883.4475
GR 4.202A
Tuesdays 2 PM or by appointment

GENERAL COURSE INFORMATION

Course Pre-requisites, Co-requisites, and/or Other Restrictions
None, although it is recommended that students have taken Introductory Psychology or Social Psychology at the
undergraduate level.

Course Description
Overview of the social bases of behavior. Topics may include social cognition and self justification, biases in
judgment, attitudes and persuasion, conformity, compliance, and group dynamics, prejudice and stereotyping,
interpersonal attraction and relationships, aggression and altruism, cultural diversity, and applications relevant
to these aspects of the human experience. Special attention to research paradigms of interest to students
developing their own empirical work.

Student Learning Objectives/Outcomes

 Students will analyze and apply fundamental concepts and theories in social psychology.
 Students will compare and critically evaluate research findings and theories in social psychology.
 Students will demonstrate effective writing skills in communicating research findings related to social
psychology.
 Students will prepare and give a class presentation of a research study.

Required Materials

Required readings (listed below) are from a variety of books and journals. Most assigned journal articles will
be available on WebCT for our class. You may also use the electronic databases at the UTD library.

Instructions for finding journal articles using the UTD library:

1. Go to the UTD library website: www.utdallas.edu/library
2. Click “Finding Articles (Databases)” at the top of left hand column. (To connect from an off campus
computer, you’ll need your Comet card number.)
3. Click “Behavioral and Brain Sciences” under Databases by Subject.
4. Click Behavioral and Brain Sciences POWERSEARCH
5. If you are searching for a specific article, the best way to do so is to search by author’s name and the
year published. Most will have a PDF file that can be accessed. If you are searching for articles on a
specific topic, you can search by keyword, by author, or look for a specific article and then search
through the articles that have cited that specific article.

There is no required textbook for this course. An optional textbook is suggested for students who do not have
a social psychology textbook to use as a reference:
Fiske, S. T. (2004). Social beings: A core motives approach to social psychology. NY: Wiley
REQUIREMENTS AND ASSIGNMENTS
1. Discussion Questions (10% of grade)
Each week students will be required to read the materials and write 2-3 discussion questions from the week’s
materials. These questions must be posted on WebCT by 5:00 PM on the Monday before each class. These
questions can take many different formats: for example, you can challenge or question methods, ponder the
implications of the research presented, suggest a connection to other research, or mention a specific question
that you felt the readings raised but did not address. The purpose of these questions is to show that you have
read and reflected on the readings as well as to help structure our discussion about each week’s topic. Your
response for each week will be graded out of 5 points. There are 12 classes for responses, with the highest 10
scores averaged for your final grade.

2. Class attendance and participation (10% of grade)

Students are expected to attend classes regularly, complete the assigned readings before each class, and
participate in class discussions. Each class will consist of a student-led presentation of a reading, discussion,
and some lecture. Active participation in the discussion is crucial to the success of this course and will be
expected. To actively participate, make sure to read the discussion questions posted on WebCT before each
class.

3. Class Leader (15% of grade)

You are required to give one presentation to the class on an empirical study that is related to the topic for that
week. There are suggestions for potential articles to use listed in the class schedule and reading list, but you are
also permitted to find another article using the UTD library databases. No less than one week before your
presentation, please submit a 1-page document including your name, date of presentation, reference of the paper
you plan to present, and an abstract of the paper (which can be cut and pasted from PsycInfo or the journal
article itself). This can be submitted over email or in person to the professor.

Once your article is approved by the professor, you can begin to prepare your presentation. Your task is to
present a 10-15 minute summary of the study as if it were a presentation at a professional meeting (such as
SPSP or SRCD). Your talk should provide everything that your audience needs to know to understand the
study: the purpose, method, results, and conclusions. You may not have time to discuss every detail or every
study in the article; instead, you should focus on telling a coherent “story”, using empirical evidence, about a
key issue in social psychology. You should provide a copy of your slides or overheads for the professor the day
of your presentation.

4. Midterm “exam” (25% of grade)

There will be one mid-term take-home exam. The exam may involve a combination of multiple choice and
essay questions, and MUST be completed on your own (not in groups). However, you may use textbooks and
your readings to help you complete the exam. The midterm exam will be due October 9th.

5. Final paper (25% of grade)

This approximately10 page paper offers you an opportunity to explore your favorite course-related topic in
greater depth. More information on the paper assignment will be provided in a handout later in the semester.
The paper is due November 27.

6. Final Presentation (15% of grade)

The presentation is a summary of your final paper so other students can learn from your research. The
presentation should be approximately 7 – 10 minutes with a few minutes afterwards for questions.
COURSE POLICIES
Grading policy
The course grade will be based on the below assignments. Final grades will be calculated as follows: 90-100%
= A, 80-89% = B, 70-79% = C, and 60-69% = D. Plusses and minuses may be given for borderline cases. If you
are concerned about your grade, see me as early as possible.

Late policy
Exams and papers are due at the BEGINNING of the class period, and they must be turned in proofread and
typed. After this, penalties are as follows:
Up to 24 hours late 10% deduction
24 to 48 hours late 25% deduction

Grades will also be lowered 10% for assignments that are not typed. FINAL VERSIONS OF PAPERS AND
EXAMS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED MORE THAN 48 HOURS AFTER THE DUE DATE.

Early policy
You may hand in your final paper up to 7 days before the deadline for a “free” evaluation. In order to receive
this early feedback, you will need to provide a cover letter regarding your specific concerns when you hand in
the paper. Complete papers will be read over, comments made, but no grades recorded.

Extra credit
There will be no individualized extra credit given for this course.

Course website
New assignments, revisions to the syllabus, announcements, and your grades will be posted on the WebCT site,
http://webct6.utdallas.edu/ When the course site is set up by the computer center, you will be notified via your
UTD email address. You are then responsible for creating an account on this site and for checking this site
frequently (at least twice weekly) in order to remain aware of new learning activities, announcements, etc. You
also need to enter a UTD email address on this account (see info below on UTD email policy). Any email to
students enrolled in this class will be sent through this service.

ACADEMIC CALENDAR
Week Date Topics Assignments Due
1 Aug 21 Introduction to social psychology
2 Aug 28 Self identity and self-concept
3 Sep 4 Self and social judgment I: Awareness and motivated reasoning
4 Sep 11 Self and social judgment II: Attribution
5 Sep 18 Self and social judgment III: Heuristics and biases
6 Sep 25 Attitudes, dissonance, and persuasion
7 Oct 2 Social influence: Obedience and compliance
8 Oct 9 Attraction and relationships Midterm due
9 Oct 16 Group functioning
10 Oct 23 Discrimination and stereotyping I
11 Oct 30 Discrimination and stereotyping II
12 Nov 6 Prosocial psychology
13 Nov 13 Applications of social psychology
14 Nov 20 Final presentations and course wrap-up
15 Nov 27 No class Final paper due
CLASS SCHEDULE
Important Note: These descriptions and timelines are subject to change at the discretion of the Professor. It is
your responsibility to keep track of changes in the schedule through WebCT and by attending class.

Potential readings for presentations are marked with ***. These readings are not required.

Introduction

August 21: Introduction to social psychology

No readings.

The Self

August 28: Self identity and self-concept

Leary, M. R. (2007). Motivational and emotional aspects of the self. Annual Review of Psychology, 58, 317 –
44.

Markus, H. R. & Kunda, Z. (1986). Stability and malleability of the self-concept. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 51, 858-866.

Lyubomirsky, S. & Ross, L. (1997). Hedonic consequences of social comparison: A contrast of happy and
unhappy people. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 1141-1157.

Dunning, D., & Story, A. L. (1991). Depression, realism, and the overconfidence effect: Are the sadder wiser
when predicting future actions and events? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 521-532.

Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations, 7, 117 – 140. **SKIM**

***Snibbe, A. C., & Markus, H. R. (2005). You can't always get what you want: Educational attainment,
agency, and choice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 703-720.

September 4: Self and social judgment I: Awareness and motivated reasoning

Nisbett, R. E., & Wilson, T. D. (1977). Telling more than we can know: Verbal reports on mental processes.
Psychological Review, 84, 231-259.

Dunning, D., Johnson, K., Ehrlinger, J., & Kruger, J. (2003). Why people fail to recognize their own
incompetence. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 12, 83 – 87.

Bargh, J.A., Chen, M., & Burrows, L. (1996). Automaticity of social behavior: Direct effects of trait construct
and stereotype activation on action. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 230-244.

Kunda, Z. (1990). The case for motivated reasoning. Psychological Bulletin, 108, 480 – 498.

***Balcetis, E., & Dunning, D. (2006). See what you want to see: Motivational influences on visual perception.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 612 – 625.

September 11: Self and social judgment II: Attribution

Ambady, N., & Rosenthal, R. (1993). Half a minute: Predicting teacher evaluations from thin slices of
nonverbal behavior and physical attractiveness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64, 431 – 441.
Mezulis, A. H., Abramson, L. Y., Hyde, J. S., & Hankin, B. L. (2004). Is there a universal positivity bias in
attributions? A meta-analytic review of individual, developmental, and cultural differences in the self-serving
attributional bias. Psychological Bulletin, 130, 711 – 747.

Choi, I., Nisbett, R. E., & Norenzayan, A. (1999). Causal attribution across cultures: Variation and universality.
Psychological Bulletin, 125, 47 – 63.

***Peterson, C., Seligman, M. E., & Vaillant, G. E. (1988). Pessimistic explanatory style is a risk factor for
physical illness: A thirty-five-year longitudinal study. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55, 23 –
27.

September 18: Self and social judgment III: Heuristics and biases
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185, 1124-
1131.

Gilovich, T. (1990). Differential construal and the false consensus effect. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 59, 623 – 634.

Pronin, E., Gilovich, T., & Ross, L. (2004). Objectivity in the eye of the beholder: Divergent perceptions of bias
in self versus others. Psychological Review, 113, 781 – 799.

***Ehrlinger, J., Gilovich, T., & Ross, L. (2005). Peering into the bias blind spot: People’s assessments of bias
in themselves and others. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31, 680 – 692.

***Lord, C. G., Ross, L., & Lepper, M. R. (1979). Biased assimilation and attitude polarization: The effects of
prior theories on subsequently considered evidence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 2098 –
2109.

Being Influenced and Influencing Others

September 25: Attitudes, dissonance, and persuasion

Cacioppo, J. T., Petty, R. E., Kao, C. F., & Rodriguez, R. (1986). Central and peripheral routes to persuasion:
An individual difference perspective. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1032 – 1043.

Strahan, E. J., Spencer, S. J., & Zanna. M. P. (2002). Subliminal priming and persuasion: Striking while the iron
is hot. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 768 – 777.

Pratkanis, A. R., Greenwald, A. G., Leippe, M. R., Baumgardner, M. H. (1988). In search of reliable persuasion
effects: III. The sleeper effect is dead: Long live the sleeper effect. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 54, 203 – 218.

Steele, C. M., & Liu, T. J. (1983). Dissonance processes as self-affirmation. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 45, 5 – 19.

***Libby, L. K., Shaeffer, E. M., Eibach, R. P., & Slemmer, J. A. (2007). Picture yourself at the polls: Visual
perspective in mental imagery affects self-perception and behavior. Psychological Science, 18, 199 – 203.
October 2: Social influence: Obedience and compliance

Cialdini, R. B., & Goldstein, N. J. (2004). Social influence: Compliance and conformity. Annual Review of
Psychology, 55, 591 – 621.

Milgram, S. (1963). Behavioral study of obedience. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 67, 371 –
378.

Baumrind, D. (1964). Some thoughts on ethics of research. American Psychologist, 19, 421-423.

Zajonc, R.B. (1965). Social facilitation. Science, 149, 256-268.

***Cialdini, R. B., Reno, R. R., & Kallgren, C. A. (1990). A focus theory of normative conduct: Recycling the
concept of norms to reduce littering in public places. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 1015–
1026.

Interacting with and Thinking about Others

October 9: Attraction and relationships

Griffin, A. M., & Langlois, J. H. (2006). Stereotype directionality and attractiveness stereotyping: Is beauty
good or is ugly bad? Social Cognition, 24, 187 – 206.

Buss, D. M. (1989). Sex differences in human mate preference: Evolutionary hypothesis tested in 37 cultures.
Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 12, 1 – 49.

Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a
fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117, 497 – 529.

Karney, B. R., & Bradbury, T. N. (2007). Contextual influences on marriage: Implications for policy and
intervention. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 14, 171 – 174.

***Rudman, L. A., & Heppen, J. B. (2003). Implicit romantic fantasies and women’s interest in personal
power: A Glass Slipper Effect? Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29, 1357 – 1370.

October 16: Group functioning

Wegner, D. M., Erber, R., & Raymond, P. (1991). Transactive memory in close relationships. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 923 – 929.

Schulz-Hardt, S., Frey, D., Luthgens, C., & Moscovici, S. (2000). Biased information search in group decision
making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 655 – 669.

Karau, S. J., & Williams, K. D. (1993). Social loafing: A meta-analytic review and theoretical integration.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 681 – 706.

Prentice-Dunn, S., & Rogers, R. W. (1982). Effects of public and private self-awareness on deindividuation and
aggression. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43, 503 – 513.

***Diener, E., Fraser, S. C., & Beaman, A. L. (1976). Effects of deindividuation variables on stealing among
Halloween trick-or-treaters. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 33, 178 – 183.
October 23: Discrimination and stereotyping I

Correll, J., Park, B., Judd, C. M., Wittenbrink, B., Sadler, M. S., & Keesee, T. (2007). Across the thin blue line:
Police officers and racial bias in the decision to shoot. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92, 1006 –
1023.

McConnell, A. R., & Leibold, J. M. (2001). Relations among the implicit association test, discriminatory
behavior, and explicit measures of racial attitudes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 37, 435 – 442.

Swim, J. K., & Sanna, L. J. (1996). He’s skilled, she’s lucky: A meta-analysis of observers’ attributions for
women’s and men’s successes and failures. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22, 507 – 519.

Steele, C. M., & Aronson, J. (1995). Stereotype threat and the intellectual test performance of African
Americans. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 797 – 811.

***Sinclair, L., & Kunda, Z. (1999). Reactions to a black professional: Motivation inhibition and activation of
conflicting stereotypes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 885 – 904.

October 30: Discrimination and stereotyping II

Fiske, S. T. (2002). What we know now about bias and intergroup conflict, the problem of the century. Current
Directions in Psychological Science, 11, 123 – 128.

Hodson, G., Dovidio, J. F., & Gaertner, S. L. (2002). Processes in racial discrimination: Differential weighting
of conflicting information. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 460 – 471.

Galinsky, A. D., & Ku, G. (2004). The effects of perspective-taking on prejudice: The moderating role of self-
evaluation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30, 594 – 604.

Brown, C. S. & Bigler, R. S. (2005). Children’s perceptions of discrimination: A developmental model. Child
Development, 76, 533 – 553.

***Kunda, Z., & Oleson, K. C. (1997). When exceptions prove the rule: How extremity of deviance determines
the impact of deviant examples on stereotypes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92, 965 – 979.

November 6: Prosocial psychology

Seligman, M. E. P., Steen, T. A., Park, N., & Peterson, C. (2005). Positive psychology progress: Empirical
validation of interventions. American Psychologist, 60, 410 – 421.

Taylor, S. E., & Brown, J. D. (1988). Illusion and well-being: A social psychological perspective on mental
health. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 193 – 210.

Kahneman, D. Krueger, A. B., Schkade, D., Schwarz, N., & Stone, A. A. (2006). Would you be happier if you
were richer? A focusing illusion. Science, 312, 1908 – 1910.

Diener, E., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2004). Beyond money: Toward an economy of well-being. Psychological
Science in the Public Interest, 5, 1 – 31.

*** Steblay, N. M. (1987). Helping behavior in rural and urban environments: A meta-analysis. Psychological
Bulletin, 102, 346 – 356.
November 13: Applications of social psychology
Zimbardo, P. G. (2004). Does Psychology make a significant difference in our lives? American Psychologist,
59, 339 – 351.

Rothman, A. J., & Salovey, P. (1997). Shaping perceptions to motivate healthy behavior: The role of message
framing. Psychological Bulletin, 121, 3 – 19.

Alexander, C. N., Langer, E. J., Newman, R. I., Chandler, H. M., & Davies, J. L. (1989). Transcendental
meditation, mindfulness, and longevity: An experimental study with the elderly. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 57, 950 – 964.

Cohen, G.L., Garcia, J., Apfel, N., & Master, A. (2006). Reducing the racial achievement gap: A social-
psychological intervention. Science, 313, 1307-1310.

***Kassin, S. M. (2005). On the psychology of confessions: Does innocence put innocents at risk? American
Psychologist, 60, 215 – 228.

***Helgeson, V. S., & Cohen, S. (1996). Social support and adjustment to cancer: Reconciling descriptive,
correlational, and intervention research. Health Psychology, 15, 135 – 148.

November 20: Presentations

November 27: Final papers due

UTD POLICIES
Student Conduct & Discipline
The University of Texas System and The University of Texas at Dallas have
rules and regulations for the orderly and efficient conduct of their business. It is
the responsibility of each student and each student organization to be
knowledgeable about the rules and regulations which govern student conduct
and activities. General information on student conduct and discipline is
contained in the UTD publication, A to Z Guide, which is provided to all
registered students each academic year.
The University of Texas at Dallas administers student discipline within the
procedures of recognized and established due process. Procedures are defined
and described in the Rules and Regulations, Board of Regents, The University
of Texas System, Part 1, Chapter VI, Section 3, and in Title V, Rules on Student
Services and Activities of the university’s Handbook of Operating Procedures.
Copies of these rules and regulations are available to students in the Office of
the Dean of Students, where staff members are available to assist students in
interpreting the rules and regulations (SU 1.602, 972/883-6391).
A student at the university neither loses the rights nor escapes the
responsibilities of citizenship. He or she is expected to obey federal, state, and
local laws as well as the Regents’ Rules, university regulations, and
administrative rules. Students are subject to discipline for violating the
standards of conduct whether such conduct takes place on or off campus, or
whether civil or criminal penalties are also imposed for such conduct.
Academic Integrity
The faculty expects from its students a high level of responsibility and academic
honesty. Because the value of an academic degree depends upon the absolute
integrity of the work done by the student for that degree, it is imperative that a
student demonstrate a high standard of individual honor in his or her scholastic
work.
Scholastic dishonesty includes, but is not limited to, statements, acts or
omissions related to applications for enrollment or the award of a degree, and/or
the submission as one’s own work or material that is not one’s own. As a
general rule, scholastic dishonesty involves one of the following acts: cheating,
plagiarism, collusion and/or falsifying academic records. Students suspected of
academic dishonesty are subject to disciplinary proceedings.
Plagiarism, especially from the web, from portions of papers for other classes,
and from any other source is unacceptable and will be dealt with under the
university’s policy on plagiarism (see general catalog for details). This course
will use the resources of turnitin.com, which searches the web for possible
plagiarism and is over 90% effective.
Email Use
The University of Texas at Dallas recognizes the value and efficiency of
communication between faculty/staff and students through electronic mail. At
the same time, email raises some issues concerning security and the identity of
each individual in an email exchange. The university encourages all official
student email correspondence be sent only to a student’s U.T. Dallas email
address and that faculty and staff consider email from students official only if it
originates from a UTD student account. This allows the university to maintain a
high degree of confidence in the identity of all individual corresponding and the
security of the transmitted information. UTD furnishes each student with a free
email account that is to be used in all communication with university personnel.
The Department of Information Resources at U.T. Dallas provides a method for
students to have their U.T. Dallas mail forwarded to other accounts.
Withdrawal from Class
The administration of this institution has set deadlines for withdrawal of any
college-level courses. These dates and times are published in that semester's
course catalog. Administration procedures must be followed. It is the student's
responsibility to handle withdrawal requirements from any class. In other words,
I cannot drop or withdraw any student. You must do the proper paperwork to
ensure that you will not receive a final grade of "F" in a course if you choose not
to attend the class once you are enrolled.
Student Grievance Procedures
Procedures for student grievances are found in Title V, Rules on Student
Services and Activities, of the university’s Handbook of Operating Procedures.
In attempting to resolve any student grievance regarding grades, evaluations, or
other fulfillments of academic responsibility, it is the obligation of the student first
to make a serious effort to resolve the matter with the instructor, supervisor,
administrator, or committee with whom the grievance originates (hereafter called
“the respondent”). Individual faculty members retain primary responsibility for
assigning grades and evaluations. If the matter cannot be resolved at that level,
the grievance must be submitted in writing to the respondent with a copy of the
respondent’s School Dean. If the matter is not resolved by the written response
provided by the respondent, the student may submit a written appeal to the
School Dean. If the grievance is not resolved by the School Dean’s decision,
the student may make a written appeal to the Dean of Graduate or
Undergraduate Education, and the deal will appoint and convene an Academic
Appeals Panel. The decision of the Academic Appeals Panel is final. The
results of the academic appeals process will be distributed to all involved
parties.
Copies of these rules and regulations are available to students in the Office of
the Dean of Students, where staff members are available to assist students in
interpreting the rules and regulations.
Incomplete Grade Policy
As per university policy, incomplete grades will be granted only for work
unavoidably missed at the semester’s end and only if 70% of the course work
has been completed. An incomplete grade must be resolved within eight (8)
weeks from the first day of the subsequent long semester. If the required work
to complete the course and to remove the incomplete grade is not submitted by
the specified deadline, the incomplete grade is changed automatically to a grade
of F.
Disability Services
The goal of Disability Services is to provide students with disabilities educational
opportunities equal to those of their non-disabled peers. Disability Services is
located in room 1.610 in the Student Union. Office hours are Monday and
Thursday, 8:30 a.m. to 6:30 p.m.; Tuesday and Wednesday, 8:30 a.m. to 7:30
p.m.; and Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.
The contact information for the Office of Disability Services is:
The University of Texas at Dallas, SU 22
PO Box 830688
Richardson, Texas 75083-0688
(972) 883-2098 (voice or TTY)
Essentially, the law requires that colleges and universities make those
reasonable adjustments necessary to eliminate discrimination on the basis of
disability. For example, it may be necessary to remove classroom prohibitions
against tape recorders or animals (in the case of dog guides) for students who
are blind. Occasionally an assignment requirement may be substituted (for
example, a research paper versus an oral presentation for a student who is
hearing impaired). Classes enrolled students with mobility impairments may
have to be rescheduled in accessible facilities. The college or university may
need to provide special services such as registration, note-taking, or mobility
assistance.
It is the student’s responsibility to notify his or her professors of the need for
such an accommodation. Disability Services provides students with letters to
present to faculty members to verify that the student has a disability and needs
accommodations. Individuals requiring special accommodation should contact
the professor after class or during office hours.
Religious Holy Days
The University of Texas at Dallas will excuse a student from class or other
required activities for the travel to and observance of a religious holy day for a
religion whose places of worship are exempt from property tax under Section
11.20, Tax Code, Texas Code Annotated.
The student is encouraged to notify the instructor or activity sponsor as soon as
possible regarding the absence, preferably in advance of the assignment. The
student, so excused, will be allowed to take the exam or complete the
assignment within a reasonable time after the absence: a period equal to the
length of the absence, up to a maximum of one week. A student who notifies the
instructor and completes any missed exam or assignment may not be penalized
for the absence. A student who fails to complete the exam or assignment within
the prescribed period may receive a failing grade for that exam or assignment. If
a student or an instructor disagrees about the nature of the absence [i.e., for the
purpose of observing a religious holy day] or if there is similar disagreement
about whether the student has been given a reasonable time to complete any
missed assignments or examinations, either the student or the instructor may
request a ruling from the chief executive officer of the institution, or his or her
designee. The chief executive officer or designee must take into account the
legislative intent of TEC 51.911(b), and the student and instructor will abide by
the decision of the chief executive officer or designee.