MATH 174
Mathematics of Finance
Description:
Units:
Units:
1 of 1
Most Helpful Review
It was clear that Rogawski has little experience teaching the Math of Finance class...but his teaching was inexcusably confusing. DON'T take Rogawski for this class, it's a lot of work and his curve is not generous at all (and he refuses to tell you grade cutoffs, so don't even bother asking). His HW's are long, but not difficult. Exams weren't too bad either, although he gives very little partial credit and in the class I felt that he expected too much explanation - some of my answers were completely correct, but because I didn't write a sentence explicitly stating that I used some property or another, he took off 20% of the points for a problem. Lectures were also confusing. He ditched the textbook which meant that the only source of course material other than class lectures were the typed notes he distributed. Too bad these were completely ridden with typos, errors, and other inconsistencies. Not to mention, he made so many mistakes during class that most of the time I read my notes not knowing if the equations I copied down from the board were correct. I was disappointed by Rogawski as I read his reviews prior to registering for the class and I thought the class had a lot of potential, but he introduced so many topics without providing clear explanation of the concepts. The lack of a good textbook and the fact that he does a poor job at introducing difficult concepts makes for a pretty terrible course. Maybe he does well teaching more familiar topics, but I would definitely NOT recommend him for 174.
It was clear that Rogawski has little experience teaching the Math of Finance class...but his teaching was inexcusably confusing. DON'T take Rogawski for this class, it's a lot of work and his curve is not generous at all (and he refuses to tell you grade cutoffs, so don't even bother asking). His HW's are long, but not difficult. Exams weren't too bad either, although he gives very little partial credit and in the class I felt that he expected too much explanation - some of my answers were completely correct, but because I didn't write a sentence explicitly stating that I used some property or another, he took off 20% of the points for a problem. Lectures were also confusing. He ditched the textbook which meant that the only source of course material other than class lectures were the typed notes he distributed. Too bad these were completely ridden with typos, errors, and other inconsistencies. Not to mention, he made so many mistakes during class that most of the time I read my notes not knowing if the equations I copied down from the board were correct. I was disappointed by Rogawski as I read his reviews prior to registering for the class and I thought the class had a lot of potential, but he introduced so many topics without providing clear explanation of the concepts. The lack of a good textbook and the fact that he does a poor job at introducing difficult concepts makes for a pretty terrible course. Maybe he does well teaching more familiar topics, but I would definitely NOT recommend him for 174.
AD
1 of 1
