Christopher Smeenk
Department of Philosophy
AD
3.4
Overall Rating
Based on 6 Users
Easiness 1.6 / 5 How easy the class is, 1 being extremely difficult and 5 being easy peasy.
Clarity 3.8 / 5 How clear the class is, 1 being extremely unclear and 5 being very clear.
Workload 1.8 / 5 How much workload the class is, 1 being extremely heavy and 5 being extremely light.
Helpfulness 3.4 / 5 How helpful the class is, 1 being not helpful at all and 5 being extremely helpful.

TOP TAGS

There are no relevant tags for this professor yet.

GRADE DISTRIBUTIONS

There are no grade distributions available for this professor yet.

ENROLLMENT DISTRIBUTIONS
Clear marks

Sorry, no enrollment data is available.

AD

Reviews (1)

1 of 1
1 of 1
Add your review...
Quarter: N/A
Grade: N/A
Dec. 5, 2005

Smeenk is a nice guy. Very helpful. His class, on the other hand, is an entirely different story.

Philosophy of Science, right? Wrong. Try "History of Science" or "Science of Science". I actually think the best name for the class would be "Science, with Interesting Questions". If you are generally bad at science: BEWARE. In this class, we use vector calculus and other things that I haven't heard since high school calculus and have mostly forgotten. Math/physics majors are better suited for this class than Philosophy majors.

If you are planning on taking one of his classes, I encourage you to talk to him before the course begins and ask about the specific content of the class and what sort of a knowledge base he is expecting from his students. If I had known that "Philosophy of Science" was going to focus on quantum mechanics and theory, I would have never signed up for it. But I'm there, I'm stuck, and my GPA is going to take a serious thrashing.

If Prof. Smeenk ever reads this, PLEASE add more philosophy to your philosophy classes and make the material, itself, more accessible. I am worried that the actual philosophy of science is not being discussed in any undergraduate courses at UCLA; which is a shame because it is really a very interesting subject. Also, Prof. Smeenk, on behalf of those who had to drop Phil 131 because of its content, you need to add the appropriate prerequisites to your courses. I know two people that dropped because they didn't know calculus, which was necessary for the class but not required to enroll. It's only fair to make those things required if your course depends on them.

Helpful?

0 0 Please log in to provide feedback.
Quarter: N/A
Grade: N/A
Dec. 5, 2005

Smeenk is a nice guy. Very helpful. His class, on the other hand, is an entirely different story.

Philosophy of Science, right? Wrong. Try "History of Science" or "Science of Science". I actually think the best name for the class would be "Science, with Interesting Questions". If you are generally bad at science: BEWARE. In this class, we use vector calculus and other things that I haven't heard since high school calculus and have mostly forgotten. Math/physics majors are better suited for this class than Philosophy majors.

If you are planning on taking one of his classes, I encourage you to talk to him before the course begins and ask about the specific content of the class and what sort of a knowledge base he is expecting from his students. If I had known that "Philosophy of Science" was going to focus on quantum mechanics and theory, I would have never signed up for it. But I'm there, I'm stuck, and my GPA is going to take a serious thrashing.

If Prof. Smeenk ever reads this, PLEASE add more philosophy to your philosophy classes and make the material, itself, more accessible. I am worried that the actual philosophy of science is not being discussed in any undergraduate courses at UCLA; which is a shame because it is really a very interesting subject. Also, Prof. Smeenk, on behalf of those who had to drop Phil 131 because of its content, you need to add the appropriate prerequisites to your courses. I know two people that dropped because they didn't know calculus, which was necessary for the class but not required to enroll. It's only fair to make those things required if your course depends on them.

Helpful?

0 0 Please log in to provide feedback.
1 of 1
3.4
Overall Rating
Based on 6 Users
Easiness 1.6 / 5 How easy the class is, 1 being extremely difficult and 5 being easy peasy.
Clarity 3.8 / 5 How clear the class is, 1 being extremely unclear and 5 being very clear.
Workload 1.8 / 5 How much workload the class is, 1 being extremely heavy and 5 being extremely light.
Helpfulness 3.4 / 5 How helpful the class is, 1 being not helpful at all and 5 being extremely helpful.

TOP TAGS

There are no relevant tags for this professor yet.

ADS

Adblock Detected

Bruinwalk is an entirely Daily Bruin-run service brought to you for free. We hate annoying ads just as much as you do, but they help keep our lights on. We promise to keep our ads as relevant for you as possible, so please consider disabling your ad-blocking software while using this site.

Thank you for supporting us!