Summary: take it if you're a political science, english, or philosophy major; don't bother if you aren't. It's pretty much a philosophy class about truth and power with lots of reading and interpretation.

This was a very interesting class. Let me begin that, unlike most, I enjoyed the majority of Panagia's lectures. He has a very deep and interdisciplinary way of teaching the material, and I really liked how he would give us a wider view on the overarching importance of the works we were analyzing.
The grading for this class consisted of eight essays, one a week after the second week, and a participation grade for discussing the readings each week in section. There were no tests, quizzes, or other papers/projects. The readings would take a significant amount of time, and we would sometimes cover two authors in one week. However, the papers were only 300-400 words each, and where meant to be concise and well thought out analyses of the texts on specific questions. I had Kye as TA, and he was awesome whenever I needed help with the readings. He had outlines and discussion questions that he would email out the night before discussion if we asked.
The issue that most people had with this class was that the lectures had nothing to do with the assignments. Yes, Panagia would lecture on the significance of the readings and provide general explanations, but the majority of interpreting the text was left to us. As a political science major I enjoyed the assignments and figuring out how the readings applied to the prompts, but everyone taking the class to fulfill a GE was dissapointed with how much you actually had to read and think.
A final note: Panagia is straight outta some liberal arts school in Canada, so our class was kind of an experiment for him and the department. I don't think most other POL SCI 10 classes go through so many readings so quickly, or have the same grading structure and assignment list.

From all of the concentrations in the Political Science department, Political Theory is the one that comes the easiest to me. That said, there will be some bias or a differing of experiences from my part.

Panagia is chill, sometimes sarcastic in class (but with good intentions) and at times engaging. If you do not like Political Theory, the class will be boring.

Panagia for one counts lecture attendance as a grade. Go to lecture. Period. If you need the points then go to lecture. Every week (with the exception of two weeks in the quarter due to a holiday weekend as well as the first week of lecture) he assigns you a 300-400 word essay answering a prompt on the reading he gives you. He goes into detail about the reading in class. Some weeks his lecture really focuses on the prompt topic; other times it does not, so make sure to do the readings or research them. All essays are Pass/No Pass, and the more essays you pass, the higher your grade. If you pass all of them (as well as attend all the lectures and discussions) you are guaranteed an A+.

I ended up with an A+ with little effort from my part (I didn't do all of the readings, I went to lecture, took notes, took notes during discussion and relied on summaries of the texts online), and I primarily give credit to my previous exposure taking philosophy courses that helped me condense my thoughts and avoid adding fluff in my essays.

If you need help with your essays, go to your TA. They will be extremely helpful in guiding you. My TA, Kye, was awesome in discussion, and from talking to some classmates in there, they said that Kye was really helpful during office hours.

If Political Theory is easy for you, then this class will be a breeze. If not, then the extra help from the TAs or the professor will do you well.