Based on 7 User s
There are no grade distributions available for this professor yet.
This isn't a bad course to take for a writing II requirement plus two GEs.
Note: discussions and lecture attendance is mandatory.
Overall, lectures are dull. Before class, you have to read the related texts. Most of the time, these are studies that the guest lecturers conducted. Which is more than fine, but when they come in to talk about them, they rarely ever add anything to what their papers said. Most topics are interesting, however, and when the professors/experts do expand on the readings, the material can be quite engaging.
The discussions are also pretty useless. My TA was super nice and tried to keep us interested, but there really wasn't much to cover, in my opinion. Most were centered around discussion questions that students wrote as part of their homework. (Hopefully that gives you some idea of how banal they were.)
The papers aren't too hard, really. The first one especially. Just make sure you follow the rubric (its organization and what it says you need to define within the parameters of your paper) and you'll do well.
Your TA will tell you for the second paper that you'll have to cut down a lot because, if you pick your topic well, you'll just want to keep going. I, along with the rest of the class, dismissed this as BS each time it was brought up, but it's actually true. If I were an AppLing major, I definitely would've just kept going after turning in the shortened version. As it were, I wasn't that motivated, but the paper was easier than I thought once I got started.
All in all, this is a paper-based class, so how well you do depends on how much time you're willing to spend tailoring your paper to the class/rubric and how kind of a grader your TA is. All the TAs for my class seemed like they wouldn't be too harsh, but I guess you never really know. I had Ashley Micklos and I'd definitely recommend her, as a teacher and a fair grader.
In case you believe grades bias reviews, I got an A.