<p>Hi,</p>
<p>I think it'd be helpful if some current students could list professors they thought were good. I honestly don't mind tough professors as long as I'm learning.
Some classes that come to mind are, Bio, Chem, Calc, English, any of the Humanities, maybe even P.E. Feel free to tell us about any other professor you enjoy beyond freshman year. </p>
<p>Thanks</p>
<p>QG</p>
<p>Two of my favorite professors freshman year (and actually they were probably two of the best professors I ever had), were…</p>
<p>Michael Jarvis - U.S. History
Thomas Krugh - Chemistry</p>
<p>LOL! I don’t think anyone except Krugh teaches Chem 131. So you’re not going to get a choice. Some people like him; some don’t. </p>
<p>Bio for bio and related majors has 2 instructors. Olek for Bio 110 and Clark for Bio 112. Olek–he’s been discussed at length in previous threads. He’s widely disliked by most students. Bio 112 is for kids who have taken AP Bio in HS and scored a 4 or better. Clark is new this year (and I suspect either a VAP or adjunct since the dept didn’t hire any new faculty)–so no idea if he’s good or bad.</p>
<p>Bio for non majors will be taught by Benyajacti—who I know nothing about.</p>
<p>For Calc 1, D1 TAed for Iosevitch (MTH 160) and liked him a great deal, thought he was well organized and reasonable. But she was on the teaching side, not the student side.</p>
<p>D2 liked Platt for Bio 112 and Biochem–but many kids absolutely hate him.</p>
<p>For upper level math–Starr, Greenleaf. </p>
<p>Anthro-- Eleana Kim. Good lectures, interesting readings & discussions. D2 like her so much, she took 2 classes (out of her required 3 for a cluster) with her. Would have taken more if she has space in her schedule.</p>
<p>English- Take David Bleich if you can. Tons of high student involvement thought-provoking discussion in his classes.</p>
<p>Krugh teaches the Tuesday and Thursday section of Chem 131 while Krauss teaches the Monday, Wednesday and Friday section. I took the class with Krauss and thought he was a great teacher who was well equipped to handle a large class size. Both Krugh and Krauss have reputations for being good professors, so you really can’t go wrong with either choice.</p>
<p>I also agree with URgrad2009’s assessment of Jarvis. I completed my cluster in U.S. History and his class was one of the better courses I took while at UR. Wolcott was another one of my favorite history professors.</p>
<p>Not sure if you are interested in engineering, but Perruchio and Lambropoulos offer great introductory courses in mechanical engineering.</p>
<p>Any input regarding Higgins who is teaching EES101 Intro to Geological Sciences?</p>
<p>Does anyone have any comments on whether to take Quest Chem or not? I’m pretty proficient in Chem, but I took the class last year and I’m a little worried it will be too vigorous for my first semester in college. How hard is it to get an A? Whats the workload difference between Quest and 131? HS Chem to college chem?</p>
<p>Quest Chem is Organic Chemistry for freshmen. It is tougher than the regular orgo that everyone else takes (sophomore year and above). I know people who dropped out and people who pushed through it, and didn’t get as high of grades they hoped for.
If you’re pre-med, I would not suggest taking it since you would want at least second semester of gen chem on your transcript. I felt that both gen chem courses were comparable to what I learned in my AP class and what was on the test. The labs take getting used to, but the workload is definitely manageable, and workshops help you prepare for exams. Both Krauss (131) and Farrar (132) I felt gave fair tests and taught the material well. The classes were on point scale and a dropped/scaled down test score, so it really gives students a chance to get the grade they want and set a goal.</p>
<p>I understand that Olek has been discussed many times; extensively on “rate my professors” but I honestly do not understand why people complained that much. Any student who put in enough effort to go through the powerpoints and to organize the material would be able to learn. Sure Olek didn’t really teach, but his ppts did a good job at explaining the topics. His tests pushed you to think and to pull in the memorized information with the reasoning he had students practice in workshop. Maybe I was lucky I had a good TA who knew what he was doing, but the course definitely is doable. (I wouldn’t suggest going to lecture though. It’s much more efficient, at least for me, to learn at my own pace with the same exact material presented and ask questions later.)</p>
<p>Another note: Quest courses in general are nothing like the material you have learned in high school, even if it is AP. Even quest math does crazy proofs of sometimes the simplest things and it really pushes you to think differently.</p>
<p>What about for humanities classes/social science classes? Political Science? Economics? History?</p>
<p>On the topic of Economics:</p>
<p>Rizzo is the main lecturer for the earlier courses. He is definitely hit-or-miss. In my case, he was a miss (but I respect the guy). His style is very conceptual, with less focus on mathematical/analytical concepts. Very scatterbrained and a hardcore libertarian (in any exam, you should lean toward his ideals in your responses).</p>
<p>Landsburg is just as crazy but you will probably learn more from his classes. More focus on mathematical analysis.</p>
<p>Here’s some knowledge about Poli Sci:</p>
<p>Meguid - very organized and demanding. If you are a conscientious student, there is a lot of knowledge to be gained from her classes.</p>
<p>Goemans - exactly the opposite of Meguid. Easy class. He is scatterbrained and nuts. You won’t gather much information from taking his class, except maybe a larger appreciation for facebook games (you’ll see…).</p>
<p>That’s all I’ve got. I won’t mention the pre-med classes again because they have been covered in depth already. If you are a matriculating student, check out ratemyprofessors, and the U of R course evaluations (available on the registrar website). With this information you should be able to make good decisions.</p>
<p>Hollinn, I have AP credit for economics and am looking to take an econ course first semester next year. Would you recommend retaking 108, or moving directly into 207/207H?</p>
<p>Yes, I have had Rizzo and I agree it’s usually hit or miss, but he is great. I guess he has libertarian views because good economics is consistent with libertarian economics, but he’s said many times that he does not call himself a libertarian.</p>
<p>As for AP credit, a lot of my friends go straight into 207 and then 209 with credit, but most of them say they regret doing so, just because 108 is a good refresher and it’s not too difficult of a class. In 108, you do a lot more than just what’s covered in AP Micro/Macro, and from personal experience (I had both the micro/macro AP Credit), I can tell you that it is definitely worth it.</p>
<p>Eventhough it was a large intro class the intro to psy course came highly recommended. So both my sons took it the second semester of their freshman year even when neither would consider it as a major or minor. DS2 took econ with Lansbury for the same reason.</p>
<p>For freshman year, it is a good idea to talk to upperclassmen about memorable courses and profs. Then sign up for as many as schedule allows. Attend the classes for a week or so and then dropping the ones that are the least interesting. [Of course, you can only do that for electives and not your major requirements.] Even some profs will suggest such course shopping. I think that was how one of them ended up with a cluster in philosophy as a student in the engineering school.</p>
<p>Back on 6/5/2010, ohhowrandon stated:</p>
<p>“I understand that Olek has been discussed many times; extensively on “rate my professors” but I honestly do not understand why people complained that much. Any student who put in enough effort to go through the powerpoints and to organize the material would be able to learn. Sure Olek didn’t really teach, but…” </p>
<p>Now that my son has Olek, I feel that I am in a better position to comment. “Sure Olek didn’t really teach?!?!” He’s a professor, isn’t that at least part of his job!! I guess I would be less bothered if he tried to teach and just sucked at it. From what I am hearing from my son what he talks abouit in class has nothing to do with Bio - hello - the name of the class is “Priniciples of Biology” for god’s sake!</p>
<p>Really ohhowrandon - “…(you) honestly do not understand why people complained that much…”</p>
<p>How can U of R allow this. Especially to freshman. Especially at what we are exepcted to pay! My local community college has better Bio professors!</p>
<p>I am sure my son will be able to learn the material on his own. It’s just too bad this doesn’t qualify as work study, soince HE is doing Olek’s job.</p>
<p>I would be curious to hear what the U of R administrators on the forum have to say.</p>
<p>LOL! D2 said the same thing about BIO 112 when she took it–it had nothing to do with the general principles of biology and much more to do with the professor’s pet interests and research. (Which since she had Platt was pretty much all biochemistry all the time. He even took exam questions out of an upper level biochem text not assigned for the class.)</p>
<p>D has Olek too. She says he’s a nice enough fellow, but she doesn’t get anything out of the lectures. She is also thinking of skipping the lectures. She feels the workshops are good at breaking it down and she can watch the powerpoints on her own. She was kinda bummed because she was very excited about Bio and not as much now. I told her that this is just an intro class and the higher levels will be better. She is also bored in intro Chem, says she already knows the material they are covering.</p>
<p>retrolady…if you don’t mind me asking, who does your D have for Chem?</p>
<p>@adkdad
"Now that my son has Olek, I feel that I am in a better position to comment. “Sure Olek didn’t really teach?!?!” He’s a professor, isn’t that at least part of his job!! I guess I would be less bothered if he tried to teach and just sucked at it. From what I am hearing from my son what he talks abouit in class has nothing to do with Bio - hello - the name of the class is “Priniciples of Biology” for god’s sake!</p>
<p>How can U of R allow this. Especially to freshman. Especially at what we are exepcted to pay! My local community college has better Bio professors!</p>
<p>I am sure my son will be able to learn the material on his own. It’s just too bad this doesn’t qualify as work study, soince HE is doing Olek’s job.</p>
<h2>I would be curious to hear what the U of R administrators on the forum have to say. "</h2>
<p>To clarify some things. OLEK is a “SENIOR LECTURER”; he does not even have a professor title. he does not do research anymore so it’s not like he doesn’t care because he’s off in his own lab.
I fully believe that by the time people get to college, they can’t expect a teacher to spoon feed them… it’s more about the material they eventually get you to learn/cover when you study for tests. it’s a lot more self-studying to get the material. How else can someone explain how this mechanism works other than showing it in a diagram… and then reiterating it when he’s explaining during class? </p>
<p>Olek has his faults for being disorganized but 110 is a good weeding out class for a reason. Anyone who puts effort and tries to follow what he wants gets a pretty good grade in the end. If you don’t try, get impatient, and get easily discouraged, science is not for you. </p>
<p>His workshops are pretty much practice tests. He gives curves on each test and curves the final grade too. He posts every bit of information that he covers and expects you to know on blackboard. His ridiculous super long tests force you to simplify and reason out things you have no clue about because thats how students should think in science -to just figure things out based on what they have even if it feels like something completely new. this is more like “principles of biology - in reality for scientists” and not “principles of biology - what you thought bio was all about in high school”. (the experimental technique/thought process, not the stuff you gotta memorize). The class works out fine in the end. Honestly. He’s just an awfully monotonous speaker.</p>
<p>I’m doing independent study at a neuro lab this semester and I gotta say, Olek’s whole look at the big picture/end result process is pretty handy now. </p>
<p>on a less rant-y note:
I’m taking ted brown’s us healthcare systems course right now, and he’s an amazing lecturer. He can get very worked up about how awful the “system” is and how it’s not even really a system, and there’s some great interesting points to support it.</p>
<p>The UR academic administration is aware of the teaching issue, though they listen to the positive, negative and neutral voices as well. They were, it seems, unaware that it had become a topic of conversation on college discussion forums.</p>
<p>ohhowrandon - I agree with almost all of what you said in your latest response about the differences between high school and college. And, as I said in my post, I am infinitely confident that my son will be fine in the end.</p>
<p>The one thing I do object to in you reply, however, is the following - “… but 110 is a good weeding out class for a reason.” </p>
<p>There was a consitent theme in all of the parent orientation sessions that we attended that talked about how the university worked to ensure the success of the students, especially freshman, especially during their first semester. Having someone like Olek teaching an Intro class seems very contradictory to that.</p>
<p>Also, classifying BIO110 as a “weeding out class”, which I recall reading elsewhere in this forum, is very disturbing to me as a parent. These students just made it through the admissions process and were accepted. Are you suggesting that Olek and BIO110 is superior to the weeding out that Admissioin does?</p>