<p>Can any current or former students give any recommendations on who to take? The upperclassmen that I have talked to recommended Gilson (my current professor) or Passalaqua, which didn't help because they're sadly not teaching BIOL 142. My options for next semester are Escobar, Cafferty, and Spell. I haven't heard much about Cafferty, and have received a lot of negative opinions on Spell.</p>
<p>Take Spell. The students you talked to probably lied. The woman has won several teaching awards (multi-time winner of crystal apple, the same award won by Gilson and Passalaucqua recently). She will prepare you the best for whatever and is most similar to Gilson in teaching ability/style and testing. She gets a bad rap because she used to be difficult Now, no one is particularly difficult (the tests are more challenging than the easiest professors but still quite easy. Her average will generally always be near or over 80 something. Regardless, you need to get used to more challenging than normal multiple choice exams, because that’s what you’ll be getting on the MCAT discreet and any GRE subject tests. You don’t wanna be surprised when you get to that stage). Most of the people who give negative opinions don’t even know, or have had her. Her voice is kind of annoying, but she really knows how to convey material (especially 142) and will use active learning when she can to get students learning at a higher level. She is superior to the other 2, trust me (they will stand up there and talk at you for an hour or more, not really engaging. Escobar tries to be, but is monotone and relatively clueless about how to explain chemical principles when needed).</p>
<p>Note About her ratemyprofessor rating: It is low. People in the past were mad because she used to give plenty of C’s, which were probably well deserved because biology 141/142 was much more difficult across the board, even if you took it with Escobar and yet people would expect it to be like the typical high school biology class and not study for it properly and whine when they couldn’t get a good grade from memorizing: the code for this sentiment is: “Tests do no reflect actual knowledge”. AKA, “I hate that they make us apply knowledge to a new situation emphasizing the facts that I simply memorized”. Yes, because standardized exams for entrance into prof. and grad. programs just test on memorization…their sentiment is completely justified lol). I think her evaluations today would be better because she dumbed down the course (along w/everyone else) when Corces came in. </p>
<p>How’s Gilson’s class this year by the way? Is it still Easy"ish" (mostly multiple choice)? Does he do more than lecture (does he do cases, problems, and stuff like that for some classes). How do you like it?</p>
<p>Thanks for the reply Bernie! I’ll give it more thought. I have a different and more positive view on Spell, especially if she’s similar to Gilson. </p>
<p>Gilson’s class is great. His tests are manageable and fair if you study enough. The last exam was about 1/4 MC and the rest short answer. Weekly quizzes are usually several MC and a short answer. Case studies are difficult, but we do them every other week. Very much lecture based, but once in awhile he has incorporated interactive demos to show biological processes. It’s unfortunate that he isn’t teaching 142.</p>
<p>Yeah, I think Spell is similar. As for case studies, trust me, you’ll thank him. View it as prepping for MCAT passages. And, at least he doesn’t overly use multiple choice anymore. I’m going to PM, I have a question.</p>