<p>so where do we go to see ratings on courses and professors from students?</p>
<p><a href="http://www.vpul.upenn.edu/coursereview/%5B/url%5D">http://www.vpul.upenn.edu/coursereview/</a></p>
<p>hazmat i cant PM you ure box is full... so i thought id find ure last post to let u know.. lol</p>
<p>oops......cleared now.</p>
<p>course review is not always the most trustworthy way to get info about professors and courses.</p>
<p>so whose class do people recommend for math 104, chemistry, biology, and writing seminar.</p>
<p>math104: galvin
chem101+53: i dont know the prof cos i didnt take
biology 121 if u have strong background in chem and bio, and biol 101 if u dont.
writing seminar: choose the one that u'r interested. they're pretty easy (to get an A).</p>
<p>math104 - DeTurck
chem101 - Davies/Pietrovito if you're an engineer</p>
<p>DeTurck is amazing and blows the rest of the math department out of the water. Not a fan of Santos.</p>
<p>For Physics, Kikkawa is great, he got a standing ovation on the last day of physics 150. Lockyer and Ovurt are also pretty good. I'm not a fan of Heiney. </p>
<p>For writing seminars, Arth 009 with walker was really good- its about Frank Lloyd Wright and architecture. Discussions are fun and very easy, there is often food in class and many "field trips" around campus to look at buildings etc.</p>
<p>soci 009.301 (race&academic achievement) is the easiest writing seminar at penn. it's also one of the best, IMO. but i think the prof is going away for a year.</p>
<p>isn't DeTruck very difficult?</p>
<p>how does the rating for course difficulty work? does a lower number equal low difficulty and high number high difficulty? or is it the opposite way?</p>
<p>Low is easy, high=hard. Deturck is the college dean and teaches some math classes. He is very clear unlike many other teachers. The actual concepts for a class like math 114 are the same regardles of teacher. He is not difficult, the class is. His classes usually have higher test averages. Ours on the final was well above the exam average for all the professors sections in math 114.</p>
<p>so a 1 would be easy and a 4 would be very very hard?</p>
<p>yes indeed</p>
<p>It's all very depressing, actually. It doesn't look like Kikkawa's going to be teaching phys this year--I was looking forward to him.</p>
<p>I found course review to be really meaningless. I mean does an extra .2 really mean anything? I would much rather talk to peers to find out what professors are good. And on that note, I'll list all the profs I had last year (I took a LOT of intro classes, so I'm sure some poeple will find it helpful)</p>
<p>Econ001: Spiegel. His class demanded a lot less work, but on the other hand it was very hard to hear what he was saying from the back of the room. I would take a class with him again, but make sure to sit in the front of the room. Get to class early, cuz everyone else wants to do this too.</p>
<p>Econ002: I'm not sure if you have a choice, but Eudey was fairly competent. She teaches in a fairly straightforward manner but reading her book, her notes, and then going to her lecture seemed to be so repetitive at times.</p>
<p>Chem101: Petrovi/Davies. They were awesome professors. The course material is really hard and I think they're your only choice if you're in engineering, but they really know their stuff and teach in a very lucid manner.</p>
<p>Math114: Galvin. He is a good professor, and will gladly answer questions in lecture. But please don't.</p>
<p>Physics152: Thomson. For the love of god, take another prof. Although she does teach all the material in a way that easy to understand, she repeats the material so many times and teaches in such an uninspired way that I always felt like I wasted an hour of my life after her lectures. In fact, I skipped almost all of the last month of classes and I found that I learned just as much, if not more.</p>
<p>Stat111: Wyner. I loved Wyner, he's one of my favorite profs. He teaches very well, always has a funny story to tell, and is a very engaging teacher. I never missed his classes because it would invariably be useful and/or fun.</p>
<p>EAS101: Pope. Well, Pope didn't really teach thaat much. Most of the class is doing a lab in each discipline, save for some bs-y personality/career thing. You mostly get to know him through his grading; he leaves a lot of comments and wants you to do a lot of work. Although the average looks intimidating, the class isn't curved so averaging a B in an A- class isn't the end of the world.</p>
<p>Math240: Wiener. I'm not really crazy about him. He's obviously very interested in the subject, and very talented, but his teaching sometimes leaves a lot to be desired. He doesn't have a very logical style of teaching, and his fuzzy logic can make it hard to follow the material.</p>
<p>ANTH009: Stockett. This was a writing seminar, civ. and ancient catastrophes, and I liked her a lot. Although she might seem demanding, she really does read your essays and marks off what she doesn't like, so you know exactly what to fix. Her grading is very flexible, and it seems like she's very committed to improving your writing. Really clear, lucid, and a great, if not easy, class.</p>
<p>wow! thats really helpful! does anyone else have any more suggestions about courses and professors to avoid, recommend? (i'm an econ major so that should narrow the field down considerably)</p>
<p>plus (i know this sounds verrry lazy) ---> could you please suggest any easy A classes that i can take just in case i need to take an extra class or two. </p>
<p>thanks!</p>