<p>I'm debating which one of these to take next semester. Pol Sci 2 is comparative politics, and Pol Sci 4 is political theory. I want to declare my major by next year, so I need to take one of these two poli sci prerequisites.</p>
<p>I'm taking Poli Sci 1 right now, and although I am really intrigued by American Politics (i'm planning to concentrate here), I'm bored as hell by our professor. It doesn't seem to tough so far (my history class seems far more challenging)</p>
<p>Anyways to those of you that have taken either class, which one would you prefer?</p>
<p>From what I have heard both PS 2 and 4 suck. I took 1, 3 and 5 and they were all pretty good.</p>
<p>I took 2 … yeah… it kinda sucked.</p>
<p>I took the 112a series (to fufill distribution) and it was okay. So I would suggest taking upper divs to fufill those 2 dis. And take 1, 3, 5:)</p>
<p>I took 4 and it sucked - really long/boring reading assigments from people in the 1700s that I’m pretty sure nobody actually read. </p>
<p>If you’re going to choose between 2 and 4, you should probably base it off the professors. Look them up on courserank/ratemyprof?</p>
<p>I took PS2 during the summer. It was a piece of cake. Fun class, not too bad reading wise, GSI was great, and the exams were fairly graded. Can’t ask for more.</p>
<p>I took PS2 with Fish last semester. I found it interesting as eff, dunno what these other guys are talking about. He’s a great lecturer, and gives his test questions along with a bunch of dummy ones ahead of time. It’s a tad hard though, you really have to study your stuff before the tests to nail them, if you’re aiming for an A. But that could be said for any class.</p>
<p>Nvm… I didn’t realize the prof was fish. I took it with Chhibber, which was probably why it was so bad.</p>
<p>If it’s fish… take PS2 for sure. He’s one of the best profs at berkeley. I would take any class he is teaching in a heartbeat.</p>
<p>He’s famous in our department 
I keep reading his articles in my PS classes. He’s a genius… and hot… and just plain awesome.</p>
<p>lolumad is speaking the truth.</p>
<p>DONT TAKE IT WITH JANOS IF HE’s TEACHING.</p>
<p>I got an 79.48 in that class and my S.O.B. GSI wouldnt round me up to a B-…and the class was 4 units, so it unnecessarily fuxed over my GPA.</p>
<p>Waiting4College, you have to draw the line somewhere. If they rounded up for you, what about the person who got 79.38? Or 79.23? It would tarnish their integrity as professional instructors if they made special allowances. We just have to suck it up and do better next time. Of course I don’t know the whole story, but from what you’ve said this is my opinion.</p>
<p>MBP: know i agree with that too. the only reason I was mad was that i did have a chance to look at my final and it was completely arbitrary where he chose to take points off, which is why I emailed him very politely to ask if he’d be willing to discuss some of the final…he didn’t even bother REPLYING to my emails. i didn’t even mention the actual letter grade in it but i guess he figured since he is done gsi-ing for the class he no longer even has an obligation to return my emails ever again even though he put on his syllabs to “feel free to contact him”. i just hate the bureaucracy that gsi’s try so hard to appear like they care about you and all, but feel the second they are done teaching a class they never have to acknowledge my existence again, but that’s just my opinion.</p>
<p>furthermore, i emailed him within an hour of seeing my final paper in the ps dept/grade on bearfacts in december right before winter break started which is why i was ****ed. so its not even like i waited so long to contact him. plus I had a 100% participation grade, never missed a single section and frequently went to his office hours too. i mean, i understand they cant exceptions for every single student, but then when exactly is stuff like that supposed to come in handy if not being .02 points away from the next letter grade-esp if it seems completely arbitrary. its fine if he had some reason, but the fact that he didn’t even see the need to reply to an email is what really turned me off.</p>
<p>oh and sidenote: im not attacking janos because of my gsi. honest to god, he was a pretty bad lecturer himself. more than2/3 of the class stopped coming or fell sleep altogether/fb during lecture (in cheitt). he frequently forgot what he was saying in midlecture which made it pretty difficult to pay attention.</p>