AHIS BC3667

I'm not that much of a writer, so I would spend a long time on the assignments. I would spend maybe 5 hours writing a 500 words essay and maybe 3 on the presentations. These assignments were graded like pieces of literature. Speaking with art history majors, the standard for this class isn't abnormal. However, I found it quite challenging as an Economics major. It's doable, but I put much more effort into this class than I wanted to. Class attendance was mandatory, but the readings were more relevant to the assignments than class. Have to visit two museums during the semester.

Thought this would be a fun class. It was interesting, but it was NOT easy. Ended up with an A- in this class. If you're not an art history major and want to take this class just for fun, think twice. I heard a lot of good things about this class, but it was not as fun as I expected.

The workload was relatively easy. 5 presentations and 5 short (500 words) papers over the course of the semester. HOWEVER grading was INSANE. The means were often well below a B. I was told that some TAs were not giving anything above a B+ on principle and there is no curve in the class. My TA shared that the Professor yelled at them for giving any grade above a 95, and therefore my grade on a paper was lowered over 5 points weeks after recieving my initial grade for no apparent reason. Grading is extremely subjective and at the whims of whichever TA is leading your section. For the erratic grading alone I would recommend thinking twice about this class. I honestly have no clue what final grade I will be given, which is kind of insane for a 4 credit class.

Literally learned nothing after the first week. If attendance wasn't taken class would have been empty. Class was in no way needed to do the assignments. Its a shame because Prof. Higonnet is a master in this field but the class was just terrible.

45% Presentation 45% Essay and 10% attendance (bi weekly presentations and essays) - strict grading

This was definitely one of the most interesting classes I’ve taken so far, but fair warning THIS CLASS IS NOT AN EASY A. Going into it, the grading policy was 45% Presentation 45% Essay and 10% attendance (bi weekly presentations and essays). So, I thought that this class would be a breeze…. However, the professor is very strict about grading and rarely any As were given out in my class. If you are truly interested in fashion, I think that this is an amazing class. I loved learning about the history and professor higonent was an amazing lecturer- incredibly eloquent and knowledgeable. I would just keep in mind that this class will not grant you an easy A.

If you are looking for an easy A, do not take this class. It sounds easy at first because there is no midterm or final, but Higonnet is a harsh grader, so TA's will reflect that. You alternate between a presentation and 450-500 word paper every week and the grading for these is way harsher than I've encountered in any other ahis class I've taken at Barnard/Columbia. So many people I know ended up taking this class pass/fail.

Higonnet is a very passionate lecturer. You can tell she genuinely loves the art of clothing. The class covers a very wide scope and was my most interesting and thought-provoking class I've taken so far. I am not sure if it can be categorized as just a fashion history class: the class starts with why we dress, and then does go over historical clothing, but I feel like she incorporates topics of sociology, gender studies, economics, etc. in every lecture. The class ended with discussions around capitalism and the fashion industry. very very interdisciplinary! I feel like I genuinely learned from this class and see fashion differently.

I’ve honestly never taken a class that had as awful of a syllabus as this one did— that is to say there really wasn’t a syllabus beyond the theme of each week and the reading assignments. There was one grading rubric for essays and presentations that was supposed to be standardized across all sections however, based on your section, the TA decides what the grading mechanics were going to be for citations and desired essay structures. It wasn’t until halfway through the semester that my TA revealed to me that I was losing points because I wasn’t using a specific kind of citations on my paper (mla v Chicago) where in the weekly paper assignment only says cite your sources. Similarly grading is incredibly subjective across sections. The TAs specify that they are going to be grading hard at the beginning of the semester, but then just leave you lots of comments with very little actionable feedback. Trying to understand what you can do to improve in this course is like talking to a brick wall and I honestly don’t blame the TAs, as mine was actually quite nice. I think it might be the way that the Professor set the class up and advised them to address grading questions and concerns. All in all don’t take this class literally anything else can fulfill whatever requirements you’re trying to complete.