AHIS W3407

Easy A. Attend lecture, section, do the reading (not all of it is necessary...Baxandall, I never opened), memorize the maybe 40 paintings and dates he expects you to know, look over the powerpoint once or twice...bam. A.

light-medium amount of readings that were often, if not almost always, unnecessary. Two pretty short papers, a midterm, and a final. The exams did involve a lot of memorization.

I had not taken an art history course at college before and this was quite different from what I was expecting. Professor Hood did not expect us to memorize copious amounts of details, facts, and dates, and, as someone else said, regurgitate them on the exam. Instead, he forced us to look at the paintings and see the meaning and historical context behind them. Yes, his insistence that we not take notes was a bit irritating at times and yes, some of his lectures (particularly towards the beginning) seemed a bit worthless, but altogether, it was a worthwhile course. I do wish we had spent more time looking at the paintings and the symbolism within them, but nonetheless, much of the vitriol in other reviews is unwarranted. If you want to take a class that takes a different approach to art history, then I would recommend it. Also, Professor Hood has an excellent Southern drawl and reminds me charmingly of Leslie Jordan.

Professor Cole is not the most exciting lecturer, but I'd say this class is still worth taking if you're interested in the subject matter or art history in general. His lectures weren't especially thrilling, and he was often hard to here, but if you could stay awake and get a seat close enough to hear him well, you would here a pretty interesting lecture. I definitely learned a lot about the subject matter and learned to approach it in new ways. The lectures were often nearly identical to the textbook reading (he co-wrote the book). While some would find that annoying, I found it convenient because it effectively meant that I could choose between doing the reading or going to the lecture (I chose the lectures and only used the book for review and still got an A-). Basically it's a fairly easy and interesting class taught by an extremely smart and knowledgeable, albeit slightly boring, professor.

Midterm, Final, short (3-5 pages) paper (you have to turn in a draft and then a final version), light reading that you have to at least skim for discussion section and for essay questions on midterm/final (you get the topics before the tests).

Weekly online reading assignments (often irrelevant to lectures), 2 papers (short and easily graded), one difficult midterm, one easy final. While the final essays were in depth, he gave us the questions one week before the test. Awesome!!

I completely disagree with the other review of this course. I loved the class and the professor. Hood is in no way insulting, he just has a sense of humor. The exams were not impossible (or scary), they just required thinking -- instead of the usual regurgitation of facts. In a usual art history class the professor says "Look at painting A, notice how painter B has painted X and note that its a symbol of Y" You spend a weekend with your flashcards memorizing Painting A, Painter B, detail X and symbol Y. Come the midterm/final you see Painting A and immediately begin regurgitating the memorized facts. On Hood's midterm you see a new painting -- and instead of scribbling factoids and ignoring the painting you have to actually LOOK AT IT. The idea is that when you look at it you begin to recognize style/composition/color/subject matter/etc that is familiar, and connect the new painting to some of the major pieces presented in lectures. If you are conscious during lectures you should have NO PROBLEM discussing them intelligently. And what the other reviewer fails to mention is that Hood and the TAs are not focused on accuracy (guessing who painted it, when and where) -- they just want you to be able to talk about what you see. I am an art history major and a senior and this is the first professor I have had who did not want his lectures rewritten for him on his exams. Instead of m…

I took Cole's Early Italian Art Art History course. Cole was new last semester from Penn, so I wasn't sure what to expect. He is an OK professor at best, though I think the class warmed up to him more and more as the semester went along. Cole is quite hard to follow during lecture. He tends to trip over his words and struggles to put together coherent sentences. Despite that problem, his lectures are very methodical. He always gives a handout noting the important slides for each topic. His lectures tie in nicely together and while his teaching style isn't exciting, the works are always interesting. Cole was a little unclear about grading and the weights of each assignment. Everything (2 papers, 1 midterm, and 1 final) ended up being 25%. Discussion sections meets sporadically and participation only counts if your grade is on a border. The end of the year trip to the MET was very helpful in reviewing for the final. Overall, an average class.

a midterm and a final, plus one small (4 page) paper. Mandatory weekly discussion section. And they took attendance both in the lecture and the discussion section.

I have been considering what to write in this view, and I thought the best thing to do was to simply copy and paste what I wrote in my course evalutation: Usually when it comes to end of year assessments, I look back on my class with rose-colored glasses, even those I did not particularly enjoy or appreciate. In this case, I'm simply too fed up to write the detailed, biting assessment I promised myself I'd write out of a sense of justice and karma. All I can say is that it takes talent to make something like Italian Art unenjoyable or even painful, but by God did Prof. Hood did it. I cannot even console myself with the thought that I had learned something, as the entire time I was worrying about the impossible midterm and having to sit through lectures punctuated by insults and the insistence that any information learned from the class would promptly get a failing grade. Hello? Could somebody explain to Prof Hood how education works? I don't know what he thought he was trying to accomplish. I've had challenging teachers before who have striven to give their students true insight into their field, and for whom I have the utmost respect. Prof. Hood does not fall into this category, despite what I'm sure he flatters himself into thinking. I can't even look at a work of early Italian art without my stomach churning. I have never had a professor so bent on making life so difficult…