AHUM V3399

sporadic. sometimes a lot of reading, never a lot of writing.

Workload was heavier due to pretty long readings but definitely worth it. If time is truly of constraint, I'd say focus more of your effort and synthesizing what Professor Hallaq presents in class.

Quite a bit, but still manageable. Read one large text, or two smaller ones, for each session. Lead the discussion on a particular text (takes either half or the entire class time). Two five page papers on topics of your choosing. Oral examination (also on a topic of your choice).

Two papers and an oral final. Lots and lots and lots of reading.

Moderate amount of reading every week, but usually not heavy reading (poetry/fiction - fast and fun). Two papers on any subject that interests you, very fairly graded. Oral final (don't freak out - more of a conversation with the professors than an exam). Also, every week a group of two or three people presented the text we'd read - you only have to do it once, and it's not intimidating at all: just prepare some questions, meet with the professor and lead the discussion in class the next day.

Lots and lots of reading. But hey, it's a four pt. class that meets once a week, so the reading isn't actually unreasonable. Two papers (5-10 pages). Oral Final.

Kamaly's conversations were uninteresting and non-substantive. He is not good at directing discussion. The readings he assigns are pretty out of the blue and subject to last-minute change. They're also very inconsistent in length. There is no clear thesis or trajectory for the class. He does not write comments or grades on your essays--that's right, nothing, except maybe "good" or something short of that nature--which is annoying, lazy, and amazingly bad instruction considering there's no way to determine how you are doing and how you can improve. You will have no idea what your grade will be until you get it. His final is a "conversation" which seems sort of unstructured and strange. He is a very sensitive man, which can be a good thing, but in his case mostly inhibits him from relating to students because he seems insecure and a bit condescending.

The best course I've ever been fortunate enough to take in 4 years of undergrad at Columbia. Professor Hallaq pulls together his deep knowledge in religion, history, anthropology, and political theory to craft a truly transformative anthology + commentary on modernity. And he is sometimes unexpectedly funny! The two-hour sessions flew by.

She clearly knows her stuff, and will provide historical context and outside information when necessary, but makes it clear that the discussion rests primarily on what we consider important. Though she appears a bit formal at times (she requests that emails must start with "Dear Teena" as opposed to "Hey" or "Hi"), she is very approachable both inside and outside of class. (Especially concerning papers and presentations.) Everyone comes away with good grades at the end, so the focus of the class is on grasping each individual text so you can connect it to the previous and later ones covered in the class.

She is a very good teacher who clearly knows a lot about the materials in the class. You can send her drafts of the papers and she will give you comments, which is an invaluable boon. There are only two papers and an oral final, which is really nice as it is a twenty-minute conversation with the professor. The only problem is she can throw curveball questions at you that you can't really bs your way out of like if it was an essay question and you had an hour and a half to write an essay about it. Attendance is crucial.