HIST BC1062

Discussion Participation- 15% Midterm- 25%, graded unfairly and arbitrarily Paper- 25% Final- 35%

If you want to take a class where someone stands in front of you reading extremely dry material in a monotone voice, then this one's for you. Probably the least dynamic class I've ever taken. I had never taken a course on the Middle Ages before and wasn't really inclined to do so, but I saw other raving reviews about this, so I decided to try it. I REGRET THIS. I'm confused about the other good reviews...The lectures dragged on forever and I don't feel like I got anything out of it. For a survey course, the expectations were extremely unclear and the grading seemed arbitrary and unfair. I didn't feel encouraged to come up with my own historical conclusions, rather just follow their unclear standards and expectations. Readings from his compilation of primary sources had potential, but were pretty boring. Didn't realize that the secondary sources were crucial for the class, but they were also hellish to read. And there were so many of them. Maybe if you're obsessed with the Middle Ages, you'll like this, but if you don't, DO NOT TAKE IT!!! All I got out of it was a humanities requirement, which I guess is the bright side?

Not too heavy. Discussion post every week based on the primary sources, one 5-7 page paper, a midterm and a final with several IDs and one essay each.

Kaye's a great professor all-around who's both passionate about the material he teaches and educating undergrads about it. His lectures are highly organized, and one might think that listening to an old professor read out of his notes about the Middle Ages would be boring, but his style and voice (which is very pleasant to listen to) make all of the material he covers seem extremely captivating. Some might find the thematic approach a bit confusing, but I appreciated it, and felt like all the material tied together in cohesive fashion by the end of the class, and really allowed you to appreciate the period and the vitality of medieval culture (and yes, Kaye does a great job of dispelling traditional stereotypes of the Middle Ages). Even if you're not interested in medieval history I'd advise taking the class- I'm sure you'll get a lot out of it if you don't go in expecting to learn about what people typically regard as medieval. Kaye's also an incredibly enthusiastic and open professor who takes time to speak to undergrads and develop their interests in history outside class- particularly if you visit him during office hours, when he's more than happy to just spend an hour talking with you about medieval history in general even if you don't have any questions. He gave me a bunch of his old journals to read through once when I asked him and was more than happy to talk with me a…

-1-3 readings in the primary source book per week, 2-3 courseworks readings per week, 3 books spread through the semester -1 discussion section post per week -Midterm: 25% -1 5-7 pg. paper: 25% -Final: 35% -Attendance and Participation in Discussion Section: 15%

I always thought the Middle Ages was a dead period, but I couldn't have been more wrong. This class was so interesting, and Professor Kaye is a great lecturer—he is clear and concise. The workload is manageable, but there are a lot of secondary sources to read, increasing both in length and amount as the semester goes on. The discussion sections are helpful because the paragraph assignments force you to read the text closer, which helped on exams. If you do the primary source readings and the more important secondary source readings, as well as pay attention in class, you should do well. But while it is doable, it is a harder Intro class than the other European history ones (Renaissance and Modern).

Very reasonable--do the readings for discussion section and participate in class, and you will do fine. Essays are graded fairly, as long as you go to office hours and show Professor Kaye that you actually care and are invested in the class. One midterm and one final, plus one paper.

Many reviews of Professor Kaye here are shocking given my incredibly positive experiences in two of his classes. His enthusiasm for the subject matter and expertise make his lectures really captivating, even for students who have no prior knowledge of the middle ages. He does an excellent job of making the material accessible and relevant to modern times, which helps your understanding of all of history. This class sparked my interest in the middle ages, and I promise you will not regret taking it. Do not listen to people who say this class is boring!! If you take the time to read the materials and go to office hours with Professor Kaye, you will discover that this is exactly the type of class that you hope to take in college with a dedicated professor and a subject matter that broadens your perspective.

2 exams - the professor expects you to use the secondary sources. 1 paper (5-7 pages). VIllehardouin's and Joinville's texts on the crusades. Judith Bennett's A Medieval Life. Brian Tierney textbook. Primary sourcebook. Secondary sources - this will be tested on the exam. weekly TA Section - 1 piece of "short" analysis on the week's readings - the TA expects you to put effort into it.

Words cannot express the stultifying sense of ennui that weighs you down each down you sit down for Kaye's lecture. If you take this class, you should expect to be bored witless. This course should be re-titled The Papacy until 1450, as most of the course focuses on the popes and the development of the Church. Most of the interesting history is excised in favor of church teachings and the development of law. In theory, the workload isn't too bad, but the boredom makes it worse. The teacher expected and graded you on your knowledge of the secondary sources for his exams. so if you unfortunately sign up for this class, you should make the effort to read the 2 or 3 articles he assigns each week and get a general sense of the argument and details. The grading is skewed towards the exams because he only assigns one paper.