HIST BC1302

One 5-7 page paper, one midterm and one final that include both IDs and essay portions.

By far one of the best professors I've ever had, met, or heard of. He's brilliant, funny, and very, very nice. He teaches the years the years 1500-2000, and does them all well. His breadth AND depth of knowledge are incredible, but, as previous reviewers have pointed out, he's not at all arrogant. His lectures are fun, his discussions are engaging, and he asks really good questions -- discussion questions that could be essay questions, rather than the all-too-common "guess what word I'm thinking of" strategy that so many professors employ. I would recommend him more strongly than any other professor I've had -- to history majors and non-history majors alike. To anyone who likes nice, smart people. P.S. Poverty and the Social Order in Early Modern Europe is possibly one of the potentially most boring subjects in history, but the class was great, anyway. Now that's saying something. Anyone can make the French Revolution interesting, but to make 16th century poor relief interesting!! Brilliance.

Mandatory lecture attendance 10%, One 5-7pp paper (topic could be almost anything you wanted) 25%, 1 midterm (IDs, essay) 30%, 1 final (IDs, short answer - question given in advance, essay) 35%.

This woman makes no sense. Going to lecture was utterly pointless, I would start out taking notes and end up facebooking or zoning out. If you're really interested in European History Since 1945, read Tony Judt's "Postwar," it will save you the angst of taking this class (and you will probably learn more). And, as always, grading totally depends on the TA. When I took this class, there was a WIDE range of expectations among them, especially when it came to the term paper. So that was also frustrating. Take this class at your own risk.

Tiersten is a great professor for history and non-history people alike. The workload is incredibly manageable, with only one 5-7 page paper on basically any topic of your choice. This said, other reviews detailing her fast-paced structure in class are accurate--fast note taking is definitely a good skill for this class, especially for prep for the midterm/final. The content is very survey, with every lecture focusing on a new historical moment from the French Revolution to the rise of Fascism in Europe. Definitely recommend this course for anyone curious about modern European history.

Midterm and final for which Plaa gives you a study aid (what a guy! :-) ), rendering them preparation exams rather than "cudgel thy brains to bethink minutiae" exams (but do actually prepare because of such a nature; Plaa, the consummate fair grader will not let you get away with fluff on exams for which he provided you with the goddamn questions beforehand.) Two papers (4-5 and 6-8 pages respectively) that are a document analysis and a book review. Standard history class amount of reading (150 pages a week or so) but if you attend class and take decent notes, you do not have to read anything (safe for the document for the analysis and the book for the review, obviously). Fairly straight forward; an A is attainable if you try.

Michal Shapira is, in a word, awful. She insists on attendance at this intro lecture course when honestly I would have learned more by spending the time at home on wikipedia. This course is dumbed-down so terribly that by the end of the semester I took no notes in class and instead used wikipedia to study, and did just fine. Yes, 1789 to the present is a fairly difficult course to teach...I mean, there were more than a few fairly major events and movements that took place over the last 200 years!! However, spending 1 lecture on Freud/psychoanalysis and 1 lecture on the causes,course, and consequences of WWI just doesn't seem right. Shapira's actual style does nothing to alleviate the problem of the course's conception. She rambles on, repeats herself constantly (every 3 sentences or so, she'll repeat all 3 sentences). She has annoying verbal habits (she said "in a sense" 87 times over the course of one lecture) and she follows her fellow Barnard professors in constantly emphasizing the role of women which is fine and indeed proper except when she claims that enlightenment thought was in fact driven by women, or that WW1, colonialism, and the depression were all caused by 'crises of masculinity'. Possible IDs and Essay questions for each exam were given in advance.

A midterm of ID's and 1 essay (previously handed out to the class with about 70 ID's yet only 5 on the exam, and 10 essay prompts, of which 3 appear on the exam, and you write 1) A paper between 5-7 pages A final exam, same format as the midterm, except for the inclusion of a short essay (study guide handed out beforehand). On top of the text, there are additional readings, comprised of books/articles, which are tied into your essay exam and are discussed in recitations. Also, 4 movies that are to be watched during the semester.

Highly recommended course. While many will assert (rightfully) that Professor Carnes (America Since 1945) is more "entertaining" given his nonesuch ability to tirelessly expound delectable witticisms (you will find yourself laughing every class, sometimes even uproariously...his personality more than compensates for the mordacious, I-was,-like-a- loser,-at-the-West-End-until-5 a.m. eye-stinging that the 11 a.m. start time will probably bring about), Dr. Plaa's course is the (emphasis on the) history course at Barnard that you will enjoy due to the actual content of the course and not, say, your professor's affected erudition or ability to constantly titillate your fancy (like a personal minstrel!). Do not be mistaken: Plaa is an excellent, knowledgable professor (you will be in awe about how much he knows about the time period and European history on the whole) who is blesed with the ability to relay his knowledge in a perspicuous and engaging manner. While he does lecture with a certain degree of "note-taking unfriendly" celerity, one becomes inured to this after two weeks so do not fret; moreover, forasmuch as Plaa uses a great deal of statistical substantiation for nearly every assertion (for an instance, he evinced the Cold War economic strength of the USA/Western Europe vis-a-vis the U.S.S.R. with consumer data such as television sets per household in each respective coun…

This class was one of the most unenjoyable experiences. The first class, I wasn't thrilled, but I was intrigued to see how the Professor would break down and disseminate all of the information (It is a huge amount of time to cover). The second class left me feeling that all too familiar, "maybe I should shop around the course catalog," but instead, I ignored my initial reaction, and stuck with the class. Though I wish this was one of those stories where I go on to tell you how happy I am to have stuck with it, and how rewarding the class turned out to be, that definitely was Not the case. This was the only class where I had to force myself to keep my eyes open, and please, do not mistake me for a student who sleeps in class, because that is not the case. She rambled on and on about such minute facts, yet sped through significant, monumental events in history. History is not my major, but after having taken an Amazing American History course the previous semester, I felt inspired and I desired to become more acquainted with European history. Well, the only time I learned anything of significance was before studying for the exam, and it was not enjoyable, nor enriching. With that being said, exams are fair, and a study guide is handed out a week before, but you are at the mercy of a TA who grades all of your work (unless you end up in Tiersten's section for discussion). My TA wa…