POLS W3619

Attendance isn’t checked, and the discussion section is optional. There’s a 7-page take-home midterm, 15-page term paper, and a 7-page final take-home exam. Reading list is immense, but, much like attendance, not required to pass. Grading felt pretty rigorous.

Took this class in Spring '24 (received A). Ten years after the last review, I’m pleased to share that little has changed. Professor Snyder has the most remarkably soft-spoken and pleasantly monotonous voice that I’ve ever heard, and paying attention in this class is an olympic sport not for the weak minded. That being said, he’s a genius in his field and perhaps the most well-read and knowledgeable professor I’ve had at Columbia so far. He’s like a trove of theory, resources, and case studies, and has such a kind and approachable demeanor. IF you can force yourself to pay attention and take notes, you will learn an incredible amount and develop a really sound, robust foundation on some leading theorists in the field. On a minor note, this class is 80% theory with 20% historical case studies. The word ‘contemporary’ is used in its most academic sense and by no means translates to ‘of the 21st century’. If you’re looking for current politics or nationalisms today, this is not the class for that.

Take-home midterm and final (25% each, 7-page essay); 15-page term paper on anything related to the course (50%). There is a LOT of reading in this course and can get overwhelming, but the additional TA discussion sections were helpful at summarizing some of the important readings if you were falling behind. But I must say that you could definitely get away from not doing readings before class as every assignment is take-home anyway, and you could read it when preparing for your papers.

This course has really interesting content and you should take it because of that. Course content goes through theories of nationalism and international relations, while covering case studies in several regions like Rwanda, India, and Bosnia. Prof. Snyder's lectures can be dry as he just talks the whole time and can be hard to keep up writing notes in his class. But he is an incredibly knowledgeable person and has published so many books/papers in his field. The most learning I've got from his class was meeting him during office hours to discuss about the term paper. He was so helpful at recommending suitable readings for my research. Got an A in this course, seemed like the median was an A-. Also shoutout to the TAs for this course: Gilbert Lai and Emily Carr, they were really amazing! Really helpful in sharing resources and their discussion sections prepped well at answering the midterm/final exams.

Much higher workload than any class in my semester. The hefty amount of reading is unrealistic, making it hard to know what to focus on. There's a 15-page research paper, with pretty high grading standards, that accounts for 50% of the grade. On top of that, there's two 7 page papers which also have pretty high grading standards.

Jack Snyder is extremely knowledgeable, and stands out as a notable IR scholar. The readings and topics he chooses for the syllabus are very interesting and relevant. However, his lectures are simply very boring. Snyder drones on for an hour and a half, speaking very slowly, and there is not much room for discourse in the classroom. I would still recommend this class to anyone who is particularly interested in the subject of nationalism. Do not take this class, however, if you are trying to fulfill the political sci credit. It's not an easy A, and the workload will exceed all of your other classes, guaranteed. Luckily, there was no attendance requirements for the lectures, and I learned that they were not very necessary if you do the readings. The "discussion" sections involve no discussion. They are just lectures to review the readings, which were useful if you are behind on them. It is silly to have an attendance requirement for the sections since they are just review sessions.

2 take-home exams, three essay questions each. 25% each. one term paper, 50%

So. Professor Snyder has one of the most boring manners of speaking I've ever witnessed. I have an incredibly hard time following anything he says because each word is about 5 seconds after the previous word. He just talks all class and it's difficult to come out of the class and be able to say "I learned X." There was not one day that I was able to pay attention for more than 3 sentences at a time in class. Eventually, after spring break, I just stopped going. And I hardly read any of the assigned readings. HOWEVER. Snyder is prolific in his field. In writing my term paper for his Nationalism and Contemp. World Politics class, I probably read about 60 articles and 3 books, and Professor Snyder was cited in about 70% of the literature (and these were articles I found myself, he doesn't just assign things he's cited in). He is clearly a leader in the field of International Relations, which is great, esp if you decide to go to office hours. Additionally, the mid-term, final, and obviously the term paper, are all take home. In the process of writing the exams, which are essays, and the term paper, I have learned SO MUCH. I spent about 3 weeks working on my term paper. While I never went to class during that time, the process of researching, conferencing with my TAs, and having small group meetings with TAs and other students was incredibly interesting and educational. I have prob…

One Take Home Mid-term, one 10-15 page paper, and one in class final that's only 10%

If you're looking for a stimulating lecturer who discusses nationalism in the context of political events today, and who relevant case studies through which we can better understand our world, then DO NOT take a class with Jack Snyder. This man is the most boring lecturer I've had at Columbia so far. His lectures are based around talking about writers' theories and little to no presentation of concrete evidence to back them up. The class is easy, mind you, as you can pretty much talk about anything you want on the assignments that relates to nationalism, but is perhaps the most boring and anti-stimulating class you'll ever take at Columbia. Trust me, its not worth it for the grade, b/c you'll listen to Snyder ramble on about theories and not once offer something concrete you can talk about. He leaves it mostly to the readings, which are numerous and boring. Though the subject "Nationalism and Contemporary World Politics" sounds interesting and stimulating, there is little to no substance you can't gain from reading a BBC or Al Jazeera article. It's not worth it to take this class unless you desperately want an easy grade.