Ayten Gundogdu

I expected to learn about immigration from around the world and this is a human rights issue/linked to human rights. This class was arguably the most painful, boring, and just overall worst class I have taken at Columbia. We just spoke about the readings from the first few weeks of class all the time. The presentations were boring and hard to follow. It just felt unrelated and boring, along with being hard to follow. The only reason I came to class was because she took attendance, I got nothing out of the class. The assignments were annoying and graded harshly. The guidelines were so unclear and she graded essay drafts (with word limits) harshly (most of my comments were wanting more information, yet I only had 600 words to write an essay draft). The class is not hard. The discussion is boring and I got nothing out of it. I had high expectations, but this class just was unfulfilling, painful, and a waste of time. We also talked about these 2 cases the entire semester, so everything just felt so redundant. There was not a lot of work and the professor is understanding, but there are definitely better, more interesting, and just less painful courses to take (especially ones that do not take attendance). She also didnt link the readings and we were expected to find them on Clio (she eventually linked them, after many complained). She also checked each of my essay citations and co…

Superficial and incomprehensible analysis of works. It is made somewhat easier by the fact that she is organized. Emphasis on somewhat. A tedious class with readings that are far-fetched rather than actually relevant, interesting, and helpful. Ultimately shows that if you want to take political theory, you are better off on the other side of broadway.

This class was okay. Some of my peers and I had already taken CC and pretty much agreed that we didn't learn anything new; the lectures weren't very stimulating and seemed to delve only into a superficial level of analysis for most of the works. It was interesting that Professor Gundogdu chose to include Simone De Beauvoir on the syllabus but having taken several gender studies courses prior I found her analysis to be very surface level and even problematic at times. The TAs were very helpful; discussion sections offered many more provocative ideas and stimulating discussions. Lecture attendance is required and there is a sign in sheet. However only about a third of the class attended each lecture.

TAKE THIS CLASS! Best professor i've had so far at Barnard (only a freshman) and even though im not a person interested in poly sci, she made every class engaging and enjoyable. You will love this class if you follow the news and have an opinion about the world. Can't express enough how much this class rocked!

Professor Gundogdu is an exceptional instructor. Prior to class you have to read articles related to a specific subject then she reviews the readings in class VERY CLEARLY. There is absolutely no doubt what the author's main points are, how the argument is constructed or how it relates to topic/class. After spring break she began having us discuss the readings in groups rather than lecturing the entire time, which was very useful to work with others in trying to understand the material. If you have ANY question (which you probably won't unless it's about an assignment) she is very helpful. She definitely enjoys her field and she is passionate about teaching. If you keep up with the readings you will be prepared for the essays and short responses. Course is about how human rights laws/norms work with governments to address refugee, migration and asylum seekers' issues. VERY interesting course!

Pros: Professor Gundogdu is a brilliant professor, and extremely nice. I heard from many of my peers that she was very helpful in office hours. No homework. Readings aren't necessary, you could leave it for last minute and understand the parts you have to read and smart-read them. usually, you will have to focus on a chapter or two. No midterm, no final. 3 papers. She gives out a detailed outline for all papers that really help. Cons: Mandatory attendance, you pass around an attendance sheet for each lecture. No computers allowed! (WHAT THE.... was my first comment but each to his own I guess...) Mandatory disc sessions which go by quite fast since it's usually the TA talking and peers sharing thoughts. Since there are a lot of GS Students, many well thought claims come to light which help for the essays. Each time a paper topic was announced, 70% of the class was confused. Like literally, the next lecture would go by with people reformulating "WHAT SHOULD I WRITE?" around a million times.. Personally, I enjoyed the class very much. She organized the class so that she begun with Plato's democracy discussion up until John Locke, etc. So, it was like a timeline of political theory. She is obviously very intelligent and extremely kind, yet not the most entertaining teacher, I must say. Grades really depend on the TA, hope that you get an easy TA for the final one! SHORTCUT: If yo…

Fascinating readings!! Gave a very holistic overview of how thinkers or philosophers or others grappled with violence, politics, and justice. The professor has a solid grasp of the material, and is very interested in helping students. However you have to be prepared to put in a lot of hours of reading. And it's not semi-optional, you actually have to read, annotate, respond, participate etc. But if you do the readings and keep up with the material, you'll be interested in what these people had to say.

This class was a vague jumble of philosophers. Professor Gundogdu tricks you with the first assignment of reading Antigone. It appears that the course is going to be easy and straightforward. As a freshmen, you are put at a disadvantage in this class. The upperclassmen with more college-level writing experience have a much easier time. It takes a while for the papers to start coming, but towards the end it is close to a paper every other week. Gundogdu is vague in her explanations and asks for too many student opinions. Students typically repeat what the professor and fellow students are saying. The professor fails to keep the attention of almost all of the medium-sized lecture class, and will constantly remind you that she cannot focus because of the "movement." The TAs are unhelpful in discussion. The best way to get a good grade on a paper is to go to office hours and have a TA or the professor thoroughly read over your paper. This class had a fair amount of work, if you did all the reading. Much of the reading is irrelevant to the papers. Towards the end, attendance was taken in almost every lecture. She often hands out note cards in response to a vague question about the reading. This is easy to bull shit even if you don't do the reading. The note cards and attendance were 10% of the final grade.

This seminar was amazing. It wasn't initially my first choice for a first year seminar, but I am so glad that I was able to take it. While the subject matter was not really in my area of interest, it was all very though-provoking. This class taught me how to think critically about my sources instead of blindly accepting them as fact. While this seminar did seem to have more work than the rest of the first year seminars, I feel that it is well worth it. Although Professor Gundogdu is strict about the course material, she is actually a sweetheart and knows everybody by name. I highly recommend this course.

Ugh this class. Not a fan. I was choosing between this and Intro to International Relations, and I really wish that I had taken the latter. More than anything, this class was just boring. I should have been more inspired, as I am a political science major, but I just could not get myself interested in the more abstract concepts the course involved. I think that the professor means well, and I really want to like her because she's adorable, but she can be crazy strict (for example, not allowing students to leave in the middle of class without a note, even just to go to the bathroom). I never did the readings, and I had trouble focusing in the lectures. However, from taking notes in the larger class and discussion group, I was able to get a basic idea of the texts' main points, and that was usually what I wrote my papers on (with help from sparknotes). I never got anything lower than a B+. I took this class as a junior, and I think the fact that I'd already had some experience writing at a college level really gave me an advantage. There are a lot of freshmen that take this class, and they're still figuring out how to write a paper the way that the professor wants them to, so if you're an upperclassman you'll already going to be ahead of the learning curve. Just actually do what she asks and follow the directions, and you'll be fine. Overall, this class was boring but not terrib…