Clement Hongler

P-set every week totaling to 10. quiz, midterm, final. similar to the practice exams he posts online.

Weekly homework (11 total), 2 midterms, Final

Pros: I actually ended up enjoying this class. You learn some neat theorems and basic analysis for optimization problems, and by the end I felt very knowledgeable on the topic. After all of the math and stats professors that I've had at Columbia, Hongler has definitely been the best - both personality/approachability wise, and teaching wise. I always sat in the front row so I could laugh at his jokes and ask questions when I was lost (which was rare, because he explained things well, drew graphs, used examples). Cons: The main con was the homeworks. They tended to be long with several proofs. He also sometimes introduces some new theories and techniques in them which he expects you to know for the exams. I just went every Friday to the TA's office hours (*they have the homework solutions*) and tried to work out the problems as a group. I definitely felt more comfortable with the material after doing them. Also, there are a lot of theorems, but they all kind of make sense / extension of derivative/tangent line stuff we did in calc. Also don't even bother using the online textbook he links to - its honestly useless. I never looked at it.

I had a terrific time in Prof. Hongler's Analysis II class. He is very genial and approachable, and he tries to make sure that the students understand what is going on, even if that means spending some extra time reviewing material from previous lectures. In terms of logistics, this class is run in a pretty standard way following Rudin's book. That is, there are weekly homeworks (consisting of about 3-4 problems each, from the book), 2 midterms, and a final exam. For the exams, he had more questions than there were available points, so you could choose which ones to answer. That being said, he did not make all the "extra" questions impossible, as some professors are wont to do.

12 Problem Sets, 1 quiz, 1 midterm, 1 final. Problem sets are not always straightforward.

Indeed, this class seems to be much more work than the average Columbia college course, perhaps only exceeded by stuff in engineering. Weekly problem sets; each took about 10-15 hours to complete; if including learning the stuff on which the set is assigned, even more time. Challenging course load, but no problem was obnoxious and without purpose.

Make no mistake, Hongler takes no distinguishable joy in teaching and puts in very little effort. However, he is an above average teacher (deserving of his silver nugget IMO) and his classes are never entirely boring. Even if you half pay attention, you will learn in his class. Some lectures he comes across as extremely lucid and other classes you are left wondering how all the methods he taught fit the puzzle. He is nice, amiable, and willing to explain. Just don't expect him to go the extra mile. He covers difficult topics fairly quickly, and he uses homework as a teaching tool rather than a reinforcing mechanism. Naturally, problem sets spanned the gamut from very difficult to mind numbingly easy. He does teach everything that shows up on the exams, whether through the HW or through lecture. You'll need to think outside the box on the harder questions though, and bring together various theorems. The material is not difficult (nor is it a breeze), but if you're new to the subject it can seem overwhelming. Would I take him again? Personally, I would. Is he a good teacher? Not particularly excellent, but not at all bad. You could do a lot worse. He gave us the famous "the limit does not exist!" Mean Girls problem on one of the questions. Is he a lenient grader? Yes, he tends to give as much credit as he can on the exams, as long as you write something relevant. Does he curve w…

Prof. Hongler is great. He presents material clearly, usually follows the book and makes notes when he departs from it. This helps keeping the material organized. He's occasionally humorous, making jokes about his study in undergrad, and in earlier study. Lectures were a joy to attend, even though they were at 9AM. To do it again, I would have reviewed more consistently, so I could better keep up with what was going on. Indeed, Analysis II is challenging and is a lot of work, but it's straightforward if you're diligent. Prof. Hongler seemed to care about student performance, and always made himself available for answering questions. Great professor; great class.

12 Tough HW (25%) 1 Tricky Quiz, but not too bad at all really (5%) 1 Impossible midterm (too many questions to do in one hour) (25%) 1 Killer (not as tough as midterm) Final (45%)

This class was like a trip to the dentist - you hate going to it more than anything else, but you still have to go through it because you signed up for it. The problem with the subject matter is that there truly isn't enough emphasis on optimization. It's simply a diluted version of Modern Analysis 1, with lagrange multipliers and linear programming. That's it. Now, for CLEMENT: My chief complaint of Clement is his lack of commitment to teaching. In short, he is more focused on his research than to teaching the class. It's obvious he doesn't enjoy teaching the subject, and he's often very rude and condescending. He knew 5 kids' names, and if you try to schedule office hours with him he will simply tell you "it's impossible since I must do my research." He makes mistakes on the board all the time, mumbles, etc. All in all, just not a good professor. In Clement's defense, the TA's sucked too. Of the 12 HW sets we did, maybe 7 were actually handed back. 5 were graded in the last week of the semester, so we couldn't use our graded HW to prepare for the exam. Plenty of people dropped out after the first midterm. And, well, I don't blame them. The first midterm was REALLY tough - highest grade an 88, lowest grade I think was around a 10. At least there was a generous curve... 6% in the class got you a D-. I ended up with an A-, and should've had a C.