Elizabeth Miller

Liz Miller's Readings in Cell Biology course was one of the best classes I took at Columbia. It is a seminar style course, which means you can have truly in-depth class discussions about a paper (not the cursory glances at the figures that you'll see in big lectures) and everyone has ample time to ask questions. Since the readings follow a single lab through a set of papers, you get into the intricacies of each experiment, why they might have chosen one method over another, and how to ask the follow-up questions to lead into the next paper. The course is based on approaching scientific literature through the C.R.E.A.T.E. (Consider, Read, Elucidate hypotheses, Analyze, Think of the next Experiment) method. Generally, our homework was to draw diagrams of each experiment, come up with our own titles for figures, write the conclusions for some articles, and propose the next step. We also talked about writing grants and the grant review process, and we evaluated classmates proposed experiments (anonymously) as if we were reviewers. Liz is always happy to meet with students, so definitely reach out if you have questions about the course. She has been a great mentor! Short and sweet: This class taught me far more about being a scientist than most others. It prepared me to analyze articles critically in grad school, and I'm convinced the discussions and coursework helped me write and…

I was very frustrated with this class this semester, mostly due to Dr. Bulinski's poor teaching style. In addition to not specifying page numbers (seriously, "parts of chapter 16" is not a real reading assignment), she was an incredibly disorganized lecturer. Her slides containing experiments were not labeled (apparently, she hates labeling graphs), and her explanations were very spotty. Often, she would remember something she had forgot to mention and skip back several slides to make a point. Her disorganization made the lectures hard to follow. At one point, she suggested that while studying for a midterm, we should try to figure out why a certain slide is in the presentation. To be quite honest, I often couldn't figure out her organizational logic, even though I understood the information presented. I never followed her "three slide rule" (i.e., you have to know something if it shows up on at least three slides). The good thing was that she did post the slides after the lectures. The bad? Unless you took meticulous notes (and it was hard to do when she's such a disorganized lecturer), it was still difficult to understand many of the slides. Dr. Miller was a much, much better lecturer. All her slides were labeled and the lectures easy to follow. They mostly came straight out of the book (another bonus: she assigns specific page numbers!), so even if you missed something duri…

We were asked to read a paper or section of a paper each week and to look up any unfamiliar methods or terms before the next class. We diagramed every experiment and designed our own follow-up experiments. The time required do to this each week varies, but is absolutely manageable and can be reduced if you pay close attention in class and participate. It's about understanding concepts rather than memorizing a lot of terms. Our final was an NIH-style grant proposal.

Before I delve in, two notes on the class: -It is ridiculous to even attempt teaching Cell Biology in just one semester, so when I say that the material was flown through in class, it is not meant to reflect poorly on the professors - it is necessary in order to cover the syllabus in half the time needed. -Yes, I said professors. The first half of the course is taught by Professor Bulinski (Jeanette Chloe Bulinski; not sure why there are two listings for her, so I tagged both), and the second half is taught by Professor Miller. (On the occasion of Professor Milled having a child the time I took the class, the split was 2/3-1/3, so where the syllabus divides in a typical experience may differ.) There are differences in their styles, which will be detailed shortly. As said earlier, Professor Bulinski teaches the earlier part of the course, which in my case consisted of the cytoskeleton, the cell cycle, and the development of cancer. I always felt that being stuck with teaching the cytoskeleton for an extended period of time means that you drew the short end of the stick, and the lectures on it strengthened my belief. In any case, Professor Bulinski teaches in the dual Powerpoint-Blackboard method; each slide has a diagram, or some experiment results, or a few bullet points while she explains it in rapid detail, and from time to time she will pick up the chalk and sketch out an i…

There are 2 instructors for this class: Prof. Chloe Bulinski: - funny professor, engaging, but not very clear or organized. Material is interesting, but poorly structured, so you might want to make sure to organize the information from class and from the book more clearly. - talks mostly about cytoskeleton and cell division/cancer Prof. Elizabeth Miller - also funny; engaging, clear and organized, but not too much detail. Both professors go through the material quite fast, so make sure to keep up with the pace of the class or you'll fall behind quickly. Also, both professors write exams with an emphasis on critical thinking, not on memorization or reproducing the textbook. Questions are something like: "Here is this experiment, and its results. Explain what the results mean, and what that would suggest about how stuff works in that particular part of the cell." This basically requires you to be able to judge the results and infer information from them, and then explain what that means, based on what you already know about how different molecules work and the information you learned in class or from the textbook. Finally, there's no mandatory attendance, but obviously it helps to go to class, because it makes learning the material much easier and faster.

Dr. Miller is one of the best professors i have had at columbia. Not only are her lectures very interesting and well-thought out, her australian accent will entertain for hours and hours. Her half of the cell bio course was much more manageable than Chloe's section on the cytoskeleton. I performed much better on her exams.

Liz Miller is one of the best professors I've had at Columbia, particularly in the science departments. She is easy to follow, very straightforward, and obviously interested in what she's doing. For a first-time teacher, she is remarkable. I actually looked forward to attending her class every day. Fortunately, she didn't waste our time rehashing material from Intro Bio; rather, she picked up where that course left off, allowing a more in-depth study of many of biology's more salient points. She picked interesting experiments to include in her lectures, and while her explanations of them were sometimes a bit cursory in lecture, she was more than accomodating with office hours and explained them very clearly then. I suspect that this will not even be a problem in future years. The pace of her teaching was perfect, neither painfully slow (think Blaer) or so fast that it's hard to follow. Things were explained thoroughly in class the first time through, and the text readings acted as supplement rather than primary resource (the book, however, is excellent-- another rarity in Columbia science courses). She also incorporated her own research, in protein folding in yeasts, in an appropriate manner: she didn't shove it down our throat, but rather referenced it in passing to help contextualize material covered in the course. She really does love yeasts! Unfortunately, the second half…

This was Dr. Miller's first time teaching, and she did a phenomenal job. Her lectures were well-designed and flowed perfectly, the class was relaxed, and I was never even remotely bored. She clearly has a very broad knowledge of cell biology and was able to field questions with ease. And her accent is an added bonus. The best part about the first half of this course is that Dr. Miller will answer all of those lingering questions from intro biology: "What is this magical protein called clathrin that forms vesicles? What are the excruciating details of mitochondrial and nuclear transport? What does a proteasome actually do?" And she does it clearly and concisely, with fascinating experimental examples, many involving the yeast that she clearly loves so much (her research is on yeast). Dr. Miller assumes that you know everything that Dr. Mowshowitz taught you in Intro Bio, which does a lot for the course. This means, first and foremost, that she only gives you new information. And when she is done giving you that new information, it's over. There is no dragging things out, there is no mindless repetition of facts that everyone already knows. She tells you what you need to know, explains how it was discovered, answers questions, and then sends you on your way. Being a first-time teacher, however, there is still some room for improvement. Sometimes her explanations of different exp…

I was in the same class as the 1/3/10 reviewer, but I took the class as an undergrad, so the workload was a little different. The major difference was that the three "discussion" papers for undergrads were one-paragraph assignments on possible future experiments, and they were only worth 10% of the final grade. Also, we could drop any one of the four exams, including the non-cumulative final (which was essentially a fourth midterm). On exams, we got a choice of which questions to answer (usually 8/10). Finally, expect the reading to be heavy, since most chapters are 70+ pages. Only Dr. Miller assigns practice problems for homework.

4 exams including the final, all covering a quarter of the course; lowest of the non-final exams is dropped. 3 paper discussions to be submitted at the end of the discussion class; sum of the grades counts as a non-droppable exam. Showing up and paying attention to the lectures is necessary if you want to pass. Textbook reading assignments are vague in the first half, useful but not vital in the second half.