Kimberly Marten

I absolutely loved this class!! Marten is an outstanding teacher and she breaks down complicated concepts in a very clear, digestible way. I have learned so much from her, and the class thoughtfully and thoroughly addresses the intersection between international politics and climate change. If you are a poli sci major, or just interested in this topic in general, TAKE THIS COURSE!! I cannot recommend it enough.

Professor Marten is lowkey intimidating but thats just because she is so smart and so well-spoken. Tbh I took her class a few years ago so don't remember too much but as with most classes, if you put in the work you will get something out of this class. I learned a ton about current events, history, and a bit of political theory.

Professor Marten is very knowledgeable about this field of study. The syllabus is amazing and so are the readings, BUT her lectures are a speed listening class. Hire a note taker because you feel winded after a 75 minute lecture. She goes over her slides so fast that by the time you've jotted a few notes she has skimmed through 2 other slides. She is biased and won't accept any argument about Russia unless it coincides with her views. Unlike her Intro to International Politics class, she reads and grades the papers herself (both Pro and Cons) because at least your not having 3 different TA's with different grading techniques, but you are also subject to a paper having to be written under her views. Do not deviate from her argument that Putin is a Judo master and his politics solely stand behind that craft (keeping the opponent off balance), because you will take a hit on your paper. If you enjoy a fast paced class then have at it.

Her style of teaching is, at first, very off-putting because she is very combative and challenging and won't accept any vague comments. If you can remember every theory you read in the weekly readings and can connect them to your own points, you'll be successful in discussion, but otherwise, she will hate you and confront you every chance she gets. That said, I learned SO much in this class - we read the true basis of all security and terrorism theories each week and you really learn so much about the subject using different case studies (Afghanistan FATA region, Chechnya, Israel/Palestine). Also, the structure of the course is very well set up to cover every aspect of the subject. She is incredibly brilliant and the subject matter is incredibly relevant today - TAKE THIS COURSE!!

Amazing senior seminar professor, very helpful with structuring a schedule for your thesis and making sure that you are on the right track at the right time. If you don't want to be able to save your thesis for the last minute, Professor Marten provides the perfect combination of guidance and structure for this international politics thesis writing seminar.

I took Professor Giuliano for "International Politics" in Fall 2009. She is amazing! I liked her so much I took another class the following semester (Russia and the West). She is easy to talk with, answers questions thoroughly, and I LOVED her lectures. It was like watching the Biography Channel---easy to digest and entertaining. I looked forward to her lectures. I learned a lot about International Politics (and Soviet Russia the following semester). The other reviewers shredded her to pieces. I don't get why. Barnard is pretty lucky to have her. (She looks just like actress Julia Ormond in "Sabrina.")

Pros: This course is the perfect blend of just enough international politics and just enough environmental science. I found it super informative and feel like I have a much better understanding of its complexities. The exams are graded by the TA's who are generally more forgiving and easier graders. I was able to communicate well with my TA during his office hours and he gave me a lot of clarity in what he was looking for when he grades. Marten also makes everyone take handwritten notes (you can use an iPad if you have a pencil with it), which I loved since I'm usually the only one handwriting notes in my classes lol. Some people hated it because Marten talks fast and they would end up with incomplete notes, but this isn't a problem if you're a good note-taker. Cons: It's SUPER hard to get an A in this class. She doesn't allow grades above 96, and A- stops at 93. So basically you'd have to either ace the final and discussion section or end with a B+/A-. The exams are also handwritten, but it's not too bad if your handwriting isn't too sloppy. I would recommend doing a practice essay before every exam to train your hand lol. Overall it was a great experience, although having my grade be reliant on only exams was stressful. Best of luck!

Prof. Marten is a good lecturer, but for this class at least I'm not sure if I would say she is a good professor. Good things first: I learnt a fair bit, her lectures are engaging and entertaining, she keeps your attention as you furiously scribble notes as she goes through her slides (because you will never see these slides again), discussion sections are interesting, take-home exams are not too hard and grading is fair. What got to me: she tends to be biased on parts of the material and perhaps due to the constraint of time, many issues are not engaged with depth nor holistically. Her answering questions from students is also frustrating because you get the sense that she is just shutting students down. There are a lot of small judgment calls she expresses which are too minor to write about, but just be prepared to be frustrated in this class if you don't think that the US acting as a liberal hegemon in the 20th century has not been the best thing for the world ever.

Professor Marten is a wonderful, engaging, and very intelligent professor. Her lectures are great, and I don't think anyone's tried to argue to the contrary here. That said, there are problems with this course, though I would disagree with the nature of them as mentioned in previous reviews. Here's my take: 1) As for accusations of bias: Professor Marten certainly does not pull punches when it comes to Russia. That said, I didn't really see much bias in her assessments. The Soviet Union WAS an economic disaster. Contemporary Russia IS extremely corrupt. Violent nationalism is prevalent. Money and power are concentrated in an extremely small elite while the masses live in abject poverty. You can certainly sugar coat these facts, but that's not the job of a political science professor. 2) In terms of speculation: I agree, this was a big part of the course. On the other hand, the Russian government is pretty closed to scholarship, and often speculation is necessary. I didn't always agree with Professor Marten on her conclusions, but she did always preface her speculations with "this is pure speculation." 3) In terms of needing to agree with her: I didn't experience this. 4) In terms of workload: I really don't know what the previous reviewer is talking about. Most political science classes assign 200+ pages a week or more plus an in-depth research paper, mid-term, and final. This…

I loved International Politics with KM, but this class was a disappointment. KM was her usual amicable if intense self, but the material was clearly outside of her realm of expertise. Maybe it's because I had high expectations going into it, but I felt that the readings and discussion were analytically superficial and intellectually lightweight. Case studies ranged from OK to really good, but the theoretical readings she assigned were just bad. There's a lot of great/classic material on terrorism and sub-state violence that's out there, but don't expect this class to cover it. If you want KM at her best, I say take Russia and the West. Otherwise, to get a better grip on what you'd expect this class to cover, I recommend Gottleib's Terrorism and Counter-Terrorism or Bett's War, Peace, and Strategy. If I had to do it over again, I wouldn't have wasted my time.