Martha Zebrowski

Not really my area of interest in political science (took this course to fulfill a major requirement) but Martha Zebrowski managed to make it bareable. Great sense of humour - even at 9am - and she really knows her stuff. Workload more than manageable - a book every week or so and a take-home midterm and final. i know some people in the class felt grading on the first exam was a little harsh, but she was more that willing to meet with students to discuss how to improve and really seemed to take that improvement into consideration in the final grade. Lecture attendance is compulsory, but there were no discussion sections.

I generally write positive reviews on CULPA, but I am hard pressed to do so for this professor. The best part of the class is the reading assignments - Amar, Sundstein, and stone ! dont expect much from her otherwise. Do the readings and you will be fine. If she likes you she will engage you and show interest in your law school application etc., but if she is nuetral toward you - you may as well be invisible, she completely ignores you....and your comments. As mentioned by someone else here also, she does not appear to be impartial at all, for any arbitrary reason, she either likes you or not - take your chances. It is a big plus if you have taken a prior class with her. Essentially, you either like her or not.

I really enjoyed this class. I did not find the subject matter too thrilling but I really enjoyed Professor Zebrowski. She views the class as a "working group" and will spend most of the first few classes discussing the paper topics. The entire class is basically geared towards the paper, much more so than any other seminar. She's interesting and funny and not too harsh a grader.. Also, she takes a real interest in her students and is more than willing to meet people to discuss their papers( she also reads drafts).

Prof. Zebrowski is a perfectly nice woman, but an extreeeeeeemely boring professor. She does little to stimulate class discussion (indeed, she often inhibits it, and essentially eliminates any chance for debate). Her treatment of the material was generally mind-numbing with a few bright spots towards the end of the semester. She does genuinely care for her students, and if you stick with her class you will receive a decent grade. Honestly though, its really only worth sticking with this class if you know any cc section you take will bore you. If you have any hopes for being interested in cc, switch out asap.

GS Political Science majors are required to take this course. What you may not know is take you can also take CC to fulfill the requirement (there is an all-GS section). If I were you, I would look into and consider this option, as I wish I had taken Contemporary Civilization instead of Intro to Political Thought. However, once you have taken this course, you cannot take CC (if I understand correctly). While the lectures can be interesting, the other reviewer is fairly accurate in describing the overall arbitrary and scattered nature of the course. The material is fabulous, but, unfortunately, we never went in-depth in either class or discussion. We talked around everything (as the other reviewer states). Paper topics were strange. We were asked to boil everything down in the form of analyzing at least 3 of the thinkers in each of 2-eight page papers, where we also asked to include “goals, methods, etc†as some have mentioned in previous reviews. Expectations were not clearly outlined. As the papers were distributed, we were given information about what was expected, but it was still vague and ill defined. Unfortunately, I did not get much more than my own thoughts and observations out of this class. I regret taking it as I truly looked forward to insights and intellectual debate about these great thinkers.

Easily the most worthwhile class I've taken at Columbia. At first, the 6-8p timeslot, serious reading list, longer paper, and final threw me off thinking this class was going to be awful. It took me just a week or two to realize the opposite. Maybe it's because she's adjunct and doesn't teach many other courses or maybe it's because it's just the way she is, but Professor Zebrowski cared so much for everyone in the class (at 12 students). She realized we chose our topics for a reason and talked about how our background, current work, and future aspirations would fit in. Incredible amount of office hours (she'll meet with you whenever you want) and great responses to e-mails too. She started each class with some time to discuss research problems or questions and we spent a good deal of time in the beginning of the term going over how to do research for and write the paper (as well as prepare for the presentation). The first 6 weeks or so were devoted to Bill of Rights by Akhil Reed Amar, which became a fixture in the class, and Perilous Times by Geoffrey Stone. Then we had presentations (2 per class) of about 45 min each with 15 min for questions. Prof. Z encouraged more class discussion on the books and topics than talking herself (though she always had insightful things to say) and she easily made the process more comfortable to work on, present, and write. The seminar someti…

Prof. Zebrowski was one of the best professors I have taken at Columbia. Her Executives seminar, as the other review indicates, is your oyster. Your experience will have a lot to do with the executive you choose to profile. If you have trouble finding research material (as I did when I chose an obscure leader), she is very encouraging and makes herself very available to meet with you and work things through. She may be one of the polisci department's best kept secrets!

My CC section with her was rather uneven. She was good at certain texts, and extremely weak on others. Thus, it was something of a crapshoot showing up to class. Her style is rather contradictory - she wants participation, but also is a rather verbose speaker. Papers are generally extremely vague and broad - which seems nice, until you have to try cram it into a 6 page limit. She's not a bad professor. But I think there are better.

I usually never write statements about Professors at CULPA, since people tend have extremely positive or negative opinions about a professor. But this time I will have to make an exception. Zebrowski bases her grades on other aspects than the work load or your knowledge of the material. In the beginning of the semester she might seem like the easiest professor ever and you might think “What the hell are these wimps complaining about. Her grading seems extremely easy, since she only expects attendance (10%) and two essays (45% each). She will laugh it off as an easy A. Her lectures are interesting, to say the least. She will tell you everything you will need to know about the authors and MORE. (Favorite foods, sexual orientation, favorite color, height, weight …). Unfortunately, she only shallowly touches on the actual book. You might as well go to Wikipedia and just print the summary. So you might hope for the TA, who in my case was Pablo, who seemed to have been unwilling to read the material himself. You might still think “Ok, I can still do this on my own. So you read the books, do extensive research in Butler on the subjects, and you feel “I should be ok, since most of the class is not even doing the reading. Then, the big day comes… MIDTERMS!!! And it is indeed THE BIG DAY, since the grade you will receive will turn out to be your final grade. READ CAREFULLY NOW …. Here i…

While I understand the students that usually post reviews on CULPA are the ones that either love or hate a particular course, I am sorry to say that I will not be diverging from this trend. That being saidÂ…..THIS WAS THE BEST COURSE I HAVE TAKEN AT COLUMBIA. If you have any desire to go to law school I would only recommend three must-take courses at Columbia which I will list in order of preference for your convenience: <Br> 1) The Bill of Rights w/ Prof. Zebrowski<Br> 2) Freedom of Speech w/ President Lee Bollinger<Br> 3) Constitutional Law Workshop w/ Jay Topkis Finally, I will be attending USC Law next fall and I feel significantly more confident in my understanding of the basic philosophical principles of the law having taken these courses. I hope this was helpful. Enjoy and good luck!