Tonya Putnam

Took Human Rights and Migration Seminar. Very boring class, of what could have been such an interesting topic. Readings were not very stimulating. However the workload made the class worth it for me because I had fun doing it.

I disagree with the previous reviews. She is not that bad. She is an awkward person, yes, but she is a good professor. If you do the readings you will know what is happening in class. She uses ppts which she posts but I copied them in class as a way to keep paying attention the entire time. In the first hald of the semester you need to learn the law cases really well. The last half of the semester (after spring break) was a mock international court which was super fun - specially if you want to go to law school. If you answer the questions in class she will like you. Midterm and Final were super fair to what she talks about and it asks you to apply the concepts she taught you into a situation. I do recommend having some background in political science.

I took this class, in my first semester and it was the first class I took in my major (political science). Overall, this is a very good class for an introduction to the discipline, especially as compared with other intro classes. Prof. Putnam sets a theme for each class to cover (human rights, NGOs, etc...). You go to class, she puts up the slides, you listen and then she promptly puts the notes up on the course wiki (kind of a better version of Courseworks). The material is all very accessible and the textbook, that you must buy, is very clear, and efficiently didactic. There is an additional case studies textbook which offers applicable instances of the topic being studied for the week. Prof. Putnam is very straightforward about her lectures. She goes through the concepts on the slides, adding additional information from her notes, and every here and there she calls on the class for answers. Though one may not think it important, I like that she has enthusiasm in her voice and changes her tone throughout the lecture; this kept me awake and into the class. I loved it when she talked about international institutions and governing bodies (such as the UN), I could tell her expertise is unmatched and that she enjoys teaching the subject. I also really liked that she wasn't snobbish or intimidating towards us newbies (as I'm sure she could have been as a Harvard law graduate and P…

In Spring 07, Professor Putnam and Professor Jack Snyder co-taught Intro to Human Rights. Snyder generally provided the "Realist" persepctive on the material we covered; Putnam generally provided the "Constructivist" or "Liberal" perspective. The material was, for the most part (i.e. 80% or more), very interesting to me as a Human Rights concentrator, but others (Human Rights concentrators and those for whom Intro to HR was their first course that dealt extensively with HR alike) might disagree. In any case, Professor Putnam was a delight to speak after class and during office hours; she is very intelligent, approachable, and friendly. With respect to her past publications, intellectual capability, and educational experience (JD and PhD from some pretty stellar institutions), she is a gold-nugget pick for the Political Science Department. That being said, her lectures were on one hand interesting but on the other extraordinarily disappointing. The material was fascinating; the questions she raised and attempted to answer were cogent and her answers thereto were well-reasoned and often attempted to cover diverse persepctives on/apply contrasting theories to each issue; in other words, her treatment of the material was thorough, thoughtful, and often enlightening. However, her presentation of the material was not so hot. Professor Putnam was always inclined, with the best of int…

The lectures in this class were split by Tonya and Jack Snyder. Tonya clearly had trouble lecturing which made for terrible lectures and made you enjoy the days when she wouldnt lead the class. Although she seemed uncomfortable away from her notes, studders, and sometimes slipped up and gave wrong information, she's a nice and smart woman.

Worse than anything I have experienced in my four years at Columbia. Students to Putnam are like taxes to ordinary people: highly annoying but must be dealt with. She is utterly incapable of delivering a coherent, let alone interesting lecture, and is downright rude in her comments. To this day I don't know if she is just socially awkward or nasty, but whatever it is, her approach to other human beings is unacceptable. I was coming into this thinking that while the reviews are negative, the subject matter is interesting enough to cover for it. Boy was I wrong. The material is only mildly interesting and her teaching methods are just painful. A typical class would be an unorganized Putnam delivering a messy lecture, followed by blank stares of those of us still awake. Her inability to publish anything useful on the matter should have perhaps informed the poli sci department to hire someone else, but unfortunately, they believed she is the best candidate. Go figure. Avoid Putnam at all costs.

Bad lecturer, boring class, she just reads her powerpoints that consist in the most basic international politics. You spend a lot of time talking about WW2, thanks but we all know Hitler and his buddies by now, isn't it enough already with this war... Had a good TA that would explain clearly what the professor was trying to explain. Hated going to the lectures. You could decide not to show up to any of the classes and do fine, provided you do the readings and go to the TA classes. Not recommended!

very smart but exceedingly boring lecturer

In a word: frustrating. She's obviously very smart ? she has a JD from Harvard and a PhD from Stanford and has done a bunch of interesting research. But this does not make her a good lecturer. I found her to be very unorganized, and her lectures scattered. She talked quickly, and it was hard to take down what she was saying and know what the important points of her lecture were (there were no powerpoints). Many times I felt like it was pointless to go to class because I knew I wouldn't take many notes since she was hard to follow, and the time would probably be better spent reading the zillions of articles. If she had given us some sort of outline before her lectures, or highlighted the important points, I probably would have gotten more out of what she was saying. Fortunately, she co-taught this class with Jack Snyder, who was much easier to follow and seemed to know his stuff a bit more (understandably so, because he's been in the polysci world much longer). But if she had been the only professor, I don't think I would have made it through the semester. Good class material-wise, but I would definitely not take another one with her.

Midterm and Final are bluebook style essay questions - pretty standard. Readings are mid-heavy and you can get away with not reading all, but you need to read the cases. The final papers for your team in the court is kinda intense but not that bad at all She gives A+s