English

Historical reviews of Susan Dominguez: Assignments are low-stakes, often worth only 3-4 points, with severe penalties for minor errors like citation formatting or grammar.[1, 2, +6]

The reading workload appears manageable, as one reviewer noted they could have skipped reading without penalty, though lectures provide necessary context.[1]

Historical reviews of Todd Bender: The workload is characterized as heavy, requiring writing assignments for every class session.[1]

The course involves frequent writing assignments and peer reviews. Weekly tasks build upon each other, requiring students to complete pre-class readings and engage in mandatory participation.[1, 2, 3]

One historical review rated the difficulty as 5/5, suggesting the course can be challenging.[1]

Historical reviews report varying difficulty under Anja Jovic-Humphrey, with one rating it high and another low.[1, 2]

The workload is generally light, consisting mostly of readings and a few easy writing assignments. Porter Shreve’s online section requires intensive weekly discussion posts and a short story project.[1, 2, 3]

Historical reviews of Theresa Delgadillo: Work includes daily reading questions, a panel presentation, and essays, rated as low difficulty.[1]

Students report a heavy reading load delivered in a short time to maximize productive class discussions.[1]

Workload is described as decently light, graded leniently, and assessed via papers and group presentations, though dense material requires attention.[1, 2, 3]

Reviewers report the reading material as extremely convoluted and incomprehensible, while weekly assignments are described as forcing engagement despite being unhelpful.[1, 2]

Students report high workload, including reading 10-20+ pages or watching films before every class, managing group projects, and extensive mandatory note-taking. One reviewer described assignments as deliberately designed to consume time, requiring library visits for participation.[1, 2, +2]

Workload varies from easy with in-class work time to heavy with frequent assignments. Grading delays and unclear requirements are common complaints, though some find the projects engaging.[1, 2, +8]

Historical reviews of Elizabeth Bearden, Karen Britland, Kristina Huang: Workload includes weekly reflections, extensive papers, and significant reading. Some instructors require high-quality work and deep analysis, while others have lighter reading loads with children's novels.[1, 2, +2]

No specific workload or preparation details are provided in the available historical review.[1]

Historical reviews of Christa Olson: The workload is described as easy, relying on group participation and turning in assignments, with a self-set grading contract reducing pressure.[1, 2]

Historical reviews of Aeron Parks, Kathryn Harlan, Phoebe Kranefuss: Grading emphasizes effort and improvement over strict difficulty, with ratings ranging from easy to moderate. Weekly critiques and discussion-based participation are central to the workload, requiring active engagement in a small class setting.[1, 2, +4]

Exams are largely lecture-based, making detailed notes essential. The course relies on only four assignments, making each one critical, and offers extra credit.[1, 2, +2]

Historical reviews of Monique Allewaert: Grades rely on five papers and participation, with manageable reading loads and accessible help outside class.[1]

Historical reviews of Anja Jovic-Humphrey, Yanie Fecu: Workload includes a 12-page midterm, creative project, and 12-15 page final paper, with some reviewers citing heavy weekly reading loads and tough grading.[1, 2]

Students must complete all readings and homework before class to succeed in this moderately difficult course.[1]

Historically under Eric Raimy, the course demands substantial homework that aids exam preparation. Under Anja Wanner, it requires mandatory attendance, weekly quizzes, and a group project, with material moving quickly.[1, 2]

Historical reviews of Thomas Purnell: Reviewers characterize the course as difficult with heavy lectures and complex materials. One review notes that assignment instructions contained typos and were unclear, requiring careful attention to detail.[1, 2]

Historical reviews of Mark Vareschi: Mark Vareschi required writing many essays, though he graded fairly.[1]

The workload is described as light, with short lectures and minimal reading. Grading is generally lenient, though one student noted a lack of feedback on the final exam.[1, 2, +2]