MUS HST 63
Bach
Description: Lecture, four hours; discussion, one hour. Designed for undergraduate students. Life and works of Johann Sebastian Bach. Credit for both courses 63 and 163 not allowed. P/NP or letter grading.
Units: 5.0
Units: 5.0
1 of 1
Most Helpful Review
Summer 2017 - (I actually took Dr. Rostomyan’s MUS HST 7, I placed it here only because her name was not found under the correct course) Before taking this class, I was a huge fan of both music and filmmaking. However, Anahit Rostomyan almost ruined my interest in both these two topics through her terrible film music GE course. 1. The lecture she gave was poorly structured and uncleared, hardly helpful to the examination. 2. She just routinely assigned huge amounts of reading material, which were not only burdensome but also unhelpful to our learning. 3. She was always persnickety with our essays, as if those were some Ph. D. journal paper instead of undergraduate GE class essays. 4. As a lecturer, she demonstrated poor commitment to her job. She is one of those least approachable lecturers in the university. She hardly replied to any email from students and always refused to answer any questions from students beyond classtime using the excues “I am busy”. 5. She did terribly unfair things to the students. She reported one of my classmates to the Dean of Students for “plagiarism” only because she thought his essay was “too polished (to be written by undergrads)”, according her own words. She made an innocent student in terrible anxiety just because her suspicion with no solid evidence.
Summer 2017 - (I actually took Dr. Rostomyan’s MUS HST 7, I placed it here only because her name was not found under the correct course) Before taking this class, I was a huge fan of both music and filmmaking. However, Anahit Rostomyan almost ruined my interest in both these two topics through her terrible film music GE course. 1. The lecture she gave was poorly structured and uncleared, hardly helpful to the examination. 2. She just routinely assigned huge amounts of reading material, which were not only burdensome but also unhelpful to our learning. 3. She was always persnickety with our essays, as if those were some Ph. D. journal paper instead of undergraduate GE class essays. 4. As a lecturer, she demonstrated poor commitment to her job. She is one of those least approachable lecturers in the university. She hardly replied to any email from students and always refused to answer any questions from students beyond classtime using the excues “I am busy”. 5. She did terribly unfair things to the students. She reported one of my classmates to the Dean of Students for “plagiarism” only because she thought his essay was “too polished (to be written by undergrads)”, according her own words. She made an innocent student in terrible anxiety just because her suspicion with no solid evidence.
AD
1 of 1
