My attendance to lecture started getting really spotty towards midterms, and remained rather low all the way to the end of the quarter thereafter. A lot of other students agreed that it usually wasn't worth the effort to go to class -- we would usually sit and read the material for the day instead of pay attention to anything he was saying. He had this tendency to talk to only a few students who he probably thought were particularly insightful on a consistent basis -- he never once called on me, despite his threat on the first day that he enjoyed putting people on the spot, and I have a feeling that may have been due to my being an English minor and not a major. With those four or five other "brilliant" people in the class, though, nobody else really had to say anything, and, frankly, you felt kind of stupid adding anything on to whatever they were saying. So the board was usually filled with their thoughts, which Mott would encourage us to steal and use in our own papers.

Grading was...weird. Mott wasn't even sure what percentages were to be given to the presentations, the research paper, etc., and nobody was ever quite sure if he was BSing or not when he said to e-mail him questions to give to the panel presenters and that it would be 10% of your grade. The research paper was anywhere from 5-10 or 8-10 pages depending on your TA, and while I was worried about it being 40% of my grade, I ended up with an A- in the class, somewhat better than I was expecting.

My TA was Tara Fickle, and I'm still on the fence about her. The first time I went to see her in office hours, I got the feeling she didn't really want to talk to me, but almost every discussion section afterward she would ask me how my paper topic was coming along and if I needed help. Her sections were generally straightforward and simple, and she held extended office hours instead of having discussion section the week we did in-class peer reviews for our paper. From my few interactions with Mark Gallagher, he always came across as somebody a little too thorough, maybe. It's not that he enjoys hearing himself talk, but... there was something slightly irritating about the way he lectured, if you could call it that. Between the two of them I'd rather take Tara again.

He's so fun! You're going to love him! He doesn't really lecture though. He kind of throws a lot of ideas on the board and you're expected to have your own reading and genuine ideas. I found the class difficult because I'm used to a more rigid teaching structure and felt as if we were thrown into the water and asked to save ourselves. I don't think I'll be taking him again because I like professors who are predictable and more structured. It's a really fun class and time will fly by.

This was not a good professor for me, personally. He took attendance for 35 minutes (over Summer Session where class was about 2 hours) and passed out candy while he chatted with us and joked around. The books he had selected were actually wonderful (minus the first from Barth) and I was really excited, as an AM LIT MAJ, to take this class. He was disrespectful in office hours and chatted around with his TAs and told me to have some candy so I can get out of his hair. Our grade was 50% 5-6p essay and 50% symposium (250 word responses for each book). He didn't really want to lecture cuz he thought we would learn better from one another.
OVERALL: I didn't like this professor because I felt like he wasn't doing his job. Yes, he's funny and nice to hang out with, etc., etc., but as a professional, I did not appreciate his methods of teaching. He refused giving extra credit or really helping with anything. AT MOST, he would make lists on the board of topics we should be thinking about when reading the book.
DON'T TAKE IF you like traditional lecturing, help from the professor, and a STRUCTURED CLASS. If you think you'll love laughing and chatting and writing a short essay to cover the whole quarter, go for it!