He's not awful, but he's not great. The lectures can be a bit dry. He talks slow and he likes to repeat himself to make sure we get what he said in his notes. The reading is actually unnecessary because everything on the midterm and final is TOTALLY based off of lecture, although sometimes lecture and the reading overlap. He made us buy two books: one was an intro to Soc, the other was just a compilation of stories pertaining to Sociology that you really didn't need to buy cause it doesn't help you at all for the exams. There's only two exams for the whole quarter, and a research paper. It's 25% for each material, so that leaves 25% for discussion (I know, make-sure to kiss up to TA's). His midterm and final are set up the same way: 20 multiple choice, 5 short-answer questions and an essay question. He tries to be tricky on the multiple choice but it's not too bad except for maybe one or two REALLY silly questions. The short-answer questions and the essay are usually pretty easy. What I absolutely hated about the class was the research paper. The prompt is literally just "Write a research paper: 1/2 page intro, 1/2 page on methods, etc." It's not that it was difficult but it just seems absurd having to construct your own silly "research", and if they expect so many people to make up their data, why bother with it at all? I really hated the class, frankly, but it's not difficult and it really could be an easy A as long as you show up and pay attention to lecture. No power-point presentations or anything, so you gotta show up to lecture and obviously for discussion.

this professor has no lecture notes whatsoever, when he lectures, he is wasting potentially interesting material by reading out of some sort of book or notes. he doesnt give any guidelines to any tests and is very vague in his lectures. there is no need to be so verbose and makes easy materials hard. i WAS excited for sociology before this class. thanks for ruining it, Hunt!