Legitimately the WORST professor I have ever had. Maybe the worst teacher I have had in my entire academic career. He was so bad it made me reconsider if college is even worth the money. Boring lectures, hard tests, NO communication, and for being a media literacy class he sure doesn't know how to use canvas or put a subject in an email. HORRIBLE!!

I took COMM 101 with him and it was the absolute worst. He did not stick to the subject of the given lecture and even when he did he was just reading from the textbook and still made no sense. And his exams were written and it was confusing and graded oddly. He also deviated from the syllabus so many times would not take again.

Professor Potter was nice but he is just not a great teacher. His lectures were just him talking, no slides or outlines, just him kind of rambling about the chapter content. Then the tests were really difficult, graded harshly, and looked for very specific answers that were hard to come about. He was nice, but I would avoid his classes

Most normal teacher in Ohio

Don't take any classes with him, EVEN if the subject interests you. I read all of the terrible comments on here before taking his class and I wish I had listened! He's smart but severely lacking in teaching and interpersonal skills. He's so close-minded, passionless, and doesn't value his students at all:/

He writes this in the syllabus. The "therefore" makes no sense. "Because of the requirements of social distancing in effect this Spring, this course will be completely online. Therefore, the professor will not be lecturing on the course material during class meetings; instead you are expected to learn the material by reading on your own."

Rambles on and on in lecture about topics that aren't even related. Would not recommend taking him for any class tbh. The book itself wasn't too bad though.

Entire class is based on two tests about the entire textbook.

This was the worst class I've every taken. He uses his own highly inadequate textbook to try to explain dated media literacy concepts. His lectures ramble and are unintelligible. There are 2 lengthy essay tests which if you don't answer with his exact rendition of the right answer, you will probably fail.

He is not too bad. I got a B on the midterm and that was super high for the average. Go to the class you get participation and read the book! The book is interesting. Create an outline on google docs with each chapter and get the main points. You need to understand the chapter as a whole.

Our class had two exams and a short quiz after each class. You could only ask questions during the first five minutes of exams and a lot of the questions were "application" based (compare and contrast concepts & theories). Assigned readings could have been better organized in my humble opinion. Overall, a challenging class, but changed my thinking.

Doesn't use powerpoint. Just talks about a bunch of random things during lecture, and difficult to grasp what his main points are. Final is 60% of your grade, and each class has exercise which you get credit for. Overall, he grades his test hard. Got a B- on the midterm and feel like I knew everything going into it (it was during week 3).

He is very knowledgeable but around the the 3rd week is when everything went downhill. His lectures are very dry, and very BORING. I got 100% on attendance, class activities and a B- on the midterm. BUT the final, absolutely horrible- Cumulative, No Study Guide, and 60% of your grade, almost unrealistic to get a full A+ in his class.

This was one of the worst classes I have ever taken. He is a very knowledgable professor, but a terrible lecturer. His tests are horrid & he's a very hard grader. If he was more organized & had PowerPoints, students would enjoy this class more. It is very hard to pay attention in class, because his lectures are dry.

I honestly cannot believe this man is tenured here. His "teaching" style is nothing more than him quietly mumbling about nothing of substance in front of a bored class. His material is shallow, has no grounded research foundation, and he grades like a grade-a d-ckhole. It's sad that this guy teaches among incredible faculty in this department

Potter is well-intending but his course seems like an excuse to get people to buy his textbook. In lecture he gives a boring overview of the book chapter of the week but not in-depth enough to be useful. Although he frames the class as application-based, test are based solely on the book. You have to go to class because he gives tedious exercises.

I don't understand why people are complaining about him. Everything for this class is in the book. All you have to do is go to class to do his super easy attendance exercises, then you can do whatever you want for the rest of the time and study from the book, which he wrote. His tests are essays, so as long as you know the material you're fine.

Professor Potter is so smart it's crazy. He wrote the textbook for the class and the class is crazy interesting. He goes through material fast so definitley read the book and study hard but his class is so worth it and so interesting. He seems really over-qualified to be a Professor.

AVOID if you can, midterm worth 30% final worth 70%, the final was on 15 chapters and he didn't give a study guide or any information to help you study, wrote the book which you can't buy at ucsb, his lectures are straight from the book, do not recommend

Horrible hard to understand teacher. Rambles on for hours and most of the stuff he speaks about aren't on the test. Unorganized and very unhelpful.

Lectures useless, teaches straight from own book. Uses terms that are poorly defined, then expects you to use same terms on midterm & final. Claims he won't test on details/memorization, but actually does. Very knowledgeable, but weak professor b/c of inefficient and unclear presentation of info, even in book.

First C I've every gotten as a COM major. This class was the first ever that I actually read for and attending. But, the first test was organized completely different than I expected and was really hard. Then the final exam was structured COMPLETELY different than the midterm. I did feel like I learned & am taking again this quarter.

His lectures are exactly out of the book, which he wrote, but way less informative. If it were not for those nobody would have gone because he teaches absolutely nothing. His tests are short answer and he says he won't test on details or memorizations, but he totally does!

Lecture is boring. Same material as in the book. Assigns lame 3 point things at end of class in order to make you attend. My main problem: A HUGE QUESTION ON THE FINAL WAS OUT OF THE APPENDIX! No, not supposed to read the appendix, but there was a question from there anyway. COOL.