Good prof when she was here. The class was freaking huge, though - it's tough on a freshman to be in a class with five hundred other freshmen!

She was my favorite art history teacher when she taught this. I just wish the class hadn't been so big.

I enjoyed this class a lot. I thought it would be kind of dry, she organized it around some interesting topics. You do have to like architecture!

Very Good Teacher... lots of reading required; good discussions; tests were not too dificult.

Very focused on architecture. Unconventional midterm; allowed three random facts on ids in place of(in case you cant memorize)dates, place and artist. Showed the teachers willingness to understand students. Discussion was boring; it focused on one reading, making other effort fruitless until th exam

First of all this class is categorized under history of art AND architecture. Secondly, her lectures were great. She presented the information clearly and told you everything you needed. Great class.

Compared to some others, she's totally fine. She will at the very least put up the names and dates of all the pieces you need to know, which is SO RARE. Boring, but as far as art history classes go, not bad.

Very cut-and-dry when it came to lectures. Tried too hard to be funny. Too much emphasis on architecture. Exams were difficult, but that's how it is with most Art Hist courses. Unless you want to take a nap in a dark room for an hour or two, avoid this prof, and Art History classes in general.

she talks a lot about architecture. i liked her shoes

these evaluations are so weird- she was not that bad! I thought her lectures were interesting, and she was so nice when i went for extra help to office hours

I thought it was pretty interesting, but she could stand to slow down a little.

AHHhhh!! she thinks she's so smart and tries to pretend like she's so versed in the worlds cultures... sometimes feigns an accent... toooo much memorization... dreaded the class and she killed all interest i had for the subject