Home

Core

Subjects

Brooklyn College Teacher Ratings: CORE

Core 1

Allen - not good
Beckwith - Fair to easy, does teach but with reasonable workload
Benjamin - very good
Brockman - good
Cooke - good
Eckert - good
Gutglueck - good
Harris - very bad
Hanson - decent guy, tough grader
Keizer - decent, but difficult tests
Koenigsberg - bad
McBreen - solid (whoops)
North - good
Sealy - good
Van Sickle - very good, fun class (I dunno how Thucydides can be fun)

Core 2.1

Glahn - good, very easy tests
Haggerty - very good (Gives only final[120 points]. Just study notes he hands out, get old test that's floating around, and do sketchbook[You could get up to 25 points *EC* on the final]it's easy to get at least 15 for effort)
Koslow - very bad
Meyardy - good
Oryshkevich - decent

Core 2.2

Blanche - very good
Cohen -very good(best)
Cox - good
Guszki - very good
Hedwig - bad
Janssen - good (teaches well)
Priest -good (nice, easygoing, good marker-During the term, he makes you learn to conduct[most don't learn]and he then tests you on it)
Shelden - very good
Taylor - good
Wilson - good (strict on attendance)

Core 3

Bashist - decent
Bermazhon - good
Brown - very good, but demanding regarding reading
Charosh - boring and difficult
Condon - decent, lot of work
Currah - very good
Farber - very good - easy tests
Freeman - good
Jayarama - very good (very interesting and easy)
Kahan - good
Koenigsberg - very bad
Kramer - good, very interesting and gives extra credit to help grade
Kraus - very bad
Miller - bad (difficult tests)
Moody - very boring, but easy
Narpay - good
Sandrale - good
Shortell - awful
Squires - good
Weimer - very good
Verbit - tough but interesting

Core 4

Back - very good
Berger - good
Bridenthal - very good
Burrows - good, interesting, easy for the core
Dimitriyadu - bad
Frome - good
Hoffman-Strock - decent
Iacullo - good
Johnson - good
Johnston - bad
Katzman - bad
Killin - very good
Shaar - good and interesting
Solovyova - good and easy
Varga - very good

Core 5

Cohen - decent (very boring)
Halpern - good
Kimmel - very good
Liu - bad
Matei - good
Page - decent
Seidman - bad, 1 *SHC
Sibner - confuses himself and doesn't seem to know computers
Small - very good
Tannenbaum - good
Uckele - decent
Waraporn - bad/decent

Core 5.1

Yarmish-Very Good-Comes in with class planned out-take notes and study and you'll do very well on straightfoward midterms (Have to study labs and HW's too)

Core 5.2
Coming soon

Core 6

See English Teachers
Lang - 3 headed monster
Deaver - very bad, and possibly anti-semitic (I'd like a second opinion)
Gelber - gave low grades

Core 7.1

Evangelest - very good
Cohen - very good
Labianca - good
Moriber - good

Core 7.2

Bond - teaches history of atom bomb, easy
Kelly - good
Khotyanov - very good, though a bit boring
Lion - good
Liu - good
Singh - very good

Core 8.1

Eckhardt - very good (for internet course)
Blamire - very good, though he was cold toward me. Maybe because I'm Jewish? I'm not the only that thinks this. 

Core 8.2

Aja - very bad
Chamberlain - good
Faqua - very bad
Kramer -decent
Penna - decent
Prince - decent
Savage - rather bad, but tests are not hard
Seineman - best

Core 9

Buncombe - very bad
Davies - bad, does not explain well, does not grade well
Hussein - bad, very boring
Lieman/Strong - good
Mbom - good
Nadal - decent, boring, but tests are multiple choice.
Oppenheim - good, but with a LOT of reading, and quizzes
Sharman - very good
Squires/Berkowitz - decent (Berkowitz is very good)
Thomas - very bad (gives bad grades)
Glasser - good
Verbit - decent to good

Core 10

Bozicevic - good
Elkholy - good, no midterm or final, but daily homework
Gluzman - good, easy
Ho - good
Kaslow - decent
Kent - very easy, but boring (won't learn anything)
Pitt - good
Repetti - very good. Misses quite a bit of class.Her midterm is short answer (multiple choice, fill in, and T or F)She teaches only on Sunday, I think.
Seely - very good - though, I think Repetti is the best
Shottenkirk - good, she's a nice person
Vasciliou - good