[kokosas]

Again... history nerds, this is another class for you.
When I took this course it was taught by Dr. Thorpe who I understand is no longer teaching it. He was a bit dry as a professor but very intelligent. That usually tends to happen.

The course itself focuses on the two World Wars and what led up to them. A lot of emphasis was put on the political changes undergoing many European countries. Tutorials consisted of reading primary source documents and discussing them with the group.

The only problem I really had with this class was the way the prof paced himself during lectures, this however shouldn't be a problem for you as he is no longer teaching the course.

Like with its counterpart, History 1A03, this class is easy to get a good grade in if you do all the readings and pay attention in class, there is a lot of detail that will be called upon during the final.

To check out the syllabus click here.

Course Breakdown:
Tutorials- 20%
Two Short Papers- 15% (7.5% each)
Term Essay- 35%
Final- 30%

I took this course in Winter 2008, and the breakdown has changed due to a new professor teaching it (Martin Horn):

Tutorials: 20% (10% attendance, 10% actually contributing to class discussions)
Essays: 15% each x 3 = 45%
Final Exam (two essays): 35%

Horn was a pretty good lecturer. As a Science student, I'm used to profs using overheads, powerpoints, etc and got a little worried when he said he won't be using any of those (well actually, we posts an overhead with terms, dates and names, but it's essentially useless if you're not paying attention to the lecture). He paced himself very well, and had enough charisma for an 8:30am class to bring certain periods since the French Revolution to life.

The essays asked pretty general questions, which is actually to your advantage because you can make several creative theses from them. You're given three topics on a certain time period and you have to write an essay for one of them.

The tutorials remained primary source document discussions, which helps you write your essays because it pools ideas from other students that you may not have considered.

hey all,
does anyone who has taken this course before know how long the essays usually are(in terms of word count) and if it is time consuming to do them... cuz i m taking this course for term 2 and I am in engineering so i m wondering if I should take it or not as my 2nd elective...

thanks a billion,

Mac_lover

Originally Posted by maclover

hey all,
does anyone who has taken this course before know how long the essays usually are(in terms of word count) and if it is time consuming to do them... cuz i m taking this course for term 2 and I am in engineering so i m wondering if I should take it or not as my 2nd elective...

thanks a billion,

Mac_lover

You should look of the syl that's posted up there. The short papers are 500
"The length of each assignment is only 500 words, so it is important in presenting your analysis to choose your examples carefully and to be concise."

And I believe the essay was about 1000.

yea, stupid me. sorry, i should have not been lazy enough to open a darn link. lol. thnx tho for quick reply.

Haha it's okay. We all do it.

I took this class in Winter 2009, with Dr. Horn and enjoyed it immensely.

Dr. Horn, as mentioned, is old school and lectures without any formal notes and without the use of WebCT. A little daunting at first but he paces his lectures expertly and enthusiastically even though it was 8:30 am. He is certainly knowledgeable about history.

The readings for this course are essential as Dr. Horns lectures often cover a specific event or concept within a grander scale which you are expected to understand from your readings. Two books were used: A basic textbook and a primary document source. Tutorials consisted of discussions on both and quality of participation, RATHER than attendance was what was strongly stressed.

Breakdown:
3 Papers - 15% each (Topics were given at the beginning of the year, 3 choices for each paper - 1500 words in length in Chicago Style)
Tutorial - 20%
Exam - 35% (Two Essays, one on a broad topic, one on a primary document. Choices were given.)

My T.A. as well as others were tough markers, similar to Dr. Horn himself.

I was mostly impressed with the letter I received after the exam form Dr. Horn about my performance in his class and offering his advice on any academic problems I had. That is the first time I have experienced something like this at Mac.

DEFINITELY take if you want to seriously pursue History!

I took this class in Winter 2009 with Professor Horn. He was extremely nice and his lectures were very organized and clear. The readings were helpful, but the textbooks were kind of expensive. The textbooks were important because half of the exam was based on the readings.

If you're interested in history, it's a good class. I'm not a big history fan and it was mildly interesting. I don't know if it would have been as good with a different prof.

My only issue was that the marks were too based on TAs. The essays and participation made up a big part of the final mark, so if your TA was extremely difficult (like mine), it's going to be a difficult class.

I talked to the prof about my problems with my TA and he looked over my essays - he is very nice and understanding.

the prof was great

I had Dr. Ferris this summer. He is a great teacher; so interested in the material and very approachable.

Just wondering, how are you marked for the discussions/participation (e.g. do the T.A.s like hearing you talk a lot, is it quality over quantity, does it vary between each T.A, etc)?

And also, what are the discussions like and what is usually discussed? (Well, of course, I'm assuming it's based on whatever was taught prior, but yeah)

I'm really interested in the subject matter of this course; should I expect it to be one of those courses that "you'll love, but don't take it to get marks" though?

Yeah, any incite would be greatly appreciated. xD

Originally Posted by Nashi

Just wondering, how are you marked for the discussions/participation (e.g. do the T.A.s like hearing you talk a lot, is it quality over quantity, does it vary between each T.A, etc)?

And also, what are the discussions like and what is usually discussed? (Well, of course, I'm assuming it's based on whatever was taught prior, but yeah)

I'm really interested in the subject matter of this course; should I expect it to be one of those courses that "you'll love, but don't take it to get marks" though?

Yeah, any incite would be greatly appreciated. xD

It all depends on the TA. My TA, personally, wanted to hear everyone talk, whether or not it was thinking outside of the box or just quick one word answers. However, a lot of the course is dependent on your participation mark, so I'd suggest talking frequently, and giving both kinds of answers. As for the discussions, they are very straight forward. You're assigned reading assignments every week, and that's what the TA uses to lead discussions during the tutorial. As long as you do the readings, you'll be fine as far as participation goes. Also, if you love the material, you'll like the course. Dr. Horn is the man, seriously. You may not get the highest marks, but if you really have an interest in the material covered, take it and you'll do fine. For me, this was definitely one of my favourite courses last year.

How much reading is required for this course? And how heavy is the course load?

Has anyone had Dr. Heathorn?