I need to go to bed but didn't want to let too much time pass before posting. I really am aspiring to post a bit more regularly this quarter.
Classes started last Monday. Unlike previous quarters in which I finished bidding by the second or third round and then didn't give it another thought, I was bidding and strategizing and shopping around until the last minute. Literally. I dropped my 5th class 3 minutes before the 11:59 p.m. final deadline Saturday. After attending 7 classes last week (that's 21 hours of class time), 4 in which I was registered plus 3 extras (in search of the perfect 5th class), I haven't quite figured it all out. So far I have:
- 35210 International Corporate Finance with Rajan
- 38002 Managerial Decision Making with Wu
- 40000 Operations with Debo
- 42115 Innovation something or other with Tennant (strategy class taught by a Whirlpool person)
This week is the last week to add a course and, as Negotiations didn't work out given the lack of campus sections (tell me, why on earth do we have only 2 sections on campus but 4 at Gleacher this term?? 4 barely filled night/weekend courses to boot, argh) I'm going to check out Fogel's Business Ethics course (38114). While taking 5 courses, especially 5 reading/writing intensive courses isn't ideal, being able to take only 2 courses in the spring when Baby X is expected, should be a big relief.
Pardon the crappy post. I must sleep now!
4 comments:
Hi, I was going through Booth course evaluations and noticed some professors tend to do much better than others (duh, just like in college evals). Is this a pretty accurate picture of which profs are better/more fair or can these be misleading in any way? I figured if I can't rely on these, I can just ask you before I bid points for courses :)
Mmmm. Yes, how to use course evaluations is tricky. The ratings are definitely a good proxy but should be viewed with a grain of salt. Often I think that students tend to be a bit lenient actually. But it is really remarkable how different a professor might fare during the same quarter between a Harper and Gleacher section - it does seem like there is a degree of arbitrariness that doesn't necessarily indicate how much you will like the professor. It's safe to say that you should probably avoid anyone with abysmal ratings. Course evaluations are also probably more reliable if you have a longer history to look at - I wouldn't place to much weight on just one section's scores. For newer profs, you don't have much history to go on unfortunately. Although the evaluations are helpful and should be more useful than asking around, I actually have gotten a lot of value in asking current classmates what they thought of classes/profs - not very emperical but has actually been the most helpful for me. Does that help? :)
Hi, Was wondering if i could get your thoughts on the Tennant's strategy class. Do you like it?
I'll have to take a rain check on judging Tennant. (But I'm sure I'll be giving a full opinion at quarter end!) For now, she seems pleasant and the class has potential. It's very Whirlpool focused so far ... and I find the readings making me feel obstinate and contrarian - a little too many "vague and bogus" (as my freshmen creative writing teacher liked to say) statements by the HBR folk. Whirlpool seems to have done some very pragmatic things though. So I have hope it will be more pragmatism than faddish, blahblahspeak. To be cont.
Post a Comment