Professor D'Altroy clearly knows a lot to the point where it's somehow simultaneously his biggest advantage and weakness. Obviously it's nice having a professor who is passionate about the stuff he is teaching, but he gets sidetrack really easily talking about minuscule details just because he knows them and he's excited to share as much information as he can with his students. This class is interesting in theory, but I wouldn't recommend it if you're just looking to fill the Global Core requirement (like me) unless you're really motivated. The entire history of five major ancient civilizations is a lot of history to cover and a lot to cram into your head prior to the midterm and the final. However, this is also coming from someone who only does the bare minimum in the classes not related to my major. I went to less than 10 lectures the entire semester, only did 10% of the required readings, and almost failed the midterm, but I ended up with a B+ which is a win in my books. I probably wouldn't have been as stressed about the class around exam time and in turn would view it in a better light if it wasn't for my own procrastination so take my view with a grain of salt. On the bright side, the exams are really broad in terms of the essay questions and he gives you practice ones beforehand that are practically the same as the ones you see on the exam. This means if you don't heed my warning and take this class anyways knowing you're a procrastinator like me then you can still pull off a decent grade by reviewing a couple of the readings really in-depth and writing outlines to the practice questions given a day before the exam. There's also a required discussion section for undergraduates, but the difficulty of that depends on the TA you get. Shoutout to Daniel because he was the best!
I have such mixed feelings about this class. I am just finishing the fall 2017 semester of this class and i think at different times in the semester i have both loved and hated the class. let me break it down for you: The Lectures: The lectures are literally going to be your least favorite part of the class. The professor is pretty much just going over slides. There is always an outline of the lecture given ahead of time so you can follow along as well as all power point slide shows. These don't serve as a good representation of the all the information thrown at you in this course though. Professor D'altroy knows his stuff. He throws a huge amount of information at you in each lecture in large part just from the massive amount of knowledge he has in his head. he clearly is passionate about the subject and extremely knowledgeable. This format of sitting for an hour just looking at slides listening to someone speak is indeed incredibly boring, but its also the most important part of the class to ensure your success. if you want an A you need to attend because there is no source wether it is the book, recitations or all the youtube videos on the web that are going to encapsulate what you need for the exams as well as terrance's lectures. Take notes every lecture, ask questions and try your best to stay attentive and you will be fine. The readings: they were a mix of fairly interesting to incredibly boring. there were a ton of readings provided broken into different levels of importance, but truth be told if you pay enough attention in lecture and take good notes then most of the readings largely wont even be needed. youll need to draw upon them for the papers but beyond that you can easilly do well without them. Overall: honestly i feel like i learned alot in this class. It goes from a very laid back feeling to a very hectic class around midterms/finals because all of a sudden you need to contextualize thousands years worth of information and it can seem overwhelming. very little direction is given in terms of what exactly to study for exams and it can be stressful, but usually if you just study an overview of everything and few important sites/people from each region you will be set for the exam. dont take this class lightly, if you slack off too much you will find yourself lost.
When I took this class, I was overwhelmed with the amount of information presented in every lecture. But you know what, getting an A in this class is possible. People, this is not a joke class, so take it seriously. Don't slack off. Come to class; make sure you go to recitation. Also, pay attention to the stuff in the review sheet (especially for finals). The TAs were great this semester. If you have questions regarding the essay prompts, e-mail/meet with them. Stop complaining about this class, and do the work.
I am warning you, do not ever take this class. It is the most boring class you will ever sit in, and on top of that Professor D'Altroy is the least funny person on the planet. He tries to make it interesting but to be honest it does not really work. The midterm was super easy, just two civilizations, Egypt and Mesopotamia and the papers are easy if you put 1-2 hours into them. I did find the context interesting but Professor D'Altroy needs to figure his stuff out. Now the way he grades is very unique. I received a B- because I got a low B...that does not make sense. He was not sympathetic in a grade change. Do not take this class, it is way too boring, I watched television in class and did other class work. And the final is kind of difficult, it pulls on literally everything, the topics are very broad so you can sometimes BS but it depends what TA grades it.
I'm a Neuroscience major. I was looking to fulfill the global core requirement. This was probably the most boring painful class i've ever had to sit through. The lectures (on material that could actually be very interesting) are extremely monotonous, the slides have very few explanations on them--only pictures, and a lot of the time the objectives of the course, what you're expected to know, etc is very unclear. If you like anthro/history it might be a bit more interesting to you but like the lecture portion of it at least i felt was poorly executed. That being said it was like extremely easy. I did no reading, (except for pulling some quotes out of the text for papers) literally 0 work aside from the days before an exam or a paper was due, and turned out absolutely fine. I guess if you're looking for a global core with very minimal work, go for it, but don't expect to be enlightened or even slightly intellectually stimulated. I think the best thing that happened to me in this course was when I beat 2048 that fateful wednesday afternoon.
This class blew my mind...when I was awake. Prof. D'Altroy is funny, intelligent, and has a drone in his voice that could put even the most caffeinated Columbian to sleep. Beware. The class, however, is enjoyable in the sense that I gained a new perspective on time by learning about Civilizations from 5000B.C. onward. When I was on Ritalin, I gained the most from this class because I was able to absorb Prof's deceptively fast-paced lectures. Take notes. You chiefly draw from lectures on exams. Read the texts, even though you dont *have* to, it helps you with the papers. T.A. section seminars are there to answer your questions, grade your papers, and serve as a guide to the course--yet, half the time I was watching futbol, and playing 2048... What is the real killer is that if you cant stand museums, this class is basically a tour of museums and historical landmarks, in a dimly lit lecture hall. When we were talking about anthropology, however, my interest was captivated. I could've taken better advantage of this class, but thus far it has been my favorite class at Columbia because of how it expanded my horizon of how society develops and has come to where it is today. Oh, and I got a B- for the course. First paper: 76 Second Paper: 96 Midterm Exam: 73 Final Exam: 82
The Rise of Civilization Anthropology V1008y This course is loaded with a vast amount of theory and knowledge. Some of which becomes a bit redundant, but for the most part will hold your attention. If you struggle with putting all the pieces together, as I do, rest easy knowing that there is a group of TA's that are just as well-educated as the professor (some give a few lectures). Matthew Sanger being one of them, made himself available almost 24/7 to help. His discussion sessions helped point out the important aspects of each civilization, and his well informed guidance is invaluable. This is a great course and worth taking to fill that global core requirement.
It's an OK course. This course is required for archaeology/anthro so there's really no way around it if that's your major. It's very well run-- TAs respond quickly to e-mails and grade quickly. The lectures are interesting enough if somewhat boring at times (especially when some of the TAs pseudo-guest lecture while d'altroy is absent). You really don't need to buy the books, just read through them at Butler and take notes before the midterm/final. D'altroy holds a review session before every exam and doesn't write the exam until the night before which seems fair. Strangely, D'altroy facilitates and seems to enjoy that half the class never attends as he always posts the powerpoint and in depth lecture notes. Don't be fooled though, I think he only does this in order to encourage some kids from attending in order to make the curve easier to create/maintain etc. It's not a course that you will worry about, but it's also not a joke course that you never have to put any work into. Primarily because the papers that were originally 1-2 page responses without any sources are now 7-8 page research papers despite containing the same prompt... kind of a cheap way to make a course more challenging but whatever. Some of the TAs are amusing, some are sleep-inducing boring, but it's kind of a lottery based on when you can actually fit one into your schedule... Easy enough to do well if you put the work in and try to do it. D'altroy was a bit self-indulgent with the jokes, innuendos, and elitism, but overall an entertaining lecturer.
I seriously do not think Professor D'Altroy is a good professor. The way he comes off is seriously pretentious and I honestly went away with the impression that he did not care about the course, which affected the way I prioritized it, and my grade suffered accordingly. One of the most egregious aspects of his poor performance as professor is the fact that there were, to my knowledge, at least 6 lectures which he was absent for. To be fair, one of the times was scheduled, as the head TA (Darryl Wilkinson) was assigned with that day's material on Sub-Saharan Africa, and actually did a fantastic job and gave what I think was unquestionably the best lecture of the entire course. The other 5 occasions, as far as I could tell, were cases of Professor D'Altroy clearly prioritizing other endeavors of his above the course; two consecutive sessions (i.e. an entire week's worth of classes) were missed in the week immediately following Spring Break, because of supposed problems scheduling the return flight from Peru (which, to be quite honest, I completely did not believe, especially in light of the absences that followed; he clearly wanted an extra week of vacation / study in his â€œarea of expertiseâ€ - truly shameful). He missed another entire week of classes because, obviously, going to a conference at Oxford was more important to him than teaching the introductory course in the department he used to chair. This goes right in line with his arrogant, pretentious attitude that he brings into every lecture, in which I honestly felt I was not getting very detailed information, due to his preference for bashing Western European intellectual historiography. I think as long as Professor D'Altroy heads the course it's doomed, because thereâ€™s no way there can be a serious exploration of the rise of civilizations around the world in any level of useful detail, when the course is headed by an academic who cares more about a pseudo-intellectual agenda obsessed with bashing the West and its historical epistemological approaches than in the actual civilizations being studied or in the students who are trying to learn about them. Iâ€™m embarrassed that this is the largest class at Columbia; itâ€™s a real shame. I overall had less problems with my TA, Dianne Scullin, than I did with Professor D'Altroy, but I felt she also failed to inspire intellectual interest in the material. Her feedback on my second paper (which I got what I honestly feel is an undeservedly low grade after my hard work had been rewarded on the first one), was almost nonexistent, despite the fact that my work merited barely above a C in her eyes. Her only annotations on my paper were ones saying "good" toward the beginning, then on the last page she wrote 80 / B- and a terse note saying that I didn't address the prompt, without explaining why or how. I put just as much work into that paper as I did the first one, which I got a solid A on. I would have felt comfortable asking her about it, except for the fact that she consistently failed to cultivate an atmosphere in which I would have been comfortable interacting with her; she blatantly ignored an e-mail I sent to her early in the semester regarding a scheduling conflict with her discussion section, in which I very politely asked to switch into one that met in the same room the hour before our time. As a result of her unwillingness to respond to the e-mail, I felt uncomfortable asking her anything (including for elaborated feedback on my second paper), and had to forego a job opportunity I would have been able to take in that time slot. She also led the discussion section with a listless, disinterested, and passionless flat affect that could not possibly inspire any intellectual curiosity. The assignments and materials for the class perfectly mirror the content: overly generic, poorly explained, and not worthwhile. The two papers are on topics that are superficial and broad, and that leave no room for academic creativity. In addition, they don't in any way productively contribute toward learning anything in any level of detail that is asked of us on the midterm or final, so they were just pointless. Also, the grading (as has been mentioned) was completely inconsistent. I got a solid A on the first paper, and then nearly a C on the second one, and I put the same amount of work and thought into both of them. The readings are obviously pointless, as neither the professor nor our TA ever addressed them besides saying that they were all required, which is obviously false, which is reprehensible for causing everyone to waste tons of money on expensive materials that aren't even incorporated. I think as long as Professor D'Altroy heads the course it's doomed, because thereâ€™s no way there can be a serious exploration of the rise of civilizations around the world in any level of useful detail, when the course is headed by an academic who cares more about a pseudo-intellectual agenda obsessed with bashing the West and its historical epistemological approaches than in the actual civilizations being studied or in the students who are trying to learn about them. Iâ€™m embarrassed that this is the largest class at Columbia; itâ€™s a real shame.
It's fairly easy, but it's also a bit of a drag if it's not something you're interested in. You do actually have to learn things, and there's a heavy emphasis on discussing archaeological evidence to prove your claims. DO go to class, it's boring but if you can manage to stay awake and pay attention you won't need to buy the book, and the details you use in your paper will reflect your attendance which will put you on the graders good side (they don't have to do the reading...but they DO have to go to every class). Go to recitation. You'll get a higher grade. You're trying to get a good grade, right? Honestly, attendance + a semi-decent amount of attention and study = doing well in this class. That said, plenty of people DO NOT do well in this class. Why do you think that is? Keep in mind that it is an actual class, and that Professor D'Altroy and the TAs don't see it as a joke as much as you might. Show some respect and you've got this, no problem.
Even though this class is probably the easiest global core option here, I'm so tempted to say I don't recommend the class at all because it's such a pathetic, miserable excuse for a lecture. Â Professor D'Altroy is painfully pretentious and all of his lectures exhibit a shockingly paradoxical combination of pretentious, pseudo-intellectual, post-colonialist nonsense on the one hand, with embarrassingly Â superficial lack of substantive information about anything on the other. Â There's almost nothing genuinely insightful to be gained from this course. Â All each lecture essentially would be is a tangential polemic against how bad Western civilization is and how vastly culturally rich all the ancient civilizations were. Â But then he goes on to anachronistically label them as "proto-imperialist/colonialist" just so he can use them to proxy-bash western civ... Â All at the expense of any possibility of actually learning about said culturesz Â It's mind-blowing. Â The only thing redeeming about it is the few minutes of actual detail he has hidden away in his sideshows and the chance that your TA might further elaborate on it and be genuinely enlightening.
JUST TAKE IT AND STFU. If you put the work, easy A. I went to all the classes and took notes until before the midterm. I regret taking these notes, as really, just reading his notes online are enough (and even then, skimming them and getting the main idea should be fine). Reading his notes should be enough to tackle the essays in the midterms/finals (and seriously, short answers in the exams should be freaking cake... C'MON, HE GIVES THEM TO YOU BEFORE THE TEST). Just make sure you know the main ideas, and evidence for trends (like you get bunch of people together, then they grow, people start caring bout religion, those w/greater religious status n stuff become more powerful, they rule, standardize society, all along social structure was getting more stratified, BAM YOU GOT AN A). Try to get Jen Van Tiem as your recitation leader, trust me, she's awesome. and an easy grader. Trust me, these recitations don't matter. SO YEAH, TAKE IT, GET AN A WITHOUT MUCH WORK. i just regret during finals caring a bit more about this class than others... Let me give you my quick advice for the final... just know in depth one civilization from the new world (I'd say do the ones from mesoamerica) and one from the old world (I'd say China). poom u got an A broski
If you are in CC, chances are you'll end up taking Rise of Civ to fill your Global Core requirement. Why? Because it's easy. Why else? Because on paper, it sounds like it would be in an interesting course. Unfortunately, only the former is true. It is very easy to get an A in this class, so by all means, you should take it (especially if your GPA needs a little bump). However, D'Altroy is not a very interesting lecturer. Some time around the end of January, I stopped going to class entirely, with the exception of the midterm and the class before it. He doesn't exactly make it essential that you go to class, either. All of his lecture notes are posted online (hint: there are way too many of them. Dude doesn't know how to write an efficient outline. But hey, all the more help to slackers like myself?). All of his powerpoints are posted online. Don't print these. He saves them at the highest quality possible, so they take forever to print. And there's literally more slides than there are minutes in of lecture. Most of the time, if you do actually go to class, the people around you will be doing one of three things: eating lunch, talking to their friends around them, or dicking around on the internet. All that said, DO go to your recitation section. And if you have the option, take the section with Kaori Hatsumi. She's adorable, and doesn't have great command over the English language, but she's an easy grader, and she, too, will post all of her notes from discussion section online. They're usually a boiled down version of whatever D'Altroy was talking about in class, and are often more useful than his lengthy outlines.
this class was boring. not much more, not much less. he basically goes through a bunch of slides(most of which are pictures) during class while frequently going off on tangents. he's a nice guy but its hard to stay awake during class. the recitations were just as boring(they were pointless to be honest). recommended if you're trying to get your global core requirement out of the way. its really not that hard. i didnt do a single reading, only showed up half time(and when i did show up i messed around on my computer), and got an A-. he posts the lectures online and they contain all the information you need(they were literally the only thing i studied from for the midterm and final). there are three 'papers'. the first two are like 2-3 pages and the last one is 3-5. keep in mind the papers only constitute 10% of your grade.
Terry is a great guy and a decent professor. His lectures could be boring at times, but at least he doesn't put a bunch of text on a slide and read off it. He shows you images and then explains them, which makes it a lot easier to remember the concepts. The material is not overly interesting to me, but as a Global Core option, this is the best class out there. There is practically no work (the textbook readings are worthless, I'll admit). There is only one thing you have to do in order to get an easy A in the course: GO TO CLASS! This simple act is something probably 85% of the class did not do. Most people think it's unnecessary since he posts all his lecture notes online, but the problem with his notes is twofold: 1) He doesn't cover everything in the notes AND sometimes something that only gets a bullet point or two in his lecture notes is talked about for 20 minutes in lecture and then appears on the exam and 2) it's incredibly difficult to interpret and understand the notes without any sort of explanation, and virtually impossible to memorize any of it. Just show up to lecture and jot down some of the main ideas and you're golden.
This course blows. The lectures itself were very dry, out of the 6 times I go to class, I cannot help but fall asleep everytime. He goes through an endless number of slides, leaving me to think what is the point? If you are thinking about taking this class to fulfill a requirement, think again. It isn't worth it. I admit that I have no interest in anthropology, but I studied hard for this class. He gives you the notes (about 250 pages worth for the entire semester) but they are somewhat incoherent and overly verbose. I took notes of the notes to help with memorizing, but the process of studying was agonizing. If you are interested in anthropology, go for it. Otherwise, stay far away. All my friends regret taking this class.
This is the dumbest class ever; I never went, mostly skipped the reading, and got an A. And it meets the ridiculous Barnard Anthro requirement! WOOOOO!!!
This class sucks. Do not take it unless you're absolutely fascinated by a never-ending series of slides- archeological digs (they're all the same!) and beads (ditto) I've been to this class five times all semester and every time I wonder why I bother. All the lecture notes are online, and he recites them- verbatim. Then he shows slides and spends a good five minutes discussing the measurements of the different bricks used in the Indus River Valley baths. Why do we CARE??? And I can't even begin to describe how boring and pretentious D'Altroy is. There are truly no words. Maybe he is a nice guy. But I don't trust anyone who thinks that it's okay to waste people's time and forty-thousand a year on this.
I found this class difficult. I just did not enjoy lectures and it totally turned me away from anthropology. D'Altroy is humorous at times and incredibly detailed, but so dry. I found myself and many others falling asleep in class. The midterm and final were a bit difficult because of the depth of knowledge we were expected to know. Plus, there's always those older "I've actually been here and seen that" students that throw off the curve.
Prof. D'Altroy was greattt!!! The class was cool, though not too many people went. It was basically a more indepth look at the major ancient civilizations: Mesoptamia, Egypt, Indus River Valley, China, MesoAmerica and Andes civilzations. Class consists of one to three power point presentations, while Prof. D'Altroy reads his notes - both the power point slides and his notes are posted online (which is why most people didn't bother to go to class). While class was really unneccessary, as were the readings (HONESTLY, you don't have to read anything to get an A in this class), going to class and doing the readings are worthwhile. Discussion was optional and there were sections that met I think every day of the week (maybe not Wed. though). If you're lucky enough to have optional sections, I highly highly recommend going to Felipe's section - he's great and makes these awesome review outlines right before the test (that you only get by going to his section). Take this class!! I got an A.
This is a great class. The reading is not light, but it's definitely manageable. There is only a midterm and a final, and an optional paper. This makes the grading a little risky, but if you go to lecture, do the reading, and take advantage of the notes posted online, you'll do fine. You might also want to take advantage of the optional discussion sections, since I found that the TAs were extremely knowledgeable. Professor D'Altroy is an engaging lecturer. He's not the most entertaining, but he has a genuine enthusiasm for the subject matter. He is also a very nice guy, very easy to talk to and happy to answer questions. The Price and Feinman text is overpriced and pretty useless, but the Wenke is excellent. The Wenke text, and the class as a whole, made me decide to change my major to archaeology. Whether you're an anthro or history major, or just need a class to fill major cultures, there's a good bet you'll enjoy this class.
Terrance is a really nice guy when you talk to him. He's so passionate about his work and he's really dedicated to his students. I enjoyed his class, and it fulfilled my major cultures requirement. I think its pretty hard if you're taking it as a requirement because he kinf of assumes that everyone in the class really wants to be an archaeologist when they grow up, so he really thinks you're going to be into it and wants you to know your stuff.
Loved him. TD is good at hitting the main points within thousands of years of cultures around the globe. It's a lot of reading, but more like a lot of skimming the readings and seeing what he hits upon in the lectures...which are online anyway. He works hard to make an info-heavy course as easy to get through as possible. A couple complaints: The textbook is useless, his lecture notes are good enough on their own. Also, he tends to spend a few too many slides on burial crafts. Sure, spend a few minutes on King Tut's sweet loot, but when every single early civilization had rich people with graves full of cool stuff, after a while he could've just said so and moved on. TD covers each culture from a basic set of perspectives to establish a good comparative base of knowledge about early civilizations. Very informative, somewhat repetitive. He knows a lot of really interesting stories and details. Basically, he's perfect if you're interested in the subject matter; very knowledgeable, can put together a good lecture, VERY approachable, sort of funny. Just prepare for lots of pottery slides.
True, Professor Altroy is a really nice guy but he's one of my worse professors this semester. He likes to go over a large amount of information so he's forced to generalize everything, which makes the class uninteresting. His lecture style needs some improvment; he often mumbles, doesn't talk loud enough, and groups large words together so it makes his point confusing (he sounds exactly like the textbook). The TA is much better at conveying the information. The tests format was standard. The most difficult thing in studying for them however is that there is just SO MUCH information to memorize that you often end up cramming. I wish he would have told the class what terms to not study because their were so many of them. I have to say I'm disappointed with this class. It wasn't as intricate or as interesting as my East Asian China class with professor Schoenenbaum.
First of all, Professor D'Altroy is a really nice guy. Not a pushover, though. His lectures are really packed with a lot of information and the pace is very fast. He clearly outlines the basic themes of the course at the beginning...how to sythesize and approach the material. If one keeps these points in mind when taking notes and studying, it really is not an overload. I felt this semester was heavier on theory than I anticipated from reading past Culpa reviews. We were encouraged throughout to utilize the "big picture." Before the exams, D'Altroy gave out example essay questions and I found this helpful. There is a manageable amount of reading - not light (if one does all of it), but certainly not horrible. Plus, in the final crunch, the outlines supplied by D'Altroy are what I relied on for exam preparation and fleshed this out with class notes. This course can appear overwhelming, with a moderate effort combined with strategic studying, it is not that hard to get an A in this course. I felt that the very nature of the course whas such that I felt we kind of skimmed over the cultures...(despite the fact that D'Altroy speaks very fast and really tries to cram as much in as he humanly can). It is a fair overview and comparison. One high compliment for D'Altroy: If he doesn't know something (he admits that China is not his strongpoint), he will honestly and refreshingly say "I don't know." But this guy knows a whole lot. He's not an armchair intellectual having spend decades in the field. His area of expertise is South America especially Peru. I recommend this course.
The guy is incredibly nice. Just really nice. The lectures are straightforward. He even posts them on courseworks for the many students that don't attend the lectures even so his lectures are sold via a copy center, so there really is no need to attend the lectures and many students don't. Though I regret not going to most of the lectures, because I was pretty stumped on the final. I suggest going to at least 75% of them. I wish I did have a chance to get to know D'Altroy more, his dry humor makes it all worth it. But I guess if you aren't the type to stare at pictures of skeletons and old archaeology sites, don't take the class.
In accordance with the majority of the other reviews, this class is essentially information-overload. It can't be denied, the lectures are horribly interesting and some of the slides are breathtaking. The conceptual analysis required on the midterm and final, however, is not mentioned until the class before. Attention to minute detail suddenly becomes intensely theoretical I believe that if Prof. D'Altroy could strike a balance between the detail and the theory, he would really have quite a class. But until that point, this class is recommended only to those with the drive to a) continually pack away a load of information or b) execute a massive pre-exam cram session. The stuff is really interesting, though. Recommended to those who enjoy reading every panel in the Museum of Natural History displays.
I completely disagree with the reviews below--and I'm not even an Anthro major. Terence D'Altroy is a very good teacher because he's passionate about his subject. Where I think people get tripped up is that his passion weirdly enough takes the form of some of the driest humor that I've ever encountered. He said some of the most hilarious things with a straight face and deadpan delivery so if you're nodding off, of course you'll miss it. Once, when the TAs forgot the slides for half of his lecture, he just cycled through using the same slides but lecturing on a different civilization--it was hilarious to hear him make these off the cuff jokes, self depreciating comments and and brilliant reaches that managed to related the slides and a totally different idea. But most those who were asleep later freaked out when they discovered that their notes and the slides didn't match--what a great litmus test for a teacher to figure out who's paying attention... He has negative tolerance for stupidity (hear that, Third Row Guy with the Jaguar fetish?), and even less tolerance for bullshit ("But its so much memorization!" just doesn't fly with this class; do it or drop it. Or better yet, talk to the TAs. They know their shit and do an amazing job of breaking it down to bite size pieces. Make friends with them--I didn't do this but I should have). That said, D'Altroy has admitted that every year he tries to strike a balance between concepts and memorization, and usually he inadvertently leans to one side or the other. My semester, it was towards memorization. If you do the reading (which I skimmed the few days before the final exam) and attend the sections (which I didn't--I was a first semester freshman and no one had told me about them, so you're not dealing with someone who's always on top of things), then you should definitely be able to manage a decent grade; I got an A-. Also, its a big class so if anonymity is your thing, then this is probably a good choice. Though D'Altroy probably has only the vaguest idea who I am, I nevertheless credit him with helping me choose my Urban Studies major. Quite a bit of Rise of Civ deals with emergence of urbanism. The info is interesting; it *is* manageable; moreover, it gives a great non-western perspective of what was going on at the same time as half of the lit hum & cc syllabus (Those of you who bitch about the core--do us all favor and transfer to Brown). Similarly, its really useful your second List A major cultures, because you'll have a solid background from which to work with there as well. I'd recommend this to anyone who's interesting in actually getting something out of their classes. If you want a comfy seat in class to sleep, and a professor to hold your hand and give you an A anyway, you could probably do it too; but why would you want to when you've got a good guy like D'Altroy to teach you?
I agree with the rest of the reviewers - overwhelming amounts of information for a 1000 level class, and studying for the final was a nightmare - you really don't know where to begin and when to end. Don't take this class unless you're fascinated by pictures of skeletons, pottery, and stones that somehow represent a temple. Some of the info is admittedly interesting, but it's just a constant stream of names that you can't pronounce, people, dates, and so on. Another thing that makes it hard is that all the civilizations resemble each other so much that it's difficult to memorize them well without getting confused.
As an anthropology major, I thought Rise of Civ would be an easy introductory class to fill a requirement. And while the grading may be easy (he curved the midterm twice to make it as high as he wanted), the class was a waste of time. As other reviews have pointed out, there is just way too much information covered to A) make it at all interesting or in-depth or B) understand it. I went to recitation with the TAs who seemed to know nothing about the subject, my TA couldn't even find the answer to my question with the book in front of him. But, if you're good at memorizing thousands of things you will never ever have a use for for the rest of your life, then maybe you want to take this class. D'Altroy seemed very interesting although the lectures were ridiculously boring (he even brought us coffee and tea to the final) so maybe a seminar would be better. Just beware wasting your semester memorizing the city layouts of ancient civilizations . . . not even useful enough information for cocktail parties.
Oh dear oh dear... don't take this class for the core. Take it only if you have interest in archeology and learning about 5 major cultures in one semester. Needless to say, notes are overwhelming and you'll never quite get it all. Readings are interesting, but too bad they don't help for the tests. Class is pretty boring, moves very fast and you'll forget everything you heard as soon as you walk out. Which means studying for tests is a beastly job. I read everything all over the night before the exam and I still barely managed a B+.
I have to agree with those people who said he was boring in rise of civ, which i also took. It's true, as it is true that he seemed to use the slide projector as a security blanket. But that is not really him. Get him in a small seminar and he is funny, engaging, witty and very knowledgable. Emergence of State Society is one of the best courses I have taken at columbia. It was a small seminar, every week we would sit around and discuss diferent theories as to why states and complex societies emerged. If you are not interested in this topic, dont take the class it is reading and thinking intensive. But if you are, you will not regret it at all. It definitely convinced me that anthro is the right field for me. And his idea that people should bring snacks was excellent.
D'Altroy is kinda bland and you may not always get his jokes but he means well. As another review said there are over 18,000 years of history to cover during the course and doing it throughly is impossible. Having the lecture notes already available is great and eliminates the need to do almost any reading at all. However, one thing that is not done well and is also essential for the midterm and final is tying all the infomration together and making connections. This is what the class is all about and D'Altroy does nothing to help you get there. That means that you are on your own to put all the pieces together. With that said... The class is not graded to harshly and if you can sit thorugh D'Altroy's lectures it might not be such a bad class.
Terry D'Altroy is not really a bad professor. Yes, he is a little dull, but it is important to keep in mind that he is trying to be faithful, in many cases, to literally thousands of years of history. If you take "rise of civ," be aware of this. there is no way to study a subject like that without memorizing a million facts. Also, most of the classes that he is teaching are for archaeology students-this seems like an interesting subject, but it can be very dry.
D'Altroy is a good man and an alright teacher. I think that the negative aspects of the previous reviews are based more on class content, which is pretty much 3000 years of cultural history for 6 different cultures; that's the equivalent of roughly 18000 years of history, folks. It's slightly overwhelming. Keeping track of the details is very difficult. I talked to him about this, and he said that he tries to strike the balance between data and theory but usually it's too strong on one side or the other (I had a data-strong class). On the plus side, he's pretty entertaining and shows lots of slides of himself in the field (which, according to his haircut, must have been in the 70s). The class notes are prepared for you--major bonus to cover for the minutae. Readings are neither difficult nor very long. And the recitations are optional--though show up for at least one, you get to see all sorts of neat stuff.
D'Altroy has the skill of taking an interesting sounding class and turning it into an orgy of dullness. Classes are sprawling collections of eclectic and mostly useless data. If you're lucky, you may escape with the memory that you used to find this stuff interesting, before you took the class. Don't get suckered into "Rise of Civilization" if he's teaching. It may satisfy the Major Cultures requirement but it's not worth it. The only bright spot is that he puts his photocopied notes on sale, so it's not really necessary to go to class. In fact, going to class may actually hurt your grade.