HIST 2002

This review is written from the perspective of a third year who got a B+ in the class and took this class as an elective requirement for their major. Unless you are a history major, I would really not recommend taking this course. I would especially not recommend it for first years. Firstly, this course isn't actually Global History Since 1760. On the first day of class, he announced that it will actually cover history since 1492, and the focus is primarily globalization. I feel like this is misleading, makes a significant difference when choosing courses, and should, therefore, be reflected in a name change on SIS and Course Forum. The only grades for the semester are two papers, a midterm and a final. Although attendance is taken for section and lecture, it is only taken into consideration when grading the papers (unclear exactly what the impact is). The grading is extremely harsh, especially for a class with many first years. Even if you complete and understand all of the readings and attend all lectures and sections, it is far from guaranteed that you will get an A/A- or even B+, as can be seen from the distributions. Professor Owensby is a good lecturer, who doesn't rely on Power Points to deliver the messages and makes an effort to get to know the names of the people in the lecture, even though it is quite large. However, sometimes his tone came off as quite self-important. Although it is good that he is passionate about the material, his tone rubbed me the wrong way and I disliked his harsh grading.

Okay so this is coming from the perspective of someone that got an A- in the class as a first year. This class was one of my favorite classes, but that is because I’m passionate about the subject – not necessarily the most knowledgeable. Owensby gives the tools you need to succeed, but this is meant to be a thought-provoking class. If you want to actually learn about historical facts and events than another class would be better because this class is more about knowledge questions. Your grade basically depends on how well you understand what the readings say and what the implications are as a whole, which he will summarize to you in lecture and you will write about in essays.
I admit, some of his lectures are a bit boring, but all of them are intellectually stimulating. His purpose is to give a very different perspective, and so in this way looks at history in an unconventional way in that he is going to talk about all the things that most people do not know. So when it comes to popularly known wars for example, we all know the story behind those, and he’s not going to tell us what we already learned from high school. This is why some might think he looks at capitalism pessimistically – because western perspective has given it mostly praise since it is indeed our current system, he presents arguments for us to try to look at it differently.
The title of the class, however, is definitely misleading. I didn’t expect it to go as far back as 1492, and what the first readings were about deeply annoyed me. In all honesty, some of the readings are pointless and can be summarized in lecture. So I suggest arranging your discussion after lecture for enough time to look at the readings that matter. The class should be known as GLOBAL TRADE focused because it’s about the history of GLOBALIZATION and interaction between countries for economic purposes – so this can include topics further than trade like slavery and imperialism/
This is definitely not a GPA booster class, and I’m very defensive about this class because a lot of people overlook its value. It’s meant to be a thought-provoking class, and you don’t have to be a history genius because I’m not. The #1 thing is to know how to read. Yes, there is a lot of reading, but only some are vitally important and some are okay to just read the beginning and the end. A good way to tell is to see what readings Owensby emphasizes in lecture. When you read, keep in mind that you will be using them for your essay and take notes (but ones that summarize a paragraph or page in a sentence, a lot of people overthink it with this class and don't have time to get everything done). This means summarizing though and knowing the author’s overall main points. For the readings though I suggest setting a small number a day, or else when you read it all at once you can forget what the author is really trying to say. When I did this, I didn’t struggle compared to my classmates.
In your essays, it’s also a really good thing to mention philosophical thinkers and paradigms. The point of the class is to also bring cultural perspective, and that’s what Owensby’s lectures are mostly about.
Owensby is a good professor, and no one can really deny that in our class. It's okay to want to take an easier history class though. I don't know about Abeer, but I had Clayton and he's a great TA. In the beginning, they try to show you how to do a statement of the argument, and what their standards are for a proper summary of the author's main points. I think from what I've seen statement of the argument grades usually reflect essay grades, but only take that correlation seriously if you put in serious effort into both.

Do not take this class.

Be ready to get an average grade in the class unless you are a passionate anti-capitalism guru. Class is quite interesting at times but should probably not be under the label "Global History"- it is taught with a much greater focus on economics than major historical events. For example, both World Wars were barely discussed, the Cold War was not touched on. My TA Abeer was often arrogant and, in my opinion, graded very subjectively at times. It often felt like attending lecture was only encouraged to give the Professor an audience to rant to. Don't get me wrong though, Owensby is a kind, genuinely good guy, but as a professor, he only presents an evil, dark side of capitalism. Class consists of four 15-line statement of the argument writings, an 8-page midterm, and a 10-page final. Prepare to read A LOT every week. I found both essay prompts to be vague in what they asked, but my TA was very specific in what wording he was looking for. Overall the class was interesting and eye-opening at times, but I would not recommend taking it if you are not a fan of being force-fed how awful capitalism is. If you are looking for a GPA booster, this is probably not the class unless you are a decedent of Karl Marx. As the graph shows above (and what the TA told us), "A-" grades will only be awarded to the very very very best works that teach them something new about how terrible capitalism. Grading is completely up to the TA, and the class average curved to give the class a B average (from what they told us).

Bottom Line: Class is more economics than history; Owensby is caring but not about your GPA; Hours of reading every week to help you learn about how terrible capitalism is; grading is done subjectively by TA on only your writing.

For the Love of God DO NOT TAKE THIS CLASS! I'm a history major who LOVES history but I couldn't stand sitting through this class. If you are conservative politcally or simply interested in world history this is not your class. I told a friend this class should be called "Economic history since 1492: Capitalism as the Devil of the World." An insane amount of reading (100-150 a week) and a midterm who's question was "How would world history be different if you started looking at it in 1760 than 1492?" Like seriously come on man. He assigned an additional two text books at the end of the semester just because and added assignments to go along with them to make sure you bought the books. He spent one class period going from 1900 to the Cold war and then the next class going back to 1850. Only spent 2 minutes on the entirety of WWI and WWII. THIS IS NOT A HISTORY CLASS BUT AN ECON CLASS! Free trade, income inequality, stupid Adam Smith and the genius Karl Marx. The Final is essentially argue whether capitalism is bad or not using the readings as evidence which means argue against it considering every single piece of reading slams western culture and ideas. I have learned nothing except how much Owensby hates the US and everything it stands for. This class would be much better if he gave us the resources to possess opposing viewpoints but I'm going to be forced to argue something on the final I don't believe in to get a good grade.

This class is the hardest of all I take first year, yet also most intellectually stimulating. My TA, Abeer, is sometimes arrogant but very intelligent and I would recommend having him as an RA (helpful during office hours and such). Prof. Owensby is a little eccentric and boring at times, but he is very knowledgable about history and just about everything. He is pretty much a socialist also if that matters to you, good or bad. There is a LOT of reading assigned every week (~80-100 pages), but you do not have to read all of it. Even Abeer said that what you have to do is read the introduction and the conclusion and you should be fine. Two big papers in the class that are important for your exam. Interesting course, might challenge some of your views on the world and how it works, and also difficult. Not a GPA booster, but recommend for a thought provoking course

I took this class my first semester at UVA and actually really loved it. The reading hit me like a truck--I wasn't used to college reading loads yet, and this was definitely on the heavy side, with some really long (60+ page) articles in the mix. Definitely do the readings beforehand (at least skimming) in case he asks for a summary 12-liner to turn in because cramming that in on a Monday night is rough. The 12-liners were really good for practicing academic readings though. Essay topic (especially the first one) was vague but talk to the TAs and play with the readings you liked/know best and you'll get there. The topics are all over the place, but you can definitely find patterns in the material.
My TA for this class was so great (Benji). Like actually best TA I've had here, every one else has paled in comparison. He made so much sense of the articles and could tell when the class had no clue where Owensby was going in lecture. He also created an incredible classroom dynamic where everyone felt friendly and comfortable sharing, which made such a huge difference in going to discussions. We were honest when we didn't do the readings and he helped so much in summarizing/making connection/navigating through the BS. Owensby is a great guy, really passionate and knowledgable about the subject and I enjoyed listening to him. If you get bored in lecture, count how many times he takes his glasses off/puts them back on.

Owensby is a fine lecture but I honestly dont this was "modern" history... we started with the age of exploration then rushed through to get to the 20th century. TAs were fantastic, though. I definitely became a better writer through this course. 6 reading responses were due on random Mondays, one page-long group essay, and two long essays (8 pages and 10 pages). Don't take this class if you don't want to do any reading, because trust me, you'll need to.

Professor Owensby is a fantastic lecturer and really brings the materials to life. He encourages everyone to participate and manages to make a large-lecture setting feel more like a discussion section. There are two papers for the course, each about 10 pages-- both based on the class's readings. If you do the reading and participate in discussion you'll do fine. Loved this class