PSYC 2200

This class must have changed since the earlier reviews, because it was not as easy or fun as people made it seem. I found the lectures extremely dull and slow, although I was interested in the material coming into the course. Hill just couldn't keep my attention. The information itself was cool, but the tests were tricky. Overall, I was kind of disappointed with this class. I thought it could have been a lot more enjoyable. Professor Hill is a nice guy, but I wasn't very satisfied with his class.

This class is harder than it should be; not because the material is that hard to grasp, but because the tests are unnecessarily tricky. Many questions were worded quite stupidly, to be frank. Otherwise, I thought this class was fine. The material is interesting and in order to fully grasp it, you have to read the book and go to lecture.

I loved this class! Professor Hill is the best. He is such a good lecturer who really cares about his students. He answers every question and makes himself available after class. I definitely recommend this class!

Pretty good class, not the most exciting but not boring either. Professor Hill was very nice and enthusiastic, I would recommend taking it with him if possible.

This class looks great on paper and Professor Hill will certainly make it sound easy, until the tests roll around. He preaches how you only need to know the lecture and you think, hey, this is easy. Then on the tests he throws in detailed unnecessary things that we never talked about. He cannot write tests. You will get a good survey of neuro but the class could be heavily improved.

This class is not what the grade distribution says. It is a very hard class (probably the hardest in the psych department 2000 levels), and pretty much requires the use of old tests (which he allows but does not post) to do well. The questions are often unfair or confusing, and the book goes into either too much or too little detail. Do not take this as an easy fun class

This class definitely is harder than the grade distribution shows. The concepts are not that hard but he doesn't do a great job of explaining things. Also, his tests are extremely tricky and detailed, and he will randomly pull things from the book that were never talked about in lecture.

harder than distribution shows. tests do not reflect what is learned in lecture and tests are unnecessarily hard; random facts show up on the tests. 4 midterms and a comprehensive final.

I just took this class in Fall 2012. As others have said, this class has got to have changed since the 2009 grade distribution. While Hill is a nice guy and can be personable in lecture, he writes lousy tests. The difficulty of the exams fluctuated wildly from one to the next. I got a near-perfect on the first exam only to fall to a C on the second with no change in study habits. Everyone did so badly on the final exam that he added 10 points to everyone's score. This unpredictability is scary since he takes the raw average of the highest scores on 4 of the 5 tests (4 midterms, 1 final). I thought the material was interesting and perhaps is enough to recommend the class, but get ready for a roller coaster ride on the exams.

Grade is only based on midterms and final, one midterm is dropped. Hill is not as good of a lecturer as Brunjes, but his tests are wayyyyy easier. This is not a hard class to get an A in, as evidenced by the grade distribution.