HIEA 2072

If reading primary documents is not your strong suit, I would not recommend this class. Some of the readings can be interesting, but always pretty dense. Expect 100-300 pages of reading each week, with a 5 minute short answer quiz during discussion based on the reading and lecture. Professor Stolz has a very unique way of lecturing in that the material is non-directional and is more idea to idea. He is very knowledgeable, but not great at conveying those ideas to a student who has little to no knowledge in Modern Japanese History.

Professor Stolz is not my favorite professor. I have nothing personal against him, but his style is one that I am not comfortable with. He tends to come into lecture without any real direction planned and just chat about the history of Japan. He expects you to understand the readings, and if you don't understand it to research your questions on your own time. The exams were both in the form of quote I.D's in which you were expected to identify a passage from some point in Japanese history (even if it wasn't a passage we read for class) and identify the time period it was from, the issues it dealt with, and the context in which it was written. I would not recommend this class, although it did expose me to a subject I had no former knowledge in.

This class was a pretty terrible experience for me. Stolz isn't a great or interesting lecturer, and class time is often very boring. Stolz assumes that you've done the reading for the first lecture of the week and pretty much talks around instead of about what the reading covered, which is where you get most of the knowledge for the course. If you haven't done the reading, you will be lost. The reading is a great deal of work, often taking many hours per week to complete. This class is terrible for someone who cannot motivate themselves to do long, and often dry, readings for lecture the next Monday. However, the reading is often pretty interesting when you get into it, as is the material covered by the course. It's a shame the material is covered up by shoddy and boring lectures. There are weekly writing assignments in discussion section about that week's material that you are given about 5-10 minutes to complete. These writings aren't bad if you did the reading and have something to talk about. Discussion sections were where this class shined. The TA, Justin McBrien, was a knowledgeable, intelligent, and helpful TA. I always felt inspired to dig into the reading after discussion sections. Tests consisted solely of analyzing primary sources and placing them into their historical slot with explanation and justification for your choice as well as expansion on each piece's historical context. This can be pretty intimidating if you have little experience with textual analysis. In summary, don't take this class if you aren't interested in learning Japanese history and you aren't willing to do extensive readings to meet that end, but if you are, you will learn a lot of interesting stuff about the history of Japan.

Do not take this class. 200+ pages of reading weekly, weekly quizzes in discussion that are graded very harshly, and impossible tests. Teaches an impossible mix of political theory and history. Stolz expects his students to remember the smallest details in the text for tests and quizzes. Should be avoided at all costs.