PLCP 3110

Being in Professor Alexander's class was fun and entertaining. Although he is a fast talker and sometimes goes off on tangents, his lectures, given freely without the help of presentations, are highly interesting and engaging (if you choose to engage yourself; otherwise, you might doze off from the inability to keep up). The workload wasn't a struggle to keep up with and grading was not too harsh, but I will warn that workloads come in waves-- every few weeks, there will be a large essay assignment that requires a lot of reading, analyzing notes, and researching. But, if you're interested in the topic, these argumentive essay assignments can be fun (he lets you take your own standpoint on issues which for me was both challenging and fun). My TA, Hsuan Lin, was extremely helpful and broke things down for us to understand, while also providing helpful study materials. I learned a lot from this class and would definitely recommend it!

Professor Alexander is nice, relative engaging lecture but does not post slides. Attendance slips throughout the semester because of class format which is 2 papers (easy to do without a full grasp of class concepts) and one final. This class REALLY depends on your TA, I had Shane (Hsuan Lin) who was amazing (fair grader, awesome review, and easy discussion participation) but I've heard of other people who weren't as lucky. Relatively easy to get a B+ but anything higher is up in the air.

The grading criteria is ridiculous and you'll never know how he will punish you for what unny reasons.

This class is well organized and expectations are very clear, so if you follow these an A is very doable. Knowing some readings well will get you an A on the essays, but you can pick and choose which ones you skim and which you actually read. The TAs for this class are great, so get their feedback before you submit each of the essays. The class is a little reductionist (he so badly wants the 5 nations we cover to fit into neat categories), but politics/related majors will definitely benefit from all the practice applying theoretical articles to current and historical trends. Overall, he's a pretty lively lecturer, and this class provides some helpful frameworks & skills to take with you.

Professor Alexander is a mainly vocal lecturer, he doesn't rely on slides heavily, so often notetaking was reliant on whatever he said and not from powerpoints. Personally, I hadn't had a professor like this before, so it was somewhat challenging at first. Unfortunately, there were multiple classes where I'd fall asleep during lecture not necessarily out of boredom, but due to Professor Alexander's voice. The information, however, is very interesting and gives a pretty good insight into Western European politics. A lot of the electoral and political systems we discussed are largely applicable across the world. Overall, I recommend the class but be prepared to pay attention during lecture.

This class is lecture-based; the slides Prof. Alexander are the bare minimum of what you need to know. Doing the readings every week is necessary because you need to cite them (a lot) in the papers. There were two 4 page papers and a final (which was also a paper this semester but usually is an exam). The paper topics usually direct you towards one certain argument to write about because it can be hard to find evidence from the readings for other arguments. The readings don't really provide a full-scope of what is covered in lecture. I personally had a bad experience with Prof. Alexander; I found him to be very rude and not open to other opinions/viewpoints. However, don't let that dissuade you from taking the class to fill the comparative politics requirement. The grade breakdown is 20% section participation, 50% papers, and 30% final exam. I had Firat as my TA. Discussion themselves were fine, but I found him to be very picky about how he wanted the papers structured.

I really liked this class and especially Professor Alexander. Some people seem to be complaining about him or his lecture style, but personally, I found him really engaging and his lectures very interesting, even over Zoom. One thing I really appreciated was how clear and manageable the assignments of this class were. Besides participation in discussion section, you only have two short papers (4 pages each) and a final (5 pages) for the whole semester. The prompts for each of these were very easy to respond to, because most of the arguments you could make were theories we discussed in class. For example, a prompt would ask if you thought ideas, interests, or institutions were the primary reason for a particular democratic outcome. If you wanted to argue that institutions were the reason, then we would have discussed in class an author who argued exactly that. So, to write the paper, you simply had to go back to that reading and make your own argument based off of it. This leads me to my last point, which is that although there were a lot of readings for this class, you could easily get by without doing most of them. Firstly, we discussed most of the readings in class anyways, so as long as you payed attention in lecture, you got the information you needed. Then, when it came time to write the essays, you just had to go through the few readings relevant to your argument, pull out some extra details, and sprinkle in a few quotes. Overall, I really enjoyed this class because I found the material interesting, the professor engaging, and the workload highly manageable. Great class, would definitely recommend.

If you're interested in the political history of Western Europe, you'll find this class interesting. Lectures and readings are focused on arguments explaining democratic stability, economic outcomes, etc. I personally thought the readings were quite dull and lectures were hit or miss. Had no problems with Prof. Alexander, just not the most thrilling class. Discussions ended up kind of like a second lecture, which might appeal to some people but scare off others. The class consists of two 4-page papers and a final exam. The first paper was graded quite harshly, but grading was eased up on the second. The final exam was very fair, and you can get by without doing all of the readings, but make sure to go over the ones he discusses in lecture, as those are the most important ones. Overall, I'd call it an average class that I wouldn't necessarily recommend unless you're into the topic.

Professor Alexander is a great guy and a great lecturer. He is passionate and quick with the lessons, but you have to attend class in order to pick up on a lot of information. I would say that in order to do well, you have to combine the readings that he assigns with attendance in lecture. He does assign A LOT of reading. It takes a really serious dedication to staying up to date with all of the information that is in the readings, and if you fall behind it will certainly have a negative effect on your ability to write the papers for this course. However, I did not have a difficult time when it came to grading. Attending office hours is pretty important to shoot ideas by him but overall it can be managed very well. I wouldn't be afraid of this course. It's a little bit on the tougher side, but it's a rewarding course that gives you a lot of information on countries like Britain, Germany, France, Italy, Spain, and others.

The content is interesting and the professor is a good teacher, but there is nothing special about this course. It is about how different Western European countries achieved democratic stability after World War II. While the content was interesting, it was a pretty standard analysis that did not feel special. The course consists of just a midterm and final, as well as participation. The professor is also not exactly the most understanding person in the world. Overall, the class was somewhat easy and manageable as long as you do the reading assigned, and study for the exams. Overall, I would hesitantly suggest this course if you're interested in the topic but would caution that you probably won't enjoy it all that much.