Re: Re. UCLA Students Evals on Anderson/Brenner

["Xxxx Xxxxxx" <xxxx.xxxxxx@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

> no point in posting anderson/brenner evals,
> no points for including website where folks
> can see that not all students were negative,
> lots of evidence indicates that evals vary
> according to grades students received, but
> neither uniformly negative anderson/brenner
> evals nor evidence that pair are not only
> horrible teachers but vile human beings as
> well 'proves' anything about 'anderson' and
> 'brenner' theses you so vehemently
> oppose...
> > i am confident that you can and will do
> better in future lou as i know you would
> (danger will robinson - irony alert!)
> never intentionally personalize your
> political disagreements...   michael hoover
>

So, what is your point? If you have disagreement , you should post the
_whole_ thing. From what I read, there was a consensus about Brenner's style
of  lecturing.. that he was not a good lecturer in terms of presenting the
material or articulating his points. You can be a super-star Marxist,  but a
horrible teacher ! Other than that, one student said that Brenner was a
"communist" (which he is "not") and added what a "cool" thing it was. My
first reaction was that that this was a student who never encountered
communism in American universities.

Other than ideological differences among students, the results uniformly
indicated an important *technicality*: that Brenner was not a very good
lecturer.


Xxxx Xxxxxx



~~~~~~~
PLEASE clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.