PSYC 2200

I really liked his lectures. Just need to attend the lectures and take good notes for the exams.

Hill is a great lecturer. His humor is a little dry, but I found it entertaining. He places a lot of emphasis on what will be on the test by being repetitive. This class depends on a series of 4-5 tests. None are cumulative. There's a lot of pressure to do well, especially on the first one. If you do, then you're solid. Tests are multiple choice.

I thought the material was interesting, but I'm probably in the minority. Professor Hill is entertaining in a dry, sarcastic way. He tells you straight up that he doesn't test on random details from the reading, which is nice, but the tests can still be confusingly worded. Watch out for matching questions and read all answers carefully. The book goes into much more detail than the class actually does, so that can be confusing at times--skim the book and don't try to memorize it all. He drops the lowest exam grade and seems to be pretty lenient about grading--he raised all our final grades by 10 points because everyone failed. Not a bad class overall.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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 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.

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.