PSYC 2200

Ugh, this class. Very sadly, it is required for the psych major. If you don't have to take it, stay far far away. It is more of an anatomy class than anything else, and Hill does an inadequate job explaining the material. The optional review sessions were useless. Hill also made some insensitive comments at various points during the semester about happenings around UVa...while it didn't directly affect his performance as a teacher, it certainly didn't make him any more likable. He also changed his mind fairly frequently. The most notable example of this is his decision to change the final from "word for word, questions from all the previous midterms" to "some questions word for word, but mostly original questions." So, just like a regular final. Good job, dude.

Professor Hill is very interested in his research. He's not the best lecturer. I was told he never had a book before spring 2010 and now he does. I at least skimmed most chapters and it helped on the tests. They're not the easiest tests but they're aren't the hardest either. He gave 4 exams and a final, all worth the same amount so if you're satisfied with the grade of the 4 exams you don't have to take the final. Its required for a PSYC major so its one of those classes you just have to sit through.

Good class, but Hill didn't seem like he wanted to teach. He's obviously there for his research. Can sometimes tell a good joke, but he doesn't know how to design a "fair" test.

This class was supposed to be easy, but I thought it was pretty challenging. I think he changed the structure of the course this semester. Some test questions come directly from reading without him ever talking about it in class. Apparently his final used to be recycled questions from old midterms, but he stopped doing that this semester to make the course harder. I honestly thought the material was interesting when I was reading the book, but the way Professor Hill presents the material was so boring that I found it almost impossible to pay attention in class.

Wow. Just...wow. He apparently changed the entire course this semester because it was too easy before. Now there's a book. No, he did not have a book for however many years he taught this course. This is apparent in his utter inability to correlate the book to the lectures. He would send out long emails dissecting each chapter down to the sentence of what to read - it would have been easier if he had just said to read the whole damn book. I've never been more disappointed in a class in my life. I was looking forward to this class a great deal and Hill ruined it. His lectures, the book, and the tests are all completely out of sync and his expectations are NEVER clear. On top of that, he's got to be one of the worst 5 lecturers I've ever seen who clearly does not want to teach. At all. Take this class with someone else. Anyone else.

This class isn't very hard but if you miss class or skip the readings the tests are pretty awful. You have to both go to class and read the textbook, but there are no assigned readings; you mostly just figure it out for yourself.

It's rather unfortunate that this class is required for the psychology major, since the relationship between neurology and behavior (which is presumably the reason that psyc majors have to take this course) came up MAYBE twice all semester. Prof. Hill's lectures were reductive and simplistic; he covered complex topics very superficially and without much enthusiasm. (I know, I know, this is the _easy_ neuropsyc class, for non-science people. I should have taken the 4000-level class. But I'm NOT a science person. Prof. Hill didn't teach complex topics very effectively.) Prof. Hill was also unable to stick to his schedule, which led to (the more interesting) topics a the end of the semester being covered much more quickly (and even more superficially) than those at the beginning of the semester. I also did not appreciate Prof. Hill's childish tone in lectures. Prof. Hill, are you really unable to maturely explain what a rectal thermometer (gasp!) is? Overall, and perhaps most frustratingly, I felt like Prof. Hill managed to make potentially interesting material boring and inaccessible.

I was told that this class was an easy science credit--a class for athletes, etc. THIS IS NOT THE CASE. i found this class very difficult--tests are really hard and cover a lot of material in the book. It's not really a psychology or biology class--covers a wide range of random topics.

Prof. Hill teaches at a pretty slow pace and repeats things a lot, which may have seemed boring to some but I actually found it helpful. He posts his lecture notes online and lets you drop an exam. It is NOT HARD to get a B in this class if you go to lecture. If you want an A then you actually have to read. Overall, I found the material interesting and would recommend taking this class.

This was meant to be an interesting and fun class; however, this professor doesn't know anything. He reminds me of a professor in the 70's that would come to class high. I think I could teach the class better and his test suck more than he does. I feel sorry to psych. majors for having to struggle through this none sense.