Wormington is knowledgeable about his subject and makes the information interesting; however, he is very partial toward his "favorite" students. He prefers females to males (most of his RAs are female) and he tends to be more open to their discussion. His major fault is the fact that he is overly subjective in his grading. If he doesn't like you, it pretty much means you're getting a bad grade, regardless of how much effort you put in to the course or how well your peers judge your knowledge of the subject-matter. He is also rather inappropriate with his female students, and has made several feel rather uncomfortable by smothering them with excessive attention and even offering to take them out to dinner. He is smart and knows the biology, but he is not a good teacher in the traditional sense. I take it I was one of the students he "didn't like", because he made himself thoroughly unavailable to sit down with me out of class to help improve my performance or to discuss difficult concepts. Compared to the other ~40-50 professors I have had at UVa, he is easily my least favorite. I respect that he knows what he's talking about, but he really should not be teaching a class that is based heavily on discussion. He is far too subjective and is not open for disagreement. Considering the field of molecular biology is every-changing, and that there is a massive amount of controversy/disagreement over biological theory, his subjectivity and stubbornness render him unfit to teach such a course.