I can take biology 1M03 either term, so i wanted to base my decision on which term has a better prof.

Term 1 is taught by Stone or Dudley

Term 2 is taught by Quinn or Evans.

If anyone has had these profs and can let me know which one/ones you liked best that would be super helpful! Thanks

Evans and Quinn were pretty tough when I took it, but then again, I didn't really keep up with my readings.... so that was pretty much my fault.

I think Stone/Dudley were better in terms of easiness, but I really liked Evans/Quinn's lecturing. Evans especially was really passionate about his research and he'd always mention frogs + his findings during his travels to Galapagos and Indonesia.

His tests weren't as fun though. I remembered Evans asking a really dumb question on the midterm,
"How many legs does a tardigrade have?" >__> and the choices were like 2,4,6,8,10.

They removed the question later on though, but still..... haha

If you put in time/effort for BIO 1M03. you'll do well, but sometimes the content can get realllly dry.

I've only had Dr. Evans and Quinn second semester

I was not a fan of the 1M03 course in general but Dr. Evans was really nice and funny in his lectures while Dr. Quinn was interested in what he was teaching.

Evans also mainly used his lecture notes for testing while Quinn used a combination of textbook and lectures (the notes were just supplementary to what he was saying so if you didin't pay attention, the notes would not make sense)

I can't comment on Dudley but Stone's midterm was a joke compared to Quinn/Evans midterm from what I heard. During lectures, Stone basically read the posted slides and unnecessarily changed some of the wording like "random" to "stochastic." The only tricky thing from Stone was his exam questions which had options like one statement is true, all statement are true, none of the above are true or something like that.

I had quinn/evans. Evans teaches by the textbook, and by that I mean he goes in order of the textbook, and everything gets covered. He integrates all of the information into his research, which is frogs. I really liked him because he was extremely passionate, and if you read the textbook, you'll do well. I wouldn't take extensive notes in class, because he talks really fast. What I did was read and take notes before hand. Then, during lecture, add in to my notes about what he said, so I can re-enforce what I had learned.
Quinn is similar, except, he doesn't teach by the textbook. His lectures are mostly applications of the material, not teaching of the material, so you have to read before hand. I can't stress this enough. You won't be learning during his lecture [not the material anyways]. Quinn is also passionate about his research, and integrates it into his lecture like Evans.
They are both lovely profs, but in terms or ease, not so much.

And I remember the tardigrade question...I got it correct :( but I didn't get to keep the mark. *shakes fist*

I'm wondering the same thing, OP. From what I gather, Stone/Dudley don't teach as well or effectively but they exams are easier. On the other hand, you will probably learn more with Evans/Quinn but the exams will be a lot harder/more ridiculous. (This is just what I found online, of course, so take it with a grain of salt).

When I was in first year, I had Stone/Quinn. I hated the course and don't really think it should be required for Life Sci I, but that's an issue for another time.

Anyways, Stone did nothing but read off the slides, but his questions were easy. Quinn had harder questions and more work was required for his part of the course but he was passionate about what he was teaching us and, overall, was a much better lecturer.

I can't comment on either Dudley or Evans so I don't know how much help this will be.

I also had Stone/Quinn in first year so I can't comment on Dudley or Evans.

Stone was incredibly boring, he read off his slides and was very **** about details from the textbook, like replacing the word "will" with "may". His MC questions were really annoying, he frequently had "A and B", "the question is incorrect", "A except ____" as options. He also asked for some specific details from the How Humans Evolved textbook. Also people talked all throughout class and he spoke kind of softly.. not a good experience.

Quinn's classes were much more interesting, he engaged the class a lot more and his questions were way easier imo. You just had to read the slides, or be there in class and there were few to no tricks/really specific details.

So Stone has hard multiple choice, but he is still easier than Quinns/Evans?

Originally Posted by brady23

So Stone has hard multiple choice, but he is still easier than Quinns/Evans?

When I had Stone and Quinn, I found Quinn to be much easier. His multiple choice questions were less tricky and focused on less specific details than Stone's horrible MC questions.

But I don't know how Quinn is now, that was 2 years ago.

The course material wasn't hrd at all. A lot of memorizing. I took is with Evans and Quinn, and found that Evans talked waaay too fast.

I had evans and quinn. They were both really passionate but i found their tests to be unfair and actually they got alot of complaints and even a couple petitions against them. my friends had stone and they found him to be very boring but really easy.. so i guess if stone is better in terms of ease.