i am afraid that i might choose the tough one and get low marks...
which one is more fair and generous?

Any advice?

Thnx.


ps: Chris is my pro for math 1F03 term1. is it necessary for me to choose the same professor?

Mclean is the best Moore is way too slow

I'm pretty sure it's the TAs that mark the tests...

I'd say Yazinski. McLean's good, but I think Yazzy, as a friend likes to call him, has the upper hand. Just search posts for his name, or ask anyone who's taken 1L03 with him, to see why.

But yes, it usually is the TAs who mark tests, not the profs.

And no, it's not necessary for you to choose the same professor as 1F03.

Originally Posted by Entropy

I'd say Yazinski. McLean's good, but I think Yazzy, as a friend likes to call him, has the upper hand. Just search posts for his name, or ask anyone who's taken 1L03 with him, to see why.

But yes, it usually is the TAs who mark tests, not the profs.

And no, it's not necessary for you to choose the same professor as 1F03.

i am getting confused
which one is better?

many students thought the 1L03 Yazinski taught confusing last year.

and i got different views about chirs.

Hmm.. I'd say McLean cause he goes at a nice pace. Moore can be slow... Not to mention that last term, McLean was the one who was really in charge of writing the exams. Most of the examples that he used in class were similar to those that appeared on the tests . You don't have to choose the same professor but judging from your options, I'd say sticking with McLean isn't a bad choice at all.

Hope that helps!

ill try to make your choice a little easier. I hated math in high school never got more than a 72. I ended up taking 1F03 with Mclean and everything clicked. I ended up finishing with a 12 (90-100). I also took 1M03 because of Mclean and I got a 12 again. He also has an interesting sense of humor and overall is one of the best profs at mac.

I've heard good reviews about both McLean and Yazinski.

Hmm, I've had both Moore and McLean, and I've heard good things about Yazinski.

Moore is definitely slower, for sure, but he is a good prof, in my opinion.
I think everyone just gets impatient with him, because of his slowness, and I'll admit, it can be annoying, at times. He likes to get off topic, as well. He definitely goes through examples, though, and will help if you ask. He cares for his students a lot.

As for McLean, he's hilarious.
He's also a great prof, but moves a lot quicker than Moore.
Also goes through a bunch of examples and helps if you ask him.

I definitely recommend both.
Good luck!

Side note: Yazinski is hot hot hot hot hot!

To the Original Poster: Regardless of which section you are in, you will be writing the same midterm. TA's (possibly different from your 'course TA') are also most likely to be the graders of your midterms and while they may make mistakes (they're only human), you can always take any discrepancies up with your professors/course TA.

The only reason to pick one prof over another (in Math at least) is their lecturing style, or if a specific time works better for your schedule. People have been giving you some insight in this way. Myself, of the 3 mentioned, I think Yazinski and McLean are great choices because of sheer enthusiasm. I've never really interacted with Dr. Moore and so I can't really comment. To me, a prof's enthusiasm is one of the most important things since, let's face it, learning math from a stuffed-shirt Yale graduate who acts superior isn't that fun.

Also, one other thing to keep in mind is that people are opinionated (stating the obvious here). One person may love a certain professor's teaching style and another may hate the same prof's style. It's all about what you value, and so you're bound to get some conflicting answers...try not to get frustrated or impatient, everyone has a little bit to add to the topic.

Hopefully that clears things up a little!

Originally Posted by lawleypop

Side note: Yazinski is hot hot hot hot hot!

I'd do him.

As for which prof, I would say Yazinski. I've never taken a class with him but from when I sat in 1L03 with Mr. Entropy to scout him, he was fantastic. He's got a great sense of humour and loves to get to know students on a more personal level as opposed to just an in-class thing. He also offered me to write the exam for funsies.

Great man.

I had Yazinski for Stats 1L03; I struggle a good deal with Math. It's just not my forte and I get stumped by linear equations on a Math exam (no I'm not lying) when I panick. That being said, while I didn't love the material, I loved the class. I asked Dr. Yazinski a million questions via email and except for a few around exam time, he answered almost every single one with detailed explanations and tips on how to improve. He's really passionate about math and that can be why people are worried about his lecturing. He goes at an immensely slowed down pace for his students compared to how he himself thinks, but he's incredibly dedicated to his class. He routinely asks us for feedback on how to make things better and while all his students may not think like he does, he will break it down for you as necessary. I did learn a lot about how to think from his class, even if I don't always remember what mutually exclusive was. If you do have him, I would suggest you ask him if he can write his notes out instead of the Powerpoints. He used a lot for Stats 1L03 but when he began writing out problems for reviews, everybody in class got it. But I think that's just because how we've been taught Math; we learned addition on a blackboard, not a computer. I ended the class with a double digit even though the chain rule makes me nervous.

Originally Posted by eullwm

I'd do him.

As for which prof, I would say Yazinski. I've never taken a class with him but from when I sat in 1L03 with Mr. Entropy to scout him, he was fantastic. He's got a great sense of humour and loves to get to know students on a more personal level as opposed to just an in-class thing. He also offered me to write the exam for funsies.

Great man.

Damn, this is one of those instances where I would reply with "I DID do him" but there's too many consequences to saying that and I don't wanna deal.

Anywho, here's my real 2 cents:

1) Moore is slow as hell. Really nice and he cares, but he's SO SLOW. I also thought (when I took 1m03) that he didn't prepare us enough for the midterms...What we saw in class didn't even compare to what we saw in midterms, in terms of examples. The examples were always so basic.

2) Yazinski is hot. I had him the first semester he was teaching (I think he said he was straight outta grad school and this was his first time teaching) and I thought that he went a little quick at times and he was VERY wordy. Wordy and math don't go well together. I could never tell if he was joking when he started explaining a theory in a super fast and wordy way or if he really thought it would help me to understand. I thought his examples were more representative of midterms, which was nice.

But he's SO FINE. And stylish.

From the comments here though, he seems to have improved?

Avoid Moore. He goes at a snail's pace.
He taught material that would be on the exam the day before.

Yazinski, only had for a few classes but he goes really fast. He explained it pretty well and would highly recommend.