[Kathy2]

I had a very difficult time in this class. Please keep in mind that I already took this course under another professor and dropped in halfway through. So it probably shouldn't have been as hard as it was.

I had a lot of problems with this course. The actual content itself was kind of difficult. I think it would be better to have the course split into two separate courses, maybe one in second year and one in third year. There is a LOT of information to take in. The information was interesting - we studied tornadoes, tsunamis, volcanoes, earthquakes, etc. But there was also some boring stuff: soils, coastlines, waves, etc.

The mark breakdown was:
Online Quizzes - 20%
Midterm - 25%
Group Assignment - 25%
Final - 30%

The group assignment was pretty good. In groups of four or five, we had to make PSAs for a disaster in a certain area. It wasn't too difficult, but a little hard to design with five peoples' input. Before we handed in the final assignment, we had to hand in a contract and an outline.

The midterm was very hard. Everyone did so poorly that the prof added 15% worth of bonuses at the end of the course. The questions were incredibly specific and I guessed on almost everything. Tons of people complained on Avenue - more than I've ever seen complain about an exam. Even if you studied really hard, you probably didn't do very well.

The setup of the course was the biggest pain in the butt for me. The prof was always late with grades, assignment descriptions, etc. I think all the assignment due dates (contract, outline and final assignment) were pushed back because she was delayed in giving us the info to do the assignment. My midterm room didn't even get into the room until 10-15 minutes after the start time, which was pretty stressful.

Overall, I wouldn't recommend this course. I didn't take it because I thought it was a "bird" course, but I thought it would at least be decent. It ended up being my hardest course this term - maybe one of the worst from my four years at Mac. The prof is very nice. I went to her office hours a few times, she answers emails and questions on Avenue, she gave us the bonus assignments - she tried to make the course doable. I appreciate that she did all that. But everything was just such a mess. I would avoid this course if possible.

Who's the prof? Will she be teaching it again next sem?

UPDATE (because I can't edit the original post): I just got my grade for the course and I did really well. Having said that, I would have much preferred taking a course I enjoyed and received a much lower mark - rather than dealing with the stress of this course all term and come out with a great mark.

The prof teaching the course is Dr. Sonnenburg and since she is a sessional prof she probably won't be teaching it again. I think this course is a lot easier if you have a bit of background knowledge in the subject and have an interest in it. I took this course last year when it had a bit of a different set up and it seemed like the exam and midterm were made to bring people's marks down. This definitely isn't a good course for people to take if they are just looking for a bird course and really aren't interested in the subject or don't have any prior knowledge.

Yes, the prof did got back on her word a few times such as not needing to read the text book for the midterm or quizes, even though some questions came word for word from the textbook. Or very small details from some random charts. The midterm marks weren't that low (average was 66, which was the lowest class average for any part of this course). Alot of people just gave her a hard time because she led us to believe that the midterm would be the same difficulty as our quizzes which everyone was averaging over 80% on.


To compensate for this she originally said that we could do a bonus quiz for a maximum of 5% bonus, and a bonus essay on a 2010 disaster for a maximum of 10% bonus (so potentially an extra 15% on our final grade). However, at the end of the course she probably realized that class average would be ridiculously high, and she didn't have the time or the TAs to mark 500 bonus essays as well as our PSAs. So in the end she added 15 marks to our final exam score if you submitted both items (which was originally out of 80, I think around 15% of the class finished with a grade over 100%), the exam was not hard to begin with- way easier than the midterm.

The PSAs were pretty easy since you had so much time, and you had small parts do every few weeks. Just be detailed, i.e. street names, building names, maps (you couldn't just make up info about a random place). The class average for the PSAs was 83%.

She did a pretty good job with the course for not having any TAs until the exam, she marked everything. If you are a science, or geo student with an interest in or previous knowledge of natural disasters this is a really good course and was a great mark booster. Most of my friends got double digits, and 3/4 of the members in my PSA group got 12s. The only difference for future courses, is that there will probably be 2 midterms instead of having a PSA, and she probably won't have bonus marks.

Originally Posted by Steady

To compensate for this she originally said that we could do a bonus quiz for a maximum of 5% bonus, and a bonus essay on a 2010 disaster for a maximum of 10% bonus (so potentially an extra 15% on our final grade). However, at the end of the course she probably realized that class average would be ridiculously high, and she didn't have the time or the TAs to mark 500 bonus essays as well as our PSAs. So in the end she added 15 marks to our final exam score if you submitted both items (which was originally out of 80, I think around 15% of the class finished with a grade over 100%), the exam was not hard to begin with- way easier than the midterm.

Did you take this in term 1 or term 2? Because this is exactly what happened to my class in term 1. She said we had a potential of earning 15% worth of bonus marks overall, but in the end she didn't want to mark everything, so she added the marks to our exam which only ended up being 5% worth of bonus marks overall.

Yeah, I took it in term 1. I don't know if she'll be doing it for term 2. It was probably a combination of not wanting to mark the bonus essays, and realizing the averages would be too high. A 15% increase to our final grade would have been pretty ridiculous, especially the bonus was only to compensate for the low average on the midterm, and the midterm was only worth 25%.

Has anyone taken this class over the summer? If so, how was it?

My boyfriend received his first 12 haha and it was this course! Funny thing is he got a 63 % on the first midterm. As for Sonnenburg, he really enjoyed her teaching style and said she gives away good hints for the exams as well as being approachable! He mention most people think it is a bird course which it isn't but if you study, take good notes you should be fine.

It sounds like the course was a lot better in second term. I thought it was a mess in first term.

I have to cut the professor some slack for doing everything herself, but administrative issues were the worst part of this course. Like Kathy, I was 15 minutes late getting into the room for the midterm, and had a test in a class right after, so it's not as though I could stay late to make up for it.

The PSA was very easy - almost too easy for a university course. There was so much time to work on it, and when split between 4 people, it required minimal effort on all members' parts.

The midterm wasn't difficult for me, but that's because I studied the textbook. Like Chris said, the professor said that the midterm and quizzes wouldn't likely contain textbook material. However, she also hinted that the textbook was important to have on the first day of lectures. I don't think there was a single question on the last two quizzes that wasn't word for word out of the textbook and not in the lecture notes. The midterm wasn't difficult, though it was very detailed - I can see why people had trouble with it. Again, it was a lot of textbook material.

The amount of bonus marks she intended on giving us was ridiculous. She complained on a number of occasions that the course is seen as a bird course, and warned us that it wasn't. But as soon as people complained that they didn't do well on the midterm, she handed out bonus marks. Then she realized that wasn't a good idea, and changed it again to adding the marks to our final exam.

Overall, the material was really interesting. Dr. Sonnenburg was an excellent lecturer, and she was really great in office hours. I don't know if she taught any courses before this one (she got her doctoral degree during first term, a couple months in) without TAs, so she may have just had trouble with it - it was a huge class, after all. Considering she did everything herself, I think she did a pretty good job. Consistency was the only major issue, really. The levels of difficulty were all over the map (midterm significantly harder than anything else in the course), and the bonus marks would have been unnecessary if she hadn't implied that the midterm would be very general and lecture-oriented.

Took it with Sonnenberg in Term 2. She gave bonus quiz (5%). Easy 11-12.

Did anyone have Riller as their prof? I checked ratemyprofs.com and he doesnt look ideal...

I have heard that he is horrible. dont take riller or rink.

Originally Posted by mike4

Did anyone have Riller as their prof? I checked ratemyprofs.com and he doesnt look ideal...

I have had Riller for this course and he definitely was not a good prof. I would definitely recommend staying away from this course if he is teaching it.

this course did have a lot of material to remember, but it wasn't too difficult. i had sonnenburg and she was new at the course when i took it so she wasn't the greatest. i've heard the course has changed since then though and got a bit tougher. lectures weren't really mandatory because everything was posted online, and having no extra labs or tutorials was great. not a bad elective