[tammy37]

Peace 1A03 was a really good elective. There are two lectures and a tutorial. We had two essays and no midterm. There is a project worth 50% with the second essay included. There was a lot of reading to be done, but if you are good at writing this course should be a breeze for you. I found the material fairly interesting, but there are some boring readings. Overall it was a great course with an amazing prof!

I hated everything about this class. stupid assignments, too much group stuff where u have to make the "politically correct" argument especially since your likely (like me) to have diverse group partners. a lot of work that wasnt worth much, a know it all professor. but still a pretty easy course to get a good grade.

I took this course in Winter '08, and the prof was Julie Hyde.
First of all, the courseware is EXPENSIVE! And it basically falls apart by the time you're done with the course. What's worse is you can't sell it to someone, because the readings will be different the next time it's offered.

The subject in the course is pretty interesting to be honest, except the prof kind of killed it in lectures. Hyde is VERY passionate about the course, which is a huge plus. However, she tends to drag on lectures. Our first lecture took literally 5 days for her to complete it. She jumps back and forth through topics, and God forbid someone asks her a question or wants to give their opinion. There goes the rest of the lecture basically. I remember there was this one guy that took up half of one lecture arguing about his opinion on peace, it was brutal.

I enjoyed my tutorials, probably because I had a pretty wicked TA. But other than that, it's a class where you can give voice your opinion. If you like to have a fun debate, this is the class for you. Plus, talking a lot gives you a great participation mark!

One huge piece of advice: DO THE READINGS! The whole course is pretty much based upon them, as are lectures. If you fall behind, you're pretty much screwed. And there are question sets for each reading that you hand in every week, so that's another reason why you have to do them.

If I remember right, we had 2 midterms and then one final. The final was brutally easy. The final project was worth 50% - 20% was the group project and 30% was the individual paper. For the group project, I had an 80% and I received a 75% for my paper.

I hated everything about this course too. The courseware was expensive ($100), the lectures were extremely boring, the assignments were stupid and overly difficult, the tutorials were awful and a large portion of your mark is based on group work which is unfair. The lectures were painful to go to and all the TAs she picked out were imo awful.

There was no real marking scheme so it was really unbalanced between a few TAs which turned out to be really unfair imo. There was one TA who would be really easy and hand out As on assignments like candy. Then there were others who were brutal and would fail people. It was ridiculous. Julie Hyde clearly didn't coordinate with her TAs and explain to them a marking scheme for the course. Everyone just got to mark how they felt like it.

I took this course in Fall 07 and a lot of people really hated the course and complained to the TAs about the workload. Apparently the TAs talked to Julie Hyde and from then on she made it easier, but I'm not really sure what was meant by that.

It sounds like the course is still awful but there are less assignments.

Out of all the possible courses to take in first year I definitely would not recommend this one. Even if you're really interested in the subject manner I doubt you'd enjoy the course the way it is taught.

Professor: Colin Salter; he merely elaborated on terms and quotes that were easily understandable to begin with. I thought this class was absolutely pointless. You have to be "politically correct" in all the work regarding this class, leaving no room for one's honest opinion (hippies excluded). Of course, by "politically correct" I mean left-wing extremist. This class is about as one-sided as Bill O'Reilly, but at the opposite end of the spectrum. Awful, awful course. If you are looking for something ridiculously easy yet painful to attend, then this is the course for you.

Peace Studies 1A03 was quite possibly the worst course I have taken at McMaster University (including Organic Chemistry 2A03, Chemistry 1A03 and Kinesiology 1Y03).

Professor Rating: Mrs. Doubleday. First of all this professor has no idea how to organize or structure a class. Our lectures were mostly unorganized and she would go off on tangents that were completely unrelated to the material (her thanksgiving dinner and lobster dinner was one lecture). The assignments and course outline were poorly structured and expectations were poorly conveyed as well, and in addition to this the T.A.s marked this class unfairly in my opinion.

Tutorials were as well poorly structured and did little to facilitate understanding of the readings and material. As well you would never get perfect from any of the T.A.s, which could be seen on Avenue because not a single user would fall into the 100% category.

In the Fall 2011 course, we had a postcard assignment, a reflection paper, and a final. The reflection paper was a 3 page paper which involved going to an activity outside of class that involved peace, particularly the first week of October during Peace Week. From the expectations 20% was supposed to be given to attending and submitting the assignment and 10% was based on excellence. Let me just say that this did not occur and most of the class got 70% on this assignment. This 3 page paper, which was a reflection on your “feelings” was worth 30% of your final grade, more than the final. Next was the postcard assignment, which was worth 25% of your final grade. This consisted of getting an image and putting in a phrase that related to peace studies. The entire class marked this assignment, and was done in class during lecture time.
Let me repeat this, the postcards were marked during class time by the students, as opposed to being taught course material for 2 weeks and being marked by T.A.s.

TL;DR – If you’re in the Faculty of Science and looking for a fair and easy elective, avoid this course like the plague and take a class like Anthro 2G03.

The course is definitely the definition of a bird course. I think I went to lecture a total of 2 times the whole year and managed to go into the exam with an 86. That being said if you are actually interested learning about the subject of peace.. don't take it. And if you plan on going to class to learn something... don't do it, you won't.
That being said for a class I literally put no effort into whatsoever I was pretty satisfied with my grade.

A lot of reading but this is a good course!

The truth is, the course taught by Dr. Doubleday is a you-get-what-you-put-in type course.

If you're really interested in learning some of the material, then you'll appreciate the fact that you get to read works by Paul Farmer, Johan Galtung, Julius Robert Oppenheimer (father of the atomic bomb), Edward Togo Salmon (sound familiar?), and the like. You'll also appreciate that the prof takes time during lectures to break down what you should be getting from the readings - because some of them are difficult - and how to make the connections between them and situations in the real world.

Yes, the postcard and reflection assignment sound a little ludicrous, but they actually make sense when you try considering the outcomes they seek.

If you look at the archetypal university course, you get the sage on the stage (prof) spitting information at you for one hour, while you scribble furiously to ensure that on the assignments and final exam, you've taken in enough information so that when weighed, the products of your academic bulimia deem you worthy of the grade you want. No where in there are you learning, developing skills or gaining knowledge of how any of what you learn really matters.

Now, if you take the pressure off evaluations; if you make the assignments so incredibly arbitrary, students are forced to draw their own connections between course readings and their relationship to the world around them. That is the purpose of the postcard. And, with the reflection, they partake in and reflect on the praxis of the course content. Everyone marks each other's work to illustrate the point that all of you will have different opinions on the subject of peace and conflict resolution, and that each of these opinions are valid and worth being listened to, considered and evaluated.

In short, the couse is an easy 12 if you're willing to let go of your desperate need to have a 12 and actually focus on doing the readings and taking away points from them that help you develop your own perspective on things (i.e. to be more than a sheep).

Live long and prosper!

How was the course work? What were some topics that you guys discussed in class? Were the essays and exam like hard to write or was it based on readings or discussions in class?