The course content and the way Professor Hunter laid it out was interesting however there were definitely some issues with organization and structure. Professor Hunter does not use slides and does not record his lectures so its crucial to be in lecture and take good notes or have a friend at every lecture to get notes from or else you will definitely miss things. I didn't find this to be an issue because I enjoyed listening to his lectures although sometimes they were hard to follow or he talked quietly so I would suggest sitting close to the front. My main issue with this class was the structure and organization. Exams were a combination of multiple choice and short/long response but were extremely hard to finish in the 50 minute class period. He ended up scrapping the first exam entirely because it was so long and was somehow "unedited" but he gave us the option to still have the grade count if we thought we did well (I wish he had given us our scores back before making us choose whether to count the grade or not because this forced us to take a gamble on how well we did, especially because exams make up so much of the course grade). However, the second exam did not feel any shorter and was just as difficult to finish in the allotted time. Further, he relied entirely on the TAs to grade exams and papers, meaning it took months for us to get grades back and we never got to see feedback on either. Also, the original syllabus did not mention papers but 3 weeks into the semester he decided to add them as well as 2 books to read that the papers were based off of. All of that being said, the exam questions weren't overly difficult and pretty closely followed what he talked about in class. I usually studied my notes and made a Quizlet in the 2-3 days leading up to the exams and did well on them. I did find the course content interesting and enjoyed Professor Hunter's unique way of teaching (his goal was to teach sociology like a story, rather than jumping from topic to topic). Hopefully some of the issues we had this semester get resolved and the class goes more smoothly moving forward.
#tCFF23

The class isn't hard if you learn what your TA wants. The TA does all of the grading, so learning to style your writing to what the TA wants is all you have to do to do well in this class. The class consists of 3 exams (Dutch knockout), a paper (critical review of Goffman), and a data analysis project. The Goffman paper was probably the worst, mostly because the time it took the read the book, but if you read the book and write the paper early enough to take to your TA for review, you will be fine. Highly recommend this class as an elective, but do be prepared for very monotone and repetitive lectures.

I personally thought the lecture was super boring because of the way Hunter presented the information. The actual material was super interesting though. My TA was annoying ad she took off points on my essay because she didn't believe that my statement that "UVA is a toxic academic atmosphere because it is more about competition then actually learning".

I LEARNED SO MUCH FROM THIS CLASS! Professor Hunter ONLY TALKS so record every lecture and take good notes. The expensive textbook is super boring and not necessary at all. Only a few online readings will be tested on. The content is amazing and this class clarifies lots of confusions and dilemmas of the modern days. I seriously think every single student should take it even if just as a 1 credit pass/fail class! Understand and recite every pages of the note and you will do good in the test. The TA matters a lot and if you can have Vasfiye Topak, CHOOSE HER! She is the best!

I loved this class and Prof. Hunter. He made the course very interesting and I enjoyed the lectures. Reading is not very necessary except for a few of the online readings. The exams were all based on lectures. Hunter does not use a power point or anything, he just talks and you have to write it down. Grading depends on your TA but mine wasn't bad. Discussions were 20% of the overall grade so you have to go to them. I studied my a$$ off and got a B which really surprised me because I felt very prepared. But I still enjoyed the class and everything I learned in it.

Prof. Hunter is a wonderful lecturer. He is extremely passionate about every topic he talks about, or seemingly so, and his own zeal for the subject makes it easy to pay attention. I will give fair warning though that he does not always speak loudly enough to be heard in the back of the hall so just be sure to get there early enough for a seat that is close to the front. This is a class in which tests are based practically solely on lectures, so attendance is pretty much mandatory to pass (also the reason I gave it a 0 for reading, if you actually read, they assign around a couple chapters or articles a week). Speaking of tests, it may not be explicitly mentioned, but some TAs grade these tests based on the length of your written answers. There are two midterms, a final, and two short (3ish pg) papers. Each test is comprised of a few multiple choice questions, somewhere around 7 short answer questions, and an essay or two. I personally found it difficult to finish these tests within the time given. Luckily enough though, prof. Hunter operates on a Dutch Knockout system (if your avg on the final is higher than on your other two midterms, he'll take your final avg as your total test avg). Overall, I enjoyed the professor, but your TA is CRUCIAL. I wasn't the luckiest in that department, so I would know.

just don't take this class. It's not really an "easy A" it's just an "easier class."
Also all the reviews that saw that Prof Hunter is a "amazing storyteller" is bs. He lectures like he's reading from a speech/textbook. There's so many better Soc classes out there. I fell asleep every class during the 2nd half of the semester. He's so boring.

As a whole, I would recommend this class because I didn't find it that difficult. The material is entirely lecture based: no powerpoints. James also doesn't allow computers, so you have to sit in the lecture hall and write down every single thing he says. He tries to make the lecture more manageable with funny stories and examples. Don't buy the textbook (I didn't and I did fine). There are supplemental readings on collab you're supposed to read. Just skim them. There are only 1 or 2 questions on the readings on the exams and you can probably figure them out from the lecture. I found the discussion section to be very useful. One reading you definitely should read for the exam is the Sociological Imagination. You also have to read the Goffman book because you have to write a paper on it. Vasfiye was the best TA!! She really took the time to break down the material discussed in the lecture and help you understand it. She was also not too harsh of a grader. Exams were not difficult at all if you know the material, but get ready for a lot of writing, especially on the final. Just read over your notes a couple times and memorize the definitions given in the lecture and you'll do fine.

This class was pointless unless you want to major in Sociology. The professor spends most of the class preaching his own opinions and views. These views often seem as if their only point is to get a rise out of the students. Grading tends to be harsh depending on the TA. Josh Chen (my TA) has a strong understanding and was very helpful in discussion. The tests are 10 multiple choice, 6 short answer and 1 long essay in 50 minutes. The time is not sufficient to complete all the writing to the level at which they expect it leading to lower scores on the tests. Overall do not reccomend this test.

This class is 100% lecture based. The material seems easy to comprehend, and the exams are a bit tricky and pull obscure details (from lectures) but should not bee too bad if you study. However, my TA (Lin) was awful. She was an extremely subjective grader, assigning grades on how a paper/assignment "felt" to her. She would give you a 90 and say "very very good," and based of that you can imagine how poorly average papers got graded. If you asked her why points were taken off or what comments meant, she gave very vague answers and used circuitous logic. Do not take it with Lin, your grade will be lower than if you take a different TA's section.