Semester.ly

Johns Hopkins University | AS.060.107

Introduction to Literary Study

3.0

credits

Average Course Rating

(4.33)

This course serves as an introduction to the basic methods of and critical approaches to the study of literature. Some sections may have further individual topic descriptions; please check in SIS when searching for courses.

Fall 2012

(4.58)

Fall 2012

(4.42)

Fall 2013

(4.56)

Fall 2013

(5.0)

Fall 2014

(4.67)

Fall 2014

(4.73)

Spring 2013

(4.43)

Spring 2013

(3.0)

Spring 2014

(4.14)

Spring 2015

(4.01)

Spring 2023

(4.12)

Spring 2023

(4.32)

Fall 2012

Professor: Adam Grener

(4.58)

The best aspects of the course included the well-structured setting, in which a wide range of literary topics were covered and the intel ectual class discussions. The worst aspects of the course included excessive readings and heavy grading that often focused too much on the technical aspects of writing. The course would be improved if the class discussions were more focused and topic specific in order for students to have a clearer understanding of the concepts. Prospective students should know that this is a great introductory English and writing course. There is some extensive reading involved, but students will find the workload very manageable.

Fall 2012

Professor: Mark Thompson

(4.42)

The best aspect of this course was the interesting lectures delivered by a pleasant and very knowledgeable professor. Students got to explore a range of literary concepts and diverse readings. The worst aspects of this course included the professor’s lack of feedback on student essays and assignments, as well as the lack of interaction in the class because of its large size. The course would be improved if the students received feedback on their work and if the class engaged in more discussions. Prospective students should know that this is an exciting course for students passionate about literature, but it involves lots of reading and writing.

Fall 2013

Professor: Jared Hickman, Eric Sundquist

(4.56)

The best aspects of this course included in-depth discussions that engage students and stimulate the intellect. However, some students felt that this was a work-intensive course for a 100 level course, and that al of the writers were men writing about men. Some suggestions for improvement included expanding the reading list to incorporate a diverse group of writers and topics. Prospective students should be interested in literary theory and dedicate a fair amount of time for reading before class. The class is recommended for students who do not have a background in literature or English.

Fall 2013

Professor: Christopher Nealon

(5.0)

The best aspects of this course included the professor’s zealous energy for the subject, as well as the interesting and board range of reading materials. Students found that the course focused on modern literature rather than classics, so they enjoyed the change. Suggestions for improvement included adding classical works in addition to the modern pieces, providing shorter, more concise reading materials. Prospective students should be prepared to meet with the professor throughout the semester to clarify questions and to be prepared to discuss the readings in class to prepare for the writing assignments.

Fall 2014

Professor: Douglas Mao

(4.67)

126The range of topics covered in the literature, engaging in-class discussions and a professor who is available and knowledgeable were the best aspects of this course. Students gave high praise to the professor’s blend of lecture and discussion and guided the discussions without taking over. The uneven distribution of the readings was the worst aspect of the class. More opportunity for one-on-one meetings was a common suggestion for improving the course. Prospective students should know that there was a lot of reading for the class, but the professor was interesting and the class discussions could be fun.

Fall 2014

Professor: Andrew Daniel

(4.73)

This class was highlighted by an engaging and knowledgeable professor, a wide variety of readings, and interesting class discussions. Many students gave the professor very high praise. The worst aspect of this class was the uneven workload – some weeks the reading was minimal while on others it became burdensome. More even distribution of the reading assignments and more time for the final essay were both suggested as improvements to the course. Prospective students should know that students found the course was great for humanities and STEM majors. The class and professor were highly recommended.

Spring 2013

Professor: Mark Thompson

(4.43)

The best aspects of this course included the variety of texts used, the analytical approach to the content, and the discussion-based format. Students also appreciated that the instructor was fun and engaging. Some students felt that more guidance was needed in regards to the writing assignments and that the reading assignments were too lengthy. Suggestions included advising students on specifics before papers are assigned and facilitating the group discussions with more rigor. Prospective students should be prepared to take thorough notes as the exams are partially based on in-class content; also, they should be ready to offer criticism, analysis, and their participation in class discussion.

Spring 2013

Professor: Jesse Rosenthal

(3.0)

Some of the best aspects of this course included the in-class discussions and the variety of readings that were assigned. Students also appreciated the smal class size. Some students felt that the class was often dominated by only a handful of students and that, at times, the material (the discussion topics, responses, instructions on how to write stylistically and to properly analyze literature) was too vague. Suggestions included providing the students with more feedback and al owing the students to facilitate and direct the in-class discussions more. Prospective students should keep up with the readings and participate in class discussions.

Spring 2014

Professor: Jonathan Kramnick, Adam Grener

(4.14)

The best aspects of this course were the novels required for reading and class discussions. Many students real y liked the professors, but were not too fond of the course grade being based mostly off of two term papers, and thought the amount of reading was overwhelming. Students also found a lack of feedback and would suggest peer review sessions, fewer novels to read, and a better teaching style as improvements to the quality the course. Prospective students should know that their grade also relies on class participation. They should keep in mind that they wil be doing lots of reading and writing.

Spring 2015

Professor: ENGLISH

(4.01)

The best aspect of this class was its interesting way of analyzing literature. Students learned to look deeper into the works they were studying. Some students felt that expectations were not clearly dictated and the reading load was inconsistent from week to week. This course could be improved by having smaller class sizes, and a grading rubric with clearly outlined expectations for writing assignments. Prospective students will benefit from having a background in humanities or the social sciences.

Spring 2023

Professor: Mary Favret

(4.12)

Spring 2023

Professor: Sharon Achinstein

(4.32)

Lecture Sections

(01)

No location info
J. Hickman
09:00 - 10:15

(02)

No location info
N. Da
13:30 - 14:45