Mongols in History

I agree with the previous review of Professor Rossabi. I was deceived by the first lecture which was given by a guest speaker from Yale who was much more engaging and better than Professor Rossabi. I regret over and over again that I decided to stay in this class.

Morris Rossabi is someone who can make the most interesting subject the most boring one. He might be knowledgeable in his field but everything he does during lecture is mumbling about things here and there without a direction. I find it extremely hard to focus or even to stay awake during his lecture. The exponentially decreasing attendance rate after the first two, three weeks show how bad the lecture is. It is almost ridiculous that attendance is required for the lectures.

His readings on courseworks were not updated until a few weeks since the semester started. The reading list was updated only after students informed him and the TA that the readings on courseworks had not been updated for years.

He does not show proper respect for other scholars. I remember he used the word “nasty” to describe a number of scholars in his field. Whether the work by those scholars are good or truly bad is something I do not know, but it’s shocking to see such words coming out of a professor during lectures at Columbia.

This was the worst class I have ever taken at Columbia. I took many classes in the ealac department at Columbia and I enjoyed every one of them. If you are considering taking this class for your major, try some other ealac classes. If you are taking this class to fulfill major cultures/global core, DO NOT choose this class. You will regret!

Seldom have I taken the time to comment on a professor on CULPA, but I do so now because students should be better prepared. In addition, Rossabi is a perfect example of why students should have access to course evaluations; students clearly have no idea what Rossabi is like when they sign up for History of the Mongols to fulfill their Core requirements, and cannot leave until it is too late.

To begin: Rossabi does not respect many other scholars in the field of Mongolian studies. He appears to find many of these colleagues contemptible, lest they have approached him from time to time to discuss his opinion over any issues currently in Modern Mongolia.

Second, Rossabi is absent minded. His lectures in no way involve the student and, for a student who is not used to his teaching style, he offers nothing for assistance. His class assumes you have a prior interest in Mongolia; in fact, most students are in the class to become interested in Mongolia, and have taken the class merely because Rossabi is wrongfully labeled as a silver nugget (he is not) on CULPA.

Third, Rossabi is lazy. He does not give any feedback until the moment he submits final grades for the class (except for the midterm). His "evaluations" (a midterm, final, and term paper) are all less than 200 words on his part.

Fourth, Rossabi is just bad. If you take this class and find it interesting, it is because you enjoyed the readings. There can be no other reason to enjoy the class. Sure, Rossabi's Modern Mongolia is a great read. But the writer, when turned into an instructor, becomes abhorrent.

THISS CLASSS SUCKED THE SOUL OUT OF MY BODY little by little every day!!!!!!! Yes I know its tempting especially when it is only once a week on tuesdays and it has a take home final but believe me when I say this, it is not worth your time or your energy. He is a horrible teacher and lacks any ability to coherently convey any organized lesson plan. He merely talks to hear himself talk and by no means does he actually mean for you to learn anything. Nothing is given in chronological order like any normal history class but instead is a jumbled mish mash of information thrown together. He spends a majority of the class talking about how nobody else knows Mongolia as well as he does and they should consult him more because he is such an expert. Well to be honest I think its because nobody else wants to waste all their efforts in life learning about one stupid place. I actually worked hard in this class and went to class, took notes, and although I did not do the readings, it was unnecessary because none of them linked up to what he discussed in class. Then I studied for the midterm and actually really studied making sure to cover every possible choice for an ID which we were told would be people or things that had been repeated over and over again in several lectures. Funny thing is none of the IDs chosen met that criteria but were instead obscure names and groups of people mentioned probably once in passing in lecture. This class FRUSTRATED me to no end and if I had to do it over I would most certainly NOT TAKE THIS CLASS. So be my guest, take the class, but don't say you weren't warned,