Intro to Comparative Ethnic Studies

TAKE THIS CLASS. It changed not only my Columbia experience, but my life. Professor Okihiro is smart, clever, funny, snarky, and really well-versed in his material. I didn't know what Comparative Ethnic Studies was before I took this course as part of my Global Core requirement, but now, I can't help but look at all aspects of my life as affected by society's perceptions of race and ethnicity. Some students were clearly not getting a lot out of it and Facebook-ing the entire lecture. I'm sure you could do that and just cram for the tests, but I think that's a waste of your time. The course gives you the opportunity to really look into yourself and your place in society and figure out who the hell you are and what you're doing and why. The entire student body definitely got more excited about more controversial subjects such as Education, African-American Studies, and Critical White Studies.

I took this class to satisfy my global core requirement. Based on the previous reviews, I expected this class to be really interesting and easy. With that said, I thought this class was a complete joke. From the first day, the professor and TAs encouraged students to develop our own critical ideas about the society. In reality, however, they're telling us what to think and write. They will like your writing if you write exactly what they say in class. If you disagree with their views, they'll think that you're not critical enough. I never fully read any of the assigned articles but simply rephrased what the professor and TA said in class and got an A. The course is easy, but it's really annoying and frustrating to do the work if you're not that interested.

Okihiro's great, but this class is NOT suited for a 175-person lecture. This is a class that requires critical engagement on the part of every student. Ethnic studies is, by nature, an uncomfortable subject for many because it requries the questioning of many of their basic assumptions about truth and identity. Hence, it is not something you can absorb passively - it requires discussion, speech, and dialogue. The readings will mean a different thing to everyone, as will the content of the lectures. Some people implicitly understand the concepts of ethnic studies while others misunderstand it completely or even feel threatened by it. Because of that, it is impossible to learn it passively.

I initially started out not-liking this class. We were thrown immediately into a world full of jargon and post-structuralist writings that I had no experience with, but it seemed like we were expected to implicitly grasp the critical assumptions associated with the course. I only started to 'get it' about halfway through the class, mostly thanks to my great TA. I'm trying to say is that this course is desperately in need of restructuring - it shouldn't have to depend on the discussion sections to do the teaching. I really think that given the right setting, everyone has the potential to understand the project of ethnic studies. It's just a pity because I think that at least half of our class doesn't 'get it' - and I know this from informally talking to many other students.

At the same time, to finally understand what this class is about is a tremendously exciting and liberating experience. The project of ethnic studies itself is extremely, extremely important for anyone even remotely interested in questions about race, identity, and power in society. For that reason alone I would recommend this course, even if the course is not structured ideally. Ethnic studies is many ways a counterbalance to all the ideas that we take for granted in our Western-centric society and institution. What people need to understand is that it's not anti-White or pro-minority. It's simply a class that teaches you how to question ideas that we take for granted as 'truths', and examines how these supposed truths lead to, and continue to influence, the formation of race in our society. It's sometimes difficult to comprehend, but once you achieve the 'critical consciousness' that ethnic studies seeks to instill, it's a great feeling.

As I mentioned earlier, my TA, Dan, was fantastic. Not only did he challenge us and push us past our comfort zones consistently, but he made it enjoyable for us to do it. Dan demanded a lot from each of us, but this expectation meant that he saw us each as people with potential, which was really refreshing. He wouldn't tolerate BSing for answers and would actively question our answers and get us to pursue our thinking further than we were accustomed to. Outside of class, he was extremely friendly, helpful, and willing to engage us substantively about our concerns or questions. Truly a wonderful guy, and probably the reason that I enjoyed this class so much.

I took this class having read all the CULPA reviews for Professor Okihiro and I have to say that while he has his funny moments and clearly knows his material he does NOT know how to teach for a large class. Apparently prior to this semester Intro to Comparative Ethnic Studies had always been a relatively small class where discussion was not only possible but organic. My class however was probably between 150-175 students with around 7 TA's. We would have readings every week (somewhere from 50-100pgs off courseworks) and Professor Okihiro would go over them during class. It was funny though, because he has a way of talking that makes perfect sense when you hear it, but then when it comes time to ID one of the terms you're at a loss.
What was most frustrating about this class however was when we all took the midterm. Each week you have a discussion section with your TA. The number of people in each discussion group ranged in size as we all just chose our discussion section based on the time slot we liked best. Being in one of the larger groups there really wasn't a lot of "discussion" going on; mainly my TA would ask a question and someone would answer. But when it came time for the midterm everyone was stressing out more then they should have been for this class. The main reason being that the terms we were required to know weren't ever clearly defined. When in lecture Okihiro would spend his time giving a history lesson which lead up to the "idea" or "term" that was mentioned in that week's readings and that we'd eventually have to know. He'd then relate the reading to his history lesson. When it came time to define a term he would either ask the class or again give a history lesson. After a lot of panic and stressing out we were all generally pretty relieved by the midterm.There were 5 terms and you had to choose 3 to ID plus write an essay. We all felt we did fairly well but apparently we did too well for Okihiro. When the TA's started grading our papers Okihiro said there were too many A's and B's and thus insisted the TA's go back and be "harsher" in their grading. For those whose jaws are currently sweeping the floor allow ME to DEFINE what THIS IS: Grading Down!!! Apparently in the hour and 15 minutes we were suppose to have written a dissertation worthy of being presented at Oxford.

Okay so bottom line... This is a class that is INSANELY frustrating. You could put massive amounts of work and energy in to doing well and it won't matter because at the end of the day your TA (the one who knows you and has been grading your work) won't be allowed to decide your grade; Okihiro will, and to him you're just another face in crowd---and that's only if you sit in the first 5 rows!

I took Intro to Comparative Ethnic Studies with Professor Okihiro and I absolutely loved the man and the course. He is definitely one of those teachers who truly encourages all sides to participate, but he will, no matter what your opinion is, interrogate you beliefs, presuppositions, and assertions. If you can't question yourself or feel okay being questioned, don't take this class. His scholarly work is also so thorough and elegant that it is like hearing a beautiful symphony especially in comparison with some of the other sloppier academic essays we read from a poorly edited Ethnic Studies book by Johnella Butler.

If you notice: reviews of Professor Okihiro seem sort of polarized. I think most of this has to do with how passionate many people are about the topics discussed in many ethnic studies classes. Many people (sadly it is mostly white people, but also some colored people) don't believe that racialized minorities are actually oppressed in the country and refuse to believe that the "American Way" might have actual structural racism embedded into the system (Look Obama is president, but it's still easier for a white ex-convict to get a job than a black college graduate). Working your individual way up the economic ladder isn't changing the system. Either way you feel about this, I would encourage you to engage in the dialogue of the class with an open mind.

Prof Okihiro did a good job of engaging the class and presenting this material in an organized and interesting manner. The readings he selected for the class are life-changing and fantastic. The lectures are enlightening since Okihiro discusses issues outside of the text, while also addressing any questions or confusion about the text that a student may have. He wants his students to shape the class to some extent, by asking questions or criticizing and commenting on the theories he presents. He loves when students challenge and debate him. This class is awesome and will change the way you view the world and how it works. Everyone at Columbia should take this class.