All Ratings and Reviews for James Gimzewski
I didn't attend many lectures because his powerpoints were pretty much directly from the book. You're probably better off reading the book if you plan on learning something. I suppose he's a decent professor but I didn't go to many lectures to know anyway. The midterms were fair and his final was ridiculously hard. I walked out wanting to cry. But I ended up with an A- in the class so I suppose the curve was pretty high. If you had to choose between Gimzewski and Baugh, take Gimzewski!
This guy is a RIOT. Read this review carefully if you really want to know the skinny on Prof. Gim.
Gimzewski worked at IBM Zurich for some 25 years where he invented, with his group, a number of truly amazing devices now commonly used in the fields of both chemistry and physics. Basically, he's a genius. A few months after I finished the course I heard on national news that he's invented tabletop cold fusion (it really is amazing; I suggest checking it out online).
As far as YOU are concerned, this guy is the absolute typical physics genius. He comes in late, always looks like he hasn't slept in a few days, stumbles and mumbles all over the place, and is truly hilarious to watch. His lectures fly in every direction and the frequency with which they coincide with the subject matter is about the same as that of an electron tunneling through a brick wall (oh you'll find out soon). He seems to be a nice guy, but he's just too out there to really help at all. He believes big time in partial credit, so if you learn the material on your own, write down all you know on his tests and you'll do fine. Don't expect any straight answer from this guy; don't expect to have any idea what grade you'll receive until final grades are in.
It's a wild ride, but hey this is freshman honors chem., what the heck did you expect?
Better than Baugh or Neuhauser. Midterms and finals are multiple choice, while the quizzes are free response. He's okay.
He's basically the epitome of the nutty professor. He doesn't do a good job at explaining concepts and its obvious teaching really isn't his first priority. This man is a giant in his field and if you ask him about STMs during office hours I'm sure he'll come to like you. On the other hand, all the midterms and finals were multiple choice so it wasn't very hard to get a good grade.
Gimzewski is a genius in his field, take him if you're willing to work really hard or if you have a passion for chemistry.
Well well well. First of all, I need to say that the professor is very brilliant and knowledgeable when it comes to chemistry. He has written about 15 scientific publications. However, he can't relate well to teaching the material to less knowledgeable students. His lectures are so above what you actually need to know. It's pointless to go to his lectures. Just go to the discussion and read the book. That is your only chance. If you go to lectures, you'll become more confused. The quizzes and midterms are fair, but they are somewhat tricky and detailed. The final is the hardest test I've ever taken in my life. It was 20 free response questions and all I knew were 2 questions. Good luck. You will need it.
I think Professor Gimzewski has been reading these reviews...I recently took him for 20A and he was really not all that bad. He started bringing in his tablet and hooking it up to the projector making his lectures a lot more coherent. He's very interesting to talk to during office hours, you can ask him endless questions and he will keep answering until the office hour is over.
He seems a lot more prepared in comparison to the previous reviews. Yes, he'll mumble about something for a bit or just point to a formula and say "just use that" but normally he explains everything pretty thoroughly.
All the other reviews basically sums it up: he's strange, he mumbles, and he can't teach. His midterm and final are relatively hard, but if you just read the book and study a little bit, then you can easily get a B in the class. His lectures are completely useless, since you'll be so confused by his teachings and he doesn't know how to simplify abstract concepts. If you have to take Chem20a, then you should be a little good with math and able to understand through reading. Also, I advise you to take advantage of the TAs, since they'll do a much better job of explaining chemistry. I probably went to a total of 6 lectures but to all discussions and read the rest of the quarter, and still got a B.
I have two words for this guy: He SUCKS. Don't every take him
This guy looks like he came straight out of a lab with his excentric scientist look. Now while that may mean that he does know his stuff, it also means that he has a very minimal ability in conveying it to his students.
He goes into extreme (advanced) detail about many aspects of the curriculum, which are obviously over any first quarter chemistry student's head. Many of the things he talks about in lecture have very little relevance to what you're actually supposed to be learning
As people have said, you can get through this class by studying on your own, and hope that you don't get the same TA as I did (who wrote all 3 quizzes and maybe the midterms?).
Did this review contain...
Thank you for the report!
We'll look into this shortly.