I have never bothered to submit a rating, but I feel obligated to share this with future students who might suffer her the way I and 349 other students had to.

You never need to go to lecture. Her lectures are summaries of the books. I recommend the latter. Her method of lecturing is incredibly annoying. Every other word that comes out of her mouth is. "mkay?" or "right?" This sounds absurd, that a professor of her supposed caliber has a tick like this. You never know if she's teaching you something or unsure of herself. And she bounces, literally bounces when she talks. Most professors might pace a little, but she bounces. If you are a student who cannot pay attention to professors who have irritating teaching habits, you will not learn from her.

She is utterly unwilling to help her students. On Finals week, after ignoring her students' emails, she sent an e-mail saying
"I'm very sorry, but I simply can't provide each of you with... answers that you want. This class is just way too large for me... As you prepare for the exam, my best advice is just to study your lecture notes and the course readings. I know that this must be frustrating, but it's the inevitable consequence of being in an intro-level class with over 350 fellow students"

In other words,I don't care about your questions, just read the book. I know it sucks, but it's your fault for taking this course.

She sent out an email and canceled one of her lectures 3 hours prior to when the lecture should have started because she "had a migraine". She spent 5 minutes on the skipped lecture's material at the next lecture.

All of the classmates I have interacted and/or studied with have said that the TA's never know what professor Johns has planned. When we asked them how we should plan for the midterm and final, they all gave the same answer: a shrug and an "I honestly have no idea, she doesn't tell us anything."
Needless to say, we all went into the exam blind and armed with only what the textbook had to teach us.

My Conclusion, Do not take her course if you can help it.

First of all, I am a PS major who has a sincere commitment to the major and curricula. I received an A+ in Prof. Johns' course, along with A+ in every other lower diver PS courses (with exception to PS 6 which I am currently taking). PS 20 isn't the easiest of lower div PS courses (I always believed 10 was) but I found the way Johns taught made it certainly the most boring. Caring about this class became the biggest challenge for me very early in the quarter, which is a shame since I have a real interest in IR.

Essentially, all of her powerpoint lectures are simply crude outlines of the textbook chapters (I think we covered 9 chapters of the Norton book, approximately 1 per week). The overwhelming majority of your performance in her class is dependent on how well you know the textbook's take on IR, rather than IR itself.

I don't usually contribute to this website but feel obligated in doing so for this class. I cannot stress enough how irritating Johns' teaching style is for PS 20 if you actually enjoy the subject. Rather than simply knowing trends, facts, etc. about international relations, the exams test how well you know how the book categorizes and organizes the necessary facts. You might know everything for the exam, but what is more important is how well you know the book/powerpoint lectures PRESENT the material (i.e. these 4 factors are what cause preemptive war; these 3 reasons why there is so much IMF criticism). In this respect, the exams leave you with pretty much no "wiggle room" to come up with your own original answer.

I know Johns is a very intelligent professor, and my guess is that she teaches this class in such a way to make it more juvenile and straightforward for younger students in lower div classes. However, this is no excuse for making the class boring and like a high school history course.

The 6 "policy briefs" are very straightforward and are a pleasant break from the textbook curriculum. I wish this "current events" aspect of the class had a bigger present.

It's a fairly straightforward class on IR, with a very general overview of conflicts, bargaining, trade, development, and financial + monetary institutions and interactions.

You should go to Professor Johns' lectures. It'll be worth your while since you won't need to even bother with the textbook unless you're confused about something. You will have to read the supplementary articles she posts online though, since you're tested on some of them and they won't necessarily be discussed in-depth in lecture.

Grading was pretty simple...midterm, final, attendance at section, and six policy briefs. The exams are both generously curved and the policy briefs are pretty simple if you spend an hour or so doing research. I got an A+ with relatively minimal effort, but take that with a grain of salt since I was already familiar with a lot of the material beforehand. If you know nothing about IR it may be somewhat more challenging.

Professor Johns is also very available and happy to help students. I had to make alternate arrangements to take the final exam, and she was more than happy to accommodate me after I discussed the issue with her during office hours.

Good class overall, would definitely recommend it to anyone interested in IR.

Very easy lower div pol sci class/GE class. Class consists of a midterm, final, 6 2-3 page write ups (lowest 2 grades dropped), and attendance at section. Hardest part of the class was showing up to section, which i found to be a complete waste of time. She is a good lecturer and takes info straight from the book (which is good if you dont go to class cause you can read the book and get the same info since she does NOT post her lecture slides online). I chose to go to class and never opened my book and that worked really well too. The write-ups required minimal effort and i usually did them an hour before they were due. Overall easy class and she has a pretty nice curve too just in case.