MIMG 101
Introductory Microbiology
Description: Lecture, three hours; discussion, one hour. Requisites: Life Sciences 3 and 4, or 7A, 7B, and 23L. Historical foundations of microbiology; introduction to bacterial structure, physiology, biochemistry, genetics, and ecology. Letter grading.
Units: 4.0
Units: 4.0
1 of 2
Most Helpful Review
Fall 2021 - Dr. Pour’s lectures were fairly concise. She seemed to read off the slides a lot but that honestly was because the slides contained all of the conceptual information. The content was interesting and she’d incorporate real-world examples quite often. The Gradescope midterm exams were not too challenging conceptually, but I and many students complained that the exams were too long — many people struggled to finish simply because the amount of time we were given was not sufficient. I extremely disliked how regrade requests were handled, as it was emphasized that putting in a regrade request would regrade your entire exam rather than a specific question, and that we may lose points — which is ridiculous, as it essentially sounds as if they are trying to discourage students from getting a fair grade. Overall, I enjoyed the course with Dr. Pour this quarter, and hope and believe that it will be improved for future students.
Fall 2021 - Dr. Pour’s lectures were fairly concise. She seemed to read off the slides a lot but that honestly was because the slides contained all of the conceptual information. The content was interesting and she’d incorporate real-world examples quite often. The Gradescope midterm exams were not too challenging conceptually, but I and many students complained that the exams were too long — many people struggled to finish simply because the amount of time we were given was not sufficient. I extremely disliked how regrade requests were handled, as it was emphasized that putting in a regrade request would regrade your entire exam rather than a specific question, and that we may lose points — which is ridiculous, as it essentially sounds as if they are trying to discourage students from getting a fair grade. Overall, I enjoyed the course with Dr. Pour this quarter, and hope and believe that it will be improved for future students.
AD
Most Helpful Review
Although I have not yet finished this course, I can already say that Dr. Bradley truly cares about student learning. He is indeed a personable person and teaches microbiology with enthusiasm and humor. One upside to his lecture style is that you will never fall asleep; Dr. Bradley connects with his students, partly because he has that type of personality himself. More importantly, he is akin to the needs of students and so he tries to provide as much help as possible during office hours and in class. He literally tells his students what he expects them to know on the exam, contrary to what some others might have said below me. Dr. Bradley's questions, however, are much more difficult than Dr. Gunsalus' questions. Bradley requires you to understand mechanisms, experiments, and big concepts. He asks a lot of hypothetical "situation" questions so that you can apply your knowledge. If you attend his office hours, he is always willing to help in any way. I have found that he is increasingly willing to give you hints about what he likes if you ask him. But... as I already said, his questions are not as easy as Gunsalus'. Anyhow, this is an excellent course, independent of the instructors. I am impressed with the topics they chose to teach because these topics covered a wide span of topics, which caused me to stay interested.
Although I have not yet finished this course, I can already say that Dr. Bradley truly cares about student learning. He is indeed a personable person and teaches microbiology with enthusiasm and humor. One upside to his lecture style is that you will never fall asleep; Dr. Bradley connects with his students, partly because he has that type of personality himself. More importantly, he is akin to the needs of students and so he tries to provide as much help as possible during office hours and in class. He literally tells his students what he expects them to know on the exam, contrary to what some others might have said below me. Dr. Bradley's questions, however, are much more difficult than Dr. Gunsalus' questions. Bradley requires you to understand mechanisms, experiments, and big concepts. He asks a lot of hypothetical "situation" questions so that you can apply your knowledge. If you attend his office hours, he is always willing to help in any way. I have found that he is increasingly willing to give you hints about what he likes if you ask him. But... as I already said, his questions are not as easy as Gunsalus'. Anyhow, this is an excellent course, independent of the instructors. I am impressed with the topics they chose to teach because these topics covered a wide span of topics, which caused me to stay interested.
Most Helpful Review
Winter 2017 - Reading the reviews posted on here before I expected a hellish professor but I have to say the people that wrote about him are crazy. Is the class hard? Yes. Is there a lot of material? Yes. But I liked him a as a lecturer. I found him funny. I even liked learning about the sewage cycle. I don't know why people are berating him about the things he seems to enjoy teaching because his enthusiasm made the potentially dry material actually interesting to me. And I couldn't disagree more with those saying he doesn't seem to care about his students. He even brought in food one day for us to eat and chill out while he discussed fermentation. He may not be the vivacious lecturer, but give him a break, he's old and he's trying his best. I enjoyed this class and him teaching it, and even developed an interest in MIMG because of this class.
Winter 2017 - Reading the reviews posted on here before I expected a hellish professor but I have to say the people that wrote about him are crazy. Is the class hard? Yes. Is there a lot of material? Yes. But I liked him a as a lecturer. I found him funny. I even liked learning about the sewage cycle. I don't know why people are berating him about the things he seems to enjoy teaching because his enthusiasm made the potentially dry material actually interesting to me. And I couldn't disagree more with those saying he doesn't seem to care about his students. He even brought in food one day for us to eat and chill out while he discussed fermentation. He may not be the vivacious lecturer, but give him a break, he's old and he's trying his best. I enjoyed this class and him teaching it, and even developed an interest in MIMG because of this class.
AD
Most Helpful Review
Fall 2019 - Dr. Moberg-Parker taught this class for the first 5 weeks and then it was Dr. Hill. Her lectures were ok, a little unclear and vague at times. I liked Parker because she gave us these learning objectives before each lecture so that you knew exactly what to focus on and what would be on the test. She also required online quizzes before the lectures which were easy points. She also used clickers. Dr. Hill didn’t have either of these things and he didn’t use clickers. The exam questions required a lot of designing experiments, especially for Parker’s questions. Dr. Hill’s questions were more memorization based, but nothing too difficult. For studying I would recommend focusing on the learning objectives that Dr. Parker gave and the slides for Dr. Hill. The grade breakdown was: 100 points midterm 1 (mean was 75.81, median 77.0) 100 points midterm 2 (mean was 74.78, median was 76.0) 150 points final exam (stats weren’t released) 45 points discussion worksheets (you can miss 1) 50 points discussion participation (you rate the other people in your group) 36 points clickers (3 dropped) 60 points pre-class quizzes (2 dropped) 10 points pre-class and post-class survey (graded on completion) There was also this extra credit forum where you would summarize a news article about microbiology. I recommend doing this early in the quarter because you can’t repeat a topic someone else has done and it’s difficult to find an article when everyone else is at the same time and Dr. Parker was pretty strict about this.
Fall 2019 - Dr. Moberg-Parker taught this class for the first 5 weeks and then it was Dr. Hill. Her lectures were ok, a little unclear and vague at times. I liked Parker because she gave us these learning objectives before each lecture so that you knew exactly what to focus on and what would be on the test. She also required online quizzes before the lectures which were easy points. She also used clickers. Dr. Hill didn’t have either of these things and he didn’t use clickers. The exam questions required a lot of designing experiments, especially for Parker’s questions. Dr. Hill’s questions were more memorization based, but nothing too difficult. For studying I would recommend focusing on the learning objectives that Dr. Parker gave and the slides for Dr. Hill. The grade breakdown was: 100 points midterm 1 (mean was 75.81, median 77.0) 100 points midterm 2 (mean was 74.78, median was 76.0) 150 points final exam (stats weren’t released) 45 points discussion worksheets (you can miss 1) 50 points discussion participation (you rate the other people in your group) 36 points clickers (3 dropped) 60 points pre-class quizzes (2 dropped) 10 points pre-class and post-class survey (graded on completion) There was also this extra credit forum where you would summarize a news article about microbiology. I recommend doing this early in the quarter because you can’t repeat a topic someone else has done and it’s difficult to find an article when everyone else is at the same time and Dr. Parker was pretty strict about this.
Most Helpful Review
Fall 2020 - I took this class virtually in Fall 2020 with Dr. Parker and Dr. Hill. The class switched professors Week 5, and the quality of the course immediately dropped, although I will be talking more about that on Dr. Hill's page. Dr. Parker was amazing. She emphasized in her introduction at the beginning of the quarter that she is interested in the process of teaching and learning, and this passion was obvious in the way she taught. She taught this class exactly like the LS 7 series (although the tests were extremely different which I'll get to.) The course breakdown: Concept Inventories and Course Evals 20 Smartworks Pre-Class Assignments 125 (a few dropped) Smartworks Post-Class Assignments 80 (a few dropped) Discussion Section Worksheets 40 (1 absence allowed) Discussion Section Participation 50 Exams 350 (2 midterms, 1 final) Total 665 A couple things of note here: - Like the LS 7 series, there are pre-class (every class) and post-class (weekly) assignments connected to a textbook which is very similar to Launchpad that I believe you have to purchase access to. - Also like LS 7 series, there is a mandatory discussion where we go over application of concepts, although I enjoyed it. I think as an adjustment for COVID, as long as you went to discussion you would get all 40 points and then at the end of the quarter, you would get the remaining 50 points by grading how involved your groupmates were (and they would grade you). - By the end of the quarter, you had the opportunity for around 30? points of extra credit from doing things like posting on the forum, doing evaluations, and going to the MIMG 101 poster conference and reviewing posters. Lectures were completely asynchronous and pre-recorded which I did not like, but was generally okay for Dr. Parker. Dr. Hill, in contrast, uploaded almost every lecture, reading list, pre-class assignment, and post-class assignment late. Dr. Parker's lectures were similar to LS 7 series lectures, where she put interactive questions (like asynchronous clicker questions) into the lecture that were not worth any points. Her slides were clear and effective. Tests were very different from the LS 7 series. They were open-notes and free-response with emphasis on being experimental, where, for example, you would be given something that scientists would want to figure out and you would write about the procedures, controls, results, etc that you would use/expect in performing that experiment. I thought that the tests were clear but a bit of a time crunch -- the professors were aware of this and responsive and as a result, gave 3.75 hours for the final. The midterms and finals all had some extra credit, although medians (averages not published) were low. The median of the first midterm was 76% and 23% of students scored below a 60 (36% scored a 70 or lower). The second midterm had a median of 80% where 13% of students scored below a 60 (25% scored a 70 or lower). While these are low grades, they were boosted by numerous extra credit opportunities and points from other categories like discussion. Probably the most intense part of the class was its workload. There was a lot of reading assigned every class and when you're taking this class, it is so easy to fall behind. The pre-class and post-class assignments rely on the reading but are not completely related to the class material (like Launchpad). I read and took notes on everything when Dr. Parker taught, which took maybe 2hr/night, but after switching to Dr. Hill, I decided to do much less reading and did not suffer, making me think that readings are not completely necessary. Dr. Parker also published learning objectives before each lecture, and that is how I guided my notes for the readings. Dr. Hill did not publish any, and when asked to, he told students to infer them from his slides. I felt like Dr. Parker was responsive and responsible and very committed to the success of her students. My experience in this course was definitely hindered by Dr. Hill, but I would recommend anyone to take this course with Dr. Parker.
Fall 2020 - I took this class virtually in Fall 2020 with Dr. Parker and Dr. Hill. The class switched professors Week 5, and the quality of the course immediately dropped, although I will be talking more about that on Dr. Hill's page. Dr. Parker was amazing. She emphasized in her introduction at the beginning of the quarter that she is interested in the process of teaching and learning, and this passion was obvious in the way she taught. She taught this class exactly like the LS 7 series (although the tests were extremely different which I'll get to.) The course breakdown: Concept Inventories and Course Evals 20 Smartworks Pre-Class Assignments 125 (a few dropped) Smartworks Post-Class Assignments 80 (a few dropped) Discussion Section Worksheets 40 (1 absence allowed) Discussion Section Participation 50 Exams 350 (2 midterms, 1 final) Total 665 A couple things of note here: - Like the LS 7 series, there are pre-class (every class) and post-class (weekly) assignments connected to a textbook which is very similar to Launchpad that I believe you have to purchase access to. - Also like LS 7 series, there is a mandatory discussion where we go over application of concepts, although I enjoyed it. I think as an adjustment for COVID, as long as you went to discussion you would get all 40 points and then at the end of the quarter, you would get the remaining 50 points by grading how involved your groupmates were (and they would grade you). - By the end of the quarter, you had the opportunity for around 30? points of extra credit from doing things like posting on the forum, doing evaluations, and going to the MIMG 101 poster conference and reviewing posters. Lectures were completely asynchronous and pre-recorded which I did not like, but was generally okay for Dr. Parker. Dr. Hill, in contrast, uploaded almost every lecture, reading list, pre-class assignment, and post-class assignment late. Dr. Parker's lectures were similar to LS 7 series lectures, where she put interactive questions (like asynchronous clicker questions) into the lecture that were not worth any points. Her slides were clear and effective. Tests were very different from the LS 7 series. They were open-notes and free-response with emphasis on being experimental, where, for example, you would be given something that scientists would want to figure out and you would write about the procedures, controls, results, etc that you would use/expect in performing that experiment. I thought that the tests were clear but a bit of a time crunch -- the professors were aware of this and responsive and as a result, gave 3.75 hours for the final. The midterms and finals all had some extra credit, although medians (averages not published) were low. The median of the first midterm was 76% and 23% of students scored below a 60 (36% scored a 70 or lower). The second midterm had a median of 80% where 13% of students scored below a 60 (25% scored a 70 or lower). While these are low grades, they were boosted by numerous extra credit opportunities and points from other categories like discussion. Probably the most intense part of the class was its workload. There was a lot of reading assigned every class and when you're taking this class, it is so easy to fall behind. The pre-class and post-class assignments rely on the reading but are not completely related to the class material (like Launchpad). I read and took notes on everything when Dr. Parker taught, which took maybe 2hr/night, but after switching to Dr. Hill, I decided to do much less reading and did not suffer, making me think that readings are not completely necessary. Dr. Parker also published learning objectives before each lecture, and that is how I guided my notes for the readings. Dr. Hill did not publish any, and when asked to, he told students to infer them from his slides. I felt like Dr. Parker was responsive and responsible and very committed to the success of her students. My experience in this course was definitely hindered by Dr. Hill, but I would recommend anyone to take this course with Dr. Parker.
AD
1 of 2
