C2407-C2507 Intensive General Chemistry

Dec 2019

this professor often comes across as arrogant, egotistic and confrontational. it is clear that he is a very intelligent man but that does not make one an excellent professor. he often interrupts students when they speak and fails to help students when they say "I don't really understand this" - instead saying "why don't you look it up and come back next week"

Mar 2017

DO NOT TAKE THIS CLASS. Do yourself a favor and get the easy A from gen chem and skip this class completely. Why kill yourself for a B when you can get an easy A doing minimal work. This class was one of the worst classes ever. He is incomprehensible, and just a terrible teacher. The tests are unpredictable, the recitations are hard to do well in (still easier to do well in than the tests), and everything about this class was unforgiving and not worth the copies time I put into it. Just do not take it.

Sep 2014

If you are looking for a class that will make you feel prepared to work in a real laboratory environment in the near future, look no further. In this course you will carry out many lab procedures used in research such as IR Spectroscopy, HPLC, Flame Ionization and other instruments. This is nothing like regular Gen Chem Lab. Professor Avila is amazing. He is genuinely has the best intentions for his students and hopes they learn to not only properly use common lab procedures but to leave his course feeling more confident in their ability to work in a lab environment. Rather than having everything set up for you like in many other classes, you will be expected to set up your experiment from beginning to end and truly understand the procedure you are intended to carry out before arriving to class. TA can be a hit or miss. Many students dropped the class the first week after receiving feedback on the first lab from our TA. The fact of the matter is that you need to be prepared to write a long, organized, Data and Analysis heavy Lab reports. There is a reason they use the adjective Intensive in the name. Overall if you plan on majoring in a science or plan to work in a Lab, I highly recommended you take this course. You won't regret it.

Apr 2013

When taeching, Flynn rarely does practical application problems. He teaches every unit by deriving the relevant equations. While this teaching style may work for some, I found it useless when doing the homework and taking the tests, given that the problems are all practical and rarely theoretical. When studying for the tests, I found that the best strategy was re-doing all of the homework (not graded, which is nice), because the lecture slides were completely irrelevant. The variables he uses have no correlation to modern convention (c is velocity rather than the speed or light) so be prepared to learn a whole different set of variables than the ones you're used to. He probably should have retired about fifteen years ago; he tells cute stories about his granddaughter sometimes, but mostly he puts you to sleep. Only a third of the class regularly shows up. Honestly, there's no need to go to lecture; at least for me, the material was entirely self-taught from doing the homework. Honestly, you might be better off taking Gen Chem; there's no real curve (most of the class does fairly well) and I don't feel like I understand Chem any better now than I did in high school.

Jan 2003

Flynn's a great person and great professor, but his class is very hard. He does his lectures in powerpoint, so you can download them, but there's a big advantage to going to class - a lot of what's on the presentations doesn't make sense unless he's explaining it to you. Top 5 reasons to take his class over normal G-chem: 5) The class is curved on a B+ average, so around a third of the class gets A-range grades 4) No chem-write paper. Ask anyone who took G-chem, it sucks. 3) For a guy of his stature, Flynn is a really humble guy. He's basically an expert in his field, but he'll happily take an hour of his time to answer your questions about the material. 2) There's about 80 people in Intensive, compared to ~225 in each section of G-chem. You can actually ask a question without feeling like you've just made 200 enemies. 1) Intensive chem is over in 1 semester; G-chem takes up 2. And if you got a 5 on the Chem AP, finishing Intensive chem gets you credit for a second semester anyway. My point is: Flynn's a good teacher and his class is worth the extra effort.

Nov 2001

Well, this course was actually pretty good, but Flynn is very dry and makes it QUITE easy to fall asleep (10 minutes max). I would recommend not even going to the classes, for the slide-show approach to teaching is not my cup of tea. The fact that Flynn himself is a knowledgeable man is virtually meaningless when it comes down to his ability to teach.

Aug 2001

Professor Flynn is a good lecturer and just generally a good guy. He's extremely organized (the whole lecture is on slides put together in Powerpoint), but he is also exteremly willing to stop class to answer any questions from students. His explanations were generally clear and helpful. The class isn't always the most interesting, since those who have taken AP Chem are already familiar with some of the material, but he does his best. Everything about the class is fair and designed to help out students. The lowest midterm grade is dropped (or the final counts for less... whichever works out better for you), the curve is generous, and the midterms often have a question from the homework. Students are also given a practice test for each of the midterms and the final. The textbook is also pretty accessible, though you are very rarely required to read it.

Jan 2000

When I signed up for this class I was under the impression that it would be a quick review of AP Chem and then a little bit of new stuff would be introduced. Not so. The class - or at least Professor Flynn - starts right out in the nitty-gritty of it, with some difficult-to-follow math on the first day. The class is further worsened by the fact that it's all on slides; all the math is done ahead of time, and thus goes by far too fast for students to really ask questions or comprehend the material - or even write it down. Basically George ends up reading the slides to you as they go by, which doesn't really help the sparse information they give. It seems he designed the course last year or the year before and just kept the slides around. He is very good at answering questions, but often the information provided on the slides are too sparse for a student to do anything less than interrogate him on the subject. Unfortunately, this is the only one-semester genchem course, so it must be borne by those of us who passed the AP test. Yeah, he got a teaching award, but I wouldn't have given it to him.