Stephanie Schwartz

Sep 2004

Stephanie Shwarz is the one teacher that convinced me to major in Art History. Her lectures are clear, articulate, and thoughtful. She makes a serious and sensitive attempt explaining how our responses to artwork can be utilized by the particular complex language used in this discipline, all the while declaring careful note of the limits of verbal expression for art. The above reviewers have complained that she's hazy and articulate, but how far should we take this? These accusations are eliminated when one takes advantage of her openness for after class hours. She'll hold your hand and stick with you if you show her you're a serious student, just like any good teacher.

Apr 2001

Schwartz is surprisingly and annoyingly inarticulate. She probably means well, but she seems bored with the material which she's presenting, so she sure hasn't excited me with any of it. And judging from the numerous people who sleep through class every Tues and Thur, she isn't inspiring them either. She never gets away from the most basic discussions of paintings and architecture. While she seems to encourage class participation, she doesn't develop or explicate students' points, except in so far as they fit to her outline for the discussion. easy class, but I would suggest avoiding her if possible.

Jan 2000

Ms Schwartz wants to get away from the 'standard' art hum curriculum, and that is honorable. She does all the architecture in one fell swoop, and then on with the paintings... However, the material she teaches sometimes doesn't fall under the 'normal' stuff covered in art hum, meaning you have to get readings from somewhere else, the images don't match those in the prints package, etc, etc. Also, she's very big on 'formal analysis' of works even though she never really explains what it means... Her lectures have interesting material in them, but they are quite dry...