Steenson, Gary  

I really enjoyed him as a teacher and I bet i would have learned a whole bunch more had i gone to class everyday.

I really enjoyed the class. He is extremly knowledgable and throws in lots of interesting info. There's a lot of reading but it's not so much that you can't get it done and he covers most everything in lecture. He does go over stuff in class that is on the tests and not in the books so it really helps if you go to class.

Steenson did an excellent job for being presented with a class with little preparation time. Many felt that his teaching method was too dry, but in his defense, it was his first time teaching the class and I'm positive in a more familiar subject he would be better. He also makes his exams very straight-foward, giving thourough study guides with enough prep time.

Dr. Steenson is very enthusiastic about history. Usually he has a copy of his lecture notes available to the students, but he didn't for 110 because this wasn't one of the classes that he usually teaches. Well, we had weekly map quizzes, worth 10% of our grade, which were really easy, and then we had a midterm and a final. He types up a study guide before the tests which have all of the possible essay questions and identifications on them. You can go into his office hours (even though they are limited), and make sure that you are on the right track with your studying. There really isn't much to it. However, make sure he likes you, because the majority of your grade is subjuective, in terms of the essays. But, if you joke with him, you'll do fine.

This class should be fairly easy, I had it for an hour 4 days a week and there is absoluetly no homework. The entire grade was based off a final (50%) a midterm (30%) and map quizes (20%)in which there were 4 of them. I got a 39/40 on the map quizes, a C on the midterm and well on the final with a B, but for reasons unkown ended up with a C. I found out the hard way you don't need to go to class everyday to get a decent grade, people who went 2 times a week would still walk away with a B. One of lifes problems I guess. The lectures can be in a monotone stucture but are fairly interesting, just work hard for midterms and final since the entire test is all in an essay format. he'll give you a pre-test sheet with everything you need to know on it, just list off as much as you possibly can. Good luck. PS... He doesn't care to know your name, so don't try and get to know him...

I had Steenson fall quarter and didnt think too much of him one way or the other, but now after my class with Daniel Krieger I realize how lucky I was. He is a little dry in his presentations, yes...but he presents the material thoroughly and clearly, has well structured lectures with the outline up on the overhead, and tells you exactly what he wants you to know for the exam so that you can adequately prepare yourself. If you don't mind the fact that the lectures are slightly monotone, you even get some pretty interesting information out of them. Steenson is also generally a friendly person and willing to listen to students. Once he gets a little more vigor into his lectures he will be an outstanding professor.

Steenson's class is a travesty. You could pass it with next to no knowledge of the subject. The reviewer below me compared Dr. Krieger's class unfavorably to Dr. Steenson's. I suspect I know why. I heard Dr. Steenson say unfavorable things about Dr. Krieger. That was very unprofessional of him. In Dr. Krieger's class you learn about historical analysis and cause and effect. Steenson's course was devoid of meaning. He should be terminated.

Professor Steenson is one of the best professors I've every had, and this is my second time though college. Not only is knowledge of the subject superior, his is very compassionate and interested in the students. I highly recommend Professor Steenson.

Professor Steenson is one of the best professors I've every had, and this is my second time though college. Not only is knowledge of the subject superior, his is very compassionate and interested in the students. I highly recommend Professor Steenson.

If one was to look up the word, "sucks," in the dictionary, they would find, Steenson-History 110. How anyone could desribe this class any other way is beyond my comprehention. Steenson is nice enough, but he is BORING!! If you ever wanted to take a class to remind you of everything you ever hated about history classes, than this is your class. If you are one who can learn everything by reading, he puts his lecture notes on-line and that is all you need, he reads, almost word-for-word from his notes. The only time you need to go to class is for quizes, which he asks stupid details on crappy books he requires. Since he has a monotone voice it is impossible to catch what he thinks is important. Because he reads from his notes, it is also impossible to write notes using key terms. There is also no class input or discussion....Once again, boring, boring, boring....

he graded my essays unfairly, and wrote rude comments on them. intellegent people do not deserve to be put down by such a poor teacher. he fails to highlight any key points, turning points, cause and effect relationships, etc. his class is memorizing info, not understanding history. his objective is to test the fuck out of you, not to make you understand history. after hearing his lecture on islam, i realized that he is ignorant and close-minded. he does not understand islam, presented it in a very negative light, had terrible pronunciation, and used obsolete vocab like "mohammadan". the books we read are about monks and saints, and are difficult for the non-believer to relate to.

Prof Steenson is an ok teacher. He is organized in his leactures that are all available online. His quizzes are not that difficult and his tests are a combo of indentifications of people or events and an essay to which he gives you the possible prompts beforehand. Dont listen when he tells you he dosent want you to write everything you know and just answer the question. I did that on the midterm and got a C because I left out one little detail about ancient greek society when the prompt about why ancient egyptian society didnt expand. He is ok, I would say that if you can take another prof, do so.

Steenson may be is an intelligent man, but that is his downfall. He tries to teach history, religion, philosophy and bunch of other stuff all at once. His lectures are online and he reads from them verbatim, so there is no need to go to class, especially because he gives out the midterm and final a week before them. However, he grades the essays really poorly. The person I studided with and I wrote essentially identical essays and I got a C on mine and she got an A- on hers. Very frustrating. The class, and this is not neccesarily his fault, skims over a lot of important things and is more a survey of history. There were three lines in his lecture about Charlemagne. Ouch

Although it's an easy A, it's not worth it. It was so boring i went to class 4 times all quarter. The only good thing about steenson is that he gives you the test beforehand, so if you can memorize dates and essays, it's an easy A. Steenson fails to connect time periods and gives no cause/effect over time in his lectures. Instead, he reads straight off his notes. If you actually want to LEARN something about history, don't take him.

Yes, Steenson's lectures are dull, not entertaining like Hiltpold or Krieger, but he's a brilliant man and good teacher. My class had a few people who were always starting discussions & getting Steenson to tell his "fascinating stories," and it made the quarter SO MUCH more enjoyable, so ask questions! He gives study guides for every quiz (each on a different novel, 25% of grade) and test (midterm, 25% & final, 50%); the quizzes are pretty specific, so you can't just read the booknotes, but the tests have nothing surprising if you actually did everything on the guide. And even w/ his notes being online, I couldn't have gotten an A if I hadn't gone to class everyday.

I went to class almost every day and I studied my ass off for the final and I got a B. The problem is that I have no clue what I would have had to do to get an A. Steenson's study guides are so vague, you could study everything on there and then he will still find some random question to ask that no one would have thought of. He very heavily weight the essays on the final, where even if you answer the question and write a wonderful essay citing tons of historical examples, you will still miss some random factoid that he was looking for and get a significantly lower grade. Good luck if you have to take him, and my advice is to just realize that no matter how much you study, you will most likely get a B and just be happy with it.

His lectures are all available online, plus he doesn't take attendence, which means you can pretty much skip class with impunity. He basically reads off his lectures, which makes class fairly boring, though he tries to stimulate discussion. His study sheets don't match up with the quizzes, so be aware! The midterm and final count for a large part of your grade (the final is 50%), so be prepared for those. He likes it when you write a lot about the subject. I actually MISSED the final because I got the time wrong, and he was really sympathetic because he knew it was an honest mistake. He let me take it the next day in his other section.

While Steenson may present the material in the most boring way imaginable, and while he may nit pick about certain dates and minor details on his quizzes, the man is very very very knowledgeable in his field and his grading system is fair. He recognizes students varying abilities in the way he grades, even if he may not bother to learn their names or ever encourage discussion in class. He also is very good at keeping his opinion seperate from the material, so he doesn't teach his leanings as gospel truth.

This class was soooo... boring. He reads his lectures word for word. On the first day of class he gives a little background information on himself and he even read that word for word. He gives 3 quizes off of books, a midterm and a final. The midterm and final consist of mulitple choice questions and an essay. The multiple choice questions are quite easy and the essay should be easy because he gives you the question before, but he grades them very hard. If you want to be put to sleep everytime you go to class then take Steenson.

I think he got lazy in this class because he was a nice guy but everything was multiple choice and I got screwed on the dumbest questions which were stupidly specific and unnecessary.

Steenson's a really good guy and an excellent professor. He's extremely well informed about history. Classes can sometimes get boring, but it's history- whadya expect? The good thing is class is not required, and he himself states that you can at least pass the class just through his lecture notes (which he gives online) and the study guides.But I would recommend attending, cuz he always adds little side notes to things in class and focuses more on some subjects that you may need to know for the mid/final. Your grade consists of 3 quizzes on 3 different books you need to read (all fairly easy), and the midterm and the final. Mid/ final are mult. choice and essay (he gives you, for ex. 3 essays to study for, puts 2 on the test, and you only write on 1 of the 2). There is textbook reading, but 1) it's fairly easy reading and 2) you can usually skim chapters to find the necessary details. All in all, he's a very fair grader and the amount of homework is up to you - depends on whether you wanna read text or not, which is lengthy. I would definitely take prof. again if I could, and I recommend him to all.

Steenson knows a lot about what he teaches and his finals and midterms reflect that. He asks very difficult questions that really do require you to memmorize most everything. I thought he was a nice guy, I don't know why other ratings say he's a jerk. Had a good sense of old man humor. Dislikes the French, which I found funny. I'd take another class of his.

Ask Professor Steenson any question about US history and he knows the answer. His lectures are just packed with information, and you have to take notes like mad, but you end up learning a ton, and he is very interesting. He is an old-school type of teacher, and gives only 1 midterm, 1 final, and a few quizzes, so it is a tough to get a good grade, but not unfair. The class also does not have an excessive amount of reading. I would recommend Professor Steenson with the highest regard.

He is a very big jerk. He is extremely rude to his students and I had problems with him on more than one occasion. If you like respect, I do not recommend taking him. There are plenty of other history teachers that don't call their students rude names and put them down.

This teacher has tremendous experience around the world, and has and incredible knowledge base. All his lectures are available on-line or in the library, and he literally reads from his lecture during class. Although this sounds boring, he does a remarkable job do it. You could not even tell he is reading if you didn't have the lecture in front of you. Occassionaly he adds some additional info. His tests are extremely reasonable, as he gives you a sheet that tells you what will be on the test. You need to prepare a couple of essays and memorize a few identifications for the tests. Very reasonable. I found his class interesting, and fun - for a GE.

Prof. Steenson is very upfront about what is required of you as a student. No question appears on the exam that has not appeared on a study guide. There are no surprises. The lectures are a little dry, but that is only expected from a history class. It is a lecture based class, yet detailed notes are available online. It is very easy to get a good grade in his class.

Professor Steenson was very rude and his comments were uncalled for. I really enjoy history but I hated this class with a passion. He was was very crude and mean, I would not recoomend to anyone who values respect! I think his grading policy is very hard.

Steenson assigns an average and completable ammount of reading, no homework, a few quizzes, one midterm and a final. The midterm and final are short answer and essay, and he gives you a study guide of any possibilities for the tests. His lectures are informative and well organized, and so are his lecture notes - both are EXACTLY the same, with an occasional "the" added into the lecture that wasn't in the notes.. a great idea if you don't go to class.

I don't understand why people say that he's rude. I took Steenson over the summer and he wasn't rude at all - he was joking with us about baseball (he's a big sports fan) and made the class easy to understand. There were three quizzes from the reading, each covering two chapters. If you did the reading you could do the quizzes (which are multiple choice). There's a final and a midterm - he gives out a sheet before both of them with all of the possible essay questions and all of the identifications. You can only do really badly in the class if you don't work at all. Steenson encourages people to visit hs office if they're having problems, and makes the class easy to pass.

Good teacher but bring a pillow. I don't think I stayed awake for a single lecture. He knows his stuff and is clear with delivery but the material is extremely dry. History is definitely not my favorite and have always struggled through it. I suppose with that in mind, he really isn't that bad of a teacher.

Steeson is a great professor. He is one of my favorite teachers here. He teaches good history and he loves the Dodgers. What more could a student ask for? His pre-class discussion of current events is great. This guy should stick around and teach more History classes.

Steenson is the most boring person I have ever had to put up with for four hours a week. I suppose that the time went by, but not without great agony. He is bad news.

This was an easy "A" but a great bore. How can you make the processes, development and individuals involved in the evolution of modern thought so totally dul and flavorless? Blaaaaah!

I feel that I did learn a lot from Prf. Steenson and he is a good teacher if you are taking a class simply to learn. HIs weakness is that his quizes ask ridculous questions and are not a fair evaluation of your knowledge on the subject.

Dr. Steenson was not boring it's just that most people find history boring so it comes across that he was. I had to take a class to fulfill that damn USCP Gen Ed requirement and this class did just that. This class was not an easy A since the grades had to be curved from hell back up to the surface. I should have dropped when I saw the first quiz question "In what year was your textbook published?" Geez, I read the chapters that I was told to read but failed to notice the copyright and publish date. Realize that his quizzes are really too hard to pass so don't read the book. Just focus on the tests and know that the final will be comprehensive.

Do not sign up for this class. His quizes are rediculous. He asks about the book's publishing date and other questions that no one remembers. His midterm and final consist of a significant number of dates, percentages, and other numbers and he does not make it easy to guess. Steenson is also very boring and dry. No one ever went to class because all of his lectures were posted on the internet and he read directly from them during class.

Professor Steenson breaks the material up into independent and chronologically loose modules (lectures) that he presents in whichever order he feels is best. He makes his lecture notes (essentially a verbatim copy of his lecture) available in the library and online. During the course, there we're 4 quizzes (on reading), midterm (on lecture), and a final (also on the lecture). The quizzes seem like they pick at minutia, but if you do the reading carefully you shouldn't have a problem. He DID ask for the publishing date of one of our books, but only once. If you take his course, keep up with the reading and follow the material. An A isn't hard to get.

Steenson is NOT a good prof. I have to say that I'm not really into history, or at least not as much as I was when i was going INTO this class. His quizzes are an absolute joke. "On page 349, in paragraph 3, what is the second word of the first line?" It may as well be that bad. I did ALL the reading and studied my brain to saturation for his tests and quizzes and did horribly on them. It's a waste of time to even go to class. He posts the lecture notes online and reads them verbatim to the class. What I would recommend doing to study for his classes if you do happen to be in one, is take the lecture notes he posts, and condense them into your own. But either way, GET THE LECTURE NOTES! If you dont, you wont be able to keep up and know what he wants you to write down. To him, its all important, but i think that he doesn't realize most of us just wanted to get through the class. He's dry, boring, and a Dodgers fan... that's about all. He doesn't want to know you personally, so don't waste your time trying. I taught myself more history than he taught me. Steer clear...

Steenson was an alright teacher. He's a real nice guy and his lectures are organized. It's pretty easy to follow, and I recommend getting copies of his lectures at the library or online. The only thing that was difficult was his quizzes. Sometimes the questions he asks are tiny details in the reading that only somewhat relate to the overall concepts. Some people did not do the readings and did well, but I did all the readings and did poor on quizzes. Also, the quizzes are only 10 questions, multiple choice, so it's really easy to only get half correct and get bad quiz grades. One good thing is that the midterms and exams are only material from lectures. If you can memorize material well, Steenson works.

A very enjoyably course. I would've gone a lot more had I not been so damned sleepy and lazy all the time. Seriously, I'd wake up 15 minutes before the class and then decide whether or not to go. Otherwise it was an interesting class, I actually feel like I learned something (I'm an aero btw, so learning something in hist lets you know how much my other classes suck). Lots of reading though, but even that can be half-assed through. Take this teacher.

I decided to take this class because I really liked history, but now I don't after taking this professor. If you take this class, print his lecture notes for each class because he reads them word for word FAST. However, I recommend finding another teacher because since we are now paying even more money to take classes at poly, this one is not worth the $200+ you would be spending for this class, nor is the information obtained from it. His test questions relate to small percentage and year questions that are NOT important except to him, but he doesn't tell you which ones he deems important. I went to class just about everyday and the people who didn't go to class did better then I did. FIND ANOTHER TEACHER AND YOU WILL BE HAPPY FOR THE QUARTER! P.S., for his first quiz know the publishing date of the text.

I enjoyed his class alot. He has done alot in his life and gives personal stories that can be interesting. He also has alot of wit. He can be boring but he goes get the information across effectivly. His quizes and almost impossible to prepare for even if you've done the reading. However, his midterm and final were a good reflection of the material he taught. If you keep up with your studies this class shouldn't be too hard (expect for the quizes which is a guessing game)

Don't take Steenson. Like people have said, his quizzes are ridiculous. I don't see how asking what year the book was published is relevant to the course. Lectures were dry and boring. Was not a fun class for a GE either.

Beneath Steenson's boring lectures is actually quite a funny guy. It helps that all of his lectures are online, verbatim. This allows you to miss class without missing anything, but if you go to class, he will tell you which topics the essay questions will be on. Also, he gives you the questions to the midterm and the final a week before the test. I know people say he's boring but Western Civilization isn't too interesting to begin with. I have him for 207 right now which is a lot more interesting. He has 3 quizzes worth 25% of your grade and 1 midterm worth 25%. The final was identification and essay which he gives you before, so as long as you look up the information and know it you should be fine. If you want to be able to miss class and still get a decent grade, take Steenson.

Since it was the first time he'd taught this course, the class wasn't too hard. It just consisted of 5 papers all quarter and the top 4 scores were counted towards your grade. There were no tests, but he might have changed to allow for quizzes so people would come to class. Overall not a spectualar lecturer, but very knowledgable about the various subjects and persons we talked about. For history majors it would be a good course to take to gain some insight into Europe's thinkers from 1800-2000, but for other majors it might be a bit boring unless you love history.

Steenson is extremely knowledgeable on most any topic in recent history. Above all, I recommend History of European thought to anyone at Cal Poly. This class teaches you how to think and evaluate supremely complex issues. Anyways, back to Steenson, some people found him a little intimidating because of his presence and wealth of knowledge, but at the same time he is very friendly. He eagerly encourages class discussions, but often it was just batter back and forth between me and him. There is a large amount of reading assigned, but it is all relevant and highly engaging.

I had Steenson for 110 and 307. His lectures are filled with knowledgeble information but are extremely boring at times. He is very intelligent which helps because he has all the answers if you ask questions. Notes seemed to make no difference in both these classes, you could have never gone to class and still recieved an A. He tells you what he wants and its up to the books and private discussions. He helped me considerably and understands personal difficulties. I reccomend taking his courses if you have a difficult schedule.

I was initially very excited about taking this history class, but I soon learned to dread coming every day. Steenson provides word-for-word transcipts of his lectures -- thank God for that, because trying to take notes of his lectures is impossible. But, hey! Don't worry about it, because in *this* class, you are never never never tested on any of the material he lectured on. In fact, your grade is made up from four papers written on the works of great thinkers like Marx and Darwin. However, he does not adequately go over the material that you are to write on. You have one chance, and one chance only, to figure out (magically) what he wants you to write on. Good luck there. He once wrote some inappropriate comments in one of my papers, and it sometimes seemed as though he was being petty when he graded our papers. Although I used my quarter with him as a great way to exercise my patience, I feel completely disappointed. I'm sure he's a fine man, and I did tend to like him personally, but I feel he's a horrible teacher.

Steenson is a very smart man...he likes to present his material in a slightly boring manor in a low and calm voice...the class was based on 3 papers and an oral presentation...he is a tough grader on the papers...so make sure you have review your papers BIG time before turning them in...overall he made the class easy by not giving tests...take this class if you want to get a B or an A!!!

My advice to Cal Poly Students: NEVER take Professor Steenson.

Steenson is a very smart and well read guy. That being said, I thought his grading was really unfair. I worked my ass off on these three essays which had kind of vague prompts and I got Cs on each, with a bunch of red inked "NO!"s and "WHAT?"s and "WRONG"s in the margins. I guess I took some of that personally since I was in class everyday, followed the lectures no problem and felt stupid when I got my paper back. I wish he had made his expectations for what he wanted dicussed in the paper more clear, besides the formatting stuff. Good teacher though. And the final is optional, which is a plus.

This class is cool if you like to read and write on your own. You write 2 papers (5 pages each), do 1 presentation and have a short 25 question test on the 1st 2 readings. You don't really have to go to lecture except for when something is due, because the lecture material is only part of the optional final. He is a laid back professor which is nice. He's kind of a tough grader on the papers...but its only because it is a writing intensive course. He just wants you to be able to write a paper answering a question about the reading. He doesn't want you to give qoutes or analyze the material... just answer the question clearly to show that you can communicate through writing.

I enjoyed his lectures. He offers lecture notes which are great for review. He grades 50% midterm and 50% final. His exams are fair. Essay with short answers. Interesting person willing to talk with students and seems interested in students well-being.

As far as history professors go, steenson is awesome. He knows everything, much from personal experience which allows for interestins, insightful lectures. I went into the class hating the subject matter, and left with a newfound interest. His lectures are as organized as can be, with notes for each lecture available on his website. The grading policy is made chrystal clear, and allows for good grades without much work. The work load for the entire quarter consists of a short novel, a midterm and a final. He even gives you all the questions for the exams a month in advance. I spent approximately 12 hours total reading and studying for this class.

Steenson has a great working knowledge of politics and world events. Lectures were very interesting, but study tools and organinzation were poor: no text required, just lecture notes and a short novel. He gives a study sheet for the only two tests on which your total grade depends. The study sheet is almost impossible to use, since there is no order to the items and no reference system for his notes to study from.

I usually detest History, but Dr. Steenson made this class very interesting. His personal experience and stories added to the lectures. All the lecture notes are online, which makes it really tempting not to go to class, since all he does in lecture is go off of the notes. For the class, you had to read a short novel, and you have one midterm, and the final. For people who are uncomfortable with the two-exam format, you can do an optional paper, which is about 6-10 pages long, and he has a list of topics that you can choose from. He gives the study guides for the midterm and final ahead of time. For the midterm, it consists of two parts: short identifications (5 out of 6), and an essay question (1 out of 2 must be answered). And for the final, it consists of short identifications (10 things out of 14), an essay (2 out of 6), and another essay based on a quotation from the short novel. If you're good at memorizing dates, (which is a MUST!) then this is a class for you.

Lectures are boring because you buy from the bookstore ALL OF THE LECTURES for the quarter. Tests are fairly easy because he gives you complete study guide before hand. He will not test you on ANYTHING he doesn't have on the study guide. If you take the time to prepare the answers from the study guide you'll do fine. Really boring lecture though. He likes to talk about his past and what he did, not the material.

After five years at Poly, I looked forward to a course the would tell me about the background of our troubled age. Instead I got the most dull boring and meaningless class that I have taken at Poly. Steenson is bad news. I have classmates who had this course from other instructors like Dr. Clark. They loved it! What a pity that a fine school like Poly has to hire losers like Steenson.