| School: | Colorado State University |
| Department: | Electrical Engineering |
| Location: | Fort Collins, CO |
| Helpfulness | |
| Clarity | |
| Easiness | |
Powered by
Mailing Address:
Uloop Inc.
306 S. Washington Ave
Suite 400
Royal Oak, MI 48067
Telephone Support:
312.854.7605
Email Support:
support@uloop.com
Post your own housing listing on Uloop and have students reach out to you!
He has a habit of yelling - and he can then go on hiding it.
Cons: He employs unimaginable unethical methods to make sure that everything is difficult. Unreasonable as he is, you are soon on a ride of whims and caprices. In his mind, Tony adheres to unflinching allegiance to unending cruelty and inhuman apathy. He believes he has a privileged position in university whereby he inherited all the rights to kick researchers and graduate students.
I was referred to take Tony as an adviser. Tony is not a good adviser. I had high expectations from Tony both academically and non-academically because he is heading ECE department. Soon my expectations were cut short when he began being rude for trifles. He is extremely cold and almost numb to reasonable demands. His fervent hatred towards low income students is a standard yet to be broken. Everything has to be important to him, else research work is insignificant. Such Humphrey Davis makes sure, there will be no Michael Faraday in coming centuries at Colorado State University.
Cons: The class focuses on rote memorization. The exam is to test only one aspect of human brain, memory.
M likes one-way lectures where he can stand and deliver very long and tiring speeches for hours. For listeners, it can be boring.
Problem-solving is never creative. He goes by old worn-out methods that are all over the book. I learned more from Little Shop of Physics than this course.
I would rather take course in Physics than in ECE.
Cons: He royally screwed my chances to graduate in time. Research papers with him took so long to publish that my potential employers got frustrated and reversed employment offer.
Not good advisor.
Cons: He is very condescending while returning graded assignments and exams.
He is very condescending while returning graded assignments and exams.
He helped us a lot as department head especially in arranging funds to fully complete project. And then he was also a judge. We got good grades.
Cons: He lacks understanding of hardware. It becomes frustrating when he says, "You are screwed. You should have thought about it earlier." Hardware projects take effort and lots of trial-and-error. I guess academic work is so tangential that he does not realizes that we are putting a lot of effort. I should gift him a book of 'encouraging words'.
He seldom promotes creativity because he made us repeat the work done earlier. He can be bossy and didn't realize that there is no fun in repeating previous work. We didn't get good marks for creativity.
He is good when he is good. When he is bad, he yells and puts brakes on project wheel. You won't even realize that soon your project is gonna be evaluated. You should keep him for lots of input and not keep him to be creative.
Cons: He is the best.
As long as I get an A, he is the best instructor.
Cons: TAs help even during the fall break, while Tony send emails "I am out-of-office." He likes compliance from his students so much that it looks like slavery. The content of the course is so easy that even a high school kid can dictate....What's the need of professor?
Fake smile: Nobody knows that as department chair Tony just sells the course. He makes it explicit with his suave mannerism. In person he can get cold.
Cons: Awful teacher. He seems very reluctant to teach. Pop quizzes are graded very harshly. Overall grading is very subjective.
Very disappointing class. You may expect the course material to be revised and adapted to latest developments in the field but the course material is rather dated.
Cons: Weher to start? His incompetence in taking actions against exploitative and unethical professors in the department shows that he agrees (and himself practices) abusive attitude towards grad students.
Probably a bad, if not worse, choice for a department chair, course instructor and thesis adviser. His hands-off approach has led to degradation of research environment and grad student slavery. I complained him of being harassed (actually some pretty bad stuff) by my adviser. The next thing I heard was I was forced to switch departments. You should be ashamed of your moral standards, Tony.
Cons: As if the lack of a textbook and meandering lectures were not enough, he is rarely available for questions outside the class.
An incompetent department chair who has let his flock of other graduate advisers run amuck. A number of students have complained to him of open abuse by graduate advisers in his department. But how can he help when he himself has emerged in cahoots with them. In fact, he is one of the abusive, cold-hearted advisers who cares little about the well-being of students and concentrates on only his career goals. PR stunts count more than real research. Shame on him!