Timothy W. Drescher

Professor Drescher was the best teacher I've ever had. He took complex issues and explained them admirably. He is not afraid to speak unhindered about the most taboo subjects, which makes him one in a million. I disagree with other reveiws that insist that he is too hard, too confusing, and too opinionated. What we need is more teachers who will speak their minds and teach subjects that are challenging. The tests are very simple, and if you pay attention in class and learn the definitions you will come away with an easy "A". I learned more information in this class than in all my others combined. If you'd perfer not to learn, not to think, and not to be exposed to ideas that challenge the dominate views, don't take this class.

No joke here: AVOID this man and this class. Find another way to fill your Section III. As a teacher, Tim is pompous in a pathetic, embarassing way, a sad middle-aged man who despises free-thinking students. Tim is fond of reminding the class that SFSU is "where future dental assistants are educated". He has a monster inferiority complex that he couldn't get a position at an Ivy League school and I get the feeling he could not possibly care any less about teaching anyhow. To say that I learned nothing from this class is an understatement-- it was a miserable waste of time.

Tim Drescher is a teacher who has the potential to open student minds and make them question what is going on around them politically in many areas of daily life. I found his class interesting and boring at times, especially when no one wants to talk, it could get uncomfortable. Not that Drescher necessarily made a safe forum to state ones ideas. In fact, I admit that after I made a comment or stated an idea once, he just looked at me with no response. I think that he feels resentful when students don't participate; however,when they do participate, he gives no encouragement. And after that, I never wanted to say anything again, and neither did the countless students that he did the same thing to (and I observed this). That was my biggest problem with him, and in my opinion, it's quite an important one.

I worked really hard in his class and it was a very hard class for me since I'm not into disecting what literature is trying to point out. And yes, the literature was difficult reading especially when one does not read that high level of analysis. At times I hated this class, at times I liked it. I found the 2 in class 50 minute essay tests difficult to write in that amount of time, especially when he gives you no clue what the questions will be. This makes it difficult to prepare. However, I still pulled an A grade, but decided to go for credit/no credit grading because I was burned out at the end with his class and just in case I ran out of time on the final (which I did), I could still pass but not hurt my gpa. If you don't have to take this class for a grade, take it for CR/NCR. I think that Tim is fair in grading also as long as he sees that you are trying hard.

And to Tim: You are a good teacher and I think a lot of people see that in you. One piece of advice, don't just stare in silence when a student comments on something. You are the leader of the classroom, so lead and keep a discussion going. Don't just leave students hanging.

My friend and I took Hum 415 this semester from him and we both couldn't even tell you what we learned! I have NO clue. And I know it just wasn't us...three other girls who sat next to us had no clue as well. His lectures are alllll over the place, he mumbles a lot, and when you have the courage to raise your hand to give an answer or idea he stands back and looks at you funny or takes forever to respond to you and once he does, YOUR usually wrong. This permitted me from ever raising my hand IF I ever understood anything, which I never did. He gives a TON of reading to do, and if you aren't highly skilled in knowing what "big," words mean, GOOD LUCK!!!! I had to look up every other word on the readings which were like up to 12-20 pg.'s long and then go BACK and re-read the reading w/ my def.'s next to the paragraphs. This just made me unmotivated to read anything more in his class, and especially since most of the things we read I didn't understand, and couldn't connect it to what the class was about. His lectures are boring and slow, he doesn't explain things in "english" to the class, and only those who are Humanties majors (not just segment 3's like us) can MAYBE understand what he is talking about. Pretty much, it wasn't that great of a class for me personally, and I ended up taking it credit/no credit in fear of failing because everything made no sense to me and I couldn't understand.

I had the biography of London class. While in the beginning this class was difficult to comprehend, I caught on quickly to his teaching style. He gave us a very 3 dimensional view of London history which I enjoyed very much. Like another student, I had never heard from a teacher that I was qualifed to go to grad school. He planted those first seeds in my head. He has a great sense of humor and is a really decent guy. I enjoyed my office hour conversations with him alot. I wish I needed to ake more classes that he teaches.

When I first heard about Mr. Drescher from a few people,many said he was an asshole. However, by the time I had heard this I already had picked my classes and was not going to change my schedule. I proceeded to take his humanities 425 class with an open mind. I can honestly say I’m very glad that I stuck this class out. In the early stages of the class we turned in our first of five essays. I received my first paper back, which was only worth a whopping 5% and got a grade of C. The second essay, which evolved from one paragraph to a page, also received a grade of a C. The class is after all a thought and image class which involves analysis of expressions or topics of works; something that most of us have not done in the past. Because of this it’s supposed to be fuzzy and unclear in the beginning and this is why the first assignments are only worth 5%. At this point I decided to go to Mr. Drescher’s office hours. This is the best thing I ever did for the class. The man has fantastic office hours, anyone that is willing to be there for you at 7:30 AM three times a week then again at 12 is obviously there to help. I was able to go to his office hours and get very good one on one constructive criticism and help on my final three essays. The end result I got straight B’s on my next two and a B+ on my final essay. My final one could have been an A, but I slacked off. Yes he does tend to be slightly arrogant and does ignore dumb irrelevant comments in his class. Heck, even Mr.Drescher referred to himself as a bozo a time or two. I think it’s funny and healthy that he can call himself that. However, some just take him for who he is in his class and call him an asshole for that! They never give him a fair chance by going to his office hours! I think he does this to separate the students that are not really trying from the good students that make use of all the college has to offer, such as office hours. By taking Mr. Drescher’s class I learned a lot of valuable useful material, and most importantly how to write effectively even after taking numerous English classes at JC and here at state. His classes are tough; they force you to think critically. They stimulate your brain unlike other classes that I have taken in the past. I say if you have the time, IE not taking four other classes and holding down 30+ hours a week at a job, take him! Be prepared for a tough essay format final involving mainly the final novels at the end of the class.

Although Drescher is an interesting instructor, don't expect to get a good grade handed to you on a silver platter (like many courses at SFSU). You really have to WORK in this class. Lot's of interesting reading. Great discussions, when they don't go over your head. If you are good at getting into someone's head and figuring out what they expect of you, you will enjoy this course. Challenging, but it was a worthwhile experience.

When he actually managed to stay on topic, the class had some decent discussions. Although Drescher says he doesn't need his ego bostered by his students, be careful of correcting him in class. Twice he told us while reading Frankenstein, that Percy Bysshe Shelly was Mary Shelly's father. He seemed quite peeved when I pointed out that they were married. Other misquotes happened and I felt so annoyed that this guy was supposed to be qualified to teach this subject. He is incredibly vague about what information he wants on the test, and even more unclear in his "lectures" which usually become non-topical rambling discussions, one gets the sense that he is glad because he isn't (as he puts it) an expert on whatever we happen to be discussing. I felt so frustrated in this class and the low grades recieved by most of the class were a mark of the level of (non?) comprehension.

I think the guy is a bit weird. I had a difficult time following him. On the other hand, his exams are easy. On the MIDTERM EXAM we only had to define 5 out of 8 terms/names and write an essay. The FINAL EXAM is made of 100 multiple choice questions. Some of them are hard, because the exam is cumulative. The readings are pretty good, but not all of them. What else? Take Drescher if you don't want to work very hard and if you are interested in the subject. Who knows, maybe you'll like him?..

What can I say, this guy really sucks! Maybe it was just me but I had no clue what was going on. His lectures are all over the place and very unstructured. Every time I left his class I had no idea what the concepts were that I was supposed to be getting. Even visiting during office hours wasn't any help. Be prepared to be clueless as to what will be on the test. His lectures are very broad, with hardly any concrete material, and his test are centered around one very small part of what he pretends to present. He's nowhere near as cool as he thinks he is, his so-called liberalness is superficial and easy to see through (if there's one thing i can't stand it's a quasi-liberal). His views are very narrow, and he doesn't take well to opinions that are different than his. The course consists of two tests (essay and definitions) and two essays. Like the other reviews, make sure what you say on your test reflects what he would say, otherwise your screwed. If your lucky Teresa Carrillo, who teaches the class with him, will grade more of your papers than he. She is much more lenient and tends to look at content rather than style. By contrast, he is an extremely difficult grader, marking down for small mistakes. The one paper she graded I recieved and "A". He gave me "c's" across the board, even when my answers to definitions on the test matched his definition verbatum. Don't take his class if you expect to learn anything about Marxist theory, you won't, you will just be left wondering why you scored so low on the test.

After taking the Biography of Los Angeles class taught by Professor Drescher I just HAD to take another class by him! His lectures for the LA class are interesting, entertaining and full of new concepts. He uses slides, videos (which are VERY good), lectures, and tests to examine LA. I do have to say though since I am from LA, that some of the lectures were generalized in a sense that not all parts of LA are just like downtown LA, but non the less his ideas and the ideas he brings up by others are challenging. For the class he gave us one midterm that was short answer and essay, but he also gave an extra optional midterm in case you wanted to pick up your grade, and then the final was multiple choice. His tests are purely from his lectures, but you have to think for yourself and connect the concepts. Drescher's Thought and Image I class was also interesting, in fact i think it's BETTER than his LA class. His choice of images in photography, paintings, novels, and movies just amazes me. All of his choices were new to me and I found them incredibly interesting!! His syllabus is very straightforward and he follows it completely. He asks for analysis' as he goes through the course, which are a little difficult but he ALWAYS there to help you out. Professor Drescher has to be the BEST professor I've had here at SFSU, just because he really cares about his students. He takes time before class to have conversations with his students or to make University annoucements, and his ofice hours are a great time to get to know him and to let him get to know you! He seems a little hard at first, but it's only to figure out who's really interested in the course. I encourage anyone to take a class by him!

I have never taken a more interesting class, nor had a better lecturer. I want to tape all his lectures, because not only are they interesting, informative, fun and exciting, but they speak truth to me. And he does the greatest thing...if you raise your hand and offer an opinion contradictory to his opinion...he will consider that opinion and remark on whether or not you have a point, most often he'll agree with you!!!! Most teachers will try and justify their opinion or just plain throw your opinion out the window, but he considers it and loves to discuss it further. He's just a wonderful teacher, one of the best I've ever had!

When one looks at the class listing of "Thought and Image", you really don't know WHAT to expect. Due to the vagueness of the name itself, the teacher has a lot of freedom concerning the curriculum. I thought that Tim Drescher followed the syllibus very well, unlike some other professors. But there was not nearly enough discussion about the material - and if there was, it was difficult to speak up because he is very set in his opinions. I believe if you look at a mural, it is ART, and art can be interpreted in many ways. That is what makes something artistic in the first place. But in this class, you must take careful notes of his interpretation and be sure to use that in your essays, rather than your own thoughts. That is the main problem I had in the class. I worked very hard and only got a B+. There were only three grades during the semester, and no matter how hard I studied, I always ended up with the same grade. You guessed it- three B+'s. He is not an extremely difficult teacher persay, but if you want to be able to interpret anything for yourself, this isn't the place for you. If you want to watch a lot of movies with subtitles and not understand what you're watching, this is the perfect class for you. Good luck!

Prof. Drescher isn't a bad guy. He's just not a very good teacher. I agree with most of the criticisms expressed by others. He is very condescending to those who don't share his particular viewpoints on things. The class consisted mainly of watching movies, with little or no lecture in between. The class lacked form, and most of the students were clueless as to what would be covered by the tests. When anyone ventured to ask about the tests, he would deflect the question, grumbling later that "students just didn't seem used to thinking for themselves, or something." Unless you prefer a formless, free-for-all format, avoid this teacher.

I enjoyed Prof. Drescher's Biography of Los Angeles class. The novels that he chose for the class were interesting and were relevant to the material covered. He followed the syllabus well and maintained thought provoking class lecture and discussions as well. He doesnt just lecture either, he talks to his students. He shows a great interest in the issues which encourage the students also.

I'd have to agree with much of what the above "F' evaluation has to say about this professor, although I would not go so far as to give him an "F". He certainly is biased politically, and while I consider myself to be very liberally-leaning, it was as if one even had to adhere to his own particular version of political thought in order to avoid his outright contempt. Oddly, he seemed biased towards the young, skateboarding kids in the class- as if they were the real free-thinking radicals, the progeny of '60's flower children or something. Class literature was pedestrian, one book, which I can't even remember now... October Heat? Was just awful and such a gimmick. Prof. D, for all of his discussion of free and open exchange of ideas (murals, art, lit, political movements) behaves rather immaturely in his classes, and it becomes immediately apparent that the "free exchange of ideas" he is interested in is but mere regurgitation of his own views. I cannot, and never have recommended this instructor. He is begrudging and openly hostile towards students when a mere smattering of dissent is even hinted at.

I took the Marxian Revolution class several years ago as part of my segment three cluster. It was way over my head. The reading was very difficult for me, having no backround in that sort of thinking. Most days I got frustrated with the reading and did not finish, hoping the lectures would clarify things for me. Usually they didn't. I think Prof. Drescher could have talked about some more remedial aspects of Marxism, the historical aspects that he touched on were certainly interesting. That said, I think Drescher, although he did not make things clear for me, is a good instructor because he challanged the hell out of me and I learned a lot just through struggling. I was introduced to a lot of concepts that have come up again and again in academia and life. Besides some (to me) incomprehensible primary texts, we read some great stuff. I think the single best thing Tim Drescher talked about was the fact that going to graduate school would greatly improve our lives and that we as SFSU undergrads had the qualifications and ability to go on to graduate school. NO ONE ever said that to me in my entire undergraduate career at State exept Tim Drescher. I'm getting my MFA now.

(Though the format for "your goal at SFSU" doesn't provide for my stating so, I graduated in Spring '97 at the age of 35 after deciding to go back and finish my BA.)Tim Drescher may just be the last honest man. Though his Contemporary Culture (Humanities 465) is not on the list of those classes which satisfy the Critical Thinking requirement at San Francisco State, it should be at the top of that list, for the theme which he stresses above all others is the need to develop the habit of critically evaluating what is presented to us as "information" or "fact." For the good reason that those who constitute the ruling class in this country (and it's the same in every country) don't want the status quo disrupted, most Americans go through their lives without being encouraged to think for themselves, but Drescher will encourage you to do just that. Without advocating any particular point of view, he provides equal time for all sides of some of the most contentious issues of the day such as the legitimacy or illegitimacy of multiculturalism in education, and the role of advertising and public relations firms in shaping popular opinion. For those students who gravitate to what Big Brother doesn't want you to think about, Drescher's class is the one to be in!

I have taken three classes from Drescher and he is one of the best teachers that I have had at SFSU. He really cares about the students. The readings are challenging at times but his lectures clarify points and he is very open to questions. I will definately take classes from him in the future and I recomend him to anyone who is not afraid to work hard and try to think critically about culture and society.

Mr. Drescher is one of the few teachers I have had which is truely dedicated to helping his students think critically about the world around them. He has a sophisticated understanding of everything he teaches in class, and has a good sense of humor.

Drescher seems to favor discussions over lectures as a format for teaching. He has a small, but vital workload (ie. one essay to read / class).