Michael P. Zimmerman

First off, Dr. Zimmerman may be difficult only because he places such a high emphasis on writing, but to the previous person: what are you doing taking an upper division English course if you don't know how to cite in MLA format? And, if Dr. Zimmerman asked you to drop the course, maybe it was because he didn't think you possessed the writing skills necessary to do the coursework. Zimmerman is a wonderful professor: he lectures well (he just captivates you) and loves what he teaches. The papers are twelve pages long, but they are really FOUR 3-4 page essays. He has a term paper he wants (12-15 pages), but if you do all the reading, and attend class, you'll do just fine. Obviously, you don't want to take an upper division English course if you don't want to write and read. Really, he's wonderful, and he'll help you as much as he can without jeopardizing the other students. He won't be able to teach you how write in one semester because he's working under the assumpation that you already have the writing skills. I'm sure that if he could have helped the previous reviewer learn how to write, he would have, but come on, he has how many students that need his help? It wouldn't be fair to everyone else.

ok here goes. zimmerman while pretty knowledgable in his field is very self centered. he doesnt really allow much for opinion other than his own. he wants you to write the papers he wants to see not what you want to write(even if it is concise and to the point) also his lectures are just him going off about how wonderful the book he picked is(we know its wonderful buddy, thats why you picked it!) but at any rate on a more personal note he is just really not a nice person at all when it comes to grading papers and his assignments are a bit absurd and offer little room for mistakes, granted he lets you do rewrites but those are rewrites for 12 page papers and are damn hard. i say damn hard because you have to write exactly how he wants but he never really gives you any clues as to what he wants, he just assumes...big mistake for a teacher to make. he belittled my writing skills and told me to drop the class. is it just me or are teachers supposed to be encouraging and helpful? stop me if im wrong. well at any rate i did drop the class because i couldnt put up with his vague descriptions of how he wanted my rewrites and i wasnt about to struggle through 2 more 12 page papers. pretty damn unfair grader and a very self absorbed teacher. unless you can write perfectly in MLA format and dont mind selling your soul as a writer to compromise for his grading policies steer clear from this guy at all costs!

You're not going to believe this, but I took this guy's James Joyce class a decade ago and it changed my life. The truth is you either hate him or love him. I loved his teaching style. Instead of "going soft" and doing a lot of "fun, interactive" (and useless) exercises in class, he just taught. Good, simple technique of lecturing. Well. He knows his stuff. And yes, he was open to other opinions, AS LONG AS THEY WERE SUPPORTED BY THE TEXT. No, he's not friendly to blow-hard psych or drama students who want to parade their lack of knowledge to a captive audience. He is alpha dog in class. Truth? I got a B+ in his course. And the reason I did not get an A was because I wrote a paper that was off topic (all my fault)--but he had the kindness to actually accept it and grade it. That's what I call flexible. Honestly, if you're looking to slide through a class and do very little work, don't take him.

Today? I'm an English instructor at Skyline and City College of SF; I frequently think of his clean, bold teaching style. The reason I became a teacher was because of Zimmerman. He turned the corner for me. Before I met him, I was a soul-free Business student, looking for the dollar. And after a survey course with him, I begged him to let me into hit Joyce class. And soon I was an English major (with a soul), struggling through my Oral Exams. After being rewarded with my M.A., I got into business to pay back my school loans. But today, a decade later, I'm teaching myself. Don't be scared off by his Eraserhead hairdo or stovepipe black pants. He's good. Want to find out more about what I think of him? Go to http://www.adjunctnation.com. I just published an article about Zim. It's called, "Motivation."

This professor lectures in a style that can best be described as eclectic. On any given day (cliche!) he may enter the classroom, walk right up to the front and launch into his "lecture", oftentimes beginning with a question that doesn't always relate to the text or make any sense at all. At least, that is, at first. This professor's ability to *ask* these questions, to get his students to consider the bigger picture (cliche!), to think in different ways, is amazing. His lectures are unlike any other- I'd sit through any one of his classes again just to listen to him speak. He does, however, expect one to KNOW how to write, and how to write WELL. But if you're not up to speed (cliche!) or genius-style with your writing, he certainly makes himself available to help you with the work. And he allows rewrites. I'll try to sum all this up: Professor Zimmerman's intelligence and lectures fly off the scale (cliche!), he expects you to DO the readings well, KNOW how to write in a coherent and competent manner, and AVOID CLICHE PHRASES at all costs...like they're the devil. Take his course, believe me that- in the end- you'll look back with a sigh of relief and thank yourself that you did. (that's right, even if you like a good cliche/pun like myself)

Prof. Zimmerman loves the subjects he teaches. He is convinced that he can share his insights with the class, teach the class the "truth", but it doesn't work that way. The price the students have to pay for such a style of teaching is simply not worth it. He lectures in a very self-centered style (which is ok most of the time, because he knows what he's talking about) but tries to suggest that his teaching is really democratic instead. This is what bothers me.

As for the papers - don't even bother. There were quite a lot of Fs in our class, and no matter what everyone thinks, I believe that at our level there are only very few arguments to be made for an F, especially if the papers are all around 10 pages long. A D- would already be a lot more appropriate, but an F is simply a slap in the face and misses the educational value completely. Granted, the papers are rewritable, but at that point the trust is already gone, and the rest of the class is one big teeth-grinding. What a pity, the subject of the class would have been rather interesting.

I think professor Zimmerman is a great man for introducing a student to literature. He presents the traditional view of a novel or an author, something which I think is good to know before you start to make your own interpretations.

If you are an advanced literature student though, you might want to consider another professor since I do not believe he is very updated with contemporary theory.

It is true that he does not encourage discussion in class, but hey, sometimes it is actually nice to have a class where you do not have to listen to the ramblings of creative writers and drama students all the time.

Most of the time he is just lecturing. He really takes his time talking about the text so that you will have a good understanding of it.

He is not a very hard grader in my opinion. Even though English is not my native language I managed to get pretty good grades on the papers in the two classes I took.

Professor Zimmerman is a nice man, deeply concerned with art and the joy it can give us.

After reading some of the gushing praise others have given Zimmerman, may I offer my two cents worth? Excuse me, I shouldn't use "vogue" phrases like that "two cents worth" -- if you've had a paper graded by him, you know what that means. He wants you to include personal experience, then criticizes your paper for straying off topic when you do. If you can't write a paper regurgitating his lectures and in a style strictly antiseptic, don't bother. Who cares if it is 2002? Let's write like it is still 1902 and we're a student of Freud!! Furthermore, to the person who thought he was the greatest lecturer ever, WHAT PLANET ARE YOU FROM?! His sentences are constantly interrupted with his stuttering "uh...uh...uh...uh..." and he speaks so quietly you can barely hear him, anyway. On top of which he constantly asks questions which he doesn't ever want anyone to actually answer. A few rhetorical questions is okay, but that's all he ever asks! In fact, class discussion and participation is practically non-existent. Instead, we are subjected to off-topic digressions (which we in turn are not allowed to do) and he has no regard for concepts such as TIME LIMITS and frequently goes 5 or more minutes past the end of class. To be fair, at least he shows a genuine interest in his topic. He puts a lot of effort into grading your paper, even if the result might be wholly negative. As far as I'm concerned, lame jokes, over-running class time, and overly-critical grading does not a great teacher make. Take at your own risk, especially if you're averse to reading mass quantities of Freud and Faulkner - and then having him read it out loud to you over and over again in class (in a bad Southern accent, no less).

I've read some of these reviews of Zim and it sounds like you either love him or you hate him. I loved him. His lecturing is the most beautiful of any prof I have ever had in my three years of uni. I would often take very spare notes in order to just sit and listen. His speaking is so engaging and alive. He has a way of inhabiting the novels we read and highlighting the amazing things the author was doing. I'd often leave class buzzing with thoughts and wonder, even though I had disagreed with him sometimes. The claims that he is a fascist brainwasher are totally surprising to me. True, he will call author's "brilliant" often and favors his prepared lecture to class discussion, but if you can get past this and entertain the thoughts of a great reader of lit, the rewards are lovely. In his office hours, I learned more from him on how to write sensitive, grounded, and clear papers than from any teacher I had to write essays for. He really got in my papers with me and gave sound assistance. He wanted to see me do well. Some say he just wants students to parrot his thoughts from class. This is absolutely bogus in my experience. I included things in papers he had never thought of, but were grounded enough to warrant his praise. Be prepared to get an old school lover of literature.

This class was the one that I looked forward to all day. After the class, I would emerge, stumbling slightly, and walk around dazed and lost in my thoughts for a while. His lectures were fantastic. Yes, they were his views and his views only. Yes, he wasn't that into class discussion, and if you try to change the subject, he will just ignore you. But do you really need every class you take to be a round-table seminar? I enjoyed just settling into my chair and listening for an hour. His views were interesting, and he conveyed them brilliantly. Sometimes I didn't agree, but he made me think about it. He took books that I was dreading reading, and made them interesting and deep. I thought if I read Great Gatsby one more time I was going to explode, but he made it fun. I did think his essays were a little odd. I felt that I was writing tired, recycled and unimaginative essays, but he seemed to like them. It may be true that he has a limited vision in regards to the interpretations of books; but oh, how the way he speaks! I highly recommend taking him, just for the lectures.

Zimmerman's class is not a difficult one. If you're looking for a 214 class that won't take up too much time, he isn't a bad choice. He assigns a 500 word paper each week and allows plenty of re-writes. However, if you are looking to really understand the literature and sharpen your skills in literary analisis, try someone else. Zimmerman is very closed-minded about his readings of the stories. You can get an easy A on any essay as long as you mimic what he says. Recently I turned in a paper on O'Connnor's "A Good Man is Hard to Find." I didn't buy into his simplistic reading of the main charechter, so I found online a short essay written by O'Connor herself. Her explanation of the story completely conflicted with his reading, and made a whole lot more sence. When I expanded on her ideas in my paper, Zimmerman complemented me on being "brave" and trying to look at the story in a very different way. He then said that he didn't see enough support in the story for my points and gave me a lower grade. I decided not to re-write. I'd rather have a lower grade on a paper I'm proud of, than an A for just paraphrasing his ideas. He's not the expert he claims to be and is very reluctant to admit to this.

Don’t believe Mike’s claims that he’s open to in-class discussion. Even if you take his seminar classes, Zim’s basically gonna preach at you. I will say that he does have his own style upon the pulpit. It’s a curious mixture of arrogance and self-confession. It can be entertaining, but his sotto voce monologues can also be tedious. When he’s not sermonizing, he fancies himself a socratic-type. So if there are exchanges in class, they are always in service to his somewhat narrow-minded ideas.

My real problem with his class comes from the course writing requirements. Mike makes confessions in his lectures, and he expects the same from his students in their papers. So, you really can’t write a straightforward, analytical paper and expect a good grade. The trick is to make him believe that you’ve come to some sort of an epiphany in writing your paper. Zim moonlights as a head shrinker. He believes that if you respond to lit. correctly, it’ll provide you with the same payoff as lying on his couch. Dankeschn, herr doctor. But if you don’t want to undertake this sort of exercise, beware of a poor grade from the Zimminator.

I can't believe the reviews that gave zimmerman a poor grade. my experience in his class was totally opposite. he really helped me to focus my analyses and to think about what i was saying in my papers. he encourages detailed and intense analysis of the text, which really helps to promote good, strong writing skills. his lectures are entertaining and interesting, and he relates just the right amount of personal anecdotes--not too many,not too few. he is definitely a hard grader--be prepared to WORK on your papers. he does let you re-write the midterm, and assigns several practice (short--like three pages) papers at the beginning of the semester (which is good so that you can get a sense of his grading style without jeopardizing your grade). he comes to class dressed in spiffy suits and with polished shoes...he's not old school, but he creates a feeling of respect (both towards his students and vice versa). he's a fantastic professor!

I thought this class was brilliantly presented! Dr. Zimmerman is an engaging lecturer with a thorough understanding of the subject matter he teaches.

The reading load is not excessive, the literature is rich and interesting, and the exams are very fair. There is a midterm and a final, each consisting of four short essays pertaining to the material covered in the class. Each piece of assigned reading is covered at length in the class discussions.

Dr. Zimmerman takes a psycho-analytic approach to analyzing the characters in the class literature, and requires that his students demonstrate an understanding of this in their essays. If you are uncompromisingly opposed to a Freudian view, think twice before enrolling in this class. (However, it is not necessary to have any prior knowledge of Freud or psycho-analysis in order to get a good grade. The necessary aspects of this are covered in the readings and the lectures.)

I disagree with the criticism in some of the other reviews which states that Dr. Zimmerman requires his students to agree with his point of view. To the contrary, I feel that he is open to other points of view, as long as they are well grounded and fully supported.

However, the assignments clearly state that students are required to apply the concepts covered in the lectures when answering the essay questions. This is not unreasonable...it's excellent teaching. He is also exceptionally willing to work with his students, allowing the midterm to be re-written if the student has done poorly.

My only criticism is that Dr. Zimmerman's handwriting is almost indecipherable. This is a pity, because he includes a great deal of valuable commentary when he returns the midterm exams. (Since I did not visit his office hours, I am unable to comment on his outside availability.)

I thought this was an exceptional class, and I loved Dr. Zimmerman's teaching style. If you are open to the idea of approaching literature from a psycho-analytic perspective, I recommend this class wholeheartedly!

Do not take this class unless you have done something very horrible in life and believe that it is your Dharma to punish yourself.

Zimmerman's philosophy in life is "Every thing you do is unconcsiously motivated by your sexual drive." He does not tolerate any other interpretations. Com'on, I know I am a sexual being but sometimes, I DON'T think about sex.

Also, he is very insensitive towards your needs as a student---unless, of course---you sit in front of the class and agree with everything he is says. He arrives late for his office hours, that is, if he arrives at all. Furthermore, he doesn't really read your paper, making pretentious remarks like "You should evaluate the sexual conflicts instead, I know you are capable."

And that is putting this all very modestly. He has obviously got his "ten-year". He seriously does not care to take the material to any other level but his own. It's his way or a bad grade. SFSU's English department should really stop and examine what a misguided person they have hired to teach upper level English.

Dr. Zimmerman is the most brilliant professor with whom I have ever had the privilege of studying. His command of the material in his classes is impeccable. He is an engaging and animated lecturer, and his passion for the literature that he teaches is apparent.

His classes are quite demanding. Attendance is required. (He reserves the right to drop students who have more than three absences.) The reading load tends to be heavy,and he expects his students to read ahead. In most cases, his midterm and final consist of four short essays each. He gives students a list of questions and allows them to pick the four that they wish to answer. Single author classes require longer term papers.

He makes his expectations for the papers very clear. He grades fairly, and has no reservations about giving low grades (including F) when they are appropriate.

He suggests that students who are not literature majors take his classes for credit/non-credit. If you are not confident in your ability to write literary criticism, I suggest you choose that option.

He can be very brutal with his commentary on written work, so it is best to be aware of this from the start. However, he is willing to work with his students and allows weak papers to be re-written.

If you enjoy a challenge, are willing to work hard, and want to gain an incredible understanding of literature, you will enjoy Dr. Zimmerman's classes.

Professor Zimmerman not the most brilliant professor- BAH! Did you ever listen to the man? Because he relentlessly spotted my lazy work that other Professors had always applauded, I wrote the best paper of my life- something I am truly proud of. The trick is you have to realize on your own that his comments on you work are encouraging you to rewrite and do better. You have to be strong enough to not get discouraged and brave enough to take him on. He is fantastic!

Michael Zimmerman could very well be one of the most misdirected professors at SFSU. Beware this class. He is using it as a forum for his one-sided beliefs. Instead of enlightening us, as Eliot would have encouraged, he tightens his grip on the subject and chains us into his boundaries of what he perceives the readings to mean. His grading is impossible. I received a low grade on a paper, then re-wrote it without complaint. He barely offered a clue as to how to fix it. Then, I worked on a 3000 word paper on Eliot I had no idea how to construct. He states at the beginning of class that people should consider taking a credit/no credit option if they are not familiar with the form and structure of an upper division poetry class. I thought that was what we were here to do-learn about it. Don't discourage us from wanting to excel by killing our hopes of getting a good grade through effort. He teaches Yeats and Eliot, but rambles on about current issues in society for an hour before even beginning his lecture. His syllabus claims he wants us to participate, but no one does, because he never stops talking. He's painfully dull and excrutiatingly difficult to understand. Half the time he looks uncomfortable, nervous and confused. There were students in this class that excelled, and I'm sure they deserved it, but they also encouraged his teaching method. He's a terrible lecturer. Most of the information I gathered about Eliot and Yeats was from my own research, which ate up all of my time. I spent more time on this class than on any other I had, not because I didn't understand the subject matter-I did after I researched in the library-but because I had to do my own teaching. I'm not looking to have my hand held at school. I'm willing to do my own work. But teachers are supposed to be guides. Zimmerman needs to find another vocation.

As I look back on my quick years here at state I can only say that Professor Zimmerman is one of the best professors I have ever had the privilege of studying with. If you have an imagination in literature he will draw it out of you. His teaching style tends to be that of the lecture format, but he is open to comments and willing to tease out an imagery that might be haunting to the students. The midterm and final are shocking. He gives four short papers which he expects back in a week, but usually the paper is not seen as he tries to present it. He really just wants the student to answer the question in a short focused essay. Honestly, its not as difficult as it sounds.

Prof. Zimmerman has a first rate command of the material. Watch out, though, if you have something strongly critical to say about a canonical author. He seems to view these authors as prophets with himself the devoted priest of their teachings. He didn't seem to care what students had to say unless he agreed with it.

At first, I thought Mr. Zimmerman was a very hard grader. He completely ripped apart my midterm, and it had me on the verge of tears. The problem was with me, however. He gives you a midterm and a final that merely ask you to answer four questions about four stories (out of about 12). I made the task much harder than it really was. I did my final the way he wanted the midterm done - merely answer the question, and make it brief - and received an A minus. People get confused in his classes because they try too hard, as I found out with myself. No matter what, however, no matter how badly you do, he allows you to do AS MANY REWRITES AS YOU PLEASE UNTIL YOU GET THE GRADE YOU WOULD LIKE. All one really has to do is edit the paper according to his notes, and you'll receive a better grade, no matter what. All I know is he is one of the better English instructors here at state, and I'm definitely going to take another class with him.

I loved this class It was a blast But we all knew it couldn't last, But through our talks about Prufrocks and Great men and Invisible men and Good men that were hard to find, and telling thumbs and Chrysanthemums, this class couldn't have been finer (I think I may just minor) Thank you for a lovely time (and for enduring all this rhyme) I could go on, But I won't.

Professor Zimmerman is an outstanding teacher. I truly felt he cared about the students, the subject matter and was interested in individuals thoughts about the stories. His class is strictly a lecture class. He is always prepared, on time and insightful. If you are interested in learning how to read a story to glean as much information from it by understanding the importance of words and how they are used in it, then this class is for you. Professor Zimmerman goes over every story. He reads passages from the stories, sometimes the entire story, emphasizing the importance of a word, a metaphor or just simply the way something is written. I have learned so much in just how to read a story. His expectations are high and you are expected to do well. Rewrites are allowed on his mid-term and he will discuss with you any problems or difficuties you have if you wish to rewrite your paper. If you want to learn about short stories, the authors, and how to read a story Professor Zimmerman is a great teacher. During the time I have been in his class I have learned a great deal. I am impressed with his kindness toward his students and his manner of teaching. Professor Zimmerman seems to really love his profession. His enjoyment of the subject matter and for teaching inspire you to do the best you can. Work hard, listen and learn and you will do well in his class.

This is a very fast-paced class, so be forewarned that you will have to finish a novel in 3-4 class meetings. I don't know if he is religious, but he will almost always bring up god in his readings. This may be good to the religious students in the class, but what about the non-religious in the class? I will never have a clue as to what he is hinting at when he takes a religious view in analyzing a scene from a novel. There is a midterm essay assignment of 12 pages toward the middle of the semester, and a final essay assignment. Besides the hefty load, there isn't a lot of work in between except the reading of the novels and short stories. You should know that Zimmerman is a tough grader, and will not have mercy on your soul if you do not present him with good writing. He does let you re-write your weak essays, but the comments he makes on your essays are very hard to read, for he tends to scribble. If you are not able to make out his comments, you certainly will not be able to improve in the areas that he wants you to improve on. If you are having trouble with writing essays or if English is not your native language, I advise you not to take ANY of Zimmerman's classes. The course grade reflects entirely on your written work, so they will either make or break you. This may be an appropriate course for those who are thinking of majoring in literature, or have mastered the written language of English.

Professor Zimmerman is perhaps the most excellent professor I have ever had. He wraps his tongue around the language in a way that is at once powerful and inspiring. His understanding of the materials he covers (Mann, Joyce, Freud, etc.) is nothing short of amazing. His grading is hard, he can spot sloppy work at a glance and truly takes no prisoners if he feels he is not getting your best. Subsequently, one learns quickly to either drop the class and take an easier instructor, or to work as hard as one can to submit the tightest, most seemless writing of one's life. His lectures are interesting, concise and beautifully human. It is truly an honor for SFSU to have such an instructor on staff. It was never my experience that he was not available to speak with (during office hours or other times), although, there is a sort of shy aloofness that Prof. Zimmerman does exude. This could possibly be off-putting to some, but it seems to me that if one truly listens to this man in his lectures, much of what is expected of his students is expertly revealed. Carefully reading his comments on returned work also goes a long way in guiding the student as to what are his expectations for assignments.

Zimmerman is a very nice man. Unfortunately, nice people don't necessarily make good instructors. The problems that I have had with professor Zimmerman stem less from his classroom work, and more from his evaluation of the work turned in to him. We mainly reviewed Tolstoy and Joyce in this class and an attempt was to be made (not by the intructor, only by the student) to draw a nexus between these writers and major scientific revolutionaries in history. Grades are based on evaluation of 3 papers - one is a "midterm" on the physics portion of the class, another is a paper on Tolstoy and the final, the culminating paper is of the student's choice that draws the previously mentioned "nexus". Unfortunately, not one minute of the class is spent talking about possible "nexuses", and students are given no material or instruction on how to write effective papers. Unfortunate because the grade student's receive is based less on their ability to draw a nexus and more on their ability to write an effective paper. Further, the instructor rarely makes it to posted office hours and is otherwise difficult to reach. This was the reported experience of a number of students who took the class and others I talked to who took classes with Zimmerman while we waited - fruitlessly - outside his office during his posted office hours. Seriously consider a different class if you are needing a class for humanities and you are a science major (your writing will not improve as a result of this poorly designed class), or if you are a humanities major looking for science credit (the physics instructor - Fisher - is fun but you will learn nothing about science).