I was so dissatisfied with this semester I am actually giving feedback.
For my contemporary paganism class:
I was actually very frustrated and dissatisfied with this course. So much so that I wholly regret wasting a credit on it. I cannot say there is anything in this class that I actually found helpful and there were a few instances some of the professor's comments bordered on offensive (and a few comments that straight up were offensive). This class would be better taught as "European Paganism and Ethnic Identity" or "New Religious Movements of Europe" - as this course did not cover much of contemporary paganism that would actually be relevant to those of us who will be living and working in America. What would be helpful would be learning about the various pagan practices we would come into contact with, how to navigate interreligious dialogue between practicing pagans and other religions (both learning how to still be able to serve them despite differing beliefs and how to navigate conflict), and perhaps explore practical applications of paganism in contemporary society. For this last item, the module of Paganism and Politics attempted to do that, albeit in a more narrow context.
I understand this was his first semester teaching here and it was not what he was expecting, however some of his information was outdated or revealed how little he actually knew about some of the movements he was teaching on. For an educator, regardless of experience with the software platform or knowledge of the atmosphere of the school, I expected better.
Entered in chat gbt to make it nicer:
I found myself quite frustrated and ultimately dissatisfied with this course. Unfortunately, I regret using a credit on it, as I did not find the content particularly helpful or relevant. In several instances, some of the professor’s comments felt inappropriate — in a few cases, even offensive — which made it difficult to remain engaged.
The course title and description led me to expect a broader and more applicable overview of contemporary pagan practices, particularly those relevant to ministry or interreligious work in an American context. Instead, the course seemed to focus primarily on European paganism and cultural identity, which might be better suited under a title like "European Paganism and Ethnic Identity” or "New Religious Movements of Europe.”
What would have been more beneficial is a curriculum centered around pagan traditions practitioners are more likely to encounter in the U.S., alongside tools for interreligious dialogue — such as navigating theological differences, supporting pagan practitioners in inclusive ways, and understanding the modern expressions of paganism in a pastoral or communal context. The module on Paganism and Politics touched on this to a degree, though it was fairly limited in scope.
I recognize this was the professor’s first semester teaching here and that the experience may not have matched his expectations. However, some of the material felt outdated or suggested a lack of depth in understanding of the movements being presented. Regardless of the challenges that come with a new teaching environment, I had hoped for a higher standard of preparation and sensitivity in course delivery.
For Contemporary Art and Religion -
I was a bit frustrated with this class. Its clear that the professor is very passionate and knowledgeable on this topic, but there was a very clear bias in the discussions in class. She did not always respond well when people contradicted her perspective or was dismissive when another spiritual context was presented to the topic. For example when referring to the "spirit of an object" it was within a specific context - if one tried to talk about a literal spirit it was completely ignored. Mysticism could be discussed academically but if one tried to approach a topics from a mystic perspective it felt unwelcome. While she never cut anyone off from speaking it was very clear where she welcomed discussion and where she didn't. As a student I felt as if I was not truly allowed to explore the topic of this class as much as I would have liked because of how limited the discussions were. Everything was approached from an almost disconnected/objective or sociological perspective as opposed to a spiritual one. There was also an almost reluctance to consider any religious context outside of Christianity for most of the discussions and topics presented. When other traditions were brought up there was perceived avoidance, even when it was relevant to what was being discussed and could have provided another avenue to explore the art.
She was never rude and while her micro expressions and body language gave a lot away, she held a decent poker face when the discussion wasn't what she wanted before she was able to redirect it. But it did reveal her bias. It also felt as if she was more eager to participate in discussions than to really hear the perspective of the class other than to respond with her own opinions and thoughts. There was a very large portion of the class that almost never spoke in class. For these reasons I would encourage her use of small groups for discussions more often in future offerings of this class. This allows for all students to feel as though they are able to speak on the topic, allows for multiple perspectives to be explored, and by limiting the number of people engaged in discussion at one time allows for deeper discussion. She did use small groups a few times in class and I will say that for me personally, those were the only time I really felt like we got to dig deep into the art the way I had hoped we would for the whole class. The biggest complaint in those cases was how short the small group discussion time was.
Asked Chat GPT to make it nicer:
I had some frustrations with this course, though I appreciate the professor’s clear passion and deep knowledge of the subject. That said, the classroom environment at times felt limited in perspective. There appeared to be a strong bias in how discussions were guided, and when students offered alternative viewpoints — especially from different spiritual or religious contexts — they were sometimes met with dismissiveness or redirection.
For example, discussions involving concepts like the "spirit of an object" were often confined to a specific interpretive lens. If someone attempted to engage with these ideas from a more literal or mystical perspective, those contributions were generally overlooked. Similarly, while mysticism could be analyzed from an academic standpoint, approaching it from a personal or experiential angle often felt unwelcome. Though the professor never directly shut down conversation, it was evident which types of perspectives were encouraged and which were not. This created an environment where I, and I believe others as well, didn’t feel fully able to explore the material in the way we had hoped.
Discussions frequently centered around Christian frameworks, and while that can certainly be appropriate, there seemed to be a reluctance to incorporate insights from other religious traditions — even when they were relevant and could have deepened the analysis of the artwork or themes we were exploring. Opportunities to broaden the discussion were often missed or redirected.
To be clear, the professor was never overtly rude and maintained a composed demeanor in class. However, her microexpressions and body language occasionally revealed discomfort or disapproval when certain perspectives were introduced, which made it more difficult to engage openly. At times, it felt as though the classroom dynamic prioritized the professor's interpretations over a fuller dialogue with student perspectives. This may have contributed to the noticeable silence of several classmates throughout the semester.
One suggestion for future iterations of this course would be to incorporate small group discussions more regularly. The few times we did engage in them, I found those to be the most enriching parts of the course. These sessions allowed for deeper exploration of the material and made it easier for diverse viewpoints to be heard. Extending the time allotted for these discussions could also allow for more meaningful engagement with the subject matter and foster a more inclusive learning environment.
