Student Feedback

Princeton University FRS113: Rise and Fall of the Roman Floodline

2025

Every paragraph below is an individual student's answer to the question: "Please comment on the quality of class discussion, including the extent of student participation?".

It was excellent. Both Frederik and Olivia made sure to create a safe and open environment for discussions, where we were not afraid to make mistakes. Therefore, everyone would contribute to the class and we would have quite fruitful discussions.

Frederik and Olivia fostered a classroom environment in which everyone felt willing and able to contribute to the discussion.

This was a really great course! Frederik and Olivia were always willing to answer questions during or after class, over email, or outside of class, and any lecturing always felt very interactive. They really made an effort to know us, joking around a lot and telling us their personal opinions on a whole host of subjects (Frederik especially). Most of us were honestly pretty scared of them for the first few weeks because their feedback on assignments could be pretty direct and terse, but eventually we found out that that was really just the communication style and that they really are very understanding and merciful and invested in their students.

This was an excellent and engaging class, with very informative group discussions that relied heavily on student participation.

Class discussions were informative, and students participated well.

Very good, everyone went to every class and small lecture allowed for good conversations.

I think that everyone in the class was involved, and discussions were relevant and educational.

Class discussions were appropriate for the subject being taught, where the professors would ask for input and students would volunteer. Almost all students volunteered, and there was a lot of participation.

The quality of class discussion was generally good, and students seemed to be engaged and involved in the conversation.

I think the quality of discussion was very high, as virtually every student was able to participate in the class and provide insights. As a result, I was able to learn from each of my classmates, which enhanced the learning experience.

Class discussions were very engaging and intriguing, largely because everyone in our class always participated extensively. The class environment was very welcoming and supportive, so our discussions often flowed naturally until everyone, or almost all students, had contributed a unique idea to the discussion.

Every paragraph below is an individual student's answer to the question: "Seminars are taught by a variety of methods. In your opinion, was the presentation of the material appropriate to the subject matter of the seminar?"

The presentation of the material was very appropriate. There were several methods to it: lecture style, discussions, and labs. They all complemented into building up all the knowledge needed for our final presentations. I learned a lot from this course, and I believe all my other classmates did too.

Yes

Absolutely.

The presentation of the material was sufficient for a survey course of this type. More rigorous explanations of some higher–level concepts may be needed in order to drive some of the more nuanced points home for students.

Our classes were almost three hours, but never felt slow. We'd usually start by briefly going over the readings, and then each of us would write 3 "key points" which were graded for how effectively they could summarize the readings in a small amount of words (we later had opportunities to revise). We would then often have some lecture (but still very interactive and discussion–based) about some topic in the geosciences or climatology or GPS technology. We usually also had a "lab" component where we would go outside to collect data, and some time doing MATLAB code together which would we then adapt for our weekly MATLAB assignments.

Yes, it was both educational and interactive.

I definitely learned a lot from the material that was presented. However, I would have appreciated a more logical structure to the topics we covered, as the things we discussed often seemed somewhat random and disjoint from each other.

Yes

the slideshow/lecture combination of the class made it hard to keep up sometimes and circle back to material that you missed in class. made it difficult to tell what the focus of each lecture was.

I think one positive challenge of the seminar was being introduced to data–analysis methods that were fairly advanced for first–year students. The only difficulty I encountered was that the line between what was being taught conceptually and what we were expected to execute in the lab sometimes felt unclear. For example, we would learn the mathematical basis for an advanced technique, but in practice we were not expected to implement it ourselves. Clearer distinctions between ‘background knowledge’ and ‘applied tasks’ would have helped me better manage my workload, and I appreciated the positive steps in this direction near the end of the course. That said, I understand the difficulty of presenting advanced material at an accessible level, and overall even with the difficulties I found the material valuable.

The material presented on the history of Roman floods, GPS technology, and Earth processes was presented very clearly, usually in mini lectures with accompanying slideshows or sketches on the blackboard or in socratic discussions focused on articles or Aldrete chapters we had been assigned to read. However, I would say that the MATLAB lessons were presented less clearly, often in quick demonstrations with code shared on the board that we had to copy on our computers. Unfortunately, these demonstrations often went very quickly, and so it was easy for me and my peers to get lost in the process.

Yes, the course was a very nice mix of lectures about flooding and climate, and hands–on work with MATLAB for data analysis.

Every paragraph below is an individual student's answer to the question: Was the amount of reading assigned each week about right, and were the selections appropriate?

The amount of reading was about right, and the selections were perfect. The readings were composed of the book about roman floods (good for us to understand the history and properties of the place we were studying and visiting), and we also had to read articles and research papers related to floods, precipitation, and extreme events. The readings were interesting, engaging, and useful to the class.

Yes

The reading was few pages but required close reading, so it was about right.

The amount of reading was fair, and the selections were relevant to the overarching goals of the course.

The readings were quite manageable. While we honestly don't need to read or memorize every detail, it was important to have read the readings so that we could summarize the readings in the 3 key points.

Yes, they always enhanced my understanding of what was being taught in class.

Yes, the readings were of an appropriate length, and generally related to the material that we discussed in class.

Yes, loved the book aldrete.

yes

Yes, the Aldrete chapters and assigned articles were easy to keep up with and always very intriguing and appropriate to our focus on Roman floods, GPS technology, and rebuilding from natural disasters.

The reading was a fair amount, and felt relevant to the work we were doing as well. It scaffolded, and felt like the perfect build–up through the course. They seemed to build off each other and reveal more things about each other.

Yes, the reading was very interesting and relevant to the subjects we talked about each week, and I genuinely enjoyed reading the selections.

Every paragraph below is an individual student's answer to the question: "Comment on the amount of writing and the pacing of the assignments. Did you receive helpful criticism? Do you believe that the seminar improved your writing skills?"

There was extensive and helpful feedback on all assignments. I believe my writing skills improved a lot throughout the course, especially those related to being able to write something concise. The end of the course involved more work than expected. I thoroughly enjoyed the work I was doing, I just wish I had more time to further explore it and do it.

The seminar definitely improved my lab report writing skills, and the input I received was helpful in this as I didn't have lots of previous experience in scientific research and reporting.

The lab reports ramped up significantly as the semester went on. Criticism was helpful and I think I am a better scientific writer now than I was at the start of the semester.

The pacing of the assignments was healthy, with plenty of helpful criticism.

The hardest part of the assignments by far was always creating figures (e.g. graphs and maps) in MATLAB, but Olivia and Frederik would always be willing to help out, and they also encouraged us to ask our classmates for help which we did a lot! The feedback often pertained more to aesthetic things like the font size or how we formatted our reports in LaTeX, or sometimes to the lab report writing itself, but not as much about the content of the MATLAB figures themselves, which was nice since we are still just beginners but I also feel like sometimes we were just adapting the code they provided without fully understanding what it was doing behind the scenes. One minor suggestion I have is if they could explain the weighting of assignments more clearly — there was a lot of histeria at several points about grades since most of us got some not–so–great grades on the lab reports and key points, but Frederik and Olivia kept insisting that the final grade weighting allows everyone to get As or Bs, but it would be helpful if they could show us more how this weighting works so we could trust it more.

Most of our writing assignments were lab reports, which helped me practice my usage of more technical language and writing. The criticism I received was very helpful, and I was able to refine my writing based off of it.

This seminar definitely improved my scientific writing skills, especially as I learned how to use LaTeX. There was a significant amount of writing, and I felt that the expectations were not always clear. However, I did receive a lot of helpful feedback.

I didn't love the 3 sentence summaries each week. Nobody could every seem to get it right and the critiquing felt random.

We didn't get feedback until the second half of the semester, so I think it would've been more helpful if I had gotten criticism sooner and been able to make changes in my later work.

I found the criticism helpful overall, and I do feel that my writing improved over the semester. One thing I struggled with at times was the tone of written feedback. Occasionally, comments came across as either very matter–of–fact or attempting humor, and it was sometimes hard to tell which tone was intended through text alone. This made it difficult to distinguish between actual critique and the lighthearted.

Yes, the feedback that Olivia and Frederik provided on every single "key point" writing synopsis and mini lab report was always very detailed and constructive. Every week, I found myself becoming more capable of writing as a scientist and more confident in my ability to create graphs and pull information from them in an effective manner. Our class discussions also improved my writing skills by allowing me to see new perspectives from my peers and thereby learn how to integrate a multitude of ideas concisely.

Yes, I really appreciated the professors' feedback and I think it was the best and most thorough feedback I've ever received. It really helped me elevate my scientific writing and taught me a lot about how to make better figures.

Every paragraph below is an individual student's answer to the question: "Please comment on in-class and out-of-class assignments, hands-on activities, trips, and other kinds of special opportunities, and describe how important they were to the Freshman Seminar."

The labs were very important to have a better understanding of the science behind it all, and prepare us for the field work we were to perform in Rome. The trip was extremely important for my understanding of what scientific field work looks like, and it exposed me to a whole different line of work. It was great to have that time to interact with so many interesting and intellectual people (the professors, graduate students, and my classmates). This course and trip have led me to pursue more research in the subject.

The trip to Rome was crucial for contextualizing the material we were working through in class. It was an amazing experience that allowed us to experience first–hand the importance of our work while being steeped in the beauty of Italy. Particularly memorable was the visit from the National Institute of Geophysics, where we got to meet experts in the field and see what they were working on in real life.

Our assignments were weekly take–home labs. While they were very challenging for me as I had not done anything similar before, Prof. Simons was very helpful and also encouraged working with more advanced classmates to understand the concepts.

The trip to Rome was extremely rewarding; in addition to the connections it made among students and faculty on the trip, students were able to get a hands–on experience with geoscience in a way that wouldn't have been possible in the class room: from studying Roman flood markers to analyzing geology in the Appenines.

The Rome trip was amazing!!! It really helped our whole class bond (including the professors, and also the grad students and non– Princeton professors who travelled with us), and while we collected lots of useful data and learned a lot, never did it feel unbalanced with the more touristy or fun stuff. We spent two and a half days in Rome collecting the GPS coordinates and altitudes of flood markers, a day at the beach in Lido di Ostia where we measured the altitude of sea level, a day learning about earthquakes in Abruzzo, a day hiking the Gran Sasso massif in the Aburzzan Apennines and learning about geomorphology, and we also visited the Vatican. While we all needed to be awake and active and ready to participate at all times, they were not quite as strict with curfew as they initially let on. One random little perk that I'll mention is that few meals were planned out ahead of time and the food budget seemed pretty big, so the chaperones would take students' advice on where to eat, and one of my classmates came prepared with a whole Google Maps list of great restaurants and they just listened to her. So we ended up having the best Neapolitan pizza and basil–sauce gnocchi and hazelnut–and–goat–cheese risotto, and they also let us frequently get gelato and espresso!

The trip to Italy during fall break was one of the highlights of my semester, as I was both able to learn a lot through hands–on experience and it was also a great bonding experience with the calss.

All course assignments definitely improved my scientific knowledge and ability to conduct experiments and write about them logically. Again, the expectations were not always clear for these assignments, but they were informative nonetheless. The trip to Rome was the highlight of the class, where we were able to apply some of the skills we learned in class by using geodetic equipment to measure flood markers. It was amazing to see a new part of the world while also developing my scientific and problem–solving skills.

Rome was amazing, and the highlight of my freshman year so far.

Really enjoyed the fieldwork aspect of the class and it hammered home a lot of important lessons with regard to the course!

The trip was amazing and well organized. Everything we did seemed to have an educational purpose, and I would not hesitate to recommend it to others. In class, reading quizzes were a fair way to assess reading engagement, and I think it taught a new style of writing effectively. The labs were overwhelming at times, but I'm certain that this is not any more than other science with lab classes. The additional professors on the trip, such as Kristel Chanard from The Institut Géographique National de Paris, were amazing additions and I learned so much from them. Additional in–field lectures from the INGV were incredible, unexpected, and incredibly educational.

The trip to Rome was a life–changing aspect of FRS 113 that I am so grateful to have experienced. After the trip, at least half of our class was considering either minoring in Climate Sciences or majoring in Geosciences, which more or less sums up how engaging our field work was and how inspiring the geoscientists we traveled with (including Frederik and Olivia) were in conveying the concepts they study. I had never before spent days at a time with experts who could talk at length about everything around us–– the mountains, rocks, wind, and sea with such intense curiosity and genuine passion. Their willingness to discuss everything with us––from geoscience to open relationships and falling in love––was a very special experience that brought our class even closer together. Also, it was incredible that in addition to the geoscience focus of our trip so many of our peers and professors had extensive knowledge about the history of Rome, religion, and language that they were so willing to share as we traveled through the city. Overall, the intense drive and love for knowledge were the most exhilarating notions of the trip, which I hope to integrate into my own life even now that FRS 113 has ended.

I believe that the trip to Rome was incredibly important to the Freshman Seminar. It allowed us to witness the effects of flooding first–hand, and we also gained experience in using tools for data collection and then processing the data afterwards. Before the trip, we also did a lot of practice with the tools we'd be using, so when we were there we were familiar with them.

Every paragraph below is an individual student's answer to the question: "Please use this space to tell us anything you want to about the seminar."

Prof. Simons is great and knows all the information in his field very well and knows how to break it down so students can understand. Loved the class.

OLIVIA AND FREDERIK ARE AMAZING!!!

The professors of FRS 113 are incredible. Olivia and Frederik are exceptionally patient, kind, and supportive, yet also push their students to learn as much as they can without fear of making mistakes.

I really want to emphasize how great this seminar was. Our instructors, Frederik and Olivia, were wonderful, and I think the course was super helpful in giving students a bit of exposure to what each step of scientific research looks like.

Every paragraph below is an individual student's answer to the question: "In thinking about the overall quality of the course, please comment on what you got out of the course. What did the instructor do particularly well, and in what ways might the course be improved?"

The course was great, definitely my favorite course of the semester. The only thing is that the final presentation intense. There was a lot to do, not much time.

I think grading policy could have been made clearer; even now I am still unsure as to what grade I should expect and there was some (in my opinion justified) panic when the first batch of grades was released.

I got a basic knowledge of scientific reporting, and I learned a lot about floods and geology. The instructor was particularly good at explaining the geological concepts to students through examples.

The overall quality of the course is very good. It is helpful as a introduction to large geoscientific concepts, and it also helps students to gain transferable skills such as crafting a research paper, and using MATLAB and LaTeX.

This course was great, and (unlike Frederik on my lab reports) I really have no notes!

The instructor did well in fostering a welcoming and relaxed environment in the class, and also taught extremely well. One way that the course can be improved is that the workload was very heavy at times, and multiple students needed extensions for certain assignments.

Overall, the course was not easy, and I would have appreciated more guidance on the expectations for each assignment. However, Professor Simons was always willing and ready to help us gain a better understanding of the material. I definitely learned so much more about the subject of geodesy while also gaining practical problem–solving skills. Additionally, I am grateful for the opportunity this course provided to learn MATLAB and LaTeX and apply them.

More specific grading and rubrics to be used.

Frederik and Olivia are great and really helpful if you talk to them one–on–one. I wish it had been more clear how to access help earlier on in the course though.

think the instructors were particularly good at sharing their enthusiasm for this topic. I knew nothing about college–level geosciences before this class, and now I feel I understand it way better, and am now even considering majoring in it.

I learned how to conduct field work, produce scientific reports, and create meaningful graphs. Although learning MATLAB was the most difficult aspect of the course, I am very proud of the figures we are now able to create with it. Frederik and Olivia provided feedback very regularly to us, which was very helpful. FRS 113 might be improved by having students begin a more comprehensive MATLAB tutorial at the course's start that goes over how to compute basic commands, teaching students syntax explicitly.

As someone who wants to go into research, this was incredibly helpful as it taught me how to analyze data, write a research paper, and present my findings. I really enjoyed each week's lab assignments, and I think they really helped me become proficient in MATLAB even though I had no experience going in.

2024

Every paragraph below is an individual student's answer to the question: "Please comment on the quality of class discussion, including the extent of student participation?".

Class discussions were super interesting – I think we all learned how to ask questions in a much deeper way after the course.

The usage of class times and discussions were pretty helpful, but given the varying knowledge and ability to catch on that people had, it was sometimes difficult to join into them.

Class discussions were very informative and engaging. I think we could have been more engaged if there were a few more pauses in class discussion so that we could formulate questions and answers, but overall great.

Class wasn't really discussion based. (...) Other than the occasional genuine question or spur of curiosity by someone in the class, including myself, participation felt forced or coaxed. Although I cannot deny that this type of participation did help with the understanding and retaining of information from lectures, it felt like it lowered voluntary engagement. One thing I did appreciate was the mixture of things we did in each class. While the lectures and coding demonstrations were dull, there would be parts of class where we would try things on our own or do some form of unique activity we hadn't done before, those parts of class were nice. The presentations and peer editing sessions in the last couple of classes were also quite nice and a welcome change of pace.

Class discussions really pushed me to ask quality questions and learn content that was out of my comfort zone. The professors encouraged all students to speak.

Adam encouraged us to ask questions, which made the class discussions more fruitful. However, there were times when the topics were so complex that I wasn't sure what to ask.

Class discussion was fruitful and students were often engaged.

Student participation, curiosity, and discussions were always encouraged.

Amazing! Lots of hands–on experience.

class with the most student participation out of the seminars I took this semester

Every paragraph below is an individual student's answer to the question: "Seminars are taught by a variety of methods. In your opinion, was the presentation of the material appropriate to the subject matter of the seminar?"

I thought they helped a lot with the programming in MATLAB. I also liked the explanations of different processes to help us understand the things we will be seeing/have seen better.

Yes, I think the powerpoints with lots of visual aspects were extremely helpful in the teaching of the courses as the ideas are not things I had previously seen.

Yes, it was all connected. Even if it was not, the content was very interesting and I really enjoyed it. The non–content–based skills were also very helpful––scientific writing, peer reviewing, asking questions, storyboarding etc.

Considering that the seminar was about natural processes that couldn't really be explained in full detail to freshmen, I think the professors did a good job of providing simplified explanations of the subject matter. So, in terms of appropriateness I believe the methods did well. The methods and hands–on research and first–hand witnessing we did in Italy were especially incredible and taught us more than many of the classes we attended. Although the class lectures were slightly dull in structure and length, they had interesting information and so they could retain attention at least for certain parts.

Yes, the presentation of the material was appropriate.

Yes, the presentations were highly appropriate to the subject matter. They helped us understand the concepts that were instrumental in our understanding of our flood.

I found the presentation of material to be logical for the flow of the class, starting with lab assignments to familiarize ourselves with MATLAB and progressively working us through the writing assignments.

Yes, the split format of lectures and labs class provided a strong base in the materials I needed throughout the class, whether it was coding, learning geodesy, or gaining hands–on experience.

Yes, very. Lots of field work relevant to the coursework we learned in class.

Despite a lot of the material feeling tangental to the specific goal of the seminar, I think it's a great introduction to geoscience in general

Every paragraph below is an individual student's answer to the question: "Comment on the amount of writing and the pacing of the assignments. Did you receive helpful criticism? Do you believe that the seminar improved your writing skills?"

There was a lot of work at times. I did receive a lot of helpful criticism, and it definitely helped improve my research–writing skills.

I am a horrible writer and so I found it difficult to transition from my past technical papers writing styles to the ones used for this class (and probably later on). I received an extremely large amount of feedback and think that it was all super helpful in improving my writing skills although I need to take the time to learn how to implement them.

I think my writing skills grew a lot. The pacing of assignments was tough to follow at first but after a few weeks we adjusted and it was generally manageable. TA sessions were very helpful.

This seminar was literally my hardest class this semester. (...) The professors would pick apart every project and essay beyond reasonability. From syntax, grammar, and diction to the quality and sizing of images, the format and correct capitalization within citations and even the essay length down to the letter. (...) The criticism was harsh but the professors promised it would make my writing better and serve me well in the future. Maybe it is just that I am being shortsighted, but I didn't feel like the comments were too helpful, although one thing that was helpful was the professor's insistence and emphasis on extreme conciseness. I can see that being helpful in future scientific writing.

There was a lot of writing in this course, but the pacing was expected (once a week). I received constructive criticism that absolutely helped me to improve my scientific writing.

The feedback was dense but highly informative. However, in the first half of the semester, there were far too many assignments given each week. Reducing the workload would allow students to focus more deeply and give their best effort to each task. Despite this, the seminar was incredibly valuable—it taught me how to write a proper scientific research paper, and I’m really glad I took this course.

I found the pacing to be very fast and often a little overwhelming. I felt I recieved helpful criticism at times, but at others it felt more so harsh than helpful. I believe the seminar did very much improve my scientific writing skills however.

The pacing of the assignments was helpful in that I didn't feel rushed on finishing my final paper by Dean's Date. This kind of writing was different from my usual classes, and I'm glad I was ab

Weekly feedback helped improve the quality of written assignments throughout the semester, and fostered a research mindset.

yes, received an incredible amount of feedback –– the effort the professors put into this was unmatched by any other course I took.

Every paragraph below is an individual student's answer to the question: "Please comment on in-class and out-of-class assignments, hands-on activities, trips, and other kinds of special opportunities, and describe how important they were to the Freshman Seminar."

The in–class and out–of–class assignments were pretty interesting and got us used to the materials/tools that we would need outside of class. Rome was a very cool experience and helped us understand how some of the tools are used on the field. I also liked seeing the different rock layers, faults, etc. in person.

All of the in–class MATLAB exercises were extremely fun and helpful. The out of class labs were a little time consuming, but was a once in a lifetime experience in my case and taught me a lot about being on the field which helped prepare me for the extremely priceless experience of going to Italy and conducting field work.

The trip to Rome was one of the best parts of the seminar; I really liked being able to put our lab skills into practice. The labs all over campus were helpful too, if hard to follow at first.

The trip to Italy was amazing. Despite being work–intensive and giving us no free time as many of the other freshman seminars or class trips did, it was incredible and in my opinion the only thing that made the class worth taking. The work we did in the streets of Rome exposed us to the heart of the city and to many historical cites and beautiful buildings and churches. The mountains were even more fascinating and beautiful. Learning about the natural processes we had been talking about all semester and then seeing them in person and connecting them with the knowledge we'd been accumulating for weeks was very fun. The learning we did there also fueled the rest of the semester and sparked our curiosity about many more topics that brought about future discussions. The one day we dedicated to historical sightseeing and all the cultural food we had were also amazing. The in–class assignments were significantly better than the out–of–class assignments although both were hard. The in class assignments allowed for more help from the professors and from peers. The last three classes in particular in which we worked on our final essays and presentations were particularly helpful and even kind of fun. Watching everyone's presentations and all the information we discovered on our own come together with what we learned in class made the work we did throughout the semester worth it. I think those presentations and the way we did them, with the collaboration and all the professors available to help in that class period, was excellent and very essential to the course. (...) Because they were important for us to learn data collection, analysis, and processing using code, the labs were very important to the class. They also set us up for the trip to Italy and gave us an idea about the data we would collect, how we would collect it and what we would do with it. As for the physical aspects of the labs, it was a hassle at times and constituted us doing unusual looking activities around campus, and it was time consuming. But, I cannot say that it wasn't at least somewhat enjoyable. It gave us a laugh or two and the tools were interesting to get to know. It was especially nice that we were able to do this part of the labs in teams and that it prepared us to use the tools in Italy, which was the truly fun part.

The trip to Rome was the highlight of my fall semester, and it was very aligned to the skills we built during the first half of the course.

Given that many of us were learning completely new concepts, the in–class demonstrations were often a bit fast–paced. However, the ample office hours provided a great opportunity to get guidance and address any questions we had. The trip to Italy was my first fieldwork experience, and I am so impressed by how much I learned not just throughout the semester, but especially during those 7 days. From learning the protocols of fieldwork to seeing how to measure and analyze our results, Adam and Frederik truly taught us everything we needed to know. This course has opened my eyes to the world of fieldwork, and it has inspired me to pursue fieldwork this upcoming summer.

The freshman seminar was defined by the trip we took to rome over fall break. The trip was extremely educational and fun, however with little free time and most of the time spent doing field research. Lab activities and field work were critical to the seminar.

I think the hands–on activities from our labs prepared us extremely well for the actual experience of taking measurements. This class taught me a lot about myself and most importantly, what I can improve on.

Super fun, super rewarding. Lots of in–class concepts were pointed out and observed in nature. Learned field drawing techniques.

most enjoyable and informative assignments I worked on so far at Princeton

Every paragraph below is an individual student's answer to the question: "Please use this space to tell us anything you want to about the seminar."

I liked it! It really reflected the amount of effort that we put in.

I'm glad I took the seminar, it taught me a lot about geoscience content as well as skills like scientific writing, coding, peer reviewing and working on labs in groups. I also got more comfortable with thinking quickly and collboratively in topics I didn't know a lot about.

I loved the people, students and professors. I particularly liked that there were 2 professors, 2 assistant professors, and 1 TA so that if one explanation was unclear or one person's style was not best for my understanding I could get help from someone else. This also meant that office hours were more spread out and consistently available which was necessary and very convenient and nice. The humor Dr. Simmons added to the course was also great. So I suppose that I would include in this part a thanks to Drs. Maloof, Simmons, Walbert and Wilcots, and Ashley Holmes for always being helpful.

Professor Adam and Professor Frederik are some of my favorite professors I have met at Princeton.

This has been the best course I took this semester. I truly admire Adam, Frederik, Olivia, Julia, and Ashley, who helped me learn so many incredible things. I thank them for making me grow as a student and as a human being.

There is so much work in this class! It is a fun class but the distribution of work could be slightly lessened and the teaching could be more expectant of the fact that students are coming in with less base geology/scientific knowledge

Unique experience!

best class I took so far

Every paragraph below is an individual student's answer to the question: "In thinking about the overall quality of the course, please comment on what you got out of the course. What did the instructor do particularly well, and in what ways might the course be improved?"

I think the course could be a bit more clear at times (e.g. the assignments and what kinds of questions we should be answering, the page limit, citation formats, etc.). However, I definitely think I got out what I put in. I really learned a lot about different techniques for MATLAB and analyzing data. I also learned a lot about the geosciences, flood processes, and different data that are important to geoscientists today (to predict future events, etc.)

The quality of the course was extremely great. We had two extremely knowledgeable and really smart professors alongside three full–time TAs who were all also extremely knowledgable, which is usually available to students. I think all of the instructors (including TAs) knew their areas of expertise and helped us learn a lot.

I appreciated the timeliness of feedback and the quality and depth of lectures, labs and the Rome trip. There was definitely a period at the beginning of the semester when the course was challenging not only in content but also in quantity and pace of assignments, but I think this was by design and it helped a lot in terms of adjusting to the overall Princeton workload.

Above all, I became a better scientific writer because of this course.

I learned how to use MATLAB and LaTeX, and I gained important statistical analysis tools, such as the p–test and coefficient correlation. Socially, I made many great friends through this course. One thing that stood out to me was how adaptable the instructors were. For example, when we provided feedback on our peers' papers, the instructors noticed that the quality of the feedback wasn’t up to par in the first round. To address this, they started grading the feedback in the next round, which helped improve its quality.

Frederik was extremely good at walking me through things when I got stuck, in terms of explaining.