Diana Brecher

The class was boring. Terrible professor.

Reviews that are critical of this course material are spot on. Positive psychology does not have enough material for 13 weeks of lectures so the prof compensates by assigning a ridiculous number of readings. Lectures are lengthy and repetitive. Theories are based on opinion rather than fact, from glorified motivational speakers. Avoid if you can.

This prof was the absolute worst. Way too many readings each week and the exams were terrible. Such unclear instructions for the paper, which she marks unfairly. Do not recommend taking a class with this prof.

Just awful. Course should be re-evaluated by the University for even being offered to students. Joke of a course, too any readings and prof marks too hard for what jumbo she teaches.

Seemed like a nice person, but not a good prof. I took this course based on past reviews—big mistake. You're only graded on 3 things, and she's a tough marker for no reason. Readings are excessive and the tests are almost entirely based on them. Also, why have a midterm if the final is cumulative? This course felt like academic nonsense. AVOID IT!!

Ridiculous amount of readings every week and she only tests you on irrelevant information from said readings. Mainly reads off the slides in class. Vague assignment instructions, provides little feedback, and gives low grades without explaining why. Could have been an interesting course but the way it was handled made it unbearable.

Extremely hard marker. Not easy on marking, not lenient. But if you like meditation and learning about character traits, take her class. Class was interesting.

Caring professor who teaches most of what you need to know in class. The amount of readings are ridiculous though and around half of exam questions are on them. I clocked about 60-70 readings this year for this course. Questions are also based on things that happen in lecture so make sure to attend. PSY706 is taught with care, but not a bird course

Diana cares about what she teaches. However, she requires a heavy amount of reading and about half of the exam questions were on them. A large portion of the course content is on her own work, which is interesting enough, but take it as you will. The assignment grading criteria is a little unclear.

Her lectures are somewhat interesting and insightful but the assignments don't let you reflect that knowledge. They're heavily weighted and even if you fulfill all the criteria on her rubric, you'd get an 80% at best. She expects you to go above and beyond to "deserve" a 100%. Grading criteria very very unclear.