I had him for sec reg during winter 2009. Khanna allows you to opt-in via the internet before class if you want to be on-call. If you opt-in about 30 or so times a semester, you get a 10 point bump in your grade. Taking the class pass/fail and not opting in leaves you with absolutely zero incentive to pay attention. Thankfully Khanna is an excellent teacher and really knows this stuff. He is pretty clear, and he even gives you a 10 page personal outline for about 1/2 the material.
Khanna is awesome. He is very straightforward, makes lectures interesting, and doesn’t take this too seriously. For class participation he does a sign up system where you get a grade boost if you sigh up ~60%+ of the time. This systems works well because it is easy to satisfy, and you don’t have to worry about being cold-called if you didn’t do the reading that day. When he does call on you, the answers are usually already on the board. His tests are relatively straightforward as well, there were no surprises. The final is usually a portion multiple choice with a final issue spotter question that he tells you beforehand has 4 big issues to spot. For EO Khanna also covers more material than the other profs, particularly M&As which are the most interesting part of the course (where the blood is spilled, Khanna likes to say). Definitely take EO with Khanna if you are going to take EO.
Khanna is an awesome professor. I would definitely recommend taking any class he teaches. Also, the other prof who usually teaches EO is not very good (Evans), so if you want to take EO, definitely take it with Khanna
Khanna, on the other hand, is the ideal professor. He’s not an asshole in class, he’s incredibly lucid, has a good sense of humor, and you learn a ton. The exam is also very straightforward and fair.
Khanna is a good professor, but don’t get so caught up in the hype surrounding him to think he walks on water. His positive aspects would include that he is: an interesting lecturer, not brutal when he cold calls, approachable outside of class. On the other hand, in his Fall 2009 EO class, I found him, or at least his class, frustrating for the following reasons: he canceled class a lot during the semester and then tried to ramrod a lot of material in at the end of the semester by holding double class sessions, none of his old exams were online, the exam was 2/3 multiple choice, he attracted what seemed like half the masthead of law review and an inordinate amount of other gunners who were trying to impress him (I don’t know how this affected the curve; draw your own conclusions). He also sometimes spends a lot of time explaining how ingenious a certain decision is, but fails to clearly explain the law.
Also, it is better to think of the “opt in” system for cold calls as a system in which if you don’t opt in the required number of times you are going to lose 10 points on your final grade as opposed to a system in which you get a 10 point boost if you do opt in enough times. Almost everyone is going to get the 10 point boost.
People rant and rave about how wonderful Khanna is. I think he’s good, certainly better than average, but I’m not sure I can join the raving. He does sometimes do the whole, “Yeah, that’s right” thing … where if asked after class, he’ll acknowledge that the answer the student gave was objectively wrong but he just decided not to bother correcting them. I’m pretty sure that counts as Not Cool.
His explanations are pretty clear, I think. I’m still not sure he was worth the priority. (Then again, people say all other EOs profs are just awful. Maybe Pritchard’s okay?)
I had heard people rave about Khanna, but found him to be pretty mediocre. He’s a nice fellow, and tries very hard to be engaging, but honestly is incredibly dull. I know he thinks he’s being engaging and funny, but it comes across of condescending and uninteresting. I can’t speak to the other EO profs, but he did not do it for me at all. On the other hand, he lets you “opt in,” so you won’t be called unprepared, and he’s not a particularly tough cold caller. Still, I don’t think it’s worth it. He just kind of sucks.
I have him for Corporate Lawyer. I don’t find him condescending (as someone said above) at all. He’s a nice guy, tries to relate to his students, and doesn’t hide the ball AT ALL in cold calls. Personally, the class is slow-paced enough—and get on tangents enough—that I have trouble engaging. We frequently don’t get through what’s planned on the syllabus, so we are usually behind the reading schedule in class. He definitely knows he stuff well.
Nicest guy you’ll ever meet. 0 ball hiding. Mostly lecture in corporate lawyer (with some “cold calls” if you opt in…and they are really just “tell me what happened” and then he takes it from there). Gives thorough notes on what happened the previous class and writes them on the board, but you need to copy them down…if you do you basically have a rough outline.
Exam was tough but fair. The practice issue spotters he sent were basically re-used and the names and a few issues changed. Would take again 100%.
I only had him for a mini-seminar and saw him about 8 times, but that was enough for him to become one of my favorite professors at MLaw. He was so nice and funny, probably the most approachable and enjoyable professor here.
I had Khanna for both Corporate Lawyer and a mini-seminar, have nothing but glowing things to say about him. He’s compassionate and fun (he’s a dad joke machine, sometimes they fall flat but you have to love the energy), and he’s a good teacher too. Explains the concepts clearly, doesn’t bother hiding the ball, and he’s very experienced in the field and has a lot of knowledge to draw on. Corporate Lawyer isn’t always the most thrilling subject, but he has cool anecdotes and sometimes provides narrative details about the cases to keep things interesting. The exam was straightforward and fair (but it’s worth noting that I wasn’t too stressed about it anyway because it was mandatory P/F for covid). Overall I recommend him–good prof and a great guy.
Took him for Corporate Lawyer (W21). He is THE person to take this class with. Not only is he an expert but he is an excellent professor who breaks down complex concepts very clearly. Khanna also has the best dad jokes and self-deprecating humor, which brings some levity to a very serious and complicated subject. He also doesn’t really cold call. He does “warm” calls where you opt into being called on for the day. If you opt into being on call a certain number of times throughout the semester, you will get an automatic grade bump at the end (keep in mind, that basically everyone does this so it doesn’t really affect you–unless you don’t do it).
Only criticism was that the reading load increased exponentially towards the end of the semester. 50-60% of the exam was what we learned in the last three weeks, which was very stressful because it was also the most complicated content. I wish the reading load was more evenly distributed throughout the semester.
MLaw Prof Reviews
I had him for sec reg during winter 2009. Khanna allows you to opt-in via the internet before class if you want to be on-call. If you opt-in about 30 or so times a semester, you get a 10 point bump in your grade. Taking the class pass/fail and not opting in leaves you with absolutely zero incentive to pay attention. Thankfully Khanna is an excellent teacher and really knows this stuff. He is pretty clear, and he even gives you a 10 page personal outline for about 1/2 the material.
Khanna is awesome. He is very straightforward, makes lectures interesting, and doesn’t take this too seriously. For class participation he does a sign up system where you get a grade boost if you sigh up ~60%+ of the time. This systems works well because it is easy to satisfy, and you don’t have to worry about being cold-called if you didn’t do the reading that day. When he does call on you, the answers are usually already on the board. His tests are relatively straightforward as well, there were no surprises. The final is usually a portion multiple choice with a final issue spotter question that he tells you beforehand has 4 big issues to spot. For EO Khanna also covers more material than the other profs, particularly M&As which are the most interesting part of the course (where the blood is spilled, Khanna likes to say). Definitely take EO with Khanna if you are going to take EO.
Khanna is the best prof I’ve had here.
Khanna is an awesome professor. I would definitely recommend taking any class he teaches. Also, the other prof who usually teaches EO is not very good (Evans), so if you want to take EO, definitely take it with Khanna
Khanna, on the other hand, is the ideal professor. He’s not an asshole in class, he’s incredibly lucid, has a good sense of humor, and you learn a ton. The exam is also very straightforward and fair.
I have Khanna for a mini seminar and I think he is awesome. The other EO profs aren’t nearly as good.
Khanna is a good professor, but don’t get so caught up in the hype surrounding him to think he walks on water. His positive aspects would include that he is: an interesting lecturer, not brutal when he cold calls, approachable outside of class. On the other hand, in his Fall 2009 EO class, I found him, or at least his class, frustrating for the following reasons: he canceled class a lot during the semester and then tried to ramrod a lot of material in at the end of the semester by holding double class sessions, none of his old exams were online, the exam was 2/3 multiple choice, he attracted what seemed like half the masthead of law review and an inordinate amount of other gunners who were trying to impress him (I don’t know how this affected the curve; draw your own conclusions). He also sometimes spends a lot of time explaining how ingenious a certain decision is, but fails to clearly explain the law.
Also, it is better to think of the “opt in” system for cold calls as a system in which if you don’t opt in the required number of times you are going to lose 10 points on your final grade as opposed to a system in which you get a 10 point boost if you do opt in enough times. Almost everyone is going to get the 10 point boost.
People rant and rave about how wonderful Khanna is. I think he’s good, certainly better than average, but I’m not sure I can join the raving. He does sometimes do the whole, “Yeah, that’s right” thing … where if asked after class, he’ll acknowledge that the answer the student gave was objectively wrong but he just decided not to bother correcting them. I’m pretty sure that counts as Not Cool.
His explanations are pretty clear, I think. I’m still not sure he was worth the priority. (Then again, people say all other EOs profs are just awful. Maybe Pritchard’s okay?)
I had heard people rave about Khanna, but found him to be pretty mediocre. He’s a nice fellow, and tries very hard to be engaging, but honestly is incredibly dull. I know he thinks he’s being engaging and funny, but it comes across of condescending and uninteresting. I can’t speak to the other EO profs, but he did not do it for me at all. On the other hand, he lets you “opt in,” so you won’t be called unprepared, and he’s not a particularly tough cold caller. Still, I don’t think it’s worth it. He just kind of sucks.
I have him for Corporate Lawyer. I don’t find him condescending (as someone said above) at all. He’s a nice guy, tries to relate to his students, and doesn’t hide the ball AT ALL in cold calls. Personally, the class is slow-paced enough—and get on tangents enough—that I have trouble engaging. We frequently don’t get through what’s planned on the syllabus, so we are usually behind the reading schedule in class. He definitely knows he stuff well.
Nicest guy you’ll ever meet. 0 ball hiding. Mostly lecture in corporate lawyer (with some “cold calls” if you opt in…and they are really just “tell me what happened” and then he takes it from there). Gives thorough notes on what happened the previous class and writes them on the board, but you need to copy them down…if you do you basically have a rough outline.
Exam was tough but fair. The practice issue spotters he sent were basically re-used and the names and a few issues changed. Would take again 100%.
I only had him for a mini-seminar and saw him about 8 times, but that was enough for him to become one of my favorite professors at MLaw. He was so nice and funny, probably the most approachable and enjoyable professor here.
I had Khanna for both Corporate Lawyer and a mini-seminar, have nothing but glowing things to say about him. He’s compassionate and fun (he’s a dad joke machine, sometimes they fall flat but you have to love the energy), and he’s a good teacher too. Explains the concepts clearly, doesn’t bother hiding the ball, and he’s very experienced in the field and has a lot of knowledge to draw on. Corporate Lawyer isn’t always the most thrilling subject, but he has cool anecdotes and sometimes provides narrative details about the cases to keep things interesting. The exam was straightforward and fair (but it’s worth noting that I wasn’t too stressed about it anyway because it was mandatory P/F for covid). Overall I recommend him–good prof and a great guy.
Took him for Corporate Lawyer (W21). He is THE person to take this class with. Not only is he an expert but he is an excellent professor who breaks down complex concepts very clearly. Khanna also has the best dad jokes and self-deprecating humor, which brings some levity to a very serious and complicated subject. He also doesn’t really cold call. He does “warm” calls where you opt into being called on for the day. If you opt into being on call a certain number of times throughout the semester, you will get an automatic grade bump at the end (keep in mind, that basically everyone does this so it doesn’t really affect you–unless you don’t do it).
Only criticism was that the reading load increased exponentially towards the end of the semester. 50-60% of the exam was what we learned in the last three weeks, which was very stressful because it was also the most complicated content. I wish the reading load was more evenly distributed throughout the semester.