Regis is so kind. He’s reaaalllllly into Roman history which gets a little weird/repetitive, but he means well and genuinely wants to help. He didn’t cold call and just relied on volunteers (which led to the same 5 people talking but was still appreciated during the pandemic). I recommend!
I got an A in this course with Carozza. I still would not recommend taking it. He was unclear about: concepts, information we needed to know for the test, what we needed to take away from textbook assignments, and gave an unfair exam – nearly impossible to finish. He is genuine, as the first commenter noted. He may want to help. But generally was unhelpful, coy, or unable to explain a concept when asked. After the first third of the course, we would do in-class exercises on topics that had not been covered, or that had not been explained – everyone would feel lost. It was a frustrating experience.
Do not take a class with Regis Carozza. He is an adjunct, not an instructor or an educator, and it really shows. Even if this was the first time he has taught a substantive law course, there is no excuse for teaching this poorly. No matter how nice he is, or sweet a guy, or knowledgeable about T&E he is, (all of which are very true, he is a great guy and I greatly enjoyed talking to him), just do not take a class with him – it is not worth it. This was the worst educational experience I have had at any institution. The class was not well taught. The reading assignments were entire chapters of the casebook, which is totally excessive and unreasonable. Even though he adjusted the syllabus throughout the semester and did cut down on some of the reading, that really did not accomplish anything. Not because it was still a lot/too much to read, but because we never went over the assigned readings or cases in class in depth. We spent very little time, if any, on discussing the cases and more class time was either spent addressing ridiculous student questions that were wholly irrelevant and better suited for office hours ( I distinctly remember lots of talk about pets and a random hypothetical about someone who is reanimated after being cryogenically frozen for decades) or being lectured to about Romans. Instead, ‘lecture’ was mostly about Roman history, since every hypothetical had to use Roman figures, or was spent in breakout rooms. Regis would provide portions of the UPC or other uniform law (not in the readings or the casebook) to apply to break out room sessions – without ever going over the material/code provisions in the first place! It was confusing and most of us felt completely lost. For most of the course, I could not help but feel like Regis either has a perverted delight in hiding the ball or doesn’t know the answers to questions. The exam was the most brutal, frustrating exam I have ever taken. (Full disclosure for anyone who may think I am only writing such a scathing review because I got a bad grade and am unhappy, I performed above average). When describing his exam philosophy, he said his job is to take us all up in a helicopter, fly us out over the ocean, kick us out, and watch us swim to shore. No joke. Those were his exact words. And to be fair, the exam wasn’t ridiculous because it was testing us on material not covered (which it did at times, but not excessively) but because he has no concept of how long it would reasonably take someone to read, outline, diagram (the different inheritance distribution schemes), and then answer the questions posed in the allotted time. I cannot and do not recommend, avoid at all costs.
MLaw Prof Reviews
Regis is so kind. He’s reaaalllllly into Roman history which gets a little weird/repetitive, but he means well and genuinely wants to help. He didn’t cold call and just relied on volunteers (which led to the same 5 people talking but was still appreciated during the pandemic). I recommend!
I got an A in this course with Carozza. I still would not recommend taking it. He was unclear about: concepts, information we needed to know for the test, what we needed to take away from textbook assignments, and gave an unfair exam – nearly impossible to finish. He is genuine, as the first commenter noted. He may want to help. But generally was unhelpful, coy, or unable to explain a concept when asked. After the first third of the course, we would do in-class exercises on topics that had not been covered, or that had not been explained – everyone would feel lost. It was a frustrating experience.
Do not take a class with Regis Carozza. He is an adjunct, not an instructor or an educator, and it really shows. Even if this was the first time he has taught a substantive law course, there is no excuse for teaching this poorly. No matter how nice he is, or sweet a guy, or knowledgeable about T&E he is, (all of which are very true, he is a great guy and I greatly enjoyed talking to him), just do not take a class with him – it is not worth it. This was the worst educational experience I have had at any institution. The class was not well taught. The reading assignments were entire chapters of the casebook, which is totally excessive and unreasonable. Even though he adjusted the syllabus throughout the semester and did cut down on some of the reading, that really did not accomplish anything. Not because it was still a lot/too much to read, but because we never went over the assigned readings or cases in class in depth. We spent very little time, if any, on discussing the cases and more class time was either spent addressing ridiculous student questions that were wholly irrelevant and better suited for office hours ( I distinctly remember lots of talk about pets and a random hypothetical about someone who is reanimated after being cryogenically frozen for decades) or being lectured to about Romans. Instead, ‘lecture’ was mostly about Roman history, since every hypothetical had to use Roman figures, or was spent in breakout rooms. Regis would provide portions of the UPC or other uniform law (not in the readings or the casebook) to apply to break out room sessions – without ever going over the material/code provisions in the first place! It was confusing and most of us felt completely lost. For most of the course, I could not help but feel like Regis either has a perverted delight in hiding the ball or doesn’t know the answers to questions. The exam was the most brutal, frustrating exam I have ever taken. (Full disclosure for anyone who may think I am only writing such a scathing review because I got a bad grade and am unhappy, I performed above average). When describing his exam philosophy, he said his job is to take us all up in a helicopter, fly us out over the ocean, kick us out, and watch us swim to shore. No joke. Those were his exact words. And to be fair, the exam wasn’t ridiculous because it was testing us on material not covered (which it did at times, but not excessively) but because he has no concept of how long it would reasonably take someone to read, outline, diagram (the different inheritance distribution schemes), and then answer the questions posed in the allotted time. I cannot and do not recommend, avoid at all costs.
I also took the class with Regis. The experience was exactly how the third poster described it. That’s all you need to know.