Reviews of professor Hugh Simmonds

Rating: 1.0/5, difficulty: 5.0/5
Professor Simmonds is a man of many talents, technology isn't one of them. Neither is organization. The difficulty of this course stems from the professors lack of tech skill stopping lectures and disorganization of course structure. Projects would constantly change deadlines, the rubric changed every week, email responses took months.

Rating: 5.0/5, difficulty: 2.0/5
Entertaining speaker, very humane Prof, friendly & accommodating. Gives explicit "hints" on what'll be on quizzes, makes it easier to study compared to other courses (note: most hints show up, some don't). The course content is not heavily focused on tech, however. Group assignment harder than the quizzes imo. Listens to constructive criticism.

Rating: 5.0/5, difficulty: 1.0/5
Absolutely incredible prof. He has a genuine care and love for his students and it shows in every aspect of the way he teaches. Content is not difficult by any means, but it is far easier and a lot more interesting when he's teaching it. Happy to have been a part of his class and thoroughly enjoyed a lot of our conversations after class.

Rating: 1.0/5, difficulty: 4.0/5
Very disorganized. Does not reply to emails. Wastes a lot of time before tests. I've never been so disappointed with the organization of a geography course at TMU. He changes instructions frequently at the last minute. His instructions are not clear and his feedback is very vague. Honestly if you can take this course with any other prof, do that.

Rating: 5.0/5, difficulty: 2.0/5
Dr. Simmonds is a fun prof. His lectures are enjoyable, he gave hints on questions that would be on each test (all mc and online + in person) and is very interactive with the class. There are three tests and a group essay, which my only gripe was the marking scheme of the essay. It was hard to understand what he wanted us to write, but it worked

Rating: 3.0/5, difficulty: 2.0/5
GEO702

Dr. Simmonds to my disappointment tends to focus on 'the Earth is dying' rather than any more of that subject in-depth or with any nuance.

In terms of getting a mark, he's fine; review all hints he gives & his tests heavily follow his wording (however superfluous at times). 

He's very specific about structure for reports, so be careful.