SELF-EVALUATION After such a challenging and yet difficult project, it is both an easy task and a pleasure to write about what was good and what was not so good during the time spent in organizing and performing the tasks. I would like to start by being quite realistic in self grading my own performance which I would not asses as a 10 (the equivalent of A+) but as a 9 (on a scale from 1 to 10) for the whole activity. What kind of reasons lie in the background of this self evaluation? Perhaps the very short time I had for writing such an innovative course. I did a hard work and I read a lot from the whole material. The output of my work is a fairly good course of Economic Sociology, which might still be a little bit too difficult for understanding. It is difficult because it combines economic knowledge and concepts with sociological theories and notions. The level of the American Economic Sociology is very high and even for me it was difficult to have a high level of comprehension of some economic theories, such as the theory of the transaction costs or the theory of the market from an Institutional point of view. Even for more experienced teachers, such as my father, who has been teaching Macroeconomics since 1990, it is not an easy task to comprehend authors like Douglass North, Oliver Williamson or Ronald Coase. But I think that I deserve A+ for the intellectual effort. Though I had a difficult semester, teaching many classes, I strived to be well prepared for all these classes and especially for Economic Sociology. I put not only intellectual effort but also a lot of all soul in the lectures and the seminars I taught and I believe the students appreciated this fact. Yet I think I need a couple of years to become a real professional Economic sociologist and to write a very good course in this scientific field. I would say that this means the specialization. And, of course, the best material is one which is based on the own professor’s field experience. I had field experience as researcher only for three lectures, namely those about the labor market, the economic elite and the Romanian capitalism. I created good readers, but maybe a little bit too difficult for my students. This was especially because of the English materials written by Weber, Polanyi and Fligstein. But I can say I directed the seminars in an interactive style and my students were very interested by this new way of interaction. They were involved in every discussions and I think I myself learned a lot from every seminar. Few of my students read all the materials from the reader but I would rather say that this was a good output as I understood that even in the top universities not all students read all the materials. I can appreciate that the best seminars were those when I had invited guests from the Economics department. They created a very good atmosphere and they added a lot of economic ideas and examples from the economic life. I could say that Gheorghe Olah had a very important role in the two seminars where he participated. He was perceived as a charismatic professor and he contributed with very clear ideas from the Macroeconomics, Economic Policies and World Economics. During all the lectures I had free presentations and I tried to be as interactive as possible. There were free discussions during these activities when I gave a lot of examples and explanations. I think that it was a good point for my lectures that the Economics students participated in these discussions. Few of them proved that they are very well prepared considering their level of education. During all of the period of the lectures I would appreciate the involvement of Raluca from the Sociology department and Florin and Antonia from the Economics. They were my best students during this semester and Antonia read also the book of Karl Polanyi “The Great Transformation”. I offered them materials including the Soros donation for our library. But only few of them read English books of Economic Sociology. This is a negative aspect, though I perceive it as their problem, not necessarily mine. Students need to be aware that a real professional of the future will be the one who masters the English language, besides a profession. I had a mid-term exam where only 8 students from Sociology participated and I brought almost all their essays. The final exam will be in February 11th. I did a hard work for completing the website and the result is a good one. And it could be a good aid I believe for those who want to create course portfolios. Finally I can say I learnt a lot from this project. Now I feel I am a better academic but I have to become a professional Economic sociologist. I also understand the difference between a top university’s academic and me. I need perhaps some more years to become one, but I think it is possible. As conclusion I would say I am satisfied with the general output of this project. It was very difficult especially because I become extremely tired at the end of the semester. But I believe I proved to my students and to the CRC staff that I am a serious person and a good academic. And all the time when I was working I wanted to prove that not only in the United States or Western Europe but also here in the Central and Eastern Europe, in Romania, and of course in the University of Oradea, are good specialists with a high intellectual potential.