i stil maintain the prof makes the courtse in most cases. a "good prof" never teaches a crappy course, unless your defn of "good prof" is someone famus in the field. that is not a good prof.
one confirmation of my thesis is the example above of the student who had lazarsfeld for abstract algebra. i will warrant no noe here or anywhere else has ever had a crappy course from rob lazarsfeld. he is a student of fulton from brown,. waslater at ucla and is now at michigan, and is not just a great algebraic geometer, but a fantastic teacher who alwYS PREOPARES THOROUGHLY AND BELIEVES IN ACTUAlly geting down on the students level and giving insight into the subject.
he never blows you away with high powered stuff that conceals the phenomena. he teaches everything well and is highly in demand as a lecturer at profesional conferences because we like to understand what we are told too!
of course a good student can also make lemonade out of lemons by reading thoroughly in the book. but that is not a good course, that is a good student making do in a bad course.
in a good cousre the profesor gives much mroe than is in the book, and makes it understandable to you.
many students here seem not to realize that even the best books are usually miles behind current knowledge, and even reading a great book, cannot possibly make up for a good prof who gives you insight from his/her own grasp of the field.
if the book seems better than the prof, then the prof is probably not very good. I know I have been spoiled in this regard, by having profs like lazarsfeld, tate, mumford, bott, hartshorne, but many of you also have great profs but are not even bothering to notice it.
It is incredible that so few people here even know the names of their profs much less their bios.
Do yourself a favor, find out who is teaching the course, and choose the good ones.
and a grad student is not ncesarily a bad prof, althugh most are not too good for lack of experience.
in my school days, essentially the best physics prof was a grad student named bamberg, who is now quite well known at least for his teaching.
of course the physics dept in thoe days was famous for its terrible teaching of undergraduates and turned many of us off almost permamently to the subject.
undergrads should never put up with this attitude that a dept does bnot care about its students who are paying their salaries.
in my day too, enough of the more courageous students complained loudly enough that in the 2nd semester they gave us a good prof. i had already lost focus unfortunately by then.
the poor lecturer first semester was a famous physicist, but i unfortunately forget the excellent lecturer second semester, probably because i had foolishly stopped attending most of the time.
in psychology the famous profesors (take my word for their fame) were mostly notoriously poor profs, one for his mediocre lectures and another for his egomania and treatment of students.
a fantastic counterexample was guest lecturer named roger brown, whose bio you can look up on google. he gave the one memorable lecture in an otherwise bad course.
this course was so bad that the only other good memory i have from it was from the reading, a sure sign the prof stunk.