Horrible lecturer; Insane Midterm 1. Squeezing 8 Mid to hard level questions in a 50-minute midterm is unreasonable and I don't think this is the right way to test the students' understandings. Do not take this class with her.

The content of this class is difficult; i've heard that it's the most challenging undergraduate math course offered at UCLA. With that said, Yeong does her best to make it as straightforward as possible. Take time to go over her notes and take advantage of TA office hours to truly understand the concepts. Once you understand what each formula actually means it makes the problems 1000x easier to compute. I had to watch the same youtube videos at least 10 times to understand concepts like greens'/stokes' theorem and the divergence theorem. It's so fulfilling when you do finally understand. You got this

Wern taught completely from the book and couldn't answer a lot of questions that when further than what was stated in the book answers. She gave practice midterms and worksheets which were fairly similar to the tests; however, the second midterm was a lot harder than the first. Her office hours were helpful in regards to homework solutions but she struggled to help those with conceptual gaps. The final was fair and her grading was generous, but when it came to overall grade in the class it was difficult to get an A because the range was adjusted for an A to be 95 and up.

Thank God for partial credit. I filled out about 25% of the questions on the second midterm (it was dropped since I did well on the first one) and got a 50%, so that goes to show you how generous they were with grading. Our average for the first midterm was around a 90%, second midterm around 70%, not sure about the final. The exams were not impossible. A lot of people say you have to learn/watch videos outside of the class, but I honestly think if you really understand the notes and a couple homework problems (exams were generally easier than the hard homework problems) you'll be just fine. The professor is a decent lecturer in my opinion and I actually liked the pacing and style of her lectures. The worst part about the class for me was the homework. Super long and hard.

Everyone seems to think Wern is an awful professor, but her class is really not that bad. There are ~10 homework problems per week, and seemed to be mostly graded for completion, with only a couple points (out of 100) docked for incorrect answers. Tests were generally pretty fair. Wern's lectures definitely lacked clarity, but the homework often made it a lot easier to understand the concepts we went over in class. Wern is not as bad a professor as she is made out to be, but I have definitely had better math professors at UCLA.

Nice person and tries, but an awful lecturer. Midterms and final were fair for the most part, but you'll have to learn most things by yourself (shoutout Mr. Leonard). 10 homework problems per week. Content itself is quite difficult.

I think in general this class is a tough one math wise, especially if you are used to just plugging in numbers to things and going about the problems that way, as I was, especially in the last chapter and a half or so, it gets a little conceptual and can be tricky. Though I personally did not, I think going outside the lectures and textbook on your own would help a lot in this class, from visualization to other things, just because, as other people may have mentioned, the textbook does an okay job with the concepts, and the lectures are basically just the textbook examples and explanations, sometimes with further insights that could be confusing (sometimes were for me). Discussion worksheets were always pretty hard and too long to finish in class, but they were often a little outside the scope of the course, and if you took it to office hours it could be explained pretty well after the fact, and it was nice that it was graded on completion, and that you basically had a full day following your discussion to do so. Tests were generally dfficult but doable to some extent, but it'll vary. My theory is that depending on the performance on the previous exam she will edit the next one so that it "balances out" (i.e. our first midterm was easy our second midterm was pretty hard, which is the opposite to her fall quarter), but the practice exams help A LOT. For the final or any exam, I suggest going over past work and stuff, especially practice problems suggested that AREN'T on the homework (I think one year one of the test questions was literally one of those problems). The homework itself is technically 10 problems, which some can be super confusing and unecessarily difficult, but people on the Campuswire site can be helpful, or friends, but be careful as it can be graded in my opinion, a little harsh.

OVERALL TL/DR: She is pretty kind and willing to help in her multiple office hours, but sometimes it can be confusing. Go to her lecture and see if you like how she explains things, if not; you can skip lectures and do fine as long as you learn elsewhere. Get the discussion worksheets (online, you don't have to go) and go if you want to meet people to help you out. Do the practice she gives out. Good luck!

Although she somewhat reads off of the textbook for lectures, her tests were fair and the problems were relatively easy. The homework load is reasonable and her partial credit policy is generous.

I took the advice of the students who took this class in the quarter before me and didn't go to class. Tests were definitely fair, as she posted recommended questions beyond the hw every week that mirrored the tests very well. Also she posted practice exams to study with. The no partial credit thing must've been a really mean TA for 2023 Fall quarter, because for my class I got partial credit on my exams. Read the textbook, everything you need to know is in there and she won't throw curveballs if you study it well.

Not a great lecturer, unclear but does provide notes, slides, homeworks. Unpredictable tests and midterms