CHEM 20B
Chemical Energetics and Change
Description: Lecture, three hours; discussion, one hour. Enforced requisites: course 20A or 20AH, and Mathematics 31A, with grades of C- or better. Enforced corequisite: Mathematics 31B. Second term of general chemistry. Intermolecular forces and organization, phase behavior, chemical thermodynamics, solutions, equilibria, reaction rates and laws. P/NP or letter grading.
Units: 4.0
Units: 4.0
1 of 3
Most Helpful Review
TAKE BAUER. BEST CHEM PROFESSOR I'VE EVER HAD. Seriously, she's so concerned about student learning and her lectures are well organized & easy to understand. Go to her office hours as much as you can, because she's really helpful & friendly. She has a good sense of humor and she does a lot of demos which keep the class interesting. Her tests are pretty fair with a generous curve.
TAKE BAUER. BEST CHEM PROFESSOR I'VE EVER HAD. Seriously, she's so concerned about student learning and her lectures are well organized & easy to understand. Go to her office hours as much as you can, because she's really helpful & friendly. She has a good sense of humor and she does a lot of demos which keep the class interesting. Her tests are pretty fair with a generous curve.
AD
Most Helpful Review
Winter 2020 - Had to take 20B to fulfill requirements, even though I had already learned the content way before. About 70-80ish students were enrolled in the class, but if you ever went to lecture you could expect to see less than 20 students, unless there was a quiz/midterm. The content is pretty simple, but Baugh can't explain it well at all. However, that's okay. He moves through his own syllabus very slowly (a week's work in a month). It's easy to keep up with the course through the textbook and a few practice questions. What's really annoying is Baugh's quizzes and exams. He is very unclear on what will be tested and keeps changing the date. Then, when you take the quiz, you'll spend half the time trying to understand what the damn question is asking you because the English used in his questions is just SO UNCLEAR. He writes them out as if he's talking, and it's hard enough to understand what he says anyway. Once you get the exams back, you'll find that the grading is frickin inconsistent and your classmate may have written the EXACT same thing as you, but you get 0/50 and he gets 50/50. His questions aren't hard, but they're stupid questions. I really thought I'd get an A in this class, because I know the topic really well. If not for his grading errors, I probably would've got it. It also felt like his final grades were quite random. I don't recommend anybody take this guy's class, and don't know how tf he is teaching at UCLA. FYI, he was "under review" this quarter for about two weeks and then he said he would improve, but that was complete BS. Don't enroll in his class.
Winter 2020 - Had to take 20B to fulfill requirements, even though I had already learned the content way before. About 70-80ish students were enrolled in the class, but if you ever went to lecture you could expect to see less than 20 students, unless there was a quiz/midterm. The content is pretty simple, but Baugh can't explain it well at all. However, that's okay. He moves through his own syllabus very slowly (a week's work in a month). It's easy to keep up with the course through the textbook and a few practice questions. What's really annoying is Baugh's quizzes and exams. He is very unclear on what will be tested and keeps changing the date. Then, when you take the quiz, you'll spend half the time trying to understand what the damn question is asking you because the English used in his questions is just SO UNCLEAR. He writes them out as if he's talking, and it's hard enough to understand what he says anyway. Once you get the exams back, you'll find that the grading is frickin inconsistent and your classmate may have written the EXACT same thing as you, but you get 0/50 and he gets 50/50. His questions aren't hard, but they're stupid questions. I really thought I'd get an A in this class, because I know the topic really well. If not for his grading errors, I probably would've got it. It also felt like his final grades were quite random. I don't recommend anybody take this guy's class, and don't know how tf he is teaching at UCLA. FYI, he was "under review" this quarter for about two weeks and then he said he would improve, but that was complete BS. Don't enroll in his class.
AD
Most Helpful Review
After taking Chem20A, I thought this class was almost a joke! The material is much easier, because it's less conceptual than 20A. The class was not that difficult at all, but then again, I wouldn't say that it's an easy A either. He's very straight forward with his HW and most of his midterm questions. As long as you do the HW, you'll do fine. He doesn't go by the physical science book that we have. Instead, he uses the Chem14B book, and their problems are easier! I never read the book, but I managed to get good grades on the quizes and midterms. I have to admit, the final was unexpectedly really harder than his midterms. Overall, Lavelle is a good prof. He explains the concepts clearly. He'll answer all the questions you may have and he won't make you feel stupid for asking them, unlike some profs. I don't know why people say he's a bad lecturer. I don't think he's bad at all. He may not be the most exciting, but he's not the worst either.
After taking Chem20A, I thought this class was almost a joke! The material is much easier, because it's less conceptual than 20A. The class was not that difficult at all, but then again, I wouldn't say that it's an easy A either. He's very straight forward with his HW and most of his midterm questions. As long as you do the HW, you'll do fine. He doesn't go by the physical science book that we have. Instead, he uses the Chem14B book, and their problems are easier! I never read the book, but I managed to get good grades on the quizes and midterms. I have to admit, the final was unexpectedly really harder than his midterms. Overall, Lavelle is a good prof. He explains the concepts clearly. He'll answer all the questions you may have and he won't make you feel stupid for asking them, unlike some profs. I don't know why people say he's a bad lecturer. I don't think he's bad at all. He may not be the most exciting, but he's not the worst either.
Most Helpful Review
Summer 2018 - Professor Levine really cares about his students and that is evident. His lectures really focus on the applications of the material, and how topics we are learning are related to upper-division chemistry. The homework assigned as well as textbook readings supported what was learned in class.
Summer 2018 - Professor Levine really cares about his students and that is evident. His lectures really focus on the applications of the material, and how topics we are learning are related to upper-division chemistry. The homework assigned as well as textbook readings supported what was learned in class.
AD
1 of 3
