For some reason, Bruinwalk won't let me choose the right class. But I had EEB 112, which was ichthyology. It completely changed the way I think about research, studying, and marine biology! It motivated me to work so hard and in the end I got an A. He says he'll give letters of recommendation to anyone who gets an A as long as they go in and have a meeting with him. The lab practicals require a TON of studying, but without them I wouldn't know nearly as much about fish. He tells lots of stories about fish and research and stuff too. And the number of handouts he gives out is kind of ridiculous, but it's good to know the material on each and every one. Also, the TA for that class, Chris Chabot, was probably the best TA I've had at UCLA.

Chen's class was not really difficult if you understood what was going on.

**********LS 4 Review************

Her class is really doable and honestly not that hard.

I think she is a very nice woman and she ALWAYS took the time to go over concept that people didn't undersand. Sometimes she took up half the class time trying to explain a concept that people didn't understand until most of them got it. In my book, that makes her a pretty good professor.

Her midterms are relatively easy, just remember the examples that she goes over in lecture -- those should be the ones that you go to when studying. I did some of the questions in the book for the first midterm and almost none for the second midterm and I still did fine. Why? Because although I didn't go to class, I always watched the lectures online and made sure I understood her lecture notes (which I think are pretty good).

I have to say though, her final was crazy.

It was like that stupid meme where in class they'll ask you easy questions like 1 + 1 but on your exam they'll ask you to calculate the mass of the sun.

Literally, that's what happened.

Somehow I did pretty well on that final. Considering that I didn't know what the hell I was doing for most of it, it makes me wonder what the heck the rest of the class was doing.

She's really not a bad choice of a professor for LS 4.

LS4. Who gave this man his teaching credentials? HORRIBLE!

COURSE: EEB 111 (vertebrate)

1) He is extremely cocky and always talks in a condescending tone

2) Severely technologically challenged( but not as bad as
Donald Buth who still uses a typewriter)

3) The only biology prof I had who doesn't use ppt, lectures were disorganized

4) EXTREMELY useless lab practicals. You need to memorize about 50 different species of fishes & frogs for the 1st practical, including those pointless latin scientific names for ALL of them, which is only 10% of your grade.

5) Kept telling us to read the whole book which contains excruciating detail. This aXXhole thinks this is the only class we're taking.

6) Put ID questions on exam that are briefly mentioned (he just spent <20 sec explaining those terms)

TL:DR: This is my last quarter @ UCLA and he is THE WORST BIO professor of ALL TIME

This course shouldn't be 5 unit, it's more like a 10 unit course, the lab practical alone would drive you crazy

LS4 wasn't an option but yeah. This is an eval for LS4.

Please don't be put off by Professor Jacobsen's lecturing during the first couple lectures. His lecturing style seems really boring and bland at the beginning but he's actually a fantastic lecturer if you actually sit through class or listen to his podcasts. He's also extremely helpful with any questions people might have after lectures. His class wasn't too difficult and I'd definitely suggest taking Jacobsen/Cohn. Their exams are pretty challenging but nothing was really unreasonable. I'd definitely suggest taking them over Siu. Siu is a fantastic lecturer but his exams personally seemed harder than Jacobsen/Cohn's.

Johnson she is an okay prof. and she not the best as other people say she is(butt kissers)

good things about her
she is nice and all the lecture are bruin-cast so you can go back and watch her lecture for the lectures you missed. thats about it

bad things about her

her exams are experimentally based so this mean you have to you have to understand all lecture slides in the her reader of (200pages) very well in order to do okay in her exam. for example for the first midterm and the final she put a picture a gel and asked question about it.some random shit that you wont care about you will see it in the exam. so know every slide in depth and understand it.

also her exams are like about 8 to 7 pages long but you have 2hours to complete it.

Reading the book can be helpful since it explains some concepts better than she does.

her lecture style, she is boring but not boring to a level where she makes you sleep. and when she lectures i feel that she does not explain the concepts very well which means you have to go for her OH and the read more about it in order to understand

every week there is stupid online quiz(5pt)that you have to do. where you have to read 7 or less pages of a published paper (written in very hard way to understand )and answer 5 multiple choice questions online.

there is also a lab portion which very is point less cuz you dont learn shit but the TA was very good and if unlucky like to me to take Johnson then take Diana because she is the Best TA that Johnson has.

i wont recommended you to take her LS3 class because i mean i did all of the above(reading and re-listening to her lectures) and i still got a B. so if you have the chance take another person(who can teach the material better)then do it. If not then good luck with her.

I took Dr. Laski's LS4 class (wasnt an option in the drop down menu). He is one of the best lecturers at UCLA. Although he may go fast at times he is very organized with how he approaches the material. He uses clickers which are very helpful when you need to review the notes. His podcasts were essential to doing well in the class.

This class boils down to whether or not you did enough problems. He has taught the class for years so he knows how twist a concept around to make it seem unfamiliar. People that complain about this simply aren't ready for the test.

Do as many problems as you can and focus a lot on his practice tests that he gives and you can get an A.

LS3:

First 2 midterms were OK. Final was semi-fair, but it's complete BS that it's worth 60% of your grade. I had an A going into the final, didn't do well enough above the average to maintain it. Very unforgiving. Went to his office hours once, he is a total douche and condescending prof. TAs were much more friendly, approachable, knowledgable even. Disappointed in this class. Not the end of the world if you get him, but don't listen to what others have been saying about giving a nice curve. I emailed him and he gave me a quick guideline based on the LScore guidelines, it's still only 10% getting a solid A.

LIFE SCIENCE 4 ( not MCDB C174)

I AM CURRENTLY STUDYING FOR HIS FINAL. HIS TESTS ARE VERY DIFFICULT BECAUSE HE ADDS A LOT OF TWISTS AND ASSUMES YOU KNOW KNOW ASSUMPTIONS THAT ARE "ASSUMED" TO BE KNOWN. you know what i mean. take another teacher if you can. NO SLEEP TONIGHT! shout out to william and diana for being great TAS!

I had him for LS 3. Don't take him. He's really unorganized, slides were useless, lectures were boring... it was bad. Ended up with a B because I stopped going to lecture and tried really hard to learn from the book, but I really didn't learn anything.