PHYSICS 1B
Physics for Scientists and Engineers: Oscillations, Waves, Electric and Magnetic Fields
Description: Lecture/demonstration, four hours; discussion, one hour. Enforced requisites: course 1A, Mathematics 31B, 32A. Enforced corequisite: Mathematics 32B. Fluid mechanics, oscillation, mechanical waves, and sound. Electric charge, field and potential, capacitors, and dielectrics. Currents and resistance, direct-current circuits. P/NP or letter grading.
Units: 5.0
Units: 5.0
5 of 6
Most Helpful Review
I took Physics 1B and 1C with Richard basically because i knew him from my summer 1B class. first of all, he is not the most eloquent lecturer, for that, go see Corbin. Richard's strength lies in his concern for his students and his desire in helping them succeed. he often tries to tell jokes and some students don't consider him very funny because his jokes are rather nerdy, but even if nerdy, it shows his desire in keeping things interesting. but make no mistake, his greatest strength is in working with the "less than stellar" students like me who weren't born with a natural physics aptitude. before i took him, i had repeated my first physics class multiple time, so i needed a professor who was like a "Physics for dummies" type of professor. I took Brent Corbin, and was mesmerized by his lectures and how funny he was. some students compare all other physics teachers to Corbin because, hey, he's a great lecturer... and i won't deny him that, but i don't care for his requirements that you memorize the formulas and his frequent divergence from the book. each of those assessments is NOT value based, some folks prefer a teacher who diverges from the book and who makes you memorize, and to them i suggest Corbin, to the rest who prefer to focus on problem solving because in real life you have formulas at your disposal all the time and adherence to the book (because those of us who read the book benefit by having difficult passages clarified), i would recommend you seriously consider Richard. since Richard often let us bring in formulas, some students believed tests would be easier, but Richard always put in a humdinger of a problem that reminds you never to underestimate the difficulty of a test. I was not good in math nor physics, so i often went to see Richard, and in the fall when i took 1C, i also went to PDP workshops (a MUST for non-geniuses) where i got my fill of Professor Corbin's chalk throwing anecdotes... for me, this was the perfect combination because i got to interface with both of them... Corbin's engaging style without being tested, and Richard's "down to business" style. testing, as i said, is not easy, but its not hard either. its usually 4-6 problems, but you rarely finish them all given the fact they rely on a fundamental understanding of the concepts... so formulas were allowed... which gave a false, sense of security to many who bombed the first midterm... DON'T make that mistake! having formulas doesn't make your test easier, it merely allows the professor to focus on more complex problems since he knows you brought formulas. I got by with doing tons of homework, more than what he assigned by about 50%. in the end, i got a B in both classes, which was better than i thought i would do given my previous negative experience in physics. in other words, a physics dummy like me did quite well because Richard was there to insure i understood the principles, because his tests were no-nonsense and had no surprises and because i took the PDP. in short, you can't go wrong with Richard because he's fair and cares. his jokes might miss the target, but who cares? as long as he is there to help you succeed, succeed you will.
I took Physics 1B and 1C with Richard basically because i knew him from my summer 1B class. first of all, he is not the most eloquent lecturer, for that, go see Corbin. Richard's strength lies in his concern for his students and his desire in helping them succeed. he often tries to tell jokes and some students don't consider him very funny because his jokes are rather nerdy, but even if nerdy, it shows his desire in keeping things interesting. but make no mistake, his greatest strength is in working with the "less than stellar" students like me who weren't born with a natural physics aptitude. before i took him, i had repeated my first physics class multiple time, so i needed a professor who was like a "Physics for dummies" type of professor. I took Brent Corbin, and was mesmerized by his lectures and how funny he was. some students compare all other physics teachers to Corbin because, hey, he's a great lecturer... and i won't deny him that, but i don't care for his requirements that you memorize the formulas and his frequent divergence from the book. each of those assessments is NOT value based, some folks prefer a teacher who diverges from the book and who makes you memorize, and to them i suggest Corbin, to the rest who prefer to focus on problem solving because in real life you have formulas at your disposal all the time and adherence to the book (because those of us who read the book benefit by having difficult passages clarified), i would recommend you seriously consider Richard. since Richard often let us bring in formulas, some students believed tests would be easier, but Richard always put in a humdinger of a problem that reminds you never to underestimate the difficulty of a test. I was not good in math nor physics, so i often went to see Richard, and in the fall when i took 1C, i also went to PDP workshops (a MUST for non-geniuses) where i got my fill of Professor Corbin's chalk throwing anecdotes... for me, this was the perfect combination because i got to interface with both of them... Corbin's engaging style without being tested, and Richard's "down to business" style. testing, as i said, is not easy, but its not hard either. its usually 4-6 problems, but you rarely finish them all given the fact they rely on a fundamental understanding of the concepts... so formulas were allowed... which gave a false, sense of security to many who bombed the first midterm... DON'T make that mistake! having formulas doesn't make your test easier, it merely allows the professor to focus on more complex problems since he knows you brought formulas. I got by with doing tons of homework, more than what he assigned by about 50%. in the end, i got a B in both classes, which was better than i thought i would do given my previous negative experience in physics. in other words, a physics dummy like me did quite well because Richard was there to insure i understood the principles, because his tests were no-nonsense and had no surprises and because i took the PDP. in short, you can't go wrong with Richard because he's fair and cares. his jokes might miss the target, but who cares? as long as he is there to help you succeed, succeed you will.
AD
AD
Most Helpful Review
Fall 2015 - It was probably the very first time of him giving lectures to a large class. He always writes down the outline for each class at the beginning of each lecture, then goes directly to introduce, derive, and explain various concepts and formulas. Professor Shadkhoo is not a big fan of calculation, so most of his lectures are derivation-based. He covered lots of formula and concepts in each class, which I found hard to keep up with. The pace might be common for all the Physics 1 series. The first midterm was a disaster. I believed many first year students in the first quarter suffered from the transition from computation to derivation. The raw average was less than 50%. ☹ Professor sent an email asking us the reasons for failing the exam. ☹ The second one was better. But the final again was a disaster to me. Out of the six problems I finished only 1 with confidence. The HWs from Mastering Physics is a waste of time. I spent more time in figuring out how to type in an equation and check the numbers than actually solving the problem. The problems in the textbook are more helpful for practice.
Fall 2015 - It was probably the very first time of him giving lectures to a large class. He always writes down the outline for each class at the beginning of each lecture, then goes directly to introduce, derive, and explain various concepts and formulas. Professor Shadkhoo is not a big fan of calculation, so most of his lectures are derivation-based. He covered lots of formula and concepts in each class, which I found hard to keep up with. The pace might be common for all the Physics 1 series. The first midterm was a disaster. I believed many first year students in the first quarter suffered from the transition from computation to derivation. The raw average was less than 50%. ☹ Professor sent an email asking us the reasons for failing the exam. ☹ The second one was better. But the final again was a disaster to me. Out of the six problems I finished only 1 with confidence. The HWs from Mastering Physics is a waste of time. I spent more time in figuring out how to type in an equation and check the numbers than actually solving the problem. The problems in the textbook are more helpful for practice.
Most Helpful Review
Spring 2024 - I agree with the other spring quarter reviews, while she wasn’t the most clear or organized professor I’ve had she definitely made exceptions and was understanding of student situations. As long as you read the textbook and understand the homework you’ll be totally fine, and if you need to ask any questions about the content she’ll probably explain it decently. But if you want to really understand the theories and concepts more than what the textbook gives you, I probably wouldn’t recommend her.
Spring 2024 - I agree with the other spring quarter reviews, while she wasn’t the most clear or organized professor I’ve had she definitely made exceptions and was understanding of student situations. As long as you read the textbook and understand the homework you’ll be totally fine, and if you need to ask any questions about the content she’ll probably explain it decently. But if you want to really understand the theories and concepts more than what the textbook gives you, I probably wouldn’t recommend her.
AD
5 of 6
