Fall 2018 - The biggest waste of time I've had at UCLA. You explore three unrelated topics every week. One is lecture, the other is discussion, and the other are "readings." Readings consist of one short story per week + a lot of outdated videos (circa 2014) that won't be discussed in lecture. Lectures are boring and very unprepared. Most of the time professor uses slides that are copied and pasted straight from the internet and sometimes he can't seem to recall why those slides are included in the powerpoint so he just skips them. Discussion is 2 hours long and quite sad. If you came to UCLA to learn new things, don't take this class. You can read a magazine and learn about the same amount of things you'll learn here
Winter 2019 - Your grade in this class relies entirely on your TA, so go to discussion. Professor Macfayden is a nice person and funny, but his lectures felt really pointless. I stopped going after a while and only attended discussion which nobody should do but I did anyways. I did feel a little bad but I don't recall learning a single thing across all his lectures I did attend. My TA was super nice but a huge stickler for grammar and convention. She didn't like the way I write (because it sucks) so I got points taken off for it. That said, she tells you exactly what she wants changed in your rough draft so there's no reason why you shouldn't get a higher grade than I did. Grades are decided entirely by three three page essays. You turn in a rough draft and get advice from it before you turn in the final copy. The readings were a little long but you don't actually have to read the whole thing if you are good at improv in discussion, as participation matters for your grade. In general, it was a fine GE.
Fall 2015 - Professor Macfadyen is a pretty cool dude. The topic can be boring and there are 3 papers you have to write, but overall it's a pretty doable writing 2 class. You don't really have to go to lecture, but use the concepts he discusses in lecture in your papers and you'll get a better grade.