Simply put: Weisbart is a mathematical genius but flops at teaching. This may be a biased review because prior to taking his class, I have never taken any statistics/probability course in my life. I went to lectures but found them utterly useless. He goes over the theorems and uses the whole 50 minute lecture time to prove them. However, this stuff never appears on the test. The only good thing about him is he is VERY PREDICTABLE. If you pay close attention, you can pretty much guess which problems will appear on the midterm/final. For 3c, make sure you know how to do the soda problem (markers and dashes), the picture problem (if two people are identical how many different pictures can there be, etc), the Russian Roulette problem, etc., etc. Know the classic problem for each concept and you should be fine. I would recommend Weisbart if you already had taken statistics in another class otherwise, you'll have to teach the course to yourself.

P.S. Don't get me wrong, Weisbart was the most reasonable and fair professor I've had at UCLA - It's just that I'm totally against his teaching style.

He's a cool, nice guy, but doesn't know how to teach well.
I'm sure that he's smart, but he gets confused while he's teaching and it gets annoying when he keeps erasing what he wrote. So basically, his lectures aren't very helpful.

But the class is pretty easy-his practice midterms/finals are like EXACTLY THE SAME as the final. well, maybe not EXACTLY, but pretty much the same. It just has different numbers and wording.He gives a lot of hints too, regarding what would be on the test.

He's pretty helpful in that he has office hours (although I never went to it, I heard that he's helpful in that he gives out hints for tests) and is very lenient about homework. If a lot of students complain about homework, he postpones it or goes over the problems.

So if you want an easy going class, take this class. But if you want some hardcore math where you're really going to feel that you learned something, pick someone else.

I took Math3A during my Freshman year with him and I took Math3C with him Fall quarter of my 2nd year and all I can say is that He IS the BEST math professor I've ever had in my life. He cares about students doing well and continuously tries to go over materials to make sure students learn. His practice exams are very helpful and I suggest you go to his Office Hours because he'll answer all your questions and give you tips on what to study. In short, take HIM if he is teaching a math class that you need. He is by FAR the BEST and he wants you to do well.

To people who think he is a bad professor it's probably because they didn't do the work they were required (such as hw) and thought it was a easy class where they can study the night before of the exam...Well I did what was required, attended lecture, did my hw, went to office hours when I need to ask questions and I ended up with an A in 3A and an A in 3C. His grading system is very student friendly as well. He gives you the option to drop one of your midterms and have the final count for more or the final can count as your grade in the class.

Long story short, the best professor at UCLA's math department and this is coming from someone who didn't have the greatest or best math background but was able to succeed.

The class was difficult for me in the beginning, but when I went to his office hours he really took the time to explain things to me. He is very concerned for students' grades and wants them to do well (he stays hours over the required office hours time). He drops little hints and information that will be on the midterms and final at office hours, so I highly recommend going.
On the other hand, his lectures are confusing and sometimes he confuses himself too. It happened several times where he wrote stuff, students had it in their notes, then the next lecture he would apologize for doing/saying the wrong thing. It happened way more times than it should have. Also, he did waste lecture time showing us how to calculate stuff and at the end say, "oh but you don't need to know that."
Overall, I'm glad I took his class because I received an A-, but he is not a very good professor in terms of explaining and lecturing. So if you are really interested in his class topic and want to learn and know the information, you probably don't want to take him, but if you just need to get through the math series, I'd go ahead and take him. Lastly, he does a grading system that picks the best overall grade for you..either summing up the HW, midterms and final, or counting the final exam as 100% of your grade.

I don't recommend Professor Weisbart for Math 3C. Perhaps he is more effective for the thirty series. I, and my floor mates who had him for Fall '08, thought he was a horrible professor. During lecture, he wastes a lot of time proving theorems that already have proofs in the textbook. He also likes to talk about his research and things that have nothing to do with what he is supposed to be teaching. Even though he prepares his own notes for lectures, he is often confused and has to think about a problem for a while after he realizes his solution is incorrect. Probability is a rather abstract concept compared to algebra and calculus, and his explanations rarely clear up anything.

He is nice, though. He provides a number of practice midterms and finals that are quite similar to the actual exams. He welcomes everyone to his office hours, but he is as effective, or rather ineffective, during them as he is during lecture. I like the fact that he has two grading systems: the conventional one with homework and exams worth different percentages of your grade, and one where your grade is what you get on the final. The only reason I earned an A- in his class is because I studied A LOT for his final with my floor mates.

The bottom line: Be prepared to teach yourself, or study with friends. That helped me a great deal. Hopefully, you'll have an effective TA. You'll have to rely on him/her, too.