Debra Lauren Greenfield
Department of Society and Genetics
AD
3.0
Overall Rating
Based on 2 Users
Easiness 3.0 / 5 How easy the class is, 1 being extremely difficult and 5 being easy peasy.
Clarity 3.0 / 5 How clear the professor is, 1 being extremely unclear and 5 being very clear.
Workload 4.0 / 5 How light the workload is, 1 being extremely heavy and 5 being extremely light.
Helpfulness 2.0 / 5 How helpful the professor is, 1 being not helpful at all and 5 being extremely helpful.

TOP TAGS

  • Tolerates Tardiness
  • Participation Matters
  • Gives Extra Credit
  • Has Group Projects

GRADE DISTRIBUTIONS

29.4%
24.5%
19.6%
14.7%
9.8%
4.9%
0.0%
A+
A
A-
B+
B
B-
C+
C
C-
D+
D
D-
F

Grade distributions are collected using data from the UCLA Registrar’s Office.

47.6%
39.7%
31.7%
23.8%
15.9%
7.9%
0.0%
A+
A
A-
B+
B
B-
C+
C
C-
D+
D
D-
F

Grade distributions are collected using data from the UCLA Registrar’s Office.

37.5%
31.3%
25.0%
18.8%
12.5%
6.3%
0.0%
A+
A
A-
B+
B
B-
C+
C
C-
D+
D
D-
F

Grade distributions are collected using data from the UCLA Registrar’s Office.

57.9%
48.2%
38.6%
28.9%
19.3%
9.6%
0.0%
A+
A
A-
B+
B
B-
C+
C
C-
D+
D
D-
F

Grade distributions are collected using data from the UCLA Registrar’s Office.

27.3%
22.7%
18.2%
13.6%
9.1%
4.5%
0.0%
A+
A
A-
B+
B
B-
C+
C
C-
D+
D
D-
F

Grade distributions are collected using data from the UCLA Registrar’s Office.

AD

Reviews (2)

1 of 1
1 of 1
Add your review...
Quarter: Fall 2016
Grade: B
Feb. 14, 2017

Given the subject matter (and the timing of the class, with the US elections happening at the time), this class had a lot of potential. The topics were interesting, but Greenfield's teaching methods made the three-hour classes painful. She talked at the class most of the time, and sometimes just read long passages straight from books she hadn't assigned us. The class was not structured in a way that made students particularly interested in participating either. Greenfield was also somewhat disorganized and often got confused about the instructions she had given us, which led to her sending a ridiculous number of emails every week. Despite the interesting topic, I do not think I would recommend taking this class with this particular professor.

Helpful?

1 0 Please log in to provide feedback.
Quarter: Fall 2016
Grade: B
Jan. 26, 2017

Honestly, I didn't care for her Soc Gen 188 seminar on Reproduction and Reproductive Technologies. The subject matter is very interesting, and I definitely learned something from the class, but sitting in section was actually painful. She speaks for most of the time and when she wants answers to her questions, she expects you to know an exact line from one of her 40 page readings that she assigns; if you're not exactly right, she tends to shoot you down. She seems like a sweet lady overall but she's frustrating at times. The grade breakdown consists of a group project, participation, and a final project (usually a research paper). The group project was the only day that I really enjoyed, and she brought a breakfast for the class, which was nice of her. I'd say that I could've gotten an A if I didn't procrastinate on my paper.

Helpful?

1 0 Please log in to provide feedback.
Quarter: Fall 2016
Grade: B
Feb. 14, 2017

Given the subject matter (and the timing of the class, with the US elections happening at the time), this class had a lot of potential. The topics were interesting, but Greenfield's teaching methods made the three-hour classes painful. She talked at the class most of the time, and sometimes just read long passages straight from books she hadn't assigned us. The class was not structured in a way that made students particularly interested in participating either. Greenfield was also somewhat disorganized and often got confused about the instructions she had given us, which led to her sending a ridiculous number of emails every week. Despite the interesting topic, I do not think I would recommend taking this class with this particular professor.

Helpful?

1 0 Please log in to provide feedback.
Quarter: Fall 2016
Grade: B
Jan. 26, 2017

Honestly, I didn't care for her Soc Gen 188 seminar on Reproduction and Reproductive Technologies. The subject matter is very interesting, and I definitely learned something from the class, but sitting in section was actually painful. She speaks for most of the time and when she wants answers to her questions, she expects you to know an exact line from one of her 40 page readings that she assigns; if you're not exactly right, she tends to shoot you down. She seems like a sweet lady overall but she's frustrating at times. The grade breakdown consists of a group project, participation, and a final project (usually a research paper). The group project was the only day that I really enjoyed, and she brought a breakfast for the class, which was nice of her. I'd say that I could've gotten an A if I didn't procrastinate on my paper.

Helpful?

1 0 Please log in to provide feedback.
1 of 1
3.0
Overall Rating
Based on 2 Users
Easiness 3.0 / 5 How easy the class is, 1 being extremely difficult and 5 being easy peasy.
Clarity 3.0 / 5 How clear the professor is, 1 being extremely unclear and 5 being very clear.
Workload 4.0 / 5 How light the workload is, 1 being extremely heavy and 5 being extremely light.
Helpfulness 2.0 / 5 How helpful the professor is, 1 being not helpful at all and 5 being extremely helpful.

TOP TAGS

  • Tolerates Tardiness
    (2)
  • Participation Matters
    (2)
  • Gives Extra Credit
    (2)
  • Has Group Projects
    (2)
ADS

Adblock Detected

Bruinwalk is an entirely Daily Bruin-run service brought to you for free. We hate annoying ads just as much as you do, but they help keep our lights on. We promise to keep our ads as relevant for you as possible, so please consider disabling your ad-blocking software while using this site.

Thank you for supporting us!