Simmons reminds me a lot of Gustavo Fring from Breaking Bad....he appears quiet and innocent upon the first impression...but behind those glasses is something diabolical .

He taught modules 3 and 4 of 111A (motor systems and sensory systems), which are by far and large make up the hardest portion of the course. Module 1 (Electrophysiology) was taught by Roberts, and Module 2 (Muscle Physiology) was taught by Tidball. Their exams were worth 100 points each, and Simmons exam was worth 160 points.

My point breakdown for the course was as follows:

Midterm 1 (Module 1):
Average - 64/100
My score - 72/100

Midterm 2 (Module 2):
Average - 86/100
My score - 91/100

Final (Modules 3 & 4):
Average - he never released the distribution
My score - 138 / 160

Final grade: B+

Personally, I feel a little cheated with my final grade and the curve seemed strict, but everyone in PhySci111A really wants to be there and succeed. With regards to his teaching style, he is very all over the place. He switches between power points and the white board with no clear order or flow. He tries to map out the concepts on the board and tie them together in diagrams. He mumbles through an insane amount of material but doesn't seem to make any precise claims about what is going on. I disliked the book because the book was just too detailed and even used words that were used differently in lecture.

I recorded all of his lectures because they weren't podcast, and I LABORIOUSLY wrote down every detail from every lecture. Upon doing this, I realized that many concepts and ideas he discussed skipped around and were disorganized. He would often reiterate the same concepts in different parts of the lecture but in a slightly different way, cut himself off during a stream of thought to discuss something else/an anecdote , and constantly correct himself after he had written stuff down on the board. To account for these things, I organized what I had written all down to establish a better flow of the concepts, and I then consolidated these notes into one form and studied them over...and over...and over...and over... and over again for the final. The final exam was excruciatingly long. Parts of the exam were reasonable and required you to regurgitate concepts, but other parts of the final were grossly excessive.

In summary, his section for the course was the bane of my existence and required a ludicrous amount of time. We covered full lecture of new material up until Friday of 10th week, and the final exam was less than a week away. Although Simmons tried to be pleasant and funny, he needs a little bit of an attitude adjustment when it comes to some of the biting things he would say. He sarcastically chuckled and told us that class evaluations "have no income on his salary no matter what we say." He also made remarks about how much he loves throwing cats to test their reflexes and how everyone continue should damage their hearing from loud headphones in order to keep funding his research about hearing loss. Thanks, Dwayne.

I know that everyone says that Simmons is awful, but that doesn't have to be true. Just know that he section requires A LOT of work, but if you put in the time and effort, you will be okay!

I am one of the few people who enjoyed Simmons' lecture style. I thought the reviews before and after each lecture were actually effective, but be aware, most people hate his teaching style.

As someone before me said, make sure to actively study! Rewrite his notes; read the book and take notes; take notes in discussion; make sure you understand EVERY SINGLE CONCEPT and then consolidate all of these notes into one form, whether it be notecards or whatever you use to study best and memorize, memorize, memorize! make sure to understand concepts and pathways insideout, because he will give questions that twist one part of a pathway or whatever and ask you what the expected results are. For example, on our Final, he asked "what would happen to the basal ganglia pathways if you switched the locations of D1 and D2 receptors and what would the effects look like?" While this may seem daunting, if you know everything about the basal ganglia, you should be able to figure out what a change will do to it. If your TAs give you worksheets, do them! Simmons asks for TA input on the test. Also do Tophat! great way for easy extra credit!

Lastly, DO NOT freak out! If you study this hard, it WILL pay off! The test, in my opinion, was fair, but tricky at points. However, be aware, Simmons sucks when it comes to wording his questions, and for me the trickiness wasnt due to the material, but more due to the fact that I wasnt sure what he was asking at times. Also it is a very long test and you will most likely be exhausted by the end, but so will everyone else! Everything on the test was covered in class, admittedly some more so than other parts. I left feeling not the best about it, while others were saying they thought it went well, which freaked me out. But in the end, by studying this way I got one of the highest scores in the class, which was a nice reward for all the work I put into it. Sidenote: He wont post grades until after spring break is over, which sucks, but theres nothing you can do about that.

Sorry, one last thing: Don't put off studying till the last weekend! While I definitely fell behind during Simmons' section, I had to start catching up a week and a half before finals week, and the week before finals week, I was eating, sleeping, breathing Physci, and it was BARELY enough time to cover everything I wanted to cover.

So, basically, I thought while Simmons was difficult, he wasnt impossible. I ended up getting an A+ in the class because of this study method. I wish I figured that this method worked for me before, because I am usually someone who gets B's in science classes, so obviously I'm far from perfect, but I was still able to do well in this class.

PS 111A Winter 2014

Here's how the past two weeks have been:
After module 1/2 exams, felt pretty confident of passing course.
Took the final on Tuesday 8-11AM of finals week
Cried myself to sleep because THAT WAS THE WORSE FINAL EVER. AND IT'S WORTH 160 POINTS?!??!?!
Constantly checked for grades on MyUCLA to make sure I passed, so I can continue onto PS 111B
GRADES WERE NOT UPDATED UNTIL THE SUNDAY NIGHT BEFORE SPRING QUARTER AT 11PM!!? ?!?!??!?

This professor, although a nice person, is the worse professor I've ever had. He is the worse thing you will encounter about the PS major... so good luck, and make sure you score as many points as you can from exams 1/2 because you will need it as padding.

He has bad flow. He needs to
(1) state what he is going to cover then go into it...
(2) make a claim
(3) support the claim/ explain the shit
(4) make a conclusion that makes us go (ahhhhh I get it)

What he does:
(1) lists everything he will go over in the beginning (wtf how are we going to keep track?)
(2) goes back and forth.
(3) wtf is up with the presentation/ white board shit? (do one or the other)

His section is the hardest part for physci 111a because of his topic. He also shouldn't teach from Purves. Fucking Purves is retarded...we're undergrads not fucking neuroscientists...the terminology makes shit confusing...for example...say interneuron instead of fucking local circuit neurons...also the book is organized terribly and is dense as shit... Probably why Simmons has a hard time teaching.. It is the books fault not simmons.

As a person, Simmons is a homie G. IDK about his exams yet...

Worst instructor I ever encounter in Physci. Boring level: 10/10, I got lost through his explanations (I dont even know what he is talking about). Lots of slides to study for. Finals was 17 pages long, halfway through, I got tired just by looking at the question. Final consisted of everything : fill in the blanks (hard), multiple choice question with multiple answers (hard), long essays, short essays, diagrams, crossword puzzles.

This guy is terrible. AVOID AT ALL COSTS.

Worst professor I have ever had throughout my whole time here at UCLA. As the person below previously stated, he only has pictures in his slides. His slides are ridiculously long. Worst thing is, he can't even explain them well.
Yeah I read the book, but there's too much information. He didn't even send us our study guide for the final.
He stands there, tries to be funny, but ends up cracking himself up. He repeats the same thing over and over and each time it gets more confusing. When he runs out of something to say, he stands there pauses, then says something that does not make sense.
He is always late to lecture, and his breaks are only 5 minutes long, ridiculous.

GG for those taking Phy Sci 111A. You cannot avoid him and he teaches the last two modules, which are the longest and hardest.

This ni**a can't teach for sh*t