Reinmann is a super nice guy but this is not a very easy class. We did too well on the midterm and he made the final extremely hard. A lot of practice is needed. Homework often took a while.

I feel like walking away from this class, I learned a lot about assembly and also learned really cool topics surrounding buffer overflow attacks and examining memory in complex ways. The labs were the highlight of this class for me, specifically the bomb lab and the attack lab, which I think both of would be very hard to cheat on other than just using someone else to do them for you.

Outside of those labs, I really struggled to pay attention or focus in this class whatsoever. I took smallberg in a completely virtual format in fall and nachenberg in a completely in person format in winter, and excelled in both, so you’d think a flipped classroom would be a combination of both of these and I would be able to focus well. Not the case. The pre class lecture videos are very mundane and are nail biters to suffer through, but they are where a majority of the learning will happen. In actual lecture time, looking around the room I saw minesweeper, google QuickDraw, working on other classes, and sleeping. I can’t blame any of these actions, as picking out what was actually useful or needed during lecture time was about as hard as finding a needle in a haystack. In class examples were very important to do well on exams, but I’d usually be so checked out at the completely random moments these were gone over that I completely missed them. I’d definitely enjoy some level of linearity or normal thought progression during lecture time rather than the scatterbrained nature of the class, and I think that would help to keep peoples attention to a much greater degree. I don’t think a flipped lecture is entirely the issue, but it did not work for this professor and his teaching style. It could work if the professor is very adamant about it being efficient, but I don’t believe it is the best for his students.

Exams:
Midterm was a shitshow, I think that’s very clear from other reviews and the professor himself. There was a slight lack of responsibility and a pointing finger nature at his students regarding this exam, but I don’t think this was the professors intention whatsoever. He definitely understood his mistakes, and this was clear from the final, where he even very generously re used a problem from the midterm that every sane student should have looked over and learned how to do.

The professor was a very knowledgeable and smart person, who was enjoyable to talk to about a variety of topics, however I think the exams and style for teaching need a harsh re evaluation and this quarter may have served as a wake up call.

In terms of getting a good grade, this quarter seems to have been an anomaly and I would say it’s a bit harder to get an A without studying or putting in too much effort like cs31 and cs32.

Since this was the first class back in person after covid, I believe Reinman was a bit disoriented on the way to teach the class and the expectations he had for us. He uses the flipped classroom method where you watch a video (presumably) beforehand and then attend lecture. Many never attended lecture because they could just watch the video, however it is helpful to go to gain a better understanding by asking and listening to others' questions. Reinman does very little preparation for his lectures. Towards the end of the class, he did not even use his own slides and often got confused while explaining the material. He doesn't even have a laser pointer!

Without going into deep technicality, the majority of the grade was the midterm and the final with very little weight given to labs and homeworks ( he emphasized that we can finish those through "other means", so they're not a good determiner of what you know). The format of the midterm was honestly a big mistake, and Reinman himself apologizes for it. However, know that he expects you to know exam-type questions without going over any sort of review of what the format is going to be on the midterm. For this, you must go to professor and TA office hours (Salekh is the best TA!). The final was fair, in my opinion. We had enough time for the exam and we had experience from the midterm on what the format would be like.

You have two weeks to complete labs and one week to do homeworks which was more than enough if you did a little every day. That being said, Reinman often brought up that our bad performance on exams was a result of us cheating on labs and homework assignments. Given that we had more time to do those assignments and ask for help, this statement obviously does not make any sense.

Overall, you would need to get a lot of outside help and go out of your way to prepare beforehand for exams if you take this professor. Honestly, I am in disbelief at how Reinman chose to teach the class this quarter, and I hope he can learn from his mistakes for future quarters.

There will likely be a number of reviews for Reinman from Spring 22, so I will just briefly sum up the extensive problems from his teaching of this course:

Exams - The average on the midterm was a 49.54, and the final was a 62.82. Standard deviation was 23.39 and 20.76 respectively.

Reinman admitted that less than 10% of students got one of the 4 midterm questions correct--but rather than eliminating that question or taking responsibility for the low score, he doubled down, saying that he suspected students who were doing well on labs but not on the exams were cheating. This midterm question in particular was very similar to a homework question that we got a full week to complete, and only about 12 minutes to complete on this exam. A later announcement said he was "not satisfied" with the midterm and that he "wants you all to do better".

The final exam was a similar story, just with a somewhat better grading scheme--still, when 40% of people got a similar question wrong, he called it "a shame" and asked "whether you really did the labs".

Cheating Accusations - The average scores for the labs was close to an A+, while the combined exam average was a 56. Reinman repeatedly expressed that he believed the class was not truly doing the labs, suggesting that students were copying from others.

As a result of this, Reinman said that final grades would be curved based only on your improvement between the midterm and the final, stating that "Labs and homework are great, but I cannot have ensured that you worked on those on your own. So there is no replacement for the exams." Thus, the "only real measure of our performance" were two low-score, often unrealistic exams, one of which he admitted was "one of the lowest averages (if not the lowest) of any test I've ever given in my 20+ years at UCLA."

So--the dozens of hours many students put in to ensure that their lab grades were good enough to offset the unrealistically difficult exams? Probably cheating, says Reinman. It won't factor into your curve.

Oh, and Reinman was so mad about his poor evaluations from this quarter that he took the time to send us an announcement addressing an evaluation from a student that he copied verbatim from MyUCLA (as a reminder, Evaluations of Instruction claim to be "anonymous and confidential" and require students to sign off as such.) Some quotes from this announcement:
- "One student complained that they learned nothing from the class - which I find hard to believe, at least they should have learned not to take a class with me again"
- "It is pretty hypocritical for someone to cheat on the labs and then tell me that I don't care."

Overall, my hard work didn't matter (I got curved up by a single point), I spent countless hours trudging through assembly code just to be accused of cheating with no evidence, and Reinman still thought it necessary to complain about his poor reviews. Don't recommend.

No idea about everything he said

To be honest, from the very start of this class and to the very end, I absolutely despised this class. As the quarter went on, the class just continued to take and take from me. It took my sanity, it took my time, it took my sleep, it took my thoughts, my hopes and fears and dreams and aspirations, anything that I had, was gone into the endless void that is CS33.

So why did I give this class and Reinman a 5/5 here on the Walk of Bruins?

I truly believe that, as difficult as this class is, if you put in the work, you'll get the grade you want. (woop dee doo, what a shocker)

The class, and I believe I can speak for many of my peers, started to truly go downhill right after the midterm, when the 'original' average for the 8 pm midterm was a 48% (which was brought up to a 67% after partial credit was given out), but I think seeing such a ridiculously low average really shocked everyone (including Reinman) into really busting their chops for the final.

I got a literal 10% on the first midterm because I made the mistake of not submitting more detailed work to squeeze out that partial credit.

So, with promises of a generous curve, a readjustment of weights for the exams, and extra credit on labs, I decided not to drop the class.

Well, I'm not gonna tell my whole story since it literally involves me sitting down for hours a day just rewatching lectures, practicing labs, and doing the LA worksheets.

Fast forward to the final, I managed to pull out a 64% on the final, with the class average being something a lot higher probably, since some of ya'll are just assembly geniuses, but for the below average assembly person like me, I was very happy with my grade.

I was honestly expecting to receive about a C to a C+ since the exams category is a whopping 50% of your grade

I ended with a B+ in the class.

And the big shocker too, Reinman decided not to curve the class this quarter since apparently half the class got A's.

I'm unsure of how he allocated the final weights, and how much the extra credit counted for (I did all of the extra credit btw), but my uncurved grade was a B+, after a terrible midterm and a mediocre final.

So all in all, yes this class is pretty difficult, but this class definitively epitomizes the notion of "you earn the grade you work for."

I don't feel that I cheesed a B+ or I lucked out with a B+, because I know I sat down and studied as much as I could for this class, it would not have been possible to get a B+ had I just cruised my way to the final.

Overall, take Reinman. This was the last quarter online, so of course your experience may differ from mine, but one thing stands whether its online or not, TAKE REINMAN!!!

I scored an A in CS 31 and 32, yet a B- in this class. Here's why.
Reinman uses the backwards-classroom approach, which you've probably read about (watch a video before each lecture, and the lecture discussion is about the video).

First of all, the class was at 8 AM on Monday and Wednesday, and oftentimes I simply did not have the time to watch the video in the time frame he gave us (he would upload it roughly a day before the class).

What made this class extremely difficult for me was the lack of clarity in what Reinman was saying in his lecture videos. He used vocabulary loosely and did not explain things in the way that the computer understands them. Smallberg, on the other hand, was a master at introducing concepts in a way that conceptually makes sense with the computer.

Thirdly, most of the content (which is a BUTTLOAD of work) is not even on the exam!

It was really frustrating to see that I put in a lot of hard work and have the CS intelligence to do well, yet failed in my standards (B-). I honestly believe this is the fault of the professor though.

NOTE: If you decide to take this class, FOCUS ON THE LABS!! I made the mistake of studying for the final by making sure I understood and memorized every detail of the videos instead of practicing the labs.

CS系的Haofei Fan！我就问还有谁？？？ 拉面人万岁！！！

I'll just put it this way: when you think other classes are hells this one is heaven! It is literally that big of a difference. Holly Reinman!

You got this class, you got the best deal ever.

Prof Reinman is great! He uses a flipped classroom structure where you have to watch 1-2 hours of pre-recorded videos before each live lecture, and these videos by themselves cover the basics of the topic you will learn in the live lecture.

The live lectures, the professor goes more in depth over the topics and answers a lot of questions. He also goes over some practice problems live in order to clarify topics and such. Lectures are very engaging since its all handwritten and uses zero slides, plus professor is very fun and charismatic. Must attend these lectures, they solidify concepts and also VERY relevant to problems you will find in exams. In fact, the professor will literally tell you that this kind of problem will show up on the exam so pay attention.

Exams are tough, but the professor will curve it up. They are worth 90% of your grade: 40% being the midterm and 50% being the finals.
All of the exam questions are advanced variations of questions the professor brought up in class or high level stuff that you don't need to know the details for, so it always feels like fair game. Since they are open note, you don't need to memorize anything(although you must have a good understanding of topics, notes won't help you much).

The midterm does have a time crunch, the final was alright.

Homeworks are based on completion, and you can just bs them if you don't want to actually do it. I personally didn't do any of the homeworks and did fine on the exams, but you do you.

Take the class with reinman yo

This class was a flipped classroom, so Professor Reinman would require us to watch online videos before coming to class, which was basically a Q&A. The workload wasn't too bad, consisting of seven homework assignments which didn't take more than a few hours. The midterm wasn't bad, but the material gets more difficult in the second half of the class and as a result, the final was much more difficult. The midterm and final decide most of your grade, and the averages were high for both, so it pays to study a lot for both.