I had done most of this class in high school, but some new concepts were taught, and I must agree with the other reviews in the sense that his way of explaining isn't the clearest - he teaches as if he is talking to well-versed mathematicians rather than freshmen. However, unlike the other reviews say, in my quarter the exams were graded unbelievably nicely. In the first midterm, 70 was an A-, 80 was an A, and 90 was an A+. The second midterm had slightly higher cutoffs, and all 3 exams of his were curved, and not only that, they all were very similar to the practice exams. The homework workload is not too heavy, and it's doable. Discussion is non-mandatory and entirely useless. But his lenient grading, charismatic persona, and okay teaching ability make this class a good one.

Pros:
- Very kind and willing to help.
-Clear with his lectures/wastes no time
- Funny. Going to lectures was genuinely exciting.
- Curves really generously to help the students to a reasonable extent.
- Exams are super similar to practice exams (pretty sure we had the same question on the exam once)

Cons:
- Rushes through the content at the end of the lectures when running out of time
- Exams are way too long for the given time (getting better tho)
- Lectures can be confusing, but he does try to clarify if you just ask.

I really had no expectations for Hood's course after reading Bruinwalk, but I would 1000% take his course again. He grades extremely fairly, because he acknowledges that his exams are difficult and long so he curves really generously. He's also super understanding, so as long as you communicate well with him, he's reasonable. His lectures can be a little unorganized and he does make mistakes with his calculations, but he does get the content through. I remember we had a sub for a week, which was a different professor, but Hood's fast-paced, straightforward way of teaching was definitely very missed.

Personally, I found the professor to be a lot better than the reviews made him out to be; Hood makes himself available to his students and genuinely cares about our learning. I do agree that his lectures are hard to follow, but he accounts for that by taking the time to address any concerns in his office after class or fielding questions on Campuswire. As for the exams, they are harder than the homework and practice exams, and aren't written to be finished in 50 minutes, but he is aware of this and takes that into consideration with the curving. Like others have said, I would advise that you go to his review sessions because what he goes over will better reflect what will appear on the midterms and final. If you have him as a professor, know that you will probably need to put in some extra work, but he definitely isn't someone you need to avoid.

A lot of people are flaming this man and honestly I don't super know why? Like yes he can be a bit disorganized, and he makes dumb mistakes like 1+1=3 or derivative of sine is sine. But he truly is a nice man and wants everyone to do well. For example, though there are often errors in answer keys, as soon as someone points it out he immediately corrects it and thanks the student. He promptly responds to concerns on campuswire as well. Grading scheme is either 10% HW, 25% M1, 25% M2, 40% final or 10% HW, 30% best midterm, 60% final; he chooses the better of the two as your final grade. So clearly this man wants you to succeed. And this quarter 63.4% had an A- or better, so grading is pretty light. Honestly, I think he graded things to be pretty easy (on the first midterm, an 80%+ was a flat A). So in general I feel like this an is definitely on your side, loves math, and pretty chill. Homework was a bit hard because he would assign homework on Friday that would have material from the lectures that following M, W, and F, and it would be due that Friday, which obviously is problematic. But homework I didn't find all that bad, though it might be useful to collaborate with some peers. I think the tests were certainly quite fair too, as the practice tests were very similar. Like I didn't really think there were ever curveballs on tests -- if you think you genuinely know a concept, you will be fine on the test. Anyway basically overall very nice guy, approachable, a bit eccentric and would go on tangents about bureaucracy and stuff (he went to UC Berkeley) but I don't have any actual complaints.

I don't believe the rating for this class is accurate (3.3 at the time of writing this) because honestly, it's not that bad. Although the content in this class is difficult at times, earning a high grade is absolutely doable. I have broken down my review below:

Exams: The exams for this class are tough, don't get me wrong. There are 2 midterms and a final that make up 90% of your grade. You will need to study hard for these exams, but trust me, you'll do fine, here's why. Prof Chatham releases practice exams a week or so prior to the actual exam that are *very* similar to the real thing. If you can master everything on the practice exam then you will do just fine come judgment day. Most of the prompts on the exams are things you have already seen either on past HW assignments or in the practice, so don't be worried about any surprises. The grading for these exams is very lenient. The grade boundaries are forgiving and Chatham awards partial credit and error follow-through points.

Homework: There is 1 HW assignment due every week. These take about 2 hours to complete and are graded mostly on completion with very few based on accuracy. I highly recommend going to office hours if you get stuck.

Lectures: Prof Chatham is not a good lecturer, he goes fast, is often unclear, and writes in chalk that is often hard to read from afar. However, he does post his lecture notes prior to the lecture which definitely come in clutch. I would normally read and take notes on his lecture notes prior to the actual lecture so that I can just sit through the lecture and try my best to absorb everything he is saying.

Tips: GO TO OFFICE HOURS. Prof Chatham's OH are super helpful and are the reason I was able to do well in this class. He usually works through tough HW problems and practice exams during this time. I would usually go to OH even if I didn't have any questions to ask because I would almost always walk out having learned something useful. My second tip is to use your resources. The textbook for this class is not required. however, is pretty helpful. I recommend reading the textbook and all its explanations and going through the examples because they for sure help develop a strong intuition of the content. I know this sounds like a silly monotonous task, but trust me, it's worth it. Also, Khan academy and the Organic Chemistry Tutor on youtube are handy. My last tip is to give Chatham a chance. When I first started this class I heard a lot of people complaining about Chatham and saying negative things about him, but if you come prepared to the lectures and show up to OH, you will come to appreciate Chatham a lot more and actually learn something in the process.

Math 32A with Prof. Hood was my first Math class at UCLA and I think it was very manageable. His grading scheme puts a lot of weight on exams, but he does allow for the opportunity to drop one midterm. As far as lectures went, he was mostly clear, though at times he would make computational errors. However, he'll usually know he is unclear, and will either clarify content in the next lecture or release a document explaining the content in a more detailed manner. His homework load was also manageable (weekly assignment). A lot of the homework isn't exactly translated to the exams, but he releases practice exams which are almost identical to the actual exam. I do recommend attending office hours as he'll usually go into these practice exams in great detail, which are super helpful for the real exam. He also offers an extra credit assignment which is very easy (took me like 10 minutes) for 40 points in the HW category (out of 0). All in all, he isn't the most mind-blowing lecturer, but he is a friendly professor who gives reasonable tests.

The lectures in my opinion were not structured very well; it seemed as if the professor was trying to teach the topics without much preparation. Even though he clearly understands the topics, his way of explaining them can often be incoherent. The tests are not conceptually but the amount of algebra needed to be done (which is completely unrelated to the calculus) is a bit too much to do for most students in a 50-minute timeframe. Though, the tests are often similar to his released practice exams so make sure to do them. He did offer an extra credit assignment, though I can't speak much on it since I didn't do it.

Lectures are clear except when the professor makes arithmetic errors. Homework manageable. Tests manageable if you do the practice tests.

Prof. Chatham is pretty disorganized, which is not a good thing when it comes to exams. He seems to try to connect with students, though. I still remember the fog net problem he introduced the class with that *coincidentally* was also on the final.

Very unclear lectures, usually erratic and out of place/order with numerous errors throughout lecturing. Exams are far off material covered in lecture and ask students to go beyond what he ever fully explains during lecture. Overall bad professor to take if you want to get through this class with a decent grade.