This professor's format of how this class is structured is very um um um um unfair and does not give enough adequate time for um um um effective learning. There are um um um um weekly quizzes each worth 10% of your grade, every week even one the day before the final exam which is um um um um um um bizarre in my opinion as if you screw up on the final quiz you will may not realize your um um um um um um um um mistake and make the same one on the final, as there is no office hour between the final quiz and final exam. We have optional um um um um um um homework that isn't required, but the homework isn't long enough for me to fully grasp all the concepts we learned in um um um um um class, so I have to do practice problems via the textbook in order to score well on the quizzes and exams. Also the um um um um teacher expects you to have memorized the class content from the previous day on the exam the following day like Tuesday's lecture um um will be on Wednesday's quiz which is very hard for most students to pull off mastering something in 24 hours. This um um um um teacher never responds to email, takes a very long time to post solutions to optional homeworks, notes, solutions to quizzes, etc. Organization and communication are not a um um um um um um um um um strong suit in this class like I would love to have known early that Tuesday's material was going to be on Wednesday’s quiz but no you had to tell me at the last possible second in an email on Tuesday afternoon when I had been studying the whole weekend for the quiz assuming that only last week's material would be on the quiz. And um um um um um Monday was Labor day, like come on, are we being punished for UCLA giving us labor day off, since Tuesday’s material was on Wednesday’s Quiz????? I'm sorry but this teacher loves exams and in order to increase overall learning I think we need graded homeworks and not be forced to master the material in lightning fast speed. The teacher has shown to be quite helpful during office hours though, but his English isn't um um um the greatest and I would appreciate it if he said um a little less. I would not recommend this professor by any means, please ignore this teacher and go get a better grade. I really appreciate his most famous quote “On the fourth biggest Monday we will have the um um um um Midterm.”

Hubeyb is a peculiar guy, he’s not necessarily a great professor but that’s the same as like half of the profs in the math department. Homework is given but not graded, only meant to help for studying for the tests and quizzes.

The course is graded from 4 quizzes, with the lowest one dropped, the midterm, and final. The quizzes are 10% each, with the midterm and final having a 30/40 split, with the one you performed on better being the 40%.

The midterm was relatively what was expected, basically the exact material that you’d expect. The final was MUCH more difficult however.

The reviews that were written previously are entirely accurate. Brush up on your 170E material, he loves testing Gamma, exponential, and Poisson distributions. We were also for some reason had a question on chi-squared testing for the final. Ordinarily I would think it’s ok but in this case we learnt the entirety of it in the last lecture day, 2 days before the final.

Overall if you have Hubeyb you’ll be fine, but I wouldn’t sing the most praises.

He's a pretty alright professor. Not perfect by any means. His lectures are pretty boring sometimes but I just like the way the class is structured. I'm not sure if it was because it's summer or the course itself, but it wasn't that difficult relative to 170E. His exams reflect the homework pretty well and you can easily do the homework by just reading the slides without any outside help.

Math 170S with Gurdogan is a strange class. First of, be an expert in 170E. He loves use Binomial, Exponential, Gamma, Beta, and Chi Squared distributions. A lot of profs skip some of the later stuff, but he will assume you are experts on them for the test. He also gives absolutely no practice, especially for Bayesian Statistics (one of the hardest topics), so maybe ask GPT to make some hard questions involving that. The second half of the class is almost entirely plug and chug, and the MT was significantly harder than the final because of that. He also goes into many tangents on proofs which he never tests on and lecture isn't very useful compared to slides.

I took the summer session so the content was accelerated but overall was still very manageable. No textbook is really needed because the slides copy-paste the most essential information and the z, t, and chi square tables are all provided on exams.

I will say that this professor struggles to explain concepts clearly, and focuses a bit more on proving theorems (not tested) than actual application. I think the best strategy to get a good grade is to review the lecture slides then use the homeworks to test your understanding. The exams are the same difficulty level as the homeworks and there are few curveball questions. I'm pretty sure he curves depending on the grade distribution.

Concepts from 170E are pretty much the foundation of this course so brush up on that before starting, as he will expect you to know poisson, gamma, beta, and chi square distributions, their expected values and their pdfs are fair game.