--Lectures: Cameron is a pretty good lecturer. When it comes to complicated topics, it is at times difficult to follow, but he is very open to questions and clarifications.
--Homework: The work was only 5-7 questions per week, so it was super light.
--Quizzes: The weekly quizzes were just to check that you're following along, so they were pretty easy. You'll get 100 as long as you stay up to date on class material.
--Exams: There were two midterms and one final. Overall the exams were pretty hard, but you do get 24 hours for each. The problems did match the homework decently.
--Discussion: They didn't have mandatory attendance, but they were pretty useful. The TA just went over new example problems.
--Tips: Discrete math is all about exposure to many problems. It's more important to do a bunch of practice problems than simply absorbing the lectures.

Do not take this class with Cameron! As a student who enjoys both math and CS, I assumed this course would be both useful and interesting. Somehow professor Cameron managed to make me hate every minute of it. Lectures are very stilted, without requisite explanations of the reasons behind his proofs. The discussion sections were worse than useless, and it was clear that the TA wanted to be anywhere else.
This has been mentioned by previous reviewers, but his tests are wildly unreasonable. The material on them is often (if not usually) absent from the homeworks. Further, they would take ridiculously long to complete (9 hours for midterms and 12 for the final). On top of this, the grading was often arbitrary, with substantial points being docked for minuscule lack of clarity (which is an enormous problem for a straight-scaled class). The moral of the story? This class was an example of an interesting topic ruined by a bad professor and TAs who didn't care.

This class has very light workload, but the tests are difficult. However, Cameron and his TAs are knowledgable and very helpful. Additionally, many of the test questions are very similar to worksheet problems and examples in class.

A wise advice is to sit in the front, so that you can understand his speaking fast and "twisted" handwriting. However, after you manage to keep pace with him, you'll find his thoughts super clear and logical. He always starts a concept with a fun example, and keeps digging deeper and deeper as he progresses, which I think helps me understand the material very well. Also, he is very knowledgeable, and seldom gets confused by himself (which many professors will). If you have a bit trouble concentrating throughout the lecture, think twice before taking him, but if you don't, I strongly recommend you take him, and get a lot from him.

Avoid this guy.

I think he does try to be a good professor, but he's just not good at explaining concepts at all, kinda annoying when he talks, and will often get things wrong while he's lecturing. His inability to explain such concepts really shines through during the longer proofs such as for Euler cycles/paths, Towers of Hanoi/Catalan Numbers, decision trees and especially for computational complexity. It seemed like he covered more material than most professors do too (i.e. the computation complexity bit), which I did not understand until now that I'm taking CS 180. Thankfully, it wasn't tested heavily on the final at all.

The exams are pretty difficult compared to many other Math 61 professors, especially the first midterm which gave some very complicated mappings to construct, and to determine equivalence relations on. He never taught us, or assigned homework that was anything like that. Second midterm was riddled with 4 or 5 errors throughout, and one of the questions was not possible making it unfair to those that spent a while working on that one, before the prof. made the correction. Final was also quite difficult, but nothing new there. Medians were like 64, 72 and 66. I was able to I think barely get an A in the class with a raw score of 84, so there is a curve I guess.

Would not recommend. Just take Manolescu in the spring lol, I hear he's quite good and makes the class pretty cool.

Uh this professor doesn't know jack and can only recite definitions from the textbook, but expects us to do proofs... so tldr don't take him unless you understand the material already because the textbook isn't clear and the professor doesn't teach. Also, if your TA is Ben, be ready to ask a question and then have take an hour to work it out with you by asking YOU how to do each step, which you most likely won't know how to do because you're asking the TA the question....
TLDR: don't take this prof and go to another TA other than ben :)

Okay, listen up: I don't usually write reviews for anyone, but THIS GUY made me question my entire existence and any future in STEM. I love discrete math and the material is actually very interesting, but this guy literally ruins it all. Things covered in class =/= what is on exams. I believe the average fluctuated at like around 45%, if not less. His tests are ridiculously hard, lectures are unclear and not very engaging, although it is visible that he is really trying his best. James Cameron, I love you and your cat, but your exams are SO UNFAIR and made me and very smart kids in the class feeling like complete retards.

This class is insanely hard. Please do not take this class. His exams are unbelievably far from what we learn in class nor is it ever covered on homework.

I don't understand the low ratings. Cameron isn't a bad professor. His lectures were pretty clear and understandable. However, I felt like that the pacing of material was pretty slow actually (he focused a lot of proofs). But if you have a question, Dr. Cameron can answer it in an articulate manner.
The part I have complaint about is his exams, not his skills as his lecturer.

Yeah, I agree that Dr. Cameron regurgitates a lot of things from the textbook, but that's the case with a lot of professors. (and... at least he didn't make it harder to understand than the textbook). I didn't see much need to read the textbook for the material (unless I wanted to learn more details about a topic)

There's very little homework (4-5 problems per week) and I always ended up doing them they day before it was due. Cameron's Math 61 was actually the class I spent the least amount of time this year. I probably could have stacked another class on the top if I knew. Unlike CS 180 problems, they are more straightforward.

For exams, it was a little different. His exams were definitely harder than other Math 61 exams. I could definitely tell that it was designed to weed people out and make a bell curve. I honestly thought I was going to get a B+ the entire quarter, and found out that I got an A because the average turned out to be pretty low (Dr. Cameron made some mistakes on 2nd midterm and added a final policy of 90% final and 10% homework as well, but the final average was too low to help many people out).

However, I partly put some blame on his harsh exams to the math department for trying to make a curve. (Also heard my TA confirming this in my discussion)
I'd say that Cameron's tests really does the job... Of making a bell by giving you pretty little time. But honestly, it's better than getting downcurved IMO.

His exam kinda... sucks. If you don't see a counter example pretty quick, you are probably going to get the question wrong. A reminder that the midterms only have 50 minutes... and there are 2-3 proof based questions, and 10 multiple choice. I wouldn't have had a complaint if the exam gave us around 20 more minutes. It tests you more on test taking skills than your knowledge after a certain point.

If you want a high probability of getting an A, just drop the class until you get a near perfect score on the first midterm. Otherwise, leave this class up to your test taking skills.

TL DR; Light course workload compared to other classes (if you can follow the material). Clear lectures that isn't too different from textbook, but expect exam questions designed to make a curve.

I really liked the class and I found Professor Cameron to be very nice and the lectures were actually pretty interesting. However, I took this class during remote learning so midterms and finals were 24 hours long, so that's probably why I don't hate this class. For reference, going at a relaxed pace would probably require 10 hours for completing the midterm, but when everything is in person, you only get like the class period or something. I probably spent at least 12 hours on the final, but in person, you only get 3. So basically, the exams are tough and comprise most of your grade.

P.S. If you want to practice for the exams, the discussion worksheets and previous tests that he releases really help. It's not really like the homework questions.