This introductory class certainly didn't feel introductory. The assignments were graded harsher than any other intro classes I've taken before, and the class instructions were very vague. As an intro class that people take to fill GE requirements I was really disappointed in the requirements and grading strictness the professor held us to. I've taken upper division political science and international studies classes with easier grading than this.

As some people have mentioned before, the midterm, although not specified in the instructions, is graded on a tough curve. Meaning that you can only get a perfect score if your answers are the best in the class. The final and midterm are both graded in relation to other students, with questions meant to look easy but are deceptively difficult. Additionally, the instructions are incredibly vague on other things such as the number of sources you need to have in your answers, or how detailed your answers should be.

When I emailed the professor about questions I had on the grading and content of our exams, I never received a response back. This happened three times over the quarter, she never answered a single email I sent her. Which is strange considering she leaves us her contact email in the syllabus.

All the grading criteria, fuzzy instructions, coursework assignments, and participation requirements in this class were difficult to deal with. Some people really enjoyed the assignments and participating in section. I didn't. Your experience may vary depending on your preferences but I wouldn't recommend this class to anyone looking for GE classes. The difficulty of this class relative to other intro and GE classes is astounding, and I really can't say this class was a good choice to take.

The midterm, final, and perusall assignments were graded harshly, not sure if that is the TA or the professor, but it felt very harsh, especially for an intro course. The lectures were really random in the beginning of the quarter (basically summaries of the assigned readings) and got more interesting/relevant later in the quarter. Overall, a decent class but would not recommend unless you are really interested in East Asian Studies because it is a lot of work/not that easy for just GE.

Overall, the course material was informative and the professor seemed fairly passionate about the class, which is good. This class, however, is one of the harder GEs in my opinion.

First of all, the readings she gives out every class is a bit much (around 40-60 pages). Secondly, the midterm and final, which are both based on the readings, are graded unnecessarily harshly. These exams are fairly straightforward: she gives us the prompts one week in advance and we're expected to write short answers to those questions during the allotted exam times.

After getting the midterm scores back, I was disappointed with my overall grade and decided to ask what I needed to work on for the next exam. Basically, she had told me that I needed to write more. Personally, I felt that I had answered the questions well enough and it was unfair for her to grade based on how much I wrote. Additionally, (though I may just be a really slow writer) I was writing nonstop for the entire exam. Even if I did not write in enough detail, she doesn't give us a rubric so it's hard to do well if you don't hit the mark from the get-go.

It was pretty interesting class. You receive your questions for midterm and final one week in advance so that you can prepare them beforehand. However, I found the grading of the exams random. She doesn't give you criteria for exams. But it is not difficult to get over 90% overall so that you can get some form of A if you do the readings and listen to lectures.

It's an interesting class, and I found the readings and topics chosen to be interesting. Jung-Kim is a clear and articulate lecturer, though if you do the readings and take notes from them beforehand, you don't really need to take any notes during lecture, which is good since she goes through her slides at a pretty quick pace.

The midterm and final questions are given about a week before each exam, though the grading standard for them is really high, and to be honest, fairly inconsistent. However, 45% of the grade comes from an easy group project and writing some posts on CCLE for discussion, which more than makes up for your exam grades if you don't get A's on them. Overall, it's probably not the easiest GE, but I'd take again.

Professor Jung-Kim moves pretty fast through each lecture and covers a lot of history, often too fast paced to take notes. However, as long as you listen closely and develop a general understanding of each historical event/time period she covers, you'll be ok.
In terms of assignments and work, this class is very front heavy -- meaning you have to work pretty hard weeks 1-7, but 8-10 were chiller and more fun.
Each midterm (both take home) was time consuming and graded pretty hard. The mandatory readings are essential for doing well on each midterm. The readings take a lot of time, but are interesting. Then, once each midterm is completed, the class shifts from studying history to studying Asia's current geopolitics. This latter half of the class was very fun -- fun projects, fun discussions in class, and good vibes.
If you're looking for an easy A, this class isn't for you. But if you're interested in the subject, by all means go for it.
Professor Jung-Kim is also just a very kind person who cares a lot about her students. Get to know her if you take any of her classes!