I have to admit... I think Pang is really good looking, and he is always dressed very well, so maybe that will skew my review a little bit.

His class isn't that hard, but it takes a lot of dedication. Set aside time to make sure you jump through every hoop he throws at you, including the online assignments and all of the pre/postlabs. I spent time on all of them and got about a 95% average on them. Most of the points I lost were on significant figures-- the TAs can be really picky about small things, so watch out. His tests were fair, and you should be ok if you can convert units really well. The concepts aren't even hard, but there are a ton of unit conversions and calculations to get through.

Bottom line: don't be afraid of him, and don't listen to the horror stories. He wants to reward you for your hard work, so show him what you've got.

Ok, I'm gonna write straight up to avoid this guy. His lectures were clear to me, but that's about the only good thing. There is SOOOO much work for a 3 credit course. The amount of work we had was more than my other core classes. The labs are just time consuming, other students grade your essays which kills your grade, and the exams are NOTHING like what you study for. What really matters is that students should understand the concepts. I think I understand chemistry well judging by my chem 20A and chem 20B grades, but his class was just nonsense.

I had Pang for chem lab. The TA does the grading of all the labs, but Pang does the tests. The tests are easy and straight forward; i don't know why everyone complains. If you can convert quantities and know sig figs, the tests are a sinch. However, he grades very hard and doesn't curve. He is a really nice guy though (ironically from how he seems in lecture) if you happen to go to office hours.

I'm not really sure why everyone's bashing on Pang, but he wasn't intimidating. In fact, he would also strike up a chat and offer you a seat when you go to his office hours. He'll also answer any email you send him, even though it was 9 pm on a freakin' Sunday when I got a reply from him.

Anyways, he does speak very quickly, but he has to because he has a limited time to cover all the material that you'll need to know in lab. The handouts were useful as long as you filled in the blank spaces and then organized them later on. Hey, I prefer him over Skibo since Skibo never covers all the material in lecture.

As for the lab reports, spam your TAs and Pang; they'll reply. Make sure you really know the study guide like the back of your hand. Also, studying for 20B is like studying for 20L, and vice versa. Know your concepts, know the calculations. The midterms may be a bit of a time crunch, but they're not too bad. I got an A in the end.

He'll visit all of your lab sections, so if you had something to ponder, ask him when he shows up. He also gave us extra credit for completing a survey, so isn't that great? Plus, you gotta admit he dresses up pretty nice compared to the other professors.

First thing to note... he talks REALLY REALLY REALLY fast. Grading wise it's no curve so feel free to help your friends. :) Labs are tedious but aren't too bad, lab write ups are long but again not terrible, but the thing that gets you, is the midterm and final. He is very nit-picky about measurements and calculations so be weary of that. Overall a good professor because he talks about what you need to know and doesn't try to trick you about what's on the midterm or final. Go to office hours if you can because he is very helpful! Very hard, but if you put in the effort, it should be okay.

Everyone warned me not to take Pang but I did anyways, and I don't regret it. Maybe it's because of his probations, but Pang was a solid professor. His lectures were good, he passed out handouts so you didn't have to write down that much. Also, most of the stuff is covered in 20B with the exception of Beer's Law so if you know 20B you know 20L. Pang talks really fast which is kind of amusing but still really understandable. His exams are moderately difficult but really if you did the labs you can get good scores. Also Pang was very accommodating to me when I got into a bike accident and nearly busted my hand. Maybe he was not concerned before, but right now he is quite concerned with his students and I would recommend him for anyone.

Pang speaks quickly, but explains concepts pretty well. Make sure you not only understand how to do problems, but the concepts behind them. His accent is not bad at all (why are people complaining about it?). I did well on the lab reports (90%+) and I did slightly above average on the midterm (around 75% when the average was in the high 60s). He said at the beginning that he doesn't curve the class, but this is impossible. I got only around 50% on the final exam (which was proctored in the computer lab and was very difficult) but I got an A in the class... So obviously he ends up curving the overall grades. Simply put, if you can get someone's old lab reports, do it. This saved me a little time but mostly helped me learn the concepts more quickly instead of getting bogged down in the details.
Put the time into this class and you will do fine. I never heard any horror stories from people who actually made a good effort. Also, go to office hours if you're confused. (I didn't, but my friends did and he is very helpful, polite, and caring!!) Expect the worst on the exams (...most science exams at UCLA are as difficult as Pang's!) and study hard, and you should be happy with your grade at the end.

Everyone is bashing on Pang as if he were the biggest douche alive....but honestly, I'm guessing that they're just a bunch of spoiled pre-med majors that constantly bitch about how the grading wasn't fair or whatever.

Here's the reality of it.

Pang is a very good and clear lecturer, and his accent is definitely not that bad... If you were to go to his office hours or ask him about something after class, he's a very nice, chill guy and he's definitely going to help you out until you understand it.

As for the material itself and the tests, you can definitely get an A if you PUT IN THE TIME and effort to learn the material, instead of just ignoring it (which is hard, considering it's only a three unit class). His midterm and his final were definitely doable if you went to lecture, and kept up with the material.

So, I don't know why everyone is bashing on this guy. It might be true that he does seem a little bit cold, but that's not the case. He's a clear lecturer, straight-forward tester, and a genuinely nice guy. Just give him a shot....it's not like you have any choice if he's the only guy teaching the class.

There were two professors this quarter - Pang & Walsh, and people were equally unhappy in both classes. This is because 20L is hard - not because of the professor teaching it, but because it is a lot of work (~4-5 hours each week spent on prelabs + lab writeups). The course is just a standard, very time-consuming lab class. Pang's a great lecturer - very organized, & always gives out guided notes.

The course grade consists of: Pre-Labs (22%), Lab Reports (35%), Midterm 1 (10%), Final (16%), CPR (8%), & In-lab work (8%).

Little nitpicky things on the labs & pre-labs are what get you graded down, and these lost points slowly accumulate - you kind of get nickeled & dimed to death, but as long as you do fairly well on the tests, you can do OK in the class, because CPR & In-lab work are freebies.

The CPR (online writing assignment) is easy points - 8% of your grade. People complain that it is unfair, but the unfair part of it is a very small part of its overall point value. In-lab work is free points as long as you follow the safety protocol & clean up properly.

Tests - tests are hard because people are unsure what to study. He hands out a study guide before each of the two tests, but the study guide only covers the relevant math concepts. In order to do well, you need to review your lab writeups + lecture notes - those concepts are much more important than what's on the study guides. If you can somehow get your hands on an old exam, that helps quite a bit, too.

He's a decent professor and puts a lot of effort into the class, but the grades he gives out are not consistent with the work his students put in. It doesn't make much sense to me to give such a crap distribution. Plus the CPRs are dumb because the self-evaluations can screw you over and have no real purpose. Have fun.