I like Professor Berthet as a person, but unfortunately not as a professor. There is a lot of information to cover, which is the nature of the class, but I am still wondering as to why MT2 and the final were written to much harder to lower the test averages. There's not really any telling of what information is more important in the lecture slides, so there's a lot of cramming information into your head. Not an impossible class, but I do hope Professor Berthet makes her tests more fair or lectures more helpful in the future.

As an MCDB major taking this class as an elective, it's a very easy class because like 70% of the material is a repeat of stuff I've already learned in my MCDB and LS classes. However, the way Dr Berthet teaches the class kinda just sucks. She goes so so sooooo fast during lectures, so you're just focused on writing down what's on the slides that you get no time to actually process what you're learning. The slides themselves are extremely dense. She says to read the textbook, but this is definitely not necessary (I stopped reading after week 1) as her slides basically are a rewritten version of it, even including info from the book that she doesn't want us to have to know for the class. Also for some reason we only had in-person lecture MW and the Friday lecture was a pre-recorded video. The worst parts of this class were the tests. For the first midterm, the TAs wrote the MCQs and she wrote the FRQs, but I guess she wasn't happy with an 84% average so for the second midterm and the final she wrote all the MCQs too. The problem with this was that you could tell she wrote them in a rush and definitely did not proofread them, because so many did not make sense (e.g. I had to ask a TA what half a question meant and the TA had no clue so she went back to look at the answer key, then I watched her pull out her phone and look it up, and then she told me something that definitely did not match up with what the question said but at least she led me to what was supposed to be the correct answer), and there was even a question that is biologically impossible (asking about what happens with missense/nonsense/silent mutations in a promoter...). I'm fairly certain some of the questions were asking things she never taught us, and the only reason I could answer them was because I learned them in other classes. She did get what she wanted though, averaged of 75% on the second midterm and 78% on the final. But all this to say, I very much disliked how Dr Berthet ran this class; it was doable for me but I can't say fs that would be the case for others.
Grading breakdown:
20% Homework (canvas discussion posts answering an easy prompt each week)
5% Discussion presentations (group presentation in week 6, very easy but ofc you do need to coordinate with your group outside of class)
5% iClicker lecture participation (can miss one day, but we didn't even use iClicker that much so theoretically you could miss more days if you check which slides have an iClicker)
40% Midterms (20% each; 20 MCQs, 4 FRQs with parts)
30% Final (technically cumulative, but very very much centered on post-MT2 material)

Loved Professor Berthet, she's passionate and is pretty understanding. I never read the textbook because all information is on the slides but it is purely memorization and studying should come from daily review not any cramming. I think the downfall is the second midterm because it's hard every year apparently and the average was very low despite no curve given whatsoever. The TAs write the FRQs which often have mistakes and are misleading but I think the exams are generally fair if you can interpret what they're asking for. Loved the content and professor.

Berthet doesn't seem to realize that she is teaching a class of college students. She talks like her audience is high school freshman, which is a problem when the topics that need to be covered are at an upper-div level. Her lectures are basically useless, as the tests are not based off of them. Read the textbook, check into iclicker every day at 11:20ish. It's not an impossible class, but the way it's set up makes it frustrating. It's easy to see how someone could fall out of love with the subject by taking this class. If you can take it with someone else, then do. If you must take it with Berthet, don't fret too much, just be prepared to shell out for the textbook.

Professor Berthet brought an extrordinary passion to microbiology but the class had so many flaws that made me despise the class. She will blaze through lectures and will try to finish as quick as possible if she realizes she is running out of time. Though she emphasizes that you must read the textbook, it isn't necessary as all the content on exams are on the slides. She hosted office hours directly after her class. You can only receive your SAQ for exams back and you will need to put an unnecessary amount of effort to just find out what you got incorrect on your MCQ portion. The exams are 30 MCQ with 4 SAQ while the final is 50 MCQ with 5 SAQ w/ a notes sheet. This class is doable, but receiving feedback on exams was my biggest frustration in this course similar to lower division courses. I would pre-read the slides before lecture, to account for her speed and reference the learning objectives as a resource to have a cumulative representation of exam content.
I did not enjoy this class.

Professor Berthet is honestly one of the best professors I've had at UCLA. She is extremely engaging, approachable, and understanding of her students. She does her best to explain concepts and answer questions during class so that everyone understands, and after our first midterm feedback, she was also clear about what she does and doesn't want us to know. I think the class agreed as a whole that her exams were generally fair. She tests on information from her slides and not the textbook, though I would definitely recommend reading the textbook chapters for a thorough understanding of the concepts, especially to prepare for exam questions that ask you to apply knowledge. Exams consisted of majority multiple choice questions with ~3 free response questions. There were two weekly homework assignments, one from the textbook (you will need to buy/borrow the textbook for these questions) and one on Canvas. I would say the workload is definitely manageable as long as you are consistently going to class and not playing catch up. The homework is graded based on effort instead of correctness so I would highly recommend doing all of them since they're basically free points. Discussion attendance is mandatory and around week 5 we were required to do a group presentation in discussion. Professor Berthet may offer extra credit based on how the class does as a whole, but it wasn't guaranteed. She generally wants an average of 70-75% for every exam. Overall, I would say as long as you do the bare minimum of going to class + turning in all assignments, you will be able to understand all the concepts. If you understand the concepts and can spend a week or so memorizing them before the exams, an A is doable. Professor Berthet wants the best for us and always offers extra office hours or one-on-one meetings if you need more help, so don't be afraid to ask!

Professor Berthet has amazing energy and tenacity to teach. It is clear that she wants all students to succeed, and I can feel that every time I walk into lecture. My qualms have so much more to do with how the course is set up rather than the instructor. The course is meant to have us memorize and cram information in our brains rather than approach from an application stand point. Professor Berthet tries very hard to integrate an applicational component, but it is just pushed aside to make room for memorizing topics. The only other critique would be the way slides are prepared. It is often too much text or colors become confusing. I appreciate very much to have an instructor who cares, but information is still taught in a forgettable way.