March Boedihardjo
Department of Mathematics
AD
2.0
Overall Rating
Based on 1 User
Easiness 3.0 / 5 How easy the class is, 1 being extremely difficult and 5 being easy peasy.
Clarity 2.0 / 5 How clear the professor is, 1 being extremely unclear and 5 being very clear.
Workload 3.0 / 5 How light the workload is, 1 being extremely heavy and 5 being extremely light.
Helpfulness 2.0 / 5 How helpful the professor is, 1 being not helpful at all and 5 being extremely helpful.

TOP TAGS

There are no relevant tags for this professor yet.

GRADE DISTRIBUTIONS

There are no grade distributions available for this professor yet.

AD

Reviews (1)

1 of 1
1 of 1
Add your review...
Quarter: Winter 2020
Grade: A-
Aug. 10, 2020

Being a math prodigy and having the ability to teach are 2 completely different things. Professor Boedihardjo's lectures are pretty underwhelming. He often gives non-standard proofs that he comes up with himself. The problem with that is they are generally hard to follow and we don't usually end up gaining any insight about what is trying to be proved. For example, his construction of the reals made no sense to me. I don't understand why he couldn't have just did the standard Cauchy sequence or dedekind cut stuff, but maybe I don't deserve to be in honors then. Also, the professor is quite unenthusiastic, so the lectures will be dry. Further, his voice is ridiculously monotone, adding to the dryness of the lectures. The last and really most important criticism I have is that he gives literally no intuition for any concepts. I left the class with no intuition for what compactness, completeness, etc are, except for what their definitions are. I know the guy is a straight up genius and will likely prove something substantial in his lifetime, but as a teacher I wouldn't recommend.

Helpful?

2 0 Please log in to provide feedback.
Quarter: Winter 2020
Grade: A-
Aug. 10, 2020

Being a math prodigy and having the ability to teach are 2 completely different things. Professor Boedihardjo's lectures are pretty underwhelming. He often gives non-standard proofs that he comes up with himself. The problem with that is they are generally hard to follow and we don't usually end up gaining any insight about what is trying to be proved. For example, his construction of the reals made no sense to me. I don't understand why he couldn't have just did the standard Cauchy sequence or dedekind cut stuff, but maybe I don't deserve to be in honors then. Also, the professor is quite unenthusiastic, so the lectures will be dry. Further, his voice is ridiculously monotone, adding to the dryness of the lectures. The last and really most important criticism I have is that he gives literally no intuition for any concepts. I left the class with no intuition for what compactness, completeness, etc are, except for what their definitions are. I know the guy is a straight up genius and will likely prove something substantial in his lifetime, but as a teacher I wouldn't recommend.

Helpful?

2 0 Please log in to provide feedback.
1 of 1
2.0
Overall Rating
Based on 1 User
Easiness 3.0 / 5 How easy the class is, 1 being extremely difficult and 5 being easy peasy.
Clarity 2.0 / 5 How clear the professor is, 1 being extremely unclear and 5 being very clear.
Workload 3.0 / 5 How light the workload is, 1 being extremely heavy and 5 being extremely light.
Helpfulness 2.0 / 5 How helpful the professor is, 1 being not helpful at all and 5 being extremely helpful.

TOP TAGS

There are no relevant tags for this professor yet.

ADS

Adblock Detected

Bruinwalk is an entirely Daily Bruin-run service brought to you for free. We hate annoying ads just as much as you do, but they help keep our lights on. We promise to keep our ads as relevant for you as possible, so please consider disabling your ad-blocking software while using this site.

Thank you for supporting us!