Based on 3 Users
Grade distributions are collected using data from the UCLA Registrar’s Office.
Sorry, no enrollment data is available.
(EDIT) Argh, I was the same person who wrote this initial positive review on Jacobs' Math 164 class. This time around, I continued with his Math 182 class (Algorithms). I was disappointed to see no practice exams posted, and little review done for the very problem-solving-esque material for each exam. I felt that we were essentially shooting in the dark for the midterm and final. Personally, I thought the final was easier than the midterm, but I didn't do as well as I hoped (I could probably contest for some more points). In the end, I got a decent grade, though I did want that A.
I probably convinced a lot of people to take this class, and judging from how things panned out, it's honestly hit or miss. To everyone who was expecting this to be a more chill experience, I'm so sorry. I never would have expected the vibe to change like this.
RIP. HE DOES NOT CURVE THE CLASSS AS IN THIS DISTRIBUTION. STAY AWAY. He is not very good at teaching, but if his class had this distribution, then I would have still voted for him, but he no more does such generous curve for some reason.
I had Professor Jacobs for Math 164 - Optimization. He was an engaging lecturer (he really understood what he was doing, and didn't just copy off notes from a notepad). Lectures were quite theoretical, focusing on concepts and proofs. Homework was from the textbook (so you could just copy the solutions manual). Exams were mostly homework-style problems with some conceptual things. Overall, exams and grading was very fair (there was no rote memorization of proofs), and I highly recommend taking a class with him.