I didn't even need this class, but Dr. Kim was hilarious and outrageous in her lectures, it made me want to stay and learn. SUCH a huge mistake, especially taking 4 classes Fall Quarter. This is the FIRST B+ I ever received in Sociology. As an Anthropology professor, she was clearly confused on some terms or ideas, and had to refer to her PhD TAs for information or correction, so this caused a lot of confusion throughout class, ESPECIALLY on the ridiculous test questions. Her tests were SO wordy, that it was difficult to read, and her answers were just as ridiculous. I would never take this class again. The only students who did well, are ones that have previously taken Sociology of Crime, which is based on the same ideas. Dr. Kim was hilarious, and she said some outrageous things, but it was definitely not worth the headache or the GPA dropped. Again, the ideas were clear and easy to understand her tests are what made it very hard to pass.

What made me mad is that I actually did fairly well on the first test (midterm), however I did worse on the final. She said she would give extra credit to those who did better on the midterm, and I call that BS. They said the final was easier than the midterm, but how was it that I did worse, if I studied harder if not longer than the midterm? Only redeeming factor was that my TA was amazing and very kind and understanding.

She does not allow computers, or talking, and absolutely hates it when we try to put our stuff away. Also there was always this one student in class that would suggest movies we should watch, and Dr. Kim would encourage the conversation which was one of the many reasons why we would ALWAYS be behind in class lectures.

I always study hard and have earned my As, however, I felt so cheated in this class and by this Professor. B+ is a better grade than most of the students in class. The class average for the midterm was 65%. The final was 70%, which she did curve in both instances, but final she barely curved, because she only cared the class average was at least 74%. One of the students I know who is a Regent's Scholar, got a B. A, freaking B. This person is an honors student, was given this prestigious University of California full-ride scholarship, which is hard for students to obtain, based on their application, profile, leadership experience and grades... it was his first B as well. It's not the end of the world, but I worked hard for my 3.94, just to have it dropped by some shitty professor's test.

She claims she was the first in her class, so she teaches it as if we were all first in our class, and her lectures she always assumes that there are NO students who are older, like myself. "You don't know this, you weren't alive for this, you don't remember this" very annoying.

This was probably one of the worst Professors I have ever taken. It was such an interesting topic, yet she made it so difficult. The class considered of 2 exams worth 25% of your grade, along with a final paper that made up for 30% of your grade. Her exams were multiple choice, however they were so subjective that no matter how much you studied, it was still so difficult. I spent 2 weeks studying for her exams only to receive low B's on both of them. The TAs also had a hard time dealing with her so it wasn't only the students. Thankfully I had a wonderful TA who actually cared about the effort his students were putting in. However, there was only so much he could do. The multiple choice options consisted of A, A and B, A B and C, all of the above, none of the above, etc. (very irritating). Before we took the exam, she sent out a mass email saying that she's not trying to trick us yet it was so obvious by the end of the quarter that she really was. She showed the TAs the first exam before she gave it to her students, and then switched it up last minute to her own benefit. The TAs themselves even said they couldn't have taken that exam because it was way too difficult. Essentially, please try taking any other professor but Dr. Kim. Although the subject is super interesting, it just isn't worth it. I cannot explain my level of hate for this class. She's just a bitter lady who wants to watch her students receive low GPAs because UCLA was difficult for her.

This class would have been interesting, but the main reason I had issue with this class is because this professor picks favorites. She is clearly bias towards certain students, and treats other students like shit. Also be careful if you plan to record lectures because she will call you out. She is rude and honestly seems like she hates her job. Obviously take this with a grain of salt considering I got a C in the class. If you're looking for an easy A, don't come here. Her exams are multiple choice, but are so detailed, its impossible to know everything. And her final paper asks you to come up with an original research topic, without really having time to do the research. Also, this class was much more STEM based than I had anticipated, and I am a north campus major soooo yeah, not for me.

I really enjoyed this class and would consider it my favorite class I have taken at UCLA. The material is not too difficult and is very interesting. Professor Kim is very funny, engaging, and personable and creates a classroom environment where students get to know one another and feel encouraged to share any thoughts or insights. There are two 50 question multiple choice exams, two short documentary responses, a final research essay, and participation points. The tests are rather simple and you will do well on them if you review the material closely. The only thing that bothered me about this class was that there were a lot of participation points and during certain classes Professor Kim would only give students full credit if they raised their hand to share or answer a question. It sometimes became difficult to get called on when every other student was also trying to get called on and it would also be hard to participate if a student did not have any prior background knowledge in the subject. Overall great class and I still 100% recommend taking it!

this class is now just Anthropology 133. Prof. Kim is great and extremely knowledgeable on the subject. I think this class is only offered during the summer so there are no discussion sections. Participation is important through class discussions and clicker questions. She did assign a good amount of reading but it was doable and most were very interesting. also there was a short research paper open prompt but related to class. she was friendly and willing to make herself available to help with our essays and any other questions/concerns.

Class and lectures are interesting, but the topics of the class are run into the ground. Shes an interesting lecturer, but theres so much participation by people in the class trying to get credit with the most inane crap, it made me really dislike the people in the major. The amount of times people volunteered information we had learned in another soc gen class only to act like they came up with it is way too high. And I just dont care that you have a vegan friend or that your grandma drinks raw milk or that you've traveled the world with your parents money and saw that some people have some random dietary difference we all already knew about

Tests were really hard because they tested on technicalities, and there were many times when I was debating if the answers go by reading or what she said in lecture which diverge slightly, or where I felt the right answer was more of an opinion than a fact. Other times i was just like, what?? Why is this random tidbit of info what were getting tested on?? 2 multiple choice tests, plus a final paper.

If your interested in the material, the basis of this class is mostly stuff you already know, but that doesnt make it easy.

Shes really nice in office hours, but not very helpful

okay look. she's great as a person. really makes you want to be liked by her. but it's a HARD class if you're not an HBS major or stem or if you're hella north campus. the amount of reading is insane and you need to do it to do well on the exams, which are vague and hard. she didn't give much direction for the research paper either. she had this high standard she wanted us to live up to but treated us like idiots with her extra resources she put online about how to write an email. idk, i wish the class was paced more realistically.

This is a review for Food Studies 159 since it is the new Soc Gen 134.

Pros:
Her lectures are really fun to listen to and very interesting.

She's pretty cool to talk to in office hours and does go over tips on papers and exams.

Cons:

Her exams are pretty hard. They're hard because her answer choices can be pretty confusing. Although it does require you to know your stuff very well, often times, I don't really know whether to go off of the reading or to go by the lecture. I also feel like I miss key information in lecture and when I ask her about it, she told me to ask someone else in the class. Whether that's bad or not is up to you.

She grades the writing assignments pretty hard. She's a stickler when it comes to good grammar, proper tone, and the content that you talk about. You would have to be a really really good writer in order to get an A on the writing assignments. I normally get A's on all my writing assignments for other classes, which are mainly upper division sociology classes, but this is the first class where I got a C+ on a big essay (the final research paper), so unless you are super insanely confident in your writing skills, I wouldn't depend on the writing assignments to raise your grade.

She doesn't allow computers in class, so you're going to have to write all the notes out, so you're going to have to be very vigilant in writing everything down. Make sure to ask someone around you if you miss anything (due to my point above).

Takeaway:
I really like this professor, but her grading scheme is pretty difficult. I wouldn't take this class if you are looking for an easy A, but if you don't care about grades and are looking for an interesting lecturer, this class is for you.

The readings are all free and she provides them so there's no issue there. She tends to go off topic and frequently gets lost on tangents (interesting tangents, but they don't relate to the class or material). I found myself thinking how does this relate to the class? can we circle back to class? is this anthro of food anymore? The class could be done better on her part, but if you're interested in the topic you'll enjoy it nonetheless.

Note: This is a review for Anthro 146 (Urban Anthropology). However, it could be relevant if you’re contemplating taking one of her courses.

So, I took Anthro 146, in the summer not knowing who the instructor was. I think the person the department had in mind dropped out at the last moment and Dr. Kim filled the position (I’m not sure). But I’m happy our instructor was Dr. Kim. Her class was not hard, but it was not an easy A. Weekly assignments consisted of short scholarly readings and short essay reflections (500 word count). She gives interesting lectures and she certainly has a sense of humor.

Yet, she is very idiosyncratic about writing assignments (grammar, punctuation and the substance of your writing), this also includes the format in how you email her (make sure it’s with a formal approach). We did not have a midterm because it was a six-week course; however, we did have a final five-page essay (I heard she varies between MCQ and Essays for the final). Keep in mind, that you’ll have to participate in class and that will reflect in your final grade. Overall, I would take another course with her and I would recommend her class to another student.