Colacurcio is great. He is sarcastic and he jokes a lot. His humor is very much like 'cringe comedy'. You have to understand the context of the subject to understand his jokes (obviously) but those who don't, should go hang out with the person who wrote a review about this class being "hands-down the worst class ever taken at UCLA" . Really? The WORST class? Just because this class was not taught by Professor Allmendinger does not make it the worst class. Give me a break. You seem obnoxious. Get off this website.

Anyways, Colacurcio is a scholar. He is very kind and loves to teach. Come to office hours! I missed several classes and fell behind (surgery) but still managed to get a B+. I took the class with two friends: one of them received an A and the other received an A+.

The people here trashing Professor Colacurcio are the sort of people who don't actually give two hells about English, and are "simpletons" themselves with no idea of the texture or measure of real learning. Yes, Professor Colacurcio is old, a little scatter-brained, but to call him a bad professor -- you don't deserve to go a school like UCLA saying such a thing, frankly. If you don't want to learn, rot your brain elsewhere. Colacurcio is not the professor for you -- and indeed, UCLA is not the SCHOOL for you.

Professor Colacurcio is difficult professor if 1. you want easy classes and no reading (why you're an English major at all then -- you may want to reconsider); 2. you aren't interested in history; 3. you want a snappy, hip-with-the-times lecturer who speaks the kids' lingo, yo.

When I go to Professor Colacurcio's office hours I don't understand half his remarks, but that's the beauty of it. He knows so much I DON'T know. I don't understand so I ASK, and I LEARN. That's what we're here for, taking upper division classes. Easy GE, fine, but this is the major you're making a living out of, right?

If you CARE about English, about this degree you're paying for, distinguished professors like Colacurcio are a blessing. We are very fortunate to have him. Fly-by-night English majors beware him; lovers of language, of history, or literature, rejoice.

I took English 166B with Professor Colacurcio, and it was hands-down the worst class I've ever taken at UCLA. The reviewer below who refers to everyone who dislikes Colacurcio as simpletons was clearly brainwashed by the professor. Colacurcio took pleasure in mocking UC students, calling them lazy and idiotic on numerous occasions. When a girl answered one of his questions incorrectly, he responded, "No, stupid," and whenever I gave the correct response, he made an uncomfortable show of mock surprise and asked me if I had transferred from an Ivy League school. I take pride in being a Bruin, and have always worked very hard in school, so this offended me immensely. He is outrageously unprofessional and makes inappropriate comments frequently. I'm not being a stick in the mud either -- these aren't those classic English-professor innuendos that are borderline irreverent but all in good fun. He crosses the line with his jokes, which tend to be explicitly sexual. No one wants to hear an old man say, "When I was in eighth grade, spin the bottle involved kissing, but now eighth graders are f*** each other's brains out," or "The problem I had in New York was that I couldn't tell the sex of the prostitute." Also, it was quite evident that he incorporated minority authors into his curriculum because he had to and not because he felt their writing has any merit. His lectures are generally long, rambling affairs, during which he reads from the texts without offering any analysis. The amount of reading is IMPOSSIBLE to keep up with, and the quizzes are definitely "shitty little quizzes," which at least he acknowledges.

The only compliment I will pay him is that his reading of Hawthorne's short stories is impressive and interesting. But by the time he gets to Hawthorne, so many of the students have checked out, because they're fed up with him.

In case anyone should accuse me of bitterness, I feel it is pertinent to share that I got an A+ in his course. In conclusion, just don't take this class. There are so many other more pleasant classes to take at UCLA.

Professor Colacurcio is an outstanding professor. This man is a GRADUATE level professor. The students complaining on this page are just upset that he is not holding their hands every single day. He is very clear and helpful. He is teaching undergraduate level with the excellency of his graduate level knowledge. These 22 year old students just want to be guided because they do not know how to be independent.

He is an amazing Professor and an excellent lecturer.

I took English 166B with Professor Colacurcio, and it was hands-down the worst class I've ever taken at UCLA. The reviewer below who refers to everyone who dislikes Colacurcio as simpletons was clearly brainwashed by the professor. Colacurcio took pleasure in mocking UC students, calling them lazy and idiotic on numerous occasions. When a girl answered one of his questions incorrectly, he responded, "No, stupid," and whenever I gave the correct response, he made an uncomfortable show of mock surprise and asked me if I had transferred from an Ivy League school. I take pride in being a Bruin, and have always worked very hard in school, so this offended me immensely. He is outrageously unprofessional and makes inappropriate comments frequently. I'm not being a stick in the mud either -- these aren't those classic English-professor innuendos that are borderline irreverent but all in good fun. He crosses the line with his jokes, which tend to be explicitly sexual. No one wants to hear an old man say, "When I was in eighth grade, spin the bottle involved kissing, but now eighth graders are f*** each other's brains out," or "The problem I had in New York was that I couldn't tell the sex of the prostitute." Also, it was quite evident that he incorporated minority authors into his curriculum because he had to and not because he felt their writing has any merit. His lectures are generally long, rambling affairs, during which he reads from the texts without offering any analysis. The amount of reading is IMPOSSIBLE to keep up with, and the quizzes are definitely "shitty little quizzes," which at least he acknowledges.

The only compliment I will pay him is that his reading of Hawthorne's short stories is impressive and interesting. But by the time he gets to Hawthorne, so many of the students have checked out, because they're fed up with him.

In case anyone should accuse me of bitterness, I feel it is pertinent to share that I got an A+ in his course. In conclusion, just don't take this class. There are so many other more pleasant classes to take at UCLA.

Witty.
Assigns optional classes to catch you up on important material.
Gives tricky quizzes, but gives you ample time to prepare for them, or even makes them take-home. Allows two options for your midterm: essay, or ID + commentary.

Great professor who really wants you to get the point of the class, rather than trivial nonsense that most other Eng professors want.

Love this guy. Went in hating/dreading a survey lit class. Came out thoroughly pleased.

*Actually tooke ENG 170A, but it's not a listed course on this eval... dunno why.

Professor Colacurcio is the worst professor I have had at UCLA. He is awful in every way possible. This is not an exaggeration, people. Avoid at all costs. Not only are his lectures painfully dry, but they are also impossible to follow. The man is eccentric--not in a fun way, and just babbles about random things for two hours. Seriously, it's bad. To make matters worse, lecture attendance is mandatory. The readings are very dense and lengthy. He makes you read a book outside of class and write an in class essay about it after the final. The final was ten identifications and they were not straight from lecture. They were difficult if you didn't do all of the reading. Also, he failed to submit our grades on time and didn't enter them until the end of week two.

Again, avoid at all costs. He will ruin your quarter.

Prof. Colacurcio is really knowledgable about his field, doubtless, but unless you have an insatiable passion for hundreds of pages of Puritan thoughts on religion, do not take his class. He is one of the driest lecturers I have ever listened to and despite his protests that he has never mumbled a day in his life, there are many things that he says for only his podium to hear. His dry sense of humor does alleviate some of the boredom, though.

If, however, you find yourself stuck taking his class (as I was), it's nothing to be concerned about. You can easily get an A without doing any of the reading if you take thorough notes in lecture. I did. Write down even the random things he says that seem irrelevant, because they sometimes pop up as trick questions on quizzes. His quizzes are fairly easy as long as you write down what he says in class and go to his review sessions. He's a pretty easy grader on the papers and the final.