something about her voice bothered the heck out of me...so monotone. she's a nice lady but i just got annoyed..exams were mostly lecture based. i did no reading only studied 1/2 days before the midterm and final but literally memorized every detail, i'm a bio major so when i mean memorrize it all I MEAN IT. did no reading, paper was graded harshly a shocking C that screwed up my grade. don't take it unless you're anthro major.

She's a great teacher who loves her job and actually wants to teach! She communicates everything in her lectures very clearly, she's friendly, helpful with any question you might have, and eager to interact with her students, even in large lecture classes. Her tests are straight forward, and she seems to pull most of her material from the lectures and key site specific information. I would highly recommend Professor Smith!

Professor Smith was a great lecturer in that she didn't just read off of the slides, which really forces you to pay attention and take notes. Her tests were easy (straight from lecture notes) and discussions were relaxed and interesting for a GE class. She always responded to my e-mail questions and never acted harsh or condescending towards me. Oh yeah, the paper topics were pretty interesting too! Archaeology IMO is not really an exciting subject, but Prof. Smith makes it worth going to class, for the most part (which is impressive considering that most of the GE classes I've taken have just been incredibly boring...)

Course Taken: Anthro 8
Dr. Smith was such a great speaker and so passionate about the subject, it made the lectures extremely interesting. Although the focus of Anthro 8 is very broad--covering millions of years of history in ten weeks--it is doable. The most important thing you need to do for this class is to go to lecture. In the beginning of each lecture, she will give you a summary of what she talked about in the previous lecture. STUDY THOSE for the midterm and final. I would say 90% of her exams are solely based on lecture notes. The readings were way too dense--I gave up reading after the midterm and still did very well in the class. However, she does like to ask questions about some random sites mentioned in the reading. I would suggest to read the summary at the end of each chapter--they give you a nice overview of the chapter and a review of what Dr. Smith talked about in lecture. Also, there were orange boxes every few pages or so in the readings that highlight specific sites or information. Make sure you read those. Those random questions about the readings I was talking about earlier are mostly from those orange boxes. The two papers were fairly easy--just answer the questions given for the topic in the prompt and you will do fine. Go to Dr. Smith or the TA's office hours and have them revise your papers--it really helps you get an idea of what they're looking for on the papers. The discussion sections are rather useless to this class, except for the handouts that the TA gives you. You need to know the material on those for the exams. Otherwise, I really recommend this class. Although we didn't have enough time to go into the smallest details for the different empires (that would've been interesting), it gave us a nice overview of archaeology and what it's all about. In addition, if you're looking for an easy and interesting GE, this is the one. Good luck.

Professor Smith is very passionate about what she does. She is a great lecturer and is always willing to help. Definitely go to lectures as much as you can; it helps a lot for the exams. As long as you read text boxes that the book highlights, you should be able to do very well. As for the papers, definitely go to the TAs and Professor with your rough draft. It will help a lot and get an idea of what they are looking for during grading. The discussion session are not so helpful except the handouts, which you might want to memorize.

This GE was a breeze. Smith's lectures were interesting, provided you actually have an interest in human civilizations and the evolution of mankind in the first place. She tries to tie up each lecture with a nice conclusion and seemed genuinely passionate about what she lectures. I missed one question on the midterm--it felt like I was in high school again, where multiple choice tests are straightforward and simple. As long as you go to lecture and take thorough notes, you should do fine, because her tests are mostly lecture-based. The textbook is supplemental, in my opinion. She assigns two 5 page papers, but they were straightforward to do, as long as you cover all the bases of the prompt. The final included questions from the midterm and was very doable. I finished mine in less than 30 minutes. But the discussion sections are totally useless, irrelevant and not well-connected to her lectures.

She is a great teacher. Lectures make the bulk of the exams so go and take notes. The reading is supplemental and a bit dense. I stopped reading after the second week. Got an A.

This class is a very very hard GE, since the class is too broad. The reading is seriously way too dense and it is impossible to memorize all the concepts in the readings.The readings by itself is way too much. The class is cumulative(lectures + readings) which make studying for this class insane. For me, the lecture and readings were totally different. I think this was because the professor is giving her own opinions about the topic. Anyways, avoid this GE if possible don't get fooled by the interesting name or you think it is easy. I'm telling you upfront, this is not worth the stress, hair pulling,or loss of sleep.

I am a diligent student and I can definitely tell you she is among the worst of the Anthro professors. Her lectures are dry and she never gave her TA's access to the students. I wonder why. As for going to all her lectures - it does not help. She gives too much reading and then does not tell you what is imp. (or what to focus on). "Anything that is mentioned more than twice or takes up two paragraphs" is not focused enough! You end up trying to remember everything. Did not have any understanding/patience for students who sought her help. She just gave what little help was needed so she 'seemed' available for her students. Awful!

Professor Smith is a very good professor and teacher. I genuinely felt that she cared a lot about the students and our learning. Archaeology is a dense subject, and while there was loads and loads of reading, she managed to break it down pretty well for the lectures. The tests were so-so... I got a B- on the midterm, mid-range As on the papers, and thought I bombed the final, but ended up with a B+ in the class, which wasn't too bad considering it was my first quarter at UCLA. In retrospect, I could've worked harder and probably gotten an A. Overall, I'd say this course is tough but enjoyable, and Professor Smith is truly one of UCLA's best. I'd take this course again in a minute.