1. Hands down one of the best lecturers I have encountered at UCLA. Incredibly engaging and fun.
2. Simultaneously, THE HARDEST final. The average was around 50%, he refused to curve it. He's strict and adamant about his straight scale grading policy, and around HALF the class had to retake it. His final was 10x harder than any of the HW problems or midterms he assigned.

Prof. Gleizer is possibly the nicest professor I've interacted with. From his overwhelmingly lenient grading policies (offering the option to redo exam problems in office hours for credit) to his emphasis on sound conceptual understanding, Oleg clearly cares about the wellbeing of his students.

During office hours, Prof. Gleizer's process for exam makeup was relatively straightforward. For any problems missed on an exam, Oleg would come up with a new problem grounded in the same conceptual area. If you could demonstrate learned understanding, he gave you points back on the corresponding exam problem. In order to balance allotted time for people wanting to redo missed exam problems vs people confused about the lecture topics, Prof. Gleizer made sure to take questions on lecture materials beforehand.

As a non-math major (who really has disliked the lower-div math classes here), I'd say 32B with Gleizer is one of the much better experiences.

My conceptual understanding of Calc 3 is pretty limited so in that respect I wouldn't say Gleizer was that great, but if you want a good grade, Gleizer is the man - his exam questions are basically just past exam questions (which he gives to you) or textbook problems that sometimes were assigned as HW with the numbers changed. It's VERY easy to do well in this class, but his lectures are quite confusing at times especially towards the end of the quarter.

Grading scheme is: 30% Final, 30% Midterms (15% each), 25% HW, 15% Quizzes (5% each).

His quizzes test more conceptual topics and his exams are more computation based. He also does a lot of exam problems repeatedly throughout the quarter in lectures so make sure you pay attention. Overall, he's quite funny and laid back, but not sure how much will stick with me going forward.

The worse professor at UCLA:)

The homework and take-home midterms were fine, but the professor screwed the class with the final. None of the homework applies to the finals or midterms, and none of the general concepts (problem-solving methods) will be tested on tests. The tests test your ability to memorize his notes and niche ways of thinking (that have nothing to do with knowing the class content), so just memorize his notes and all the things that don't relate to the class material itself. Take this class with another professor if you can.

This was a pretty bad experience. The textbook on the professor's syllabus was different from the one on the Study List, so about half the class purchased the wrong textbook. It wasn't until Week 4 that we realized that some of us had the wrong one. The homework problems are all in the textbook, so a lot of us had to start over. He went too slow at the beginning of the class so he had to shove a bunch of information in the last few weeks. We didn't get to integrals until the end of Week 9. I was very close to dropping this class just because of how unprepared the professor was. It stressed me out much more than my other classes (I was taking 17 units). The homework is a lot and is meant to be spaced out, but a lot of the problems are harder than anything we went over in the lecture. He also made a lot of the homework due in the second half of the quarter because he took too long to cover the material. We didn't get the grade on our first homework until after the first midterm, so it was difficult to determine whether we grasped the concepts before the test. I don't really feel like I learned anything new in this class and it was disappointing overall. The professor clearly likes math, but I would recommend taking this class with someone else if you can.

While the other reviews are indeed correct that his class is quite a bit of work, as he does assign around 20 questions per homework, which often takes a few hours, the truth is a 4 unit class expects around 4 hours of work a week, and there are only 5-6 homeworks, thus spaced out over 10 days, so it is not to demanding...His problems are chosen wisely to help you get an intuitive learning of the process, and understand the material. His tests are fine, the first two were take home(and collaboration was allowed, the second midterm was much harder than the first as we averaged 100% and we definatly needed the collaboration), since we were moving to slow in our class, and we did not have time in class, the averages were around 100% on both midterms

the final was a diffrent beast though, the average was a 52%... There was obviously no collaboration, one 3x5 note card, and despite what other reviews said the test was not harder than his 2nd midterm, there just was no collaboration.

20% of the grade was from homework(lowest dropped), 30% over the two midterms(15% each, unless the final was better than a midterm, than it's dropped, and the final is 65% of the grade), and the final is 50% of the grade.
My best advice for his tests, when he says a question from class will be in the midterm(he loves vortex fields, torus strips, cones and all their many miracles, 4d spheres, integral of a gaussian curve, and maybe proving some theorem given in class ), look up how it's done, and put it on your cheat sheet(a 3x5 sheet). Your cheat sheet will best serve you, if it's more tailored to questions, rather then a bunch of formulas. This certainly saved me in the final for the class. The formulas are quite intuitive, but write down the questions(gaussian, torus, cone's center of mass, etc), and then you'll do fine on the tests! Overall hard class, but he is more then willing to answer your questions in class, more then willing to derive stuff in office hours, and more then willing to help. I would definatly take this class again with him, and definatly take another class with him in the future. It is quite a bit of work, but then again if you want to understand a topic well that takes a lot of work.

Honestly if you don't have to take this class then don't. Assigns heavy homework and is very bad with spacing out the homework and expects you to complete 20 problems (which doesn't seem like a lot but with 32b math, it is) over like a week timeline(that is a requested timeline like he was going to give us like five days to do homework) or will give you just six days. Also he assigned homework on the Wednesday before thanksgiving break to be turned in person on paper (even though students are going to be traveling). Like keep in mind if you're taking other classes this is such a large workload to get done in that amount of time. His lectures are so unhelpful or not clear so you just have to end up reading the book. Will call you out if you disrupt the class (like this girl tripped one time and he called her out in the middle of class for being disruptive and called out another student for using their phone but the student was translating the lecture from English to their spoken language -it was so bad) honestly not a good class, don't take it. The only good part of this class was that he was sometimes funny and in general everyone is also struggling.

Honestly Gleizer is a nice person, but I feel like he's a below average professor. I tried hard in this class and studied the textbook and sample midterms/finals, but its just a waste of time. His tests are basically if you're good at visualising, you'll know how to do it, and if you don't you'll fail the exams. Homework every 2 weeks is basically 20 questions out of textbook, and extra credit is only given if you answer the super hard bonus question on his midterms and finals. The mean of each exam is basically 60%, and he grades on a straight scale so no curving. He's not a good professor at explaining concepts, and I attended office hours but he still fails to explain the rationale behind the integrals we do. Do NOT choose him if you have an alternate choice.

im going to be honest, a lot of people make him seem worse than he is. i will admit he does go a little too fast in lecture sometimes and he doesn't like to record lectures, but if you can do the homework pretty well, the tests should be okay. his practice midterms are a lot harder than the actual midterms. that being said, i didnt do too well on the midterms (mt1 i got an 88% and mt2 i got a 70%) but i still scored slightly above avg for both exams. hes a good guy with good intent and i do think both his and the TAs' office hours do help with this class a lot. the one gripe i have about this class is the fact that his homework system is based on any problems on his lecture notes that he doesn't get to in class, and 90% of the time when he asks the class if he should skip a problem in lecture and assign it to hw, the class begs him to skip it (idk why they do, maybe they think theyll somehow know how to do it for hw w/o any practice in lecture). overall, for discrete, hes an average prof. if his exams were horrible, unbearable, etc. then i wouldnt take discrete w him again. would i still take discrete w him again? perhaps, im not sure because i havent taken the final yet. hes a really nice guy and, like i mentioned earlier, his office hours are rly helpful. he just kind of brushes thru a lot of things in lecture rly fast which can be kind of annoying.

tl;dr: im pretty meh about him and the only reason i dont completely hate it is bc his tests arent too difficult (although i def couldve scored better)