Thinking

Patricia W Cheng

Thinking

Psychology department

Patricia W Cheng

Add Review
from 15 users

Ratings

Bad
Overall 2.5
Good
Hard
Easiness of class 2.0
Easy
Heavy
Workload 2.2
Light
Not Clear
Clarity of professor 2.1
Clear
Not Helpful
Helpfulness of professor 3.2
Helpful
AD

Tags

  • Uses Slides
  • Tolerates Tardiness
  • Appropriately Priced Materials
  • Gives Extra Credit
  • Tough Tests

Grades

Fall 2018
22.2%
18.5%
14.8%
11.1%
7.4%
3.7%
0.0%
A+
A
A-
B+
B
B-
C+
C
C-
D+
D
D-
F

Grade distributions are collected using data from the UCLA Registrar’s Office.

Spring 2017
27.3%
22.7%
18.2%
13.6%
9.1%
4.5%
0.0%
A+
A
A-
B+
B
B-
C+
C
C-
D+
D
D-
F

Grade distributions are collected using data from the UCLA Registrar’s Office.

Fall 2017
25.0%
20.8%
16.7%
12.5%
8.3%
4.2%
0.0%
A+
A
A-
B+
B
B-
C+
C
C-
D+
D
D-
F

Grade distributions are collected using data from the UCLA Registrar’s Office.

Fall 2015
24.1%
20.1%
16.1%
12.1%
8.0%
4.0%
0.0%
A+
A
A-
B+
B
B-
C+
C
C-
D+
D
D-
F

Grade distributions are collected using data from the UCLA Registrar’s Office.

Fall 2014
20.6%
17.2%
13.7%
10.3%
6.9%
3.4%
0.0%
A+
A
A-
B+
B
B-
C+
C
C-
D+
D
D-
F

Grade distributions are collected using data from the UCLA Registrar’s Office.

Winter 2013
29.2%
24.3%
19.4%
14.6%
9.7%
4.9%
0.0%
A+
A
A-
B+
B
B-
C+
C
C-
D+
D
D-
F

Grade distributions are collected using data from the UCLA Registrar’s Office.

Fall 2013
22.2%
18.5%
14.8%
11.1%
7.4%
3.7%
0.0%
A+
A
A-
B+
B
B-
C+
C
C-
D+
D
D-
F

Grade distributions are collected using data from the UCLA Registrar’s Office.

Winter 2010
34.6%
28.8%
23.1%
17.3%
11.5%
5.8%
0.0%
A+
A
A-
B+
B
B-
C+
C
C-
D+
D
D-
F

Grade distributions are collected using data from the UCLA Registrar’s Office.

AD
AD
1 of 1

Reviews

Quarter Taken: N/A Submitted Dec. 9, 2014 Grade Received: N/A

I am a 4th year cognitive science student, and for once out of my entire experience here at UCLA as an undergrad I wish I had listened to the cautionary BruinWalk reviews.

Professor Cheng seems to have a genuine interest for student learning, but she is not effective in implementing it. She consistently comes to class 5-15 minutes late, her voice is quiet, and her authority lacks the scaffolding necessary to encourage student engagement. Less than half of the seats are filled in the class on a regular basis and at any given point of the lecture students are dozing off, on their phones, or just generally unresponsive. The power point presentation material itself is interesting but the manner in which she presents it is extremely dry and unfocused because she reads straight off of them without elaborating and assumes we understand it as she moves through them. The majority of students were not content with the midterm - NOT because we scored poorly, but rather because it was not representative of the time we spent covering topics in class. I understand that her approach to teaching is to encourage thinking (as that is the course title) rather than strict memorization, but her midterm was discouraging because I do not feel like I learned anything constructive on a measurable basis. I would absolutely not recommend this class to my peers.

Quarter Taken: N/A Submitted Nov. 23, 2008 Grade Received: N/A

Took 124 F--Thinking...Professor Cheng is so scatterbrained and all over the place. she really wants to help but she does a terrible job. i think she forgets that we aren't inside of her head and she expects you to just know certain things that are not commonsensical. She is very loving and wants to help but is not a very good professor. she tries to be fair though with her grading. the exams are pretty difficult and you don't have enough time to complete them. there is a lot of reading but it can be interesting if you like to think...go figure...the class is called thinking. definitely not an easy a.

Quarter Taken: Fall 2018 Submitted Jan. 11, 2019 Grade Received: NR

Lectures were usually unclear and unhelpful because she is really spacey. She shows up late, talks about unrelated topics for 10 minutes, doesn't remember how to work the projector, and is generally disorganized. This wastes a lot of class time. The only redeeming quality of her class was that she did not assign homework. To further explain her flakiness and poor organizational skills, a week into the winter quarter, we still don't have our grades, and she has not responded to emails. She seems to care, but she is too scatter-brained to be helpful or clear.

Quarter Taken: Winter 2020 Submitted May 19, 2020 Grade Received: B+

A paper was written to test reading fluency as a mediator between unnecessarily long word usage and subjective ratings of the writer's intelligence. I kid you not - from Problems with Using Long Words Needlessly. Oppenheimer, 2006:
"Twenty-five randomly chosen dissertation abstracts from the Stanford University sociology department were examined, and the abstract with the highest proportion of words of nine letters or longer was chosen (Chang, 1993)."
Yes that Chang was our Professor Patricia Chang.

She's super nice, but when a paper for another class cites her as being difficult to understand, you realize why you learned almost nothing from her class.

Quarter Taken: Fall 2018 Submitted Jan. 17, 2019 Grade Received: A+

I honestly think Dr Cheng is a very kind person, however, I agree with the reviews here that she is very disorganized. She is not very good at explaining the material in lecture, so if you're not sure about something you'd better go to office hour to clarify. Dr. Cheng is always very willing to help you outside of class! Even though the logic of rational thinking in this class is intuitive to me (since I've been always interested in rational thinking, and have taken a logic class before), I studied my ass off for the midterm and final. I'm confident to say that NO ONE studied as hard as I did for this class!! I carefully went through all the details in the readings, went to office hour frequently, and pulled 2-3 consecutive all nighters before two exams. Maybe I overstudied, but my point is that you have to work REALLY hard to get good grades. The workload it requires to get an A is on par with PSYCH 186 series imo. If you're taking this class, make sure you understand every details on the study guide. You will suffer and learn a lot in this class... but is it worth it? I could be wrong, but I think it is --- and it's always painful to be rational.

Quarter Taken: Fall 2015 Submitted Jan. 26, 2016 Grade Received: A+

Professor Cheng means well and definitely knows her stuff but isn't the best at communicating it with the class. She's a really nice and intelligent woman but her teaching style just doesn't work. It's often hard to follow. Ultimately, I ended up getting an A+ in this class but it was a LOT of work to study for tests because I had to teach myself a lot of the material. The review sessions and office hours saved me - she is much better at explaining one on one when you can ask very specific questions. She also offered a huge chunk of extra credit by doing a final paper so with that, you'll be fine. And the plus side of it all is that the topics of this class are interesting!

1 of 1

Tags

  • Uses Slides
  • Tolerates Tardiness
  • Appropriately Priced Materials
  • Gives Extra Credit
  • Tough Tests
ADS

Report Review

Did this review contain...

There are errors in the report form.

Thank you for the report!

We'll look into this shortly.

It seems like you’re

using an ad blocker. :(


Bruinwalk is an entirely Daily Bruin-run service brought to you for free. We hate annoying ads just as much as you do, but they help keep our lights on. We promise to keep our ads as relevant for you as possible, so please consider disabling your ad-blocking software while using this site.

Thank you for supporting us!