Professor Kassabian is a full-time lawyer. He did not have any real office hours. I got a D on the midterm and final but was not really told why I got points off of certain questions. Ended up with an NP even though my friends had similar answers to mine and ended up with A's and B's. The class is out of date and the amount of reading required is comparable to comm 10. Do not take this class if you have heavy readings for other classes or do not have an interest in Law.

This was one of my first classes at UCLA as a transfer student and the most difficult class I've taken here. Like others have said do not believe the grade distribution this is a difficult class especially if you have no interest in Law or being a lawyer. I found the material in this class to be interesting and think its a great class to take in prep for law school, however, the professor is a very boring monotone speaker and is not always clear on explanations and expectations from the class. Additionally, he really does not have office hours so you will be relying heavily on the TA for explanations so hopefully, your TA is good.

I dropped the classes after buying the course reader...
I am selling it. If you are interested, let me know. ( ********** )

selling the textbook (Intellectual Property in the New Technological Age 2020 Vol. II) for comm 168 with Biagioli – *************

This is a really interesting comm upper div if you are interested in being pre-law or just learning more about law / the First Amendment. The only assignments are outside of class readings, but you also learn everything you need to know in lecture and it is re-emphasized in discussion (so go!). If you take advantages of the resources like practice HYPOs you will be fully prepared for the exams (midterm and final are 2/3 grades). There is also a speech that is pass/no pass and if you put in decent effort you will pass it. The teacher and TA (I had Ethan Lai) really want you to succeed so take advantage of them and this is a super interesting class!

Veryyyy hard tests and Kassabian isn't very clear on what the tests are/their content. Teaching isn't his full time job, so he often comes late and doesn't seem the most interested. Long lecture that isn't engaging, no homework and grade is basically all tests.

I don't think that these reviews do this professor justice - honestly, I enjoyed the course and while it was challenging, it was totally reasonable. If you are at all interested in law school, you should ABSOLUTELY take this class. It is structured exactly like a law school class - you read Supreme Court cases, discuss them in class, learn about the IRAC method, then apply what you've learned to hypothetical situations during the exam. As long as you stay on top of the readings, attend lecture and discussion while taking good notes, you should be able to get an A. In the first exam you get to see exactly what the professor is looking for so that by the time you take the final, you know just what is expected of you. He gave a generous curve on the midterm and told students that if they had a significant increase from their midterm to their final, he may adjust their grade to better reflect their growth in understanding. He's nice and a clear lecturer.