Do NOT take this class! HARSH GRADING. Do not believe the grade distribution. Maybe I just had a bad TA, but I thought this class would just be a fun COM class. Hell no. This class messed up my GPA. I say again, DO NOT TAKE THIS CLASS!!!!!!

If you're interested in law/law school then you should definitely take this class!! However, for people not interested in law school then it's definitely a challenging class. You learn a lot and it's not pointless busy work, but the exams are 3 hours of grueling short answer questions where you are furiously writing until the last second. If you want to learn how to think like a lawyer, this class is a great crash course. I got an A because I worked really hard and diligently followed the methods they teach you on how to approach cases, so it's possible to do very well. Bailey Loverin was my TA and she was so thorough and good at explaining. Just don't take this class if you want an easy class you can skip most days.

This class was one of the worst classes I've taken so far. This man does not know how to communicate to a class with what he wants to teach them. Ironic. Very vague lectures where he basically just reads court cases and how courts analyzed them. But the midterm and final are hard because he'll go over the rules on how to look at a case but grades 80% of it very hard based on your analysis. The tests i feel are open to interpretation since you're writing 3 blue books in 3 hour and lots of room for error. I know most people in the final exam didn't even finish. When we received the midterm back he got mad at the whole class for doing poorly and him having to curve the grade up when he should realize that he's just another poor part-time professor trying to boost his ego. Just take 101 with someone that cares to teach or a different legal communications course to save some headache.

I have the textbook in the class. Just finished the quarter for this class and would only take this class if you want to go to law school or have any interest in this topic.

Have the textbook for this class and will sell this for less than the original pricing!!

Text me if you want the textbook **********

I have mixed feelings about this class. It deals with interesting and important subjects, and teaches you a lot of basics about law. I would highly recommend this class to someone contemplating law school and looking for an intro.

However, if you are a Comm major who just needs to fill the requirement like me, pick another class. This class requires reading a lot of dense court cases every week. The exams are pretty grueling: 3 hours long and you need almost every minute of them.

Bottom line: I knew nothing about law, I went to every lecture, did all the reading, studied intensively, and ended up with a B. If you do all the work you'll be ok, but this class will take up A LOT of your time.

Kassabian's 101 class is interesting. It is pretty challenging and all the rules and facts of the cases take a while to understand. If you read, ATTEND lecture and discussion, and memorize all the rules and how they could be applied to hypothetical situations, you can definitely get an A. There is an midterm and a final- thats it.

SELLING COURSE READER FOR
$40.00/
It's $80 at the store.

Text me ASAP if you are interested:
**********

Great professor and great class!
Currently selling the course reader for $30 text me at ********** if interested!

The class is like an easy version of a pre-law class. You read Supreme Court cases regarding the first amendment and you must learn the rules given by the court regarding such a situation and you must later apply them to hypothetical situations for the midterm and the final. It is a straightforward class with no busy work. He is not available much except the days of lecture, but i did not email him at all so he might be more available if help is needed. The only down side is writing for 3 hours for both the exam and the final and the lectures are 3 hours. Most times it ends early. With competent writing skills this class is not difficult at all.

I felt compelled to write a review, as Kassabian's class was entertaining, informative, as well as useful. I'm glad I came along, as this professor has not been given an adequate shake by the below posters.

1) As a new 1L in law school, I can say this class gave me an excellent undergad foundation in reviewing and analyzing case law. Many sources now advocate expanding law school exam analysis beyond IRAC; however, having been exposed to the method and numerous cases, I believe I gained an edge having taken CS101 with Kassabian.

2) Kassabian is busy, as he is a full-time practicing attorney. However, he was never unavailable and always hung around as long as necessary after class to answer specific questions. I cannot attest to his availability during office hours or by email, as I always clarified any necessary points in person either before or after class, or during break.

3) I know nothing of Kassabian's undergrad career, but I do know he started law school at a well known and long standing Southern California law school--one that has produced a plethora of local practicing attorneys. Having said that, I also know he made a drastic and uncharacteristic jump in transferring to UCLA School of Law. This should be a testament to his ability, not his inadequacy (I believe he was #1 in his class prior to transferring; that's an accomplishment at any ABA law school).

4) In addition to useful practical skills for someone interested in law case-study, this class was very informative and entertaining in its subject matter. The rights afforded by the first amendment are not well understood. This class explains the beauty of freedom of speech, as well as the (few) ways in which it is justly and necessarily limited. This understanding is delivered in an entertaining historical context.

In conclusion, I think most of the reviews below do not do this course or the professor justice. This class is more than adequate in explaining the material it purports to cover in an appropriate contextual basis (i.e. the ways in which the amendment has been tested in the forum designated to do so). Moreover, the appropriate analysis used to do well in this class is useful for those entertaining law school.

Classes involving case-study analysis necessitate more engagement than strictly reading text and memorizing historical facts; this class requires active thinking and application of the rules contained in the cases. It is easy to do well in this class if one is willing to engage the material. Read the cases, show up, engage in the discussion, note the rules applied by the court in the various cases, and follow the exam instructions and format recommended by Kassabian. If you do this it is virtually impossible to not do well, to not learn something useful about the first amendment, and to not enjoy the class.

This was probably the most important class I've taken at UCLA. Knowledge of your civil rights is a vital part of being a global citizen, and freedom of speech is a phrase people bandy about but actually have no idea of the intricacies behind the concept. This class was incredible because you read the court cases that have clarified what you can and cannot say or do, and learned the tests that resulted from them. So for all the above reasons, this was an excellent class and I learned a lot. That being said, if you can't hear the instructor basically you're left to decipher case law on your own through the readings, and that's what happened when I arrived late and had to sit in back. I don't know why the mic wasn't used, but it wasn't. Also, for some reason the instructor and TA would not give out anything written to show what they were looking for in an IRAC. I wouldn't actually change lecture at all because I enjoyed all the information, even the circuitous off-the-track tangents. But I would really have appreciated some model answers to hypotheticals so I would have known what I was looking to emulate on the midterm and the final, since these are the only two components of the grade (midterm 45%, final 55%). A skeleton model answer was posted 2 days before the final, but it was like 'too little, too late.' If I'd had that before the midterm I could have relaxed and enjoyed the course and learned much more.