All Ratings and Reviews for Rajesh R Nandy
What a horrible class. I Couldn't stay in class more than fifteen minutes and stopped going altogether after the second week. He may care about learning, but I couldn't tell because I couldn't understand what he was saying due to his thick accent. The practice exams were not similar to the real ones and the homework supplied was worthless. Luckily I took AP stats in highschool, and this is just a dumbed down version of that with a tiny amount of ANOVA which you don't need to understand so long as you can fill in a grid with the 6 page equation sheet he gave for the final. O ya, whatever calculator you have is going to be too advanced for this class, my regular scientific calculator was not allowed on the midterm which moderately sucked.
Nandy is a new professor who came from a junior college just started teaching here this quarter... so I think we should cut him a little slack. The course consists of three exams one midterm worth 30%, a conceptual exam worth 20% and a final worth 50%. The first two exams were ridculously difficult(the class mean was 17 out of 30) I just got out of the final and it was very reasonable...I feel like he made things easier because he realized how behind everyone was. He trys his best to help his students, but it up to them to ask questions. His lectures are dry and hard to follow (I stopped going after a while because they didnt help) All in all Nandy is a good guy, an ok professor and a fair grader.
his accent is very strong and understanding what he says is very difficult. his lectures are dry and almost stupified for the student. As the course progresses, however, the lectures become more and more disorganized and hard to follow. His supplied homework assignments and practice exams are horrible.
Professor Nandy is not a super good lecturer. Section is not very helpful so I wouldn't recommend attending. Accent makes him a little difficult to understand and he talks the entire lecture. Overall, manageable class but I wouldn't recommend taking this class without taking Stats 10 before.
This class was very straightforward and not at all difficult, just a little tricky and very (VERY!) tedious. Nandy is an okay teacher, but the best way to learn is to teach yourself from the book and then attend the discussion sections. Seriously - read the book and then to do the exercises at the end of the chapter; that's the best way to make sure you're actually learning the material.
The in-class "pop" quizzes were easy and so was the homework. Midterm 1 was a joke - everybody did super well. Midterm 2 was a little harder, but overall definitely doable. The final was astonishingly simple.
If you have to take 100A, do it with Nandy. You'll definitely get at least a B+.
worst professor ever!
Lets put it this way, I have gotten an A in almost ever single one of my pre-med science classes but somehow this man gave me a B! He has a very thick accent, and he reads straight off of his computer screen every lecture. I want to know how this man is a teacher at UCLA. Worst experience of my College career. Avoid Nandy!
Easily the worst professor I've had at UCLA. His lectures are painful to sit through, at best. While it is good that he puts his lecture slides online, they are often confusing and jump around a lot. His teaching style for Psych 100A makes almost no sense if you have never taken a statistics class before. It is very hard to teach yourself the material using his slides, but even harder to try and learn it from him. Try as much as you can to avoid getting this pathetic excuse for a teacher, unless you have already a firm grasp of statistics in which case it doesn't matter too much.
Here's the class:
20% midterms X 2
10% pop quizzes (using iclicker)
5% participation (iclicker)
45% FINAL (45%!!!!!)
The class wasn't too bad, honestly. The first midterm was a joke. Everyone should do very well on it. The second one had a few tough multiple choice questions, free response was easy. The final, overall, was really tricky. He gave us the formula sheet but one of the formulas needed wasn't on there. That same problem was only briefly covered in class, and the practice final he gave us was a bit different. Be careful on the final, that's my best advice. The rest it was easy though. Definitely a lot better than McCauliffe.
So this class was extremely boring. The class only lasts an hour and fifteen minutes but nandy has some sort of power that makes it feel like the class is 12 hours long haha. Overall, I liked the class because i got an A but i thought i was going to fail. Professor Nandy is a genuinely sweet guy who wants his students to pass and do well. This is evident, from the way he gave us an option at the end of the class. He changed his grading so that if we receive a 95 on the final he'd give us an A regardless of what our previous grade was. His grading scheme is already pretty easy because he grades on a 80-60-40 scale, meaning an A is an 80, B is a 60, and so on...but his two midterms are pretty hard. The wording is very tricky ad the multiple choice is where i struggled most. Surprisingly the final was very easy and it seemed like it was not written by Nandy himself because it was so different that the midterms. Overall, I'm grateful for Nandy and his caring manner toward his students. I would recommend him...but I also was at an advantage because I was taking Stats 10 during the same quarter and the concept are pretty much the same so it was like i was receiving the same lecture twice a week.
The best professor to take for this class. He genuinely cares about his students and tries his best to maximize the A's he hands out. You have to be an idiot to do poorly in his class. Just attend lectures and study the slides and do all the homework he assigns.
Did this review contain...
Thank you for the report!
We'll look into this shortly.