I didn't like this class very much. But I'm more of a STEM girl than a history or writing girl. There's a lot of reading, honestly more than I think is possible to realistically do. That being said, I don't think you need to do all of the reading to do well in the class. You learn really niche, interesting things but don't expect it to be easy.

Taking this cluster is one of my best experiences here at UCLA. For those of you who are deciding whether or not to take this class: there will be 2 lectures (75 minutes each) and 1 discussion (1h50min, ik it's long). There will be 2 essays (poli sci 30% + English literature 30%), a midterm (20%), and discussion score. For 60A, there is no final, but for 60B, there is no midterm but a final that is cumulative. Now I've finished taking 60B, and I'm grateful for how much I learned from this class. This class is really interesting and enriching if you are interested in this period, but the workload can also be pretty big (that's expected for a 6-unit cluster, though). Personally I think if you are a humanities/social science and good at writing, go for it. But if you are a STEM person and hate reading/writing, you would probably have to spend more time considering whether to take this class and going over other reviews. Here are some suggestions: (a) I don't do the reading ever since week 2. Trust me you don't have to do the reading because professors will cover all you need to know during the lectures; b) go to lectures and take notes; c) your essay scores are TA-dependent, so go to their office hours and ask for suggestions; d) some TAs are strict about grading participation in discussions but some are not, but I would say participate; e) for each of the professor: Vavreck (polisci) is clear and interesting and organized; Avila (history) is clear but sometimes boring; Fink (music) is really interesting but sometimes unclear; Decker (English) is the most boring prof, but try to stick to his lectures as he is also knowledgable.