I took M4 because I was desperate to finish up my GEs. I normally enjoy studying things like the interaction between society and religion, but this class was nothing but painful. Maybe if I’d taken this class a freshman, when I was taking only a bunch of other GEs (and as a north campus major), it would have been bearable. But as the fourth class and the only GE in a bunch of upper divs, all with their own huge loads of reading and actual work, this class was utter misery. I can kind of understand 50+ pages of reading if you aren’t doing much else with your time, but with everything else I had on my plate then, I didn’t have the time to go through all the nitty-gritty details every week on time.

So like every other student hoping to maximize their time in lecture, I hoped Bartchy would actually, you know, lecture on the material, to at least make up a little bit for always being behind on reading. But out of an hour of lecture, he’d spend the first half talking about things like soapboxing about how scientologists were sketchy as hell, pleading with students to come to his office hours, and reminding us over and over again about our field reports. A lot of what he talked about not related to the material could have easily gone out through emails, but he’d always start every lecture by drawing his circles on the board and labeling them with initials and then saying, “Okay, we’ll continue on our discussion of Islam shortly, but first I’d like to say...”

Granted, the field research report was much more enriching and enlightening than other lame research projects you might get assigned in a GE, but the paper and its grading were entirely subjective and based on how your TA felt about you at the time. My TA, Alex, did what apparently a lot of other TAs did by writing all over the rough draft, saying things like “this is a C-level paper at best” at the end, and then never returning my final draft back to me. I didn’t care enough to get it back, but I must have done alright, though, considering I did really poorly on the final and got by with a B in the class overall. Alex was also an utterly useless TA when it came to cementing the material, so if he’s still around, avoid him if you want to do any actual learning in discussion.

Yeah, it was my fault for not doing the readings on time, and Bartchy is just being a professor by assuming that his students do the reading before class. I’d feel worse about it if he actually did his job by lecturing and not by diving in a full-length biography of the speaker coming to his next discussion panel. Put it in an email and be done with it there, man. I go to lectures in hopes of learning about the topic of the class itself.

Wow, this professor is amazing. Professor Bartchy is not one of those traditional teacher who summarizes the reading materials via powerpoints. He assumes that students read the required readings and expounds on them. After taking this class, now I understand why some students found his lectures useless. It is because they haven't done the readings and they have expected the professor to give summary. However, Professor Bartchy, in his deep knowledge in each religion, helps students to think critically with insightful insights in the lecture. If you have any question, I definitely recommend office hours because he knows his stuff. Anyway, if you are interested in religions, this class will be great.

I took history of religion. The lectures were useless but that's not really important because grades depend on the TA. I had Maria Ornelas, and it was a horrible experience, probably because I did not kiss her ass. The first time I went to her office hours she, straight to my face, accused me of not going to lectures, and I went to every single lecture. She probably didn't realize that it was her job to clarify some things that were confusing to students. The funny thing is she actually did not answer the question. Or she couldn't answer it? Moreover, she kept on changing her office hours and location. At a few instances she notified the change in location a few minutes before the office hours. What a joke of a TA. I spent a good 20-30 minutes in each of those instances waiting and waiting and waiting. She should have gotten punished for that since how could students properly communicate with her and reduce the confusion from the already confusing class if she kept on changing her office hours and location? Moreover, for the final paper, she butchered me on the rough draft, writing a lot of question marks and acting like everything was not put together, and then on the final paper which i spent tens of hours on and was really really improved in my opinion, she just put a number grade. I didn't know if she was just lazy or was just plain arrogant. What a huge ego she had. I think someone did not go to the lecture on Buddhism and ego and therefore should take a full course on it.

The class in general consists of just discussion section, a paper, midterm and final. Thats all you really need to worry about. But the readings can be a bit tedious and boring. its about 50 pgs a week and sometimes it goes up to about 100. I learned everything in discussion. If I hadnt had a good TA I would not have found the class as easy as I did. Bartchy is a horrible lecturer. I didnt pay attention after week 1. Its hard to understand him and he spends 20 min going over random tangents before he even gets to the core material and it doesnt make much sense to begin with. Some people will find his lectures offensive. He has a very strong opinion and unless you see it his way, your wrong. He will call you out on anything small detail that is wrong. Eventually, I started doing my readings in lecture because otherwise it was a waste of my time to go. Overall, it was an easy class but again ONLY

I took this class thinking it would be interesting to learn about different religions. But, I was wrong.
Going to lecture is pointless when the professor says nothing related to the class. Bartchy tends to speak very fast and mumble so going to lecture is a waste of time. Section is worth 45% of your grade and it is extremely long. If you are looking to take this class for a GE, do not do it. You will regret it.

I have taken Hist 4, 186A, 186B, 186C and 191K and I love professor Bartchy. He is by far my favorite professor at UCLA. His lectures are amazing and totally interesting...he does not just go over the reader but fills in the gaps and gives new information. He requires you and gives you the tools to actually think about the material for yourself. Yes he does go on "tangents" sometimes but if you pay attention and use your brain you will discovering that everything he says is connected. He is very friendly and loves meeting with students. Go to his office hours! He is brilliant and everyone should take at least one of his courses. He has a following for a reason!

Professor Bartchy is an extremely knowledgable professor but his lectures are unorganized, difficult to follow, and rarely contain anything important. All the information is in section and from the extraordinarily long readings. The subject is interesting but the material covered is far too much for one quarter. If you are looking for an easy GE, do NOT take this class! Grading is fair and there is no curve.

Professor Bartchy is an extremely knowledgeable and kind man. Although section is more important for your grade and he often goes off in tangents during lecture, what he has to say is extremely valuable for individual knowledge about the world. If you pay attention you will definitely get something valuable out of it. In this class you will study Hinduism, Buddhism, Daoism, Confucianism, Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Bahai, Sikhism and the general characteristic of tribal religions. Although the material doesn't go extensively in depth, the foundation provided through section and lecture (and the readings if you feel like doing them) really gives insight into these different religions and the cultures surrounding them. You get a study guide for both the midterm and the final which have the questions on them and there is no reason why anyone shouldn't be able to get a good grade if they try.

So here's how History 4 plays out: 1. Lectures are irrelevant and boring--you might get a few helpful announcements but RARELY anything related to the material. 2. Discussion is mandatory but it's where you learn all the material anyway. 3. Grades...are fair but NOT lenient; then again, what class ever is? 4. Save your sanity and whatever interest you may have in this subject and...DON'T TAKE THIS CLASS. It is NOT an easy GE and requires a lot of reading and commitment if you want that A. But if you're ok with your time being deliberately wasted 3 hours a week then go for it. Bring a laptop to "take notes" too, it helps with the boredom. Professor Bartchy is NOT a good teacher; I have no idea why everyone is praising him for "caring" or his "wisdom." He is one of the most BIASED professors ever. Take my word for it, History 4 is an utter waste of time...Final Grade: A-

I am a slacker in this class. I have no idea what's going on, the class is too abstract for me, and I ALWAYS use this class as napping time. However, I will say that Bartchy is SERIOUSLY one of the most caring, professors at UCLA. He talks to students like they're his equal, and he's very open-minded about things. He shakes your hand and asks you for your name (that surprises the hell out of me, I always thought that a lot of professors were arrogant a**holes), and he'll give away as many A's as he wants. He even posts up which questions are going to be on the midterm and final one week before the exams!!!!!1!!
I seriously have a lot of respect for him, even though I couldn't care less about what he was teaching. If you are a south campus major who is taking some seriously hard classes, and you need a class to come to where you can sleep, not do any reading, zone out, have no idea what the hell is going on, and still get an easy A, then take this class, because it's pretty friggin easy.