TL;DR: This class was kind of a mess, but I still recommend taking it if you want to learn more about statistics in scientific research and the problems with some of the standard statistical practices. If you don't care at all, it won't be fun. Plus, Dr. V is very nice, wants all her students to do well, and explains the content well. I can't say how it compares to STATS13, since I know nothing about that course except it fills up quickly, but definitely consider this class since it's way less popular. Plus you pretty much don't have to do math.

Structure: This is a pretty new course, and the text book isn't even written yet. They posted a few incomplete chapters by Garfinkel(ls30 guy) and some papers by some dudes who don't like how statistics is done in research. The labs and lectures don't match up well at all, and there's concepts and things that are on the midterm/final that barely get any focus in lecture. I think Dr.V's lectures did a good job explaining the general concepts, but they didn't help too much for the labs and homework. Also the prelab videos, for the most part, are worthless. At the beginning you'll be very confused, and by the end you'll probably still be confused but a little less. If you have any problems, make sure you ask for help. Also, Jane (the other professor) and Dr. V didn't seem to be on the same page (even though their classes shared a ccle page and campuswire), and Jane referred to some of the terms in different ways than Dr. V. So be careful.

Content: I recommend at least reading the first few weeks of the written material, since p values, bootstrapping, and confidence intervals are ESSENTIAL in doing well in the later topics. I also think this class will make more sense if you actually have read a couple published studies, and are at least somewhat familiar with the statistics used. Like if you aren't familiar with seeing "p<0.05", you may be confused. I had a lot of fun learning about the bad statistics in studies, and actually understanding some of the problems. Unfortunately, I don't think the course does a very good job fully explaining the problems with traditional tests. It's more "these equations are too complicated and bad, and our simulations are so much better". Nonetheless, I think the content is very interesting. Plus, you don't really have to do any actual math. You get tested on concepts and analyzing graphs, but you never have to use any formulas. All you need to do is write the code and you'll get your p value and confidence intervals.

Labs: the labs weren't graded, but if you want to get a good grade you really should do them. Unless you're already a coding wizard, the labs are essential in actually knowing how to do the coding. Plus, in my opinion it helped me understand the concepts from lecture. I would try to do the labs before lab section, and only go to get help with the problems I couldn't solve on my own.

Homework and Creative Applications: these were our assignments. The homework was individual and doing coding stuff on cocalc, and creative application was a partner assignment that's graded on completion. The homework sometimes included stuff we never did in lab, so it was sometimes hard to figure out. They were supposed to be biweekly (one every other week), but that full apart and we ended up having a pretty long homework assignment and a partner assignment due the day of the final. (the partner assignment was making a meme. But still). I remember one of the partner assignments was pretty long, but the other ones were required very little time to complete.

Coding: I say don't worry about the coding too much. And when in doubt, ask the TAs for help. In LS30A/B I hated the coding and did not understand it at all, but even though the coding in LS40 is objectively more complicated, I found it easier. This sounds weird, but in this class the coding isn't just plotting random graphs and stuff like in LS30, it's doing the tests on data from actual studies. When doing the coding assignments, it's easy to see how what you're doing can actually be applied, which at least for me made it more fulfilling and easier to do. Keep in mind this class is python NOT sage math like LS30. It's very similar, but slightly different in very annoying ways (like srange is just range in python).

Exams: the midterm and final were a mess. The midterm had 2-3 questions that were written incorrectly, and based on a group me poll, the class did very badly. But thankfully (probably due to Dr. V), they had a "points back" opportunity, which made it a bit better. But I found the exams pretty difficult, and I think the final was harder. Dr. V was very kind and after everyone did poorly on the midterm, the final was made unlimited attempts with your highest score counting. You couldn't see your score of each attempt, but this still helped make my top final score 10% higher than my bottom score.
The final two parts with a ccle test and a coding portion. The coding portion wasn't too difficult, but it took a while to finish. If you do the labs, I think you'll be fine.

Overall: You'll learn some basic programing stuff and learn some statistics. If you despise math and seeing scary statistics formulas, this course may be for you. Though it definitely isn't easy, the course definitely isn't the hardest out there and I enjoyed it way more than LS30. It'll probably be better in the future when the text book is finished, and if it is structured in a way that makes sense.

The rest of the reviewers seemed to have had a different experience than me in taking this class. Dr. Venugopal is by no means an incompetent teacher. However, she isn't the best of lecturers and after taking the exams, it sometimes felt as if she emphasized the wrong things. You are given 24 hours to complete the midterm, which was a CCLE multiple choice quiz, and 48 hours to complete the final, which was comprised of both a CCLE quiz and a coding project on CoCalc. I did not find either of the exams too difficult because I made sure I understood all aspects of the labs, which are not graded, and the homework. I missed a few points on things that I felt were not properly explained; nonetheless, I was able to get As on both of the exams.

I might be unique in saying that I enjoyed the coding aspect of the course very much. Although the coding does become somewhat repetitive in certain ways, it forces you to become comfortable with specific fundamental aspects of Python: this is immensely useful skill development. In addition, if you plan on doing research in the life sciences (as I do) in a lab or even by pursuing research as a career, the concepts conveyed in this class are paramount.

To say it briefly, this class wasn't overly trying and you can easily earn an A if you invest a reasonable amount effort.

I feel like people really disliked her for no reason. I thought she was clear and easy to follow. The material and tests were quite easy and basically exactly what she taught. She would kind of go off on unrelated tangents if you asked a question though, so I usually asked my TA for help not her. My TA was Ganesha who was an absolute god. If you have him thank your lucky stars

I was reluctant when I enrolled in this class because the reviews for Dr. Venugopal are all over the place. This class, in general, is super easy but I would highly recommend reading the textbook as it explains all concepts. Venugopal does explain the topics but at times she confuses you. I would definitely take another class with her because she was great overall.

Her class is the easiest one, in my opinion, out of all the options for 30A. Her exams were basically a modified study guide, and the review sessions held by the TAs are really helpful because they go over answers and procedures for the practice exams. However, she is not very clear with her explanations in lecture and I relied a lot more on my TA than her when it came to learning material for this course. The only difficult part about the class are the labs, so I would get some people's numbers from this class to help each other out with those.
Overall, take her if you want an A, but not if you care about the concepts of the course.

I feel like I should not have taken this class with her. The material itself was not hard at all, and I didn't take the final due to the grading schemes she provided (which put all my weight on the midterms), but bro. I hated doing her homeworks. Her homeworks genuinely sucked the life out of me. Why'd I do my work for this class then I did for physics and chem. I stayed up for hours doing her homeworks just to get 1.25 points off per assignment. Why can't she just give me practice problems like every other professor. Also her responses to how we did on midterms was very mean. Bro just said to do better lol. Her test was not how she described it. I don't like her lol.

Dr. V offered us a grading scheme that made it so that you didn't have to take the final if you did well enough on the two midterms, but weekly homework was tedious and not helpful to many students. It was formatted as open ended "study guides" that had unclear instructions. Lecture wasn't super helpful and honestly the TAs carried my understanding in this class.

Dr. V is a really kind and sweet professor who cares about her students, but I'm not sure I'd take this class with her again.

Dr. Venugopal's style of teaching and responses to students' concerns are extremely unsupportive and discouraging. After midterm 2, her Piazza forum was flooded with complaints and concerns saying how unfair the test was. I agree with all the students who said that she inadequately prepared us for the exam, also because the practice exams that we were given were nothing like the midterm we were tested with. In class the following afternoon, she completely invalidated our concerns, which left many of us further discouraged and shocked at her response. I never expected Dr. Venugopal to shut all of us up and make us feel like we were incompetent. One student voiced her opinion on behalf of majority of the class, saying how the situation was unfair, and the entire class clapped very loudly; louder than any applause I've ever heard in a lecture hall. It was clear that most students were in accord with the said student.

Dr. Venugopal needs to better cater to the student's needs. She doesn't listen to us. When the entire class voiced their opinions being concerned about how unfair midterm 2 was, being all respectful, Dr. Venugopal tries to play victim and she even has the audacity to threaten to not post preparation materials for the finals. I am just blown away at her response as an instructor at such a prestigious institution.

Dr. Venugopal's style of teaching and responses to students is extremely concerning, and she is extremely unfair. She won't consider her students' complaints, even if it's the whole class, TAs, and LAs voicing their concerns. The midterm averages were terrible as well, with midterm 1 having a 72% average, and midterm 2 having a 68% average. This is one of the most basic math courses one can take here, and she overcomplicates things for no reason. I personally feel that she's the worst teacher I've had here so far. For context, I scored 92% on midterm 1 and 98% on midterm 2, so I am not biased because I have a terrible grade. I currently have and am expecting to end the class with an A+, and I strongly dislike her style of teaching and arrogance that causes her to fail to comply with student needs. Overall, Dr. Venugopal needs to change her style of teaching because it's very much just busy work and extremely ineffective to our learning, and she needs to be a lot more open minded when her entire class is voicing their concerns against her.

This class was definitely one not to underestimate. If not for the adjustments made during the protests, I would definitely not have done as well. the bulk of the work is the homework, which is done on Cocalc. It is rarely easy to do and can take 4-5 hours to complete. You will also most likely need to ask a TA or another person for help at multiple points to try to start this as soon as possible so you can hit up a TA during OH and get the help you need. The number of stressed out Sunday mornings I've spent scrambling together a homework assignment before it was due on noon....not worth it!! The midterm is also fairly rough if you were not paying attention to lecture. We had 24 hours to work on it. Don't forget to do the pre-lab quizzes!! The knowledge assignments are fairly easy as well but time consuming (hit me up at ********** if you want mine to save time). EC is given for practice exams submitted.

Good teacher, she obviously cares about the subject and whether the students learn! I personally really liked this professor!

She's very good at explaining concepts, but if you don't understand the other concepts that she uses to explain them, then you're sort of screwed. For most of the class, I didn't really understand linear approximation, which made me struggle a lot. In these cases, I would recommend going to office hours.

The labs vary in difficulty, from just easy and boring to excruciatingly difficult. However, there are ~10 of them and you have a week to do each (which overlap).

Also, a lot of the stuff used in exams are lifted directly from her lectures, so watch them!

The midterm was unexpectedly difficult, and both the midterm and final took an obscene amount of time for things we only had 24 hours to complete.

My only problems with this course are with the course itself and not the professor. I would strongly recommend this professor to anyone who wants to take this course.