LS 2

just to clear up the comment below MIchelle kim is the worst fucken TA

I had him for LS2.

First off, Dr. Schein is a pretty nice guy. He is enthusiastic, a little dorky and really into his material which kinda kept me awake through most lectures. He definitely likes to learn the names of the people in the front, mostly girls, which is pretty cool. HOWEVER, his class is not easy. He races through lectures and I feel like he said we were behind already from week 2 to week 10 (and never lectured about 10 slides in the last chapter).

His test are difficult. LOTS OF STRAIGHT MEMORIZING. Not too much conceptual and a lot of tricky questions. But my biggest problem was the curve. I calculated my points in at the end (he tried to "normalize" the scores -wtf??- by giving us a 0/8.1 for everyone) and i dont know how he does his grading. The percentage I got in the class was my final grade, however I talked to some people and there final letter grade was curved up from their raw percentage so i dont know what the fuck happened to mine but that was jacked up...

Sure it was hard and I got ripped off in grading, but hes still not a bad lecturer. Really smart and available if you need him but GOOD LUCK on his tests!!

LS 2 Eval.

Worst professor.

'nuff said.

This school and our GPA will be much better off without Schein.

I TOOK LS2.

Schein seems pretty sweet, and he says that he cares about conceptual student learning.
However- THIS WAS NOT SO!! His lectures were SO rushed.. he was horrible with his time management, spending a lot of time on concepts that weren't so important, and then basically click-clicking through all the slides at the end of the lecture. We really didn't get much out of that. In addition, when we covered the toughest lectures, he would have so many slides... it would basically be that he would read a little off of every one of them. Then, you'd be forced to go home and just teach yourself, talk to your friends, etc. This proved difficult to master the material.

His midterms and final were non-cumulative, which was great. BUT BEWARE, the details were impossible! Dates, percentages, numbers... How the hell is that conceptual? I felt like I learned a lot about the material, and I liked it a lot. All of the processes of the human body, etc... But the details were killer.

In class, he can be obnoxious, too. There were ALWAYS the same people asking questions, which he would courteously and curtly respond to. I still remember the names... Sheila, Yassi, blah blah... Anyone in LS2 for this quarter can attest to that. For the people hopefully waving your hands in the back, just give up hope, buddy. No one cares or likes you. Well, at least not Professor Schein. Ha Ha Ha... But really. I remember another person asked a question about the syllabus and he was really mean about it. I just don't know why. He was so rude, it was unnecessary.

Don't get me wrong, he can still be a sweet guy, but he isn't easy and he isn't exactly nice all the time. Just get on his good side. As for your grade, GOOD LUCK... memorize your heart out. What else do you expect from a UCLA bio class? C'mon...

Took him for LS2. He loves girls, will take the time to memorize all the female's names. Lecture's are okay. Studying for the midterms and finals are a bitch because you don't know what to expect. I basically spent all night memorizing the different pathways in the GI tract, kidneys, ear, etc. and he had very little questions on those. The questions on Inconvenient Truth were INSANE "what percentage of people agreed that saying that global warming is caused mainly by humans is controversial in this journal compared to this journal" (something like that). I wouldn't take this class if I were you, honestly.

Like most of the people on this page, I took LS2 with Schein. Professor-wise, he is helpful, knowledgeable, and has good passion. He seems pretty excited in lecture and clearly loves his subject. However, he has a colder side, which is apparent during testing times. He also has a HIGH preference for girls in the class. Just saying.

The material in LS2 is worth learning, and I felt like I learned a lot. However, the exams stand in stark contrast; they are mostly inane and test on your ability to memorize, memorize, memorize. They are not cumulative (reviewer below me probably typo'ed), and they are only multiple choice. Each midterm has 50 questions; the final has 60. Sounds good, right? No. Most of the questions test on some of the most trivial details discussed only in his lecture notes. In addition, he LOVES to test on numbers; this is clearly evident on the first midterm and on the final. He says it's about concepts. Pish-posh. You'll be much better off memorizing every bolded word in his lectures, completely ignoring the book, and memorizing statistics. In addition, he will test you on An Inconvenient Truth and a book called Life Ascending. Both are fascinating on their own, but testing on them is not. The point of an exam is to test on your ability to understand BIOLOGY and LIFE and its CONCEPTS. None of his exams did. You'll learn quite a lot, but you have to change your studying strategy when it comes to midterms and the final. That's how I did much worse on the second midterm. I don't know my grade as of now but I'm pretty sure it won't be a solid A. Good luck.

I wish I didn't have to say this but I agree with the person below me 100% about this professor. I took LS2 with him in the Fall as well. My biggest problem isn't so much the Lane book (its actually a fun read)...it is more so his EXAMS. He claims his multiple choice exams to be "conceptual" but they are not like that at all. On his first exam he made us remember little trivial details like when "man made the first cities and started language". Emmmm...those facts are nice to know but they are not very relavant to the main focus of the class and its something I can filter away the next day in my head. The BIG BROAD GENERAL questions that really test us on how much we understand the material was lagging on his exams. Studying for his class is more like... LETS SEE HOW MUCH I CAN MEMORIZE OFF HIS SLIDES right before the day of the exam. Yes, it was nice that his exams were cumulative...but.... I would have much rather gotten tested on more broad general conceptual facts rather than remembering %ges and detailed facts about Al Gore's movie that we watched in a PITCH dark room... so we couldn't even take notes... gahhhhhhh

But he is a really passionate and great lecturer. I just HATE his silly exams and just basically bombed the final.

I had him for LS2.

I really used to think he was a cranky, so-so professor. But after taking other classes at UCLA, I could definetly say that he is one of the most EFFECTIVE professors. I still remember the things I learned in his class and I miss having such an interactive class (you will do lots of 'repeat-after-me').

I regret not taking his honors course and wish I went to his office hours :(