Dr. Ghervas is a very engaging, knowledgeable, and friendly professor. This course focuses more on evaluating, engaging with, and understanding how historical narratives of what constitutes historically significant European wars, discussion of the successes and failures of peacemaking processes, and the relationship between war and peace rather than a pure discussion of the content, which was refreshing and enjoyable. Dr. Ghervas encourages you to critically challenge the course material and think beyond simply what they are at a surface level (ex: how could this document represent a major intellectual shift in policymaking, how might these events reflect debates and trends in diplomatic thought, how could this document have varying interpretations), and she welcomes and actively supports students who want discuss and analyze course content, both in and outside of lectures. Staying up to date on course readings is highly encouraged as these can stack up very quickly, and are essential to engaging with lecture discussions. The course only consists of an attendance grade, midterm paper, and final exam, but grading for each assignment felt very fair and . Rubrics and expectations were very clear and provided early, which was also very helpful. Dr. Ghervas's approach to this class is very intellectually stimulating and strongly supports student learning and engagement, and I would recommend this class to anyone who has even a passing interest in history.

Most reviews do a solid job of outlining how this class is structured, but what they miss is what truly sets Professor Ghervas apart—why she is the kind of professor you *want* to learn from. She isn’t just an expert on the subject; she’s redefining how we understand the history of war and peace in Europe from 1700 to 1925. Her scholarship is groundbreaking, and her approach in the classroom reflects that—rather than just presenting history as a series of events, she actively challenges students to engage with historical narratives in a way that feels fresh, thought-provoking, and fun.

Even if military and diplomatic history aren’t your usual cup of tea, this class offers something more than just content—it teaches analytical reasoning, argumentation, and critical thinking skills that are invaluable for anyone considering law school or any humanities-based field. You’re not just memorizing dates and treaties; you’re grappling with interpretations, questioning assumptions, and learning to think like a historian.

Personally, I came in knowing next to nothing about this period, but Professor Ghervas’s ability to foster engagement made all the difference. Her lectures are anything but passive; she invites discussion, challenges perspectives, and ensures that every student has the opportunity to be part of the conversation. The result? A class that never feels like a chore.

Now, can you technically get by with minimal participation, skimming readings, and cramming before assignments? Absolutely. But would I recommend it? Not a chance. This was hands down the most enjoyable and engaging lecture course I’ve taken at UCLA. If you’re willing to participate, even just a little, you’ll walk away with an amazing grade and the skills helpful in approaching other rigorous courses.

In short, Professor Ghervas is approachable, knowledgeable, and she understands how important grades are to students in "Pre-Law" majors. Without a doubt, I would recommend anyone interested in history, politics, and law to take the course.

I was apprehensive taking her, but she is really a wonderful professor. The class consisted of a take-home midterm (40%), an in-person final (50%), and a participation grade (10%). The midterm was based on two or more primary sources and the final was two essays where she gives the questions beforehand to study. I did not care for war before this class, and she made it interesting. There were a lot of things I didn't know and she was very understanding and sweet. She is clearly passionate about the topic. She does assign a lot of reading, so be prepared. Honestly, do the D’Avennant, Saint Pierre, and Kant reading for sure. Read on topics you don't know and her book is a good base for each lesson but isn't necessary. Her presentations are helpful and make sure to attend class and participate. I wish this class had an additional discussion succession. She really wants people to talk and argue, so she asks the crowd questions during her lecture. She seems like a hard grader, but I feel like if you follow the directions, you'll be fine in the class. A great upper division class and I would take her again.

Before taking this class, I had thought that I knew a decent amount about the topic, but I learned that I didn't fully understand the depth of the philosophical movements regarding peace that are often left out of European history courses of a similar nature. The class consisted of a take-home midterm (40%), an in-person final (50%), and a participation grade (10%). The midterm was on a subject that I was actually able to engage in. It was very open-ended which let you form and defend your own argument revolving around a primary source from the class. The paper itself was only 700-800 words. I know some people don't like open-ended prompts, so if that's the case, this isn't the class for you. I have not yet received my final grade, but we were given the questions for the final in advance, so I felt that it was a fair test. Professor Ghervas is much less concerned about grades and more about what students actually take away from the class-which I appreciated but some might find frustrating if you're just looking for an easy A. An A definitely seemed obtainable, but you have to do more than surface-level analysis on the papers. Overall, I would recommend taking it!

Professor Ghervas is very kind and organized and gives everyone a chance to participate. She also organized an end-of-year field trip to the Wende Museum, which was super fascinating and a stellar way to end the course.

The course includes an oral and written report, which are manageable thanks to Professor Ghervas’s clear and precise guidelines. Additionally, a final historiographical paper challenges you to engage deeply with the readings. This class is rigorous, and Professor Ghervas has high expectations, expecting that students thoroughly engage with the course material and participate.

As a history major, one of the aspects of history that I find most compelling is how it serves as a tool for identity creation. This course delved deeply into this theme, exploring how the RUS-UKR war is also a “history war,” where certain narratives are marshaled to justify violence and militarization. I highly recommend this course if you're looking for a challenge and a great professor.

At first, I was intimidated to take a seminar course. However, Prof. Ghervas made participating easy, and I truly feel like I learned a lot about Russia and Ukraine in this course. She truly is passionate and an expert in the field; it shows in her lectures and source material. There is a lot of group work and a group presentation. The final was a 10 page historiography essay, which was surprisingly not difficult. You need to get familiar with some textbooks for your group project, and you may use those for your final later. She is a new professor at UCLA, but this was no issue at all. On our last day, she set up a museum tour, which was a very nice, fitting conclusion to the course. It was also my last class at UCLA, which I do not regret at all!

My experience in HIST: 187 taught by Dr. Ghervas was overwhelmingly positive. Dr. Ghervas spent a large amount of time focusing upon educating students regarding the Russo-Ukrainian War even though the class is technically a 3 hour discussion. Speaking of which, Dr. Ghervas is very understanding as she will dismiss the class if everything has been thoroughly covered prior to the 'official' end time. I usually really dislike 3 hour classes, but this time around I don't have any complaints! There might be a quiz regarding the geography of Eastern Europe but other than that your grade is only dependent upon a pretty graciously graded group presentation and two papers. All and all I highly recommend HIST: 187 with Dr. Ghervas!

Professor Ghervas is the best professor to teach the historiography of the Russo-Ukrainian war, and I thoroughly enjoyed her lectures, the in-class discussions, and the weekly readings. The course grade is based upon attendance/ participation, a midterm (presentation and write up), and a final paper. The final is a LONG historiographic essay on two course books... definitely don't procrastinate doing it lol. My only critique of this course is Professor Ghervas' inconsistent instructions e.g. the professor's verbal instructions sometimes contradicted her emails or assignment descriptions. Talk to her if you are confused about anything... she is really good at responding to emails.

This is one of the most interesting and currently relevant courses I have taken at UCLA. The History of the Russo-Ukrainian war is such an important topic to discuss right now, especially with the way that historical interpretations have shaped government narratives and policy decisions. Professor Ghervas has a deep knowledge of the subject matter, and the readings she selected demonstrate her personal engagement with the most recent historical debates and her attentiveness to the newest scholarly developments. While she was a very dynamic lecturer with high quality presentations, a large portion of the seminar was devoted to discussion and roundtable dialogue. Professor Ghervas always made sure there was enough time for questions. The grades for this course are mostly dependent on a final paper, which was very doable. Weekly participation and a verbal presentation during one of the weeks are also important parts of the grade. Overall, I would highly recommend taking this class or any other taught by Professor Ghervas.

When I first saw the chance to take a class on War and Peace in Europe in 132, I immediately jumped at that chance since I am very interested and knowledgeable in the subject, which meant that going into the course, I and some of my other classmates knew some of the things she taught already, and Professor Ghervas was a great lecturer when it came to those things and as she is extremely knowledgeable on these topics. Though something that I personally really enjoyed was getting new perspectives on the history that we have all gotten accustomed to learning about it as a certain type of way, but instead in this class she challenges that which made for very engaging lectures with interesting primary and secondary sources. The class structure itself was nothing crazy, consisting of a 3 page midterm essay and a 6 page final essay, the midterm was more of a reading response while the final essay was more of a research paper. Both were very interesting to write/research, and I was able to go to Professor Ghervas' office hours when I had questions where she gave much clarity regarding these assignments. Though there was problem with ChatGPT users in the class for the midterm, I felt she handled it well and I very much appreciate her willingness to keep the final exam as an asynchronous paper and not an in person blue book exam. Overall I really enjoyed the class and I feel like I learned a lot that will definitely stick with me for not only the rest of my college career, but also personally with the history I love to learn about pertaining to war and peace in Europe; and I hope that others will be able to experience this class to also get an eye opening experience like I did regarding this field of history that Professor Ghervas is so passionate about.