Haven't even taken the midterm but already feel like the class is shitty... I feel like the professor does not go over material thoroughly and the way he handles class is messy. He also expects so much when he himself does not do such a good job explaining concepts. Totally lowered my interest towards this subject.
--------------------------------------------------------------
I don't know why there are more than 30 percent of people getting As in the previous years...

I’m sorry to anyone who liked this class but I came into this class so excited to learn about psychopathology and I found myself more interested in every other psych course I have taken at UCLA and that’s sad to me because I want to go into clinical psychology. Dr. Lee seems decently nice but he is a boring lecturer and no matter how hard I studied the slides his exams screwed me over because I always questioned if I was right since he had many select all that are correct questions. Overall I would take this class with another prof or just take normal abnormal bc this class is a regret of mine.

I really was not a fan of this professor at all. His exam was really inconsistent and subjective, he emphasized all throughout the class that this class would not make u able to diagnose any of these disorders then on the exam that's exactly what he asked you to do, like they were mostly situational based and was like does this kid have xyz disorder. His lectures on eating disorders were downright triggering and I don't even have an eating disorder. Like for anorexia he really put up on the screen a huge picture of a holocaust-skinny girl, and said that "people with anorexia are underweight and have a severe fear of gaining weight" and left it at that. No mention of like actual mental psychology or how anyone of any size can have an eating disorder, etc.

I think his research focus is autism because he gave really in depth lectures on that, and only that and for each other condition he basically just read off the DSM-5 (like i do mean literally, like for some slides he quite literally screenshotted the DSM-5 criteria and just read them).

I think this class had the potential to be super cool and engaging but it fell short of my expectations.

This was the first core Psych class I got to take at UCLA, and I was so excited, even though I was taking it online because of covid. I found the lectures really difficult to pay attention to. They were dull, and people were constantly blowing up the Zoom chat with questions that Prof Lee was *going to answer anyway* if students would just wait, so it could get kind of chaotic and disorganized in lectures. Ultimately, he read off the slides (which were posted), so I ended up taking notes from the slides and rewatching his lectures later. Like other people have said, the tests were very heavy with the "Mark all that apply" questions, so even though they were open-note, I found myself second guessing my answers and having trouble on tests. Further, we had to take the tests on CCLE, so we couldn't even go back and check our answers, and we were timed. With so much going on during Spring quarter, I (and I'm sure many others) had a very difficult time focusing on schoolwork, and honestly, it didn't seem like Prof Lee was concerned with whether or not we were engaged. I get it, professors had to shift their method of instruction abruptly, and were subjected to many of the same external stressors as their students, but compared to my other professors-- in classes I didn't even like-- Prof Lee fell short. He sent an email at the beginning of the quarter that said something like "email will not be the primary form of communication this quarter, email your TAs if anything," and although he was friendly in lectures, I felt like he was inaccessible or unapproachable as a professor. I don't know, I guess this class just really disappointed me, but I think if you have the time, energy, and motivation to teach yourself the material, you'll be ok. It really wasn't the worst class I've taken, just incredibly underwhelming and needlessly difficult at times.

I had high hopes for this class but was very disappointed with it. The midterm was comprised entirely of "mark all that apply" questions, many of which were incredibly specific. I was not prepared for nor had I encountered this format previously and it added so much additional stress, confusion, pressure to the exam/(my life for a time). It added some annoyance too because this question format change appeared to be both a deviation from the provided syllabus and the expressed experiences of past students. The final was mixed multiple choice/multiple answer and substantially more straightforward. Overall though, this class felt unduly difficult and horribly stressful.

Taking the class this spring. We've only taken the midterm so far and I'm honestly confused. Idk if he changed his syllabus or grading scheme when classes went online but I don't understand how so many people have gotten As in the class in the past. The grading scheme is midterm (40 points), final (50 points), 10 points for discussion. Final grade is sum of points earned/100. He tests you on lectures and the textbook and doesn't tell you what material from each you will be tested on and still makes the questions very specific.

The professor is quite helpful in explaining the bigger, more confusing concepts. Definitely go to OH. There are weekly readings and it is not specified what concepts from the book will be on the exam. I found the test format to be similar to Psych 100B. I'd say rewatch lectures, review book annotations, and focus on the slides!

Disregard all old reviews. It seems after COVID he changed his teaching style because he has been the complete opposite of the past reviews. He was a cool professor who was super clear during his lectures and often said, "this will be on the test". The one annoying this is that you have to read the textbook because he tests on material that isn't mentioned in lecture but in the textbook. For that though, you only need to read the sections in the book that relate to the material discussed in class, so not too bad but very annoying. The exams weren't hard at all, but the wording is kinda tricky sometimes. Like I would read the question over and over again during the test to see what the question was really asking-- so that's annoying too but the exams weren't that hard. For reference, I got a high As on all exams with minimal studying. Also, very cool that he gives candy to the people who got the highest grades on the midterms!! Overall, an easy class that was interesting and not too much work. I would definitely take again-- class has very little stress.

I was late on giving an evaluation so i wanted to atleast give a review. I am a transfer student and i really wanted to take this class but was worried about the reviews. However, this class is doable IF you are the type of person that actually reads materials and studies in advance. My advice to you is read the materials as soon as possible. Take good notes and go to class even if its recorded because you never knew when his mic or some technical issues may arise. I had Prof Lee. and he is willing to talk you through it and answer 99 plus questions during his office hours. also don't second guess yourself sometimes you read a question (like I did) and think there is a better answer because alot of what you are taught can overlap (you will understand once you take the class). I got 30 and 31/ 40 right on the exam and would erase and go back and realize I had the right answers the first time. I did the math and it looks like I am getting an A. Just study. Read in advance. Take notes. If uou are more of an auditory learner with the aid of visuals definitely go to class. The material is straight forward and he provided practice questions in class that helped alot. Remember everything because you never know what will be on the test. Let me say again. If you have any questions go ask the Professor for clarification. His office hours before the quizes helped out immensely. Good luck!

Professor Lee is probably the best teacher I've had at UCLA. I took this class and was extremely wary of all the negative Bruinwalk reviews from previous years. He made lectures extremely engaging and provides lots of helpful examples to boost your understanding. His tests can be tough, but you really need to study for them and be more careful with your answers. Personally, I devoted a lot of time to studying for the first and second exams and scored pretty well on both. I would recommend re-watching the lectures and taking notes on them to study. The three exams were all comprehensive but would mainly focus on the content after the preceding exam--there is no final. He also recognized that students were scoring worse on "select all that apply" questions so he got rid of all questions in that format after the first exam. He really cares about his students and genuinely wants them to learn.

Overall, the exams are manageable if you study (like you do in every other class). If you study, you will be fine (trust me). He gives 3-5 extra credit questions for each exam and drops your lowest exam score if you score 65% or higher on all three exams. Another thing he did was tell you which EXACT concepts would be on the exams, which was very helpful. I would usually put a star next to the concepts on my notes and study them.

The workload was very manageable--I believe the exams and participation were the only parts of our grade. TAs Rddhi and Mary were also helpful and did review sessions (definitely recommend going or watching the recording) before each of the exams. They were great and broke down the concepts to make it easier for us to understand. Both of them made Psych 127C a lot more manageable.

This class was my first Psych upper div at UCLA. Professor Lee made me admire psychology more and constantly reminded me why I chose the psychology path. He's also a great dad who is extremely kind to his students. I highly recommend this class!