He is monotone and his lectures are not engaging. Most students are on Facebook or falling asleep in his class. He offers exam reviews which are supposed to be similar to his actual exams but he changes it so much that people end up doing poorly in his class anyway. I would not recommend him.

Lectures were pretty dry, since he focused a lot on derivations for relatively simple concepts (which may be useful if you haven't taken a physics class before). The class was really slow for the first two weeks, and the material for the last unit was rushed. However, Anton's lectures are very organized (and he posts all of his slides and notes online), and I reckon the class wasn't as difficult as with some of the other physics professors.

Took Physic 5b in the winter 2019 quarter. He should change his name to Bond because he has a license to kill your GPA. The midterm averages were 50-60%. The review sessions before the tests and the homework did not reflect the difficulty of the exam. Don’t believe the other reviews saying this is an easy, straight forward. I regret taking this class.

Probably the most organized professor I've had at UCLA. In lecture, he teaches pretty much straight out of the textbook and writes clear notes that he then uploads to CCLE every week. His review sessions are relevant to his tests. If you understand what's going on in the class, the tests are pretty doable. The biggest downside to his class is probably its use of iClickers.

Took Physics 5b in the winter 2019 quarter. He should change his name to Bond because he has a license to kill your GPA. The midterm averages were 50-60%. The review sessions before the exam we’re not helpful because the exam questions were much harder. The math on the tests is very difficult. Don’t believe all the other positive reviews. I regret taking this class.

Bondarenko has been my favorite physics professor at UCLA so far. However, that doesn't mean it was easy to get an A in his class. He's a good lecturer and really helped me understand the concepts. I thought his tests were tough but fair extensions of the material he taught in class, and they actually made me feel really accomplished when I figured the problems out (though the final was pretty damn difficult). He really emphasizes problem solving over plug and chug. On the other hand, I got over 90s on every exam, full score on the lab and homework... and still ended up with an A- because of the strange curve he chose to use. I would recommend him with reservations just because he's an incredible rarity in the department in that he actually knows how to teach, but be aware of his grading scheme if you choose to take him.

Bondarenko's lectures are really well planned and organized, but they can be a bit slow and boring. He is very clear though, and scans the lecture notes so you can use them to study (he doesn't use the blackboard, he does his lectures on the camera thingy). The second midterm was somewhat hard (more because of time constraints than the material itself), but the other exams were fair.
Overall, good class, I don't have much to complain about.

Anton Bondarenko is a legend. Take Physics 1A with him. He is very clear and provides a lot of material for students to work with. He uploads handwritten lecture notes. Leads excellent review sessions before examinations that strongly resemble the exam itself. The medians in his class are around ~80%. This means you basically have to lock in a raw score of 90+ to have a shot at an A-. I personally did not have much intuition for physics and relied heavily on mathematics to derive most of the answers. I would blindly compute integrals and take derivatives to get the answer based on the mathematical relationships between the equations. If you have a good grasp of the calculus, you will find it that you don't really have to get the "physics" to do well in Bondarenko's class. But, if you want to develop the intuition for physics, paying attention in lecture, following his demos and asking questions in office hours will definitely help.

As mentioned before in the reviews for 1A, Bondarenko is a legend. Much has not changed about how you can muscle your way through with a grasp of calculus. But one thing that is problematic is circuits. The last part of the course is a bit rushed and makes a strong appearance on the final. So it is important to understand these well.

The lectures were very clear, but a bit monotonous. He makes sure to write down every step in his derivations, and when I say every step, I mean every step. Thus, lecture is pretty slow paced and you can get bored pretty easily. That being said, you won’t have to worry about being lost in his proofs which is good. If you’re someone able to focus dry lectures, then you’ll learn a lot. Also, his review sessions are really useful for the midterms and final so I would definitely recommend attending those. If you understand the solutions to the problems done in these reviews, you’ll find the exams to be fair. Overall, I think this is a nice and solid introduction to classical mechanics.