Going to lectures did not help at all. Does not respond to emails. Does not round up.

I took this class online during winter quarter. I had a hard time understanding some of the material, but what I did like about the professor is that she would go over homework problems during her office hours. Also, she would allow questions during class. I highly recommend signing up with Cecelia Higgins as your TA for discussion. She was extremely helpful and explained the math problems well.

Had her for math 31A Winter '22
Don't recommend

Yes I did fail... but it was bc i missed the final...
Before that I was on track for an A...
Other than that, lectures are very boring and skippable. Could always find a better explanation online. She also just isn't that good at explaining stuff. Examples in the lectures were somewhat helpful, but I personally found that they were often very different from what was in the homework.
Homework was pretty easy and graded on correctness, but wasn't too harsh. ~10-15 questions weekly, no assignment in week 10. Questions in text book.
Textbook: J. Rogawski, Calculus: Late Transcendentals Single Variable Calculus Fourth Edition
Both midterms were online ( Winter '22 ), and the practice exams were very helpful bc they were very similar.
Didn't take the final, but syllabus says u have to take it in order to pass.
Never went to discussion either.

There were 2 grading schemes,
1: HW 10% , each midterm 25%, final 35%
or
2: HW 15%, highest midterm 35%, final 50%
90+% => A- , 80+% => B- , 70+% => C-

Had her for 31A. Absolute worst teacher I have EVER had at UCLA. Avoid at all costs. Extremely hard to understand, rarely does example problems correctly, all-in-all very unhelpful.

This teacher is just not good, the lectures were straight from the textbook and I noticed I understood better when I just wrote down the slides after. Although don't be discouraged my TA Cecelia Higgins is amazing I go to office hours twice a week and discussion once a week and feel ok about hw and tests because of it. You'll get through it she is just not a good teacher.

This review is for math 110a (she doesn't have a math 110a page for some reason). This was her first time teaching at UCLA and I think she did a pretty good job. I think she can be pretty quiet but I found her lectures to be straightforward.
The grading scheme is scheme 1: 15% homework, 5% journal, 2 midterms (25% each), 30% final; scheme 2: 15% homework, 5% journal, highest of two midterms 35%, 45% final exam. The journals are free points, and we submit these every Sunday. The journal assignments is literally just to keep a list of definitions and theorems we learned from class and submit it, either by handwriting or typing them. These can be tedious but it's free points so there's nothing to complain about.
There were 7 homework assignments, 2 dropped. These homework assignments were very short since she only assigned about 4-5 problems from the textbook. (2 problems being easy computation problems, 2 easy proof problems, and 1 medium difficulty proof problem).
The exams are alright. She posts an exam review sheet and held a review session for each exam where she solves most of the problems on the review. Many of the exam problems are pretty similar as the review sheet problems so definitely study it a lot. The first exam was pretty long (6 questions) and many of us didn't finish. She listens to feedback so she made the other exams more manageable.
I'd recommend this professor and I think her class is straightforward and not too difficult. I didn't study well so I could've done a lot better in this class.