I highly recommend you read the other reviews, as I found them to be generally accurate toward Tienson. Her lecturing is pretty mediocre, a solid 3.5/5 maybe. But her tests are the trashiest that I've ever seen. Her tests alone make my overall rating 2/5.

In general, I don't think the any of the course is worth much emphasis except the tests. There's a ton of things that you can point out that's terrible, so let's just list them out.

1. Questions are worded vaguely or in a misleading way. You often struggle to figure out what in the world Tienson actually wants. Tienson doesn't seem to have the self-awareness to realize that if a bunch of students complain, then it's probably the question's fault, not every single one of the student's fault.
2. The short answer questions have a strange limitation that you cannot write more than x number of sentences. Mind you, x is usually something like 1 or 2. Try explaining a concept in 1 or 2 sentences. Then she takes off points during grading for not being detailed enough. Oh, and writing run-on sentences gets counted as multiple sentences.
3. Her grading policy allows partial credit in a question. The only problem is that her grading rubric demands relatively specific things to be mentioned, such that having a question mostly right will usually still net you almost no partial credit.
4. She only allows 10 regrade requests for the entire quarter. That is, 10 questions. Due to how vague the questions are and how oddly specific the grading rubric tends to be, it can often be a struggle to figure out if it's worth it to use up a regrade request on that question. Of course, if she does determine that the question was graded incorrectly, then you get one regrade request back, but come on. I've never seen a professor that mistrusts students to this degree to not abuse the regrade requests.

The course is *not* graded on a curve, though the professor does scale it so that something like an 82% still counts as an A. Good luck getting even 80% on the tests though. Anyways, I find that the best way to prepare for the tests is to watch the Bruincast lecture vids before the test. That'll refresh your memory on what it was that Tienson brought up in class, since you can bet that she'll use something that's only mentioned in passing as a question on the test.

I only took Tienson because Gober's class filled up before my pass and I definitely wish I could have taken Gober. Tienson's class is not hard but it's just a lot of unnecessary work to be fully honest. 153A is supposed to be a MTWF class but Gober's class didn't even meet every Tuesday. Tienson has around 8 or 9 quizzes, 2 of which are online that are worth 100 points of your grade. Your preassessment quiz will give you 10 points of leeway (aka not extra credit since you can earn 100 points max).
She DOES NOT scale the class more generously when the averages for both midterms and the final are around a 70%, so use that for reference. This means that it's necessary to get an 82% average for an A-. The A grade depends on your class but generally aim for an 87% for a solid A.
The tests are quite honestly not hard in terms of the content. The questions are all very fair. However, if any one tries to tell you that she doesn't require key words or phrases to be in the answer, they're wrong. Even if you explain something fully but you don't include a specific term, they're going to mark your answer as incorrect. I'm not talking about excluding important words, but I'm referring to cases where you explain what a futile cycle is, but don't specifically mention the words "futile cycle." My advice in this case would be to examine all past exams you can to learn what words and kinds of answers she wants as that is what helped me get ~10% above the average on the midterms. Thus, this class is a lot of memorization. I understand needing to memorize the steps of glycolysis and TCA, but it was annoying to need to memorize the answers she wanted even though I knew I understood the material well enough to explain it.
Class was also super disorganized with us waiting a minimum of 5 minutes pretty much every day to start class, which was frustrating considering that we were already behind schedule by Wednesday of Week 1. We ended up not covering a lot of material and not doing the TQIB extra credit presentations.

All in all, try to go for Awad or Gober if you can, but if not, it's not the end of the world. You just have to learn how to take Tienson's tests and you should be good.

When you are in the classroom and hear the lecturer talks like "ah...today...ah...we gonna talk about ah...ah...DNA...ah..."; guess what? You are in the class of Dr. Tienson!
She uses the iclicker to take attendance, but the only purpose of her lecture is to torture her students' ears. She doesn't know much biochemistry, not even good at reading from the slides.
She can't even produce a complete sentence without saying "ah..ah..ah..", but she is truly a master in annoying people.

The exams were graded using gradescope, and please be informed that you almost can never get a score that you expect because the answer key really contains everything one can think of, and it is impossible to write them all down within a such short time.
Her class has made me to doubt myself...Indeed, I thought that I was crazy, so I went to see a shrink. Fortunately, after a few sessions, the shrink told me that the problem wasn't on me, but there are some serious mental issues with Dr. Tienson. It is extremely disappointing that such a pathetic "lecturer" teaches at UCLA.

~Quick Grade Breakdown / Stats from Fall 2018~

Clicker Points: 20/20 (reduced from 25; fewer days than expected)
Homework: 30/30 (2 extra credit points were possible here)
Quizzes: 100/100 (Doing the pre-assessment gives 10 free points ONLY in quiz grade )
Midterm 1: 85/100
Midterm 2: 91.5/100 (1 extra credit point was possible here)
Final: 175/200 (or 87.5%)
Extra Credit: 10/10 I think (EXCLUDING extra credit mentioned above)
[3 surveys, 2 points each
This Quarter in Biochemistry, up to 3 points (would have been 5 if your response was selected to be presented, but we didn't have time for any)
Course eval, 1 point]

MY TOTAL: 511.5/550 or 93.00%

AVERAGE MIDTERM 1: 69/100 before regrades and before Dr. Tienson-Tseng changed the grading of a question
AVERAGE MIDTERM 2: 73/100 before regrades
AVERAGE FINAL: 135/200 or 67.50%
OVERALL AVERAGE POINTS IN THE CLASS: 418/550 or 76.00%

NOTE: as mentioned above, our grading scale was adjusted down from 555 to 550 because she didn't believe we had enough clicker days. Therefore, she adjusted the grade cutoffs by 5 points.

Dr. Tienson-Tseng did not adjust the scale to be more lenient this quarter, so the bare minimum to get an A- this quarter was roughly ~82.7%, or 455/550. She determines plus or minus grades only after the quarter has finished, I think. An LA mentioned to me that from her understanding, basically, the top 75% of those in the A range (455-550) will get As or A+s, and the bottom 25% will get an A-. I believe a safe estimate for any future quarters would be roughly 87% for a solid A... This was also confirmed to be a good estimate by an LA.

~REVIEW~

So anyway. Wow. Biochem was DEFINITELY a ride! As others have mentioned before, Dr. Tienson has some rather odd pacing. In retrospect, I partly recognize the purpose, but it was still very stressful to go through at the time. The first week will seem to drag on forever - we took THREE days for general chemistry review, primarily thermodynamics. You DO need a very solid foundation of this though, particularly thermo, to be able to give what she calls "biochemically sound" reasoning. Whether that's for protein folding, metabolic pathways, etc. The second half of the quarter does pick up a lot, and post-midterm 2 felt like a MESS.

Our midterm 1 was Waeek 3 Friday and I was chilling all of Week 1 and part of Week 2. I tried to get my ass into gear on the weekend of Week 2, but still felt blindsided when we were given new lecture material literally the lecture before the midterm. The worst part was having the pyMOL assignment due RIGHT before the midterm too. So if you are reading this, PLEASE, for your own sanity, since she seems to love the pymol assignment - keep this in mind when prepping for Midterm 1.

Also note that for pyMOL, the first part where you're just giving data about the protein is more chill, and she's generous when you're measuring distance between side chains of proteins also. However, be detailed in your explanations for the parts that ask for one. I unfortunately lost 2 points for being more concise in one part, though I did get the 2 points of extra credit.

In terms of studying for this class... as everyone else has already said, the study questions are important. Rewatching parts of lecture can be helpful also, because Heather will be randomly slow at parts and fast at parts of the lecture. I will say though, be really careful when reading questions on the exam! Sometimes over-studying the study questions can actually be harmful if you assume she's asking the same thing she did in the study questions, when the question may actually be asking something slightly different.

Also, YES, she is EXTREMELY particular in her key words. This is no joke. Learn how to break this down super mechanically/systematically though! I know I would panic whenever starting a question because all I could think about was how many details I was missing or freak out about how I would fit all the knowledge I had into the word limit. This hurt me a little for Midterm 1, but realize that in her study questions that she's also extremely wordy. Try to cut out the fat, so to speak, yourself. For example, with protein folding, you should be thinking of the entropy and enthalpy for both the water/protein respectively as well as the overall favorability... Realize that she may not bring some of these things up in the study questions because the questions specifically focus on entropy or enthalpy. You need to be able to think critically about what it is she's truly asking, rather than just mindlessly rewriting the answers (no shade intended here!).

What I think is very anxiety-inducing is that although there is a good amount of predictability with the exams, it can be hard to tell what exactly she's looking for. Like, depending on how you vibe with the exam, you could do 5-10 points better or worse - and that was definitely a terrible feeling. Especially when reviewing, and the answers actually don't seem so difficult to attain. So seriously, try your best to keep a cool head!

As a whole though, I would say that all the exams were fair, but studying for this class constantly feels like a mind game with just how much content and NUANCES TO THE CONTENT that there is to go through. Keep the fundamentals close to heart though, always, and try to find comfort in that because it really should carry you most of the way.

NOTE: everyone freaks out about the final, but I SWEAR, even though the questions do force you to """think outside of the box""" I really DO think they are graded more leniently than the midterms because I literally have no idea how I would have gotten 175/200 otherwise. Like yes, I busted my ass for this class and 85% of time spent for ALL my classes was actually directed toward biochem... and I would have expected as much for any regular class, but this final does have a well-earned reputation. If this final were graded like the midterms I would have expected myself to get ~150, max 160 TBH. All my friends did leave feeling scared though, as did I.

TIP: go to LA review sessions, because I do think the intent was for students who took advantage of these opportunities to do better than the average student. I can pretty clearly see how she tried to prepare us for the Final with similar questions in the LA review.

ALSO, be aware that when she says 50% of post-midterm 2 content is on the final, don't assume that this means a ton of electron transport chain stuff, which is taught at the VERY end. Glycolysis and TCA cycle may not seem totally new by the time you get around to the final, but the REGULATION of metabolic pathways technically is, and literally everyone I knew left that final feeling really surprised the questions weren't awfully specific on ETC details. This may vary depending on whether you finish early though, and we were scrambling to finish.

By the way, shoutout to Agape for subbing for Heather after her father passed away. I absolutely ADORED Agape, and although the grading scheme will be EXTREMELY similar and they share many study questions/resources (as Agape was formerly Tienson's TA)... I do believe Agape was more clear and had more consistent pacing.

EDIT: I just wanted to come back and affirm that even though I didn't end up hating the class and I even changed my major to biochemistry... that EVERYTHING that the person who wrote the review on December 28 is saying...is true. There is not one single thing in that review that I can say isn't fair criticism - though I would be slightly less harsh.

I would clarify that Tienson/Awad seemed to collaborate on some final exam questions because I checked in with a friend who took Awad and there were definitely questions that were EXACTLY the same between our classes - but we also did have differences between our questions on electron transport chain near the end of the quarter and it would be frustrating to hear in Awad's office hours that we would be tested on this topic in more detail than her class.

Avoid her if you can. Exams and discussion worksheets required very specific answers, when quite frankly, there could've been different solutions to the question. There is a decent amount of extra credit available though, so take advantage of that. Kudu is very overpriced for it not to work all the time. Group project we had also makes up a good chunk of the points, so be sure to do well in that.

I’m so happy this class is over, not because of the material which I loved, but because it required so much work! I spent 10+ hours a week in lecture, discussion, in LA study sessions, and on my own trying to memorize and understand the material. The discussion sections and the LA weekly workshops helped a lot. I would recommend going to both if you have a good TA. My TA was Rekha and she was awesome.

I really enjoyed Dr. Tienson’s lectures. I thought she explained the material really well. We had a substitute, Dr. Agape Awad, the last two weeks of the quarter because Dr. Tienson had a family emergency. Dr. Awad was a great lecturer, engaging, and funny. I think if I had a choice I would choose to take Dr. Awad. Her lectures made the class fun.

I would recommend memorizing the study questions and past Gradescope exams to do well on the midterms and final. The exam questions are similar to the study questions. The difficult part for me was is finishing the exams in 50 minutes. The final wasn’t as bad as I thought it was going to be. There were a few questions that were difficult but most of the final exam is similar to the midterms and study questions, the only difference is that you have plenty of time to check your work.

Here’s my scores:
First midterm: 76/100 (Avg. 69/100)
Second midterm: 74/100 (Avg. 72/100)
Final: 147/200 (Avg. 135/200)
Protein Assignment: 29/30
Quizzes: 100/100
Clicker: 20/20
Extra credit: 9/9 (I think)
Total score: 455/550 (Avg. 418/550)
Grade: A- (YAY!)

As you can see she is a very generous professor. I got pretty much average on the midterms and still got an A- in the class. I would take Dr. Tienson again because of her curve. Good luck to anyone taking her<3

(This is a review for the online version of the class during COVID-19)
The amount of cheating going on this class made it an absolute joke. It was an absolute travesty for those in the major who took this course earlier in the year, and had to actually had to put in a great amount of effort to get through. My classmates and some of my roommates would always FaceTime each other during assessments and assignments and cheat through shared online materials, not only in this course but in their other chemistry classes. If everyone could use help from the internet to find the answer in all of our chemistry classes instead of learning anything why bother even calling it a class? Just give everyone who signs up an A+ and save effort. This course is not up to the standards it used to be and it is sad for me to see it. This is much worse for us who choose to take these classes to learn honestly, it makes a double standard. I hope the chemistry department makes some big changes in how they teach online classes. Maybe giving everyone different versions of assessments would change this and actually encourage learning. This opinion may not be popular for those who saw this online class as an easy pass but I stand by my opinion.

Read the book before lecture, make sure you work to understand lecture material after each class, do the study questions as you go to every lecture, go to discussion - it's optional but the worksheets aren't online and you can go to any that fits your schedule, do to LA review sessions - their worksheets are helpful. I'm selling old biochem quizzes - it should be the same format as current quizzes - for $5 and my old protein assignment - I got a 32/30 - for $5 and $8 for both. Text me at 805-657-9253

Would not recommend at all, if possible please take this class with another professor.

Honestly, take this class with any other professor. My grade ended up okay due to the sole grace of additional assignments; I did terrible on most of the exams compared to my past STEM classes.

I feel like the class content overall isn't that bad, and while the rubrics are frustrating, the worst part was probably Professor Tseng's structure and attitude...

For reference, the first five weeks of our class had discussions and LA workshops where the TAs/LAs WERE LITERALLY NOT ALLOWED TO HELP US. We were pushed into breakout rooms and sat there for at least 30 minutes until LAs came in. Apparently this was part of the professor's structure to encourage collaboration, but none of us knew anything at all. We expressed these concerns repeatedly to the professor early on, but nothing was done until some of the LAs advocated for us after the first midterm.

Homeworks are worth like 30% of your grade. There's one individual assignment (completion based) and three group homeworks based on your discussion breakout rooms. Be prepared for literally everything to be pushed back: we ended up having our final homework due AFTER the final because the professor uploaded them so late. Two of the group homeworks are Pymol based, so be sure to go to office hours for help to work them out if you're not familiar with it after discussion.

For peer review, GO TO TA OFFICE HOURS. They're not allowed to look over your answers, but you can talk about general theory and reasoning behind some of the questions, which helps a lot given NONE of the rubrics are given out.

For discussion worksheets, be warned that they're not actually completion. She expects accuracy to a certain extent. For example, if a graph asks for three labels and you put two, you'll lose points even though you filled the entire worksheet out.

Kudu is pretty bad too: stay on top of how many points you have and I'd also take screenshots of the finished assignments and save them somewhere if you need proof of completion. It glitches a lot and assignments are uploaded irregularly, so make sure to check the night before class just in case.

Finally, the rubrics for both the peer review and the exams is a little indescribable...it really is as bad as everyone says. You'll have a question that asks something very directly, but even if you have the right answer, you could end up getting none of the points if you didn't say something really specific that often is outside of the scope of the question. It's really weird how you can literally write an exam correctly, and still completely fail it. The two midterms have exam wrappers worth three points, which is really nice.

If you end up getting around 100% on every other portion (peer review, Kudu completion, discussion worksheets), you can average around 50% on the exams and get an A- using the grading scheme. There is an additional 3% extra credit added, so it's entirely possible to get an A using this distribution. For extra credit itself, it's a little strange because it's maxed out at 3%, so you almost want less extra credit opportunities since the totality, regardless of how many assignments, is 3%.