Well in short, if you want stressful and hard class to pass or get good grade then this is your professor.

Coming from someone who didn't perform super well in this class but still passed, overall I would say I wouldn't recommend the class but it definitely didn't end up being as nightmarish as reviews stipulated and there are a few Reddit posts to corroborate this opinion.

The workload was significant but not over the top - a homework packet of 5-9 questions each week (most but not all a/b/c/d, sometimes to h) and usually assignments to turn in the next day in lecture (you have to check CCLE because sometimes she didn't remind us to do it). Sometimes gives pop quizzes in the middle of the lecture (off her powerpoint point slides she would have an example of the day's topic for us to work on and hand in our work, but only once or twice did she grade on correctness. It was more like participation even if wrong). That's about it for work; one midterm is multiple choice, the second is free response, and the final was mostly multiple choice with a little free response. Warning that she never gave enough time so you have to work fast. Sometimes she got rid of questions after realizing how long the tests were though.

Her exams are open note - first midterm we were allowed one page of formulas, second midterm and final were open notebook. Don't be fooled though, you barely have enough time to glance at notes so it's not super helpful unless you already know everything.

The good thing I noticed about the class that I was surprised about is how nice and available she usually was. She holds a lot of office hours and doesn't make you feel stupid for asking simple questions, and we usually had a lot of them because her lectures are way too fast. But another thing is that she records all her lectures and posts them online so I usually went back to watch them.

The complaints that she takes attendance every lecture for participation, and the complaints of her exam rituals are fairly accurate - she seemed obsessed with cheating and had us take lots of precautions for every test. She did in fact have a lot of typos in lecture notes and even in her textbook so hopefully your lecture will have a smart person to call them out.

Summary: If you ask lots of questions/don't fall behind like I did, you will be ok! There did end up being a big curve at the end of the class. Medium-to-slightly heavy workload with medium-to-difficult material - very light math 32B and no 33A. First half of class without any calculus even seemed harder for the class than the calculus bit.

TLDR: better off taking another prof for the easy A/learn the same materials

Definitely try and get through your college experience without taking her. She's an awful lecturer who doesn't know how to answer questions. The first few weeks are pretty easy, but once you start going into MGFs and other topics, she fails to explain why we do what is done. She scrutinizes on finding "typos" but there are ALWAYS typos everywhere(which doesn't bother me much, except how she'll literally start class saying that she went through already to make sure there aren't any typos).

Her favorite thing to do is give an attendance pop quiz in the last 2-4 minutes of class that would typically take 10 minutes to complete, and force you to finish it before class ends. You end up not really learning what you did, and just working with friends/copying neighbors/writing gibberish just to get an answer(it's usually okay to "work in groups").

The worst part is that for her finals, she'll randomly tell you that for some of the questions, "Choose the answer closest to your answer." Like... you've had 10 weeks, previous quarters, etc. to make this final, and you're telling me that you didn't put the right answer in here? And we have to GUESS for the "correct" one? Hmmmmm.

The curve at the end of the class is nice though, but be prepared to work your butt off. People complain about her accent, but it's not bad - it just impedes on her ability to explain anything well enough for you to get a better grasp.

Sanchez's 100A was easy. There were some tricky integrations from time to time but if you followed the lectures and studied every concept prior to exam then it wouldn't be hard. She also liked to reuse questions from the practice tests. It was one of the few classes where you could get a very high raw score and even an A+. Her obsession with discipline is obviously notorious but in a large class like 100A it's not too big of a deal. Looking past a natural tendency to dislike her personality, I want to say that she taught the material relatively well and covered most of the introductory probability that's helpful for future study.

She is by far the worst professor i've met from UCLA. She essentially floods you with handouts and homeworks on topics you have yet to learn and she gives you rude and unclear answers when you ask for help. Her lectures are so dry and she makes you do really unnecessary participation activities in class as well as pop quizzes and also makes you do 2 hour quizzes at home every week. The midterm was really rough despite the topics being pretty easy she purposely chooses the hardest questions to lower the average and gives barely enough time to finish. The final was a bit better though and the TAs were the most help. In all just try to avoid her at all costs to avoid being swamped with work and dragged through the mud with trivial nonsense that will ruin your grade.

I don't understand why she is still a professor at UCLA. The worst professor I ever had in my life. A lot of homework ridiculous
I feel like I learned nothing from her lecture.
Avoid her, please.

I'm impressed how the professor can make such an easy class a nightmare for everyone. Strict class rules; Attendance for classes that you learn nothing from; weekly homework (normally 5 pages) and weekly online quiz (at least 30 questions). 6 weeks in and I haven't learnt anything from her. Exams are alright but you need a 95% overall to get an A so yeah it can be tough.
Anyway avoid her at all cost, or you will probably end up writing another comment above me.

By far the worst professor I've ever had at UCLA. Her lectures are unorganized, her examples don't teach you anything, and she rambles in such a way that makes it very hard to follow along. She is also very strict and makes her lecture seem like a bad high school class. She takes attendance everyday and sometimes gives us handouts 5 minutes before the lecture ends that we have to turn in for credit. Thankfully, the material in Stats 100A is very easy and you can get by just fine, but her class is raw scored so you'll probably still get a B unless you try super hard. The homework was not that hard, but did take really long and based off problems in her terribly written textbook. Instead of having one section of problems per chapter like a normal person, she has problems after every subsection. So a HW assignment will be something like: Section 8.3.2 2,4,7, Sec 8.5.4 6,9, Sec 8.7.1 3,5 etc... very confusing. Also for each HW expect to find one or two typos or for her to randomly introduce a variable that's never appeared before that makes the problem unsolvable. You should definitely not spend $70 on her textbook and download it here instead (https://tinyurl.com/qlr3d22). Midterm and Final weren't that bad, but she's really spiteful and had questions about the syllabus on them because she was tired of students asking her about it. I literally lost more points on those questions than on the actual problems about stats.

I can't see why so many people say she is bad. She is fine and I really like her handouts, they are so clear and really helpful. Her class is not easy mostly because the grading system is pretty strict. You need to get 95 or 96 to get an A. That means you can't make any stupid mistakes during the tests, and finish the test fast enough. There is written homework and online homework. Written one is easy, online one is much harder but really really helpful. She prints all the teaching materials for you, these materials are really informative and in detail, so you don't have to use textbook.

In all honesty, this course wasn't as bad as the reviews would have made it seem. I do think it's annoying that the required textbook is written by herself, but you can get an outdated version and still probably be fine.

The tests and quizzes were difficult, but if you study and take advantage of the cheat sheets I think they aren't the worst. Christou's courses felt much more difficult to me, although I do think I had to do a bit more self studying in Sanchez's course.