Avoid taking huppin at all costs.
Huppin teaches evolutionary psychology, which is sexist, homophobic, and xenophobic. If you are female, an immigrant, and/or gay, you will be offended by him.
On top of that he also bores you to death with his monotone voice, while torturing you with trick questions on MC exams.

huppin is a decent professor. i'm not quite so sure why his reviews are so glowing. he's a great person, there's no doubt in my mind about that and he would make a great friend as well. it is also quite clear that he is an intelligent individual. unfortunately, his communication style can be... boring at times. he speaks in a sort of monotone voice that drags on. not exactly exciting to listen to. his tests for 146 are multiple choice only and some of the questions are worded vaguely, which is supposedly meant to make us think more critically. i disagree with this concept however, as the purpose of a multiple choice midterm is more towards seeing whether or not we know the information, not whether or not we can actually interpret what the question is asking. be sure to pay attention to the facts and figures he gives you because you just can't be sure which ones will be asked of you on the tests. i think this class could be a lot better if the tests were short answer format, asking us to discuss the ramifications of the studies we read in class rather than having us memorize minute details that we would forget not long after taking the exam anyway. actually having us think critically would be a far more constructive way of learning concepts in a way that we can apply in real life. i literally took the exam a week ago and i've already forgotten the majority of the material. that doesn't happen when we have to think about a topic in a coherent manner. unfortunately, we were simply asked to regurgitate.

First off, I have to address the rating made by a fellow student on Feb 4 that begins "do not take this class." I know who the student is who wrote this review, as I am currently in both Huppin's and Von Blum's class (the class she suggests you take instead of Huppin's) with her, and I can honestly say that her view does not reflect the view of the vast majority of students in Mark Huppin's 146 class. She is a student who has taken some of Huppin's lecture material completely out of its scientific context and turn it around on him, calling him a sexist, etc. While this class does deal with some delicate issues such as rape and sexualization of women in the media, Huppin is very careful to always surround the information that he gives his students with a scientific background and empirical studies. Furthermore, he never suggests that evolutionary psychology directly determines any aspect of human communication/interaction, and someone who thinks this should pay more attention in class. His lectures balance both the roles of nature (evolutionary) and nurture (environmental) in determining the topics we discuss in class.

Now for an evaluation of the course-- I'm a graduating senior in the Comm Studies department and can honestly say that this has been one of my favorite classes I've taken thus far. The material is interesting and applicable to everyday life and I find myself discussing it with my friends even outside of class.

Course work is completely manageable. There are two multiple-choice exams, a midterm and a final. To some I know the midterm seemed tricky but honestly, if you just attend lecture and do the readings you'll get what he's asking (the readings are interesting, too, so that's a plus). He doesn't try to trick you and he is really concerned about his students and how well they grasp the material. There are also two short papers throughout the quarter that are unlike any I've had in any other classes. I really like the essay questions he asks because they allow you to synthesize the material in the class and apply it to a movie we watch in class (not a really lame academic one, either). It's helpful because the papers are kind of like a review of the material for the exams. Each takes less than a day to complete.

If you want a comm studies course that is both interesting and manageable, take this course. The professor is awesome! You won't regret it.

Hi, I would agree with the majority of people that the class is great!
Multiple-choice is a little bit tricky, but as long as you pay attention you are going to be fine! Two-short papers are easy, you apply the knowledge you learn and read to real life, and they are related to two films
Huppin uses a lot of videos in his presentations, which are very interesting and related to the material! The use of videos is awesome, especially when it is a 2-hour lecture!
Huppin is also very approachable and shows concern for his students!
Moreover, it is one of the classes (and there are not many of them) in which you can apply the knowledge you get to real life. Also, evolutionary psychology helps to explain life situations, you don’t have to live or pray on it :) but the parallels it draws with real life are understandable.
I guess, the main issue here is not religious beliefs (though they may play some role), it is the issues of gender. If you are a strong feminist and is not able to accept some other possible truth of life, then do not take the class!
Personally, I consider myself is somewhere in between… but I really enjoy the class!
Moreover, there is actually a reading on the issues of feminism and evolutionary psychology which says that feminists could use evolutionary psych for their benefits and be more persuasive than creating ridiculous arguments defending women’s rights.

Huppin is a real laid-back guy who knows his subject well--not to mention he has degrees from both UCLA and Stanford. He makes it clear from the start that the class (evolution of mass media images) is based on evolutionary psychology. I personally believe that evolutionary psychology is a great, interesting, and valid subject of study. I can honestly say that this was my favorite class in my 4 years at UCLA.

However, if you are a die-hard creationist and believe adam and eve are your great-aunt and -uncle (hate to be sarcastic about it, but just being honest) I would recomend taking a biology class instead. All sarcasm aside, if you truly reject Charles Darwin's theory of evolution and are not open to considering science that may conflict with an ultra-conservative personal/religious background, you will probably not enjoy this class as much as I did.

IMO, great class, great professor: very interesting topic, light workload (2 short assignments, multiple choice midterm and final). If you enjoy evolutionary psych or interpersonal communication theory, I definitely reccomend taking this class!

I've never written one of these, but the first review is so off-base that I couldn't ignore it. Professor Huppin said first week that men and women both value the same top five traits in a prospective partner, and neither good looks nor high status is in this 5. He has never said anything close to "rape is an adaptation" or "killing stepchildren is natural", that is absolutely ridiculous. 146 is a pretty interesting class that isn't too hard if you pay attention, which may explain why the first reviewer is both confused and angry.

The first reviewer couldn't be more wrong. The class is based on peer-reviewed, published, and respected science. The professor does not preach that killing stepchildren is natural or acceptable, does not say that rape is an adaptation, etc. In making these misrepresentations, the first reviewer actually commits the naturalistic fallacy, something we learned about in class. From one of our readings: "This fallacy assumes that because a phenomenon occurs in nature, it 'ought to' be this way. This would be akin to believing that if cancer is the natural result of interactions between our physiological system and environmental influences, it is justified, and we, therefore, should not use accumulated medical knowledge to prevent it." The first reviewer clearly hasn't been paying enough attention, and must be hearing through the distorted filter of their own ideology. One of my favorite classes at UCLA.

Do not take this class. All he does is preach about evolutionary psychology.
I cannot believe this pseudo-scientific sexist crap is being taught at a prestigious University like UCLA.
Pornography is "natural", killing stepchildren is "natural", and rape is an adaptation.
Men are only attracted to women with good looks, women are only attracted to men with a fat wallet, and all humans are just pre programmed robots.
If you believe humans are free agents, and in charge of their own destiny, take a class with Paul von Blum instead.