Professor
Marta Pozuelo
1 of 1
Most Helpful Review
Fall 2020 - Pozuelo was a kind person and clearly knowledgeable about materials science, but she really was not good at lecturing. I didn't watch most of her lectures and chose to read slides and the textbook instead, but it was abundantly clear in the few hours I did spend that she simply does not know how to explain stuff in a way that is appropriate for an introductory class. The lecture alternated between basic level info that you probably already know to higher level info that was clearly not useful nor testable, with not nearly enough time spent at an intermediate level appropriate for the course. Far too frequently there would be questions on the homework that were absolutely not answerable with the content given in lecture, as if she somehow expected us to read 50 pages of the textbook every week as well as attend the lectures. The textbook, btw, is actually great and absolutely reading it is a great way to learn, but the quality understanding you can get from the book is way overkill for what the class actually requires and I stopped reading the book when I realized it was not time effective. Back to homework, the problems were a strange blend of dense computation and straight up short response to conceptual questions, in such a way that made it completely unclear what the professor wanted you to actually know. There were two quizzes, a midterm, and a final, of which the first two to occur were pretty darn hard, and the second two were way easier. There was a curve at the end of about 1/3 of a letter grade, which was annoyingly small. TLDR; the course was poorly organized and unclear in its objective, and the lecturing by the professor was not worth watching. I would avoid Pozuelo.
Fall 2020 - Pozuelo was a kind person and clearly knowledgeable about materials science, but she really was not good at lecturing. I didn't watch most of her lectures and chose to read slides and the textbook instead, but it was abundantly clear in the few hours I did spend that she simply does not know how to explain stuff in a way that is appropriate for an introductory class. The lecture alternated between basic level info that you probably already know to higher level info that was clearly not useful nor testable, with not nearly enough time spent at an intermediate level appropriate for the course. Far too frequently there would be questions on the homework that were absolutely not answerable with the content given in lecture, as if she somehow expected us to read 50 pages of the textbook every week as well as attend the lectures. The textbook, btw, is actually great and absolutely reading it is a great way to learn, but the quality understanding you can get from the book is way overkill for what the class actually requires and I stopped reading the book when I realized it was not time effective. Back to homework, the problems were a strange blend of dense computation and straight up short response to conceptual questions, in such a way that made it completely unclear what the professor wanted you to actually know. There were two quizzes, a midterm, and a final, of which the first two to occur were pretty darn hard, and the second two were way easier. There was a curve at the end of about 1/3 of a letter grade, which was annoyingly small. TLDR; the course was poorly organized and unclear in its objective, and the lecturing by the professor was not worth watching. I would avoid Pozuelo.
Most Helpful Review
Winter 2021 - This is probably an age-old story, but the professor is a nice person who makes life hell as the teacher of this class. Her grading is completely subjective and is probably dependent on her day to day mood. Her grading scale started as not good, good, excellent and eventually devolved into very good but not excellent, ok, and a bunch of other subgrades that never really made any sense with the amount of feedback given This class is not hard content, but the lab reports are miserable because she is extremely picky and inconsistent with the criteria. ALSO, she likes to do this thing where she discusses the grade for each lab report in front of the entire class, so if you screw up, she will likely roast your entire group in a public forum. Even if you do well, she might find something to pick on and roast you for that as well. The material itself is boring but it's not too big of a deal. Clear out your day for the lab reports because that will be a massive time sink in this class
Winter 2021 - This is probably an age-old story, but the professor is a nice person who makes life hell as the teacher of this class. Her grading is completely subjective and is probably dependent on her day to day mood. Her grading scale started as not good, good, excellent and eventually devolved into very good but not excellent, ok, and a bunch of other subgrades that never really made any sense with the amount of feedback given This class is not hard content, but the lab reports are miserable because she is extremely picky and inconsistent with the criteria. ALSO, she likes to do this thing where she discusses the grade for each lab report in front of the entire class, so if you screw up, she will likely roast your entire group in a public forum. Even if you do well, she might find something to pick on and roast you for that as well. The material itself is boring but it's not too big of a deal. Clear out your day for the lab reports because that will be a massive time sink in this class
AD
Most Helpful Review
Fall 2019 - This is a review for MSE 104, which isn’t listed yet. I thought she was a decent professor, but not super engaging and sometimes hard to understand. Her tests were tricky and often focused on tiny details. A lot of the information on the tests came directly from lecture and were really hard to find anywhere else, so it was pretty important to pay attention in lecture. She was super nice and tried to learn everyone’s name. If you’re super interested in materials science I would definitely go to her office hours and talk to her about the detailed stuff! If not, you can probably take this class and just read the textbook and do just fine. I thought it was a little harder than I would’ve hoped for this class. The grade scheme was very nice (2 quizzes, 1 midterm, HW, final).
Fall 2019 - This is a review for MSE 104, which isn’t listed yet. I thought she was a decent professor, but not super engaging and sometimes hard to understand. Her tests were tricky and often focused on tiny details. A lot of the information on the tests came directly from lecture and were really hard to find anywhere else, so it was pretty important to pay attention in lecture. She was super nice and tried to learn everyone’s name. If you’re super interested in materials science I would definitely go to her office hours and talk to her about the detailed stuff! If not, you can probably take this class and just read the textbook and do just fine. I thought it was a little harder than I would’ve hoped for this class. The grade scheme was very nice (2 quizzes, 1 midterm, HW, final).
Most Helpful Review
Winter 2022 - Idk who will actually read this since all MSE majors have to take this class, but it might as well be documented how much of a mess this class was in winter 2022 This class needs to be redesigned. Pozuelo basically said hurry up and pick a project with little guidance whatsoever, but we quickly learned that if you're not characterizing something metallic or alloy-based, there is pretty much no equipment available to do the necessary tests to identify your materials. However, if you pick something not containing metals, she seems to be much more chill with presentation feedback since apparently if she doesn't have much experience with your topic, she won't have much criticism for you (or helpful feedback). Since my group was analyzing a polymer structure, we basically suggested wildly complicated and lowkey bunk characterization methods that she didn't have enough knowledge about to question, and we did pretty alright lol. If you pick metals, which she knows very well, she will probably rip your presentation apart regardless of quality, picking apart the most meaningless things. The papers end up being stupidly long and you will likely end up with absurd levels of criticism for formatting things that don't even stay consistent between the mid-quarter and final report. Your final report will basically be the same thing as the mid-quarter report except with way more sources and maybe a bit more data Ultimately, the department is trying to get this class accredited by ABET after it lost its accreditation a couple years ago, so if the prof is pushing for things that seem trivial and meaningless, that's probably why. This class needs more clarity and direction if she's going to be so picky about everything
Winter 2022 - Idk who will actually read this since all MSE majors have to take this class, but it might as well be documented how much of a mess this class was in winter 2022 This class needs to be redesigned. Pozuelo basically said hurry up and pick a project with little guidance whatsoever, but we quickly learned that if you're not characterizing something metallic or alloy-based, there is pretty much no equipment available to do the necessary tests to identify your materials. However, if you pick something not containing metals, she seems to be much more chill with presentation feedback since apparently if she doesn't have much experience with your topic, she won't have much criticism for you (or helpful feedback). Since my group was analyzing a polymer structure, we basically suggested wildly complicated and lowkey bunk characterization methods that she didn't have enough knowledge about to question, and we did pretty alright lol. If you pick metals, which she knows very well, she will probably rip your presentation apart regardless of quality, picking apart the most meaningless things. The papers end up being stupidly long and you will likely end up with absurd levels of criticism for formatting things that don't even stay consistent between the mid-quarter and final report. Your final report will basically be the same thing as the mid-quarter report except with way more sources and maybe a bit more data Ultimately, the department is trying to get this class accredited by ABET after it lost its accreditation a couple years ago, so if the prof is pushing for things that seem trivial and meaningless, that's probably why. This class needs more clarity and direction if she's going to be so picky about everything
Most Helpful Review
Winter 2019 - This is the most chill MSE lab, but it is definitely the most boring and most useless. The exams were pointless and the lab section was just basic MyDAQ wiring and coding to turn on a LED light. Nothing really spectacular or life changing. I do not feel any more enriched by the class, but at least it was easy AF. Little to no effort required in the class and lectures are a waste of time. Would recommend to all seniors or as a filled lab class during a hard quarter.
Winter 2019 - This is the most chill MSE lab, but it is definitely the most boring and most useless. The exams were pointless and the lab section was just basic MyDAQ wiring and coding to turn on a LED light. Nothing really spectacular or life changing. I do not feel any more enriched by the class, but at least it was easy AF. Little to no effort required in the class and lectures are a waste of time. Would recommend to all seniors or as a filled lab class during a hard quarter.
AD
1 of 1
