- Home
- Search
- Marta Pozuelo
- MAT SCI 104
AD
Based on 1 User
TOP TAGS
- Uses Slides
Grade distributions are collected using data from the UCLA Registrar’s Office.
Grade distributions are collected using data from the UCLA Registrar’s Office.
Grade distributions are collected using data from the UCLA Registrar’s Office.
Grade distributions are collected using data from the UCLA Registrar’s Office.
Sorry, no enrollment data is available.
AD
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.
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.
Based on 1 User
TOP TAGS
- Uses Slides (1)