CHEM 172
Advanced Inorganic Chemistry
Description: Lecture, three hours; discussion, one hour. Requisite: course 171 with grade of C- or better. Systematic approach to modern inorganic chemistry, structure and bonding of inorganic molecules and solids, structure/reactivity relationships, vibrational spectra of complexes, electronic structure and ligand-field theory, mechanisms of inorganic reactions, bonding and spectroscopy of organometallic compounds, transition metals in catalysis and biology. P/NP or letter grading.
Units: 4.0
Units: 4.0
1 of 1
Most Helpful Review
Spring 2019 - Diaconescu is easily the worst instructor I have ever had in terms of teaching. Not once was she able to coherently explain a topic. I am sure she is very intelligent and knowledgeable in her field and her research, but it certainly wasn't communicated through her teaching. Thank God the class was Bruincast because I couldn’t physically sit in that room and listen to her without losing my mind. She's been teaching this class for how many years and still hasn’t bothered to find a way to explain the basics? You will have to do a lot of studying on your own, consulting multiple textbooks and YouTube videos (I recommend UCI and TMP Chem). Her slides were scattered and some lacked important details, while other slides had way too much unnecessary detail. Anything she said in lecture did nothing to explain the slides further, I wouldn’t say she’s mean, but she really wasn’t approachable. This class is supposed to cover so many cool and important topics, and I genuinely feel like I learned nothing. I know it is generally unfair to blame a professor for a bad grade but I’m being serious: Diaconescu ruined any and all passion I had for inorganic chemistry. . The worst part is, she knew. She knew she couldn’t teach and she knew you didn’t care. She would straight up admit that the topics are too complicated, so here’s what you need to get an A. And we just kind of accepted that. Funny enough, I can tell her attitude rubbed off on her TAs. I went to both their discussions and they both seemed like they didn’t care about what they were teaching and they didn’t care about you, but they were still way better than Diaconescu herself since they actually put some effort into their lectures. . Anyways, as for the class itself: All that being said, you can get by in the end fairly easily. I honestly didn't grasp so many of the concepts but scraped with an A. Two midterms, lowest dropped. Midterm 1 was actually fairly easy, Midterm 2 was significantly harder. Final was really hard and focused heavily on the material after Midterm 2, but of course she won’t tell you that, so don’t bother studying the content before that. Midterm 40%, Final 60%. Be warned she does test on topics that are not in the problem sets. Do NOT be an idiot like me and forget to do the extra credit project (worth 5%). All exams also have some extra credit. The problem sets (not required) were pretty good practice but they were usually too short and lacked detail. . So yeah, she actually *does* set up the class so that it’s possible for most people to get an A. Maybe I’m salty because I was too spoiled with past professors who actually gave half a shit. But I could not find one person in our class that even remotely liked her. Unfortunately if you’re reading this review that means she’s the only professor offering the course and you need it to graduate, so I’m sorry. Just another case of a professor that is much more committed to her research than to teaching.
Spring 2019 - Diaconescu is easily the worst instructor I have ever had in terms of teaching. Not once was she able to coherently explain a topic. I am sure she is very intelligent and knowledgeable in her field and her research, but it certainly wasn't communicated through her teaching. Thank God the class was Bruincast because I couldn’t physically sit in that room and listen to her without losing my mind. She's been teaching this class for how many years and still hasn’t bothered to find a way to explain the basics? You will have to do a lot of studying on your own, consulting multiple textbooks and YouTube videos (I recommend UCI and TMP Chem). Her slides were scattered and some lacked important details, while other slides had way too much unnecessary detail. Anything she said in lecture did nothing to explain the slides further, I wouldn’t say she’s mean, but she really wasn’t approachable. This class is supposed to cover so many cool and important topics, and I genuinely feel like I learned nothing. I know it is generally unfair to blame a professor for a bad grade but I’m being serious: Diaconescu ruined any and all passion I had for inorganic chemistry. . The worst part is, she knew. She knew she couldn’t teach and she knew you didn’t care. She would straight up admit that the topics are too complicated, so here’s what you need to get an A. And we just kind of accepted that. Funny enough, I can tell her attitude rubbed off on her TAs. I went to both their discussions and they both seemed like they didn’t care about what they were teaching and they didn’t care about you, but they were still way better than Diaconescu herself since they actually put some effort into their lectures. . Anyways, as for the class itself: All that being said, you can get by in the end fairly easily. I honestly didn't grasp so many of the concepts but scraped with an A. Two midterms, lowest dropped. Midterm 1 was actually fairly easy, Midterm 2 was significantly harder. Final was really hard and focused heavily on the material after Midterm 2, but of course she won’t tell you that, so don’t bother studying the content before that. Midterm 40%, Final 60%. Be warned she does test on topics that are not in the problem sets. Do NOT be an idiot like me and forget to do the extra credit project (worth 5%). All exams also have some extra credit. The problem sets (not required) were pretty good practice but they were usually too short and lacked detail. . So yeah, she actually *does* set up the class so that it’s possible for most people to get an A. Maybe I’m salty because I was too spoiled with past professors who actually gave half a shit. But I could not find one person in our class that even remotely liked her. Unfortunately if you’re reading this review that means she’s the only professor offering the course and you need it to graduate, so I’m sorry. Just another case of a professor that is much more committed to her research than to teaching.
AD
AD
Most Helpful Review
Spring 2017 - Taking a class with Prof. Spokoyny is always a pleasure! I have taken both Chem 171 and Chem 172 with him. What's even more helpful than his engaging and funny lectures is that his door is always open to discuss any of the materials or even help you with astute advice on how to apply to grad school. The tests are tough but it's UCLA so that's normal. If you study, do your assignments, make sure you get the material, you'll be fine! I highly recommend taking this class with Prof. Spokoyny!
Spring 2017 - Taking a class with Prof. Spokoyny is always a pleasure! I have taken both Chem 171 and Chem 172 with him. What's even more helpful than his engaging and funny lectures is that his door is always open to discuss any of the materials or even help you with astute advice on how to apply to grad school. The tests are tough but it's UCLA so that's normal. If you study, do your assignments, make sure you get the material, you'll be fine! I highly recommend taking this class with Prof. Spokoyny!
1 of 1
