HIST 171
Variable Topics in Japanese History
Description: Lecture, three hours; discussion, one hour (when scheduled). Designed for juniors/seniors. Important topics in Japanese history, including political change, economic development, social questions, and popular culture, as well as media and arts, explored through extensive readings. May be repeated for maximum of 16 units with topic and/or instructor change. P/NP or letter grading.
Units: 4.0
Units: 4.0
1 of 1
Most Helpful Review
Winter 2025 - This review is for her C159 course, Winter 2025. Half the class dropped, and now I understand why. As a Chinese student in the class, I never felt comfortable disagreeing with her. The few who did were immediately shot down. In a course where she proclaims the importance of diversity in a country where 98.5% of the population is Japanese, serious questions must be asked. She tried to argue that diversity exists through small minority groups like the Ainu or Koreans. But rather than stretching a truth that barely exists, she should recognize that the greatest diversity is simply humanity itself — we all differ in looks, thoughts, and interests. In her class, however, diversity is only valued when it aligns with her political views and focuses on peripheral aspects of Japan, such as its small minority groups, rather than reflecting the reality of the overwhelming majority. As for the coursework, the good portion centered around museums, her area of expertise. I took the class to learn about late medieval Japan, not complete a museum project where I ended up learning more about curating exhibits than about Japanese history. I honestly can’t recommend her class at all. I felt uncomfortable the whole time and kept my mouth shut because I knew what would happen if I disagreed. I’ve taken handful of classes on Asia, and this was by far the worst. Everyone I talked to in the class felt the same way.
Winter 2025 - This review is for her C159 course, Winter 2025. Half the class dropped, and now I understand why. As a Chinese student in the class, I never felt comfortable disagreeing with her. The few who did were immediately shot down. In a course where she proclaims the importance of diversity in a country where 98.5% of the population is Japanese, serious questions must be asked. She tried to argue that diversity exists through small minority groups like the Ainu or Koreans. But rather than stretching a truth that barely exists, she should recognize that the greatest diversity is simply humanity itself — we all differ in looks, thoughts, and interests. In her class, however, diversity is only valued when it aligns with her political views and focuses on peripheral aspects of Japan, such as its small minority groups, rather than reflecting the reality of the overwhelming majority. As for the coursework, the good portion centered around museums, her area of expertise. I took the class to learn about late medieval Japan, not complete a museum project where I ended up learning more about curating exhibits than about Japanese history. I honestly can’t recommend her class at all. I felt uncomfortable the whole time and kept my mouth shut because I knew what would happen if I disagreed. I’ve taken handful of classes on Asia, and this was by far the worst. Everyone I talked to in the class felt the same way.
AD
Most Helpful Review
Winter 2021 - Wow, I'm a history major and for some reason this class killed me. Her recorded lectures are very dull and lackluster, but there are 100% necessary to do well on the quizzes. Annoyingly, she has 2 quizzes that are almost impossible to prepare for I couldn't score over 17/20 despite studying. Her midterm is term and vocab-based--which she provides a study guide for. The final research paper was aggravating because she was quite unclear about what she wanted, and the rubric she provided was quite basic. I wouldn't take her again. The grading goes as follows. 20% midterm, 10% 2x quizzes so 5% each, 25% participation based on discussion boards, 45% final paper. Overall, a dull course with an unmotivated instructor who never replies to emails---which is super necessary for remote instruction. Took her 2 full weeks to respond to my email regarding a super quick question. Her teaching of history was remedial level and juvenile, not nurturing her student's analytical abilities. This is UCLA, there are better professors. Edited--since people want to comment on my intellectual abilities in other reviews. I feel the need to defend myself--I have a 4.0 from UCLA and was recently accepted into USC law school on a full scholarship. But hey "I guess I'm not really that smart" Way to be a jerk when other people are just sharing their opinion :)
Winter 2021 - Wow, I'm a history major and for some reason this class killed me. Her recorded lectures are very dull and lackluster, but there are 100% necessary to do well on the quizzes. Annoyingly, she has 2 quizzes that are almost impossible to prepare for I couldn't score over 17/20 despite studying. Her midterm is term and vocab-based--which she provides a study guide for. The final research paper was aggravating because she was quite unclear about what she wanted, and the rubric she provided was quite basic. I wouldn't take her again. The grading goes as follows. 20% midterm, 10% 2x quizzes so 5% each, 25% participation based on discussion boards, 45% final paper. Overall, a dull course with an unmotivated instructor who never replies to emails---which is super necessary for remote instruction. Took her 2 full weeks to respond to my email regarding a super quick question. Her teaching of history was remedial level and juvenile, not nurturing her student's analytical abilities. This is UCLA, there are better professors. Edited--since people want to comment on my intellectual abilities in other reviews. I feel the need to defend myself--I have a 4.0 from UCLA and was recently accepted into USC law school on a full scholarship. But hey "I guess I'm not really that smart" Way to be a jerk when other people are just sharing their opinion :)
1 of 1
