Brooke A Scelza
Department of Anthropology
AD
4.0
Overall Rating
Based on 8 Users
Easiness 2.7 / 5 How easy the class is, 1 being extremely difficult and 5 being easy peasy.
Clarity 4.4 / 5 How clear the class is, 1 being extremely unclear and 5 being very clear.
Workload 2.6 / 5 How much workload the class is, 1 being extremely heavy and 5 being extremely light.
Helpfulness 3.6 / 5 How helpful the class is, 1 being not helpful at all and 5 being extremely helpful.

TOP TAGS

There are no relevant tags for this professor yet.

GRADE DISTRIBUTIONS
15.3%
12.7%
10.2%
7.6%
5.1%
2.5%
0.0%
A+
A
A-
B+
B
B-
C+
C
C-
D+
D
D-
F

Grade distributions are collected using data from the UCLA Registrar’s Office.

15.3%
12.8%
10.2%
7.7%
5.1%
2.6%
0.0%
A+
A
A-
B+
B
B-
C+
C
C-
D+
D
D-
F

Grade distributions are collected using data from the UCLA Registrar’s Office.

17.8%
14.9%
11.9%
8.9%
5.9%
3.0%
0.0%
A+
A
A-
B+
B
B-
C+
C
C-
D+
D
D-
F

Grade distributions are collected using data from the UCLA Registrar’s Office.

13.3%
11.0%
8.8%
6.6%
4.4%
2.2%
0.0%
A+
A
A-
B+
B
B-
C+
C
C-
D+
D
D-
F

Grade distributions are collected using data from the UCLA Registrar’s Office.

18.4%
15.3%
12.2%
9.2%
6.1%
3.1%
0.0%
A+
A
A-
B+
B
B-
C+
C
C-
D+
D
D-
F

Grade distributions are collected using data from the UCLA Registrar’s Office.

ENROLLMENT DISTRIBUTIONS
Clear marks

Sorry, no enrollment data is available.

AD

Reviews (1)

1 of 1
1 of 1
Add your review...
Quarter: N/A
Grade: N/A
March 1, 2014

I have to disagree with most of the reviews here. I found Professor Scelza's lectures entirely uninspiring. While she does put a lot of information into her slides there are a number of problems with her lectures.

First, the module I took (Human Behavioral Ecology) involved quite a number of fairly abstract quantitative models for explaining human behaviour. However, as these were presented on an extremely broad scale: they were made assumptions about hunter gatherer societies in general - it became quite difficult to conceive of how they actually manifested in the real world (HG societies being hugely varied and not complying with extremely basic statistical models).

Had she introduced a concept - e.g. methods of hunting in a particular society, and then demonstrated how a particular model could be applied to that situation, I would have stayed engaged with the class. As it was, she would simply talk in an extremely abstract fashion rarely displaying any applicability to the models in question.

The fact that a good 90% of lectures involved Professor Scelza simply reading out slides, the dull nature of the content kind of inspires you to stay at home. I think the fact that only around a quarter of enrolled students were ever in a lecture at any one time is testament to the level of engagement felt overall.

So, if like me, you do well writing papers - i.e. understanding concepts and demonstrating that knowledge by expanding on the basic points from lectures, you will hate this module - there is no continuous assessment. If however, you enjoy learning content and then repeating it parrot fashion in multiple choice exams then go right ahead, just prepare yourself for some dull hours in the lecture theatre.

Helpful?

0 0 Please log in to provide feedback.
Quarter: N/A
Grade: N/A
March 1, 2014

I have to disagree with most of the reviews here. I found Professor Scelza's lectures entirely uninspiring. While she does put a lot of information into her slides there are a number of problems with her lectures.

First, the module I took (Human Behavioral Ecology) involved quite a number of fairly abstract quantitative models for explaining human behaviour. However, as these were presented on an extremely broad scale: they were made assumptions about hunter gatherer societies in general - it became quite difficult to conceive of how they actually manifested in the real world (HG societies being hugely varied and not complying with extremely basic statistical models).

Had she introduced a concept - e.g. methods of hunting in a particular society, and then demonstrated how a particular model could be applied to that situation, I would have stayed engaged with the class. As it was, she would simply talk in an extremely abstract fashion rarely displaying any applicability to the models in question.

The fact that a good 90% of lectures involved Professor Scelza simply reading out slides, the dull nature of the content kind of inspires you to stay at home. I think the fact that only around a quarter of enrolled students were ever in a lecture at any one time is testament to the level of engagement felt overall.

So, if like me, you do well writing papers - i.e. understanding concepts and demonstrating that knowledge by expanding on the basic points from lectures, you will hate this module - there is no continuous assessment. If however, you enjoy learning content and then repeating it parrot fashion in multiple choice exams then go right ahead, just prepare yourself for some dull hours in the lecture theatre.

Helpful?

0 0 Please log in to provide feedback.
1 of 1
4.0
Overall Rating
Based on 8 Users
Easiness 2.7 / 5 How easy the class is, 1 being extremely difficult and 5 being easy peasy.
Clarity 4.4 / 5 How clear the class is, 1 being extremely unclear and 5 being very clear.
Workload 2.6 / 5 How much workload the class is, 1 being extremely heavy and 5 being extremely light.
Helpfulness 3.6 / 5 How helpful the class is, 1 being not helpful at all and 5 being extremely helpful.

TOP TAGS

There are no relevant tags for this professor yet.

ADS

Adblock Detected

Bruinwalk is an entirely Daily Bruin-run service brought to you for free. We hate annoying ads just as much as you do, but they help keep our lights on. We promise to keep our ads as relevant for you as possible, so please consider disabling your ad-blocking software while using this site.

Thank you for supporting us!