Prof Weltman is very sweet and funny. Class isn't very important since he posts the slides and allows a page of notes front and back for midterms. I often came 20-60 minutes late or skipped class and I still got an A. Midterm and final were multiple choice, and if you come across anyone who has an old test, I believe most of the questions were reused or just phrased differently. The papers, especially the group paper, were frustrating to write (mainly bc my TA was pretty awful), but I think most of the grading is preeetttyyyy lenient for the most part. Most of the prompts are Civil Engineering related, which was a cool way to learn about some Civil ethical failures, but I think most people thought it was boring.

Honestly i liked this class a lot :). I went lecture and learned a lot about the present issues like overpopulation, environment, laws, history etc. I enjoyed the lecture taught by professor Weltman. It's even more convient because he post lecture online. This class give you knowledge in different field like history, war, environments, ethical knowledge, laws.... etc. Many different fields crambled in one course

The class itself is pretty good, there are a lot of writing things but not that bad. The only thing I'd complain abt is, it was the WALL STREET guys and/or politicians made this world miserable, not our nerdy software engineers. Why do engineering students need to take an ethics class, even if ethics is necessary, why not let these future businessmen do?

I’m very glad that this class is being phased out and replaced with technical writing classes for each department, because it was a complete waste of time. Lectures were made mandatory for the first time this quarter via pop quizzes every two weeks or so. The syllabus claimed these only accounted for 5% of the final grade, but this was never explicitly communicated and we were all left guessing how heavily we would be penalised for attendance. I’m not sure how the grading ended up working out, but in the interest of your time I suggest just taking the L on the 5% and not showing up to lecture ever.
**
The midterm and final exams were extremely easy, as they were take-home open-everything and consisted of 50-70 multiple choice, true/false, and matching questions on Canvas that were ripped straight from the lecture material. I erroneously bought the textbook when it was not required, which ended up being a blessing in disguise, as the answers were sometimes word-for-word written in the text. I would like to take a moment and acknowledge the contributions CTRL+F did to my stress level entering the midterm and final.
**
I think the main selling point were the essays, which were fairly BS-able. There was significant flexibility in what was permissible in the two individual papers. The first was a report about a technological advancement and the second as a post-mortem study of some engineering disaster from the perspective of some ethical framework. Definitely ask your TA for feedback - they will appreciate you wanting to perfect the essay to their liking and be more inclined to grant you a higher grade. The final project was a group report selected from a pre-determined list of topics. It consisted of a final presentation (30-40 min) and a written report (at least 40 pages). The time and page restrictions may appear terrifying, but remember that this is work split between 5-6 people. One person only has to write the length of an essay and speak for five minutes.
**
Definitely pick a good TA, too. I’ve heard some TAs make their students stay the entire there hour duration of discussion. My TA, Oindrila, always finished her spiel within 40 minutes, and then required 20-30 minutes of discussion with our groups about the final report. After that we were free to leave. I was usually out within 70-90 minutes.
**
Final verdict: useless. Take the writing class offered by your department.

Useless material, mandatory pop quizzes, currently over a week past the grade deadline and I know my grade for only the midterm and the first essay.

The professor's presentation was engaging. I was not interested in the course material however.

This class is one of the most useless classes you will take at UCLA. I'm surprised HSSEAS still requires it. While you do learn an "ethical perspective," the professor's opinions and past career experience really shine through and impact the supposedly objective material taught. You are recommended to purchase the textbook because 5% of your exams are the optional textbook quizzes. Unfortunately, the textbook is not free and suspiciously enough is written by the professor himself. I felt like I was paying the professor for a grade boost. The lectures effectively copy from the textbook, provide little new insight than a high school history class, and have minimal relation to the class essays. The first essay takes over 6 weeks to complete while you only have 3 weeks to complete the second essay. In addition, the professor re-introduced a complete waste of time class project that supposedly builds teamwork skills. This took way too much time to complete and felt completely unrelated to the class. They also required a recorded team presentation to be viewed only by the TAs which was an even bigger waste of time. The professor and Professor Browne hardly helped with the assignments. It felt like the TAs were in charge the whole quarter. The tests were equally useless. Questions typically involved meaningless factoids that the professor writes about in his book. They ask you questions about quotes, random historical events, and random statistics. Even more infuriating is the insertion of questions with answers that reflect the professor's opinions on the subject. I received points off on my final due to these questions. Unfortunately, you have to take this class, so I recommend preparing yourself to be subject to an insane and cramped workload with no help from the Professors. Once you accept that you will learn nothing useful, the class becomes way easier to take.

The contents of this class were super interesting, but I feel like it wasn't worth spending a whole quarter on the subject. The writing portion was mildly annoying since we had to submit either a draft or a paper every 2-3 weeks. My TA, Ryan, was super nice and helpful on reviewing our papers, and the professor also gave great lectures. Overall, I would recommend taking this class with this professor, given that engineering writing is a degree requirement.

Gershon Weltman and Donald Browne "co-teach" this class during the summer. Lecture is interminable sometimes, but lucky me, I got to watch it on 1.5x speed!
Lecture is for ethics (case studies, formal ethical theory, industry specifics, etc.), discussion is for writing (how-to, assignment details, peer reviews, style guides, etc.). Prof uses slides which are great for referencing and studying during exam season. Two major essays, one on the tragedy of the commons and one on an ethical case study (I chose the I85 bridge collapse). Pretty easy to swing an A IMO if you study and attend discussion/TA meetings to improve your paper before submission.

Class was alright. I found some of the topics interesting so not too boring overall, but lectures are all powerpoints. Tests were all open everything with generous time limits, so it was easy to find what you needed in the book as you took it. There are two essays which are both pretty long, but they're not graded too harshly and aren't that difficult to write.