If you don't have any religious background, DON'T take this course. I didn't have a religious upbringing and have pretty much no knowledge about religion, and I definitely had to work a lot harder to grasp a lot of what was going on in the class.
This class is hugely dependent on your TA. I had a TA that said he hadn't given a single A the quarter before, and I'm pretty sure he didn't give any this quarter either. But I also think they've made the course more difficult over time-- I have friends who took this course a few years a go and said it was a lot easier. This course was genuinely one of the most difficult courses I have take at UCLA, and will be the first B I ever get (I'm a Junior, so I've taken a fair amount of classes).
The course content is relatively interesting, especially if you're into ancient history and buildings. Professor Smoak is clearly very knowledgeable and passionate about this topic, and his lectures are pretty engaging. If I had a TA that wasn't so hell bent on giving bad grades and a stronger religious background, this class may have been bearable. But it's A LOT of work for a Writing 2 or a GE. You can definitely find something easier to fulfill requirements if that's what you're looking for.

Yes it was so very interesting learning about this material and he really is a good lecturer, BUT if you are taking this only for a writing 2 not for minor or major then pick another.. this is a history class which had in my opinion a hard midterm and final so not only do you have to worry about your writing two essays (TA was very strict with the grading since this is a writing 2 class) but also worry about memorizing and knowing a lot of the historical background as well ! Quick pointer to those people who are reading about having two papers for the class, and that you get to submit a draft and then revise it... I WISH SOMEONE had TOLD ME THAT BOTH THE DRAFT AND THE REVISION COUNT IN MY GRADE AND EACH ARE WORTH A LOT before taking this class ! So beware everything counts. Best of luck !

Selling textbooks! Text **********

Professor Smoak is a good lecturer you can really tell he knows his stuff. The material to be quite honest was different from what I had expected and was at times mundane. As another reviewer said, this class does focus its essays on the architectural and buildings of Jerusalem rather than the history/religion itself. Also the TA's make or break your grade. My TA was relatively difficult and it was difficult to pinpoint what the TA wanted fixed on my essay. Overall, I did pretty well on the exams and the first essay but on the second essay (which is weighted the heaviest in the class) I didn't do so hot. Overall, it's interesting but I wouldn't take it again.

Let me start by saying that I had high hopes coming into this class; I heard that it was a straightforward Writing II class and I was interested in the subject due to my religious background. Unfortunately, this class did not live up to expectations.

There are a few good things about the class. Dr. Smoak is passionate about teaching this class and it comes through in his lectures. He infuses pictures and anecdotes of his time in Jerusalem. He is also a nice and approachable person and was more willing to answer my questions than my TA. The midterm (10%) and final (10%) are extremely straightforward. As long as you memorize everything on the study guide that is given, you are set.

Unfortunately, this class has more cons than pros. Instead of learning about religion itself, this class focuses on the architecture and space and how it relates to religion. I wanted to learn more about how the three monotheistic religions developed, and less about how the buildings located in Jerusalem relate to religion. In addition, there are so many assigned readings that will take a few hours each week. 70% of your grade is dependent on your TA. That means that having a good relationship with your TA is key in this class. I had a horrible TA, one that was unwilling to help even when I went to office hours and asked additional questions. My TA was also extremely nit-picky about everything in grading.

Writing classes are subjective which is part of the reason why I do not like them in general, so just get a fair and good TA and this class will be ok. My recommendation is just to avoid this class unless you are really interested in Jerusalem's religious buildings.

Despite not being particularly excited to take this class, it was my favorite class I took last quarter and would highly recommend it to anyone who likes history or is interested in religion. The class is basically an overview of the rise of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam in the Ancient Near Eastern world from a historical perspective, focusing particularly on the religious buildings in Jerusalem and how those relate to the evolution of religion in the city. Again, it was not a topic I thought sounded interesting, but I loved the course.

The professors and Das do not tolerate tardiness, and you are only allowed to miss one discussion section per quarter. That said, they are incredibly helpful, kind, and want you to succeed. The quizzes and tests are very easy, but you do have to study, as they focus on specific dates and people. The essays are harder to do extremely well on, but you turn in a draft, which is graded, and then you revise that draft and the revision gets graded as well. There are two papers for the course, one with a 5 page min and another with a 7 page min.

Do not be fooled by the Fall 2015 Grade Scale. I do not if this is lies, but I am currently taking this class and the average is probably around an 82-86. In comparison to other Writing IIs, this class is not worth the numerous amount of work. Personally, I am not doing bad in this class, however, this course has become harder and requires the attention of not only a writing class, but a history class too. There are easier Writing II GE's and I would wait for them personally, especially if you are not too interested in Judaism, Christianity, and Islamic beginnings.

FALL 2016 Grading Scheme:
Discussion/Attendance/Quizzes: 10%
Midterm Exam: 10%
Final Exam: 10%
Paper #1: Draft (10%) + Revision (20%) = 30%
Paper #2: Draft (15%) + Revision (25%) = 40%
Book: Jerusalem: One City, Three Faiths by Karen Armstrong ($3-5 for a used one; he tries to make things affordable for us!)

He gives us a midterm study guide, a final study guide, and every single thing you need to write for the essay (you really shouldn't be getting anything lower than an 80% for any assignments).

Quizzes are 10-15 questions of multiple choice for the most part, some fill in the blank. All are memorization such as dates and events. You get all of the information from the main book you will be reading and your TA/the professor will emphasize on what to study for them. It's an easy quiz and it's just to show if you're reading. They give you 10 minutes in the beginning of discussion to do it.

In discussion, you will go over the essays, revisions, how to make them better, study guides for final/midterm.
Oh, and attendance for discussions are mandatory and only 1 can be missed (for those who don't like going).

Pros: As a political science major, this class gave me a grasp of what analytical and close reading is. It definitely made my writing skills better in a span of 9-10 weeks. The lectures are anything but boring: he makes jokes, visited Jerusalem himself, and is knowledgeable. Literally, ask him any question and he knows how to answer it.

Cons: Prior to the class, I had no knowledge of the Bible other than what my friends have told me (sorry, I'm atheist) so I had to pay even more attention to the lectures than other students. There aren't really any other cons since I'm pretty open to any topic to learn. But if the Hebrew Bible.

I thought this subject sounded boring prior to the class, but after it, I'm interested in it a lot more. Probably because Smoak is such an amazing teacher. Handsdown the best I've taken at UCLA thus far for my 2 years here. 10/10.

The course is great- if you go to class and do the readings its mostly about 2 essays and you actually get to turn in and then revise. He basically outlines a number of options in class.

I personally do not why this course gets high points and all the positive reviews. I feel it is a horrible writing class for students who do not have much background towards this area of study. So if you do not have that related knowledge about religion and you are not very interested in this type of topic, DONT ever take this class, it will be way more difficult than you think.

Prof. Smoak could be a good teaching faculty for some others but not for me, he taught you by using indirect, obscure and difficult language that you cannot follow him in every words. Also, the worst of all is that he won't put any slides on the course website. So if you lost in the lecture, bare with it because you thought it was a easy class.

I would say the best part of this class is that only 70% grade dependent on papers so not too bad if you are not a good writer. But we all know who would decide this 70% , TAs. They can be either a great one or a horrible one. Unfortunately, I met with the TA who was unfriendly, not professional and very unhelpful.

Just during the very first week, this TA sent us email said that he could not make up the discussion. Okay, it was kind of good that we could have a cheat day, but it was the first week and he already skipped once his responsibility to teach and to guide us.
Overall, the discussion session could be your peak of boredom of a week. Because of the inorganization and insipid style of teaching (I do not even think what he did could be said teaching), no one was paying any attention to what he said. But you got to show up because participation of discussion counts.
Also, my TA was very irresponsible on grading papers. On our first draft of first paper, he simply gave the comments with less than 20 words and graded in a low score. We all know writing paper is not as easy as someone else thought. I felt all my time and hard work were just wasted if it was graded by a totally irresponsible TA who did not really care about and read your paper then simply put a grade on your paper made no sense.
I ended up with a B and I felt ok, because after all the experiences and feelings related to this course I felt B was enough, surely I would and should not expect with an A because of the lack of background knowledge, no slides to study and my horrible TA.
By the way, my TA is Tim Hogue, I do not mean to throw shades on him, but I just want to give you guys a hint that you could switch to another discussion as soon as possible if you are in discussion session with him.

My comments may seem like a complaint from a student getting a low grade. Well, it could be. But I do want to tell you, I chose this course back before I took this based on all the positive comments, however, after me really taking this course with Prof. Smoak and my TA Tim, I do not think it is a easy class. Also the emotional experience was very bad, I went to every lecture because of there was no slides posted online, but every time when I went to the lecture, I felt bored, struggled, sad, and sorry for innocently believed all the positive comments about this class.

Sharing my personal experience to you, but the right to choose is within you. If you are good at taking notes, actively listening, writing really well and have the best luck to take this class with a good TA, then surely you can do that. Still lots of people say this is an easy and great class. But just to clarify, as a Senior student in my last year, this class could be my worst nightmare among all other classes, even it is not my only B class.