Professor Sanchez was...a lot. She was not too bad she was manageable but I am not sure if that was because this class was online or just her regularly. You are forced to buy her textbook and a cognella quiz thing to take some chapter quizzes but this thing looks EXACTLY like ccle!! AND its mostly extra credit other than like 3 or so that are graded! Which I thought was a waste of money honestly but no matter. Her teaching was not too bad, she had slides and sort of went through it, you really have to read the book to get a good understanding though, a lot of these questions on homeworks and exams require some sort of practice. Her exams were not too bad either, except that for the first midterm she tested on material that we had literally learned the lecture prior. She is a very kind lady but she is also not the best so just keep that in mind

Professor Sanchez was a real pain in my ass this quarter and I honestly regret taking this class with her even though I did alright. Her lectures almost always went overtime and would be full of participation quizzes that you would have to do on your own time before next class if she didn't get to them and her homework assignments were full of dumb technicalities that weren't even relevant to the course content that you had to make sure to follow if you didn't want to get a 0. The class itself wasn't that difficult (especially if you had taken a statistics class in high school or community college) but some of the assignments could be pretty long (in particular the ones that she assigned over Thanksgiving break and the week of the final). My advice would be to take this class with a competent professor that is reasonable about the workload and the grading and if you absolutely have to take this class then be prepared to do a lot of extra work. Oh, and don't waste $95 on the textbook--you can find it online for free.

I will keep this review simple. Took this class while working a day job during the Covid pandemic. So I might have a different perspective than others.

1. She gives daily homeworks with tight deadlines. That might sound easy to follow, but it isn't. I missed almost half of her homeworks. Of those I missed, half were because she posts them both at Gradescope and CCLE. What clarity. Also those freaking participation quizes... While my other classes have once a week homeworks with scheduled deadlines, her class was a mess.

2. She has annoying rules and mark schemes. She will take points off your work for the most annoying reasons. If you're someone who takes classes extremely seriously, fine, you'll succeed in her class. If you might have other things going on in your life, and just want to learn statistics, don't take this class.

3. She makes the textbook she wrote to be the class textbook, so she'll make money off of it. The worst thing is, she cannot express herself clearly. With statistics, most questions are long convoluted. Her questions are often ambiguous and she insist on making her own questions. If you didn't understand it, too bad, you'll get no points because of her mark scheme is strict down to the last symbol.

I am taking STATS 100A with Prof Jauna Sanchez over Summer 2020. She made it compulsory for us to dump $95 to buy the book 'Probability for Data Scientists' written by guess who? Herself, Juana Sanchez. The book has online content just to make sure that you absolutely have to buy a new one. And then she also gave us the spiel on the importance of copyrights and that the university takes copyright infringement seriously.
I respect authors and their rights to their intellectual property. However, making it compulsory for your students to buy an expensive book that you yourself wrote, at a time when the university administration has been pushing for professors to offer classes that either do not require a compulsory textbook or have a lower-cost alternative. And then being self-righteous is just ridiculous.
I would have dropped the class if I had the slightest option to delay taking STATS 100A any longer.
I'm sure the other reviews are already convincing enough on why you shouldn't take this class. But if you need another reason, here it is. So unless you absolutely have to take this class, I'd suggest finding an alternative.

Well in short, if you want stressful and hard class to pass or get good grade then this is your professor.

Coming from someone who didn't perform super well in this class but still passed, overall I would say I wouldn't recommend the class but it definitely didn't end up being as nightmarish as reviews stipulated and there are a few Reddit posts to corroborate this opinion.

The workload was significant but not over the top - a homework packet of 5-9 questions each week (most but not all a/b/c/d, sometimes to h) and usually assignments to turn in the next day in lecture (you have to check CCLE because sometimes she didn't remind us to do it). Sometimes gives pop quizzes in the middle of the lecture (off her powerpoint point slides she would have an example of the day's topic for us to work on and hand in our work, but only once or twice did she grade on correctness. It was more like participation even if wrong). That's about it for work; one midterm is multiple choice, the second is free response, and the final was mostly multiple choice with a little free response. Warning that she never gave enough time so you have to work fast. Sometimes she got rid of questions after realizing how long the tests were though.

Her exams are open note - first midterm we were allowed one page of formulas, second midterm and final were open notebook. Don't be fooled though, you barely have enough time to glance at notes so it's not super helpful unless you already know everything.

The good thing I noticed about the class that I was surprised about is how nice and available she usually was. She holds a lot of office hours and doesn't make you feel stupid for asking simple questions, and we usually had a lot of them because her lectures are way too fast. But another thing is that she records all her lectures and posts them online so I usually went back to watch them.

The complaints that she takes attendance every lecture for participation, and the complaints of her exam rituals are fairly accurate - she seemed obsessed with cheating and had us take lots of precautions for every test. She did in fact have a lot of typos in lecture notes and even in her textbook so hopefully your lecture will have a smart person to call them out.

Summary: If you ask lots of questions/don't fall behind like I did, you will be ok! There did end up being a big curve at the end of the class. Medium-to-slightly heavy workload with medium-to-difficult material - very light math 32B and no 33A. First half of class without any calculus even seemed harder for the class than the calculus bit.

She is by far the worst professor i've met from UCLA. She essentially floods you with handouts and homeworks on topics you have yet to learn and she gives you rude and unclear answers when you ask for help. Her lectures are so dry and she makes you do really unnecessary participation activities in class as well as pop quizzes and also makes you do 2 hour quizzes at home every week. The midterm was really rough despite the topics being pretty easy she purposely chooses the hardest questions to lower the average and gives barely enough time to finish. The final was a bit better though and the TAs were the most help. In all just try to avoid her at all costs to avoid being swamped with work and dragged through the mud with trivial nonsense that will ruin your grade.

I don't understand why she is still a professor at UCLA. The worst professor I ever had in my life. A lot of homework ridiculous
I feel like I learned nothing from her lecture.
Avoid her, please.

TLDR: better off taking another prof for the easy A/learn the same materials

Definitely try and get through your college experience without taking her. She's an awful lecturer who doesn't know how to answer questions. The first few weeks are pretty easy, but once you start going into MGFs and other topics, she fails to explain why we do what is done. She scrutinizes on finding "typos" but there are ALWAYS typos everywhere(which doesn't bother me much, except how she'll literally start class saying that she went through already to make sure there aren't any typos).

Her favorite thing to do is give an attendance pop quiz in the last 2-4 minutes of class that would typically take 10 minutes to complete, and force you to finish it before class ends. You end up not really learning what you did, and just working with friends/copying neighbors/writing gibberish just to get an answer(it's usually okay to "work in groups").

The worst part is that for her finals, she'll randomly tell you that for some of the questions, "Choose the answer closest to your answer." Like... you've had 10 weeks, previous quarters, etc. to make this final, and you're telling me that you didn't put the right answer in here? And we have to GUESS for the "correct" one? Hmmmmm.

The curve at the end of the class is nice though, but be prepared to work your butt off. People complain about her accent, but it's not bad - it just impedes on her ability to explain anything well enough for you to get a better grasp.

Sanchez's 100A was easy. There were some tricky integrations from time to time but if you followed the lectures and studied every concept prior to exam then it wouldn't be hard. She also liked to reuse questions from the practice tests. It was one of the few classes where you could get a very high raw score and even an A+. Her obsession with discipline is obviously notorious but in a large class like 100A it's not too big of a deal. Looking past a natural tendency to dislike her personality, I want to say that she taught the material relatively well and covered most of the introductory probability that's helpful for future study.