I usually only write reviews for professors that I love or hate. Professor Karlsgodt is literally one of the best professors I've ever encountered at UCLA. She is so sweet, accommodating, and understanding. For example, bc participation poll questions weren't working for some people during live zoom lecture, she changed it to participation CCLE questions after class. She also went out of her way to reserve a computer lab for students who needed a quiet place to work to take the midterms. Just some examples of her kindness. Overall, she gives off vibes of that English teacher in high school who was basically your mom.

Beyond just her personality, her slides are very clear and she's obviously a very knowledgable professor. She explains everything for your benefit and goes in depth on many topics literally just to educate you, not bc she's trying to fill time or needlessly go into detail. With that being said, despite how detailed the lectures can get, the tests are always fair and ask questions about main concepts. Since the tests were open-note this quarter, even questions that did get a little detailed were in no way unfair. She gets through the material in a timely manner and always stays on target, but not to the point of boredom or tedium. She's funny but not overbearing in her humor; ultimately she's there to teach you and she won't waste your time in the slightest. If she doesn't finish a lecture in time, she won't force you to stay to hear the rest--she'll just finish it next lecture; aka she's very reasonable, down to earth, and fair.

As far as class content goes, this class is about mental disorders at its core, and involves some neuroscience (synaptic gap, neurotransmitters, synaptogensis, etc.) but as long as you can understand it on the surface level and know the difference between an agonist and antagonist, you should be fine. A little bit of dev psych (if you took 130 you already know at least one lecture haha).

There is a textbook, but in my opinion, it's useless. I read the first chapter, but stopped afterwards because the professor's slides are really all you need to pass the tests. I never once looked at the book for the second midterm and was able to answer everything with just my lecture notes. The book may help you if you're confused about a concept, but other than that, you really don't need it.

We had two midterms (not culm) both worth 40%, participation polls 10%, and discussion section attendance 10%. There was an optional final (culm) that you could take for 40% as well and drop your lowest grade of the two midterms and final (aka no harm in taking it).

The only thing I didn't like about this class was the discussion section, but that's the TA's fault, not the professor's. My TA just did not do a good job of facilitating discussion and it felt pointless to attend even though the concepts might be interesting. For reference, concepts from discussion are NOT on the test; you have to go simply for attendance points but you don't have to pay attention in the slightest or in my case, even do the readings (small articles usually or ted talk type videos).

Overall, if you have a good grasp on neuroscience and neurotransmitters and can handle learning about mental disorders like OCD, Schizophrenia, autism, personality disorders, etc. then you should be fine and this class should be an easy A.

Disclaimer: I'm a "good" student and a good test taker and usually don't find psych classes to be that hard, content wise. If you're not like me, you might find the amount of content in the class and level of detail overwhelming.

I actually really enjoyed this class. I thought the material was really interesting to learn, and Professor Karlsgodt is really approachable as well. Lectures were always posted in advance so you can just go through them whenever you wanted. I would say, however, that she does talk a bit slow but if you speed up the lectures you should be able to get through them without a problem. The course was broken down in the following way:

Exam 1 (40%)
Exam 2 (40%)
Polls (10%)
Discussion (10%)

The polls are really easy, you just complete them as you're watching the lecture and basically just get graded upon completion. If you do all of them, you get one extra credit point. Discussion is also mandatory. Sometimes TED talks are assigned or reading an article but overall, I enjoyed the discussions. The TA's sometimes go over some content review as well. You are allowed to miss one discussion and still get full credit for them. I also found both exams to be fair. Most of the questions came from her lecture slides so if you went over those and truly understood them, you should be able to get a good grade. There are a few questions, however, that come from the book so keep that in mind. The readings are sometimes kind of long (50 pages for one chapter) but if you space them out, they don't feel long at all. The final is optional so if you do well on both midterms and are happy with your grade before the final, you don't have to take it. The thing that does suck is that midterm 2 is on week 10 so if you decide to take the final, you basically take it the following week. You also can get two extra credit points by doing some studies, for a total of 3 possible extra credit points.

The multiple choice exams were straightforward and you are at least guaranteed a B if you studied the lecture slides and did the readings. However, the questions she asked were VERY specific and because each point lost really counts for your grade it was easy to at least get 5 wrong purely because you skipped over the material and didn't know it would be on the exam. Instead of having general knowledge about the material, she expected you to know specific facts which were easy to look over. There were questions from the readings so it is important to do those too. She does not boost grades up by even a point so do the extra credit! If you are keen to detail and memorization then this is the class for you.

Honestly, very disappointing. We barely did anything the entire class besides participation, class assignments, one midterm, and a final paper. Seeing the grade distribution on bruinwalk, I thought the class would be chill but they graded the final paper so hard. I wish they were thorough with their paper instructions because I included everything they asked for yet got a C. Also, the professor is very nice and approachable but she's not very helpful answering emails during finals week. I gave both TA and professor very good reviews but I wish I could take them back because they did not clarify paper instructions nor make an effort to help me outside of their office hours.

This quarter online, with this class and professor in particular has been hectic and stressful. Be prepared to watch and take notes on hour and half long lecture VIDEOS (not on zoom) twice a week. That means 3 hours a week of monotone videos. You will also be required to read anywhere from 40- 80 pages a week depending on the weekly subject. Every week you will have 2 "Poll Quizzes" that are due at not at midnight when most things are due but at 9:30AM. You will also be required to enroll in a discussion section hosted by a TA with a hidden zoom link found somewhere in your inbox from 1st week and not in CCLE. Overall, this class has been a constant adjustment period where for some reason it has not stuck at least not in my experience. That may be because I'm just unorganized or it may also be the utter lack of participation and collaboration with students, TA's and Professor Karlsgodt that has moved this class into the background of my mind. If I could do it all over again, I wouldn't this class has made me feel more hopeless and has actually made me resent my choice of major. Proceed with caution.

If you need a manageable psych core class, this is a good option. The lectures are easier to digest in person, but she records the meetings so if needed, you can listen to them later and view the slides. There are weekly learning checks that are easy and quick, usually under 3 questions online. Discussion attendance is mandatory and it is different material from lecture. I actually enjoyed the case studies we analyzed in section! The tests are a bit tricky, but you can make it up with some quick SONA extra credit. This class was interesting and relatively easy!

Bar none, the best professor at UCLA.

The class was well organized and engaging. The tests shouldn't be too hard if you pay attention during lecture and focus on the main points from the slides. A lot of the questions were case based, so if you know the symptoms, you will know the answer.

Hello everybody, my name is ****** and I would 100% not take this class. save your self. the bruin walk grades are a lie. Im in the middle of this class, and oh my god she sucks. im not dumb, im an A student. trust me on this. she pulls questions out of her ass on the test.

TA and the professor graded the papers super hard. The rubrics for the paper were not clear when it came to grading papers. My TA was GIO do not take with him! Participation mattered for class, but they were not clear at all to how many times to participate. I actually participated more than half the class and still got points deducted. I got a B- for class participation when I did participate. Class papers were super frustrating.