This class was very....interesting, and I was admittedly hesitant going into it due to the other reviews.

The class required one midterm and one paper throughout the quarter. The midterm was a series of short answer questions, and she gave very conflicting answers on how she wanted it to be graded. I would say hit every point she mentions on the midterm exam sheet and you should be okay. The final paper was an ethnographic style analysis of a topic of your choice related to COVID-19 and race (again, the directions were kind of vague, but TA tried his best to break things down.)

For lectures: It was extremely hard to follow along in lectures, because not only does she use outdated language (ex. 'the Blacks were very upset by..) but the presentation slides used were overall non-cohesive and unclear. Essentially, she is repeating everything from the reading. Attendance is occasionally checked.

Reading: I would say do as much of the reading as you can leading up to the midterm, but then after that, you can focus on the material pertaining to your paper. Fortunately, the reading topics themselves are clear and engaging, and I did get a more in-depth perspective of the LA riots (the book that she wrote.) I feel like sticking to the (very much so outdated) reading helped a lot, albeit a little repetitive by the end of the quarter.

Overall workload: It is manageable, just make sure you run the directions past your TA as for what they are looking for in your papers because following along with the professor is very confusing. As someone with a heavy courseload and student-worker, I got through the quarter without dedicating an unfair portion of time. This class felt a bit tedious but not unmanageable.

I loved this course and its subject matter. Dr. Park did a great job in selecting readings to accompany the lecture material. I can genuinely say I learned something new every week from the readings and lectures of the class. Dr. Park always had well-organized lecture slides and notes that contained the points she wanted to emphasize in the lecture. She is very knowledgeable about the course material and related topics, and you can tell that she is passionate about teaching students. Dr. Park is a fantastic professor and I hope that she is able to continue to teach this course for many more years, as I think everyone should take her class. This class is not super difficult as far as graded assignments go. The most difficult part is keeping up with the readings assigned. They may be long, but they are worth reading all the way through to include in your midterm and final papers.

grading scheme (total 120 points):
participation 30 pts
midterm 60 pts
final 30 pts

TL;DR: don't take this class with this prof

dr. park gave unclear instructions for everything. participation rules were foggy beginning week 3 when she returned the class in person; no one was clear on what they had to do to receive full participation points. she also changed the participation rules at least once which made it even more confusing. the midterm rules, which should have been straightforward, were made unclear by her. for the final, she was incredibly unclear on what EXACTLY she wanted to see. are we required to interview 3 people? do we have to do participant observation? both/neither? do we have to turn in field notes/transcripts? no clue. the burden was on TAs to decide, so each TA gave their students different instructions. it was incredibly stressful to put our projects together for this reason.

additionally, even though she 1. offered a zoom meeting during lecture, 2. recorded the zoom meeting and posted it on bruinlearn, 3. uploaded lecture slides, and 4. only lectured on reading material adding nothing new, she required in person participation. there was no check of symptom monitoring surveys, no mask requirement, nothing. she required us all to risk our health to receive no new information and an unengaging lecture. there was no need to have in person requirements for lectures because there was no activities. there was no reason to go other than she wants it that way.

the cherry on top is that the final project was supposed to be due friday of week 10. people asked for it to be moved so she moved it to monday of finals week. that's fine, no complaints. then she moved it to friday of finals week, so we were all really happy! fast forward to thursday of week 9 and she says it's due monday of finals week again. once again, flip flopping between instructions and putting the brunt on TAs, who were kind enough to allow extensions to those of us who had planned out our project around the friday due date. she also had everyone do their evaluations in class two days before she did this, so most people could not even include this detail in their evals. sick behavior.

Prof Park is a great professor. The time that I took this class was during the protests, and she and her TAs were accommodated students by cancelling the final. Her exams were essay format with page maximums and a lot of questions to answer. Get familiar with the material before exams are due in order to write short, yet very specific, responses.

This class was easy, straightforward, and had a light workload. The lectures were dry, but Professor Park posts the lecture slides on CCLE before the midterm and final so we can use them while studying for the exam. Going to class wasn't very helpful, and I only went because Park takes attendance (which counts in your grade). She assigns very long readings, and I didn't bother doing them. In addition to participation, your grade is also based on a midterm and final, which are both short essay style. She gives the study guide a week before the exams and the exam is based on the readings. I would only do the readings mentioned on the study guide and take notes on them for the short essays. This strategy worked well for me. The midterm is in class but the final exam is take home.

I thought she was a very good professor! Probably one of the best I've had at UCLA. She actually makes me want to pursue Social Anthropology for grad school!
I don't know why people are saying her lectures are disorganised because that is the complete opposite from my experience. It is in fact super organised and she even pauses briefly to allow people to finish copying down her slides before she starts talking. Genius!
She gave out the questions for the exams ahead of time so we could prepare. She even briefed us days before so we would know exactly what she wanted to see in our essays.
Also, I don't know why someone claimed her grading is hard because she gave me a 100% on my midterm, which she also gave to a handful of people in my class. It might just be my first 100% on a blue book ever!
The grading was 40/60 midterm/final. The midterm was an in-class bluebook and the final was a take home. Pretty straight forward essay questions, which I liked. Not at all designed to confuse you. She also bumped grades up with extra credit for attendance, which everyone else liked.
Her research on Race is pretty cool. She even created a linear model the outlined race relations! If you need some solid background in Social Anthropology, I think this class is essential.
Yes, her accent is thick, but still very understandable. And I'm deaf on one ear. Also, come on people, you're Anthropologists; don't mock people with accents. SMH!!

Graded fairly hard on exams. Class average was low and was not curved unless we all did bad on final. Lectures were long and went over the readings. Had to do readings to do well though becasue she asked super detailed exam questions.