Okay, I felt that Professor was trying too many new things and it got really confusing. The TAs were literally the saving grace of the class, they were kind and taught all the material. I hated that classes were not recorded, they were so late in the day and the guest lectures were literally on zoom. My main issue was her changing the grading scale on the midterm. After our midterms were graded, she changed it so everyone got a whole grade not +-. So although great for people who got A- , it brought the grades down of us who got B+ or A+. TAs were pissed about it too since they were the actual ones doing all the work. I thought the content was interesting but we did not even really learn content it was just QA every lecture. I also hated how the midterm and final were set up since we only had 2 pages double space to write about 4 weeks of content.

I just felt the professor really was trying to make the class a staple class and it just really fell through. Its okay for a GE to be simple. Most students get into a major or minor from the simple GEs.

confused by the negative reviews lol the professor was definitely annoying to listen to but this class was SOOOOO eeeaaaaasssssyyyyyyyyyyyy!! def recommend for an easy GE. i literally gave zero effort because i knew i'd get an a regardless. soo, yea ignore the rating (again, so confused. and take this class!

I’m so confused why the rating is low this is quite literally the easiest class I’ve ever taken at ucla. 2 page paper for midterm and final DOUBLE SPACED like cmon. Then all you had to do for an assignment each week was submit a discussion question based off the readings. The only thing to beware about is that I didn’t attend any of the lectures but you need quotes from the lecture for midterm/final paper so make sure u attend a couple and write down some quotes from speakers. 100% recommend this class to everyoneee

TLDR: Take another 10B professor. This class was a complete waste of time. The class was badly structured and unorganized. There was a midterm essay and a final essay that we had plenty of time to complete. However, the prompts that Chavez made were very limiting and unfair. She required you to mention what the guest speakers said during class, and almost everyone found this difficult. She didn't want to record any lectures or give out recordings of the few she did record. Despite stating in syllabus she would give out recordings to CAE students. The guest speakers maybe said a couple relevant things, but they mostly talked about themselves, politics, how much they hate Trump, comparing gender to "dough," and one comparing the term "LatinX" to an adult website. The topics covered in class are interesting and important, but they were poorly presented, and only made Latinos look bad. As a Latino taking this class, it was embarrassing that this is how we were represented, and many people felt this way because over a 1/4 of the class would walk out during lectures. She's a professor, but the guest speakers did most of the talking/teaching, and when she would teach, it was very repetitive and difficult to understand the point she was trying to make. TA's would try to recap/expand on lectures, and they did an amazing job because they too had to sit through lectures and realize it was a mess. But Chavez didn't like that, she power tripped a lot. A lot of talk went around that she mistreated her TA's, and some TA's did speak out in sections. If you kiss up to her and volunteer in class, you'll get your name on her list and get extra credit. As an engineering student having to take a GE, this is my last GE in the Chicano department.

tldr: hate the professor so much but still recommend because EASYYYYYYYYY VERY FUCKING EASYYYYY GE

Grades:
Participation during discussion
Midterm Essay
Final Essay

I really fucking hate her. The way the classes were structured was so weird. The first week both lectures in person, second week Tuesday in person and Thursday online, weeks 3-9 tuesaday online and thursday in person, and week 10 both classes in person. Basically each lecture you have a guest lecturer come and talk about the article you read that they wrote. They answer questions that the discussion sections submited. What I find was so INSANELY STUPID was that pretty much all the guest lecturers talked to us through zoom SO WHY DID WE EVEN HAVE IN PERSON CLASSES WHY COULDNT WE HAVE ALL THE CLASSES THROUGH ZOOM. She also DIDNT RECORD LECTURES LIKE WHYYYYY. Its so easy to record stupid bitch. The midterm and final essays required you to mention the lectures so it was so stupid and kinda difficult since the lectures weren't recorded. To gain participation points during discussion you must answer the discussion post with 2 questions for the authors of the 2 articles you read that week and comment at least one thing about the readings during discussion. Its very important you do this since there is not much that is graded. You are given two free passes to use if you will have to miss discussion. If you do not use them each pass will bump you a letter grade. So if you have a B and don't use the passes your final grade becomes an A-. WHICH IS THE BEST THING ABOUT THE CLASS. You can very easily pass the class with an A+. Idk if my TA was just nice af or I actually misjudged my writing but I got an A on both the essays somehow I swear they were shitty. I also never went to like any of the in person lectures, i felt like most the lectures were a complete waste of time. I did go to like one or two but once the guest lecture ended and she started talking I left because whatever she had to say was a waste of my time. ALOTTTT of people would leave mid lecture too LMAOOOO. I kinda felt bad that like 25% of the class kept leaving but whatever.

The class is very very easy trust me. As much as I hate the professor the class was easy af so take it.

I am honestly confused by the negative reviews here. This class was easy and low commitment. The way this class was set up was that we read an article for the class, came up with a question to ask the author of the article in our discussion groups, and the author came and gave a guest lecture. Professor Chavez Moreno did not lecture much, but I didn't mind. She is very kind and approachable and wants her students to learn.
Given that this class is a general ed class with over 400 people enrolled in it, you don't get a chance to know her. Still, she was never dismissive and always made sure to keep in communication with her students via Canvas or in-class announcements. Professor Chavez Moreno provided all the articles we needed to read, and there were no textbooks we needed to buy.
While Chavez Moreno is the Professor, the course is primarily guided by your TA. Your TA is also responsible for grading everything. So, the choice of your TA is crucial! My TA, Bri Damacio, was exceptional, and I highly recommend them!
The way this course grades is definitely unique. The grading isn't calculated with points or percentages. I'll try to explain with this grading breakdown:
DISCUSSION PARTICIPATION: This part of the grading rubric requires attendance at your discussion section, participation in the discussion, and submission of discussion posts. You are allowed to miss two discussion meetings without affecting your grade. However, I advise against missing any because if you do not use a 'freebie' absence, your grade level will rise. So, if you don't miss two classes, your grade level will go from a B- to a B to a B+. The discussion posts are very simple. You just read the articles (2 per week), create one question for each article, and post your question to the discussion board. Participation in the discussion is crucial. Even if you get an A on your midterm and final paper, your grade can be a B or C if you do not talk in the discussions. So, make sure you talk!
MIDTERM: a two-page double-spaced paper covering weeks 2-5. The midterm required three guest lecture quotes and three reading quotes, and the essay had to include all 3-course themes.
FINAL: a two-page double-spaced paper covering weeks 6-10. The final required two guest lecture quotes, two reading quotes, and 1 quote from Professor Chavez Moreno's lecture. The essay also had to include all three-course themes.
Now, I'm not gonna lie—the midterm and final were a bit hard. The prompts themselves weren't difficult, but including everything the Professor wanted in two pages AND double-spaced was. Personally, I felt that Professor Chavez Moreno was asking too much for that short paper. My TA allowed us to resubmit if we were unhappy with our grade, although I am unsure if the other TAs offered this as well.
Attendance at lectures is not mandatory. This course was hybrid, so on Tuesdays, we were online, and on Thursdays, we were in person. You absolutely do not have to go to all the lectures in person.
Aside from the final and midterm, this class is really easy. I mentioned that this course was low commitment because, aside from the weeks you have the midterm and final, all you do is read two articles and come up with two questions. This course requires 3 hours of work a week at most, and you can get the work done in one sitting. I agree that some of the guest lectures were repetitive, and some definitely said some odd things, but Professor Chavez Moreno cannot control what the guest lecturers say or how they decide to recap their articles. Overall, don't listen to the negative reviews. As long as you actively participate in discussions, you will be okay in this class.

Think again about taking this class, just read the other reviews that explain it all. It was an absolute mess of the class.

If you're eager to broaden your knowledge across a wide array of subjects, this class comes highly recommended. However, for those who prefer a more structured and organized learning environment, considering a different course or professor might be advisable. Laura is undoubtedly committed to student learning, though I believe this dedication could have been manifested in a more structured manner. The course frequently introduces a deluge of information, courtesy of numerous guest lectures, but often, it felt like a repetitive cycle of the same stories and topics.

For students with a keen interest in departmental research, this class offers a valuable overview of the various research areas and topics that have been explored. It also presents an opportunity to identify unexplored research avenues, potentially inviting you to take on the challenge of pioneering these areas yourself.

Professor Chavez-Moreno was a great professor. This class was huge and I think that she did a great job. I would say to ignore the negative reviews towards the professor because she genuinely shifted my perspective in how I view society. This class helped me to gain a new perspective through the readings and guest speakers. I did not like that the guest lectures were on zoom, but I was still attentive to what they were saying. Going to class and taking notes on the main idea really helped me with my essays. I took a couple of notes, and that's all I needed because the essays were only 2 pages. I recommend attending your TA's office hours to ask questions about how to start the essay or how a part of your essay sounds. This class was pretty easy. We had 2 papers (midterm and final) which were both two pages each, and they were not bad at all. We also had 2 readings each week (some longer than others) and we had submit 2 questions about the readings. The grade also depended on participation in section (as long as you say something once each class, you should be good). Overall, this was an easy GE and shifted my perspective a lot.

Good: Don't have to purchase a textbook, some interesting guest lectures. One lecture each week was on zoom. Only big assignments were two essays that were double spaced and two pages MAX. They were relatively easy although the prompts were very broad and vague. Other than that, you had two readings per week and you had to submit a question for each guest lecturer which was very easy.

Bad: None of the lectures are recorded and you need to cite lectures for the 2 essays your grade is based on. 90% of the class was guest lectures and although some of them were interesting, the majority were pointless as they restated exactly what we read in the assigned reading. Since the professor only had maybe 4 lectures total (two were 30 min) I didn't feel that we learned as much as we should have. The format of the course is truly meant for a smaller seminar where you can discuss readings as a class not a large lecture. Participation matters in discussion. So much so that even if you get an A on both essays, you can still get a D in the class if you don't participate in discussion (even if you show up). The syllabus is set up so that you get two freebies to miss discussion but every tardy or missed discussion after that results in your grade going down a whole letter grade (even if you have a valid excuse). The grading system feels very subjective since there is no true rubric with percentages or points.

Overall, the professor isn't horrible I just think that her method of teaching is meant for an upper division small seminar course not a lower division 300+ person lecture. The few times that she did lecture were rather interesting and you can tell she cares I just wish there was more of that.