This class is based off of 2 short papers (10% each), 1 midterm (40%) and 1 final (40%). No textbooks needed. The midterm and final have a pretty heavy studying load, however; if you attend lecture and set aside time to study, you will be fine.

Professor Huppin is my favorite professor at UCLA! He is incredibly smart and can answer all of your weird hypothetical questions (or will find you an answer!) The class is super manageable – just show up and skim the short online readings. There are two short thought papers that are basically impossible to get less than a B on, a midterm and a final. The multiple choice questions are from reading details and lecture details – very easy to get right if you pay a little bit of attention in class. The short answer questions are fun and focus on expanding ideas we discussed in class. Overall, he's a great guy who will let you complain about your life and aspirations, while also providing you with great insight into the First Amendment.

I'm fairly certain that there is one student in particular that is posting the same negative reviews on Huppin (8/28)... she posted something similarly negative about Professor Johnson in the Comm department as well. I had her in several of my classes as we were both Communication majors, and it was clear from the beginning that she hates evolutionary psychology and anyone that incorporates it into their lessons. Considering how many UCLA professors refer to it and how much evidence there is for the theory, it's shocking that she is still so ignorant about the subject. She consistently freaked out about sexism and racism and other -isms despite Huppin's very clear explanations about the studies that yielded these supposedly offensive results. So I would disregard her remarks, mostly she came off as a crazy.

As for Huppin himself, he’s a good professor who is very interested in building relationships with his students. I think I went to office hours with a total of 3 professors, and Huppin was one of them because he was so approachable. Tests weren’t super easy though. They’re multiple-multiple choice and get a little dicey, but he’s fair with any written assignments and curves generously at the end.

** Courses Taken with Huppin: Communications 146 and Communications 171

As previous reviewers have said, Huppin can have a monotone voice during his lectures. However, he is actually a good lecturer and knows his information pretty well. I've taken him for 2 different Communication courses and I would choose to take him again for a different course.

Communications 146: This was my first class taken from him and it was interesting because it involved a more thorough view into mass media images. The kind of annoying part of the class was that he had a monotone voice and went through lecture slides fast so it might be best to use a laptop to take notes. The topics were interesting - pornography, why men are attracted to certain women, the smell of men as an indicator of mate selection for women, etc. Pretty good stuff! The downside to this class were the exams. Both the midterm and final were quite tricky! He puts tricky questions on the exams so be warned! Read each question carefully and at least a few times. Overall, the class was enjoyable. The viewer below that mentioned that he was pro-abortion and rape of women is absolutely NUTS. She was in my class and she just wanted to have conflict with him because she was a troublemaker. It is NOT wise to take her review seriously.

Communications 171: This class is a law class around theories of freedom of speech. It's kind of an extension of Communications 101, so if you've taken 101 it might be a little easier to understand the concepts. I liked this class a little more than 146 because the exams (a midterm and a final) were essay-based and not tricky, multiple choice questions. There are a lot of cases that he goes over, but he goes over them in depth and you actually understand the material. His monotone voice is still there but at least the cases are interesting! There were some cases about pornography and school speeches that were kind of funny. I would recommend this class over Comm 146 but that's because law classes interest me.

First off, I have to address the rating made by a fellow student on Feb 4 that begins "do not take this class." I know who the student is who wrote this review, as I am currently in both Huppin's and Von Blum's class (the class she suggests you take instead of Huppin's) with her, and I can honestly say that her view does not reflect the view of the vast majority of students in Mark Huppin's 146 class. She is a student who has taken some of Huppin's lecture material completely out of its scientific context and turn it around on him, calling him a sexist, etc. While this class does deal with some delicate issues such as rape and sexualization of women in the media, Huppin is very careful to always surround the information that he gives his students with a scientific background and empirical studies. Furthermore, he never suggests that evolutionary psychology directly determines any aspect of human communication/interaction, and someone who thinks this should pay more attention in class. His lectures balance both the roles of nature (evolutionary) and nurture (environmental) in determining the topics we discuss in class.

Now for an evaluation of the course-- I'm a graduating senior in the Comm Studies department and can honestly say that this has been one of my favorite classes I've taken thus far. The material is interesting and applicable to everyday life and I find myself discussing it with my friends even outside of class.

Course work is completely manageable. There are two multiple-choice exams, a midterm and a final. To some I know the midterm seemed tricky but honestly, if you just attend lecture and do the readings you'll get what he's asking (the readings are interesting, too, so that's a plus). He doesn't try to trick you and he is really concerned about his students and how well they grasp the material. There are also two short papers throughout the quarter that are unlike any I've had in any other classes. I really like the essay questions he asks because they allow you to synthesize the material in the class and apply it to a movie we watch in class (not a really lame academic one, either). It's helpful because the papers are kind of like a review of the material for the exams. Each takes less than a day to complete.

If you want a comm studies course that is both interesting and manageable, take this course. The professor is awesome! You won't regret it.

Huppin is a real laid-back guy who knows his subject well--not to mention he has degrees from both UCLA and Stanford. He makes it clear from the start that the class (evolution of mass media images) is based on evolutionary psychology. I personally believe that evolutionary psychology is a great, interesting, and valid subject of study. I can honestly say that this was my favorite class in my 4 years at UCLA.

However, if you are a die-hard creationist and believe adam and eve are your great-aunt and -uncle (hate to be sarcastic about it, but just being honest) I would recomend taking a biology class instead. All sarcasm aside, if you truly reject Charles Darwin's theory of evolution and are not open to considering science that may conflict with an ultra-conservative personal/religious background, you will probably not enjoy this class as much as I did.

IMO, great class, great professor: very interesting topic, light workload (2 short assignments, multiple choice midterm and final). If you enjoy evolutionary psych or interpersonal communication theory, I definitely reccomend taking this class!

I've never written one of these, but the first review is so off-base that I couldn't ignore it. Professor Huppin said first week that men and women both value the same top five traits in a prospective partner, and neither good looks nor high status is in this 5. He has never said anything close to "rape is an adaptation" or "killing stepchildren is natural", that is absolutely ridiculous. 146 is a pretty interesting class that isn't too hard if you pay attention, which may explain why the first reviewer is both confused and angry.

Do not take this class. All he does is preach about evolutionary psychology.
I cannot believe this pseudo-scientific sexist crap is being taught at a prestigious University like UCLA.
Pornography is "natural", killing stepchildren is "natural", and rape is an adaptation.
Men are only attracted to women with good looks, women are only attracted to men with a fat wallet, and all humans are just pre programmed robots.
If you believe humans are free agents, and in charge of their own destiny, take a class with Paul von Blum instead.

The first reviewer couldn't be more wrong. The class is based on peer-reviewed, published, and respected science. The professor does not preach that killing stepchildren is natural or acceptable, does not say that rape is an adaptation, etc. In making these misrepresentations, the first reviewer actually commits the naturalistic fallacy, something we learned about in class. From one of our readings: "This fallacy assumes that because a phenomenon occurs in nature, it 'ought to' be this way. This would be akin to believing that if cancer is the natural result of interactions between our physiological system and environmental influences, it is justified, and we, therefore, should not use accumulated medical knowledge to prevent it." The first reviewer clearly hasn't been paying enough attention, and must be hearing through the distorted filter of their own ideology. One of my favorite classes at UCLA.

Huppin really cares about his students and does everything he can to ensure that they understand the material.