Not as bad as what other comments say. Meliha is helpful and accepts after-class meetings and long office hours unlike other professors, and cares about students' feelings. The course scheme is indeed disorganized, but that is because it is impossible to squeeze the very concept of corporate finance in a quarter--MBA students spend a year on the same concepts.

Personally, I've had 10+ misgraded quizzes and a misgraded midterm, but in the end they were all fixed. Do come to the class for the last three weeks, as Bond value is a crucial concept on the final. Otherwise, just go along the schedule so one would expect him/herself to be fine. Remember to find a bunch of above average group members in advance. (this is a comment based on experience rather than discrimination. if you took the class you would know that half of the students do not study for the materials at all. I had a group of 5 with 2 people spending 2 days writing a 100-word summary, 1 copying the company description and analysis from preexisting documents, and 1 applying simple arithmetic average to the stock price over 5 years to demonstrate that its variance is large.)

As a previous reviewer mentioned, this class is a really strange one. Mel is a really smart and approachable person in person and in office hours, but she is extremely disorganized in lectures and structuring the class. Homework assignments are the most original problems, so don't put your hopes on finding solutions easily. The best way to tackle this class especially when you have no economics or finance background is to find a good TA and stick with them in office hours. You can brute force your way through the material and possibly find understanding, but Mel often has little details written into the problems (sometimes not written at all...) and she assumes everyone is on the same page.

She does do a Piazza board, but she is not very responsive/responsive in a timely manner. The TAs don't have access to the board, so Piazza was pretty unreliable. The group project isn't bad at all. It's a good grade booster if you do it well.

Midterm was alright, and final was challenging. She provides a few old exams for both the midterm and final, and she usually will tell you the structure and content of the exams.

If you have a question, just ask. The professor takes note of who is paying attention and thinking beyond the class materials. The homework may seem straightforward, but the exams will challenge you to apply to concepts rather than regurgitate homework problems. She's one of the most personable and friendly professors at UCLA, take advantage of that!

Her lectures are somewhat unstructured, as she often goes off on wild tangents are randomly brings up some current event she's been reminded of. She does go over a wide range of topics and does go into quite a bit of detail with most of them. She goes through a ton of examples, that should make it clear how to do the calculations and what you should be looking for in problems. These are reinforced in the homework assignments and the exams are iterations of these problems.

The midterm was fairly easy. Some more difficult concepts are introduced after that, so the final exam was quite a bit tougher. The questions, I believe, were still all fair game. Working through the homeworks was helpful (even though I think the questions are repeats from previous quarters).

There's a final project where you apply economic principles to compare two somewhat similar products. You work with a group and it doesn't take too much time after you divvy up the work.

I would say highly of professor mel since she literally helps you when your grade turns out to be out of your expectation. My midterm improved like 10 points since she knows how these tricks in her exams work and what her students deserve. Her lecture sometimes might sound unstructured, but generally concrete with examples. Her slides are super helpful and are exactly test material. She is super available and helpful to her students and she helped me with my recommendation letter when another professor forgot it and it was almost deadline. I have almost nothing to say against this professor. If you want to learn about finance and business world, please take this class.

She lectures straight from her Powerpoints that are very poorly made (and you can tell she put little to no effort in them because she just took screenshots of the examples from the textbook). She goes on tangents, which waste class time and do not help in understanding what the material is about. I cannot stress how much clarity she lacks in her instruction. If you're just taking this as a TBA, I advise taking some other course. Also, I don't know how previous reviews claim she has "charisma"; my classmates and I find her boring.

Fairly straightforward class. There's a group project but the grading is easy. She tends to go on tangents but if you're confused just go to office hours and she will clear it right up. I'd give this class a 9.5/10 overall.

Since I already took Econ class for 2 years in high school, it goes without saying that the Micro and Macro Econ stuff in this class are quite basic. If you have already taken AP Econ, feel free to make this course a GPA booster. The Materials are straightforward, and she REPEATS the materials a lot, going again and again on some points (which are bound to be in the exams). The microeconomics stuff is roughly 40% of an AP exam, with no mention on externality, market failure, deadweight loss etc. The macro stuff is even less, only 10% of an AP exam: only GDP + fiscal + monetary policy. Other than the economics topics, another BIG topic (40%) is Time Value of Money, which I think she explained pretty thoroughly, breaking everything into separate ppt files and talking about it for 3 weeks, sometimes using 10-12 slides just to explain a single concept.
Now a more objective take on Mel and her class. She is a very, very nice person (objectively). As long as you go to her lectures (hard may be for us engineers), she would give you lots of extra credits just for showing up and paying a little bit of attention, for EVERYBODY by submitting a paper answering a simple question related to that day's topic. She may sometimes go on tangents, but seriously, it's a two hour class, and there's only so much to talk about (which she explains at least 2-3 times a single key concept). The course load isn't heavy at all. The HW can be done in groups. There's one group project that basically gives you 90+ for a clearly organized submission. AND she gives you an optional HW after final exam to replace the lowest HW score. Although my raw score is around A- (80+), with all the extra credit + optional HW, it made itself to A+.

Cons: It is true that her powerpoint skills are not the best.
Pros: She's a very energetic person, she keeps you engaged in class by asking simple and interesting questions, she tries to remember names of the students and is very kind to all sorts of answers. Her exams are pretty easy, you don't have to study a lot, just go over the things she say in class and take some notes. She asks exactly what she lectures so try to pay attention to class. She goes over every topic 3 times, so you don't have the chance to get lost.
Fav: She always does a current events part every class, where there is a class discussion on real tech/finance events, and you can relate real strategical management decisions to class material. I love this part since most other teachers just focus on the theoretical part and leave. One of the most engaging ENGR classes of all and its pretty easy.

I think Mel is a super nice and cool person, but she was not really a great teacher for ENGR 111. I had her for ENGR 110 and she was fine but she was not able to really engage the class or teach the material at a good enough level in my opinion for Finance. Also, I felt a lot of the class got shortchanged on the Extra Credit and the exams, which covered a lot of difficult material that was only briefly touched upon in discussions and not even in the lecture. Overall, I like Mel as a person, but I would probably NOT take this class again if given the choice.