This is one of the more overrated classes. Coming into the class, I have such high expectation for learning something useful instead of some old school stuff from Eggert. However, I don't think anything other than design patterns are that useful, and there are so many good online resources and practices for design patterns.

To get an A, you need to score almost 100% on every homework, quiz and exam, and get at least median on all parts of project, which is pretty difficult.

AVOID THIS PROFESSOR AT ALL COST!

You would never know a graduate course will give you some of C just because this professor personally does not like you and your work. This course includes a tool presentation, a paper presentation, a project and a final. All of them are group based. Ridiculously, she granted different scores among group members, in terms of she likes and she does not like. For my presentation, she gave a 3.4/5.0 of paper presentation for the members responsible for algorithm/methodology part and evaluation, and her comments are "dry" and "boring", while she gave a 4.0/5.0 for the one talking about introduction and outline because it was interesting! She rudely disrupted student's presentation and asked some questions she DOES NOT EVEN KNOW, and then blamed students that can not answer the question, saying that they are the problems we should think about even though she does not know!

Also, she did not carefully review the group project, and she just randomly commented something from project presentation and report, and randomly assign some scores differently with "peer evaluation" she got, without any justification of her reasons of the scores she assigned. Her handwriting is scribble and messy, and we could basically understand nothing from her comments.

Her final is ridiculously as well. There are two essay questions, each worth 10/100 of the final exam. The questions needed us to summary three key points from one paper, and analyze that to another paper which does not have a strong relationship with the first paper, and used that to improve the framework in the third paper. The average of final is only 52. She neither provides any solution of the final, nor CURVE! What's more, we used GradeScope for the final at home. If you get in the GradeScope one minute late due to technical issues, you will get 10% deducted! Even though we all have 180 minutes to finish and GradeScope will automatically close your exam, she said she is aim to make it FAIR to everyone.

As a result, the highest letter grade I know about is only B and there are some students like me getting C in her course, which means we failed her course.

She basically taught nothing. Only 3-4 lectures at the beginning of the quarter, and all of them are from her CS 130 course. After that, they are all student's presentation with her rude disruption, unreasonable comments and unconsidered challenging questions!! She taught this course because she does not enjoy her life, and she would like to give low letter grades to students for fun to fill the void inside her heart. Letting us beg her for a passing grade will make her life more meaningful because she is neither a great professor and even nor a human being that behaves normally!

Her academic standard largely harm the reputation of UCLA CS program. Her grading is ridiculously strict without any classification and criteria, like 90-100 to get A or 80-90 to get B. You will never know how you get your letter grade. All you got are a low final exam grade, and some presentation scores out of 5 with some random comments which has nothing to do with computer science!

I personally feel like this class is missing a lot of useful concepts that CS majors going into software engineering should learn about. This includes CI/CD, development environments, testing frameworks, and web architectures. Instead, this class focuses more on theoretical material, especially design patterns and test coverage. This isn't to say that these concepts aren't useful, but it's disappointing to see that the capstone course of the CS degree focuses so heavily on them. If you're looking to take CS 130, I would strongly recommend that you take the spring version of the class, assuming it's taught by the Google engineers, as their curriculum covers more practical and common technologies that you might use in industry.

However, I will say that one positive thing about this class is that Prof. Kim is really nice and does a good job teaching the material in a clear manner.

Miryung Kim is the worst professor teaching this course.
2% of participation was taken off by the professor, and that's the same for every student this quarter. You need to get 100% on everything to get an A, which is impossible.
No curves! She literally curved everyone down!
She usually gives around 4 out of 5 for group projects, which is super mean and unfriendly, since the project worths 40%. You never wanna do the project again!
The exames have so many coding problems, which are super difficult.
You will end up feeling like "learning from void" all quarter long!
Screw this class and avoid this professor!

Genuinely cares about student retention of material, and actively looks for feedback throughout the course. Quizzes and tests are simple enough if you follow along with the slides, and encourages interaction with material through online polling tools.

Course itself can feel a bit schizophrenic because it's essentially a design lab combined with some lectures on software patterns, but that's a problem with the course rather than the instructor.

Prof. Kim was pretty good. A lot of this class will probably be obvious to people who have done internships in the industry before, but it's still good to formally cover the topics. The first half of the class goes over design patterns, and the last half is mostly about testing. Personally I found the design patterns part to be not very useful, aside from reinforcing a few key concepts about how to think about designing software. The testing portion was definitely more useful, as it gave more formal tools and things to think about that I hadn't learned officially during my internships.
There's a few written homeworks which were all pretty straightforward and easy. The tests were also fine, not too difficult and mostly what you'd expect. The majority of the work is a quarter long group project. How that goes depends largely on your group, but don't have to do anything super complex.
Overall I still recommend this class. If you haven't worked in industry it's probably useful knowledge. If you have, you might find this class somewhat redundant, but overall there's still material here you'll likely find useful.

Don't know if I really learned anything but it's a decently easy class. She's pretty nice and the exams are around the same difficulty as the homework. Project can be a pain depending on who your group member is.

Pretty good professor for 130. Lectures are clear and worth going to especially towards the end of the quarter since she does practice problems that make topics (like computing weakest precondition) easier to follow. Tests seem long, mostly because you have to read/write a fair amount of code, but aren't too difficult.

Quarter-long group project is most of the work and there are measures in place to make sure you don't slack off. There are midpoint assignments to check your progress and TAs will look at your Github repos to see how much people are contributing. Mine stressed that you should expect to get a different score than your teammates.

Overall would recommend taking this class with Prof Kim. It's hard to get in once the quarter starts due to high demand so try to grab a spot in first pass.

Prof Kim is a nice professor and really care about her students. The workload is managible if you have a solid group for the group project. The class is sonceptually based, so you will need to know a lot of concepts, but the professor mainly focus on a subset of them (she pretty much emphasize the concepts she will mainly test on). If you are not a strong conceptual learner and you want a lot of practice, the class may be difficult for you compared to others because the theory of the concepts wasn't applied as much as I'd hope (but that may be a personal weakness). Midterm and final were based on applying the concepts, but were applied in ways that were not practiced as much in class. Grading is not bad because roughly 75% of the class will get a B- or above; about 30% gets an A- or above.

She is the best CS professor I have ever had in my life!! (I am graduating otherwise, I would take all my CS courses with her)

Her teaching method is excellent!! You are constantly engaged with material via MENTI. She kept asking question which makes you learn the topics during the lecture, and there are lots of examples on lectures which helps you a lot when you review the slides.

There are 4 quizzes each 3% of total grade the lowest one will be dropped.
Two assignments each 4%
midterm 20%
final 25% (the final test will be on week 10)
team (5 to 6 students) programming assignment is 35% which is divided in 3 parts: Part A 6%, part B 11%, and part C 18% (The final presentation "part C" will be on department's final week and day)

Take her class!! She is the best!! You will learn the latest testing methods and some research topics like "refactoring" which you may need for your career.

Tests and quizzes are fair, if you don't do well you should only blame yourself. If you are taking a class just to get an "A" take her class, remember no surprise question on tests, so getting an "A" is not hard.

IF YOU ARE TAKING A CLASS TO LEARN SOMETHING USEFUL TAKE HER CLASS!!!!!