I took this course For Fall 2010, and I think I know who posted the eval about Mrs. Lee being "disorganized, monotonous." How this individual could not be more wrong about Mrs. Lee. She is a brilliant professor who teaches some of the most interesting topics I've ever come across in school. She's engaging and genuinely IS concerned with student's opinions, otherwise she would not incorporate them so much into her lectures. The individual who wrote the eval is speaking out of resentment for her own incompetency and inability to comprehend the material.

The majority of the previous evaluations for Professor Lee have caught me completely off guard; I completely agree with the previous comment. Although I could understand how my peers might come to perceive her that way, I really feel that they have failed to understand her efforts and brilliance. I for one appreciate her attentiveness to the students' input; she goes so far as to contemplate and incorporate their feedback, therefore meriting her reflections and sighs (which commentators called mmm's, um's, and head shaking). The course maintains the fundamental elements of education with its presentation of stimulating material coupled with its emphasis on the exchange of ideas. Through the class discussions and online critiques, I have been challenged and inspired by both the professor and my peers' conceptualizations. If you really want to get the most out of your UCLA education, then this class delivers.

I honestly have to completely disagree with the two previous posts, which I guess were posted by two of my current classmates, as I am also taking the class right now. I think that Professor Lee is an exceedingly brilliant woman, sometimes to the point where some of the material is above my head--but I don't find that she ever makes it inaccessible. It is difficult to participate sometimes in discussion because of how dense and complicated the theory/works can get, but I have found this class to be beyond satisfying. I have learned so much over such a short period of time, and can honestly say that this is the class that made me happy to be an English major.

There is quite a bit of reading, but the topic of the course ("Narrating through Body Parts") is vast in itself, and I think that Lee has done a pretty good job of giving the class a thorough look into Body Studies. Not many people go to office hours to speak with her about their concerns, which I suppose would account for some of the dismay. I find her to be engaging, certainly not monotonous (I am taking an ethics class with a professor who DEFINES monotony, so I understand the difference), and incredibly well-versed in her subject. Not only that, but she knows how to communicate difficult material with the students. I enjoyed her class so much that I will be taking a seminar with her next quarter. If you are up for the intellectual challenge, take a class with Lee. She is great.

Whole heatedly agree with the post below.
There is only one pro to the class and that is the texts.
All the cons of the class involve her. She's not interesting. Her lectures are dull. She has epiphanies while lecturing, as if she's finally understanding the material. She pretends to be interested in what students are saying by acknowledging them with shaking her head up and down, looking at them with pensive intent, and then uttering a couple of "mhmm"s and an "...interesting".
I think the only reason she weighs discussion/attendance so heavily is because no one would show up to her class if she didn't. I honestly don't know how she got hired. I definitely know it was not for her teaching skills.

She's disorganized, monotonous and low-toned, and irritatingly unclear.

Disorganized: She brainstorms while lecturing (if you can even call it lecturing). She bounces back and forth from one previously assigned texts when the syllabus designates otherwise. Her poor insight, or complete lack there of, is clearly evident in her constant stumbling & pauses throughout; "Um", "Uh" are uttered back to back in the middle of many points she tries to make. She flashes through outlined topics but never really sticks to it, no less permits the students to fully see it when flashing through power point slides.

Monotonous & low-tonwed: In a ever-shrinking attendance level, her volume equates to a one-on-one conversation. Even while seated upfront, I could barely make what she was trying to say. She seems characteristically reserved and shy yet her duty is to lecture!

Irritatingly unclear: She's presented imagery via Power Point but so many of them dont help expand our insight or clarify what we're to grasp of the assigned reading. It seems like a slap stick google search she pieces together the morning of. She's prone to constantly reading numerous passages in a decreasing volume but fails to draw key points, term, or hints that would (re)direct us toward the focus of the reading(s) at hand. In an upper division English course, I want more than to be read to, especially considering the burden of 400-word weekly postings dangling over our heads.
It's nice that she opens the floor to student questions and observations, but to fill 2/3rds of the lecture with it goes nowhere. Our colleges aren't the ones who'll be grading us.