Professor Kassabian is very nice and knows what he is talking about, and he was approachable after every class meeting. He mentioned several times that he can stay talking to students as long as they need!

Suggestions to the Professor, if he is going to read it:
***I think extra office hours would not hurt! I felt like knowing everything during the class, but the discussions helped to raise diffferent questions!

***Also, Prof. Kassabian needs to make extra evening for the midterm and final reviews, specifically going over the practice hypos or just ANSWERING QUESTIONS because e-mail system does not inform everyone who has similar questions which could be adressed over the meeting! (although he tried to put all questions in one file and posted them on class website for the midterm, he forgot to do this for the final)

***Another problem with this class of 150 ppl is that Kassabian is not a loud person, people in the back could not hear him at ALL! We have been complaining about it all the time, but Kassabian used mike only once or twice - please, take an example from Professor SUMAN, he always uses mike!!!

***In addition, I've noticed that he was using the notes which outlined every single case with the rules, and TAs had them as well, but he did not want to share them with the class! So many students suffered not because they did not read the cases but because they did not know specifically what is important and what is not for the exam. (*suggestion to students - bring a voice recorder, it helps a lot, I had to listen over the lectures and transcribe important things).
The notes, by the way, many people got through their friends who took 101 with Professor Hobbs, but the other part of the class did not have them, and I think this was unfair!

***Another thing: PLEASE bring several hypos to the example when disscussing the case! It is essential way to learn because you know how to apply rules to different relevant facts by practicing them!!! But we only got practice hypos to practice on our own, which is NOT a good learning experience!

TO THE STUDENTS:
This class was hard, but law-related classes are always like that because you need to read cases written many years ago and with a specific language, about which everybody complains even today. Plus, not only you have to memorise the rules used almost in every case you read and several "thinkings" the justices provide, you have to memorise every single relevant fact from the cases (although this facts can help you on the exam to raise more issues and guide your analysis, this is Kassabian's style of "helping us out").

Well, midterm and final are also hard because you have to write for three hours NON_STOP, otherwise your analysis will not be complete. My hands weve numb for about 20 minutes after this extensive writing!

There are 3 hypos (1 -for each blue book) which takes at least an hour to write (suggets you wear a wrist watch to time yourself out, this helped me a lot!) and I suggest that before the exam you practice writing everything by timing yourself. I did that too, because it helps you to organize writing in your head + and allows you to cut less relevant info, bc you have to leave some extra time for the disscussion of specific facts mentioned in the case!

This was Kassabian first time teaching this particular class, and I hope that he can find ways to improve, so I will leave the judgement to you!

I felt compelled to write a review, as Kassabian's class was entertaining, informative, as well as useful. I'm glad I came along, as this professor has not been given an adequate shake by the below posters.

1) As a new 1L in law school, I can say this class gave me an excellent undergad foundation in reviewing and analyzing case law. Many sources now advocate expanding law school exam analysis beyond IRAC; however, having been exposed to the method and numerous cases, I believe I gained an edge having taken CS101 with Kassabian.

2) Kassabian is busy, as he is a full-time practicing attorney. However, he was never unavailable and always hung around as long as necessary after class to answer specific questions. I cannot attest to his availability during office hours or by email, as I always clarified any necessary points in person either before or after class, or during break.

3) I know nothing of Kassabian's undergrad career, but I do know he started law school at a well known and long standing Southern California law school--one that has produced a plethora of local practicing attorneys. Having said that, I also know he made a drastic and uncharacteristic jump in transferring to UCLA School of Law. This should be a testament to his ability, not his inadequacy (I believe he was #1 in his class prior to transferring; that's an accomplishment at any ABA law school).

4) In addition to useful practical skills for someone interested in law case-study, this class was very informative and entertaining in its subject matter. The rights afforded by the first amendment are not well understood. This class explains the beauty of freedom of speech, as well as the (few) ways in which it is justly and necessarily limited. This understanding is delivered in an entertaining historical context.

In conclusion, I think most of the reviews below do not do this course or the professor justice. This class is more than adequate in explaining the material it purports to cover in an appropriate contextual basis (i.e. the ways in which the amendment has been tested in the forum designated to do so). Moreover, the appropriate analysis used to do well in this class is useful for those entertaining law school.

Classes involving case-study analysis necessitate more engagement than strictly reading text and memorizing historical facts; this class requires active thinking and application of the rules contained in the cases. It is easy to do well in this class if one is willing to engage the material. Read the cases, show up, engage in the discussion, note the rules applied by the court in the various cases, and follow the exam instructions and format recommended by Kassabian. If you do this it is virtually impossible to not do well, to not learn something useful about the first amendment, and to not enjoy the class.

The class is like an easy version of a pre-law class. You read Supreme Court cases regarding the first amendment and you must learn the rules given by the court regarding such a situation and you must later apply them to hypothetical situations for the midterm and the final. It is a straightforward class with no busy work. He is not available much except the days of lecture, but i did not email him at all so he might be more available if help is needed. The only down side is writing for 3 hours for both the exam and the final and the lectures are 3 hours. Most times it ends early. With competent writing skills this class is not difficult at all.

This was probably the most important class I've taken at UCLA. Knowledge of your civil rights is a vital part of being a global citizen, and freedom of speech is a phrase people bandy about but actually have no idea of the intricacies behind the concept. This class was incredible because you read the court cases that have clarified what you can and cannot say or do, and learned the tests that resulted from them. So for all the above reasons, this was an excellent class and I learned a lot. That being said, if you can't hear the instructor basically you're left to decipher case law on your own through the readings, and that's what happened when I arrived late and had to sit in back. I don't know why the mic wasn't used, but it wasn't. Also, for some reason the instructor and TA would not give out anything written to show what they were looking for in an IRAC. I wouldn't actually change lecture at all because I enjoyed all the information, even the circuitous off-the-track tangents. But I would really have appreciated some model answers to hypotheticals so I would have known what I was looking to emulate on the midterm and the final, since these are the only two components of the grade (midterm 45%, final 55%). A skeleton model answer was posted 2 days before the final, but it was like 'too little, too late.' If I'd had that before the midterm I could have relaxed and enjoyed the course and learned much more.

If you're interested in law/law school then you should definitely take this class!! However, for people not interested in law school then it's definitely a challenging class. You learn a lot and it's not pointless busy work, but the exams are 3 hours of grueling short answer questions where you are furiously writing until the last second. If you want to learn how to think like a lawyer, this class is a great crash course. I got an A because I worked really hard and diligently followed the methods they teach you on how to approach cases, so it's possible to do very well. Bailey Loverin was my TA and she was so thorough and good at explaining. Just don't take this class if you want an easy class you can skip most days.

I have mixed feelings about this class. It deals with interesting and important subjects, and teaches you a lot of basics about law. I would highly recommend this class to someone contemplating law school and looking for an intro.

However, if you are a Comm major who just needs to fill the requirement like me, pick another class. This class requires reading a lot of dense court cases every week. The exams are pretty grueling: 3 hours long and you need almost every minute of them.

Bottom line: I knew nothing about law, I went to every lecture, did all the reading, studied intensively, and ended up with a B. If you do all the work you'll be ok, but this class will take up A LOT of your time.

This class was one of the worst classes I've taken so far. This man does not know how to communicate to a class with what he wants to teach them. Ironic. Very vague lectures where he basically just reads court cases and how courts analyzed them. But the midterm and final are hard because he'll go over the rules on how to look at a case but grades 80% of it very hard based on your analysis. The tests i feel are open to interpretation since you're writing 3 blue books in 3 hour and lots of room for error. I know most people in the final exam didn't even finish. When we received the midterm back he got mad at the whole class for doing poorly and him having to curve the grade up when he should realize that he's just another poor part-time professor trying to boost his ego. Just take 101 with someone that cares to teach or a different legal communications course to save some headache.

Do NOT take this class! HARSH GRADING. Do not believe the grade distribution. Maybe I just had a bad TA, but I thought this class would just be a fun COM class. Hell no. This class messed up my GPA. I say again, DO NOT TAKE THIS CLASS!!!!!!

Soooo I took this class to fulfill a comm requirement and it was the worst class I've ever taken at UCLA. Not the worst grade I got, but it's definitely down there. Professor Kassabian was kind of boring and I guess that's also why I never really went to class. To be fair, I only started studying last minute and wanted to pull my hair out because exams were tough and I wasn't interested in the subject very much. Readings were super dense and I just never bothered until a week before exams. Luckily my friend was a sweetheart and shared her notes with me and we studied together which really helped. For midterms i got around a D (lol) but somehow ended with an overall B grade so don't give up if you got a bad grade for the midterm! The final could save u if u did well in that. Overall, yeah, worst class at UCLA and glad that it's over. Should've probably did the readings early and went to class so don't be like me! One thing I learned from this class: I never want to be a lawyer

This class was a lot of work, with many cases to cover every class period. It requires diligent work and studying. The tests are not difficult if you study properly. The hardest part for me was learning how to take the test, the professor has specific guidelines. The information learned is really valuable, it just takes a lot of time. The professor was kind of boring, had no excitement in his voice, and kind of felt condescending when you asked a question. Would recommend taking the class in a quarter where the other classes are you are taking aren't as hard.