Professor
Ryoko Nishijima
1 of 1
AD
AD
Most Helpful Review
Winter 2021 - Wow, I'm a history major and for some reason this class killed me. Her recorded lectures are very dull and lackluster, but there are 100% necessary to do well on the quizzes. Annoyingly, she has 2 quizzes that are almost impossible to prepare for I couldn't score over 17/20 despite studying. Her midterm is term and vocab-based--which she provides a study guide for. The final research paper was aggravating because she was quite unclear about what she wanted, and the rubric she provided was quite basic. I wouldn't take her again. The grading goes as follows. 20% midterm, 10% 2x quizzes so 5% each, 25% participation based on discussion boards, 45% final paper. Overall, a dull course with an unmotivated instructor who never replies to emails---which is super necessary for remote instruction. Took her 2 full weeks to respond to my email regarding a super quick question. Her teaching of history was remedial level and juvenile, not nurturing her student's analytical abilities. This is UCLA, there are better professors. Edited--since people want to comment on my intellectual abilities in other reviews. I feel the need to defend myself--I have a 4.0 from UCLA and was recently accepted into USC law school on a full scholarship. But hey "I guess I'm not really that smart" Way to be a jerk when other people are just sharing their opinion :)
Winter 2021 - Wow, I'm a history major and for some reason this class killed me. Her recorded lectures are very dull and lackluster, but there are 100% necessary to do well on the quizzes. Annoyingly, she has 2 quizzes that are almost impossible to prepare for I couldn't score over 17/20 despite studying. Her midterm is term and vocab-based--which she provides a study guide for. The final research paper was aggravating because she was quite unclear about what she wanted, and the rubric she provided was quite basic. I wouldn't take her again. The grading goes as follows. 20% midterm, 10% 2x quizzes so 5% each, 25% participation based on discussion boards, 45% final paper. Overall, a dull course with an unmotivated instructor who never replies to emails---which is super necessary for remote instruction. Took her 2 full weeks to respond to my email regarding a super quick question. Her teaching of history was remedial level and juvenile, not nurturing her student's analytical abilities. This is UCLA, there are better professors. Edited--since people want to comment on my intellectual abilities in other reviews. I feel the need to defend myself--I have a 4.0 from UCLA and was recently accepted into USC law school on a full scholarship. But hey "I guess I'm not really that smart" Way to be a jerk when other people are just sharing their opinion :)
AD
1 of 1
