<p>I'm a first year, planning my spring schedule. I'm taking CS 32 and Math 31B, and my choices boil down to taking Nachenberg+Martin or Smallberg+Brown. I'm agonizing over which to pick (probably unnecessarily so).</p>
<p>I like Smallberg a lot (I have him right now for CS 31), but I've heard awesome things about Nachenberg. Am I really really missing out if I forego Nachenberg? If I end up with Smallberg again, is there any chance I could establish some kind of rapport with him that could lead to a research position or something? (I'm doing really well in 31).</p>
<p>I have Brown right now, and I really like him. I've heard bad things about Martin. I'm just not sure whether I should give up Brown to have Nachenberg, or stick with Smallberg to stay with Brown.</p>
<p>All I know is that Nachenberg is the Chief Architect for Symantec, running stuff out of Culver City. When I interned in Cupertino on a business team there were tons of Bruins in Culver City doing work.</p>
<p>I’m also stuck like you are. In order to keep Brown i have to have a chemistry class with Baugh, whom everyone says avoid like fire. But I feel like I would need to keep Brown because the other teachers focus alot on mechanical calculations and not concepts, and also aren’t very good either. But If i changed math teachers, I would be able to get Tolbert, who I hear is hard, but you actually learn from, which is what I want.</p>
<p>In the 3+ years that I’ve been at UCLA, Nachenbeg has been the best professor I’ve ever had. I would definitely NOT pass up on the experience.</p>
<p>Plus, you have a great opportunity to get an internship straight out of first year if you receive an A in his class (which isn’t THAT difficult).</p>
<p>Also, even if you take Nachenberg, that doesn’t mean you can’t still approach Smallberg during OH or attend his lectures.</p>
<p>Ugh, I’m still getting conflicting advice. Some people say to take Nachenberg at all costs, and some say to avoid Martin at all costs. I can’t do both :P</p>
<p>look heres how i would look at it… math is math, its more about practicing it to ace test rather than learning it all during lectures… 31b is just differentiation which is important but it is easy to master with practice… now you have to think about why people suggest you avoid martin at all cost, is it because his tests are difficult? is it because he is not a good lecturer? if people tell you his class is hard then i would say take it, the curve will keep you up… for me i rather take a professor that’s known to be great and just put a little bit more effort into studying for 31b :)</p>
<p>Sounds good. Time-wise, the Nachenberg-Martin combo works better for me. I’ve taken calculus before, so between (bad) lectures, the discussions, the student math center, the textbook/ssm, etc. I think I’ll survive.</p>
<p>Now I just need to pray that none of the lectures for the classes I’m taking fill up before I can get to them…</p>
<p>you’ll regret it if you miss out on the nachenberg experience. plus, you can study for math from the textbook without ever having to go to class if you wanted to. you’ll get a fair share of terrible professors in your 4-year life at UCLA, but it’s rare to get the best professors.</p>
<p>at first i was going for smallberg for cs32, song for 31b, and zocci for physics… but if i get nachen, then i’ll have to get martin for 31b and musu for physics (with time conflicts between math lec on friday and physics dis)</p>
Thanks guys</p>