Introduction to Formal Languages and Automata Theory

Computer Science department

Sheila A Greibach

Introduction to Formal Languages and Automata Theory

Computer Science department

Sheila A Greibach

Add Review
from 10 users

Ratings

Bad
Overall 2.8
Good
Hard
Easiness of class 1.3
Easy
Heavy
Workload 1.3
Light
Not Clear
Clarity of professor 2.3
Clear
Not Helpful
Helpfulness of professor 3.8
Helpful
AD

Tags

There are no relevant tags for this professor.

Grades

Spring 2010
23.4%
19.5%
15.6%
11.7%
7.8%
3.9%
0.0%
A+
A
A-
B+
B
B-
C+
C
C-
D+
D
D-
F

Grade distributions are collected using data from the UCLA Registrar’s Office.

Fall 2009
14.3%
11.9%
9.5%
7.1%
4.8%
2.4%
0.0%
A+
A
A-
B+
B
B-
C+
C
C-
D+
D
D-
F

Grade distributions are collected using data from the UCLA Registrar’s Office.

Fall 2006
23.3%
19.4%
15.6%
11.7%
7.8%
3.9%
0.0%
A+
A
A-
B+
B
B-
C+
C
C-
D+
D
D-
F

Grade distributions are collected using data from the UCLA Registrar’s Office.

Spring 2006
23.3%
19.4%
15.6%
11.7%
7.8%
3.9%
0.0%
A+
A
A-
B+
B
B-
C+
C
C-
D+
D
D-
F

Grade distributions are collected using data from the UCLA Registrar’s Office.

AD
AD
1 of 1

Reviews

Quarter Taken: N/A Submitted June 10, 2010 Grade Received: N/A

My evaluation is below, I just realize that I put the wrong course, it should be cs 181. Sorry.

Quarter Taken: N/A Submitted Jan. 11, 2010 Grade Received: N/A

She's a very nice person, and clearly one of the smartest pioneers of computer science. BUT, her close is incredibly boring and VERY hard to follow. She's very sharp - you can tell that from office hours, but the smartest don't make the greatest teachers.
It's a very tedious class if you don't have a good TA, and I don't know how much longer Brian's going to stick around. So, if this TA isn't Brian, you might want to think twice

Quarter Taken: N/A Submitted Aug. 23, 2009 Grade Received: N/A

She is the worst professor I've had at UCLA.

It is clear that at one time, she was a preeminent mind in her field (around 8th week, you do a section on "Greibach Normal Form"). I would guess that she was at one point a pretty good teacher as well- she at least makes attempts at humor, she seems to understand the material pretty well, and she seemed to at least mildly prefer that we learn something. That being said, she should have retired 10+ years ago.

I sat in the third row, and I couldn't hear a word she said. She somehow managed to mumble in a quiet monotone. We started with 40 people in the class, and by the time I stopped going (around 6th week) there were only 12 students still showing up. Her course reader is a collection of fragmented sentences giving vague psuedocode descriptions of algorithms you've never heard of.

The savior of this course was Brian Taigku, the TA. If you have to take this class, don't bother going to lecture- just go to your discussion section and you'll be fine.

Greibach seems like a nice person, and I have nothing against her personally, but it is clear that she is at UCLA for the sole reason that she is a big name in the field of automata theory. I was surprised her bruinwalk raitings were so high- I suspect that people gave her some leniency because she IS a sweet old woman. Just not a good professor.

Quarter Taken: N/A Submitted June 21, 2009 Grade Received: N/A

This professor is terrible at lecturing. The course notes you buy have most her slides. My friends and I learned everything from the TA, who wrote the homework, held great discussions, and offered helpful office hours. The thing is that the professor write the actual midterm and final. So like previously stated, review the practice midterms and finals to get a good taste of her exam style.

If you're considering taking the class one quarter, check to see if the TA is Brian. If so, take the course. He helps your understanding and overall enjoyment. Good luck.

1 of 1

Tags

There are no relevant tags for this professor.

ADS

Report Review

Did this review contain...

There are errors in the report form.

Thank you for the report!

We'll look into this shortly.