EC ENGR 10
Circuit Analysis I
Description: (Formerly numbered Electrical Engineering 10.) Lecture, four hours; discussion, one hour; outside study, seven hours. Requisites: course 3 (or Computer Science 1 or Materials Science 10), Mathematics 33A, Physics 1B. Corequisites: course 11L (enforced), Mathematics 33B. Introduction to linear circuit analysis. Resistive circuits, capacitors, inductors and ideal transformers, Kirchhoff laws, node and loop analysis, first-order circuits, second-order circuits, Thevenin and Norton theorem, sinusoidal steady state. Letter grading.
Units: 4.0
Units: 4.0
1 of 1
Most Helpful Review
Fall 2019 - I am writing this review only because I think this page does injustice to Prof. Abidi's EE 10 section. Most people seem to agree that he is a fantastic lecturer, but they bury this under reels of complaint about how terrible his tests are. Fact is, they just aren't that bad. Maybe his upper-div tests are draconian (I don't know), but for 10 they are absolutely fair. You should definitely take him for 10 if you can. In fact, unless it puts you back by too much, I'd recommend waiting to take 10 with him.
Fall 2019 - I am writing this review only because I think this page does injustice to Prof. Abidi's EE 10 section. Most people seem to agree that he is a fantastic lecturer, but they bury this under reels of complaint about how terrible his tests are. Fact is, they just aren't that bad. Maybe his upper-div tests are draconian (I don't know), but for 10 they are absolutely fair. You should definitely take him for 10 if you can. In fact, unless it puts you back by too much, I'd recommend waiting to take 10 with him.
Most Helpful Review
all the reviews that say he's by the book are completely true. everything was from the book. the homework, extra credit, midterm questions, final... just read the book, do all the homework and go through the examples because its what he goes over in class. it's really easy to over study for this class because he could make it a lot harder than he does.
all the reviews that say he's by the book are completely true. everything was from the book. the homework, extra credit, midterm questions, final... just read the book, do all the homework and go through the examples because its what he goes over in class. it's really easy to over study for this class because he could make it a lot harder than he does.
AD
Most Helpful Review
Basically (<- get used to hearing this word) she was average. Her teaching was not great, not much better than the textbook (though I found that if I went to lecture I didn't need to read the textbook). Midterm average: 56%, Final average: 41% so her tests were pretty hard. Her grading on the tests was not generous as the M16 student noted. You need to FINISH the problem and double check it to get full credit. In some senses it was more beneficial to spend your time doing the easier problems and checking them to get points for certain.
Basically (<- get used to hearing this word) she was average. Her teaching was not great, not much better than the textbook (though I found that if I went to lecture I didn't need to read the textbook). Midterm average: 56%, Final average: 41% so her tests were pretty hard. Her grading on the tests was not generous as the M16 student noted. You need to FINISH the problem and double check it to get full credit. In some senses it was more beneficial to spend your time doing the easier problems and checking them to get points for certain.
Most Helpful Review
Winter 2018 - EE 10 really is more complicated than it needs to be. The lectures are boring albeit clear. However the professor is scattered and doesn’t really make a clear distinction between topics. The homework’s are way too long for the amount they contribute to the grade. Also the exams are graded way to harshly. The lazy TAs only give credit for a few key points for each question so if you miss those “milestones” you get essentially zero points. They also do if you miss A you miss B-D too even if the methodology is right. The utter lack of effort by the TAs shows fundanmetal flaws and they will make abysmal professors and further degrade the reputation of Ucla Engineering. Overall this class has eroded any sense of liking circuits which is a real shame. Take this class because it’s required. Oh and if you’re CSE take this as a warning to switch to CS. The extra E in your degree isn’t worth the suffering of this class. Only pro is the curve is good.
Winter 2018 - EE 10 really is more complicated than it needs to be. The lectures are boring albeit clear. However the professor is scattered and doesn’t really make a clear distinction between topics. The homework’s are way too long for the amount they contribute to the grade. Also the exams are graded way to harshly. The lazy TAs only give credit for a few key points for each question so if you miss those “milestones” you get essentially zero points. They also do if you miss A you miss B-D too even if the methodology is right. The utter lack of effort by the TAs shows fundanmetal flaws and they will make abysmal professors and further degrade the reputation of Ucla Engineering. Overall this class has eroded any sense of liking circuits which is a real shame. Take this class because it’s required. Oh and if you’re CSE take this as a warning to switch to CS. The extra E in your degree isn’t worth the suffering of this class. Only pro is the curve is good.
Most Helpful Review
I think his tests were all pretty fair and that the averages should have been much higher. I'm not one of the people that did really well in this class either, I got a B. Maybe the reason the scores were so low was because of the ambiguity of some of the questions? He was not bad at teaching but sometimes it was hard to understand what he was saying because of his accent/fast talk.
I think his tests were all pretty fair and that the averages should have been much higher. I'm not one of the people that did really well in this class either, I got a B. Maybe the reason the scores were so low was because of the ambiguity of some of the questions? He was not bad at teaching but sometimes it was hard to understand what he was saying because of his accent/fast talk.
AD
Most Helpful Review
Fall 2018 - I really disliked Pamarti. Probably the worst professor I've ever had. Every time I see a picture of him I start reaching for the toilet paper to wipe the shit off my monit- oh wait that's Pamarti. He's just the biggest asshole of all time. Here's a conversation I had with him: Me: So why didn't I get any points for this question? My setup equations are correct, but I put the R in the numerator instead of the denominator. P (interrupting loudly): Yes, your setup is correct. I can give you three points (out of 40) for that. Your answer is wrong though. Me: My answer would be right if I put R in the denominator. Even with my wrong setup, though, all my followup algebra is correct. P: That's true, but your answer isn't right. You just don't understand the fundamentals. You shouldn't even have done the math, I don't know why you did. You need to go back and learn the basics. Me (somewhat confused): I was just trying to show my thought process. P (interrupting again): Yes, but your thought process is wrong. I won't give points for wrong work, even if it's correct work. And I'm just like ?????????????????? Fuck this guy
Fall 2018 - I really disliked Pamarti. Probably the worst professor I've ever had. Every time I see a picture of him I start reaching for the toilet paper to wipe the shit off my monit- oh wait that's Pamarti. He's just the biggest asshole of all time. Here's a conversation I had with him: Me: So why didn't I get any points for this question? My setup equations are correct, but I put the R in the numerator instead of the denominator. P (interrupting loudly): Yes, your setup is correct. I can give you three points (out of 40) for that. Your answer is wrong though. Me: My answer would be right if I put R in the denominator. Even with my wrong setup, though, all my followup algebra is correct. P: That's true, but your answer isn't right. You just don't understand the fundamentals. You shouldn't even have done the math, I don't know why you did. You need to go back and learn the basics. Me (somewhat confused): I was just trying to show my thought process. P (interrupting again): Yes, but your thought process is wrong. I won't give points for wrong work, even if it's correct work. And I'm just like ?????????????????? Fuck this guy
Most Helpful Review
This guy rocks. If you ever have the opportunity to take him, do it. I took Professor Abidi for 10 the previous year and that was a huge mistake, hence why I retook it with Razavi this year. He was head over heels better than Abidi. The exams were brutal, but they make you think. Razavi doesn't just make you memorize formulas, he encourages you to use intuition and think before you apply the math. And this is how engineering needs to be in every class here. In the end you feel so much more accomplished, since you can actually understand circuits, rather than just the answer to 2 + 2. As far as the grading goes, I'm pretty sure he is a godsend. 7 homework assignments total 20% of the grade, whereas the midterm and final make up 40% each. However, if you do better on the final, you will get 45% towards your final and 35% for the midterm. I scored probably 20-25% below the average on the midterm because the only thing I couldn't do was Thevenin/Norton. Turns out that was the entire exam. I definitely got an average of C's/B's on the homeworks, and thought I did well on the final, but maybe not enough to get a good grade. Only to check MyUCLA and see I ended up with a C+, when I was all but sure I'd get a D. Or with Abidi, probably an F----- (ya, 5 minuses) on his grading scale. Razavi only gave a handful of D's and C-'s. Most of my friends who were doing poor as well got C+'s due to improvement. Overall he is an understanding guy and grades on improvement it seems. Word on the street is that the EE department asked Razavi to teach EE 10 this quarter since upperdiv students have not been learning the fundamentals in lower div circuits classes. To the department and to Professor Razavi, I just say thank you.
This guy rocks. If you ever have the opportunity to take him, do it. I took Professor Abidi for 10 the previous year and that was a huge mistake, hence why I retook it with Razavi this year. He was head over heels better than Abidi. The exams were brutal, but they make you think. Razavi doesn't just make you memorize formulas, he encourages you to use intuition and think before you apply the math. And this is how engineering needs to be in every class here. In the end you feel so much more accomplished, since you can actually understand circuits, rather than just the answer to 2 + 2. As far as the grading goes, I'm pretty sure he is a godsend. 7 homework assignments total 20% of the grade, whereas the midterm and final make up 40% each. However, if you do better on the final, you will get 45% towards your final and 35% for the midterm. I scored probably 20-25% below the average on the midterm because the only thing I couldn't do was Thevenin/Norton. Turns out that was the entire exam. I definitely got an average of C's/B's on the homeworks, and thought I did well on the final, but maybe not enough to get a good grade. Only to check MyUCLA and see I ended up with a C+, when I was all but sure I'd get a D. Or with Abidi, probably an F----- (ya, 5 minuses) on his grading scale. Razavi only gave a handful of D's and C-'s. Most of my friends who were doing poor as well got C+'s due to improvement. Overall he is an understanding guy and grades on improvement it seems. Word on the street is that the EE department asked Razavi to teach EE 10 this quarter since upperdiv students have not been learning the fundamentals in lower div circuits classes. To the department and to Professor Razavi, I just say thank you.
AD
1 of 1
