I chose the 60s cluster because my schedule only fit two of the clusters and the other one was the myth cluster and I've heard it's a lot of reading and not very enjoyable (if you're not into it -- it's not just Greek mythology like Percy Jackson lol). People say 60s cluster is one of the easier ones (I've heard that the food one is easy and maybe the old age one). Personally, I struggle with time management and "studying smarter" so I had to dedicate a lot of time to the course and it was a struggle for me to get an A. There are two essays per quarter (one assigned by each professor), so fall quarter we wrote a literary analysis paper on a book we read and a polling data paper about survey trends in the 60s and winter quarter we wrote a paper analyzing Jimmy Hendrix's "All Along The Watchtower" and a paper about an oral history interview. If you are comfortable with writing and manage your time well then they shouldn't give you too much trouble. The essays are 4 pages max. Personally writing is not my thing and I struggled with it (for various reasons) but there are many resources for help with your writing and I was able to get A's on them. There's a midterm, no final in fall quarter and a final, no midterm in winter quarter. The average amount of reading is about 40 pages per week, and if you keep up on that, you'll be set for discussion. It also depends on who your TA is because they're the ones grading your papers and tests.

Looking back on it, I'm glad that I took it because I learned SO much about American history and just general knowledge that I wasn't taught (I practically lived under a rock before college). As you've probably seen, you're taught by four professors who all specialize in different fields, and seeing it all come together really rounds out your education and it's really special. You also learn about culture and some really important events and that affected how things are today. The 60s were such a rich time in history with so much turbulence and changing ideals so it really just makes you more aware and gives you a deeper understanding of today. For me, this was a very valuable course for these reasons. There's so much to gain from it.

Spring quarter is completely different for the clusters because instead of two lectures for an hour and 15 per week with 200ish people taught by four professors and one discussion for two hours per week with 20ish people taught by your TA, you just have one seminar for 3 hours per week with 20ish people that you get to choose the topic for. I chose a seminar on film (with Patrick Craven) and it's very easygoing and fun but informative and I really enjoyed it! (I'm interested in a film and TV or theater minor). Again, it'll differ depending on your TA (they teaching the class now)

Professor Decker is so fucking boring; by the end of the second quarter I hated his lectures with passion. The other professors were somewhat better, specially Fink, but overall the class gets really tiresome by the Winter quarter. However, I would advise sticking with it until the end, as the Spring seminar was quite fun and enjoyable (I took it with Tom, but it is different for every TA and year, so YMMV). Personally, I think it's worth the extra credit.

If you have in interest in any of American history, 60's music, or contemporary politics, this is definitely the cluster to take. However, this class is interesting in spite of Professor Decker, not because of him. His lectures are dry and full of black text and white backgrounds. A slight improvement on Decker is Professor Reiff but if you don't love looking at slides full of blocks of text that are not essential to the material you need to know, you probably won't be a fan of her either. Vavreck and Fink are both stellar lecturers and manage to make complex topics approachable and engaging. They are the reason I enjoyed this cluster through the first two quarters.

Took this class with Decker (English), Reiff (History), Vavreck (Poly Sci), and Fink (Musicology). Decker and Reiff are super boring lecturers, but Vavreck and Fink make up for that by being AMAZING lecturers. Vavreck is just super engaging and smart. Fink is hysterical and always sings and dances. The midterm is so easy and the essays are graded pretty leniently. The class is a super easy transition into college. Recommend Patrick and Tom as TA's.

Don't take this cluster, freshmen. Seriously, it's not a history class. It's a bunch of crap that makes no sense. Yes, we are talking about the sixties but with no chronology and purpose. I know the cluster is looking very nice on paper, but trust me, don't. Just take a regular GE. As for Decker, who is in charge of the "English" portion of the Cluster, he's very boring. I can't stay awake.

I loved the cluster 60. Absolutely engaging and fascinating subject matter covering the 1960s. Even though there are weekly readings, most TA's don't do reading quizzes so the work load is pretty light. Overall, great class.
Four professors teach the class and not all of them are engaging lecturers. They did get better as the quarter progressed. Basically, if you fall asleep easily in lecture, be wary of this class.

Pros: You knock out a bunch of GEs with one class
Cons: You need to put in a good amount of work
This was probably one of the easier GE clusters, but still not an easy class. The course readers are almost useless except for weekly discussion questions that you only need to skim the reading material for. You have to go to lecture if you want a good grade in the class because the slides posted are not enough to get you by. I would take the class again just because it satisfied so many GEs, not because of the material.

Ahhhh Professor Decker. This man is a horrible lecturer, he goes off on so many tangents and it's really hard to understand what he's talking about, ever, even when not lecturing. He treats us like children with his condescension and constant patronizing, I had enough of this in high school, I expected more in college, especially so at UCLA. That being said, he lectures about Semiotics which to this day I have no understanding of how it is relevant to the class. Decker is very unclear. I think I have a strong abhorrence for this guy. He plays a major role in the early readings (two books) and our literary analysis paper. You must incorporate some of the things he teaches into your essay. TAs determine your grade in the class, the professors just administer the exams (what will be tested) but they are actually graded by your TA. Your TA is your best friend! Get a good one!

Professor Decker (and a few others on his team) managed to turn one of the most interesting decades in American history into what I have no doubt will be the most boring class I will ever take. The content is fascinating, but I hated walking into lecture in the morning because I knew the professors would screw it up somehow. Decker's lectures are almost entirely auditory, so visual learners will walk out with very little. I find him irritating, a feeling also expressed by many of my classmates. I managed to get an A in the class because of one stellar paper I wrote, but even that paper I can't say I enjoyed. I highly recommend avoiding this class and any others taught by Decker.

Since he's the head guy for this cluster I'll review him and the class overall. Decker is a very difficult lecturer to follow. He often starts talking about whats on his slide, which usually barely makes sense, and by the time he moves on you're even more confused than before. He also tends to go into painstaking analysis for everything. I usually started off strong taking notes, but about 20 minutes into the lecture I was hopelessly lost. He also seems to think that he has way more power than he does since he's the head guy for this cluster, so he can be super condescending and kind of a douche.
I wouldn't recommend this cluster at all. The material presented in lecture has nothing to do with the papers you write, which are basically all of your grade. All of the lecturers are pretty awful except for Maverick, who is the only one who is remotely interesting. The amount of reading is absurd compared to how little it is discussed in section, but for some reason they test you on it on the winter quarter final by making you identify excerpts from the reading. The description of the cluster is also bogus, because the entire winter quarter the only relevant music is "All Along the Watchtower" because you have to write a paper on it. Then as soon as you turn that in week 7, they give you a new paper due week 10, while you also get a final on everything going back to fall quarter. The way the class is set up makes no sense and makes it very difficult on you. Don't take it, no matter how interesting it sounds.