Professor Nasiali's lectures are multi-dimensional in terms of history, politics, culture and economics, entertaining and she does a great job of connecting modern French history to today's political and cultural environment. Her class mainly focuses on the political development of modern France at the beginning of the Third Republic and goes into the early 2000's. She encourages students to engage with questions throughout the lectures which are usually short. Once a week, participation will be graded by a group write-up of a primary source document assigned for the week which are not difficult. She remembers everyone's name and face, so constant attendance and participation are helpful. She also offers extra credit and encourages attendance to office hours. Overall, this is one of the easier classes I've taken at UCLA and would highly recommend it for the interesting material and great professor.

This class is by no means an easy A. Professor Nasiali is a kind and warm professor who genuinely cares for her students not only for their academic success but also for their personal-wellbing. This class is compromised of 1 midterm, and revised 2nd midterm, and final paper. The topics of this class are complex. The professor is a tough grader, but she really wants her students to improve on their historical inquiry. She offers extra credit and it definitely helped my grade. If you are looking to do the bare minimum please take another class. Professor Nasiali's curriculum is the UCLA standard, so if you're not passionate about History and have no motivation to improve your writing skills you're setting yourself up for failure in this course.

I'll split this review into two parts, the professor and the class.

First the class:
The class is broken down into this:
There are 100 points in the gradebook, Midterm Paper (40 pts) Final Project (45 pts, includes Annotated Bibliography 10 pts), Attendance and Participation in Discussion (15 pts). Every single one of these is graded by your TA. You TA will make or break you grade in the class, so when you are working on the final project (which is a podcast or an op ed) and your midterm go to your TA and ask them about what they want to see and how you can get the best grade possible on these. If you screw up your midterm, there going to be a revision opportunity which allows you to get back at most 3 points. During my discussion my TA give you a full point for the day if you came and said at least one thing. So make sure you do your part and ask how your TA is going to grade participation. The lectures are pretty useless especially if you took AP Euro or AP World History. She requires you to buy the textbook to read and because you will have to quote it at some point but I never read any of the readings or textbook and still got an A.

The Professor:
She is very nice and helpful and she is a pretty decent lecturer. I love History but I was so bored during her lecturers I do not know why but I just did work during the lecture. She is very friendly and helpful and makes it easy to participate.

Overall: This is a good GE that gets the Historical Analysis and Diversity Requirement

You really need a great amount of work in this class to have an A.
For the midterm draft, she will give you a lot of revising advice and DO follow her instructions (although lots of them are actually contradictory and ambiguous).

If you show your improvements, she will give you a pretty good grade.

A great GE, the lectures are to the point and move at a good pace. The professor makes an effort to be personable and available. The workload is extremely minimal, there are textbook readings and short sources each week (I found that you didn't ever have to read them to be successful as she covers in lecture what she wants you to get out of it). We had one midterm where you wrote on three key terms of your choice out of a larger bank of terms and this was the same format for the final. The final was not cumulative. I would recommend anyone take this for a GE, it was my class that required the least work and least amount of my attention and still got my highest grade of the quarter in it.

This class was such a chill GE. The professor was genuinely so nice and passionate. She doesn't post any lecture slides, which sucks, but she has audio recordings of all the lectures. Most of the time, your TA truly decides your grades based on participation and midterm and final grades. Midterm and final were super easy; I just had to memorize key terms and connect them in short answer responses. As long as you attend the discussion and glance at the primary sources for the week, you are honestly guaranteed participation points. Overall, I highly recommend it if you want an easy GE for a packed quarter with a super sweet professor who genuinely cares about your learning.

I found the course content interesting and engaging and it aligned with my interests in the global dynamics of history. However, Professor Nasiali's approach to teaching was rigid and inflexible, confining students to a set structure of lecture and leaving no room for self-exploration or self-led digression of the content. There was a noticeable lack of empathy towards students' learning needs and circumstances, with sloppy audio recordings of lectures and no way to revise previous content than to decipher her back-and-forth storytelling. Enticing to hear as a fireside story maybe, but greatly unhelpful in this context.

Additionally, the grading system in this course was highly subjective, with all major components including the midterm and final being in the form of an essay; however, the problem emerges as the evaluation of work appeared to be at the complete, subjective discretion of the TA rather than based on consistent rubrics or criteria. This made the assessment component imbalanced, and needless to say, it caused high degrees of uncertainty and difficulty over how work would be evaluated.

Factoring in the lack of empathy for students, it is safe to say that I will never be taking Professor Nasiali's classes again. Very disappointing, considering that the course content was very interesting and had the potential to be highly engaging.

This class was a great GE to take. Overall only one essay and one podcast or Op-Ed as the final. There were no in person tests and the grade was based off of these two assignments. I would very much recommend taking this class.

I took this class because it was the only GE that fit into my schedule where the prof didn't have terrible reviews. Going into it I was not too interested in the material, but I will say Dr. Nasiali made the lectures very engaging and entertaining. I am not a huge history nerd, but I enjoyed how passionate Nasiali was about the subject and how she also made an effort to connect with her students and learn their names. The class is really only based on a midterm essay, a final project, and participation. The final project is pretty fun because you have the option to do a podcast episode on a historical object, which I actually quite enjoyed. Your grade in this class, like many GEs, is based more so on the TA than the prof. So, while Nasiali was a great professor, my TA was a harsher grader in my opinion and so I did find myself struggling a bit in the quarter after receiving my first essay grade. However, we were allowed to do essay revisions which really helped. Overall I would say this is a pretty good class to take if you are looking to fulfill a GE requirement or are just interested in history!

class was easy, wasn't a huge fan of prof Nasiali and her lectures, but you don't need to go to lecture to succeed in the class. Spencer was the best TA, definitely recommend his section. grade was based on participation, a paper, and a final project (either an op-ed or a podcast). straightforward to succeed, but the class covers so much I didn't feel like I learned much