2.5
Quality3.4
Difficulty44%
Would Retake105
Reviews44%
Would Retake
105
Reviews
Rating DistributionOfficial
5
9
4
18
3
29
2
20
1
29
What Students Say
“He was a fantastic teacher who really cares about his students”
PSYCH125 - 5.0 rating“Do the entire study guide, you'll get an A”
PSYC1 - 4.0 ratingClass Info
Online Classes
100%
Attendance Mandatory
33%
Textbook Required
38%
Grade Predictor
Your expected effort level
Predicted Grade
B+
Grade Distribution
Common Tags
Rating Trend
Improving
+0.21 avg changeRatings by Course
PSYC229
5.0
(1)PSYC194B
5.0
(1)PSY139P
5.0
(1)PSYCH3
4.0
(1)PSYC001
4.0
(3)Difficulty by Course
PSYCOFREADING
5.0
PSYCHOLOGY001
5.0
COGNITIVE
5.0
PSYCH127
5.0
PSYC002
4.5
Reviews (105)
It's clear that he knows the material well, but he doesn't present it in a clear manner at all. His exams are very difficult and long. NOT recommended.
He really knows his statistics, its just too bad he can't teach it. I stopped going to class because he didn't make any sense, was no help in understanding material. Plus his tests are really hard, especially for a lower division class, open book though
This professor may be difficult to understand sometimes,but he is a genuinely nice person and just wants you to do well in his class. Follow his study guides, the tests draw heavily from them! Take good notes in class and you will do fine on the test.
He knows his stuff, but often forgets that we don't know. The lectures, therefore, are somewhat disorganized and hard to understand. And the tests are far too difficult.
I really really wish I could say this guy was a good professor. I really liked him, was a totally nice, laid-back teacher, but he had such a hard time conveying ideas verbally. He'd often take one subject too far, and everyone was left baffled.
Very nice guy, lectures were difficult to impossible to follow. Study guide and text were of no help. He's extremely enamoured of statistics, the course was more about stats than the Psych of Reading. Tests were very difficult
nice guy, just not a great professor. knows his stuff, but has a hard time verbalizing. Also, tests are very challenging and expect a lot.
He's a nice guy and teaching what he loves (much of the research covered in class was his), but he just can't teach. I felt completely lost in this class and gave up on the readings, but between my notes and the study guides I was somehow able to scrape together a good grade.
He seems like a good person but his teaching skills aren't that wonderful, he loves graphs and stat stuff so you're into that you'll love it, the class was hard and the readings were hard to understand but if you just go to lecture and look over the review sheet it's not as bad, i got a B
This class was horrible. He knew about stats but had no clue how to teach it to people that didn't understand stats. the tests were so hard and long. He is the worst. And the TA were horrible also
Prof. Kawamoto is a bit eccentric, but this is a good thing in a math class. It livens things up. He's a little confusing sometimes, but nothing major, and he's truly nice and wants to help you do well in his class.
Nice guy, but horrible teacher. Hes very willing to help, but the topics are extremely abstract. His tests are ridiculously hard and complex. Steer clear if you care about your gpa.
Prof. Kawamoto is the most horrible professor I've ever had. He seems nice enough and he's pretty flexible about make up exams but he just can't teach. If you ask him a question about the material, you will probably end up confusing him and he in turn will just confuse you even more. Avoid his classes if possible.
easy enough class, his lectures were basically summaries of the book, which made review easy. Tests were tough, essays requred lots of details, but he did a good job preparing us for them
Alan Kawamoto is the least inspiring instructor I had at UCSC. I actually stopped going to class at one point b/c if you read the book it was the same material... just clearer. He also screws up his tests. Overall, watching your nose hairs grow is probably more entertaining than going to lecture.
I thought he taught the class well. The material is difficult and complex, but he is certainly enthusiastic about the subject matter.
Sitting in his class right now. All he does is read from the powerpoint that's available online. Why am I even here? This guy has 20 minutes to convince me to come to his next lecture. So far, it doesn't look very good.
One of the worst professors of all time.
He's a really great person, but his lectures are only okay. He's very confused with the technology most of the time (in the Media Theater there are four laptops in front of him) and a good ten minutes out of almost every class is devoted to figuring out the Power Points.
He says everything that is already in the book and his test was on totally random stuff that he didnt cover and the book didnt fully explain. You need to have good logical thinking skills to do well on his test. I dont want to take a class from him again.
class was very challenging but a nice change of pace from the usual memorize everything approach. He really emphsizes logical thinking
He is not a good prof. His teaching style is somewhere between dull and boring. The material he teaches does not usually cover what are on his tests, and a 30 min study session with a couple of friends or a TA is sufficient for a B on any of his midterms.
kawamoto is a nice guy, not a lecturer though. his classes are really boring, and his lectures are confusing and not very helpful. to do well in the class, read, talk to TA's, and work with friends.
UNORGANIZED, UNCLEAR AND UNSURE OF WHAT HE IS DOING. HIS TESTS SEEMED TO HAVE HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THE MATERIAL. IT WAS VERY DIFFICULT TO LEARN.
He is one of the most intelligent ppl I've ever met but def. the worst prof. ever. His lectures will confuse you more than teach you anything. If you must go to his lecture, write down the notes and don't listen to him. Pray that you have good TAs. Our TAs should have just taught the class themselves. I'm glad it's all over. I retained nothing.
No Comments
This guy was just confusing and unorganized. He had some interesting examples and videos, but I'm sure any psychology professor could have come up with them.
stay away stay away stay away stay away, i cannot emphasize this enough, unless you have an immense knowledge of cognitive psychology, and/or computer science/engineering, stay away from this class. it is one of the hardest classes i have ever taken.
BOOOOOORING!! All of the cog psych/stats people may find it interesting, but snooze fest for me. I did OK, and followed the material OK, but I feel like it just wasn't relevant enough for me to take the info further. The only thing I remember is what a "plosive" is. Sorry...
A very bad professor. Extremely badly written m/c exam. Occassionally cool examples per his powerpoints, but generally very boring and thick with information. For the exam he doesn't give a review sheet because there's so much information. He should take that as a hint.
He is a bad teacher. I don't think he knows anything about pyschology. The lectures were pointless, because you can get everything you need to know from the textbook and outline online. If you have to have him as a teacher, don't expect to learn anything about psychology.
horrible. boring, monotonous, confusing, and the exam blew.
worst teacher i have ever had. his voice made me want to stab myself to death. he is vapid, unintellegable, and makes little to know sense in lecture. his test is misleading, several of the "answers" are disputable, if not wrong. save yourself...avoid kawamoto.
Out of the three teachers we had for intro to psych, I thought Kawamoto was the BEST! He is soo straightforward and easy to understand in both his lecture and his test. Most importantly, his test questions and answers are very straightforward and he won't trick you with flowery language or more than one possible answers like the other two professor
A little unclear but otherwise a pretty good teacher. His midterm was easy if you paid attention and did the reading.
we just finished his portion of the class, and it pretty much sucked. he was very unclear in his lectures. all he did was read off the slides, but somehow made it more confusing.his explanations of things were roundabout, defining things in terms of themselves as opposed to trying to put them in context with examples. he is a nice, funny guy though
After a couple of classes with him, I stopped going to class and just reading the lectures online. He was dull and useless. I still did okay in the class- he's a pretty easy teacher.
Unfortunately you're kinda stuck with this guy if you take psych at all cuz you have to make it through this class with 3 professors! I found him confusing and dull. He movied too fast, so be prepared for class with the online lectures. You're better off studying from the book instead of going to class because you'll get more out of it.
haha, kawamoto was awesome...i was never bored in his class because he always included funny video clips. and he taught rather well.
intro to psych..love the class cuz i love psych..everyone thought it was hard (in the class) i thought it was pretty straightforward... just study before the tests and you should do fine..the papers are important so make sure to do well but if you communicate with your TA's it should be a painless experience
OMG so boring. He taugh the more science part of psych and everything he had on the slides was in the book and on the test.
Don't be fooled by the picture, lol. He has completely white hair now. Bring food to class; his teaching style is very bland, and his voice can lull you to sleep. Psych classes are so impacted--even though it's an intro course, they make it difficult to ace on purpose!
Explained difficult materials very well. He was also always available to meet individually for help on projects.
I attended only one of his lectures. I passed his test easily, but definitely make sure to study out of the book for it, even if the TA's say to only look at his lectures. Very boring, with a few fun in-class activities. I taught myself better than he taught me.
Hard to follow, lectures were just him reading from the slides. Do not recommend him
Verrryyy boring and bad at explaining. I was really interested in the biological aspect of psychology, but his lectures put me to sleep in no time flat.
He really wasn't that boring, and this is coming from someone who hates the subject matter of the section he taught, too. His test was also the easiest out of the three quizzes. Basic memorization.
Alan is an awesome guy. I really enjoyed working with him. I'd definitely recommend taking a class and getting to know him.
Dull. Dull. Dull. Dull. I am interested in the topics and can't stay awake through his lecture. Literally. Did I mention he was dull?
He is extremely boring...the material on his subject is hard enough as it is without him confusing us with vague explanations and examples that make no sense. Just study hard for his section because his test is hard and unclear.
Incomprehensible does not begin to describe his style. I have never fallen asleep in a lecture until I tried to make it through one of his. Will ramble on and on, mumbling about a topic for an entire lecture that will never appear on the exam. Takes perfectly straightforward material and, just like the other two professors, twists it beyond reason.
Took this class in Fall 2K9. He was the first teacher for the psych 1 team. He was okay... kind of dull and a little weird but harmless. I liked him the least but maybe just because I hate cognitive haha and all the sciences! But he's really just... okay...
The biology/cognitive portion of Psychology is all ready extremely complex, yet Kawamoto takes this material and words it in the most complicated and unclear way. I absolutely love the subject of Psychology but his teaching skills clearly needs improvement. He is wordy, boring, and simply makes me never want to attend class.
His overall rating is low because his lectures and lecture material are fairly bland. Neurons and Brain lobes might not be everybody's cup of tea, but what he says goes straight from lecture to midterm. He looks a little bit like older Jimmy Page for any Zeppelin fans out there... just stay awake to take good notes and he's a breeze.
Horrible. I dreaded going to class. He is the worst of the three, but you only have to deal with him for a month. The next 2 teachers (Callanan and Cardilla if thats who they will be) are WAY better.Just read the book and talk to IAs. But yeah his lectures blow and he breezes by them too quickly. Beware.
Pretty boring... I did not like the subject matter of his portion, though so that might have had something to do with it. He was my least favorite of the 3 psych 1 professors. Study hard for his test.
Terrible teacher. Unclear and confusing in lecture. Hard to take notes. The only way I could understand was through going to section. TA was wonderful. Grade break down is 50% midterm and 50% final. Does not adequately prepare students for exams. I withdrew after midterm because the mean was 50%. Barely curves exam grades. Do not take him!!!!!
worst teacher i had at ucsc. do not take his class. he talks slowly and doesn't make sense... rambles on and no one understands. he knows what he is talking about and is smart, but can't teach and is very unclear. entire grade is 50% midterm 50% final which really sucks too...
Not a good professor. He doesn't use powerpoint, makes lecture UNBEARABLE, and even if you do go to lecture, you won't have learned much! If you can, skip this class! If you NEED this class, only go to section, and skip the lectures. Make sure you study study study for the exams, because they are 100% of your grade!
He is incredibly boring. I skipped lecture almost every time because I could NOT stand his monotone voice. He was super hard. The material was difficult to learn. Failed his test. Don't recommend!
Professor Kawamoto does his best to help his students, but cognitive psychology is difficult and he had a lot to teach in a short amount of time. It's important to go MSI for this course and especially this section of the course.
While Kawamoto is boring to listen to in lecture, you should still go to his class. People who say that his tests are impossible in this class probably just didn't study enough. As long as you go to lecture, take good notes, and study the study guide you should be fine on the tests. It's not an easy A, but you can get an A if you put in the effort.
His lectures are somewhat boring, but please go to lectures and take good notes, because he tells you what is important for the test and what is not. Also, try to understand the concepts not but the facts then you will do great.
His teaches cognitive portion, which is hard for many but he curved the exam 10%. I got a 76% raw and it got bumped up to a 86%. Pretty dope to me.
Old and terribly boring
Alan's tests are difficult, just took the first midterm in psych1 and the average is a 65%. With that being said, it isn't impossible to get a good grade. I took AP Psych in high school and studied my butt off (went to MSI & section) got an 86% on his test which curved to a 96%. Topics are difficult-definitely possible to do well if you study!
Boring lectures, but the tests are straightforward. Just memorize studyguides and you'll be fine.
Professor Kawamoto answers student questions really specifically and spends a lot of time going over details in lectures. You can tell he wants students to do well. Does get a little verbose at times.
Kawamoto teaches the cognitive part of psych 1 which is difficult on its own. He tries his best to get all students to learn the material. He genuinely wants you to learn it but the examples he gives aren't the best but the test are usually curved. I went to office hours and that seemed to help.
Eh. he's very tricky when it comes to his midterm.
Alan is one of the most laid back guys. Really smart and knows a lot about psych, linguistics, and cog sci. He will teach you things no one else in the department is even familiar with.
Went to office hours and section and took great notes! I felt very prepared for the first exam and studied as much as I could and still got a D on the midterm. The class is really hard and made me hate cog sci
I was impressed with Kawamoto's knowledge in his field. His classes may be a bit tough but he is an awesome professor who cares about his students.
This class was mind-numbingly boring. I was so disengaged by lack of slides or much of any media supplement during lecture. He would just stand and talk very slowly and rarely use the blackboard. His examples were too long for easy concepts, and then rushed over hard material. Had I taken this class earlier, I would have switched majors. Terrible.
He talks really slowly, which is boring most of the time but sometimes he'll say something useful reaaaally slowly, so pay attention. Sections are a must because this class is technical in the beginning and the TA puts it into layman terms very nicely. 2 midterms, 1 non-cumulative final, all short answers, multiple short parts per question.
Kawamoto is cool, you don't need to even go to lecture because his slides are online and are super detailed. Do the entire study guide, you'll get an A. Test is not nearly as hard as it seems.
Lectures weren't exactly interesting, but his slides are online and his test revolves around them so class tech isn't mandatory. Know everything on his study guide! It is basically the test itself.
This dude is probably one of the worst teachers I've had in my life. He's boring, reads from slides, doesn't know how to articulate thoughts in a coherent way, doesn't understand technology, and gets information mixed up multiple times each lecture. This class was a big bummer
Professor Kawamoto is a good professor. This was his first time teaching this class. His lecture slides were not available for student use due to the fact that they were another professors. 3 exams given, which was worth a total of 75% of the final grade, no study guide, just expected to study off notes taken from lecture.
I ain't know why everyone hating on the OG Alan Kawamoto. He was a fantastic teacher who really cares about his students. Maybe if yall went to class and stopped slacking yall would understand.
Alan is a great guy! He has an accent and speaks really excitedly so it can be hard to understand, but he's more than willing to elaborate and never skips a question. He's super passionate about what he teaches and explains things visually which really helped me.
Honestly, not as tough a lecturer as he may seem. The content may scare some people because it appears to be more in the STEM side of psych, but with studying, reading, and MSI, the exam is totally doable. Very passionate about his field.
Kawamoto was the first of three professors who taught PSYC 1 for the spring 2019 quarter, and he was alright. His lectures were a little boring and he had a strong accent, but the content of his lectures was useful and delivered well. His test was the hardest of the three that we took in the class, but it wasn't anything ridiculous for PSYC 1.
Dr. Kawamoto is sort of a hidden gem. Cares about each student, and works with you. He doesn't shy away from the complexity of neural networks, but explains it well and is helpful. He seems to understand students. The material is very cutting edge and cool, if you just show up to learn and go with your gut on projects, you'll do great.
I enjoyed my class natural & artificial intelligence with him! Yes, it was challenging- especially the Hws at the beginning, but he cares so much about the students so if youre stuck you can get help! I learned so much and actually might say this was the best & most interesting class Ive taken at UCSC! Keep in mind I am super interested in CS tho
I do not recommend this class if you are online. Alan could barely figure out zoom or canvas. Also, the whole grade was based off of 3 tests, and some 2 point attendance quizzes. He never curved the grade itself, just told us what the letter grade would eventually be, so I never knew my grade in the class, so I did p/np. I did not enjoy at all.
there is not much homework for this class but the homework is helpful and so are sections the most important thing to do is to read the textbooks and you will pass easily
Honestly, I did not enjoy his lectures. A lot of what he lectured about can be found in the textbook. Great guy, but his lectures never stuck with me. The homework was pretty easy and what it entailed was obvious.
HIs lectures were boring as heck and a watered down version of the textbook. Your grade is based on 7 homeworks and the 3 tests he gives throughout the quarter. As long as you read the textbook and find study guides online, you'll do fine. If you could choose, don't take him. If you have to take him, just know there's a lot of self learning.
I took the same class with Prof. Seymour and hated it, so taking it again with Prof Kawamoto was definitely an improvement. His lectures can be a bit dull if you read the book, but if not or if you were confused they're helpful. The discussions probably more helpful for me personally than the lectures but I didn't find anything too challenging.
Lectures were long and hard to follow, oftentimes ended up just writing down slides and leaving. Tests are mainly based off readings and theres a lot so be prepared. Personally thought Alans a great person just not the best teacher! TAs rlly helped.
it's so bad, i want to give you a zero, but i can't. so i give you... a one.
I took this class as a no pass before I completed the class. The material is sick but prof Kawamoto doesn't teach it well. His lectures only left me more confused and he didn't take time to explain much. If you are looking for an easy A don't take this class. This class also had a 1o minute presentation and a 15-page paper so take that as you will.
If you struggle with tests do not take this class with him. There were 3 tests, and that was all. sections were good though, but i also didn’t get my grades for the first midterm until the day before the second, and i didnt get the grade for the second midterm until after the final. it says a lot about the professor when the test average is 53%
Alan isn't great at explaining complex neurological concepts to students who have never seen them before. It was almost like he expected you to already know what he was talking about. I didn't like the style of his lectures either. I would recommend waiting to take Psych 20 with one of the other profs at UCSC that teach it the following quarter.
I learned the most from my TA in this class. She was phenomenal. Overall Alan's lectures were just reading off slides, and it didn't help that it was online.
Too much reading for me to keep track of. Quiz answers were on quizlet, and weren't very complex. Dense subject matter.
The worst class I've taken at UCSC. His lesson slides and lectures are wildly disorganized and extremely hard to follow. Simple concepts are explained horribly and complex concepts are nearly impossible to understand. I am shocked at how incoherent lectures, exams, and homework were. Not one aspect of this class felt like a good learning experience
You need to study in this class. Kawamoto is very reasonable on grading, and he ended up curving everyone's exams almost 2 letter grades up. There are a lot of topics to understand so take the time to learn them... if you study the concepts...YOU WILL SUCCEED. Don't be discouraged by the other reviews, this class is hard but it is reasonable.
Tests are worth a lot of your grade, but Alan gives out generous curves so I wouldn't worry too much about getting a bad grade on the test. There are no prereqs so if you have never taken a psych class, I would not suggest this one being your first because the content is already hard enough and the professor will only make it more confusing.
Kawamoto is kind of a boring lecturer, so it's going to be hard to go to class if you have a habit of skipping (also because the classes are like 2 hours long). If you read the lecture slides and the textbook you'll be fine. I wasn't doing too well in the class until I studied really hard for the final by reading the textbook a lot.
The class is mainly based on a few exams, but he is a generous grader. Curves have been 1-2 letter grades up. But, if you are not interested in a lot of self-teaching and textbook reading, this is not the class for you. You need to be reading/studying A LOT out of class to do well on exams. The class is not crazy difficult, just takes more effort.
I don't understand why this Professor has such an awful rating. This class was difficult but I didn't expect less, we are in college NOT high school. The key to his class is understanding the concepts and not just memorizing definitions. This is definitely one of the classes I've enjoyed the most. He is also pretty flexible and curves when needed.
This class was extremely stressful. Ended ok but curve was huge and only bc we argued a 50% average test score and a C is not an ideal score. My D was curved to a B+ but the tests were nothing like the hws, and he didn't communicate with the TAs so they could barely help us either. He also said he'd only ever taught online/open notes exams.
he's a nice guy, but his lectures are all over the place. his tests are kinda hard to understand, but if you've used InQuizitives before, that's how the tests are formatted. definitions on slides are quite unclear and don't reflect what's on the test, so you're better off skipping and reading the book and self-teaching.
Class Info
Online Classes
100%
Attendance Mandatory
33%
Textbook Required
38%
Grade Predictor
Your expected effort level
Predicted Grade
B+
Grade Distribution
Common Tags
Rating Trend
Improving
+0.21 avg changeRatings by Course
PSYC229
5.0
(1)PSYC194B
5.0
(1)PSY139P
5.0
(1)PSYCH3
4.0
(1)PSYC001
4.0
(3)Difficulty by Course
PSYCOFREADING
5.0
PSYCHOLOGY001
5.0
COGNITIVE
5.0
PSYCH127
5.0
PSYC002
4.5