Probability · Statistics
midterm, final, weekly homeworks which were harder than the midterm and final.
Homework: 30% (book is on cramster, problems are of moderate difficulty but the theory problems can be very tricky) Midterm: 20% (6 questions, relatively easier than the final, questions are usually easier than questions on the homework) Final: 50% (6 questions, harder than the midterm but you are given 2 hours instead of 75 minutes, questions are about the same difficulty on the homework and focused mainly on the 2nd half of the class) On his exams there will always be a couple questions on problems that he goes over in lecture, so be sure to review problems done in class before the exams. You are allowed to use 2 sheets of paper (front and back) for a cheat sheet for both exams.
Weekly HW, and it's HARD. Tons of problems and proofs. FIVE EXAMS, which is nice since your risk is diversified, the exams are doable if you go to every class and study your notes carefully. NO FINAL, not in the form of a cumulative one at least. Each exam requires at least 3 days of pain and suffering to prepare for battle. Exams are not open notes/book, you have to remember a lot in addition to being able to figure puzzles out during the exams.
Weekly hw set containing 5 questions of varying difficult, 2 midterms (easier than hw), 1 final (way harder than midterm; more comprable to hw problems)
9 homeworks (lowest grade dropped) 30% Midterm 30% Final 40%
Not bad. Problem sets were generally short and fairly easy. Exams weren't that hard.
He is a smart guy that knows his stuff. The explanations were fine but sometimes went over math that wasn't in the prereqs. Calc 3/4 and linear algebra would've been helpful here. At the beginning of the course, he warned that the second half of the semester is different and usually harder than the first half, which I found to be true. He also included two or three lectures that discussed advanced topics that probably wasn't covered in the 3105 class. I didn't need R for the class, I got by with Excel just fine.
For those of you who are unaware, Probability 4105 is going to be a difficult class, regardless of whatever professor you have. Of all the professors in the stat department, Scarsini, in my opinion, is one of the most qualified and nicest teachers. His quite competent in his teaching ability and his lectures are straightforward and slow paced. During his lectures, he does a good job of balancing: introducing new concepts, proving those concepts, and doing practice problems for application. He will always answer any questions people have in class before moving on to new material, and takes the initiative in making sure his students are understanding the material being taught. During his office hours he will do any problem you want him to, review concepts that you don't understand well, and even provide helpful hints on how to do problem sets. If this is your first class in probability, I recommend you to NOT missing a single class. After week two, is when you start getting into "real" probability and attending class becomes highly important. His lecture notes were the only things I used to do the problem sets and study for the exams, with a few occasions of looking up a few things in the book. The book for the class is not that helpful and does a poor job of explaining the harder concepts.
The guy is a sansei in teaching math. Notes are perfectly organized and clear, the proofs are laid out so nicely with examples and everything. He has a clever sense of humour that breaks up the mind f#*$ing curriculum. Don't try to outsmart him, you will fail, nobody outsmarts Prof. Kim. The Text by Ross is good, and can be used as backup if lectures are too hard to grasp. Make no mistake, this course is difficult, but I think he curved up grades slightly, still tough to get an A. In the beginning the pace of the class was fine, but then we were flying through the last few chapters. He does give you an idea of what's expected of you to know for the exams, but the grading was harsh and sometimes stupid, but that's on the TA's. All in all, based on pure teaching skills, he is one of the best if not the best lecturer I've come across. He knows where students can get confused and dissects the essence of things. He actually INTERACTS with the students, which is unheard of in this day and age, very socratic in his method, he will call on you and have you go to the board and attempt at a proof. Not for the faint of heart, but if you wanna be a math samurai, enter into his dojo, only the honorable survive....
The content in this class is amazing, but Wright is a pretty bad lecturer. He tends to just read off pdf files containing his poorly handwritten notes. And so, lectures can be rather dull. Nonetheless, this was definitely my favorite class this semester. Also, sometimes he randomly gives extra credit if you can do a homework problem on the board in class. He also talks a lot about his experience working with IBM and teaching at University of Arizona.