Lots of reading, impossible to review for tests, interesting content if you are into that kind of thing, overhated professor but still difficult to understand

I honestly am livid that i got a B+ in the class because the class was easy; readings are dense and making yourself a study guide is important, but it's not hard. I got A's on both tests but failed the essay for despite following my TAs advice. DeLombard can be super condescending and I honestly struggled to stay awake. beware your TA

Very condescending teaching style. Didn't give much info about how the tests would be formatted so you were walking in blind. You're gonna need study sessions to figure out what the readings even meant. She uses old texts that have difficult language, I could never get through a whole reading because of how dense and hard to understand they were.

Intro to Legal humanities was a very unenjoyable class as it focused on very outdated philosophy of law. A few of the guest lectures were interesting however the subject matter of her lectures were uninspiring. My attempts to contact the professor were almost completely ignored and ultimately, the personal contact with her was disheartening.

Lots of dense and long readings, which you will need to know for test. Lectures and section aren't mandatory but highly recommended you go as you get a lot of clarifications. TA's were sometimes lost as well but if you study her slides you can pass the tests. It can get confusing but try not to overthink it and readings do get easier.

super cool chick she's a great person but was not born for teaching. gave us tests on insane amounts of reading, had no study guides, gave us no notice before tests. the TAs didn't know how to help us either. she literally ruined my idea of law and english classes altogether. she seriously needs to quit this job and work retail or something.

You know those teachers in high school that are genuinely out to get their students? Prof Delombard is one of those. Honestly, the class was interesting but be ready to attend lectures every time. There are A LOT of guest lectures- more guest lectures than lectures by her. ENG 37 is definitely more of a philosophical class than about real law.

You have to do the readings, grading criteria aren't super clear for tests and essays. Lots of guest speakers. Wouldn't take unless you're very interested in the topic.

I've only been in her class 3 weeks and it has been the worst 3 weeks. Be ready to not know what is going on during lectures, she seems pretty nice, engages with the students during lecture, etc. but the reading is too heavy and most of the time you don't know whats going on. Would never take again and do not recommend. Dropping this class.

103LL, DO NOT TAKE! The midterm and final are very reading-heavy and extremely specific. If you can memorize, then you will do okay. The essay requires substantial analytical thought. Do not take for GE. Discussion posts require knowledge of course concepts that reflect her lecture points. Class is manageable but it is more so her. Cat lady grumpy

She will treat you like an english major. So do the readings, contribute to discussions, and start those papers EARLY. Her feedback is great, but you have to earn the grade. Tests are either shockingly easy if you memorize the right things (done in 10 mins), or IMPOSSIBLE if you don't. Very, very difficult class, but you can learn a lot from her.

Easily the worst class I have taken at my time at UCSB. The tests were unnecessarily hard and based on books that we were supposed to memorize. This class was absolutely not worth the time or effort and there was no support from the teacher. Do not take her classes.