Maybe she worked for other people but I found her lectures very difficult to stay focused on and her materials outside of class were completely insufficient to help me if I missed something from the lecture

She's an amazing lecturer, but idk if I'm just a little slow or the tests were really hard. No cheat sheet for the exams, and you have to understand all the concepts and memorize long proofs. You likely won't fail as long as you show up to lectures and take the pop quizzes. They act as a buffer if you do badly on the exams. This class is doable.

She's a really nice and caring professor. The exams were kind of tough but the project wasn't too bad and it's worth a lot of your grade. The homework essentially covers stuff that we learned in the lecture. Attendance is key to making sure you're up to date with the content covered in the course.

The class is pretty straightforward, with two exams, a midterm, and a final project. As long as you go to lecture, the exams will be pretty easy. Everything she says in the lectures ends up being on the exams. She's a great lecturer and a kind professor.

Very good lecturer. Tells you whats is going to be on the test and what isn't. Tests are fair and graded easily. Take this class with Pandey if you can.

Extremely rare situation where she is a GREAT lecturer but really struggled to organize the class at around the midterm and beyond. There is often a grey area on what you can be tested on due to lectures not directly lining up with slides and the last two "practice exams" raised more questions than answers. She knows the content clearly and low HW.

Definitely not a bad lecturer, she really wants all of us to understand everything. However whenever she is talking about something it's always "it will be on the exam". Her practice exams are not that helpful cause it's just topics and nothing else. 3 exams for this class is too much and you are expected to memorize every single proof basically.

Quality of this class fell off around the midterm, very unfortunate because until then her lectures were strangely intuitive despite pressuring that everything will be on the exams. Beyond that it was very unorganized and was frustrating, because we're learning proofs in what's supposed to be primarily a coding class. Do take with caution.

too many tests

got cooked on a couple of the tests and still ended up with a B+. super nice, apparently the course is supposed to not be as proofs based but honestly she still made it great. the stats department at ucsb is absolutely terrible but she stands out as a great professor.

Shes a great professor and lecturer but the class is very proof heavy (you just have to memorize them not like formulate them). theres 2 class exams, one midterm, pop quizzes, 4 homeworks and a final project. grades pretty nicely and is very friendly. dense lectures and a lot of material though

Pandey is amazing at teaching proofs. She explains every proofs very clearly and intuitively, but this is not what this course is supposed to be about. I expect to learn more about analysis based on coding in this course, but clearly this is not what I experienced. I would recommend her to teach classes like 120 rather than 126.