professor
Wei Min

May 2021

Min is a good person, but his teaching skills are subpar which I understand cause he definitely focuses more on research. He reads from his ppts pretty fast (positive side is that we almost always end early by ~10 min). I ended up not going to lecture by the halfway point of the semester and would read the ppts myself and only watch the lectures if I didn't understand what was going on. The ppts themselves aren't horrible - they're just a regurgitation of the textbook plus some extra sample questions. His way of class engagement (optional) is asking people what the next step/answer to a sample problem in the ppts is, and he does have quite of special way to verify if you truly understand the answer or not: he continually asks you why the answer you chose (correct answer), not another answer, making you second guess yourself. It's not arrogant or egotistical in any way, he's just trying to make sure your understand the logic behind solving what he calls a "standard question." One thing that everyone probably hated was that he assigned all the odd-numbered textbook questions as "homework" (not graded, just practice)... there are ~180 questions per chapter and every midterm has ~2-3 chapters of information on it. No one has enough time to do all those questions. Min also only gave 1 practice exam per midterm, so I had to rely on Savisky's old exams to make sure I covered/reviewed all concepts before each midterm. The quizzes were horrible. They were only 2 questions long (4 points total) and normally 1 mc for 2 points and 1 mc with multiple answer choices correct (didn't tell you how many) for 2 points. Considering 1 point on a quiz is 1 point of your overall grade, they're pretty bad. Also, some midterm/final questions were also pretty convoluted. Best bet to study is his practice exam and Savisky's old exams. It's not worth your time during finals to do all the textbook questions. Pro tip: if you think you're doing badly, everyone else is also doing badly. You don't have to shoot for a good raw score for this class, just beat the curve.

Dec 2019

this professor often comes across as arrogant, egotistic and confrontational. it is clear that he is a very intelligent man but that does not make one an excellent professor. he often interrupts students when they speak and fails to help students when they say "I don't really understand this" - instead saying "why don't you look it up and come back next week"

Jul 2018

I did not enjoy this class at all. The professor would skip a lot of slides, and I felt very lost in the material. The tests were often tricky, with questions that varied a lot based on which TA wrote them. I ended up alright with the curve, but as someone who always loved chemistry, I was deeply disappointed by the class. There were times I felt very overwhelmed with the material and other times where it was smooth sailing. Office hours were a life saver. Honestly, the TAs did a lot to try and make up for the class, and I thank them for it. They hosted some additional review sessions which were incredibly useful. There were times that I did not know what was going on at all until the TA explained it. Honestly, if you only need one semester of chemistry, definitely take regular. It will give you a GPA boost. Even if you need more than one semester, consider trading the GPA boost for this class.

Apr 2018

I personally would not recommend this class if you are a person who needs a helpful professor. Wei Min just lectured based off the textbook (at one point in the class attendance dropped severely as a result) and often made assumptions to what we should've already known about certain concepts which became unhelpful if you come from a background where you don't have this prior chemistry knowledge. I didn't find his TA's (Benedkit and Yupeng) very helpful either. I'd recommend finding a tutor either with CSA or outside if you can afford one. Actually, I'd recommend not taking this class to begin with, find a different section.

Dec 2017

Wei Min is a very intelligent guy. He's done a lot of work in the field of Physical Chemistry, and through his lectures, you can tell he is extremely passionate about Chemistry. He's super witty and seemed like he wanted us to understand the material. However, at times, this fell short because he has the tendency to go off on tangents and complicate concepts that could've been communicated much simpler. I guess that because he is so distinguished in the field, his explanations, at times, flew over our heads and seemed esoteric. He lectures using Powerpoint but he uses the slides more as a guideline rather than reading straight from the slides. I found it easier to just print out the slides before hand and write notes on that, which many students did as well. His exams are HARD. Mainly because he doesn't assign any practice problems/ specific areas to concentrate on. He literally just says, "Do all the chapter problems." I found it helpful to read the chapters that corresponded to the lecture and do the most challenging problems in the textbook. But sometimes, the exams covered topics that were not deeply covered in the textbook. I recommend going online and finding alternate practice problems that are different/ more in depth than the ones in the textbook, just so you avoid any curveballs in the exam. His tests aren't something you can prepare for a few days before. Start studying the chapters immediately after he lectures on them. (I know you guys will probably still try to study the night before, so you will have to learn the hard way) If you take this course, make sure you pay attention to those small topics he just barely brushes over in lecture, because chances are, 1 or 2 obscure questions related to those topics will be on the test.

May 2016

i haaaaaaate him

Jan 2014

PChem was as expected a difficult course. The problem sets were difficult and time consuming (the 2nd one in particular !). Min is a pretty good professor and tries to make the class interactive- however he didn't seem to have a good feel on what was difficult vs easy for the students- the result was that some exam problems were virtually impossible ( he had to make one of the problems on the first midterm a bonus question). The practice exam he gave for the first exam was way easier than the actual first exam. The material was interesting though and for most people it was required for their major. To succeed work in a group for the psets (they were worth 35% so do well in them) study like crazy for the exams and hope that you immediately "see" the solution for the exam problems....it's almost guaranteed for some you won't and you'll end up calculating randomly and hoping for partial credit though ( he gives good partial credit). If you've taken differential equations and have a good calc background things will probably be a bit easier but you can get by if not just get the basic calc stuff down. Just ensure you do well on the psets they are worth a lot. The first midterm was harder than the second..,,the exam was probably in between in difficulty closer to the first.