One student found the lectures had almost no correlation to the homework, creating the feeling of taking two separate classes and requiring significant extra effort to connect the material.
What you’ll be able to do
Design and analyze efficient algorithms based on the paradigms of divide-and-conquer, dynamic programming, and greed.
Construct clear, concise, and sound proofs for algorithmic correctness and complexity statements, applying logical reasoning, synthesizing definitions and theorems, and effectively communicating structured arguments.
Formulate abstractions of computational problems, and design and analyze efficient reductions between computational problems.
Describe, select and apply paradigmatic algorithms and reductions dealing with numbers, strings, graphs, and networks, including some that go beyond the standard paradigms and/or involve more intricate mathematics.
Recognize computational intractability, demonstrate NP-hardness, and articulate the repercussions.
(MATH/COMP SCI 240 or STAT/COMP SCI/MATH 475) and (COMP SCI 367 or 400), or graduate/professional standing, or declared in the Capstone Certificate in Computer Sciences for Professionals
“Used by” includes alternatives; linked courses may
have other requirements. This is a best-effort interpretation; check the
catalog requirements above.
Raw average: 2.33/5 from 168
quality ratings. The adjusted rating blends this with the UW review average
(3.66/5), weighted as 20
additional ratings. Smaller samples stay closer to that average. Each
captured review is counted once in the prior; this does not correct who
chooses to leave a review.
For this course: 1.8/5 raw quality · 4.5/5 difficulty · 124
reviews
RMP profile ↗ · All captured review dates; profile matched by name.
Past student reviews · Marc Renault
Marc Renault taught a difficult course where students reported lectures were rushed, poorly explained, or disconnected from homework, while others noted clear expectations and generous grading for bonus points. Opinions on his demeanor varied sharply, with some finding him kind and reachable, while others described him as rude, unhelpful, or dismissive of student questions.
Recent recorded grades — Spring 2025: 2.97 GPA, 47.3% A/AB (n=433 letter grades); Fall 2025: 2.89 GPA, 37.7% A/AB (n=305 letter grades); Spring 2026: 2.75 GPA, 36.7% A/AB (n=368 letter grades).
Historical instructors & teaching patterns
Past student reviews · Alexander Brooks, Shuchi Chawla
Alexander Brooks thought deeply about algorithms, sometimes making material confusing, but was always willing to stop and explain. Shuchi Chawla delivered detailed lectures, and although exams were hard, a generous curve helped students. Both instructors emphasized thoroughness and support, though students noted the course required significant independent thinking and preparation.
ALEXANDER BROOKS is recorded teaching in Spring 2020. Recorded history may be incomplete and does not establish a future schedule.
CHRISTOS TZAMOS is recorded teaching in Fall 2018, Spring 2020. Recorded history may be incomplete and does not establish a future schedule.
DEBORAH JOSEPH is recorded teaching in Spring 2007, Spring 2008, Spring 2009, Fall 2009, Spring 2011, Spring 2012, Spring 2013, Spring 2014, Spring 2015. Recorded history may be incomplete and does not establish a future schedule.
ERIC BACH is recorded teaching in Fall 2008, Fall 2013, Spring 2015, Spring 2016, Fall 2016, Fall 2019, Fall 2021, Fall 2023. Recorded history may be incomplete and does not establish a future schedule.
JEREMY MCMAHAN is recorded teaching in Spring 2020. Recorded history may be incomplete and does not establish a future schedule.
JIN-YI CAI is recorded teaching in Fall 2011, Fall 2017, Fall 2020, Spring 2022. Recorded history may be incomplete and does not establish a future schedule.
MANOLIS VLATAKIS is recorded teaching in Fall 2024, Spring 2026. Recorded history may be incomplete and does not establish a future schedule.
MARC RENAULT is recorded teaching in Spring 2020, Fall 2021, Spring 2022, Fall 2022, Spring 2023, Fall 2023, Spring 2024, Fall 2024, Spring 2025, Fall 2025, Spring 2026. Recorded history may be incomplete and does not establish a future schedule.
SANDEEP SILWAL is recorded teaching in Fall 2024, Fall 2025. Recorded history may be incomplete and does not establish a future schedule.
SHUCHI CHAWLA is recorded teaching in Fall 2006, Spring 2010, Fall 2010, Spring 2012, Fall 2012, Fall 2014, Spring 2016, Spring 2017, Spring 2018, Fall 2018, Spring 2020. Recorded history may be incomplete and does not establish a future schedule.
Recorded history may be incomplete and does not establish a future
schedule.
Calendar & sections
Spring 2027
Schedule loads here as you scroll.
Section
Mode
Enrolled / capacity
Waitlist
LEC 001
Classroom Instruction
0 / 225
0
DIS 311
Classroom Instruction
0 / 45
0
DIS 312
Classroom Instruction
0 / 45
0
DIS 314
Classroom Instruction
0 / 45
0
DIS 313
Classroom Instruction
0 / 45
0
LEC 002
Classroom Instruction
0 / 225
0
DIS 321
Classroom Instruction
0 / 45
0
DIS 322
Classroom Instruction
0 / 45
0
DIS 323
Classroom Instruction
0 / 45
0
DIS 324
Classroom Instruction
0 / 45
0
DIS 325
Classroom Instruction
0 / 45
0
DIS 315
Classroom Instruction
0 / 45
0
Times are Central. Select a meeting for
details; export includes recorded dates for the selected sections. Enrollment reflects scan time.
Students described the course as difficult but well-structured, noting that clear expectations and a participation-heavy grading scheme made the semester less stressful, though the final exam remained a significant challenge.
Recent recorded grades — Spring 2025: 3.06 GPA, 52.4% A/AB (n=483 letter grades); Fall 2025: 3.04 GPA, 45.2% A/AB (n=438 letter grades); Spring 2026: 2.82 GPA, 39.9% A/AB (n=501 letter grades).
difficulty & workload
Past student reviews · Marc Renault
One student found the lectures had almost no correlation to the homework, creating the feeling of taking two separate classes and requiring significant extra effort to connect the material.
Past student reviews · Marc Renault
Opinions on Marc Renault’s teaching varied widely; some students appreciated his kindness, while others criticized his rushed lectures and felt he failed to explain concepts clearly or provide useful visual aids.
Topics
Algorithm design paradigms such as greed, divide-and-conquer, dynamic programming, reductions, and randomness.
Computational intractability and NP-complete problems.
Skills
Design and analyze efficient algorithms using standard algorithmic paradigms.
Prove algorithm correctness and complexity claims.
Construct reductions between computational problems.
Recognize and demonstrate NP-hardness.
Grades
Historical instructor
Spring 2027 · Projected
Before grades are released
2.452.45–3.433.43average GPA
Approximate 80% prediction interval
0.04.0
About this estimate
The course’s semester-average GPA, not an individual student’s grade.
The center uses 5
same-season terms, weighted toward
recent results.
The range uses the finite-sample 80th-percentile rank of absolute errors
from earlier same-season forecasts. Each forecast uses only records from
earlier terms. At least four forecasts are required; bounds are rounded
outward and limited to 0–4. This is an empirical estimate: changing
instructors or grading policies can reduce its coverage.
8 earlier forecasts · 0.20 GPA average error.
Grades over time
Through Spring 2027
More grade details Grade mix, volume & source data
Where this course fits relative to
Latest available grades · Spring 2026 · all course levels
2.822.82GPA
Higher than 22% of other courses in this group.
Course GPAs · red marks this course’s range
501501letter grades
More recorded grades than 9797% of other courses in this group.
Typical course in this group: 66.066.0 letter grades.
About this comparison
1280 courses over the same term, each with at least 30 recorded
letter grades. Cross-listed courses count once. GPA is not a measure
of difficulty or teaching quality. The typical course is the median by
recorded grade count; tied values are not counted as lower. Grade
counts describe course scale, not unique students or typical section
size.
Descriptions compare GPA with this group’s average: at least 0.20
higher or lower; otherwise close to average. Section size uses median
recorded enrollment: small up to 30, mid-sized 31–99, large 100+.
Lectures and discussion/lab sections are described separately.
Sources & history
UW–Madison
Catalog & offerings
Descriptions, prerequisites, and recorded course offerings.
Catalog observation history
Observations at scan time; dates do not imply when a catalog change took effect.