Professor Chung is the best physics professor I've ever had. His lectures go through the full derivation process clearly, and while his homework and exams are difficult, they ask deep conceptual questions that force you to truly understand the material. Even though this was just an introduction to GR, I have a complete understanding of the material

This class was just another instance of out-of-touch STEM pedagogy at UW. Don't get me wrong--Dan is actually a pretty good teacher and you can tell that he cares, but exam averages were in the 40% range. 50%+ for an A. Really? This class could have been taught in Russian and I would have performed just the same. I hardly learned anything.

Incredibly knowledgeable about physics and cares about pedagogy. However, he expects a lot out of students (sometimes too much) which makes this far from an easy A.

Keeps all his lectures online but does some practice problems in class that are helpful. So far prof. Chung seems to be pretty good at teaching a course that can get confusing. Overall, you can tell he knows what he's talking about.

He is my favorite physics professor and this was my favorite physics course. He did justice to this beautiful physics course. I loved all his math and proofs. If you like math, then you will like him. His teaching belief is that you must understand all the math before you tackle the physics problems. Keep that in mind if you want to do well.

Professor Chung is one of the best professors I've ever had. His intro courses were taught at a very high level. They do a great job preparing you for future work. Initially I found the courses extremely challenging. 1 on 1 he's extremely helpful, and will answer questions (or point you in the right direction) for anything you can come up with.

Very intelligent guy, but extremely difficult class. With the curve however it is pretty easy to get an A. Be prepared to put A LOT of extra time into reviewing lectures, as they can be difficult to follow in class.

Chung has good intentions, but tends to lose the class easily in his complex mathematics and proofs. His office hours can be intense, as he really drills you to talk your way through problems. He has difficulty explaining complex concepts in a simple way. However, after taking a class with Chung other classes seem pathetically easy.

Extremely hard class, but you learn an enormous amount. Even though it's really hard, Chung curves the class so at the least 30% get A's, and up to 50% get AB's. You'll learn a ton and it's easy to get an A if you apply yourself.

If you want to learn physics, take it with Dan Chung. He will challenge you to accomplish tremendously difficult things, then help you as much as you need. Lecture notes are posted online, and if you need extra help Dan is very good at making time for students. If you want to be inspired, and if you want a career in physics, take physics with Chung

Incredibly intelligent and even more intimidating, Professor Chung is somewhat unhelpful because he has trouble seeing where students are having trouble.however. His lectures are well organized and exams often come straight from the homework. Awesome curve--the mean is usually quite low soif you're smart, it's it hard to land In the A range.

I don't really get everyone's problem with professor Chung. Yeah the class is sort of rough, but I mean it's honors physics. Just take the time outside of the class to review the material and you'll be fine. He also always ends up curving the class so almost everybody gets an A or AB so there's no reason to stress.

Introductory physics with Professor Chung may not be the best idea. He is brilliant, but sometimes can assume that something is "trivial" and not explain it overly well to students in lecture. If you go to his office hours, he will help you until you understand the concept or solve the problem. This was not an easy class, but is worth it.

Not clear on the subject. At all. And this is an introduction class. It's terrible.

The best way to describe Dan is to compare him to Cell from DBZ: he will kick your ass, but is so badass you'll still have to respect him. Such an expert in his**** that it's intimidating. He tries, but he over complicates things to make it "interesting". Unless you're Gohan or Goku, hope on a generous curve to save you.

As said before, nice, intelligent guy, but really does NOT understand how to teach. Homework given out is mostly calculus based proofs to fill in holes in lecture, but equations are never explained. Looks out on a lecture hall of confusion, repeats himself, then moves on. Class was curved pretty decently. 25 pt curves on tough 100 pt tests.

Okay, Dan probably shouldn't be teaching intro physics, for the same reasons others have pointed out. The wording on his hw assignments is way more complicated/confusing than necessary. However, Dan's a genius, he posts lectures on the web, and solves problems in several different/unconventional ways. Interesting guy, but could kill your GPA.

Not good for an intro course. He killed any love of physics I may have had, and I took it for 3 years in HS. Does unnecessarily complicated proofs. If you have a good TA you'll be okay, mine reexplained entire lectures in about 10 min.

He is extremely intelligent, and has a very in-depth understanding of the subject of Relativity. The only problem with his teaching is that he can't teach! He doesn't understand how/why some students don't understand the subject the first time he goes over it. If you ask the same question more than once, after he "answered" it, he gets angry!

Should never teach intro physics. Writings on the powerpoints are incomprehensible and he writes insane proofs and passes them off as simple and common sense (as if you were a grad student) If you take this class, take it with somebody else

As I said on my comment sheet at the end of the semester... Astrophysicist + teaching intro Physics= NO BUENO He is obviously very smart and when equations are he expects you to understand it fully

Not very helpful and thinks students should understand everything as easily as he dors

Definitely expects you to have prior knowledge of subjects covered even though it is an intro course. Spends the entire class going over the most complicated proofs you have ever seen. The tests he write are very very hard but are often therefore curved graciously.

Often times he would expect knowledge of things that hadn't been covered in the class, even though it was an intro class. Most days he also didn't cover all of the lecture, some days we barely got into what we were supposed to.

I agree that he should not teach intro courses. He expects that you are as intelligent as your grad students. He made an interesting contrast, however, to Eriksson, who tended to baby the students. Chung's sweet and intelligent but quite difficult to understand. Don't take him for intro physics.

He should not teach an introductory course. His is obviously brilliant, but first semester students are not and he doesn't realize that. I imagine his higher level courses are interesting, but when I had him, he was unorganized and expected too much from his students.

His presentation is very clear and organized.

He is fine, but he sometimes over values his students.

Dan is brilliant in his field, but he cannot impart any of his brilliance upon his students. He spends a lot of time talking about how easy the problems are, in spite of the fact that his students struggle. I would still recommend the course, however, because of the other professor, Mark Eriksson.