Economics?

<p>So does anyone know how good the economics department is at UCLA? Any stats or experiences?</p>

<p>Our economics department is rank #14 in the nation, basically on par with our other graduate schools.</p>

<p>[Rankings</a> - Economics - Graduate Schools - Education - US News and World Report](<a href=“http://grad-schools.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-graduate-schools/top-economics-schools/rankings]Rankings”>http://grad-schools.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-graduate-schools/top-economics-schools/rankings)</p>

<p>There isn’t much of a variety of undergraduate courses at UCLA and upper division courses can fill up fast. People say the variety over at Berkeley is better. A lot of our professors are only “associate” or “assistant” professors. Others are “visiting faculty” that never happen to leave. For Econ 1, I had a professor, Bresnock, that received her degree from University of Colorado - Boulder and identifies some CSU as her primary university.</p>

<p>Overall, the program isn’t great but it’s public education for you. I don’t really know how much it is better at other UCs. I will say that we do have a variety of companies that visit our campus every so often so this is a good place to look for an internship. People say we are the “bottom tier” university many companies are willing to scout at so take that as you will.</p>

<p>that doesnt sound too promising… are you in economics? do you feel it’s a good program?</p>

<p>i thought 14 was a good number…</p>

<p>I’m a Biz-Econ major.</p>

<p>I wanted to major in business. I wanted to go to USC but couldn’t afford it. I’m fine with going here, especially since lots of people (my neighbor owns a mid-sized CPA firm) and the Pres. of the company I worked for last summer (his son goes to SC for business) said that “UCLA was better” and that I should be thankful I got in (there were some racist overtones in there). </p>

<p>Bottom line: major in Econ if you WANT to do Econ. major in BizEcon if you want to do accounting. </p>

<p>All I’ve heard from others in Econ is that the department “sucks”. I’ve heard about how UCLA econ is basically strict theory with very little application, something that in my mind doesn’t sound like the best. And like the other poster said, a heavy majority are pretty much permanent visiting faculty that UCLA doesn’t have to tenure (supposedly there’s a guy here who’s tenured but can’t teach because his bigotry and racism will bring lawsuits against the school - they pay him 175k+ to twiddle his thumbs, sit in the corner, watch porn, and drink!). </p>

<p>So yeah, public education, even at UCLA, is declining severly. I definately think in 20 years it will not have the prestige it has today, which in my opinion already deserves to be lower, but that’s just my opinion.</p>

<p>Yes, 14 is a decent number (but corporations mostly only scout at top universities so the schools above us are things like Columbia). And, yes, I’m an Econ major.</p>

<p>Personally, I think our Econ department is acceptable for a public school and I don’t really mind the lack of courses or anything. (Though, if I had wanted to graduate in 2 years, in line with my degree progress, it would have been difficult picking out all the courses I needed.) The problems with our professors is seemingly pervasive across the school for all non-humanities courses. The only actual “professors” I’ve had so far were from taking GEs. </p>

<p>I don’t know if my professors will get better as I take more upper division courses. I’ll admit I’ve only gone up to Econ 101 and 103. That’s basically half way through the degree and near the peak of the difficulty one should expect of undergraduate Econ courses. Maybe they’ll have better professors for non-core classes?</p>

<p>Right now, I’m worried about finding someone to write my recommendations for graduate school because all my econ classes have been through 500 people lecture halls. I will have to put up an effort to find internships or to talk to professors. Still, I’m probably better off than at a school like UCI where they’ll have lecture hall style teaching and even less internship opportunities. I probably wouldn’t have this problem at a private school.</p>

<p>I don’t think the graduate rankings accurately reflect the quality of our undergraduate education. The admittance standards are much more stringent for grads. I think Berkeley suffers from the same effect (though they’re plummeting in quality from rank 6). Grads also have significantly smaller class sizes. Grad school is a whole different animal.</p>

<p>Overall, I would have picked UCLA as my university for Econ even knowing all I know now because its relatively cheap and I don’t pay attention to lecture anyways. I find that Econ at the undergraduate level is propelled more by a “competitive” student body than the the faculty. I’ve had several upper-division classes already where the lecture hall is half empty after the first two classes. But if you’re looking for the best education, a private school may better suit your needs.</p>

<p>this puts a bit of a damper on my ucla expectations… why does ucla economics have such a high rating then?</p>

<p>thanks both of you for the great replies! i’ll have to hope i get into a private school then</p>

<p>My dad did UCLA econ in the '80s. He never showed up to class. He got into UCLA grad school. He now runs a small business, where I would like to think he is reasonably successful, if not in proportion to his ability.</p>

<p>

I’d assume for the following reasons:

  1. Graduate school != Undergraduate school. Behold Berkeley.
  2. Student Body
  3. Major requirements such as you need a 2.5+ GPA to declare Econ as your major and something a bit higher for Business Econ. Econ is one of the only departments at our school that does this.</p>

<p>If you opt for a private school, make sure you don’t go below something like USC. Remember, UCLA is “bottom tier” for a lot of internships, something we can be proud and not proud of.</p>

<p>@ChristianSoldier
UCLA in the 80s was significantly less prestigious. The demand for college has risen drastically and UCLA has matured more as a university. Even now, when many have a gloomy outlook for the university, our applicant pool is getting stronger and our acceptance rates lower every year. 5 years ago our admittance rate was something like 26%. Today we have the lowest admittance rate of any public university in the nation.</p>

<p>

Doesn’t equal to, but almost always correlates with. A better graduate program has some relation with a better undergraduate program.</p>

<p>anon2528462 and sentiment you both have good points about the relationship between graduate and undergraduate school. tell me then, do you guys know students studying econ at the graduate level? what do they think of it?</p>