<p>Hello. I am just wondering what the undergrad economics program (not bizecon or intl) at UCLA is like.</p>
<p>Specifically, I want to know how competitive it is in comparison to other major. And if there are any things I should know. Can anyone provide some vital information to a clueless little boy?</p>
<p>Thank you in advance :)</p>
<p>i heard it sucks, don’t take my word for it though.</p>
<p>UCLA has a strong economics department, but economics is often poorly taught at big universities. You’ll get a strong foundation in economics at UCLA, but it’s not an easy path, and I tend to be of the opinion that undergrad economics is taught better at LACs in general.</p>
<p>Still, you can’t go wrong with econ at UCLA if you’re willing to put in the work.</p>
<p>UCLAri, are you trying to say UCLA’s econ department is strong, but the econ course is poorly taught since it’s a big university. Or are you saying most “big” universities teach econ poorly, but UCLA is an exception? Are you suggesting that LACs teach econ better than UCLA, but if one doesn’t go to a LAC, UCLA is ok when comparing with other “big” university. </p>
<p>I am just confused - isn’t a strong econ department indicates that the econ is taught properly?</p>
<p>^^^ Common misconception.</p>
<p>binks09, do you mean my last question?</p>
<p>are you suggesting that UCLA’s strong economics department does NOT translates into properly teaching of undergraduate econ courses ?</p>
<p>Watermark,</p>
<p>“Strong department” in academia usually refers to the quality of the research and the departmental rankings rather than the quality of the teaching. Truth be told, most big research universities have only okay teaching relative to LACs and smaller colleges. That’s the price you pay for having access to luminaries, I guess.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>“Properly” is subjective. You’ll learn the material, but you won’t get the one-on-one education you might get at a smaller school. That means a lot more initiative on your part. But that’s, again, one of the things you’ll find to be true at pretty much any big university.</p>
<p>UCLAri, thinks for the clarification. As a fact, my child is in a dilemma of going for UCLA for the prestige/reputation or a smaller LAC style (but not really a LAC) college for a better learning experience. That’s why your post #3 caught my attention. Thanks.</p>
<p>Undergraduate economics at UCLA is rather subpar. The majority of courses are taught by random lecturers outside of UCLA. The department is also extremely impacted. Upper division courses are still in hundreds.</p>
<p>Nonetheless, there are certain teachers in the Econ department who are simply amazing. Professor Mcdevitt, for example, is one of the best. One should also note he is not a researcher but also works as an administrator. That doesn’t mean teachers who do research are bad. Professor Ackerberg, for example, is wonderful as well.</p>
<p>As UCLAri said, you can get a solid foundation at UCLA, but it will require you to take the initiative to get to know your professors and go above what is expected.</p>
<p>To continue to yahooo, most of the teachers are just visiting lecturers (I think Bresnock for Econ 1 is CSU Pomona or something)</p>
<p>If you still have any specific questions about the undergraduate econ program, you can pm me.</p>