He is not helpful at all. He doesn't like to answer student questions after class, feels like he's just here for the salary. No practice materials for midterm or final, you have to find your own way to study for this class. There's nothing wrong with this course, I just took the wrong professor. Good luck!

Hopenhayn was very nice and he seemed to care a lot about students' learning. His lectures often included a number of examples and applications of the stuff he talked about, which was pretty interesting imo. He also assigns a few group projects that make you apply the material in different contexts, which I found pretty interesting. Note that a lot of the material is an extension of ECON 101 (and he spends a lot of time reviewing 101 stuff too); I wish that there was more of an emphasis on newer content since a few lectures were a bit boring. However, I do think that the class was a bit disorganized and it was hard to gauge your standing throughout. ForApart from the homework, none of the assignments were graded until after the final, despite counting for 25% of the grade. I had no idea I was doing something fundamentally wrong until Week 9. Further, for those assignments (and partially the homework too), there was very little guidance provided and it was pretty confusing to solve. The final itself (which is worth 50% of your grade) was also pretty challenging too. While a few questions were based off the practice final (which was just a repurposed homework we didn't get to on time), there were a few tricky ones too that he didn't really go over much. I didn't think it was the worst and most of it just required some critical thinking and reasoning during the final, but was definitely not the level of difficulty that was expected. However, the curve seemed to be pretty generous (I ended up with A after an 89 in the final and 10/20 in one of the group assignments).

Truly very unclear teaching style and the tests are hard for normal students. If you want to challenge your GPA, then you can consider this.

Hugo sucks. Disinterested and makes no effort to teach anything. Absolute snoozefest. However, the topic is fairly interesting and is basically just a continuation of 101

I was afraid to take his class after reading the reviews but actually, it was one of my favorite classes at UCLA. Prof. Hugo is a very nice person and is always willing to help students to understand the materials. Come to his office hour, he will explain everything. The final was not bad at all and the curve is pretty nice. Study and you will do great!

Just don't take this class. I had to because I messed up my first enrollment pass. Hugo is a really nice guy, but nice doesn't equate to good professor. The lectures are his own and have typos and do not explain the concepts, so you are relying on his explanation. He tends to go off track here and there when he lectures, and has an accent that can be difficult to interpret. If you learn better with examples (like me), you will really struggle because what he teaches is solely comprised of formulae and theory. Everyone did badly on the final, but there was a massive curve (it is hard to tell what grade you will get until they're posted). This class caused me more stress than it was worth, and the material was pretty useless quite frankly. Not an easy A by any means either.

I totally disagree with the comment below. His lecture is not helpful at all for solving homework, albeit those problems are in similar format with midterm's. We NEVER solved any calculative problems in class or was not even provided with enough resources to practice, and nevertheless we were supposed to solve these heavy math problems that took too much time. Also, he didn't give us 2 weeks, only 1 week for each problem set except for the last one. His lecture slides aren't clear and full of errors. The textbook choice was not good, but we didn't even use it anyways.

Honestly the worst problem of this class is that all three factors are not connected and failed to work together towards improvement in learning: Lecture, Homework, Exam. It's like, you hear something from lecture, are expected to solve something else for exam, and again get tested on some other thing.

Final Official grade came out okay, but the curve was so harshly done. Since everyone dropped towards the end, those single points from your homework became severely important to decide one scale. I was below only a few points from my peers and ended up with B.

It seems like he has changed the structure of the class or something, because the old reviews do not coincide with the actual class at all. The class is supposed to be a continuation of ECON 101, but in my case it ended up being a review since my 101 professor (Kung) covered most of the stuff Hopenhayn lectured.

He gives three problem sets that are very straight forward and gives you like two weeks to do them. These account for 30% of your grade, and they are the extremely helpful when preparing for the final. Also, he is always available via email or office hours, very helpful and caring for his students.

Like I said before the material covered in class was pretty much a copy of 101, I am not kidding. He can be a little bit confusing with his notation and lecturing, but not as bad as other professors in the department.

The midterm was very similar to the homework, I got an 80% and the average was 70%. Now, the final I though was extremely straight forward. Remember the MANDATORY problem sets? Yea, two of the five problems in the finals were copy pasted from there. I finished the final in an hour and half.

ECON 170 is one of the easiest electives I have taken in the department, the professor is fair, and the structure of the class is there to only help students. Best of luck.

All I can say about Hopenhayn is this: I did not score higher than a 72% on midterms or final and ended up with a legit A in his class. He offers a massive extra credit "game" as he calls it. DO IT. It will save you!! Not to mention that he holds a "lottery" at the end of the class. Whoever wins the game is entered into the lottery to win a boost in your grade (i.e. B+ will become A-). My team and I won the lottery :)

Overall, the material is EXTREMELY difficult to grasp and the exams are even harder, sometimes asking questions that were never brought up in class.

It's a struggle, but push through it and work / study HARD!!!

I took this class in Winter 2011 and got A+.
Hugo is my favorite professor at UCLA because he is very knowledgable and very nice. He is also very friendly and he cares about his students. Always visit his office hours and you can learn a lot from him.
It is true that the material is harder than that of other econ classes at UCLA but it's really not that bad. It's just that the Econ classes at UCLA are way too easy and you don't get to learn anything.
There are 2 midterms and 1 final, and one of the midterms will be dropped. There is one mandatory group activity and you basically get free points from writing weekly summary. You can also participate in group activities and get extra credit. Also, he curve is very generous.
If you do study and you're not stupid, you should get a decent grade. Definitely take his class and you won't regret it.