This class sucks. You have two weekly online reading quizzes and the reading assignments range from 25-60 pages. yes, 60 pages.

Discussion participation is graded and even if you’re like me and make the effort to participate 3-4+ times per discussion your TA might still screw you over you and give you a shitty discussion grade

There are no tests. Instead there are 4 major writing assignments and some small response papers to various news articles or documentaries. The smaller assignments aren’t bad, but basically if you want an A in this class you have to include waaaay more information than what is specified/what is asked for in the prompt. Highly highly recommend going to your TA and asking questions for each assignment so you know exactly what they’re looking for. Also, Thies PROHIBTS the TAs from discussing the assignments in class or from giving back or showing you your paper after it’s graded. so if you want answers as to why you got the grade you got on a paper, you have to settle for a vague explanation from your TA during office hours. Makes no sense to me. How are you supposed to improve on the next paper if you can’t see your mistakes from the last one?

Lectures can be sooooo boring. He posts SOME of the slides online but if you want all the info you gotta go to class. it was kinda annoying bc some classes he’d simply go over info that was explicit in the notes, and other times he’d go over info that was not from the notes and key to writing a solid paper so I felt like I could never skip lecture.

Overall, this class is pretty interesting and it really changed my perspective of how the political sphere works. I got used to the pace of the reading assignment and you go weeks at a time where your only assignment is reading/quizzes which is nice. Aside from the 4 weeks each paper is due the workload is light. If I would’ve gone to see my TA for the first two papers I would’ve gotten an A instead of an A- so highly highly recommend that.

Thies is kinda the worst and makes annoying comments during class and thinks he’s funny when he isn’t, but if you can get past that and want to increase your general knowledge about the different political systems of the world, then this class is worth. My advice is to go see your TAs for the 4 major assignments and participate a lot and you should do well.

This class is not an easy GE and definitely way more stress and work than I thought I was signing up for. Two long readings every week which you have to read to take the quizzes on them, discussions take attendance and also grade you on how much you talk in them. There were no tests (although he said he may be changing this) and the main assignments were papers, which Theis claimed would take "two hours or so." Not the case. The papers are hard and he does not ask for what he actually wants you to write and so much is left up for interpretation. My final paper took over 20 hours to write and was 27 pages long, and since this class was a GE for me that seemed like overkill. Also, you never get your papers back and never see any feedback for anything so it is impossible to know how to improve. Unless you are a polisci major or are very passionate about this course, I would not recommend.

COMPARATIVE POLITICS implies that you will be learning about different political systems. You will not. The book appears to have been written by someone who either is, or should be, on the CIA's payroll. ONLY America is the best democracy! Any other type of government is wrong! The book is relatively simple. The lectures are at a high school level. HOWEVER, the assignments/papers have NOTHING to do with what is covered in class or your discussion groups. The papers are complex, graded randomly it appears, and, once again, have no correlation with the material covered in class. When you do get a paper back, in many cases, there are NO comments. Whatever you may have missed or made a mistake on you will never know. This means that going into the next paper you will have no idea what to do to fix it, And if you ask your TA they will say "grade appeal" or "I don't know I don't know what paper I graded", etc. In short your TA is worthless. Your TA won't actually grade your papers or be able to give you feedback on your paper unless you go see them before you submit your paper and have them write part of it. Worse your TA will show up unprepared for their own office hours and act like they are doing you a favor by telling you nothing. None of this is an exaggeration. This class is a waste of time and when UCLA loses it's #1 ranking it will be because of classes like this. The unprofessional- ism and lack of concern for the students education should be embarrassing for UCLA. The fact it isn't should tell us even more...Cash Cows for UCLA! That's all we are.

Plan to avoid taking this professor in the future. If you're enrolled in this class...good luck.

I actually enjoyed both PS50 and Professor Thies. Comparative politics is an extremely interesting yet complex topic, but Thies is very well-versed in the material and presented it in a clear and engaging way. I didn't find his lectures to be boring at all, although the slides were not very helpful so showing up to class and taking good notes is pretty essential. I did not love my TA as a person but the sections were still a good expansion and clarification on the readings and class material. The weekly quizzes did kind of suck but if you actually do all the readings you'll be ok. He doesn't try to trick you with the exams; the concepts that you'll be asked to write about are the ones that he spends the most time on in class, and I thought both the midterm and the final were very fair. I'm surprised that I actually got an A+ in this class, but it's all thanks to the curve. I know a lot of people say to avoid this class with Thies at all costs, but I strongly disagree -- I learned a lot of valuable information, I thought Thies was a solid professor, and it's REALLY NOT impossible to do well if you actually put in the work and learn how to articulate your ideas clearly when you write.

Thies is a good lecturer, but he doesn't post slides with very meaningful info on CCLE. He's also kind of condescending in his emails, which is funny at first but it makes him look like kind of a jerk after awhile. The material for the first 6 weeks or so is pretty interesting, but after that it gets pretty dry. The reading quizzes are absolute BS, as he claims that if you read you'll be able to do well on them, but they're set up by the TA's who make them super hard. The mean over the quarter was below 60. Section participation is also mandatory, like you actually have to speak in section or you don't get full credit. The midterm, final, and paper are also all graded very hard, and he doesn't tell you anything about what's going to be on the midterm or the final, even if you ask questions about it. That being said, the curve was incredibly generous, as I got fairly above the mean on just about everything and ended up with an A-. If you put in the work to be in front of the mean you'll be fine, but as a class it wasn't particularly enjoyable.

This is the most frustrating class I have ever taken at UCLA. Please note that I'm a polisci major, found the material and readings extremely interesting, but I absolutely hated the class because of the professor. Thies' exams are essay format and graded by multiple TAs, which leads to disparity between expectations and grading, as it is all subjective to your TA. The professor is often rude to students who ask questions, brags about how he writes exams the night before they're given, and grades exams and essays about 20 points below what each student deserves. The testing materials and assignments truly ruin this class, which is a shame because comparative politics is an interesting subject. I thoroughly outlined and took notes on all the readings and truly understood the material, and I failed the midterm. Why? Because Thies instructs his TAs to grade much harsher than is accurate so that he can curve the class at the end. Because the class is curved (which is, by the way, completely illogical for an essay-based class), you have no idea how you're progressing. I ended up with an A- after feeling anxious and incompetent the entire quarter. If you're polisci, do yourself a favor & take this amazing subject with a half-decent professor. If you're taking this as a GE, drop it immediately. I would have switched majors if I took this as my first polisci class.

Class wasn't that bad. Material was interesting especially if your a Poli Sci major. Thies is very knowledgable and seems keen to answer your questions. However, grading is VERY specific and if you don't regularly do the readings your screwed.

He's been teaching this class for a decade, and it shows. Insanely boring, and he clearly doesn't give a shit anymore. Interesting material rendered totally inane.

It really wasn't as bad as everyone said it was. It definitely helps if you're a PoliSci major or if you actually like studying politics, but still, the reading load isn't much worse than other humanities/social science GEs, the midterms and final really weren't that bad, and I didn't have to spend an abnormal amount of time studying to get an A. As a Poli Sci pre-req, it isn't a bad option, but if you're taking it as a GE and all you care about is your GPA, then yeah, probably look elsewhere.