Her math is HORRIBLE. Plus, her grammar is nightmare. Just avoid her.

I'm not really sure if the people who gave her positive reviews actually went to lectures. Professor Ozler makes me cringe at least twice in every class. Before I had this class, I didn't realize professors had the right to be so rude to students. She's probably the rudest person I've ever seen, and she blames it on her being tired or whatever but uh, yeah, who isn't? Every time she does attempt to apologize to students she's rude to, it's pretty half-assed and she's even said, "I already apologized, what do you want me to do?" If you ask her about a concept, she'll either repeat exactly what she had in the powerpoint slide or rudely tell you to go back to the slides yourself.

As for the material itself, it's rightfully dense. Still, I thought it'd be a comparatively easier elective but it's actually a huge pain in the butt with Ozler as the professor. Yes, you can drill the fundamentals through her study questions and study all her lecture notes but she'll still manage to pinpoint the most specific, minute details to ask about on the exams. Sometimes her exam questions are extremely broad and yet she'll have such specific answers on the key so the graders will still mark points off.

I studied for this class more than I have for any other class, and I got a raw B, curved to an A- on the midterm. It's not worth it at all for the amount of work you have to put in to organize all the material yourself and memorize every single word from lectures. Don't do it. It doesn't matter that she eliminated the department curve and now you're "competing with yourself"; not really. You're competing with the vicious professor and exams. Just do yourself a favor and avoid this class at all costs.

I have never submitted on BruinWalk review, nor could I ever imagine myself submitting one. But after what I have endured in this class I wholeheartedly view it necessary to warn anyone considering this class that they will be walking into something I would never imagine being possible at UCLA.

This class, in a nutshell, is the study of economic history. You will go over economic philosophers and their ideas about the economy and society. Sule is very passionate about this and it is apparent. However, she cannot teach and is extremely unfair. First off, there was many moments in the class where students would ask questions and she would speak down to them/be condescending of them. Second, she does not believe in multiple choice exams, only short answers. And third, she sets a very weird (yet somewhat generous) abritrary curve (i.e., she does not follow the Econ department policy of 25% As, etc.).

The issue is with the exams. With the midterm being worth 44% and the exam being worth 54% (2% goes to course evaluations), she will take the best midterm score out of two offered. But her exams will ask the most vague question possible and expect you to craft an answer so specific. The amount of times it feels like her answer keys are fully just making up logic to get an answer is insane, and if you do not follow that logic precisely you get the question wrong. The class is not open note when in person (given), but I cannot stress enough how impossible it is to actually do well when there is no objective way to do well. Unless you are the professor herself you are bound to not do well because the questions are so vague and ambiguous yet she demands something precise, making it impossible to achieve.

Lastly, Sule is very harsh/hates criticism. My class got the most passive aggressive email on the Sunday before finals at 11PM where she proclaimed that she didn't think MT2 was harder than MT1 (even though there was a 20% decline in mean scores) and that she was being so generous doing things she didn't have to do (referring to writing sub-par review powerpoints that convuluted information further than it was). She also told students not to email her anymore because she didn't want to hear about it. I didn't think it was appropriate to send an email like that since, at the end of the day, she is a professor, but that is my opinion.

Overall, I really think you would be better off in ANY other Economics elective course. I think past reviews are not doing readers justice in understanding why this class really isn't the best use of time for those in Econ degrees. Sure, there is some level of randomness and I won't say I did terribly in the class (expecting somewhere in the B+/A range), but why put yourself through a quarter like that when there's other options? I would not take this class again nor would I consider taking a class with this professor going forward. If you DO decide to take the class against better judgement, make sure you memorize every aspect of the economists covered (Smith**, Ricardo, Mill, Marx, Keynes) and be prepared to essentially take crapshot guesses at what Sule is actually looking for on exams.

After taking this class, I found it surprisingly necessary to create an account just to review the professor. To be honest, she is the absolutely worst professor I’ve ever met at UCLA, to an extent that I could never have imagined. Her class was just her reading off her terrible, non-logic slides, with terrible English. She read so fast that we could hardly follow or understand. As a result, she sometimes ended her lectures earlier than expected but was not willing to give the next topic because she "didn’t prepare it".
When we tried to ask questions, she would rudely disrupt us and basically repeat what she had already said. When the class was too quiet, she complained to us about students who suggested the class be more interactive in previous course evaluations and questioned us "how could the class be interactive if you don’t ask anything?" She forgot to record lectures and instead emailed us that she "didn’t have pockets or belts to put the microphone’s base" so she would not record any more.
When a student asked her if we had to rent a class content documentary, she sent out an email in which she compared the price of the documentary with the average price of LA’s cappuccino to prove that we should be able to cover the cost.
Like many of the others who took this class, I did so because of the grade distribution. I did well in this class because, to be honest, this class was pure memorization. Despite that, she had two midterms, and the second was even cumulative. So do think about it if you find the grade distribution attractive but you are not good at memorizing or enduring her rudeness and shady emails.

As did a lot of people in reviews for her other classes, I made an account only to review this professor. She is the actual worst professor I have ever experienced at UCLA by such a large margin it is absurd. She seems angry at all times, rudely snaps at students, and is absolutely the most unhelpful professor to ever set foot on this campus. In the first lecture she made made an extremely rude comment about a student's accent who asked a question in class. She is not even in the field of economics and it is an absolute joke that she's allowed to teach Econ classes here. Her lecture slides are the most useless things on earth and have 4 words that aren't even written in sensible English. She forgot to record multiple lectures and then when asked why stated that she will not be recording lectures or bringing a microphone for in person lectures because she "does not want to wear a belt to hold the microphone stand." Somebody needs to fire her immediately this is the only class at UCLA I have ever taken that has made me honestly lose some respect for the school as a whole. I did fine in it and I'm all for taking a class because it looks easy but im telling you DO NOT take this one.

I took this class during Spring 2020, meaning that everything was entirely online. I took this class as an engineering major who needed to take an upper-div econ class (as part of my sci-tech requirement), but was looking for something easier than the core upper-div econ classes (like 101 or 102). Overall, I found it pretty dull but easy.

The course material for the first few weeks was very uninteresting to me. I had to force myself to pay attention while watching the lectures, and I found it difficult to stay engaged enough to continue taking notes. That said, taking detailed notes really paid off on the midterm.

The lecture slides were helpful but cryptic. The professor mainly just reads off the slides, so towards the end of the quarter I started to just skim the videos at 2x speed rather than watching them thoroughly.

The midterm exam was pretty easy in my opinion. Since it was online, it was open-book, open-notes. I found it easy since I could just search my typed notes for whatever the question was asking for. I ended up finishing it pretty quickly, and got a good score.

Professor Ozler was kind enough to make the final optional due to the difficult circumstances at the time; I chose not to take it, so I can't comment on its difficulty.

Overall, I thought this class was a bit uninteresting, but it was easy to do well in, so if that's what you're looking for, then go for it.

I had the misfortune of taking Ozler for Econ 121 in the Fall.

First off, it's not so much that Ozler is a difficult professor (I ended up getting an A in the course), but just that she is unquestionably the worst professor in the Econ department in terms of quality. Her lectures consist of her reading off chapter slides and relevant chapter questions at a rapid pace. By the end of the quarter, students end up being responsible for nearly 500 pages of reading material. As mentioned before, she is absolutely useless without a laptop. One time, her laptop was not working for the slides and instead of improvising like any normal professor would and working on the chalkboard, she decided to leave the classroom for the next 30 minutes and search for a laptop so she could read us the slides. And who could forget the three times she cancelled class last minute, which judging from previous posts is actually not uncommon. For example, in our final class, where she promised to do a final review with us, she never shows up to class. Two days later, she emails us saying the reason she didn't show up is because her garage door was not opening.

So, all mediocrity aside, how do you do well in this class? For Econ 121, find as many past tests as you can get your hands on. I kid you not, she reposts the same questions over and over again on every exam (truly signs of a lazy professor). If you are able to memorize these exams, you are guaranteed at least an A-. If you cannot get your hands on as many exams as you can, you literally need to memorize every line of the book she covers and every answer to questions she covers in class. So, if you are good at memorizing, this is the class for you. Otherwise, do not expect to get any true learning value from this course. This class is a joke and she is a joke.

I was a little intimidated to take this course as the reviews on here aren't the most comforting. I thought it would be a really tough course and in some ways it was but I actually enjoyed the class and the professor. I think the lectures are a little daunting sometimes but the information and examples on there really are helpful for the practice and exams. There was 1 midterm, 1 final, and 2% extra credit for completing Evaluations. The curve she has for the class is very generous that an 84% is an A-. I can't remember exactly but I believe the cuttoffs are something like A+: 100-97, A: 96-91, A-: 90-84... Because the exam is open notes as long as your notes are good you can definitely pull off good scores. Even if there is something that you don't really understand from the lecture write it down because you can ask the professor to clarify later and it's likely that it will be helpful during the exam. I think the exams were graded fairly and I enjoyed learning about different economic theories from an unbiased source.

It's hard to describe the exact reason why you shouldn't take this class. There isn't one specific thing that makes it so bad - it's the culmination of a lot of little things that made it the worst Econ class I've taken at UCLA.
The first thing out of Professor Ozler's mouth was "I am combative." Not a good sign, right? She then proceeded to present disorganized lectures in mildly broken English and expected us to understand every single piece of information she gave.
The exams were my least favorite part of the class. The final was cumulative, so we were expected to know an ungodly amount of information about a WIDE variety of topics. She actually told us that we needed to know everything we had learned in class. Literally everything (?). But once I actually saw the final, it became clear that she was only testing us on MAYBE 10% of the material covered in class, and she wanted SPECIFIC answers. These were subsets to side sections to additions to lectures-type answers - quite vague and seemingly useless compared to the main points outlined in the course.
This was truly the biggest waste of my time. If you want to learn about Globalization, take a Global Studies class. If gender, take a gender studies class. Unless someone else teaches this, don't waste your time in a class where the material is made so incredibly over complex that it drives you crazy.
Rant over, but seriously, would not recommend.

I don't get why there are so many negative reviews on bruinwalk. Professor Ozler cares about students' learning and always encourages questions. She never had a problem with repeating something or explaining it in a different way. She always asked us what she can do to make the class better and really cares what students think of the class. There is a lot of material but if you just take the time to really review the slides and take good notes in lecture you will be fine on quizzes/midterms and I also don't think she asked overly hard questions on the quizzes/midterms like a lot of the reviews suggest like if you read the slides and pay attention in lecture you're going to know the answers. I'd take the class again