I would like to agree that Professor Ozler's lecture is not like funny or participating driven, but she does give a clear lecture with obvious expectations from students.

There are four quizzes, but the lowest two quizzes are automatically dropped.
Grading schemes are: 2 quizzes (10%) + Midterm (40%) + Final (50%).

Because of this scheme heavily weighted on exams, she gives very generous cutoffs.

98-100 A+, 91-97 A, 84-90 A-, 77-83 B+, 70-76 B, 63-69 B-, 55-62 C+, 50-54 C, 45-49 C-
39-44 D+, 33-38 D, 25-32 D-, the rest Fs --> I have never seen anything like this in Econ department (unless some classes are curved because they're hard).

She posts every slide and material (including documentary) covered in the lecture on ccle.
One best thing about her lecture is that she posts questions, which are used for your study guide. If you do not know the answers to the questions because you did not go to the lecture, you can find those answers from posted materials too.

Exams are the same. They are mostly from those study questions and slides.
For our final exam, most of the questions are exactly (word by word) from some quiz questions and guide questions.

I would like to disagree with some people, who think Prof Ozler is rude because she is not.
Her voice is deep and heavy, and she is not a native English speaker, so maybe that is why some people think that way.

She tries to accept our ideas and requests: she even gave us an extra opportunity to make up for the midterm grade because some people messed it up (It was not even a hard midterm). She also gave us the final review sessions and makeup lectures even when she was sick.

If you are not a math person and sick and tired of 11 41 101 102 103, which are basically all math, this class is more like political science or history class; all you need to do is to go the class, know the answers to her posted questions, and memorize some basic algebraic things like how to calculate domestic/foreign opportunity cost.

All exams/quizzes are free response, but they are not like an essay. If you know what she is asking and use those target words to answer, she counts it as correct answers.

Overall, I would take her again if she teaches other classes.

Ozler tried very hard to change the way she teaches based on the negative reviews she's received in the past. In my personal opinion, she did a fairly decent job of improving herself. There are 4 "pop" quizzes that count for 10% of your grade and she drops your 2 lowest scores. I quote pop because she told us in advance when each quiz was going to be even though she said earlier in the quarter that she wouldn't. The midterms and final were fair. I didn't do very well on the midterm because I was under the impression that it was more important to understand the theories as opposed to just memorizing the PowerPoints. WRONG. Trust the prior reviews and MEMORIZE. EVERY. LECTURE. Do that and you're almost guaranteed an A. Most of the questions on the midterms and the final come from previous tests so if you just focus on studying those and regurgitate the answers on the midterm and the final, you'll be fine. I did that on the final and managed to still get out with a B+, but I'm sure that I would've done much better if I just memorized her presentations and looked at all the answers from her previous midterms.

Professor Ozler really cares about her students and is trying to correct some of the bad reviews that she's gotten before.

She has 'random' quizzes that are 10% of your grade (lowest 2 are dropped) but she told us in advance of every quiz and even gave us a lot of the questions ahead of time.

If you are good at memorization, this class is for you. If you word for word memorize every sentence on every powerpoint, you will get an A. It takes a lot of time, but isn't conceptually hard. The midterm and final were very fair, and she even ended up making the final non-cumulative.

Overall - would definitely recommend taking as an upper div.

I looked at all the reviews on Bruinwalk before taking both 107 and 113 during the same quarter. This was partly due to my disbelief that a professor could receive such horrible reviews, and also because the department wasn't offering a lot of the electives I wanted.

The material itself was somewhat interesting, as you cover famous economists and their theories. It's useful as a base for other courses as well because I've learnt about each of these economists in almost all of my classes in some manner. However, because you're learning about these economists and their theories within the span of 10 weeks, the lectures are EXTREMELY dense. Though there is no reading or homework, it's still a lot of work because you have to pay attention every single second in the class and type notes at basically the speed of light.

The professor seemed alright at first. She seemed like she cared about our learning as she asked us if she was going too fast, and would slow down when we requested to do so. However, this was clearly not the case as the quarter progressed. She speaks with a lot of pauses which makes it difficult to understand her, and she has a lot of grammatical errors in her powerpoints as well as her speaking which makes it even more difficult to understand (these are not just mere spelling mistakes).

For both classes, the professor told us as we were preparing for the midterm that we just needed to know the intuition behind the theories and not have to memorize a "kitchen sink list" of the information we had learned. She reiterated this fact, and so my classmates and I all did so. The class did EXTREMELY poorly on the midterm. The exam questions were very broad and vague, but the way that our exams were graded made us realize that she had a very specific answer key. This answer key consisted of very minute details from the lectures and if we didn't phrase something exactly the way she had in her powerpoints, we lost points. She didn't test us on some of the concepts that we spent multiple lectures going over, but rather asked us questions on a subpoint in a slide that she had skimmed over.

Naturally, the students were quite upset at their grades, as many had studied hard but had not memorized. She dealt with a few questions, but soon after she snapped at us every time we mentioned the exams and even claimed that we were "harassing" her. Everyone eventually just shut up about the exams and we knew from then on to type every single word that left her mouth.

I scored a 66 on the midterm and spent two weeks studying for the final, memorizing everything I could possibly read in my notes. I ended up getting As in both classes, but this was only because I devoted the entirety of my Week 10 and finals week to these two classes. However, the amount of material that I had to memorize was insane and basically my answers on the finals were me spouting exactly what she had said in class.

TL;DR
No matter WHAT the professor says, MEMORIZE every single thing she says.

Professor Ozler is one of the best professors I've had at UCLA. She is very clear in what she expects from you. She posts slides that give you the information that you need to be successful on the tests, and she also reviews the material from the prior lecture everyday in class for the first ten minutes. The review questions that she asks almost always constitute the test questions or at least give you the point of focus for that topic. The material for the class is not extremely daunting. Famous economists, most of which you are probably familiar with. Tests are short essays that are easy to earn partial credit on even if you're not exactly on. A lot of the prior reviews were when she had a curve. She has now changed to an absolute scale, if you are in a certain range you get a certain grade regardless of the rest of the class. So the class has really changed a lot, and I would disregard a lot of the earlier reviews because it is more an overarching problem of the econ department and not attributed to Professor Ozler.

This is one of the worst classes I have taken at UCLA. The lectures are extremely dry and straight from the powerpoint - the professor does take the time to take feedback from her students but I am not sure how much of that is used. She says she likes the class to be involved but most questions were snarkily shut down.
I would advise you not to take this class unless you really really have to.

Professor Ozler is a good professor. I was horrified before taking her class cuz I viewed all the negative comments on bruinwalk, but that's not true. She is always trying to help her students, and if you really spend some time on this course, you will get a good grade. For me, this is the easiest course I took in Econ department, and what I recommend is to review every slide right after the lectures and go to her office hours whenever you have questions. If you put everything needs to be done right before the final, then you screw. It is a very helpful class that teaches you a lot of transformations of Economic theories, and I never regret taking with Ozler.

She is the worst professor you could ever have at UCLA. Her slides are full of mistakes and she is also really rude if you try to ask her questions. Such a bad experience taking her class.

Professor Ozler cares about her students and cares about how she is teaching. She always makes sure students can follow along with her pace, and if they can't she slows down. I think many students found her intimidating or short-tempered because she is very straight forward, which is not necessarily a bad thing. The important thing is that she wants her students to enjoy the class, and cares about their input. The material is quite interesting, and is a quantitative course which most students in the econ department are not used to. I think she also has a bad reputation because of the curve from last quarter that may have given people a lower grade than they got on their exams, but the good thing is that this quarter she has eliminated this curving system. Everything is based on your raw score, which means you're only competing with yourself. I think more professors should adapt this method, because it is a lot of pressure for students to compete. Thank you, Professor Ozler, for doing this! Overall, an interesting class, with many different perspectives to economics.

Prof. Ozler definitely cares about her teaching and her students a lot. This is abundantly clear in how much effort she puts into getting feedback from students, changing the course based on the feedback, and always allowing people to ask questions, slow her down, and reviewing material constantly. Honestly, more professors should care as much about their students as Ozler does.

The course itself is very interesting. It's definitely a qualitative course which many econ majors are not used to. As a PoliSci double major, however, this was a pretty straightforward course that goes through the history and evolution of economic thought from Adam Smith to Marx to Keynes and up to present day trends such as gender economics. Honestly, the material is fascinating and it's a very cool course that is a great synthesis of the things I've learned in my four years as an Econ major--I'm glad I took this at the end with all of my other classes serving as a sort of reference for this history.

Now, I will admit that the course is definitely not as organized as it should be. Slides are a bit haphazardly thrown together, sometimes the wording on them doesn't make sense, and the outlines can be hard to follow. I think Ozler would definitely benefit from someone helping her create a much more structured and clear outline that's more consistent across the various people we study. This can sometimes lead to frustration among the students because they get lost or confused and can't really articulate why. If this one problem were fixed, I think the class would be much more popular. As it stands, I still believe the course is great and honestly learning about gender economics from Ozler was super cool given that is her field of study and it's a topic the rest of the department ignores. I would definitely take the course again, but do warn those that are not as good memorizing lectures and have difficulty following along if a professor doesn't have a very good outline to be weary of taking this course if they don't want to put in the time or effort