Grade distribution fall 2012:
A+ = 2.7%
A = 12.4%
A- = 10.3%
B+ = 11.4%
B = 16.2%
B- = 10.8%
C+ = 5.9%
C = 17.3%
C- = 9.2%
D+ = 1.1%
D = 1.6%
D- = 0%
F = 1.1%

First off, grade in class: A.

Avoid getting George Ofosu as your TA. He and another TA went off to Ghana for a few weeks to do field work and our section got Steve as a replacement and he was much more informative/useful. George goes for sort of a Socratic method approach which is not very effective and he's one of the least efficient teachers I've ever had. He ended section late 5-10 minutes every time and wouldn't let us leave when his time was up (which meant being late to my class across campus thanks). He was probably the most approachable of the TAs though so I guess it depends on what you value from sections. He also seems to grade participation fairly harshly in comparison to other TAs. I attended every section and participated somewhat regularly (spoke up at least 3 times per section) but got an extremely poor section grade relative to the rest of the class.

Thies is a good lecturer. He's very prepared, he covers a lot, and he adds a lot of detail. Yes, he's arrogant but he doesn't mean to be which makes things a little better. He's studying Japan so he also bring up Japanese examples up for basically every topic which gets annoying.

The midterms were all multipart essay question tests. The first was fine, the second was too long and disorganized and he admitted to the former at least. The final had a few more essay questions and some multiple choice (which were scattered throughout the test which I'm sure he though was helpful but was just irritating).

His grading system is the real issue you're going to have with this class. He expects you to remember every detail he ever mentions for a topic in order to get a perfect score. Giving a thorough answer isn't enough to get a good score if you don't specifically mention whatever details he puts into his rubric. He even admitted in a review session that your phrasing can make a difference in the scoring - he said two answers with the same can receive different scores depending on the wording. He believes that as long as someone in the class got a perfect score on each question then the test was fair because that means perfect scores were possible. This would be fair if we either only had one question or our grade was based on our highest score but since no one ever gets (even close to) a perfect score on the whole thing I think his logic of fairness kind of falls apart.

That doesn't really matter though since he grades on a curve. A lot of people seem to be unfamiliar with the concept of a curve and spent the quarter freaking out. Basically what it boils down to is as long as you're doing better than the mean you're probably in A/B territory depending on how much better you're doing than the mean. I got a C and a D on the midterms (top 15-20% of scores) and still ended up with an A so.

You have reading from an online book (don't know why professors don't seem to realize this doesn't actually save us money but okay) and from pdfs on the website. He started off just making us take online quizzes from the textbook but since apparently people weren't reading the pdfs and I can only assume he wasn't confident in his tests ability to weed those people out in the grading he made us take additional quizzes in section which as far as I can tell just (1)made us all procrastinate the pdf reading as much as possible so it would be fresh for section and (2)ate up section time which was already limited.

There was a lot of reading. A lot. Comparable to the amount you'd get in a history class which is ridiculous. This wouldn't be too much of an issue expect for how much detail he expects in your essay answers while also covering so much material.

Poli sci 50
So first lecture was intense to say the least. Thies will Not go out of his way to make anything easier, but that being said he is very systematic and after some time: predictable. Yes, the grades will be low. Yes,the work load is challenging. However, if you concentrate enough and really know everything he covers in depth(which is very reasonable), then you you have a very good chance. The thing about this class is that everything is very evenly spread, so really 1 bad grade is not the end- all you need is to be willing for every part. There are 2 midterms, weekly online quizzes and participation grades that you could use for your advantage. The key for scoring good on midterms is taking very very detailed notes and integrating it with readings and the book. I got an A+ and learnt a lot as a freshman for Fall. Take it but be prepared to work hard and ask TAs for help Before midterms.

Despite the fact I failed his class, I don't despise Professor Thies and don't plan on talking shit about him in this review. That said, he certainly gave me a rough "impacted" introduction to what it would be like majoring in Political Science. The class is extremely intensive, and grade breakdown is as follows:
15% Midterm 1
20% Midterm 2
30% Final
25% Online Quizzes
15% Discussion Participation
The online quizzes and discussion participation are going to be your best friends in this class. You use Pearson for the quizzes, which are weekly and 25 questions that cover one chapter of the digital textbook. I'm not sure if the rest of the class noticed, but the quizzes have no time limit and you can open/browse the textbook while taking them ;) Not that I'm advocating or did anything myself that violated the honor code LOL.
The problem comes with the midterms. The way he grades them is ridiculous...they're in class and are composed of 5-10 mini-essay questions. Sounds easy, right? WRONG. For each essay, you're awarded points based solely on whether or not you included the exact phrases and key points he wanted you to. If you don't, the TAs give you no credit. The class average for the first midterm was a 60% and the second was a 50%. Another thing that bothered me was the first midterm only covered stuff from the textbook and the next midterm only covered stuff from the lectures, really threw me off. I imagine the final will have a similar average. Discussions are mandatory...the problem is some TAs are far better than others and will cover what he puts on the tests, whereas others suck and don't do much at all. Ultimately the class is curved at the end, so your final grade ends up being bumped up a solid 25% usually (I think a low C was an A).

For PS 50:
This is a very difficult class, especially for freshmen/ new students. There was a lot of heavy readings and there were quizzes every week in discussion, usually 5 MC. The midterm and final were graded really harshly, where most people's raw scores were in the 50s. The curve is huge, obviously, but it was difficult to do well in that class because the topics were simple, and it was easy to study just the IDs, but the exams were much more difficult. The quizzes were mostly easy but sometimes you had to know the smallest detail in the hugest readings. I had Lisa for a TA- and she was pretty mean/ ineffective. All discussions were supposed to have a developing country to cover for the exams, and Lisa didn't give us anything; we all had to wing it on that one. I once went to her office hours to ask questions about lecture and she criticized me for asking too detailed questions. Basically, the class is very difficult for a GE. Don't take it if you can avoid it.

Don't take this class. Just don't.

The average on the second midterm was a 49.4. You can't even get a perfect score or A in section. Michael Theis seems to want his students to fail & cares very little about them personally. Going to office hours is like a constant slap in the face--you ask him a question, he tells you you're wrong, and doesn't even let you talk.

So shitty. Save your GPA. Just don't take his class.

I was really scared to take this class because of the reviews. I almost dropped, then talked to someone else who had taken it before and decided to stick with it. And I'm so glad I stuck with it!
A lot of people are complaining about Thies...yes, his lectures can be disorganized, he can talk about irrelevant things sometimes, he likes to make things "hard"....but honestly this was probably the best class I've taken at UCLA thus far. I think Thies did a great job teaching the things, and also showing why things are so complicated due to all the tradeoffs (which he focuses a lot on in this course).
The tests really were not that bad. Just know the ID's and tradeoffs. The quizzes aren't too bad if you do the readings.
Generally for the tests, I would just do all the ID's using my notes, then study them before, because his tests ask about the ID's.
I suggest going to the Test Bank in SAC or asking someone who previously took the course to look at previous midterms, because he recycles a lot of the questions.

In conclusion: a great course and very useful. Don't let others or the professor intimidate you! He may think he's tough, but he's really not.

Grade in class: A (PS major)

:( don't take this class if you're not motivated to work your butt off! I ended up dropping. Quizzes aren't hard however the midterm and 2nd midterm are too hard! The first midterm is graded pretty easily but the 2nd one is graded a lot harsher! His lectures put me to sleep! I dropped his class last quarter so it wouldn't ruin my grade...I had a 3.61 without that class. If you're not a poly sci major don't take it! Take another g.e.! The reading was a ridiculous amount. I'm sure he's a pretty knowledgeable professor, but if you don't have any interest in politics don't take it.

I disagree with many other reviews about Thies. I took his class the first quarter of my freshman year. I'm not a Poli Sci major (although I do like the subject) and I managed an A.

At first I was overwhelmed because of all of the negative reviews and the first week of heavy reading and weird quizzes. But it didn't take long to figure out this class.. here's what I recommend to anyone taking PS 50 with Thies:

Do the assigned reading before class (even just skimming and reading only the pages he notes as especially important). Midterm and final material comes almost exclusively from lecture, but I found it most effective to see what he talked about in lecture that was ALSO in the book and really focus on those things before tests.

Tests are essay questions where he asks a question and wants a very specific answer. Grading is tough (second midterm average was a 56) but the curve is generous.

Besides textbook reading, there is also a course reader and a lot of articles from the Economist. I opted to not buy the course reader (you only use it a few times and there is a reserve in the library). The weekly quizzes in section are based heavily on Economist articles, not textbook. Some quizzes were very specific, so if you're serious about doing well on these, refresh the week's articles before section.

Lectures are LONG (almost 2 hours) but towards the end of the quarter he starts letting us out earlier which was nice! It is kind of hard to sit through that long of a lecture, but Thies is very very smart and overall I enjoyed listening to him. Bland slides, outdated examples, but the most important thing is that he won't ask anything on a test that he hasn't talked about in lecture.

This was a really long review but I hope it helps! Overall, very effective professor. He may not be the friendliest and most approachable or exciting man, but I learned a lot.

THIS CLASS IS THE HARDEST GE I'VE EVER EXPERIENCED. OH MY. I gave it an average effort and ended up with a B-. The tests seemed easy, but he grades EXTRA hard. The only positive thing of the class is that he curves grades in the end. Pretty sure an A was 75%+. Do not take this class if you don't have a passion for political science.