Thies was the worst intro to UCLA I could get as an incoming freshman in Fall 2020. He was condescending, rude and made lectures miserable. His office hours were jumbled and unclear, and he gave us tons of work to stress over while purposefully being vague and unhelpful. It is a shame, because I really was engaged by some of the material, but his inconsistent grading and brutal workload made me want it over with. I will be avoiding this man for my remaining 11 semesters.

POL SCI 50 was the first class I took at UCLA as a freshman. Based off everyone's reviews, I thought it would be a lot worse—with all honesty, if you enjoy the material that is taught then homework assignments and readings all become part of the process of learning. I even liked that we were learning things through different mediums eg. documentaries. I felt that each homework assignment felt purposeful in developing different analytical and communication skills.
Last quarter, I didn't find that the workload was too heavy. In retrospect (having taken more classes at UCLA since) I will say that the whole debate prep, three papers, assignments and blah is relatively Much More time-consuming than a lower div class should be. That said, I had no issues completing any of the papers because the prof is right in saying that following the instructions were enough to get you a 90+ grade—just remember to insert in a lot of the common-sense connections you can make between theory and the facts that you're researching for. However, my TA was helpful during sections but stuck to giving nonspecific feedback on my papers even during office hours.
Tldr; Not as bad as the reviews make it seem. Lots of content, good range of global contexts worked in. Workload is heavy, but content is interesting enough that it's worth it, in my view. NOT an easy GE.

Thies clearly deeply understood many complex political science concepts, and did a good job designing the class to allow the students to process and understand those concepts. I thought the readings and reading quizzes were very relevant to course material and incredibly helpful in learning the concepts discussed in class.
I did find this course difficult, but I thought that the work was helpful in teaching students and not overly tedious. I liked the assignments we were given, and I saw the purpose of them in the scope of the class. I will say that the papers took me considerably longer than Thies estimated, maybe because I am less skilled in political science than he is. Paper 2 definitely took me at least 10 hours of research, writing, and revising.
This course involves a lot of writing and a difficult final, as well as a lot of reading and weekly assignments, so only take it if you are willing to deal with all the work...
Also: they have a very strange grading policy where the average on the final and most papers was a D or F and most people did very poorly. Then the grades were curved for a better distribution

I had a genuine interest in the topic of this class before taking it, but I got less interested as the weeks passed. The assignments were stupid, but there were no tests so no memorization of all the information (there was a lot of information). You kind of have to do the readings, and there were a lot of them. Participation is important in discussion and you need to show that you know your stuff. I went to Thies' office hours and he seemed like a nice guy, he has a sarcastic humor which I like, but he also definitely thinks he's the shit.
Overall, if you are super interested in this class, an A is possible and you will learn a lot. If not then don't take it!!

This class is probably the worst ever, not the class itself but THIES specifically. The assignments are stupid, he's mean AF, and the workload is ridiculous. There was a kid from the previous class who forgot his backpack, so he interrupted our lecture to get it back. Embarrassing right? Forgetting your backpack and then having to interrupt a whole ass lecture. WELL IF THAT ISN'T EMBARRASSING ENOUGH, Thies had the audacity to not only mock the student, but literally stop the entire lecture as the kid nervously retrieved his backpack. This happened at the beginning of the quarter, and ever since then it became blatantly obvious that Thies thinks he's above everything and everyone. Don't take this class :)

He redesigned the class for this quarter so he eliminated the impossible tests that everyone else had written about. His assignments during my quarter were ridiculously hard, as everyone else has described, and he gave very little guidance for what he was looking for. The way the class worked was that most of your grade (something like 80%) was based on 4 assignments due every 2-3 weeks and these assignments were huge papers that required very thorough research.
However, I have taken multiple classes with him and I must say that he is very responsive to feedback so I think it is fair to assume that there is a good chance that he has adjusted his course to provide more guidance/flexibility for his assignments for upcoming quarters.

Do not take this class. Unclear and competitive grading. Pretty much a nightmare. Harder than all my upper-division classes, and grading was so harsh. The class average on most assignments was 56%. Not great and not worth the stress.

LOOK AT ME I'M TYPING IN CAPS LIKE ALL THE OTHER REVIEWERS BOO HOO DON'T TAKE THIS CLASS MY GPA EWW SOB

Ok, seriously. The way others described this class made it seem like THE. WORST. POSSIBLE. THING. but it wasn't. Poli Sci 50 was a thoroughly enjoyable and thought-provoking experience.

Lots of reading? Yes, but you're in college. Suck it up. You ALWAYS have to read. Difficult midterm/finals/quizzes? Again, college. Grades aren't going to be served to you on a silver spoon. I loved this class for what everyone should eventually take a class for: knowledge. I really miss having this class! I took it as a GE in my first quarter at UCLA (my major is in Engineering) and it really got me interested in Political Science. If I wasn't already set on Engineering, I would have switched over to Poli Sci, or something related.

It's true: the weekly quizzes are a weekly pain, but you learn to get used to them after a while. I thought the grading scheme overall was just. True, some grades may have been disconcerting, but the curve at the end accounts for these unwanted results. I ended up with an A, even when I didn't think I was as well-versed as my peers, who probably majored in PoliSci-related fields, were NOT freshmen, or contributed the most in discussions.

As for Thies himself, I thought he was a humorous and knowledgeable guy. I appreciated his humor and his thinly-concealed political views, and he managed to lecture for a good two hours at a time; I have to commend him on that! I never went to Office Hours (mostly because they didn't fit with my schedule) but, even hearing others describe their sometimes ill experience, I think you just have to see through and adapt to his personality to understand him. If I WAS a PoliSci major, I would have definitely looked more into his research and whatnot.

TL;DR: Relax. The class is cool, and so is the professor. Good educational value. Take the class and see for yourself.

The professor is energetic and really cares about Poli sci 50. That said, his lectures really aren’t mandatory at all if push comes to shove; you could probably get away with skipping a few. However, the discussions and the book are 100% mandatory, and participation is important.
The reading quizzes, personally speaking, are rather fool proof, along with the little assignments here and there. There are quite a lot of readings though, and they can be unnecessarily long.
The professor has apparently changed PS 50 this year. There are no tests, but instead they’re replaced with papers. They’re not graded easily, but fairly. The deadlines are pretty reasonable, but the papers can be unnecessary long. Just remember to answer every. Single. Question

AVOID THIS CLASS AT ALL COST. Even if you have no choice, even if this is the only class you can take. DO NOT DO IT. This man feels like he has the obligation to prove to you that college is hard. He acknowledges that almost all of the people that take his class are first years. He also knows that this is also most peoples first ever college class. Nonetheless, he makes this class extraordinarily hard almost to punish first years for thinking of attending college. Long story short, his attitude needs some work, he's extremely rude, and the lectures are absolutely useless. Unless you want to hear this man talk about everything but the material, don't even think about going to lecture. He has slides prepared that he doesn't even reference. One time he had a whole lecture where he didn't use a single slide. Not. a. single one. I went to every lecture and the final did not mention a single thing said in lecture was on the final. He literally went one lecture where he asked "why do Japanese people live so long" and went the entire time going over peoples guesses. It had absolutely nothing to do with anything. He tried to prove something about statistics since the class is mainly statistical but he did not achieve the point he was trying to make. He refuses to give deadlines, he doesn't give anyone any extra time at all. Even if you were paralyzed he would have the attitude of "too bad" and would expect the assignment done by his deadline. I was in the hospital the day before the final and he basically told me that if I didn't make it to the final, he would give me an incomplete for the class. I had to walk from the hospital to the location of the final with a 101 degree fever and he showed no sympathy. Not to mention the discussions, you could talk every since discussion but if you don't talk every 2 seconds, you're not getting participation credit. They want you to be annoying. If you're a first-year who took this class, this is not a reflection of the quality of education at UCLA. I've had many professors who teach because they truly care about not only the subject of the class but the students. This man just wants to prove he knows a lot about comparative politics when he should care about teaching the students. I truly believe that the only reason this man still works at UCLA is because he's a white man with tenure. Long story short, this man is absolutely the worst teacher I've every had. Middle school and high school combined, he takes the cake.