Professor
Bernardo Silveira
1 of 1
Most Helpful Review
Winter 2021 - After taking Professor Mazzocco’s nightmare of an Econ 11 class last quarter, I found this class similar but better. In my opinion, Silveira was a much better professor than Mazzocco and very easily the best economics professor I’ve had at UCLA. That’s not saying much, though. The content of the class was—for a lack of better words—all over the place. I don’t attribute this to the professor but the nature of the class itself. We found ourselves switching gears constantly: we started off with monopoly and oligopoly; abruptly shifted to a diverse spread of game theory topics; and ended by spending the last week on uncertainty and risk topics that had nothing to do with the prior topics we had learned. Although the professor constantly attempted to demonstrate common trends between the topics, we only ever saw them in practice problems or exam problems. The problem sets were much more challenging than Mazzocco’s and served as adequate preparation for the exams. The few practice exams he put out a week or less before each exam, however, were more helpful. Although there was a lack of practice exams given the fact that Bernardo has only taught this class for two quarters, I found myself prepared for most of the content on the exams. Becoming intimately familiar with the way in which he formats each question on the problem sets and practice exams is essential, especially those that slightly deviate from the examples in lecture. The exams were some of the hardest I’ve had in UCLA economics, although—as I said before—that isn’t saying much. There were some problem types that we simply never encountered in the lectures or any of the practice materials that made it on the exams; at the end of the day, they just require some creative intuition because there is no good way to prepare for them. Just follow the strategy I give above, and you will do fine.
Winter 2021 - After taking Professor Mazzocco’s nightmare of an Econ 11 class last quarter, I found this class similar but better. In my opinion, Silveira was a much better professor than Mazzocco and very easily the best economics professor I’ve had at UCLA. That’s not saying much, though. The content of the class was—for a lack of better words—all over the place. I don’t attribute this to the professor but the nature of the class itself. We found ourselves switching gears constantly: we started off with monopoly and oligopoly; abruptly shifted to a diverse spread of game theory topics; and ended by spending the last week on uncertainty and risk topics that had nothing to do with the prior topics we had learned. Although the professor constantly attempted to demonstrate common trends between the topics, we only ever saw them in practice problems or exam problems. The problem sets were much more challenging than Mazzocco’s and served as adequate preparation for the exams. The few practice exams he put out a week or less before each exam, however, were more helpful. Although there was a lack of practice exams given the fact that Bernardo has only taught this class for two quarters, I found myself prepared for most of the content on the exams. Becoming intimately familiar with the way in which he formats each question on the problem sets and practice exams is essential, especially those that slightly deviate from the examples in lecture. The exams were some of the hardest I’ve had in UCLA economics, although—as I said before—that isn’t saying much. There were some problem types that we simply never encountered in the lectures or any of the practice materials that made it on the exams; at the end of the day, they just require some creative intuition because there is no good way to prepare for them. Just follow the strategy I give above, and you will do fine.
Most Helpful Review
Winter 2021 - For a seminar, the workload was on the heavier side. There was a weekly one-page assignment in which we had to break down the essential elements of the paper we were assigned to read. These elements included the research question, data sets, empirical challenges, and conclusions. We were also split into two-person teams for a single group project that required us to give a PowerPoint presentation of the above elements for a different paper from the one everyone was assigned for the week. The class is small—there were only 10 students—, so be prepared to know your stuff. You will not succeed if you choose to sit in the background and say nothing. The topic of the seminar, discrimination in the justice system, was extremely interesting and engaging. An overall great experience, especially if you are interested in research in the social sciences.
Winter 2021 - For a seminar, the workload was on the heavier side. There was a weekly one-page assignment in which we had to break down the essential elements of the paper we were assigned to read. These elements included the research question, data sets, empirical challenges, and conclusions. We were also split into two-person teams for a single group project that required us to give a PowerPoint presentation of the above elements for a different paper from the one everyone was assigned for the week. The class is small—there were only 10 students—, so be prepared to know your stuff. You will not succeed if you choose to sit in the background and say nothing. The topic of the seminar, discrimination in the justice system, was extremely interesting and engaging. An overall great experience, especially if you are interested in research in the social sciences.
AD
1 of 1
