I liked this class. Easy, straightforward tests and relatively interesting lectures made me really enjoy this class. Convery seems really interested in the material and wants all students to do well. Homework counted as 20% and the midterms/final collectively counted as 80% of the grade.

This was one of the worst econ classes I've taken at UCLA, not only does the professor just really not explain anything but he doesnt provide accurate study materials or really support you much throughout. The midterm was reasonable (30%) but the final was obscenely hard and the curve that he applied was not transparent at all, I know of several people who found their grade boosted a significant amount from the curve and others who had no change from their raw score. I don't really understand why the course was set up the way it was but there was really no clear learning trajectory, the professor really just read off pre-written notes (some of which were from previous quarters so he doesn't really update materials) and just generally it was not great. Highly recommend NOT taking 103 with this professor if you can!

Great professor. He is so nice. His lecture is straightforward, and his exams are reasonable. He allows to take a one page notes to exam so that you don't need to memorize all the complicated formulas. He also concern about students, will always listen to students and take their suggestions. Take him and won't be regret

The class was pretty easy and straightforward. The professor is good but just a very boring lecturer especially with being on zoom. When I took it all tests were online and they were pretty easy.

The workload is very doable and the tests are fair. Just review past exams to prepare for the finals.

Took ECON 106F with Professor Convery last quarter. He is a really nice guys, always willing to help you during OH and really makes an effort to help you learn the material. The class lecture were pretty well organized, most of the material mirrored the textbook, so much so that the pp were actually from the book's publisher with some alterations made by the professor.
Overall the grades material were distributed: 20% data case, 20% midterm 1, 20% midterm 2 and 40% final. The exams were very fair and straight forward. If you went to class, read and understand the slides fully and did the practice problem, the exams were very straight forward (you actually dont really need to read the book except for the data case). The data case were long problem sets from the back of the chapter, there were 4 in total (5% each) and we ad ample time to do it.
The only problem was that there were major issues with the problem set and solution that he posted. The formatting became really weird and there were numerous mistakes in them (as well as many of the answers were very convoluted). I dont blame the professor for this because it was his first time teaching the course and these problem set were from the publisher themselves so hopefully next time he would fixed this. Also, for the one of the midterm, there were MAJOR issues with the grading. One of the TA was basically clueless and literally marked the exam all wrong. In some question where the question was answered perfectly correct, she gave me 0 point but luckily the professor fixed this so it was alright. Most people (and sure more than 50% of the class) had to ask for regrades and in most case got back a huge chunk of points (I actually felt really bad for the professor because he had to regrade all the exams himself one-by-one).
Overall, really enjoyed this class. I would say it was one of the more interesting 106 and the material was very straightforward. I would definitely recommend it to all BizEcons (and Econs).

We spent weeks on present value and future value calculations and glazed over the most interesting parts of the content (valuation methods). Convery uses the textbook's slides, and will quickly read them to himself before presenting them. The exams are hard, and often contain errors. Bad professor for interesting material. Convery doesn't even actually have a background in econ/finance, which is probably why his teaching style is so fragmented. Take this class with another professor. Also, the labs are pretty easy - don't bother making a group to work on them together - you can pump them out easily in one hour on your own.

If I had the chance to go back and re-plan my schedule, I would not have taken Econ with Patrick Convery. I think that the material that was taught was interesting but his lectures are extremely boring (and pointless because he puts the lectures up online) and he just reads off the slides. There is no homework in his class but there are suggested reading assignments that no one really does (but I found them helpful because Convery was not helpful at all). There are 2 midterms each worth 25% of your grade and the final that's worth 50% of your grade. I didn't do that well on the fist midterm and when I went to go see him to talk about what I did wrong and to go over the concepts, he didn't really answer my questions and I found the other meetings I had with him were unhelpful. The TA's for this quarter were all very unhelpful and the only recommendations that Convery gave to me was to get a tutor (who cost $70/hour). He also purposefully said that he would make the second midterm and final harder so that there was a larger distribution in terms of grades amongst the class.

I would suggest not to take Econ 1 with Convery and spare yourself the tears and stress.

Econ is just a dry subject, so I can't really blame Convery for this class being terrible--I don't really know how you can teach Econ with pizzazz or make it seem engaging and fascinating. Convery is a very nice guy and more than willing to help you--he met with me outside of class, always emailed me back, and hooked me up with a tutor. But yeah--I had to get a tutor for this class, because I was doing that badly.
The lectures are dry and dull, and all of his slides go up online so you don't really have to go to class anyway. I think I would have done better if I had just worked out of the textbook and done example problems from there, because his slides don't really help you learn how to do the mathematical problems you later see on his exams. Convery is great about providing practice problems--he puts up problem sets for every chapter that is covered, as well as provides sample midterms and finals for you to work on (all with answers included). He holds review sessions before each test--which were of no use to me, but maybe some people got more out of them. It's really not Convery that makes this class bad--econ just sucks tbh.
Anyway, class is 25% midterm 1, 25% midterm 2, 50% final. He curves the class at the end of the quarter, so here's to hoping I end up on the right side of the curve because I could go one way or another. If possible, I would recommend you check out one of Convery's lectures and one of Sproul's and then decide whose class to take depending on who seems more engaging. I wish I had done that, maybe Sproul's style would have worked better for me.

Convery is extremely nice and is a genuinely nice guy. However, be prepared for 10 full weeks of him and his terrible TAs reading off of generic slides for an hour and a half 2x per week. Don't go to lecture, don't go to discussion. It's just rehashing a collection of slides that the textbook company provides to him. It's a snoozefest for the entire quarter, so be warned.