Do not take this class. Literally the worst teacher and class I have taken.
There's been a lot of hate surrounding Uribe but he's a great professor. He's really clear in his lectures; a lot of people say that he's too slow with the lectures but I actually think that's a good thing because he takes the time to make sure everything is clear to his students. The TAs for this class though, at least for the Spring 2021 sections, were a bit horrendous. The organization of the class in an online format hasn't been amazing but I'm watching his lectures now before the final, and they're super clear. His line of arguments are well thought out and easy to follow. People who don't like him are just intimidated by the LaTeX equations; his logic is really clear. He's a good professor.
she sucks period don't take her she cannot teach
PROFESSOR X IS AWESOME!!! This is still my favorite class I've ever taken. Prof. Sala-i-Martin is an extremely interesting guy and a great, engaging lecturer (he would get standing ovations from my class lol.) Definitely recommend anyone to take his class. I think the 2019 nobel prize winner in econ was his student.
I would absolutely recommend anyone to TAKE HER!!! I took her class and everything was straight forward. She is very nice and love to talk to students and help them during office hours. Psets are short and are made out of the lecture notes so you are fine by just reading the lecture slides. I also recommend reading the textbook if you want a better understanding of the subject. The midterm is similar to the problem sets and maybe some things she went over in class. Make sure you take notes. The final has the same format. If you don't understand something or can't figure out the HW, the TA's are more than willing to help you and so is the professor. THIS CLASS WAS GREAT! Never stressed about doing bad or anything.
OVERRATED!!! Thought it would be better based on what I've heard but really just ended up just learning about the Solow growth model. The problem sets are not like what we see in class. Midterm was four questions but complex. You barely have time to finish half of it. I ended up doing okay but not as good as I thought I would. His class is big (about 300 students), which makes it harder to ask questions and less approachable.
Steinsson's lectures were really engaging and interesting. They incorporated aspects of history and political science which was really cool. I would recommend going to his lectures and reviewing the slides after because they are the bulk of what appears on his tests. His problem sets were very difficult and time consuming, but we were not tested on much of the material that appeared in problem sets or what was covered in recitation.
Although sometimes distracted, Andrews managed to keep an econ lecture to full capacity throughout the semester due to his charisma and a constant flow of fascinating and useful information. He is passionate, knowledgeable and genuinely cares that his students receive a quality education. His lectures always include a social/racial/gender/historical perspective and current political and economic situations are given time for speculation in lecture.
Professor Andrews made economics interesting by telling stories and giving real life examples to explain the basics of macroeconomics. It was always a pleasure to come to lecture, and Andrews has a unique way of inspiring people. I came to class just to hear him talk, and it seems like everyone in the class went to each and every lecture, as the classroom was always full. He also didn't move too fast and always made sure that everyone was following along. Overall, he's just a really, really great guy. He's completely understanding and he goes out of his way to help his students. He also conducts review sessions, tells us what we need to know for the exams, and is very generous with grading/curving grades.
People seem to be a bit harsh on Colacelli here. It is true that her teaching style leaves something to be desired, but she's not a seasoned veteran. Colacelli got her Ph.D. quite recently, so she hasn't had the decade of teaching experience that other econ professors here have. Give her some time, and I think she'll turn out to be one of the better ones.
This class was generally really easy and Professor Colacelli is so sweet and really tries to help her students out. She is also really great at explaining anything that you're unclear about. It's not really necessary to come to class and most people don't but I think it really helps. She just reads her slides which she takes directly out of the textbook during class but for the first few classes you don't really have to read the chapters if you come to class. Her lectures tend to be kind of boring but again, she is really sweet and she definitely reconigzes the people that consistently come to class.
This class really frustrated me. Every class was spent going over the text word for word. Even the examples used in class were straight from the text, and the slides were straight from the textbook website (she also posts them on courseworks before each class). Attending the class was pretty much a waste of time. If you read the text, read the articles posted online, and did the problem sets, you were prepared for the exams. The curves were generous. The weekly problem sets were long, very long. The assignments online were a breeze, but the weeks when written problem sets were due werenÂ’t fun. There were several written sets, and they each took several hours to complete. I personally felt that the problem sets could have been made shorter in exchange for actually solving some real example problems in class rather than going over the textbook verbatim (very, very few real examples were gone over in class). The text only goes over VERY simple questions, so of course she only went over very simple examples in class. The questions at the end of the chapters (those on the written problem sets) were very hard, which left you kind of stuck (neither the text or the professor went over any real examples). There were optional TA sessions offered weekly where (apparently) problem set problems were discussed. Overall, the class wasn't hard, but Colacelli makes a bland topic even blander.
This class was fairly easy to do well in. I came to class 4 times the entire semester, and I still managed to get an A on the midterm. If you can teach yourself things out of a book then there is no use coming to class because all she does in class is go over the book word for word. But beware- the book is extremely slanted to the right and you might get upset when you read it.
This is the worst class for first semester, but unfortunately you have to take it. If you are good at teaching yourself things out of the book/from the slides Colacelli posts online then you will be fine. In order to really do well, you need to find yourself a group of people who semi-understand economics already and make sure you do your problem sets with them (yes they are on Aplia, and yes, they are horrible... don't leave them until 2 pm on Friday). Her midterm/final is damn near impossible, considering the average for our midterm was in the 40s, she thought this was "good for us" ...right. Just study almost all the topics, don't stop writing, and do the questions that are worth the most points first, because you will not have enough time to do all of them. You can still get away with a b+/a- if you get a 40 on the midterm... so don't worry! if you can, avoid taking it with her, but you'll live if you have to take it with her.
i'm sure she's a great person but i think she should really drink a few cans of red bull before beginning her lecture...or perhaps she should be allowed to have a few glasses of wine before and during class. her monotonous argentine accent just makes her lectures even more boring. sometimes i wished she would lecture in spanish just to make it more interesting. I actually stopped attending this class for an entire month and when I finally returned to class after a month long absence i saw the 4 people sitting closest to me fall asleep. a month ago i had never seen these people fall asleep. the material for the course itself isn't that difficult to grasp. i didn't think the midterm was as hard as many other people in the class thought it to be...it was just long. in my experience, classes with lots of first year(?) barnard girls always have very generous curves. I would recommend this class because it is relatively easy...but i would also have to recommend avoiding this class simply because it is so boring. this class is equivalent to a slightly more difficult class that is more engaging. i'd take the slightly more difficult that was more engaging. you'll end up with the same grade, but at least you weren't bored. if you're a nerd or have an unusually high tolerance for extremely boring lectures then take this class and you'll do well without taking any losses.
Prof. Colacelli is a very nice, caring professor. She is very willing to help you with anything that you are having trouble with and is very knowlegable. She knows A LOT the current economic situation in almost every country. She gives out slides for every chapter as well as supplementary readings. These can be helpful to understand the reading. Take notes right on the slides and you'll have no problesm on the midterm/final. However, her lectures can be fairly boring since she reads directly from the slides. I would still go to class though, because she gives great stories and is able to add life to the dull book. Overall, this was a great class; I never thought I'd enjoy economics but I did and I learned a lot!
I'm sure she's very nice, but Professor Colacelli's sterling Harvard credentials still don't save her lectures from being tedious at best. Since day one, every single one of the lectures, no joke, was a powerpoint slide show of exactly what the book says - including the exact same diagrams and examples! She then proceeds to read off the slides for an hour and fifteen minutes (the entire class). Her idea of involving the class are random fill in the blank questions that no one responds to because they're all asleep. The problem sets given each week take time, but are easy. The midterm was awful, and ended up with a curve where 50% earned you an A-. At least she's prompt with emailed questions. Save yourself the time and skip the uninspired, pre-packaged lectures.
Basically, don't take this class. Even if you do well, you'll regret having spent the time you did studying. Because that is how useless the curriculum is. Get a copy of the Economist for a year - your money will be better spent. There are too many great classes and gifted teachers at Barnard and Columbia - don't waste your time and money on this guy
I feel that he is a really good professor. He gave us a lot of historical backgrounds of each macroeconomic topics. Which is essential to understand the course material. (Come on, it is a macro class, unlike micro which are full of graphs and numbers) I don't agree with previous comments that the history is irrelevant and a waste of time. He is trying to make us connect history with macroeconomic principles and I believe it was really useful for me. His tests covered what he taught in lectures, very straight forward. At the end of the semester, I gained a lot of extra insight and now I can read the econ news and understand what it is talking about.
STAY AWAY!!!!!! Who are you freaks that gave this man such great reviews - golden nugget - yeah right?!!! I switched into his class from principles b/c of those reviews and I believe it was one of the absolute worst mistakes of my life. I, too, am taking principles next semester. This class was a complete waste of my time and money! This man DOES NOT TEACH HE PREACHES about how God is the invisible hand and how abortion is genocide - completely inappropriate for the classroom. He does NOT present a fair view of other economic theories and teaches his own made up models as if they were acredited (which they are NOT)! His tests have nothing to do with economics but are about obscure quotes and that the spanish thaler is the original dollar or some unimportant bullshit like that. He teached his OPINIONS as if they were fact and does not present the other view. AVOID THIS MAN AT ALL COSTS!!!
This man should not be a golden nugget - i'm sure his money and banking class was great, but his first attempt at an Intro class has really been a complete waste of time. Rather than teach us the material necessary to understanding the global economic system, he prefers to talk about why the US should return to the Gold Standard. For two classes. If it weren't for our incredibly dedicated TAs, no one would learn anything. While I am an econ neophyte, and can't judge this, apparently he gets a lot wrong, too - he's an econ history phD. In short, everyone in the class is really pissed - not only are we paying 40,000/year (and thus should expect more than this), but barnard should be ashamed. In my opinion, this man is simply not qualified, nor is he interested in, teaching a well-balanced class. Actually, a TA remarked that our class is probably what columbia students in the 1930s were learning. I'm going to take Principles next year - that's how ill-prepared we are for the next level.... THIS MAN IS AWFUL!!!!
The work for the class was unnecessarily annoying. By this, I mean there are Aplia assignments, and you have to subscribe to Aplia (this online economics course supplement) for a fee, and he assigns 3 annoying Excel spreadsheet assignments that you have to go to lab sessions for if you're not familiar with excel. For someone who isn't fond of math, this was not a fun thing to do. With that said, as someone who isn't even really all that interested in economics, I liked the course and I liked Weiman. Some may find him boring, his lectures to be sleep-inducing (not helped by the fact that the class was a Mon-Wed 9AM), but it is clear that Weiman knows his stuff. He's a clear lecturer, and if you stay awake in class to take notes you WILL feel better about the quizzes (which tend to be easy) and the midterm and final (which are not quite as easy). The textbook is expensive and boring, and not a whole lot of it is on the tests. I think he does a decent job of preparing students for the final, and if you go to all the classes and do the practice and graded aplia assignments, do your reading and all that, you should be fine. This isn't coming from someone who did exceptionally well in the class,. As a matter of fact i didn't do nearly as well as I could have. From my experience, just make it to the class, even though it's early. It'll pay off in the end.
Overall, Professor Weiman is an INCREDIBLE teacher. I recommend taking intro to macro with him or any other course he teaches. After taking the course, I want to be an econ major. His lectures are interesting, clearly outlined and on courseworks. He answers questions in class and during office hours well. While the average grades are low, they are curved, so if you read the text and donÂ’t skip class you can be on the top of the curve and get an A.
What a nightmare this class was! Had I known that econ majors consider Weiman to be one of the most boring lecturers ever, I probably would not have taken this class...and now that I've experienced Weiman for myself, I KNOW that would not take this class again or any other that is taught by him. Please bear in mind that this class is called "INTRO" and there are no prerequisites; however, I often felt unable to comprehend Weiman's lectures because he seems to assume that his audience follows him. He often abbreviates terms without clarifying what he's abbreviating and likes to give major assignments that have no immediate basis in the textbook. Weiman also likes to hear himself talk and he does a lot of it, and aside from random moments of humorous sarcasm, you'll want to tune out his whiny monotone voice. While he's extremely organized, his lack of clarity is an issue. All I can say is that thanks to a bunch of outgoing question-askers in the class, some things were clarified; but in general, I felt like I was sinking in quicksand. Do not take this class if you have no interest in econ or if you do not have the time to camp outside Weiman's office for his weekly office hours. Another thing, expect there to be major curves in his class to make up for the lack of teaching. In my opinion, curves are only necessary (especially on his grandiose scale) when professors are not getting through to students. As a side note, if for whatever reason you choose to take Weiman's class, make sure that you know how to use Excel!
Weiman is an awful professor. He spends his class going over the textbook reading. Asking him questions is like getting teeth pulled; he lets you know that you are wasting his valuable time. The lecture doesn't break up into sections, though, so if you do have questions you're kind of screwed. My class had one TA, she was literally 70 years old. While she was very nice, she wasn't exactly accessible...plus, she couldnt hear anything you said. Also, the few assignments that we did have were returned about 3 weeks after their due date, since there was no one to grade them except Weiman and the old lady. Weiman is very whiny. He'll walk into the classroom and find his desk out of place, or a piano in front of his lectern (the room is used for music classes as well), and he'll moan, "This is NOT in my contract." Then he'll call the custodian and bitch to him. Needless to say, I did not enjoy Weiman's class.
If you are an English major hoping to learn a little about money and the economy, I don't recommend taking Weinstein's class. He is very intelligent and his lectures always follow an outline (which is posted on courseworks). However, he leaves most of the work, including all grading, up to the T.A. and I don't think he knows anyone's name in the class (this is probably due to the fact that he has a "second" job as a financial consultant). Nonetheless, if you know a thing or two about economics and you are good at excel spreadsheets, you will probably enjoy David.
Very fair professor. He's really nice. Holds a review sessions and gives last year's exam as a practice exam. Very nice as well. He really likes applying what he teaches to real life, so it's always good to know the current conditions of the economy for any exam. On the final, he made us read two short article on the economy and then asked us essay questions on them. Go to his office hours and get to know him. He'll remember your name and it matters!! When he knows you and sees that you're a good student, he may grade you in a more lax manner. Overall, good class. The class is much smaller than some intro classes at columbia. I thought this class was much more understandable than the Principles of Econ i took with Brendan O' Flaherty at Columbia.
I'm not exactly sure what the last person was talking about. There was absolutely no math in this class unless you consider high school (or middle school) level algebra to be math. While the textbook isn't the most exciting thing I've read this semester (you also don't really need to read it, let alone the study guide), we also got to read a really good and interesting Stiglitz book. As a Columbia student who's taken Columbia econ classes, Wennerlind's approach to the subject is really fresh and exciting. I highly recommend this course to anyone interested in learning about basic macroeconomic policy issues facing our country.
Professor Wennerling is extremely interesting in class and the course seems fun from the beginning but when he starts drawing graphs it becomes a pain in the neck. Take this class if you are good in math and like boring books, because the assigned book was tough and very unclear. His group projects take a lot of time and homeworks are boring, although they help to revise the material for the exam. Overall not bad but beware, the exams are challenging.
While I would agree with previous reviews that Prof. Onatski teaches a heavily math-based class, his class his certainly not a math gulag like one of the reviews suggests. I only took one math class at Columbia (IIA) before taking macro, and I did lousy in it. Nonetheless, I managed Onatski's class with an A (even though I was convinced I had failed the final before I got my grade). While I am not the biggest fan of math or macro, I would still highly recommend Prof. Onatski. He's entertaining, thoughtful, and will always leave you with another speculative scheme with which you can cheat the world! I am now approaching my final in Micro, though, and I can honestly say that Onatski's class makes this one seem like cake. But you'll learn from it (if not from the incompetent TAs).
Prof Preston is organized and he has done a good job of conveying the concepts thoughtfully considering it is the first time he is teaching it. He makes himself available for office hours quite readily. And for those who take the trouble to attend class, his subtle sense of humour - like a fine Australian wine - can grow on you...
No one should take this class with Preston - he is the most boring guy in the world and everyone falls asleep during his lectures. He is not well organized, follows the book so precisely that it doesn't even pay to go to class. I am telling you - Columbia needs professors in economics who can really make the material interesting. Preston killed my will to major in economics....don't ever take a class with him.
Prof. Sethi was amazing!!! I have never seen a teacher so dedicated to his students and wanting them to excel. Take advantage of his office hours and of his message board on courseworks!! Economics is a very important subject to understand for all aspect of your life and Prof. Sethi makes it so interesting and makes you want to understand. I highly reccomend him!!
He's a good professor. In my class, he gave a lot of group projects. So if you don't like group work, you might not want to take him. One good thing, we did not get pop quizes!
This was a really cool class to take because it teaches you quite a bit about economics in one semester. I went into it knowing absolutely nothing about the economy and yet had no problems with understanding the materials. Professor Wennerlind is really nice and keeps the class interesting with his witty (albeit sometimes corny) sense of humor. Although he does have a tendency to add his personal opinions in about theory, policy, etc---it makes the class interesting and adds a different viewpoint. The reading isn't necessary at all because his notes are quite comprehensive. While it's clear that he knows the material he's covering, he does tend to skim over important things rather quickly sometimes leaving you feeling lost and confused. But he has a habit of repeating things from class to class so that helps to clarify things. And if you still have trouble understanding he is always available in office hours and is quite approachable, although he is sometimes awkward in interaction.
Rajiv was a great professor!! I really reccommend this course whether you're interested in econ or not because Rajiv makes it so interesting and enjoyable. He's sooo cute!! His teaching style is very systematic and everything he covers is in the book too. He's very organized and clear. for the second half of the course he applies everything you've learned to real life situtauions that have happened in the world, which makes it very interesting. After this course you'll feel like a much more informed voter and participant in society. Yuo'll be able to pick up the NY Times business section and understand what it's saying. It's a great lecture! He has a bit of an accent but it's really not bad at all.
Great teacher, Hard Hard class, this is not the class you want to take if you really don't find the material that interesting... He is great to look at that is certain , however expect a heavy workload to achive success... take it pass fail for a fun class or expect to do 2 hrs each day for a decent grade.
I really enjoyed this class. I feel like I have a better understanding of the economy which is cool, and the material was challenging but logical. Wennerlind is a great guy. He is relatively funny, understanding, and accomodating. The only problem is that he is a little unclear when he teaches. You really have to keep up with the reading in order to be able to follow in class. But the book is really good, so it's not so bad. Added bonus: he's really good looking.
Although he did make an effort to disguise his own personal opinions on the subject matter, his standpoint was fairly clear. As far as papers were concerned, I think he happens to be one of those teachers who only gives A's to people who tell them what they want to hear. It seems there is little room for creativity. In some senses this is beneficial, because it is clear how you should write your paper, however, in at other times it is problematic. I will personally never take another class with this man again. I would advise the same if you value a teacher who respects his/her responsibilities as a professor and who respects your responsibilities as a student.
Wennerlind is not a good professor, but probably better than most. In the beginning of the course, he blamed several students for asking too many questions (this was true) and we didn't get through a lot of the stuff. Of course, this was partly his fault too, for fielding too many questions. As the course went on, we still had problems, or rather he had problems getting through the material in class. He oversimplifies the course material and while this is in some cases good, in this class it is not. Not only does he take too much time explaining the material and oversimplifies it, he gives additional material--the history of the U.S. economy, so that it becomes impossible to get to the important material that is actually hard to explain, and that is on the test. His tests are difficult in comparison to the way he explains the material, so he is very misleading. As other reviewers have advised, make sure you do the study guide! He's a really nice guy most of the time, but he really oversimplifies many of the concepts and doesn't really get to the important ones. For example, he gave us a problem set due and a pop quiz on the Monday before our midterm. (He did this for both midterms, btw.) He also, as I said above, teaches the last two chapters the monday before the exam, and then provides a huge and very vague essay question on them. Overall, he may be better than the alternatives (check the reviews of the other professors), but that's not saying much.
Wennerlind is nice, funny, and fair. One thing that really bugged a lot of us: he is not good at hiding his personal partialities when it comes to politics and political economics. Though he will not come right out and say what he thinks, it is in his tone, right beneath the surface of his words. This was annoying, especially since you couldn't argue back if you disagreed, because it's an economics class, not a philosophy class. Also, many thingsmare not clear in class unless you have read the book beforehand. Overall good class, though.
Wennerlind is a sweet and funny guy. Problem is, he's not much good at teaching. Course starts off fine and easy to follow, but when the material turns difficult, Wennerlind is not very good at explaining it. As an economist, he probably knows the material, but he cannot seem to transfer it from his brain to the students'. Class is not boring; Wennerlind keeps it light and entertaining, but the material can get heavy, so you'd better keep up with the reading where he comes up short but I guess that's a requirement in every class. One drawback - he's a fan of pop quizzes.