Is it alright if I take Econ 1BB3 (Macro) before 1B03 (Micro) would that be fine? Because O'Shaugnesy is teaching 1BB3 term 1 but gajic is teaching term 2 and I heard gajic is hard.

Also, what would the difficult levels be for 1B03 and 1BB3, are they easily 12able?

That's fine. I took 1BB3 before 1B03 and had no problems in either course.

Both are pretty straightforward, although I'd say 1BB3 requires a bit more effort. You should have no problem getting a 12 in 1B03.

Originally Posted by Brendan

That's fine. I took 1BB3 before 1B03 and had no problems in either course.

Both are pretty straightforward, although I'd say 1BB3 requires a bit more effort. You should have no problem getting a 12 in 1B03.

Do you think Econ 1BB3 is also easy to get a 12 in?

Originally Posted by gunsnroses

Do you think Econ 1BB3 is also easy to get a 12 in?

I guess it's possible, but it won't be easy. I got a 12 in all the other econ courses I took so far (1B03, 2A03, 2H03, 2X03, and 3H03) but only got a 10 in 1BB3.

Originally Posted by Brendan

I guess it's possible, but it won't be easy. I got a 12 in all the other econ courses I took so far (1B03, 2A03, 2H03, 2X03, and 3H03) but only got a 10 in 1BB3.

Thanks for the help!

I would recommend taking Micro Econ first, I got a 12 in that and it was just pure simple do practice tests and read text and you will do fine. Macro Econ in terms of content is less than Micro Econ, but the proff (O'Shaugnesy) has tricky wordings in the tests that make it harder. Pay attention to the quizzes and be in a smart group, I got an 11 from the course because I got a 70 in Quizzes...

Originally Posted by SciGuy

Is it alright if I take Econ 1BB3 (Macro) before 1B03 (Micro) would that be fine? Because O'Shaugnesy is teaching 1BB3 term 1 but gajic is teaching term 2 and I heard gajic is hard.

Also, what would the difficult levels be for 1B03 and 1BB3, are they easily 12able?

I wouldn't do this. I would take 1B03 first no matter what because that should be 12-able. 1BB3 is harder, so it doesn't matter when you would take it.

taking macro 1bb3 right now with sengupta. its not as easy as 1b03. more work needs to be put in but definitely doable.

That's because Sen Gupta is teaching it, lol.

I vastly prefer macro, so I'm biased but they really are difficult to compare because macro and micro are very, very different.

Micro has a lot of small calculations, nothing too difficult, mostly simple algebra and calculating areas on graphs. It isn't too strenuous, nor is it all that interesting (in first year at least). It's more relevant to business. There's no calculus in this class, and you really do need a bit of calc to understand the important aspects of micro so to me, so I wouldn't say you really learn a whole lot. That said, Hannah Holmes is God's gift to the field of economics. Her tests are very straightforward and she's all about bonus marks.

Macro has more to do with how the graphs interact with each other, which makes it more relevant to disciplines like political science or anybody who wants to understand the basics of how the economy works. It has way less math, is more fact based and the hardest part of it will be the last few chapters where there are many different graphs to understand and you have to really get how changes in one variable affect everything. The prof during the year is O'Shaughnessy who's nice, but a bit of a hardass.

It's entirely possible to get a 12 in either of them.

How about Gajic? Is she easy to get a 12? Or are her tests more difficult?