<p>Hey, I heard the only difference is that one of em's macro and the other's micro, is that true? Do we need to take I before II? I'm just wondering because my schedule's much nicer if I take II instead of I.</p>
<p>Thanks!</p>
<p>based on what i know, it doesn't matter. make sure you get kits or lieberman for intro econ classes.</p>
<p>You DO NOT need to take econ I before econ II - and yes, econ I is macro and econ II is micro.</p>
<p>kits is a good teacher?</p>
<p>he literally changed my interest in econ + even though the classes are HUGE, he is always willing to answer your questions with email / after lecture. he cares about the students. the class' grade is based entirely on 3 tests, and some questions may turn you off, you should be definitely be able to pull of an A- with reading the book. and other instructors are mostly grad students i hear so...most of them cannot communicate enough (though kits accent can be hard to understand, but you will get used to it!)</p>
<p>by econ. I do you guys mean the class entitled economic principles I or just microeconomics?</p>
<p>Do you guys know anything about Andrew Paizis, he's the professor for the Econ II class that fits well into my schedule. The thing about Kits is that I've heard good things about him when talking to people, but at least on ratemyprofessor, he seems to have bad reviews. If it matters, I'm taking econ to do economics, rather, I'm doing it because I need it for IR.</p>
<p>Thanks</p>
<p>every proffs have bad reviews because they are not perfect beings....</p>
<p>Marc Lieberman. Take his class. Kits is good too.</p>