<p>She's been known for a "draconian" grading curve (14% 4.0, class avg 2.76). I looked on ratemyprofessors.com and a bunch of people have said that it's "impossible" to get an A in her class. Of course, they probably didn't mean in the literal sense, but this is still an awful curve either way.</p>
<p>So far I'm finding the material straightforward, but I've done quite a bit of micro in high school (although not quite up to AP-standard.) I don't know anything about macroeconomics besides what I've gathered from following the news over the past year.</p>
<p>I looked at the midterms and they seem straightforward, but since they're all short-answer questions, I don't know how much she expects from us, i.e. how thorough or analytical our answers are supposed to be. I always have a habit of writing as much as I know for open-ended questions, but time constraints often prevent me from showing the full extent of my knowledge.</p>
<p>After four years of EECS classes, being able to take a class and not feel completely lost by the first lecture is already quite a relief.</p>
<p>Anyway, for those of you who had her in previous years, did you do well? If so, any advice? Thanks in advance.</p>
<p>You're going to need to train yourself to write the bare minimum for her exams, as they are very time-consuming. She always tells you how long she expects you to spend on a question and that is her way of telling you how much she wants written down.</p>
<p>I took her in Spring 08 as a first year. I got a 63/100 on Midterm1, 88/100 on Midterm2, and a 46/50 on problem sets. I remember being told I was ranked in the top 20% going into the final and had a good chance of an A if I did well on the final. Well, I didn't as I got 156/200 on the final (I also got 49/50 in section, which as you know is required). 402/500 got me a B+ in the class and a lot of what if questions had I studied more for her final (probably didn't help that I had a Math 1B final the same day). In other words, take her final seriously.</p>
<p>Where did you find data that said she gives out only 14% 4.0's?</p>
<p>Oh wow, that sounds tough.</p>
<p>Was MT1 unusually hard for the class? [url=<a href="http://www.econ.berkeley.edu/%7Eolney/spring09/econ1/oldmt1.html%5DThis%5B/url">http://www.econ.berkeley.edu/~olney/spring09/econ1/oldmt1.html]This[/url</a>] was the exam, right? Seems like first midterms mainly involve drawing graphs (PPF, supply-demand, etc.) and not much analysis.</p>
<p>The grading stats came from [url=<a href="http://www.campusbuddy.com/profs_courses/view/36281%5Dthecampusbuddy.com%5B/url">http://www.campusbuddy.com/profs_courses/view/36281]thecampusbuddy.com[/url</a>]. The Sp08 distribution was 1% A+, 13% A, 11% A-, 13% B+, 11% B, and the rest lower. If you got a B+, your final rank was somewhere in the top 26-38%, which is still impressive. That curve is just ridiculous.</p>
<p>Fortunately, I've scheduled my classes so that I only have two finals, spaced five days apart. It's my last semester here and I don't want to go through another brutal, stressful exam week. (I've scheduled exams too close to one another in the past like you did, and I bombed every one of them.)</p>
<p>Thanks for the info.</p>
<p>No problem at all. Yes, MT1 was relatively much more difficult than MT2, in terms of class mean and such. I found MT2 to be much more straightforward. The main thing with econ exams is that you usually have to make assumptions, and you need to state those on the exam. You can then proceed with your analysis.</p>
<p>That's a smart exam strategy. I'm sure you will do very well in the course. May I ask why you are taking it as an EECS major?</p>
<p>Also, I looked at some older emails from my GSI and I was 11 points away from an A- (so 413/500 was at least an A- in Sp08).</p>
<p>Why do you find Olney's grade distribution ridiculous? 25% A's and 50% B's seems like the standard for a lot of classes I've taken as a Intended Business major. Don't EECS classes have an even harder curve?</p>