<p>Hi guys</p>
<p>I was wondering... Which do you take first microeconomics or macroeconomics? Which do you recommend taking first? And last any recommondations for textbooks.</p>
<p>Thanks in advance :)</p>
<p>Some schools teach micro first, others macro. Basically, it doesn't make a difference either way. You could prolly even take them concurrently if you wanted to since they're not mutually exclusive.</p>
<p>If you really can't decide, flip a coin :D</p>
<p>It really should not matter which you take first. </p>
<p>Nevertheless, if you take macro first you class may fly through the basic introductory concepts in order to get to National accounting, AD/AS etc. Therefore if you intend to study both sets of material spend a little time on your own getting a firm grasp on basic supply/demand and the corresponding statics/graphs and you will save yourself a little time in January. Macro does very little with developing the nuances of elasticity, supply/demand, etc. whereas this is a large part of the micro course.</p>
<p>You will be fine no matter which order you study the material if you put forth a little effort. </p>
<p>Micro, as far as AP is concerned, is anologous to one basic idea (marginal analysis), and a number of corresponding mathematical definitions. If you have any interest/ability in math you are almost automatically a 4. </p>
<p>Macro is not any more difficult than Micro (for AP purposes), but it is not as completely mathematized.</p>
<p>i dont think it matters but most colleges teach micro first. </p>
<p>my school only offers macro b/c apparently, my school thinks it's more "basic"</p>
<p>any textbook and/or prepbook for economics...
thanks</p>
<p>If anything, take micro first. The first unit in macro basically sums up all of micro, so having already taken micro helps juuust a little. Taking macro first wouldn't help at all in micro. </p>
<p>And don't use sparknotes for econ. My dad got it for me and it was FULL of inconsistencies and wrong information</p>
<p>My school offered a year-long AP Econ course which covered both, but began with Macro--which, coincidentally, was how our text (McConnell Brue--it's a good one) was organized. I think that's a common order. It worked well.</p>
<p>I did micro first and enjoyed it more.</p>
<p>Here's what I did (loved economics, got a 5 on both tests).</p>
<p>Took 1 semester of Macroeconomics.
After getting the basics of economics and a few of the important graphs under my belt, I studied PR's AP microeconomics book.
Micro was C-A-K-E.
Micro seems more cut and dry. Macro was an awesome class - more fun. I think that is so because macro studies more interesting subjects for a regular student. General economic theories and the US economy are more exciting (IMO) than talking about a pizza factory for an example.</p>
<p>5 on both tests...</p>