<p>Does it matter? I'm currently enrolled to take macroeconomics next semester, but someone told me that if I wanted to do good in macroeconomics that I had to take micro first to understand the rudimentary concepts or sth like that is this true?</p>
<p>Problem is, if I switch from macro to micro then it's gonna mess up my schedule and also I have no guarantee of how good the teacher will be since the teacher is till ''TBA'', but for macro I know that I'll get an above average professor at least (even if he supposedly isn't that easy).</p>
<p>I took micro before macro. Micro, in my opinion, is a little harder. We covered much more in micro. I didn’t even learn half of macro, and the half that I didn’t learn turned out to be like 80% of the AP exam. So I just used my knowledge from micro, and got a 3. I don’t know, you be the judge.</p>
<p>The colleges I’ve attended usually suggest (or require) micro before macro, but I just took both at once (at the into and intermediate levels) and that worked out well.</p>
<p>Take microeconomics first. My college recently condensed introductory microeconomics and introductory macroeconomics into one semester, and the new introductory economics course spends the first quarter on microeconomics. You learn about the technical concepts that underlie economic decision making, although I normally suggest that if you are going to choose one economics course, take macroeconomics because it is generally more applicable to “real-world” activities (i.e. reading the newspaper, listening to politicians, etc).</p>
<p>Take them at the same time so that you can think “wider”. I am (online) and it makes it easier to understand the concepts because I can compare how I need to use them in each class. However, if scheduling is an issue don’t worry, it doesn’t matter. Also, if scheduling is an issue, look for online classes in any subject- just don’t overload because you will have to teach yourself most of the material.</p>