[W1105] Principles of Economics

Makes lectures entertaining, cracks jokes, no participation necessary since the class is huge. If you read the textbook, then you'll only miss a few questions on the midterm and final. If you don't read the textbook but you attend lecture, you will do decently. If you do both, you're in good shape. Highly recommended even for non-Econ majors.

Where should I start on Dan O'Flaherty? Reading past reviews, I definitely agree with most of the comments. He has a strange sense of humor and tries to relate unnecessary things to Economics (I recall examples using penguins). The lectures are dry unless he brings up obscure examples which, although they are funny, don't help you learn the material. Aside from problem sets, the textbook isn't really used because he focuses on his lectures for the midterm and final. Therefore, going to the lectures is the only real way to do well on the tests, and I would strongly recommend going to recitations too, even though my TA wasn't the least bit helpful.

AARRRGH!

Okay, so when I got schedule-conflicted out of Gulati, I came and read the very reviews that you are reading now. "Oh," I thought, naively, "O'Flaherty doesn't sound so bad, according to these." But how wrong I was!

Start off with twenty-five minutes or so of bad jokes, followed by an hour of STUDENTS making idiotic jokes, which O'Flaherty engages rather than, I don't know, teaching economics--then a mandatory recitation section where a TA who can't speak more than a half-dozen words of English lectures me on basic math!

Rinse and repeat thirty times.

In my opinion, the man can't teach. He can't lecture, he can't run a classroom, and he can't write tests. The class is an hour of straight-up agony while some jackass in the back of the room asks "can chickens fly" and rather than shutting him up, O'Flaherty chats with him about it for hours at a time. Yeah, it's cute to get your students to like you, but some of us would like to cover the material without feeling compelled to tear out our eardrums.

What's really strange is that his notes on the website are actually coherent and intelligent -- but you will never hear ANYTHING like that in class. I'm assuming somebody else wrote them.

I hate to be this harsh. But take Gulati. Don't compromise.

What a great professor. He made me laugh every lecture, something I was not expecting out of this class. He is one of the best lecturers I've ever experienced, ever, not just at Columbia, not just in Academia. If you take Economics, take it from him!

I don't know anything about the other teacher O'Flaherty but I can say that Gulati is a great teacher. Not amazing but definitely worth getting up at 9 am to listen to (for all you considering taking his class in spring of 2007). He speaks loudly and clearly and often makes jokes in class (sometimes at the students' expenses, all in good humor of course). As to accusations of having a large ego in previous reviews and having hard tests...not true. The average for the midterm in fall 2006 was a 72 when he was aiming for a 60 something. I went to dinner with him (there will be signups) and he is a very approachable guy and modest in person.

For some reason the TAs seem to be unfair with problem sets. But do the homework and don't leave studing till the last day and you should be fine: 5 in-class pop quizzes, 5 psets, 1 midterm, 1 final.

Such a dissapointment. Stiglitz was fascinating to listen to... unfortunately he never attended class (probably had more important engagements considering his fame). This left Brendan O'Flaherty to lecture who is just awful -- painfully boring and useless since he oversimplifies everything which left me feeling lost on the midterm and final. Discussion section weekly which is semi-helpful. Almost everyone says Principles is a class where you have to "teach yourself" so if you can do that, take this class. Otherwise, steer clear!!!!

Gulati is the greatest thing since sliced bread. I can see how people would complain about the entertainment factor, but I think he felt like people should get the basics from the text book. I asked him about it, and this is why he requires you to read the chapter before coming to class.
The grading system is extremely fair. He's very approachable, and people only seem to go to his office hours the day before the final or mid-term. He does an amazing job with 300 students. He's the most down to earth professor I've seen at Columbia (and the best so far).

If anyone writes one more review raving about this man, I will shoot myself.
Okay, his lectures may be entertaining (minimally), but the problem sets and especially exams will make you think twice. Most of the time he attempts too much to "entertain" that he barely gets in to the substance which you actually need to get through the problem sets/exams. One rule that especially got to me was the fact the he (and TAs) will not accept ANY questions on the problem sets. True, the class is huge, but this is the first class I have ever taken at Columbia to have such a pointless rule (and i'm not a freshman).
One good thing I have to say is that he will give you atleast 5 sample exams for both the midterm and final, which was very helpful. But what would have been more helpful is if he shut up about what style iPod/Blackberry was coolest and actually taught something in class.

Simply put, he's not the best professors I've ever had at Columbia. But he's not the worst either.
Indeed, he was pretty bad for the first two weeks,(I seriously considered dropping the class) but then I began to appreciate his insights, somewhat oddball comments, and his efforts to translate his apparent genius in Economics to decency in teaching Economics. Now that the midterm is over, I actually enjoy going to class (though I always bring my textbook and read it when the lecture isn't too interesting), and I like his promptness and attentiveness.
He's actually a nice guy in person. I feel bad that he's hated by so many people (read the reviews below), and that his teaching and efforts are under-appreciated.
And about Gulati: I wanted to take his class but couldn't due to the schedule conflict, and I believe most of my classmates chose O'flaherty for the same reason. However, it's not that O'flaherty is too bad but that Gulati's too good, and I guess O'flaherty happens to lie in the shade of a star professor like Gulati.
My closing comment similar to the one far below: take Gulati if you can, but you'll be just fine with O'flaherty. I actually decide to major in Econ after taking O'flaherty's class.

I don't have too much to add to what has already been written about him, but he is definitely a unique teacher, and it is worth taking a class with him. He is witty, sarcastic, and engaging. Classes went by very quickly because they were almost like performances. He often spent long periods of time asking questions and soliciting answers from the class, then shooting down (in a funny and sometimes slightly mean way) evreyone's answers (even the ones that in the end often seemed to be correct). So, the classes were very entertaining, which was good, although I sometimes felt like Gulati put entertainment above teaching -- sometimes I left class feeling like not everything was explained as well as it could be. With that being said, I think overall he did an excellent job of covering a ton of material and making it accessible and understandable. The text book is also very good and can fill in holes Gulati leaves. Although he sometimes seems a bit harsh during class, Gulati is very nice, and sets up a ton of lunch/dinner sessions so he can get to know his students -- he learns many names by the end of the semester. He also definitely cares about his studetns and about economics and current events and does a pretty amazing job of combining wit and economics to create a class unlike any other I have taken. His class isn't always easy, but it's worth taking!

This guy is a great teacher, but has also got one hell of an ego that you will first amsue you and make you think he is THE MAN. This wore off for me by november when i was definitely convinced that he was indeed a total four letter word i shouldn't type. Besides his character, he is quite energetic on stage (yes, stage because principles is a class of around 250 people) and that really helps you stay awake, even if you hate economics. He will most likely take some of his students out to dinner at faculty house because he is well aware that if he doesn't, he will probably only remember 20 students from his class.
Freshman should definitely do this because John Jay is horrific. Anyways, take this course. Don't take the other section. Yea, fine, it will be easier but why sell yourself short?

Why are you reading the reviews? You surely have had to have heard of this legendary lecturer!
He is a great teacher. He is a great speaker and he communicates the material perfectly. He makes economics interesting.
One lecture he was not there and a professor I will not name was lecturing us instead. Simply put, all 290 of us came to appreciate Gulati all the more after that day. The best part about Gulati is that he is fun to listen to. He always cracks random jokes throughout the lecture. He gets the class involved a lot for a 290 person lecture and he makes the most amusing jokes when students say rather unintelligent things.
That said, this is not an easy class! If you are a non-econ person and you just want to be enlightened, the class may put a dent in your GPA but this class is worth taking Pass/Fail if you can't manage the material because just being in the room you will learn more about economics than you could in another section

O'Flaherty is the worst type of economist. He is a stale thinker and exceedingly dull professor. His jokes are failed attempts to convince the class of his humanity.
O'Flaherty resorts to gross simplifications when explaining most theories. For simplification's sake, O'Flaherty invented something called the "Short Run Inflation Adjustment Curve", an inadequate proxy for Aggregate Supply. He also rejects mainstream ideas, simply because it makes him appear smart. As a result, this class is useless. You WILL have to re-learn the basic theories as an economics major.
His tests consist of inane questions, "True or False: Poor people in WVA will be better off if more jobs are available and the area is more proseperous".
Not difficult, not even economics (just hearsay). Take Gulati if you don't want a headache.

I really don't think Dan is that bad. I found him a bit dry, but some of his lectures were very interesting--espcially on contemporary issues like Chinese currency and the Bush tax cuts. While you'll be more interested in economics if you take Gulati's class, you will survive if you have Dan. After all, our class even started a facebook group in his appreciation.

I know that O'Flaherty annoys the heck out of some people, but I actually find him quite endearing. He moves a little too slowly sometimes, uses some unnecessarily ridiculous examples, but it works if you're not already an ace at econ. I personally like how he focuses on the humanitarian and environmental aspects of economics, with a whole lecture on homelessness. He views the study of economics as a mechanism to make the world better, not just as a way to make money, and offers real economically sound ways to do so.

Professor Gulati is the best professor I have ever had at Columbia. Even if you are not interested in Economics, take this course.

Flaherty cannot teach to save his life. The lectures were totally scattered and irrelevant to what we were actually supposed to be learning about. Moreover, he's SO boring that even if he was making sense,you wont be awake to see it happen. Most of my class stopped coming to lecture by the second week. If you really like econ, do yourself a favor and stay away from this class so as to not kill your interest in it. Go for Gulati! The midterm was irrelevant, and the problem sets are annoying since you have to figure them out yourself. You will have to read the book if you want to learn anything. Moral of the story- STAY AWAY!

he's flat out amazing, seems to love teaching and love his students. a great guy, which shows in the way he approaches his job. i'd recommend this class to anyone and everyone who has interest in econ.

Although this may be a problematic course in and of itself, O'Flaherty is an incompetant and unhelpful professor. At best, he is a footnote to the textbook, which you will need to read to learn anything in this class. He's also one of the most boring professsors I've had at Columbia. One thing that was particularly frustrating was how the midterm did not cover class material, nor book material, nor anything we had ever really seen before. I highly recommend avoiding O'Flaherty as a professor.

I've always admired someone who's able to capture the attention of an entire lecture hall of 300 students. Prof. Gulati is exactly this type of person. His teaching style is amazing, he barely relies on his notes, and his references to current events and things of actual inerest really make him outstanding. The midterm/final are hard, but if you go to class and take notes, you'll do fine. He stresses what is important, meaning he'll pause, turn to the students, and repeat again what he said slowly and clearly, really emphasizing the point, so there's no reason room for doubt as to what really counts. Everyone says, "I cried after the final/midterm", but those people spent time reading the book, instead, they should have goneto class and took notes instead of relying on the book. In the end, whether or not you get a D of an A, Gulati is worth it, TAKE HIS CLASS.

I thought this class was horrible. With only a small amount of experience in economics I took this my first semester as a SEAS student. I immediately started falling asleep in class or wondering what paper clips and his new windows had to do with econ. (Trust me, he never made a relationship.) I was wondering why he was even teaching until I invited a student from Gulatti's class to visit a lecture and he said the same thing. In the end I skipped most of the classes and got an A.

I'm not going to blame O'Flaherty for the content of this course. He's a bit of an oddball, but I don't think that it really makes his lectures any less effective. The lectures are interesting in that they demonstrate how an economist (namely O'Flaherty himself) might think about issues. What's really important is that you have a good TA, because it is in the recitations where you really learn the quant heavy stuff.

Ultimately I have a problem with the course itself. Why is this a requirement for Economics majors anyway? It's way too basic to really prepare you for anything and the Intermediate Macro and Micro classes do an adequate job of teaching these same concepts in depth from first principles. Therefore, I propose that the requirement be cut altogether, anybody with a passing interest in the subject already knows this stuff anyway.

I took the Principles of Economics course with Professor Desai in Spring 2005. I did well in the course and attended all the lectures and read the specified readings. I figure most people didn't attend all the lectures, but I found it helpful to aid in a more complete understanding of the topics. The book by Mankiw I thought was really well written. Mankiw gives many examples, and those can be quite helpful for visual learners.

I think that some of the older reviews of this class say that it is an easy A. Perhaps Desai read those reviews and tightened up her class, because we weren't getting great grades at the beginning. But I think enough of us whined hard enough to get her to lighten up and take it easier on us, which I think she did.

In the end I think this class is like many others. If you enjoy economics and put the time in, you should get a good grade easily. But if you naturally don't get it and/or are not interested, you may find yourself skipping classes and not getting a good grade. If you read the book alone, you may not be focusing on the key points highlighted in the course.

Lectures were boring, and basically everything was in the book, verbatim. Sometimes she would attempt to involve participation, which would end up being some kind of degrading arithmetic question or the like... you can just read the textbook and save yourself some time. She doesn't post grades online, which was annoying for the less frequent attendees. The exams were not very difficult, and the grading is fair.

Sunil Gulati is the man. Economics can be dry, but if you take it from "Sunny G", it'll never be boring. The tests are hard but it turned out that anything over 25/48 on the midterm was an "A", so it's not much of a problem.

O'Flaherty almost killed my interest in economics, His lectures are boring, tangential, and useless. His exams do not reflect his lectures nor the book reading at all. Do not take this class with OFlaherty.

Gulati is a great professor, will keep your attention, and he is a really down-to-earth, friendly guy. The dinner at faculty house is great and I appreciate that he makes the time for it.

Despite the fact that he is a great guy his class doesnt give you a deep foundation of economics (obviously, its a principles class) and it will make you feel like you are skimming the very very surface of economics and thus I usually never understood what was really going on. The class really makes you loose confidence in yourself because despite your efforts, you realize you really know nothing. Its a tough class. I came into the class having taken an ecomomics class the year before at another institution and my grade in this class was my lowest of the semester which I found to be really dissappointing.

The final is ridiculous and really doesnt reflect the class at all. I walked out wanting to cry and smoke 3 packs.

Professor Gulati is a really great lecturer. He starts most classes with some kind of reference to recent news events in an effort to relate what we are learning in class to the "real world." He is always well-organized and very easy to understand, and for the most part his lectures correspond well with the textbook (more so in the micro section than in macro). Although most information in class can be found in the book, lectures are really worth going to, because he can explain in an hour 15 minutes what may take longer to get through in the book, and sometimes questions on the exams come directly from explanations of things given in class. Also, VERY IMPORTANT: his final lecture of the semester is a very enlightening look at economics, and should not be missed.

Tests are fairly difficult, but there is a significant curve, so don't get scared if you think you missed a lot of things. It's important to go to class, etc, but I found that even though I kept up, serious cramming worked best for remembering all the different concepts. Also, know the graphs, what each line and intersection means. Those things are always on the tests, and they're pretty easy to memorize. He also posts copies of old tests on Courseworks, which is really helpful, and probably the best way to study.

Gulati is a great/funny/knowledgeable lecturer, and you will learn a lot from him. However, beware, his tests are quite difficult. He likes questions from some intermediate econ class! I feel I do learn a lot in class (despite the huge size) but I am very frustrated from his tests. It seems that faithful attendence in lectures and diligent reading (of Frank's book) are not enough to do well in this class.

As everyone has said Gulati is an AMAZING man. He has perfect command of the class of over 300 students and allows for an amazing amount of participation. The class is not only very interresting but quite amusing. Gulati knows how to teach econ in a way that is manageable and it is very clear that he has great command of the material as he lectures without notes and when asked an irrelevant question by some overachieving loser he simply replies with, "wait 15 minutes" or "thursday i'll answer that question" or "two courses from now" rather than digressing like others. He also tries to add a personal touch to econ and sometimes brings up relevant current events. Gulati's style and charisma are amazing, there is rarely a dull moment. Gulati is a clear choice. (Oh and if you are thinking of registering for the other class and going to gulati's lectures...not gonna work...the classes start at different places just for that reason). The downside to Gulati is that because he teaches so well he expects everyone to know the material very well and makes the exams quite difficult and long. On top of that he has the TAs introduce new material during recitation but you can go to any recitation during the week, not necessarily the one you are registered for. But the positives CLEARLY outweigh the negatives. If you go to Columbia you have to hear this man lecture , even if you don’t take the class, he's simply the greatest.

Simply put, I want to be Sunil Gulati. He is one of the most impressive and endearing people that I've ever come into contact with. He was a fabulous lecturer who was extremely funny and engaging, and I genuinely looked forward to going to lecture. The lab sessions were totally unnecessary and my TA was awful, so I almost never went. The class is difficult but well worth it, I learned a fair amount and enjoyed the class. I would recommend this, or any other class Gulati teaches, to anyone.

The best class ever! If you go into it just wanting to taking one semester of econ so you can make smartass comments about fiscal policy/maybe get a job at some point, you will leave wanting to major in economics and with a slight crush on Sunil. His lectures are like performances; out of 320 people in this class, I'd say there were about 300 at every class. He will mercilessly make fun of you if you say something stupid, but in the most benevolent way...TAKE THIS CLASS!!! And stalk Sunil every chance you get, because he is the man.

One of the most amazing professors around. There were over 300 people in the class, and Prof. Gulati had such great presence that everyone in the room was focused on him. His lectures are well done and creative as he often mixes in current events to explain things. He keeps a constant dialogue between himself and the students and class can often be funny and entertaining. Even if you don't need to take economics, you won't regret taking this class.

he is a nice enough guy, he tries and if you have nothing better to do you could show up to class and listen. i tried going to classes but i found them pointless as did 90% of the class. if you want a class to which you don't have to come to, take this class. i'm ok at economics and all i did was read the book and i did fine on everything. he uses weird examples that are way out there but do make sense. if you don't mind the sillyness, go to class and learn.

I just came back from his last lecture of the semester and I can't express how much I've learned from him in the past 3 months. This man might appear a bit cocky at first sight, but he is the nicest person ever and knows his stuff very well.. I never took econ in my life and now I'm in love with econ, partially because of my family, but a huge part has to do with Gulati. His lectures are interesting and interactive, some stuff might be a bit boring and sleep-inducing, but for the most part, he tries hard and makes sure everyone's awake(sometimes with flying chalk). Sure his midterm is a little picky, but if you studied the book well, you can't do that bad; I got a A- on that. However, even if I got a not so good grade on the midterm, I will still not regret taking Gulati's class. He's a small man that speaks volumes. He has been to many places and knows a lot about economics and the world. His last lecture about income distrubution exemplifies his benevolence and his charisma... I will definitely be taking more classes from him and try to know him better.. On a side note: he loves soccer and that makes up for every flaw he has, not that he really does.

He seems like a nice guy. He tries to make jokes in the class (most of which are about how everyone falls asleep in his class)... however, he can't teach. I had to take his class because one of the classes I had was overlapping with Mr. Gulati's.

If the same applies to you, then simply do not take this class this semester.

Come on, everyone knows Econ dept in Columbia is the worst and hardest and don't even mention the department administrators and the MAJOR REQUIREMENT!!!!
Dan is the only fun person in the department (I have rights to say so coz I am a senior Econ major, don't ask how much I have been though....) anyway, take his classes as many as you can, coz if you want to major in econ you already got loads of dump work to do, only smart pleasant teacher is this guy after all. ( Yes, there are famous guys nobel prize winners in the dept., but as an undergrad, you will NEVER get a chance to experience their classes, they only teach like business school seminars with 20 people limits, what the ****.) So, at senior year as a econ major, I tell you the truth, if you have to take any econ electives, take with Dan, because, others are worse, much much WORSE...believe or not, you try them all yourself...

O'Flaherty was awesome, but he's not for everyone. His lectures are really interesting and uses real life examples and statistics to make the class more interesting. But listen up all you screwballs who think you can go to class and not read the book (or vice versa), you cannot do that in this class becuase the lectures go above and beyond the book and you will not be able to follow the lecture as well if you havn't read the book. If you're not that into economics or if you're a SEAS kid just trying to satisfy your principles requirement, don't take this class.

Oh, and if you don't go to class, read the book, do the problem sets, or go to the discussion section, don't be surprised when you get a bad grade.

A great lecturer as many before me have said. The beauty of economics is that a conceptual understanding of the topic can greatly help you with understanding the fundamentals and underlying theory, which is what is tested on exams. With his cool style and balance between theory and current events, learning the basics of econ becomes not a chore but rather an interesting training in a field that is so very crucial to the political, social, and fiscal decisions that surround us. Take it even if you're not an econ major.

Professor Desai is a very good professor. She covers all the basic economics material in a very methodical manner, making it quite easy to understand. Furthermore, she always sticks to the syllabus, and goes out of her way to provide extra problems for students to practice on. The biggest complaint that I have were that her lectures could be boring. So long as you attend every class and recitation section, do all the reading and problems, Professor Desai's class is great for those who wish to/must take Principles of Economics.

if you wanna get a good grade, DO NOT TAKE HIS CLASS!!
principles of economics under gulati seems like an advance economics course for me. his materials are unneccessarily hard. yes , he is interesting, he is a great professor, but you can hardly get a good grade from him because his tests are just too hard. I worked very hard and still got an A-, because he only gave out like 15As out of a class of 250+ students. The curve is set as a B/B+ and there are so many terms in the final that you have never ever heard of and you just have to leave the entire long question blank. fully understanding and knowing your text book can give you an A- , for an A, i guess you have to be an economics genius (but this is only a Principles of Economics course)

This course gives a very basic introduction to economics, which makes it pretty easy for anyone with a solid grasp of the way the marketplace functions in the first place. If you understand Paul Krugman's column in the Times, or ever find yourself watching CNBC and knowing what they're talking about, you'll have no trouble with this course. If you don't understand why it's not a good idea to carry balances on your credit card, you'll have trouble with this course.

The problem is that Desai teaches down to the level of the people who have no hope of understanding the material. She teaches almost straight from the book, even using exactly the same examples contained in the book. She then spends about every third lecture doing an in-class problem set, more or less identical in form to the homework problem sets, which felt like a bit of a waste, since that's what the recitations should be for. Instead, the recitations were a total waste, with the TAs spending all of their time helping out the people who had no hope of understanding the material.

To give an idea of how ill-suited some of the students were for the course, high school algebra is required. During the final exam, after complaints that people didn't know how to handle the math, the head TA gave a quick lesson in how to divide one simple fraction by another. That Columbia students taking a course that requires high school math were upset at having to do elementary school level math is amazing. The course was set up to cater to those people, who by all rights should have chosen a different course.

Because the curve has to take the hopeless people into account, someone who understands the basic concepts can get a B without any effort, and without necessarily doing the homework. A higher grade isn't difficult with work. If you don't remember how to graph a simple line, don't bother with this course.

ARE YOU CRAZY? Taking his class will reduce the opportunity cost of attending other classes. YES and I don't mean his class is expensive. He was great, he was funny, and he was enjoyable. Absolutely recommended. He taught well and he kept students awake too. If you want to learn about economics and you want to know how economics can be funny sometimes, he is your choice

One word to describe this professor: WOW!!!! Sunil may quite possibly be the best professor I'll have in my entire Columbia undergraduate experience. I did not like econ at all, and even though I wasn't terribly good at it, he will make you love it! Not forcefully, but he is such a fantastic guy and a wonderful professor. Having a 9 am class is tough, but after a few minutes you're wide awake and enjoying the lecture. After class, feel free to go up to him and talk, he is very fun to chat with. It's also cool because he has a very high position in MLS (major league soccer), and rumor has it he used to play.

The midterm is pretty easy, but the final is very difficult. It is probably the most difficult exam I've ever taken. 23 pages: 40 multiple choice, 12 identification, 12 long answer. Even though it's difficult, take this class just to have him! I will probably audit a class by him because it is such a pleasure to have him as a professor.

Gulati is awesome. I have never been in a 280 person class that was as interesting and engaging as his. He knows what he is doing, and makes his lectures funny and informative. Its amazing how much you soak in just by going to class, and you get a good laugh while you're at it. I would definitely recommend taking him.

I took this class because I thought it would be interesting and helpful. It's not. It's the biggest waste of time you can imagine -- lectures are messy and useless, problem sets aren't applicable to anything you've been taught, and you'll have to teach yourself everything. A waste of time effort and you sanity. Desai manages to suck the learnability and clarity out of everything you have to know.

Professor Gulati is amazing!!! I loved his class. He makes it interesting, even if you don't like Econ. He's funny and teaches well. Listen in class; there's stuff he doesn't write on the board. His examples are informative and apply to the real world. He makes people participate, because if no one answers his questions, he'll pick someone or just wait in silence until someone raises their hand. Recitation session is helpful if you have a good TA. Oh, and DO THE READING!!! It's really helpful and if you leave it until the end, you'll be swamped. Trust me. It's just a chapter or two a week, so it's not that tough.

Take this class. Even if you are not in SEAS, and majoring in Underwater Basket Weaving, take this class. Sunil Gulati, former commisioner of Major League Soccer and an accomplished economist, makes what I think is an interesting subject phenomenonally fascinating and engaging. He is hilarious, and will make jokes even in the most drudged of lectures. He manages to involve most people out of a class of 300, something that I imagine is unique to large lectures. Personally I never went to lab sections because the book and professor were so good that I was confident I knew what was going on. Gulati was responsive to emails and questions and really knows his stuff. There was only one annoying aspect of his class--sometimes he would spend half an hour engaging the audience in a question, such as "if tariffs on imports are so inefficient, then why do we [the United States] have them?" Then, after rejecting every answer he hears, Gulati will end the class or move on to something completely different. Why will he never answer the question, or at least make some comment on it? It seemed to be a big waste of time for me. Thats what the lab sections are for, not lectures. Overall though, this class was my utmost favorite and now I'm seriously considering minoring in economics. So take this class and nominate Gulati for a teaching award.

The O'Flaherty bashing has gotten ridiculous. All the complaining done by the past reviewers seems effected by the notion that the intro Econ course should be easy. I hear kids who didn't do the problem sets, didn't go to lecture, and didn't go to recitation complain that O'Flaherty did a crappy job. That's just bullshit. The book and recitations taught the course. O'Flaherty offered his own interesting insights and real-life examples on the current topics taught in the weekly reading. Of course, he assumed that kids had actually done the reading and thus didn't teach the fundamentals the book went over. Indeed, if you hadn't done the reading you didn't have a clue what was going on in lecture. In other words, if you keep up with the work you will do fine in the class and get a decent introductory understanding of economics.

Wow, this was far and away one of the worst classes I have ever taken in my life. O'Flaherty is not only bumbling and disorganized in every sense of the word, he is also obscenely boring. His has an unbelievably dry sense of humor that matches his unbelievably dry teaching methodology. He does not prepare you at all for the midterm or final -- he does not highlight any particular area of the textbook, and therefore you simply end up guessing at what to study. The multiple choice questions on the midterm and final end up being sheer luck. You will not know what grade you have at any point during the term - he will keep you in the dark and then spring a random grade on you faster than you can say JP Morgan Chase.

Just going to echo the other reviews and say that this guy is great. I had no economics experience whatsoever before taking Principles in the fall, and he made it very easy to follow. Lectures are very engaging: this was probably the only class I never fell asleep in, despite it being at 9 AM. Gulati has a great sense of humor (although I do remember things like the other review described happening, right down to the "Achoo!") and the class almost never drags until the end with some of the macro stuff. As for Global Econ, it's the first time they're offering the class, and I only took it because of him. So far it seems to be pretty good, run very much like the Principles class except no discussions. (Which, BTW, were utterly useless in Principles.) He can take any subject and relate it to econ. He also encourages class discussion, but doesn't really require it. Overall, he's probably the only professor I've had here that I'd recommend to anyone else. And in case anyone thinks this is a review from an econ major, it's not. I'm a pathetically apathetic engineer :)

As I'm sure my comrades will say. Gulati is the man! I never took econ before freshman year so initially I was a little worried when he said we would be moving fast. If you do the reading and you go to recitation and lectures you will do fine. In fact I know someone who didn't really go to any of those or even unwrap his book and got an A! Gulati makes a dull subject interesting. He's a funny guy and makes his lectures entertaining.

Holy John Nash, this has to be the worst course at Columbia. O'Flaherty is a nightmare, and not just a nightmare, but a really bad one. The one where you wake up in a cold sweat and it bothers you for a good week, recurring night after night, plaguing your life. He and his sorry excuse for a class ruined my semester and view of econ. His lectures are irrelevant and confusing. I had taken econ in high school and he successfully confused me on stuff that I aced on the AP. The T.A. I got was a mess too. He could barely speak english and was obviously very smart, but lacked any and all ability to teach. If you want to go into econ, DO NOT take principles with O'Flaherty. It'll be the worst mistake you've ever made.

The Econ dept. at Columbia isn't as good as some of the other dept.s here, and Dan makes this pretty clear. His lectures were pretty bad, and although he tried to make funny jokes and explain things from a logical perspective, he often ended up saying next to nothing in lectures. Sections were VERY helpful, I didn't read most of the book and still got an A in the class bcs my TA was so helpful and organized. Not that it really matters who you have for Principles, but Columbia people will be disappointed by Dan. He let's too many people ask questions in class, which are mostly stupid and designed only to outsmart him, and ends up wasting time dealing with these stupid questions. I'm sure he's a nice guy and very smart, but I'm honestly not very interested in Econ after taking his class. Thumbs down.

I was considering being an econ minor before this class. I don't understand why Columbia continues to allow this man to destroy economics for eager students. Flaherty seems like a nice guy, and I'm sure he does an excellent job teaching the higher level courses ('cause he really does know the material) but I mean please people, Principles should not be taught this way. Flaherty took a whole (boring) class period to explain why the demand curve slopes downward, but then glossed over important issues like monetary policy. His strange sense of humor popped up on the tests, but the questions tended to be rather tricky and not at all straightforward. So both learning and getting a good grade are a gamble with this guy. Stay away! He seems nice, though.

I liked the material in principles, but O'Flaherty was a major disappointment. His lectures always took one of two bad paths, the second worst than the first. In the former case, he would lecture on situations to which the material in the textbook could be applied without mentioning the textbook material directly. These lectures were informative, but became hopelessly stalled by frivolous questions from people who couldn't understand the lecture because they didn't do the reading from the textbook. O'Flaherty would sometimes spend 20 minutes repeating the same point when answering questions from these people. In the latter case, he would simply repeat the material in the textbook and still repeat himself several times in response to frivolous questions from non-readers. These lectures were a waste of time, pure and simple. If you're going to take Principles and are serious, avoid this guy because the lectures never turn out very well.

When I say that Dan O'Flaherty is the worst teacher I have ever seen, you will probably think that I am exaggerating, or that he hates me for some reason, and I am just trying to get back at him. Neither of these are the case. I'll provide a couple of examples for you all, so that you don't make the same mistake I did. In one class (on exchange rates, I believe) Dan was drawing graphs on the board to demonstrate a point, then, realizing he was wrong, looked back at what he had drawn. He then tried for at least a couple of minutes to sort out his mistake, but could not. He ended up asking the TAs for help. Also, Dan has a theory about how to structure toll systems so that there will be no waiting time. Basically the amount of the tax would be in a pyramid: lower and lower as you get further from the peak of rush hour in either direction (which is somehow economics........) This theory of Dan's, which had little bearing on the rest of the class, took up an entire lecture, an entire problem set, and half of the long answer questions on the midterm. The only good thing about this class was the size. Because the class was gimongous, I could walk out at any time and Dan would still never know who I was.

Amazing professor all around, uses practical examples to relate abstract theories and throws in some humor to make the whole thing that much more palatable. A nice friendly guy in general, i'm very happy i took this class with him. Got my ass kicked on the final which was not curved as much as i had hoped but the grading is still pretty fair

He was my TA in Fall 2002. He is a great TA. He speaks English well, though with a slight accent which did not cause a problem in understanding him. He went over the problem sets and was very helpful in explaining them. He also took time to answer everyone's question. Take his section if possible.

Question: If your friend is playing excessively loud music, what kind of economic solution could you come up with? Student 1: You could pay him to stay quiet. Sunil: Hold on, I'll get back to that. Student 2: Achoo Sunil: Bless You Students 3,4,5,6,7,8,9, 10 answer...sunil makes some jokes about their answers, students 11, 12 answer...Sunil says, "you're getting there...come on someone new...someone who hasn't spoken yet," Students 13, 14 answer.. Finally Sunil says: " Ok well since none of you got the answer, an economic solution would be to pay the person to be quiet.
That's a good summary of class.

Gulati's a fantastic professor. His lectures are really engaging and relate the subject matter with current events. His sense of humor is also pleasant, and takes the edge off 9am classes.

If you're remotely interested in Econ (or required to take it like I was)...you want to take Econ with Sunil Gulati. You'll actually learn something in the lectures and he does everything in his power from keep you from falling asleep even though the material is extremely dull. He's one of those teachers that can directly answer every question you ask because he knows Econ that well. His comedic teaching style will make you remember why something is wrong and help you think like an economist(sometimes).

He's a VERY GOOD professor. He teaches very well and his lectures are very clear and organized. He's also very funny unlike most professors. He has a great style of teaching. If you're not unintelligent you should have no trouble following the lectures and learning all the materials.

Absolutely the worst professor in the department. He is a very monotonous and boring lecturer, his jokes are lame, and he constantly will talk to the class about his cat. It is not surprising no one shows up for class, and don't forget that his final will contain questions on his cat's birthday!

Having no background in economics/business at all, I found this class fairly easy to understand and follow. Professor Elms is great in her lectures, comes very very prepared and makes good use of the chalkboard when drawing lots of diagrams. Sometimes she can be a bit sarcastic in her jokes/comments, but I found it a bit funny (and apparently other students as well, since I wasn't the only one laughing/giggling). Her lectures follow the book almost exactly, though she adds a bit more examples from current events and makes other points clearer. The textbook (Principles of Economics by Mankiw) is actually one of the best ones I've seen. Very clear and concise, with lots of examples and graphs/diagrams, and not boring at all. The TAs were not as competetent as they could have been, and the whole TA / Recitation structure could have been much improved or maybe just eliminated. The recitations were mostly for going over homework problems, so they could have just had a few "open recitations" where anyone could show up and get questions answered, instead of making you go to assigned weekly recitations that sometimes were a waste of time...

[culpa censor].....Padma is a decent teacher, even funny at times I think. She lectures well and does not give too much work. There's really nothing radically different about her, so I feel unable to review her further. The material itself is so general and easy that you can really learn from the book. Not to mention that basic economics is very often commonsensical ideas expressed in graphs (and sometimes formulae). The class provides you with a technical perspective on and a precise vocabulary to talk about very obvious things, and to a lesser extent the ability to identify ridiculous statements on newspapers. But if you're not really interested in pursuing economics further, it's rather pointless.

So Padma doesn't teach the most complicated version of economics out there. Prof. Desai is great for an overview and general understanding of this class. She goes through the material slow and deliberately although sometimes she may jump around in theb book, but what professor doesn't? Even if you struggle with this class she curves the class extremely high to make up for it.

I went into this class believing she would be a good professor based on CULPA reviews. And admittedly, she was, for maybe 2 classes. She is quite frankly a really boring lecturer and is really disorganized. Her goal is to teach macro and micro but there is absolutely no coherent order in what she lectures on or what she writes on the board. Tests aren't especially hard, might as well stay home and read the book (lectures and examples are exactly the same).

You can ignore the review from April by the writer who thinks that a good text makes for a good professor. I should note that when she needed to cover remedial calculus about the slope of a line, it was SEAS students who left class early and the CC kids who had to stay.

Professor Desai is as old as the hills, having started teaching in 1957! (you do the math) She has a slightly tangential lecture style, trying to spice things up with an occasional story or two, but although she has a sense of humor the class comes across as fairly dry. She tests on material barely mentioned in the book but emphasized in class, so unless you took the Econ AP exams, forcing yourself to go to class really pays off.

In person she has the usual entitlement expected of a University professor. It was nearly impossible to get some of her time to answer questions in the week before the midterm, and once I had finished asking her questions there was no handshake or "goodbye" or addendum, she just got up, went back to her desk, and got back on the computer while I packed my things up and left her office. Don't expect much help from her - as the other reviewers have said, find a good TA.

Classes are boaring as hell so don't even bother going. The textbook is the best textbook I've ever read, you can totally teach yourself during your free time. My TA was pretty bad, and I don't think anyone ever went. But if you want an easy A, take this class as long as you have the self-discipline to teach yourself the material.

If you can avoid taking Principles with Padma, do. Lectures are incredibly dry and lazily taught. Desai doesn't answer questions of clarification and graphs are utterly confusing. She'd rather go into more complex concepts and raise the curve than have you understand the "intro" concepts and do well on your own. The amount of people who either don't attend lecture/ leave early out of disgust is incredible. Wish I knew before hand what a waste of time this class is. Language barrier is also an issue with Desai as well as TA's.

he;s such a wonderful lecturer and not to mention a wonderful and interesting man. his lectures are very clear and he always does something or other to keep the class entertaining. if youre gonna take this class, take it from him

The first class, he started talking about short people. The second class, he played country music at the end of lecture. He's definitely a quirky guy. I'm sure he'd be interesting to talk to, but the lectures bored me to death. I stopped going after the second week. Sometime in the second half of the semester, I started feeling guilty, so decided to give him another chance. Admittedly, the lecture had more content and was kind of interesting, but still was not enough to convince me to go. The last few, where he gets on tangents sometime, are okay.
Recitations are required, and one problem with that is GRADE DISTRIBUTION IS THE SAME WITHIN EACH SECTION. This means if you're stuck with 2 or 3 dorks who make econ their ENTIRE life, it'll be hard to get a top mark. This doesn't mean the class is hard though; reading the textbook and going to recitation should be enough. Just go to the very last lecture, where he makes a list of all the topics that are on the exam. People ask, and he goes over, just about every topic that's not in the book.
Another warning, if you want to continue in Econ, this might not be the right intro class to take. Significantly less material is covered compared to other Principles classes. This makes for an easier class, but you're put at a disadvantage later on because you have to learn concepts other people have seen before. Dan's philosophy is to teach this class assuming that most people won't take another intro class, so he wants to 'instill you with an appreciation of econ' or something, but doesn't expect you to major in it.

This class is very easy (and this statement is coming from a "sheepish SEAS student" as one idiotic fellow classmate of mine has termed the engineering students). I'm glad you can assume my (and hundreds of others') motives for attending Columbia (though, making assumptions about motivation is far over my head and yours too, I suspect). In any event, if you're looking for an easy A, then take this class. The problem sets are incredibly easy, and the midterm is also simple (provided you go to class and take notes because she doesn't always agree with Gregory Mankiw). She has an amazing presence and a charming personality (you're just a horrible person if you don't come to her class).

Please, Dan is a nice person, funny guy, and intelligent scholar. How can anyone says negative things about him!
I like the class very much and decided to major in Econ since then.
I mean, those who blame Intro-econ level professor, must be very incapable of learning econ as a subject, coz with normal IQ and common sense, Principle is really damn easy and fun class!

You can ignore all of the dopey complaints of various SEAS students regarding this class. They're just upset because they weren't talented enough or are too sheepish for MIT. This class is exceptionally taught and has an excellent text to boot. If you need one,you may want to surf through the TA's untill you find one to your liking.

O'Flaherty made a wonderful success of a very difficult job in this course. He was witty, personable, and very rarely boring in a huge lecture with over 200 students. The material was pretty basic, with many students knowing most of it from high school economics, but O'Flaherty avoided being boring by focusing on real life implications of concepts, rather than on dry technical definitions. The class does see the supply and demand graphs a few too many times, but perhaps the emphasis is warranted.

Great professor, his lectures make an intro econ course as interesting as possible. Teaches pretty much out of the book but some of the questions on the exams are only included in lectures. The second half of the course was much less interesting than the first, but I guess that's just microeconomics.

The lectures are sometimes interesting, and prof. O'flaherty does his best to make them enjoyable. The recitations would be helpful if I didnt feel like something new was taught everytime. The readings, the lectures, and the recitations all seemed to cover three somewhat similar but yet very different topics. I still dont understand the grading system but i dont think it matters much. I didnt do great on the midterm and the final I found very hard (and can't imagine I did well on) yet my grade was rather good. I think this is a class where 'things just work out in the end" . Warning though if all this info is new to you, you may be a bit screwed; most of the students have already taken econ in some form (high school.. another class etc...) and it seems your graded based on your rank within your recitation. So find a recitation with the fewest amount of students who already know their stuff ( they're easy to spot they'll be the ones arguing wih the TA's on the first day of class, and constantly asking questions with no relevence to the material) and you shouldn't do to bad.

No matter what everyone else says, Principles of Economics can be a pretty challenging class if you've never taken an econ course before. Prof. O' Flaherty is a pretty good professor in trying to keep the course interesting in that he will teach concepts outside of the boring text. He is also understanding about grades.

He's a smart guy, but he can't teach Principles. He taught many things not in the book that were fairly complicated. You'd have to listen very carefully during the boring lecture to get the specific questions that he would ask on the exams. I basically couldn't keep my eyes open during any of his lectures

The class was okay. Gulati didn't really teach so much as stand in front of the class, make a bunch of jokes, bring up some weighty current events issues, and draw some graphs. Everything you need to know can be found in the textbook, and the lab sessions with the TA's were completely useless (most of them had pretty thick accents but were understandable). Gulati's class is a fun one, but don't expect too much beyond a good laugh and basic knowledge.

Sunil is not only a great teacher, he's a good guy too. Despite the fact that the department allots way too many students to the intro class, he handles a large lecture hall as if it were his stage and he isn't afraid to involve the audience. He answers questions, and lets people know, subtly, when they're wrong. Intro is dry sometimes and the material is basic. nonetheless he is a good guy to get and a good guy to get to know.

Econ is boring. Econ with Gulati is pretty enterainting. He breaths life into the class. He is in touch with the class and his students. Pretty funny at times which keeps the class moving. A sports illustrated to read really helps sometimes though, as Econ itself can be pretty dry. All in all, Gulati was an awesome teacher, definetly worth taking

I don't recommend the class itself, but if you're one of those people required to take Principles of Econ take it with this guy. He does all he can to make the material interesting, and he makes plenty of digressions to put econimics in perspective.

Sunil is the man. I went in thinking 'i should probably take a little econ', and came out thinking 'I wanna major in econ and be like sunil.' He is a great lecturer, and organizes the class very well. Especially for an econ professor he is really funny. He's traveled the world and has great stories to tell about india, mexico, england, and other places. He also takes time away from the syllabus to enlighten the class about current events and decisions we will have to make in the future. Definitely take econ with this guy.

I agree that Sunil is really engaging, but that's engaging for an econ professor. The material can get exceedingly boring no matter who's teaching it. And while the curves on the mid-term and final are quite generous, the tests themselves were fairly strange, with true/false questions that turned into essays with no partial credit and "essay" questions which turned into math problems, despite the fact that this class is non-calculus.

GREAT professor! Consider yourself lucky if you get in this class. He is a funny, smart guy who can answer every question. Very accomplished man who is amazingly personable and congenial. No need to go to class unless you just want to be entertained. The book was great and the teacher was even better.

O'Flaherty is a good, though unspectacular. O'Flaherty's lectures are fairly dry; he has his own sense of humor that is entertaining, though not funny. O'Flaherty himself will entertain any and all relevant questions; he will always have the answer, and will simply give it to you- no compassion, no smugness, just information. If you are interested in Economics, you will find several lectures interesting and to your liking. If you don't like the course, you never have to go to lecture. Either way, it shouldn't be too taxing for your schedule.

He's the man. He's a great lecturer, he's enthusiastic, there's not a question he can't answer, he's funny, and he has the ability to incorporate 150 kids into his lecture. So in a way it's unfortunate that the class is a joke. Read the book (which happens to be very good), go to the review session, get an A. No point in going to class, unless you want to hear a great lecturer.

Professor Della Valle is a genuinely nice human being. Her lectures, when they stay strictly on topic, can be quite boring, but she knows this, and tries to stray into interesting, useful material as much as possible. Spontaneous lectures on "Why this whole Enron thing matters, anyway" and "I disagree with the textbook here, because..." kept me from falling asleep. She doesn't rely on lecture slides, and tries to make it clear what you really need to know for the final. Finally, the best part of this class is that, in a traditionally conservative-only department, Ms. Della Valle is a LIBERAL. Or, that is to say, more liberal than most of her colleagues. Instead of regarding conservative economics as heaven-sent, she examines both sides of most issues, exposing her mom-like ideals and her Italian-Canadian heritage in the process. Overall, not bad for a class designed to turn us all into Republicans.

Prof. Desai's Principles is insultingly easy. The class is taught under the assumption that CC students ("who aren't very good in math" as opposed to SEAS students) have to really review their simultaneous equations not to drastically fall behind. She is supposed to be brilliant in internaional politics, as some of her articles in the Financial Times reveal, but don't expect any of that to come across in this particular class. Students get a kick out of Padma, and she seems to be aware of it, digressing every so often to insert some personal story (as every favorite professor should do, right?). Take this class as a GPA padder and expect to be disappointed and bored if you've ever taken econ before and expect anything mildly challenging.

Professor Desai was not bad at all. Occasionally she cracked jokes that were actually funny. Lectures were well organized and followed materials in the textbook. She also handed out in-class problem sets with answer keys for practice purpose. Students must register for recitation, but attendance wasn't required. I only went twice because the TA was terrible. He even disagreed with what the professor taught in class. Problem sets due every week. I don't know how the TAs grade them, because you either get a 2/2 or 1/2. Midterm and final have multi-choice, IDs, true/false, and normal word problems. Class is recommended.

Not bad; not great either. The class was typically big (200+, five TAs), and her lectures weren't the most interesting. On the other hand, she seemed to have a good grasp of the material, and her lectures were well-organized. The textbook is also very clear and well-written. On the whole, if you are interested in econ, this isn't a bad way to start. One note: there is a weekly discussion section which all students must register for; I found it to be virtually useless, and there isn't an attendance requirement.

She's a pretty good professor with some good stories to tell between the different parts of her lecture. She's a little bit weak on teaching the "micro" part of the course, though. The textbook is quite good. This having been an intro course, I'm glad to know that econ courses can only get better.

Ron Miller is pretty straightforward. His lectures can get quite boring, but they are very factual and useful. Sitting in the auditorium of International Affairs can put you to sleep. He does tend to give decent grades (I thought so anyway). Going to lectures is beneficial, but the class can be passed without them. The midterm and final are a little difficult (especially 'true, false, and uncertain' problems and anything to do with OPEC), but the grades are assigned on a curve fluctuating with B+ as the median.

His lectures are boring as hell. They're all right out of the book. Going to the lectures are pretty much pointless BUT now and then he'd throw in something that isn't in the book and you'll most likely find it on exam. His problems sets are straight out of the text so if you can find someone who's taken his class, you'll do just fine. Unfortunately his exams are not as easy as his problem sets, I would even say that he grades harder than other professors teacher Principles. Essentially, if you can take another professor, do so.

Indifferent and rude to students. Clear antipathy to his undergrads, the education process, and the world in general. It's certainly possible to get an A, and he is qualified as an instructor, but even his TAs have complained about him.

Ron is very clear and concise about the subject material. He has notes outlined on a screen, which is basically an overview of the textbook layout. You should copy down all of his overhead notes, in a very quick and efficient manner, because he likes to go ahead onto the next slide, even if half of the class is still copying down the last screen. While you're copying down the notes, you must also carefully listen to what he is saying, to comprehend the material. IF you miss class, no worry, just read the textbook. Many people walk in and out of class late, so don't be surprised if you start doing the same. If you're tired, it will be extrememly hard to stay awake in this class, since it is the same routine over and over again. The one thing Ron lacks is the way he presents the class. Just make sure you're awake and eager to learn the material.

She refers to illegal transactions of money as "Bads and Services"...she says a definition, writes it on the board, reads it, then explains what parts of it mean ("what does during a given time period mean?")...I felt like a third grader. There were two review sessions on how to draw a graph; I became stupider as the days went on. If you feel that Economics could tear you to pieces, Sally Davidson will make the class seem like a children's book.

In case you were worried, there's no linguistic barrier here (he's American) and he is actually a very good lecturer -- pleasant guy, tons of good examples and stories to illustrate the material. It's important to read the book if you plan on breaking a B-.

When I took this class as a freshman, the only other section offered was by McLaren at 9 in the morning so obviously I had to pick Gulati's section. It was decent, I guess, not very exciting or anything. i think i learned a few things....but whatever, they always send the junior econ profs to teach these sections anyways, so chances are you prob won't get a good prof for this class. sorry