[W4400] Labor Economics

Lalith is an engaging teacher, probably the most engaging econ teacher I have had yet. His lectures do not cover too much material, but they are still interesting -- people don't fall asleep in this class.

He's also very good at explaining concepts clearly. When students are wrong, Lalith is unafraid to let them know, and he uses his response as an opportunity to further clarify the subject to the student and the rest of the class.

Unfortunately, he often takes an antagonistic attitude with the class. He got upset if we interrupted his train of thought, told students they were wrong when they were right, and made sure that everyone knew when a student was entering the classroom late. That's his teaching style.

Personality-wise, lalith doesn't fit the bill for an econ. professor. He's too cool. When he's not engaging the class in lively discussion about the subject he's going off on wonderful tangents about the economics of wine and wine-tasting (Q: Why is it that the billionaires who go to lalith's parties (where everyone brings a bottle of wine by definition)have the worst taste in wine? He'll teach you!). All econ majors interested in HR stuff should definitely take this class, and
I'd say even my comp-lit friends should take this class, even if it'll only just refine their disdain for economists.

I enjoyed this class. Lalith definitely knows his stuff about labor econ and applies the lecture material to real-life situations that make it that much easier to understand. The class got a little disorganized at times, probably because Lalith was a little overwhelmed by the class' size (my section was about 50 students--he said most previous sections had a little over 20). But in spite of that, I still think he did a good job.

I (and everyone else in it) really enjoyed this class. Lalith is awesome. It def helped that it was a smallish class and everybody contributed a lot. The material is really interesting stuff that you can apply to all sorts of real world situations. Also, if you ask him to, he will post lecture notes on courseworks, which is really helpful when you're studying for the exam. I would def recommend this class.

Who wrote that professor Edlund treats students like adults??? Her class is very boring and dull. She spends a lot of time going over obvious issues and skips all of the analytical parts of the course that actually do need explaining. But because she makes attendance mandatory and knows your name you have to suffer through her lectures. Furthermore, your performance on her tests is pure luck! They are not related to her lecture notes or the textbook so you are pretty much lost and on your own even if you do study. She ONLY grades your answers so there is NO partial credit. On the bright side, because everyone is as lost as you are, the curve is very low and you can manage an OK grade even if you learned absolutely nothing. DO NOT TAKE THIS CLASS IF: you want to learn, or if you want an easy A, or if you are actually interested in the material.

Prof. Edlund is very middle-of-the-road. On the one hand, she runs the class as though it were high school: she takes attendance, learns your name, employs (relatively) current events, and frequently has the class pair off to discuss some topic or work on a problem. On the other hand, she realizes that her students are in fact adults, and she treats them as such. Her teaching style is not particularly thrilling, and she won't turn you on to labor economics (will anyone?)...but she is always happy to answer questions, and she'll even look up the answer on her own if she doesn't know right away. She's also very concerned with her performance - she gave two informal class evals in addition to the official one at the end of the semester, and she even videotaped a lecture or two (for her own personal use, of course). Overall, if you don't mind a little discussion with your lectures or the fact that class participation counts for 10% of your grade, you won't be disappointed.

I guess I can see how the previous reviewer could get the impression of Prof. Munasinghe, because he's idiosyncratic and opinionated. But, in my opinion, he's also really cool. I think his attitude makes lectures interesting and fun. He's excellent at conveying subject matter, and I thought the course material was interesting. Yeah, he won't hide his antipathy towards whiners and grade grubbers... but s**t, those people piss me off too. If you get a kick out of seeing smart-asses being taken down a notch, then you'll like Munasinghe. In addition to having had him for this course, Munasinghe is also my major adviser, and I think he's f**king awesome: down-to-earth, accessible, will help you out in a jam, etc. He's kind of a smart-ass himself, but in a funny way; I don't know about this "indifferent and rude" stuff that the other person is talking about.... that hasn't been my experience at all.