Economics · Columbia University
This class was mid. The exams were more conceptually heavy, so if you are not the strongest math student, I would take Macro with Xavier. Xavier rarely interacted with students outside of lecture. We spent the first half of the semester learning economic growth and the Solow model because that is Xavier’s area of expertise. However, this forced him to cram seven chapters of Macro into the second half of the semester, which was overwhelming for many students. Xavier often omitted key concepts from his actual in-person lectures, but luckily he covered them in his comprehensive chapter notes. Read the chapter notes and practice the problem sets and past exam questions. The chapter notes are quite long, but you must read them thoroughly if you intend to succeed in this class. His exams consist of many short essay questions, and the TAs can be quite strict with grading, so be sure to explain things very clearly and thoroughly. Also, make sure you understand all the different graphs, as he likes to ask students to construct graphs, transform them, and analyze them. I believe he curves the median grade to around a B/B+. I studied fairly consistently throughout the semester, relying only on his lecture notes, past exams, and PSETs, and ended up with an A. I recommend not packing your semester with too many challenging classes if you intend to take Macro.
Okay people are going to love him or hate him; easily. If you enjoy personality and theory, you'll like him; he's very obviously knowledgable and teaches in a very funny and unique way. He, as a person, is hilarious; his personality carried lectures for me. This was the only class I went to every lecture in. That being said he is very disorganized, and the class topics are split super weirdly in that most of the semester is covering one specific topic (which he admits, is the only topic he thinks is important) and thus cramming the rest at the end of the semester. I did not need the TAs, like most people said they did, I went to all lectures took notes and got a really high A, but not all TAs are good. The one I regularly went to was amazing, but I heard others are quite bad; but you have 10 TAs to pick from, so keep looking till you find one you like. Overall I'd say register for the class, go to the first three lectures to see if you fuck with him; if you don't, drop the class and go next semester, but if you do I think he's worth taking. I personally adore this guy, I think he's hilarious and I love his outfits, but it's very very personality dependent. He's an acquired taste.
You either like Professor Xavier's teaching style or you don't. Personally, I enjoy it. He is a very engaging lecturer. It is a lot of the same material that he goes over in Macro and he reuses some of the same stories but gives some new ones. I always went to class and was always engaged. His stories were fun and he went over the models in class more than he did in macro.
OVERRATED!!! Thought it would be better based on what I've heard but really just ended up just learning about the Solow growth model. The problem sets are not like what we see in class. Midterm was four questions but complex. You barely have time to finish half of it. I ended up doing okay but not as good as I thought I would. His class is big (about 300 students), which makes it harder to ask questions and less approachable.
Most disorganized class I have ever taken. TAs did not know what was happening and problem sets often did not match what was being taught in lecture. 2 problem sets were assigned during reading week to ensure all material was covered before the final. The lecture notes that are given in lieu of a textbook are difficult to navigate and contain errors. I will say that Xavier really is a great lecturer, though. I did learn while in lecture and the exams were not incredibly difficult. I think the class is just too large to manage effectively.
Well I didn't think he was that great. He wasn't all that bad, but I wouldn't put off Macro until he is teaching it because he really isn't all that spectacular.
A lot! Continuous time dynamic optimization, value function existence and so many tools. Most of all, I love macro and I really enjoyed all of the course contents. The way Kuhn-Tucker consitions were taught, I really saw the intuition! I truly understood the (or so I think!) how to look for shortfalls in a model and what ingredients to add to make them more plausible. This was the main takeaway...Taking a bare bones model, analysing why it isn't really sensisble and making it appropriately richer..
he's funny and spunky and the class material isn't actually that hard, though it is tedious. However he's really not good at lecturing, which is a shame and makes it difficult to learn at all in lecture.
Long psets, 7 of them, but graded very leniently. The exams were very fair if you study what was covered in the lecture, I got above 90 on both studying relatively normal amounts for a 4 credit class. If you study and stay up to date with the class, you will do well.
This was by far my favorite class at Columbia. It was an 8:40 which was unfortunate, but Xavier's lectures were so riveting that I wouldn't actually mind going to class. And I knew I wasn't alone in this, as the lecture room was nearly full every morning. Essentially this course explores the question "why are some countries poor?" The class is a mix of theory, models and mathematics, and Xavier blends the three elements together as if telling a semester long economic narrative, rather than lecturing at you. The math involved isn't particularly terrifying for an upper level economics class- the most complicated it gets is Lagrangian, but it's basically applied in a manner that is no more difficult than it was in micro. I think the most compelling thing about this class was the way in which math was used to help tell the story of economic development. You don't feel like you are learning abstract and pointless graphs and equations, but rather real-life solutions. Also, Xavier is basically the best human being. A funny, passionate, quirky Spanish guy, he explains complex concepts in a simplified yet elegant way. He matches his brightly colored suit jacket to his power point every day, calls Trump our "funny orange man" and uses the game of soccer to explain the concept of idea innovation. It really doesn't get better. And he is very approachable and loves questions. I seriously e…