BESS Thread

europerson

I thing Babybing may be confusing going on a SOCRATES exchange for a year and the ESCP-EAP programme, which is something very different. You can read brief summaries of both here. Basically, a year abroad forms part of your undergraduate degree, while the ESCP-EAP programme is a combined bachelor's/master's stream. As Babybing said, you'll be getting loads of information about these things in SF.

europerson

On an entirely different note, how have all the BESSheads settled in this year? Last week, I finally decided for sure what courses I'm taking in SS (this year). I'm reading single honours Economics, so I had to choose Theory. It appears to be quite intense at first, but I don't think it's so bad, when it's gone through for a second, third... nth time. I take Securities Markets, which is going well. I hadn't taken Investments in JS, but so far I appear to be at little disadvantage. Food is going equally well. It is very heavy on the readings front though, but they are interesting readings. It is SS though, so I won't complain about such petty things as having to read a lot! My fourth choice is International Economics. I'm going to reserve judgement on that for a while, although my initial opinion (from an Economics perspective) is that it seems to be fairly straight-forward. It all comes down to apple trees and Diet Coke, apparently.

How is everyone else getting on?

[In-joke for the economists]I can't believe I got through that without mentioning big pi![/In-joke]

Time Magazine

Theory - Looks like it will be a good bit of work but at least it's something genuinely interesting. Mathematical Economics will help with the workload too. I like Prof. Whelan's lecturing style. Although I'm sure the content is an endogenous factor there.

Transport - I like the fact that I can prepare for the end of year exam already. The lectures sway violently from extremely interesting, thought-provoking, anger-at-government-inducing hilarious escapades to situations where you're sure you've seen this movie before and set about practicing writing as fast as you can in preparation for The Exam.

Securities - I think this course would be intolerable to non-Finance Jocks were it not taught by Séb. He'll be of great loss to the Department's teaching calibre. A bit like Theory in structure, I think it will be a difficult course to get to grips with, but that there's not an awful lot of meat in there once you get past the preliminary hurdles. I can deal with covariances of integers .

Economic & Legal Aspects of Competition Policy - I'm learning about marginal cost. But I have an interesting 6,000 word project due (by April 2008, mind) on the Irish League of Credit Unions vs The Competition Authority, which is something I think I'll enjoy doing. Worth 5% of my degree, too. (I guess you could logic out of that that my degree is worth 120,000 words then.)

shay_562

JS Business: Financial and Management Accounting is grand - all relatively easy and straightforward, and Pat McCabe is a legend, which always helps make lectures more attendable. Applied Finance...difficult to get a hold on so far. The lectures are interesting, but I'm reserving judgement until I actually do the assignment for this week's tutorial and see how all that works out. Organisational Theory and Change is mind-numbingly crap, and blindingly self-evident (in a way that OB last year never seemed to be), but a good chunk of my grade is a spectacularly easy 3,500 word project on organisational structure and change within my workplace, so that'll be handy.

JS Economics: Economic Analysis has me baffled (I'm sure Somerville is very cool with his llamas and all, but I find his lectures very hard to follow and as such some of the concepts haven't quite clicked with me yet). Mathematical Economics seems quite handy; a little mind-bending at times with all the numbers, but entirely doable with a little application. Econometrics, well, I'm just delighted I actually understood a good portion of the first set of exercises and what to do with them, so hopefully that'll be doable. (though I'm really not sure about that essay - it sounds woefully boring)

So overall pretty good. I seem to be re-discovering my work ethic, which I lost somewhere around February of 6th year and never really found. The only course I was considering swapping was OTC, but I figured a nice simple waffle course never killed anyone, and that if I had to deal with any more number-based courses I may kill someone.

europerson

shay_562 wrote: »

Economic Analysis has me baffled (I'm sure Somerville is very cool with his llamas and all, but I find his lectures very hard to follow and as such some of the concepts haven't quite clicked with me yet).

It will click: don't worry.

Mathematical Economics seems quite handy; a little mind-bending at times with all the numbers, but entirely doable with a little application.

I hate to say this, but it will become harder. You're probably starting off with some matrix theory, which isn't the most stretching of subjects. Apparently, the second part of the course (number theory and set theory and all that jazz) is being redesigned this year. Any word on that?

Econometrics, well, I'm just delighted I actually understood a good portion of the first set of exercises and what to do with them, so hopefully that'll be doable.

I'm getting a lot of positive feedback from this year's JS's about 'Metrics. It's rather upsetting. Our year was crying at that stage.

shay_562

europerson wrote:

I hate to say this, but it will become harder. You're probably starting off with some matrix theory, which isn't the most stretching of subjects. Apparently, the second part of the course (number theory and set theory and all that jazz) is being redesigned this year. Any word on that?

Yeah, I know it'll get tougher (you're right, matrix theory right now), but given that it's the one subject I'm completely on top of at the moment, I'm refusing to accept that just yet. All we've been told about the second half of the course is that it will cover "static optimisation and certain other economic applications", which doesn't sound as bad as set theory tbh. I quite like differentiating things.

europerson wrote:

I'm getting a lot of positive feedback from this year's JS's about 'Metrics. It's rather upsetting. Our year was crying at that stage.

Yeah, but you guys didn't have Carol Newman, did you? She's a fantastic lecturer (actually, I'm quite happy with all but one of my lecturers this year; apparently they keep the goods ones back til you're older and better able to appreciate them), and very good at explaining all the impossibly difficult stats stuff in such a way that it sounds perfectly understandable.

Edit: Plus, you guys had me so prepared for the worst that the fact that it seems tough-but-manageable rather than tough-and-tougher-and-rage-inducing has me quite positive about the whole thing. If I had been coming into it blind I might be a little more scared right now, but for the moment I'm taking the fact that I don't feel like weeping to be A Good Thing.

Crash

europerson wrote: »

Food is going equally well.

I'm intrigued as to the shortened course name. elaborate.

Time Magazine

Economics of Food Markets. AKA Agricultural Economics. AKA Culchie Class.

europerson

Ibid wrote: »

Economics of Food Markets. AKA Agricultural Economics. AKA Culchie Class.

The class, in which, interestingly, only three people are from the countryside!

Sorry çrash: no free samples.

Tricity Bendix

Ibid wrote: »

Economics of Food Markets. AKA Agricultural Economics. AKA Culchie Class.

Ahem?


I shall be brief.

Securities: I love Sébastien Wälti. And I'm not ashamed to admit it. His tutorial today was an absolute classic. I really need to start reading more after lectures.

Theory: I'm unsure of this. It seems deceptively easy. I like Karl Whelan's style. Less graphs, more gritty economics. I think I'm being lulled in to a false sense of security.

Bogger Studies: Alan Matthews is just a really interesting guy. I'm trying to catch up in the readings, but there is just so much to try and take in. My head is filled with agricultural conundrums from morning til night. I can't wait to start the essay just so I get a chance to marshal my thoughts. The subject itself is a lovely mix of theory and real life, which I don't think I've come across before. Definitely my favourite subject at the moment.

Economic and Legal Aspects of Competition Policy: Very, very easy at this stage. Learning about cost curves and consumer surplus in economics, and why competition is generally a good thing in law. It better kick in to gear soon before I lose interest.

europerson

b.ie polar wrote: »

The subject itself is a lovely mix of theory and real life, which I don't think I've come across before.

That's a good point: the only course I've already taken that managed that outcome so successfully was Monetary in JS.

His tutorial today was an absolute classic.

I agree: lecturing excellence in an easily-ingested tablet.

Randomness

cool, thanks for the info everyone about the double degree programmes, guess i'll jus see what happens when i apply next year, wud love to get in, sounds interesting.

jf is cool n everything id hoped for, good mix of subjects n people. we hav to do 6 subjects this year (im not sure if that was the case always).

business, economics, sociology, politics, maths n stats and either a language r law

i like the mix n the fact that u can specialise later, so life is good!

thanks again

EGaffney

Single honours Economics (I got my I in Mathematics last year)

Economic Theory: Good material and good lecturer, even if Prof. Whelan is now one with the dark side, or Belfield, as they call themselves. Though a bit of talk about the new endogenous technological growth models wouldn't have gone astray, after two weeks of 1950s models.

Quantitative Methods: It's all material that I covered in Mathematics last year so I can't really judge yet.

International Economics: Seems straightforward enough.

Monetary Thought and Policy: Reading is very, very, very important. No maths, but lots of books. Prof. Murphy is great as long as he's not reading straight out of his lecture notes.

Crania

Could anyone here give a rundown on what topics are studied in JF Maths and Statistics?

europerson

CoolCiaran wrote: »

Could anyone here give a rundown on what topics are studied in JF Maths and Statistics?

There's information here and here. The first link is the general course information page. The second gives more detailed information about the maths part of the course, which is what's taking place at this time.

manicmonoliths

JF Maths and Stats I'm actually finding pretty handy at the moment, but it seems a lot in the class are having problems. I think its just the switch from Leaving Cert which was mostly theory to now which is all application based.
Lecturer Carol Newman leaves a lot to be desired though, she either oversimplifies or makes things ridiculously complicated. She insists on using the quadratic formula for solving even simple equations!

Time Magazine

Carol Newman is one of the best lecturers in the Department.

manicmonoliths

Ibid wrote: »

Carol Newman is one of the best lecturers in the Department.

I just can't agree with that mate...
She knows what she's talking about, but she has real problems getting her point accross.

defiantshrimp

manicmonoliths wrote: »

I just can't agree with that mate...
She knows what she's talking about, but she has real problems getting her point accross.

I have her for econometrics and I have to say she's as clear as day in getting accross the material. A vast improvement on last year's lecturer from what the SS guys tell me :-)

manicmonoliths

I don't know what she's like for Econometrics but for Maths and Statistics I find her very poor as a lecturer. Maybe it's because I'm fairly good at maths myself, but I find that she makes things way more complicated than they actually are. She would do something in 5 lines that could easily and more simply be done in 2 lines.

gilroyb

It's the first few days of a course. It gets harder, but this way you will have learned how to approach the more difficult problems. Give it a couple of months before you really start judging lecturers. It's very easy to just do the questions the easiest way, but trust me, when it gets harder you'll find yourself suddenly struggling as you try and change back to the way Newman has been doing all along.

As someone who finished in 2006, I believe there are/were one or two shaky lecturers, but you really shouldn't discount Newman just yet. So far you've only had the introduction to introduction to maths. You'll have plenty of lecturers over the next few years, and trust me, you'd be doing well if by the end you still considered Carol Newman the worst lecturer you encountered.

EGaffney

manicmonoliths wrote: »

I don't know what she's like for Econometrics but for Maths and Statistics I find her very poor as a lecturer. Maybe it's because I'm fairly good at maths myself, but I find that she makes things way more complicated than they actually are. She would do something in 5 lines that could easily and more simply be done in 2 lines.

Remember that Maths and Stats is aimed at quite a low level of mathematical comprehension; what is unnecessary repetition to one may be necessary exposition to another.

shay_562

manicmonoliths wrote:

I find that she makes things way more complicated than they actually are. She would do something in 5 lines that could easily and more simply be done in 2 lines.

I can actually see this a bit - some of the stats stuff in Econometrics has had me gaping for a few seconds 'til she hits the end of whatever complex stuff she's doing and I realise it's relatively simple 1st/2nd year stuff, just explained more theoretically. And while that's incredibly useful by 3rd year (since the actual number-crunching barely matters any more, and theory is everything), I can see why, in 1st year Maths & Stats (which doesn't introduce anything that you wouldn't have encountered in LC higher level maths) that would be absolutely rage-inducing. That said, the 3rd & 4th years jumping to her defense are quite right - she's a fantastic lecturer to have once you're doing stuff that's a bit more complex, and you'll encounter much, much worse before you're out of here. For now, just find yourself a good lecture buddy and spend the time playing dots or doing work for other classes while picking up the few % for attendence (assuming they still do that in 1st year Maths to stop people skiving?) and making sure you already know how to do whatever she's doing.

Tricity Bendix

Plus she's hawt.

europerson

b.ie polar wrote: »

Plus she's hawt.

Well done on raising the tone of the thread. You're so right though.

shay_562

Really? I mean, I know (a) I'm not the best judge and (b) female staff in the Economics Dept. are in short supply, but...really? Not that there's anything wrong with her, it's just that...well, she's not all that.

Tricity Bendix

shay_562 wrote: »

Really? I mean, I know (a) I'm not the best judge and (b) female staff in the Economics Dept. are in short supply, but...really? Not that there's anything wrong with her, it's just that...well, she's not all that.

Its got a lot to do with (b). And the stripper boots.

defiantshrimp

We haven't had the pleasure of the stripper boots yet. Sigh.

Running Bing

manicmonoliths wrote: »

I don't know what she's like for Econometrics but for Maths and Statistics I find her very poor as a lecturer. Maybe it's because I'm fairly good at maths myself, but I find that she makes things way more complicated than they actually are. She would do something in 5 lines that could easily and more simply be done in 2 lines.

That must be it:rolleyes:

europerson

Does anyone take the Economics of Human Resources course or know anyone taking it? I haven't heard a word about it since last year!