Rant: Why are Upper Division Econ Classes so terrible?
Note: I have not taken every single upper-division economics class, and do not doubt that there are great classes among the rough. However, I am mostly referring to the required classes (Econ 100/101 series (except 100a, love Campbell) and Econ 140/141 series, alongside other more theoretical-based econ classes)
It's so strange to me knowing that Berkeley is simultaneously one of, if not THE top-ranked school for economics, and yet nearly all of the upper-division classes are taught horribly. I've talked to other people taking these classes, and I think this generally seems to be a common sentiment. I think the biggest issues I have with these classes are the following ones:
Completely confusing course material. I've taken difficult classes in other departments like CS/DS and Stats, but nothing comes close to the level of carelessness I've seen from econ classes. It's hard enough that they barely release any practice exams, if at all (and often without answer keys making them practically useless without OH), but the kicker is half these classes don't even bother to create decent SLIDES. I've taken multiple classes (Econ 155, Econ 144 etc) that release nearly empty slidedecks, with most of the content consisting of really scattered and unclear pieces of information. Even when these classes do create slides, they are often just mostly consistent of random statements, formulas, and proofs without any sort of context or explanation written. If you miss a class and don't have a friend's notes? You better pray the GSI, who's probably as confused as you are, knows how to help you in Office Hours.
Lack of communication between course staff. It is such a surreal experience going into office hours, trying to find the answer to a practice question without an answer key, and finding the GSI to be as stumped as you are. I do not blame the GSI's (for the most part) for this: from what I have heard, this is often because GSIs are often not even given an answer key from the prof, and have to create one themselves. Not only does this lead to a lack of support, but it ultimately makes grading on homework a complete dice roll as to whether you got "the nice GSI" or not. It also has led to feeling a significant disconnect between discussions and lectures, with course material being taught in different ways in both domains.
Unbearably boring lectures. I think this is probably the most subjective out of my points here, and I totally get if people find these lectures fascinating, but holy hell. While I am sure the lecturers do fantastic research and love their field very much, their passion does NOT come across during lectures. Whether it is highlighting random formulas without any indication of their practical application or purpose, writing down absurdly long proofs that aren't even going to be tested on, or just the monotonous tone that turns the lecture into white noise, I cannot stand them. It's no wonder the lecture halls for my econ classes all turn to barren wastelands halfway into the semester. I don't believe this is an issue exclusive to the econ department, but it is especially pervasive here.
I'm sure everyone has their own stories with these classes, so feel free to share. The saving grace to many of these classes is that they aren't that hard to get a decent grade in, but that's mostly because everyone is as confused as you are. There are definitely good classes in the major like 100a, but the bad massively outweighs the good IMO. Rant over.