MicroEcons or MacroEcons for UOL?

[xiaojiong]

Hi there,

Of late,i have signed up for UOL Banking and Finance w one of the private schools here. I have reached a stage where i am deciding to follow my interest, though i have so far been accepted by Local Uni , SIT for their hospitality course.

Thinking about future prospect, working hours, work life balance, that could really be tough . Thus, decided to apply for Banking And Finance with the mindset that even if its tough, at least i am doing what i like to be doing.

I am now pondering whether to choose micro-economics or macro-economics for my studies in UOL. Some said Micro is tougher, while some mention that the lecturers claims Macro is tougher.
Would sincerely be hoping that those who have done both, or have graduated can shed some light on this.

I wouldnt mind if its your personal view, as i do understand different people might feel the difficulty level differently.

Truly appreciate it

Thanks

 

[panda_hippo]

Read the subject guide and decide for yourself.

Microeconomics: http://www.londoninternational.ac.u...s/lse/lse_pdf/subject_guides/ec2066_ch1-4.pdf

Macroeconomics: http://www.londoninternational.ac.u...s/lse/lse_pdf/subject_guides/ec2065_ch1-4.pdf

 

[xiaojiong]

hi thanks for the link.

i have opened both and am shock to see so many pages to read-through. I know i am not qualified to actually know which is better as i have not learnt them both at uni level yet.

Hence really hope those who have taken, come and share.

 

[xiaojiong]

52 views and nobody gona give some advise?

 

[Mathemagician]

I am guessing people dont reply you because you want to be spoon-fed. I read your reply and it sounds like "Hey guys, I am too lazy to read those subject guides, can someone just tell me what are all these about?"

Choose subject based on your passion not based on other people's opinion..

 

[Geforce3]

both, learning economics and not knowing either is just

 

[rollbread]

Hi there,

Of late,i have signed up for UOL Banking and Finance w one of the private schools here. I have reached a stage where i am deciding to follow my interest, though i have so far been accepted by Local Uni , SIT for their hospitality course.

Thinking about future prospect, working hours, work life balance, that could really be tough . Thus, decided to apply for Banking And Finance with the mindset that even if its tough, at least i am doing what i like to be doing.

Wad course are u offered by local uni? From wad I know by my friends from UOL or other banking courses, studying wad u like doesn't mean u will get the job u like in future. And I guess local uni should be tougher than UOL right?

 

[AshleyRiot]

Econs is a pain in the arse for UOL no matter how I see it...I can't speak for others but I already struggled with Intro twice...Amos loves to set questions that you don't even understand WTF he is talking abt...so good luck with Macro or Micro...

 

[xiaojiong]

well i perfectly understand that it's part of learning, and all it requires is your energy , effort and interest.

i am not writing in here to get spoon-fed. If anyone feels that im like this, please accept my apology and ignore this thread.

Else, i am really hoping to get feedbacks on the subjects difficulty level. I am fine with both micro and macro. have touched them in previous qualification level , though i believe that is the basis level, hence the birth of this thread.\

Pls do not be offended by what i have asked, or assume that im here to get some answers for free. It's because im interested, have read both subject guides briefly, but still am clueless.

would appreciate if i can get more feedbacks

 

[Bedokian]

I took both, because it was required for my final year subject - international economics.

Personally I find Macro to be easier than Micro, but then again, the lecture notes, the delivery by lecturers, etc. all play a part in shaping my opinion.

 

[cowed77]

Econs is a pain in the arse for UOL no matter how I see it...I can't speak for others but I already struggled with Intro twice...Amos loves to set questions that you don't even understand WTF he is talking abt...so good luck with Macro or Micro...

Hahah pruss one!!

But I think macro shud be slightly easier. But just by a nano hair oki, don't too happy lol.

 

[wiwi]

UoL macro is a bitch when it comes to scoring. 1.5-2 pages for 5 marks. Derivation of IS-LM BP internal/external equilibrium. I heard they cut down on content for derivation solutions in 2011 though.

 

[gladiusgg]

Fyi macro has been the harder of the 2 for the past few yrs. last yr failure rate was about 50%. Thats what my macro lecturer said.

Im bracing myself for macro paper tmr. Gg to me. Lol.

 

[xiaojiong]

Best of luck to you!!

Macro is the harder one? Was it claim by M.Harris ?

Fyi macro has been the harder of the 2 for the past few yrs. last yr failure rate was about 50%. Thats what my macro lecturer said.

Im bracing myself for macro paper tmr. Gg to me. Lol.

 

[octupusmaths]

Hi there,

Of late,i have signed up for UOL Banking and Finance w one of the private schools here. I have reached a stage where i am deciding to follow my interest, though i have so far been accepted by Local Uni , SIT for their hospitality course.

Thinking about future prospect, working hours, work life balance, that could really be tough . Thus, decided to apply for Banking And Finance with the mindset that even if its tough, at least i am doing what i like to be doing.

I am now pondering whether to choose micro-economics or macro-economics for my studies in UOL. Some said Micro is tougher, while some mention that the lecturers claims Macro is tougher.
Would sincerely be hoping that those who have done both, or have graduated can shed some light on this.

I wouldnt mind if its your personal view, as i do understand different people might feel the difficulty level differently.

Truly appreciate it

Thanks

I would guess that macro will have more relevance for banking and finance? The macro papers have been difficult ever since the new examiner took over in 2009. Despite being tough, there are people who get A for the subjects. I got both C for both micro and macro. But in my opinion, macro is tougher than micro. The micro paper are rather quantitative and uses maths 1 principles, hence the calculation and differentiation are rather manageable. If the trend continues, the long game theory question is also another easy question as well.

 

[DaRealG]

Read through the UOL thread. Lots of info there on specific modules and recommended subject combinations.

Based on personal experience (took Micro in 13, Macro in 12) and statistics, Micro is by far the easier subject.

Micro used to be extremely tough, with top score each year about 70+ only (that probably translates to about 1 or 2 students out of thousands worldwide getting an A). But since the new examiner took over in 2009 or 2010, every year tons of ppl have been getting >80, >90 marks. Way way easier compared to last time. That being said it doesn't mean you can pass without studying.

Macro on the other hand, is exactly like Micro in the past. Still extremely hard, every years top scorer only about 70+, and 2012's failure rate one of the highest (only 49% passed globally).

So based on these, I would def. say Micro is the easier one.

 

[ifr33doom]

I am currently goin to year 3, bnf student.

I am really having headache when choosing between micro and macro.

I know macro is wht bnf student should take.
During intro econs lessons, i prefer macro and done mostly macro qns.

I wanted to choose macro at first but the passing rate is low so i think of choosing micro but i am not good in micro. Oh man, is mirco really easier thn macro and their marking is not tht strict? Bcuz i need to score at least 50.

 

[rabidbulldog]

I am currently goin to year 3, bnf student.

I am really having headache when choosing between micro and macro.

I know macro is wht bnf student should take.
During intro econs lessons, i prefer macro and done mostly macro qns.

I wanted to choose macro at first but the passing rate is low so i think of choosing micro but i am not good in micro. Oh man, is mirco really easier thn macro and their marking is not tht strict? Bcuz i need to score at least 50.

If you are more towards calculation, go for micro; theory, go for macro.

Micro exam papers used to be way tougher under the old examiner, but the past few years qns have become more direct and geared towards quantitative-type qns, which can be solve easily (i.e by doing basic differentiation for oligopoly qns). Also, with the inclusion of game theory into the syllabus, you can easily score one full section with simple calculations.

Macro on the other hand I heard the qns used to be easier under the old examiner. But currently, qns they asked are more tricky and test a lot on your basic concepts. E.g for the basic IS-LM-BOP model, you need to understand what a strict horizontal or vertical IS or LM line means and also learn about the upward sloping BOP line etc.

Regardless of whether you take micro or macro, do take note that they are quite different from what you learn under intro to econs, where qns are usually more general and vague.

 

[saltydog]

took both since im enf. quick ans: macro tougher. imo