ECON 3020

TO preface this, I did not take this course. My girlfriend is currently undergoing extreme mental duress, an episode of sorts, while studying for McGee's final because she is realizing that her section's tests were objectively and consistently harder than McGee's other section. Considering there is a test every three weeks, it adds up. Additionally, she has expressed severe dissatisfaction with McGee's teaching style (or lack thereof). As I type this, she wishes to note that there were multiple questions on a midterm that asked for students to answer a question from a specific PowerPoint but somehow failed to include the actual details for the questions. Honestly, I am not entirely sure how that happens.

Her official review in short: nice guy that means well but mid/unorganized teacher, terrible tests. go with Westerfield for this class (I had her and she was great)

This course, while structured in a way that is meant to introduce students to fundamental and important macroeconomic concepts, from my perspective failed to truly provide students with a better understanding of the material. Personally, I think I learned a lot, but this was principally because I read the textbook and completed many practice problems independently. The resources provided by Mcgee, although sometimes helpful for specific exams, were often challenging to understand and disorganized in the way the material was presented. Mcgee undoubtedly attempts to help his students, and hosts office hours before exams, for example. But overall, the lectures and the format of the course was rather disorganized.

Unlike previous reviews have suggested, however, I think that if you work hard—and put in independent effort outside of the class—it is entirely possible (and not improbable) to receive a good grade. While the lectures and resources may be disorganized, it is entirely within the student's capability to succeed in this course—although you may have to put in a lot of studying outside of class. A previous review has also suggested that the exams for one period were far more challenging than the exams for the other, although I would like to briefly debunk this assertion. First, in reviewing the answer keys, this alleged disparity in difficulty was not evident at all to me. Second, Mcgee did look at the averages of the different test versions and adjusted the curve for each class period accordingly; it was often the case that the curve for one section was different than for that of the other.

Thus, though this course is often disorganized and Mcgee can be an ineffective professor, he is a fair grader and it is entirely within the capability of the students to succeed.

Prof with good intentions, but this class is very disorganized. The powerpoints for one chapter are sometimes 100+ slides and mcgee doesn’t do a good job of highlighting the stuff thats important. On the exams, he also asked super specific questions about something that was mentioned in a specific slide, which made answering the questions very hard if you hadn’t reviewed the slides that much. I found that studying the handouts he gave in class was pretty helpful. He gives way too much historical context, and then asks about it on the tests. Final was straightforward, but there’s a lot of material so it’s hard to study for it. Lectures were pretty boring too. I feel like Mcgee means well, but his teaching style isn’t engaging enough and I literally feel like I learned nothing this semester…

This class is okay. McGee definitely is knowledgeable about economics, but I found his lecturing style to be boring and confusing. He pretty much tells you exactly what will be on exams at the bottom of his PowerPoints and from his in-class handouts, so it is not too difficult if you understand your material though. Additionally, there was a partial dutch knockout where you could replace two of the four exams with the final if the grade was higher. #tCFfall22

This class is not very difficult and you can tell that Mcgee wants his students to succeed. My only knock on the class is that the lectures were hard to follow since Mcgee goes on tangents often. Study the handouts and random graphics in the slide decks are you'll do very well. It feels like your studying for the exam and not really for the course. #tCFfall22

McGee is the worst lecturer at UVA. He has no idea where he is supposed to going and it feels like the lectures have no point. He reads straight off of extremely wordy slides taken from the textbook and gives out handouts each class. The handouts are helpful practice for tests, but when he explains them in class it rarely makes any sense. Would not suggest taking this class with him unless you have no other option.

I overall enjoyed taking Intermediate Macro with McGee. I don't know much about the other professors, but McGee was not too difficult and very entertaining.

The hardest part about the class, at least in my opinion, was figuring out what numbers to solve versus which numbers were just made up. Intermediate Micro is much more proof-based, as you are always solving equations and proving some identity. In macro, McGee would just make up numbers to prove the general idea but skip the calculus / differentiations. Overall this does make the class easier, as there is a lot less math, but also sometimes you are just going with the flow and aren't sure about anything or what is real.

With that being said, the exams for this class were nearly identical to the practice exams – of which he posts a key on Canvas. So DEFINITELY DO AND LEARN THE PRACTICE EXAMS!!! I stopped reading the textbook about 1/3 of the way through the semester and honestly felt fine. I went to lecture and found it useful, although he does jump around a lot and is hard to follow. As long as you read and take notes on his PPTs for the general ideas, learn his handouts, and know how to do the review problems at the end of each PPT, you will be fine. His exams, at least my year, were probably 95-100% problems from 1) the practice exam he posts, 2) the handouts, and 3) the questions at the end of the PPT. And even more, I'd say 85% of the exams were just the handouts and past exams. So if you study that content, you'll be fine.

I would also recommend going to discussion section (if you find your TA useful). My TA made discussions mandatory (although they were on Tuesday afternoons, so not like a Friday morning session which would be hell). However my TA was actually a much more efficient and clear teacher than McGee, so discussion was always a good use of my time.

Also, the exams in this class were graded pretty generously. I did not put that much effort in at the beginning (and I'm someone who needs to over-study for every exam) and got an 86, 93, and 88 on the three midterms. If you learn the handouts and look over the PPTs, you'll be fine. Also, the class does both Dutch and partial-Dutch knockout, so if you do better on the final exam (40% of your final grade) you can replace any/all exam scores with the final (each exam is 15%, and then you have 15% of participation via your discussion sections).

Really, this class is not bad at all. The content is relatively interesting if you think big picture, and you will come away with a better understanding of markets in general. Have fun with McGee and appreciate his wackiness. He's much less rigid than most econ professors at UVA, which is a breath of fresh air.

If your goal is to actually learn about macroeconomics, this course is not for you. McGee is terrible lecturer and glosses over important details that would make my time in lecture much more productive. Needless to say, I did not learn anything until the few days before each exam, when I would cram the specific examples and handouts he told us to know (because that's really all you need to do well). Just know the info included at the end of every slideshow, study the handouts, go over the practice exams, and you'll do fine.

It's sad that this class has such low ratings, since it's pretty good all things considered. It's not a 5/5 across the board, but it's not a terribly difficult or bad class. While I agree with other reviews that McGee sometimes goes off on tangents and lectures are sometimes hard to follow, I think the class is still fine. Grading is based entirely on exams and attendance at discussion sections. Exams are very straightforward and McGee tells you everything you'll need to know for them. Often, he just recycles questions from old exams or class handouts which makes it very easy to know how to do everything. From a knowledge standpoint, I've learned more from other classes but didn't feel like this one was a waste of time. Relevant information in all lectures, and the models McGee goes through are super interesting. Macroeconomics inherently has politics elements, and I appreciated that McGee acknowledged his own political opinions and made sure to present different perspectives on how certain macro issues (i.e. Fed policy) should be approached (ie "this interpretation would support the more conservative/liberal policy argument"). Textbook is helpful. Course is structured in a way that it builds nicely on itself. I agree with another reviewer that TAs/discussion sections are pretty helpful. My TA did review sessions before every exam that were extremely helpful and probably got me an A (shoutout to Lucille).

McGee means well but his class lectures are pretty disorganized. Stay on top of learning the practice material and the in-class worksheets.