Leo Michelis

He doesn't really teach. He was very hard to understand and didn't want good at explaining things. His lectures go on random tangents and are very unorganized. The mt and final were sometimes completely unrelated and riddled with errors and typos.

Tests largely involve memorization. Questions are very much like the textbook's practice questions, use them as frame of reference. Unengaging lectures, in my opinion. During class i considered my own death extremely frequently, more than i did anywhere else by a long shot, and I took a course on existentialist philosophy last year.

The course itself is hard but the most annoying part is the MCQ auto-checker incorrectly marks your grade. You yourself have to find out if the auto-checker made a mistake and you have to email the professor about it.

Rude, doesn't support students at all. Says he treats everyone the same but then some students were allowed cheat sheets while others were not in the final exam. Every single question is from the 6th edition question bank except for the one about the Gini coefficient. Also very out of touch with what is happening in Canada. It's almost startling.

Aviod at any cost he alwys want to say "I treat my classes as a consersation" the moment you try to answer or go wtih that type lecture he inturps you or he cant listen to you even whe you raise your voice. All the question are in mylab.

To be honest I do not know why his rating is so low. Course is hard but if the class performs unfairly low it will not go unnoticed. He is also very detailed in his in-person lectures, if you pay attention he will actually have you understanding very complex macroeconomic content. Impressive! Midterm was much easier than final for some reason.

Im sorry but avoid this professor at all costs, he makes things more confusing as it actually is. Relies on explaining things through graphs without writing down what they actually mean. Is very hard to understand, and is never clear about anything he wants. AVOID.

No point going to his lectures because it's really hard to understand him. The class comprised of a 40% midterm and a 60% final which were both hard. The review packages help understand concepts but sometimes it was no help. However, there was a significant bell curve at the end ( a whole grade level) meaning if you got a D he boosted you to a C.

He gave the class PHD level questions that even the TA was struggling to solve. He seems to be on some sort of endless power trip as the only prof of this course and enjoys torturing his students. Only got an A- cause he bell curved.