Copic....where to start. He was entertaining if nothing else, pretty disjointed lectures and lecture notes, but that still ended up somehow relevant to game theory. Some random extra credit thrown in. Tests that exactly mirrored the questions given in class. His energetic attitude and random nature leave you with a whirlwind feeling wondering what just happened after finishing the class, but his class is almost certainly easier and more fun than the other 101 teachers out there. I'd say take it, just be prepared for a weird ride.

I actually thought he was a really good lecture. We didn't cover as much as we probably could have but still looking over my lecture notes we covered a good amount of stuff decently in depth.

Also I don't know if you've heard already just through the econ department grapevine, but if Kyle Woodward is ever offered as a TA for any of your classes get him. No seriously he was so helpful he had to get a bigger room because so many people were showing up to section.

The real problem with this class is that he didn't really test on what he taught. HOWEVER, he posts practice tests online which are basically what's on the tests. We only had one midterm unlike the people below. 14 questions but your grade was out of 12. Final was 35 questions but only 30 counted and one was a freebie.

13.5% available as additional extra credit outside of tests. So no curve but a ridiculous amount of extra credit to raise your grade if you need it. I did none of the extra credit homework but did show up to all the lectures that were extra credit and got 4% just from that.

My first (and probably last) A+ in college.

Whatever you say about his teaching prowess, it is undeniable that his lecture notes for Econ 101 are friggin hilarious. So randomly awesome.

I don't know if he changed his teaching style since the previous posts were written... but I'm taking the class with him and he's HILARIOUSLY INGENIOUSLY AWESOME! His lecture notes are hilarious as the previous poster mentioned and he tries REALLY hard to break down concepts to simple logic that we can directly apply (in contrast to other professors who teach you how to solve problems using a certain technique but not WHY that is the right technique). In terms of negatives - he isn't always prepared and sometime tends to have ambiguities in how he phrases questions. However, this really isn't that big a problem. Overall, he's a very nice guy with a very quirky, fun personality who actually makes an effort to teach well.

Bottomline: definitely recommend him for 101.

pros: easy, huge amounts of extra credit, final grade = max (midterm 1, midterm 2) +final, which means you get to drop one midterm.

cons: lectures' slow, very very very slow... not clear either (but you can always ask him to clarify things), he cannot make one question right, there're mistakes every where in his keys.

you need a good TA for his class. i wouldn't say i liked his lectures, but he does have a pleasant personality, and he does care about his students though.

anyway, your choice

I took Econ 101 with Copic. He is a nice person, but not a good professor. His lectures are unorganized, confusing, and boring. I basically learned everything in my discussions. The midterm and final multiple choices are similar to the practice exams, but they are still difficult. I scored way below average on the midterm and slightly above average on the final and ended up a B+, which is good enough for me.

I couldn't agree more with the review below this one.

Oops, that should say course taken: econ 101. Sorry.

In short: Unclear Notes/No Textboo/Unclear Notes/Thinks he's too wise

Details: I don't know what you guys been laughing at, but his "funny" lectures weren't funny, but rather extremely time wasteful... Humor isn't the best way to go around teaching, when it is subjective. He tries to be funny too much, although not funny, that most of the time is wasted in lecture.
Notes are very unclear with more than half of the notes consisting of unnecessary stories and sentences which are confusing.
I would avoid him at all costs, unless you don't care for what you are learning from the class, besides his "funny" lectures. To those who thought his lectures were funny, please live life.

Prof. Copic is purely amazing. He cares about teaching and he cares about students who are willing to learn. I was ranked 1st in his class and I am currently doing research under him. He is so encouraging when I want to proceed with an original research that may violate some fundamental assumptions in economics (and I assure you 90% of all professors would not want to waste time with an undergraduate student in research like this). He may get low ratings under things like "effectiveness" and "clarity" because he is ACTUALLY teaching his students something meaningful and uses ones intelligence instead of memorization skill, which can be quite challenging to both him and the students, instead of just going through formulas and procedures to solve problems. Therefore, to do well in his class, my advice is to put away the "methods" you are accustomed to and turn on your brain; I believe that everyone admitted to UCLA can get A in his class with their brain actually turned on. His presence is enough to make me choose UCLA over Harvard. My life would be totally different without him. After my family and my girlfriend, he is the best thing happened to me in my life!