I had to retake the class due to family issues so I took him twice, once in winter once in spring..

During winter, I went to every single lecture and took very close notes of all his points. The lecture helped me prepare for 20% of the exam.

During spring, I went to 0 lectures and only studied off slides and the textbook questions. If you want the A, go to lecture. If you want B or C, please don't go to lecture.

The textbook has some errors so if you feel like you don't understand, go to office hours to make sure he didn't assign you problems with errors.

I would say Meric is a poor professor, because proficiency of the subject doesn't require his contribution at all. Also he randomly didn't show up to multiple lectures and made the TAs do the lectures (so unprofessional). Oh yeah and if the TAs lecture on what he doesn't cover, you don't need to study it. Wasting your time.

I took his 8 am class and wasn't "able" to attend most lectures. His lectures are good but quite skippable if you read the slides he posts online. And PLEASE review the slides and do the practice problems in the textbook. The best and only way to do well in this class is to do many practice problems. (Good news: any single problem doesn't take up that much time) My TA gave us good exercises that really helped. As is the case with many Econ classes, 102 seems straightforward and even intuitive at times but don't let the appearance fool you. He had 2 midterms and a final which had many easy questions and a few tricky ones that were tricky because you confused one concept with another. Doing well in 102 demands you to be extra careful and not get fuzzy with the seemingly easy stuff. For example, review the difference between endogenous and exogenous variables, it helps a lot.

Keskinel's grading scheme is fairly straightforward:
Midterm 1 - 25%
Midterm 2 - 25%
Final - 50%

Both midterms and final exams have between 30-50 Multiple-Choice Questions and a few analytical questions.
His lectures are kinda disorganized and he often skips alot of material covering just the calculation/graph sections of the textbook. However going to lecture is both rewarding as well as important because not only is he funny and entertaining but alot of the things he says in class which might seem irrelevant are actually tested on in the Multiple-choice portion of his exams. That being said, I think reading the textbook and the lecture slides and solving all the questions at the end of each chapter are extremely crucial in doing well in the class. The analytical questions he asks are very similar to textbook questions and the multiple-choice are almost entirely from the textbook (case-studies are VERY important). Overall, would recommend the guy if youre willing to do a decent amount of self-study while also looking for an entertaining professor.

Keskinel is a funny guy and his lectures aren't horribly boring to sit through, unlike a lot of other econ professors. That said, he's pretty disorganized in how he presents his material- no slides, and he'll often jump from whiteboard to whiteboard without explaining what's going on. Tests were reasonably fair but a little bit tricky. Overall, he's a very average professor- not one to avoid taking this class with, but not one I'd go out of my way to take again.

Keskinel is really funny which made lecture actually enjoyable, but sometimes he can be a little all over the place. Thankfully the lectures were podcasted and he made pdf supplements to the textbook available which helped clarify things. The first midterm was insanely easy, the second was insanely hard, and the final was somewhat in the middle. It's a lot of work but I would recommend him!

He tries but he's just plain bad.

He tries but he's just plain bad.

He expects quite an unreasonable amount of material to be memorized and his multiple choice will be poorly worded or based off of something he barely mentioned in class. Fun. Reminds me of ravetch and that wasn't pleasant, but at least ravetch knew how to teach and explain things.

his lectures are not horrible, but not great as well. He brings up different topics without clear explanation. you just go anywhere with him without knowing what exactly he is talking about. i feel like listened to a mess after every lecture. he pays attention to the concept or math that everybody understands and neglect the confusing parts… I do not like his lectures at all which are frustrating.
but, his tests are kind of easy.

He is one of the best professor at ucla. His lecture is Crystal clear and the book he offers is so helpful. He is always available and give a perfect lecture which make the reading more easier . Very fair grader.