Sue Dynarski claims to teach econometrics, but in practice they just read journal articles and do pointless (and lengthy) Stata problem sets. Students leave knowing nothing of metrics and love her for it. This is in her graduate level courses.
Teach econometrics to grad students as a reg monkey


Teach what you use
reg y, x robust
Shouldn't it be reg y x, robust?

What? Most people can understand geometric arguments which is so abstract?
Honestly use Ruud's book. It gives a nice geometric argument that most people can understand and will make fielding questions much easier. Hayashi will just bog you down with his love affair with the GMM framework and the lack of appendices overviewing the prerequisites.
Pictures dude. Pictures

Teach what you use
reg y, x robust
Shouldn't it be reg y x, robust?
I dunno. I'm a theorist

Teach what you use
reg y, x robust
Shouldn't it be reg y x, robust?
I think it depends. Is x in logs?

LOL.
Northwestern bro who was taught by Manski first quarter.
Phd first semester econometrics is a fantastic course to teach. Math does not get cleaner than that.

Reg monkey teaching metrics at an ULRM here. I recommend Bruce Hansen's book, which is rigorous enough to not be embarrassing to teach without being beyond your (and my) level.

Are you talking about Notredame? Bill Evans teaches this way. It's a disgrace.
I know of a decent uni where a ref monkey teaches metrics. The course is heavy on Mostly Harmless type stuff and thinking through endogeneity problems.

Are you talking about Notredame? Bill Evans teaches this way. It's a disgrace.
I know of a decent uni where a ref monkey teaches metrics. The course is heavy on Mostly Harmless type stuff and thinking through endogeneity problems.
I am a reg monkey, and IMO first year metrics should be theory based. No, I cannot prove that convergence a.s. implies convergence in probability, but I think surviving the classes helped me a lot with better understanding what my reg y x, r is doing. My concern has long been that people who are only taught Mostly Harmless type stuff have no idea what they're doing in Stata.

Mostly Harmless

Teach them reg y x Robust, FEs, IV etc, invite each of your reg monkey colleague to guest lecture marketing or promoting their (useless) papers (they would be happy to do so), then you easily fill a semester course...

Thanks everyone. The guy who taught the course before me used Gujarati. Would you switch to Wooldridge?

I wonder what Levitt teaches at Chicago

MOstly harmless is for causal analysis (mostly)
OP is talking about the theoretic foundation, prove this prove that

Thanks everyone. The guy who taught the course before me used Gujarati. Would you switch to Wooldridge?
He used Gujarati at Grad level? I thought he only had a UG book.
Wooldridge is very good but, as it says on the tin, only has cross sectional and panel metrics. 
what about Wooldridge's introductory econometrics book? Or Davidson and MacKinnon? Btw this guy used Gujarati's UG book....I teach in a UVLRM to people with very limited math background, I guess this course will end up being similar to an advanced undergrad course
He used Gujarati at Grad level? I thought he only had a UG book.
Wooldridge is very good but, as it says on the tin, only has cross sectional and panel metrics. 
what about Wooldridge's introductory econometrics book? Or Davidson and MacKinnon? Btw this guy used Gujarati's UG book....I teach in a UVLRM to people with very limited math background, I guess this course will end up being similar to an advanced undergrad course
He used Gujarati at Grad level? I thought he only had a UG book.
Wooldridge is very good but, as it says on the tin, only has cross sectional and panel metrics.
Wooldridge's undergrad book is very comprehensive. Probably the best UG book around. With regards to the level of math, it is about as tough as you can get without using matrix algebra.