Pub Date : 1999-01-01DOI: 10.1080/00220489909595953
Joseph I. Daniel
Computer-aided instruction (CAI) moved from mainframe computing in the 1960s and 1970s, to microcomputing in the 1980s, to the threshold of network computing in the late 1990s. Previous generations of CAI have met with limited but increasing success and acceptance. Economic educators were generally disappointed with mainframe CAI and questioned its cost effectiveness and value added. Siegfried and Fels (1979, 942) summarized this view: "CAI in [undergraduate] economics do[es] not appear to be the route to nirvana [it was] once expected to be. CAI appears to generate no more (or no less) cognitive achievement but probably costs more than conventional methods." Nevertheless, economic educators expected microcomputers to reduce development costs and to overcome CAI's earlier limitations. By the late 1980s and early 1990s, evaluations of introductoryand intermediate-level CAI programs ranged from the damning-"Economics software engages the student at 'the lowest level of computer use' (drill) and little intellectual development is likely at this level" (Reclam and Sexton 1994, 368, quoting from Yoho and Walstad 1990)-to the enthusiastic-"The microcomputer has become a major pedagogical instrument of demonstrated value" (Smith and Smith 1989, 73). In spite of the promises and disappointments of earlier generations of CAI, I argue that the World Wide Web represents an even greater change in the cost structure of developing, distributing, and using CAI software than the movement from mainframe to microcomputer. The Web can sustain a level of experimentation, innovation, and collaboration necessary to produce significant advances in CAI. The Web fundamentally alters the cost structure of instruction and learning by changing the costs of authoring, publishing, distributing, modifying, updating, applying, and using economic course materials. However, realizing the potential benefits of Web-based instruction requires that course materials be redesigned to reflect the expanded possibilities for interactivity, adaptability, rapid distribution, and integration of text, audio, video, graphics, animation, spreadsheets, and programming within a common package. Instructional software should not remain merely supplementary to a traditional textbook as has been previously argued (e.g., Walbert 1989).
{"title":"Computer-Aided Instruction on the World Wide Web: The Third Generation","authors":"Joseph I. Daniel","doi":"10.1080/00220489909595953","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00220489909595953","url":null,"abstract":"Computer-aided instruction (CAI) moved from mainframe computing in the 1960s and 1970s, to microcomputing in the 1980s, to the threshold of network computing in the late 1990s. Previous generations of CAI have met with limited but increasing success and acceptance. Economic educators were generally disappointed with mainframe CAI and questioned its cost effectiveness and value added. Siegfried and Fels (1979, 942) summarized this view: \"CAI in [undergraduate] economics do[es] not appear to be the route to nirvana [it was] once expected to be. CAI appears to generate no more (or no less) cognitive achievement but probably costs more than conventional methods.\" Nevertheless, economic educators expected microcomputers to reduce development costs and to overcome CAI's earlier limitations. By the late 1980s and early 1990s, evaluations of introductoryand intermediate-level CAI programs ranged from the damning-\"Economics software engages the student at 'the lowest level of computer use' (drill) and little intellectual development is likely at this level\" (Reclam and Sexton 1994, 368, quoting from Yoho and Walstad 1990)-to the enthusiastic-\"The microcomputer has become a major pedagogical instrument of demonstrated value\" (Smith and Smith 1989, 73). In spite of the promises and disappointments of earlier generations of CAI, I argue that the World Wide Web represents an even greater change in the cost structure of developing, distributing, and using CAI software than the movement from mainframe to microcomputer. The Web can sustain a level of experimentation, innovation, and collaboration necessary to produce significant advances in CAI. The Web fundamentally alters the cost structure of instruction and learning by changing the costs of authoring, publishing, distributing, modifying, updating, applying, and using economic course materials. However, realizing the potential benefits of Web-based instruction requires that course materials be redesigned to reflect the expanded possibilities for interactivity, adaptability, rapid distribution, and integration of text, audio, video, graphics, animation, spreadsheets, and programming within a common package. Instructional software should not remain merely supplementary to a traditional textbook as has been previously argued (e.g., Walbert 1989).","PeriodicalId":51564,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Economic Education","volume":"48 1","pages":"163-174"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"1999-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"73826736","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 1999-01-01DOI: 10.1080/00220489909596094
D. W. Findlay
The IS-LM model, as noted by Barron and Lowenstein (1996), continues to be an important analytical tool in many money and banking and intermediate macroeconomic textbooks.' The model is used, for example, to explain fluctuations in output and interest rates and to illustrate the analytics of fiscal and monetary policy.2 A number of textbooks also use the IS-LM model to examine how the output effects of given changes in the money supply and government spending (or taxes) depend on the model's parameters and on the slopes of the IS (investment-saving) and LM (liquidity preference-money supply) curves. This has become a particularly important application of the model given recent policies and economic developments.3 In these textbooks, one often finds the following "slope rules": (1) monetary policy is more effective the flatter the IS curve; (2) fiscal policy is more effective the flatter the LM curve; (3) monetary policy is more effective the steeper the LM curve; and, less frequently; (4) fiscal policy is more effective the steeper the IS curve. The use of these slope rules creates at least two problems for an instructor (and the student). First, whereas rules 1 and 2 are always correct, rules 3 and 4 are, at best, misleading and, at worst, incorrect. Second, some students invariably memorize such rules without being able to explain and to show how changes in the underlying parameters of the IS-LM model affect the slopes of the IS and LM curves and the effectiveness of fiscal and monetary policy. Explanations of shifts of the IS curve generally focus on the size of the horizontal distance between the two IS curves, but explanations of shifts of the LM curve generally focus on the size of the vertical distance between the two LM curves. In this article, I offer instructors a slightly different presentation of the IS-LM model. Specifically, a number of benefits emerge if the instructor simply focuses on what determines the size of both the horizontal and vertical distances between the IS curves and between the LM curves. This approach can be easily incorporated into any course that currently presents the IS-LM model. Students will be able to examine graphically how changes in the parameters alter the effectiveness of fiscal and
{"title":"The IS-LM Model: Is There a Connection Between Slopes and the Effectiveness of Fiscal and Monetary Policy?","authors":"D. W. Findlay","doi":"10.1080/00220489909596094","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00220489909596094","url":null,"abstract":"The IS-LM model, as noted by Barron and Lowenstein (1996), continues to be an important analytical tool in many money and banking and intermediate macroeconomic textbooks.' The model is used, for example, to explain fluctuations in output and interest rates and to illustrate the analytics of fiscal and monetary policy.2 A number of textbooks also use the IS-LM model to examine how the output effects of given changes in the money supply and government spending (or taxes) depend on the model's parameters and on the slopes of the IS (investment-saving) and LM (liquidity preference-money supply) curves. This has become a particularly important application of the model given recent policies and economic developments.3 In these textbooks, one often finds the following \"slope rules\": (1) monetary policy is more effective the flatter the IS curve; (2) fiscal policy is more effective the flatter the LM curve; (3) monetary policy is more effective the steeper the LM curve; and, less frequently; (4) fiscal policy is more effective the steeper the IS curve. The use of these slope rules creates at least two problems for an instructor (and the student). First, whereas rules 1 and 2 are always correct, rules 3 and 4 are, at best, misleading and, at worst, incorrect. Second, some students invariably memorize such rules without being able to explain and to show how changes in the underlying parameters of the IS-LM model affect the slopes of the IS and LM curves and the effectiveness of fiscal and monetary policy. Explanations of shifts of the IS curve generally focus on the size of the horizontal distance between the two IS curves, but explanations of shifts of the LM curve generally focus on the size of the vertical distance between the two LM curves. In this article, I offer instructors a slightly different presentation of the IS-LM model. Specifically, a number of benefits emerge if the instructor simply focuses on what determines the size of both the horizontal and vertical distances between the IS curves and between the LM curves. This approach can be easily incorporated into any course that currently presents the IS-LM model. Students will be able to examine graphically how changes in the parameters alter the effectiveness of fiscal and","PeriodicalId":51564,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Economic Education","volume":"84 1","pages":"373-382"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"1999-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86700906","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 1999-01-01DOI: 10.1080/00220489909595998
J. Siegfried
A 30 percent decline in the number of bachelor's degrees earned in economics over the three years from 1991-92 to 1994-95 created consternation in numerous American economics departments. Shortly thereafter, Robert Margo and I (1996) cautioned against alarm about this decline, noting that adjustments to previous postwar shocks to economics enrollments had regularly returned the number of economics degrees to approximately 2.2 percent of total degrees. In contrast, Becker (1997) argues that the decline in majors may be related to academic economists persistence in using "chalk and talk" while other disciplines have turned to more appealing teaching methods. Although the number of economics degrees continued to fall in 1995-96, the rate of decline slowed considerably, to about 3 percent that year (Siegfried 1998). In 1996-97, the trend turned upward, and the number of undergraduate economics degrees grew further in 1997-98. New results from a sample of 120 colleges and universities show a 10 percent rise in the number of undergraduate economics degrees awarded from the trough year of 1995-96 to 1997-98 (Tables 1 and 2). Although a recovery in undergraduate economics degrees undoubtedly is underway, there remains a long way to go (an additional 31 percent rise is required) to recover to 1991-92 levels. Furthermore, the overall trend masks huge differences among types of institutions. In 1997-98, undergraduate economics degrees at private economics Ph.D.-granting universities actually attained their peak level for the 1990s. Two successive years of double-digit increases easily compensated for the modest losses suffered by this group from 1991-92 to 1994-95. Economics degrees at exclusively undergraduate private colleges and universities are down 16 percent during the 1990s. The largest declines, however, are in the public sector, especially at large public universities with graduate programs
{"title":"Trends in Undergraduate Economics Degrees, 1997--98","authors":"J. Siegfried","doi":"10.1080/00220489909595998","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00220489909595998","url":null,"abstract":"A 30 percent decline in the number of bachelor's degrees earned in economics over the three years from 1991-92 to 1994-95 created consternation in numerous American economics departments. Shortly thereafter, Robert Margo and I (1996) cautioned against alarm about this decline, noting that adjustments to previous postwar shocks to economics enrollments had regularly returned the number of economics degrees to approximately 2.2 percent of total degrees. In contrast, Becker (1997) argues that the decline in majors may be related to academic economists persistence in using \"chalk and talk\" while other disciplines have turned to more appealing teaching methods. Although the number of economics degrees continued to fall in 1995-96, the rate of decline slowed considerably, to about 3 percent that year (Siegfried 1998). In 1996-97, the trend turned upward, and the number of undergraduate economics degrees grew further in 1997-98. New results from a sample of 120 colleges and universities show a 10 percent rise in the number of undergraduate economics degrees awarded from the trough year of 1995-96 to 1997-98 (Tables 1 and 2). Although a recovery in undergraduate economics degrees undoubtedly is underway, there remains a long way to go (an additional 31 percent rise is required) to recover to 1991-92 levels. Furthermore, the overall trend masks huge differences among types of institutions. In 1997-98, undergraduate economics degrees at private economics Ph.D.-granting universities actually attained their peak level for the 1990s. Two successive years of double-digit increases easily compensated for the modest losses suffered by this group from 1991-92 to 1994-95. Economics degrees at exclusively undergraduate private colleges and universities are down 16 percent during the 1990s. The largest declines, however, are in the public sector, especially at large public universities with graduate programs","PeriodicalId":51564,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Economic Education","volume":"1 1","pages":"325-328"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"1999-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84156095","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 1999-01-01DOI: 10.1080/00220489909596091
Donald G. Freeman
Grade point averages (GPAs) for college courses have been increasing at least since the 1960s (Kolevzon 1981). Grade inflation has been the subject of a considerable literature investigating the causes (McKenzie 1975; Kolevzon 1981; Dickson 1984), consequences (Millman et al. 1983; Sabot and WakemanLinn 1991; Shea 1994), and suggested remedies (Zangenehzadeh 1988). Perhaps less well documented is that grade inflation has occurred at different rates across university departments, causing average GPAs to diverge across disciplines. In particular, grades in the sciences, including economics, tend to be lower than grades in the humanities and in pre-professional fields (Shea 1994; Becker 1997). Sabot and Wakeman-Linn (1991) documented the division of colleges into highand low-grading departments as a byproduct of their work on grade inflation. They found that this division is affecting enrollment patterns, with students abandoning "harder" or low-grading disciplines like math or science in favor of "softer" or high-grading disciplines. Thus, grade divergence may be exacerbating the shortage of technically qualified graduates by skewing enrollment away from science and engineering. Similarly, the recent decline in economics majors may reflect student aversion to tougher grading practices in economics relative to other disciplines (Becker 1997). I offer an economic explanation for grade divergence. My hypothesis is that, given equal money prices per credit hour across disciplines, departments manage their enrollments by "pricing" their courses with grading standards commensurate with the market benefits of their courses, as measured by expected incomes.I analyzed grade divergence using a cross-section of 59 fields of study from a recently published survey of college graduates by the National Center for Education Statistics, A Descriptive Summary of 1992-93 Bachelor's Degree Recipients: 1 year later (NCES 1996). The survey tracks 1992-93 college graduates to determine outcomes from postsecondary education, including returns to investment in education. Using this sample, I found evidence consistent with the economic explanation of grade divergence: Graduates from high-grading fields of study have lower earnings than graduates from low-grad-
至少从20世纪60年代开始，大学课程的平均绩点(gpa)一直在增长(Kolevzon 1981)。成绩膨胀一直是研究其原因的大量文献的主题(McKenzie 1975;Kolevzon 1981;Dickson 1984)，后果(Millman et al. 1983;Sabot and wakemanlin, 1991;Shea 1994)，并提出了补救措施(Zangenehzadeh 1988)。也许文献记载较少的是，大学各院系的分数膨胀率不同，导致各学科的平均绩点存在差异。特别是，包括经济学在内的科学成绩往往低于人文学科和专业预科领域的成绩(Shea 1994;贝克尔1997)。Sabot和Wakeman-Linn(1991)记录了将大学划分为高分和低分系的现象，这是他们研究分数膨胀的副产品。他们发现，这种分化正在影响招生模式，学生们放弃了数学或科学等“较难”或评分较低的学科，转而选择了“较软”或评分较高的学科。因此，年级差异可能会使理工科毕业生的入学人数减少，从而加剧技术合格毕业生的短缺。同样，最近经济学专业的学生人数下降可能反映了学生对经济学相对于其他学科更严格的评分做法的厌恶(Becker 1997)。我为等级差异提供了一个经济学解释。我的假设是，在各学科每学时的货币价格相同的情况下，院系管理招生的方式是，用与课程的市场效益相称的评分标准(以预期收入衡量)来“定价”课程。我从国家教育统计中心最近发表的一项对大学毕业生的调查中，使用59个研究领域的横截面来分析年级差异，该调查是1992-93年学士学位获得者的描述性总结:一年后(NCES 1996)。这项调查追踪了1992年至1993年的大学毕业生，以确定高等教育的成果，包括教育投资的回报。通过这个样本，我发现了与等级差异的经济学解释相一致的证据:高等级专业的毕业生收入低于低等级专业的毕业生
{"title":"Grade Divergence as a Market Outcome","authors":"Donald G. Freeman","doi":"10.1080/00220489909596091","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00220489909596091","url":null,"abstract":"Grade point averages (GPAs) for college courses have been increasing at least since the 1960s (Kolevzon 1981). Grade inflation has been the subject of a considerable literature investigating the causes (McKenzie 1975; Kolevzon 1981; Dickson 1984), consequences (Millman et al. 1983; Sabot and WakemanLinn 1991; Shea 1994), and suggested remedies (Zangenehzadeh 1988). Perhaps less well documented is that grade inflation has occurred at different rates across university departments, causing average GPAs to diverge across disciplines. In particular, grades in the sciences, including economics, tend to be lower than grades in the humanities and in pre-professional fields (Shea 1994; Becker 1997). Sabot and Wakeman-Linn (1991) documented the division of colleges into highand low-grading departments as a byproduct of their work on grade inflation. They found that this division is affecting enrollment patterns, with students abandoning \"harder\" or low-grading disciplines like math or science in favor of \"softer\" or high-grading disciplines. Thus, grade divergence may be exacerbating the shortage of technically qualified graduates by skewing enrollment away from science and engineering. Similarly, the recent decline in economics majors may reflect student aversion to tougher grading practices in economics relative to other disciplines (Becker 1997). I offer an economic explanation for grade divergence. My hypothesis is that, given equal money prices per credit hour across disciplines, departments manage their enrollments by \"pricing\" their courses with grading standards commensurate with the market benefits of their courses, as measured by expected incomes.I analyzed grade divergence using a cross-section of 59 fields of study from a recently published survey of college graduates by the National Center for Education Statistics, A Descriptive Summary of 1992-93 Bachelor's Degree Recipients: 1 year later (NCES 1996). The survey tracks 1992-93 college graduates to determine outcomes from postsecondary education, including returns to investment in education. Using this sample, I found evidence consistent with the economic explanation of grade divergence: Graduates from high-grading fields of study have lower earnings than graduates from low-grad-","PeriodicalId":51564,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Economic Education","volume":"60 1","pages":"344-351"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"1999-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"79544717","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 1999-01-01DOI: 10.1080/00220489909595946
Sam Allgood, W. Walstad
Teacher education in economics is essential if high school students are to have an opportunity to learn economics. Teachers need to develop a solid understanding of economics through course work because students cannot be expected to learn what teachers do not know. In fact, research in economic education at the high school level has found that the number of economics courses taken by teachers has a positive and consistently significant effect on the economic learning of students (Becker, Greene, and Rosen 1990; Bosshardt and Watts 1990). For most teachers, however, the amount of course work in economics is limited. Studies of teacher education programs at colleges and universities show that most prospective social studies teachers (the ones most likely to teach economics in the schools) take about four college credit hours of course work in economics, and only 11 states have specific requirements for course work in economics for teacher certification (Walstad 1992). Although some teachers can correct deficiencies in their economic education by taking in-service courses and workshops, these programs are of short duration and often limit content coverage to the level of a one-semester principles course. Taking just one or two courses in economics is inadequate preparation in the view of a distinguished national committee of economists and educators that
如果高中生有机会学习经济学，经济学教师教育是必不可少的。教师需要通过课程作业培养对经济学的扎实理解，因为不能指望学生学习教师不知道的东西。事实上，对高中经济教育的研究发现，教师所修经济学课程的数量对学生的经济学习具有积极且持续的显著影响(Becker, Greene, and Rosen 1990;Bosshardt and Watts 1990)。然而，对大多数教师来说，经济学课程的工作量是有限的。对学院和大学教师教育项目的研究表明，大多数未来的社会研究教师(最有可能在学校教授经济学的人)大约需要四个大学学分的经济学课程，只有11个州对教师资格认证的经济学课程有具体要求(Walstad 1992)。尽管一些教师可以通过参加在职课程和研讨会来纠正他们在经济教育方面的不足，但这些课程的持续时间很短，而且通常将内容覆盖范围限制在一个学期的原理课程的水平上。一个由杰出的经济学家和教育家组成的全国委员会认为，只上一两门经济学课程是不够的
{"title":"The Longitudinal Effects of Economic Education on Teachers and Their Students","authors":"Sam Allgood, W. Walstad","doi":"10.1080/00220489909595946","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00220489909595946","url":null,"abstract":"Teacher education in economics is essential if high school students are to have an opportunity to learn economics. Teachers need to develop a solid understanding of economics through course work because students cannot be expected to learn what teachers do not know. In fact, research in economic education at the high school level has found that the number of economics courses taken by teachers has a positive and consistently significant effect on the economic learning of students (Becker, Greene, and Rosen 1990; Bosshardt and Watts 1990). For most teachers, however, the amount of course work in economics is limited. Studies of teacher education programs at colleges and universities show that most prospective social studies teachers (the ones most likely to teach economics in the schools) take about four college credit hours of course work in economics, and only 11 states have specific requirements for course work in economics for teacher certification (Walstad 1992). Although some teachers can correct deficiencies in their economic education by taking in-service courses and workshops, these programs are of short duration and often limit content coverage to the level of a one-semester principles course. Taking just one or two courses in economics is inadequate preparation in the view of a distinguished national committee of economists and educators that","PeriodicalId":51564,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Economic Education","volume":"1 1","pages":"99-111"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"1999-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"85968291","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 1999-01-01DOI: 10.1080/00220489909595947
Tom Oberhofer
Active learning has been widely recognized as central in a student's mastery of a subject (Angelo and Cross 1993; Pascarella and Terenzini 1991). One type of active learning is role playing, which has been used effectively in a variety of fields. For example, Bhawuk (1990) discusses it as a technique to foster cross-cultural awareness; Smokowski (1992) describes its use in psychodrama; and McCaughey (1991) describes its role in exploring acute psychological distress. Role playing is also widely used in studying economics and evaluating social policy options (Williams 1992; Hester 1991; and King and LaRoe 1991). It has also been part of a number of experiments reported in this journal (Leuthold 1993; DeYoung 1993; Bell 1993; Fels 1993). Most closely related to the topic of this article is the example used by Brooks (1985) in a history of psychology course. In each case, role playing is a part of the course experience for students, usually intertwined with other, more traditional academic experiences. In no case was it the exclusive technique used in the delivery of course material. In this article, I describe a history of economic thought (HET) course built entirely on a role-playing model. This course places unusual demands on students and faculty but has led to a remarkable student engagement with the subject matter.
主动学习被广泛认为是学生掌握一门学科的核心(Angelo and Cross 1993;Pascarella and Terenzini 1991)。主动学习的一种类型是角色扮演，它在许多领域都得到了有效的应用。例如，Bhawuk(1990)将其视为一种培养跨文化意识的技术;Smokowski(1992)描述了它在心理剧中的应用;McCaughey(1991)描述了它在探索急性心理困扰中的作用。角色扮演也被广泛应用于经济学研究和评估社会政策选择(Williams 1992;海丝特1991;King和LaRoe 1991)。它也是本杂志报道的一些实验的一部分(Leuthold 1993;DeYoung 1993;贝尔1993;费尔斯1993年)。与本文主题最密切相关的是布鲁克斯(1985)在心理学历史课程中使用的例子。在每种情况下，角色扮演都是学生课程体验的一部分，通常与其他更传统的学术体验交织在一起。在任何情况下，这都不是课程材料交付中使用的唯一技术。在这篇文章中，我描述了一个完全建立在角色扮演模型上的经济思想史(HET)课程。这门课程对学生和教师提出了不同寻常的要求，但却导致了学生对这门课程的显著参与。
{"title":"Role Playing in the History of Economic Thought","authors":"Tom Oberhofer","doi":"10.1080/00220489909595947","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00220489909595947","url":null,"abstract":"Active learning has been widely recognized as central in a student's mastery of a subject (Angelo and Cross 1993; Pascarella and Terenzini 1991). One type of active learning is role playing, which has been used effectively in a variety of fields. For example, Bhawuk (1990) discusses it as a technique to foster cross-cultural awareness; Smokowski (1992) describes its use in psychodrama; and McCaughey (1991) describes its role in exploring acute psychological distress. Role playing is also widely used in studying economics and evaluating social policy options (Williams 1992; Hester 1991; and King and LaRoe 1991). It has also been part of a number of experiments reported in this journal (Leuthold 1993; DeYoung 1993; Bell 1993; Fels 1993). Most closely related to the topic of this article is the example used by Brooks (1985) in a history of psychology course. In each case, role playing is a part of the course experience for students, usually intertwined with other, more traditional academic experiences. In no case was it the exclusive technique used in the delivery of course material. In this article, I describe a history of economic thought (HET) course built entirely on a role-playing model. This course places unusual demands on students and faculty but has led to a remarkable student engagement with the subject matter.","PeriodicalId":51564,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Economic Education","volume":"51 1","pages":"112-118"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"1999-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"88277572","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 1999-01-01DOI: 10.1080/00220489909595952
A. Katz
The difficulties of teaching introductory principles of comparative statics equilibrium analysis are well known, and failures to grasp their essentials often leave beginning students with a weak foundation for studies of other topics in economics. In this article, I describe a computer-aided supplement to the introductory microeconomics course that enhances students' understanding with simulation-based tools for reviewing what they have learned from lectures and conventional textbooks about comparing market equilibria. The heart of the method is an exercise that asks students to predict the consequences of supply and demand shifts by constructing statements of the form "If X increases (or decreases), then Y increases (or decreases)" where the X and Y variables are chosen from a menu including variables such as income, population, demand, supply, equilibrium price, equilibrium quantity, and so forth. The if-then statements are an alternative to the usual textbook way of describing equilibrium market changes, forcing students to translate what they have learned into a somewhat different format from the more traditional approaches. Although most students find the translations difficult, they typically show a dogged persistence in getting them right and, in the process, learn from their mistakes. The computer-based aids are essential to the way in which students have been doing the exercise in my classes-as an integral part of instructional software that I have been developing known as the Smithtown Collection. The collection derives from a laboratory prototype developed by cognitive psychologists (Shute, Glaser, and Raghavan 1989; Shute and Glaser 1990a, 1990b) who were interested in comparing computer-based learning in economics with other disciplines.' The exercise, adapted from the prototype, owes much to what psychologists have learned from studies of skill development, especially the importance of repetitive practice. Smithtown and my adaptations of it for classroom use have been described elsewhere (Katz and Ochs 1993; Katz 1992; Raghavan and Katz 1989), so I shall outline only those features that are directly relevant to understanding
教授比较静力学均衡分析入门原理的困难是众所周知的，如果不能掌握基本原理，往往会使初学的学生在学习其他经济学主题时基础薄弱。在这篇文章中，我描述了一个计算机辅助的微观经济学入门课程的补充，通过基于模拟的工具来提高学生的理解，以回顾他们从讲座和传统教科书中学到的关于比较市场均衡的知识。该方法的核心是一项练习，要求学生通过构建“如果X增加(或减少)，那么Y增加(或减少)”的形式的陈述来预测供给和需求变化的后果，其中X和Y变量是从包括收入，人口，需求，供给，均衡价格，均衡数量等变量的菜单中选择的。if-then语句是描述均衡市场变化的常用教科书方式的另一种选择，它迫使学生将所学知识转化为与更传统的方法不同的格式。尽管大多数学生发现翻译很难，但他们通常会表现出顽强的毅力，以使他们正确，并在这个过程中，从错误中吸取教训。基于计算机的辅助工具对于学生们在我的课堂上做练习的方式是必不可少的——作为教学软件的一个组成部分，我一直在开发被称为史密斯敦集合。该系列源自认知心理学家开发的实验室原型(Shute, Glaser, and Raghavan 1989;Shute和Glaser(1990年a, 1990年b)，他们对比较经济学和其他学科的计算机学习感兴趣。这个根据原型改编的练习，很大程度上归功于心理学家从技能发展研究中学到的东西，尤其是重复练习的重要性。史密斯镇和我对它的课堂应用的改编已经在其他地方描述过(Katz和Ochs 1993;Katz 1992;Raghavan和Katz 1989)，所以我将只概述那些与理解直接相关的特征
{"title":"A Computer-Aided Exercise for Checking Novices' Understanding of Market Equilibrium Changes","authors":"A. Katz","doi":"10.1080/00220489909595952","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00220489909595952","url":null,"abstract":"The difficulties of teaching introductory principles of comparative statics equilibrium analysis are well known, and failures to grasp their essentials often leave beginning students with a weak foundation for studies of other topics in economics. In this article, I describe a computer-aided supplement to the introductory microeconomics course that enhances students' understanding with simulation-based tools for reviewing what they have learned from lectures and conventional textbooks about comparing market equilibria. The heart of the method is an exercise that asks students to predict the consequences of supply and demand shifts by constructing statements of the form \"If X increases (or decreases), then Y increases (or decreases)\" where the X and Y variables are chosen from a menu including variables such as income, population, demand, supply, equilibrium price, equilibrium quantity, and so forth. The if-then statements are an alternative to the usual textbook way of describing equilibrium market changes, forcing students to translate what they have learned into a somewhat different format from the more traditional approaches. Although most students find the translations difficult, they typically show a dogged persistence in getting them right and, in the process, learn from their mistakes. The computer-based aids are essential to the way in which students have been doing the exercise in my classes-as an integral part of instructional software that I have been developing known as the Smithtown Collection. The collection derives from a laboratory prototype developed by cognitive psychologists (Shute, Glaser, and Raghavan 1989; Shute and Glaser 1990a, 1990b) who were interested in comparing computer-based learning in economics with other disciplines.' The exercise, adapted from the prototype, owes much to what psychologists have learned from studies of skill development, especially the importance of repetitive practice. Smithtown and my adaptations of it for classroom use have been described elsewhere (Katz and Ochs 1993; Katz 1992; Raghavan and Katz 1989), so I shall outline only those features that are directly relevant to understanding","PeriodicalId":51564,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Economic Education","volume":"105 1","pages":"148-162"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"1999-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"77092154","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 1999-01-01DOI: 10.1080/00220489909595937
Donald W. Swanton
Theories of the interest rate begin with either the supply and demand of loanable funds or the stock of investment opportunities and their rates of return. Fisher's (1930) two-period model has an undifferentiated stock of investment opportunity. Teaching the standard Fisher theory of interest to undergraduates is generally difficult and not very successful. The graphical version with its double tangency solution to the production-consumption problem is only convincing to undergraduate economics or finance majors with unusual mathematical sophistication. Moreover that treatment, found in Hirschleifer (1970) and in Fama and Miller (1972) as well as in later treatments like Howe and Gronewoller (1990), has no capital goods and no explicit capital market. The model I propose requires no graphs and puts students in the position of being present at the auction for credit to see how simple maximizing behavior determines the rate of interest and how outside factors raise and lower it.
{"title":"Teaching Fisher's Theory of Interest in a Simple Auction Setting","authors":"Donald W. Swanton","doi":"10.1080/00220489909595937","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00220489909595937","url":null,"abstract":"Theories of the interest rate begin with either the supply and demand of loanable funds or the stock of investment opportunities and their rates of return. Fisher's (1930) two-period model has an undifferentiated stock of investment opportunity. Teaching the standard Fisher theory of interest to undergraduates is generally difficult and not very successful. The graphical version with its double tangency solution to the production-consumption problem is only convincing to undergraduate economics or finance majors with unusual mathematical sophistication. Moreover that treatment, found in Hirschleifer (1970) and in Fama and Miller (1972) as well as in later treatments like Howe and Gronewoller (1990), has no capital goods and no explicit capital market. The model I propose requires no graphs and puts students in the position of being present at the auction for credit to see how simple maximizing behavior determines the rate of interest and how outside factors raise and lower it.","PeriodicalId":51564,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Economic Education","volume":"35 1","pages":"43-51"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"1999-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"87775254","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 1999-01-01DOI: 10.1080/00220489909596099
W. Becker
Much has been written in the higher education administration literature about measuring the research, teaching, and service outcomes of faculty members (Braskamp and Ory 1994; Dilts, Haber, and Bialik 1994; Lewis 1996; Centra 1993). How each of many multiple outcomes enters salary determination equations is also well studied, with even similar departments of economics apparently adopting different fixed-weight formulae for assigning a salary index and/or changes to a salary index for multiple research, teaching, and service outcomes (Ragan, Warren and Bratsberg 1999).1 But the methods for allocating salary raises to individuals on the basis of an aggregate merit score, when faced with the constraint of a fixed amount of money for raises, receive little attention. For example, the authors of the four works on higher education administration previously mentioned addressed the measurement of faculty output, the weighting of output, and the assigning of merit points, but they did not address the algebra for converting merit points to salary raises given a fixed-budget constraint.2 A single formula for merit-raise salary schemes based on either a fixed cash amount, a percentage of base salary, or any combination of the two is provided here. What is unique about this formula is that it makes explicit how merit scores, together with prior salaries and the pot of money available for raises, determine individual salaries. There are no arbitrary thresholds or untraceable relationships between merit scores and the pot of money available for merit raises.
关于衡量教师的研究、教学和服务成果，高等教育管理文献中已经写了很多(Braskamp和Ory, 1994;Dilts, Haber, and Bialik 1994;刘易斯1996年;中心1993)。许多多个结果中的每一个如何进入工资决定方程也得到了很好的研究，即使是类似的经济学系，显然也采用不同的固定权重公式来分配工资指数和/或对多个研究，教学和服务结果的工资指数进行更改(Ragan, Warren和Bratsberg 1999)但是，当面临加薪金额固定的限制时，基于综合绩效分数向个人分配加薪的方法却很少受到关注。例如，前面提到的关于高等教育管理的四部著作的作者讨论了教师产出的测量、产出的加权和绩效分的分配，但他们没有解决在固定预算约束下将绩效分转换为加薪的代数问题这里提供了一个基于固定现金数额、基本工资的百分比或两者的任何组合的绩效加薪方案的单一公式。这个公式的独特之处在于，它明确说明了绩效分数、之前的工资和可用于加薪的资金是如何决定个人工资的。在绩效分数和可用于加薪的资金之间，没有武断的门槛，也没有不可追溯的关系。
{"title":"Turning Merit Scores into Salaries","authors":"W. Becker","doi":"10.1080/00220489909596099","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00220489909596099","url":null,"abstract":"Much has been written in the higher education administration literature about measuring the research, teaching, and service outcomes of faculty members (Braskamp and Ory 1994; Dilts, Haber, and Bialik 1994; Lewis 1996; Centra 1993). How each of many multiple outcomes enters salary determination equations is also well studied, with even similar departments of economics apparently adopting different fixed-weight formulae for assigning a salary index and/or changes to a salary index for multiple research, teaching, and service outcomes (Ragan, Warren and Bratsberg 1999).1 But the methods for allocating salary raises to individuals on the basis of an aggregate merit score, when faced with the constraint of a fixed amount of money for raises, receive little attention. For example, the authors of the four works on higher education administration previously mentioned addressed the measurement of faculty output, the weighting of output, and the assigning of merit points, but they did not address the algebra for converting merit points to salary raises given a fixed-budget constraint.2 A single formula for merit-raise salary schemes based on either a fixed cash amount, a percentage of base salary, or any combination of the two is provided here. What is unique about this formula is that it makes explicit how merit scores, together with prior salaries and the pot of money available for raises, determine individual salaries. There are no arbitrary thresholds or untraceable relationships between merit scores and the pot of money available for merit raises.","PeriodicalId":51564,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Economic Education","volume":"11 1","pages":"420-426"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"1999-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"79200007","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 1999-01-01DOI: 10.1080/00220489909595949
D. Alden
Role play is a rarely used teaching technique in universities (Newble and Cannon 1995) and for teaching economics, in particular. My aim is to describe how scripted role play can be used to teach economics. I present a brief justification for using role play as a teaching technique for economics and instructions for running a scripted role play. I provide part of a scripted role play that I designed for use in an environmental economics course to illustrate how the role-play process works.
角色扮演在大学中是一种很少使用的教学技巧(Newble and Cannon 1995)，尤其是在经济学教学中。我的目的是描述如何将脚本化的角色扮演用于经济学教学。我将简要说明使用角色扮演作为经济学教学技巧的理由，以及运行脚本角色扮演的说明。我提供了我为环境经济学课程设计的脚本角色扮演的一部分，以说明角色扮演过程是如何工作的。
{"title":"Experience with Scripted Role Play in Environmental Economics","authors":"D. Alden","doi":"10.1080/00220489909595949","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00220489909595949","url":null,"abstract":"Role play is a rarely used teaching technique in universities (Newble and Cannon 1995) and for teaching economics, in particular. My aim is to describe how scripted role play can be used to teach economics. I present a brief justification for using role play as a teaching technique for economics and instructions for running a scripted role play. I provide part of a scripted role play that I designed for use in an environmental economics course to illustrate how the role-play process works.","PeriodicalId":51564,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Economic Education","volume":"31 1","pages":"127-132"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"1999-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"74132267","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：