Course No. & Title
Queensborough Community College/CUNY
Department of Social Sciences
Individual Course Assessment Report
Date Submitted: 5/14/2014
Course No./Title: Econ 101 / Introduction to Macroeconomics
Course Description: A study of the determination of national output, income, unemployment,
and prices, the impact of government spending, taxation, and monetary policy; the banking
system; economic growth, international trade.
Pathways Flexible Core Student Learning Outcome Assessed:
-Evaluate evidence and arguments critically or analytically.
More specifically:
Students were given a short reading assignment in which the results of a couple of prominent
recent studies on the economic implications of raising the minimum wage were presented.
Students were then asked 16 multiple choice questions that ranged in difficulty from the merely
descriptive to those that required significant critical evaluation, identifying both strengths and
weaknesses of the studies whose results were summarized in the short reading assignment.
Participants
No. Sections Assessed: 3 sections in total / 2 writing-intensive sections, 1 lecture
No. Students Assessed: 68
Course Assessment Method: A reading was assigned (see Appendix 1), after which students
were given a 16 question multiple choice quiz (see appendix 2) based on the reading, and scores
were derived consistent with a critical reading rubric (see appendix 3).
1
Course No. & Title
ECON 101-Macroeconomics-Course Assessment Results:
Rating Criteria
Emerging
Weak
Development
Strong
Development
2 correct
3 correct
0-1 correct
Constructing
Meaning
Mastery
Average
4 correct
% correct
x
77.75
Questions 1-4
Contextualizing
x
Questions 5-8
Using Other
Perspectives
and Positions
53.75
x
41.75
Questions 9-12
Evaluating
Evidence and
Drawing
Conclusions
x
46.25
Questions 13-16
Total
x
54.88
As can be seen in the table above, though the students evidenced a strong degree of development
in constructing meaning, they floundered thereafter in areas of contextualizing and evaluating
evidence. And they tested particularly poorly in the area of using other perspectives and
positions.
This is not entirely surprising, as those latter skills are more demanding of students, but the
general performance was quite poor. One would hope that students could do more than get
approximately half the questions posed to them correct. And so, the question is, “What is to be
done?”
2
Course No. & Title
Action Plan:
Though an analysis of such an exercise is inevitably fraught with speculation, I think it is safe to
conjecture a few things.
-One, teacher administration may have been sub-optimal.
The assessment reading assignment was distributed a week prior to the exercise with a brief
discussion of the meaning and purpose of assessment. Students were told that they could bring
the reading with them during the following week’s exercise. Students were also given an
incentive to perform, being promised a “bump up” 1/3 of a grade for the semester if they
answered at least three-fourths of the questions correctly.
During the next round of assessment, I would do all as above, except I would not allow students
to bring the reading with them to the exercise. Very few students seemed to have applied
themselves in advance and many students seemed to be as distracted by the copy beside them as
aided by it.
-Two, teacher questions will be optimized.
Though I believe I did a fair job of finding a decent reading assignment and of fashioning
questions to fit the categories in question, I’m sure that some questions lacked clarity, or perhaps
were too challenging given the level of the class and the expectations of the assessment exercise.
During the next round of assessment, I would endeavor to hone questions further, improving
clarity and focus, and avoiding ambiguities wherever they may occur.
-Three, strict enforcement of assessment exercise protocols will be followed.
During this round, in an effort to increase participation, I was lax in my approach to the exercise,
allowing ill-prepared, late-arriving students to participate.
When inspecting answer forms individually, I realize that a disproportion of poor, badly or
incompletely filled-out forms came from this group.
In the next round, I will administer the exercise with precision to those who conform strictly to
the requirements of the exercise.
3
Course No. & Title
Appendix : 1 – Assigned Reading
Summary & Review from Employment Policies Institute:
A comprehensive review of two decades of economic research on the minimum wage by
economists David Neumark (University of California—Irvine) and William Wascher
(Federal Reserve Board) concludes that increases in the minimum wage reduce job
opportunities for the least-skilled workers.
As a consequence of this inconvenient truth, advocates of a higher minimum wage have
increasingly leaned on alternate arguments to make the case for additional employer mandates.
Increases in the minimum wage have been sold as a stimulus or a “shot in the arm” for both
state economies and the U.S. economy as a whole.
These claims have rhetorical appeal, especially in a troubled economic environment where
policymakers are desperate for a quick fix. The problem for those taking that line of
argument is that no hard evidence exists to confirm whether or not a higher minimum
wage really helps the economy.
Existing research tends to take a bird’s-eye view of business growth. Comparing industryspecific employment growth in states with a lower federal minimum against those states with
a higher statutory wage, these studies are problematic and unreliable because they don’t
control for state-specific demographic or economic trends.
In this new study, Dr. Joseph J. Sabia (U.S. Military Academy at West Point) uses data from the
Census Bureau and the Bureau of Economic Analysis to measure the Gross Domestic Product
(GDP) and employment response associated with an increase in the minimum wage. Sabia
shows that increases in the minimum wage can actually have a negative effect on GDP—
specifically, GDP generated by lower-skilled industries.
Sabia first examines whether increases in State and Federal minimum wages between 1997 and
2007 have decreased low-skilled employment (defined here as the employment-to-population
ratio for 16-to-19 year-olds). Controlling for economic performance and other unmeasured state
employment trends, Sabia finds that each 10 percent increase in a state’s minimum wage
decreased employment for the group by 3.6 percent. And because these employment losses were
not accompanied by an increase in school enrollment, they suggest that job loss caused by wage
hikes is not offset by long-term productivity gains.
After determining that increases in states minimum wages did decrease employment, Sabia
looks at data on economic growth to determine whether job loss associated with a higher
minimum wage has had a negative impact on GDP; he focuses specifically on GDP generated
by those industries affected most by minimum wage increases. This includes low-skilled
industries like wholesale trade, manufacturing of durables, warehousing and storage, rental and
leasing services, and administrative and waste services. Sabia finds that each 10 percent
increase in the minimum wage is associated with a two to four percent decline in state GDP
generated by these lower-skilled industries.
4
Course No. & Title
Broadening the analysis to examine national GDP, Sabia finds that increases in the minimum
wage between 1997 and 2007 had a small, insignificant negative effect on the national
economy overall. This means mandated wage increases are far from the economic “shot in the
arm” advocates claim them to be.
This research is relevant for two reasons. Each year, states across the country increase their
minimum wages, or consider legislation to do so. Sabia’s findings suggest that these policies are
unwise both in good and bad economic times, because of the negative employment
consequences for states’ low-skilled workforce and the negative economic consequences for
states’ low-skilled industries.
Additionally, the research suggests that exuberant claims about the positive economic benefit of
a minimum wage increase are not based on economic reality. Far from stimulating an economy,
an increase in the minimum wage has no discernible impact on overall GDP and could actually
hinder growth in certain low-wage sectors.
5
Course No. & Title
Appendix: 2 - 16 Multiple Choice Questions on Minimum Wage Reading
1) When the term "comprehensive review" is used in the article, it most closely means:
A) one study was analyzed
B) several studies were analyzed
C) many studies were analyzed
D) none of the above
2) The minimum wage is:
A) the lowest wage per-hour a teenager can be paid
B) the lowest wage per-hour a union member can be paid
C) the lowest wage per-hour that any worker can be paid
D) none of the above
3) In the article "policymakers" refers to:
A) politicians and government institutions
B) citizens and voters
C) judges and juries
D) all of the above
4) GDP stands for:
A) Gross Domestic Product
B) Gross National Product
C) both A. and B.
D) General Domestic Productivity
5) According to the article, the truth is "inconvenient" because evidence supports the notion that
setting the minimum wage higher:
A) increases the well-being of low-skilled workers
B) decreases the well-being of low-skilled workers
C) adds to the GDP of the nation
D) substantially reduces the GDP of the nation
6) Demography is the statistical study of:
A) populations and their characteristics
B) economies and their growth
C) incomes and their distributions
D) none of the above
7) The aim of the "minimum wage" is often portrayed as:
A) helping all working classes
B) helping the working poor
C) helping the unemployed
D) expanding individual freedom
6
Course No. & Title
8) Historically, most Americans have earned wages:
A) below the minimum wage
B) above the minimum wage
C) equal to the minimum wage
D) determined by the government
9) The Sabia study, has:
A) settled all issues regarding the minimum wage
B) has investigated a specific ten year period
C) has included all the low-skilled workers in its definition
D) has contradicted standard economic expectation
10) The Sabia study:
A) corrected for all demographic biases
B) though thorough, is not definitive
C) did not use state-specific data
D) did not use industry-specific data
11) The Sabia study may suffer from:
A) generalizing too much from a single sample
B) confusing correlation with causation
C) being mistrusted by groups whose findings it contradicts
D) all of the above
12) The Employment Policy Institute:
A) is completely unbiased like all other think tanks
B) may have chosen studies whose results strengthen its arguments
C) may or may not have funded the research cited
D) all of the above
13) Assuming the Sabia findings cited are correct, then raising the minimum wage:
A) benefits no one
B) benefits the targeted group at no cost
C) both benefits and costs the targeted group
D) none of the above
14) Assuming the Sabia findings cited are correct, then raising the minimum wage:
A) puts all low-skilled workers out of work
B) puts all workers' jobs at risk
C) is not an effective economic stimulus
D) none of the above
15) Assuming the Sabia findings are correct, then:
A) states will never again raise the minimum wage
B) states will abolish existing minimum wages
C) states will reinvest in training and educating their workers
D) states might do better to train and educate their workers
7
Course No. & Title
16) Assuming the Sabia findings cited are correct, we can assume that politicians proposing an
increased minimum wage are:
A) liars
B) idiots
C) both A. and B.
D) none of the above
Appendix: 3 – Critical Reading Scoring Rubric
Rating Criteria
Emerging
0-1
Weak Development
2
Constructing
Meaning
Derives meaning
from texts in a
confused or
inaccurate way
Derives meaning
from texts in a limited
fashion; makes sense
of written words but
no further analysis
Contextualizing
Reads written
language in isolation
or connects it to
irrelevant or
inaccurately
understood contexts
Using Other
Perspectives and
Positions
Takes text at face
value, showing
minimal awareness of
perspectives and
assumptions
contained within the
text
Conclusions are
inconsistently tied to
some of the
information; related
outcomes
(consequences and
implications) are
oversimplified
Makes connections in
a limited fashion
between written
language and
contexts, such as
prior experience,
historical setting,
physical setting,
knowledge of the
discipline, etc.
Attempts to explore
perspectives and
assumptions
contained within the
text
Evaluating
Evidence and
Drawing
Conclusions
Draws conclusions
that are logically tied
to information
(because information
is chosen to fit the
desired conclusion);
some related
outcomes
(consequences and
implications) are
identified clearly
8
Strong
Development
3
Mastery
4
Usually derives
accurate meaning
from texts by making
sense of written
words and analyzing
reading with respect
to prior knowledge,
research, and
experience
Usually connects
written language with
contexts, such as
prior experience,
historical setting,
physical setting,
knowledge of the
discipline, etc.
Consistently derives
accurate meaning
from texts by making
sense of written
words and analyzing
reading with respect
to prior knowledge,
research, and
experience
Consistently connects
written language with
contexts, such as prior
experience,
historical setting,
physical setting,
knowledge of the
discipline, etc.
Usually explores
perspectives and
assumptions
contained within the
text
Consistently explores
perspectives and
assumptions
contained within the
text
Draws conclusions
that are logically tied
to a range of
information (because
information is chosen
to fit the desired
conclusion); related
outcomes
(consequences and
implications) are
identified clearly
Draws conclusions
and related outcomes
(consequences and
implications) that are
logical and reflect
student’s informed
evaluation and ability
to place evidence
and perspective
discussed in priority
order