Transforming Course Design in Principles of Microeconomics
A collaborative project by:
Anne Bresnock
Jeff Gold
Aaron Hegde
Jessica Howell
Jennifer Imazeki
Janice Peterson
Frederica Shockley
Lisa Takeyama
Cal Poly Pomona
CSU Office of the Chancellor
CSU Bakersfield
CSU Sacramento
San Diego State
CSU Fresno
CSU Chico
San Francisco State
August, 2009
Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................... 1
I.
Why Students Don’t Succeed ............................................................................................. 2
i.
Student Performance Data ...................................................................................... 2
ii. Student Challenges ................................................................................................. 2
iii. Student Personas.................................................................................................... 4
II. Improving Student Learning................................................................................................ 5
i.
Principles of Microeconomics Course Structures in the CSU ................................... 6
ii. Redesign Pedagogy with Interactive Learning ......................................................... 6
ii.a. Student Learning Assistants ..................................................................... 6
ii.b. In-Class Exercises and Quizzes ............................................................... 8
ii.c. Classroom Games and Experiments ........................................................10
ii.d. Software for Online Homework, Experiments, Simulations, and Quizzes .10
ii.e. Multimedia ...............................................................................................12
ii.f.
Personal Response Systems (Clickers) ...................................................13
ii.g. Labs.........................................................................................................15
ii.h. Universal Design and Accessibility Issues ...............................................15
III. Individual Redesign Plan Summaries ................................................................................17
IV. Cost Savings .....................................................................................................................18
V. Appendices .......................................................................................................................19
i.
Appendix 1: Student Challenges in Principles of Microeconomics ..........................19
ii. Appendix 2: Student Personas ...............................................................................20
iii. Appendix 3: Course Structures across CSU Campuses (2009) ..............................22
iv. Appendix 4: Comparison of Aplia and MyEconLab .................................................24
v. Appendix 5: Cost & Brands of Clickers ...................................................................27
vi. Appendix 6: Additional Information about Accessibility ...........................................28
vii. Appendix 7: Individual Course Redesign Plans ......................................................29
viii. Appendix 7: Individual Course Redesign Plans ........ Error! Bookmark not defined.

Anne Bresnock, Cal Poly Pomona ...........................................................29

Aaron Hegde, CSU Bakersfield ................................................................30

Jessica Howell, CSU Sacramento............................................................32

Jennifer Imazeki, San Diego State University ..........................................33

Janice Peterson, CSU Fresno..................................................................36

Frederica Shockley, CSU Chico ...............................................................37

Lisa Takeyama, San Francisco State University ......................................43
VI. References ........................................................................................................................44
INTRODUCTION
As part of the continuing CSU systemwide Transforming Course Design (TCD) initiative, in fall
2008, campus provosts identified principles of microeconomics as a strong candidate for course
redesign because it was deemed to be a large enrollment course with high rates of D, F, and W
grades across the CSU system. The goal of the redesign project was to encourage a group of
economics faculty from a variety of CSU campuses to analyze student challenges, explore
course structures, and identify and evaluate strategies for improving student learning outcomes
and increasing cost efficiencies when possible.
In winter 2009, a Design Team consisting of five faculty members and a Review Team with two
faculty members representing seven CSU campuses began conducting an analysis of student
outcomes and instructional models typically seen in CSU principles of microeconomics courses.
The team then selected and assessed tools and resources that augment traditional classroombased instruction with increased opportunities to master key microeconomics concepts. Over
the course of six months, the team engaged in individual research, collaboration in a web-based
project workspace, weekly phone conferences, and a face-to-face meeting.
The wide variety of contexts among the various campuses in the CSU system prohibits a “one
size fits all” approach to principles of microeconomics course redesign. Because of this, the
microeconomics team opted not to recommend a single redesign approach, but rather to
construct a “menu” of course redesign components from which faculty at any given campus can
select various redesign elements that are appropriate for their particular student needs and
campus resources.
The general approach to course redesign presented here draws on the strategies for "designing
courses for significant learning" developed by L. Dee Fink. According to Fink, the initial phase
of course design begins with identifying the key situational factors surrounding the course. In
our case, this included identifying student challenges associated with principles of
microeconomics and the different student "personas" we aim to help through course redesign.
The next step is to identify student learning goals. In principles of microeconomics, key learning
goals include enhancing the ability of our students to leave the course "thinking like
economists," involving not only the ability to understand and remember the core concepts of
microeconomics, but also the ability to apply and think critically about these concepts and to
connect them with other areas of study and life. These learning goals informed our discussion of
different course structures and approaches to incorporating interactive learning strategies into
principles of microeconomics. The final steps in this approach to course design are the
formulation of appropriate assessment procedures, the selection of effective teaching and
learning activities, and the integration of these key course components. This facet of course
design is highlighted in our recommended methods of incorporating interactive teaching and
learning activities and also in our individual redesign plans for the future. After discussing each
of our suggestions in more detail, we finish with a section devoted to the issue of accessibility
and universal design, which is necessary given that most of our recommendations involve a
more hands-on approach by students that frequently involves technology-enhanced pedagogy.
The report is organized in six sections:
I.
Why Students Don’t Succeed – This section briefly examines data on student
performance in principles of microeconomics courses, identifies key challenges facing
1
II.
III.
IV.
V.
VI.
students in these courses, and presents several student personas, each with a name
and a vivid description of the student’s background, situation, challenges, attitudes, and
personality. The personas were borne out of discussions about the common obstacles
that prevent microeconomics students from succeeding in the course.
Improving Student Learning – Acknowledging that many of today’s students have an
approach to learning that differs dramatically from norms of even ten years ago, this
section provides an overview of various tools, resources, and strategies designed to
enhance student engagement. Also included are suggestions for implementation and
best practices.
Individual Redesign Plan Summaries – This section includes summaries of team
members’ individual course redesign plans, which illustrate the diversity of approaches
required to meet student needs on different CSU campuses.
Cost Savings – This section provides a general overview of ways in which the various
redesign plans may improve efficiency of instruction, including reducing the cost per
class section or reducing the number of sections offered.
Appendices– The appendices provide additional information about topics covered in this
report and include team members’ individual course redesign plans.
References – The final section provides a list of references for further research.
I. Why Students Don’t Succeed
i.
Student Performance Data
Members of the microeconomics team analyzed D, F, and W rate data from their campuses
for principles of microeconomics. From the available data, it was determined that the
average D, F, and W rates were between 15 and 35 percent for the majority of sections
offered, although wider ranges were found in some cases. A few CSU campuses were able to
determine the D, F, and W rates for their principles of microeconomics course relative to other
course offerings. In general, the principles of microeconomics courses were among the
higher enrollment courses on all campuses participating in the analysis, thus the number of
students receiving these grades is relatively large, and the number retaking the course
(especially pre-business students) presents an ongoing challenge in terms of the efficient
usage of campus resources.
For one campus where data were available for a five year history, a statistical analysis of 184
principles of microeconomics classes showed that the D, F, and W rates were evenly
distributed for freshmen, sophomores, juniors and seniors. This finding would seem to dispel
the notion that larger percentages of lower-division students receive D, F, and W grades. For
this data set, the mean D, F. and W rate was 26.24 percent, the range between the maximum
and minimum D, F, and W rates were wider for freshmen (minimum 19.47 percent and
maximum 43.27 percent) than for seniors (minimum 18.80 percent and maximum 31.91
percent) and the range narrowed from a difference of 23.80 percent for freshmen to 16.29
percent for seniors. These findings would suggest some student improvement in capability
across class levels.
ii. Student Challenges
As a first step in trying to understand why many students don't succeed in principles of
microeconomics, the team identified key challenges facing students who enroll in this course.
2
These include those associated with student characteristics (preparation, time constraints,
etc.) as well as attributes of the material covered in principles of microeconomics:
1. Student Preparation/Skills
 Didn’t take high school economics
 High school economics did not adequately introduce microeconomics
 Poor abstract, analytical thinking skills
 Poor quantitative skills
 Poor critical reading skills
 Poor computer literacy
 Poor graphing skills
2. Time Constraints
 Work schedule (conflict with class, office hours, study time)
 Other classes (heavy schedules)
 Family responsibilities
 Extracurricular and social activities
3. Study Habits/Patterns
 Poor class attendance
 Doesn't read book and/or course materials
 Reads book but does not work problems
 Poor organizational/time-management skills
 Doesn't pay attention to or follow directions
 Poor exam-taking ability (e.g., difficulty understanding questions, difficulty working
under time pressure, not good at multiple choice tests)
 Difficulty keeping up with the material
4. Cultural/Language Factors
 Poor English reading ability
 Poor English audio comprehension
 Failure to ask for help
 Failure to ask questions
5. Financial Factors
 Cost of text book and supplements (e.g., Aplia, clickers)
6. Other Student Factors
 Lack of interest
 Examples that are dated or not particularly relevant to students’ lives
 Unrealistic expectations
7. Attributes of the Material – Principles of Microeconomics requires:
 Some raw memorization
 Analytical ability
 Abstract thinking
 Systematic thinking
 Cumulative understanding
 Geometric/space-relational abilities
 Quantitative abilities
 Precise vocabulary skills
3
The team also tried to distinguish those challenges over which faculty might have some
control from those that are largely beyond our control. For example, faculty have little control
over student preparation for the course, but do have a great deal of control over the types of
examples presented in class and whether or not they are relevant to students' lives. For
further discussion of student challenges, please see Appendix 1.
iii. Student Personas
Building on these student challenges, the microeconomics team created personas, which are
descriptions of typical students we deal with in principles of microeconomics, in an effort to
better understand the types of problems we need to address when we redesign principles of
microeconomics. We gave each persona a name so that we could quickly reference the types
of problems that they face.







Brett and Brittney are business majors, who don’t really see the need to take
economics, and their goal is to minimize their effort to obtain a C. A higher grade
would be nice, but they prefer minimizing the cost necessary to get a C in the class.
Both figure that they can pass the class with a C if they complete most of the
assignments and show up to take the tests.
Sean, who got nothing lower than a B in high school, expects the same in college,
but he is too busy with sports to make time for studying economics. He really hates
the online homework because he always forgets to complete it before it’s due, and
he hates the in-class clickers almost as much because he has to go to class in
order to get a grade. Sean is shocked to learn that he is getting a D in
microeconomics.
Ricky has a C+, yet he hasn’t really learned much economics. He's good at
cramming for exams and answering multiple-choice questions, and usually this is
enough to get him through the classes with “curves” designed to make sure that the
vast majority of students pass.
Mai really wants to learn economics, but she must balance family responsibilities
with her studies. As a result, she frequently misses class, and when she is there,
she sits quietly in the back where no one will notice her. Too timid to ask questions
in class or go to her professor’s office, Mai is falling further and further behind.
Abdulatif is a highly motivated student, who is just learning English. He has
difficulty understanding the lectures and reading the assignments, but his strong
math skills help him perform well once he does understand the concepts. He has
not been able to complete many of his online homework assignments, and about a
third of the way into the semester he realizes that he is going to fail principles of
microeconomics unless he does something different.
Maria and Trang had very little training in economics in high school. Both miss
classes frequently, and when they do attend, they seem to alternate between
staring into space and text messaging. Their grades on the exams are
approximately 30 - 40 percent of the available points. Despite several notices from
the instructor that students consistently scoring below 50 percent will fail the class,
they continue their spotty class attendance and attention patterns, take the final,
and again score in the 30 - 40 percent range.
George and Carmen have poor math skills. They struggle throughout the quarter
with graphical and mathematical examples and analysis despite their attendance
4


and attention in class, and utilization of the instructor's office hours to seek help.
Both have failing or D-grades on the exams.
Frederico and Nancy, engineering students with excellent math skills who often find
the material too easy, are headed for the B to C range, grades that reflect
performance, not ability. Both are likely to cut class when too much time is spent
going over basic graphical and numerical analysis since they don't think they need
such reviews.
Lily is a vision-impaired student who wants to maintain her independence. Services
to Students with Disabilities offered to pay a student to attend classes and help Lily
take notes, but Lily declined. She is fearful that she will not be able to use the
technology required in her econ class.
These student personas are referenced throughout the remainder of the document as we
describe our course redesign recommendations. Please see Appendix 2 for a more detailed
description of each student persona.
II. Improving Student Learning
Following our discussion of the challenges that students face in principles of microeconomics
and the synthesis of that information into specific personas that represent students we
frequently encounter in our own classrooms, we set out to identify potential solutions for
improving student learning in this course. Our potential solutions emphasize interactive
teaching and learning methods, which can mean different things and be implemented through
a variety of approaches. In the context of this project, the term interactive teaching is used to
characterize a variety of active and cooperative learning approaches to go beyond “chalk and
talk" in principles of microeconomics. Active learning can involve a wide range of activities,
including simulations, games, experiments, case studies, problem solving activities, and small
group discussions. Active learning exercises that involve students working together in groups
(formal or informal) can add an element of cooperative learning. The literature on active and
cooperative learning in economic education suggests that these approaches have the
potential to move students beyond passive listening, involve them in higher order thinking
(such as analysis, synthesis and evaluation), and encourage them to explore their own
attitudes values (Becker and Watts, 1998; Becker, Watts and Becker, 2006). Further, active
and cooperative learning approaches provide new opportunities to reach students with diverse
learning styles, personalities, and goals.
There are varied course structures in place for Principles of Microeconomics across the CSU.
The microeconomics team identified a number of approaches to incorporating interactive
learning that are consistent with, and can build on, many of the structures already in place.
For example, some of the approaches suggested in this report utilize in-class assignments,
while others require student work outside of class. In some cases, students work individually,
while in others they work in groups. Some of these approaches are enhanced by the use of
computers, online resources, and personal response systems, while others require little or no
technology. The use of learning assistants and peer tutors is an integral part of some
approaches, while others utilize more informal forms of peer-based learning. All of the
approaches to improved student learning we discuss, however, reflect the belief that redesigning the principles of microeconomics course to provide students more opportunities to
"do economics" will enhance student learning and overall performance in the course.
5
i. Principles of Microeconomics Course Structures in the CSU
While there is diversity in the course structure across the CSU system, there are many
aspects which are common to many of the campuses. One such feature is the use of
technology in the classroom. At least 11 campuses (48 percent) use an online pedagogical
tool such as Aplia or MyEconLab (discussed in more detail below). One campus uses
SimEcon, developed by one of the Design Team members. Four campuses use classroom
response systems (clickers) in addition to Aplia or MyEconLab. One campus plans on using
clickers in an upcoming term.
In addition to varying in technology use, campuses vary in modes of course delivery. A
campus can offer a course as a face-to-face lecture, a mix of lecture and lab, a hybrid class
consisting of a portion of the class offered online and a portion face-to-face, or a completely
online course. Regardless of the mode of delivery, we feel that a principles of microeconomics
course needs to be interactive in nature. This is especially important for many of the student
personas identified above to better understand the material.
Some campuses use a mix of part-time and full-time instructors to deliver principles of
microeconomics classes. Quite a few campuses use various interactive learning strategies,
such as experiments (9 of 12 surveyed), and undergraduate learning assistants (7 of 12
surveyed). While there is no systemwide policy regarding pre-requisites, about half of the
campuses require students to have some math prior to enrolling in a principles of
microeconomics course. Two-thirds of CSU campuses (8 out of 12 surveyed) have a writing
requirement in the principles of microeconomics class. The effectiveness of any
recommendations will vary across campuses based on the student demographics and even
perhaps whether or not the campus is on a quarter or semester system.
For a detailed list of CSU principles of microeconomics course structures please see
Appendix 3.
ii. Redesign Pedagogy with Interactive Learning
In the sections below, we present various tools for improving student learning in principles of
microeconomics. Our approach is to present these tools in an a la carte fashion in order to
provide a clear description of each, clarify advantages and disadvantages, indicate student
personas that may be particularly amenable to each tool, and cite relevant research on
student outcomes. We begin our discussion with pedagogical tools that require little or no
technology in the classroom, expand to technology-enhanced versions of some of these
pedagogical tools, and then finally discuss more technologically-based suggestions, some of
which occur completely in a computer lab. We recognize that each set of tools will have
advantages and disadvantages in different settings and for different students, and we briefly
highlight these issues at the end of each discussion. We also recognize that many of these
individual tools work best when used in conjunction with one another, thus, we conclude our
redesign recommendations in Section III with a discussion of potential combinations of these
pedagogical tools in the context of our individual redesign plans.
ii.a. Student Learning Assistants
6
Student Learning Assistants (SLAs) are generally charged with facilitating small group
interactions between students enrolled in large lecture-style courses. At various universities,
this type of peer-assisted or supplemental instruction employs either graduate students or
advanced undergraduate teaching assistants in recitation, discussion, or review sections.
Instruction may occur in a classroom or computer lab.
There are a variety of ways in which SLAs might be employed at different institutions. For
example, the assistance of SLAs may be available to all enrolled students in "high failure rate
courses," or may be focused on groups students considered to be "at risk" of experiencing
academic difficulties. SLAs may work with students primarily on course specific materials, or
they may focus more generally on study skills. Below are three possible options for utilizing
SLAs that exist at different CSU campuses, for example:
1. Through Learning Skills Center
In this option, students may register for a 1-unit Learning Skills section for which they
receive credit (assuming attendance is adequate). The section meets twice per week
for 50 minutes. SLAs are paid for running the sections, attending the professor’s
lecture, holding office hours, and other miscellaneous meetings with faculty and/or
Learning Skills Center personnel. In a variation of this approach, students do not
register for supplemental instruction sessions for a separate unit of credit, but are
encouraged to attend the supplemental instruction sessions for the course through
other incentives such as the ability to earn extra credit.
2. Through the Educational Opportunity Program (EOP)
In this option, EOP students are required to register for a 1-unit EOP section for credit
(assuming attendance is adequate) if it is available for the course. The section meets
once per week for 50 minutes. In addition, students are required to attend the SLAs
tutoring hours to meet the contact hours that a 1-unit course entails. The purpose of
the section is to provide EOP students with study skills and only a small component of
the section is dedicated to the specific course material. SLAs are paid for running the
sections, attending the professor’s lecture, holding office hours, and other
miscellaneous meetings with faculty and/or EOP personnel. In a variation of this
approach, the EOP sections take the form of "academic success workshops" that are
strongly encouraged but do not generate a unit of academic credit.
3. Through Individual Academic Departments
The department may also employ SLAs by following their departmental guidelines for
assigning course credit for internships, tutoring, or research assistantships. These
SLA positions are unpaid and allow the undergraduate or graduate SLA to earn
course credit. The requirements of this position, and the maximum number of units
that may be earned in this manner, are either set at the departmental level or
determined by individual faculty members who utilize an SLA. Typically, the SLA
completes a form at the beginning of the semester that specifies the requirements for
earning credit, which may include tasks such as attending the professor’s lecture,
delivering a lecture or lectures throughout the semester, holding exam review
sessions, holding office hours, grading, and other miscellaneous meetings with the
faculty member.
7
Previous CSU Transforming Course Design Projects (in General Chemistry and
Developmental Mathematics, for example) identified the use of SLAs through supplemental
instruction programs as an important strategy for improving student success and addressing
instructional costs (see the final reports of these projects for references to evaluation
research). Current research at CSU Sacramento by Howell and Van Gaasbeck, which
evaluates the impact of supplemental instruction in principles of macroeconomics courses,
finds that students enrolled in a large lecture who also participated in a voluntary adjunct
(supplemental instruction) section were substantially less likely to get a D, F, or W grade
relative to their peers in the large lecture who didn't participate and relative to peers in a small
lecture taught by the same professor that did not have adjunct (supplemental instruction)
sections available.
Some additional advantages of utilizing SLAs include:






actively engages the SLAs in a collaborative learning experience with students
and faculty
provides an opportunity for SLAs to directly apply and retain their knowledge
through repetition of information
enhances the learning skills of SLAs via observation of the learning and retention
process of others
increases access for individual assistance with course material for students
allows SLAs to gain experience as teachers and evaluate their interest and
capability in this role
relieves faculty of some clerical tasks (e.g. recording attendance, grading
homework, entering scores)
Some potential disadvantages associated with utilizing SLAs may include:



prohibitive costs to employ SLAs with pay for some departments
disallowance of rewarding SLAs with academic credit for some departments
modest time costs to faculty to meet with and monitor the responsibilities of
SLAs
For Mai, with heavy responsibilities in addition to her classes, the additional meeting time
outside of class associated with supplemental instruction session could deter her from
participating. The peer instruction and cooperative learning environment of the session,
however, could be very helpful to her in providing an opportunity to ask and discuss questions
she might be reluctant to bring up in class. For George and Carmen, students who regularly
attend class but struggle with mathematical, problem-solving exercises, meeting with the
SLAs outside of class time would allow them to seek assistance in a less intimidating
environment in which the SLAs can focus on their special math needs as applied to
economics.
ii.b. In-Class Exercises and Quizzes
In-class exercises can provide a relatively simple and "low tech" way of introducing interactive
learning experiences into principles of microeconomics courses. While in-class exercises can
be designed to utilize a variety of new technologies, they can also be structured to work
effectively without technological enhancement. A typical classroom exercise contains a
hypothetical scenario/graph/data table, with questions that pertain to the information given
8
(sample available at http://tinyurl.com/l9qkkj). One approach is for the instructor to prepare an
exercise and distribute it in class after discussing the relevant topic. Together the students
and instructor interactively work through the questions in the exercise. This type of exercise is
helpful in solidifying concepts discussed in lecture and keeping students engaged, and offers
an additional pedagogical instrument that can address a greater diversity of student learning
styles.
In-class assignments may also utilize cooperative learning strategies. For example, the
instructor may stop lecturing after presenting a potentially difficult concept and ask students to
answer a question involving the concept through a "think-pair-share" exercise. Typically,
students are asked to spend a few minutes working on their own and to write down their
response. Then, they are asked to share their responses with another student sitting nearby. If
their responses differ, they are asked to figure out why and agree on a response. Finally, the
class as a whole discusses the problem and the desired answer/s. This type of exercise is
helpful in immediately identifying points of confusion and reinforcing students' understanding
of the material. Students who are shy and reluctant to ask or answer questions in class may
be more likely to participate after having a chance to talk about the material with another
student.
In-class exercises may be collected and graded or recorded for participation, which provides
some incentive for the less motivated students to attend class and participate. Although this
model has proved successful for some faculty, even when in-class exercises are not collected
and graded, instructors find students respond very positively to the exercises as a tool for
keeping them engaged and assisting them with learning the material.
Giving relatively short (graded) quizzes regularly throughout the term also provides students
with an incentive for attending class and keeping up with the material. This may be particularly
useful in very large classes, but can be a useful assessment strategy in smaller classes as
well. In addition to reinforcing the key concepts covered in class and in the reading, regular
short quizzes can help students with "test anxiety" practice their test taking skills before they
face a longer and more heavily weighted exam. Quizzes can also be structured to help
students achieve a particular goal regarding test performance and mastery of the material.
For example, one team member utilizes weekly two-question quizzes designed to fill noted
gaps in student knowledge. The first quiz question is directly from a previous homework
assignment, providing students with a reward for revisiting previous material that they may
have previously answered incorrectly. The second quiz question is based on information from
the lecture and asks students to attempt a slight variation or extension of a familiar problem.
This second question provides incentive and practice at tackling something that requires
applying existing knowledge to a new situation. Both of these goals address attributes of the
course material that were identified as student challenges by team members.
While the use of in-class exercises and quizzes have many advantages, such as identifying
points of confusion, reinforcing key points, and providing incentives, they have the
disadvantage of taking class time and may require a reduction in the amount of material
covered, a trade-off that arises with many of the activities discussed in this section.
For a student who wants to learn but struggles to balance a number of responsibilities and
activities, such as Mai, regular in-class assignments and quizzes may be helpful in providing
incentives to reinforce the importance of class attendance, as well as helping her to get the
most out of class time and better focus her efforts outside of class. Further, cooperative
learning exercises may help encourage Mai’s participation in class discussion. For George
9
and Carmen, instructor-led, in-class exercises and quizzes would assist them in knowing how
to start a problem-solving activity and structure complete answers. Additionally, similar but
not identical, exercises and quizzes made available via a course website would allow them to
practice through repetition of the steps covered in classroom activities.
ii.c. Classroom Games and Experiments
Games and classroom experiments are exercises in the classroom that do not require the use
of technology and, typically, do not require students to do any preparation before class. Often
the instructor brings "props" to facilitate the activity, but participants do not use computers or
other technology. Experiments and games can help students learn abstract concepts such as
the law of diminishing marginal returns. Rather than talking about why marginal product
increases or decreases, student can learn why a fixed resource eventually leads to
diminishing returns in a “fold-its” experiment that utilizes nothing more than a single stapler,
paper, and some student “workers” (see http://tinyurl.com/lxp7m8 for the classroom
experiment).
Some students learn more by “doing economics” than they do by listening to a
lecture. Classroom experiments, games and simulations give students the opportunity to learn
by “doing economics.” Thus, experiments convert learning from a passive activity, listening to
a lecture, to an active experience, participating in the game. The professor can explain why
demand curves are usually downward sloping, or students can learn their demand curve for
an ice-cold Coke is downward sloping by bidding against other students for the soft drink.
As with the in-class assignments and quizzes, classroom games and experiments may be
particularly helpful to students such as Mai, who are serious about their studies but may lack
large amounts of time outside of class. Classroom games and experiments that actively
engage all students should be helpful in drawing students like Maria and Trang, who are often
found texting during lectures, and failing largely due to inattention, into meaningful activelearning exercises. Additionally, because these activities involve students actively completing
some task to demonstrate an economic concept, they are a break from lecture time that
students like Ricky, Brett, and Brittany often find boring.
ii.d.
Software for Online Homework, Experiments, Simulations, and Quizzes
Various programs provide students with interactive exercises that can be used in conjunction
with most widely used college economics textbooks. Students complete their homework on a
computer through a web-based program (like Aplia or MyEconLab), the homework
assignments are automatically graded, and then students receive feedback on what they got
right and wrong along with some explanations that should help them understand why the
correct answer is correct. These programs also deliver electronic versions of the textbook and
allow the professor to post supplemental materials (e.g. syllabus, handouts, review sheets)
and announcements as well as email students directly. Additionally, a host of other course
activities like experiments, quizzes, and even exams can be implemented through these webbased programs.
Two of the most popular programs are Aplia and MyEconLab (see Comparison of Aplia and
MyEconLab in Appendix 4 for a comparison of the features of these programs). Although
virtual learning environments like WebCT and Blackboard can also be used to deliver online
homework assignments that are graded automatically, the primary difference is that Aplia and
10
MyEconLab contain proprietary content. As a result, students pay for access to the content
associated with these programs whereas use of campus-supported systems like WebCT and
Blackboard are free but require the instructor to generate all content.
Advantages





These programs free up the professor’s time from grading, which can presumably
then be used to improve other facets of the course and student interaction (i.e.
higher quality lectures, more office hours, better alignment between course
materials and exam questions).
The programs provide the professor with detailed information about what
proportion of the class answers each homework question incorrectly, thereby
allowing for a more efficient use of time and targeted review of homework
questions in class.
Scheduling an online experiment (available through Aplia only) allows the instructor
to provide students with a hands-on learning experience without setting foot in the
classroom. This feature is particularly useful when the instructor is required to be
out of town and might otherwise cancel a class session.
Programs won't accept assignments after the deadline has passed, so it alleviates
the problem of dealing with pleas to accept late work.
In a large class where regular graded homework assignments might not otherwise
be possible, automatically graded homework is useful for helping students keep up
to date with the material.
Disadvantages








Instructors incur a fixed cost (in terms of time and effort) associated with first time
use.
Depending on the way in which these programs are utilized, it may be possible
for students to free-ride and/or cheat.
Students need reliable access to a computer with an internet connection, which
may not be a trivial issue for some financially constrained students or commuter
students who might find it difficult to access campus computer labs.
These programs are generally utilized at an additional cost to the students,
although, because they enable the delivery of an electronic version of the
textbook, the bundle may actually be cheaper than a hard copy of the textbook
alone.
Completing homework assignments and quizzes online can leave some students
feeling ill prepared for paper-based exams.
Care must be taken to insure consistency between material covered in online
components of the course and material that appears in exams.
By providing electronic versions of the textbook, use of these programs might
further reduce already low rates of textbook reading.
Not all textbooks are available to be partnered with Aplia or MyEconLab. While a
non-textbook-specific version of Aplia is available, the potential lack of
consistency with the chosen course textbook may add confusion for some
students or be problematic for some instructors. A complete list of principles of
microeconomics textbooks that are partnered with these programs is available at
www.aplia.com/economics for Aplia and http://www.myeconlab.com/books for
MyEconLab.
11
Adding a technological component to principles of microeconomics may alienate students like
Ricky who have limited access to a computer off campus and who are sensitive to anything
that adds to the cost of a particular class. Additionally, a price sensitive student may view
Aplia or MyEconLab as optional course material, and thus choose not to purchase, even if as
much as 25 percent of the overall course grade is at stake. For Federico and Nancy, who are
competent in mathematics due to their engineering curricula, computerized assignments with
economic applications should provide easy access, and a technologically interesting vehicle
for them to apply their mathematics training.
ii.e. Multimedia
In order to offer a varied and enticing approach to principles of microeconomics, instructors
can use multimedia presentations. These video and audio presentations can break up an
otherwise monotonous class and provide an opportunity for students to apply theoretical
knowledge to real-world problems. Multimedia options include:



Videos: There is a plethora of videos that can be used within a classroom.
These range from a series of videos that are designed to introduce economic
concepts to students, such as the Economics U$A series, to movies that have
examples of concepts embedded within. Economics U$A is a series of 30 minute
videos that discuss basic concepts such as supply and demand, as well as
inflation and unemployment among others. There are a total of 28 videos
available at http://www.learner.org/resources/series79.html. These are free of
charge and can be shown in any class with access to the internet.
Short Video Clips: Another use of multimedia is to show short video clips on
various key topics or issues covered in a principles of microeconomics class.
One such example is a short video on the recent credit crisis (available at
http://www.crisisofcredit.com/). Other short clips that can be used in a classroom
can be found on YouTube (www.youtube.com). For example, a clip from the
television show "The Colbert Report" demonstrates the effectiveness of antitrust regulation in a humorous manner (available at
http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&videoid=9468811
). Sexton (2006) provides numerous additional examples of clips from movies
and television shows that can be used to illuminate class concepts while Mateer
(2005) has a textbook companion with exercises for specific movie clips.
Audio Lecture Clips: In addition to showing videos, the instructor can also have
the principles of microeconomics class listen to radio programs on various topics
and follow up the presentation with discussion. The audio clips can be as long
as an hour, such as the American Radio Works program on climate change
(http://americanradioworks.publicradio.org/features/climate/), of moderate length
(23 minutes on wildlife smuggling in Australia at
http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/documentaries/2009/02/090203_wildlifesmug
s.shtml), or short clips (5 minutes on externalities at
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4463526). There are also
many audio products available in podcast form, which are a series of digital
media files released episodically and released through web syndication. A
search of the iTunes podcast store can provide many examples. Faculty may
also want to consider creating their own podcasts as complements (or
substitutes) for class readings (see Jennifer’s Plan for a description of how she
uses podcasts to supplement lectures).
12

Music Clips: Another creative approach to teaching economics is through
music clips. The website http://divisionoflabour.com/music/ offers songs and
lyrics that relate to various economic concepts in addition to structured
assignments about the concepts in the music clips. Taking that one step
further, http://www.musicforecon.com/ houses a database of animated flash
files, mini music ‘videos’ for each song, that include the economic interpretation
of the lyrics.
Advantages



Non-threatening, even welcoming, format for presentation of concepts
Appeals to different learning styles
Opportunity to understand real-world economic applications
Disadvantages



Can be distracting and detracting if not properly contextualized
A learning curve in finding appropriate videos
Can be time consuming in terms of both utilization of class time and
instructor’s preparation time
By presenting course material in alternative formats like audio and video clips, students who
complain about boring lectures (such as Brett/Brittany, Ricky, and Maria/Trang) may find that
they are more interested in attending and paying attention in class.
ii.f. Personal Response Systems (Clickers)
Clickers, also called personal response systems, allow professors to ask computer graded
multiple-choice or numeric input questions. Students use hand-held devices to send their
responses to questions that the professor displays using a computer and LCD projector, and
then an immediate summary of the students’ answers can be generated to provide both
students and the professor with a clear signal of how well the material is understood.
Computer software and a receiver allows the professor to produce different types of reports
following student responses, including a spreadsheet with grades that can be uploaded to
learning management systems, such as Blackboard/Vista. Note that there are several brands
of clickers including eInstruction, TurningPoint, and i>clicker. The clicker of choice for many
professors in the CSU appears to be the eInstruction clicker, but each campus may have
adopted a clicker standard. Please see Appendix 5 for a discussion of brands and cost.
Questions can be placed into PowerPoint slides, such as the one shown in Appendix 5, but
professors can alternatively use the native clicker software provided by the firm that sells the
clickers. Some publishers provide questions that can be easily inserted into PowerPoint or
the native clicker software. When slides are in “professor view,” the answers will be listed
below the question and marked to the left for multiple choice style questions. When the
professor presents the questions to students, they will not see the answers. It is easy to copy
and paste images on the question slides. Images can be easily copied using a screen capture
program, such as Snagit. Note that some clickers make it possible to specify a tolerance
range for numeric responses. The professor can insert a timer on the question slide set for
the exact amount of time that students have to answer the question, or the professor can
decide when to end the period for answers. The question slide will display the number of
13
students who have responded. Some professors like to give students time to discuss the
questions before they send their answers.
There are several ways that clickers can be used in class, including, but not limited to the
following:





Ask questions that determine if students understand the material just covered
in class. If many of the students answer incorrectly, the professor can go over
the material again.
Repeat similar questions on difficult concepts, such as elasticity and profit
maximization, in several classes until the professor is convinced students
understand.
Teach students to read graphs by asking questions about graphs that require
numeric responses.
Use the clickers to give quizzes.
Use the clickers to give anonymous surveys.
Please see Salemi (forthcoming) for additional specific examples.
Clickers give students an incentive to attend and pay attention to the lecture in order to
answer the questions correctly. These incentives increase if the responses are graded and if
the professor gives clicker questions in every class. The professor can specify how the
answers are evaluated. For example, the software is flexible enough to allow the professor to
assign students 1 point for an incorrect answer, 2 points for a correct answer, and then
calculate the score based upon 100 points.
Some professors use clickers in conjunction with online homework. The professor reviews
online homework topics in class before assigning the homework by including clicker questions
during the lecture that are similar or identical to homework questions. This method helps to
prepare students to successfully complete the online homework. Please see Frederica's Plan
for more information on how she uses the Aplia and clickers together.
Advantages






Clickers can allow faculty who teach extremely large sections to still use
many of the techniques discussed in previous sections, such as experiments
and in-class exercises or quizzes.
Students are more likely to attend class when they are graded every class on
their participation in the clicker questions. It increases the minimum cost of a
C for students like Brett and Brittney, but they also learn more economics.
The professor can use clickers to teach students like George and Carmen
with poor quantitative background how to read graphs. Just include a clicker
question that requires reading a graph every couple of classes, and watch the
students as their success rates increase.
Shy students like Mai who do not like to speak in class will feel more
comfortable answering questions behind the anonymity of clickers.
Clickers increase the likelihood that students like Maria and Trang, who text
or daydream in class, will have to pay enough attention to the lecture to
answer the questions.
Clickers help students like Abdulatif prepare for the Aplia assignments.
14


Although standard clickers wouldn't be feasible for Lily, our visually-impaired
student, there is a virtual clicker available through eInstruction that works with
other assistive technology available to her.
For students who might otherwise avoid all professor and/or SLA interaction
(e.g. Brett and Brittany), clickers force some interaction that provides both the
student and the instructor with more information about how well students
understand the material.
Disadvantages




The professor cannot cover as much course material when using clickers in
class; however the material is likely to be covered more thoroughly.
Clickers, like any technology, have an "up-front" cost for the professor; it
takes time to prepare the questions before class.
Students like Sean who don't like to attend class will dislike clickers.
Because adding clickers increases the cost of participating in the class, price
sensitive students like Ricky might be more inclined to drop the course or
attempt to pass the class without purchasing the clicker.
ii.g. Labs
Labs may be used in teaching principles of microeconomics in a variety of ways. The extent
of lab access, however, varies by CSU campus. Some CSU campuses have classrooms
equipped with computer workstations for each student, some have open, dedicated labs for
use by Economics, or Social Science or Business students only (depending on the college
that Economics resides in on each campus), while others have a sign up system for specified
hours for instructors in Economics, or Social Science or Business. Some campuses may not
have dedicated labs but offer computer lab access to all students with extensive hours. Some
campuses equip their classrooms with “smart” technology that faculty can use to demonstrate
computerized course assignments as an alternative to dedicated labs.
In general, lab use for completing computerized assignments can offer an excellent
environment for student collaboration with instructor oversight especially if the instructor is
utilizing economic simulations and computerized games. Assignments can be written to allow
students to compete with each other to solve problems, demonstrate economic principles,
and/or meet other assignment-prescribed goals. Students can more easily discuss, compare,
and synthesizes their collective results in lab settings. Students can submit results in real time
to the professor and receive feedback, organize and reinforce their findings by discussing their
results with other students, and provide summations of their results during the lab sessions
that can be shared and improved upon by members of the class.
For students like George and Carmen, instructor-led or SLA-led labs offer additional
opportunities to ask questions and to collaborate with other students.
ii.h. Universal Design and Accessibility Issues
California State University is governed by a variety of laws and regulations that impose the
requirement that the CSU campuses provide "equal and equitable access" to all academic
programs and services. A series of recent rulings have determined that the same exact level
and timeliness of access must be available to individuals with disabilities. The universal
15
access to information technology is part of the CSU's commitment to equal and equitable
access. The CSU policy is premised on the following federal and state laws including but not
limited to Section 504 of the 1973 Rehabilitation Act; the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)
of 1990; Section 255 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996; and California Government
Code 11135 of 2003 which applies Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act as amended in 1998
to the CSU.
Accessible technology is electronic and information technology designed to be accessible to
all, including persons with disabilities. The Accessible Technology Initiative (ATI) reflects the
California State University's ongoing commitment to provide access to information resources
and technologies to individuals with disabilities. This commitment is articulated in Executive
Order 926(EO 926), the CSU Board of Trustees Policy on Disability Support and
Accommodations. The ATI addresses universal design and accessibility in three broad areas:
web accessibility, instructional materials accessibility, and accessible electronic and
information technology procurement (see Appendix 6 for a detailed description of these three
areas of accessibility). Because many of the recommendations in this document involve the
incorporation of technology into the classroom, it is necessary to clarify the importance and
means of doing so in a manner that is consistent with EO 926. Additionally, because the CSU
Accessible Technology Initiative gives priority to high enrollment courses, it is critical that
redesign efforts in principles of microeconomics courses address these issues as redesign
occurs rather than to later retrofit redesigned elements of the course.
Instructors who incorporate web-based software for homework, quizzes, simulations,
experiments, multimedia, and/or personal response systems (clickers) should be aware that
not all features of these products are equally accessible to students with some disabilities,
although accessibility can be dramatically improved in some cases through thoughtful
implementation of these tools by instructors. All instructional materials that are delivered
electronically must be available in print form in advance (for conversion to an alternate format)
or delivered in a format that can be recognized by tools utilized by disabled students (e.g.,
compatible with screen readers for those with visual impairments like Lily, closed captioned for
those with hearing impairments). Aplia, for example, has been evaluated for accessibility and
performed quite well, however, there are still features of online assignments (e.g., creation
and manipulation of graphs) that are incompatible with assistive technology and would need to
be made available in an alternative format by the instructor. Additionally, although standard
clickers wouldn't be feasible for Lily, our visually-impaired student persona, there is a virtual
clicker available through eInstruction that works with other assistive technology available to
her.
Not all student disabilities are readily evident to instructors and, furthermore, technology in the
classroom is not the only barrier to accessibility. Several of the other "low tech" pedagogical
tools we describe above could also be problematic for students with physical disabilities if not
designed properly. Additionally, any pedagogical approach can be problematic for a student
with a learning disability and this fact may not be known by the instructor at any point during
the semester. This is where the concept of Universal Design Learning (UDL) plays an
important role in course redesign. UDL uses multiple ways of presenting course material to
students, via multiple means of engagement that allow students to assimilate course material
to best serve their learning styles. Under UDL, students also then have multiple avenues to
express their knowledge learned in the classroom. UDL involves curricular redesign that
incorporates learning and assessment, such that no student is left behind. The goals of UDL
are to turn novice learners into expert learners; to reduce inflexible, one-size-fits-all curricula;
to minimize barriers to learning and provide fair and equitable opportunities to learn without
16
isolating or stigmatizing certain students; and to meet the needs of the greatest number of
students. Under the UDL paradigm, it is preferable to take a proactive approach to designing
instruction to meet a diverse student body rather than to have a reactive approach that utilizes
case by case exceptions. It is this proactive approach to course redesign that is at the heart
of the laws governing universal access. A simple analogy to physical barriers is the
construction of a building that is designed to be universally accessible (without the use of
ramps), rather than designed such that it requires a ramp for accessibility.
Questions about specific pedagogical tools should be addressed to either an Instructional
Materials Accessibility Specialist or Services to Students with Disabilities on individual
campuses.
III. Individual Redesign Plan Summaries
While the tools, resources, and teaching strategies listed in previous sections have been
analyzed independently, improved student learning outcomes can be achieved by employing
multiple solutions simultaneously in the principles of microeconomics course. Accordingly,
each team member has selected specific course redesign components to pursue in the course
they teach. The summaries below illustrate the diversity of approaches pursued by team
members to meet the specific needs of their campus population.





At Cal Poly Pomona, Anne Bresnock will introduce two course redesign
components into her principles of microeconomics courses for fall 2009: (1)
student learning assistants (SLAs), and (2) multiple-choice with extensions
(MCWE) exercises. Students will be given the opportunity to attend weekly
tutorial sessions led by the SLAs (current MA students in the Economics
Department). The SLAs will also work with students in instructor-led activities that
focus on MCWE exercises. For the MCWE exercises, students will be organized
into small groups that begin the exercises in class, and then complete them
outside of class meetings. Other course activities, including use of computerized,
economic simulations (SimEcon), and non-computer based problem-solving
exercises (offered on a course website), will be retained in the course design.
At CSU Bakersfield, Aaron Hegde will maintain the course structure similar to
previous quarters by continuing to use Aplia and introduce a personal response
system (clickers). This should force the students with poor attendance records
to be present and to pay attention, since clicker participation will be graded,
without being disruptive. Several videos will be used to reinforce course material
and to present new material in a lively format that promises to keep the attention
of students like Brett and Brittany.
At Sacramento State, Jessica Howell will introduce personal response systems to
her principles of microeconomics course that also currently utilizes in-class
exercises, classroom games, and Aplia for online homework and experiments. To
facilitate the use of clickers, lectures will also be delivered via PowerPoint. Other
facets of the course will be maintained to permit assessment of the effect of
clickers on student learning.
At San Diego State, Jennifer Imazeki will continue to use Aplia, eInstruction
clickers and podcasts, and intends to extend her use of music and video clips.
At Fresno State, Janice Peterson will introduce two course redesign components
into her principles of microeconomics course this fall: 1. an on-line homework and
tutorial system (MyEconLab) and 2. supplemental instruction (SI). Students will
17


use MyEconLab for practice problems and quizzes as well as graded homework
assignments. In addition, the economic news feature of the program will be utilized
in required writing assignments. Students will also have the opportunity to attend
SI workshops, led by an economics major who has successfully completed the
course. The SI workshops will incorporate material from MyEconLab in addition to
other problem solving and cooperative learning activities.
At Chico State, Frederica Shockley will continue using Aplia, eInstruction
clickers, and some classroom experiments. In fall 2009 she will use the CPS
chalkboard, a device that will allow her to walk around the room while advancing
the clicker questions. She will also make weekly videos available for
downloading at the Aplia site. She would also like to cover more “application”
chapters such as one on anti-trust, but that will require dropping some of the
theory classes. For the longer run she is looking for a way to add entertainment
to her classes.
At San Francisco State, Lisa Takeyama will continue to use Aplia and extensive
in-class exercises. Extra effort will be made to better integrate the Aplia
exercises into the classroom lectures in order to address the disconnect
between the two that students sometimes feel. Additionally, more review and
practice problems beyond Aplia will also be offered as optional material (e.g.,
the study guide that accompanies the text).
Complete copies of team members' course redesign plans are available in Appendix 7.
IV. Cost Savings
As part of the Transforming Course Design project, the microeconomics team focused on
course redesign solutions that would either maintain or lower instructional costs. Cost-saving
course redesign plans focus on reducing costs per section and/or reducing the number of
sections offered.
Reducing costs per section is typically achieved in the following ways, all of which were
considered as part of our team’s work:
 Reduce the cost of instructional time
 Reduce the cost of instructional assistants
 Reduce the amount of time in particular types of classroom facilities.
Solutions were also discussed for reducing the number of sections offered by:
 Increasing the number of students in course sections;
 Decreasing the number of students who need to repeat the course.
As detailed in the individual course redesign plans in Appendix 7, microeconomics team
members have largely chosen to implement interactive teaching strategies that seek to
improve the high rates of D, F, and W grades in the principles of microeconomics courses. By
providing increased active learning opportunities for students to gain “hands-on” experience
applying microeconomics principles to real-life situations in interactive and meaningful ways,
team members hope to bring about substantial savings by increasing student learning and
decreasing the number of students who need to repeat the course.
18
V. Appendices
i. Appendix 1: Student Challenges in Principles of Microeconomics
Things Potentially Within Our Control

Student Preparation/Skills – None except possibly remedying some skill deficiencies
at beginning of course

Time Constraints – Very little except possibly being cognizant/respectful of their
constraints

Study Habits/Patterns – Some control in the form of setting up appropriate incentives


o
Poor class attendance
o
Doesn't read book and/or course materials
o
Reads book but does not work problems
o
Doesn't pay attention to or follow directions
o
Poor exam-taking ability (e.g., difficulty understanding questions, difficulty
working under time pressure, lousy at multiple choice)
Cultural/Language Factors – Very little except being cognizant and providing some
incentives to counteract these factors
o
Poor English reading ability
o
Poor English audio comprehension
o
Failure to seek help
o
Failure to ask questions
Financial Factors – Primarily under faculty members’ control
o

Costs of text book and supplements (e.g., Aplia, clickers)
Other Student Factors – Primarily under faculty members’ control
o
Lack of interest
o
Examples that are dated or not particularly relevant to students’ lives
o
Unrealistic expectations
Attributes of the Material – Control in the form of designing activities that hone these skills:

Some rote memorization

Analytical ability

Abstract thinking

Systematic thinking

Cumulative understanding

Geometric/space-relational abilities

Quantitative abilities

Precise vocabulary skills
19
ii. Appendix 2: Student Personas
Brett and Brittney, both business majors, are taking principles of microeconomics because it
is required for their major. A higher grade would be nice, but they prefer minimizing the cost
necessary to get a C in the class. If they underestimate the minimum effort required,
professors will usually give them some work for extra credit. The text is too difficult to read
and the lectures are boring. Anyway, they don’t like math and they don’t like to read! Neither
Brett nor Brittney visit the professor during office hours or see the tutors who are available in
the Economics Department. Both figure that they can pass the class with a C if they complete
most of the assignments and show up to take the tests; it worked in high school. “Why learn a
subject that has no application to my life?”
Ricky is taking principles of microeconomics because it will get him past one more hurdle to
obtain his degree in business. He works about 25 hours per week in order to make payments
on his new ride, a sweet Scion tC. As a consequence, he is only on campus two days per
week. He frequently misses class because 9 a.m. is just too early for him. Actually, Ricky
hates the boring lectures, and any excuse for missing class is a good one! Although Ricky is
fairly comfortable with technology, he cannot afford a computer at home, (“gotta pay for that
ride”) and he doesn’t have time to go to campus, which makes it difficult for him to complete
weekly Aplia assignments. It looks like Ricky is headed for a C+ in the class, but he really
doesn’t know much about the subject. He’s just good at cramming for exams and taking
multiple-choice questions, and usually this is enough to get him through the classes with
“curves” designed to make sure that the vast majority of students pass. Although unaware of
enrollment goals, Ricky behaves as if he understands them.
Sean graduated from a California high school with nothing lower than a B on his transcript,
and he expects the same grades at Chico State. Sean is really busy with the sports that he
loves, snowboarding, beach volleyball, basketball, and soccer, and he has about as much
time left for his college classes and he had for his high school classes. Sean was often late
turning in assignments in high school, but he used his charm to get papers accepted.
Deadlines were meant for other students; teachers and his parents convinced Sean that he is
special. He really hates Aplia because he always forgets to complete it before it’s due, and he
hates the clickers almost as much as Aplia because he has to go to class in order to get a
grade. Sean is shocked to learn that he is getting a D in principles of microeconomics. “This
must be a mistake. I never got anything lower than a B in high school!”
Mai, the daughter of a traditional Hmong family, is the first in her family to attend college. She
lives with her extended family, many whom are not English speakers, in a community close to
the university. Mai really wants to learn principles of microeconomics, but in addition to her
classes, she has family responsibilities, a part-time job, and volunteer work. As a result, she
frequently misses class, and when she is there, she sits quietly in the back where no one will
notice her. Too timid to ask questions in class or go to her professor’s office, Mai is falling
further and further behind, and that is very upsetting for someone who has such high
expectations for herself. When she saw the negative comments on her last exam, she almost
cried! “I want to make my parents proud of me, but I am failing economics!”
This is the first semester at an American university for Abdulatif whose government pays for
his education as long as he maintains a C average. He graduated from a high school in Saudi
Arabia which did not offer any foreign languages, social studies, economics, or other classes
that a typical American student studies. Typically, students learned by memorizing.
20
Research, communications skills and independent thinking were generally absent. Despite
the weakness of his school, Abdulatif has good math skills. Since he is just learning English,
he has difficulty understanding the lectures and reading the assignments, but his strong math
skills help him perform well after he does understand the concepts. Abdulatif is struggling in
all of his classes despite the fact that he spends many more hours studying than most other
students at the University. He has not been able to complete many of his Aplia assignments,
and about a third of the way into the semester he realizes that he is going to fail principles of
microeconomics unless he does something different. “What can I do? I have to get a C in this
class!”
Lily is a vision-impaired student who wants to maintain her independence. Services to
Students With Disabilities offered to pay a student to attend classes and help Lily take notes,
but Lily declined. She can see well enough with the assistance of her cane to get from class
to class, but Lily especially has difficulty seeing the graphs in principles of microeconomics
even though she sits on the front row. Since she cannot see the graphs, Lily cannot follow
what her instructor says about them. Lily’s instructor has also asked her students to enroll in
Aplia and to purchase a clicker. The class meeting time fits her schedule well, but Lily is
worried that she will not be able to get through principles of microeconomics. “Will I be able to
answer the clicker questions and the Aplia questions about the graphs? Why do we need so
many graphs?”
Maria and Trang, both freshman, graduated from local high schools and are undeclared
majors. Both are taking principles of microeconomics to satisfy their Area D2 general
education requirements. Maria and Trang had very little training in economics in high school.
Both miss classes frequently (lack of attendance), and when they do attend, they seem to
alternate between staring into space and text messaging (lack of attention). Both do not print
the partial lecture notes provided by the instructor for use with class lecture, or do print them
and leave them sitting on their desk. At test time both students leave the exam early, using
only half of the available test-taking time, and skipping the 80-point problem-solving and short
answer sections of the exam. Their grades on the exams are approximately 30 - 40 percent
of the available points. Despite several notices from the instructor that students consistently
scoring below 50 percent will fail the class, Maria and Trang continue their spotty class
attendance and attention patterns, take the final, and again score in the 30 - 40 percent range.
George and Carmen, both freshmen, graduated from local high schools and are taking
principles of microeconomics to satisfy their Area D2 general education requirement. George
hopes to major in business, and Carmen's major is undeclared. Both George and Carmen
have difficulty during the first week of classes with a take-home set of assignments on
graphing. Each seeks the professor's help with questions during office hours that pertain to
these assignments. Their questions indicate that the mathematical concepts of slopes,
intercepts, proportions and simple linear equations have not been mastered in their prior math
courses. Both students continue to struggle throughout the quarter with graphical and
mathematical examples and analysis despite their attendance and attention in class, and
utilization of the instructor's office hours to seek help. Both have failing or D-grades on the
exams.
Federico is a freshman who graduated from a local high school, and Nancy is a graduate of a
local community college. Both students are taking principles of microeconomics to satisfy
theirgeneral education requirements, and both are engineering majors. Federico and Nancy
can't seem to understand why so many other students have difficulty grasping economic
concepts. They find economics easy, as well as the graphical and mathematical analysis
21
associated with it. Both are likely to cut class when too much time is spent going over basic
graphical and numerical analysis since they don't think they need such reviews. Federico
scores in the 80 - 90 percent range on the exams despite gaps in his attendance and
attention, but Nancy is surprised to score in the low 70 percent range on the exams even
though she misses fewer classes than Federico and pays attention during class.
iii. Appendix 3: Course Structures across CSU Campuses (2009)
While there is diversity in the course structure across the CSU system, there are many
aspects which are common to many of the campuses. One such feature is the use of
technology in the classroom. At least 11 campuses (48 percent) use an online pedagogical
tool such as Aplia or MyEconLab. One campus uses SimEcon, developed by faculty. Four
campuses use classroom response systems (clickers) in addition to Aplia or MyEconLab.
One campus plans on using clickers in an upcoming term.
In addition to varying in technology use, campuses can vary in modes of course delivery. A
campus can offer a course as a face-to-face lecture; a mix of lecture and lab; a hybrid class
consisting of a portion of the class offered online and a portion face-to-face; or a completely
online course. Regardless of the mode of delivery, we feel that a principles course needs to
be interactive in nature. This is especially relevant in helping the student personas identified
better understand the material.
22
Principles of Microeconomics Course Structures Across CSU Campuses (2009)
Campus
Course
Number
Econ 201
Econ 110
Econ 103
Econ 210
Econ 2301
Econ 40
Econ 201
Econ 210*
Econ 101
Econ 201
Eco 101
% Taught
by PT
0 – 25
Tech Use
(Clickers)
Yes (No)
Experiments
SLAs
Pre-Reqs
GE/Writing
Requirements
Yes/Yes
# of sections
(per year)
9
Bakersfield
Yes
No
No
Channel Islands
Chico
Yes (Yes)
Yes
Dominguez Hills
East Bay
0 – 25
No
No
Yes
Yes; No F
Yes
6
Fresno
50 – 75
Yes (No)
No
No
Yes; F ok
Yes
20
Fullerton
Humboldt
50 – 75
Yes (No)
Yes
Yes
Yes; F ok
No
4 – 5*
Long Beach
25 – 50
Yes (No)
Yes
No
Yes; F ok
Yes
12
Los Angeles
Maritime
75 – 100
No
No
No
No
No
2
Monterey Bay
Northridge
Econ 2302
25 – 50
Yes (Yes)
No
Yes
Yes; F ok
No
12 - 15
Pomona
Econ 201
35 - 45
Yes (No)
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
36 - 45
Sacramento
Econ 1B
25 – 50
Yes (No)
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
20
San Diego
Econ 102
0 – 25
Yes (Yes)
Yes
Yes
Yes; F ok
Yes
10 - 12+
San Bernardino
Bus 313
San Francisco
Econ 101
25 – 50
Yes (Yes)
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
12
San Jose
Econ 1B
San Luis Obispo
San Marcos
Econ 201
0 – 25
Yes (No)
Yes
No
No
No
6
Sonoma
Econ 205
Stanislaus
Econ 2510
* Combined principles class; + 500 student section;
Notes: Tech use can either be Aplia (most common), MyEconLab or SimEcon. Surveys sent out to all 23 campuses; 10 responded.
Additional information provided by microeconomics design and review team members.
23
iv. Appendix 4: Comparison of Aplia and MyEconLab
Feature
Product Pricing
Feedback for Students
on Homework
Performance
Algorithm to Vary
Numerical Portions of
Homework Questions
Quizzes and Tests
Aplia
MyEconLab
$80 for Aplia plus e-text, $45
$40 for MyEconLab and select
additional for a bound hard-copy access to e-text (only links to
of text. Note that if instructors use text for concepts that are in
a text that is not available to be homework questions), $70 for
“partnered” with Aplia, there is a MyEconLab and complete echeaper option ($40) that only
text, $35 additional to either of
involves access to Aplia and no the previous options for a spiralelectronic or paper copy of the
bound hard copy of the text.
text. There is a three week
There is no “grace period” so
payment “grace period” for
students are unlikely to keep up
students to try Aplia but then drop with early homework
the course without incurring any assignments if they feel there is
expense.
potential for dropping the
course.
Graded assignments in
Students get multiple attempts
“Standard” mode give
(# set by instructor) to answer
feedback/explanation after due
questions set up as “Homework”
date/time has passed.
(answers are not averaged in
Assignments in “Grade It Now”
grade). “Teach Me” button
mode allow students to attempt walks students through problem
up to three different versions of a step-by-step, making it possible
question and get immediate
to reach the right answer if
feedback (multiple answers are enough time is allocated.
averaged in grade). Previously,
“Practice” versions of all graded
homework assignments were
available to students, although
this feature seems to be
disappearing.
All assignments are identical
Set up so that the numbers in
across students accessing them numerical problems are varied
in “Standard” mode. Alternatively, randomly so that different
questions can be randomized
students face slightly different
algorithmically in either
versions of the same question
“Randomized” or “Grade It Now” (reduces cheating, but makes it
mode.
difficult to discuss numeric
problems in class after the fact).
These are only possible by
Quizzes work the way Aplia’s
making an assignment visible and graded homework assignments
then setting its due date to be a work. Instructors can select a
short time later.
“pool” of exercises from which
one question is drawn so that
each student answering a
particular question will see one
of the multiple “pooled”
questions, randomly chosen.
24
Tutorials and Tailored
Study Plans
News Analysis
Experiments
Graphing
Grade Book Features
Course Management
Features
Interface Functionality
and Appearance
Tutorials in math and graphing
skills available (particularly useful
at the beginning of the course)
and can be assigned as
homework. No additional built-in
tools like individually-tailored
study plan or flash cards.
Student Resource Kit contains
math and graphing reviews.
Within each chapter, students
can answer a series of
questions that will identify a list
of topics in which their
knowledge is still deficient,
which generates an individualspecific study plan. Glossary
and Concept Review
Flashcards enable students to
build their own study system.
Some additional graded
“Economic News” button
assignments that are based on
includes NY Times articles
short popular press style pieces relevant to each chapter.
are available. Not available for
Although questions are provided
every chapter, but they work just after each article, they are not
like the other graded
assignable in a way that is
assignments.
automatically graded as with
other assignments.
Supports online experiments with No online experiments.
chat window for students to
interact during experiment.
Instructor may “silence” group
chat in order to explain something
regarding the experiment.
Questions include graphical
Questions include graphical
questions that enable students to questions that enable students
shift and draw curves.
to shift and draw curves.
Ability to download student
Ability to download student
performance data into Excel (with performance data into Excel
some tools that enable dropping (with some tools that enable
lowest score and so on), ability to dropping lowest score and so
view class-wide performance on on). Student-level item analysis
each question to pinpoint where (including # of attempts)
to spend additional teaching
available.
effort. Student-level item analysis
(including # of attempts) available.
Ability to easily upload supporting Course Compass add-on
documents, email registered
required to be able to upload
students, and post
supporting documents and
announcements.
email students. Not sure how
the cost changes with this
feature. Can post
announcements that appear on
home screen.
Well organized with assignments “Calendar” button shows a
and reading due in the next two monthly view calendar with
weeks visible on home screen.
homework, quiz, and test
Ability to view supporting
dates. Interface for creating
25
Student Support
Faculty Support
Course Set-Up
End-of-Chapter
Textbook Questions
Multimedia Features
documents classified within
subfolders if Instructor sets them
up that way.
Primarily positive reports.
Nothing but good experiences
reported.
homework and quizzes is rather
clumsy.
Primarily positive reports.
Good experiences with tech
support after adoption, but very
mediocre description of the
program by representatives
prior to adoption.
A new course, complete with
Instructors have to create their
homework assignments and text own course from scratch. Every
reading schedule, is automatically homework assignment, quiz,
generated upon selecting a
and/or test is built question-byspecific text and the course
question.
start/end date. Easy to
add/remove/rearrange questions
from any individual assignment or
to add/remove/rearrange entire
assignments. Alternatively, a
previous Aplia course may just be
copied into a new course with
different start/end dates for repeat
users.
Not available to be added directly Are available, in addition to Test
as Aplia questions.
Bank questions, to be added
directly as homework, quiz, or
test questions.
None available.
Online multimedia library
contains animated graphics of
the Figures in the chapters as
well as audio-slide show
answers to some of the end-ofchapter questions.
Comparison is based on several users’ observations and contact with representatives from
both Aplia and MyEconLab. We attempt to present the information in an impartial way, but
recognize that our preferences and personal experiences bias the information included in this
document. Additionally, these products are constantly changing, so we recommend contacting
an official representative for the latest product features and pricing.
*
26
v. Appendix 5: Cost & Brands of Clickers
Federica’s clicker of choice is eInstruction, which she has used for three
semesters. She has also used TurningPoint clickers which she found to
be far less reliable than eInstruction. TurningPoint also lacks true
numeric capability. Thus with TurningPoint, if you ask students to
calculate elasticity and you want to allow a range of answers, you will
have to type in every number that you accept. With eInstruction, you just
type in the range of numbers. Many professors in the sciences use
i>clickers which are also a very reliable clicker and their newer models
have more features, such as numeric
capability.
The cost of clickers vary by brand. The
eInstruction clickers cost about $22 with the
bookstore markup, and then students pay
about $15 per class to register the clicker.
Students may buy also ‘lifetime’ code that
allows the clicker to be used for multiple
semesters without additional fees (if they buy a
one-semester code, they can upgrade later for
the difference in cost between the onesemester and lifetime codes).
TurningPoint clickers cost about $40, but
students do not have to pay when they
register their clickers for class. It will be
necessary for someone at the university to call
TurningPoint and negotiate a price for their
receivers since they do not list the prices,
while eInstruction gives the university the
receivers. Either each classroom will need a
receiver or a professor who uses clickers will
need to take the receiver to class and plug it
into the computer. For many students the
major clicker cost is the time required to
attend class more frequently. Students are
less likely to object to the purchase price of
clickers if the professor uses the clickers
frequently in class. It is also most cost-efficient for students if the same
hardware is used in multiple courses; for example, San Diego State and
Sacramento State have standardized clicker use across campus so that any
faculty member who uses clickers, regardless of department, is encouraged to
use eInstruction. Thus, the cost of a clicker is spread across multiple courses.
Clickers do slow down class, and they may require the professor to drop a
chapter or two during the semester. However, students tend to appreciate the
more in-depth coverage, and they will likely learn the material better. For
professors, the major cost is the “up-front” preparation time. First, the
professor needs to spend some time learning how to use the software and the
27
equipment, but the major time cost will be the time to develop clicker questions. The former time
will decrease as the technological skills of the professor increase. The latter time will be less if
the textbook publisher has clicker questions ready to be inserted into the slides.
vi. Appendix 6: Additional Information about Accessibility
The Accessible Technology Initiative (ATI) reflects the California State University's ongoing
commitment to provide access to information resources and technologies to individuals with
disabilities. This commitment is articulated in Executive Order 926 (EO 926), the CSU Board of
Trustees Policy on Disability Support and Accommodations. The ATI addresses universal
design and accessibility in three broad areas: web accessibility, instructional materials
accessibility, and accessible electronic and information technology procurement.
Web Accessibility
The Internet has become the primary communications vehicle by which CSU campuses reaches
their vast communities. The ATI seeks to bring all of the web pages associated with campus
administration, services, courses, instruction, programs, and activities into compliance with Web
accessibility standards and requirements. At the campus level, the initiative has already begun
an orderly assessment of the most frequently used web pages reflective of a wide range of web
services including pages accessed by students with disabilities. The process used automated
tools for analysis but also required manual assessment, human interaction, training, and
knowledge of software to insure conformity with national accessibility guidelines. Eventually, all
individual faculty members’ web pages that are accessed by students will also be assessed and
brought into compliance.
Instructional Materials Accessibility
It is the goal of the ATI to make all instructional materials, whether print or non-print, accessible
and available in a timely manner to all learners to meet the accessibility requirements mandated
by EO 926. For instructional materials in print form, CSU encourages faculty and staff to
consider the availability of an electronic version (to facilitate conversion to alternative formats
using assistive technology) when deciding on the textbook or any other printed material for
instruction, including a process outlining a specific timeline for ordering print and non-print
materials. For instructional materials that are in electronic form, such as class notes, interactive
media, graphics, and video presentations, compliance requirements would find the disabled
learner using tools such as a screen reader or closed captioning. First priority and attention
should be given to new materials by including accessibility features at inception, then to
retrofitting older materials, beginning with those demonstrating the highest utilization or
academic demands. A collaborative effort among the faculty, administration, staff and the
publishers, media distributors and bookstores is a key ingredient in implementing this goal.
Individual campuses should have Instructional Materials Accessibility Specialists to address
questions of individual faculty members.
Accessible Electronic and Information Procurement
Important to the success of the first two priorities is for each campus in the CSU to adhere to the
set of accessibility standards for six categories of electronic and information technology (E&IT)
including websites and web applications, hardware, software, Telecommunications, multimedia
and self-contained closed products like copiers, fax machines, kiosks, etc. CSU campuses are
required to purchase E&IT products and services that conform to standards which have been
established for each of the six categories of covered items, if such is commercially available and
the purchase does not result in undue burden.
28
vii. Appendix 7: Individual Course Redesign Plans
Anne Bresnock, Cal Poly Pomona
Current Approach
My normal teaching load at Cal Poly Pomona includes two sections of Principles of
Microeconomics – Microeconomics (EC 201) each quarter. I have been teaching this course at
Cal Poly since 1990. Enrollment in each section of EC 201 averages between 49 – 70 students,
and the Department of Economics offers between 10 and 16 sections per quarter – two of these
sections each quarter are hybrid courses (primarily on-line. All of our sections of EC 201 have a
writing component which comprises between 5% and 20% of each student’s grade. All of the
full-time tenured faculty utilize technology in the form of computerized quizzes, problems sets,
simulations, and games (i.e. Aplia, MyEcon Lab, SimEcon®) as a component of each student’s
grade, and the percentage of the student’s grade derived from technology-driven assignments
ranges from 10 – 20% for traditional lecture classes to 30 – 48% for our hybrid courses. The
majority of our part-time faculty use non-computer generated quizzes and problem sets as a
component of each student’s grade.
Strengths and Weaknesses
In my EC 201 sections, I have use a variety of “learning-by-doing” activities to engage the
students both in and out of the classroom. From my experience, students have more incentive
to learn when given active learning exercises that align with course goals and test
requirements. The range of activities that I use is designed to help students develop an
“economic eye” for critical analysis and synthesis of course concepts.
First, I provide partial lecture notes for each microeconomic topic via a course website. The
students print and use these notes in class as a structure for each lecture. We work through the
notes in class adding problem-solving extensions, and contemporary examples. This approach
allows more class time for students to ask questions, and has been one of the aspects of the
class that has been a strength.
My EC 201 website contains dozens of problem sets from old exams that are organized by topic
with complete answer keys for the students to work on inside and outside the classroom. This
aspect of my approach gives the students clear signals as to the level of depth that will be
required for complete analysis on upcoming exams, gives the students materials to work on
together outside the classroom, and complements classroom instruction. Students have
responded favorably to the accessibility of these materials with written comments in my teaching
evaluations. They specifically noted that their efforts on these example problems enabled them
to perform successfully on exams.
I also use SimEcon®, a web-based, economic simulation package that contains 16 modules, as
part of the graded assignments in my EC 201 courses. This package was co-authored by Neil
Garston (Prof., CSULA) and myself with funding from NSF. Each quarter I assign 2 or 3 of
these modules for assignments worth approximately 12% of each student’s grade. I post an old
example of the first module assignment with an answer key to the class website to show the
students how to navigate the simulations. I also give a brief demonstration of how the module
works in class, provide a set of instructions for each module on the course website, post the
assignment to the class website, and post the answers after the due date. The modules offer
the students an environment to learn experientially. Students are encouraged to collaborate
29
with each other outside of class on the assignments. They have responded favorably to using
SimEcon® via surveys that have been conducted to derive feedback on the modules Student
comments in my course evaluations also indicate that the module assignments helped them
prepare for and succeed on exams.
Despite the usage of these active learning tools, it has been disconcerting to produce final
quarter grades that contain a higher than desirable D, F and W rate. Across all of the EC 201
sections the D, F, and W rate has been increasing over the last 10 to 15 years. Students start
out each quarter with good intentions, but many disappear when the going gets more difficult.
My colleagues and I have tried every creative teaching method that I know, but still the students
seem to set their priorities on other activities outside of their university commitments. This trend
has indeed worsened as our current economic recession has deepened.
Plan for Fall 2009 – Spring 2010
For this project, I chose to focus on two areas that may assist students in mastering the EC 201
course material that I have not pursued previously. First, I will incorporate student learning
assistants (SLAs) into the class design. Initially the SLAs will work with me in class each week
for a portion of one of the two meeting times. The SLAs will also have tutoring hours per week
at times that maximize student access. The SLAs will conduct Friday afternoon tutorial
sessions for students that need additional help. I began this process in Spring, 2009 and expect
to continue working with SLAs during the 2009-10 academic year.
The second new feature for the EC 201 class is development of multiple-choice with extensions
(MCWE) exercises. Students seem to earn lower scores on the multiple-choice section of my
exams. Standard multiple-choice questions with marked answers in textbook study guides, and
even multiple-choice questions in computerized programs that have explanations do not seem
to improve their scores on this section of the tests. The purpose of MCWE style questions is to
make the students write the explanations themselves. This engages them in the process,
requires them to document why an answer is correct or incorrect, and provides them with
tangible review examples for exams. I developed seven MCWE exercises (one for each nonexam week) during Spring, 2009 and plan to continue this practice throughout 2009-10.
Aaron Hegde, CSU Bakersfield
Current Approach
I have been teaching principles of microeconomics as far back as graduate school, about eight
years now. Over the years I have experimented with various teaching techniques. While still in
graduate school, I was part of an initiative on Inquiry Guided Learning. This involved shifting the
responsibility of learning back on to the student, principally through guided inquiry. As such I
would use various techniques founded in the Socratic method of teaching. For instance, I would
ask students to draw some principles from various articles published in the popular press. I
would also engage in discussions and activities such as the two-minute paper. There would
also be discussions following videos, pertinent to the day’s topic.
Strength and Weaknesses of Current Approach
Over the years, I found most of these techniques to be working, as demonstrated in the average
student performance. However, since my move to CSUB, I have noticed a downward trend in
the average scores, specifically an increase in the percentage of Ds and Fs (the ‘DF’ rate). The
pinnacle of this was the fall quarter of 2008, when the ‘DF’ rate was about 56 % of overall
30
grades. This class was probably the worst performer, in so far as grades were concerned. I
started to wonder if there was something I was not doing, or something I should not be doing.
The Transforming Course Design (TCD) project, whose objective was to examine the same
system-wide, came at an opportune time.
One of the strengths of my approach, as indicated in student evaluations, has been that
students are not always intimidated by most of the material. They see that economics is more
than just graphs, charts and equations. Through readings and videos, they can relate to the
concepts.
A major weakness is the lack of responsibility from the students. Some students view assigned
work as busy work, or feel that average performance on exams and in-class activities would
give them the minimum grade needed in microeconomics, a required course for their majors. A
few lack the intellectual curiosity and the motivation to acquire more knowledge. This is typically
demonstrated by the poor attendance, which is not required in my classes. I would rather not
have the disinterested present, rather than being present and disruptive in my classes.
Towards addressing greater responsibility and ownership, I decided to use the online homework
program, Aplia, at my offering following the disastrous fall quarter, i.e. during the winter quarter.
To be consistent, I retained all other aspects of the course from the fall quarter. Exams and
quizzes were essentially similar; the same readings and videos were discussed; the number of
assignments and short papers were identical. My teaching style and lecture notes were also
unchanged. The student population makeup was also roughly the same, i.e. the average class
GPA was not significantly different. The only difference between the two quarters was the
introduction of Aplia. The ‘DF’ rate for the winter quarter dropped much lower to approximately
13%. While the results are not scientific, the decrease is rather dramatic.
Plan for Fall 2009
Once again, I will be teaching micro principles during the fall quarter of 2009. So far, the class
make up does not look very different than the previous two offerings (fall 2008 and winter
2009). I will keep the course structure similar to Winter quarter and introduce a personal
response system (clickers). iClickers are being used in the School of Natural Science and
Mathematics at CSUB. While these clickers are not ideal for economics, I will use them in my
class so as to have a common device throughout our campus. This should force the students
with poor attendance records to be present and to pay attention, since clicker participation will
be graded, without being disruptive.
I recently attended a Teaching Innovations Program (TIP) workshop offered by the American
Economics Association (AEA), where I was introduced to various innovative teaching ideas. I
will try some of these in my classes, especially the principles class.
Assessment Plan
One phase of the participation in TIP requires that I enroll in a expert guided module. One of the
modules I have chosen to enroll in during the fall is the Assessment module. This module will
teach me ways in which I can assess the learning of my students. In order to complete the
module, I need to try an innovative approach from the TIP workshop, and then assess it in
different ways, some traditional and some non-traditional. I plan on using some of these tools to
assess the effect of introducing clickers. Of course, the ultimate measure would be a lower ‘DF’
rate.
31
Extended Plan
Over the long run I plan to combine techniques acquired through my involvement in the TCD
project as well as the TIP workshop. My goal is to step away from the ‘traditional’ approach to
teaching economics, the plug and chug method, and to make it non-threatening, fun and
educational. I would like to do this without sacrificing content or rigor. I suspect this will require
much fine-tuning of the course over multiple offerings.
Jessica Howell, CSU Sacramento
Current Approach
I have been teaching Introductory Microeconomics since the fall of 2003. From the beginning, I
have used Aplia in conjunction with the McEachern textbook (although Aplia was not tied to
specific texts at that time). I require students to purchase the textbook, although now Aplia is
now bundled with an electronic version of the text. My exams are predominantly multiple choice
with a small written response component.
Strengths & Weaknesses of Current Approach
Most student criticism about Aplia concerned the need for better integration of my lecture
material, Aplia homework questions, and exam questions. As a result, the tweaks that I have
made over the years have concentrated primarily on better integration. For example, rather
than waiting until after a homework assignment to work through a problem that students
struggle with, I now bring in my laptop, project an Aplia practice assignment on the screen, and
work through a non-graded version of the problematic question(s) prior to when the graded
assignment is due. I’ve also looked for other ways to better integrate the three elements of the
course (lecture, Aplia, exams) by adding an element, in-class exercises. These paper-based
exercises are often modeled after an Aplia question, but students work out the problem on
paper (as they are asked to do during exams). These exercises, in addition to fostering peer
interaction and improving their mastery of the topic, are designed to remind students that online
homework assignments are still likely to require some paper-based calculations or graphical
analysis to arrive at the correct answer.
One of the weaknesses of my current approach is related to student enthusiasm, which I
strongly suspect is due to the fact that many economic concepts are not successfully related to
their lives and the issues that matter most to them. Guns and butter might be perfectly
wonderful examples of defense goods and consumption goods in the teaching of a production
possibilities frontier, but I don’t believe the example stays with the typical 20-year-old student.
Plan for Spring 2010
I teach this course next in the spring of 2010. The changes I plan to make are predominantly
about increasing student interest and engagement, which I hope will foster better understanding
and retention.
Features of the Course that I will Maintain:


The textbook employed
Aplia (although some features of Aplia are different since the last time I used it)
32


Multiple choice exam style and most questions (to facilitate assessment of the
impact of other changes) – I will likely reduce the weight of exams in the overall
grade to allow room for other activities to impact their grade
Topics covered (to facilitate assessment of the impact of other changes)
Features of the Course that I will Change:


Add Personal Response Systems, or clickers (the goal is better attendance and
better attention among those attending)
Lectures delivered via PowerPoint (to more easily incorporate clickers)
Assessment Plan
I will seek student feedback at several points during the spring 2010 semester in order to tweak
the way in which the addition of clickers and switch to PowerPoints appear to affect student
interest and learning. I will maintain some key features of my previous course so that I may
more convincingly demonstrate the effect of the proposed changes. In particular, if the
textbook, lecture material, Aplia assignments, and exam questions are the same as in previous
semesters, then changes in student performance may be more credibly attributed to the use of
PowerPoint and clickers. I will compare performance on homework and exams, as well as
overall number of D, F, and W course grades. While it would be somewhat complicated to
control for other confounding factors (like a change in the average caliber of student enrolled
from previous semesters), I will investigate whether there have been changes in average
student characteristics with help from the CSUS Office of Institutional Research.
Extended Plan
The results of my initial assessment will determine whether I continue to employ clickers in
conjunction with Aplia. Because I would like to continue to make the course content more
interesting and relevant to students and their daily lives, I will bring in more pop culture and
current news through various multimedia sources and also experiment with different textbooks
in future classes. I am also interested in continually improving the accessibility of the
instructional materials in the course.
Jennifer Imazeki, San Diego State University
Current Approach
I have taught Introductory Microeconomics almost every year since starting at SDSU in 2000.
In a sense, I redesigned my course two years ago when I began teaching a section of 500
students. Prior to that, I taught sections of 50-60 students and my approach has always been
relatively interactive (e.g., I did in-class games and experiments, gave daily quizzes and had
students work collaboratively on in-class exercises). In order to maintain this interactive
approach with the super-sized class, I adopted eInstruction clickers and Aplia, which I now use
primarily to do on-line experiments. I also had to convert my lectures entirely to PowerPoint and
I use Blackboard extensively to communicate with the class and post course materials.
Because it takes additional class time to incorporate clicker questions, I eliminated some
material (e.g., I do not teach cost curves or game theory) and I expect students to come to class
already familiar with basic concepts and definitions, so we can spend class time on applications.
To facilitate that, I record short podcasts that summarize these concepts and definitions, and
33
expect students to listen to those (and read the accompanying textbook pages if they need to)
before coming to class.
Clickers
I use clickers from eInstruction; San Diego State decided a few years ago to standardize with
one company across campus (more information about clicker use at SDSU, including faculty
and student feedback, and links to research on their effectiveness, can be found at
http://clicker.sdsu.edu/). As more and more faculty have adopted clickers, it has become easier
for me to explain them to my students and to justify their cost. I embed clicker questions in the
PowerPoint slides using eInstruction’s PowerPoint plug-in so the transition to questions is
seamless during lectures. My policy is to make every class worth the same number of points
(last semester, it was 3 points) and if I happen to ask more questions, I randomly select three
(other colleagues at SDSU adjust the points on each question or make every question worth the
same so the points per day could vary). At the end of the semester, I keep the top 25 scores;
dropping at least a few scores means I can avoid issues with students who forgot their clickers
or who have dead batteries, etc. (note: I teach MWF and there are always several days without
scores for various reasons; I found that it is better to tell students that I will KEEP the top 25
scores, rather than telling them I will DROP the lowest X scores, because X may have to
change over the course of the semester). Last semester, I also made a quiz available on
Blackboard that students could take if they missed class; I take the higher of their clicker score
or quiz score for a given day. It is easier for students to get full credit if they come to class but
by offering the quiz, a) students who attend class get a little extra practice if they want it and b) I
believe there were fewer disruptive students in class (i.e., students who were only coming to
class to get the points but really did not want to be there tended to talk more, especially given
that the size of the class allowed them a lot of anonymity; with the online quiz, they were less
likely to come to class, which I feel is ultimately better for the other students, but I still felt
reassured that they were staying on top of the material).
One feature of the eInstruction system that I use occasionally is “pick-a-student”, which
randomly draws a name from the roster (a box shows up on the screen with the name and
clicker ID). I tend to use this when I have asked the class to brainstorm examples or asked
them a question that doesn’t really have a ‘wrong’ answer. Although students don’t love it, they
admit that knowing I might call on someone randomly makes them more likely to stay on task.
In general, student feedback about clickers has been largely positive. They recognize that the
clickers keep them more engaged; for example, students have made comments like, “I pay
more attention because I know a clicker question is going to be coming up” and “I like that I can
see right away if I get the answer right.” The clickers give the students (and me) immediate
feedback on how they are doing that would not otherwise be possible in that large a class. I
think they also appreciate that the clicker questions are similar to what they will see on exams.
In fact, now that I have been using them for a few semesters, I have started using old exam
questions as clicker questions. I also have found ways to use the multiple-choice clicker
questions to motivate working on more open-ended questions: I pose an open-ended question
(e.g., “Use a supply and demand graph to show what happens to price and quantity if X
happens”) and then follow that with a multiple-choice clicker question that can be easily
answered if they did the graph first (and I give them less time to answer, since they were
already given time to draw the graph).
Aplia
34
The first semester I used Aplia, I assigned several problem sets. Students hated them, in part
because I did not edit the questions carefully enough, to make them match what I do in class
and the questions I ask on exams. In subsequent semesters, I have assigned fewer problem
sets, and those I do assign have now been edited carefully. Instead, I use Aplia primarily
because it allows me to do experiments that I could not otherwise do with that many students.
Aplia has five experiments that are appropriate for micro principles and I use four of them (basic
supply and demand, taxes, tragedy of the commons and asymmetric information; the one I omit
covers price controls). Each experiment has a preparatory problem set that walks students
through how the experiment works, and a follow-up problem set that helps them process what
they have done (because the follow-up problem set provides some made-up data, it is possible
for students to do the follow-up problem set even if they did not do the experiment). As an
incentive for the students (and because attendance is typically lower on Fridays anyway), I
schedule each of the experiments in place of a regular Friday class meeting; that is, students
log in from home or a computer lab instead of coming to class. I also schedule at least one
other time slot, for any students who have technical problems.
Because I use Mankiw’s textbook, Aplia has the added advantage of providing an online version
of the textbook. I do not follow the text super-closely and I always tell students at the beginning
of the semester that if they are consistent about listening to the podcasts, coming to class and
taking good notes, they may not even need the book. However, if they decide not to buy the
book, they can still access the online version through Aplia.
Podcasts
In order to make time for clickers and other in-class activities that I believe are important for
students to get a deeper understanding of ideas, I have stopped using class time for basic
definitions. Instead, I require that students listen to short podcasts (no more than five minutes)
that I record using Audacity (freeware, available at http://audacity.sourceforge.net/). The
podcasts give a basic introduction to new terms and concepts, and the presentation is quite
similar to what I used to say in class. I found that recording the podcasts was smoother if I
wrote out a script first; this has the added advantage that I can also post that script on the
website along with the audio file (an example of a podcast script can be found at
http://docs.google.com/View?id=dcvwc65_85hnstxwdc). One advantage of using the Audacity
software is that I can easily cut out and paste in selected parts of any podcast. In particular, I
can tailor the introduction each semester (for example, including reminders to students about
upcoming assignments or exams), without having to re-record the whole thing.
In order to make sure that students really are listening to the podcast and are ready to dive into
applications, I usually ask a clicker question or two at the beginning of class that tests their
knowledge of the terms and concepts I expect them to know. If too many students get those
questions wrong, I will spend a minute or two reviewing the material (which often is
accomplished simply by explaining the answer to the clicker question itself); however, I don’t
spend too much time, instead telling students that they really need to come to class prepared.
Student reaction to the podcasts has been extremely positive. Students have told me that they
like that they can listen to the podcasts anywhere, and repeatedly, and many read the scripts as
well. Because I do the podcasts myself, they are closely tied to what I cover in class and
students recognize that the podcasts are pointing them to the concepts I consider most
important.
Future Plans
35
I will continue with the techniques that I have been using. One area that I intend to work on is
incorporating more music and video clips into my lecture material. I occasionally start class with
a music ‘video’ from http://www.musicforecon.com and have also made two of my own videos
using the timed animation features in PowerPoint (this allows me to customize the video more to
what we have discussed in class). However, this is time-consuming so I anticipate only adding
a few of these each semester. Finding video clips, and more visual images for my lecture slides
in general, is time-consuming but I try to make a little progress each semester.
Janice Peterson, CSU Fresno
Past Approach
I last taught Principles of Microeconomics in the Spring of 2000 at the State University of New
York, College at Fredonia, where I had taught the course since the Fall of 1990. I structured the
course as an "interactive lecture," where I utilized short, and typically informal,
active/cooperative learning exercises in class to reinforce key concepts and to provide formative
assessment experiences (for myself and the students). Although these exercises were
(typically) not graded, I recorded them as part of class participation (which comprised a small
part of the final grade). I also assigned graded out-of-class homework, based on the textbook's
study guide and/or problems I developed. I tested frequently, giving regular quizzes and multiple
"mid-term" exams (typically in a multiple choice and short essay/problem format). I typically
gave a graded writing assignment with a "current issues" focus, drawing on articles in current
news periodicals. During this time period, I was involved in an on-going national project focused
on integrating issues of race and gender into introductory economic courses, which informed my
choices with respect to particular issues and topics.
Strengths and Weaknesses of Past Approach
I think that this course structure worked fairly well overall. For the time and institution it was
considered fairly interactive, and the students (for the most part) appeared to appreciate the
emphasis placed on current economic issues and problems. Testing often and assessing
students on a variety of different assignments also seemed to work fairly well in providing both
useful formative assessment information and a reasonable basis for determining final grades.
The most serious weakness with this course (from the perspective of current practice) was that I
did not utilize any form of computer (or other) technology to enhance student learning.
Plan for Fall 2009
I will teach Principles of Microeconomics at CSU Fresno for the first time in the Fall of 2009. I
plan to continue to use an "interactive lecture" format (incorporating active/cooperative learning
exercises), to use frequent exams and quizzes, and to structure the (required general
education) writing assignments around current economic issues. The two important
changes/additions that I will make are: 1) the use of an on-line homework and tutorial system
(MyEconLab) associated with the text book (Foundations of Microeconomics, Robin Bade and
Michael Parkin), and 2) the use of Supplemental Instruction (SI).
On-line Homework and Tutorial System: I chose to use the Bade/Parkin text and MyEconLab
on-line system to provide some consistency with the other full-time faculty member teaching
multiple sections of Principles of Microeconomics. (In addition, this is the text and on-line
homework/tutorial system used by the Supplemental Instruction leader for my course, discussed
36
below). I plan to use several of the on-line features available through this system, including: a)
the economic news feature which provides students access to current news articles and videos,
b) the study plan which provides practice problems linked with the text and a variety of study
aids, c) practice quizzes, and d) graded homework problems. I plan to work closely with the
Supplemental Instruction leader for my course to incorporate problems from MyEconLab into his
SI sessions.
Supplemental Instruction (SI): At CSU Fresno, Supplemental Instruction (SI) sessions are peerled review sessions provided for selected courses/sections. The sessions are led by SI leaders,
who are students who have successfully completed the course. SI leaders are hired, trained (in
cooperative learning and other pedagogical strategies), supervised, and paid the by the
University Learning Center. SI leaders attend each class meeting, facilitate study sessions
outside of class (three per week), and meet regularly with the professor. Student participation in
the SI sessions is not required; I will be given the names of those students who attended SI
sessions at the end of the term and plan to assign a small amount of extra credit for attending SI
sessions.
Assessment and Evaluation
My course assessment strategy for Fall 2009 is to use of frequent exams, quizzes, writing
assignments, and (on-line) homework for both formative and summative assessment, and to
provide students with multiple opportunities for success. I plan to examine the assessment
component of my course more rigorously in spring 2010 (see below).
My ability to evaluate the impacts of introducing the on-line homework/tutorial system and
Supplemental Instruction on student outcomes will be limited by the availability of a true
comparison group. But I will gather information on the usefulness of these course innovations in
two ways. First, the SI program (in cooperation with the University's Institutional Research,
Assessment and Planning office) will compare the mean final course grades of students (from
my Principles of Microeconomics sections) who attended SI sessions versus those who did not
(using a model developed by the SI program's creators), as well as the mean final course grade
for those Principles of Microeconomics sections supported by SI versus those that did not
participate in SI. Second, the SI program will survey students at the end of the semester to
assess their views on the usefulness of the program. The SI coordinator will work with me to
expand this survey to include questions that go beyond the SI program, such as the usefulness
of the on-line homework/tutorial system.
Extensions -- Spring 2010
In spring 2010, I will follow a similar plan (if SI is available) with an additional focus on the
development of assessment strategies for the course. I plan to complete the AEA's Teaching
Innovations Program module on assessment, which provides expert guidance on improving
formative and summative assessment techniques as well as using classroom assessment for
interactive learning. Completing this module will involve developing an assessment plan for my
Principles of Microeconomics course and selecting/implementing/evaluating a set of
assessment techniques for the purpose of interactive learning.
Frederica Shockley, CSU Chico
Introduction
37
Although I started redesigning my introductory microeconomics class in order to improve
student learning, I found a model that reduces cost and helps student learn more economics. I
began experimenting with my class in 2001, and it took me 7 years to find the right combination.
At first I thought that if I could find an easier text, then students would read more and therefore
they would learn more. After talking to many book “reps” and trying several texts, I gave up on
finding an easier text, but I still searched for a way to reach my students.
Classroom Experiments
I found a text that had a non-technology based class experiment in every chapter. Since I
believe that students learn more by “doing economics” than they do by listening to a lecture, I
thought that the “all experiment” text might help me reach my students. On closer inspection I
realized that this approach would not work unless the students read the text before coming to
class.
I discovered some non-technology based classroom experiments that students could try without
reading about them before they came to class. Students really seemed to like the experiments
and I felt that it was a good way to move from passive to active learning. My favorite is the
“foldits” experiment in which students fold a piece of paper in thirds and staple it. I add one
student each round with an extensive supply of paper but only one stapler. Then I show them
how to calculate marginal product and to calculate the costs.
Aplia
In 2003 I discovered Aplia, an online homework program, developed and managed by Paul
Romer. It had “generic” tutorials and computer graded homework that was supposed to fit with
any intro micro text. Professor Romer strongly advised me to assign the homework before I
cover the material in class. “Aplia is designed to get students to read the text before the
professor lectures on it.” Reading through some of the Aplia assignments, I decided that
anyone working through the material would have to learn some economics. By basing almost
40% of their grades on Aplia, I thought that I could give them an incentive to read the text and
complete the online assignments. In fall of 2003 I began using Aplia in class, assigning the
material before I covered it in class, just as Professor Romer advised.
Reading, a Universal Problem?
I began to think that getting students to read is not just a “Chico” problem if Professor Romer,
who teaches at Stanford, designed Aplia to get students to read. On my first trip to the middleeast I met some Saudi professors who were also complaining about how difficult it is to get
students to read. Maybe we face a universal problem with students who refuse to read their
assignments!
Student Complaints
About one-third of my students preferred taking a D, W, or F over doing the Aplia assignments.
I asked my students who were there at the end of the fall 2003 semester to evaluate Aplia.
About 80% of those who completed the evaluation said that Aplia had a positive effect on their
understanding of economics, but only 60% wanted to use Aplia again.
38
In 2004 I continued assigning Aplia before the lecture despite many complaints from my
students. The complaints decreased somewhat when Aplia offered tutorials and homework
designed for the Krugman and Wells text that I was using. Moving away from the “generic”
approach to questions designed for a specific text was a major improvement for Aplia.
“I learned more than I ever intended to learn about economics!” complained one student. A lot
of my students let me know that they hated Aplia because it took too much of their time. In fall
2005 only half of my introductory micro section filled. Despite the fact that in each of the 4
semesters I used Aplia, about 80% of the students I surveyed said that Aplia had a positive
effect on their learning economics, I dropped Aplia.
No Aplia
In 2006 I changed to the Frank and Bernanke text which promoted “economic naturalism,”
which is analyzing everyday problems using the Principles of Microeconomics. I inflated their
grades; students were happy and my classes were full.
Clickers
I still searched for a way to reach my students, and in 2007 I heard about “clickers,” also called
a classroom response system. It reminded me of a visit to Disney World back the 1970’s where
I responded to survey questions in a classroom setting. We used little computers built into the
arm of the desks and we saw summaries of our responses almost immediately on the screen at
the front of the classroom. At that time I thought that this would be a terrific way to teach a
class, but that was Disney World and I teach at Chico State.
The einstruction clickers that I adopted in spring 2007 were easy to use and very reliable. I
spent a couple of weeks before class learning how to insert the questions into my PowerPoint
presentations and how to use the equipment; it required several calls to einstruction, but I did
not need any on-campus support. The first day I tried them in class, I told my students to turn
on their clickers and they immediately started answering the questions that I had inserted into
my PowerPoint presentations. That semester not one single student had to exchange a faulty
clicker, and I did not need any assistance in the classroom with the clickers. The students and I
were confident that the clicker software recorded their grades accurately, and their clicker
scores counted for 20% of their grade.
Clickers are great because they let me know immediately if students understand the material
that I have covered. Mostly, I ask them questions about the material that I have just covered,
but I repeat some questions, such as demand and supply questions that test their
understanding of a shift in the curve vs. a movement along the curve, throughout the semester.
I discovered that I could also teach students to read graphs with clickers by asking them
questions that require them to read the graphs on the slides. At last I had my “Disney
Classroom” at Chico!
Unfortunately, Chico State adopted TurningPoint as a standard in fall 2007, and I found that my
Disney classroom was in the Haunted Mansion! Every week I spent hours with our on-campus
tech support trying to make the TurningPoint clickers work. Students told me that their scores,
which get automatically recorded in a spreadsheet with clickers, were incorrect. They said that
they did not miss as many questions as TurningPoint said they did. I asked our on-campus
tech support if this was possible, and they said that TurningPoint may produce incorrect scores;
they told me that they didn’t recommend using TuriningPoint clickers for “high stakes” testing. I
39
calculated the students’ averages with and without their clicker grades, giving them the higher of
the two scores.
In spring 2008 I told my students that I was sorry that some may have to buy two clickers, but I
am asking you to buy the one that works, einstruction. At the end of the fall 2008 semester I
had 25 out of 95 students who had used either TurningPoint or i>clickers in other classes as
well as the einstruction clickers they used in my class. (The College of Natural Sciences
adopted i>clicker for their standard.) Although available for all 25 students, only 16 chose to
take the survey, and all 16 had used TurningPoint as well as einstruction clickers. When asked
“If you had a choice between two sections of a class, one using einstruction clickers and one
using the other brand, which would you prefer?,” 13 our of 16 said that they preferred
einstruction over TurningPoint.
Back to Aplia
In spring 2998 I ran into a former student who asked me, “Are you still using that great program,
Aplia?” That made me start thinking about a way that I could get my students to use Aplia.
Mostly, from the students’ perspective it was a workload issue; they could minimize their cost of
taking intro micro by enrolling in a section that does not use Aplia.
I feel very strongly that students learn more economics using Aplia and clickers. If only I could
find a way to get them to accept the workload! Then it occurred to me that I could eliminate
exams in order to balance the workload between my classes and the other intro micro classes in
my department. On the first day of class in the fall of 2008 I told my students that I had bad
news and good news. “Which would you like to hear first?” The class got very quite and one
student asked for the bad news first. I told them that they were going to have 2 to 3 graded
online homework assignments every week and that they would have graded clicker questions
every class. It was difficult to believe that 95 students could be so quiet. Then one student
asked for the good news. When I told them they would have not exams, they cheered.
This time I did not assign the material before I covered it in class. Instead I read through the
Aplia material and tried to cover the most difficult questions in class, often inserting Aplia
questions into my clicker questions. I carefully coordinated my lectures with the Aplia material,
and I believe that is critical for success since the assignments are too difficult for many of my
students unless they get help before they start.
At the end of fall 2008 I had only 10% DWF’s as compared to 30% to 50% in my previous intro
micro classes. Still about 80% of those taking the survey at the end of the semester say that
Aplia has a positive effect on their understanding of economics. About 70%, up from 60% in
prior surveys, say they would like to use Aplia again. At last, I know how to reach my students!
Reliability
Professors who have used technologies such as TurningPoint clickers or WebCT/BB/Vista will
be pleasantly surprised to find out how reliable Aplia and einstruction clickers are. Aplia is
rarely down and when they are, they send a notice to faculty. I have never had a student in
class with a registered einstruction clicker who was unable to use the clicker. Both Aplia and
einstruction have very good technical support over the phone or by email.
Cost
40
For students Aplia costs $80 per semester for an online text, the homework, tutorials, and the
online experiments. They can also order a hard copy of the text for approximately $50 more,
but very few of my students require the hard copy. The einstruction clickers cost about $24
with our bookstore markup of 37%, and they cost about $15 to register for each class. At the
end of the semester students can sell their clickers back to the bookstore for about $12.
There is a lot of fixed cost for the professor who needs to spend some time learning to use Aplia
and the clicker software, but that is not the major expense. Much more time will be required to
read the assignments and eliminate some assignments and some questions since the outline
contains all possible chapter and assignments associated with a text. The professor will have to
spend more time developing or copying the questions and inserting them into PowerPoint or
another program that will allow the students to respond to clicker questions.
I have a student assistant who manages both the Aplia and the clicker grade files. Basically, he
downloads the Aplia files from Aplia’s website and uploads them to my BB/Vista account where
students can view their grades. I email him the grades that the einstruction software produces,
and he uploads those grades. I drop their 3 lowest clicker scores and their 3 lowest Aplia
scores, and my assistant calculates the 3 lowest scores each week. Aplia does have a grade
book, and I may switch from BB/Vista to Aplia’s grade book.
In summary,
 Aplia puts text and homework into a calendar in my account at Aplia.
 I decide which chapters, assignments, and questions that I want to keep and when they
are due.
 I read through Aplia homework and put more difficult questions into clicker question
format.
 I check to see how they did and go over material if large percent miss questions.
 Student assistant uploads files from Aplia and from clicker software to BB/Vista grade
book.
Although the fixed cost of my Aplia-Clicker class is quite high, the marginal cost is low. With no
exams the cost of admitting another student is lower than it is with a traditional class. I am
uncertain about the optimal size for intro micro, but I had 95 students in a class that normally
holds 80 during fall 2008. A reduction in the rate of DWF’s also reduces cost since fewer
students have to repeat the class. Although I started looking for a way to improve learning, I
discovered a way to reduce cost as well.
Cheating
Some fear that students will cheat with Aplia. There are 20 or more variations for each question
and there are many questions to answer each week. Since students have so many different
variations, it is difficult to share answers. Perhaps they will work together and discuss the
questions, but if they do, then they are learning economics!
I estimate that a student in my class will need to spend at least 5 hours per week outside of
class in order to complete the assignments. It would be expensive to pay someone to put in this
much time, and it would be difficult to find a friend who will work this hard.
41
I allow students to discuss their clicker questions before they answer them in class. I tell them
that they don’t have to learn; they can just enter the answer they hear from other students, but
they will have more difficulty with Aplia since they will get some similar questions online.
Cheating is possible with Aplia and with clickers, but it is also possible in our crowded, backpack
filled classrooms. If they are determined enough, students can probably find a way to cheat in
any class. We can only try to increase the cost of cheating in an effort to minimize it.
Shortcomings
Using clickers slows me down in class which is both good and bad. It’s good because I get far
fewer complaints that I go over the material too rapidly. It’s bad because I cover about 2 fewer
chapters.
Students have to register with Aplia and with einstruction using the same student ID as they use
to logon to BB/Vista in order for me to upload grades to the BB/Vista grade book. Unfortunately,
students at Chico State have 2 different ID’s, and it is really difficult to get them to use the
correct ID even though I offer extra points for the correct registration.
Sometimes students have difficulty remembering to bring their clickers to class. Last semester I
discussed this at the first meeting of the class, pointing out that this was a major problem for
some students. I asked them how they could remember to bring their clickers to class. They
came up with a few suggestions, and the discussion really seemed to reduce their forgetfulness.
I do have a “loaner” clicker which goes to the first student who requests it on any given day.
Students find many excuses for not being able to use the computer when they need to do their
Aplia assignments, and they find many excuses for missing their clicker questions because they
can’t come to class. For these reasons, I drop their 3 lowest Aplia and their 3 lowest clicker
scores.
Since I allow my students to discuss their clicker questions before I close polling, the class can
get quite noisy. When I start using the CPS Chalkboard next semester, I will be able to move
about the room while advancing the questions, and I hope that this help reduce the noise level.
Reduce or Spread Fixed Cost?




Cengage bought Aplia and signed a marketing agreement with einstruction. Maybe they
will put together slides ready for clicker software. This would be a considerable
reduction in prep time.
If anyone wants to use the same text that I use, Krugman and Wells, they can use my
outline and/or my slides with the questions already set up for einstruction clickers.
Maybe 2 or more professors want to use the same text and they can work together on
the materials.
Maybe you want to start with one of the technologies and later add the other in order to
spread the fixed cost over several semesters.
Assessment
Next fall my department plans to use some common multiple-choice questions in all sections of
introductory microeconomics. That will allow me to compare my students’ knowledge of
42
microeconomics with the students who do not use Aplia. I will continue giving the end of
semester Aplia evaluations which have consistently shown that about 80% think that Aplia has a
positive effect on their learning economics.
Future Plans
I will continue using Aplia, eInstruction clickers, and some classroom experiments, but I do want
to try some minor changes. Next fall I am going to use the CPS chalkboard, a devise that will
allow me to walk around the room while advancing the clicker questions. Without the
chalkboard I am tied to the desktop computer since my PowerPoint remote will not advance the
clicker questions. I hope that the CPS chalkboard will give me some insights about how my
students work together to answer the questions.
I would like to cover more “application” chapters such as one on anti-trust, but that would
require dropping some of the theory classes. I haven’t decided which chapters to drop. I also
want to make some weekly videos available for my students. Likely, I will post the url’s at the
Aplia site where I post my PowerPoint presentations for downloading.
Someday I hope to have a classroom with a computer built into every desk. Then I can ask the
students to download data from the Web and work with the data using Excel. In the longer-run I
want to find a way to add entertainment to microeconomics. I am not sure how I will do this.
Please let me know if you have suggestions
Conclusions
I like classroom experiments because I think students learn more by “doing” economics than
they do listening to a lecture.


I like Aplia because students learn more economics if they use it.
I like einstruction clickers because I can:
o Determine if students understand the material;
o Use them to teach students how to read a graph;
o Repeat questions about difficult concepts throughout the semester;
o Give them an incentive to come to class & to listen.
Lisa Takeyama, San Francisco State University
One change that I intend to implement in my microeconomics course is to better integrate the
Aplia assignments into classroom lectures. This will hopefully address the disconnect that
students sometimes feel exists between the Aplia assignments and what we have covered in
lecture. To accomplish this, I will select one or two problems from the upcoming weekly Aplia
assignment and work through parallel exercises in class. Additionally, after the weekly
assignment has been graded, I will note which problems had a high percentage of incorrects
and review one or two of those in class. Of course, making these changes involves the
opportunity cost of somewhat reduced course coverage; however, I expect that the tradeoff will
be well worth it. I also plan to make available to the students even more review and problemsolving exercises beyond Aplia; in particular, I will offer the study guide that accompanies the
text as an option for those students wishing to have additional study tools.
43
VI. References
Improving Student Learning













Teaching Economics to Undergraduates: Alternatives to Chalk and Talk, edited by
William E. Becker and Michael Watts, Edward Elgar, 1998.
Teaching Economics: More Alternatives to Chalk and Talk, edited by William E. Becker,
Michael Watts and Suzanne Becker, Edward Elgar, 2006.
"A Self-Directed Guide to Designing Courses for Significant Learning," L.Dee Fink,
Director, Instructional Development Program, University of Oklahoma.
"Targeted Teaching: An Illustrated Case for Active Learning," Michael I. Salemi,
Southern Economic Journal, Vol. 68, No. 3, Summer 2002, pp. 721-731.
"Implementing Hansen's Proficiencies," J. Lon Carlson, Raymond L. Cohn, and David
D. Ramsey, Journal of Economic Education, Vol. 33, No. 2, Spring 2002, pp. 180 - 191.
"Use It or Lose It: Teaching Literacy in the Economics Principles Course," W. Lee
Hansen, Michael K. Salemi, and John J. Siegfried, AEA Papers and Proceedings, Vol.
92, No. 2, May 2002, pp. 463 - 472.
"Expected Proficiencies for Undergraduate Economics Majors,” W. Lee Hansen, Journal
of Economic Education, Vol. 32, No. 3, Summer 2001, pp. 231 - 242.
"What Knowledge Is Most Worth Knowing -- For Economics Majors", W. Lee Hansen,
American Economic Review, Vol. 76, No. 2, March 1986, pp. 149 - 152.
"The Scholarship of Teaching Economics," Carol Johnston, Ian McDonald, and Ross
Williams, Journal of Economic Education, Vol. 32, No. 3, Summer 2001, pp. 195 - 202.
"A Little More Than Chalk and Talk: Results from a Third National Survey of Teaching
Methods in Undergraduate Economics Courses," Michael Watts and William E. Becker,
Journal of Economic Education, Vol. 39, No. 3, Summer 2008, pp. 273 - 286.
"Teaching Economics at the Start of the 21st Century: Still Chalk-and-Talk", William E.
Becker and Michael Watts, AEA Papers and Proceedings, Vol. 91, No. 2, May 2001, pp.
446 -451,
"Teaching Tools: Teaching Methods in Undergraduate Economics," William E. Becker
and Michael Watts, Economic Inquiry, Vol. 23, October 1995, pp. 692 - 700.
Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The Classification of Educational Goals,
Handbook 1: Cognitive Domain, edited by B. S. Bloom, McKay, 1956.
Student Learning Assistants



"Measuring the Effect of Class Size and Supplemental Instruction on Student Success in
Introductory Macroeconomics," Jessica S. Howell and Kristin Van Gaasbeck, CSUS
Working Paper, 2009.
"Integrating Undergraduate Peer Mentors into Liberal Arts Courses: A Pilot Study,”
Tanial Smith, Innovative Higher Education, Vol. 33, Issue 1, pp. 49 - 63.
"Learning Through Teaching: Knowledge Changes in Undergraduate Teaching
Assistants," William J. Fremouw, W. J. Millard, and John W. Donahoe, Teaching of
Psychology, Vol. 6, Issue, 1, Feb. 1979, pp. 31 - 32.
44







"Undergraduate Assistants as an Integral Factor in an Educational Psychology Course,"
Kathryn W. Linden, Russell E. James, and John F. Feldhusen, Teaching of Psychology,
Vol. 4, Issue 4, December 1977, pp. 182 - 185.
"Working with and Training Undergraduates as Teaching Assistants," Thomas P.
Hogan, John C. Norcross, J. Timothy, and Christie P. Karpiak, Teaching of Psychology,
Vol. 34, Issue 3, Summer 2007, pp. 187 - 190.
"Analysis of Learning Assistants' Views of Teaching and Learning," Kara Gray and
Valerie Otero, AIP Conference Proceedings, Vol. 1064, Issue 1, October 2008, pp. 123 126.
"Using Simulations and Collaborative Teaching to Enhance Introductory Courses,"
Jeffrey L. Bernstein, Sarah Scheerhorn, and Sara Ritter, College Teaching, Vol. 50,
Issue 1, Winter 2002, pp. 9 -12.
"Personalizing the Large Class in Psychology", Richard P. Halgin, and E. Christopher,
in Engaging Large Classes: Strategies and Techniques for College Faculty, edited by
Christine A. Stanley and M. Erin Porter, Anker Publishing Company, 2002, pp. 290 298.
"Using One's Own Passion and Undergraduate TAs to Transform the Large-Lecture
Introductory Psychology Course," Camille B. Wortman, and Joshua M. Smyth, in
Teaching Introductory Psychology: Survival Tips from the Experts, edited by Robert J.
Sternberg, American Psychological Association, 1997.
"With A Little Help from their Friends,” Peter Janssen, Change, Vol. 8, No. 2, March
1976, pp. 50 - 53.
In-Class Exercises and Quizzes


"Using Multiple-Choice Questions to Evaluate In-Depth Learning of Economics,"
Stephen Buckles and John J. Siegfried, Journal of Economic Education, Vol. 37, No. 1,
pp. 48 - 57.
"An Evaluation of the Introduction of Collaborative Problem-Solving for Learning
Economics," Carol G. Johnson, R. H. James, J. N. Lye, and Ian M. McDonald, Journal of
Economic Education, Vol. 31, No. 1, 2000, pp. 13 - 29.
Classroom Games and Experiments




Teaching Undergraduate Economics: A Handbook for Instructors, edited by William
Walstad, and Paul Saunders, Irwin/McGraw-Hill, 1998.
"Using Experiential Learning Techniques", Kim Hawtrey, Journal of Economic Education,
Vol. 38, No. 2, Spring 2007, pp. 143 - 152.
"Experimenting: Does It Increase Learning in Introductory Microeconomics?" Mark
Dickie, Journal of Economic Education, Vol. 37, No. 3, Summer 2006, pp. 267 - 288.
"Games Economists Play: Non-computerized Classroom Games," Gregory
Deledmeester, and Jurgen Brauer, Journal of Economic Education, Vol. 31, No. 4, Fall
1999, p. 406.
Software for Online Homework, Experiments, Simulations, and Quizzes
45

















"Active and Cooperative Learning Using Web-Based Simulations," Stephen J. Schmidt,
Journal of Economic Education, Vol. 34, No. 2, Spring 2003, pp. 151 - 167.
"CAI in Economics: What Happened to the Revolution," Tod S. Porter and Teresa M.
Riley, Journal of Economic Education, Vol. 23, No. 4, Fall 1992, pp. 374 - 378.
"Economic Pedagogy and Microcomputer Software,” Betty J. Blecha, Social Science
Computer Review, Vol. 9, No. 4, Winter 1991, pp. 542 - 557.
"Teaching Modeling and Simulation in Economics: A Pleasant Surprise," Eshragh
Motahar, Journal of Economic Education, Vol. 25, No. 4, Fall 1994, pp. 335 - 342.
"Computerized Simulation Models: An Educational Experiment," James A. Gentry,
Journal of Economic Education, Vol. 6, No. 3, Fall 1974, pp. 38 - 45.
"Designing and Testing Simulation Software for Economic Education: The Case of
SimEcon," Anne Bresnock and Neil Garston, presented at the 4th Global Conference on
Business and Economics, Oxford, UK, June, 2004.
"SimEcon: Design, Usage and Assessment," Anne Bresnock and Neil Garston, paper
presented at the American Economics Association Annual Meetings, San Diego, 2004.
"What Have We Learned from 15 Years of Supporting the Development of Innovative
Teaching Technology?" Myles Boylan, Social Science Computer Review, Vol. 22, No. 4,
Winter 2004, pp. 405 - 425.
"Teaching with Technology: May You Live in Interesting Times," William L. Goffe and
Kim Sosin, Journal of Economic Education, Vol. 36, No. 3, Summer 2005, pp. 278 - 291.
"Efficiency in the Use of Technology in Economic Education: Some Preliminary
Results," Kim Sosin, Betty J. Blecha, Rajshree Agarwal, Robin L. Bartlett, and Joseph I.
Daniel, American Economic Review, Vol. 94, No. 2, May 2004, pp. 253 - 258.
"Cost and Effectiveness Considerations in the Use of Computer-Assisted Instruction in
Economics," Bruce R. Dalgaard, Darrell R. Lewis, and Carol M. Boyer, Journal of
Economic Education, Vol. 15, No. 4, Fall 1983, pp. 309 - 324.
"MarketSim: A Simulated Economy for Microeconomics," Tod S. Porter, Kriss Schueller,
Teresa Riley, Rochelle Ruffer, and Ebenge Usip, Journal of Economic Education, Vol.
37, No. 4, Fall 2006, p. 483.
"Interactive Economic Jodels fromthe Wolfram Demonstrations Project," Fiona
Maclachian, W. J. Bolte, and Seth Chandler, Journal of Economic Education, Vol. 40,
No. 1, Winter 2009, p. 108.
"Technology and the Teaching of Economics to Undergraduates," Arnold Katz and
William E. Becker, Journal of Economic Education, Summer 1999, pp. 194 - 199.
"Computer-Aided Instruction on the World Wide Web: The Third Generation," Josheph I.
Daniel, Journal of Economic Education, Vol. 30, No. 2, Spring 1999, pp. 163 - 174.
"Computer-Assisted Instruction in an Elementary College Economic Course," Donald W.
Paden and Michael D. Barr, Computers and Education, Vol. 4, 1980, pp. 259 - 267.
"Computer-Assisted Instruction in Economics: A Survey," John C. Soper, Journal of
Economic Education, Fall 1974, pp. 4 - 27.
Multimedia
46




"Movie Scenes for Economics," G. Dirk Mateer and Herman Li, Journal of Economic
Education, Vol. 39, No. 3, Summer 2008, p. 303.
Economics in the Movies, G. Dirk Mateer, South-Weestern, Thomson, 2005.
"Using Short Movie and Television Clips in the Economics Principles Class," Robert
Sexton, Journal of Economic Education, Vol. 37, No.4, Fall 2006, pp. 406 - 417.
"Froim Abba to Zepplin: Using Music to Teach Economics," Journal of Economic
Education, Vol. 39, No. 1, Winter 2008, p. 107.
Personal Response Systems (Clickers)




The Tech Econ Mailing List frequently has discussions of clickers:
http://org.elon.edu/econ/tch-econ
"Clickenomics: Using a Classroom Response System to Increase Engagement in a
Large Enrollment Principles of Microeconomics Course"
http://www.unc.edu/~salemi/Papers/Clickenomics%20JEE%20Revision%206_2 ... (by
Mike Salemi; forthcoming in the "Journal of Economic Education")
"Clicker Resource Guide"
http://www.cwsei.ubc.ca/resources/files/Clicker_guide_CWSEI_CU-SEI_04.. . (pretty
much a summary of physicists who use them -- which they've done for some years; note
this center is headed by the Nobel Laureate Carl Wieman who now devotes his research
time to improving teaching)
"Why Peer Discussion Improves Student Performance on In-Class Concept Questions,"
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/323/5910/122. This is a summary:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/01/090102100234.htm
Labs


"Laboratory-Based Experimental and Demonstration Initiatives in Teaching
Undergraduate Economics," N. Scott Cardell, Rodney Fort, Wayne Joerding, Fred Inaba,
David Lamoreaux, Robert Roseman, Ernst Stromsdorfer, and Robin Bartlett, AEA
Papers and Proceedings, May 1996, pp. 454 - 459.
"Teaching Economics as a laboratory Science", Robin Bartlett and Paul King, Journal of
Economic Education, Vol. 21, No. 2, Spring 1990, pp. 181 - 193.
Universal Design and Accessibility




Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) - http://www.ada.gov/
Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act - http://www.access-board.gov/508.htm
CSU Accessible Technology Initiative (ATI) - http://www.calstate.edu/accessibility/
CSU Executive Order 926 - http://www.calstate.edu/eo/EO-926.html
47