Influences of Teaching Methods and Personality on Junior College Students in Macroeconomic Principles

Abstract

The basic principles-of-economics course, whether offered in a junior or senior college, has traditionally been taught by the lecture approach, with heavy reliance on mathematical modeling. Many studies have been done on ways of improving students' understanding of economics by changing some of the traditional methods of teaching the principles course. Wentworth and Lewis, Walstad and Rock, Talafuse, and Emory and Enger did studies using simulations and games to test improvement of understanding of economics. Auten, Cox, and Freisen used practical economic problem solving in their research in the classroom. Craig and O'Neil, Soper and Thornton, and Allison used open student involvement in learning along with self-paced instruction in their research. Television lectures have been studied by McConnell. Dallenbach, Schoenberger, and Wehrs studied the use of computerassisted instruction in improving understanding of economic principles. Our research seemed to indicate that the studies that were most successful in increasing understanding in college economics were those that brought practical, real-life experiences into the classroom. Research also seemed to indicate that where students were allowed to be involved in class discussion, their economic understanding improved. The purpose of our study was to discover whether an teaching design based on the use of current events combined with classroom and small-group discussions could improve the level of understanding of macroeconomic principles and whether any discoverable improvement could be attributed to personality differences among students. Two different teaching methods were used in this study. Each method was carefully laid out on an hour-by-hour basis and the instructors involved in the study followed those outlines closely. Method One was the control. The procedure is called Method Two. We used these designations instead of and experimental so as to avoid what is commonly called the Hawthorne effect. Method One, the control method, was designed along traditional lines; the major emphasis was on lecture by the instructor. Method Two, the method, was also carefully designed and laid out in an hour-by-hour description for the instructors involved in teaching the sections. Method Two involved fewer lectures by the instructor, but more current event readings and more whole-class and small-group activities. The experiment was conducted using six sections of junior college students taking principles of economics. Three sections were taught by Saul Barr: one and one control at Robins Residence Center in Warner Robins, Georgia, and one control at Macon Junior College in Macon, Georgia. Another instructor at Macon Junior College taught one control and one section; and another section was taught by a third instructor at Kennesaw Junior College,