Economic Education Research Research Articles

Does Sex Really Matter?

The sex variable has been discussed at great length in economic education research reports, because it so often appears that males learn more than females in the college introductory course. The authors of this study go beyond idle speculation as to the reasons for this puzzling phenomenon, however, and attempt to determine the point at which the male-female differential first appears. They note that significant sex differences rarely occur at the precollege level, and report the results of their own study of some 2,000 pupils in elementary and secondary schools. Asserting that the sex-linked differences in learning begin to occur “between the late high school years and the sophomore year of college,” the authors assume that the differences are “wholly cultural in origin” and present several possible explanations.

Special Section: A Debate on Research Techniques in Economic Education

This Special Section represents a “first” for the JEE. In previous issues the “Communications” section has often included comments and criticisms of previously published articles, and authors of the original pieces have sometimes replied to these criticisms. Initially, the intention was to treat Becker's comment on Soper's article “Programmed Instruction in Large-Lecture Courses” (JEE, Spring 1973) in the conventional way. It was finally decided, however, that the exchange between Becker and Soper, and Highsmith's reaction to both papers, was important enough to merit special treatment. The research techniques discussed in the three papers should be of great interest to all who are involved in economic education research and, indeed, to all who read the reports of such research.

Self-Paced Economics Instruction: A Large-Scale Disaggregated Evaluation

There is a growing interest in various schemes for individualizing instruction in economics, and at least 50 studies have been made of some aspect of this approach. Soper and Thornton report on a study that constitutes a valuable addition to the literature in this subject. Perhaps more important than the results of their experiment, however, is the experimental design they used. Their model is one that should be examined carefully by everyone interested in research in economic education.

Second Generation Research in Economic Education: Comment

Second Generation Research in Economic Education: Comment

Second Generation Research in Economic Education: Problems of Specification and Interdependence

bility that the i-th independent variable, or set of independent variables, has a different effect on the post-TUCE in the two groups. If such is the case, Soper's multiple regression estimates reflect erroneous aggregation between groups demonstrating different post-TUCE eftects. The customary way to check for such aggregation or distribution coefficient biases is to use an Arnold Zellner unrelated regression testing procedure [9] or a Gregory Chow type coefficient stability testing procedure [2]. Although I have additional comments concerning the lack of error term specifications and analysis, I believe the comments above are sufficient to indicate major statistical weaknesses in Soper's contention that his quantitative evidence suggests that PI material can be used effectively in large-enrollment principles courses when used in combination with a set of optional, objective quizzes.

Programmed Instruction in Large-Lecture Courses: A Technical Comment

groups. Becker's comments appear below, with Soper's lengthy reply. Stimulated by Becker's remarks, Soper did further research and presented his findings at the 1975 meeting of the Southern Economic Association in New Orleans. Robert Highsmith of Towson State University in Maryland commented on Soper's paper at that meeting. The JEE feels that the views of all three of these economic education specialists have merit, that anyone contemplating economic education research would do well to pay close attention to their discussion of statistical techniques, and that the exchange represents a significant contribution to the advancement of economic education.

The Economics of Reducing Faculty Teaching Loads: Comment

Previous articleNext article No AccessMiscellanyThe Economics of Reducing Faculty Teaching Loads: CommentDouglas NeedhamDouglas Needham Search for more articles by this author PDFPDF PLUS Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by Journal of Political Economy Volume 83, Number 1Feb., 1975 Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1086/260316 Views: 2Total views on this site Citations: 6Citations are reported from Crossref Copyright 1975 The University of ChicagoPDF download Crossref reports the following articles citing this article:Hector Correa The microeconomic theory of education, International Journal of Educational Research 23, no.55 (Jan 1995): 405–472.https://doi.org/10.1016/0883-0355(95)00014-3Hector Correa, Gene W. Gruver Teacher-student interaction: A game theoretic extension of the economic theory of education, Mathematical Social Sciences 13, no.11 (Feb 1987): 19–47.https://doi.org/10.1016/0165-4896(87)90057-6William E. Becker Building Theoretical Models, (Jan 1987): 19–26.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-3271-5_2Michael E. Wetzstein, Josef M. Broder The Economics of Effective Teaching, The Journal of Economic Education 16, no.11 (Jul 2014): 52–59.https://doi.org/10.1080/00220485.1985.10845099William E. Becker Economic Education Research: Part II, New Directions in Theoretical Model Building, The Journal of Economic Education 14, no.22 (Jul 2014): 4–10.https://doi.org/10.1080/00220485.1983.10845010Douglas Needham Improving Faculty Evaluation and Reward Systems, The Journal of Economic Education 13, no.11 (Jul 2014): 6–18.https://doi.org/10.1080/00220485.1982.10844982

Economics in the Junior Colleges: Terminal or Transfer?

Responding to the call for further research in economic education in the two-year colleges, the authors report on the relative effectiveness of economics instruction for transfer and terminal courses. They attempt to answer the question: Do the two types of courses often found in junior colleges produce different learning outcomes? Furthermore, the researchers compare student performance in the two-year colleges with that of students in a four-year institution. Among the variables taken into account are age, type of school, student's class standing, precourse interest in economics, sex, and high school economics background. In a concluding section, the policy implications of the findings are discussed.

Political Opinions and the TUCE

The TUCE is being widely used in economic education research at the college level. Although it has gained acceptance as a standardized evaluation instrument, it has also become the subject of close scrutiny. Rothman and Scott report on their study to determine whether or not the TUCE “may also measure political attitudes.” The relationship between the students' political opinions and their scores on the TUCE are examined, but other possible explanatory variables (such as previous economics instruction, sex and SAT scores) are also analyzed. The authors discuss possible reasons why “untrained conservatives know more about market systems than do untrained liberals,” and suggest that there are factors other than economic conservatism at work.

The Economics of Reducing Faculty Teaching Loads

Previous articleNext article No AccessMiscellanyThe Economics of Reducing Faculty Teaching LoadsRichard B. McKenzieRichard B. McKenzie Search for more articles by this author PDFPDF PLUS Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by Journal of Political Economy Volume 80, Number 3, Part 1May - Jun., 1972Part 1 Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1086/259914 Views: 5Total views on this site Citations: 11Citations are reported from Crossref Copyright 1972 The University of ChicagoPDF download Crossref reports the following articles citing this article:Siddhartha Bhasker Modelling Teacher Student Class Interaction in Higher Education as a Prisoner’s Dilemma, SSRN Electronic Journal (Jan 2018).https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3713658Stefano Bianchini, Francesco Lissoni, Michele Pezzoni, Lorenzo Zirulia The economics of research, consulting, and teaching quality: theory and evidence from a technical university, Economics of Innovation and New Technology 25, no.77 (Dec 2015): 668–691.https://doi.org/10.1080/10438599.2015.1114340Hans Bonesrønning School Characterisitcs and Student Achievement: Evidence from Combined Upper Secondary Schools in Norway, Education Economics 4, no.22 (Jul 2006): 143–160.https://doi.org/10.1080/09645299600000014Hector Correa, Gene W. Gruver Teacher-student interaction: A game theoretic extension of the economic theory of education, Mathematical Social Sciences 13, no.11 (Feb 1987): 19–47.https://doi.org/10.1016/0165-4896(87)90057-6William E. Becker Building Theoretical Models, (Jan 1987): 19–26.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-3271-5_2Michael E. Wetzstein, Josef M. Broder The Economics of Effective Teaching, The Journal of Economic Education 16, no.11 (Jul 2014): 52–59.https://doi.org/10.1080/00220485.1985.10845099William E. Becker Economic Education Research: Part II, New Directions in Theoretical Model Building, The Journal of Economic Education 14, no.22 (Jul 2014): 4–10.https://doi.org/10.1080/00220485.1983.10845010Cliff J. Huang Optimal allocation of faculty time under uncertainty in production, Economics of Education Review 1, no.11 (Dec 1981): 99–112.https://doi.org/10.1016/0272-7757(81)90030-3Edward Shapiro The effects on teaching of changes in relative rewards for research and teaching, Research in Higher Education 9, no.11 (Jan 1978): 43–67.https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00979186CAROL C. McDONOUGH, LLOYD C. KANNENBERG THE MICROECONOMIC IMPACT OF A REDUCTION IN FACULTY TEACHING LOADS, Australian Economic Papers 16, no.2828 (Jun 1977): 112–120.https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8454.1977.tb00588.x Douglas Needham The Economics of Reducing Faculty Teaching Loads: Comment, Journal of Political Economy 83, no.11 (Oct 2015): 219–223.https://doi.org/10.1086/260316

Current Status and Trends in Economic Education Research

What is the present status of research in economic education and what implications does this hold for the economist and educator contem? plating such research ? Nearly everyone agrees that in order for an area of professional concern or studies to emerge there must be (1) increasing recognition of its importance by the allied professions, (2) prototype research designs within a growing body of literature, and (3) adequate tests and evaluation instruments for appropriate validation and replica? tion. Is economic education coming of age in these regards ? This paper (1) reviews the current status and trends in economic education research and (2) concludes with a summary of problems and prospects for future research.

Economic Education and Economic Research in the Soviet Union

Economic Education and Economic Research in the Soviet Union