IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/amerec/v45y2001i1p62-70.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Essay versus Multiple Choice Exams; An Experiment in the Principles of Macroeconomics Course

Author

Listed:
  • Patrick B. O'Neill

Abstract

Examining the impact of test type in Principles of Macroeconomics via two-stage estimation of an education production function, I find that students do better on a post–course TUCE when they take multiple choice exams throughout the semester instead of taking essay exams. The type of test, however, does not impact the student's attitude toward economics or the decision to complete the course.

Suggested Citation

  • Patrick B. O'Neill, 2001. "Essay versus Multiple Choice Exams; An Experiment in the Principles of Macroeconomics Course," The American Economist, Sage Publications, vol. 45(1), pages 62-70, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:amerec:v:45:y:2001:i:1:p:62-70
    DOI: 10.1177/056943450104500106
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/056943450104500106
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/056943450104500106?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Benjamin Greene, 1997. "Verbal Abilities, Gender, and the Introductory Economics Course: A New Look at an Old Assumption," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(1), pages 13-30, March.
    2. Paul W. Grimes & Paul S. Nelson, 1998. "The Social Issues Pedagogy vs. The Traditional Principles of Economics: An Empirical Examination," The American Economist, Sage Publications, vol. 42(1), pages 56-64, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Hadsell, Lester, 2020. "Not for want of trying: Effort and Success of women in principles of microeconomics," International Review of Economics Education, Elsevier, vol. 35(C).
    2. Robin Bartlett & Marianne Ferber & Carole Green, 2009. "The Committee on Economic Education: Its Effect on the Introductory Course and Women in Economics," Forum for Social Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 38(2-3), pages 153-172, January.
    3. Barber, David L. & Weldon, Richard N. & Wysocki, Allen F., 2004. "Do Prerequisites Matter? An Analysis Of Agribusiness Financial Management And Agribusiness Marketing Management Courses," 2004 Annual meeting, August 1-4, Denver, CO 20416, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    4. Parama Chaudhury & Christian Spielmann, 2016. "Let's Make a Movie! Introducing Economics With a Multimedia Project," Journal of Economics Teaching, Journal of Economics Teaching, vol. 1(1), pages 17-41, June.
    5. William E. Becker & Carol Johnston, 1999. "The Relationship between Multiple Choice and Essay Response Questions in Assessing Economics Understanding," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 75(4), pages 348-357, December.
    6. Steven Dickey & Robert Houston Jr., 2009. "Disaggregating Education Production," Atlantic Economic Journal, Springer;International Atlantic Economic Society, vol. 37(2), pages 135-144, June.
    7. Lehmann, Erik & Warning, Susanne, 2002. "Teaching or research? What affects the efficiency of universities," Discussion Papers, Series I 322, University of Konstanz, Department of Economics.
    8. Nolan, Elizabeth & Ahmadi-Esfahani, Fredoun Z., 2007. "Predicting performance in undergraduate agricultural economics," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 51(1), pages 1-15.
    9. Ray Bachan & Michael Barrow, 2006. "Modelling Curriculum Choice at A-level: Why is Business Studies More Popular than Economics?," International Review of Economic Education, Economics Network, University of Bristol, vol. 5(2), pages 58-80.
    10. Carlos J. Asarta & Austin S. Jennings & Paul W. Grimes, 2017. "Economic Education Retrospective," The American Economist, Sage Publications, vol. 62(1), pages 102-117, March.
    11. Tisha L. N. Emerson & KimMarie McGoldrick, 2023. "An investigation of unsuccessful performance and subsequent retake behavior in principles of economics," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 89(3), pages 986-1021, January.
    12. Pm Horn & Ai Jansen, 2009. "An Investigation Into The Impact Of Tutorials On The Performance Of Economics Students," South African Journal of Economics, Economic Society of South Africa, vol. 77(1), pages 179-189, March.
    13. Ann L. Owen, 2011. "Student Characteristics, Behavior, and Performance in Economics Classes," Chapters, in: Gail M. Hoyt & KimMarie McGoldrick (ed.), International Handbook on Teaching and Learning Economics, chapter 32, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    14. Geoffrey Schneider, 2011. "The Purpose, Structure and Content of the Principles of Economics Course," Chapters, in: Gail M. Hoyt & KimMarie McGoldrick (ed.), International Handbook on Teaching and Learning Economics, chapter 27, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    15. Bagues, Manuel & Perez-Villadoniga, Maria J., 2012. "Do recruiters prefer applicants with similar skills? Evidence from a randomized natural experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 82(1), pages 12-20.
    16. Robin Bartlett & Marianne Ferber & Carole Green, 2009. "The Committee on Economic Education: Its Effect on the Introductory Course and Women in Economics," Forum for Social Economics, Springer;The Association for Social Economics, vol. 38(2), pages 153-172, July.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:amerec:v:45:y:2001:i:1:p:62-70. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://journals.sagepub.com/home/aex .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.