IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cbt/econwp/10-10.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Impact of Question Format in Principle of Economics Classes: Evidence from New Zealand

Author

Listed:

Abstract

This study investigates whether question format disadvantages certain types of students. I use assessment data compiled from principles of economics classes at the University of Canterbury from 2002-2008. I combine these with administrative data on student characteristics to create a comprehensive dataset of over 20,000 observations. To control for student ability, I use a battery of measures of student performance in non-economics classes. In the absence of controls for student ability, I find that question format appears to have a significant impact on student performance. These mostly disappear when student ability variables are added. The major exception are student characteristics associated with language: I find that non-native English speakers are relatively disadvantaged by constructed response questions even after controlling for student ability.

Suggested Citation

  • Stephen Hickson, 2010. "The Impact of Question Format in Principle of Economics Classes: Evidence from New Zealand," Working Papers in Economics 10/10, University of Canterbury, Department of Economics and Finance.
    • Handle: RePEc:cbt:econwp:10/10
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://repec.canterbury.ac.nz/cbt/econwp/1010.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bai Juhong & Tim Maloney, 2006. "Ethnicity and academic success at university," New Zealand Economic Papers, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(2), pages 181-213.
    2. William B. Walstad & Denise Robson, 1997. "Differential Item Functioning and Male-Female Differences on Multiple-Choice Tests in Economics," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(2), pages 155-171, June.
    3. Andrea L. Ziegert, 2000. "The Role of Personality Temperament and Student Learning in Principles of Economics: Further Evidence," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 31(4), pages 307-322, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Paul McKeown & Gillis Maclean, 2013. "Is activity in online quizzes correlated with higher exam marks?," New Zealand Economic Papers, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 47(3), pages 276-287, December.

    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. Roger B. Butters & Carlos J. Asarta & Tammie J. Fischer, 2011. "Human Capital in The Classroom: The Role of Teacher Knowledge in Economic Literacy," The American Economist, Sage Publications, vol. 56(2), pages 47-57, November.
    2. Marianne Johnson & Denise Robson & Sarinda Taengnoi, 2014. "A Meta-analysis of the Gender Gap in Performance in Collegiate Economics Courses," Review of Social Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 72(4), pages 436-459, October.
    3. Stephen Hickson, 2016. "Maybe the Boys Just Like Economics More - The Gender Gap and the Role of Personality Type in Economics Education," Working Papers in Economics 16/07, University of Canterbury, Department of Economics and Finance.
    4. Carlos J. Asarta & Roger B. Butters & Eric Thompson, 2013. "The Gender Question in Economic Education: Is it the Teacher or the Test?," Working Papers 13-12, University of Delaware, Department of Economics.
    5. Tim Kaiser & Luis Oberrauch & Günther Seeber, 2020. "Measuring economic competence of secondary school students in Germany," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 51(3-4), pages 227-242, August.
    6. Edward M. Scahill, 2006. "Evaluation of the Training the Trainers Programme. What Did Trainers Know? What Did They Learn?," International Review of Economic Education, Economics Network, University of Bristol, vol. 5(2), pages 9-28.
    7. Paul Dalziel, 2011. "Schumpeter's 'Vision' and the Teaching of Principles of Economics to Resource Students," International Review of Economic Education, Economics Network, University of Bristol, vol. 10(2), pages 63-74.
    8. Marianne Johnson & Denise Robson, 2008. "Clickers, Student Engagement and Performance in an Introductory Economics Course: a Cautionary Tale," Computers in Higher Education Economics Review, Economics Network, University of Bristol, vol. 20(1), pages 4-12.
    9. Oberrauch, Luis & Kaiser, Tim, 2020. "Economic competence in early secondary school: Evidence from a large-scale assessment in Germany," International Review of Economics Education, Elsevier, vol. 35(C).
    10. Joshua D. Miller & Robert P. Rebelein, 2011. "Research on the Effectiveness of Non-Traditional Pedagogies," Chapters, in: Gail M. Hoyt & KimMarie McGoldrick (ed.), International Handbook on Teaching and Learning Economics, chapter 30, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    11. Elchanan Cohn & Sharon Cohn & Donald C. Balch & James Bradley Jr., 2004. "The Relation between Student Attitudes toward Graphs and Performance in Economics," The American Economist, Sage Publications, vol. 48(2), pages 41-52, October.
    12. Anthony Barilla & Darrell Parker & Chris Paul, 2005. "An Educational Note on Locus of Control and Personality Type in the Formation of Students' Attitudes Toward Economic Institutions," Journal of Private Enterprise, The Association of Private Enterprise Education, vol. 20(Spring 20), pages 192-202.
    13. Abdullah Al‐Bahrani & Darshak Patel, 2015. "Using ESPN 30 for 30 to teach economics," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 81(3), pages 829-842, January.
    14. Lisa Meehan & Gail Pacheco & Zoe Pushon, 2017. "Explaining ethnic disparities in bachelor's qualifications: Participation, retention and completion in NZ," Working Papers 2017/01, New Zealand Productivity Commission.
    15. Arlette Beltrán Barco & Karlos La Serna Studzinski, 2008. "¿Qué explica el rendimiento académico en el primer año de estudios universitarios? Un estudio de caso en la Universidad del Pacífico," Working Papers 08-09, Centro de Investigación, Universidad del Pacífico.
    16. Huikku, Jari & Myllymäki, Emma-Riikka & Ojala, Hannu, 2022. "Gender differences in the first course in accounting: An achievement goal approach," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 54(3).
    17. Katherine Baldiga, 2014. "Gender Differences in Willingness to Guess," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(2), pages 434-448, February.
    18. Rapheal Andrew Luccasen III, 2012. "Individual Differences In Contributions And Crowding-Out Of A Public Good," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 59(4), pages 419-441, September.
    19. Patrick Conway & Derek Stimel & Ann E. Davis & Monica Hartmann, 2010. "Case Use in Economics Instruction," Chapters, in: Michael K. Salemi & William B. Walstad (ed.), Teaching Innovations in Economics, chapter 9, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    20. Angela Hung & Joanne Yoong & Elizabeth Brown, 2012. "Empowering Women Through Financial Awareness and Education," OECD Working Papers on Finance, Insurance and Private Pensions 14, OECD Publishing.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Principles of Economics Assessment; Multiple Choice; Constructed Response; Free Response; Essay;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • A22 - General Economics and Teaching - - Economic Education and Teaching of Economics - - - Undergraduate

    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:cbt:econwp:10/10. 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: Albert Yee (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/decannz.html .

    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.