IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/gue/guelph/2011-11.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Making Large Classes Small(er): Assessing the Effectiveness Of a Hybrid Teaching Technology

Author

Listed:
  • Barb Bloemhof

    (Department of Economics and BHSc Program, McMaster University)

  • John Livernois

    (Department of Economics and Finance, University of Guelph)

Abstract

This paper examines learning outcomes in a one-semester introductory microeconomics course where contact time with the instructor was reduced by two-thirds and students were expected to view pre-recorded lectures on-line and come to class prepared to engage in discussion. Students were pre-and post-tested using the Test of Understanding in College Economics (TUCE - 4). Learning outcomes as measured by the change in test scores are found to be as good as or better than calibrating data for groups assessed using the TUCE - 4. In addition to being a more enjoyable course for the instructor, the course design can be part of a more self-directed curriculum that uses available resources more efficiently to achieve similar learning objectives to a lecture-based introductory course.

Suggested Citation

  • Barb Bloemhof & John Livernois, 2011. "Making Large Classes Small(er): Assessing the Effectiveness Of a Hybrid Teaching Technology," Working Papers 1111, University of Guelph, Department of Economics and Finance.
    • Handle: RePEc:gue:guelph:2011-11
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.uoguelph.ca/economics/sites/uoguelph.ca.economics/files/2011-11.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Siegfried, John J & Fels, Rendigs, 1979. "Research on Teaching College Economics: A Survey," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 17(3), pages 923-969, September.
    2. Paul Michael Privateer, 1999. "Academic Technology and the Future of Higher Education," The Journal of Higher Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 70(1), pages 60-79, January.
    3. Schwerdt, Guido & Wuppermann, Amelie C., 2011. "Is traditional teaching really all that bad? A within-student between-subject approach," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 365-379, April.
    4. Siegfried, John J, et al, 1991. "The Economics Major: Can and Should We Do Better Than a B Minus?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 81(2), pages 20-25, May.
    5. Scott J. Savage, 2009. "The Effect of Information Technology on Economic Education," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(4), pages 337-353, October.
    6. Dobkin, Carlos & Gil, Ricard & Marion, Justin, 2010. "Skipping class in college and exam performance: Evidence from a regression discontinuity classroom experiment," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 566-575, August.
    7. Sims, David P., 2009. "Crowding Peter to educate Paul: Lessons from a class size reduction externality," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 465-473, August.
    8. Bedard, Kelly & Kuhn, Peter, 2008. "Where class size really matters: Class size and student ratings of instructor effectiveness," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 253-265, June.
    9. J J Arias & Douglas M. Walker, 2004. "Additional Evidence on the Relationship between Class Size and Student Performance," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(4), pages 311-329, October.
    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. Sam Allgood & William B. Walstad & John J. Siegfried, 2015. "Research on Teaching Economics to Undergraduates," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 53(2), pages 285-325, June.
    2. Tisha L. N. Emerson & Linda K. English & KimMarie McGoldrick, 2018. "The High Costs of Large Enrollment Classes: Can Cooperative Learning Help?," Eastern Economic Journal, Palgrave Macmillan;Eastern Economic Association, vol. 44(3), pages 455-474, June.
    3. Matej Opatrny & Tomas Havranek & Zuzana Irsova & Milan Scasny, 2023. "Publication Bias and Model Uncertainty in Measuring the Effect of Class Size on Achievement," Working Papers IES 2023/19, Charles University Prague, Faculty of Social Sciences, Institute of Economic Studies, revised May 2023.
    4. Emerson, Tisha L.N. & McGoldrick, KimMarie & Wagner, Jamie, 2023. "Decomposing a pre- post-test outcome to measure the effect of cooperative learning on student achievement," International Review of Economics Education, Elsevier, vol. 44(C).
    5. Kim Sosin & Betty J. Lecha & Rajshree Agarwal & Robin L. Bartlett & Joseph I. Daniel, 2004. "Efficiency in the Use of Technology in Economic Education: Some Preliminary Results," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 94(2), pages 253-258, May.
    6. Wayne A Grove x & Stephen Wu, 2011. "Factors Influencing Student Performance in Economics: Class and Instructor Characteristics," Chapters, in: Gail M. Hoyt & KimMarie McGoldrick (ed.), International Handbook on Teaching and Learning Economics, chapter 33, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    7. Mandel, Philipp & Süssmuth, Bernd, 2011. "Size matters. The relevance and Hicksian surplus of preferred college class size," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 30(5), pages 1073-1084, October.
    8. Beleche, Trinidad & Fairris, David & Marks, Mindy, 2012. "Do course evaluations truly reflect student learning? Evidence from an objectively graded post-test," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 31(5), pages 709-719.
    9. Martin Schlotter & Guido Schwerdt & Ludger Woessmann, 2011. "Econometric methods for causal evaluation of education policies and practices: a non-technical guide," Education Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(2), pages 109-137.
    10. J. Mitchell O'Toole, 2013. "A Review of "The High Quality Teacher: What Is Teacher Quality and How Do We Measure It?"," The Journal of Educational Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 106(4), pages 332-333, July.
    11. James E. McClure & Lee C. Spector, 1997. "Behavior and Performance in the Economics Classroom," Working Papers 199701, Ball State University, Department of Economics, revised Jan 2003.
    12. De Villiers, Rouxelle & Hess, Alexandra Claudia, 2018. "Melding traditional and progressive andragogy in marketing education, using the hermeneutic competency development strategy," Australasian marketing journal, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 140-156.
    13. Ralph Hippe & Luisa De Sousa Lobo Borges de Araujo & Patricia Dinis Mota da Costa, 2016. "Equity in Education in Europe," JRC Research Reports JRC104595, Joint Research Centre.
    14. Damon Clark & David Gill & Victoria Prowse & Mark Rush, 2020. "Using Goals to Motivate College Students: Theory and Evidence From Field Experiments," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 102(4), pages 648-663, October.
    15. Bauer, Thomas K. & Grave, Barbara S., 2011. "Performance-related Funding of Universities: Does More Competition Lead to Grade Inflation?," IZA Discussion Papers 6073, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    16. Stephen B. Deloach & Steven A. Greenlaw, 2005. "Do Electronic Discussions Create Critical Thinking Spillovers?," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 23(1), pages 149-163, January.
    17. De Paola, Maria & Scoppa, Vincenzo, 2011. "Frequency of examinations and student achievement in a randomized experiment," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 30(6), pages 1416-1429.
    18. Gerald Eisenkopf & Pascal A. Sulser, 2016. "Randomized controlled trial of teaching methods: Do classroom experiments improve economic education in high schools?," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 47(3), pages 211-225, July.
    19. Phillip Saunders, 2011. "A history of economic education," Chapters, in: Gail M. Hoyt & KimMarie McGoldrick (ed.), International Handbook on Teaching and Learning Economics, chapter 1, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    20. Göke, Michael, 2008. "Homo oeconomicus im Hörsaal: Die Rationalität studentischer Nebengespräche in Lehrveranstaltungen," Arbeitspapiere der FOM 9, FOM Hochschule für Oekonomie & Management.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    active learning; assessment; computer-assisted instruction; introductory microeconomics;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

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

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:gue:guelph:2011-11. 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: Stephen Kosempel (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/degueca.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.