IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nyo/oswaaa/199901.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Determinants of Student Retention of Microeconomic Concepts

Author

Abstract

In this study, we examine a variety of individual, institutional, and course-specific factors that influence students' retention of concepts from the microeconomics principles course. Students in 15 upper-division courses in the SUNY-Oswego economics department completed a survey instrument and the TUCE exam at the beginning of the Spring 1999 semester. A regression analysis is used to examine the effect of principles course characteristics on student recall (as measured by TUCE score), controlling for student demographic and ability characteristics. Among the factors examined are the impacts of large-class instruction, writing-intensive curricular, and the time interval since the completion of the principles course. The results suggest that students who have completed a writing-intensive introductory microeconomics course perform significantly less well on the TUCE exam at the start of their upper-division courses than do students who participated in classes that relied on multiple-choice examinations.

Suggested Citation

  • John Kane & Larry Spizman, 1999. "Determinants of Student Retention of Microeconomic Concepts," Departmental Working Papers 199901, Department of Economics, SUNY-Oswego, revised 18 Mar 1999.
    • Handle: RePEc:nyo:oswaaa:199901
    Note: This paper was presented on March 12, 1999 in Boston at the Eastern Economic Association conference.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://economic.oswego.edu/papers/retention.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Heath, Julia A, 1989. "An Econometric Model of the Role of Gender in Economic Education," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 79(2), pages 226-230, May.
    2. Ronald W. Crowley & David A. Wilton, 1974. "An Analysis of 'Learning' in Introductory Economics," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 7(4), pages 665-673, November.
    3. Ferber, Marianne A, 1995. "The Study of Economics: A Feminist Critique," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(2), pages 357-361, May.
    4. Mary O. Borg & Stephen L. Shapiro, 1996. "Personality Type and Student Performance in Principles of Economics," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(1), pages 3-25, January.
    5. Roberta Edgecombe Robb & A. Leslie Robb, 1999. "Gender and the Study of Economics: The Role of Gender of the Instructor," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(1), pages 3-19, January.
    6. Karen E. Dynan & Cecilia Elena Rouse, 1997. "The Underrepresentation of Women in Economics: A Study of Undergraduate Economics Students," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(4), pages 350-368, December.
    7. Ellen Miller & Geraldine Westmoreland, 1998. "Student Response to Selective Grading in College Economics Courses," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 29(3), pages 195-201, September.
    8. Siegfried, John J & Kennedy, Peter E, 1995. "Does Pedagogy Vary with Class Size in Introductory Economics?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(2), pages 347-351, May.
    9. Maureen J. Lage & Michael Treglia, 1996. "The Impact of Integrating Scholarship on Women into Introductory Economics: Evidence from One Institution," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(1), pages 26-36, January.
    10. Rajshree Agarwal & A. Edward Day, 1998. "The Impact of the Internet on Economic Education," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 29(2), pages 99-110, June.
    11. Akerhielm, Karen, 1995. "Does class size matter?," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 14(3), pages 229-241, September.
    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. Hart Hodges & Yvonne Durham & Steve Henson, 2018. "Economic Education Production Functions for the Principles of Macroeconomics and the Principles of Microeconomics: Is There a Difference?," Journal for Economic Educators, Middle Tennessee State University, Business and Economic Research Center, vol. 18(2), pages 22-41, Fall.
    2. Timothy L. Sellnow & Deanna D. Sellnow & Derek R. Lane & Robert S. Littlefield, 2012. "The Value of Instructional Communication in Crisis Situations: Restoring Order to Chaos," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(4), pages 633-643, April.

    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. Yvonne Durham & Thomas Mckinnon & Craig Schulman, 2007. "Classroom Experiments: Not Just Fun And Games," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 45(1), pages 162-178, January.
    2. David Sabiston & Ambrose Leung & Gianfranco Terrazzano, 2017. "Learning styles and performance in principles of economics: does the gender gap exist?," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 37(4), pages 2935-2944.
    3. Arnold, Ivo J.M., 2020. "Gender and major choice within economics: Evidence from Europe," International Review of Economics Education, Elsevier, vol. 35(C).
    4. Tisha L. N. Emerson & KimMarie McGoldrick & John J. Siegfried, 2018. "The Gender Gap in Economics Degrees: An Investigation of the Role Model and Quantitative Requirements Hypotheses," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 84(3), pages 898-911, January.
    5. Patricia M. Flynn & Michael A. Quinn, 2010. "Economics: Good Choice of Major for Future Ceos," The American Economist, Sage Publications, vol. 55(1), pages 58-72, May.
    6. Cynthia L. Harter & John F.R. Harter, 2004. "Teaching with Technology: Does Access to Computer Technology Increase Student Achievement?," Eastern Economic Journal, Eastern Economic Association, vol. 30(4), pages 507-514, Fall.
    7. 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.
    8. Kent Saunders & Phillip Saunders, 1999. "The influence of instructor gender on learning and instructor ratings," Atlantic Economic Journal, Springer;International Atlantic Economic Society, vol. 27(4), pages 460-473, December.
    9. Hart Hodges & Yvonne Durham & Steve Henson, 2018. "Economic Education Production Functions for the Principles of Macroeconomics and the Principles of Microeconomics: Is There a Difference?," Journal for Economic Educators, Middle Tennessee State University, Business and Economic Research Center, vol. 18(2), pages 22-41, Fall.
    10. Coates, Dennis & Humphreys, Brad R. & Kane, John & Vachris, Michelle A., 2004. ""No significant distance" between face-to-face and online instruction: evidence from principles of economics," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 23(5), pages 533-546, October.
    11. Scott Simkins & Stuart Allen, 2001. "Are learning outcomes in economics different at predominantly black and white universities? Lessons fromPrinciples of macroeconomics courses at two schools," The Review of Black Political Economy, Springer;National Economic Association, vol. 28(3), pages 23-39, December.
    12. Robin L. Bartlett & Marianne A. Ferber & Carole A. Green, 2009. "Political Orientation and the Decision to Major in Economics: Some Preliminary Observations," International Review of Economic Education, Economics Network, University of Bristol, vol. 8(1), pages 13-31.
    13. Cornéa van Walbeek, 2004. "Does Lecture Attendance Matter? Some Observations From A First‐Year Economics Course At The University Of Cape Town," South African Journal of Economics, Economic Society of South Africa, vol. 72(4), pages 861-883, September.
    14. 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.
    15. Benjamin Matta & Joseph Guzman & Sue Stockly & Benjamin Widner, 2015. "Class Size Effects on Student Performance in a Hispanic-Serving Institution," The Review of Black Political Economy, Springer;National Economic Association, vol. 42(4), pages 443-457, December.
    16. 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.
    17. 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.
    18. Ann L. Owen & Elizabeth J. Jensen, 2000. "Why Are Women Such Reluctant Economists? Evidence from Liberal Arts Colleges," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(2), pages 466-470, May.
    19. 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.
    20. James V. Koch & Ziniya Zahedi, 2019. "The effects of role models on college graduation rates," Journal of Economics and Finance, Springer;Academy of Economics and Finance, vol. 43(3), pages 607-617, July.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    TUCE; class size; writing requirements; economic education; student performance; multiple choice exams;
    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:nyo:oswaaa:199901. 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: John Kane (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/edoswus.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.