Assessment Plan and Design: A Model for Enhancing Instruction in Economics Courses
AbstractThis paper develops a systematic approach to course assessment that aims to identify strengths and weaknesses in student achievement and course design that can be addressed through instructional change. We develop seven distinct steps for course assessment and explain these procedures with an assessment tool that was developed for an economics foundation course. Our assessment tool includes twenty five common multiple-choice questions that were developed to evaluate student achievement and assess an economics course through yearly evaluation. During a seven year process, student data were collected first to revise the assessment tool and later to evaluate the program and student performance. The analysis of student data by topic, question, and level of difficulty enabled faculty to gain a better understanding of student weaknesses and address these in the classroom through the adoption of a variety of different teaching approaches. This process strengthened both the foundation course and individual lectures and resulted in a positive impact on student performance. Continuous reinforcement of these strategies by faculty is expected to benefit both the course and students.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by Economics Network, University of Bristol in its journal International Review of Economics Education.
Volume (Year): 9 (2010)
Issue (Month): 1 ()
Contact details of provider:
Postal: University of Bristol, BS8 1HH, United Kingdom
Fax: +44(0)117 331 4396
Web page: http://www.economicsnetwork.ac.uk/iree
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Don J. Webber, 2005. "Reflections on Curriculum Development, Pedagogy and Assessment by a New Academic," International Review of Economic Education, Economics Network, University of Bristol, vol. 4(1), pages 58-73.
- William E. Becker & Michael Watts, 2001. "Teaching Methods in U.S. Undergraduate Economics Courses," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(3), pages 269-279, January.
- Kennedy, Peter E. & Siegfried, John J., 1997.
"Class size and achievement in introductory economics: Evidence from the TUCE III data,"
Economics of Education Review,
Elsevier, vol. 16(4), pages 385-394, October.
- Kennedy, P. & Siegfried, J., 1995. "Class Size and Advievement in Introductory Economics: Evidence from the Tuce III Data," Working Papers dp95-05, CRABE, Department of Economics, Simon Fraser University.
- Carol Johnston & Ian McDonald & Ross Williams, 2001. "The Scholarship of Teaching Economics," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(3), pages 195-201, January.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Martin Poulter).
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.