The Instructor's Optimal Mix of Teaching Methods
This paper presents a model for determining the lecturer's optimal mix of teaching methods. The optimal mix balances the greater time cost of more active teaching methods against the increase in the quality of the learning outcomes that result. In the case of two students in a class, one active learner and one passive learner, the optimal teaching mix and the time that each student chooses to spend learning are jointly determined. The paper also shows that the response of the optimal teaching mix to changes in the learning technology depends on the instructor's (or the university's) utility function. A Benthemite utility function implies equal weighting for additional learning outcomes of 'academic' and 'non-academic' students. A Rawlsian utility function implies a higher weighting of additional learning outcomes of 'non-academic' students. These and other utility functions imply different optimal teaching mixes.
If 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.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 9 (2001)
Issue (Month): 3 ()
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.tandfonline.com/CEDE20|
|Order Information:||Web: http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/CEDE20|
References listed on IDEAS
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.:
- Bacdayan, Andrew W., 1997. "A mathematical analysis of the learning production process and a model for determining what matters in education," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 16(1), pages 25-37, February.
- Allgood, Sam, 2001. "Grade targets and teaching innovations," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 20(5), pages 485-493, October.
- Oosterbeek, Hessel, 1995. "Choosing the optimum mix of duration and effort in education," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 14(3), pages 253-263, September.
- 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.
- McDonough, Carol C & Kannenberg, Lloyd C, 1977. "The Microeconomic Impact of a Reduction in Faculty Teaching Loads," Australian Economic Papers, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(28), pages 112-20, June.
- Huang, Cliff J., 1981. "Optimal allocation of faculty time under uncertainty in production," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 99-112, February.
- Becker, William E, Jr, 1982. "The Educational Process and Student Achievement Given Uncertainty in Measurement," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 72(1), pages 229-36, March.
- Becker, William E, Jr, 1979. "Professorial Behavior Given a Stochastic Reward Structure," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 69(5), pages 1010-17, December.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:edecon:v:9:y:2001:i:3:p:313-326. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Michael McNulty)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.