IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/frd/wpaper/dp2010-06.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Explaining Randomized Evaluation Techniques Using Classroom Games

Author

Listed:
  • Subha Mani

    (Fordham University, Department of Economics)

  • Utteeyo Dasgupta

    (Franklin and Marshall College, Department of Economics)

Abstract

Over the last decade, randomized evaluations have taken the field of development economics by storm. Despite the availability of strong review pieces in the topic, there is no pedagogical paper on randomized evaluation. This paper bridges the gap by introducing three interactive classroom games to communicate the concepts of Average Treatment Effect (ATE), Intent–to-Treat Effect (ITT), Sub-group Average Treatment Effect (SATE), and Externality Effect (EE). The classroom games are easy to implement and provide students an opportunity to participate in a simple randomized trial of their own.

Suggested Citation

  • Subha Mani & Utteeyo Dasgupta, 2010. "Explaining Randomized Evaluation Techniques Using Classroom Games," Fordham Economics Discussion Paper Series dp2010-06, Fordham University, Department of Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:frd:wpaper:dp2010-06
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://archive.fordham.edu/ECONOMICS_RESEARCH/PAPERS/dp2010_06_mani_dasgupta.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Abhijit V. Banerjee & Shawn Cole & Esther Duflo & Leigh Linden, 2007. "Remedying Education: Evidence from Two Randomized Experiments in India," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 122(3), pages 1235-1264.
    2. James Stodder, 1998. "Experimental Moralities: Ethics in Classroom Experiments," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 29(2), pages 127-138, June.
    3. Tisha L. N. Emerson & Beck A. Taylor, 2004. "Comparing Student Achievement across Experimental and Lecture-Oriented Sections of a Principles of Microeconomics Course," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 70(3), pages 672-693, January.
    4. Tisha L. N. Emerson & Beck A. Taylor, 2004. "Comparing Student Achievement across Experimental and Lecture-Oriented Sections of a Principles of Microeconomics Course," Southern Economic Journal, Southern Economic Association, vol. 70(3), pages 672-693, January.
    5. Mark Dickie, 2006. "Do Classroom Experiments Increase Learning in Introductory Microeconomics?," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(3), pages 267-288, July.
    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. Dupont, Brandon & Durham, Yvonne, 2021. "Adam Smith and the not so invisible hand: A revision for the undergraduate classroom," International Review of Economics Education, Elsevier, vol. 36(C).
    2. Grace Finley & Charles Holt & Emily Snow, 2019. "The welfare costs of price controls and rent seeking in a class experiment," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 22(3), pages 753-771, September.
    3. 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.
    4. Inhyuck Steve Ha & Jessica Hollars Wisniewski, 2011. "Experiential Learning Based Discussion vs. Lecture Based Discussion: How to Estimate the Unemployment Rate," Journal for Economic Educators, Middle Tennessee State University, Business and Economic Research Center, vol. 11(2), pages 33-38, Fall.
    5. 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.
    6. Inhyuck Steve Ha & Jessica Hollars Wisniewski, 2011. "Experiential Learning Based Discussion vs. Lecture Based Discussion: How to Estimate the Unemployment Rate," Journal for Economic Educators, Middle Tennessee State University, Business and Economic Research Center, vol. 11(1), pages 33-38, Summer.
    7. Berning, Joshua P., 2014. "Using self-reported data collection and analysis to facilitate student learning: A case study," 2014 Annual Meeting, February 1-4, 2014, Dallas, Texas 162482, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    8. Stefano Carattini & Eli P. Fenichel & Alexander Gordan & Patrick Gourley, 2019. "For want of a chair: teaching price formation using a cap and trade game," CESifo Working Paper Series 7583, CESifo.
    9. Hilde Patron & William J. Smith, 2016. "The Short-Term and Long-Term Trade-Offs of Sustainable Entrepreneurship," Journal for Economic Educators, Middle Tennessee State University, Business and Economic Research Center, vol. 16(1), pages 36-48, Fall.
    10. Dickinson, David L., 2009. "Experiment timing and preferences for fairness," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 89-95, January.
    11. Špačková Zuzana, 2015. "Laboratory Experiments in Teaching Public Economics and Policy," Central European Journal of Public Policy, Sciendo, vol. 9(1), pages 196-206, May.
    12. 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.
    13. Beth A. Freeborn & Jason P. Hulbert, 2011. "Persuasive and Informative Advertising: A Classroom Experiment," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 42(1), pages 51-59, January.
    14. David L. Dickinson, 2006. "Cash or Credit? The importance of reward medium and experiment timing in classroom preferences for fairness," Working Papers 06-12, Department of Economics, Appalachian State University.
    15. Ninos P. Malek & Joshua C. Hall & Collin Hodges, 2014. "A Review and Analysis of the Effectiveness of Alternative Teaching Methods on Student Learning in Economics," Working Papers 14-27, Department of Economics, West Virginia University.
    16. Steve Muchiri & Mihai Paraschiv, 2019. "Where Do Rebounds Go? Using Balls to Teach Price Elasticity of Demand," Journal of Economics Teaching, Journal of Economics Teaching, vol. 4(2), pages 60-75, December.
    17. Paul Johnson & Bart J. Wilson, 2008. "Economics Works! Experiments in High School Classrooms," Journal of Private Enterprise, The Association of Private Enterprise Education, vol. 23(Spring 20), pages 149-156.
    18. Martin Dufwenberg & J. Todd Swarthout, 2009. "Play to Learn? An Experiment," Experimental Economics Center Working Paper Series 2009-08, Experimental Economics Center, Andrew Young School of Policy Studies, Georgia State University.
    19. Odell, Kathleen E., 2018. "Team-based learning and student performance: Preliminary evidence from a principles of macroeconomics classroom," International Review of Economics Education, Elsevier, vol. 29(C), pages 44-58.
    20. Amalia Rodrigo-González & María Caballer-Tarazona & Aurora García-Gallego, 2019. "Active Learning on Trust and Reciprocity for Undergraduates," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 11(16), pages 1-22, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    program evaluation; classroom experiment; pedagogy; economic development;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • A22 - General Economics and Teaching - - Economic Education and Teaching of Economics - - - Undergraduate
    • C70 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - General

    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:frd:wpaper:dp2010-06. 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: . General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/edforus.html .

    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: Fordham Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/edforus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.