IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/37249.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Teaching consumer theory to business students: an integrative approach

Author

Listed:
  • Axelsen, Dan
  • Snarr, Hal W.
  • Friesner, Dan

Abstract

Economists teaching principles of microeconomics courses in business schools face a difficult pedagogical dilemma. Because the vast majority of students in these courses are business majors or minors who will not study economics beyond the principles level, these students need a different set of skills than what is taught in a traditional (liberal arts) setting, which is focused primarily towards economics majors and/or minors. In particular, business students need relatively less emphasis on the mechanics of neoclassical economic theory and relatively more emphasis on how economic tools and concepts form the basis for (and are subsequently integrated into) other business fields, including (but not limited to) marketing, management and finance. This paper presents a case study illustrating how instructors can more effectively teach principles of microeconomics when the majority of students in the course are business majors and/or minors. We use consumer theory as an example. Our goal is to not only describe why principles of microeconomics courses fail to adequately introduce and explain utility and demand theory to this cohort of students, but also to demonstrate how course content can be altered such that learning outcomes are enhanced.

Suggested Citation

  • Axelsen, Dan & Snarr, Hal W. & Friesner, Dan, 2009. "Teaching consumer theory to business students: an integrative approach," MPRA Paper 37249, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:37249
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/37249/1/MPRA_paper_37249.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sam Allgood & William B. Walstad, 1999. "What Do College Seniors Know about Economics?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(2), pages 350-354, May.
    2. J. Wilson Mixon, Jr. & Soumaya M. Tohamy, 1999. "The Heckscher-Ohlin Model with variable input coefficients in spreadsheets," Computers in Higher Education Economics Review, Economics Network, University of Bristol, vol. 13(2), pages 4-6.
    3. Miles Cahill & George Kosicki, 2000. "Exploring Economic Models Using Excel," Southern Economic Journal, Southern Economic Association, vol. 66(3), pages 770-792, January.
    4. Arthur Caplan, 2004. "Seeing is Believing: Simulating Resource-Extraction Problems with GAMS IDE and Microsoft Excel in an Intermediate-Level Natural-Resource Economics Course," Working Papers 2004-10, Utah State University, Department of Economics.
    5. John J. Siegfried, 2000. "How Many College Students Are Exposed to Economics?," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 31(2), pages 202-204, June.
    6. Eric Nævdal, 2003. "Solving Continuous-Time Optimal-Control Problems with a Spreadsheet," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 34(2), pages 99-122, January.
    7. Charles A. Holt, 1996. "Classroom Games: Trading in a Pit Market," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 10(1), pages 193-203, Winter.
    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. W. Lee Hansen & Michael K. Salemi & John J. Siegfried, 2002. "Use It or Lose It: Teaching Literacy in the Economics Principles Course," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(2), pages 463-472, May.
    2. Huck, Petra & Salhofer, Klaus, 2006. "Teaching sustainable resource management in uncertain environment," 2006 Annual meeting, July 23-26, Long Beach, CA 21451, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    3. Geoffrey Schneider, 2011. "The Purpose, Structure and Content of the Principles of Economics Course," Chapters, in: Gail M. Hoyt & KimMarie McGoldrick (ed.), International Handbook on Teaching and Learning Economics, chapter 27, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    4. Ruffle, Bradley J., 2005. "Tax and subsidy incidence equivalence theories: experimental evidence from competitive markets," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(8), pages 1519-1542, August.
    5. Goedde-Menke, Michael & Langer, Thomas & Pfingsten, Andreas, 2014. "Impact of the financial crisis on bank run risk – Danger of the days after," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 522-533.
    6. Liu, Donald J. & Walker, J.D. & Bauer, Theresa A. & Zhao, Meng, 2007. "Facilitating Classroom Economics Experiments with an Emerging Technology: The Case of Clickers," 2007 Annual Meeting, July 29-August 1, 2007, Portland, Oregon 9873, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    7. Giuseppe Attanasi & Samuele Centorrino & Elena Manzoni, 2020. "Zero-Intelligence vs. Human Agents: An Experimental Analysis of the Efficiency of Double Auctions and Over-the-Counter Markets of Varying Sizes," Working Papers 05/2020, University of Verona, Department of Economics.
    8. Jonathan Guest, 2015. "Reflections on ten years of using economics games and experiments in teaching," Cogent Economics & Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 3(1), pages 1115619-111, December.
    9. William Hamlen & Kevin Hamlen, 2012. "An Interactive Computer Model of Two-Country Trade," International Review of Economic Education, Economics Network, University of Bristol, vol. 11(2), pages 91-101.
    10. KimMarie McGoldrick & Robert Garnett, 2013. "Big Think: A Model for Critical Inquiry in Economics Courses," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 44(4), pages 389-398, October.
    11. Steve Cohn, "undated". "Telling Other Stories: Heterodox Critiques of Neoclassical Micro Principles Texts," GDAE Working Papers 00-06, GDAE, Tufts University.
    12. Tisha Emerson & Denise Hazlett, 2011. "Classroom Experiments," Chapters, in: Gail M. Hoyt & KimMarie McGoldrick (ed.), International Handbook on Teaching and Learning Economics, chapter 7, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    13. Allgood, Sam, 2001. "Grade targets and teaching innovations," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 20(5), pages 485-493, October.
    14. W. Lee Hansen & Michael K. Salemi & John J. Siegfried, 2001. "Creating a Standards-Based Economics Principles Course," Vanderbilt University Department of Economics Working Papers 0105, Vanderbilt University Department of Economics.
    15. Tisha L. N. Emerson, 2014. "Anyone? Anyone? A Guide to Submissions on Classroom Experiments," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(2), pages 174-179, June.
    16. Charles E. Hegji, 2000. "Demonstrating Cournot and Collusive equilibria using computer spreadsheets," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 21(7), pages 305-312.
    17. Jorge Ivan Gonzalez & Mauricio Perez Salazar, 2019. "Mercados y Bienestar. Ensayos en memoria de homero cuevas," Books, Universidad Externado de Colombia, Facultad de Economía, number 79, December.
    18. Denise Hazlett & Kathy A. Paulson Gjerde & José J. Vazquez-Cognet & Judith A. Smrha, 2010. "Conducting Experiments in the Economics Classroom," Chapters, in: Michael K. Salemi & William B. Walstad (ed.), Teaching Innovations in Economics, chapter 5, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    19. Robert Garnett & John Reardon, 2011. "Big Think: A Model for Critical Inquiry in Economics Courses," Working Papers 201102, Texas Christian University, Department of Economics.
    20. Haferkamp, Alexandra & Fetchenhauer, Detlef & Belschak, Frank & Enste, Dominik, 2009. "Efficiency versus fairness: The evaluation of labor market policies by economists and laypeople," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 527-539, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Economics instruction; utility theory; demand;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • A22 - General Economics and Teaching - - Economic Education and Teaching of Economics - - - Undergraduate
    • D11 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Consumer Economics: Theory

    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:pra:mprapa:37249. 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: (Joachim Winter). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.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 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.

    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.