The Social Issues Pedagogy vs. the Traditional Principles of Economics: An Empirical Examination
Standardized test (TUCE) scores for students enrolled in a Social Issues course were compared to those of students in traditional Principles of Economics courses within the framework of a standard educational production function. The production function was estimated using Heckman's two-step procedure to correct for self-selection due to student attrition over the course of study. After controlling for student demographics, prior experiences, and academic aptitude, no significant test score differences were found between students in the Social Issues course and those in the Principles of Macroeconomics. However, Social Issues students were found to score significantly below students in the Principles of Microeconomics, ceteris paribus. The results also indicate that students had a higher probability of completion in the Social Issues course relative to a theory oriented Principles course.
|Date of creation:||27 Oct 1995|
|Note:||Approximately 20 pages, ASCII file, includes tables, Appendix available upon request|
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://econwpa.repec.org|
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.:
- Becker, William E & Walstad, William B, 1990. "Data Loss from Pretest to Posttest as a Sample Selection Problem," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 72(1), pages 184-188, February.
- Heckman, James, 2013. "Sample selection bias as a specification error," Applied Econometrics, Publishing House "SINERGIA PRESS", vol. 31(3), pages 129-137.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wpa:wuwpge:9510001. 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: (EconWPA)
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.