A possible new direction…

Some folks may have noticed that my posting is pretty sporadic. I was just looking at my stats and when I first started this blog (can’t believe it’s been five years!), I posted roughly every few days during the first year. Then it slowed down to about once a week. For the last several months, it’s been closer to once every few weeks, and some of those have been more public service announcements than me really writing about anything I’m personally doing with my teaching. This pattern is partly a reflection of what’s been happening with my classes – one reason I started this blog was as a place to ‘think aloud’ about what I was doing with some courses that were new to me and I was trying all kinds of random stuff, so it’s probably natural that over time, as I’ve honed what I’m doing, I haven’t felt the same need to write about them. It’s also a reflection of what’s been happening with me emotionally with regard to teaching – I’m definitely feeling burnt out. There is a reason that teachers need sabbaticals and I’m very excited about mine (I’ll be off this next academic year). The more drained I have felt about teaching in general, the less motivated I have felt to write anything for the blog.

One of the things I plan to do during my sabbatical is figure out what to do with this blog going forward. I’d like to say that I’ll commit to posting more regularly – and I’ll certainly be working on teaching stuff during my sabbatical that I could write about – but I also feel like maybe I need a bit of a sabbatical from blogging as well so I can get re-invigorated about it. At the same time, one of the things I really enjoy about blogging is that it makes me feel more connected to a community of people who really care about teaching. I know there are a lot of folks who ‘lurk’ and even if you never comment or otherwise let me know you’re out there, the fact that you have bothered to subscribe, ‘like’ or just drop by the blog once in a while means a lot to me and I don’t want to let that community down.

However, somewhat ironically, I think that feeling (of not wanting to let down this community) is actually contributing to my ambivalence about blogging. That is, this blog originally started out largely as a ‘personal’ blog – it was simply a place for me to get my thoughts out about a range of topics related to teaching. I had no idea who, if anyone, was going to read what I wrote and in a lot of ways, it didn’t matter: the process of writing itself often helps me think things through, whether I get feedback from others or not. But over time, I’ve found myself worrying more about what will be useful for readers than what is useful for me. I think twice (or three or four times) before just shooting off some random thought and while I know I’m over-thinking it (gee, me? over-think things?), the reality is that I simply end up not posting as often.

So, I have a proposition for you folks. Although I feel like I don’t have as much to say as I used to about what I’m doing in the classroom, I know plenty of YOU are doing cool and innovative things. If you would like to write a guest post about something you are doing, please let me know. It could be that you have a unique way to teach a particular concept, a different approach to grading, a particularly effective assignment, etc. It doesn’t have to be groundbreaking, just something other teachers might find useful. Send me an email, give me an idea of what you want to write about and we can discuss format and all that. I won’t promise that I’ll post anything and everything but if you read this blog regularly, chances are pretty good that you are doing something in your classroom that other readers will be interested in hearing about. I’m also going to reach out to some folks who presented at the AEA Conference on Teaching and Research on Economic Education last week (which sadly, I missed) and see if they would be willing to summarize their papers [NOTE: This is an invitation to individual teachers to share their personal experiences; I will not post anything from a business or organization that is trying to sell something or promote themselves].

Don’t worry, I’m not going anywhere, and I still think of this as more of a personal blog. I’m just hoping that with these guest posts providing more of the tangible ‘hands-on’ type information that I think a lot of people will find useful, I will feel more freedom to muse and ramble about other random stuff. Would love to hear from you!

More conferences

The 9th Annual Economics Teaching Conference (sponsored by the National Economics Teaching Association and Cengage Learning) will be in Austin on October 24 and 25. The call for papers is here, and there is an 'extra early bird' discount if you register by May 31.

You can also try for a free trip to the conference by competing for Cengage's Second Annual Economist Educator Best in Class Award. Submissions are due by July 8.

And the National Association of Economic Educators has a Call for Papers out for the 2014 ASSA meetings:

The National Association of Economic Educators and the Council on Economic Education will conduct three sessions at the January 2014 meetings of the Allied Social Science Associations (ASSA) and American Economic Association (AEA) annual meeting in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania January 3-5, 2014.

New research papers on any relevant topic in economic education will be considered. Those interested in presenting a paper should send an abstract or complete paper, no later than May 24, 2013, to:

Dr. Andrew Hill, Chair
NAEE Research Commitee
c/o Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia
10 Independence Mall
Philadelphia, PA, 19106.

Alternatively, papers and/or expressions of interest in serving as a discussant may be sent via email to: Andrew.Hill@phil.frb.org.

Why it can be good to date a non-economist

The other night, Joey and I were walking to our favorite neighborhood brewpub for dinner. I saw what looked like a twenty dollar bill on the ground and I swear to God, my first thought was, "That can't actually be a twenty." I'm not sure I would have actually kept walking if I were alone but Joey did not even hesitate - he pointed at the money, said, "whoa!", and picked up what turned out to be TWO twenties. Honestly, I still couldn't quite believe they were just lying there, like maybe they were counterfeit, or someone had planted them and was just waiting to see what we would do. I had to explain the joke to Joey (who is a computer engineer) and he just said, "Well, good thing I'm not an economist, isn't it?" Amen to that...

Grading followup

I mentioned at the start of the semester that I'd be trying a different approach to grading in the writing class this spring. I've finished grading the second big writing assignment and I have to say that although grading is taking just as long as it used to, I definitely notice a reduction in my level of stress about the process. There are two main things that I've changed: one, I am only assigning straight letter grades for papers (i.e., A, B, C or D, recorded as 4, 3, 2 or 1 in the Blackboard gradebook) and two, students are allowed to revise and re-submit papers as many times as they want, any time up until the last day of class, and I will use whatever grade they receive last (which will presumably be higher than where they started but only if they actually do the work).

Giving straight letter grades has greatly reduced my angst about assigning the score for the overall assignment. For the most part, it's pretty easy to tell B papers from C papers but what I really love is that I DON'T have to spend time trying to figure out if a B paper should get an 84, 85 or 86, and making sure whatever number I give one paper is consistent with the numbers I gave on other papers. I do note informally if I think there really should be a plus or minus attached, and that may come into play at the end of the semester but again, noting that a paper is a B+ is much easier than trying to decide if it's an 88 or an 89. So far, there have been two papers I just couldn't bring myself to give an A but they really were better than most B papers so I gave them a 3.5.

But even more than the straight letter grades, I think giving students the option to revise their papers is really what is making the biggest difference in my grading attitude. In the past, I would always have this internal struggle with myself about the comments I gave on papers. On the one hand, I want to give students specific and detailed comments so that they can see how to make their writing better. On the other hand, I know that many students will not even look at the comments (they just look at the grade) so why spend all that time? But by giving students the option to revise their papers for a higher grade, I free myself from making detailed suggestions about how to change things AND I feel like students may actually use the feedback I give them. Not giving detailed suggestions doesn't mean I don't give feedback - it means that now I am much more specific about WHY something is not working, but I don't necessarily give students an exact fix. For example, in the past, if a particular sentence were not clear, I would leave a comment like, "This isn't clear - it would work better if you re-wrote this as 'the higher prices cause demand to fall' instead". That is, my explanation of the problem would be a bit vague ('this is unclear', 'this jargon isn't appropriate', etc.) but I would try to give them a specific suggestion for a re-write that, by comparison, would make the problem more obvious and also help them see a way to fix things. But now, my explanation of the problem tends to be much more detailed (e.g., 'this sentence isn't clear because it sounds like demand falling is causing prices to go up instead of the other way around') but I do not give them a specific edit they can use to fix the problem, since I don't want them to just replace their words with mine and turn that in as a new revision. I do try to point them to other sources for specific help when possible (e.g., 'See the class notes about making sentences more direct'). This approach doesn't necessarily save me much time (though it is generally easier to tell them exactly what the problem is than to fix it for them) but I definitely notice a difference in my own attitude. That is, IF they decide to do a revision, I feel like I'm actually helping them but not doing the work for them, and if they don't do a revision, then I'm not "wasting" my time either.

In addition, I worry less if the grade I give them seems a little harsh (e.g., someone gets a straight B who would have gotten a B+ in the past) because they do have the option to do a little work and get a better grade. So i expect that I won't be getting any whining about grades.

So far, only one student has actually done a revision, though I expect at least a few others will be working on their papers over Spring Break...

Call for Papers, Intl Atlantic Economic Conference

If you aren't on the tch-econ mail list, you might have missed this: Paul Hettler is putting together one or two special sessions on the use of active learning strategies in economics. Paul notes: "This is the seventh year I've created such sessions. In the past, we've seen some very interesting presentations on the use of several different strategies in principles through upper-level courses. If you are using an interesting learning strategy, others would like to hear about it. Please consider sending a brief abstract of what you are doing in for this session (Note, there are no submission fees if you send the abstract directly to me). The session will be rather informal--if you have a formal analysis comparing the learning outcomes of some active strategy to 'lectures' that's great; if you just want to describe the technique you're using and provide anecdotal evidence of it's effectiveness that is good too. In all cases, the idea is to learn more about alternative ways to get our students more involved in the learning process."

Special Conference Session
Active Learning Strategies in Economics

at the
76th International Atlantic Economic Conference
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
October 10-13, 2013

Numerous “active” learning strategies have been developed over the past 30 years to engage students more in the process of learning. Are you using techniques such as Team-Based Learning, Classroom Experiments, Simulations, Problem-Based Learning, Case Studies, etc. in your classes? Share your experiences and compare outcomes with others engaged in similar efforts. Papers for this special conference session can focus on describing the technique and how it is implemented, student or faculty reactions, or documented learning outcomes.

To be considered for the session, please send a 500-word abstract describing the active learning project you wish to present at the conference. Paper submission fees will be waived for participants in this session. (Conference registration fees will be required. Please see the Society web site at http://www.iaes.org for more information). To be considered, the abstract must be received by May 14, 2013.

Abstracts may be sent by email to: hettler@calu.edu

Or by mail to:
Dr. Paul Hettler
Department of Business and Economics (Box 74)
California University of Pennsylvania
250 University Ave
California, PA 15419

Call (724-938-5730) or email (hettler@calu.edu) with any questions.

Intended consequences: HEOA edition

As an economist, I know that policies often have unintended consequences. As an ed policy researcher, I know that the unintended consequences of many education policies arise because a) policymakers generally have no idea what a teacher's job is actually like and b) local implementation of state and federal policies often focuses more on 'compliance' than 'educational quality'. I was reminded of both these problems when I received an email from our administration about Section 133 of the Higher Education Opportunity Act, which deals with textbook information. Apparently, this federal law requires that students have access to information on course materials prior to registration. This, in and of itself, seems benign. I think the prices that students pay for textbooks and associated materials are often outrageous and letting students know what they're signing up for is good (pointless, but good, since I can't imagine any student chooses classes based on textbook prices, but I tend to fall in the 'more information is always good' camp). But faculty are being asked to submit our materials requisitions FOR FALL SEMESTER by the end of March. The email I received implied that failure to adhere to this deadline will put us out of compliance with HEOA, putting our students "at risk for an estimated $51 million in Federal student assistance."

So, faculty can either decide NOW, in the middle of spring semester, what books and materials we will use in the FALL, or be made to feel like we could be responsible for students losing tons of Federal aid. So what's the most likely outcome? If I'm teaching a course I've taught before, I just use the same books as last time, even if there are other books that might be better, since I'm not going to have time to think about it before summer (the requisition deadline isn't even after Spring Break). I don't know about others but I have generally used summer to re-vamp classes, including deciding on different books and materials. Sure, I can still restructure some lectures and activities but if I've already committed to the reading materials, there's only so much I can do with the course as a whole. And if I've already committed to the reading materials, why spend much time looking at new materials (which might help me keep my course current or at least give me ideas of new ways to present content) and re-thinking the course in general? I'll just make a few tweaks and keep mostly doing what I did last time.

I realize this isn't that huge a deal - I know that if I wait a couple months to get my book order in, the Feds are not going to come swarming onto campus and cut off all financial aid. What bugs me is that no one in the administration seems to recognize that there may be very good reasons for faculty to wait until summer to get their book orders in. So I can either do what I consider 'good teaching' (i.e., reflect on what has worked and what needs changing in my course) and piss off my administration; or I can 'comply with the law' and just muddle along. These are annoying bad choices...

Trying something different with grading

As I gear up for teaching the writing class again this spring, I've been thinking a lot about how to make the grading more tolerable. In a Profhacker post last September, Brian Croxall summed up my own feeling about grading pretty well:

"The thing that I dislike most about teaching is grading... The reason I typically don’t like grading is because my grading sessions often leave me feeling conflicted about the final scores I give students. “Is this essay an 87 (AKA a B)? Or is it an 88? How does it compare to that 84 I just read?” For personal reasons, my internal fairness meter gets really worked up by this process, and I have found that grading papers produces a bathetic (and pathetic) amount of handwringing on my part that is not productive in any which way."

Croxall goes on to say that he planned to try using only straight letter grades on papers (i.e., A, B, etc. with no pluses or minuses):

"...while it might be hard to know the difference between an 87 and an 88, or sometimes even between the dreaded B+/A- split, I absolutely do know the difference between an A and a B paper. I expect to see a sharp drop in the amount of stress that I feel as I grade the four essays I’m assigning this semester."

According to his recent follow-up post, this approach did, indeed, make grading easier. In addition, instead of students fixating on the grades, there was more focus on how to actually improve their writing. In the comments on that post, Croxall mentions that he does use detailed rubrics so students have a good idea of where each letter grade comes from.

My two big problems with grading in the writing class are 1) deciding what numeric score to give on papers (the same issue Croxall was dealing with) and 2) how to grade 'participation' when there are numerous assignments that don't have a 'right' answer but that I want students to complete on time and take seriously (like peer reviews and reflections on their own writing). I have toyed with the idea of contract grading before but couldn't quite bring myself to go that far. Reading the comments on both of Croxall's posts, as well as another Profhacker post on Grading: Letters or Numbers, got me thinking and I finally decided to try the following set-up this spring: Papers will be graded on a straight letter-grade basis but everything else will be graded out of either one or two points. Homework and in-class assignments that I simply want students to make a good-faith effort to DO will be graded on a scale of one point (done) or zero (not done) for each item on the assignment (so a handout with six questions will be worth six points - this is so I don't have to deal with things like half-points if a student only does half the questions and the only way a student gets a complete zero is to not do the assignment at all). Pre-writing, peer review and evaluation assignments (where students must answer some questions reflecting on their papers as well as evaluating the peer reviews they received) will be graded out of two possible points (again for each item) where a two is 'fulfills assignment with exceptional skill or effort', a one is 'meets basic requirements' and zero is 'not completed'. Then at the end of the semester, the criteria for final grades will be based on 1) grades on papers (on a traditional GPA-like 4-point scale), 2) total points, and 3) number of completed assignments according to the cut-offs in the table:

I haven't completely solidified all of the questions for all of the assignments for the whole semester yet so to leave myself some room for tweaking, I didn't try to figure out the exact number of points that correspond to each grade. But if a student does the bare minimum, i.e., doing everything but only getting 1s on every possible item on every assignment, and they are only writing at a C level, then they get a C. To get a B, students must be writing at a B level, AND have completed at least a third of the assignments at a level above 'meets basic requirements', etc. Pluses and minuses will depend on where students fall in each of the categories (I'm still trying to figure out exactly what those rules will look like).

I expect this will reduce at least some of my stress about actually grading - as Croxall put it, I can generally tell the difference between an A paper and a B paper (or a thoughtful review versus one that is just 'fine'). But I have no idea how this is going to go over with students. In some ways, I think it will be fine, since students seem to like when they can count up points and map that directly to a particular grade. But this mapping isn't your standard "90% is an A, 80% for a B, etc." so I anticipate some confusion about that.

Has anyone out there done anything similar? Would love to hear about your experience in the comments!