Skip to main content

Discussing the financial crisis

I must be a masochist. I woke up yesterday morning and decided that I just couldn't NOT talk about the financial crisis in my classes. But since my own understanding of the crisis was pretty shallow, I proceeded to spend the next five hours reading everything I could find, bugging my colleagues and putting together a lecture for my Principles class at noon that tried to tie the crisis together with our recent discussions of cost-benefit analysis and incentives (if anyone is interested, the lecture is now on my iTunesU site - email me directly and I'm happy to send the link). I jumped forward in my syllabus and talked about moral hazard but I think it actually fit quite well with our previous discussions so I may even keep it there in the future. Of course, I have no idea what my students thought of my presentation but I'm glad I did it; this whole situation clearly has huge implications and even if most of my students aren't directly affected right now, they need to be aware of what's going on.

This morning, the Freakonomics blog has a post from Chicago economists Doug Diamond and Anil Kashyap that explains it all way better than I could (though they do assume a certain level of familiarity with financial markets that I'm not sure all my students have). And I could never share this with my students in class but this powerpoint show gives a hysterical, and fairly accurate, explanation too.

Comments

  1. I'm about to do the same thing. (I have a little flexibility, because my campus is closed by flooding until next Monday, making a total of 2 weeks...having a campus in a flood plain in what sed to be a marsh--northwest Indiana--has its drawbacks.) So I'd love to see/hear what you did.
    Don

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Comments that contribute to the discussion are always welcome! Please note that spammy comments whose only purpose seems to be to direct traffic to a commercial site will be deleted.

Popular posts from this blog

What are the costs?

I came across an interesting discussion about a 19-year-old intern who was fired from The Gazette in Colorado Springs for plagiarism. There appears to be some controversy over the fact that the editor publicly named the girl in a letter to readers (explaining and apologizing for the plagiarism), with some people saying that doing so was unduly harsh because this incident will now follow her for the rest of her career. I was intrigued by this discussion for two reasons - one, it seems pretty clear to me that this was not a case of ignorance (as I have often encountered with my own students who have no idea how to paraphrase or cite correctly) and two, putting aside the offense itself, I have often struggled with how to handle situations where there are long-term repercussions for a student, repercussions that lead the overall costs to be far higher than might seem warranted for the specific situation. As an example of the latter issue, I have occasionally taught seniors who need to p

What was your high school economics experience like?

As I mentioned in my last post , I am asking my Econ for Teachers students to reflect on their reading by responding to discussion prompts. It occurred to me that it wouldn't be a bad idea for me to share my thoughts on those issues here and see if anyone wants to chime in. For this week, the students were asked to read the California and national content standards , an article by Mark Schug and others about why social science teachers dread teaching economics and how to overcome the dread, an article by William Walstad on the importance of economics for understanding the world around us and making better personal decisions (with some evidence on the dismal state of economic literacy in this country), and another article by Walstad on the status of economic education in high schools (full citations below). The reflection prompt asks the students to then answer the following questions: What was your high school econ experience like? What do you remember most from that class? How do

When is an exam "too hard"?

By now, you may have heard about the biology professor at Louisiana State (Baton Rouge) who was removed from teaching an intro course where "more than 90 percent of the students... were failing or had dropped the class." The majority of the comments on the Inside Higher Ed story about it are supportive of the professor, particularly given that it seems like the administration did not even talk to her about the situation before acting. I tend to fall in the "there's got to be more to the story so I'll reserve judgment" camp but the story definitely struck a nerve with me, partly because I recently spent 30 minutes "debating" with a student about whether the last midterm was "too hard" and the whole conversation was super-frustrating. To give some background: I give three midterms and a cumulative final, plus have clicker points and Aplia assignments that make up about 20% of the final grade. I do not curve individual exams but will cu