Bill, the problem is that many of my students do seem interested. and i do agree that the quiz is pretty pathetic. but i used to read 2000 papers a term, with rewrites and lots more interest on my part. it did not seem to make much difference, and i just cannot physically do this anymore. beleive me over the years i have used films, games, speakers, you name it. michael William S. Lear wrote: > > On Wed, February 10, 1999 at 19:14:12 (-0500) Michael Yates writes: > > ... I have to say that the level of > >illiteracy and general stupidity seems to be rising among students. the > >most basic words are unknown to them, and they never bother to look them > >up. I have to continually check myself when I am about to use a word I > >know that they should understand but do not. > > Solution?: write up a dictionary of all the terms that you will use. > Give it to them on the first day. > > > On a recent quiz someone said that the name of Adam Smith's famous book > >was "Rivethead."!! this after at least a dozen mentions of "The Wealth > >of Nations." ... > > Not to be too critical, especially at a distance, but perhaps you > should take part of the blame. This at least has the virtue of > providing an avenue from the despair you seem to be drifting towards, > because you can then work on something close to fix, rather than > trying to fix the students' problems, which are more remote. > > It sounds to me as if your examples are a bit on the rote-ish side of > things. If the students fill in "Rivethead" for "Wealth of Nations", > that's pretty sad, but why are you asking them this? This sounds like > a very good measure of how much interest the kids have in the subject, > not how stupid they are. Perhaps you could alter your teaching a bit > --- I mean if today's kids are even less prepared, perhaps traditional > methods, or whatever elements of traditional methods you use, could be > rethought. Perhaps try making economics fun, or meaningful, on their > terms --- I mean, who cares if Adam Smith wrote "Wealth of Nations" or > "Rivethead" or "Gunga Din"? Perhaps try interviewing some of the kids > to find out why they wrote some of these outrageous things (Did you > just not care? Were you bored?). > > The most important thing for a teacher is to develop the natural > curiosity of the students. You have to reach deep for this one, > especially in a subject as potentially boring as economics. I have > always thought that having the students act out, in a sort of play, > different types of roles that illustrate what you are talking about, > would be a good learning mechanism for economics. Take, say, the > creation of money. You could have students form different entities: > The Treasury, Banks, Farmers, Consumers, etc. Then, the directions of > the play would have the Farmer go for a loan to the bank, etc. > Someone could be in charge of counting all the money that exists (you > could give stop/start directions to the actors, "OK, everybody stop, > Counter, go count the money"). Someone could write on the chalkboard > when money was destroyed (reflux!), etc. > > Or another game might be to have a small society that buys and sells > different colors of apples (or Mountain Dews, or Snowboards, etc.). > Each group of students would have different apples (etc.) and would > buy and sell with the other groups. You could illustrate the MV = PT > identity. You could have several runs where V varied, etc. You could > calculate GDP, etc. This society could be combined with the banking > society, etc. > > Or, how about watching the Wizard of Oz in class one day? Discuss > with them the Gold Standard and why Baum was writing the things he > did... Relate this to why the PT = MV equation holds such interest > for people who wanted (and want) tight money, etc. This might pique > interest in general... > > Or, give them a book by Noam Chomsky discussing how the rich are > screwing the rest of us (e.g., *Class Warfare*). Or, get a tape from > David Barsamian and edit it for class, play it, then discuss it. Try > to motivate them to *want* to learn this stuff from the first day. It > might just get them interested enough in the economics if you show the > political side of the game and how consciously it is played by elite > groups --- might also be worth it to explore some of Tom Ferguson's > work on how the wealthy and corporations dominate, and have always > dominated, the political system, and how our Constitution was written > to give them this advantage over the rest of us. > > Read William Lazonick's essay "The Anglo-Saxon Corporate System" in > the book *The Corporate Triangle* --- not terribly difficult, you > could even perhaps summarize it yourself to cut down on length, then > go on a field trip to a factory to see for yourself. Go to a bank. > Go to the Federal Reserve branch... Go to an EPA office to see how > much pollution industries are letting off, and how much they pay > relative to their annual profits in fines and purchases of pollution > credits. > > Or, have a union member or activist, or Michael Perelman, or Doug > Henwood, or Paul Newman or Ed Asner (make some phone calls) come in to > talk to the kids. Let them know what unions are for. Get political, > man! > > Finally, by all means, don't tackle this alone. Call in outside help > on this. Not just from other economists, but from teachers who have > had success in getting kids interested in the broad scope of subjects > in order to teach sometimes messy/boring details. Try reading Nancy > Eisenberg and Paul H. Mussen's *The Roots of Prosocial Behavior in > Children* (Cambridge University Press, 1989) to see if you get any > ideas from it. > > But, this is just random thoughts. I'd say you have a tough job on > your hands, and my sympathy. > > Bill
