Abstract

Students of introductory economics are often able to predict changes in equilibrium price correctly on standardized assessments, but make consistent errors in predicting changes in equilibrium quantity. To examine the reasons for this pattern, the authors collected open-ended explanations written by students and categorized their reasoning using a rigorous multi-step qualitative method. Integrating the qualitative analysis with quantitative data, they find that students exhibit remarkable consistency in their reasoning errors. Common multiple choice assessments tend to reward some types of reasoning errors and thereby make it harder for students to acquire the correct reasoning method. The authors demonstrate that, with thoughtful consideration to avoid excessive subjectivity, a qualitative study can deepen our contextual understanding of the primarily quantitative assessment metrics utilized in economics education research.

摘要

入门经济学的学生通常能够在标准化评估中正确预测均衡价格的变化，但是在预测均衡数量的变化时会出现一致的错误。为了研究这种模式的原因，作者收集了学生撰写的开放式解释，并使用严格的多步定性方法对他们的推理进行了分类。将定性分析与定量数据相结合，他们发现学生在推理错误方面表现出显着的一致性。常见的多项选择评估往往会奖励某些类型的推理错误，从而使学生更难掌握正确的推理方法。作者证明，为了避免过分主观的考虑，