No abstract

Efficiency considerations have led to increased use of multiple‐choice questions to assess economics understanding at the secondary and tertiary levels throughout Australia. A multiple‐choice test would suffice if multiple‐choice and essay questions measure the same dimensions of knowledge, as suggested by least squares estimation of the relationship between these two forms of testing. We show a simultaneous equation bias inherent in least squares estimation of the relationship between these two forms. A two‐stage least squares estimation reveals no relationship, implying that these testing forms measure different dimensions of knowledge. Thus, a single form of testing economics knowledge must be avoided.

No abstract

Reports on a study in a system of public education that is widely believed to be at the forefront of efforts to create world class schools. The aim of the study, thought to be the first of its kind, was to determine the extent to which five disciplines in the Senge model of a learning organisation are apparent in management practices of schools within the system. Concludes that Senge's model of a learning organisation provides a helpful template for conceptualising progress towards world class schools. Implications for leadership are identified as an avenue through which to energise the quest for world class schools.

In this paper, we examine eight years of Quality of Teaching (QOT) responses from an Economics Department in an Australian University. This is done to determine what factors, besides the instructor, have an impact on the raw average student evaluation scores. Most of the previous research on student ratings has been conducted in the US. One significant difference between US and Australian tertiary education is that, on average, the number of foreign undergraduate students in Australia is ten times the number in US institutions. We find that cultural background significantly affects student evaluations. Other factors that have an influence on the average QOT score include: year level; enrolment size; the quantitative nature of the subject; the gender of the student; fee-paying status by gender; course of study; the differences between the course mark and previous marks; the quality of workbooks; the quality of textbooks; and the QOT score relative to those in other subjects taught at the same time. In addition, average QOT scores for instructors who have taught in a mix of subjects are similar to those based on scores adjusted to account for subject and student characteristics.

A new Internet-based subject delivery and assessment system, Critical and Analytical Leaming in Macroeconomics (CALM), introduced in the Faculty of Economics and Commerce at the University of Melbourne, was designed to help students see connections between economic theory and the real world, develop positive attitudes toward economics, develop deep approaches to learning, improve critical analysis and problem-solving, and encourage more effective study habits. In an evaluation of the CALM project, students were surveyed concerning their level of skills confidence, attitudes and approaches to learning, direct experiences with CALM, and perceptions of the quality of instruction. A survey was also administered to tutors. The overall results of the evaluation indicated that CALM had met its objectives. (25 ref) 0452-37lGMT

In this paper, we examine eight years of Quality of Teaching (QOT) responses from an Economics Department in an Australian University. This is done to determine what factors, besides the instructor, have an impact on the raw average student evaluation scores. Most of the previous research on student ratings has been conducted in the US. One significant difference between US and Australian tertiary education is that, on average, the number of foreign undergraduate students in Australia is ten times the number in US institutions. We find that cultural background significantly affects student evaluations. Other factors that have an influence on the average QOT score include: year level; enrolment size; the quantitative nature of the subject; the gender of the student; fee‐paying status by gender; course of study; the differences between the course mark and previous marks; the quality of workbooks; the quality of textbooks; and the QOT score relative to those in other subjects taught at the same time. In addition, average QOT scores for instructors who have taught in a mix of subjects are similar to those based on scores adjusted to account for subject and student characteristics.

No abstract