Reflections on Modern Macroeconomics: Can We Travel Along a Safer Road?

In this paper we sketch some reflections on the pitfalls and inconsistencies of the research program - currently dominant among the profession - aimed at providing microfoundations to macroeconomics along a Walrasian perspective. We argue that such a methodological approach constitutes an unsatisfactory answer to a well-posed research question, and that alternative promising routes have been long mapped out but only recently explored. In particular, we discuss a recent agent-based, truly non-Walrasian macroeconomic model, and we use it to envisage new challenges for future research.Comment: Latex2e v1.6; 17 pages with 4 figures; for inclusion in the APFA5 Proceeding

Learning in evolutionary environments

Not availabl

Characteristics of Feedback that Influence Student Confidence and Performance during Mathematical Modeling

This study focuses on characteristics of written feedback that influence students’ performance and confidence in addressing the mathematical complexity embedded in a Model-Eliciting Activity (MEA). MEAs are authentic mathematical modeling problems that facilitate students’ iterative development of solutions in a realistic context. We analyzed 132 first-year engineering students’ confidence levels and mathematical model scores on aMEA(pre and post feedback), along with teaching assistant feedback given to the students. The findings show several examples of affective and cognitive feedback that students reported that they used to revise their models. Students’ performance and confidence in developing mathematical models can be increased when they are in an environment where they iteratively develop models based on effective feedback

Applying science of learning in education: Infusing psychological science into the curriculum

The field of specialization known as the science of learning is not, in fact, one field. Science of learning is a term that serves as an umbrella for many lines of research, theory, and application. A term with an even wider reach is Learning Sciences (Sawyer, 2006). The present book represents a sliver, albeit a substantial one, of the scholarship on the science of learning and its application in educational settings (Science of Instruction, Mayer 2011). Although much, but not all, of what is presented in this book is focused on learning in college and university settings, teachers of all academic levels may find the recommendations made by chapter authors of service. The overarching theme of this book is on the interplay between the science of learning, the science of instruction, and the science of assessment (Mayer, 2011). The science of learning is a systematic and empirical approach to understanding how people learn. More formally, Mayer (2011) defined the science of learning as the “scientific study of how people learn” (p. 3). The science of instruction (Mayer 2011), informed in part by the science of learning, is also on display throughout the book. Mayer defined the science of instruction as the “scientific study of how to help people learn” (p. 3). Finally, the assessment of student learning (e.g., learning, remembering, transferring knowledge) during and after instruction helps us determine the effectiveness of our instructional methods. Mayer defined the science of assessment as the “scientific study of how to determine what people know” (p.3). Most of the research and applications presented in this book are completed within a science of learning framework. Researchers first conducted research to understand how people learn in certain controlled contexts (i.e., in the laboratory) and then they, or others, began to consider how these understandings could be applied in educational settings. Work on the cognitive load theory of learning, which is discussed in depth in several chapters of this book (e.g., Chew; Lee and Kalyuga; Mayer; Renkl), provides an excellent example that documents how science of learning has led to valuable work on the science of instruction. Most of the work described in this book is based on theory and research in cognitive psychology. We might have selected other topics (and, thus, other authors) that have their research base in behavior analysis, computational modeling and computer science, neuroscience, etc. We made the selections we did because the work of our authors ties together nicely and seemed to us to have direct applicability in academic settings

Maximizing the Benefits of Collaborative Learning in the College Classroom

abstract: This study tested the effects of two kinds of cognitive, domain-based preparation tasks on learning outcomes after engaging in a collaborative activity with a partner. The collaborative learning method of interest was termed "preparing-to-interact," and is supported in theory by the Preparation for Future Learning (PFL) paradigm and the Interactive-Constructive-Active-Passive (ICAP) framework. The current work combined these two cognitive-based approaches to design collaborative learning activities that can serve as alternatives to existing methods, which carry limitations and challenges. The "preparing-to-interact" method avoids the need for training students in specific collaboration skills or guiding/scripting their dialogic behaviors, while providing the opportunity for students to acquire the necessary prior knowledge for maximizing their discussions towards learning. The study used a 2x2 experimental design, investigating the factors of Preparation (No Prep and Prep) and Type of Activity (Active and Constructive) on deep and shallow learning. The sample was community college students in introductory psychology classes; the domain tested was "memory," in particular, concepts related to the process of remembering/forgetting information. Results showed that Preparation was a significant factor affecting deep learning, while shallow learning was not affected differently by the interventions. Essentially, equalizing time-on-task and content across all conditions, time spent individually preparing by working on the task alone and then discussing the content with a partner produced deeper learning than engaging in the task jointly for the duration of the learning period. Type of Task was not a significant factor in learning outcomes, however, exploratory analyses showed evidence of Constructive-type behaviors leading to deeper learning of the content. Additionally, a novel method of multilevel analysis (MLA) was used to examine the data to account for the dependency between partners within dyads. This work showed that "preparing-to-interact" is a way to maximize the benefits of collaborative learning. When students are first cognitively prepared, they seem to make the most efficient use of discussion towards learning, engage more deeply in the content during learning, leading to deeper knowledge of the content. Additionally, in using MLA to account for subject nonindependency, this work introduces new questions about the validity of statistical analyses for dyadic data.Dissertation/ThesisPh.D. Educational Psychology 201