SERVICE-LEARNING AND THE ECONOMICS COURSE: THEORY AND PRACTICE.

McGoldrick, KimMarie ; Battle, Ann ; Gallagher, Suzanne 等

KimMarie McGoldrick [*]

Ann Battle [**]

Suzanne Gallagher [***]

Abstract

Service-learning has grown in popularity as a pedagogical alternative in many liberal arts based educational settings. While many disciplines have embraced this new approach, the economics discipline seems slow to respond to this educational trend. This paper overviews the recent reexamination of the economics classroom including a discussion of the links between active, experiential, and service-learning. The authors then provide a detailed application of one form of service-learning, student-based instruction, for a managerial economics course.

Introduction

Economic education has come under increasing scrutiny during the past decade. Much of this has been driven by the downward trend apparent in the number of economics majors. Questions arising from analyses of this trend include many related to teaching methods, course content, and learning styles. For example, Spencer and Van Eynde (1986) offer a motivation for experiential learning; Carlson and Schodt (1995) present an example of using case studies in the classroom; Lage and Treglia (1996) study the impact of integrating scholarship on women into introductory economics; and Bartlett (1996) addresses methods for identifying learning styles in our students so that we might better teach them.

The recurring theme throughout this and related literature is that the diversity of students in our classrooms necessitates a diversity in course content and presentation style. The motivation for this change is best typified by the research of Kolb. This work indicates that "as a result of our hereditary equipment, our particular past life experiences, and the demands of our present environment, most of us develop learning styles that emphasize some learning abilities over others" (1981: 237). Kolb's research indicates that undergraduate economics majors tend to be assimilators: taking in knowledge through reflective observation and processing it via abstract conceptualization. While further analyzing the impact of general disciplinary norms on student learning, Kolb suggests that students choose their major based on the presentation style that is most consistent with their own learning style. Thus, a perpetual cycle of economics major assimilators is created. Bartlett (1996) argues that this practice limit s diversity within the economics major since European-American females, Hispanics, and African American students tend to be accommodators (taking in information via concrete experience and processing it through active experimentation) (148). This line of research provides one motivation for the student-based teaching example described below. Unfortunately, only additional research conducted over long periods of time will allow one to access its impact on diversity within the major.

Although studies clearly indicate that alternative pedagogies (i.e., not lecture) are of great benefit to students, Siegfried (1996) and Becker and Watts (1996) report that an overwhelming majority of instructors still rely solely on the lecture mode of information transmission. A reexamination of the classroom paradigm is further motivated through the work of Phillips (1984). This research validated that we remember 10% of what we hear, 15% of what we see, 20% of what we hear and see, 60% of what we do, 80% of what we do with active reflection, and 90% of what we teach. The goal of this paper is to detail a particular active learning technique: service-learning. Well planned service-learning projects can take advantage of hearing, seeing, doing, and reflection activities. In the application that follows, we have developed a project that reinforces economics principles through practice, i.e., teaching. Based on the results of Phillips' research, it is our hope that this practice will also have the added bene fit of increasing the recollection of economic principles over time.

The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. Active and experiential learning are presented as the backdrop for service-learning. The paper then focuses on one form of service- learning, student-based instruction, and provides an example as well as an assessment of the costs and benefits of this active learning technique.

Active and Experiential Learning

Active learning may be somewhat of a misnomer, after all, who has ever heard of passive learning? Its appearance in the literature falls under a variety of venues suggesting everything from applications of and alterations in the Socratic method (the modified lecture) and class discussions (Cohn, Cohn, and Bradley, 1995) to solving case studies (Palmini, 1996), computerized applications (Bartlett and King, 1990) and cooperative learning exercises (Bartlett, 1996). Thus, attempting to formulate a simple definition of active learning would be fruitless. Instead it is more useful to describe its characteristics:

"Students are involved in more than listening.

Less emphasis is placed on transmitting information and more on developing students' skills.

Students are involved in higher-order thinking (analysis, synthesis, evaluation).

Students are engaged in activities (e.g., reading, discussion, writing).

Greater emphasis is placed on students' exploration of their own attitudes and values."

(Bonwell and Eison 1991:2)

Experiential learning is one pedagogical technique consistent with these characteristics. It recognizes a link between personal experience and learning and suggests a reversal of the traditional "theory to application" mode of instruction. Students use their own experiences to formulate complex, abstract models through guided discussion or reflective journaling. Student developed models can be compared and contrasted with existing theories, providing a student-based avenue for critique.

The benefits of this form of active learning are numerous. It "puts students in real world learning situations, which involve the total self and the call for insight, action, and self-examination" (Davis 1993: 354). The educational process becomes tangible and individual oriented. During the process, students become experts through their own experiences. Knowledge is constructed in the collective as opposed to transmitted from "expert" to "novice." Students are encouraged to involve their whole selves including emotions and intuitions. Since economic decisions are political and personal as well as based on costs and benefits, incorporating these attributes into economic decision making processes creates a realistic exercise. In addition, it develops a sense of responsibility to the greater community.

As with any alternative pedagogical technique, there are barriers that inhibit the adoption of these experiential techniques. Typical questions of content coverage, applicability in large classes or to particular subject materials, and methods of assessment often arise. Active learning exercises are often criticized for neglecting certain subject materials and not being particularly useful in large classes. This paper provides an example of an active learning technique (student-based instruction) that can be applied across all class sizes and subjects and does not take up additional class time. Although standard assessment techniques (examinations) are not generally applicable in evaluating student learning generated from these active learning exercises, there are alternative methods that are widely used in other disciplines. For example, journal writing, reflective essays, presentations to community leaders, and video taped presentations are appropriate alternative outcomes for assessment.

There is clearly some risk associated with moving from the standard paradigm and presentation to these more active exercises. Experiential learning requires the existence of an experience over which the instructor is unlikely to have control. In fact, the form of experiential learning of interest in the remainder of this paper cannot occur in the college classroom. As a result, an instructor cannot exhibit as much control over the learning that takes place during the experience. Most of the risk associated with this practice can be mitigated through careful planning and preparation associated with each students' potential experience location to avoid loose structures and ambiguous outcomes.

Service-Learning

It is often easy to lecture, discuss, and profess detailed economic theory while neglecting applications to the world outside the classroom. While some of our students may be able to draw on limited work experience, many do not recognize that there are links between economic theory and their everyday lives. While course work is often deductive, running from general to specific, service-learning provides an alternative process of inductive learning that runs from specific to general. An instructor can then use this as a vehicle for further discussion. In this way, each student's experiences provide the motivation for materials to be discussed.

Service-learning begins with, but extends beyond the experiences of students that take place during volunteer service activities. Thus, it not only draws upon activities outside the classroom, it also suggests a category of appropriate locations. The reason for this limitation is twofold. Students need to be able to link their education with real life experiences which cannot be simulated within the classroom. Second, the volunteer nature of their activities instills in each student a link to their larger community which is not possible for students working for pay or during internships. Thus, service-learning provides a method by which students can become participatory through their education.

A variety of forms of community service learning have been documented. These range from a limited volunteer experience focused mainly on exposure to a more in-depth experience culminating in a research-focused project benefiting the organization as well as the student. [1] Each has a different focus, degree of time commitment, and applicability to theories discussed in economics courses. These differences allow for a number of alternatives in the integration of service-learning into any course within the discipline.

The focus of this paper is a particular form of community service learning, student-based instruction. Student-based instruction necessitates a translation of economic knowledge, implying a mastery of economic theories. It provides students with the opportunity to teach and provide mentorship for those in need. This service might be provided in the form of after school programs, seminars, or presentations. For example, principles students may teach basic economic concepts such as scarcity, choice, and opportunity cost to grade school students. It suggests a time commitment of 10 to 20 hours over the course of the semester and accounts for approximately 10 percent of the students' final grade. The integration of this work with course content may be displayed through class discussion, journal writing, an on-site evaluation of each students' work, or a formal paper.

Student-based instruction has the advantages of being readily applicable in all economics classes, having a number of sources for predeveloped economics lessons, and having an unlimited potential for community involvement. In what follows, these advantages will be highlighted in an application developed for a Managerial Economics course.

Implementing a Student-Based Instruction Project

One of the main requirements for a successful experience is the level of support each faculty member, student, and classroom has available. Although many college campuses are now developing service-learning centers, the resources they would have available for this project are likely to be minimal. As an alternative source of support, faculty may seek out the local Center for Economic Education. For example, The Virginia Commonwealth University (VCU) Center lent substantial assistance in coordinating the activities for this student-based instruction project.

The VCU Center is one of 263 such Centers for Economic Education across the nation. The mission of these Centers is to enhance economic literacy among K-12 students. They accomplish this mission by providing materials and training to K-12 teachers. Thus, these centers are uniquely positioned to support economics faculty who wish to make student-based instruction a component of their classes.

Centers can assist in developing student-based instruction projects in a variety of ways. First, because centers work with local teachers, they can help identify teachers who would welcome college students coming into their classrooms to present economics lessons. The Center might even be able to handle the scheduling of these visits. In addition, Center personnel are familiar with state economics learning objectives for each grade level. Thus, once students have selected their topics and planned their lessons, the Center staff will be able to match students to the appropriate classrooms. Centers will also have information about and materials to teach the topics in the new Voluntary Standards for Economic Education presented by the National Council on Economic Education at the January 1997 Allied Social Science Association meetings.

Professors who wish to provide their students with sample lessons to use in these demonstrations will find in the Center a wide range of tested teaching materials. The professor, or the students themselves, may choose lessons from dozens of curriculum guides. In addition, they may explore the new Virtual Economics CD-ROM program which contains over 130 publications with thousands of economics lessons. [2] Lesson topics range from opportunity cost, choice, and market decisions to international and environmental issues. Using a search tool, one can locate lessons both by topic and grade level. Thus, neither professors nor students need to spend their time developing lessons plans in order to get the benefit of learning through teaching.

One advantage of working with a Center for Economics Education is that all parties have incentives to participate. The professor wishes to enhance student learning by providing the opportunities for students to teach, and thus make real, the very concepts they are learning themselves. By working with the Center, the professor may achieve these benefits at a reduced cost because the Center may provide the lessons as well as make the matches with teachers in local classrooms and perhaps even gather feedback. Students gain in two ways. Their incentive for participating may be to simply improve their grade. However, they may also achieve a higher level of learning as a result of the teaching experience.

Teachers gain because they see these demonstration lessons and now have new tools for teaching economics. They also gain because the presence of visitors often increases the involvement and enthusiasm of their students. If teachers are now better equipped to teach economics, Centers win because the demonstration lessons have provided one more avenue for teacher training. In addition, visiting university students may inform teachers of other Center materials and programs. Finally, the university gains because its students are learning more and it is making a contribution to the community.

For all student-based instruction exercises, there will be a number of commonalities. These range from determining student groups and lesson plans to developing outcome requirements. What follows is an outline of the steps and requirements designed for a managerial economics course. This case can easily be adapted to any economics course through the selection of lessons available to students. This project also has the unique component of being adaptable to other university requirements such as those for "speaking-intensive" courses.

Managerial economics, a course often required of business school students, draws on many basic microeconomic principles throughout the course. During the Fall semester, 1996, an optional assignment of engaging in a student-based instruction project was offered to students. The project was presented as an opportunity for them to more thoroughly master some fundamental economic concepts through the process of teaching these concepts to others. Students became the teacher of an economics lesson, embodying one or two basic concepts, to elementary school children in grades two or three.

Students were provided a number of firm deadlines for each component of this project. These included dates by which they were to have formed their teaching groups, chosen their economic topic and lesson, coordinated a teaching time and location, completed their lesson, and turned in all required materials. The highly structured nature of this project was necessary due to the high degree of coordination between faculty, students, and grade school teachers.

The job of coordinating the assignment of student groups to an elementary school classroom was made much easier through the efforts of the coordinator of the VCU Center for Economic Education. She was able to identify teachers who would have a likely interest in having college students come into their classrooms to teach an economics lesson. She also made the initial contact with those teachers by requesting that they complete an information survey (see Appendix 1) detailing the number of students in the class, their preference as to a "topic" (chosen from a list), and the best time to try to contact them. To make the coordination effort easier, each student filled out an information sheet (see Appendix 2) which included some suggested dates and times when they would be available. Using this information, the professor or someone in a university-wide community service office, made initial phone calls to the interested grade school teachers, coordinated dates and times, provided the students' names and numbers , and verified the specific lesson topic to be presented.

Beyond this point in the project, the students worked independently within their groups to prepare the lesson [3] and, ultimately, go into the classroom to teach. Each lesson was expected to last about 45 minutes to an hour. Groups had to assign roles to each member and plan every detail, making sure to consider the following questions: What materials would be needed for the lesson? Who would hand out the materials for the lesson? Would one student stay free to roam and maintain order? Who would do writing on the board if needed? Students were advised that the more detail they included in their planning, the more smooth the experience would be for them, the children, and the teacher.

One member of the group was required to contact the teacher and discuss tips for handling the particular class, any related lessons that the teacher may have already covered with the class, and any other information that might be helpful. Additional "training" could be provided for students by inviting an elementary school teacher to give a seminar on "tips for teaching young children." The following section describes the experience of some of the student groups with a lesson on scarcity and opportunity cost.

A few of the groups chose the same lesson, the first lesson in Children in the Market Place, with a theme on relative scarcity and the need to make choices. In this lesson the children learn that to make a choice means to "give up" something and that each person's choice will depend on his or her own likes or dislikes. The children are divided into groups of four or five, and each group is given a bag containing items such as stickers, pencils, trading cards, erasers, or candy. Before opening the bag, the children are told to discuss possible ways of distributing the contents. This part of the lesson is where the children needed some guidance to stay on task, but even when things seemed a little more chaotic than anticipated, the children learned the important points:

"... Everyone had something to say, but there were three answers that pretty much covered everyone's response. The class realized that one doesn't always get just what they want, that there are a variety of ways to share, and that one needs to think about the costs and benefits together whenever making a decision. Just when I thought our lesson had fallen on deaf ears after nearly an hour, the class gave these answers, showing that they somewhat understood scarcity and opportunity costs." (student summary)

Clearly, the student-based instruction benefits the elementary school children, but what about the impact on the college economics student?

The modest goal of this project, from the professor's perspective, was to have at least one important economic principle indelibly marked in the mind of the economics student through the experience of teaching to others. [4] Requiring the students to complete a reflective summary of their teaching experience is one way to assess whether this goal was accomplished and to gain insight into other benefits the students gained from the experience. Each individual student was asked to turn in a two to five page summary consisting of two main components: (1) a description of the lesson and the teaching environment, (2) a presentation of their opinion on the "success" of the project: What parts of the lesson worked well and what parts did not? Did the students learned something? How could you tell? What did you gain from the experience?

These reflective summaries provide the best window into the experience from the perspective of the "economics student." The summaries were a pleasure to read. While the classroom experiences of the groups were varied, the feeling was nearly universal that the project was worthwhile and positive. Many of the students were surprised at what elementary school children already knew about "scarcity" or "barter." Others expressed pleasure at being around young children as a change of pace from the normal college scene. Still others reminisced about those tiny desks in the classrooms!

The following quotes give some examples of the sentiment expressed in the summaries:

"Overall I have to say that this was probably the single most enjoyable thing I have been involved with since I came to VCU over three years ago."

"There are a number of things which I gained from this service-learning project. First, I definitely gained a new respect for elementary school teachers.... Also I learned that it is important for second graders to see things before their eyes. For example, writing terms and instructions on the board is much more effective that expecting the class to pick up concepts only mentioned by a speaker."

"At first, I was more nervous for this presentation than any of my business presentations. After a few minutes though, I was having a blast watching ten hands blasting towards the sky for me to call on them so they could offer some input and have me write their responses on the easel. I had more fun than they did and I believe our presentation was really worth everyone's time involved. And, truthfully, this sure was more fun than regression analysis."

To assess the overall performance of each student group and to have another perspective on the quality of the experience for the children, each teacher completed an evaluation form (see Appendix 3) and returned it directly to the professor. The teachers' responses to the project were extremely positive, which is not surprising since they volunteered to participate and were therefore very open to the idea at the outset. All of the teachers expressed a willingness to participate in the project again the following semester.

"These three young men were natural teachers. Their excitement with what they were doing was clearly evident. All three did a fantastic job and worked extremely well with this age group. I would like to get all three to go into teaching!! I would love to have more VCU students come to the classroom."

"My students had a very clear understanding of the economic principles that were taught. The VCU students introduced the topic, taught several examples, and had a conclusion to wrap it all up. The students... knew exactly who would teach what and how to do it. It was an amazing presentation."

Aside from the written feedback from the students and the elementary school teachers, the students also expressed their enthusiasm in person--including conversations in the hall the following semester encouraging the continued use of this teaching opportunity in future classes.

Conclusion

As a form of active learning, student-based instruction has a number of advantages for students, teachers and faculty. The example of student-based instruction presented in this paper requires that economics students have a firm grounding in the material they are presenting to such young children. Although they are relying on predetermined lessons, they must be able to anticipate questions and give examples in terms that their audience will understand. Economics students need to be able to pull examples of economic concepts from the most basic aspects of everyday life, reminding them of its universal relevance in decision making. As one student reflected, "All in all, I would recommend that you have all your students do this, it really makes you think about what we learned in class and how to interpret it and relate it to others."

The gains to constituencies other than the college student reinforces the value of student-based instruction. Although the Virginia Standards of Learning include economic concepts at all levels of primary and secondary education, many teachers still tend to be more comfortable with the "other" subjects of the Social Sciences curriculum and therefore de-emphasize economics. By introducing teachers to these lessons they will be exposed to the available resources and methods by which they may begin to include these standards in their classrooms. The gains to the children include increasing their knowledge about the world in which they live and providing them with information about economic decision making. As one teacher relates, "... this was a very good experience for the children. Learning economics concepts early on should pay dividends later on!"

Finally, the benefits associated with student-based instruction go beyond those listed above. Student-based instruction offers a method of learning by doing, addresses alternative learning styles, builds real world examples into the most basic of economic concepts, adds a level of excitement and applicability to knowledge, and may even influence some students to continue in the major.

One might ask whether the effort necessary to set up a student-based instruction project is worth it. Clearly there are significant start up costs to the project, but with the help of service-learning and economic education centers these might be minimized. Further, the project has great potential for self perpetuation once a network of local school teachers are enlisted. Finally, there is significant potential for a wide range of winners: elementary school children, teachers, college students, college professors, and the university.

(*.) Economics Department, University of Richmond, Richmond, VA 23173, (804) 289-8575, kmcgoldr@richmond.edu.

(**.) Currently, Corporate Economist, Crestar Bank; Formerly, Economics Department, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA

(***.) Center for Economic Education, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA

Notes

(1.) These models of community service learning and their applications in economics are further described by McGoldrick (1998).

(2.) Since 1996 Centers have been distributing, at no charge, the Virtual Economics CD-ROM to schools in the United States. These disks, made available by the National Council on Economic Education (NCEE), contain nearly all of the NCEE EconomicsAmerica publications (over $2,000 worth of materials).

(3.) These lesson plans were chosen from publications available on the Virtual Economics CD-ROM such as EconomicsAmerica, Children in the Market Place, and Teaching Environmental Economics, though there are certainly many other available sources. Students were encouraged to follow lesson plans fairly closely, but to adjust or add to the lesson as they desired, allowing for some creativity on their part.

(4.) Although this was our main goal, it would also be useful to test the effectiveness of this technique on student learning. There are many problems with testing the effectiveness of active learning techniques, especially in constructing the control groups necessary for comparison purposes. No reliable method for pre and post testing was at our disposal at the time this exercise was implemented.

References

Bartlett, Robin L. 1995. "A Flip of the Coin--A Roll of the Die: An Answer to the Free-Rider Problem in Economic Instruction." Journal of Economic Education, 26 (Spring), 131-39.

Bartlett, Robin L. 1996. "Discovering Diversity in Introductory Economics." Journal of Economic Perspectives, 10 (Spring), 141-53.

Bartlett, Robin L. and Paul G. King. 1990. "Teaching Economics as a Laboratory Science." Journal of Economic Education, 21 (Spring), 181-93.

Becker, William E. and Michael Watts. 1996. "Chalk and Talk: A National Survey on Teaching Undergraduate Economics." American Economic Review, 86(2), May 1996, 448-453.

Becker, William E. and Michael Watts. 1995. "Teaching Tools: Teaching Methods in Undergraduate Economics." Economic Inquiry, 33 (October), 692-700.

Bonwell, Charles C. and James A. Eison. 1991. Active Learning: Creating Excitement in the Classroom. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No. 1. Washington, D.C.: The George Washington University, School of Education and Human Development.

Carlson, John A. and David W. Schodt. 1995. "Beyond the Lecture: Case Teaching and the Learning of Economic Theory." Journal of Economic Education, 26 (Winter), 17-28.

Cohn, Elchanan, Sharon Cohn, and James Bradley, Jr. 1995. "Notetaking, Working Memory and Learning in Principles of Economics." Journal of Economic Education, 26 (Fall), 291-307.

Davis, James R. 1993. Better Teaching. More Learning: Strategies for Success in Postsecondary Settings. The American Council on Education Phoenix, AZ: ORYX Press.

Kolb, David. 1976. Learning Style Inventory: Technical Manual, Boston: McBer and Company.

Kolb, David. 1981. "Learning Styles and Disciplinary Differences." In Chickering and Associates, Eds., The Modern American College. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers 232-255.

Kolb, David. 1984. Experiential Learning: Experience as a Source of Learning and Development, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall.

Lage, Maureen J. and Michael Treglia. 1996. "The Impact of Integrating Scholarship on Women into Introductory Economics: Evidence from One Institution." Journal of Economic Education, 27 (Winter), 26-36.

McGoldrick, KimMarie. 1998. "Service-Learning in Economics: A Detailed Application." Journal of Economic Education, 24(Fall), 365-376.

McGoldrick, KimMarie. 1996. "The Road Not Taken: An Example of Feminist Pedagogy in Economics." Unpublished paper. In 1999, April Aerni and KimMarie McGoldrick, Valuing Us All: Toward Feminist Pedagogy and Economics, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

Palmini, Dennis J. 1996. "Using Rhetorical Cases to Teach Writing Skills and Enhance Economic Learning." Journal of Economic Education, 27 (Summer), 205-16.

Phillips, Gary. 1984. Growing Hope, Minneapolis, MN: National Youth Leadership Council.

Siegfried, John, Robin L. Bartlett, W. Lee Hansen, Allen C. Kelley, Donald N. McCloskey, and Thomas H. Tietenberg. 1991. "The Status and Prospects of the Economics Major." Journal of Economic Education, 22 (Summer), 197-24.

Siegfried, John J., Phillip Saunders, Ethan Stinar, and Hao Zhang. 1996. "Teaching Tools: How is Introductory Economics Taught in America?" Economic Inquiry, 43 (January), 182-92.

Spencer, Robert W. and Donald F. Van Eynde. 1986. Journal of Economic Education, 17 (Fall), 289-94.

"Standards of Learning for Virginia Public Schools," Board of Education, Commonwealth of Virginia, June 1995.

Virtual Economics: An Interactive Center for Economic Education. National Council on Economics Education, Nebraska: Economics America.

"Voluntary National Content Standards in Economics." 1997. Developed by National Council on Economic Education in partnership with National Association for Economic Educators, Foundation for Teaching Economics, and the American Economic Education Association Committee on Economic Education; development funded by Calvin K. Kazanjian Economics Foundation, Inc., AT&T Foundation, and the Foundation for Teaching Economics. Presented at American Economic Association Meetings, January.

Appendix 1

Service-Learning Teacher Information Form

Earlier this semester you indicated that you would be like to have a VCU student come to your classroom to present an economics lesson. We are now ready to start that program. These students are in professor Ann Battle's economics class. We will be trying to match teachers' and students' schedules as well as lesson topics. A pair of students will visit your classroom once, sometime between now and Thanksgiving. You will be asked to evaluate their presentation.

Please fax (***_****) this back as soon as you can to let us know if you still want to participate. Call if you have any questions (***_****). Thanks.

_____Yes, I am still interested in this project.

Name

Phone

Best time to call

School

Address

Grade Level

______No, I can't participate at this time.

Fax

Room #

District

Number of students in class

We will be trying to match your schedule with our students' schedules; please give us the best time for the lesson. The more flexible you can be, the better the chance that a match can be made!

Day of week

Day of week

Time

Time

Lesson topic preferred (Mark any that suit you.)

(1) Scarcity:

--Wants are unlimited

--Making choices--must give something up to get something else

--Factors that influence choice

--tastes, values, habits

(2) People's Wants Stimulate Production

--Producers make goods that people want

--Chain of supply--manufacturing, retail, wholesale

--Demand for goods is influenced by producers through advertising

(3) Production

--Production takes place before consumption

--Products are made from resources

--Resources (such as labor) are scarce

--Availability of resources and technology influences production decisions

(4) Barter

--People are better off (happier) by trading

--Money makes it easier to get the goods you want

Appendix 2

Service-Learning Planning Form

Student Name:

Phone:

Other Members of Group (List Names):

Best Times to Call:

Fax:

Address:

E-mail Address:

Windows of opportunity when you are available to go to your assigned school for an hour. (You will want to speak with your assigned teacher prior to your visit.)

Day: Time:

Day Time:

Day Time:

Is there a school that you particularly want to work with?

Is there a school system that you particularly want to work with?

What is the topic of the lesson you will be presenting?

Do you have a grade level preference?

K-2 3-5

Appendix 3

Teacher Evaluation Form

Instructions: Please take a few minutes to complete this form. A brief sentence or two for each question would be appreciated. This will help me to determine the grade which the students will receive for participating in this project. Please call me if you have any questions: ***_**** (office) or ***_**** (home).

Teacher Name:

School:

Students Names:

Organization:

(1) Did the students demonstrate adequate advanced preparation for their lesson?

(2) Were all of the necessary materials for the lesson provided by the students?

Implementation:

(3) Were the economic principles of the lesson presented in a way that was clear and understandable at the level of the children in the class?

(4) Did the lesson stimulate the children's interest and keep them actively involved?

Further Comments:

(5) Do you have any suggestions that would enhance the learning experience of your class or improve the teaching experience for the VCU economic students who participated in this project?

(6) Would you be interested in having VCU students come to your classroom for another economics lesson in the future?

Thank you again for sharing your classroom with my students!