Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-xm8r8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-07T03:27:25.096Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Student Learning on a Multistage Market Simulation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 September 2016

Fred C. White
Fred C. White*
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics, University of Georgia, Athens
Get access

Abstract

Simulations are widely used to teach economic principles and to provide students experience in decision making. This paper describes and evaluates a simulation exercise that helps students understand public policy impacts in a multistage market. Student teams of producers, marketers, and processors use information on costs and demand in negotiations to determine prices and quantities. Selected public policies such as marketing orders with price discrimination are implemented and analyzed. The simulation exercise improved student understanding of marketing orders and policy impacts on prices, quantities, and profits in a multistage market. Financial outcomes in the simulation were related to student learning as evidenced by exam scores.

Type
Articles
Information
Agricultural and Resource Economics Review , Volume 27 , Issue 2 , October 1998 , pp. 252 - 257
Copyright
Copyright © 1998 Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Anderson, P.H., and Lawton, L. 1992. “The Relationship between Financial Performance and Other Measures of Learning on a Simulation Exercise.” Simulation and Gaming 23: 3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gosenpud, J. 1989. “Prediction of Simulation Performance as It Is Affected by Time.” Simulation and Gaming 20: 319–50.Google Scholar
Gosenpud, J., and Miesing, P. 1992. “The Relative Influence of Several Factors on Simulation Performance.” Simulation and Gaming 23: 311–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greenlaw, P.S., and Wyman, F.P. 1973. “The Teaching Effectiveness of Games in Collegiate Business Courses.” Simulation and Games 4: 259–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hornaday, R.W., and Wheatley, W.J. 1986. “Four Factors Affecting Group Performance in Business Policy Simulations.” Developments in Business Simulation and Experiential Exercises 13: 17–21.Google Scholar
Norris, D.R., and Neibuhr, R.E. 1980. “Group Variables and Gaming Success.” Simulation and Games 11: 301–12.Google Scholar
Oltmans, A.W. 1995. “The Leverage Game: Teaching Growth, Leverage, and Risk in a Dynamic, Experiential Framework.” Agricultural Finance Review 55: 100–117.Google Scholar
Valenchik, A.D. 1995. “The Case Method as a Strategy for Teaching Policy Analysis to Undergraduates.” Journal of Economic Education 26: 29–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whiteley, T.R., and Faria, A.J. 1989. “A Study of the Relationship between Student Final Exam Performance and Simulation Game Participation.” Developments in Business Simulation and Experiential Exercises 16: 78–82.Google Scholar