Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=vjeb20
Download by: [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] Date: 11 January 2016, At: 20:57
Journal of Education for Business
ISSN: 0883-2323 (Print) 1940-3356 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/vjeb20
Using the Crossword Puzzle Exercise in
Introductory Microeconomics to Accelerate
Business Student Learning
Tin-Chun Lin & Steven M. Dunphy
To cite this article: Tin-Chun Lin & Steven M. Dunphy (2013) Using the Crossword Puzzle Exercise in Introductory Microeconomics to Accelerate Business Student Learning, Journal of Education for Business, 88:2, 88-93, DOI: 10.1080/08832323.2011.649312
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08832323.2011.649312
Published online: 04 Dec 2012.
Submit your article to this journal
Article views: 101
View related articles
ISSN: 0883-2323 print / 1940-3356 online DOI: 10.1080/08832323.2011.649312
Using the Crossword Puzzle Exercise in Introductory
Microeconomics to Accelerate Business Student
Learning
Tin-Chun Lin and Steven M. Dunphy
Indiana University–Northwest, Gary, Indiana, USAThe authors propose using crossword puzzles for the purpose of assisting business students in their efforts to learn economics. The exercise provides students with a lively, creative, and challenging learning method. The authors developed an experiment to test whether the use of a crossword puzzle exercise would accelerate business student learning of basic economics vocabulary and terminology in undergraduate classes. The findings revealed that working cross-word puzzles can help students build and maintain an introductory microeconomics vocabulary. Test results show that crossword puzzles do in fact aid student learning of microeconomics terms and do improve their grades on quizzes.
Keywords: crossword puzzles, interactive learning, microeconomics terms, study guide
Many people enjoy solving crossword puzzles. Solving these puzzles gives the puzzler a great workout because it requires several skills including spelling, reasoning, making infer-ences, evaluating choices, and drawing conclusions. Further, the exercise may enhance an individual’s ability to mem-orize words. The specific benefits of the crossword puzzle can be found in medical theory. Much has been written in the medical studies literature about the benefits of crossword puzzles (e.g., Wilson et al., 2010; Wilson, Leurgans, Boyle, and Bennett, 2011). Research has shown that the crossword puzzles engage puzzlers in cognitive activities that may help them prevent memory loss. Further, it has been found that crossword puzzling is a mentally stimulating activity that can help building up cognitive reserve (Wilson et al., 2010). Thus, the medical theory suggests that mental challenges may keep brain cells healthy and less prone to disease or damage. For this and related reasons, the crossword puz-zle exercise has been used in various fields of education for the purpose of improving student learning. Educators who have utilized it include Franklin, Peat, and Lewis (2003), Walker (2003), Kronholz (2005), Weisskireh (2006), Goh and Hooper (2007), Parsons and Oja (2008), and Whisenand and Dunphy (2010).
Correspondence should be addressed to Tin-Chun Lin, Indiana University–Northwest, School of Business and Economics, 3400 Broadway, Gary, IN 46408, USA. E-mail: [email protected]
In 2003, Franklin et al. used the crossword puzzle exercise in their biology classes and found that doing so accelerated learning for first-year biology students. Both Walker (2003) and Kronholz (2005) found that engagement in subject-related crossword puzzles can assist students in mastering basic terminology. Weisskireh (2006) stated that a specially designed crossword puzzle exercise may offer students an easy and engaging way to review concepts in preparation for a test, because successful completion of the puzzle requires students to be able to identify and understand terms. Goh and Hooper (2007) suggested that the use of a crossword puzzle game offered students a motivation and challenge be-cause “it required both lateral and longitudinal thinking to solve the puzzle” (p. 450). Parsons and Oja (2008) designed a crossword puzzle exercise to help students learn terms in their computer concepts textbook. They found a significant effect on students’ efforts to master computer terms and con-cepts. In 2010, Whisenand and Dunphy used the crossword puzzle exercise in an introductory management information systems (MIS) class. They also concluded that the use of crossword puzzles accelerated the learning of MIS vocabu-lary and terms.
Although a number of educators in different fields have shown that crossword puzzles can enhance student learning, this exercise has not been broadly used or studied by eco-nomics educators in business schools. Using the crossword puzzle exercise to assist business major students in learn-ing economics may be an innovation, because this exercise
USING THE CROSSWORD PUZZLE EXERCISE 89 provides students with a lively, creative, and challenging
learning method.
On the other hand, in a traditional study guide learning method, students may learn economics vocabulary and ter-minology by rote. We believe that this relatively insipid ped-agogy may discourage students’ creativity and interest in business. For this reason, we developed an experiment to test whether use of a crossword puzzle exercise can accelerate business major student learning of basic economics vocabu-lary and terminology in undergraduate classes.
In the present article we first explain the testable hypoth-esis and present method and data information. Second, we report results. Third, we briefly discuss survey evidence. Fi-nally, we offer conclusions.
METHODOLOGY
A total of 102 business major students in two sections of an introductory microeconomics class in Fall 2010 participated in an experiment involving student learning and retention of economics terms using the crossword puzzle exercise. The two sections were taught by the same instructor, who offered exactly the same materials and topics and used the same textbook. One section (57 students) was defined as a con-trol group, while the other section (45 students) was defined as an experimental group. Before we conducted this experi-ment, we tested whether the quality of students in these two groups were significantly different. We defined students qual-ity (QUA) as Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT)×Grade Point Average (GPA). The SAT score is a measure of a student’s in-nate ability, while the GPA (regardless of a student’s major) is a measure of a student’s motivation and scholarly abil-ity. Therefore, the measurement of both innate and scholarly abilities is necessary. Students’ SAT scores were provided by the admissions office, while students’ GPAs were offered by the register office. As a result, at the 1% significance level, there was no statistical evidence to support that the students’ quality of these two groups was significantly different (the mean of QUA in the experiment group was 2494.395 [SD=
838.945], while the mean of QUA in the control group was 2467.885 [SD=905.693]).
One day about two weeks before the end of semester, students in the control group were given a list of terms taken from the text book used in the course (i.e., a traditional study guide, see Appendix A); students in the experimental group were given a crossword puzzle exercise (see Appendix B) containing terms and phrases taken from the same text book and based on the same list of terms given to the control group. Before an in-class quiz, both groups had 40 min to use their handouts to prepare; after 40 min, both groups were given the same quiz. To ensure that experimental subjects worked the crossword puzzle, they had to submit a complete puzzle to the instructor prior to the quiz. It should be noted that students in both groups were not informed in advance that there would
be an in-class quiz. Thus, all students just prepared the quiz in class on that day, and everyone was given the same time to study.
Data from this study enabled development of the following testable (null and alternative) hypotheses:
Null hypothesis (H0): Students who used the crossword puz-zle handout as an aid in studying for their microeco-nomics quiz would not score higher than those students who used the traditional stud -guide handout.
Alternative hypothesis (Ha): Students who used the cross-word puzzle handout as an aid in studying for their microeconomics quiz would score significantly higher than those students who used the traditional study guide handout.
To testHa, we compared the mean scores for these two groups. Let µ1 = the population mean score for the quiz in the experimental group, whileµ2=the population mean score for the quiz in the control group. Thus, the hypotheses can be rewritten in the following way:
H0:µ1−µ2≤0
Ha:µ1−µ2>0
In this study, we set the significance level (α) at 1%. If the null hypothesis was rejected, it would mean that students who used the crossword puzzle handout as a study aid for their microeconomics quiz scored significantly higher than those students who used the traditional study guide handout, leading us to conclude that the crossword puzzle exercise can accelerate student learning of microeconomics terms.
RESULTS
The results of the hypothesis test are reported in Table 1. As that table shows, the null hypothesis that students who used the crossword puzzle handout as an aid in studying for their microeconomics quiz would not score higher than those students who used the traditional study guide handout is rejected because thepvalue (.0005) was less than the signifi-cance level at .01. Alternatively, thetvalue,t(99)=3.43,p< .0005, was higher than the critical upper value (2.364). Thus, we conclude that those students who used the crossword
TABLE 1 Scores for All Quiz Takers
Experimental group Control group
TABLE 2
Improved my understanding of the terms associated with the field of microeconomics.
3.89 0.71 0 0 1 2.22 11 24.44 25 55.56 8 17.78 Helped me enhance my knowledge of the terms
associated with the field of microeconomics.
3.82 0.58 0 0 0 0 12 26.67 29 64.44 4 8.89 Assisted me in retaining the content. 4.07 0.65 0 0 0 0 8 17.78 26 57.78 11 24.44
Increased my level of confidence of the terms. 3.89 0.71 0 0 1 2.22 11 24.44 25 55.56 8 17.78
Assisted me in preparing for the quiz. 4.29 0.69 0 0 1 2.22 3 6.67 23 51.11 18 40.00
Was a fun way to reinforce my understanding of the microeconomics terms.
4.16 0.77 0 0 0 0 10 22.22 18 40.00 17 37.78
Assisted with my recall of the definitions and terms. 4.20 0.69 0 0 0 0 7 15.56 22 48.89 16 35.55
Forced me to read and/or study the terms. 4.00 0.74 0 0 0 0 12 26.67 21 46.67 12 26.66
Was an effective tool in building a vocabulary of technical terms.
4.02 0.62 0 0 0 0 8 17.78 28 62.22 9 20.00
I would like more exercises like the crossword puzzle. 4.38 0.68 0 0 0 0 5 11.11 18 40.00 22 48.89 Note.n=45. GrandM=4.07.
puzzle handout as an aid in studying for their microeco-nomics test scored significantly higher than those students who used the traditional study guide handout.
These results seem especially robust. The range of scores jumps from a low of 6 to a high of 100 for the control group, and from a low of 31 to a high of 100 for the experimental group. Also, the drop in the wide dispersion of scores can be seen in the shrinking of not only the range but also the stan-dard deviations from 26.60 in the control group down to 22.10 in the experimental group. We believe that using the cross-word puzzles as a learning aid may be especially important for those students having difficulty studying for the test. For example, we noticed that some of the students in the control group seemed somewhat disengaged from the subject matter. These students asked fewer questions, avoided eye contact, and seemed to tune out the lecture material. We believe that the equivalent counterparts of these same students in the experimental condition especially benefited from the cross-word puzzle exercise. While they, too, may have been dis-engaged, they had an important assigned task—completion of the crossword puzzle exercise—which may have helped them focus on the material. This anecdotal observation was backed up by the raw numbers. The low scores jumped from 6 to 31, and the standard deviation shrank in the experimental versus control condition by approximately 17%. We believe that the lower scoring students might have been especially helped by the crossword puzzle exercise.
SURVEY
At the end of the study, subjects were asked to complete the crossword assessment survey adapted from Berry and Miller (2008) to assess their perceptions of their experience in working the crossword puzzles. Students indicated their
extent of agreement with 10 statements on a 5-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). The questions and results are depicted in Table 2.
Students claimed that the exercise “assisted me in prepar-ing for the quiz” (M =4.29, SD=0.69), rated the cross-word exercise as an effective tool in building a vocabulary of technical terms (M=4.02,SD=0.62), and stated that it improved their understanding and knowledge of technology-related terms (M =3.89, SD = 0.71), and were in slight agreement that it was a “fun way to reinforce their under-standing of the microeconomics terms” (M =4.16,SD =
0.77). Paralleling Weisskireh’s (2006) results, students asked for more such exercises for subsequent chapters’ vocabulary (M=4.38,SD=0.68). The overall mean score for all sec-tions and quessec-tions was 4.07 out of 5.
While it does not appear that all students enjoyed the crossword puzzle exercise, the majority found it effective as a learning tool in recalling definitions and terms, and there-fore useful in preparing for the quiz. We believe that not all undergraduates find homework assignments associated with learning the fundamentals of microeconomics fun regardless of the exercise. Perhaps faculty wishing to adopt this ped-agogical tool may employ it as an extra credit or optional exercise so that those students who especially enjoy working crossword puzzles can do so and those who do not can opt out of the exercise.
CONCLUSION
In the present study we developed and reported on an ex-periment to test whether using crossword puzzle exercise might accelerate student learning of microeconomics terms. The authors found that those students completing a 40-min economics vocabulary crossword puzzle assignment
USING THE CROSSWORD PUZZLE EXERCISE 91 icantly outscored those students in the control group who
spent the same amount of time studying a list of basic eco-nomics vocabulary terms. That is, working crossword puzzles helped students build and maintain a microeconomics vo-cabulary. We conclude that working microeconomics-related crossword puzzles is an effective learning method enabling students to improve their quiz grades. In addition, based on student feedback, most students accepted the crossword puz-zle exercise as a learning tool.
Although crossword puzzles are typically associated with game-playing, fun, and recreation, they can serve as a sub-stantive pedagogical method. Crossword puzzles offer oppor-tunities for students to accelerate learning by quickly mas-tering new words and phrases and by directing students to more actively interact with basic economics vocabulary and terminology as compared with the rote learning method. It is for these reasons that we conclude a faculty member would be well advised to include the crossword puzzle exercise in his or her pedagogical arsenal.
REFERENCES
Berry, D. C., & Miller, M. G. (2008). Crossword puzzles as a tool to enhance athletic training student learning: Part 2.Athletic Therapy Today,13, 32–34.
Franklin, S., Peat, M., & Lewis, A. (2003). Non-traditional interventions to stimulate discussion: The use of games and puzzles.Journal of Biological Education,37, 79–84.
Goh, T., & Hooper, V. (2007). To TxT or not to TxT: That’s the puzzle.The Journal of Information Technology Education,6, 441–453.
Kronholz, J. (2005, March 8). To tackle new SAT, perhaps your need a new study device; test-prep CD’s, puzzles, cell phone software hit a market of nonreaders.Wall Street Journal,1.
Parsons, J. J., & Oja, P. (2008).New perspectives on computer concepts (10th ed.). Boston, MA: Thompson Course Technology.
Walker, B. (2003, October 17). A playful tutor who chalks up results. Re-generation & Renewal, 15.
Weisskireh, R. S. (2006). An analysis of instructor-created crossword puz-zles for student review.College Teaching,54, 198–201.
Whisenand, T. G., & Dunphy, S. M. (2010). Accelerating student learn-ing of technology terms: The crossword puzzle exercise.The Journal of Information System Education,21, 141–148.
Wilson, R. S., Barnes, L. L., Aggarwal, N. T., Boyle, P. A., Hebert, L. E., Mendes de Leon, C. F., & Evans, D. A. (2010). Cognitive activity and the cognitive morbidity of Alzheimer disease.Neurology,75, 990–996. Wilson, R. S., Leurgans, S. E., Boyle, P. A., & Bennett, D. A. (2011).
Cognitive decline in prodromal Alzheimer disease and mild cognitive impairment.Archives of Neurology,68, 351–356.
APPENDIX A
STUDY GUIDE OF MICROECONOMICS TERMS
Deadweight loss=the fall in total surplus that results from a market distortion.
Consumer surplus=a buyer’s willingness to pay minus the amount the buyer actually pays.
Efficient scale=the quantity of output that minimizes aver-age total cost.
Quantity demanded=the amount of a good that buyers are willing and able to purchase.
Giffen good =a good for which an increase in the price raises the quantity demanded.
Opportunity cost=whatever must be given up to obtain some item.
Demand curve=a graph of the relationship between the price of a good and the quantity demanded.
Elasticity = a measure of the responsiveness of quantity demanded or quantity supplied to one of its determinants.
Complements = two goods for which an increase in the price of one leads to a decrease in the demand for the other.
Fixed costs =costs that do not vary with the quantity of output produced.
Explicit costs=input costs that require an outlay of money by the firm.
Inferior good=a good for which, other things equal, an increase in income leads to a decrease in demand.
Marginal cost=the increase in total cost that arises from an extra unit of production.
Economic profit=total revenue minus total cost, including both explicit and implicit costs.
Equilibrium price = the price that balances supply and demand.
Substitutes=two goods for which an increase in the price of one leads to an increase in the demand for the other.
Normal good =a good for which, other things equal, an increase in income leads to an increase in demand.
Perfect complements=two goods with right-angle indif-ference curves.
Marginal product=the increase in output that arises from an additional unit of input.
Indifference curve=a curve that shows consumption bun-dles that give the consumer the same level of satisfaction.
92
T
.-C.
L
IN
AND
S.
M.
DUNPHY
APPENDIX
B
MICR
OECONOMICS
CR
OSSW
USING
THE
C
R
OSSW
ORD
PUZZLE
EXERCISE
93
