The effects of courses on student achievement are studied using 2006 data from the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) in economics. A regression analysis showed expected and significant achievement differences by course, with the highest scores in advanced economics, followed by general economics. Courses in business and personal finance were not substitutes for advanced or general economics courses. A probit analysis showed that students taking economics courses relative to personal finance courses are significantly more likely to think their courses helped them understand the US economy, the international economy, and current events--but not how to manage personal finances.

This study investigates three questions: (i) are there differences in teaching and research behavior between economists and other professors; (ii) do economists in the top 100 research departments allocate time differently than faculty in other disciplines at similarly ranked departments; and (iii) do professors respond to changes in incentives in allocating their time? The study uses data from the National Study of Postsecondary Faculty (NSOPF). The study specifies a regression equation controlling for institutional incentives to compare time allocation to teaching and research for economics professors and faculty members in math, physics, psychology, political science and business.