There are two discussion questions. You will need to answer both questions in order to receive full credit. Please review the Discussion & Peer Review Rubric.

Discussion Questions:

1. At times we all regret decisions. Does this necessarily mean we did not use the economic decision rule when making the decision?
2. Research shows that after-school jobs are highly correlated with decreases in grade point averages. Those who work 1 to 10 hours get a 3.0 GPA and those who work 21 hours have a 2.7 GPA. Higher GPAs are, however, highly-correlated with higher lifetime earnings. Assume that a person earns $8,000 per year for working part-time in college and that the return to a 0.1 increase in GPA gives a 10 percent increase in one’s lifetime earnings with a present value of $80,000.

• • What would be the argument for working rather than studying harder?
  • Is the assumption that there is a trade-off between working and grades reasonable?

Discussion & Peer Review Policy:

As a reminder, see below regarding my course policies on “Discussion” (Also located in the Course Syllabus).

• Each discussion topic will be “Open” for a one-week period. There are two aspects to discussions: an original post and response to a response to peers.
  • You are required to post one “substantive” posting addressing the course material. By “substantive,” I mean not merely providing a brief “yes, I agree” or “no, I do not agree” posting, but discussing the issues in some depth, providing your own thoughts or questions on the matter. Ideally, I’d like you to connect and integrate the discussion prompt to the course lectures, class discussions, and course textbook (whenever possible). The more evidence that shows you are doing the readings and engaging with them, the better. In your posting, avoid making unsubstantiated assertions and claims. Support your point with evidence from the textbook or other websites (include citations), whenever possible. Some possible ideas to write about include, describing any connections between the readings or course material, expanding on a concept or idea that struck you in the course material, or offering another explanation or illustrative example. (minimum of 250 words)
  • You are also required to do two peer reviews. In other words, you must reply to two student posts. You will be randomly assigned your peer reviews. Additionally, I expect you to read the posting of your colleagues to further the discussion (and avoid repeating what others have posted). Simply saying “I agree, great point, etc” is not a sufficient peer review. Similar to your initial post, you must discuss your peer’s argument with detailed evidence from the textbook or other websites (include citations). If someone posted to you and the discussion can be further elaborated on, I expect you to keep the dialogue flowing! (minimum of 100 words)
• Please note! Friendly greetings and compliments are not included in the word count.
• Discussions and responses must show evidence of knowledge of facts pertaining to the issues being discussed and must attempt to apply the economic terms, ideas, and theories in the textbook.
• Word counts under the minimum of both requirements will be deducted 10 points.