Another way of teaching microeconomics: impact evaluation of the CORE project

Abstract Taking advantage of the random assignment of students in Uruguay to either a conventional introductory microeconomics course or one based on the Curriculum Open‐access Resources in Economics (CORE) project, we provide causal evidence on the effects of CORE on students' academic performance, learning experience and study practices. We find no systematic differences in pass or dropout rates between the two courses. Similarly, we observe no significant differences in performance in the concurrent calculus course or in a subsequent advanced microeconomics course. Therefore we find no evidence of disadvantages in related subsequent courses resulting from the use of a CORE‐based course. Consistent with the project's objectives, our results also show that students assigned to the non‐conventional course are 18% more likely than those in the traditional course to believe that it contributed to their academic and professional development. Furthermore, assignment to CORE reduces the likelihood of students paying for private microeconomics tutoring outside school hours, and increases both class attendance and the likelihood of studying in groups.