The Weblog of Econometrics at XJTLU

On Monday I asked you what topics would you like for revision. I am very surprised with your answers. There was 20 students that day and I got 9 suggestions which can be grouped in:

A- format/mock of the final exam and example questions: 7 students
B- key points for each chapter since mid term exam: 1 student
C- binary variable regression: 1 student

There is noting wrong with asking for some guidance about the final exam structure. However, is that the only thing you all have to suggest? Is not surprising to you that you are not concerned about anything else but the structure of the exam? It seems you are actually studying how to answer exams rather than Econometrics. I am sure if this module were about what is the best strategy to exam solving you would be well prepared.

But what about learning? The point to be made is that you are concern too much with high marks. This is related to my last post. The last paragraph of our previous entry said

… I am concerned about your approach to learning and studying. All this resumes to one thing. There is a part of you that want me to put down the level of the module so you have a (fake, meaningless) higher mark. Even if that means that you put less effort in studying or diminish your learning outcome. Some how you think you achieve more because the number is inflated.

Also, in the comments I wrote:

Many of you have this tendency of studying how to answer exams rather than the module contends. Far more effort than needed is put in standardizing answers to mock exam papers. This has a negative impact in how much you learn. Many of you study a LOT…, the problem is that all that effort is not reflected in how much you have learned.

Apparently, some others think studying is something you do in private. You get the book and class notes, and you acquire knowledge from your own isolated effort. In this case, take into account that you may get valuable feedback from me if you raise any topic that are difficult to interpret or challenging to your understanding. Otherwise, you may get into the wrong path, since the material is new to you. Misunderstanding the material is very common in these cases and can be quite costly in terms of your studying time and poor learning outcome.

I would like to share with you a comment that, actually, worries me. I found the sixth comment in this entry quite disturbing. It is not my intention to make a generalization and impute this to the whole class. Neither I want to make of this student a particular suspect, responsible for all evil in the world. However, I would like to take this opportunity to share with you some thoughts that I have since the midterm exam.

My fist question is why to level down your options. The same opportunities than the Liverpool guys? Why should we aim to be UoL? Do you want to know what is the programme I want to follow? Here you have (notice we are using the same book). If you want to compare this module, do it with the bests in the business. Go to the exam section and check out the mid term exam 2007. You may be surprised they do panel data analysis. I wonder if students at Harvard have the same opinion: do you think they are in a disadvantage position because UoL students have easier exams?

You do not like Econometrics? That is fine with me but you can still learn something. The mark in the exam should reflect how much you know. You are here to learn rather than get 100 points in every exam. If you know the topic, this would be reflected in your mark. The objective of the module is not to be condescending with the students but to give you some guidance so you can make use of your analytical skills.

What about the modules that you actually like (if there is anyone)? You also want a high score even if you do not learn or you care about those modules? I think it is a bit unfair that you demand from my module different standards only because you do not enjoy it but, at least, your argument would be consistent. It is not fair but, otherwise, will make no sense. However, if you only aim high score independently of your knowledge in all modules and you get away with it, I think we at XJTLU have failed you.

This is not the first time I hear this excuse. I wonder how much further you will take it. That is, you point is that you do not care whether you learn or not, you only want a good score so you can go for a Masters degree in a good university (or whatever other reason you have that you want a high score even though your score does not reflect how much you have actually learned). Therefore, you do not care how much you know but how high your final mark is. My question is what would be your excuse when you do your masters. There will be modules that you wont like, what about them? When does it stop?

Going back in time, I also wonder for how long have you being using this argument. And whether you may regret this in the future. Let me give you an example: what about your English? You have been in XJTLU for 3 years now. You spent your first year learning English. How much did you care about learning the language and how much about having a high score? Don’t you think you would be better off if you had put more effort in improving your English rather than just having a high score? Having better English may be important for your studies in more advanced years, and even in your Masters.

I do not want to offend orbe unfair with any of you but I am concerned about your approach to learning and studying. All this resumes to one thing. There is a part of you that want me to put down the level of the module so you have a (fake, meaningless) higher mark. Even if that means that you put less effort in studying or diminish your learning outcome. Some how you think you achieve more because the number is inflated.


PD: any following up of this matter would be appreciated.This is your chance to tell me why I should give you higher marks even if this is not proof that you actually learned the topic.

This week there is another lecture by a guess of XJTLU: professor Rolf Mirus, school of Business, University of Alberta, Canada. Here you can visit his website. This time, the lecture is about the recent financial crisis, a topic which looks very relevant for most of you. Professor Mirrus has a research and teaching interest in International Business and Finance so it is promising.

The relevant information is as follows:

Topic: The Financial Crisis: Causes and Consequences! (金融危机的起因与结果！)
Lecturer: Prof. Rolf Mirus
Time: 6pm, 26th Nov.
Venue: Lecture Theatre 3W
Seminar Series of Xi’an Jiaotong-Liverpool University 西交利物浦大学创新论坛

Hope to see you there.

Nouriel Roubini is a professor in New York University, where you can check is website. Most interesting for us, he as a blog which will be included in our links from now on. Unfortunately, you have to register first to have full access to all the material in the blog and it cost you money but you still can access some interesting articles for free.

His nickname is Dr Doom because he always predicts catastrophes, which is not that strange (there are many negative people around the world) but the problem is that he is usually right. While others usually predicts good news, Roubini foresight bad news all around. The thing is there is an entry in his blog called

"The Rising Risk of a Hard Landing in China: The Two Engines of Global Growth – U.S. and China – are Now Stalling".

If you are not registered in his blog, here you have an alternative link to the article. Hopefully, he is wrong this time.

update: here you have an article in the NY times that makes a similar point but with no so many charts.