Do you want BuboFlash to help you learning these things? Or do you want to add or correct something? Click here to log in or create user.

A yet more complex knowledge structure appears in the analysis of tax revenues in an attempt to plot the Laffer curve for European countries in the years 1975-1982. Upon the analysis, on the two ends of the spectrum, notable examples of two countries are worth considering: Sweden and Spain. The former, with the average tax rate of 49% showed 12% decline in tax revenue, while the latter with the average tax rate of 23% experienced a remarkable increase in tax revenues of 60%. Naturally, a single item cramming all the above facts has little chance of passing the minimum information criterion. Consider then the following items intended to ensure the student’s recall the facts related to tax rate vs tax revenue relationship:

**Q: What was the average tax rate in Spain 1975-1982?**

**A: 23%**

and

**Q: What was the change in the tax revenue in Spain 1975-1982?**

**A: 60% increase**

Unfortunately, similar questions asked for Sweden do not form a coherent memory image that would allow the student recall the entire collection of information pieces that make up the understanding of the relationship illustrated by the Laffer curve. Naturally, the understanding does not need examples. The theoretical implications of marginal tax revenue might be considered as a sufficient element of understanding; however, the usefulness of facts illustrating the theory has long been appreciated in education; I will therefore present for consideration an exemplary set of items acting as an associative glue for the discussed tax revenue case:

**Q: In the years 1975-1982, the average tax rate and the tax revenue in Spain and Sweden were as follows:**

**Spain: ...% and 60% (respectively)**

**Sweden: 49% and -12% (respectively)**

**A: 23**

and in a similar way:

**Q: In the years 1975-1982, the average tax rate and the tax revenue in Spain and Sweden were as follows:**

**...: 23% and 60% (respectively)**

**Sweden: 49% and -12% (respectively)**

**A: Spain, **etc., etc.

If you want to change selection, open document below and click on "Move attachment"

**Knowledge structuring for learning**

l answer is indeed strongly suggested by examples accompanying the enumerations, (2) graphic skeleton for hooking up pieces of knowledge acquired by narrow-focus questions as presented earlier. <span>A yet more complex knowledge structure appears in the analysis of tax revenues in an attempt to plot the Laffer curve for European countries in the years 1975-1982. Upon the analysis, on the two ends of the spectrum, notable examples of two countries are worth considering: Sweden and Spain. The former, with the average tax rate of 49% showed 12% decline in tax revenue, while the latter with the average tax rate of 23% experienced a remarkable increase in tax revenues of 60%. Naturally, a single item cramming all the above facts has little chance of passing the minimum information criterion. Consider then the following items intended to ensure the student’s recall the facts related to tax rate vs tax revenue relationship: Q: What was the average tax rate in Spain 1975-1982? A: 23% and Q: What was the change in the tax revenue in Spain 1975-1982? A: 60% increase Unfortunately, similar questions asked for Sweden do not form a coherent memory image that would allow the student recall the entire collection of information pieces that make up the understanding of the relationship illustrated by the Laffer curve. Naturally, the understanding does not need examples. The theoretical implications of marginal tax revenue might be considered as a sufficient element of understanding; however, the usefulness of facts illustrating the theory has long been appreciated in education; I will therefore present for consideration an exemplary set of items acting as an associative glue for the discussed tax revenue case: Q: In the years 1975-1982, the average tax rate and the tax revenue in Spain and Sweden were as follows: Spain: ...% and 60% (respectively) Sweden: 49% and -12% (respectively) A: 23 and in a similar way: Q: In the years 1975-1982, the average tax rate and the tax revenue in Spain and Sweden were as follows: ...: 23% and 60% (respectively) Sweden: 49% and -12% (respectively) A: Spain, etc., etc. Items formulated in the above way appeared to produce very coherent memory engrams that showed above average retention rate despite the inherent intractability of numeric responses (as

l answer is indeed strongly suggested by examples accompanying the enumerations, (2) graphic skeleton for hooking up pieces of knowledge acquired by narrow-focus questions as presented earlier. <span>A yet more complex knowledge structure appears in the analysis of tax revenues in an attempt to plot the Laffer curve for European countries in the years 1975-1982. Upon the analysis, on the two ends of the spectrum, notable examples of two countries are worth considering: Sweden and Spain. The former, with the average tax rate of 49% showed 12% decline in tax revenue, while the latter with the average tax rate of 23% experienced a remarkable increase in tax revenues of 60%. Naturally, a single item cramming all the above facts has little chance of passing the minimum information criterion. Consider then the following items intended to ensure the student’s recall the facts related to tax rate vs tax revenue relationship: Q: What was the average tax rate in Spain 1975-1982? A: 23% and Q: What was the change in the tax revenue in Spain 1975-1982? A: 60% increase Unfortunately, similar questions asked for Sweden do not form a coherent memory image that would allow the student recall the entire collection of information pieces that make up the understanding of the relationship illustrated by the Laffer curve. Naturally, the understanding does not need examples. The theoretical implications of marginal tax revenue might be considered as a sufficient element of understanding; however, the usefulness of facts illustrating the theory has long been appreciated in education; I will therefore present for consideration an exemplary set of items acting as an associative glue for the discussed tax revenue case: Q: In the years 1975-1982, the average tax rate and the tax revenue in Spain and Sweden were as follows: Spain: ...% and 60% (respectively) Sweden: 49% and -12% (respectively) A: 23 and in a similar way: Q: In the years 1975-1982, the average tax rate and the tax revenue in Spain and Sweden were as follows: ...: 23% and 60% (respectively) Sweden: 49% and -12% (respectively) A: Spain, etc., etc. Items formulated in the above way appeared to produce very coherent memory engrams that showed above average retention rate despite the inherent intractability of numeric responses (as

status | not read | reprioritisations | ||
---|---|---|---|---|

last reprioritisation on | suggested re-reading day | |||

started reading on | finished reading on |

Do you want to join discussion? Click here to log in or create user.