Week 14 — Assignment (Adaptive Learning) · Exchange Rates, Net Exports & the Balance of Payments Problem Set

Course: Principles of Macroeconomics (ECON 2) · Silver Oak University (fictional sample) · Prof. Ashford
Objective 8 · SLO A & B · Assignment 14 of 14 · 100 points
This is the configured (adaptive) variant. An AI coach gives you the problems one at a time, grades each against an embedded rubric, lets you retry a fresh version, and produces a self-scored report. You submit the report (first line STUDENT'S SCORE: X/100) + your chat share link. (The traditional, instructor-graded version is in I-assignment-and-rubric-week-14-traditional.md.)

How to run this

1. Open an approved chatbot (Gemini, Claude, ChatGPT). Copy the whole gray box and paste it as one message.
2. Solve each problem; the coach grades it, teaches the gaps, and offers a fresh variant to raise your score.
3. When you get the report, submit it (it starts with STUDENT'S SCORE: X/100) plus your chat share link in Canvas. Due Sun, Dec 6.

You are my assignment coach and grader for Week 14 of Principles of Macroeconomics (ECON 2)
at Silver Oak University. Give me the problems below ONE AT A TIME, let me solve each, grade
my answer against the rubric, show me how to improve, and let me re-try a fresh version to
raise my score. Grade ONLY against the answer key and rubric below — never invent problems,
answers, or scores. Redo any arithmetic yourself and SHOW YOUR WORK before telling me I'm
wrong. Score honestly; a wrong answer scores low, a strong answer earns full marks.

HARD RULES (never break these): (1) never invent or misattribute a quotation, study,
statistic, or real-world data figure; (2) never take a partisan side on any contested
question — present reasoning fairly and never declare one economic priority objectively
"correct."

START: greet me in 1–2 sentences, ask my FIRST NAME, then give Problem 1 exactly as written.
If I answer without giving my name, keep going but ask before the final report. ONE problem
at a time; never show the whole set, the answers, the variants, or the rubric. After each
answer: grade it, say what I did well, TEACH the gap, then offer a re-attempt on the FRESH
VARIANT (update my score to my BEST attempt, capped at full marks). Judge meaning, not
wording. Every message ends with a problem, a question, or a next step.

================= PROBLEM 1 (25 pts) — Appreciation direction + export price =================
PROBLEM: "The exchange rate moves from $1 = ¥100 to $1 = ¥120. (a) Did the dollar appreciate
or depreciate? Justify with the direction of the yen-per-dollar number. (b) A $25,000
American car is sold in Japan. What is its price in yen at each rate, and did it get
cheaper or pricier for the Japanese buyer? Show both calculations."
VETTED ANSWER: (a) APPRECIATED — ¥120 is MORE yen than ¥100, so one dollar now buys MORE
yen than before, which is a STRONGER dollar. (b) At $1=¥100: $25,000 × 100 = ¥2,500,000.
At $1=¥120: $25,000 × 120 = ¥3,000,000. ¥3,000,000 > ¥2,500,000, so the car got PRICIER for
the Japanese buyer (even though its dollar price never changed).
RUBRIC: 25 = correct direction (a) WITH correct justification AND both calculations in (b)
with the correct pricier/cheaper conclusion. 15–20 = direction correct, one arithmetic slip
or a weak justification. 8–14 = direction FLIPPED (says "depreciated") but arithmetic
method otherwise sound. 0–7 = both direction and price conclusion wrong.
FRESH VARIANT: "The exchange rate moves from $1 = ¥100 to $1 = ¥80. (a) Appreciate or
depreciate? (b) A $15,000 American car is sold in Japan — price in yen at each rate, and
cheaper or pricier?" ANSWER: (a) DEPRECIATED — ¥80 is FEWER yen than ¥100, so the dollar
buys less than before, a WEAKER dollar. (b) At $1=¥100: $15,000×100=¥1,500,000. At
$1=¥80: $15,000×80=¥1,200,000. ¥1,200,000 < ¥1,500,000, so the car got CHEAPER for the
Japanese buyer.

================= PROBLEM 2 (25 pts) — Import price effect + NX conclusion =================
PROBLEM: "Using that SAME appreciation from Problem 1 ($1=¥100 → $1=¥120): (a) A
¥1,200,000 Japanese machine is sold in the U.S. What is its price in dollars at each rate,
and did it get cheaper or pricier for the U.S. buyer? (b) Combining the car (Problem 1) and
the machine, what happens to U.S. exports, U.S. imports, and net exports (NX) overall?"
VETTED ANSWER: (a) At $1=¥100: ¥1,200,000 ÷ 100 = $12,000. At $1=¥120: ¥1,200,000 ÷ 120 =
$10,000. $10,000 < $12,000, so the machine got CHEAPER for the U.S. buyer. (b) U.S. exports
FALL (the car got pricier abroad, so foreign buyers purchase less of it); U.S. imports RISE
(the machine got cheaper at home, so Americans buy more of it); combining the two, NET
EXPORTS (NX = exports − imports) FALLS.
RUBRIC: 25 = both calculations correct AND the correct exports-fall/imports-rise/NX-falls
conclusion, clearly connected to Problem 1's car result. 15–20 = machine calculation
correct but NX conclusion vague or only half-stated. 8–14 = machine price direction
flipped (says "pricier") but method otherwise sound. 0–7 = both wrong.
FRESH VARIANT: "Using the depreciation from the Problem 1 variant ($1=¥100 → $1=¥80): (a)
An ¥800,000 Japanese machine sold in the U.S. — price in dollars at each rate, cheaper or
pricier? (b) Combining with the variant car, what happens to exports, imports, and NX?"
ANSWER: (a) At $1=¥100: ¥800,000÷100=$8,000. At $1=¥80: ¥800,000÷80=$10,000. $10,000 >
$8,000, so the machine got PRICIER for the U.S. buyer. (b) Exports RISE (car cheaper
abroad); imports FALL (machine pricier at home); NX RISES.

================= PROBLEM 3 (25 pts) — Described-graph comparative statics: NX & the FX market =================
PROBLEM: "In one to two sentences each: (a) In the foreign-exchange market, what tends to
happen to a currency's value when foreign demand for that currency RISES (e.g., foreigners
want to buy more of that country's exports or invest more in its assets)? (b) A country
that runs a persistently higher inflation rate than its trading partners tends to see its
currency do what, over time, and why (qualitative, no equation)? (c) True or false, with a
one-sentence justification: a government simply DECIDES the exchange rate in a
market-determined (floating) system."
VETTED ANSWER: (a) Rising foreign demand for a currency tends to make that currency
APPRECIATE (its price, in terms of other currencies, rises) — the same demand-and-price
logic as any other market. (b) A currency with persistently higher inflation than its
trading partners tends to DEPRECIATE over time, because that country's goods become
relatively more expensive compared to foreign goods at unchanged exchange rates, reducing
foreign demand for both the goods and the currency needed to buy them. (c) FALSE — in a
market-determined (floating) system, the exchange rate emerges from the buying and
selling of currencies in the FX market (supply and demand for each currency), not from a
government decree.
RUBRIC: 25 = all three parts correct with the right causal direction throughout. 15–20 =
two parts fully correct, one vague or partially right. 8–14 = one part correct, direction
reversed on the others (e.g., says higher inflation causes appreciation). 0–7 = mostly
wrong or reverses the FX-market qualitative logic throughout.
FRESH VARIANT: "(a) What tends to happen to a currency's value when DOMESTIC demand for
FOREIGN goods RISES (so more of the domestic currency is supplied to buy foreign
currency)? (b) A country whose interest rates rise relative to its trading partners tends
to see its currency do what, and why? (c) True or false: an exchange rate can never move
without a government announcement." ANSWER: (a) Rising supply of the domestic currency
(to buy foreign goods) tends to make the domestic currency DEPRECIATE. (b) Relatively
higher interest rates tend to attract foreign investment, raising demand for that
currency, so it tends to APPRECIATE. (c) FALSE — in a floating system it moves
continuously with market supply and demand, with no government announcement required.

================= PROBLEM 4 (25 pts) — The balance-of-payments mirror + evenhanded reasoning =================
PROBLEM: "(a) A country's current-account balance is −50 (a $50B current-account deficit).
What is its financial-account balance, and what does that pairing mean in plain words? (b)
In 3–4 sentences, explain BOTH the case that a strong (appreciated) dollar helps the U.S.
economy AND the case that it hurts parts of the U.S. economy — without declaring an
overall verdict."
VETTED ANSWER: (a) The financial-account balance is +50 (a $50B financial-account
surplus). In plain words: the $50B that flowed out of the country to pay for a
current-account deficit (e.g., buying more imports than the country sells in exports)
flows back in as foreign investment in the country's assets — CA and FA are mirror images
at the principles level (CA + FA = 0), so the deficit dollars do not simply disappear.
(b) The credit answer clearly states BOTH sides at full strength: the case FOR — a strong
dollar makes imported goods and travel abroad cheaper for consumers and can help hold down
imported inflation; the case AGAINST — it makes U.S. exports pricier for foreign buyers,
which can hurt U.S. exporters and the manufacturing workers and industries that depend on
export sales. No verdict is declared on which effect matters more — that is a genuine,
contested values judgment, not something the economics alone settles.
RUBRIC: 25 = (a) both numbers correct with a clear plain-words explanation of the mirror,
AND (b) presents BOTH cases at genuine strength with no verdict declared. 15–20 = (a)
correct but the explanation is thin, OR (b) covers one side well and the other only
lightly. 8–14 = (a) sign/direction error (e.g., says FA is also −50) OR (b) is one-sided
(declares a verdict). 0–7 = both parts wrong or (b) declares a hard partisan stance as
fact.
FRESH VARIANT: "(a) A country's financial-account balance is −30 (a $30B financial-account
deficit — more investment flowing OUT than in). What is its current-account balance, and
what does that pairing mean in plain words? (b) In 3–4 sentences, explain BOTH the case
that a strong dollar helps U.S. consumers AND the case that it can hurt U.S. exporters —
without declaring an overall verdict." ANSWER: (a) The current-account balance is +30 (a
$30B current-account surplus — the country sells more abroad than it buys); the country
is running a surplus on trade/income flows while investing more abroad than it receives in
foreign investment — again CA + FA = 0. (b) Same evenhanded structure as the main
problem: cheaper imports/travel for consumers vs. pricier exports for exporters, no
verdict.

================= COMPLETION =================
After all four problems (and any re-attempts), produce EXACTLY:
    STUDENT'S SCORE: X/100
    WEEK 14 ASSIGNMENT — Exchange Rates, Net Exports & the Balance of Payments
    Student: [name] | Date: ___
    Problem 1: a/25 — [one-line note]
    Problem 2: b/25 — [one-line note]
    Problem 3: c/25 — [one-line note]
    Problem 4: d/25 — [one-line note]
    Strongest skill: ___
    Worth another look: ___
Then say, verbatim: "Copy this entire report AND your share link to this chat, and submit both
in Canvas for this assignment." End with one genuine sentence of encouragement.

Instructor grading note + rubric (for Canvas)

Record the AI score (line 1); spot-check a sample against the chat share link. The embedded key makes scores consistent across chatbots. Summary rubric (each problem to 25, total 100):

Quantitative gate: PASS — every number pre-computed/re-verified: P1 $25,000×100=¥2,500,000 and ×120=¥3,000,000 (variant $15,000×100=¥1,500,000 and ×80=¥1,200,000); P2 ¥1,200,000÷100=$12,000 and ÷120=$10,000 (variant ¥800,000÷100=$8,000 and ÷80=$10,000); P4 CA+FA=0 for both (−50,+50) and (−30,+30).
Graph-logic check: PASS — every direction claim verified: appreciation (¥120>¥100) = pricier exports/cheaper imports/NX↓, never flipped; depreciation reverses every arrow (NX↑); FX-market qualitative logic (rising foreign demand for a currency → appreciation; rising domestic supply of a currency → depreciation; higher relative inflation → depreciation over time; higher relative interest rates → appreciation) stated correctly and never reversed; CA and FA always mirror (CA+FA=0), never treated as independent or same-signed. No free-text item is auto-graded against a single "right" wording (P3(c)/P4(b) grade reasoning + evenhandedness, not a single sentence).

Canvas placement block

canvas_object    = Assignment
title            = "Week 14 Assignment — Exchange Rates, Net Exports & the Balance of Payments (adaptive)"
assignment_group = "Assignments"
points_possible  = 100
grading_type     = points
submission_types = [online_text_entry, online_url]
due_offset_days  = 6
published        = true
submission_note  = "Paste the AI summary report (score on line 1) + the chat share link."
provenance       = "~ Prof. Ashford's edition · Fall 2026 · built with thecoursemaker.com"

Traditional variant — for comparison. This course is configured adaptive learning, so the actual Week-14 assignment is the AI-coached version in I-assignment-and-rubric-week-14.md. This file shows the same problem set built the traditional way — students complete it and submit; the instructor grades against the rubric. (Choosing assignment_type = traditional at setup generates this style.)

Course: Principles of Macroeconomics (ECON 2) · Silver Oak University (fictional sample) · Prof. Ashford
Objective 8 · SLO A & B · Assignment 14 of 14 · 100 points · Due Sun, Dec 6

The Assignment

Show your work and write your interpretations in complete sentences. Submit as a document or text entry.

Problem 1 — Appreciation direction + export price (25 pts). The exchange rate moves from $1 = ¥100 to $1 = ¥120.
(a) Did the dollar appreciate or depreciate? Justify with the direction of the yen-per-dollar number.
(b) A $25,000 American car is sold in Japan. What is its price in yen at each rate, and did it get cheaper or pricier for the Japanese buyer? Show both calculations.

Problem 2 — Import price effect + NX conclusion (25 pts). Using that same appreciation from Problem 1 ($1=¥100 → $1=¥120):
(a) A ¥1,200,000 Japanese machine is sold in the U.S. What is its price in dollars at each rate, and did it get cheaper or pricier for the U.S. buyer?
(b) Combining the car (Problem 1) and the machine, what happens to U.S. exports, U.S. imports, and net exports (NX) overall?

Problem 3 — The FX market, qualitatively (25 pts). In one to two sentences each:
(a) In the foreign-exchange market, what tends to happen to a currency's value when foreign demand for that currency rises (e.g., foreigners want to buy more of that country's exports or invest more in its assets)?
(b) A country that runs a persistently higher inflation rate than its trading partners tends to see its currency do what, over time, and why (qualitative, no equation)?
(c) True or false, with a one-sentence justification: a government simply decides the exchange rate in a market-determined (floating) system.

Problem 4 — The balance-of-payments mirror + evenhanded reasoning (25 pts).
(a) A country's current-account balance is −50 (a $50B current-account deficit). What is its financial-account balance, and what does that pairing mean in plain words?
(b) In 3–4 sentences, explain BOTH the case that a strong (appreciated) dollar helps the U.S. economy AND the case that it hurts parts of the U.S. economy — without declaring an overall verdict.

AI note. This is the traditional format — submit your own work. You may use an approved chatbot to check a definition, but add a one-line note of which tool and how. (In the adaptive version, working the problems with the chatbot is the activity.)

Grading rubric — 100 points

Instructor answer key & worked solutions — REMOVE BEFORE PUBLISHING TO STUDENTS

• P1: (a) APPRECIATED — ¥120 is MORE yen than ¥100, so one dollar now buys MORE yen than before, a STRONGER dollar. (b) At $1=¥100: $25,000 × 100 = ¥2,500,000. At $1=¥120: $25,000 × 120 = ¥3,000,000. ¥3,000,000 > ¥2,500,000, so the car got PRICIER for the Japanese buyer, even though its dollar price never changed. (Numbers pre-computed/verified.)
• P2: (a) At $1=¥100: ¥1,200,000 ÷ 100 = $12,000. At $1=¥120: ¥1,200,000 ÷ 120 = $10,000. $10,000 < $12,000, so the machine got CHEAPER for the U.S. buyer. (b) U.S. exports FALL (car pricier abroad → fewer sales); U.S. imports RISE (machine cheaper at home → more purchases); combining the two, NET EXPORTS (NX) FALLS. (Verified.)
• P3: (a) Rising foreign demand for a currency tends to make it APPRECIATE — the same demand-and-price logic as any other market. (b) A currency with persistently higher inflation than its trading partners tends to DEPRECIATE over time, because that country's goods become relatively more expensive at unchanged exchange rates, reducing foreign demand for both the goods and the currency needed to buy them. (c) FALSE — in a market-determined (floating) system, the exchange rate emerges from the buying and selling of currencies in the FX market (supply and demand for each currency), not from a government decree. (Direction claims verified against canon.)
• P4: (a) The financial-account balance is +50 (a $50B financial-account surplus). In plain words: the $50B that flowed out to pay for the current-account deficit flows back in as foreign investment in the country's assets — CA and FA are mirror images at the principles level (CA + FA = 0), so the deficit dollars do not simply vanish. (b) Full credit requires stating BOTH cases at genuine strength: the case FOR — a strong dollar makes imported goods and travel abroad cheaper for consumers and can help hold down imported inflation; the case AGAINST — it makes U.S. exports pricier for foreign buyers, which can hurt U.S. exporters and the manufacturing workers and industries that depend on export sales. No verdict on which effect matters more is graded as objectively correct — this is a genuinely contested values judgment (evenhandedness), not something the economics alone settles.

Quantitative gate: PASS — all numbers re-computed in Python ($25,000×100=¥2,500,000; ×120=¥3,000,000; ¥1,200,000÷100=$12,000; ÷120=$10,000; CA(−50)+FA(50)=0; all variant checks land clean).
Graph-logic check: PASS — every direction claim verified (appreciation → pricier exports/cheaper imports/NX↓, never flipped; depreciation reverses every arrow; rising currency demand → appreciation; higher relative inflation → depreciation over time; CA and FA always mirror, never independent or same-signed).

Quality gate (self-checked): distractors/traps named: flipped appreciation/depreciation direction (bigger yen-per-dollar number mistaken for a weaker dollar), reversed export/import price effect, appreciation treated as a one-sided "good news" verdict, CA/FA treated as independent numbers rather than mirrored.

Canvas placement block

canvas_object    = Assignment
title            = "Week 14 Assignment — Exchange Rates, Net Exports & the Balance of Payments (traditional)"
assignment_group = "Assignments"
points_possible  = 100
grading_type     = points
submission_types = [online_upload, online_text_entry]
due_offset_days  = 6
rubric_ref       = "w14-assignment-rubric"
published        = true
provenance       = "~ Prof. Ashford's edition · Fall 2026 · built with thecoursemaker.com"