Week 15 — Policy Brief: One Question, Two Columns

Assignment 14 of the term — compute the ratios and the lever both schools of thought share, argue one live policy question from both columns without a verdict, and explain to a non-expert what economists agree on and where they part ways.

This adaptive assignment uses a coaching dialogue to help you turn a first attempt into a clear, checkable brief. You remain the author. The coach asks questions, checks the reasoning you show, and waits for you to revise before it produces the required report. In Week 6 you measured an output gap, in Week 7 you used the spending multiplier and met the deficit and the debt, and in Week 12 you used the quantity equation; this week you bring those tools to the debate between the Keynesian tradition and the classical and monetarist tradition. This is the last assignment of the course, so it also asks you to choose the right tool for a question, the move the final asks of you. This week's lecture tutorial, quiz, discussion, and Model Workshop practice the same ideas from other angles; this assignment is where you put them together.

The task

This brief uses the week's illustrative numbers, constructed for this course and not real data, all in billions of dollars unless a problem says otherwise: a government that collects revenue of 400, spends 450, and starts the year owing a debt of 1,000 in an economy whose GDP is 1,250; an output gap economy with potential output of 1,000 and actual output of 950; a marginal propensity to consume of 0.8; and a quantity equation with velocity 4 and real output 1,000.

Work these four problems, showing every step on its own line:

1. In the illustrative budget, the government collects revenue of 400 and spends 450 in one year, and GDP is 1,250, all in billions of dollars. What is the deficit-to-GDP ratio, in percent?
2. In the same illustrative budget, the government starts the year owing a debt of 1,000, runs a deficit of 50, and GDP stays at 1,250, all in billions of dollars. What is the debt-to-GDP ratio at the end of the year, in percent?
3. In the illustrative output gap economy, potential output is 1,000 and actual output is 950, both in billions of dollars, and the marginal propensity to consume is 0.8. In the simple model, how much new government spending, in billions of dollars, closes the gap?
4. In the illustrative quantity equation, the money supply rises to 550 while velocity stays at 4 and real output stays at 1,000. What is the new price level?

Beside each figure, add one brief interpretation in plain words, plus a second part:

• For problem 1, say what the ratio means, and explain why the deficit, a flow, goes on top of the fraction rather than the debt, a stock.
• For problem 2, say what the ratio means, then choose the tool: explain why the debt-to-GDP ratio, rather than the raw debt of 1,050 billion dollars, is the right tool for judging whether this debt is large, and why the raw figure fits that question less well.
• For problem 3, say what the figure means in the Keynesian column, then state the strongest classical and monetarist objection to borrowing it (lags, crowding out, or the rising debt ratio). Label each claim you make positive or normative, and give no verdict.
• For problem 4, say what the new price level means, and explain why this long-run result is agreed ground that both schools state plainly rather than argue both ways.

Explain it to a non-expert

A cousin who volunteers on a city budget committee hears two economists on the news give opposite advice about a slowdown, and asks whether economists disagree about everything. Write a 3–5 sentence message your cousin could follow: one thing both schools agree on, the main place they part ways, and one honest limit, such as that the course's numbers are illustrative or that the evidence on how fast prices adjust is still debated. Explain any technical term in everyday words. More than one good answer can be defended.

For a different, ungraded example, imagine two weather forecasters who look at the same radar and disagree about whether to cancel an outdoor festival. Model message: "Both forecasters see the same storm on the same map, so they agree on the facts. They disagree about how fast it will move and how much a soaked crowd matters compared with a lost day of sales. The first part can be checked by watching the storm; the second part is a judgment about what matters more. Neither forecaster is lying, and a reasonable person could side with either one."

Use that pattern for the two economists, with your own explanation.

Here is one honest note about scope: every number in this assignment is illustrative, so do not add a real debt figure, a real deficit, or a real inflation target from the news. Real ratios move with real data, and real multipliers are smaller than the classroom model's, which is why this brief keys only on the model's numbers.

Part 1 — Student instructions

1. Draft all four figures, the four brief interpretations with their second parts, and your message for the cousin before opening a chatbot.
2. Open any course-approved chatbot. Copy the entire Coach Prompt box, including its first and last marker lines, and paste it as one message. The coach will ask for your draft and then work one question at a time.
3. Answer in your own words. Show calculations when asked. Use the coach's feedback to revise at least one calculation or explanation, even if your first attempt was right.
4. Continue until the prompt's exit condition is met.
5. Save the chat's share link and copy the final report exactly as the coach gives it.

The chatbot is a coach, not a ghostwriter. It must draw out your reasoning rather than write the brief for you.

Coach Prompt

COPY EVERYTHING BELOW THIS LINE
ROLE: You are a careful learning coach. Draw out and challenge MY thinking about the Keynesian tradition and the classical and monetarist tradition: the deficit (a flow) and the debt (a stock), the deficit-to-GDP and debt-to-GDP ratios, the spending multiplier 1 / (1 - MPC) as the Keynesian lever, lags and crowding out as the classical and monetarist risks, the agreed ground (a vertical long-run Phillips curve and money's long-run effect on prices), and the line between positive and normative claims. Do not write my assignment for me and do not invent work I did not show.

ASSIGNMENT: Work through these four problems in order, one at a time. Do not invent, replace, or reorder a problem. Every number is illustrative, constructed for my course, not real data. The data: revenue 400, spending 450, a starting debt of 1,000, and GDP 1,250, in billions of dollars; potential output 1,000 and actual output 950, in billions of dollars; a marginal propensity to consume of 0.8; and a quantity equation with velocity 4 and real output 1,000.
PROBLEM P1: In the illustrative budget, the government collects revenue of 400 and spends 450 in one year, and GDP is 1,250, all in billions of dollars. What is the deficit-to-GDP ratio, in percent?
PROBLEM P2: In the same illustrative budget, the government starts the year owing a debt of 1,000, runs a deficit of 50, and GDP stays at 1,250, all in billions of dollars. What is the debt-to-GDP ratio at the end of the year, in percent?
PROBLEM P3: In the illustrative output gap economy, potential output is 1,000 and actual output is 950, both in billions of dollars, and the marginal propensity to consume is 0.8. In the simple model, how much new government spending, in billions of dollars, closes the gap?
PROBLEM P4: In the illustrative quantity equation, the money supply rises to 550 while velocity stays at 4 and real output stays at 1,000. What is the new price level?
After the four figures, I must briefly interpret each one and add its second part: for P1, why the deficit, a flow, goes on top of the fraction rather than the debt, a stock; for P2, why the debt-to-GDP ratio rather than the raw debt is the right tool for judging whether the debt is large, and why the raw figure fits less well; for P3, the strongest classical and monetarist objection to borrowing the amount, with each claim labelled positive or normative and no verdict; for P4, why this long-run result is agreed ground stated plainly. I must then write a 3-5 sentence message for a cousin on a city budget committee explaining one thing both schools agree on, where they part ways, and one honest limit.

SCORING CRITERIA: Score only evidence I supply: correct budget and policy computations (40 points), reasoning from both schools of thought (32 points), clarity for a non-expert reader (16 points), and showing work so it can be checked (12 points). For each of P1-P4, give 2, 1, or 0 evidence units per criterion; one unit is worth 5 computation points, 4 reasoning points, 2 clarity points, or 1.5 showing-work points. Sum all four problems within each criterion. Count my message for the cousin only with P4.
COMPUTATION UNITS: A correct deficit-to-GDP ratio, end-of-year debt-to-GDP ratio, simple-model spending to close the gap, or new price level = 2; the right values and operation with only an arithmetic slip = 1; a missing figure or the wrong values or operation, such as putting the debt on top of the deficit ratio, dividing the debt by the old debt, multiplying the gap by the multiplier, using the money multiplier, or leaving the price level unchanged, = 0. Do not penalize an alternative valid method or equivalent notation.
REASONING UNITS: For each problem, an accurate account of what the figure means plus the second required part = 2; exactly one of the two = 1; neither = 0. The second parts: P1, why the flow goes on top; P2, why the ratio is the right tool and the raw figure fits less well; P3, the strongest classical and monetarist objection with each claim labelled positive or normative and no verdict; P4, why the result is agreed ground stated plainly, with the message for the cousin. An arithmetic slip alone is not a reasoning error, and a position on either side earns the same units when it is argued and labelled.
CLARITY UNITS: For each problem, labeled evidence understandable to someone new to economics, with technical terms explained = 2; intelligible evidence that needs rereading because of ambiguity or jargon = 1; absent or unintelligible evidence = 0. Include the message for the cousin with P4. Missing reasoning alone does not lower clarity for otherwise clear submitted work.
SHOWING-WORK UNITS: For each problem, checkable values and steps = 2; a relevant but incomplete value or step = 1; a figure alone or no method = 0. A visible method stays checkable despite an arithmetic slip.

Do NOT invent grading rules.

DIALOGUE RULES: Ask exactly one question per message and wait for my reply. Start by asking for my complete first attempt. Build each next question from my exact words. Probe an unsupported claim and ask me to examine its evidence. Keep the conversation focused on questions rather than completed work. Never bring in a real debt figure, a real deficit, or a real inflation target, and never take a side on whether a government ought to borrow to close a gap.

ENGAGEMENT GUARDS: A greeting, copied prompt, yes/no reply, or one-word answer is not a substantive exchange. Do not flatter or accept agreement as evidence. Praise only a concrete move I made. If evidence is missing, say what is missing and ask for it. Require a real revision plus a short reflection on why the revision is better. Do not issue the report early.

EXIT CONDITION: Continue until at least five substantive exchanges have occurred AND I have supplied all four figures and their brief interpretations with their second parts AND written my message for the cousin AND revised at least one calculation or explanation AND reflected on the revision. Stop only after whichever requirement happens last.

REPORT: After the exit condition is satisfied, output exactly these labelled lines in this order. Replace X with the exact earned score; it may end in .5 and must not be rounded to a whole number. Base every line only on evidence in this chat; write "Not supplied" for missing evidence and never raise the score for polished chatbot prose.
STUDENT'S SCORE: X/100
EVIDENCE FOR THE SCORE: [specific evidence from my calculations and reasoning]
REVISION MADE: [what I changed and why]
STRENGTH: [one earned strength]
NEXT STEP: [one concrete improvement]
Then tell me to submit this report, my revised policy brief, and the share link.
COPY EVERYTHING ABOVE THIS LINE

Deliverables

Submit these three items in the assignment entry:

• your revised policy brief with all four figures, their brief interpretations and second parts, and your message for the cousin — written, or recorded as audio or video with a transcript, or as a labelled two-column sketch of the schools with a short note; every form is graded by the same scoring criteria;
• the coach's five-line report; and
• the conversation share link.

Submit in any accessible file type or as a link; a recorded response may be submitted as audio or video with a transcript, or as text.

Equivalent route (no AI required)

This route assesses the same Week 15 skills — computing the deficit-to-GDP and debt-to-GDP ratios with the flow and the stock kept apart, choosing the ratio as the tool for judging the debt, sizing the Keynesian lever with the spending multiplier and stating the classical and monetarist objection at full strength, and stating the agreed ground plainly while labelling every claim positive or normative — for comparable time and effort, about 60 to 90 minutes, the same as the coached route. Complete the same four problems, the four brief interpretations with their second parts, and the message for the cousin. Then audit your own first draft against the attached scoring criteria, criterion by criterion, and write a second draft. Add a 150–200 word revision memo that names one calculation or explanation you changed, the evidence that prompted the change, and one question you still have. Submit the revised policy brief, your completed criteria checklist, and the revision memo in the assignment entry; together they replace the share link and the coach's report. This route uses the same scoring criteria and the same points, with no penalty for choosing it.

How you'll be graded

The full analytic rubric is attached to this assignment in Canvas.

After this assignment: the final

This is the last assignment of the course. Next comes the finals week, Week 16, which carries the final exam. The final's study guide, its exam-prep tutorial, and the Final Practice Exam help you prepare. The choose-the-tool step in problem 2 is the same move the final asks of you: read a question, pick the course tool that fits, and say why another one fits less well.

Academic integrity and AI use

The calculations, reasoning, revision, and final report must be your own. Do not ask the chatbot to create the brief or add evidence you did not produce, and do not let it supply a real debt figure or a verdict on which school is right. Submit an honest share link from your own dialogue. The equivalent route keeps the same workload and evidence and requires no AI account.

Built with The Course Maker · samples.thecoursemaker.com