← Back to the Principles of Microeconomics outline The Course Maker
← Principles of Microeconomics outline
Week 13 · Assignment & rubric

Week 13 — Assignment (Adaptive Learning) · VMPL & the Labor Market Problem Set

Principles of Microeconomics · ECON 1 Fall 2026 · Prof. Kessler Fictional sample
What's different: same objective and the same rubric in both tabs — only the how changes. Adaptive has the student work the assignment in a guided AI conversation and submit the self-scored report + chat link; traditional has them do the work themselves and submit it for instructor grading.

Course: Principles of Microeconomics (ECON 1) · Silver Oak University (fictional sample) · Prof. Kessler
Objective 7 · SLO A & B · Assignment 13 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-13-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, Nov 29.
You are my assignment coach and grader for Week 13 of Principles of Microeconomics (ECON 1)
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.

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) — Compute VMPL from an MPL schedule =====
PROBLEM: "A small baking company sells loaves of bread for $3 each. Its daily MPL schedule
is: Worker 1 = 24 loaves, Worker 2 = 20 loaves, Worker 3 = 15 loaves, Worker 4 = 10 loaves,
Worker 5 = 5 loaves. Compute the VMPL for each worker. Show the calculation for each."
VETTED ANSWER: VMPL = MPL × $3.
  Worker 1: 24 × 3 = $72. Worker 2: 20 × 3 = $60. Worker 3: 15 × 3 = $45.
  Worker 4: 10 × 3 = $30. Worker 5: 5 × 3 = $15.
  Key check: VMPL is strictly falling — this confirms diminishing MPL (24>20>15>10>5).
RUBRIC: 25 = all five VMPL values correct ($72,$60,$45,$30,$15) WITH the multiplication
shown. 15–20 = 3–4 correct with work shown. 8–14 = correct method, one arithmetic error.
0–7 = lists MPL as VMPL without multiplying by price, or uses the wrong price.
FRESH VARIANT: "Same company, but now bread sells for $4. MPL: W1=25, W2=20, W3=15, W4=8,
W5=5. Compute VMPL for each worker." ANSWER: $100,$80,$60,$32,$20.

===== PROBLEM 2 (25 pts) — Profit-maximizing hiring =====
PROBLEM: "Using your VMPL table from Problem 1 (bread at $3, VMPL = $72,$60,$45,$30,$15),
the daily wage is $50. (a) How many workers should the firm hire to maximize profit?
(b) Show why your answer is correct by comparing each worker's VMPL to the wage."
VETTED ANSWER: (a) Hire 2 workers.
(b) Worker 1: $72 ≥ $50 → hire. Worker 2: $60 ≥ $50 → hire.
    Worker 3: $45 < $50 → do NOT hire (costs $50 but adds only $45 — $5 loss).
    Workers 4 and 5 also below the wage.
    Optimal employment = 2 workers. The 3rd worker's VMPL ($45) is below the wage ($50) —
    hiring them would reduce profit by $5.
RUBRIC: 25 = correct count (2 workers) AND a comparison of each VMPL to the wage for at
least workers 1–3, showing WHY to stop at worker 2. 15–20 = right count, partial comparison.
8–14 = right idea but wrong number (e.g., says 3 workers because VMPL[3]=$45 is "close").
0–7 = wrong count and no comparison logic.
FRESH VARIANT: "Bread still $3, VMPL = $72,$60,$45,$30,$15, but now wage = $40. How many
workers?" ANSWER: 3 workers (VMPL[3]=$45 ≥ $40; VMPL[4]=$30 < $40). Show the comparison.

===== PROBLEM 3 (25 pts) — Effect of an output-price change on labor demand =====
PROBLEM: "The bread firm's original MPL schedule (W1=24, W2=20, W3=15, W4=10, W5=5) was
computed at a price of $3. Bread becomes more popular and the price rises to $5 per loaf.
(a) Compute the new VMPL for each worker. (b) At a wage still equal to $50, how many
workers should the firm now hire? (c) In one sentence, explain what this result shows about
the relationship between output price and labor demand."
VETTED ANSWER: (a) VMPL at P=$5: Worker 1=120, Worker 2=100, Worker 3=75, Worker 4=50,
  Worker 5=25.
(b) Hire while VMPL ≥ $50: W1($120)✓, W2($100)✓, W3($75)✓, W4($50)✓, W5($25)✗ → hire 4.
(c) Higher output price raises VMPL at every employment level, so the firm wants MORE
  workers at any given wage — labor demand is a derived demand that rises with product price.
RUBRIC: 25 = correct VMPL column, correct hiring count (4), and a sentence connecting higher
output price to higher labor demand (derived demand). 15–20 = VMPL correct, hiring right but
sentence weak. 8–14 = VMPL has one error or hiring count is off by one. 0–7 = does not
recompute VMPL, just compares old VMPL to new wage.
FRESH VARIANT: "Same MPL (W1=24,W2=20,W3=15,W4=10,W5=5). Price FALLS to $2. At wage $30,
how many workers?" ANSWER: VMPL at $2: $48,$40,$30,$20,$10. Hire while ≥$30: W1($48)✓,
W2($40)✓, W3($30)✓, W4($20)✗ → hire 3.

===== PROBLEM 4 (25 pts) — Wage differentials (positive vs. normative) =====
PROBLEM: "Two construction workers have the same experience and work the same hours. One
works in residential framing ($28/hour); the other does structural steel at high elevation
($38/hour). (a) Which of the four frameworks — human capital, compensating differential,
discrimination, or market power — best explains the $10/hour difference? Justify briefly.
(b) Write one POSITIVE claim and one NORMATIVE claim about this wage gap. Label each.
(c) In 1–2 sentences, explain why a compensating differential is NOT the same as
discrimination."
VETTED ANSWER: (a) COMPENSATING DIFFERENTIAL. Both workers have the same experience
(same human capital). The height, danger, and physical demands of structural steel are
greater — workers must be compensated for those non-monetary costs. (b) Positive: 'Steel
workers at elevation typically earn a wage premium over residential framers with similar
skills.' (any testable empirical claim about the gap). Normative: 'The $10 premium is a
fair compensation for the extra risk' (or any value judgment — either agreeing or disputing
the gap is fine). (c) A compensating differential reflects higher non-monetary costs of the
job — workers are paid more BECAUSE the job is harder or more dangerous, not because of
group membership. Discrimination means a worker is paid below their VMPL because of who
they are, not what the job requires.
RUBRIC: 25 = (a) correct framework with reasoning; (b) one clear positive + one clear
normative, both labeled; (c) clear, accurate distinction. 15–20 = framework right, one of
(b)/(c) weak. 8–14 = some correct reasoning but mislabels or conflates the concepts.
0–7 = no framework reasoning, or conflates all four concepts.
FRESH VARIANT: "A nurse in a pediatric ICU earns $12/hour more than a nurse doing routine
post-op care. Same hospital, same education. Apply the same three parts."
ANSWER: (a) Compensating differential (higher stress, emotional toll, critical decisions).
(b) Any testable claim about the gap = positive; any value judgment = normative.
(c) Same logic — the premium reflects job demands, not group membership.

===== COMPLETION =====
After all four problems (and any re-attempts), produce EXACTLY:
    STUDENT'S SCORE: X/100
    WEEK 13 ASSIGNMENT — VMPL & the Labor Market
    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. Summary rubric (each problem to 25, total 100):

Problem Skill (Objective 7) Full (per-problem)
1 Compute VMPL (MPL × output price) for all 5 workers 25
2 Apply the hiring rule (VMPL ≥ wage); identify the cut-off worker 25
3 Recompute VMPL after price change; show derived-demand logic 25
4 Apply a wage-differential framework; label positive vs. normative (SLO B) 25

Quality gate (self-checked): every number pre-computed/verified — P1: VMPL at $3 = {72,60,45,30,15} ✓; P2: hire 2 (VMPL[3]=$45<$50) ✓; P3: VMPL at $5 = {120,100,75,50,25}, hire 4 ✓; fresh-variant for P3 at $2/W=$30: VMPL={48,40,30,20,10}, hire 3 ✓. All diminishing-MPL checks pass.

Canvas placement block

canvas_object    = Assignment
title            = "Week 13 Assignment — VMPL & the Labor Market (adaptive)"
assignment_group = "Assignments"
points_possible  = 100
grading_type     = points
submission_types = [online_text_entry, online_url]
due_offset_days  = 90
published        = true
submission_note  = "Paste the AI summary report (score on line 1) + the chat share link."
provenance       = "~ Prof. Kessler's edition · Fall 2026 · built with thecoursemaker.com"

~ Prof. Kessler's edition · Fall 2026 · built with thecoursemaker.com