Let's close the gap: Revising teaching materials to reflect how the Federal Reserve implements monetary policy

Finance and Economics Discussion Series

Divisions of Research & Statistics and Monetary Aﬀairs

Federal Reserve Board, Washington, D.C.

Let’s close the gap: Revising teaching materials to reﬂect how the

Federal Reserve implements monetary policy

Jane Ihrig and Scott Wolla

2020-092

Please cite this paper as:

Ihrig, Jane, and Scott Wolla (2020). “Let’s close the gap: Revising teaching materials

to reﬂect how the Federal Reserve implements monetary policy,” Finance and Economics

Discussion Series 2020-092. Washington: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System,

https://doi.org/10.17016/FEDS.2020.092.

NOTE: Staﬀ working papers in the Finance and Economics Discussion Series (FEDS) are preliminary

materials circulated to stimulate discussion and critical comment. The analysis and conclusions set forth

are those of the authors and do not indicate concurrence by other members of the research staﬀ or the

Board of Governors. References in publications to the Finance and Economics Discussion Series (other than

acknowledgement) should be cleared with the author(s) to protect the tentative character of these papers.

Let’s close the gap: Revising teaching materials to reflect how the Federal Reserve

implements monetary policy

Jane Ihrig and Scott Wolla*

October 9, 2020

Abstract The topic of the Federal Reserve’s (the Fed’s) implementation of monetary policy has

a significant presence in economics textbooks as well as standards and guidelines for economics

instruction. This presence likely reflects the fact that it is the implementation framework that

helps ensure that the Fed’s desired level of its policy interest rate is transmitted to financial

markets, which helps it steer the economy toward the Congressional dual mandate of maximum

employment and price stability. Over the past decade or so, the Fed has purposefully shifted the

way it implements monetary policy to an environment with ample reserves in the banking

system, and it has introduced new policy tools along the way. This paper shows that,

unfortunately, many teaching resources are not in sync with the Fed’s current framework. We

review six, 2020 or 2021 edition, principles of economics textbooks, and we find they vary

greatly in their coverage of the concepts associated with the way the Fed implements policy

today and in the longer run. We provide recommendations on how the authors can improve the

next editions of their textbooks. We also review standards and guidelines used by secondary-

school educators. All of these are out of date, and we provide proposals for how these materials

can be updated.

Keywords: Federal Reserve, monetary policy, economic education, introductory economics,

macroeconomics

JEL codes: A22, E43, E52, E58

* Ihrig is an economist at the Federal Reserve Board; Wolla is the economic education

coordinator at the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis. Corresponding author: Jane Ihrig; Board of

Governors of the Federal Reserve System; 20th Street and Constitution, NW, Washington, DC

20551; 202-452-3372 (O); [email protected]. We thank Ellen Meade, Ed Nelson, Mary

Suiter, Gretchen Weinbach and David Wheelock for their useful comments.

Analysis and conclusions set forth in this paper are those of the authors and do not indicate

concurrence by other members of the staff of the Federal Reserve Board or the Federal Reserve

Bank of St. Louis.

Introduction

The topic of the Federal Reserve’s (the Fed’s) implementation of monetary policy has a

significant presence in economics textbooks as well as standards and guidelines for economics

instruction. This presence likely reflects the fact that it is the implementation framework that

helps ensure that the Fed’s desired level of its policy interest rate is transmitted to financial

markets, which helps it steer the economy toward the Congressional dual mandate of maximum

employment and price stability. Over the past decade or so, the Fed has purposefully changed the

way it implements monetary policy. Unfortunately, many teaching resources have not been

updated. Before the financial crisis of 2007-2008, the Fed implemented policy with limited

reserves in the banking system and relied on the daily use of open market operations as its key

tool. Today and over the longer run, the Fed has stated that it plans to implement policy with

ample reserves and rely on its administered interest rates.

These changes, along with a few

others, seem subtle, but the current framework is very different from the previous one. And,

these changes are not well reflected in teaching resources.

Textbooks both shape and reflect instruction, and the content should evolve over time.

Mankiw (2020) posits that introductory textbooks evolve because the world changes. However,

this change often occurs at a slow and measured pace. Colander (2003) suggests that the content

of a major principles text can only deviate 15 percent from the standard mainstream text. He

suggests that changes greater than 15 percent require professors to modify their notes and

presentations more than the majority of professors are willing to do. Resistance may also reflect

two processes. First, a new textbook will be sent to at least 60 reviewers, many of whom are

teaching professors whose understanding is intertwined with the current textbooks on the market.

See the Statement Regarding Monetary Policy Implementation and Balance Sheet Normalization

https://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/pressreleases/monetary20190130c.htm

Many of them will have an expertise in a specific field of economics and might only be slightly

acquainted with topics in the area where there are new developments. Second, later editions are

affected by the “textbook convergence rule”-- a market test that positions sales of revised

versions of text to the previous versions -- which Colander suggests will result in each edition

deviating less and less from a common standard. While this convergence might lend itself to

consistency in instruction across courses and institutions, it can inhibit the flexibility necessary to

ensure that materials reflect current realities in the field.

Incorporating new developments is particularly important for the introductory course.

These are the courses that focus on economic literacy and shape understanding of economic

systems and decision-making. About 40 percent of undergraduates take an introductory course in

economics (Siegfried and Walstad, 2014). Bowles and Carlin (2020) estimate that roughly two

million undergraduate students take some sort of introductory economics course every year (or

about 600 times the number who enter doctoral programs). Most of these students will never take

another economics course (Siegfried, 2000), so it is critically important to ensure that professors

provide students with accurate and relevant content. Mankiw (2016) realizes that a majority of

students who use his introductory textbooks will not major in the field, and suggests he writes his

introductory book for future voters, not future economists. As such, it is vitally important that the

information conveyed in introductory courses, with the textbooks and supporting teaching

materials, is accurate. This is especially true for monetary policy, which remains one of the least

understood topics in large-scale assessments (Walstad et al, 2013).

In this paper, we start by providing the foundational content that should be covered in

classroom discussions; in particular, material about how the Fed implements monetary policy in

an ample-reserves regime. We lay out a simple supply-demand model, consistent with what is

often presented in principles textbooks, that incorporates the key concepts associated with this

framework. With this framing, we next discuss actions the Fed has taken in recent years,

showing how they are captured in the model. These two sections provide the needed reference

material to teach the basic concepts of how monetary policy is implemented today and over the

longer run.

Then, we review how the ample-reserves framework differs from the limited-reserves

regime the Fed used prior to the financial crisis of 2007-2009. There are many concepts that are

different in these two regimes, including the level of reserves the Fed chooses to supply to the

banking system, the principal policy tools it uses, and the mechanics that ensures the target

policy rate set by the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) transmits to financial markets.

This comparison sets the stage for understanding why and where some teaching materials are

lagging.

Next, we compare the ample-reserve regime content with what is presented in six, 2020

or 2021 edition, principles of economics textbooks by major publishers and familiar authors. We

limited our search to textbooks that have publication dates no earlier than 2020 – which resulted

in a small number of books to choose from. We evaluate the textbooks in three areas and across

15 concepts. The three areas are: information related to the Fed’s policy rate, concepts

associated with the Fed’s policy tools used for implementation, and the discussion of an interest

rate adjustment. The 15 concepts cover factors that should be present in curriculum that is

discussing implementing monetary policy with ample reserves. We also include factors that

should not be present because they are associated with the pre-2009 framework that is no longer

relevant. We create a scoring metric that awards a positive point to those concepts associated

with the current framework and a negative point to those concepts that are holdovers from the

pre-2009 framework.

Overall, we find that the textbooks vary greatly in their coverage of the concepts

associated with the way the Fed implements policy today and in the longer run. Scores range

from –2 to +6, with a perfect score being +12. Half of the textbooks have negative scores, one

scores near zero, and two have positive scores. Those textbooks with negative scores tend to add

a discussion of the Fed’s current policy tools to content that was previously written to cover

policy implementation of times past. Unfortunately, this approach results in some outdated

statements, keeping the focus on the discussion in the old, limited-reserves regime. The textbook

with the highest positive score, on the other hand, covers the ample-reserves regime quite well.

Of note, this textbook is relatively new, and the authors only discuss the Fed’s current policy

tools. Looking at how each of the 15 concepts was scored allows the authors to see where the

textbooks’ material is consistent with the current Fed’s implementation regime and consider

where authors may want to adjust their discussion in future textbook editions. We provide

recommended changes for each textbook; all the textbooks miss at least a few concepts that

could be added to their discussion.

Next, we examine the economic material on monetary policy implementation from the

Voluntary National Content Standards (VNCS) in Economics and the College Board’s Advanced

Placement Macroeconomics Course and Exam Description. These standards and guidelines

provide a baseline for the information being taught in high school economics instruction. We

find that both are quite out of date, with neither including any information about the Fed’s

current, key policy tools—interest on reserves and the overnight reverse repurchase agreement

(ON RRP facility). In fact, if we applied our scoring metric to these materials, these standards

and guidelines would score worse than any textbook we evaluated. We provide proposals for

how the standards and guidelines should be revised to reflect the Fed’s current implementation

framework. Updating this material is important because teachers and textbooks authors, to some

extent, lean on these resources when considering how to update their own teaching materials.

Overall, by pointing out the “lagged” information in textbooks and guidelines we hope

this paper puts a spotlight on an area of economic education that needs a refresh. Our work

differs from Neveu (2020), who also highlights the lag in this content area. He however,

recommends, at a very high level, using balance sheet mechanics to help students understand the

bank-level incentives and decision-making processes that lead to money creation and how that

interacts with monetary policy. Our focus, instead, is grounded in standard textbook supply-

demand models, and we focus on how to update existing materials to bring them up to date on

monetary policy issues. In particular, we provide details of the Fed’s key policy tools, including

discussion of the economic concepts associated with the tools, and explain how they work in

normal times and during periods of severe stress.

In the next two sections, we review the baseline concepts that should be included in

teaching resources about how the Fed implements monetary policy today and in the long run.

Then we compare the current, ample-reserves regime to the pre-financial crisis limited-reserves

regime so the reader can see some of the stark differences in the key concepts and understand

where some of the curriculum are lagging. With this information, we score principles textbooks

and review standards and guidelines on their presentation of the Fed’s implementation regime.

We find some textbooks need substantial updating and some need a few additional points

covered. Both standards and guidelines need substantial updates, as their materials focus on the

way the Fed implemented policy pre-2009. We propose updated language for each of these

sources. Finally, we discuss why there may be a curriculum lag and end with our recommended

summary of how the current ample-reserves regime concepts should be taught. It is only after

these materials are updated that we can be sure that students are taught the relevant concepts

needed to understand how monetary policy is implemented today and in the future.

Overview of the Ample-Reserves Regime

The Fed implements monetary policy with the aim of keeping the market-determined federal

funds rate (FFR) in the FOMC’s target range. The federal funds rate is the interest rate at which

depository institutions, or what we term “banks,” borrow reserves from and lend reserves to one

another on an overnight basis to meet short-term funding needs.

The FOMC, knowing the

linkages from the setting of their policy rate to economic activity, as highlighted in figure 1,

decides the appropriate target range of the FFR knowing it will affect the current level and

expected path of short-term interest rates, which influences long-term interest rates and overall

financial conditions. These financial conditions, in turn, influence the decisions of consumers

and producers, thus affecting overall spending, investment, production, employment, and

inflation in the United States.

Figure 1 - Transmission of Monetary Policy

Banks and a few other government-sponsored entities bilaterally conduct federal funds trades at different rates and

quantities. The FRBNY publishes the effective FFR, the volume weighted median of all fed funds trades, each day.

When the FOMC sets a target for the FFR, its goal is to have trades occur near the target so that the effective FFR is

within the target range.

Once the FOMC determines the appropriate stance of policy, or position of the policy

rate target range, the implementation framework (represented as the orange arrow in figure 1)

ensures that target transmits to market interest rates, from the FFR to broader interest rates as

well. Today, the Federal Reserve is operating with ample reserves in the banking system and is

relying on its administered rates—primarily interest on reserves—to steer the market FFR into

the FOMC target range.

To understand the Fed’s implementation framework it is easiest to consider the stylized

model of the demand for and supply of reserves shown in figure 2. The blue, downward-sloping

curve represents banks’ demand for reserves. Banks demand reserves for a variety of reasons,

including meeting intraday payment needs, earning interest on this high-quality liquid asset, and

meeting internal as well as regulatory liquidity risk management constraints.

Figure 2 – Ample-Reserves Regime

There are three segments of the demand curve. First, the top of the curve, which is

truncated by the Fed’s discount rate. This flat portion incorporates the fact that banks should not

be willing to pay more for reserves in the market than the interest rate charged by the Federal

Reserve to banks for loans they can obtain through the Federal Reserve's discount window.

Hence, the discount rate sets a ceiling on fed funds transactions. Second, the middle of the

demand curve that is steeply downward-sloping. This portion of the curve captures the idea that

the lower the cost of overnight borrowing in the federal funds market, the more reserves banks

are generally inclined to hold. That is, the opportunity cost of holding funds declines and having

more reserves helps them not be caught short of funds. Third, the bottom of the curve is where

the quantity of reserves in the banking system is significantly large and the demand curve is

nearly flat, as indicated by the horizontal region. The transition from the steep portion of the

curve to the nearly flat portion illustrates that as the quantity of reserves in the banking system

increases, at some point, banks do not find much benefit from holding additional reserves other

than earning the interest the Fed pays on these balances. As a result, the demand curve flattens

out at a level that is close to the interest rate earned on reserves the IOR rate (or the interest rate

paid on excess reserves). This is a key interest rate that the Fed administers.

To be “ample” the supply curve must intersect the demand curve where it is flat. This

location is consistent with the key feature of an ample regime, which is one where a central bank

does not need to actively react to small movements in the supply of reserves to keep the level of

the FFR in the FOMC’s desired target range.

That is, if the supply curve shifts a little to the left

or right because of factors outside the Fed’s control, it will remain on the horizontal region of the

demand curve and, therefore, achieve nearly the same FFR.

Federal Reserve Banks pay interest on required reserves and excess reserves balances. Since March 2020 reserve

requirement ratios have been set to zero, so banks do not have any required reserves. With this new policy, all

banks’ reserves are excess balances. For more information on reserve balances see:

https://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/reqresbalances.htm

When supply is ample, the Fed relies on the settings of two of its administered interest

rates– and in particularly IOR – to control the level of federal funds rate. Looking at that bottom

of the demand curve in figure 2, one sees the two critical administered rates: the IOR rate and

the overnight reverse repurchase agreement (ON RRP) offering rate. Each rate is available to a

specific set of counterparties on particular funds deposits held at the Fed. The counterparties can

decide if they want to deposit their funds at the Fed and earn the relevant standing rate or lend it

instead to another market participant at a negotiated rate in one of the various money markets for

funds. Because of this tradeoff, one can think of the Fed’s administered rates as reservation

rates—the lowest rate that counterparties are willing to accept for lending out their funds. And,

they (the IOR rate and the ON RRP rate) set a lower bar on the return a counterparty is willing to

accept from others in money markets. Hence, movements in the Fed’s administered rates

directly help steer money market interest rates.

The Fed’s key administered rate is IOR, which is the interest rate that the Fed can pay

banks on their reserve balances held at the Fed. While banks have several short-term investment

options for their money (see figure 3), the IOR rate offers a safe overnight option to banks.

Because IOR is a risk-free, liquid, investment option, banks will not lend reserves in the federal

funds market for less than the IOR rate. In other words, the IOR serves as a reservation rate for

banks. And, if the FFR were to fall very far below the IOR rate, banks would borrow in the

federal funds market and deposit those reserves at the Fed, earning a profit on the difference.

This activity, known as arbitrage, is an important aspect of the way financial markets, and

monetary policy implementation, work. Arbitrage ensures that the FFR does not fall much below

the IOR rate.

Figure 3 – How IOR acts as a reservation rate for banks to arbitrage across money markets

These financial incentives (i.e., reservation rates and arbitrage) ensure that when the Fed

raises or lowers the IOR rate that the FFR also moves up or down. As such, the Federal Reserve

steers the FFR into the target range set by the FOMC by adjusting the IOR rate. And, because the

Fed sets IOR directly, it serves as an effective monetary policy tool. In fact, IOR is the primary

tool used by the Fed for influencing the FFR.

However, not all institutions with reserve accounts can earn interest on their deposits at

the Federal Reserve, and not all important institutions in financial markets have access to Fed

accounts, which means that important short-term rates (including FFR) might drop below the

IOR. So, in 2014, the FOMC announced that it intended to use an ON RRP facility to help

control the FFR.

The ON RRP facility is a form of open market operation where the Fed

interacts with many nonbank financial institutions, such as large money market funds and

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, “Overnight Reverse Repurchase Agreement Facility.”

https://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/overnight-reverse-repurchase-agreements.htm

government-sponsored enterprises.

As highlighted in figure 4, when one of these institutions

uses the ON RRP facility it essentially deposits reserves at the Fed overnight, receiving a

security as collateral. The next day the transaction is unwound and the institution earns the ON

RRP rate (which the Fed sets) on the funds it deposited at the Fed.

Because it is a risk-free option, these institutions will never be willing to lend funds for

lower than the ON RRP rate. As such, the ON RRP rate acts as a reservation rate, and institutions

can use it to arbitrage other short-term rates. Thus, the rate paid on ON RRP transactions, which

the Fed chooses to set below IOR, acts like a floor for the FFR and serves as supplementary tool.

Figure 4: ON RRP Transaction

The last administered rate, also featured in figure 2, is the discount rate. As noted above,

the discount rate is set above the target range; it tends to be set 50 basis points (½ percentage

point) above the top of the target range. This tool is intended to serve as a ceiling for the traded

level of the federal funds rate. Of course, the stigma associated with borrowing from the Fed

Federal Reserve Bank of New York. “Reverse Repo Counterparties.”

https://www.newyorkfed.org/markets/rrp_counterparties

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. “Overnight Reverse Repurchase Agreement Facility.”

https://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/overnight-reverse-repurchase-agreements.htm

dampens the discount rate’s effectiveness as a ceiling. Since the discount window serves more

as a safety net for banks to borrow when there are stresses in markets, this administered rate is

not directly influencing the FFR and so is not featured as one of the key rates to ensure day-to-

day implementation of policy.

For the Fed’s administered interest rates to be the key tool for interest rate control,

reserves must remain ample. Over time, there are forces in the economy that slowly drain

reserves from the banking system.

The Fed maintains an ample supply by monitoring the level

and conducting, when deemed appropriate, open market operations (OMOs) where it purchases

securities and injects reserves into the banking system.

This type of open market operation is a

long-standing tool of the Fed; it was the key tool used before the crisis when implementing

policy with limited reserves. Today and going forward, periodic open market operations are an

important tool used to ensure that reserves remain ample so that the administered rates can

continue to steer the FFR into the target range.

To summarize, as presented in table 1, the Fed chooses an implementation regime to

ensure that when the FOMC sets a target range for the federal funds rate, that this setting is

transmitted to financial markets. The current regime choice is an ample-reserves regime. In this

regime, the supply of reserves is large enough that small shifts in this level have minimal impact

Demand for currency grows at a rate of about 6 percent per year. When a bank requests currency for its customers,

an armored truck comes to a regional Federal Reserve Bank, picks up the cash that was ordered, and delivers it to

the ordering bank. The Fed decreases the ordering bank's reserve account to take payment for the cash. See Ihrig,

Senyuz and Weinbach (2020b) for a discussion of key factors that naturally drain reserves from the banking system.

Some call the Fed’s purchases of securities a standard or traditional OMO. The ON RRP facility, which was fully

established in 2015, is another form of an OMO. The traditional OMO is where the Fed determined the quantity of

government securities it wants to buy (or sell) from primary dealers (i.e., securities dealers who are active in the

market for U.S. government securities and have agreed to do operations with the Fed). When the Fed initiates a

purchase, it pays for the securities by crediting the reserve accounts of the banks used by the primary dealers and,

hence, boost reserves in the banking system. The ON RRP facility, on the other hand, stands ready to purchase the

quantity of securities that a broader set of counterparties determine they want to place at the Fed.

on the FFR. This ample level means the Fed does not need to actively monitor and adjust the

supply of reserves with daily open market operations. Instead, in this regime, the Fed relies on

its administered rates, with IOR being the primary tool and the rate associated with the ON RRP

facility being a supplementary tool. Because reserves are ample, these administered rates act as

reservation rates for banks and other key non-bank financial counterparties that influence market

rates when they are deciding where to invest their marginal excess funds. Arbitrage between

alternative short-term investment options ensures money market interest rates converge and are

related to the Fed’s administered rate, and the ON RRP serves as a floor for the FFR. Finally,

the Fed monitors the level of reserves because there is a gradual drain in reserves by factors

outside the Fed’s control. When reserves are judged to be getting close to not being ample, the

Fed will purchase securities through open market operations, which injects reserves in the

banking system, to boost their level.

Table 1 - Key concepts of an ample-reserves regime

Concept

Fed’s Choice

Role and Description

Policy Rate

Federal Funds Rate

(FFR)

The way the Fed conducts monetary policy. The FOMC

sets the target range (or the stance of policy) with the goal

of moving the economy toward its dual mandate, as

depicted in figure 1.

Reserve

Level

Ample

Level of reserves in the banking system. The Fed

supplies a level of reserves large enough so that small

movements in this level do not influence the FFR. This

level of reserves intersects the horizontal region of the

demand curve in the money market diagram. This

relatively high level implies the tools the Fed relies on for

control of interest rates are its administered rates.

Policy Tools

Interest on Reserves

(IOR)

Primary tool of monetary policy implementation. IOR

is an administered rate that acts like a reservation rate for

banks and, through arbitrage, helps steer the FFR into the

FOMC’s target range.

Overnight Reverse

Repurchase Agreement

(ON RRP) rate

Supplemental tool of monetary policy implementation.

The ON RRP rate is an administered rate that acts like a

reservation rate for a large number of financial institutions

and helps set a floor for the FFR.

Discount rate

Tool of monetary policy implementation. The discount

rate is an administered rate that is set above the target

range, with the intention to serve as a ceiling for the FFR.

“Stigma” of borrowing from the Fed may dampen the

effect of being a firm ceiling.

Open Market

Operations (OMO)

Tool of monetary policy implementation. OMO are

conducted periodically to maintain ample reserves.

Implementing Policy in the Ample-Reserves Regime

We now turn to examples of the Fed implementing policy in an ample-reserve regime.

First, we review a standard cut to the policy rate to provide more monetary policy

accommodation to the economy. Here the FOMC announces that it lowers the policy target

range. Along with this announcement, the Fed lowers its administered rates, which encourages

OMOs can be used in other ways during times of stress. For example, large-scale purchases were conducted

during the COVID-19 pandemic to stabilize financial markets.

market rates to decline as well. Second, we discuss, at a high level, some actions the Fed takes

when faced with severe stresses in the economy and the policy rate is dropped to what is termed

the effective lower bound (i.e., near zero). In these extraordinary circumstances, such as during

the 2007-2009 financial crisis and the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic, the Fed turns to nontraditional

policy tools.

Normal times means Standard Tools

As the economy moves through a normal business cycle, with output ebbing and flowing, the

FOMC may lower or raise the federal funds target range to steer the economy toward the

FOMC’s dual mandate. For example, suppose the economy weakens, with unemployment

starting to rise and inflation averaging below the Committee’s 2 percent target. The FOMC

might decide to make monetary policy more accommodative. If so, the FOMC would lower its

target range for the federal funds rate. And, to encourage this lower policy rate to transmit to

financial markets, the Fed would lower its administered rates (the IOR rate, the ON RRP rate and

the discount rate) accordingly.

Lowering the administered interest rates is what encourages the policy accommodation to

transmit to money markets, broader financial conditions, and the economy more generally.

depicted in figure 1, the lower federal funds rate would rapidly be reflected in the interest rates

that banks and other lenders charge on short-term loans to one another, households, nonfinancial

businesses, and government entities. Similarly, the lower federal funds rates would be reflected

in the rates applied to floating-rate loans, including floating-rate mortgages as well as many

personal and commercial credit lines. Longer-term interest rates move with short-term interest

For more discussion of how changes in the federal funds rate affect the broader economy, see this overview on the

Board’s website:

https://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/monetary-policy-what-are-its-goals-how-does-it-

work.htm

rates as well as expectations for future short-term rates. When long-term rates decline, they will

spur economic activity and job creation because many key economic decisions--such as

consumers' purchases of houses, cars, and other big-ticket items or businesses' investments in

structures, machinery, and equipment--involve long planning horizons.

Over the past several years, the FOMC has raised and then lowered the target range of the

federal funds rate to move the economy toward its dual mandate. Figure 5 shows the FOMC’s

target range, grey shaded area, over time. When the FOMC decides to make any change to the

policy target range, the Fed adjusts its administered rates. The black line shows the Fed’s chosen

setting of the IOR rate, the interest rate paid on excess reserves. In most instances, the

administered rates will be decreased or increased by the exact same basis points as the target

range. However, the administered rates can be moved by more or less to offset current market

pressures that may be pulling the federal funds rate towards the top or bottom of the target range.

Ultimately, the setting of IOR is such that the market-determined federal funds rate (the effective

FFR), the red line, remains in the target range.

Figure 5 – Federal Funds Rate and Interest on Reserves

Figure 6 graphically illustrates how a cut to the FOMC’s policy target, with the

associated decline in Fed administered rates, transmits to the market federal funds rate. The

demand curve shifts down, but only at its endpoints where the Fed’s administered rates interact

with banks’ decisions to hold reserves. At the y-axis, a lower discount rate implies that banks

will no longer pay rates in the market higher than the new, lower discount rate. And, the flat

portion of the curve also moved down along with the new, lower IOR rate because this is the

new interest rate is the marginal benefit banks get from holding additional reserves. With these

changes, the FFR moves lower. That is, the lower administered rates, working through market

forces, moves the FFR into the target range.

Figure 6– Lower Administered Rates translate into a lower FFR

This discussion focuses on how the Fed’s administered rates transmit the FOMC’s FFR

target directly to market interest rates. Then consumer and business behavior, which is affected

by the level of interest rates, is captured in standard macroeconomic textbook models of saving,

investment and, ultimately, aggregate supply and demand. Of course, the Fed’s actions

endogenously affect money demand and money supply, as the adjustments to interest rates affect

banks’, consumers’ and businesses’ behavior. However, the Fed does not implement policy by

setting a target for a particular level of the money supply in the economy. Discussions of this

fashion are a holdover of how the Fed conducted and implemented policy in the past. First, the

Fed conducted monetary policy with explicit money supply targets in the 1970s and 1980s, but

has long moved away from this practice as the link between growth in the money supply and

economic activity became unstable.

Second, the Fed implemented policy with limited reserves

before the 2007-2009 financial crisis. Within this old, limited-reserves regime, the Fed provided

daily estimates of the supply of reserves—or money quantities—that were needed to transmit the

FOMC’s target to market interest rates.

In the current, ample-reserves regime, however, the

FOMC does not influence short-term rates through quantities nor consciously target a particular

monetary quantity.

Extraordinary Circumstances means Nontraditional Tools

Twice in recent history the U.S. economy faced severe economic stress. The first was the 2007-

2009 financial crisis and the second was the 2020 coronavirus pandemic. Though the trigger for

each of these events was very different, each resulted in extreme hardships for U.S. households

and businesses that moved employment and inflation away from the Fed’s dual mandate. At the

In the 1970s and 1980s, money supply growth was seen as a key factor influencing economic activity and the

price level. As a result, the Full Employment and Balanced Growth Act of 1978, known as the Humphrey-Hawkins

Act, required the Federal Reserve to set one-year target ranges for money supply growth and to report to Congress

on the behavior of the money supply relative to those target ranges. However, because the historical relationships

among these variables were not stable, the FOMC gradually shifted away from a focus on the monetary aggregates

as a key guide for monetary policy over time. By the mid-1990s, the FOMC increasingly focused on adjusting a

target for the level of short-term interest rates with the goal of influencing overall financial conditions in a way that

would attain the Committee’s dual mandate.

Many textbooks present the limited-reserves framework where the Fed uses OMOs to achieve a desired level of

the money supply to move market interest rates to the FOMC’s target and ultimately steer the economy toward the

Committee’s dual mandate. Today, in an ample-reserves regime, the Fed must ensure the quantity of reserves is

ample, but targeting a particular the level of reserves (or money supply) is not the focus for policy implementation.

onset of each of these events, the FOMC lowered the target range for the federal funds rate to 0

to 25 basis points. It also used “forward guidance” about the likely future setting of the policy

rate and announced balance-sheet programs where it purchased sizable quantities of government

securities.

To ensure this stance of policy was transmitted through the economy, the Fed

leaned on many tools-- some standard tools used in different ways and other, nontraditional tools

that are reserved for unusual and exigent circumstances and need the approval of the Secretary of

the Treasury.

These tools tend to be used to support the smooth functioning of financial

markets, help foster accommodative financial conditions or, more directly, support the flow of

credit to households, businesses, and communities.

As these tools were used, reserves in the banking system increased. For example, during

both crises, the Fed conducted large-scale asset purchases to either deliberately push down

longer-term interest rates (the motive during the 2007-2009 financial crisis and subsequent

recession) or aid market functioning and help foster accommodative financial conditions (the

motive during the COVID-19 pandemic). As a traditional open market operation, when the Fed

purchases securities it pays for these securities by adding reserves to the banking sector. The Fed

When central banks provide forward guidance, individuals and businesses will use this information in making

decisions about spending and investments. Thus, forward guidance about future policy can influence financial and

economic conditions today. A timeline of the FOMC’s setting of the policy rate and use of forward guidance is

found here:

https://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/timeline-forward-guidance-about-the-federal-funds-rate.htm

In an emergency, the Federal Reserve has the power to provide liquidity to depository institutions using standard,

traditional tools, like open market operations and discount window lending. Under section 13(3) of the Federal

Reserve Act, the U.S. central bank also has authority to provide liquidity to nondepository institutions in “unusual

and exigent circumstances.” Since the passage of the Dodd-Frank Act in 2010, the Board's authority to engage in

emergency lending has been limited to programs and facilities with "broad-based eligibility" that have been

established with the approval of the Secretary of the Treasury. For a detailed discussion of the Federal Reserve's

response to the 2007-2009 financial crisis see:

https://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/bst_crisisresponse.htm

Similarity, the extensive measures taken by the Fed during the COVID-19 pandemic are found here:

https://www.federalreserve.gov/covid-19.htm

See Ihrig, Weinbach, and Wolla (2020) for a discussion of the Fed’s early monetary policy response to the

COVID-19 shock.

also made adjustments to existing lending facilities and introduced new, emergency lending

facilities to help provide short-term liquidity to banks and other financial institutions.

For

example, the Fed expanded its currency swap program where it loans dollars to foreign central

banks to alleviate dollar funding stresses abroad. It also introduced the Primary Dealer Credit

Facility during both stress events, which provided overnight loans to primary dealers and helped

foster improved conditions in financial markets. As these counterparties use the Fed’s tools, the

lending boosts reserves in the banking system.

In the 2007-2009 financial crisis and subsequent recession, the Fed’s measures resulted in

reserve balances rising from their pre-crisis $20 billion level to about $2.7 trillion at their peak in

October 2014; it was during this time that the Fed had to abandon the limited-reserves regime.

In 2020, in response to the COVID shock, reserve balances rose from $1.6 trillion in early March

to $3.3 trillion in mid-May. This latter pace of securities purchases had never been seen before,

and the level of reserves that resulted from it was about a 35 percent share of GDP, a share that

had not been recorded since World War II.

In terms of our supply-demand diagram, figure 2, when faced with these shocks, the

Fed’s actions shift the supply curve far to the right. Some have termed the level of reserves at

these times as abundant or super abundant. Since the supply curve remains on the flat portion of

the demand curve, the ample-reserve regime remains in place. The administered rates do their

job to keep short-term interest rates near zero. Then the Fed’s other tools, which are introduced

Section 13.3 of the Federal Reserve Act lays out actions the Fed can take in unusual and existent circumstances.

And, the Dodd-Frank Act of 2010 includes additional requirements, among them the approval of the Secretary of the

Treasury.

to help stabilize markets and more directly help credit flow through the economy, are able to

quickly be implemented.

Ultimately, when the economy improves and no longer needs support through these

additional measures, the Fed puts the nontraditional tools “back on the shelf” and takes actions to

slowly reduce the supply of reserves to a more efficient and effective level.

Between late 2014

and early 2020, for example, as the economy grew, the Fed began to lower the level of reserve

balances from their October 2014 peak in an action they termed “normalizing” the balance

sheet.

This same, slow lowering of reserve balances will most likely occur after the economy

recovers from the COVID-19 shock. But in both cases, the level of reserves will be such that the

Fed continues to implement policy with an ample level of reserves; that is, one where small

movements in the level of reserves do not affect the federal funds rate.

Ample-Reserves Regime is different than a Limited-Reserves Regime

The ample-reserves implementation regime described above should be reflected in the way the

topic is taught in the classroom, with aid from teaching materials. This regime is different than

the pre-2009, limited-reserves regime. This section highlights key differences in the two regimes,

which provides the background for understanding where some textbooks might be out of date.

The FOMC has made statements through the years that it wants, in the longer run, to hold no more securities than

necessary to implement monetary policy efficiently and effectively. Holding other parts of the Fed’s balance sheet

constant, an increase (decrease) in securities will increase (decrease) reserves. So a statement about “holding no

more securities than necessary” is also saying the Fed plans to hold no more reserves than necessary to implement

policy efficiently and effectively. More information about the Federal Reserve’s discussion of efficient and effective

is summarized at the following link:

https://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/policy-normalization-

discussions-communications-history.htm

Over the years the FOMC has released multiple statements related to policy normalization. A summary of these

communications is found here: https://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/policy-normalization.htm

Figure 7 presents the standard money market diagram under a limited-reserves regime

(left side) to the same model under the ample-reserves regime (right). The important differences

in how the Fed operates in each of these regimes is embedded in these diagrams. We also

summarize the differences in table 2.

Figure 7 – Graphical Comparison of Limited and Ample-Reserves Frameworks

A key difference across these diagrams is where the supply curve intersects the demand

curve. In the limited-reserves regime (left image), the supply curve intersects the demand curve

on the downward sloping part of the demand curve. This position implies the Fed supplies a

“limited” amount of reserves to the banking system. That is, it targets a particular supply of

reserves so that the market FFR hits the FOMC’s target. And, since relatively small shifts of the

supply curve to the right or left move the FFR rate higher and lower, respectively, the Fed has to

carefully monitor the level of reserves. In the ample-reserves regime (right image), the supply

curve intersects the demand curve on the flat portion of the demand curve. In this region, the Fed

has chosen to offer a sizable level of reserves to the banking system and, since small shifts of the

supply curve have little or no effect on the FFR rate, the level does not need to be monitored as

closely.

This difference in location of the supply curve has important implications for the tools the

Fed uses for interest rate control. To solidify this point, let’s consider an expansionary monetary

policy action of lowering the policy rate. In the limited-reserves regime, the Fed would need to

purchase securities in the open market. This means the New York Fed Trading Desk would

purchase securities from primary dealers and pay for those securities by crediting the reserve

accounts of the bank used by the primary dealers. The banks, in turn, would credit the dealer’s

bank accounts. This open market purchase results in an increase in reserve balances (which then

boosts the money supply), and that shifts the supply curve to the right, resulting in a lower FFR.

This series of steps, which are quite abstract, can be difficult for students to follow.

In the ample regime, as shown in figure 6, the Fed no longer relies on OMOs as the

principal policy tool to target the policy rate in its day-to-day, normal operations because small

shifts in the supply of reserves have no impact on the FFR, by design. Instead, the Fed would

lower its administered rates, shifting the bottom of the demand curve down, which induces

market rates, including the FFR, to move in the same direction and by a similar amount. To be

clear, the lowering of the administered rates puts downward pressure on the federal funds rate

and other market rates by lowering the incentive to hold reserves at the Fed. The interest rates

are adjusting through arbitrage. Conceptually, these actions are less abstract – the Fed lowers the

administered rates it controls which encourages market rates, including the FFR, to follow.

A tool that was dropped in the transition from the old toolbox to the new toolbox is

reserve requirements. In the limited-reserves framework, the Fed used reserve requirement

ratios—the fraction of banks net transaction deposits that needed to be held in very safe, secure

assets like reserves—as an important tool for driving the demand for bank reserves, keeping the

downward sloping portion of that curve somewhat steady. In the ample-reserves framework,

banks hold excess reserves, making reserve requirements largely non-binding. Effective March

2020, the Federal Reserve announced that it was reducing reserve requirement ratios to zero. In

short, reserve requirements are now a non-operational tool.

Table 2 – A Comparison of the Limited and Ample Reserve Regimes

Limited-Reserves Regime

Ample-Reserves Regime

Level of Reserves

Limited; banks manage levels,

in part, to meet reserve

requirements

Ample; banks tend to have plenty of

reserves for all operational needs

Key policy tools

Open Market Operations

(OMO) Reserve Requirements

Interest on Reserves (IOR) is

primary tool

Overnight Reverse Repo Facility

(ON RRP rate) is supplemental tool.

Reserve

requirements

Reserve requirements are one

factor that cause banks to

demand reserves. Banks pay

attention to their level of

reserves relative to their reserve

requirement. Banks that are

short (long) of their requirement

can turn to the federal funds

market to borrow (lend) funds.

Because of a high level of reserves

in the banking system, most banks

hold excess reserves and so reserve

requirements are not a significant

factor in their decision-making. As

of March 2020, reserve requirement

ratios were set to zero.

Supporting policy

tools

Discount window

Open market operations

Discount window

Graphing: Where

Supply intersects

Demand

Supply intersects demand on the

steep, downward sloping, part

of the demand curve.

Supply intersects demand on the flat

part of the demand curve.

Graphing: Change

in Policy Rate

The Fed affects the FFR by

using OMOs to shift the supply

curve left or right.

The Fed affects the FFR by raising

or lowering the IOR and ON RRP

rates to shift the flat portion of the

demand curve up or down.

Example: Key

tools’ action to

implement

expansionary

monetary policy

FOMC lowers the FFR target.

Fed purchases U.S. Treasury

Securities using open market

operations to increase the

supply of reserves.

FOMC lowers the FFR target range.

The Fed lowers its administered

rates.

Note that we are focusing this discussion on the limited-reserves regime that the Fed had in place prior to 2008, as

this is the focus of textbooks’ discussion of the limited-reserves regime. If the Fed chose to implement policy in a

limited-reserves regime from now on, IOR and the ON RRP facility would be available tools. However, in 2019,

the Fed stated that it intends to implement policy using an ample-reserves regime in the longer-run.

What is the State of Teaching Materials?

Given the above discussion of the ample-reserves implementation framework and how that

differs from the pre-2009 limited-reserves regime, we are now set to review teaching materials

for the key concepts they cover. Our analysis adds to the rich literature analyzing the textbook

treatment of topics and concepts. Several studies focus on the treatment of specific content, such

as sunk costs (Colander, 2004), consumption possibility frontiers (Olson, 1997), diminishing

marginal utility (Dittmer, 2005), public choice and government failure (Fike and Gwartney,

2015), international economics (Lee, 1992), consumer choice (Holmgren, 2017),

entrepreneurship (Kent, 1989), perfectly competitive markets (Hill and Myatt, 20017), the

financial crisis (Madsen, 2013), and the GDP expenditures equation (Wolla, 2018). Other authors

have focused on the degree of consensus in the textbook coverage of content. Stiglitz (1988)

found textbooks to be clones of Samuelson’s and suggested market forces had led to

standardization. Colander (2003) discussed the potential forces that have led to textbook

convergence. Peter-Wim Zuidhof (2014) wrote about the shift from the Samuelsonian approach

to one that emphasized core concepts and encouraged students to “think like an economist.”

Walstad, Watts, and Bosshardt (1998) found a “surprising degree of consensus” among textbook

content but criticized textbook length and inadequate coverage of certain topics. We hope to add

to this body of work in this assessment of textbook coverage of how the Fed implements

monetary policy in ordinary times.

To assess whether the ample-reserves regime is reflected in economics classrooms, we

examine three aspects of the economics curriculum. First, we review six prominent principles of

economics textbooks for their coverage of the topic. Because textbooks both guide and reflect

instruction, they have a big influence on student learning outcomes. Next, we examine the

Voluntary National Content Standards (VNCS) in Economics, which serves as a guide to high

school textbook authors and curriculum developers. In addition, the VNCS in Economics serves

as a model for many committees that design state and district-level content standards. Finally, we

examine the AP Macroeconomics Course and Exam Description, which is used by teachers to

design their syllabi – which must be approved by the College Board in order to teach a

sanctioned AP course. These guidelines determine the specific content that AP Macro teachers

are expected to cover and reflect what will be assessed on the AP Macroeconomics exam.

Principles of Economics Textbooks

We focus our examination on prominent principles of economics textbooks for their coverage of

the Fed’s implementation of monetary policy. We limited our search to textbooks that have

publications dates of at least 2020. These include industry-leading textbooks, major publishers,

and familiar authors: Case, Fair, and Oster (2020), Hubbard and O’Brien (2021), Mankiw

(2021), Mateer and Coppock (2021), McConnell, Brue, and Flynn (2021), and Stevenson and

Wolfers (2020). We chose principles-level books because these classes have the largest

enrollment, and because these are often students’ first, and sometimes last, exposure to

economics. In fact, most of the 40 percent of undergraduate students who take an introductory

economics course will never take another economics course (Sigfried, 2000; Sigfried and

Walstad, 2014), so it is important that their exposure to this content reflects current practices.

More generally, all students should expect to be taught material that accurately reflects current

practices.

In evaluating these textbooks’ treatment of monetary policy implementation we use a

systematic approach where we allocate points to key concepts that should and should not be

covered in the Fed’s current regime. We focus the evaluation in three areas: information related

to the Fed’s policy rate, concepts associated with the Fed’s policy tools used for implementation,

and the discussion of an interest rate adjustment. These concepts are reported in the appendix,

table A1. If all textbooks covered a give concept, we excluded it from the scoring. For example,

all textbooks mentioned IOR is a tool of monetary policy implementation. So, we do not include

this fact in the scoring metric. Instead our scoring metric focuses on concepts that varied across

the textbooks.

We assign a positive point to a concept that is consistent with an ample-reserve regime.

And, we give a negative point to a concept that is covered and out of date because it reflects

features of a limited-reserves regime. Some books blend correct information using the current

regime with outdated information associated with past implementation practices, so we assign a

positive point for each of the concepts that the book accurately covers and subtract a point for

each of the concepts that inaccurately portray the current regime. In total, we evaluate the

textbooks on 15 different concepts. A textbook that accurately covers all the concepts will

receive a score of +12. A textbook that totally misses the mark will have a score of -3.

Figure 8 reports the overall ratings of the six textbooks in our sample. The textbooks’

total scores range from -2 to +6. The scores on each of the concepts are reported in the

appendix, table A2. There are three textbooks with negative scores. These textbooks are those

with the most room for improvement in their content coverage of the Fed’s current and long-run

ample-reserves implementation regime. The other three textbooks have positive ratings,

suggesting that their material more accurately discusses the Fed’s current implementation

regime. Of course, none of these textbooks received the highest score, suggesting that these

latter textbooks have areas for improvement in their content as well.

Figure 8 – Scoring Principle Textbooks for Content on Monetary Policy Implementation

Those textbooks with the lowest scores tended to have their discussion most consistent

with the Fed’s pre-2009 implementation framework. This methodology is evident in their

presentation of the Fed’s policy tools. In particular, most of these books emphasize OMO as the

tool most often used to move market interest rates. In particular, Mateer and Coppock, state

“Expansionary monetary policy occurs when a central bank acts to increase the money supply in

an effort to stimulate the economy, and it typically expands the money supply through open

market purchases: it buys bonds” (p.1003). Mankiw notes that “open market operations are the

tool of monetary policy that the Fed uses most often” (p. 603). McConnell, Brue, and Flynn

(date) state “open-market operations are the most important of the four monetary policy tools”

(p. 714). All three textbooks include discussion and figures that show the Fed increasing the

money supply to provide monetary policy accommodation; this story and the associated figures

are grounded in the limited-reserves regime.

Our recommendation is that these authors update

their text to the Fed’s current operating regime, where OMO is not the principal tool.

These books largely neglect the Fed’s current, ample reserves, tools. None of these

textbooks characterize IOR as the primary tool of policy implementation, nor discuss how it is a

reservation rate and works through arbitrage to help move the federal funds rate into the

FOMC’s target range. These textbooks’ discussion of IOR focuses on the policy tool as a means

for influencing banks’ decisions about lending and how this affects the money multiplier and

money supply.

Though this connection is valid, it complicates the discussion and could

encourage the reader to think that the Fed thinks about implementing policy in terms of monetary

quantities instead of interest rates. Our recommendation is that these textbooks adjust their

discussions to spend more time on IOR, addressing how it influences market rates, through the

key economic concepts as well as illustrating policy accommodation using IOR (instead of

OMOs). Adjusting their graphical presentation to something like figure 2 will emphasize that the

lower administered rates directly reduce market interest rates. Then the existing textbook

discussions can continue, showing lower market rates spur investment and aggregate demand. In

addition, these textbooks do not mention the ON RRP facility nor that OMOs are a tool to keep

Matter and Coppock figure 31.1 (p. 1004) and Mankiw figure 3 (p. 726) examine the effect of the Fed buying

bonds on the money supply and how that translates into the economy. McConnell et al. Figure 36.3 (p. 720) show

an increase in the money supply, though it does not explicitly note the Fed action that boosted the supply.

For example, McConnell, Brue, and Flynn state “The Fed has, however, shown an eagerness in recent years to

alter the rate of interest on excess reserves (IOER) as a way of managing bank reserves and the supply of money”

(p.714). Mankiw (604) says, “The higher the interest rate on reserves, the more reserves banks will choose to hold.

Thus, an increase in the interest rate on reserves will tend to increase the reserve ratio, lower the money multiplier,

and lower the money supply” (p. 604). Mateer and Coppock say, “This historic change in policy means that banks

now have less incentive to loan out each dollar above the required reserve threshold. The Fed put this policy in place

to reduce the opportunity cost of excess reserves. The increase in excess reserves means that the money multiplier is

much smaller than our earlier analysis implied. When banks hold more dollars on reserve, fewer are loaned out and

multiplied throughout the economy” (p.995).

reserves ample from now on. These two additional concepts can be added to the discussion to

round out the Fed’s current implementation framework.

Turning to the textbooks with positive scores, these books more accurately discuss how

the Fed’s policy tools transmit the FOMC’s target to market interest rates. Each emphasizes that

IOR is the primary tool of the Fed. And, each explains that IOR works through arbitrage or is a

reservation rate for market interest rates. Two of the three also cover the ON RRP facility and

how its rate acts as a supplemental tool. In these textbooks, the discussion of how the Fed

ensures the policy target transmits to market rates is straightforward: increases (decreases) in the

Fed’s administered rates move market interest rates up (down).

Based on our assessment, Stevenson and Wolfers—the newest book on the market (first

edition, 2020) —is most accurate in its description of the ample-reserves framework. Stevenson

and Wolfers focus on the Fed’s use of its administered rates to transmit the FOMC’s target to the

federal funds rate. The order in which they introduce the monetary tools is telling. While nearly

all books start their discussions with open market operations and make mention of interest on

reserves last (as the fourth tool)—consistent with the idea that IOR is simply an extension of the

old framework (not an entirely new framework) —Stevenson and Wolfers introduce IOR first

and open market operations last, even stating that OMO is “really more of history lesson” (p.

884).

They describe IOR as the Fed’s primary tool, ON RRP rate as a supplementary tool, and

they are the only book in the set that describes the discount rate’s role in setting an effective

ceiling for the federal funds rate. To round out the discussion of the current regime, we

OMOs have been used quite often in 2019 and 2020 as the Fed addressed different stresses. The authors might

consider adjusting their words about OMOs being a historical lesson.

recommend the textbook adds some discussion about what it means for the Fed work operate

with ample reserves—what is the appropriate level and how OMOs are used to maintain ample.

Case, Fair, and Oster cover both the limited and ample reserve regimes. They clearly

segment their discussion of the Fed’s tools as “tools prior to 2008” then “expanding Fed

activities beginning in 2008” and then “tools after 2008.” In doing so, they provide clear

segmentation of the key tools used in the past versus today.

We recommend that they add to

their discussion of today’s regime how IOR acts as a reservation rate and a discussion how the

Fed’s other administered rates, ON RRP rate and discount rate, influence the federal funds rate.

Finally, Hubbard and O’Brien can improve their discussion and coverage of IOR. For

example, in our scoring, the authors received a point for saying “beginning in 2008, the Fed

began paying banks interest on their reserve holds. The interest rate that the Fed pays on reserves

sets a floor for the federal funds rate” (p.880).

But, they lost points for emphasizing OMO over

IOR when discussing the Fed’s tools in their section on monetary policy tools (p. 853-855) and

in their chapter summary (p. 866). We recommend that they include IOR in their graphical

analysis. In addition, like the previous two textbooks, their material can be enhanced by adding a

discussion of what it means for the Fed to operate with ample reserves.

Our findings about the treatment of the monetary policy tools across the textbooks is

consistent with Colander’s (2003) suggestion that existing textbooks resist change. Most of the

textbooks we examined in this study are several editions into publication. It seems that the

newest tool (IOR) is simply added as an extension to the old framework which, for many of these

For example, they refer to the limited-reserves tools in the past tense “traditionally the Fed had three tools

available to it to control the interest rate via changing the money supply: open market operations, changing the

reserve requirement ratio, and changing the discount rate that banks pay to the Fed to borrow reserves” (p. 526).

We award Hubbard and O’Brien a point for saying IOR is the primary tool, though this is only implied by the text

on page 880. This point could be brought out more forcefully in their next edition.

books, has persisted through several editions. The newest book (first edition in 2020) described

the new framework as a different model, not an extension of the old one. In our estimation,

relieved of the baggage of previous editions, the authors were free to describe how monetary

policy is implemented now, rather than trying to adapt an existing model and text that has deep

roots in past editions and the Fed’s old policy implementation framework.

Standards and Guidelines

Turning to the standards and guidelines for economic instruction, we find they need updating.

Similar to the textbooks that received negative scores, the limited-reserves regime is deeply

entrenched in historical concepts. However, worse than the textbooks, these materials do not

even mention the Fed’s primary tool, IOR. We believe it is a priority to update these materials

because many textbooks and teachers lean on these standards and guidelines.

The Voluntary National Content Standards (VNCS) in Economics, includes 20 broad economics

content standards with specific benchmarks (expected achievement levels) for grades 4, 8, and

12 for each standard. The VNCS are not government mandates. Rather they are a resource for

states, local school districts, individual schools, and for teachers. MacDonald and Siegfried

(2012), contributors to the most recent, 2010 revision, tout the influential effect of the standards,

including that several high school textbooks incorporate the standards and states often use VNCS

as a starting point in developing their curriculums and state-level standards. And, in addition,

many commercial and non-profit producers of economics classroom resources align their

education resources with these standards.

Due to their influence on what is taught in the classroom, it is important that the

benchmarks that describe the Fed’s current implementation of monetary policy reflect current

practice. The current benchmarks state that the Federal Reserve System’s “major monetary

policy tool is open market purchases and sales of government securities” and that that the

Federal Reserve’s target for the federal funds rate is “largely reached by buying and selling

existing government securities.” (Council for Economic Education, 2010). Other benchmarks are

also outdated.

Siegfried and Meszaros (1998) report that one of the five criteria the authors used in

creating the VNCS was that the standards should be correct and reflect the best scholarship

within the discipline. We agree. Our prosed changes can be found in table 3.

Table 3: Proposed Changes to Voluntary National Content Standards

Standard,

Benchmark

Current Benchmark

Proposed

Comment

Standard

20,

Benchmark

Monetary policies are

decisions by the Federal

Reserve System that

lead to changes in the

supply of money, short-

term interest rates, and

the availability of

credit. Changes in the

growth rate of the

money supply can

influence overall levels

of spending,

employment, and prices

in the economy by

inducing changes in the

levels of personal and

business investment

spending.

Monetary policy

decisions by the

Federal Reserve lead to

changes in interest

rates and broader

financial conditions.

These changes

influence overall levels

of spending,

employment, and

prices in the economy

by inducing changes in

the levels of personal

and business savings

and investment

spending.

In the Federal Reserve’s

current implementation

regime, the focus should be

on how the Fed’s setting of

its policy tools directly

influence short-term interest

rates and broader financial

conditions, which influence

employment and prices.

Standard

20,

Benchmark

The Federal Reserve

System’s major

monetary policy tool is

open market purchases

or sales of government

securities, which affects

the money supply and

short-term interest rates.

The Federal Reserve’s

major monetary policy

tool is interest on

reserves. Changes in

this rate, along with the

Fed’s other

administered rates,

directly affect short-

1. The key tool in the

Federal Reserve’s

current implementation

regime is its

administered interest

rates, not open market

operations.

Other policy tools used

by the Federal Reserve

System include making

loans to banks (and

charging a rate of

interest called the

discount rate). In

emergency situations,

the Federal Reserve

may make loans to

other institutions. The

Federal Reserve can

also influence monetary

conditions by changing

depository institutions’

reserve requirements.

term market interest

rates. The other

administered rates

include overnight

reverse repurchase

agreement (ON RRP)

rate (which sets a floor

for the federal funds

rate), and the discount

rate (which helps set a

ceiling for the federal

funds rate.

In normal times, open

market operations are

used to ensure reserves

remain ample.

At times, the Federal

Reserve uses forward

guidance about the

expected path of the

federal funds target

range over the next

several months or

years.

In emergency

situations, , the Federal

Reserve can use the

full set of its tools to

stabilize financial

markets, help put

downward pressure on

longer-term interest

rates, and keep credit

flowing. Most of these

tools are subject to

prior approval of the

Secretary of the

Treasury.

2. Reserve requirements

were never a significant

tool in the current

implementation regime

and have been

inoperative since March

2020.

3. OMOs are used in

normal times to maintain

ample reserves or, in

crisis events, to mitigate

stresses in financial

markets and help put

downward pressure on

longer-term interest

rates.

4. In recent years, the

FOMC has used forward

guidance on the policy

target range when the

target range has been

near zero.

5. As a result of Dodd-

Frank, the Fed cannot

directly lend to any

individual institution.

All lending has to be

“broad based” and

approved by the

Secretary of the

Treasury.

Standard

20,

The Federal Reserve

targets the level of the

federal funds rate, a

The Federal Reserve

targets the level of the

federal funds rate, a

As with benchmark #8, the

text needs to be updated to

Benchmark

short-term rate that

banks charge one

another for the use of

excess funds. This

target is largely reached

by buying and selling

existing government

securities.

short-term rate that

banks charge one

another for the

overnight use of funds.

This target is largely

reached by adjusting

the rate of interest on

reserves.

reflect the current “major”

tool used by the Fed.

Standard

20,

Benchmark

The Federal Reserve

tends to increase

interest rate targets

when it feels the

economy is growing too

rapidly and/or the

inflation rate is

accelerating. It tends to

lower rate targets when

it wants to stimulate the

short-term growth of

the economy.

The Federal Reserve

tends to increase its

target for the policy

interest rate when it

judges there are no

employment shortfalls

and average inflation is

too high.

It tends to lower its

interest rate target

when there are

shortfalls in

employment or

average inflation is too

low.

Update the language to

reflect the FOMC’s 2020

consensus statement on

Longer-Run Goals and

Monetary Policy Strategy.

Turning to the Advanced Placement (AP) Macroeconomics Course and Exam

Description, we find its guidelines are similarly outdated. The College Board designs the AP

Macroeconomics course to reflect the content of an introductory college-level macroeconomics

course. In 2019, 5,595 schools offered AP Macroeconomics courses and 146,091 students took

an AP Macroeconomics class.

The 2019 AP Macroeconomics Course and Exam Description

states “the tools of monetary policy include open market operations, the required reserve ratio,

and the discount rate. The most frequently-used monetary policy tool is open market operations.”

Unlike the college classroom, AP Macroeconomics teachers cannot stray too far from the

prescribed curriculum—they must submit a syllabus and receive approval from the College

Based on “Program Summary Report,” published by the College Board, 2019, available here: https://secure-

media.collegeboard.org/digitalServices/pdf/research/2019/Program-Summary-Report-2019.pdf

Board before being approved to teach the course. In other words, the syllabus must align with the

AP curriculum. Further, AP teachers spend much of their time preparing students for the AP

exam, which assesses student understanding of the AP Macroeconomics curriculum, including

monetary policy implementation. As such, outdated concepts in the curriculum are directly

reflected in the instruction by teachers and understanding by students. Our proposed changes can

be found in table 4.

Table 4: Proposed Changes to AP Macroeconomics Course and Exam Description

Current Guidelines

Proposed

Comment

POL-

1.D.1

Central banks implement

monetary policies to

achieve macroeconomic

goals, such as price

stability.

Central banks implement

monetary policies to

achieve macroeconomic

goals such as maximum

employment and price

stability.

Given the Fed’s

congressional dual

mandate, one should add

maximum employment to

the guideline

POL-

1.D.2

The tools of monetary

policy include open-market

operations, the required

reserve ratio, and the

discount rate. The most

frequently used monetary

policy tool is open-market

operations.

The tools of monetary

policy implementation

include the central bank's

administered interest rates

(interest on reserves, ON

RRP rate, and the discount

rate) as well as open

market operations.

The key policy tool is

interest on reserves.

Redirect teaching to the

Fed’s administered rates.

Drop mention of reserve

requirements, which have

been set to zero since

March 2020.

Should consider adding the

point that interest on

reserves is the primary

tool.

POL-

1.D.3

When the central bank

conducts an open-market

purchase (sale), reserves

increase (decrease), thereby

increasing (decreasing) the

monetary base.

When the central bank

raises (lowers) its

administered rates, market

interest rates increase

(decrease).

Redirect teaching to the

key policy tool.

POL-

1.D.4

The effect of an open-

market purchase (sale) on

the money supply is greater

than the effect on the

monetary base because of

the money multiplier.

Drop

This issue does not need to

be discussed in the current

framework.

POL-

1.D.5

Many central banks carry

out policy to hit a target

range for an overnight

interbank lending rate. (In

the United States, this is

the federal funds rate.)

No Change

POL-

1.D.6

Central banks can

influence the nominal

interest rate in the short run

by changing the money

supply, which in turn will

affect investment and

consumption. [See also EK

MKT-5.G.2 for the

influence on net capital

inflows.]

Central banks can

influence market interest

rates by adjusting their

administered interest rates,

which transmit to overall

financial market

conditions and ultimately

affect investment and

consumption.

Adjusted the text to focus

on the Fed’s current

implementation regime,

where the policy tools

directly influence short-

term interest rates and

broader financial

conditions

POL-

1.D.7

Expansionary or

contractionary monetary

policies are used to restore

full employment when the

economy is in a negative

(i.e., recessionary) or

positive (i.e., inflationary)

output gap.

The Federal Reserve tends

to increase its interest rate

target when it feels there

are no employment

shortfalls and average

inflation is too high.

It tends to lower its

interest rate target when

there are shortfalls in

employment and or

average inflation is too

low.

First, the guideline should

include the Congressional

dual mandate of maximum

employment and price

stability. Second, the

language is updated to be

consistent with the

FOMC’s 2020 consensus

statement on Longer-Run

Goals and Monetary Policy

Strategy.

POL-

1.D.8

Monetary policy can

influence aggregate

demand, real output, the

price level, and interest

rates. [See also EK MKT-

5.E.3 for the effect on

exchange rates.]

Monetary policy can

influence interest rates,

aggregate demand, real

output and the price level.

Adjust the list to put

interest rates first, as this is

the link from the FOMC’s

target range to financial

markets.

POL-

1.D.9

A money market model

and/or the AD–AS model

are used to demonstrate the

short-run effects of

monetary policy.

No Change

There should be a change

in the way these models

depict a change in Fed

policy. The standard

money market model

should be adapted to reflect

the ample-reserves

framework (see figure 2).

In particular, the model

should start with changes

in the Fed’s administered

rates that affect market

interest rates, which will

ultimately affect

investment and AD-AS.

This linkage does not start

from that OMOs affect the

supply of money.

POL-

1.E.1

In reality, there are lags to

monetary policy caused by

the time it takes to

recognize a problem in the

economy and the time it

takes the economy to adjust

to the policy action.

No Change

Updating the VNCS will ensure that this content is reflected in state and local standards

and included in materials designed by organizations and firms that prepare classroom materials.

Updating the AP Macroeconomics curriculum and exam creates incentives for teachers to update

their instruction, and for students to be taught the correct information. These high school courses

provide some students with the only economics course they will ever take, and for others the

classes provide foundational information as they move to college courses. In both cases, it’s

important that the content reflects current practice. So why are these standards and guidelines out

of date? The next subsection looks at this curriculum lag.

The Curriculum Lag

Given that the Fed has been implementing monetary policy with ample reserves for about a

decade, why are academic materials not up to date? Part of this curriculum lag may reflect the

fact that the Fed did not formally announce that it will continue in this framework over the

longer run until January 2019. So, textbook authors, standards, and guidelines might have been

waiting for a formal announcement from the Fed that it was not returning to the limited-reserves

regime. However, the Fed had signaled it was leaning toward adopting this framework for some

time, and the Fed had been actively using the current policy tools since raising the federal funds

rate target above the effective lower bound in December 2015.

Another reason for the slow response to update economic materials may reflect the fact

that there are not a lot of educational materials for educators to lean on for guidance in making

accurate changes. Around the time of lifting the policy rate from near zero (fall, 2015), the

Journal of Economic Perspectives published “Rewriting Monetary Policy 101: What's the Fed's

Preferred Post-Crisis Approach to Raising Interest Rates?” (Ihrig, Meade & Weinbach). Though

a widely-read generalist journal, it is not directly targeted to economic educational outlets.

Stepping forward, in 2019, the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis published “A New Frontier:

Monetary Policy with Ample Reserves” (Wolla); this resource is a short piece that introduced the

reader to IOR and the ON RRP rates in the ample-reserves regime, in its Page One Economics

series, a publication written for economic educators. This educational piece was followed by

“The Fed’s New Policy Tools,” (Ihrig and Wolla) in August 2020, also part of the Page One

Economics series, which provides a discussion of all the policy tools used in the ample-reserves

framework. As materials stand today, the most complete discussion of the concepts of policy

implementation is found in this paper.

We provide an overview of the framework and the

policy tools, we walk through the mechanics of how the Fed raises or lowers interest rates, and

we discuss how the framework works in normal times as well as periods of stress. In addition,

In 2020, many additional education resources were posted on the Federal Reserve System’s websites, including

“The Fed’s New Monetary Policy Tools” (Page One Economics, St. Louis Fed), “How Does the Fed Influence

Interest Rates Using Its New Tools” (Open Vault Blog, St. Louis Fed), and “Closing the Monetary Policy

Curriculum Gap: A Primer for Educators Making the Transition to Teaching the Fed’s Ample-Reserves Framework”

(FEDS Notes, Federal Reserve Board of Governors). Ihrig, Senyuz, and Weinbach (2020a) have a primer that

presents most of the key concepts of an ample regime. However, they do not walk through an interest rate

adjustment. Also, their discussion is quite detailed in some areas, making it a good resource for money and banking

courses that dive into more details than discussed in a principles textbook.

for those schooled in the limited-reserves regime, the comparison section helps to hit home how

existing tools are used differently (or not at all) as well as outlines the new tools.

Recommendations for Teachers, Professors, Curriculum Specialists, and Textbook Authors

The Fed stated it is using an ample-reserve regime now and over the longer run. It is time that

teaching materials are updated. In many ways, the Fed’s current ample-reserves framework is

easier for students to understand than the limited-reserves framework. For example, focusing on

how the Fed influences the federal funds rate with a limited supply of reserves, students used to

be required to understand how the New York Fed’s Trading Desk buying and selling of bonds in

the open market affected the supply of reserves. Students were introduced to technical details of

the operations and accounting concepts. While these details may seem like natural connections to

professors, they are often complex and abstract to introductory students—it’s no wonder

monetary policy was one of the least understood topics in large-scale assessments (Walstad et al,

2013).

At its most basic level, the ample-reserves framework requires students to know more

intuitive concepts. Once the student learns that the Fed uses its administered rates to steer the

federal funds rate, the intuition is straight forward. Students can easily grasp how IOR acts as a

reservation rate and arbitrage helps keep market interest rates near IOR. These two concepts are

discussed in other areas of economics as well. As such, we disagree with Hubbard and

O’Brien’s (2021) view that the ample-reserves framework is “a more complicated mechanism”

(p. 880).

Further, rather than tying monetary policy implementation to the textbook content of

money and banking and the money supply, we recommend focusing directly on the Fed’s ability

use these tools to influence the federal funds rate and other market interest rates. These are

demand-side tools that affect business investment and personal consumption decisions. One can

discuss monetary policy implementation at the introductory level in the context of aggregate

supply and demand. For example, expansionary monetary policy results in lower interest rates

that encourages spending and investment by consumers and firms. This additional spending

increases aggregate demand and employment, moving the Fed toward its maximum employment

and price stability goals.

Conclusion

The Fed has been implementing monetary policy in an ample-reserves regime for nearly a

decade. While several statements and articles discussing the current framework were published

by the Federal Reserve between 2009 and today, not many were provided for educators, and it

wasn’t until January of 2019 that the Fed formally announced that it would continue in the ample

reserves framework over the longer run. As such, it is not surprising to see the varied textbook

treatment of the topic.

We provided a detailed description of the ample-reserves framework using classroom-

friendly models and language, and we contrasted it with the limited-reserves framework. Then

we assessed the treatment of monetary policy implementation in six principles-level textbooks –

all by major publishers and popular authors. Specifically, we scored the textbooks on a total of

15 different concepts grouped into three areas – the policy rate, the policy tools, and interest rate

adjustment– assigning both positive and negative points for different concepts. We found half of

the textbooks with negative net scores and the other half with varying degrees of net positive

scores. We reviewed where the books hit the mark and provided recommendations for where

content improvements can be made. Finally, we assessed the Voluntary National Content

Standards in Economics and the AP Macroeconomics Course and Exam Description. In both

cases, updates are needed; we proposed specific updates to make these materials consistent with

the Fed’s current framework.

While the Fed’s current framework is not well represented in curriculum materials, we

hope that this article encourages and guides a shift away from content that focuses on the

limited-reserves framework that was used prior to 2009 and toward the ample-reserves

framework the Fed uses today and will do so from now on. This revision is especially important

at the principles-level because these classes have large enrollment and, for many students is their

first and last exposure to economics. As such, it is important that the content reflects current

practices. More generally, all students should expect to be taught material that is accurate and

reflects current practice.

Appendix – Textbook Scoring Metric

Table A1 provides the 15 specific concepts used in evaluating the principles textbooks. Each

concept that we deemed important to the ample-reserves framework received +1 point. Each

concept that was outdated received -1 point. A textbook that covered all the concepts correctly

would score +12; whereas, a textbook that covered all the material inaccurately would score – 3.

The concepts are grouped into three areas: information related to the Fed’s policy rate,

concepts associated with the Fed’s policy tools used for implementation, and the discussion of an

interest rate adjustment. Most of the points are given for explaining the correct policy tools and

how they work in the ample-reserves framework.

Table A1 – Scoring Metric

Awarded Points

Fed’s policy rate

FOMC determines the target range for FFR

Fed’s policy tools

IOR is the primary tool the Fed uses to adjust the FFR

IOR is a reservation rate

IOR works through arbitrage

ON RRP facility/rate is a supplementary tool for adjusting the FFR

The discount window/rate sets a ceiling on the FFR

Reserves are classified as ample

OMOs are used to ensure reserves remain ample (not to adjust FFR)

Because reserves are ample, reserve requirements are not a significant

tool

Uses some version of ample regime figure

OMO is the Fed’s primary tool for adjusting the FFR

-1

IOR is used to manage the level of reserves / supply of money

-1

Interest rate adjustment

The Fed adjusts the FFR by moving the administered rates (at least

IOR)

Uses some version of ample regime figure

Uses some version of limited regime figure

-1

Table A2 reports the scores for each of the six textbooks in our sample on each of the 15

concepts. The total score is reported at the bottom of the table.

Table A2 – Scoring details for each textbook

References

Bowles, S & Wendy C. (2020). "What Students Learn in Economics 101: Time for a Change."

Journal of Economic Literature, 58 (1): 176-214.

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. (September 17, 2014), " Federal Reserve

issues FOMC statement on policy normalization principles and plans." Press

release; https://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/pressreleases/monetary20140917c.htm

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. (September 16, 2014), “Policy

Normalization Principles and Plans”

https://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/files/FOMC_PolicyNormalization.pdf

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. (March 18, 2015), “Policy Normalization

Principles and Plans, Addendum to the Policy Normalization Principles and Plans”

https://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/files/FOMC_PolicyNormalization.pdf

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. (January 30, 2019). "Statement Regarding

Monetary Policy Implementation and Balance Sheet Normalization." Press release;

https://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/pressreleases/monetary20190130c.htm

Case, K., Fair, R., Oster, S., (2020). Principles of economics (12th ed.). New York, NY: Pearson.

Colander, David. 2003. “Caveat Lector: Living with the 15% Rule.” Middlebury College

Discussion Paper 03-26.

Colander, D. (2004). On the treatment of fixed and sunk costs in the principles textbooks.

Journal of Economic Education 35(4), 360-364.

Council for Economic Education. (2010). “National Voluntary National Content Standards in

Economics,” second edition. https://www.councilforeconed.org/wp-

content/uploads/2012/03/voluntary-national-content-standards-2010.pdf

Dittmer, T. (2005). Diminishing Marginal Utility in Economics Textbooks, The Journal of

Economic Education, 36:4, 391-399, DOI: 10.3200/JECE.36.4.391-399

Rosemarie Fike & James Gwartney (2015) Public Choice, Market Failure, and Government

Failure in Principles Textbooks, The Journal of Economic Education, 46:2, 207-218, DOI:

10.1080/00220485.2014.1002962

Holmgren, M. (2017). From continuous to discrete: An alternative approach to teaching

consumer choice. Journal of Economics Teaching 2(1), 1-13.

Hubbard, B., & O’Brien, A. (2021). Economics (6th ed.). New York, NY: Pearson.

MacDonald, R. A., & Siegfried, J. J. (2012). Refreshing the voluntary national content standards

in economics. The Journal of Economic Education, 43(3), 308-314.

Ihrig, J. E., Meade, E. E., & Weinbach, G. C. (2015). Rewriting Monetary Policy 101: What's the

Fed's Preferred Post-Crisis Approach to Raising Interest Rates?. Journal of Economic

Perspectives, 29(4), 177-98.

Ihrig, Jane, Zeynep Senyuz, and Gretchen C. Weinbach (2020a). 'The Fed's 'Ample-Reserves'

Approach to Implementing Monetary Policy,' Finance and Economics Discussion Series 2020-

022. Washington: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System,

https://doi.org/10.17016/FEDS.2020.022.

Ihrig, Jane, Zeynep Senyuz, and Gretchen C. Weinbach (2020b). "Implementing Monetary

Policy in an "Ample-Reserves" Regime: Maintaining an Ample Quantity of Reserves (Note 2 of

3)," FEDS Notes. Washington: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, August 28,

2020, https://doi.org/10.17016/2380-7172.2553.

Ihrig, J., Weinbach, G. C., & Wolla, S. A. (2020). COVID-19’s Effects on the Economy and the

Fed’s Response. Page One Economics®.

Ihrig, J., & Wolla, S. A. (2020). The Fed’s New Monetary Policy Tools. Page One Economics®.

Kent, C. A. (1989). The treatment of entrepreneurship in principles of economics textbooks.

Journal of Economic Education 20(2), 153-164.

Lee, D. Y. (1992). Internationalizing the principles of economics course: A survey of textbooks.

Journal of Economic Education 23(1), 79-88.

Poul Thøis Madsen (2013) The Financial Crisis and Principles of Economics Textbooks, The

Journal of Economic Education, 44:3, 197-216, DOI: 10.1080/00220485.2013.795450

Mankiw, N Gregory. 2020. "Reflections of a Textbook Author." Journal of Economic

Literature, 58 (1): 215-28.

Mankiw, N. Gregory. 2016. “Response: The Tradeoff between Nuance and Clarity.” Eastern

Economic Journal 42 (2): 169–70.

Mankiw, N. G. (2021). Principles of economics (8th ed.). Boston, MA: Cengage Learning.

Mateer, D., & Coppock, L. (2021). Principles of macroeconomics (2nd ed.). New York, NY:

W.W. Norton & Company.

McConnell, C., Brue, S., Flynn, S. (2021). Economics: principles, problems, and policies (21st

ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Education.

Andre R. Neveu (2020) Reimagining the introductory material in teaching money creation and

monetary policy, The Journal of Economic Education, DOI: 10.1080/00220485.2020.1804505

Olson, T. L. (1997). Construction of consumption possibility frontiers in principles textbooks.

Journal of Economic Education 28(1), 76-81.

Roderick Hill & Anthony Myatt (2007) Overemphasis on Perfectly Competitive Markets in

Microeconomics Principles Textbooks, The Journal of Economic Education, 38:1, 58-76, DOI:

10.3200/JECE.38.1.58-77

Siegfried, J. J., & Walstad, W. B. (2014). Undergraduate coursework in economics: A survey

perspective. The Journal of Economic Education, 45(2), 147-158.

Siegfried, John J. “How Many College Students Are Exposed to Economics.” Journal of

Economic Education, Spring 2000, 31(2), pp. 202–04.

Siegfried, J. J., & Meszaros, B. T. (1998). Voluntary economics content standards for America's

schools: Rationale and development. The Journal of Economic Education, 29(2), 139-149.

Stevenson, B., & Wolfers, J. (2020). Principles of Economics (1st ed.). New York, NY: Worth

Publishers.

Stiglitz, J. E. (1988). On the market for principles of economics textbooks: Innovation and

product differentiation. Journal of Economic Education 19(2), 171- 177.

Walstad, W. B., Watts, M., & Bosshardt, B. (1998). The principles of economics textbook:

History, content, and use. In W. B. Walstad & P. Saunders (Eds.) Teaching Undergraduate

Economics: A Handbook for Instructors. Boston, MA: Irwin/McGraw-Hill.

Walstad, William B., Ken Rebeck, and Roger B. Butters. 2013. Test of Economic Literacy:

Examiner’s Manual. 4th ed. New York, NY: Council for Economic Education.

Wolla, S. (2018). “The Textbook Treatment of Net Exports: Will the Uninformed Reader

Understand?” Journal of Economics Teaching, 3(2), pp. 233-253, 2018.

Wolla, S. A., (2019). "A New Frontier: Monetary Policy with Ample Reserves," Page One

Economics®, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, May 2019.

Zuidhof, P. W. (2014). Thinking like an economist: The neoliberal politics of the economics

textbook. Review of Social Economy 72(2), 157-185.