Economics is often presented as the quintessential example of
what is wrong with undergraduate teaching at US institution.  The
discipline is often one of the lowest ranked on undergraduate student
ratings, and many argue that the lack of cooperative learning is the
culprit. Although time brings change and students favor non-lecture
methods, the lecture/chalk and talk approach tends to dominate the
classroom at the undergraduate level.  Cooperative learning groups are a
worthy complement to the traditional economic classroom setting. This
paper reports on one such experiment in an Intermediate Macroeconomic
course setting.  Students are divided into groups (4-5 per group) and
are given an economic issue (e.g., unemployment, inflation, economic
growth...) presented from three perspectives (conservative, liberal,
radical).  Students are also given a pre-screening survey at the
beginning of the semester, to corroborate their positioning in the
policy-spectrum (conservative, liberal or radical preference). At the
end of the semester, groups present their issues and select which
approach (conservative, liberal, or radical) gives the best
prescription. In general, out of the five presentations per class (five
groups of five, one presentation per group), three groups (60%) will
select the conservative approach as superior. Nevertheless, about 65% of
students consistently indicate a liberal preference in surveys. As the
reader might anticipate, this opens the door for fascinating policy
discussion among undergraduate students.