Economics · Grade 12

Active learning ideas

Antitrust Policy and Regulation

Antitrust policy involves complex legal and economic concepts that students grasp best through interactive, real-world applications. Active learning lets them analyze actual cases, simulate decision-making, and test arguments, which builds deeper understanding than passive lectures alone.

• Ontario Curriculum Expectations
• Ontario Curriculum CIA4U: C3. The Firm and Market Structures. analyse different types of costs a firm faces and the relationship between them
• Ontario Curriculum CIA4U: C3. The Firm and Market Structures. analyse the relationship between a firm’s inputs and outputs in the short run and the long run
• Ontario Curriculum CIA4U: C3. The Firm and Market Structures. analyse a firm’s profit-maximizing and loss-minimizing behaviour

• 35–60 min
• Pairs → Whole Class
• 4 activities

Activity 01

• Jigsaw
• 45 min · Small Groups

Jigsaw: Competition Act Provisions

Assign small groups to expert roles on mergers, cartels, or abuse of dominance from the Competition Act. After research and note-taking, experts rotate to mixed home groups to teach peers. Groups apply concepts to a current news case and report findings.

Explain the rationale behind antitrust laws and regulations.

Facilitation Tip

During the Jigsaw activity, assign each group a distinct section of the Competition Act to research and present, ensuring all students become experts in one area before teaching others.

What to look for

Pose the question: 'Should the government intervene to break up large, dominant companies even if they are efficient and provide good service?' Students should prepare arguments for and against, citing specific examples of Canadian companies or industries.

• Understand
• Analyze
• Evaluate
• Relationship Skills
• Self-Management

Activity 02

• Case Study Analysis
• 60 min · Small Groups

Mock Tribunal: Rogers-Shaw Merger

Divide class into roles: Competition Bureau lawyers, merging firms, consumers, and judges. Groups prepare 5-minute arguments with evidence from the real case. Hold a 20-minute hearing where judges deliberate and rule, followed by class debrief.

Analyze historical examples of antitrust cases and their outcomes.

Facilitation Tip

For the Mock Tribunal, provide students with a simplified version of the Rogers-Shaw merger documents so they can focus on legal arguments rather than drowning in legal jargon.

What to look for

Provide students with a brief case study of a proposed merger. Ask them to identify: 1. Which section of the Competition Act might apply? 2. What are two potential anti-competitive effects the Competition Bureau would investigate? 3. What is one potential pro-competitive argument for the merger?

• Analyze
• Evaluate
• Create
• Decision-Making
• Self-Management

Activity 03

• Case Study Analysis
• 35 min · Pairs

Market Simulation: Pricing Under Regulation

Pairs model a market first as a monopoly with high prices, then introduce antitrust breakup. Track consumer surplus changes on graphs. Pairs present results and discuss innovation incentives post-intervention.

Evaluate the effectiveness of government intervention in promoting market competition.

Facilitation Tip

In the Market Simulation, start with a simple oligopoly structure before adding regulatory constraints, so students can first see unchecked market behavior before testing policy interventions.

What to look for

On an index card, students should write one key difference between a cartel and abuse of dominance, and name one specific tool the Competition Bureau uses to enforce antitrust policy in Canada.

• Analyze
• Evaluate
• Create
• Decision-Making
• Self-Management

Activity 04

• Case Study Analysis
• 50 min · Pairs

Debate Carousel: Intervention Effectiveness

Pairs prepare pro or con positions on statements like 'Antitrust always boosts welfare.' Rotate to debate four stations, refining arguments with peer feedback. Conclude with whole-class vote and reflection.

Explain the rationale behind antitrust laws and regulations.

Facilitation Tip

Use the Debate Carousel to rotate students through different stations with distinct intervention scenarios, forcing them to adapt arguments quickly and engage with multiple perspectives.

What to look for

Pose the question: 'Should the government intervene to break up large, dominant companies even if they are efficient and provide good service?' Students should prepare arguments for and against, citing specific examples of Canadian companies or industries.

• Analyze
• Evaluate
• Create
• Decision-Making
• Self-Management

A few notes on teaching this unit

Experienced teachers approach antitrust policy by grounding abstract legal concepts in concrete market scenarios students can relate to. Avoid overloading students with statutory language early; instead, let them discover the purpose behind each provision through case analysis. Research shows that role-playing tribunal or bureau roles deepens empathy for enforcement challenges and helps students see policy as a living process, not just a set of rules.

Students should demonstrate the ability to identify anti-competitive practices, evaluate their market impact, and justify policy decisions using the Competition Act. Look for clear reasoning tied to evidence from case studies and simulations, along with respectful, evidence-based debate skills.

---

Watch Out for These Misconceptions

• During the Jigsaw: Competition Act Provisions, some students may assume the Competition Act targets all large companies equally.

  During the Jigsaw activity, have students compare case examples where large firms were either penalized or regulated, using the Competition Bureau’s annual reports to distinguish between firm size and anti-competitive conduct.

• During the Mock Tribunal: Rogers-Shaw Merger, students might believe antitrust enforcement always restores competition immediately.

  During the Mock Tribunal, ask students to research post-merger market data for similar cases, such as past telecom mergers, and present findings on whether competition actually improved over time.

• During the guest speaker or video session, students might claim Canada lacks strong antitrust enforcement compared to the US.

  During the guest speaker session or bureau video, provide students with a side-by-side comparison table of enforcement tools and penalties under both Canada’s Competition Act and the US Sherman Act to evaluate strength objectively.

---

Methods used in this brief

• Jigsaw
• Case Study Analysis