Economics · Year 13

Active learning ideas

Competition Policy and Regulation

Active learning works for this topic because students must weigh evidence, role-play decision-makers, and experience market pressures firsthand. These approaches build the critical evaluation and analytical skills needed to assess real-world regulatory scenarios.

• National Curriculum Attainment Targets
• A-Level: Economics - Market Structures
• A-Level: Economics - Competition Policy

• 35–50 min
• Pairs → Whole Class
• 4 activities

Activity 01

• Expert Panel
• 45 min · Small Groups

Case Study Rotation: Merger Decisions

Prepare three merger cases from CMA reports. Small groups rotate every 10 minutes to summarize rationale for approval or block, consumer impacts, and alternatives. Groups report back with one key insight each.

Analyze the economic rationale behind government intervention in mergers and acquisitions.

Facilitation Tip

During Case Study Rotation, assign each pair a different merger scenario to analyze, then rotate until all cases are covered, forcing students to compare multiple outcomes.

What to look for

Present students with a hypothetical merger scenario (e.g., two major supermarket chains). Ask: 'What specific evidence would the CMA need to see to approve or block this merger? What are the potential benefits and drawbacks for consumers?'

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

Activity 02

• Expert Panel
• 50 min · Pairs

Debate Pairs: Regulation Effectiveness

Assign pairs to argue for or against the statement: 'UK competition policy prevents most anti-competitive harm.' Provide data sheets; pairs prepare 3-minute speeches then switch sides for rebuttals. Whole class votes and discusses.

Differentiate between different types of anti-competitive practices and their impact on consumers.

Facilitation Tip

For Debate Pairs, provide a pro-regulation and anti-regulation prompt to ensure balanced arguments and push students beyond initial assumptions.

What to look for

On one side of a card, write 'Price Fixing'. On the other, write 'Predatory Pricing'. Ask students to define each term in their own words and provide one sentence explaining why each is harmful to consumers.

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

Activity 03

• Expert Panel
• 40 min · Small Groups

Role-Play: CMA Hearing

Small groups role-play a CMA investigation into a cartel: one group as firm representatives, one as regulator, one as consumer advocate. Present evidence, question witnesses, and decide on remedies.

Evaluate the effectiveness of competition policy in ensuring fair market outcomes.

Facilitation Tip

In the Role-Play, assign roles (CMA investigator, corporate lawyer, consumer advocate) with clear objectives to keep the hearing focused on economic evidence.

What to look for

Students write a short paragraph evaluating the CMA's decision in a recent, real-world case. They then swap paragraphs with a partner. The partner checks for: clear identification of the anti-competitive practice, a stated economic rationale for the CMA's decision, and at least one counter-argument. Partners provide one sentence of feedback.

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

Activity 04

• Expert Panel
• 35 min · Pairs

Market Simulation: Oligopoly Pricing

Pairs simulate bidding in an oligopoly market with/without collusion rules, using cards for products. Track prices and profits over 5 rounds, then analyze anti-competitive effects.

Analyze the economic rationale behind government intervention in mergers and acquisitions.

Facilitation Tip

In Market Simulation, limit the number of firms to four to create visible oligopoly behavior and force students to react to price leadership.

What to look for

Present students with a hypothetical merger scenario (e.g., two major supermarket chains). Ask: 'What specific evidence would the CMA need to see to approve or block this merger? What are the potential benefits and drawbacks for consumers?'

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

A few notes on teaching this unit

Teachers should ground abstract concepts in concrete examples and require students to justify their reasoning with data. Avoid letting students default to ‘block all mergers’ or ‘regulation is always good.’ Instead, guide them to identify trade-offs using structured frameworks. Research shows that simulations and role-plays deepen understanding of tacit collusion and enforcement limits better than lectures alone.

Successful learning looks like students using economic reasoning to justify CMA decisions, explaining how different practices distort markets, and linking theory to case outcomes. They should confidently critique both corporate strategies and regulatory responses.

---

Watch Out for These Misconceptions

• During Case Study Rotation, watch for students assuming all mergers reduce competition and should be blocked.

  Redirect students to reread the efficiency defenses in their case pack and calculate long-run consumer price changes before voting. Ask them to prepare a two-sentence argument balancing market share against cost savings.

• During Debate Pairs, watch for students believing anti-competitive practices only occur in monopolies.

  Prompt pairs to cite examples of tacit collusion from the Market Simulation or cartel cases they read earlier, and ask them to explain why oligopolies often coordinate without written agreements.

• During Role-Play, watch for students thinking competition policy can fully eliminate market power.

  After the hearing, have each student write one sentence on the whiteboard showing where some market power remains despite regulation, then discuss why perfect elimination is impossible.

---

Methods used in this brief

• Expert Panel