National High School Fed Challenge: publishable economics

Editorial overview

The High School Fed Challenge asks teams to behave like researchers and public explainers. Its current form is more interesting than a conventional economics quiz because students must choose a question, find evidence and write for listeners. The submitted object is a podcast script, but the competition evaluates the written research rather than a polished recording.

The Journal of Future Economists is published annually to recognise selected scripts and all participating schools. That publication model changes the tone of the contest. There is no single champion standing above every other team. Federal Reserve reviewers build a journal that balances academic quality, geographic representation and a useful range of topics, so teams are writing both an argument and a contribution to a collective issue.

CompeteMap's view is that the strongest fit is a team curious enough to make an everyday housing question genuinely economic. A broad report on affordability will struggle to develop a clear line of reasoning. A narrower study of zoning, mobility, mortgage access, insurance, construction costs or a local rental market can connect data to a question that listeners understand. The preparation burden is substantial, but previous economics study is not required; careful research habits matter more than early jargon.

Quick Facts

For current dates, eligibility and registration details, see the National High School Fed Challenge competition page.

Review Evaluation

Rated Advanced. The work demands sustained source research, data interpretation and collaborative writing that makes economics rigorous without losing clarity or an engaging spoken voice.

The current route

Checked on 2026-09-12: registration opened on 10 September 2026 and closes on 15 February 2027. Completed scripts are due on 15 March, with publication decisions scheduled for 14 May. The annual theme is Economics of Housing.

Eligible student authors must be enrolled in grades 9–12, and each eligible school may enter one team and one submission. The rule book permits three to eight credited student authors, with up to two adult advisors inside the overall participant limit. Homeschool teams have a defined advisor route.

A faculty advisor registers the school team online and submits a signed principal acknowledgement. This requirement makes early school approval essential. A team that waits until the script is nearly finished may discover that the official contact, school email or acknowledgement process has not been arranged.

Choose a question small enough to answer

Housing is connected to almost every part of the economy, which makes it easy to choose a topic and hard to choose a researchable question. Begin with a tension: why do two nearby places have different rents, what prevents new supply, how does insurance change household decisions, or what happens when commuting costs reshape where people can live?

Write the tentative answer before collecting dozens of sources. This is not a commitment; it is a hypothesis that helps the team notice what evidence would change its mind. Then list the economic concepts involved and decide which data can distinguish one explanation from another. A script improves when evidence does analytical work rather than decorating a conclusion the team already preferred.

Local questions are welcome, but local anecdotes need context. A conversation with a tenant, planner or builder can reveal mechanisms and vocabulary. Public datasets can show whether the experience is typical, exceptional or changing. The best scripts often move between a concrete opening and a wider economic frame.

Write for the ear without losing the research

The official submission is a written script between 1,500 and 2,500 words, with speaker labels and a bibliography. It may be written in English or Spanish. Students do not submit an audio recording, so the page itself must demonstrate both academic discipline and a believable spoken rhythm.

Assigning every paragraph to alternating speakers does not automatically create a podcast. Give each voice a reason to exist: one can frame the question, another test evidence, and a third introduce a counterargument or example. Read the script aloud early. Sentences that look formal on the page may become impossible to follow when heard once.

Citation practice must remain visible and consistent. Choose a recognised style guide, identify it on the title page and cite data, claims and conclusions that are not the team's own. The current rules reject AI-generated writing as student work, so teams should keep research notes and draft history that show their authorship.

Learn from the journal, not from a formula

Checked on 2026-09-12: twelve of 207 submissions were selected for the 2026 journal, including Bergen County Technical High School's Swiftonomics, Greenwich High School's study of jazz-club closures, and Phillips Exeter Academy's analysis of the Live Nation antitrust case. These topics share a theme but not a template.

Checked on 2026-09-12: the 2026 selectors praised scripts that combined strong economics with clarity, creativity and a sense of play. The editorial lesson is not to imitate pop stars, jazz or antitrust. It is to find a question the team genuinely wants to explain, then make the economics precise enough that an intelligent non-specialist can follow it.

Read past journal pieces in two passes. First, notice how quickly the question becomes clear and how evidence is introduced. Second, map the hidden structure: claim, mechanism, data, limitation and conclusion. Borrow the discipline, not the voice.

Divide the work without fragmenting the argument

A team can assign research streams, but one shared outline must control the complete script. Otherwise each student contributes a mini-essay and the result repeats definitions, shifts tone and never answers one central question. Use a source table that records the claim supported, method, date, limitations and exact citation details.

Schedule an internal challenge session. One student should argue that the evidence supports a different conclusion; another should identify missing stakeholders or geographic limits. This is where the script becomes economics rather than advocacy. A credible conclusion can acknowledge uncertainty while still explaining what the evidence suggests.

Selected scripts are published in the Journal of Future Economists; all timely participating teams receive individual certificates. Publication is valuable, but the more durable outcome is a piece of collaborative research that students can discuss honestly: what they asked, what they found and what changed their interpretation.

A workable preparation calendar

Before the school enrolment window closes, secure the advisor, team and approval, then choose several possible housing questions. Spend the next phase testing source availability before fixing the topic. Build the argument and data displays next, and only then convert the research into spoken form.

Leave the last fortnight for reading aloud, citation checking and PDF compliance. One editor should check continuity, but every credited author must have participated in research or writing. Submit before the cutoff; the last evening is a poor time to discover a missing title-page field or inaccessible upload link.

Key Takeaways

Treat this as a publication project rather than a quiz. Choose a narrow housing question, use evidence to test an explanation and write for a listener without weakening the citations. Secure the faculty advisor and principal acknowledgement early. Past selections suggest that clarity and creative topic choice work best when they rest on genuine economic analysis.

Sources checked

• https://www.newyorkfed.org/outreach-and-education/high-school/high-school-fed-challenge
• https://www.newyorkfed.org/medialibrary/media/outreach-and-education/high-school-fed-challenge-rule-book-2026-2027
• https://www.newyorkfed.org/newsevents/news/regional_outreach/2026/20260515