John Taylor (of "the Taylor Rule") poses a very intriguing question in this post on Economics One from last Saturday. And while the formal implication for many of us (especially at the high school level) is probably some time off, his argument is sound.
He proposes dropping the traditional micro/macro division when teaching introductory economics courses. His case rests on the assertion (and I agree) that for students to really understand the current crisis takes a mixture of some micro and some macro principles. I believe the best way to help students understand economics is to put in context. But very few real life examples are strictly micro issues or strictly macro issues. They can be stripped down to one or the other, but doing so often forces us to omit something.
To what extent do you "mix" micro and macro, especially if you're teaching an AP or IB econ course and your students' focus is "the test"? I would welcome your thoughts on this. I think Taylor's case is very good.