Does Pluralism in Economics Education Make Better Educated, Happier Students? A Qualitative Analysis
AbstractThis paper contributes to the debate on pluralism in the economics curriculum. Here pluralism means a diversity of theoretical perspectives. One set of pedagogical arguments for pluralism are those found in 'liberal' philosophy of education. To this end, the first part of the paper presents arguments for pluralism based on 'liberal' pedagogical arguments. The paper also notes more instrumental arguments for pluralism and the barriers to such an approach. Finally, the paper considers new primary evidence from focus groups on student perceptions of economics. This evidence shows support for the arguments that a pluralist curriculum is popular and develops cognitive capacities of criticism, comparison and analysis â€“ exactly those argued for in (liberal) pedagogical discussion â€“ as well as judgement, understanding and writing skills. However, pluralism as a teaching strategy may be more difficult for those delivering it.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by Economics Network, University of Bristol in its journal International Review of Economics Education.
Volume (Year): 10 (2011)
Issue (Month): 2 ()
Contact details of provider:
Postal: University of Bristol, BS8 1HH, United Kingdom
Fax: +44(0)117 331 4396
Web page: http://www.economicsnetwork.ac.uk/iree
Other versions of this item:
- Andrew Mearman & Tim Wakeley & Gamila Shoib & Don J. Webber, 2009. "Does pluralism in economics education make better educated, happier students? A qualitative analysis," Working Papers 0916, Department of Accounting, Economics and Finance, Bristol Business School, University of the West of England, Bristol.
- A22 - General Economics and Teaching - - Economic Education and Teaching of Economics - - - Undergraduate
- B4 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - Economic Methodology
- B5 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - Current Heterodox Approaches
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Budzinski, Oliver, 2007.
"Monoculture versus diversity in competition economics,"
158, University of Duisburg-Essen, Faculty for Economics and Business Administration.
- Oliver Budzinski, 2008. "Monoculture versus diversity in competition economics," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 32(2), pages 295-324, March.
- Paul Downward & Andrew Mearman, 2007. "Retroduction as mixed-methods triangulation in economic research: reorienting economics into social science," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 31(1), pages 77-99, January.
- Hendrik P. van Dalen, 2003.
"Pluralism in Economics: A Public Good or a Public Bad?,"
Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers
03-034/1, Tinbergen Institute, revised 18 May 2004.
- Dalen, H.P. van, 2007. "Pluralism in economics: A public good or a public bad?," Open Access publications from Tilburg University urn:nbn:nl:ui:12-347616, Tilburg University.
- Don J. Webber & Andrew Mearman, 2012.
"Students’ perceptions of economics: identifying demand for further study,"
Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 44(9), pages 1121-1132, March.
- Don J. Webber & Andrew Mearman, 2009. "Students’ perceptions of economics:Identifying demand for further study," Working Papers 0914, Department of Accounting, Economics and Finance, Bristol Business School, University of the West of England, Bristol.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Martin Poulter).
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.