IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/uow/depec1/wp05-16.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Double Paradox of Elementary Economics Education

Author

Abstract

Elementary economics textbooks have become less attractive to students requiring only an introduction to economics, given that their content is pervaded by mathematical diagrams and simple equations. Also they are of relatively little value to those interested in, for example, attempting to gain an understanding of the New Economy, for they rarely emphasise business innovation and its crucial dynamic role. These factors engender something of a double paradox. First (paradox of the tools and the audience), newcomers are frequently 'turned off' by existing economics textbooks due to the pervasive use of mathematics. Second (paradox of the content and relevance), those newcomers who are not initially turned off tend to be disenchanted with economics because they perceive that economics is of little use in understanding the New Economy in which they work, or will come to work. We suggest an integrated solution to both paradoxes. The implementation entails a minor reorientation of the traditional pedagogical strategy for teaching introductory economics.

Suggested Citation

  • Pol, Eduardo & Carroll, Peter, 2005. "The Double Paradox of Elementary Economics Education," Economics Working Papers wp05-16, School of Economics, University of Wollongong, NSW, Australia.
    • Handle: RePEc:uow:depec1:wp05-16
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.uow.edu.au/content/groups/public/@web/@commerce/@econ/documents/doc/uow012199.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. MartinNeil Baily & Robert Z. Lawrence, 2001. "Do We Have a New E-conomy?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(2), pages 308-312, May.
    2. Robert J. Gordon, 2000. "Does the "New Economy" Measure Up to the Great Inventions of the Past?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 14(4), pages 49-74, Fall.
    3. Dale W. Jorgenson, 2001. "Information Technology and the U.S. Economy," Higher School of Economics Economic Journal Экономический журнал Высшей школы экономики, CyberLeninka;Федеральное государственное автономное образовательное учреждение высшего образования «Национальный исследовательский университет «Высшая школа экономики», vol. 5(1), pages 3-34.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Dale W. Jorgenson & Mun S. Ho & Kevin J. Stiroh, 2008. "A Retrospective Look at the U.S. Productivity Growth Resurgence," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 22(1), pages 3-24, Winter.
    2. Atanas Leonidov, 2003. "“The New Economy”," Economic Studies journal, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences - Economic Research Institute, issue 2, pages 3-33.
    3. John Van Reenen, 2001. "The new economy: reality and policy," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 22(3), pages 307-336, September.
    4. Robert C. Feenstra & Benjamin R. Mandel & Marshall B. Reinsdorf & Matthew J. Slaughter, 2013. "Effects of Terms of Trade Gains and Tariff Changes on the Measurement of US Productivity Growth," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 5(1), pages 59-93, February.
    5. Jonathan Temple, 2002. "The Assessment: The New Economy," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 18(3), pages 241-264.
    6. Basu, Susanto & Fernald, John G. & Shapiro, Matthew D., 2001. "Productivity growth in the 1990s: technology, utilization, or adjustment?," Carnegie-Rochester Conference Series on Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 55(1), pages 117-165, December.
    7. Eliasson, Gunnar & Johansson, Dan & Taymaz, Erol, 2004. "Simulating the New Economy," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 15(3), pages 289-314, September.
    8. Francesco Venturini, 2009. "The long-run impact of ICT," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 37(3), pages 497-515, December.
    9. P.D.F. Strydom, 2003. "Work And Employment In The Information Economy," South African Journal of Economics, Economic Society of South Africa, vol. 71(1), pages 1-20, March.
    10. Oliner, Stephen D. & Sichel, Daniel E. & Stiroh, Kevin J., 2008. "Explaining a productive decade," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 633-673.
    11. repec:dgr:rugggd:200260 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Jakob B Madsen & E Philip Davis, 2006. "Equity Prices, Productivity Growth and 'The New Economy'," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 116(513), pages 791-811, July.
    13. John G. Fernald, 2015. "Productivity and Potential Output before, during, and after the Great Recession," NBER Macroeconomics Annual, University of Chicago Press, vol. 29(1), pages 1-51.
    14. Lach, Saul & Trajtenberg, Manuel & Shiff, Gil, 2008. "Together but Apart: ICT and Productivity Growth in Israel," CEPR Discussion Papers 6732, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    15. Landon Kleis & Paul Chwelos & Ronald V. Ramirez & Iain Cockburn, 2012. "Information Technology and Intangible Output: The Impact of IT Investment on Innovation Productivity," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 23(1), pages 42-59, March.
    16. Menzie D. Chinn & Robert W. Fairlie, 2007. "The determinants of the global digital divide: a cross-country analysis of computer and internet penetration," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 59(1), pages 16-44, January.
    17. Boyer, Robert, 2001. "La "nouvelle économie" au futur antérieur : histoire, théories, géographie," CEPREMAP Working Papers (Couverture Orange) 0113, CEPREMAP.
    18. Steve Onyeiwu, 2002. "Inter-Country Variations in Digital Technology in Africa: Evidence, Determinants, and Policy Applications," WIDER Working Paper Series DP2002-72, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    19. Oliner, Stephen D. & Sichel, Daniel E., 2003. "Information technology and productivity: where are we now and where are we going?," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 25(5), pages 477-503, July.
    20. Antonin Bergeaud & Gilbert Cette & Rémy Lecat, 2016. "Productivity Trends in Advanced Countries between 1890 and 2012," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 62(3), pages 420-444, September.
    21. Motohashi, Kazuyuki, 2007. "Firm-level analysis of information network use and productivity in Japan," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 121-137, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Double paradox; elementary economics education;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:uow:depec1:wp05-16. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Peter Siminski (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/deuowau.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.