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 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 – exactly those argued for in (liberal) pedagogical discussion – 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 InfoPaper provided by Department of Accounting, Economics and Finance, Bristol Business School, University of the West of England, Bristol in its series Working Papers with number 0916.
Length: 24 pages
Date of creation: Aug 2009
Date of revision:
Contact details of provider:
Postal: Frenchay Campus, Coldharbour Lane, Bristol BS16 1QY
Phone: 0117 328 3610
Web page: http://www1.uwe.ac.uk/bl/research/bristoleconomics.aspx
More information through EDIRC
Students; pedagogy; pluralism; perceptions; focus groups;
Other versions of this item:
- Andrew Mearman & Tim Wakeley & Gamila Shoib & Don J. Webber, 2011. "Does Pluralism in Economics Education Make Better Educated, Happier Students? A Qualitative Analysis," International Review of Economic Education, Economics Network, University of Bristol, vol. 10(2), pages 50-62.
- 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
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
- NEP-ALL-2009-08-22 (All new papers)
- NEP-EDU-2009-08-22 (Education)
- NEP-HAP-2009-08-22 (Economics of Happiness)
- NEP-HPE-2009-08-22 (History & Philosophy of Economics)
- NEP-PKE-2009-08-22 (Post Keynesian Economics)
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.:
- Don J. Webber & Andrew Mearman, 2009.
"Students’ perceptions of economics:Identifying demand for further study,"
0914, Department of Accounting, Economics and Finance, Bristol Business School, University of the West of England, Bristol.
- Don J. Webber & Andrew Mearman, 2012. "Students’ perceptions of economics: identifying demand for further study," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 44(9), pages 1121-1132, March.
- Oliver Budzinski, 2008.
"Monoculture versus diversity in competition economics,"
Cambridge Journal of Economics,
Oxford University Press, vol. 32(2), pages 295-324, March.
- Budzinski, Oliver, 2007. "Monoculture versus diversity in competition economics," IBES DiskussionsbeitrÃ¤ge 158, University of Duisburg-Essen, Faculty for Economics and Business Administration.
- 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.
- 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.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Felix Ritchie).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.