IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/nos/voprob/2020i3p137-164.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Russian Faculty's Attitudes Toward Using Math in Economics Courses

Author

Listed:
  • Alexander Myasnikov
  • Svetlana Seregina

Abstract

Alexander Myasnikov - Candidate of Sciences in Economics, Associate Professor, Academic Department of Political Economy and History of Economic Science, Plekhanov Russian University of Economics; Associate Professor, Department of Theoretical Economics, Faculty of Economic Sciences, National Research University Higher School of Economics. E-mail: amyasnikov@hse.ruSvetlana Seregina - Doctor of Sciences in Economics, Professor, Department of Theoretical Economics, Faculty of Economic Sciences, National Research University Higher School of Economics. E-mail: sseregina@hse.ruAddress: 20 Myasnitskaya Str., 101000 Moscow, Russian Federation.Opinions of Russian economics professors are highly polarized as to how much mathematics should be used in teaching undergraduate economics. A number of faculty members believe that the use of math should be kept to an absolute minimum, with perhaps only the most basic plots and equations being included in the syllabus. In our study based on a survey of 160 Russian faculty members teaching economics, we analyze the factors behind faculty's beliefs about the adequacy of students' math skills and whether more or less math should be used in introductory economics courses. Our findings show that most economics professors in Russia consider their students' math skills to be insufficient, for various reasons, while agreeing that math helps learners to get a better grasp of certain aspects of economics. Meanwhile, they find the existing amount of math in introductory economics courses optimal. It appears that professors' views are significantly affected by their own perceptions of the role of mathematics in economics. In addition, there are some differences in opinions on a number of issues between professors in Moscow versus other regions of Russia.

Suggested Citation

  • Alexander Myasnikov & Svetlana Seregina, 2020. "Russian Faculty's Attitudes Toward Using Math in Economics Courses," Voprosy obrazovaniya / Educational Studies Moscow, National Research University Higher School of Economics, issue 3, pages 137-164.
    • Handle: RePEc:nos:voprob:2020:i:3:p:137-164
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://vo.hse.ru/data/2020/09/17/1581693643/%D0%9C%D1%8F%D1%81%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B2,%20%D0%A1%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B5%D0%B3%D0%B8%D0%BD%D0%B0.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kevin E. Staub, 2009. "Simple tests for exogeneity of a binary explanatory variable in count data regression models," SOI - Working Papers 0904, Socioeconomic Institute - University of Zurich.
    2. Maria Dobryakova & Grigory Androuschak, 2010. "Admission to Russian state universities in 2010: To see and to start thinking," Voprosy obrazovaniya / Educational Studies Moscow, National Research University Higher School of Economics, issue 4, pages 101-121.
    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. Мясников А. А. & Серегина С. Ф., 2020. "Отношение Российских Преподавателей Экономики К Использованию Математики," Вопросы образования // Educational Studies Moscow, National Research University Higher School of Economics, issue 3, pages 137-164.
    2. Maurus Rischatsch & Maria Trottmann, 2009. "Physician dispensing and the choice between generic and brand-name drugs – Do margins affect choice?," SOI - Working Papers 0911, Socioeconomic Institute - University of Zurich.
    3. Chen, Linkun & Clarke, Philip M. & Petrie, Dennis J. & Staub, Kevin E., 2021. "The effects of self-assessed health: Dealing with and understanding misclassification bias," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    4. Polk, Andreas & Schmutzler, Armin & Müller, Adrian, 2014. "Lobbying and the power of multinational firms," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 209-227.
    5. Heike Mensi-Klarbach & Stephan Leixnering & Michael Schiffinger, 2021. "The Carrot or the Stick: Self-Regulation for Gender-Diverse Boards via Codes of Good Governance," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 170(3), pages 577-593, May.
    6. Kul B. Luintel & Yongdeng Xu, 2017. "Testing weak exogeneity in multiplicative error models," Quantitative Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(10), pages 1617-1630, October.
    7. Ilja Neustadt & Peter Zweifel, 2009. "Economic Well-Being, Social Mobility, and Preferences for Income Redistribution: Evidence from a Discrete Choice Experiment," SOI - Working Papers 0909, Socioeconomic Institute - University of Zurich, revised Jan 2010.
    8. Geraci Andrea & Fabbri Daniele & Monfardini Chiara, 2018. "Testing Exogeneity of Multinomial Regressors in Count Data Models: Does Two-stage Residual Inclusion Work?," Journal of Econometric Methods, De Gruyter, vol. 7(1), pages 1-19, January.
    9. repec:fgv:epgrbe:v:66:n:4:a:3 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. Canan GÜNEŞ & Mustafa ÜNLÜ & Yasin BÜYÜKKÖR & Şenay ÜÇDOĞRUK BİRECİKLİ, 2016. "Türkiye’de Sağlık Hizmetleri Talebinin Sayma Veri Modelleriyle İncelenmesi: İçsellik Sorunu," Sosyoekonomi Journal, Sosyoekonomi Society, issue 24(30).
    11. Michele Sennhauser, 2009. "Why the Linear Utility Function is a Risky Choice in Discrete-Choice Experiments," SOI - Working Papers 1014, Socioeconomic Institute - University of Zurich.
    12. Maurus Rischatsch, 2009. "Simulating WTP Values from Random-Coefficient Models," SOI - Working Papers 0912, Socioeconomic Institute - University of Zurich.
    13. Richardson, Leslie A. & Champ, Patricia A. & Loomis, John B., 2012. "The hidden cost of wildfires: Economic valuation of health effects of wildfire smoke exposure in Southern California," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 14-35.

    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:nos:voprob:2020:i:3:p:137-164. 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: Marta Morozova (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://vo.hse.ru/en/ .

    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.