IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Contending Perspectives, Twenty Years On: What Have Our Students Learned?

  • Robert Garnett

    ()

    (Department of Economics, Texas Christian University)

  • Andrew Mearman

    ()

    (Department of Economics, University of the West of England)

The authors examine the pluralism of Barone (1991) through the lens of subsequent developments in the pluralist economics literature, particularly the shift from teacher-centred to student-centred conceptions of education and the growing demands for evidence to demonstrate student achievement of stated learning goals. This contextual frame opens the door to a fresh appraisal of Barone’s ‘contending perspectives’ model, both as a landmark contribution to pluralist education and as a touchstone for future efforts to reach beyond conventional heterodox/mainstream boundaries in order to expand the liberal education mission of undergraduate economics.

If 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.

File URL: http://www.econ.tcu.edu/RePEc/tcu/wpaper/wp11-04.pdf
File Function: First version, 2011
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by Texas Christian University, Department of Economics in its series Working Papers with number 201104.

as
in new window

Length: 32 pages
Date of creation: Jan 2011
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:tcu:wpaper:201104
Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.econ.tcu.edu/

More information through EDIRC

References listed on IDEAS
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.:

as in new window
  1. Fels, Rendigs, 1974. "Developing Independent Problem-Solving Ability in Elementary Economics," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 64(2), pages 403-07, May.
  2. Sheila Dow, 2009. "History of Thought and Methodology in Pluralist Economics Education," International Review of Economic Education, Economics Network, University of Bristol, vol. 8(2), pages 41-57.
  3. Peter Davies & Ross Guest, 2010. "What effect do we really have on students' understanding and attitudes? How do we know?," International Review of Economic Education, Economics Network, University of Bristol, vol. 9(1), pages 6-9.
  4. Feiner, Susan & Roberts, Bruce, 1995. "Using Alternative Paradigms to Teach about Race and Gender: A Critical Thinking Approach to Introductory Economics," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(2), pages 367-71, May.
  5. Andy Denis, 2009. "Pluralism in Economics Education," International Review of Economic Education, Economics Network, University of Bristol, vol. 8(2), pages 6-22.
  6. Marianne Ferber, 1999. "Guidelines For Pre-College Economics Education: A Critique," Feminist Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(3), pages 135-142.
  7. Stephen Kinsella, 2010. "Pedagogical approaches to theories of endogenous versus exogenous money," International Journal of Pluralism and Economics Education, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 1(3), pages 276-282.
  8. McCloskey, Donald N, 1983. "The Rhetoric of Economics," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 21(2), pages 481-517, June.
  9. Andrew Mearman, 2011. "Pluralism, Heterodoxy, and the Rhetoric of Distinction," Review of Radical Political Economics, Union for Radical Political Economics, vol. 43(4), pages 552-561, December.
  10. Victoria Chick & Sheila Dow, 2005. "The meaning of open systems," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(3), pages 363-381.
  11. Tonia Warnecke, 2009. "Teaching globalisation from a feminist pluralist perspective," International Journal of Pluralism and Economics Education, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 1(1/2), pages 93-107.
  12. Dow, Sheila C, 1990. "Beyond Dualism," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 14(2), pages 143-57, June.
  13. 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.
  14. Bartlett, Robin L & Feiner, Susan F, 1992. "Balancing the Economics Curriculum: Content, Method, and Pedagogy," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 82(2), pages 559-64, May.
  15. Alan Freeman, 2009. "The Economists of Tomorrow: the Case for a Pluralist Subject Benchmark Statement for Economics," International Review of Economic Education, Economics Network, University of Bristol, vol. 8(2), pages 23-40.
  16. Becker, William E., 2007. "Quit lying and address the controversies: there are no dogmata, laws, rules or standards in the science of economics," MPRA Paper 39958, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  17. Freeman, Alan, 2007. "Catechism versus pluralism: the heterodox response to the national undergraduate curriculum proposed by the UK Quality Assurance Authority," MPRA Paper 6832, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  18. Janice Peterson & KimMarie McGoldrick, 2009. "Pluralism and Economic Education: a Learning Theory Approach," International Review of Economic Education, Economics Network, University of Bristol, vol. 8(2), pages 72-90.
  19. Shackelford, Jean, 1992. "Feminist Pedagogy: A Means for Bringing Critical Thinking and Creativity to the Economics Classroom," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 82(2), pages 570-76, May.
  20. Siegfried, John J & Meszaros, Bonnie T, 1997. "National Voluntary Content Standards for Pre-College Economics Education," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 87(2), pages 247-53, May.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:tcu:wpaper:201104. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (John Harvey)

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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.