IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/uwe/wpaper/0916.html

Does pluralism in economics education make better educated, happier students? A qualitative analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Andrew Mearman

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

  • Tim Wakeley

    (Griffith University, Australia)

  • Gamila Shoib

    (Griffith University, Australia)

  • Don J. Webber

    (Department of Business Economics, Auckland University of Technology and Department of Economics, UWE, Bristol)

Abstract

This 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.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
  • Handle: RePEc:uwe:wpaper:0916
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://carecon.org.uk/DPs/0916.pdf
    File Function: First version, 2009
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Henning Schwardt, 2024. "Evolutionary alternatives to equilibrium frameworks in economics education," Evolutionary and Institutional Economics Review, Springer, vol. 21(1), pages 115-130, April.
    2. Andrew Mearman & Aspasia Papa & Don Webber, 2014. "Why do Students Study Economics?," Economic Issues Journal Articles, Economic Issues, vol. 19(1), pages 119-147, March.
      • Andrew Mearman & Aspasia Papa & Don J. Webber, 2013. "Why do students study economics?," Working Papers 20131303, Department of Accounting, Economics and Finance, Bristol Business School, University of the West of England, Bristol.
    3. Andrew Mearman, 2012. "Pluralist economics curricula: do they work; and how would we know?," Working Papers 20121203, Department of Accounting, Economics and Finance, Bristol Business School, University of the West of England, Bristol.
    4. Helmy, Heba E., 2016. "A lottery on the first day of classes! An innovative structured steps assignment on a partially randomly selected topic," International Review of Economics Education, Elsevier, vol. 21(C), pages 41-47.
    5. Juniper, James & Nadolny, Andrew & Pantelopoulos, George & Watts, Martin, 2021. "Orthodox macroeconomic textbooks: A critical evaluation using institutional practice as a benchmark," International Review of Economics Education, Elsevier, vol. 37(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • 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

    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:uwe:wpaper:0916. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Jo Michell (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/seuweuk.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.