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

Pluralist economics curricula: do they work; and how would we know?

  • Andrew Mearman

    ()

    (University of the West of England, Bristol)

This paper aims to illuminate the debate on pluralist economics curricula by examining ways in which such curricula are evaluated. The paper argues for pluralism as a general approach and as pedagogy. It argues that there is a plurality of pluralist curricula. It further argues that pluralist curricula have multiple goals, implying multiple criteria for their success. The paper then examines the potential for experimental methods to evaluate pluralist curricula. It is argued that for general and specific reasons, experimental methods are unlikely to be illuminating. Rather, the paper argues for a mixed approach, entailing different types of data, different metrics of success, and a variety of data collection and analysis methods. It is claimed finally that the existing (albeit scant) evidence on pluralist curricula already employs many of the principles of pluralist evaluation.

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://www2.uwe.ac.uk/faculties/BBS/BUS/Research/economics2012/1203.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Paper 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 20121203.

as
in new window

Length:
Date of creation: 03 Jan 2012
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:uwe:wpaper:20121203
Contact details of provider: Postal: 0117 328 3610
Phone: 0117 328 3610
Web page: http://www1.uwe.ac.uk/bl/research/bristoleconomics.aspx

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. 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.
  2. June Lapidus, 2011. "But which theory is right? Economic pluralism, developmental epistemology and uncertainty," International Journal of Pluralism and Economics Education, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 2(1), pages 82-95.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. Ruzita Mohd Amin & Mohamed Aslam Haneef, 2011. "The quest for better economics graduates: reviving the pluralist approach in the case of the International Islamic University, Malaysia," International Journal of Pluralism and Economics Education, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 2(1), pages 96-113.
  6. Andy Denis, 2013. "Pluralism in economics education," Chapters, in: Teaching Post Keynesian Economics, chapter 5, pages 88-105 Edward Elgar.
  7. Richard McIntyre & Robert Van Horn, 2011. "Contending perspectives in one department," International Journal of Pluralism and Economics Education, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 2(1), pages 69-81.
  8. Stephen Resnick & Richard D. Wolff, 2011. "Teaching economics differently by comparing contesting theories," International Journal of Pluralism and Economics Education, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 2(1), pages 57-68.
  9. 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.
  10. 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.
  11. Marianne Ferber, 1999. "Guidelines For Pre-College Economics Education: A Critique," Feminist Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(3), pages 135-142.
  12. Cher Ping Lim, 1998. "The Effect of a Computer-Based Learning (CBL) Support Package on the Learning Outcome of Low-Performance Economics Students," Computers in Higher Education Economics Review, Economics Network, University of Bristol, vol. 12(1), pages 19-26.
  13. Siakantaris, Nikos, 2000. "Experimental Economics under the Microscope," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 24(3), pages 267-81, May.
  14. Robert Garnett & Andrew Mearman, 2011. "Contending Perspectives, Twenty Years On: What Have Our Students Learned?," Working Papers 201104, Texas Christian University, Department of Economics.
  15. 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.
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:uwe:wpaper:20121203. 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: (Felix Ritchie)

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.