Teaching Economics

In 1915, the AEA established a Committee on Secondary Education in Economics, and through the 1920s resumed a series of roundtable discussions on teaching general economics, in addition to the continuing committee work on secondary and collegiate teaching. But by 1950, when Lawrence Leamer published "A Brief History of Economics in General Education" it was shown that economists who were working and occasionally writing in this area almost always failed to find out what had been written by previous authors, resulting in frequent repetition and little real progress. Leamer called for the development of a cumulative body of literature on teaching economics, but that plea was largely unheeded for two decades.

The standards for research on teaching economics and the volume of such research increased dramatically from 1969 to 1979, and that pattern has continued since then, based on several standard measures. For example, a number of other JEL review articles in economic education have been published, and the JEE has dramatically improved its position in the ranking of journals based on out-of-journal citation counts.

There are several reasons why the Nobel prize winning economists are worthy of consideration in teaching economics. First, there is the variety of their fields of interest. The Nobel prize five-member selection committee seems to vary its choice by area of economic specialty, by nationality, by economic ideology and political beliefs. The economic environment and the state of the world economy at the time of selection appear to be factored into the decision-making process. The areas of economics covered include macroeconomics, microeconomics, history of economic thought, developmental economics, econometrics, financial economics, game theory, input-output, and international economics. Thus, the lectures offer the instructor a broad range from which to choose. Second, the laureates gain increased influence simply because they are selected. They are asked to advise governmental agencies, to address business organizations, and to talk to collegiate student groups. As a result of their increasing visibility, they become role models to younger economists.

The primary purpose of teaching economics is to give students a fundamental knowledge of our socioeconomic organization. In discussing this point, the authors seem to be particularly interested in making clear to the students that our economic organization is determined by free markets plus customs, public decisions, and controls or authorities of a variety of types, but primarily governmental. They claim further that the best way to teach the "facts of life" regarding our socioeconomic organization at the college level is to use comparisons. Students first need to be shown that all societies have to solve the same basic economic questions. Then, to understand and appreciate our particular procedures for solving these questions, the student should become involved in a comparison of the means that have been used in various systems to attack these problems.

The degree of emphasis on this methodological phase of teaching economics varies, of course, from statement to statement; but it is fair to say that developing the ability and desire to think critically or rationally about economic questions is by far the most commonly stated objective for this field. Just as Leamer has made economic problems, associated political and social problems, and the process of solving them three-fourths of his purpose statement for teaching economics, so would most of the other economists who are speaking on this question. Economic reasoning is the primary goal. Even though there is more agreement on what should be taught, we are not out of the woods in terms of very real problems for teaching this field. Teaching economics has some headaches, some that are unique to the field and others that are shared with other subjects.