MEA Presidential Address

From: Brooks Taggert J (brooks.tagg@uwlax.edu)
Date: Tue Mar 28 2006 - 08:57:05 CST

  • Next message: Michael Oakes: "Class Observations..."

    Anyone out there attend Bill Becker's MEA Presidential Address?

    For those that didn't most of what you need to know comes from the
    original title ""Quit Lying and Teach the Controversies: There Are No
    Dogmata, Laws, Rules, or Standards in the Science of Economics". He
    basically argued we appear to be moving towards more standards based
    education akin to K-12.

    He finds it troubling as do I, though I believe the right balance is not
    so easy to strike. Below is a copy of the email I sent to Dr. Becker,
    I'd be interested in your thoughts and reading a discussion on the topic
    (which will hopefully devolve into a deep discussion in epistemology :)
    ).

    -------
    Dr. Becker-

    First let me say that I enjoyed your presentation at the MEA, (except
    for the mini lecture by the grad student, and the inappropriate comment
    on font size). You covered ground I have long struggled with as an
    instructor. I do wonder if we don't do the discussion a bit of a
    disservice by painting it as a choice between the extremes. I don't
    think Hansen and the rest would advocate abandoning the interesting
    stuff in favor of literacy tests of concepts like opportunity cost or
    comparative advantage. In fact, my reading of their work is that if we
    are doing that, we are not very good at it. At the same time, teaching
    the controversies is similarly problematic. Several decades ago
    Philosophy tried to teach ethics in just this way, but they soon
    realized the result was students became moral relativists. Students did
    not gain a deeper understanding of ethics, in fact if anything they were
    less equipped to understand the basic ideas in the field. Christina Hoff
    Summers has written much on this, here is just one link
    (http://www.forerunner.com/forerunner/X0116_Teaching_the_Virtues.html).

     

    I could imagine the same thing happening in economics, if it hasn't
    already. Our profession is already famous for the "on the one hand...on
    the other". Yet, there are some things we agree on as economists. Very
    rapid money growth leads to rising prices, as an example. I would hate
    for students to leave an economics class believing that what ever they
    believe about economics is okay, simply because it is easy for them to
    find an argument to support their prejudice or preconception. This is
    much more likely the more emphasis we place on the controversies. The
    fact is I'm not sure we can say they have learned anything, if you take
    as learning the ability to overcome or refine ones preconceptions or
    prejudices. So as is always the case, good teaching falls somewhere
    between the two. Should we and the text books move further towards the
    controversies....probably, but I fear the basic understanding of
    economics might not improve much. I look forward to your future work,
    and I particularly look forward to someone trying to more precisely
    outline where the best balance is struck

    TJ

    Taggert J. Brooks, PhD
    Associate Professor of Economics
    Department of Economics
    University of Wisconsin - La Crosse
    403O Carl Wimberly Hall
    1725 State Street
    La Crosse, WI 54601
    Phone: (608) 785-5295
    Fax: (608) 785-8549
    Email: brooks.tagg@uwlax.edu

    Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary
    safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety -Benjamin Franklin



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri May 05 2006 - 12:42:09 CDT