Education is often associated with the broad goals of developing engaged citizens, encouraging personal growth, and promoting professional fulfillment. Each academic discipline contributes to these goals in its own way, and as an economist I seek to do so by teaching students the value of "thinking like an economist." This entails applying quantitative reasoning to social problems, which includes evaluating trade-offs in the presence of constraints, recognizing implicit opportunity costs, and examining how incentives influence human behavior. To some this may sound dry, but thinking like an economist requires creativity: economists attempt to frame issues in ways other people do not see, devise novel solutions to real-world problems, and develop innovative strategies for estimating quantities of interest to policymakers. Whether I am teaching an interdisciplinary group of students or economics majors, my approach to teaching promotes both the analytical and creative side of thinking like an economist by focusing on three core practices.
Incorporating student-centered instruction: Teaching economics requires striking a balance between teacher- and student-centered instruction. On the one hand, the research suggests that "chalk and talk" is less effective than more interactive classrooms in terms of improving student understanding, engagement, and interest. On the other hand, a purely student-centered approach misses the point: economics is not a body of facts immediately accessible to the student, and the more counterintuitive content often requires a teacher's careful facilitation. While the appropriate balance depends on a number of factors (e.g., class size), the typical day in one of my classes alternates between teacher- and student-centered instruction. The teacher-centered component generally consists of a brief lecture or structured discussion, and the student-centered component involves in-class exercises, such as group problem solving, classroom experiments, or brainstorming activities.
One particularly popular exercise is an extra-credit competition: three times throughout my Principles of Microeconomics course I devote a class period to an activity where students are prompted with several questions and each student responds via a website called Poll Everywhere. The students earn points for each correct answer and the top-scoring students for each competition earn a pre-specified number of extra-credit points. In my experience, interactive activities like the extra-credit competition have been effective in motivating students. For example, across all of my classes in the spring of 2024, my evaluations showed that roughly 85 percent of students answered "strongly agree" or "somewhat agree" when asked whether they felt motivated to do high-quality work. The narrative comments further showed that students appreciated my approach, as evidenced by comments stating that I "made learning the material very manageable" and "made class very engaging."
Connecting to real-world content: Economics tends to be highly abstract, but effectively teaching abstract concepts requires connecting to the real world. In particular, linking economic concepts to the real world can make the material seem more relevant to students, both on an intellectual and personal level. The literature suggests that relevance is key to promoting intrinsic motivation and a "deep" (i.e., interactive, meaningful, and integrated) rather than "surface" (i.e., passive, rote, and disjoint) approach to learning. To promote such deep learning, I rely heavily on empirical examples, activities, and assignments. For instance, in my course Developing Economies, I ask students to analyze real data to evaluate the impact of a poverty-alleviation program in Kenya. Other examples include regular discussions of economic issues or research, the use of movie clips or podcasts in the classroom, and written assignments about current events.
In my senior seminar, which is a research-oriented capstone course, I have tried to promote more "authentic" assessment by requiring data-driven capstone papers, inviting other faculty to observe student research presentations, and by advising students to publish their work. In my short time teaching the seminar, I have had numerous students submit their research for publication, two of which were accepted in an undergraduate research journal. My emphasis on connecting to the real world shows up clearly in my teaching evaluations: 97 percent of my students in the spring of 2024 answered "strongly agree" or "somewhat agree" when asked whether I clearly presented the class material. The narrative comments additionally suggest that I "made course material practical" and that "real-world examples reinforced the content."
Challenging and critical: Finally, economics education should not only be rigorous and challenging, but also critical. The history of economics consists of numerous debates regarding the appropriate assumptions, methods, and topics for the discipline. Research on constructive controversy suggests that such debates can be useful in the classroom: (1) exposure to conflicting viewpoints creates uncertainty about one's beliefs; (2) uncertainty prompts a search for new information and perspectives; and (3) the process of reconceptualization promotes creativity, reasoning, and an appreciation of other viewpoints. Not only does constructive controversy help students think like an economist, but they also find it interesting. For example, in Principles of Microeconomics, I present the students with a thought experiment where they must decide how to allocate a kidney dialysis treatment among alternative patients. The students often debate extensively about whether to emphasize "fairness" (i.e., by choosing the first on the waiting list) or "efficiency" (i.e., by maximizing the quantity of life saved).
In my senior seminar, we spend a class period having a debate about a quantitative evaluation of a poverty-alleviation program called the Millennium Villages Project (MVP). The MVP represents a top-down approach to development policymaking, and has been criticized extensively by advocates of more bottom-up or partnership-based models. Having read the associated research paper, the students state whether they would like to support or oppose the MVP's approach, but are then assigned to the opposite group. We then have a structured debate where each side presents their argument and rebuttal, after which we discuss whether and why any students changed their positions. Overall, students seem to respond well to constructive controversy and, in the spring of 2024, approximately 86 percent of my students answered "strongly agree" or "somewhat agree" when asked whether the course enhanced their learning. The narrative comments further suggest that students are "encouraged to engage with the subject and develop critical thinking skills actively."
Incorporating student-centered instruction: Teaching economics requires striking a balance between teacher- and student-centered instruction. On the one hand, the research suggests that "chalk and talk" is less effective than more interactive classrooms in terms of improving student understanding, engagement, and interest. On the other hand, a purely student-centered approach misses the point: economics is not a body of facts immediately accessible to the student, and the more counterintuitive content often requires a teacher's careful facilitation. While the appropriate balance depends on a number of factors (e.g., class size), the typical day in one of my classes alternates between teacher- and student-centered instruction. The teacher-centered component generally consists of a brief lecture or structured discussion, and the student-centered component involves in-class exercises, such as group problem solving, classroom experiments, or brainstorming activities.
One particularly popular exercise is an extra-credit competition: three times throughout my Principles of Microeconomics course I devote a class period to an activity where students are prompted with several questions and each student responds via a website called Poll Everywhere. The students earn points for each correct answer and the top-scoring students for each competition earn a pre-specified number of extra-credit points. In my experience, interactive activities like the extra-credit competition have been effective in motivating students. For example, across all of my classes in the spring of 2024, my evaluations showed that roughly 85 percent of students answered "strongly agree" or "somewhat agree" when asked whether they felt motivated to do high-quality work. The narrative comments further showed that students appreciated my approach, as evidenced by comments stating that I "made learning the material very manageable" and "made class very engaging."
Connecting to real-world content: Economics tends to be highly abstract, but effectively teaching abstract concepts requires connecting to the real world. In particular, linking economic concepts to the real world can make the material seem more relevant to students, both on an intellectual and personal level. The literature suggests that relevance is key to promoting intrinsic motivation and a "deep" (i.e., interactive, meaningful, and integrated) rather than "surface" (i.e., passive, rote, and disjoint) approach to learning. To promote such deep learning, I rely heavily on empirical examples, activities, and assignments. For instance, in my course Developing Economies, I ask students to analyze real data to evaluate the impact of a poverty-alleviation program in Kenya. Other examples include regular discussions of economic issues or research, the use of movie clips or podcasts in the classroom, and written assignments about current events.
In my senior seminar, which is a research-oriented capstone course, I have tried to promote more "authentic" assessment by requiring data-driven capstone papers, inviting other faculty to observe student research presentations, and by advising students to publish their work. In my short time teaching the seminar, I have had numerous students submit their research for publication, two of which were accepted in an undergraduate research journal. My emphasis on connecting to the real world shows up clearly in my teaching evaluations: 97 percent of my students in the spring of 2024 answered "strongly agree" or "somewhat agree" when asked whether I clearly presented the class material. The narrative comments additionally suggest that I "made course material practical" and that "real-world examples reinforced the content."
Challenging and critical: Finally, economics education should not only be rigorous and challenging, but also critical. The history of economics consists of numerous debates regarding the appropriate assumptions, methods, and topics for the discipline. Research on constructive controversy suggests that such debates can be useful in the classroom: (1) exposure to conflicting viewpoints creates uncertainty about one's beliefs; (2) uncertainty prompts a search for new information and perspectives; and (3) the process of reconceptualization promotes creativity, reasoning, and an appreciation of other viewpoints. Not only does constructive controversy help students think like an economist, but they also find it interesting. For example, in Principles of Microeconomics, I present the students with a thought experiment where they must decide how to allocate a kidney dialysis treatment among alternative patients. The students often debate extensively about whether to emphasize "fairness" (i.e., by choosing the first on the waiting list) or "efficiency" (i.e., by maximizing the quantity of life saved).
In my senior seminar, we spend a class period having a debate about a quantitative evaluation of a poverty-alleviation program called the Millennium Villages Project (MVP). The MVP represents a top-down approach to development policymaking, and has been criticized extensively by advocates of more bottom-up or partnership-based models. Having read the associated research paper, the students state whether they would like to support or oppose the MVP's approach, but are then assigned to the opposite group. We then have a structured debate where each side presents their argument and rebuttal, after which we discuss whether and why any students changed their positions. Overall, students seem to respond well to constructive controversy and, in the spring of 2024, approximately 86 percent of my students answered "strongly agree" or "somewhat agree" when asked whether the course enhanced their learning. The narrative comments further suggest that students are "encouraged to engage with the subject and develop critical thinking skills actively."
