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 economic thinking 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: thinking like an economist is not about learning some immediately accessible body of facts, but rather requires a teacher's careful facilitation to understand the more counterintuitive ideas. 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: once every week, I prompt the class with a question based on that week's topic and each student responds via a website called Poll Everywhere. The students earn points for each correct answer and the top-scoring students over the course of the semester receive a pre-specified number of extra-credit points. In my experience, interactive activities like the extra-credit competition have been effective in promoting independent thinking. For example, across all of my classes in the fall of 2019, my evaluations showed that 96 percent of students answered "frequently" or "almost always" when asked whether I "found ways to help students answer their own questions." The narrative comments further showed that students appreciated my approach, as evidenced by statements like "great job keeping the course engaging" or "always came to class with a positive attitude and tried to engage the students in a fun manner."
Connecting to real-world content: Thinking like an economist requires abstract thinking and effectively teaching abstract concepts requires connecting to the real world. In particular, linking economic concepts or ideas 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 course Senior Seminar on Global Poverty, 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 papers for publication, four of which have been accepted in an undergraduate research journal. My emphasis on connecting to the real world shows up clearly in my teaching evaluations: 96 percent of my students in the fall of 2019 answered "frequently" or "almost always" when asked whether I "demonstrated the importance and significance of the subject matter." The narrative comments additionally suggest that my class was "useful and relevant" and effectively "tied economic principles to real world examples."
Challenging and critical: Finally, my approach to teaching economic thinking is not only rigorous and challenging, but also critical. One way I promote critical thinking is by exposing students to controversial issues or lively debates in the social sciences. 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 oflife 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 fall of 2019, approximately 94 percent of my students answered "frequently" or "almost always" when asked whether I "introduced stimulating ideas about the subject." The narrative comments further suggest that students are "challenged," "inspired," and found class to be "interesting."
Incorporating student-centered instruction: Teaching economic thinking 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: thinking like an economist is not about learning some immediately accessible body of facts, but rather requires a teacher's careful facilitation to understand the more counterintuitive ideas. 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: once every week, I prompt the class with a question based on that week's topic and each student responds via a website called Poll Everywhere. The students earn points for each correct answer and the top-scoring students over the course of the semester receive a pre-specified number of extra-credit points. In my experience, interactive activities like the extra-credit competition have been effective in promoting independent thinking. For example, across all of my classes in the fall of 2019, my evaluations showed that 96 percent of students answered "frequently" or "almost always" when asked whether I "found ways to help students answer their own questions." The narrative comments further showed that students appreciated my approach, as evidenced by statements like "great job keeping the course engaging" or "always came to class with a positive attitude and tried to engage the students in a fun manner."
Connecting to real-world content: Thinking like an economist requires abstract thinking and effectively teaching abstract concepts requires connecting to the real world. In particular, linking economic concepts or ideas 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 course Senior Seminar on Global Poverty, 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 papers for publication, four of which have been accepted in an undergraduate research journal. My emphasis on connecting to the real world shows up clearly in my teaching evaluations: 96 percent of my students in the fall of 2019 answered "frequently" or "almost always" when asked whether I "demonstrated the importance and significance of the subject matter." The narrative comments additionally suggest that my class was "useful and relevant" and effectively "tied economic principles to real world examples."
Challenging and critical: Finally, my approach to teaching economic thinking is not only rigorous and challenging, but also critical. One way I promote critical thinking is by exposing students to controversial issues or lively debates in the social sciences. 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 oflife 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 fall of 2019, approximately 94 percent of my students answered "frequently" or "almost always" when asked whether I "introduced stimulating ideas about the subject." The narrative comments further suggest that students are "challenged," "inspired," and found class to be "interesting."
