At 12:01 PM 8/30/99 -0400, you wrote:
>Penners,
>
> I had replied to Mitch's questions off-list. But
>since Michael thought the questions of general interest,
>I'm forwarding my responses to the list.
>
> Ellen Frank
>
>1. Especially in introductory classes, how do you balance conveying
>information and helping students to think critically?
>
>Introductory classes, in my opinion, are not fundamentally about
>conveying information. Look at an introductory textbook - all
>theory, very little hard facts. The object of an introductory economics
>course is to indoctrinate, to teach a theory uncritically. It's fairly
>easy
>to subvert this intent (and teach students to think critically) simply
>by assigning readings that take issue with the textbook. I use the
>Dollars and Sense readers and other materials.
Anothe suggestion is to include texts on economic sociology and sociology
of organizations that generally adopt a critical view og the prevailing
economic instiutions, there is w whole bunch of publications - check for
book and articles by Richard Swedberg, Charles Perrow, DiMaggio, Mark
Granovetter, Fred Block - also Kathy Ferguson, Nancy Hartsock, Barbara
Reskin for a feminist perspective on the subject.
Another good resource is the bi-montly _Dollars and Sense_ and the readers
they put together.
>
>2. How do you evaluate the development of your students as critical
>thinkers?
>
>I ask for a lot of compare and contrast papers. I organize debates.
>I also have students do an investigative project, finding out
>all they can about a particular market or program and compare
>the actual to the textbook ideal.
Another thing that I tried was linking theory with student's own experience
- especially on the job. For example, in one class (intro to sociology) I
covered the topic of deskilling ("strandard" Braverman's text) and then
asked students to find examples of that process (or its opposite) in the
places they work. Other assignments may include the analysis of different
interaction types at the workplace (cf. Burawoy, _Manufacturing Consent_)
and asking students to do a similar analysis of their own workplace.
>
>
>3. How important is it to you that classes be structured democratically?
>
>I'm not sure what it means to structure a class democratically, at least
>in introductory classes. When I started teaching, I tried very hard
>not to be authoritarian, to seek students input and so on, but the nature
>of an introductory course is that I know alot more than the students and
>I have a much better sense of how they learn than they do. I do try
>not to lecture too much and I always stop talking immediately when
>a student raises his/her hand. I don't require students to raise their
>hands, actually, and sometimes, if I have a very motivated and talkative
>group of students, my classes turn into free-for-alls. But I reserve the
>right to pull rank and move on.
I tend to agree with Ellen on that - "democracy: is often seen as a lack of
structure and does not help very much. The students are expecting to learn
something from the instructor - otherwise they would not be in the
classroom - and that by definition implies an unequal relationship = it
makes to sense to pretend otherwise. But that, of course, does not mean
teaching a clas in an authoritarian manner. IMHO, the key here is to make
the classroom experience relevant to what students do outside the
classroom, especially at work. This way, not only do they learn something
of practical significance, but will also have a chance to contribute
something other class participants (including the instructor) do not know.
For example, one paper on deskilling I just described and which I remember
quite vividly because I learned something from it was written by a female
student who worked as a cashier at a local supermarket, and described how
the introduction of the bar codes changed their job - a truly exciting
stuff.
>
>
>4. How much freedom do you have to plan your own syllabus, or to alter
>your syllabus so as to better meet the needs of students?
>
>Well, nobody's standing over my shoulder telling me how to teach
>and my colleagues are generally supportive of pedagogical
>experimentation. But I work within the context of broader
>institutional and social constraints. I need to be cognizant
>of discipline boundaries, to make sure my courses
>transfer to other institutions, to give grades that will be
>understood by graduate institutions and so on.
A good idea is to check the syllabi put together by experienced teachers.
I know that the American Sociological Association sells such sample syllabi
for economic sociology and organizational sociology - check their website
for more info
http://www.asanet.org/
also check _Dollars and Sense_ based in Somerset, MA they may have
soemthing to say on that subject too.
I would be a bit reluctant recommending the same for "mainstream" economics
classes, because they are known to slavishly follow the conventional
wisdom, but perhaps someone else has other suggestions.
>
>5. What relationship do you see between academic education in economics
>and
>social justice movements?
>
>I do feel there's a relationship. I teach economics in a very
>critical manner and students who take my courses are
>often motivated to become involved in social justice work.
>Also, education is important, even if I'm not reaching thousands
>of people. How many places are there in the US where people
>have frank on-going discussions about whether income
>distribution is just, or what justice even means in an economic
>context. While I understand that teaching is not a substitute
>for social justice efforts, it's not unimportant. I am often asked
>to teach classes organized by labor groups or other activist
>groups who tell me that their members need more education
>about economics.
>
I am afraid that the relationship might be negative - I recall that econ
students were found to be more individualistic and competitive than
students of other disciplines. Sociology and its students are generally
much more sympathetic toward social movements - but I am afraid that
academic interest often means only vicarious instead of real participation.
wojtek
