Author:
Schraner Ingrid,Mariyani‐Squire Edward
Abstract
PurposeThis paper aims to present the implications of discussing the economic concepts relevant to student projects within the international program Students in Free Enterprise (SIFE) and to discuss them as a teaching strategy that provides a simple but effective way to break the hegemony of market fundamentalism.Design/methodology/approachThe paper proposes using opportunities provided by the SIFE program to start the teaching of economics from a novel perspective: start with whatever project the students propose to undertake and support the students in examining the relevant economic concepts, strictly following SIFE's own assessment criterion: “Considering the relevant economic, social and environmental factors, which SIFE team most effectively empowered people in need by applying business and economic concepts and an entrepreneurial approach to improve their quality of life and standard of living?”.FindingsAsking which economic concepts are relevant to a particular project that effectively empowers people in need sidesteps the discussion of restrictive assumptions presented as principles of economics. Asking this question facilitates the introduction of those elements of heterodox traditions that are relevant to the projects in question.Originality/valueThe paper investigates implications of a radical shift in perspective to one grounded in a project of interest to students and one focusing on economic concepts that are relevant to the project. This shift allows students and their teachers to break the hegemony of economic principles in so far as the reality of the students' project is already beyond these restrictive assumptions.
Reference46 articles.
1. Akerlof, G.A. (1969), “Relative wages and the rate of inflation”, Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 83 No. 3, pp. 353‐74.
2. Baumol, W.J. (1959), Business Behaviour, Value and Growth, Macmillan, London.
3. Becker, W.E. (2007), “Quit lying and address the controversies: there are no dogmata, laws, rules or standards in the science of economics”, American Economist, Vol. 51 No. 1, pp. 3‐14.
4. Becker, W.E. and Watts, M. (1996), “Chalk and talk: a national survey of teaching undergraduate economics”, American Economic Review, Vol. 86 No. 2, pp. 448‐53.
5. Becker, W.E. and Watts, M. (2001), “Teaching economics at the start of the 21st century: still chalk and talk”, American Economic Review, Vol. 91 No. 2, pp. 446‐51.