Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Teaching Political Economy

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Challenging the Orthodoxy

Abstract

This chapter considers the teaching of political economy, paying particular attention to the unique approach to that challenge taken by Frank Stilwell and colleagues in the Department of Political Economy at the University of Sydney. The chapter considers a range of definitions of political economy. It then explores the relationship between notions of political economy and teaching approach, mainly via the case of International Political Economy. This relationship is complex and over-determined; however a central factor influencing teaching approach is the educational goals of the instructor. The chapter considers liberal, instrumental and critical goals. All three of these are evident in the Sydney approach. The chapter offers some principles for the teaching of political economy, and claims that most of these are present in the Sydney paradigm.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    A strand of this, Comparative Political Economy, tends to be dominated by the Varieties of Capitalism (Hall and Soskice 2001) literature, which specifically highlights the political underpinnings of market processes and competitiveness.

  2. 2.

    “By its very nature, international political economy (IPE) involves the juxtaposition of opposing logics, and the interaction of complex dynamics across multiple national, subnational and international political arenas” (McNamara 2009, p. 72).

  3. 3.

    See Clarke and Mearman (2004); Mearman (2007) et passim.

  4. 4.

    Liberal goals clearly reflect a specific political philosophy: liberal education has its own reproduction as an instrumentalist goal. The irony in this context is that we have discussed how IPE is viewed by some in that sub-discipline as having become dominated by liberal political philosophy and that this is considered problematic.

  5. 5.

    It might also mean that they think dialectically.

References

  • Abdelal, R., Blyth, M., & Parsons, C. (Eds.). (2010). Constructing the international economy. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Amin, R., & Haneef, M. (2011). The quest for better economics graduates: Revising the pluralist approach in the case of the international Islamic University, Malaysia. International Journal of Pluralism and Economics Education, 2(1), 96–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baker, D. (2012). Getting radical with markets. Review of Radical Political Economics, 44, 374–379.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barone, C. (2011). Contending economic perspectives at a liberal arts college: A 25-year retrospective. International Journal of Pluralism and Economics Education, 2(1), 19–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bloom, B., Krathwohl, D., & Masia, B. (1964). Taxonomy of educational objectives, Book 2 affective domain. New York: Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blyth, M. (2002). Great transformations: Economic ideas and institutional changes in the twentieth century. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Boulding, K. (1989). Three faces of power. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bridges, D. (1992). Enterprise and liberal education. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 26(1), 91–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, C. (2001). “Our side?” Critical theory and international relations. In R. Wyn Jones (Ed.), Critical theory and world politics. Boulder: Lynne Rienner.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, P., & Mearman, A. (2004). Comment on C. Winch, “economic aims of education”. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 38(3), 249–255.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, B. (2007). The transatlantic divide: Why are American and British IPE so different? Review of International Political Economy, 14(2), 197–219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cowley, E. and Smith, S. (2013). Motivation and mission in the public sector: Evidence from the world values survey. CMPO Working Paper Series, 13/299.

    Google Scholar 

  • Denis, A. (2009). Editorial: Pluralism in economics education. International Review of Economics Education, 8(2), 6–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dow, S. (1990). Beyond dualism. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 14(2), 143–157.

    Google Scholar 

  • Earl, P. (2000). Indeterminacy in the economics classroom. In P. Earl & S. F. Frowen (Eds.), Economics as an art of thought: Essays in memory of G. L. S. Shackle. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freire, P. (1970 [2000]). Pedagogy of the Oppressed, New York: Continuum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fullbrook, E. (2002). The Post-Autistic Economics Movement. Journal of Australian Political Economy, 50, 14–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gamble, A., Payne, A., Hoogvelt, A., Kenny, M., & Dietrich, M. (1996). Editorial: new political economy. New Political Economy, 1(1), 5–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garnett, R., & Mearman, A. (2011). Contending perspectives, twenty years on: what have our students learned? International Journal of Pluralism and Economics Education, 2(1), 2–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilpin, R. (1975). U.S. power and the multinational corporation. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, P., & Soskice, D. (2001). Varieties of capitalism: institutional foundations of competitive advantage. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Harvey, J. (2011). Student attitudes toward economic pluralism: survey-based evidence. International Journal of Pluralism and Economics Education, 2(3), 270–290.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hicks, S. R. C. (2004) Explaining Postmodernism: Skepticism and Socialism from Rousseau to Foucault. Tempe: Scholarly Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Higgott, R., & Payne, A. (2000). New political economy of globalisation. Aldershot: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Higgott, R., & Watson, M. (2008). All at sea in a barbed wire canoe: Professor Cohen’s transatlantic voyage in IPE. Review of International Political Economy, 15(1), 1–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • hooks, B. (1994). Teaching to transgress: Education as the practice of freedom. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lapidus, J. (2011). But which theory is right? Economic pluralism, developmental epistemology and uncertainty. International Journal of Pluralism and Economics Education, 2(1), 82–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, F. (2006). The ranking game, class and scholarship in American mainstream economics. Australasian Journal of Economics Education, 3(1&2), 1–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maliniak, D., & Tierney, M. J. (2009). The American school of IPE. Review of International Political Economy, 16(1), 6–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McIntyre, R., & van Horn, R. (2011). Contending perspectives in one department. International Journal of Pluralism and Economics Education, 2(1), 69–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McNamara, K. (2009). Of intellectual monocultures and the study of IPE. Review of International Political Economy, 16(1), 72–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mearman, A. (2007). Teaching heterodox economic concepts. Handbook for Economics Lecturers. Bristol: Economics Network.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mearman, A. (2011). Who do heterodox economists think they are? American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 70(2), 480–510.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mearman, A. (2012). “Heterodox economics” and the problems of classification. Journal of Economic Methodology, 19(4), 407–424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mearman, A. (2013). How should economics curricula be evaluated? UWE Discussion Paper in Economics, International Review of Economics Education, forthcoming, 13/06.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mearman, A., Shoib, G., Wakeley, T., Webber, D. (2011). Does pluralism make better educated, happier students? International Review of Economics Education, 10, 50–62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, J. And, & Goodwin, N. (2009). Teaching ecological and feminist economics in the principles course. Forum for Social Economics, 38(2–3), 173–187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Donnell, R. (2009). Economic pluralism and skill formation: adding value to students, economies, and societies. In R. Garnett, E. Olsen, & M. Starr (Eds.), Economic pluralism. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, N. (2009). The slow death of pluralism. Review of International Political Economy, 16(1), 85–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Resnick, S., & Wolff, R. (2011). Teaching economics differently by comparing contesting theories. International Journal of Pluralism and Economics Education, 2(1), 57–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strange, S. (Ed.). (1984). ‘Preface’, in paths to international political economy. London: George Allen & Unwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strange, S. (1994). Wake up, Krasner! The world has changed. Review of International Political Economy, 1(2), 209–219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stilwell, F. (2005). Teaching political economy: curriculum and pedagogy. Journal of Australasian Economics Education, 2(1&2), 66–82.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stilwell, F. (2006). Four reasons for pluralism in the teaching of economics. Journal of Australasian Economics Education, 3(1&2), 42–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stilwell, F. (2011). Teaching a pluralist course in economics: the University of Sydney experience. International Journal of Pluralism and Economics Education, 2(1), 39–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stilwell, F. (2012). Teaching political economy: making a difference? Studies in Political Economy, 89(Spring), 147–163.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wade, R. (2009). Beware what you wish for: lessons for international political economy from the transformation of economics. Review of International Political Economy, 16(1), 106–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. The University of the West of England, Bristol, BS16 1QY, UK

    Andrew Mearman

Authors
  1. Andrew Mearman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andrew Mearman .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Political Economy, University of Sydney, Sydney NSW, Australia

    Susan K. Schroeder

  2. Department of Political Economy, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia

    Lynne Chester

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Mearman, A. (2014). Teaching Political Economy. In: Schroeder, S., Chester, L. (eds) Challenging the Orthodoxy. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-36121-0_4

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-36121-0_4

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-36120-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-36121-0

  • eBook Packages: Business and EconomicsEconomics and Finance (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation