Skip to main content

Curric-onomics: WHAT TO TEACH, AND WHEN? The Structure of Content, Choosing Contexts, and the Repeating Quest – Part 1

 

WHAT TO TEACH, AND WHEN? The Structure of Content, Choosing Contexts, and the Repeating Quest – Part 1

The thinking in this section accepts:

-          That in economics we will teach students the core canon of existing economic thought (presented as ‘the best we have thus far’, rather than ‘fact’) in terms of substantive knowledge.

-          That we will also teach the required 'user' disciplinary knowledge elements of application, analysis and evaluation to enable students to become skilful users of existing theory, as well as developing 'theorist' disciplinary knowledge and wider awareness by questioning existing theory and highlighting the continued development of the subject.

The Structure of the Subject

I conceive of the substantive subject knowledge in economics as being arranged in different parts or layers. I have named this idea: the ‘Russian doll model’. The core areas of theory relate to study of different ‘sized’ domains; the firm and market (which combine as microeconomics) and the nation and globe (which we consider as macroeconomics). Some aspects of study run through all layers, for example labour markets which can be studied at the firm, market, national and global levels, and PPF which can be applied from the tiniest micro context right up to global issues such as specialisation and international trade.

Displaying this thinking graphically can help students to understand the whole subject and also to understand the journey they will take though their studies.



Choosing Contexts

Whilst the doll formation and content of the canon at each layer is fairly well agreed upon, the precise embellishment of each doll can (and does) vary widely from teacher to teacher. This is therefore, in some ways, the most important aspect of considering ‘what to teach’ in economics as teachers have huge creative licence here. Which case studies? Which countries? Which markets? Which firms? Which time periods?

What counts are ‘core’ knowledge with regards to contexts is far more a matter of intuition, tradition and preference and there is much less unity of agreement on what must be studied in this respect. I would hazard a guess that almost every teacher will allude to case studies of the impact of smoking in teaching externalities, or the Greek debt crisis when teaching about public sector finances, but should students know about the construction of the Hinkley Point C power station, the takeover of EE by BT, the introduction of the Euro in Lithuania or the nature of tariffs imposed by Tunisia?

Exam board specifications make very little reference to required contexts beyond the broad mention of phrases such as ‘markets such as housing, transport and oil’ or the like, and a few mentions of specific events like the Great Depression and the 2008 financial crisis.

This is an area of curriculum thinking which I feel is likely overlooked quite frequently in a subject which is heavily focused on the theory. Often the application context seems to be chosen almost at random, last minute or with regards to what’s convenient, without much wider thought on what we should actually be covering in terms of context. And whilst it might seem I am presenting this as ill-thought-out, and maybe sometimes it is, alternatively it is possible to argue that selection of context 'last minute' is exactly what should be happening, as we endeavour to remain topical, act as news-connected role models and pique curiosity. Interestingly teachers are engaged in debate about the issue of 'topicality' and I would thoroughly encourage you to explore Andrew Lay's (2020) blogs on this topic.  

This is certainly an area where I will be thinking more and writing more, and where others may also like to contribute to the field, in order to establish what would and should represent a rich, powerful and coordinated curriculum with regards to context choice.

How much ‘contextual’ work?

It can be very easy to dedicate large amounts of time to explanation of the often rather complex substantive knowledge in an abstract manner. Coverage of ‘the theory’ often precedes application of it to a context, but how much application and case study work should be we doing?

From a disciplinary knowledge and expert ‘user’ perspective, we could consider that we do need plenty of application practice as students must be shown how theory can be applied across a range of markets/firms/countries etc. in order to be able to ultimately be able to skilfully and appropriately apply this themselves in a new and unfamiliar situations. If students have only experienced price elasticity of demand in contexts where consumers need or are addicted to a good, how could they understand application of the theory in contexts where consumers do not really need a good at all, but yet their responsiveness to price changes is minimal as the product represents a tiny percentage of their income.

The answer to this question really does therefore seem to be: as much as possible. ‘More is more’ in terms of exposure to contexts but teachers should consider prioritising breadth of contexts in order to offer contrast at least when faced with time constraints. Encouraging students to read widely outside the classroom is also important in enabling them to increase their contextual awareness.

There is also a hierarchical element to this contextual work, as students should initially be presented with simple examples where basic theory appears to ‘just work’ and neatly explains the situation, before moving up to messier situations where more specific or less obvious applications are required, where standard theory doesn’t seem to fully explain what is happening, or where different theoretical approaches could explain the same reality.

The Repeating Quest

If there is one repeating narrative element within the course, then it is the question of whether the government should intervene or not. Time and again we introduce theoretical and often ‘free market’ systems and models, demonstrate their abstract and theoretical operation, consider the ‘real life’ behaviour and performance of such systems, then explore government interventions to affect behaviour and performance, before finishing on exploration of why that can also fail.

My initial thinking around this seemed to relate the progression of the subject journey to something of a spiral model, where teaching returns time and again to the same concepts at increasing levels of difficulty. This didn’t quite seem to convey the full picture though, and therefore I have developed a ‘zigzag model’ of curriculum to reflect not only the repetitive nature of the subject (as we continually revisit the stops on the zigzag path) but also the back-and-forth veering between free market versus interventionist perspectives.


The sequencing of the zigzags over time is hierarchical in nature as some zigzags are more conceptually straightforward than others, and thus I would happily posit the rationale for some zigzags being taught before others. The sequencing of zigzags is not, in my opinion, something that can be cumulatively developed over time in any order.

The graphic below attempts to represents this repeating quest to some degree, mapping each zigzag quest within the doll layers,  although it fails to convey the actual journey I will take through the domain landscape, and thus I shall describe the key sequencing principles that should sequencing choices in words in my next post.

Practical Steps for School Teachers

1.       Consider the different ‘Russian doll’ layers of the subject content. Arrange teaching into segments that relate to these layers. Recognise and highlight to students where concepts transcend different dolls.   

2.       Take time to deliberately think about and make choices around your use of contexts. Ponder the importance of topicality. Be careful to consider contextual work as hierarchical and ensure you include sufficient practice to develop high levels of disciplinary 'application' knowledge.

3.       Notice the repeating quest and highlight this to students along the way so they can also see the repetitions and develop their schema in such a way.


Read further blogs in the Curric-onomics series here

For more on a taking a graphical approach in curriculum thinking, read this


References & Contacts

Lay, A. (2021). “Slaves of some defunct Economy”/On Topicality, Part 1
https://teachingexternalities.wordpress.com/2020/04/27/slaves-of-some-defunct-economy-on-topicality-part-1/
Twitter: @apwlay





Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Back to the Future

Ensuring something happens in the future is potentially rather easier to achieve if you possess a time machine. In theory such a contraption facilitates your travel back in time to amend things that are wrong with the present before they happen, or enables you to leap forwards to tweak moments in the future for the better. However, as Marty and Doc humorously demonstrate, this isn’t always as simple as it might seem! For the rest of us non-time-machine-owning folk, our main hope for ensuring things happen in the future lies in the effectiveness of our ‘prospective memory’. As opposed to ‘retrospective memory’ (where we are trying to remember something from the past), the concept of prospective memory refers to our ability to remember something in the future. Will you remember to wish Lucy a happy birthday tomorrow morning? Will you remember to send Jack to the office at 12.20pm for their appointment? Will you put out the garden waste bin instead of the food waste bin next week? T

Subject Symmetry

Some subjects appear to be awash with books on how to teach them and writing on what constitutes a ‘good’ curriculum in terms of that subject. Wise subject leaders who are engaged in curriculum design would of course do well to read such material to help aid their thinking, as would senior leaders who are responsible for quality assurance.   But what if little or nothing appears to have been written about the teaching of or curriculum thinking in relation to a particular subject? Where does a subject leader go for inspiration? How do they know if their curriculum is any ‘good’ or how it could be improved? How might senior leaders attempt to quality assure that curriculum?  The answer is that the curriculum thinking must be done from scratch. Before any work can be started the parties involved need first to educate themselves in the underlying principles and concepts of curriculum theory. These generic principles then need to be tentatively applied to the subject. There is no other w

Classifying & Addressing Misconceptions

Are there different types of misconception? Does thinking about this help us to better identify them, prevent them and address them?  I am suggesting here that misconceptions may be classified into two types: - pre-existing misconceptions - instructional phase misconceptions (or ‘miscompletions’) If the student simply does not know something, this shall not be considered a misconception, but rather an ‘incompletion’. They have a gap, and it isn’t filled with something wrong, it’s just empty!  This post is in response to a blog named ‘Misconception?’ from Ben Newmark, you can read it here ! Thanks, Ben!