Teaching
I regularly teach Principles of Economics, Labor Economics, Health Economics and a Seminar in the Economics of Discrimination.
I enjoy teaching. Engaging with students and participating in the learning process gives me energy. I strive to channel this energy so that my enthusiasm for teaching and studying economics energizes my students.
A fundamental aspect of my teaching is promoting critical engagement to foster pluralistic and inclusive learning. Requiring critical engagement with competing approaches within economics helps students develop an important understanding of the “how” and “why” of economics and the reasons why economists often disagree in policy debates. Understanding how and why economists often disagree also contributes to my goal of diversifying the discipline by expanding the range of perspectives I introduce to students.
I design my courses to promote critical engagement with competing economic theories by modeling the importance of engagement. Students engage with material, each other, and myself in each class meeting. This engagement empowers my students to develop a well-informed perspective on the field and learn that economics is a field of inquiry that is defined by issues of study rather than a particular methodology or perspective. Thus, even students who disagree with a particular perspective come to realize that they, too, have something to contribute to the discipline.
Students find their place within the discipline through my careful design of course materials and class meetings. In each course, the readings comprise sources from diverse perspectives that I introduce into the course structure to mimic a conversation or debate. I similarly design each class meeting to be conversational and student-centered. In my principles courses, for example, I design examples related to current course material that students (in groups) complete in each class meeting. These exercises designed to develop skills in economic reasoning (quantitative analysis, assessing trade-offs and incentives, etc.) prompt students to work through the details of an economic theory as well as critically assess its underlying assumptions. I circulate the room monitoring and assisting students as they complete their exercises. This allows me to develop relationships with my students, cultivate a relaxed environment where students are comfortable speaking, learning, and assisting each other, and I am able to identify students in need of extra encouragement or assistance.
I include in-class debates in all classes except for principles. In each, I assign students to a particular perspective regarding a contemporary public policy to keep the class grounded in the real world. Assigning perspectives for the debate allows students to debate a particular perspective (without putting their individual identity at stake) while reducing anxiety associated with any fear of the ramifications of voicing an unpopular opinion. These debates serve two primary purposes. First, they require students to master economic theory by serving as a particularly effective mechanism to motivate students to engage with the nuance of competing economic perspectives and theories. Second, they reinforce that economics does not provide concrete answers to social questions. Different perspectives often provide different answers to the same question.
In addition to arguing orally, I emphasize the importance of argumentation in written communication often in assignments related to personal interest to promote intrinsic motivation for learning. Each of my classes includes a writing component. In principles, I assign a group project that requires students to predict the impact of a proposed public policy using an economic approach from class. Students improve their skills with more complex written assignments that require advanced quantitative analysis and more creative economic reasoning as they progress the curriculum up through the senior theses I regularly supervise (typically three to five per year.) These theses often include independent empirical research, and, in one case, the research was of sufficiently high quality that I continued to work with an advisee after graduation to co-author an article based on the thesis in the Journal of Labor Research.
By emphasizing the importance of diverse perspectives and economic rigor, I promote the development of a sophisticated and useful body of knowledge and skills within my students. These skills in critical thinking, argumentation, and the ability to produce new knowledge prepare students to be engaged citizens and successful in their future professional endeavors. Students communicate satisfaction with this approach in their quantitative and qualitative student evaluations. The distribution of quantitative student evaluations of my teaching is concentrated among four and five on a five-point scale. Qualitative evaluations are similarly positive. For example, students praise my ability to “communicate(s) complicated topics in a way that is accessible and inclusive.” I am careful to not sacrifice a depth of knowledge for a breadth of topics, which my students acknowledge. For example “It often surprised me how subtle some of the deeper concepts are. The course heavily rewards those minutes spent understanding rather than memorizing.” Thus, I believe my inclusive and pluralist pedagogy is good for my students as well as good for the discipline.
My emphasis on inclusion brings more students with traditionally under-represented perspectives in the discipline. These perspectives, as my research shows, are important to the development of theories applicable to the issues of our time. Training and retaining economists with under-represented perspectives is one of the ways I contribute to an improved discipline and one of the many reasons I enjoy it.