Standing in the way of rigor? Economics’ meeting with the decolonization agenda

Figures & data

Table 1. Do you think there is a problem with traditional Economics education?^a

Response	Number	Percentage of total
Yes, it is too far removed from reality	159	31.86%
Yes, it is not interdisciplinary enough	156	31.26%
Yes, there is not enough economic history	114	22.85%
Yes, there is not enough history of economic thought	101	20.24%
Yes, it is not pluralist enough	97	19.44%
Yes, it is too abstract	91	18.24%
Yes, it is too math-heavy	84	16.83%
There are no major problems	81	16.23%
Yes, it is not heterodox enough	59	11.82%
Yes, it is too textbook-based	52	10.42%
Yes, it is too Eurocentric	52	10.42%
Yes, it is too removed from students’ own experiences	46	9.22%
Yes, it needs to be decolonized	19	3.81%

^aRespondents could choose a maximum of 3 options.

Table 2. Logistic estimation; dependent variable for each specification listed below.

	(1)	(2)	(3)	(4)	(5)
	Does not identify a problem in economics^a	Move away from textbook teaching^a	Stop teaching students to think like an economist^a	Difficulty in relating to standard economics curriculum^a	Teach course that allow to understand structural inequality^a
Department: Pluralist/ Heterodox (Reference Group: Mainstream)	0.0892*** (0.0634)	2.136*** (0.605)	4.733*** (1.370)	3.470*** (0.970)	11.32*** (4.441)
Department: Non-Economics	0.425** (0.168)	3.515*** (0.945)	4.672*** (1.246)	2.949*** (0.783)	11.61*** (4.028)
Region: Global South (Reference Group: Global North)	1.527 (1.191)	4.102** (2.350)	2.241 (1.317)	5.155*** (2.906)	4.331** (3.213)
Years since PhD: 5-15 Years (Reference Group: 0-5 Years)	1.197 (0.519)	0.889 (0.274)	0.715 (0.226)	0.557* (0.171)	1.972* (0.723)
Years since PhD: 15-30 Years	0.965 (0.408)	1.851** (0.551)	0.875 (0.276)	0.900 (0.271)	1.815 (0.692)
Years since PhD: More Than 30 Years	2.471** (1.022)	1.266 (0.412)	0.497** (0.171)	0.476** (0.166)	2.630** (1.038)
Gender: Woman (Reference Group: Man)	0.852 (0.273)	1.584* (0.373)	1.545* (0.380)	1.191 (0.287)	2.245*** (0.616)
Gender: Prefer Not to say	1.192 (0.853)	0.855 (0.622)	0.737 (0.601)	0.588 (0.393)	0.808 (0.587)
Belonging Ethnic/Racial Minority: Yes (Reference Group: No)	0.507 (0.249)	1.841** (0.552)	1.101 (0.357)	1.270 (0.393)	0.844 (0.296)
Belonging Ethnic/Racial Minority: Prefer Not to say	2.378* (1.229)	0.247** (0.159)	0.613 (0.324)	2.849** (1.397)	0.754 (0.458)
Constant	0.2282*** (.083)	0.3181*** (0.083)	0.324*** (0.091)	0.391*** (0.107)	.2742*** (.0950)
Pseudo R^2	0.1049	0.0802	0.1218	0.0913	0.2080
N	448	448	446	441	403

Robust standard errors in parenthesis.

Pseudo R² = percent.

* p < 0.10, ** p < 0.05, *** p < 0.01.

Non-Economics departments include Interdisciplinary/International Development/Development/Political economy/Politics/Political science departments.

^a (1) Logistic estimation, where the dependent variable is a categorical variable takes values 1 if the respondent does not identify a problem with economics and 0 if they do.

(2) Logistic estimation, where the dependent variable is a categorical variable that takes value 1 if the respondents agree with the statement that ‘We need to move away from the Textbook Approach if we are going to be able to teach students to think critically and independently’, and 0 otherwise.

(3) Logistic estimation, where the dependent variable is a categorical variable that takes value 1 if the respondents agree with the statement that ‘we need to stop teaching students to “think like an economist”, and rather teach them that there are equally valid ways of thinking about economics phenomena’, and 0 otherwise.

(4) Logistic estimation, where the dependent variable is a categorical variable that takes value 1 if the respondents responded in affirmative to the question if they ‘find it difficult to relate the standard Economics curriculum to the specific country or socioeconomic context in which you teach’ and 0 otherwise.

(5) Logistic estimation, where the dependent variable is a categorical variable that takes value 1 if the respondents responded on affirmative to the question whether the ‘courses they teach allow for an understanding of structural racialized inequalities and/or the role of European colonialism in shaping economic outcomes’ and 0 otherwise.

The results are reported as odds ratio, where an odds greater than 1 implies that relative to the base category, those belonging to the non-base category are more likely to subscribe to the opinion outlined in the dependent variable.

Figure 1. Evaluating various aspects of economics teaching, by department.

Full statements respondents were asked to evaluate:

(1) We need to move away from the textbook approach if we are going to be able to teach students to think critically and independently.

(2) We need to stop teaching students to ‘think like an economist’ and rather teach them that there are many equally valid ways of thinking about economic phenomena.

(3) Do you find it difficult to relate the standard economics curriculum to the specific country or socioeconomic context in which you teach?

(4) Do any of the courses you teach allow for an understanding of structural racialized inequalities and/or the role of European colonialism in shaping economic outcomes?

Figure 2. Percentage who agrees with the following statements (by department).

Table 3. What are the main constraints to reforming Economics teaching, in your own experience? (by department, in percentages).^a

	Mainstream economics	Heterodox/pluralist economics	Others	Total
None of these constraints are relevant	31	31	41	33
My institution requires me to teach Economics in a certain way	9	7	7	8
Students prefer the standard curriculum	9	11	11	10
Students need to be updated on ‘the canon’ of their discipline	17	23	20	19
Students need technical training, which takes time	40	32	28	37
I don’t have the knowledge and background to teach decolonized Economics	15	11	10	13
I don’t have time to reform the courses I teach	17	16	14	16
My institution does not have the resources required to develop new courses	5	11	5	6
I don’t have the training and background to teach pluralist or heterodox Economics	11	4	10	10

^aThe respondents could pick as many as they deemed relevant.

The most popular answer is marked in bold.

Table 4. Percentage who chose the following options as ways to make Economics education as relevant and realistic as possible.^a

Response	Number of responses	Percentage of respondents
Give students realistic/real case studies	391	79%
Include readings and/or insights from other disciplines	246	49%
Include alternative economic perspectives	227	46%
Don’t rely heavily on mathematics	213	43%
Include more history of economic thought	211	42%
Embed the course in economic history	204	41%
Shift to alternative assessments	197	40%
Centrally involve students’ perspectives and experiences	189	38%
Seek to include perspectives from the Global South	149	30%
Seek to include more case studies from the Global South	136	27%
Include more about colonialism and empire	104	21%
Break down common ideas of who is an ‘expert’	101	20%
Seek to include readings from the Global South	97	19%
None of the above	18	4%

^aThe respondents could pick as many as they deemed relevant.

Figure 3. Ways to make Economics education as relevant and realistic as possible.

Table 5. Logistic estimation: dependent variable for each specification noted below (odds ratio).

	(1)	(2)	(3)	(4)	(5)
	Decolonizing movement: not relevant^a	Decolonizing the curriculum: not relevant^a	Challenging eurocentrism: not important^a	Critical pedagogy: not important^a	Challenging universalism: not important^a
Department: Pluralist/ Heterodox (Reference Group: Mainstream)	0.105*** (0.0638)	0.0610*** (0.0328)	0.162*** (0.0536)	0.273*** (0.112)	0.113*** (0.0510)
Department: Non-Economics	0.296*** (0.113)	0.260*** (0.0815)	0.244*** (0.0693)	0.766 (0.224)	0.404*** (0.119)
Region: Global South (Reference Group: Global North)	0.992 (0.689)	1.084 (0.694)	0.954 (0.549)	0.166* (0.178)	1.125 (0.690)
Years since PhD: 5-15 Years (Reference Group: Age 0-5 Years)	1.146 (0.437)	0.992 (0.327)	1.108 (0.348)	1.180 (0.412)	1.955** (0.657)
Years since PhD: 15-30 Years	1.145 (0.432)	0.818 (0.270)	2.127** (0.665)	1.117 (0.390)	1.139 (0.388)
Years since PhD: More Than 30 Years	1.965* (0.772)	2.683*** (0.953)	2.434*** (0.835)	2.613*** (0.943)	2.820*** (1.013)
Gender: Woman (Reference Group: Man)	0.560* (0.175)	0.464*** (0.127)	0.503*** (0.124)	0.543** (0.157)	0.471*** (0.128)
Gender: Prefer Not to say	1.630 (1.094)	1.026 (0.645)	1.066 (0.697)	3.611** (2.335)	0.809 (0.511)
Belonging Ethnic/Racial Minority: Yes (Reference Group: No)	0.787 (0.324)	1.024 (0.356)	1.388 (0.444)	1.314 (0.456)	0.861 (0.301)
Belonging Ethnic/Racial Minority: Prefer Not to say	0.843 (0.475)	1.631 (0.808)	2.048 (1.033)	1.366 (0.705)	1.925 (0.944)
Constant	0.368*** (0.121)	0.850 (0.242)	0.957 (0.263)	0.3433*** (0.105)	0.521** (0.154)
Pseudo R^2	0.0989	0.1646	0.1358	0.0898	0.1210
N	448	403	448	448	448

Robust standard errors in parenthesis.

Pseudo R² = percent.

* p < 0.10, ** p < 0.05, *** p < 0.01.

^aNon-Economics departments include Interdisciplinary/International Development/Development/Political economy/Politics/Political science departments.

(1) Logistic estimation, where the dependent variable is a categorical variable takes values 1 if the respondent say that the Decolonizing movement is not relevant and 0 otherwise.

(2) Logistic estimation, where the dependent variable is a categorical variable takes values 1 if the respondent says that Decolonizing the curriculum is not relevant and 0 otherwise.

(3) Logistic estimation, where the dependent variable is a categorical variable takes values 1 if the respondent say that challenging the eurocentrism that prevails in the field is not important and 0 otherwise.

(4) Logistic estimation, where the dependent variable is a categorical variable takes values 1 if the respondent say that critical pedagogy is not important and 0 otherwise.

(5) Logistic estimation, where the dependent variable is a categorical variable takes values 1 if the respondent say that challenging universalism in the field is not important and 0 otherwise.

The results are reported as odds ratio, where an odds greater than 1 implies that relative to the base category, those belonging to the non-base category are more likely to say that the issue outlined in the dependent variable is not important/relevant, and vice versa.

Figure 4. What aspects of the movement to decolonize science, if any, do you find to be the most relevant for improving Economics education and teaching, especially in your own course(s)?