IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/nea/journl/y2019i43p116-150.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Role of Mathematics in Teaching Undergraduate Economics: Students' Opinions and Recommendations

Author

Listed:
  • Belokrylov, K.

    (Southern Federal University, Rostov-on-Don, Russia)

  • Kivarina, M.

    (Yaroslav-the-Wise Novgorod State University, Novgorod, Russia)

  • Myasnikov, A.

    (Plekhanov Russian University of Economics, Moscow, Russia)

  • Ogurtsova, E.

    (Saratov State University, Saratov, Russia)

Abstract

Based on a survey of 622 students of different majors from 4 Russian universities, we check the validity of the opinion widely popular among Russian professors of economics, according to which the use of math in undergraduate economics courses should be kept to a minimum since students do not possess enough math skills and consider economics a non-quantitative field. Our analysis shows, however, that most students do not see economics as being non-quantitative, and just 6% of students do not find math knowledge to be important for studying economics. It should be noted that students' opinions on both measures do not depend in a statistically significant way on students' majors. More than half of the students included in the survey found math helpful for their study of economics. And again there was no statistical significance of majors in explaining this result; furthermore, students' knowledge of whether derivatives are used in economics was also found to be insignificant. Makes us believe that math is on average helpful even for lagging students. Building on our statistical results, we propose several recommendations aimed at increasing the quality of economics courses offered at Russian colleges and universities.

Suggested Citation

  • Belokrylov, K. & Kivarina, M. & Myasnikov, A. & Ogurtsova, E., 2019. "The Role of Mathematics in Teaching Undergraduate Economics: Students' Opinions and Recommendations," Journal of the New Economic Association, New Economic Association, vol. 43(3), pages 116-150.
    • Handle: RePEc:nea:journl:y:2019:i:43:p:116-150
    DOI: 10.31737/2221-2264-2019-43-3-6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.econorus.org/repec/journl/2019-43-116-150r.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31737/2221-2264-2019-43-3-6?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Paul M. Romer, 2015. "Mathiness in the Theory of Economic Growth," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(5), pages 89-93, May.
    2. Charles L. Ballard & Marianne F. Johnson, 2004. "Basic Math Skills and Performance in an Introductory Economics Class," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(1), pages 3-23, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Carlos J. Asarta & James R. Schmidt, 2013. "Student Choices of Reduced Seat Time in a Blended Introductory Statistics Course," Working Papers 13-14, University of Delaware, Department of Economics.
    2. Jaakko Kuorikoski & Aki Lehtinen, 2018. "Model selection in macroeconomics: DSGE and ad hocness," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(3), pages 252-264, July.
    3. Chatelain, Jean-Bernard & Ralf, Kirsten, 2018. "Publish and Perish: Creative Destruction and Macroeconomic Theory," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 46(2), pages 65-101.
    4. Lars P. Feld & Ekkehard A. Köhler, 2023. "Standing on the shoulders of giants or science? Lessons from ordoliberalism," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 195(3), pages 197-211, June.
    5. Falkinger, Josef, 2016. "The order of knowledge and robust action: How to deal with economic uncertainty?," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal (2007-2020), Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel), vol. 10, pages 1-30.
    6. Florentin Gloetzl & Ernest Aigner, 2015. "Pluralism in the Market of Science? A citation network analysis of economic research at universities in Vienna," Ecological Economics Papers ieep5, Institute of Ecological Economics.
    7. Gosselin, Pierre & Lotz, Aïleen & Wambst, Marc, 2016. "How To Spend It? Capital Accumulation in a Changing World," MPRA Paper 71665, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Bergtold, Jason S. & Yeager, Elizabeth A. & Griffin, Terry W., 2016. "Academic, Demographic and Spatial Factors in the Classroom Affecting Student Performance in Principles of Agricultural Economics Courses," 2016 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Boston, Massachusetts 235930, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    9. Jeffrey J. Green & Courtenay C. Stone & Abera Zegeye & Thomas A. Charles, 2008. "How Much Math Do Students Need to Succeed in Business and Economics Statistics? An Ordered Probit Analysis," Working Papers 200802, Ball State University, Department of Economics, revised Apr 2008.
    10. David Zetland & Carlo Russo & Navin Yavapolkul, 2010. "Teaching Economic Principles: Algebra, Graph or Both?," The American Economist, Sage Publications, vol. 55(1), pages 123-131, May.
    11. Tasnádi, Attila & Kánnai, Zoltán & Pintér, Miklós, 2010. "Matematikaoktatás a bolognai típusú gazdasági képzésekben [Maths instruction in Bologna-type economics tuition]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(3), pages 261-277.
    12. Mohsen Javdani & Ha-Joon Chang, 2023. "Who said or what said? Estimating ideological bias in views among economists," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 47(2), pages 309-339.
    13. Leiv Opstad, 2023. "The Relationship Between Norwegian Business Students’ Attitudes Towards Mathematics And Success In Business Education," International Journal of Teaching and Education, European Research Center, vol. 11(1), pages 47-60, December.
    14. William Bosshardt & Neela Manage, 2011. "Does Calculus Help in Principles of Economics Courses? Estimates Using Matching Estimators," The American Economist, Sage Publications, vol. 56(1), pages 29-37, May.
    15. Sam Allgood & William B. Walstad & John J. Siegfried, 2015. "Research on Teaching Economics to Undergraduates," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 53(2), pages 285-325, June.
    16. David Sabiston & Ambrose Leung & Gianfranco Terrazzano, 2017. "Learning styles and performance in principles of economics: does the gender gap exist?," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 37(4), pages 2935-2944.
    17. Patrick Schotanus, 2022. "Cognitive economics and the Market Mind Hypothesis: Exploring the final frontier of economics," Economic Affairs, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(1), pages 87-114, February.
    18. de la Fonteijne, Marcel R., 2018. "Why the concept of Hicks, Harrod, Solow neutral and even non-neutral augmented technical progress is flawed in principle in any economic model," MPRA Paper 107730, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Jeremy Edwards & Sheilagh Ogilvie, 2022. "The Black Death and the origin of the European marriage pattern," Oxford Economic and Social History Working Papers _204, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    20. Carlos J. Asarta & Roger B. Butters & Andrew Perumal, 2013. "Success in Economics Major: Is it Path Dependent?," Working Papers 13-11, University of Delaware, Department of Economics.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    teaching microeconomics; teaching macroeconomics; mathematization of economics;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • A22 - General Economics and Teaching - - Economic Education and Teaching of Economics - - - Undergraduate
    • C02 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - General - - - Mathematical Economics

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nea:journl:y:2019:i:43:p:116-150. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Alexey Tcharykov (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nearuea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.