IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wpa/wuwpgt/0502011.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Case for Minimum Teaching Standards

Author

Listed:
  • J. S. Armstrong

    (The Wharton School)

Abstract

We all share the desire to improve the learning environment at Wharton and to have students who will be satisfied with this environment. While most of the Wharton Teaching Committee's recommendations are consistent with these aims, I believe that recommendation #1, to 'Establish Minimum Standards for Acceptable Teaching,'' will be detrimental to learning. I therefore recommend that we reject proposal #1. This letter describes how I reached this conclusion, suggests alternatives, and recommends a process for resolving tie issues.

Suggested Citation

  • J. S. Armstrong, 2005. "The Case for Minimum Teaching Standards," General Economics and Teaching 0502011, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    • Handle: RePEc:wpa:wuwpgt:0502011
    Note: Type of Document - pdf; pages: 5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://econwpa.ub.uni-muenchen.de/econ-wp/get/papers/0502/0502011.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. JS Armstrong, 2004. "Teacher vs. Learner Responsibility in Management Education," General Economics and Teaching 0412020, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Attiyeh, Richard & Lumsden, Keith G, 1972. "Some Modern Myths in Teaching Economics: The U. K. Experience," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 62(2), pages 429-433, May.
    3. J. Scott Armstrong, 1983. "The Ombudsman: Learner Responsibility in Management Education, or Ventures into Forbidden Research," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 13(2), pages 26-38, April.
    4. J. S. Armstrong, 2005. "Learner Responsibility in Management Education, or Ventures into Forbidden Research (with Comments)," General Economics and Teaching 0502012, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    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. J. S. Armstrong, 2005. "The Devil s Advocate Responds to an MBA Student s Claim that Research Harms Learning," General Economics and Teaching 0502008, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. J.S. Armstrong, 2005. "Are Student Ratings of Instruction Useful?," General Economics and Teaching 0502007, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. J.S. Armstrong, 2005. "Improving Learning at Universities: Who is Responsible?," General Economics and Teaching 0502006, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. J. S. Armstrong, 2005. "Business School Prestige ^V Research versus Teaching," General Economics and Teaching 0502009, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Armstrong, J. Scott, 2012. "Natural Learning in Higher Education," MPRA Paper 37648, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. JS Armstrong, 2004. "Would Mandatory Attendance Be Effective for Economics Classes?," General Economics and Teaching 0412018, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Richard F. Elmore & Michael O'Hare, 1991. "Formal models and government: Teaching to do," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 10(3), pages 519-541.
    8. JS Armstrong, 2004. "The Natural Learning Project," General Economics and Teaching 0412021, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. JS Armstrong, 2004. "Teacher vs. Learner Responsibility in Management Education," General Economics and Teaching 0412020, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    learning; universities; business schools;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • A - General Economics and Teaching

    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:wpa:wuwpgt:0502011. 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: EconWPA (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://econwpa.ub.uni-muenchen.de .

    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.