TUNTREET
LAUNCH OF REPORT:
ARE WE EDUCATING ECONOMISTS FOR THE 21. CENTURY? Sofie Bergset Janols Journalist
“Economy is politics, economy has influence”, says Liv Anna Lindman from Rethinking Economics. Economists are are becoming increasingly influential when political decisions are to be made. They analyse, advise, and make their mark on the society. Are they fit to have this central role in the development of our society? A growing movement of economist and economy students are questioning this. Rethinking Economics is an international network of economy students and economists that want to reform the economy education. The goal? A more pluralistic, critical and relevant education for the problems we are facing these days. Wednesday February 3., Rethinking Economics invited NMBU to a digital launch of the report “Are we educating economists for the 21. Century?” and a panel debate. The panel consisted of Liv Anna Lindman, Benedikt Goodman, Rani Lill Anjum and Ragnar A. Øygard. Marie Storli was chairman. Storli, the leader of Rethinking Economics Norway, opened the Zoom-event by welcoming the guests accompanied by Roon Elmi from Rethinking Economics NMBU. Rani Lilla Anjum, scientist at NMBU and leader of Centre for Applied Philosophy of Science, was then the next to talk. Philosophic bias and interdisciplinarity Anjum gave a short introduction to scientific philosophy. She explained the meaning of philosophic bias; the basic assumptions you have that you are unaware of. Different disciplines have different philosophic biases, different views on problems and different methods to solve them. Philosophic biases may cause a problem in interdisciplinary 22 Edition 02 Volume 76
Vetle Rakkestad Translator
cooperation. Therefore, it is important to be aware of, and work with, your discipline’s philosophic bias. Anjum points on the advantages to a more pluralistic education where more philosophic biases appear: “Different methods finds different things, which gives a more holistic picture”. The next point in line was a presentation of the main aspects from the report, given by Liv Anna Lindman. The report is written by Storli and Goodman amongst others, but Lindman is behind the survey and wrote the master thesis which is the fundament for the report. The goal was to examine whether the criticism aimed at the economy education holds water; whether their education is far from reality, methodologically uniform and not a source for critical thinking. The conclusions of the report Lindman examined course and program descriptions, exam questions and sensor guidance for the bachelor degrees in social economics at UiB, UiT, UiO, NTNU and NMBU in 2018. She learned that the educations have a high percentage of mandatory subjects, with small amounts of education in economic history, and few traces showing that the students are encouraged to have a critical approach the subjects. In addition, there is a high proportion of written exams (90%), where 80% of the questions ask the students to explain the theory or use models, while only 15% of the questions ask for reflection or critical thinking. The report can’t determine that the social economics education in Norway is unrealistic or uncritical, but gives the economy program “the benefit of the doubt” and encourages to further discussion. On the other hand, the report concludes that the education is methodologically uniform.
The students are educated in neoclassical theory, which is the dominating way of teaching economics. The problem, according to the report and Rethinking Economics, is that there is little evidence that students are made aware that they are being taught in this specific tradition. NMBU among the best However, it’s worth noticing that NMBU scores relatively high in the report. NMBU scores highest in the percentage of courses teaching socially relevant subjects (44%), and in courses that have hints of critical discussion (36%). Furthermore, NMBU have as the only institution surveyed, economical history as a mandatory course. They also teach the program with the highest percentage of group work, and the program where the largest percentage of mandatory courses utilizes more than five sources. After the digital launch, Tuntréet talked to Liv Anna Lindman, Ragnar A. Øygard and Benedikt Goodman. From interest to master’s thesis In the winter of 2017 Liv Anna Lindman and Benedikt Goodman started the local team Rethinking Economics NMBU. One and a half year later, on an international gathering with Rethinking Economics, Lindman decided that a survey of the Norwegian social economics education would be her master thesis, even though the survey would involve criticising the tradition professors, sensors and what the field of study stands for. She admits thinking “I’m gambling with the grade of the master thesis, but let’s go”. The master thesis was nevertheless well appreciated, but Lindman feels sceptical to how much change there will be, and how
