Last month, my university held its Orientation Day. On that day, I met a lot of high-school students, who were interested in studying economics. As I told them that learning economics in university needed some math (this requirement is not obvious in high-school economics), some asked me how math could be used in economics. In particular, a student asked how M1/M2 would be used in economics.
M1/M2 are the extension section of mathematics in DSE, Hong Kong's high-school public examination. As far as I know, it covers some basic calculus. Hence, I need to explain to the student how some basic calculus can be used in economics.
High-school calculus does not allow students to do much. Nonetheless, at least it enables students to find the maximum point of a curve (or a function) with or without some constraints. One use of derivatives (dy/dx) is that the maximum point can be found at dy/dx = 0, given certain assumptions (say, when a curve is convex). This mathematical method is indeed very useful for economics.
Why? It is because economics studies human behaviours from a specific viewpoint. It considers rational choice as a basic model for understanding human behaviours. Perhaps there are other aspects in human behaviours. But at least we recognize that rational choice is an important aspect, if not the only aspect.
Rational choice is this. People aims at achieving the best outcome for what they can do. In other words, if you can do better, you will do it. If you can do better, but you do not, you are irrational. Economists do not think people are (at least not very often) irrational. Sometimes someone seemingly have not attained the best for them. This is only an interpretation from an outsider's perspective. In fact, the person can't improve further but we, as outsiders, do not know the constraints facing this person. This person perhaps lacks the relevant knowledge or skill. An easy job (from an observer's view) may not be conducted because the actors himself do not think it is easy. Economists will not easily say people are irrational.
If people are rational in making choice, then what? The answer is that they will maximize their benefit subject to some constraint (the "what they can do" part). For example, consumers maximize the satisfaction derived from consumption (choosing quantity bought for different goods) subject to budget constraint (what they can buy). Firms maximize profit subject to the technology that they can get access to, and the prices of hiring production factors.
As such, mathematically, rational choice can be represented as a maximization problem, or, more precisely, a constrained maximization problem. Economists use this type of mathematical models to study behaviours. For example, a firm want to maximize profit. It knows that some factors can increase or decrease profit in different situations. A higher price decreases the quantity that a firm can sell but increases the profit that it earns for each unit sold. Thus, price may increase profit up to a point, and will decrease profit beyond this point. We need a mathematical model to find out the point where profit is maximized. A successful mathematical model predicts correctly what a profit-maximizing firm will choose.
Mathematics, and M1/M2, provides the technique to solve these maximization problems. Since economics involve many these problems, mathematics is a useful tool for us. Of course, economics also involves other problems that require mathematics to help. Since I have to explain only by some math concepts that high-school students understand, I simply touch on maximization in our conversations with these students.
Thursday, 2 November 2017
Sunday, 20 August 2017
Why "hi, economics"? (3)
I have explained why high-school level economics are important even to an university teacher in my past two posts. Now the question is: what can I do?
I cannot affect what high-school students learn from their economics courses. I am not the one who design the syllabus nor can I affect how high school teachers teach their students. Though I write this blog and hope some people influenced by high-school economics will read it, I know this will not have a high impact. Even so, at least I start to do something. For me, the most important thing is not the impact of writing a blog (I don't have pressure to meet any targets) but what thing should or can I write.
Economics education is one research area that interests me. Nonetheless, I cannot devote too many efforts to exploring high-school economics. It is too costly for me. I still have to teach and do researches for other areas. Even for economics education, I am more interested in exploring how to improve university level education than high-school level. I can never be (and do not intend to become) an expert in high-school economics education given these constraints. Notwithstanding all these, I still think I can write something.
The idea of "hi, economics" is this. In this blog, I will be critical of selective aspects of economics that high-school students may have or layman with similar understanding may have learned. Since I will touch on only these selective aspects, I need not be an expert on the entire curriculum, and I simply need to know how students or laymen have learned -- perhaps the concepts are taught correctly but what students or laymen have in their mind is another thing. What concerns me is the results of these education. When I confine the scope of my blog to this aspect, I can infer what students have learned from high schools based on my interactions with them, through interviews or chats. Of course, if there are other sources of information that I can get access to, I will also use. This method saves my time and also serves my purpose.
I must make clear that I do not think high-school economics is currently badly designed. My position is simply that if some aspects are already well designed and taught, I should not be bothered by them. Hence, I had better focus on the parts that need to be improved.
I may not touch only on ideas that HKDSE economics students would have. Other programmes, such as GCSE, IB, etc., may also be involved. If some ideas are prevalent among normal people, though not from any high school syllabus, but are understandable by a high-school standard, may also be discussed.
I think this is a reasonable starting point for a university teaching trying to say something on high-school level economics.
I cannot affect what high-school students learn from their economics courses. I am not the one who design the syllabus nor can I affect how high school teachers teach their students. Though I write this blog and hope some people influenced by high-school economics will read it, I know this will not have a high impact. Even so, at least I start to do something. For me, the most important thing is not the impact of writing a blog (I don't have pressure to meet any targets) but what thing should or can I write.
Economics education is one research area that interests me. Nonetheless, I cannot devote too many efforts to exploring high-school economics. It is too costly for me. I still have to teach and do researches for other areas. Even for economics education, I am more interested in exploring how to improve university level education than high-school level. I can never be (and do not intend to become) an expert in high-school economics education given these constraints. Notwithstanding all these, I still think I can write something.
The idea of "hi, economics" is this. In this blog, I will be critical of selective aspects of economics that high-school students may have or layman with similar understanding may have learned. Since I will touch on only these selective aspects, I need not be an expert on the entire curriculum, and I simply need to know how students or laymen have learned -- perhaps the concepts are taught correctly but what students or laymen have in their mind is another thing. What concerns me is the results of these education. When I confine the scope of my blog to this aspect, I can infer what students have learned from high schools based on my interactions with them, through interviews or chats. Of course, if there are other sources of information that I can get access to, I will also use. This method saves my time and also serves my purpose.
I must make clear that I do not think high-school economics is currently badly designed. My position is simply that if some aspects are already well designed and taught, I should not be bothered by them. Hence, I had better focus on the parts that need to be improved.
I may not touch only on ideas that HKDSE economics students would have. Other programmes, such as GCSE, IB, etc., may also be involved. If some ideas are prevalent among normal people, though not from any high school syllabus, but are understandable by a high-school standard, may also be discussed.
I think this is a reasonable starting point for a university teaching trying to say something on high-school level economics.
Sunday, 13 August 2017
Why "hi, economics"? (2)
As a university teacher, my knowledge about high-school economics is limited. In Hong Kong, the high school curriculum is now known as DSE. I have never taken this exam because DSE is a new system and no students can take it before 2012. But I can know what students have learned from high schools through two channels.
First, as mentioned in my last post, my interactions with students at university, especially with first-year students, is an important source. I am the academic counselor for some students and so we will have meetings and talks. Also, some students asked me questions after my lecture. They will be particularly concerned with the parts that are different from high school's curriculum, and let me know these.
Second, for many years, I am also responsible for interviews with many students applying for admissions to the economics department. From these interviews, I know from them something about high school's economics, not only for DSE, but also GCSE, IB, etc. Of course, this can never let me have systematic knowledge of their studies. Nonetheless, importantly, I know their impression of economics that they have learned, both for the positive or negative parts, from their responses and answers to my questions.
For example, I know that many students like game theory, which is a part of the GCSE syllabus, though their knowledge about game theory is basically limited to an oligopoly model.
Many students from DSE are impressed by the concept of opportunity costs because they think it is useful for their decision-making in daily life.
Meanwhile, students often do not like abstract concept like "utility" or "indifference curves". These concepts were part of the high-school economics in Hong Kong (HKAL) but are not now (in DSE). Better or worse, a consequence is that when high-school economics students go to university, they are not as accustomed to these abstract concepts frequently found in university economics as past students (with HKAL background).
In fact, through interviews, I know many students eventually will study business instead of economics. If they major in business, they will learn only some more economics related to business, and the style of these courses is also much closer to high-school economics than university economics taught in economics department. This is another reason why high-school economics is important: eventually perhaps a lot of people will be impressed only by, and have knowledge only of, high-school economics.
First, as mentioned in my last post, my interactions with students at university, especially with first-year students, is an important source. I am the academic counselor for some students and so we will have meetings and talks. Also, some students asked me questions after my lecture. They will be particularly concerned with the parts that are different from high school's curriculum, and let me know these.
Second, for many years, I am also responsible for interviews with many students applying for admissions to the economics department. From these interviews, I know from them something about high school's economics, not only for DSE, but also GCSE, IB, etc. Of course, this can never let me have systematic knowledge of their studies. Nonetheless, importantly, I know their impression of economics that they have learned, both for the positive or negative parts, from their responses and answers to my questions.
For example, I know that many students like game theory, which is a part of the GCSE syllabus, though their knowledge about game theory is basically limited to an oligopoly model.
Many students from DSE are impressed by the concept of opportunity costs because they think it is useful for their decision-making in daily life.
Meanwhile, students often do not like abstract concept like "utility" or "indifference curves". These concepts were part of the high-school economics in Hong Kong (HKAL) but are not now (in DSE). Better or worse, a consequence is that when high-school economics students go to university, they are not as accustomed to these abstract concepts frequently found in university economics as past students (with HKAL background).
In fact, through interviews, I know many students eventually will study business instead of economics. If they major in business, they will learn only some more economics related to business, and the style of these courses is also much closer to high-school economics than university economics taught in economics department. This is another reason why high-school economics is important: eventually perhaps a lot of people will be impressed only by, and have knowledge only of, high-school economics.
Saturday, 5 August 2017
Why "hi, economics"? (1)
As mentioned in the description of this blog, I teach economics at a university in Hong Kong and "hi, economics" assumes that its readers have knowledge of economics not beyond high-school level. But why should a university teacher be concerned with high-school level economics?
The idea of creating this blog originated from my interactions with students, especially first-year students. Obviously, first-year students do not know any economics beyond what they have learned from high schools. But over time they will learn more economics through taking more courses. What they have learned from high school, right or wrong, may only have a transitional impact. Eventually, they will learn the (more correct) economics from university.
My teaching experience these years, however, suggests that things do not happen as what has been described above.
By contrast, high-school economics has a much bigger impact than expected: Students are often greatly (or even permanently) affected by their high-school education. They normally will not think what they have learned from university is more right and what they have learned from high schools is less right. In fact, many students evaluate the good or the bad of university economics by high-school standard.
For example, most (though not all of them) still considers economics should be taught in a high school style - don't use more mathematics in economics. These students will not appreciate the rigor brought about by using (a little bit) more math, or that as a (social) science subject, using more math is very natural, and should be gradually added (as what university physics should differ from high-school physics).
On the other hand, many students consider the variety of economics models introduced in university is a confusing factor. We (teachers) think that learning more models will enrich one's toolkit in analyzing different types of real-world events. Nonetheless, students often do not think so.
In short, high-school economics does really matter for one's university education, or even for the whole life!
The idea of creating this blog originated from my interactions with students, especially first-year students. Obviously, first-year students do not know any economics beyond what they have learned from high schools. But over time they will learn more economics through taking more courses. What they have learned from high school, right or wrong, may only have a transitional impact. Eventually, they will learn the (more correct) economics from university.
My teaching experience these years, however, suggests that things do not happen as what has been described above.
By contrast, high-school economics has a much bigger impact than expected: Students are often greatly (or even permanently) affected by their high-school education. They normally will not think what they have learned from university is more right and what they have learned from high schools is less right. In fact, many students evaluate the good or the bad of university economics by high-school standard.
For example, most (though not all of them) still considers economics should be taught in a high school style - don't use more mathematics in economics. These students will not appreciate the rigor brought about by using (a little bit) more math, or that as a (social) science subject, using more math is very natural, and should be gradually added (as what university physics should differ from high-school physics).
On the other hand, many students consider the variety of economics models introduced in university is a confusing factor. We (teachers) think that learning more models will enrich one's toolkit in analyzing different types of real-world events. Nonetheless, students often do not think so.
In short, high-school economics does really matter for one's university education, or even for the whole life!
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)