What Should We Be Teaching in Basic Economics Courses?

James Gwartney

The Journal of Economic Education, 2012, vol. 43, issue 3, 300-307

Abstract: Advanced Placement economics leaves thousands of high school students with a misleading impression of modern economics. The courses fail to cover key sources of growth and prosperity, including private ownership, dynamic competition, and entrepreneurship. The tools of public choice economics are totally ignored. Government is modeled as a corrective device available to impose ideal solutions. Market failure is covered, but there is no such thing as government failure. The macroeconomics course reflects the simplistic 1960s Keynesian view of stabilization policy. Time lags, incentive effects, secondary effects of budget deficits, and other factors that complicate effective use of stabilization policy are almost entirely ignored. In contrast, the 20 Voluntary National Content Standards in Economics of the Council for Economic Education illustrate what a balanced course in modern economics would look like.

Date: 2012
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (12)

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/00220485.2012.686398 (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:taf:jeduce:v:43:y:2012:i:3:p:300-307

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/VECE20

DOI: 10.1080/00220485.2012.686398

Access Statistics for this article

The Journal of Economic Education is currently edited by William Walstad

More articles in The Journal of Economic Education from Taylor & Francis Journals
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Longhurst ().