Dans Courrier international 1359, la traduction d'un article
de David Pilling pour le Financial Times, 30.09.2016
Crash and Learn: should we change the way we teach economics ?
A growing student rebellion is challenging the decades-old academic consensus
1 question d'exam en 1er cycle :
« The Econocracy reproduces a typical exam question set for undergraduates. “Consider a two-period economy in which the representative consumer maximises the lifetime utility function U (C1, C2) = u(C1) + ßu(C2), subject to the lifetime budget constraint (1 + t)C1 + C2/R = W, where 0 < ß < 1, W is the present value of after-tax lifetime income, t is the VAT tax rate and R = 1 + r, where r is the interest rate.” »
« In London, both Goldsmiths College and the University of Greenwich are offering courses with a pluralist bent. University College London is already teaching from the open-source “core” programme, which seeks to make economics more relevant to the real world. At Manchester, too, broader-based modules are being introduced, too late and still too narrow for the students who pushed for change back in 2012, but a breakthrough nonetheless. Post-Crash Economics itself has folded into Rethinking Economics, a registered charity that links more than 40 student groups pressing for curriculum changes in campuses from Italy to Canada and from China to Brazil. »
the Post-Crash Economics Society itself has folded into Rethinking Economics, a registered charity that links more than 40 student groups pressing for curriculum changes in campuses from Italy to Canada and from China to Brazil.