1. Teaching application and communication of economics Dean Garratt and Stephen Heasell Teaching application and communication of economics Dean Garratt and Stephen Heasell

2. Workshop Session Abstract We host this interactive workshop as a way to explore and discuss with colleagues the value of seeking new opportunities by which hard-pressed HE tutors of economics can equip students to use sound economic analysis effectively for various purposes which make a distinctive difference in civil society, including graduate employment. We observe that incentives facing grade-hungry students and their tutors often produce curricula whose activities and assessments focus predominantly on specifying a limited range of analytical models. Insofar as those activities and assessments require and elicit application of economic analysis to live issues or cases of interest beyond the community of academic economists, they seem often to do so largely for the limited purpose of illustrating features of some such model. We sense collusive rejection by students and tutors of learning to express analytical uncertainty and contextual complexity in a constructive critique of a reductionist model, as they seek the line of least resistance to an upper second or beyond. Declared module, course and institutional learning outcomes now recognising aspects of the broader context of HE, including employability and global citizenship. Various indicators suggest, nonetheless, that evidence of knowledge and skills which graduate economists offer to employers when applying for jobs does not match closely what employers seek from them. Is tacit collusion between students and tutors widespread; does it contribute to a mismatch of capabilities or expectations, and what are the cost effective ways to align incentives sufficiently for newly graduating students to demonstrate the contribution of their HE to civil society?

3. Economics Network Employers’ Survey Areas of knowledge and understanding identified as ‘very’ important:  Incentives and their effects  Social costs and benefits  Microeconomics of decision-making and constrained choice  Opportunity cost

4. A Brief Introduction and Agenda Evidence of disappointed expectations about what graduates in economics can do beyond academia:  prompting an attempt to pool tutor reflections on the effectiveness of course syllabus, delivery and outcomes Discussion phase 1: towards explanation of disappointed external expectations (`Diagnosis’) Discussion phase 2: towards resolution and reconciliation (`Prescription’)

5. Economics Network Employers’ Survey EN Employers’ Survey, 2014-15 Skills and knowledge gaps of graduates in economics  Skills identified as ‘very’ valuable:  Communication of economics ideas  Ability to analyse economic, business, social issues  Ability to organise, interpret, present quantitative data

6. Economics Network Employers’ Survey Employers’ rating of skills:  Weakest (‘not very high’)  Critical self-awareness  Awareness of cross-cultural issues  Applying what has been learnt, in a broader context  Creative and imaginative powers  Strongest (‘very high’)  Fluency in using IT/computers  Analysing and interpreting quantitative data

7. Economics Network Employers’ Survey Areas of knowledge and understanding identified as ‘very’ important:  Incentives and their effects  Social costs and benefits  Microeconomics of decision-making and constrained choice  Opportunity cost

8. Economics Network Employers’ Survey Skills or knowledge in need of further development within economics courses:  Application of economic theory  Communication skills  Quantitative skills  Critical thinking  Economic history and the history of economic thought  Cost-benefit analysis

9. QAA Benchmark Statement: latest Nature and Context of Economics: key intellectual features; ability to 1. abstract and simplify to identify and model the essence of a problem. 2. analyse and reason - both deductively and inductively. 3. gather evidence and to assimilate, structure, analyse and evaluate qualitative and quantitative data. 4. communicate results concisely to a variety of audiences, including those with no training in economics. 5. think critically about the limits of one's analysis in a broader socio-economic context. 6. ability to draw economic policy inferences, to recognise the potential constraints in their implementation and to evaluate the efficacy of policy outcomes in the light of stated policy objectives.

10. QAA Benchmark Statement: latest In assessing students' work, the following criteria may be adopted:  Focus on the questions asked and/or identified key problems  Choice of arguments, relevant theory or model, for the area specified or question asked  Quality of explanation  Demonstration of consistency, coherence and purposeful analysis  Use of evidence and knowledge of institutional and historical context  Collection, processing, analysis and interpretation of data  Extent and quality of critical evaluation  Demonstration of knowledge of relevant literature

11. Workshop Discussion Phase 1 What limits the extent to which newly-qualified graduates in economics can use their distinctive skills and subject knowledge, in a valuable way beyond academia?  For example, is it (mainly):  what is learnt (and taught) about economics?  how economics is learnt (and taught), including course structure and delivery?

12. Workshop Responses: Phase 1 Summary of `Diagnostic’ suggestions by Groups (no particular order):  some tutor arrogance (offering little critique of what is taught or how it is taught )  difficult to instil confidence among individual students for attempting, or responding to, constructive critique  narrow range of tutor experience of work beyond academia  students remain unaware of skills in application they possess: a tutor feedback problem  overloaded syllabuses and student cohort sizes  explosion of opportunities to work with data sets but not applications in external context  courses culminate in a project or dissertation couched in academic terms  texts largely are aligned with academic priorities, not applications in external context  student personality types drawn to economics courses + Group endorsement of one suggestion by Dean and Stephen (see conference Abstract):  an element of tacit collusion based on opportunity cost, between time-poor grade- hungry students and research-orientated tutors (plus perhaps other academic parties) leading to familiar, predictable course outcomes based on specifying the technical toolkit

13. Workshop Discussion Phase 2 Is the difference between what new graduates in economics can distinctively do and what is expected of them beyond academia a problem which tutors should address? What further could feasibly be done to reconcile that which new graduates in economics are capable of doing with the expectations of prospective employers?

14. Workshop Responses: Phase 2 Following the `Prescription’ phase 2 discussion, Groups still found it difficult to suggest quick or easy reforms; the closest were:  require all students to write a dual summary of their final year project report or dissertation which is accessible to an intelligent non academic readership, alongside the academic text  an embedded course input with current students, by alumni who have experienced application of economic analysis beyond academia  simply moderate the quantum of economic models included in the syllabus at all undergraduate levels of study  meet employers regularly to agree reasonable expectations of newly- graduated students of economics