Economics teaching and learning through the arts: the contribution of cinema and literature Gherardo Girardi, Guglielmo Volpe and John Segwick

Project sponsored by the Economics Network of the Higher Education Authority

Developments in Economics Education, Cambridge6 September 2007

Overview

1. Introduction2. Interactive session with Death of a Salesman3. Results from pilot studies4. Conclusion

Introduction

Aim:

To set up a module that teaches economics by means of cinema and/or works of literature

Introduction

What motivates this project?

• Draw in non-mathematically inclined students• Relate economics to students’ lives • Show beauty in economics• Multidisciplinary• Material set in historical context• Multicultural

Introduction

So far, I have experimented with cinema.

Advantages of cinema:

• Effective and popular• Time saving

Introduction

Comparison with trials in US:

Leet and Houser, 2003. Economics Goes to Hollywood: Using Classical Films and Documentaries to Create an Undergraduate Economics Course. Journal of Economic Education (Fall)

Examples of films

• Grapes of Wrath• Balkanizateur• City of Joy• Death of a Salesman

Examples of films

• Grapes of Wrath• Balkanizatuer• City of Joy• Death of a Salesman

Workshop: Death of a Salesman

Pilot study - introduction

The module was piloted in 4 existing modules at LMU:

1. Introduction to Macroeconomics, 1st year, mostly economists (13): Balkanizateur

2. Economics of Cinema, 3rd year, mostly non-economists (9): Grapes of Wrath

3. Economics of Industry, 3rd year, all economists (16): Death of a Salesman

4. International Business Studies, Master’s, mixture of economists and non-economists (7): Death of a Salesman

Pilot study - Summary of data

• 45 responses, of which 25 complete/non self-contradictory• See distributed questionnaire (Economics of Cinema questionnaire simpler)

Pilot study – Students’ comments

• “It is good to visualize real life examples and to chain them to theory“• “I found the material that was shown relevant to my life situation”• “The movie is quite old so the relevance is minimal”• “It uses a media which young people grow up with”• “One picture says a thousand words”• “people can discuss the matter in relation to their experience”

Pilot study – Students’ comments (cont’d)

• “It bring the very relevant aspect of behavioural economics [psychology, sociology] into the picture”• “It’s the best session I have ever had”• “The module would be good before uni”• “It gives economics students an opportunity to relate to the arts and approach things from a different perspective”• “Seeing a film and relating it to real life is fascinating”

Pilot study – overall evaluation

Overall session rating

(average score: 7 highest, 1 lowest)

% of students who think module should be introduced

If you think module should be introduced, how useful would it be? (average score: 3 = hugely, 2 = a lot, 1 = a little)

Introduction to Macroeconomics

5.6 92% 2.1

Economics of Cinema 5.7 81% 2.1

Industrial Economics 5.6 77% 2.4

International Business Studies

5.9 83% 2.4

Pilot study – averages of determinants of evaluation

Average Average

Film quality 5.60 Relevance to your life

5.39

Discussion quality

5.33 Economic content

5.15

Total time 4.67 Will you remember?

5.47

Distribution of time

5.09 Male 55%

Academic material

5.53 Econ or business degree

82%

Structure 5.47 Scores from 1 to 7, 7 highest

(except for male and econ degree)

Pilot study – significance of determinants of evaluation

coefficient p value coefficient p value

Intercept 1.371 0.340 Will you remember?

-0.151 0.262

Film quality 0.037 0.870 Male 0.014 0.963

Discussion quality

-0.136 0.512 Age -0.003 0.957

Total time -0.065 0.736 Film title -1.024 0.281

Distribution of time

0.109 0.600 Year of degree

0.918 0.265

Academic material

-0.109 0.645 Econ or business

-0.444 0.605

Structure 0.667 0.029 All values from 1 to 7, where 7 highest

Relevance to your life

0.352 0.048 Adjusted R2 0.615

Economic content

0.194 0.371 Overall F (p value) 0.021

Conclusions • Students’ responses show that project aims were achieved• Students respond very well to project regardless of their year of study• Student evaluations seems to be linked to (a) relevance of session to students’ lives and (b) clear structure of sessions• Hence the message is clear: CONTINUE DEVELOPING THE MODULE, paying attention to personal relevance and clarity of structure

Future work • Make link with the academic literature stronger• Increase cultural diversity of the film portfolio