"I've learned that people will forget what you said, people will forget what you did, but people will never forget how you made them feel." Maya Angelou

How do fearless girls ​feel about economics?

If economics as a discipline is gender-blind does that mean that the economics classroom is gender-blind too? How does this make girls feel in an economics classroom? What can we do about it?

 I lapped England this week, starting in London.

The key econovents were:

• A workshop investigating how a Pluralist Economics Course could be accredited at Universities organised by Henry Leveson-Gower, editor of Mint Magazine and founder of Promoting Economic Pluralism.
• I spoke with Ellen Quigley at Cambridge about the findings from her PhD thesis on Economics and Education.
• Pasan Fernando from St Mary’s, Gerrards Cross (outside London) hosted me for the day.
• I headed to visit Gavin Clarke at Emmanuel College in Newcastle-upon-Tyne to discuss “Do girls in economics have a problem?” Mauricio Armellini was visiting from the Bank of England and gave a short talk to the Economic Society.
• I spent time with Hannah Dewhirst from Rethinking Economics, the grassroots campaign that sees economics as an “analysis of humans by humans” (Fischer, et al., 2018, p. xiii) who mapped the landscape of a pluralist approach to economics in a post GFC, post-Brexit world of uncertainty.
• I met with Sarah Smith, from Bristol University and Ashley Lait from the Economics Network.
• Jo Mitchell from UWE, Bristol spoke about Reteaching Economics and Sarah Stevano, his colleague outlined the new Feminist Economics module.

Sunrise over Manchester

Economic modelling relies on self-centred independent individuals, and positions households as homogeneous decision-making units in the market. A more gender-inclusive approach to economics recognises how women and men act on their feelings which cannot be explained by homo economicus. The way we relate to one another is through our mutual interdependence in and out of the market. If fearless girls are sitting in a classroom where economic modelling identifies the main decision-maker of the household as being in paid work and contributing to GDP and neglects to consider other aspects, what role is that giving women?  What role do girls see themselves in when they are being presented with a neo-classical economic model?

Social norms are not preferences and we are not the "separate selves" that neo-classical economics uses. Norms can make change difficult but when they are altered then they can reinforce change. 

Social norms influence what people want and do and can be analysed
-Susan Himmelweit in 'Feminist Economics' (Rethinking Economics)

​If in our classrooms we rely on explaining behaviour solely through a utility-maximising model, we might be leaving girls out of the conversation. If they are considering where care provision is in the model and can't find it, they may be feeling left out.

A recent article in The Economist (link provided here) discussed research around a thesis that expresses a likelihood that men have more self-confidence than women. The researchers decided to find out who was asking questions at university seminars.
When a man asked the FIRST question, it correlated with men being 2.5 times (compared with females) likely to ask a question.

When a woman did so, the gender split in question-asking was, on average, proportional to that of the audience. ​

Simply inviting a female student to ask the first question may help.

Outside factors, such as misinformation and poor access to understanding economics is limiting interest in economics. Internally some influences such as the high stakes testing environment of the HSC and a selective, elitist attitude to economics in schools is also turning girls away. The subject itself when limited to a neo-classical model is not speaking to girls as it is gender-blind. With less girls in the economics classroom asking questions, the fearless girls left may be feeling that they are not seen or heard. The problems are compounding the dynamic around economics. This study points out what individual teachers can do in their classrooms:

Get girls talking first.

As teachers we are aware of what makes great teaching. Coe, Aloisi, Higgins, & Major (2014) offer the following:

1. Pedagogical (Content) Knowledge
2. Quality of instruction
3. Classroom climate / relationships / expectations
4. Behaviour / control / classroom management
5. Beliefs (theory) about subject, learning & teaching
6. Wider professional elements: collegiality, development, relationships

​Knowledge tops the list as it is the starting point. If teachers recognise that the role of women, within the scope of a social norm, is not privileged in an exposition of classical theory in economics they may be able to shift the emphasis in a more inclusive discussion. Girls in classrooms also explain "Boys dominate the discussion". With a more inclusive recognition of gendered roles it might give them a chance to speak up.

A meeting of the Economic Society at Emmanuel College with special guest, Dr Mauricio Armellini, The Agent for the North East, Bank of England.

​References

Coe, R., Aloisi, C., Higgins, S., & Major, L. (2014). What makes great teaching? Review of the underpinning research. Washington, D. C.
Fischer, L., Hasell, J., Proctor, J. C., Uwakwe, D., Ward-Perkins, Z., & Watson, C. (Eds.). (2018). Rethinking Economics: An Introduction to Pluralist Economics. New York, NY: Routledge.