The Philosophical Foundation Of The Lecture Method Of Instruction And The Case Method Of Instruction: Implications For Examinations

Any adequate comparison between the lecture method of instruction and the case method of instruction necessarily requires a comparison of their underlying philosophical foundation and methodology. This is based on the premise that foundational philosophies or world views underlie educational philosophies, and each educational philosophy favors a certain instructional methodology, which in turn implies a certain way or method of instruction. More specifically, this paper discusses how each philosophical foundation implies a certain type of examination

The Academic Field of Finance and Paradigm Diversity

Kavous Ardalan, Ph.D., is associate professor of finance, School of Management, Marist College, Poughkeepsie, NY 12601

Invisible Ideology of Mainstream Economics: The “Invisible Hand”

The purpose of this article is to show the ideological character of the “invisible hand,” which is the cornerstone of the mainstream economics. The article discusses how the “invisible hand” acts as a cognitive metaphor in mainstream economics' adoption of its worldview, its scientific view, its research methodology, and its mathematical rationality, which are spread in society through the educational system and the media. According to the “invisible hand,” the individuals' selfish interest automatically results in the improvement for society as a whole. The “invisible hand,” therefore, focuses on individual behavior and recommends abstraction from the social consequences of individual behavior. This atomistic view, together with its attendant abstraction from society as a whole, constitutes the foundation of the ideological character of the “invisible hand.” This is because it conceals the actual social consequences of what it supports

Theories and controversies in finance: a paradigmatic overview

The purpose of this paper is to provide an overview of the paradigmatic context and structure of the current theories and controversies in mainstream academic finance. It identifies the context among paradigms and the structure within the identified paradigm. The paper is based on the view that worldviews underlie theories and controversies in general, and those of finance, in particular. It notes how any worldview can be positioned on a continuum formed by four basic paradigms: functionalist, interpretive, radical humanist, and radical structuralist. Then, the paper notes that theories and controversies in mainstream academic finance, despite their apparent diversity, are founded on and associated with the functionalist paradigm. Then, the paper continues with the discussion of the hierarchical structure of paradigms. It discusses that it consists of three consecutive levels: paradigm; metaphor; and puzzle solving. It looks at a sample of prominent controversies in academic finance and notes that they belong to the substructure of the functionalist paradigm. Throughout, the paper emphasizes that, in the future, mainstream academic finance should benefit from the contributions of the other three paradigms.Diversity, Finance, Methodology, Paradigms, Philosophy

Mathematics and academic finance: the role of paradigms

Purpose – Any adequate analysis of the nature of mathematics and its role in sciences necessarily requires fundamental understanding of the world views underlying the views expressed with respect to the nature and role of mathematics. Aims to discuss four general views with respect to mathematics and its role in sciences, corresponding to four broad worldviews. Design/methodology/approach – This paper starts with the premise that any worldview can be positioned on a continuum formed by four basic paradigms: functionalist, interpretive, radical humanist, and radical structuralist. It looks at the current state of mainstream academic finance and notes that it is founded only on the functionalist paradigm. It argues that any view expressed with respect to the nature of mathematics and its role in sciences is based on one of the four paradigms or worldviews. Findings – Emphasizes that the four views expressed are equally scientific and informative; they look at the nature and role of mathematics from a certain paradigmatic viewpoint. Originality/value – Concludes that there are opportunities for mainstream academic finance to benefit from contributions coming from the other three paradigms, if it respects paradigm diversity.Finance, Mathematics, Philosophy

On the theory and practice of finance

The purpose of this paper is to provide an explanation for the way the reality in the world of finance comes to be formed, among other things, by the theory of finance. It is based on the idea that financial behavior is not independent of the theory of finance. The paper, therefore, examines certain aspects of the academic field of finance. That is, it examines theories, PhD programs, journals, and conferences in academic finance. It notes that they adhere, almost exclusively, to a certain worldview, called the functionalist paradigm. Then, the paper discusses the role of finance graduates as employees of universities, corporations, and financial institutions in the practice of finance. In this way, the paper provides an explanation for the social construction of the world of finance.Business studies, Doctorates, Economic processes, Finance, Globalization, Professional associations

The philosophical foundation of the lecture-versus-case controversy: Its implications for faculty teaching, research, and service

Purpose – To see how educational philosophies that underlie lecture and case methods of teaching are related to how faculty perform their teaching, research, and service. Design/methodology/approach – This paper is based on the premise that foundational philosophies, worldviews or paradigms underlie educational philosophies, and each educational philosophy favors a certain instructional methodology, which in turn implies a certain way or method of instruction. Findings – The findings of this paper are that each educational philosophy favors a certain instructional methodology, which in turn determines not only the way that the instruction is performed but also how faculty perform their teaching, research, and service. Research limitations/implications – This paper implies that differences between the underlying world views of lecture and case methods of teaching similarly lead to differences in many other aspects of the teaching and learning process. Practical implications – This paper implies that, in practice, faculty would perform their teaching, research, and service in a more consistent manner if they become consciously aware of the underlying philosophy of their teaching method. Originality/value – The original contribution of this paper is that it shows how in a systematic manner the differences in teaching philosophy lead to differences in what faculty do in all areas of their activities: teaching, research, and service.Academic staff, Case studies, Educational philosophy, Lectures, Teaching