Antonie Doležalová

English

Research Papers in Economics

284       PRAGUE ECONOMIC PAPERS, 3, 2010
AN ANNIVERSARY OF AN INSTITUTION – A REPORT ON THE 
“TEACHING ECONOMICS FOR 90 YEARS” CONFERENCE
Antonie Doležalová, University of Economics in Prague
A conference titled “Teaching Economics for 90 Years” took place from 16th to 18th 
September 2009 at the University of Economics (UE) in Prague. The conference 
was organised by the Department of Institutional Economics within the Faculty of 
Economics and Public Administration (FEPA) at the UE, and generously ﬁ  nancially 
supported by a Czech bank ČSOB. The aim of the conference was to commemorate a 
very important anniversary for the university. It was in September 1919 when the very 
ﬁ  rst course in economics taught at an independent university was opened. Remembering 
this event is highly appropriate as it encompasses the history of the institution itself, 
the forming of Czech economic thinking and the beginning of economics studies as an 
independent subject at a university level in the Czech lands. It was a good opportunity 
to return back to the events and ﬁ  gures closely linked to the birth of the university, 
but also to those to whom the Vysoká škola obchodní (VŠO) or the UE became the 
alma mater and the stepping stone to further scientiﬁ  c, political or social career. The 
organisers’ aims were reﬂ  ected in the suggested themes: 
 The foundation of the business academy & its development as an institution
 The teaching of economics in the past 90 years
 The history of czech economic thinking and its leading ﬁ  gures
 Big names linked to the ue
 Academia under the pressure of circumstances or in unfree times
All these themes were covered by individual papers. There were, among others, 
biographies of prominent Czech (Czechoslovak) economists, descriptions of the 
teaching methods, analyses of ideologies by which the teaching of economics was 
often bound, and reﬂ  ections on the role of the university in different political and 
social contexts. The closing part of the conference was dedicated to papers addressing 
the question: “What kind of economics do we teach today and why?”
The conference was ofﬁ  cially started by F. Stellner (Vice Dean of FEPA, UE) 
on Wednesday 16th September at 4pm, and this was followed by the presentation of 
the main papers. The very ﬁ  rst presentation was by C. Albrecht (Dean of the Getty 
Scientiﬁ  c LifePRAGUE ECONOMIC PAPERS, 3, 2010        285
College of Arts and Sciences, Ohio Northern University, USA), titled Two Transitions: 
The Origins and the End of the VSO. It offered a well-researched insight into our 
own history, unburdened by hagiographic tendencies. The paper examined the aims of 
higher education in economics and business in the Czech lands in the late 19th and early 
20th centuries, the role of economics study in the law faculties and the growing interest 
in more specialised study in economic administration. It also analysed links among 
the development of a modern business curriculum in higher education, economic 
modernisation and the Czech national movement. Political and economic changes 
after WWII had a profound effect on the institutional setting in which business and 
economics education were conducted, as well as on the content of the curriculum and 
the personnel considered qualiﬁ  ed to teach. Last but not least, the paper identiﬁ  ed the 
key issues that emerged within the VŠO after 1945 and looked into the fundamental 
restructuring of higher education in business management that took place in 1948-1953. 
Then D. Tříska (FEPA, UE) focused on the types of economics taught in the 
period of “real socialism” at the Institute of Economics at the Academy of Sciences. 
Dr. Tříska stressed that he considered himself to be no expert on the VŠO’s set-up, and 
that he wished to focus solely on alternative ways of studying economics under real 
socialism. He pointed to the scholarly papers that were being written at the Institute in 
this period and to the seminars led by Václav Klaus and popularly attended by students 
of the UE, who were coming to the Institute without much knowledge of the basic 
terms of economic theory. This paper brought about a ﬁ  erce debate, joined in by those 
who were teaching or studying economics at the UE at the time, such as Z. Džbánková, 
J. Koderová and M. Ševčík among others. 
M. Ševčík (FEPA, UE) gave the ﬁ  nal paper of the day: The Teaching of Standard 
Economic Theory at the UE in the 1980s. It is well worth mentioning that the names 
of subjects, within which standard economic theory was taught, tended to contain 
the word “critique”. The actual amount of criticism then depended on the lecturer. 
M. Ševčík emphasised the extent to which J. Petráček inﬂ  uenced the quality of the 
teaching of economic theories at the UE, which in turn transformed the institution. 
This occurred as early as in the mid-80s thanks to the new generation of lecturers 
and, therefore, the teaching of History of Economic Thinking required no fundamental 
changes post 1989. Despite this, however, it was this very subject that eventually lost 
out and is no longer taught as a compulsory subject. 
The second day of the conference was divided thematically into four parts. The 
ﬁ  rst group of papers was to do with the important ﬁ  gures linked with the VŠO and the 
beginning of Czech economic thinking. 
I. Bažantová (Faculty of Law, Charles University) gave a paper on Albín Bráf 
and the Origins of Czech Economic Thinking. She focused on Bráf’s part in organising 
economics education at both college and university levels in the Czech lands and 
drew attention to the fact that it was Bráf who taught all prominent inter-war Czech 
economists and that all economics was taught according to his curriculum and his 
terminology. 
M. P  olášek (Faculty of Arts, Charles University) chose as his subject J. Macek 
and the role of economics within his framework of social theory and politics. M. 
Polášek only touched upon Macek’s actual economic proposals. Instead, he pursued 
mostly theoretical questions, namely Macek’s ideas about economic science and its 286       PRAGUE ECONOMIC PAPERS, 3, 2010
possibilities, the reconciliation of economics and Macek’s philosophical utilitarianism 
and his socialist beliefs, the role of economics in politics, etc. The main message of 
his paper was that Macek regarded economics as a social science, as the chief method 
through which human society can be studied, and that he was convinced that anything 
to do with social life is the domain of economics, the only exception being national 
security, which falls into the realm of politics. 
Z. Džbánková (Faculty of Business Administration (FBA), UE) looked into the 
ethical aspects of the teachings of A. Bráf, J. Macek and K. Engliš. She introduced their 
principal works, where they deal with the relationship between economics and ethics, 
and she pointed out that it was J. Macek who created space in the Czech setting for 
a deeper analysis of A. Smith’s work. She also emphasised the clear tendency within 
Czech economic thinking to strive towards an integrated interpretation of economics, 
including ethical matters. The following discussion included points such as Bráf’s 
relationship with his contemporaries and the circumstances under which Macek left 
the UE. In the discussion that followed, J. Jirásek shared his memory of a particular 
lecture by Macek, during which Macek said that “there are three kinds of a lie – a lie, 
an outright lie and statistics”.
M. Sekyrková (National Technical Museum, (NTM)) gave a paper on R. Hotowetz, 
a signiﬁ  cant economist and an inter-war minister, basing her paper on documents from 
his estate, stored at the NTM Archive. She called attention to him as an economic advisor 
in numerous inter-war advisory boards to the government and to his involvement with 
the VŠO. And yet, he was one of those who, from their academic post, voiced their 
critical views of the economic policy of the time very openly. 
The next part of the day consisted of papers on important ﬁ  gures linked to the UE. 
Z. Hrdličková (Faculty of Economics, Masaryk’s University) focused on Č. Kožušník 
and the ways in which he contributed to the history of Czech economic thinking. His 
research work falls into the periods of real socialism, his most important works date back 
to The Prague Spring in the 1960s, when he was a prominent theoretician on the subject 
of reforming the planned economy. Hrdličková’s paper gave opportunity to look closely 
at the evolution of his theoretical views in the context of the times. 
J. Koderová (Faculty of Finance and Accounting, UE) highlighted F. Vencovský 
as an expert in the ﬁ  eld of monetary policy and as a signiﬁ  cant researcher into Czech 
economic thinking. She made a mention of his principal works as well as his teaching 
at the UE, namely his lectures on Czech economic thinking.
F. Stellner (FEPA, UE) adopted a chronological approach to a presentation 
of scholars and events linked with the teaching of economic history at the UE. He 
explored the development of economic history as a subject, together with the main 
problems accompanying the running of the department, which from the 1950s focused 
on research into both national and international economics. The department had 
a special status within economic historiography until 1989 since it was the only place 
in Czechoslovakia oriented solely towards this scientiﬁ  c discipline. 
The ﬁ  rst afternoon session, titled Economics in Unfree Times, was full of very 
inspiring contributions. Its aim was to look in more detail at what was happening at 
the UE between the end of WWII and the early 1950s and then in the times of real 
socialism. PRAGUE ECONOMIC PAPERS, 3, 2010        287
M. Devátá (Institute for Contemporary History, Academy of Sciences) presented 
a paper on The University of Political and Economic Sciences and the Problem of 
(Dis)Continuity of Humanities and Arts in 1949–1953. She outlined the evolution 
of humanities and arts after February 1948 in connection with the establishment of 
the Communist regime, political interference with university education and Marxist-
Leninist indoctrination. She addressed the institutional reorganisation of the teaching 
of economic sciences and showed how the all-encompassing approach to Economics 
became curbed by subjects such as Ethics, Psychology, Sociology and Social Care 
having to give way to utilitarian subjects like Planning or Scientiﬁ  c Communism. 
Devátá demonstrated clearly how the substance of education changed completely 
under the pressure of the Communist ideology. 
V. Němec (Association of Geoscientists for International Development), a student 
at the UE in 1948–1951, shared several personal memories and illustrated in detail the 
methods of study at the university then. Whereas “Post-February 1948” undergraduates 
did not experience difﬁ  culties in getting into universities, they witnessed ﬁ  rst-hand the 
changes that followed. Not only did posters by the association of Catholic students 
started disappearing, as did the busts of Masaryk from the plinths, some lecturers and 
students began to vanish too, such as J. Macek etc. 
J. Řezník (Philosophical Faculty, Palacký University (PF PU)) titled his paper 
The Planning Department at the PFPU in 1949–1953 and called attention to the fact 
that steps were taken in the Post-February period to teach economic theory in other 
places apart from the UE. The Planning Department was founded as part of the plans 
to open the Faculty in 1948 and was led by J. Janiš. It ran a one-year course designed 
for the study of company and regional planning. One of the intentions was for those 
completing the course successfully to continue their studies at the UE. 
The subsequent discussion revolved around questions such as who actually taught 
the newly implanted Marxism, what textbooks were used, what proportion of students 
and lecturers were affected by the post-February purges, and what role individual 
professors, e.g. J. Macek, played in them. V. Němec noted that UE graduates, like 
Hanzelka and Zikmund, popular travellers, increased the prestige of the UE at the time. 
The last part of the day was dedicated to the ways in which Economics used to be 
taught. 
L. Němcová (Council for Ethics in Economics) explained how the UE dealt with 
teaching Cooperative Ownership and Business Ethics. She clariﬁ  ed that Cooperative 
Ownership was lectured already prior to 1948 (J. Macek) and that there was a group 
of lecturers at the UE, led by Prof. Pernica, who engaged in teaching as well as partly 
researching Cooperative Ownership until 1968. Later on, the study and research of 
this topic were incorporated within relevant subjects elsewhere, among others at the 
Department of Domestic Trade (V. Doležal). After 1989 the Department of Small 
Business, led by J. Císař, encouraged the study of “The Role of Cooperative Ownership 
in Market Economy” as a subject in its own right again. And it was here that Business 
Ethics was lectured for the ﬁ  rst time ever. 
V. Škochová (Centre of Information and Library Services, UE) focused on what 
sources of information are available today to students of economics and to researchers 
into Czech Economic Thinking and Economic History.288       PRAGUE ECONOMIC PAPERS, 3, 2010
Friday morning there was a follow-up of the previous afternoon, with discussion 
and the presented papers. The whole session bore the title: What Sort of Economics Do 
We Teach Today? 
D. Lipka (FEPA, EU) considered carefully the ultimate question: Why teach 
economics at all? According to him, while everyone questions what sort of economics 
should be taught, hardly anyone asks himself why in fact we should teach it in the ﬁ  rst 
place, what its purpose is, what role economics plays among other arts and humanities 
and what being an economist actually entails. 
J. Soukup (FBA, UE) deﬁ  ned what the priorities underpinning the study of 
microeconomics at business-administration-oriented faculties are, what information is 
a key for courses in microeconomics, and what the graduate’s proﬁ  le should be. This 
was then discussed in more detail in the context of time allocation and the textbooks 
used for the study of relevant subjects. D. Tříska (FEPA, UE) explored the possibilities 
of applying economic theory in UE graduates’ every-day working life. T. Sedláček 
(Faculty of Social Sciences, Charles University) ﬁ  nished the session with his paper 
titled: Economics in Crisis. The discussion which ensued centred around three areas 
of questions: 
1)  What is the relationship between micro- and macroeconomic analysis? What is 
the deﬁ  nition of economics as a science? What is economics’ own deﬁ  nition of its 
method?
2)   How demanding are the requirements for a successful completion of the studies, 
including the dissertation? What textbooks are used and do students have and/or 
should they have access to alternative teachings and different methodologies?
3)   To what extent are graduates from economics degrees able to put their theoreti-
cal knowledge into practice? How is the teaching of Economics set up in terms 
of Economic Theory vs. Economic Practice? To what degree can one learn to 
embrace economics as a method of decision making without getting stuck in the 
formula of proﬁ  t maximization? 
The contents of the conference will come out as a book, published this year. The 
publication will be divided into three parts: From the History of an Institution, Chapters 
from the History of Czech Economic Thinking and What Sort of Economics Do We 
Teach? The ﬁ  rst part deals with the historical circumstances in which the VŠO was 
founded in 1919, and it addresses its transformation after 1945. The second section 
explores the teachings of Czech and Czechoslovak economists over the last 100 years. 
The last part of the book will offer different viewpoints and several answers to the 
question contained in its name. Just as not all economists agree on the deﬁ  nition of 
the terms “economics” and “economist”, they also disagree over what the purpose 
of economics studies is. Individual chapters show clearly how our ideas today about 
what sort of economics should be taught differ from the visions of those who helped 
establish economics as an independent subject, or from the ideas of Josef Macek, one 
of the ﬁ  rst professors at the VŠO. It suggests that discussions on this topic live on and 
that both the conference and the book can bring useful contribution to them.

An Anniversary of an Institution - A Report on the ,Teaching Economics for 90 Years´ Conference

http://www.vse.cz/polek/download.php?jnl=pep&pdf=377.pdf

An Anniversary of an Institution - A Report on the ,Teaching Economics for 90 Years´ Conference

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Research Papers in Economics