CC BY
7ECONOMIC SCIENCES
DEMAND FOR ECONOMIC KNOWLEDGE AT UKRANIAN NON-ECONOMIC UNIVERSITIES
Chornyi O.
Vinnytsia Finance and Economics University, PhD Associate professor of the Management and Administration Department
Abstract
Despite remarkable fluctuations in the direction of economic development (capitalism versus socialism) over the last 30 years, one thing remains unchanged in Ukraine, namely, the increased efforts of Ukrainians to create a modern market economy. This affected not only the revitalization of economic life in the country, but also the spread of economic knowledge, especially within non-economic universities. At the level with the economic disciplines introduction, a lot of economic departments and even faculties are created. In this regard, we decided to investigate how students feel about the feasibility of studying economic knowledge.
The main purpose of our research is to study the attitude of non-economic major students to economics (demand for economic knowledge) at Vinnytsia universities. Within the article, we investigated the students' perceptions of a curriculum, their attitudes towards studying economic knowledge at a university, their understanding of the relationship between economic knowledge and the real economy comprehension. Students' attitudes toward theoretical and practical economic courses and their desire to start private business were analyzed.
The methodology of our work is based on the questionnaire (field research) method and a set of statistical methods. We interviewed more than 670 students among 30 different non-economic specialties from 4 target universities in Vinnytsia (Ukraine). Statistical analysis of the obtained data showed that there are common trends in economics understanding within all examined specialties.
The main conclusion of our study is that students are not interested in increasing the number of non-core disciplines in the curriculums, but they do understand the importance of economic knowledge. That is supported by the following facts: 52% of the respondents consider economic disciplines to be moderately important, and 70% of respondents are interested in obtaining economic knowledge at the university level; 86% of those polled would like to start a business related to their specialty; 76% of those surveyed would like to take courses related to business training.
Keywords: economics, demand for economic knowledge, entrepreneurship, tertiary education, Ukraine.
Introduction. Since the early 1990s, a rapid development of a market economy has begun in Ukraine. In parallel, the study, assimilation and application of economic thought from developed capitalist countries got a wide spread. During the last three decades, Ukraine has experienced complications in economic life, but also reformation of economic departments at universities, the emergence of national capitalist thought, and even the spread of economic knowledge in all spheres of society. Therefore, it is not surprising that economic knowledge has become important not only for financiers, economists and entrepreneurs, but also for the widest range of Ukrainian universities graduates and professionals on the labor market. For this reason, we have decided to conduct a marketing study concerning a demand for economic knowledge at Ukrainian non-economic universities.
In general, this study is a part of a broader research conducted by the author over the past two years. It is a section of the experimental chapter of the doctoral dissertation, within which the study of the attitudes toward economic knowledge was conducted among students and schoolchildren. Overall dissertation deals with exploring the possibilities of an interdisciplinary approach application to economics. During this long-term research a lot of new knowledge were obtained: the functioning of economic knowledge at Ukrainian universities, the specifics of economic and interdisciplinary discourses, the place of economic knowledge in modern interdisciplinary courses and the problems of
domestic interdisciplinary courses development. Since students can be determined as stakeholders that are interested in improving of the learning process, it is important to analyze in what degree students with non-economic majors are interested in obtaining economic knowledge.
Specifically, this study, which is presented within the article, is an integral part of the survey related to students' perceptions of the need for economic knowledge teaching among non-economic specialties. On the university level, we investigated attitudes toward economics and economics' interdisciplinary connections understanding among 1st and 5th (1st year master's) course students. This article presents the results of a study related to the economics comprehension among the students of 1 year at Vinnytsia non-economic universities. The results of the study are quite representative. At the end of the article, the author made some recommendations for those involved in decision making processes.
Literature overview. In order to explain the features of our research, we need to address the general context of the economic knowledge functioning in the contemporary world. The first thing to keep in mind is that competencies related to financial and economic literacy are essential in the modern world (Walstad, Rebeck & Butters, 2013). Every person, without exception, needs to arrange personal finances, as well as to pay taxes. Moreover, citizens of each country must understand and adequately interpret economic policy, as
well as be aware of the basic macroeconomic indicators at least at the superficial level. This information is needed, so the civil society to be able fully implement the principles of democracy.
In order to teach different professionals (not only marketers, economists and financiers) how to create an adequate understanding of their own and national economic situation, students of non-economic specialties are learned different economic disciplines. Most often, this takes the form of a general economic theory course (Carlson & Schodt, 1995). However, the need for economic education at the bachelor's level has long taken a serious place, especially in capitalist countries (Becker & Bartlett, 1991). Modern researchers consider economics to be an important part of learning in the 21st century (Ferguson, 2011). It should be noted that even the curricula for economics majors are under scrutiny. For example, for several decades, studying of the undergraduate economic forecasting remains an important problem (Donihue, 1995).
In fact, contemporary context regarding existing problem of studying economics at universities is much broader. Some studies explore different aspects of teaching economics in a global dimension (Round & Shanahan, 2005). Accordingly, studies of economic education depending on various parameters are widespread: regional studies, level of economic development, type of economic system, needs of a population, etc. For example, studies of economic education at British universities are quite promising (Davies & Durden, 2010). However, at the current stage of global relations development, it is equally important for students and faculties to understand economics functioning in transitive economies (Walstad & Rebeck, 2001). Moreover, economic science and education differ within different countries, and even within individual universities. Therefore, there exists a very important problem of the uneven economic education at universities (Bayer & Wilcox, 2019). Given the great difference in national traditions of teaching economics, Ukrainian scholars should pay attention to the works concerning the history of teaching economics in different countries. For example, an important landmark for capitalism and market economy is the attitude of American scholars to the economics teaching in the 1980s (Solow, 1983). In this context, modern information resources can offer numerous opportunities for Ukrainian scientists.
Finally, it is safe to say that the interdisciplinary component of economics is becoming increasingly important. The last one can successfully replace the "economic imperialism" that was prevalent in the second half of the 20th century. Articles on interdisciplinary economics began to appear in the early 1990s (Siegers, 1992) and since then, attention to this issue has continued to increase. For example, at the beginning of the 21st century, fruitful scientific works appeared, combining courses on interdisciplinary economics and critical thinking (Borg & Borg, 2001). Contemporary scholars continue to study various interdisciplinary aspects of teaching economics (Freedman, 2008). So, given this context, we decided to investigate the attitude of non-economic specialties students regarding
their loyalty to obtain economic knowledge at Ukrainian universities (specifically in the city of Vinnytsia).
Methodology. The main purpose of our work is to study the attitude of non-economic major students to economics (demand for economic knowledge). The main purpose correlates with the achievement of the following goals: to investigate students' understanding of a curriculum, to determine students' attitudes towards studying economic knowledge at university, to evaluate students' understanding of the relationship between economic knowledge and the real economy comprehension, to determine students' attitudes to theoretical and practical economic courses, to analyze students' desire for starting their own business and doing business.
The organization of the study was related to obtaining permission for questioning among students of Vinnytsia non-economic universities. We received a promoting letter from the Department of Education of Vinnytsia Regional State Administration (VRSA). This letter was sent to the offices of Vinnytsia universities. Subsequently, we received permits for questioning from the pro-rectors of the Donetsk National University named after V. Stus (based in Vinnitsa since 2014) (DonNU), Vinnitsa National Medical University (VNMU), Vinnitsa National Pedagogical University (VSPU) and Vinnitsa National Technical University (VNTU). Within the VNMU and VNTU, the survey was conducted by the staff of the universities. Within the DonNU and VSPU, the author received further permissions for questioning from the faculty members and directly conducted questionnaires in the student educational groups of non-economic orientation.
Within the 4 target universities, a survey was conducted among students of numerous non-economic majors. At DonNU the survey was conducted among students of the following specialties: computer science, applied mathematics, cybersecurity, jurisprudence, international relations, history and archeology, information and library affairs. At VNMU the main specialties among which the questioning were conducted are medicine, dentistry, medical business and pharmacy. Specialties surveyed at VSPU: philology, language and literature (secondary education), geography, chemistry, labor education, primary education, professional education, journalism, fine arts, physical education and sports, mathematics (secondary education), system analysis and history (secondary education). Specialties surveyed at VNTU: automation and computer integrated technologies, computer engineering, cybersecu-rity, software engineering, information systems and technologies, ecology. Hence, the survey was conducted among students of 30 different specialties.
The author proposes two main hypotheses, confirmation or refutation of which will allow to provide specific conclusions and basic recommendations:
Hypothesis 1: Students of Vinnytsia non-economic universities understand the importance of economic knowledge in their curriculums.
Hypothesis 2: Students of Vinnytsia non-economic universities are ready to become economically active population.
The author designed a questionnaire to help investigate the hypotheses. The developed questionnaire contained 4 blocks of questions. A total of 20 closed tests with 4 possible answer options. This paper highlights the results of a study regarding the first two blocks of questions (10 closed tests in total) that correlate with above mentioned hypotheses. The questionnaire was conducted within numerous student groups in the form of paper questionnaires distribution. After explaining the rules of a questionnaire filling, 10-15 minutes were given to students, directly to fill in a questionnaire.
The completed questionnaires were processed manually by the author. A total of 683 questionnaires were processed. Paper questionnaire answers were downloaded to a computer and processed using Microsoft Excel. Than, basic responses were classified by university, specialty, and gender. Based on these, tables have been built containing the aggregate results of the study (the distribution of responses by specialty and gender will not be covered by us in this article). We have also constructed the diagrams for visual presentation of the research results.
Overall, the study took 9 weeks. It took 1 week to obtain a permission from the VRSA Education Department. Obtaining permits for questioning from the university administration - 1 week. Direct surveying at universities - 3 weeks. Systematization and processing of paper questionnaires - 1 week. Transfer of data from paper form to electronic form - 1 week. Systematization of answers into tables and charts - 1 week. Writing an article - 1 week.
The limitations of the study are related to the following: survey was not conducted at all faculties of the target universities (except VNMU). In addition, within VNTU research was conducted mainly among students of specialties related to computer science and software development. If we take into account the limitations of the direct study results, it should be noted that of the 683 questionnaires received, 6 questionnaires were spoiled. Alike, within some questionnaires, students did not answer specific questions. There were 25 unanswered questions total out of 6770 (677 questionnaires * 10 questions) in all questionnaires, which is approximately 0,4%.
Results. Table 1 summarizes the overall quantitative results of our study.
Table 1.
Overall distribution of answers for the VNTU, VSPU, VNMU and DonNU
Block of questions Question number Distribution of answers (votes) Distribution of answers (percent)
Keys to the questions A B C D A B C D
Block 1 1 19 211 430 13 2,81 31,17 63,52 1,92
2 41 348 144 143 6,06 51,40 21,27 21,12
3 604 57 13 1 89,22 8,42 1,92 0,15
4 51 351 134 138 7,53 51,85 19,79 20,38
5 59 203 210 202 8,71 29,99 31,02 29,84
mBlock 2 6 193 408 48 27 28,51 60,27 7,09 3,99
7 35 436 146 59 5,17 64,40 21,57 8,71
8 121 160 253 143 17,87 23,63 37,37 21,12
9 251 56 269 96 37,08 8,27 39,73 14,18
10 253 258 115 46 37,37 38,11 16,99 6,79
Source: developed by the author.
Although at this stage the interpretation of the results is rather superficial, it is still possible to analyze the distribution of answers in the context of specific questions. Firstly, Table 1 shows that there is no uniform distribution of answers for all 10 questions. Secondly, in questions 1, 2, 3, 4, 6 and 7, one and the same answer was chosen by more than 50% of respondents. Thirdly, in the 5th question, the answers are almost evenly distributed between 3 favorites. Fourthly, there
are two obvious favorites within the 9th and 10th questions. Finally, although there is a leader in question 8, the other three answers were answered by approximately the same number of respondents (the biggest distance being 5.76%). This is how a cursory analysis of the answers distribution looks like. Let's have a look at the coincidence or difference with the overall trend within individual universities.
Table 2.
Distribution of answers for the VNTU and VSPU
Question Distribution of an-
number Distribution of answers for the VNTU (votes) swers for the VSPU
Block of questions (votes)
Keys to the questions A B C D A B C D
1 6 72 77 5 4 37 129 2
2 5 100 33 23 19 76 23 55
Block 1 3 151 9 1 0 152 15 4 1
4 13 80 35 32 16 99 31 26
5 18 49 51 42 16 58 60 37
6 45 96 13 6 62 101 8 2
7 12 102 31 15 6 111 40 16
Block 2 8 44 33 52 32 23 42 82 26
9 59 14 60 26 68 15 64 25
10 61 60 29 10 71 74 22 6
Source: developed by the author.
All the universities have answers that are partially or completely in line with the overall trend. At Vinny-tsia National Technical University (Table 2), this occurs within questions 2, 3, 4, 5 (partial), 6, 7, 9 and 10. The distribution of answers to the 1st question for students of VNTU is somewhat different: there are two obvious leaders and two outsiders who have scored relatively the same number of points. The distribution of answers to the 8th question in VNTU differs from the general trend and is quite complex. So, we will explain the differences within the 1st and 8th question for VNTU in the "Discussion of the Results" section.
The answers of Vinnytsia State Pedagogical University students (Table 2) also, to a large extent, coincide with the general trend. Questions 1, 3, 4, 6, 7, 9, and 10 are almost the same as the overall trend, the 5th question is partially the same. The answers to questions 2 and 8 are different from the overall trend. Same as in the answers distribution for VNTU, here we have only 2 questions that differ from the general trend, and this allows us to speak about the common moments in relation to economic knowledge within non-economic specialties at different universities. To find out if it is true, the peculiarities of answers distribution in VNMU and DonNU should be analyzed.
Table 3.
Distribution of answers for the VNMU and DonNU
Question Distribution of an-
number Distribution of answers for the VNMU (votes) swers for the DonNU
Block of questions (votes)
Keys to the questions A B C D A B C D
1 2 35 97 2 7 67 127 4
2 1 95 24 16 16 77 64 49
Block 1 3 104 25 8 0 197 8 0 0
4 6 70 31 29 16 102 37 51
5 4 41 43 49 21 55 56 74
6 35 83 9 10 51 128 18 9
7 10 85 27 15 7 138 48 13
Block 2 8 19 32 50 36 35 53 69 49
9 60 20 48 8 64 7 97 37
10 48 46 30 10 73 78 34 20
Source: developed by the author.
Within Vinnitsa National Medical University (Table 3), the answers to the following questions coincide with the main trend: 1 (partly), 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 (partly) and 10 (partly). The underlying trends persist where the coincidence is partly present, but there is a slightly different distance between favorites and outsiders. Though the distribution of answers to the 9th question for VNMU retains the relevance of the main leaders (as in the general trend), but the distance between them is greater and the positions of outsiders have changed
places. Despite the aforementioned deviations, the distribution of answers differs from the basic trend within only 1 question.
Finally, analyzing the coincidence of the answers distribution at Donetsk National University (Table 3) with the overall trend (Table 1), it should be noted that within questions 1, 3, 4, 5 (partly), 6, 7, 8 and 10 a great level of correlation is presented. The answers distribution in the 2nd question for DonNU has an uneven downward trend: B, C, D, A. The distribution of answers to the 9th question for DonNU has almost uniform downward trend: C, A, D, B. Like for the other
universities studied, in DonNU only 2 answers are significantly different from the general trend. This indicates that for most non-economic major students at Vinnytsia universities, a similar attitude towards economic knowledge is typical. Considering that we conducted research among 30 non-economic specialties, we can speak of a broad attitude homogeneity towards economics and economic knowledge among non-economic specialties.
It should be noted that roughly speaking almost 80% of the answers coincide with the main trend, nevertheless 20% of the difference is significant. That is why, along with the general trend interpretation, we will do an additional review of differences across individual universities (if any). In the case of VNTU, these are questions 1 and 8; in the case of VDPU - the 2nd and 8th questions; in the case of VNMU - the 9th question; in case of DonNU - the 2nd and 9th questions. Although the results of the study proved to be quite representative - full or partial coincidence of the answers distribution in 80% of cases - we encourage an individual approach to teaching economic knowledge to students at Ukrainian universities.
Considering the increase of autonomy at Ukrainian universities, we believe that good governance within them should be encouraged. In view of this, stakeholder theory should be taken into account. In the context of the latter, students (the opinions of whom are analyzed in our study) are one of the key stakeholders involved in improving Ukrainian higher education.
Therefore, along with the university administration, academic staff, local authorities, top-level authorities, business representatives, civil society, public organizations, and even parents of students, students themselves become active participants in the processes of modernization and improvement of Ukrainian tertiary education. That is why we invite all other interested parties to take into account the students' opinion when making important decisions regarding the acquisition of economic knowledge by students within university programs.
Discussion of the results. The answers to the 1st question (Figure 1, upper-left diagram) are quite significant, since very few students have preferred theoretical knowledge in the specialty and a block of general disciplines at all universities. Thus, they constitute 3% and 2% respectively. Instead, nearly 64% of the students surveyed believe that the most important part of the curriculum is both theoretical and practical knowledge that related to their specialties. In addition, almost 31% of respondents believe that the most important part of their curriculums is a practical specialized knowledge. The only exception here is VNTU, where almost the same number of students (72 and 77 votes) was split between practical specialized knowledge and theoretical-practical specialized knowledge. This indicates that students of VNTU are more oriented towards practical activity. In spite of this, the positive option is that the vast majority of students (almost 64%) have deliberately chosen their specialty and consider it important to study both theoretical and practical aspects.
1. What part of the curriculum is the most important?
I theoretical on speciality
I practical on speciality
I both theoretical an< practical
non-core disciplines
2. Does the amount of non-core disciplines need to be changed?
yes, upnward yes, downwai doubt no
3. Have you already studied economic 4. Evaluate the importance of economic
disciplines at university? disciplines for your specialty:
Figure 1. The answers to the survey questions (Part 1)
Source: developed by the author.
Analyzing the distribution of answers to the 2nd that there is a high level of correlation between the an-question (Figure 1, top-right diagram), it must be said swers to the 1st and 2nd questions. This is reflected in
the fact that the vast majority of respondents (almost
52%) are interested in reducing the number of non-core disciplines in their curriculum. In addition, almost the same number of respondents believe that the number of non-core disciplines should not be changed (27.12%) or doubted (21.27%) about such a need. Only 6% of respondents believe that the number of non-core disciplines in the curriculum need to be increased. It confirms that the students of Vinnytsia universities are interested in obtaining theoretical and practical
knowledge within their specialties, and therefore they are concerned about specialties they have chosen. Despite latent antipathy towards non-core disciplines, it will be shown further in the paper that the interviewed students are quite positive about obtaining economic knowledge at the university.
2. Does the amount of non-core disciplines need to be
changed?
■ yes, upward Byes, downward ■ doubt ■ no
m
A Ii
Im
il
i
VN T U
VSPU
VNMU
DONNU
Figure 2. The distribution of answers to the 2nd question by university Source: developed by the author.
Figure 2 shows that the distribution of responses for VSPU and DonNU are significantly different from the overall trend. Although the largest number of students tends to decrease the number of non-core disciplines, the differences in distribution require additional explanation. It is clear that both in the case of VDPU and in the case of DonNU, a significant number of students tend to increase the number of non-core disciplines (although this indicator has taken the last place). In addition, both in the case of VDPU and DonNU, a relatively large number of students is inclined to say that the curriculum does not need to be changed at all. And only in the case of DonNU there is a large group of students (the second largest for DonNU) who doubt the need to modernize the curriculum. Such a result is quite acceptable since abstaining from a particular decision indicates intellectual maturity.
Question 3 in Figure 1 (bottom-left diagram) concerns the number of economic subjects taught to students. Since the survey was conducted only among the 1st year undergraduate students of non-economic majors, it is evident that the vast majority of students did not study economic subjects. To be precise, 89.2% of students did not study economic subjects at all, 8.4% of students studied 1-4 economic subjects, and slightly less than 2% of students studied 5-10 economic university subjects. Of course, with the passage of further education (4 bachelor's and 2 master's years of study) the attitude of students to economic knowledge may change. At the moment, it is important to keep in mind
that the vast majority of respondents (89.2%) did not study economics at university.
In spite of the lack of attention to non-core disciplines, the answers to the 4th questions (Figure 1, bottom-right chart) show that the most students have a clear understanding of the economic knowledge importance for their specialties. Hence, almost 52% of those surveyed consider economic disciplines to be moderately important to their specialties, and another 8% consider economic disciplines very important. The fifth part of those surveyed consider economic disciplines insignificant (20%) and another 20% have doubt. These answers, in turn, echo with the answers to the following question.
The answers to question 5 (Figure 3, upper-left diagram) show that 70% of the respondents are interested in gaining economic knowledge, while 30% believe they are not interested in economic knowledge at all. Given that economic disciplines are not included in the major of non-economic specialties (first semester), and the answers to questions 1 and 2 make it clear that most students are not interested in non-core knowledge, the situation related to economic knowledge is quite significant. Thus, 9% of students are very interested, 30% are moderately interested, and 31% are little interested in gaining economic knowledge. It can be assumed that such interest in economic knowledge is related to the apparent desire to study interdisciplinary subjects related to the intersection between economics and relevant specialties.
5. Are you interested in ganing economic knowledge at university?
6. Do you need economic knowledge to understand modern Ukrainian society?
yes, a lot yes, moderate yes, a little
I yes, as a universil discipline
I yes, as self-education
I yes, from mass media
no, not needed
7. Can a person who hasn't studied economics adequately understand the real economy?
yes, to a great extent
I yes, if interested in economics no, too difficult
no, only economists understand
8. Which economic subjects would you prefer?
21%
only theoretical
I only practical
theoretical and practical
I do not like economic disciplines
9. Would you like to start aprivate business that relates to your specialty?
10. Would you like learn courses that relate to business opening?
yes, certainly yes, after graduation I yes, during the life no
I yes
I rather yes, than n I rather no, than ye I no
Figure 3. The answers to the survey questions (Part 2) Source: developed by the author.
no
Summarizing the answers to the first block of questions, we conclude that Hypothesis 1 is fully confirmed. Although the vast majority of students do not have a propensity to study non-core disciplines, they are well aware of the importance to gain economic knowledge. The following block of questions will give an opportunity to find out what kind of economic knowledge students prefer: general economic understanding of reality or creation of their own business.
The 2nd block of questions is related to the confirmation or refutation of the 2nd Hypothesis. In fact, it contains questions regarding the real economy understanding, opening own business, and the specificity of demand for economic subjects among non-economic students.
Figure 3 (top-right diagram) shows that almost 70% of the surveyed students believe that economic knowledge is needed to understand contemporary society. Of these, 29% believe that it is necessary to study economics as a university subject, and 60% believe that
self-education is sufficient. A much smaller percentage of respondents (7%) believe that economic knowledge can be gained from the mass media. Only 4% of the respondents believe that economic knowledge is not needed to understand modern society, so the latter do not belong to the economically active population. The question of whether one can master economics independently is rather debatable. On the other hand, such results speak not only for the students' self-confidence (regarding the study of economics), but also for the scattered perceptions regarding the connection between the life of modern Ukrainian society and real economic phenomena. In order to better understand this, let's analyze the answers to the following question.
When we look at the middle-left diagram of Figure 3, we'll see that the most respondents believe that a person who has not studied economic subjects but who is interested in economics can adequately understand the real sector of an economy (64%); 5% of the respondents believe that this understanding can be adequate to a
great extent. Instead, 22% believe that in such a situation, it will be difficult to reach an adequate understanding, and another 9% believe that adequate understanding is only available to economists. On one hand, we do not want to instill an opinion spread within the limits of economics and to resort to "economic imperialism". On the other hand, we will not discuss in what way fragmented economic knowledge, provoked by interest in the economics, can help to comprehend the real economy. Being impartial, we need to state that just over 64% of those polled believe that adequate understanding is available for curious people.
Generally, the answers to the 8th question (Figure 3, middle-right diagram) are very positive. This is reflected in the fact that just over 20% of respondents do not like economic subjects. This situation is acceptable, since - once again - the survey was conducted among non-economic specialties. Consequently, 37% of those polled have a positive attitude towards obtaining both theoretical and practical economic knowledge. In addition, 24% of those surveyed are interested in studying economic subjects only in practical direction, and 18% only in theoretical direction. In sum, this gives a large percentage of interest (79%) concerning economic knowledge obtainment. If we compare these results with the previous two questions, it is obvious that students have a latent interest in studying economic subjects at the universities, but for various reasons it cannot convert to a conscious desire. Obviously, this concerns a superficial understanding of the links between economics and respective specializations as well as the theory of interdisciplinarity itself. Taking this into account, the interest in the economic sphere of public life is still unformed, nevertheless, consideration of the last two issues will clearly show that students' own economic interest is well expressed.
Although the distribution of answers to the eighth question for VNTU is relatively uniform (as in the main trend), interest in theoretical economic knowledge have took the second place (44 points), and practical economic knowledge same as lack of interest in economic disciplines rank third. The biggest difference can be observed in the distribution of responses for VDPU. The answers here are rather uneven. Although no economic discipline was taught, most students are interested in economics (approximately 87%). Students are interested in both theoretical and practical knowledge (47%), second place is occupied by practical economic knowledge (24%). The lack of interest in economic subjects constitutes only 13% (which is less than at other universities).
86% of the respondents said "yes" to the question "would you like to start your own business related to your specialty" (Figure 2, bottom-left chart). Only 14% of those surveyed have not such a desire. This indicates that the vast majority of the respondents are ready to take part in the economic processes within Ukraine and globally. Specifying the results of the study, it should be noted that 38% of the respondents are absolutely sure that they want to start their own business, 8% are ready to do it immediately after graduation, and 40% want to open a business during their lives. These results are largely coincide with the results for VNTU and
VSPU. Instead, the distribution of the answers to this question for VNMU and DonNU needs further interpretation.
The distribution for VNMU (the 9th question) is very similar to the general trend, but the ratio between the favorites and outsiders has changed in cities. For example, the number of students who do not intend to start a private business is the smallest among all universities, while more students want to start a business immediately after graduation. Yet 82% of those polled want to start their own business and look at it rather pragmatically.
The distribution of answers to the last question largely coincides with the main trend (Figure 2, bottom-right chart). So, 76% of the surveyed students would like to take university courses related to business start-up. At the same time, half of them are sure that they want to study relevant courses and half of them are doubtful. 17% of the respondents believe that they do not have the desire to study problems related opening of their own business, and 7% firmly believe that they do not need such courses. This is largely correlated with the answers to the previous question. However, we must say that a relatively small number of students is frustrated about the essence of economic knowledge and its place in the system of science.
In general, Hypothesis 2, as well as Hypothesis 1, is fully confirmed. Students believe that economic knowledge is accessible for study and comprehension. They also want to start their own business. In addition, a very small number of students are not interested in economic knowledge or business related courses.
Summarizing the results of our study, we conclude that although students of non-economic Vinnytsia universities have little interest in studying non-core subjects, there is a hidden interest in gaining economic knowledge among them. The latter manifests itself in the awareness of the economic knowledge importance and it is related to the desire of improving one's own financial position by opening a private business. That is why, in the paper, we will take into account the possibility of this interest consideration by all key stakeholders.
Given the latest democratic trends and pluralism within university education that characterize the 21st century, it is important to emphasize the possibilities of university autonomy in Ukraine. Reinforcing the latter can significantly affect the quality of Ukrainian higher education by seeking individual (or regionally specific) approaches to conducting scientific and educational activities. Increase in the autonomy level of Ukrainian universities can have a positive impact on the improvement of students' learning effectiveness, it can also increase the correlation between the content of a curriculum and the activity of graduates in the contemporary labor market. To do this, a university needs to optimize relations with all key stakeholders interested in improving of the learning process quality.
The key stakeholders in the academic sphere can be divided into 2 main types: internal and external. Internal stakeholders include university governing bodies, academics (scientists and faculty) and students themselves. External stakeholders include national and
local education authorities, international organizations and foreign partners, other universities, representatives of the real economy (business or industry), public organizations (civil society), and student parents. For the moment, we will not start a discussion about optimization of the communication between key stakeholders concerning university education. Instead, we note that this study focuses on the survey of students' thoughts, and in this context, their opinion should be taken into account on a par with other key stakeholders. Therefore, this study contains information that will be useful both for familiarization and implementation.
A holistic vision of the syllabus in various specialties at Ukrainian universities strongly linked to the number of non-core disciplines. Given the desire to develop a market economy in Ukraine, the administration and academic community of a particular university must decide for themselves how much economic competencies their graduates need. It should be noted that at the Vinnytsia non-economic universities the situations are quite different. For example, as many as 3 faculties of economics (or management) are present at Vinnytsia National Agrarian University. And as of December 2019 no economic subjects are taught at VSPU. Therefore, taking into account the results of our research, educational communities of different Ukrainian universities will be conscious of the results or, if necessary, they can conduct further research.
Considering that our questioning was conducted among 30 different specialties, we must say that within each specialty academicians need to use an individual approach. It is well known that the efforts of faculty should be concentrated around teaching students the competencies and knowledge they need to live in the modern world and to pursue effective professional activities. The level of individual industry integration with the real sector of the economy is quite different, and therefore it is necessary to take into account the specifics of specific industries. As for basic financial literacy, we believe that Ukrainian citizens should receive it at school or non-formal education levels.
The inclusion of economic subjects (disciplines) in the curriculums of non-economic specialties depends on two main factors: the development of a market economy in Ukraine and the study of experience in higher education within developed countries. Thus, the administrations and academic communities of Ukrainian universities can be guided by both national and global trends. In any case, the education at Ukrainian universities that is related to economic competences will affect the size of economically active population and the reactivation of Ukrainian economic life.
Finally, the possibility of strengthening the economic-interdisciplinary component in Ukrainian industry and classical universities is a debatable issue. It depends on the vision of the administrations of specific universities and the values of specific local communities. We believe that such issues should be scientifically substantiated and explored. Therefore, there is a need for corresponding research to help analyze the views and thoughts of other stakeholders. The next step may lay down in the study of the academic community and
university administrations thoughts, or representatives of the real economy.
Conclusions. Overall, both of our hypotheses were confirmed. That is supported by the fact that, although students are not interested in increasing the number of non-core disciplines in the curriculums, they do understand the importance of economic knowledge. Firstly, 52% of the respondents consider economic disciplines to be moderately important, and 70% of respondents are interested in obtaining economic knowledge at the university level. Secondly, the most of students believe that economic knowledge is needed to understand contemporary Ukrainian society; such knowledge is relevant to the study of economics at university (29%) and self-education (60%). Thirdly, the third part of students wish to obtain theoretical and practical economic knowledge (37%); 24% of respondents are interested in obtaining mainly practical economic knowledge, and 18% are mainly focused on economic theory. Fourthly, 86% of those polled would like to start a business related to their specialty. Finally, 76% of those surveyed would like to take courses related to business training. All the above mentioned leads to the conclusion that students of non-economic majors at Ukrainian universities understand the importance of economic knowledge and ready to become economically active part of the Ukrainian population.
Considering that the opinion of the students themselves should be taken into account, we have formulated general recommendations for the improvement and modernization of the non-economic specialties curricula. Given that university autonomy is strongly encouraged in modern Ukraine, the students' opinions about the quality of education should be taken into account on a par with other internal and external stakeholders. All the key stakeholders should join their efforts to cultivate a holistic vision of curricula and useful competencies (including economic ones). Attention should be paid to the systemic study of European experience in higher education, as well as to the real requirements that exist in the labor market. Despite the widespread use of complex interdisciplinary discourses in Ukrainian science, the very Ukrainian tradition of the interdisciplinary theory is just beginning to develop. Therefore, there is a great need for the dissemination of conceptual directions related to the cultivation of the global interdisciplinary discourse. The possibilities of further research are related to various interdisciplinary investigations regarding Ukrainian science and education.
References
1. Bayer A. & Wilcox D.W. (2019). The unequal distribution of economic education: A report on the race, ethnicity, and gender of economics majors at U.S. colleges and universities. The Journal of Economic Education, 50(3), pp. 299-320. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220485.2019.1618766
2. Becker W.E. & Bartlett R. (1991). Preface to Special Issue on Undergraduate Economic Education. The Journal of Economic Education, 22(3), pp. 195196. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220485.1991.10844709
3. Borg R.J. & Borg M.O. (2001). Teaching Critical Thinking in Interdisciplinary Economics Courses. College Teaching, 49(1), pp. 20-25.
4. Carlson J.A. & Schodt D.W. (1995). Beyond the Lecture: Case Teaching and the Learning of Economic Theory. The Journal of Economic Education, 26(1), pp. 17-28.
5. Davies P. & Durden G. (2010). Economic Education in Schools and Universities in England. The Journal of Economic Education, 41(4), pp. 413-424. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220485.2010.510400
6. Donihue M.R. (1995). Teaching Economic Forecasting to Undergraduates. The Journal of Economic Education, 26(2), pp. 113-121.
7. Ferguson W.D. (2011). Curriculum for the Twenty-First Century: Recent Advances in Economic Theory and Undergraduate Economics. The Journal of Economic Education, 42(1), pp. 31-50. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220485.2011.536488
8. Freedman O. (2008). Sex, Class, and History: An Experiment in Teaching Economics in an In-
terdisciplinary Setting. The Journal of Economic Education, 39(3), pp. 251-259. https://doi.org/10.3200/JECE.39.3.251-259
9. Round D.K. & Shanahan M. (2005). Perspectives on Teaching Economics from Around the Globe. The Journal of Economic Education, 36(3), pp. 203-204. https://doi.org/10.3200/JECE.36.3.203-204
10. Siegers J.J. (1992). Interdisciplinary economics. De Economist, 140, pp. 531-547.
11. Solow R.M. (1983). Teaching Economics in the 1980s. The Journal of Economic Education, 14(2), pp. 65-68.
12. Walstad W.B. & Rebeck K. (2001). Teacher and Student Economic Understanding in Transition Economies. The Journal of Economic Education, 32(1), pp. 58-67.
13. Walstad W.B., Rebeck K. & Butters R.B. (2013). The Test of Economic Literacy: Development and Results. The Journal of Economic Education, 44(3), pp. 298-309. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220485.2013.795462
ИСПОЛЬЗОВАНИЕ МОДЕЛЕЙ АВТОРЕГРЕССИИ В ИССЛЕДОВАНИИ ВАЛОВОГО
ВНУТРЕННЕГО ПРОДУКТА РОССИИ
Гришин В.А.
Нижегородский государственный университет им. Н.И. Лобачевского,
кандидат технических наук, доцент
USING AUTOREGRESSIVE MODELS IN THE STUDY OF RUSSIA'S GROSS DOMESTIC
PRODUCT
Grishin V.
Lobachevsky University Candidate of technical Sciences, Associate Professor
Аннотация
Построение прогноза уровня ВВП в среднесрочной перспективе является важной составляющей экономического анализа. В настоящее время существуют различные методы экономического прогнозирования, в том числе динамические модели временных рядов. Для анализа временных рядов разработаны со-ответстующие программные пакеты. На практике они не всегда доступны рядовому пользователю. В данной статье сделана попытка оценивания параметров моделей авторегрессии с помощью инструментальных переменных в табличном процессоре MS Excel. Информационной базой исследования послужили статистические данные ВВП и финансовых результатов деятельности за период с 2004 года по 2019 год, размещенных на сайте Росстата. Результаты исследования указывают на то, что полученные уравнения авторе-гресии ВВП значимы в целом, если в качестве независимых пере-менных выбраны компоненты денежной массы М0 и М1 и позволяют про-водить среднесрочные прогнозы.
Abstract
Forecasting the level of GDP in the medium term is an important component of economic analysis. Currently, there are various methods of economic forecasting, including dynamic time series models. The corresponding software packages have been developed for time series analysis. In practice, they are not always available to the average user. This article attempts to evaluate the parameters of the autoregression model using instrumental variables in the table processor MS Excel. The information base of the study was the statistics of GDP and financial performance for the period from 2004 to 2019, posted on the website of Rosstat. The results of the study indicate that the obtained GDP autoregree equations are significant in General, if the components of the money supply M0 and M1 are cho-sen as independent variables and allow for mediumterm forecasts.
Ключевые слова: модель авторегрессии; метод инструметальных переменных; экономическое прогнозирование; валовой внутренний продукт; денежный агрегат; консолидированный бюджет; табличный процессор.
Keywords: model of autoregression; method of instrumental variables; economic forecasting; gross domestic product; monetary aggregate; consolidated budget; table processor.
