Gary Hoover: Teaching with Purpose

Scott Wolla (VO): This is Teach Economics from the St. Louis Fed. On this episode, we’re joined by Professor Gary Hoover, or Hoov.

Hoov is executive director of The Murphy Institute and a professor of economics at Tulane University, co-chair of the American Economic Association’s Committee on the Status of Minority Groups in the Economics Profession, founding and current editor of the Journal of Economics, Race, and Policy, past vice president of the Southern Economic Association, and a fellow of CESifo Group Munich.

We’ll start our conversation with what initially sparked Professor Hoover’s interest in economics.

Gary Hoover: What we need to do if we want to talk about me is go back to the 1980s. I’m a student who is in high school, and I’m watching my mother.

At times my mother would have up to three jobs that she would work, and she’d work very hard at those jobs. Her mantra to me was: “If you just work hard, we’re going to get ahead.” But that didn’t seem to jive with what I was seeing. I mean, she was working very hard, but we never seemed to be getting that far ahead. I was told that by working hard, this would make one quite financially successful. But if that were the case, then I believed that my mother should be some type of millionaire, maybe even a billionaire, if it was just hard work that was necessary.

I suspected that my mother should have been rich. She wasn’t. So, I went searching for answers to that specific question: Why is it that just working hard didn’t always guarantee moving up the economic ladder? And where did I go to find answers to that question? Economics. I went to the economics profession to ask that exact question.

In fact, I thought about it in these terms: Is it more of an economic ladder, or is it an economic lottery where two people could do the exact same thing, work hard, but one person would be insanely successful, and others wouldn’t? That’s what drove me to economics all those decades ago. And that’s why I’m still here now, still looking for answers to that.

But I found that the best way to address those questions has been by using economic analysis.

Wolla: So, after studying economics for a long time and doing research, have you come closer to the answer of whether it’s a ladder or a lottery?

Hoover: I actually have. I have a book forthcoming in 2025 that uses that title: Ladder or Lottery? The Economics of the Social Contract.

What I’ve come to conclude is that we need to be clear in our expectations, in that some people will do the exact same things as others, but they won’t be nearly as successful; therefore, we need to set expectations so that people are able to realize that.

Also, what we need to know is that there’s something wrong with our system. This is what I tell other economists, as opposed to the general public: What do we know as economists? We know that in any system that works properly, the same input should predictably and consistently give you the same output.

So, when we see two individuals putting in the exact same inputs—hard work or getting a required skill set—yet we see divergent outcomes, that’s a tell that we might need to think about some type of system redesign. That’s what economics has taught me, that when we don’t see the exact same outputs coming from the exact same inputs, it might not be anything wrong with the person who is doing the inputting. There might be some fundamental flaw in the system.

Wolla: That’s really great, and I look forward to your book. Was there a teacher or professor that was instrumental in you finding economics?

Hoover: Absolutely. It was a high school teacher. I initially thought about economics when I was asking these questions. So, I went to a high school teacher who was actually a social studies teacher. She said, “Look, the questions that you’re asking, about hard work and economic success, they can be addressed through economics.”

And here’s a story that you didn’t ask, but I’ll tell you anyway: What she ends up doing is contacting the only African American economist that she knows—the late Walter Williams. Walter Williams is a professor at George Mason University at that point. And she says, “I’ve got this young man who is interested in economics, and he’s asking these questions about inequality and race, and I don’t think that I have the right way to answer him. Could you please answer him?”

What Walter Williams does is he starts sending me his books. Interestingly, he doesn’t know me. He doesn’t know who I am. I’m some kid in a high school in Milwaukee, and he is a distinguished professor at George Mason. But he sends me his books, and we start a correspondence that lasts for the rest of his life.

So, even though later on I become an economist—I go all the way through graduate school—I still keep up with him. Later, our economic reasoning, our economic thinking, really diverged to the point that I don’t think we ended up seeing the world the same way. But I was so grateful that this person who did not know me reached out to me and started sending me books and kept writing back and forth with a high school junior—not corresponding with Nobel laureates—a high school junior who had one simple question about his mom. That was what kept me in economics.

Wolla: That is a great story. In fact, I had the pleasure of hearing Walter Williams speak a couple times. He was a great communicator. I’m sure that he was a great teacher, and it sounds like a great mentor.

Hoover: Absolutely. Even though—I must stress that as I came into my own economic reasoning, into my own economic theory—we diverged, but he never stopped being encouraging. Even though, by the time I became a Ph.D. economist, we would have these knock-down, drag-out discussions. And that’s actually when we became the closest—when we started to diverge in our thinking. That’s what I think a good mentor does.

Wolla: That’s the sign of a healthy relationship, a healthy, healthy mentoring relationship. In your teaching, when you have students come into your classroom who may or may not have had any economics training before, any courses or classes, what kind of misconceptions do they bring to that economics class, and how do you overcome them?

Hoover: The biggest one is that my students, who I’m initially meeting, seem to confuse economics and finance. They come in saying, “I’m very much interested in being an entrepreneur,” or “I’m very much interested in being a stockbroker,” and “That’s all that economics is about, all that economic stuff.” And I’m like: “Well, you know, let me give you the tools so that you can then do whatever it is that you want to do better. Whether it’s trading investments or any other type of financial studies, economics is a good grounding. Whether or not you want to go into forestry. There is a good area of economics where these types of learnings can be helpful.”

I like to dissuade students that economics is finance, and that economics doesn’t have something to say regarding almost anything that they can come to me with.

Probably our biggest failing is turning away any student who comes to us with any question. If a student comes to us with a question and the question is: What does economics have to say about blank? Our answer should be: “You know what? I don’t know, but I will find out who does, because I assure you, economists like to poke our noses into almost everything.”

That’s why we have so many different fields of economics, from health economics to tax economics to climate economics. You name an area, and economists have some type of economics we can put on it. We have health economics. Why? Because we can get into that; we can apply these economic principles to everything.

I want students to know that there is an area called financial economics. But that is not the end of the story; that’s actually the beginning. “Let me tell you about what economics can do.”

Wolla: Because there’s limited time in a semester, when you’re thinking especially of that introductory course, what are the two key lessons that you want your students to walk away from your class with?

Hoover: The thing that I want students to know is that economics is real. Too often our students walk away with the impression, even after having taken that first introductory course, that economics is abstract, that all we talk about is widgets and thingies. They don’t see how that relates to anything in their lives or anything in the real world.

My first and foremost job is to show them that this is a science of people, about people, for people. It is real and applicable to their everyday existence—that’s my No. 1 thing.

The other thing I want them to know, and which I think is critically important, is that if they’re never going to be able to take another economics course or if they don’t want to, I want them to be able to discern economics discussions that are happening around them, whether or not they are aware of them. I want them to have a firm understanding that when you’re watching the news, you can discern whether anything said was true or whether it was false. I want them to be able to discern economic fact from economic fiction. Just because someone said it doesn’t mean that it’s true.

So, if a student can walk away with those two things—this is real-world and applicable, and that they have some ability to discern—whether or not they major in economics, whether or not they ever take another economics course, we’ve done our job.

Wolla: Those are two great lessons. In your paper, you note that for many students, their first contact with economics is off-putting. You mentioned how some respondents feel that intro courses are designed to weed out students. What do you think is driving that perception, and what can instructors do differently?

Hoover: It’s actually rather counterintuitive, because an instructor is trained to speak; what an instructor needs to learn to do, to not be so off-putting, is to actually listen. And I know that you’re saying, “What? I’m not in class to listen. I’m in class to lead. I’m in class to instruct, to open up minds, to push the frontiers of knowledge and understanding.”

That’s true. But what you could do is actually listen to the lived experiences of people who are coming from different backgrounds than your own. That’s what diversity is: people who do not look like you and do not come from the same experience base that you do. Listen to their questions and then help them to find the answers to their questions.

But isn’t that really what science is? I often tell my graduate students who are getting ready to finish up their Ph.D.s: “Look, my job is to transform you from a student who is looking for the answers to a scholar who’s looking for the questions. I’m actually looking for the good questions—that’s what a scholar does. Because a student needs to be given tools, I’m going to give you a toolbox. I’m going to give you tools that will allow you to find equilibrium and to take the second derivative. So, I’m going to give you a big bag of tools. And then you have to go out as a scholar and find the interesting things to build with them.”

I find economics interesting in that economists are the only people who have a toolkit. But they would build a very nice-looking house and then spend all day admiring the hammer—that I find to be quite odd—as opposed to saying, “Look, look at what I can do with this!”

Instructors need to say, “I have this set of tools, and I’m going to give you those tools, students. But what you do with them is what really matters.” And the only way that I can know what the students can do with them is to actually listen. So, instructors of economics need to spend more time listening to their students to know what to put in their toolkits.

Wolla: I really like that. So, taking the tool analogy—not just giving them the tools, but showing them how to use them or to ask questions so that they know how to use them.

Hoover: Right. So they can use them appropriately. I should not spend a whole bunch of time teaching them tools or loading up their toolbox to build an airplane if they’re actually more interested in, maybe, sailing—wrong set of tools. If you listen to the students, and those students are saying, “I’m really interested in sailing. I want to get out on the water,” and you’re giving them a toolkit for desert living—wrong set of tools.

Wolla: That’s great.

Wolla (VO): We’re going to take a quick break, but when we come back, professor Hoover will break down his research into what draws students into the field.

[FRE Promo]

Wolla (VO): Welcome back. Before the break, Hoov was discussing the value of helping students build toolkits that match their interests. We’ll pick things back up with his findings that it’s not money that draws the majority of students to economics. Rather, most students say an interest in public policy is what draws them into the field.

Hoover: We know that policy will eventually end up impacting the market environment. And as such, if we could look at that policy, we could have an understanding of what the market looked like before the policy was implemented, and what the market looked like afterward. That’s where these people are coming in, because we know that something happened that altered the market environment.

If we can get a better understanding of how that mechanism transfers from policy decision down to economic outcome, that matters. For instance, a dozen years ago, we had an education policy called No Child Left Behind—a national policy, No Child Left Behind. For someone like me and people who come from my background, what I would be interested in is this: You had a policy, and you had a world where No Child Left Behind didn’t exist. What were the economic outcomes and economic trajectories of those students who had no experience with No Child Left Behind? No child comes along, and students are put on a different path and a different trajectory.

One thing I know is that education is supposed to be one of those avenues for rising up the economic and social ladder. This is very important to me, because I’ve been told: “Education, education, education.” I want to know: What was the impact of that policy?

Then No Child Left Behind left us. And now we have a different group of people who have never been exposed to it. For someone like me and someone who came from this background, I find that really important to want to know. That was a policy tool that was implemented that was supposed to have been something that directly impacted me. How did it work out? Am I better off now, having been exposed to this policy prescription? I could go on to talk about housing policy. I could talk about health policy. I could go on and on and talk about these policy areas that you said were going to make me better off. And if I don’t see myself better off, I’ve got questions and I’m going to come to economics looking for those answers. I think that’s why most of us who think about these things think that this is critically important.

Wolla: That’s great. The students who have had you as a professor are lucky people. I wish I would have had a professor like you when I was in college. It sounds like you bring that humanity and bring a real story to the classroom. What do you enjoy most about teaching?

Hoover: For me, teaching is about the “light bulb” moment, the “I get it” moment. I love it when the students don’t get it, and they’ve got that look on their face: “Yeah, I’ve got nothing for you, professor. I don’t know what you’re doing.” And I say, “Okay, well, let me try it this way.” What I end up doing in class is giving them the exact same thing in different ways.

For some students, words work best, and I just describe to them what’s going on. For some students, they need to see equations. And for some students, they need to see it presented visually, like on some type of graph.

So, what I’m going to do with a student is start with method 1. And they’re going to say, “You know what? I don’t get it.”

“Okay. Don’t get discouraged.”

I go to method 2. “Let’s try this one.”

“Yeah. Okay. … No, I don’t get it.”

Then I go to number 3—one of those learning techniques. And then it goes off, and they say, “I got it! … You’re saying that this is the same way that you were doing it in method 2?”

“Yep. Same thing. I’m just giving it to you in a different form.”

When I hear “I got it!” that’s great. What’s best to me about teaching is those who say, “I can’t get it. I’ll never be able to get it.” I like to say, “Challenge accepted! You think you can’t get it? I’m going to get it into your head. Don’t worry about it. That’s my job. Your job is just to be receptive. My job is to find a way and a technique to get it in there.” Then together, we’re both looking at each other, and we’re like: That person got it!

That’s what I like about teaching. I like that moment when it’s a challenge for me, and it’s a challenge for them. They say, “I’ll never be able to get this.” I love those students the best because I’m like: “Yeah, I’m gonna get you. You’re going to get it. I’ve just got to think of how I’m going to get it in there, but I’m going to get it.”

I really like that. I like the challenge.

Wolla: That’s great. And you’ve been at this for a few years.

Hoover: Yeah, a few.

Wolla: As you look back on your career, what experiences have been the most rewarding?

Hoover: I’m going to take you someplace that you didn’t ask, but I’m going to take you there anyway.

I started out at the University of Alabama; it was my first job. And when I’m at the University of Alabama, I am the first tenure-track faculty member ever hired in the business school. They had never had an African American in the business school on a tenure track when I show up. This is 1998. They never had an African American.

I start teaching these classes, and I have mostly students who are white. Right? It is the University of Alabama, and it is in the business school.

Fast-forward a few years, and my first students that I ever taught graduate. I had a student come back to me a few years after that—a white student, by the way—comes back to me and he says, “You know, Dr. Hoover, I’m back on campus, and I’m recruiting for my firm now.”

And I say, “Oh, well, great.” I don’t even remember this student. He says, “I’m here specifically looking for a diverse set of students.” And I say, “Okay, pretty cool.” I’m still not sure where the student is going with it. And he says, “The reason why is that I’m a native Alabamian from rural Alabama. And being in your class was the first time that an African American had ever been in a position of authority over me. Having grown up where I grew up, African Americans were never in charge of anything that I would have come in contact with. Your competence and your diligence and the way that you taught my class gave me a different perspective on how I interacted with folks.”

I’m blown away by this kid because all I did was teach a couple of marginal cost curves and some graphs.

That was probably the most rewarding, in that, just being me, not mentioning anything about inequality or race or anything about that, but just doing this job and opening up economics to this young man was enough for him to say, “I’ve walked away with a different perspective on how I’m going to and how I do interact with other people, other humans on this planet.”

You can’t get any better than that.

Wolla: That’s a great story. I’ll ask you if you’re comfortable sharing another story. In the auditorium, you talked about your experience at WashU when a professor took the time to ask you a question. Do you want to share that story?

Hoover: Sure. So, I’m at Washington University in St.Louis, just a couple of miles from where we are now.

I’m comfortable saying that in my first year of graduate school, I was not successful. In fact, I had to do the first year of graduate school over—clearly it didn’t hurt me, because here I am now. But during that first year, I’m struggling so much, and one of the reasons that I’m struggling is that I’m showing up to class late. Every day for this one class, I’m showing up late, and the professor asked me, “Hoov, what’s going on? I noticed that you’re coming to class late.”

What he could have done is just attribute it to: “This guy isn’t very serious; he’s not doing that well in the class. I don’t know what’s going on with him.” But he asked me what’s going on, and I tell him that every day I’m being stopped by the police. The same police officers are stopping me every day as I’m going across campus. Sometimes I’m on the run going across campus, but the same police officers, these same two police officers are stopping me every day, and they’re harassing me. By now, they’ve got to know that I’m a student on campus, but it doesn’t seem to matter to them that they’re bothering me.

Obviously, by the time I get to class, I’m frazzled. I won’t say that that’s the only reason I wasn’t doing well, but I wasn’t doing well in that class. And then when I get to class, I’m already frustrated because of this experience I’ve had. But that professor took the time to ask me: “What’s going on with you, beyond the fact that you’re showing up late?”

As a result of that, the next day that professor says, “I’m walking with you to class. I’m walking with you to class, and I’m going to dare anyone to bother you. I want to see them do that.”

That’s going above and beyond. That’s the type of intervention that changes people’s lives. I still remember to this day that intervention that happened when that professor took the time to ask me, “What’s going on with you?” That mattered a lot to me. And to this day, I honestly can say I’m not quite sure I would still be in this profession had it not been for that interaction.

That’s what we need. We need people who care enough to say beyond the obvious—which was: “This guy shows up late every day. He doesn’t seem to be focusing very much on what we’re doing. He shouldn’t be in this profession”—to saying, “I want to make sure that no matter whatever else happens, it won’t be because you’re being harassed.”

Those types of interventions we need to see more and more often in our profession.

Wolla: That’s a powerful story, and I appreciate your sharing it. If you could go back in time and give advice to your younger self sitting in that very first economics class, what would you tell yourself?

Hoover: If I were sitting in that first class, I would tell myself: “You know, one of these days, you’re going to be in front. So, pay attention to what works and what doesn’t.” I think, at the time, because I’m so interested in that one question that I had, that I’m not appreciating the effort being put forth by that professor.

What I should do now is go back in time and tell myself: “Not only pay attention to the words, but pay attention to what can come out of this—the interaction, the care that can go into teaching a class,” because that’s what we need to do.

We, as economics instructors, need to quit thinking about ourselves in the front of the class and start remembering ourselves back in the class. Would you take a class from you? Are you good enough to teach this class? Are you doing it well enough?

If I went back in time, I’d tell myself: “Pay attention, because there are several things I never want you to do when you’re up front. But there are some things I want you to do. So, I want you to watch.” And I’ve got to say that I think I’m at the point where I’m ready to teach previous me.

It took only 35 years, but I think I’m ready to teach the class that I could actually appreciate. And I think that that’s where we, as economics instructors, have to be. Would you take your class? Would you?

Wolla: That’s a challenging question. Given that you had a question that drove you into the field, I bet when you’re teaching, you help students answer those kinds of questions.

Hoover: I want to bring it out of them. I want to bring out for my students the questions that they have in them that they don’t even know that they have in them. “It’s in there, and I’m going to get it out of you, and then I’m going to get you an answer.”

Wolla: So, do you have any final thoughts or advice for fellow economics educators as we wrap it up?

Hoover: Sure. Here’s what I have for my fellow economics educators: Use economics. Don’t just teach it; use it. We know that incentives matter. That’s the first thing we’re going to teach everybody: Incentives matter. Incentivize the learning environment. We know it every day. We teach it every day. Let’s use it.

Wolla: Hoov, thank you so much for taking time to speak to me today. And thank you for your contributions to economics education.

Hoover: Thank you. Thank you for having me.

Wolla: It was an honor to have you on the show.

Wolla (VO): Thank you for listening to my conversation with professor Gary Hoover. If you like this show, please subscribe anywhere you get podcasts. And be sure to leave us a review; each one really helps. I’m Scott Wolla, and from the St.Louis Fed, you’ve been listening to Teach Economics.