More thoughts on teaching economics.
Economists should know something beyond mathematics [including that necessary for analyzing chaotic and complex systems, which many economists do not learn now]. For example, they should have some knowledge of the sort of history developed by, say, Fernand Braudel or Eric Hobsbawm. And they should have some understanding of contemporary institutions. How can they learn all of this necessary background and the needed mathematics5, as well? I do not have an answer, although I can think of three suggestions. First, much of what economists currently teach might be drastically streamlined. Second, one might not expect all economists to learn everything; a pluralist approach might recognize the need for a division of labor within economics. Third, perhaps the culture of economics should be such that economists are not expected to do great work until later in their lifetimes. I vaguely understand history is like this, while mathematics is stereotypically the opposite.Thoughts On Economics
Steve Keen: Economists Are "Insufficiently Numerate"
Systems, systems, systems. Start with modeling simple static closed systems that are highly stylized and build up to modeling chaotic and complex dynamic open systems that aims at being representational. The math and application have already been developed in other sciences.