Here is the syllabus for one of the History of Economic Thought courses at San Diego State University. Quoted from the syllabus,
II. Chicago School of Economics: (Maybe) The Greatest Economics Department Ever. 1. The Chicago School, text Ch 24.
2. The Antithesis of Chicago: Aristotle: Scholasticism: Usury.
III. Austrian School of Economics. So Close and Yet So Far From Chicago. 1. Austrian Economics. Text: pages for F. Hayek (410), J. Schumpeter (479-482), O. Lange (409-411)
2. Vienna & Chicago. Friends or Foes. Mark Skousen. Chapter 1.
3. Nobel Prize Winners. http://almaz.com/nobel/nobel.html
I imagine they’ll treat scholastic economics as if it were all about usury, and ignore its outstanding work in value theory and in analyzing the market process. And by focusing on Hayek and Schumpeter, it looks like they’ll treat the Austrian school as an eclectic approach, instead of studying the integrated, building progress of the tradition of Menger, Bohm-Bawerk, and Mises.
I like how they threw in Oskar Lange. I’m surprised the professor didn’t add Kaldor and Sraffa’s “critique.” Here’s my guess: he’s going to marginalize AE as “well-intentioned” but “ultimately incorrect.”
Reading through the syllabus, it does mention the marginalists Jevons, Menger, Weiser, Bohm-Bawerk, which is the start of the Austrian school, although it seems they are classified under the heading of “Neoclassical Economics.”
There is also a required reading (at least the first chapter) of Vienna & Chicago, Friends or Foes? by Mark Skousen, a known Austrian economist.
The newer textbooks for the History of Economic Thought (used in many colleges) do have a section on the Austrian school.