Month: November 2020

M.I.T.’s department of economics has done historically well in attracting graduate students who have received third-party funding, e.g. National Science Foundation Graduate Fellowships. Besides offering a top-down report of the position of the economics department at M.I.T., the excerpt from the President’s 1961 Centennial Year Report transcribed below offers the factual nugget: “This year, too, M.I.T. was selected as first choice by more Woodrow Wilson Fellows in economics — eighteen out of eighty — than any other school in the country”.

_____________________

Also from 1961

M.I.T. Graduate Economics Brochure of 1961.

General Examinations in Economic Theory at M.I.T. from 1961: Microeconomics; Macroeconomics.

Fun antique video. Round table discussion with Jerome Wiesner, Jerrold Zacharias, and John Burchard of MIT with Raymond Aron of the Université de Paris-Sorbonne, Isidor Rabi of Columbia University, and Sir Eric Ashby of Cambridge University was filmed as part of the Tomorrow television series produced by CBS Television Network for MIT on occasion of MIT’s Centennial in 1961.

_____________________

From the President’s Report 1961, M.I.T.

The Social Sciences In the light of the concerns of the Centennial for the larger influences of science upon society, I think it appropriate to review this year the state of the social sciences at the Institute. That we should have become occupied with these areas was inevitable, and the Institute has a clear obligation to cultivate especially those that relate most directly to modern developments in engineering, science, and mathematics. M.I.T. has recognized this responsibility and has responded with strong and growing support to work in the social sciences in the School of Humanities and Social Science and elsewhere. These activities are giving to the Institute an entirely new dimension that few not associated intimately with M.I.T. yet appreciate.

It is a simple truth that the interests of the great physical and social sciences were never more interwoven than today. The overriding practical problems of our time — defense; disarmament; the economics of change; the politics of peace; the relationships among industry, science, and government — require joint technical and social analysis. The very progress of science is influenced by the broader social context, and the advances of engineering affect all our human institutions.

In our decision to encourage the growth of certain key social sciences at M.I.T., we determined not only to build on strength, but also to exploit particularly those that have special relevance to our central concerns with science and engineering. We hope to create more points of contact between the social and physical sciences and to foster more fruitful collaboration between them. In this way, in spite of enormous pressures for growth, we can delimit the domain of our interests and the way in which we allocate our resources to them.

We have given special attention to those fields in which mathematics and statistical techniques are playing an increasingly important role. This is, of course, completely compatible with our M.I.T. style, with our desire to be governed in our approach to problems by a sense of the quantitative, the analytical, the mathematical. But by no means are we seeking to build our social sciences in the image of the physical. We recognize full well the many differences in set and attitude that distinguish them. An exaggerated insistence on emphases that are too narrow or criteria that are too rigid will only defeat our long-range objective of making the social sciences an integral part of the modern scientific university. Each field must be free to develop in its own way, to follow with complete freedom its own professional instincts.

From this point of view, the flowering of the social sciences at M.I.T. represents a new experience for us. Accustomed as we are to the demonstrable factual data of the physical sciences, we must accept the larger subjective element of judgment that enters into the social sciences in their present state. Since developments in many of these areas are open to a variety of interpretations, we must foster, within the limits of our aims and resources, a range of views and interests. The ultimate safeguard, however, lies not in seeking an impossible balance among modes of thought, but in recruiting a faculty of the highest intellectual power and integrity. This we have done.

In my report of a year ago I touched on a faculty survey of the social sciences which gave highest priority for development to fields of economics and economic history, political science, and psychology. I want now to comment briefly on the current status of these fields at the Institute and to examine in passing our commitments and our hopes in these areas.

ECONOMICS The oldest social science at M.I.T., economics is still by a sizable margin the largest. The teaching of economics goes back to 1881 and Francis Amasa Walker. General Walker, the Institute’s third president and one of its great builders, was an authority on political economy — as economics was then called — and his understanding of the processes in American industrial development notably influenced his views on the education of engineers. He gave an outstanding lecture course on political economy and was the author of a distinguished text in the field. He also brought other economists to the Institute.

Yet, until well into the modern era of M.I.T., economics remained largely a service department for the School of Engineering. Only since World War II has the department matured and assumed a truly professional character. Today it is universally conceded to be among the most distinguished. Indeed, by any of the usual measures — the stature of its teachers, the quality of its research, the achievements of its graduates — it ranks in the small handful of leaders. This year the president of the American Economic Association [Paul Samuelson] and the presidents-elect of the Econometric Society [Franco Modigliani] and of the Industrial Relations Research Association [Charles A. Myers] are members of this department. This year, too, M.I.T. was selected as first choice by more Woodrow Wilson Fellows in economics — eighteen out of eighty — than any other school in the country. The strengths which have won this kind of recognition within the profession are substantial indeed. They were achieved, essentially, by encouraging economics at M.I.T. to chart its own professional course; by the development of a distinguished graduate curriculum and of a major research program; and by insistence on the same standards of excellence we demand of our scientific and engineering departments. As a consequence, we have accomplished in economics the same kind of comprehensive renovation of purpose that Karl Compton undertook at an earlier date for the School of Science.

Economics at M.I.T. is also an important resource for other areas of teaching and research, and for the School of Industrial Management in particular. Management education at M.I.T. grew out of our teaching in economics, and today the teaching and research of the Department and the School reinforce one another more strongly than ever. Much of the research of the Department bears directly on the interests of the School — research on the economics of particular technologies; on the problems of measurement of productivity and output; on the contribution of technical progress to economic growth; on the origin and growth of new enterprises. Through this close relationship between the Department and the School, we also enjoy a fruitful interchange of theoretical and practical points of view.

The history and current role of economics at M.I.T. is the model for our development of other social sciences. We have now established sections of political science and of psychology within the Department of Economics and Social Science. Both are fields in which student and faculty interest is keen and in which we have unusual opportunities to make important contributions.

POLITICAL SCIENCE Because of the interweaving of technology with all the affairs of the modern world, and especially with those of government, we have set high priority on the development of political science. It is an area in which we have been moving rapidly ahead. This June we awarded our first Ph.D. degrees in this field, and there are now about thirty doctoral candidates within the Section. In addition, some five hundred undergraduates take elective courses in political science each year.

The Section now offers courses in six fields of political science, all of which are related to other interests of the Institute: international relations and foreign policy, political communication, defense policy, government and science, political and economic development, and political theory and comparative politics. Besides providing opportunities for combining work in political science with a scientific or engineering field, the faculty of the Section maintain close ties with their colleagues in economics, psychology, industrial management, and city and regional planning.

In the past two years, we have developed superlative strength in the field of comparative politics of developing areas, and through the association of the Section with the Center for International Studies we probably have as strong a faculty as is to be found anywhere in the politics of development. In support of this work, the Institute received two notable gifts this year. One, the donation of $500,000 from Dr. Arthur W. Sloan and Dr. Ruth C. Sloan of Washington, D.C., establishes a professorship in political science with emphasis on African studies. Not only does this gift provide an important new endowed professorship, but it also recognizes in a most dramatic way the growing stature of political science at the Institute.

The second grant is one of $475,000 from the Carnegie Corporation for research in training on the politics of transitional societies. The grant will make possible expansion of our research on the problems of nation-building in transition countries such as the newly emerged African and Asian nations. It, too, gives substantial recognition to the quality of our program. The Carnegie grant, among other benefits, establishes graduate fellowships both for course work at M.I.T. and for field work towards the doctoral thesis. We are enthusiastic about the values to be derived from this aspect of the grant which will permit us to send our students overseas for on-the-spot research in developing areas.

We have enjoyed magnificent opportunities for field studies in other areas of our political science activities through the generous support of the Maurice and Laura Falk Foundation, the Ford Foundation, and the Rockefeller Foundation. The Ford Foundation has also underwritten much of our work on government and science, and the Rockefeller Foundation this year supported a new seminar on arms control. This seminar brought together some thirty individuals in the Cambridge academic community with strong interests in both the technological and political aspects of this subject. We very much hope that this may prove to be the beginning of a substantial new research program on defense policy.

This brief sampling of our progress in political science is intended only to suggest the vitality of this field at the Institute. It has grown quickly, but without over- stretching itself. It has set high standards in research, and it has developed both its undergraduate and graduate courses in a most creative and constructive spirit. This new venture for M.I.T., in sum, has met with outstanding success.

[Reports on Psychology and Linguistics complete this  section of the President’s Report]

Source: Massachusetts Institute of Technology. The President’s Report 1961. pp. 11-16.

Image Source: The M.I.T. mascot beaver on the cover of its yearbook, Technique 1949.