Categories
Curriculum Yale

Yale. Undergraduate and Graduate Courses in Economics, 1899-1900

 

 

Occasionally Economics in the Rear-view Mirror will post the economics course offerings at leading U.S. and Canadian universities at the turn of the twentieth century. Today we have both undergraduate and graduate course offerings in economics and social science at Yale for 1899/1900. While Irving Fisher was already member of the Yale Faculty, he was in the middle of a three year struggle with tuberculosis, returning to teaching (part-time) in the fall term of 1901. We see that John Bates Clark was brought in to teach a course on theories of income distribution. For those who find the discipline name “sociology” somewhat ugly, they will discover here that William G. Sumner appeared to have a certain fondness for the alternative “Societology“. 

_____________________

 

 

Catalogue Yale University 1899/1900,
pp. 66-70

II. POLITICAL SCIENCE AND LAW
[Undergraduate Courses, Yale College]

 

30 Economics. 3 hrs.

Lectures: Wednesday and Saturday, 11.30. 12 divisions,
Monday to Saturday, 8.30.

President Hadley and Professor Schwab.

            Two hours a week will be devoted to lectures,—for two-thirds of the year by President Hadley on the general problems of production, exchange and distribution of wealth; for the remaining time by Professor Schwab on money and monetary questions. The third hour will be occupied by a quiz-exercise in small sections under an assistant.
Text-books: Hadley’s Economics and Jevons’ Money and the Mechanism of Exchange.

 

31 Statistics. 2 hrs.

Monday and Thursday, 12.30.

Dr. Bailey.

            The sources and reliability of statistical data are discussed, and the methods of distinguishing true and false inferences are pointed out. Index numbers are studied, and the lectures treat of statistics of population, crime, suicide, property, etc. The attempt is made to determine the laws which govern the group actions of men.
Mayo-Smith’s Statistics and Sociology is used as a basis.

 

The following courses (32 to 38 inclusive) are open only to those who have already studied elementary economics.

 

32 Finance. [Seniors.] 3 hrs.

Monday and Thursday, 11.30, A1 O; divisions
I, Monday, 8.30.
II, Wednesday, 8.30.
III, Friday, 8.30.
IV, Tuesday, 12.30.

Professor Schwab.

            A course on Money, Banking, and Finance. Two hours a week will be devoted to lectures, one hour a week to quiz-exercises in small sections under Dr. Bailey.
Text-books: White, Money and Banking, Dunbar, Banking; Greene, Corporation Finance, and Plehn, Public Finance.

 

33 United States Industrial History. [Seniors.] 3 hrs.

Tuesday and Friday, 11.30, A1 O; divisions
I, Tuesday, 8.30.
II, Wednesday, 12.30.
III, Saturday, 8.30.
IV, V, Saturday, 9.30.

President Hadley and Professor Schwab.

A course on the history of the tariff legislation and industrial development of the United States. Two hours a week will be devoted to lectures—for two-thirds of the year by Professor Schwab on tariff history, foreign commerce and industrial organization; for the remaining time by President Hadley on railroads. The third hour will be occupied by a quiz-exercise in small sections under Dr. Bailey.

Text-books: Taussig, Tariff History of the United States (edition 1898); Hobson, Evolution of Modern Capitalism; Hadley, Railroad Transportation, and Newcomb, Railway Economics.

 

34 Mathematical Economics. [Seniors.] 2 hrs.

Wednesday and Saturday, 10.30.

Mr. Gaines.

The course is prefaced by a few lessons in elementary calculus. These are followed by the analysis of: I, value and prices; II, general price-levels; III, effects of “appreciation” and “depreciation,” with statistical discussion; IV, bimetallism and other currency schemes, with especial reference to the experience of France, Austria, and India; V, international trade; VI, capital and interest; VII, distribution.

Cournot’s Mathematical Theory of Wealth and Fisher’s Introduction to the Calculus; Value and Prices, and Appreciation and Interest, are used as a basis. Reading is also assigned in other works, especially recent investigations. Special papers are read by members of the class.

 

35 Debates on Public Questions. [Seniors.] 2 hrs.

Tuesday, 4.00 to 5.50.

Dr. Raynolds.

Members of the class will be expected to organize debates each week on subjects of public interest; to prepare and interchange briefs, and argue the questions at issue on the basis of special study and investigation.

 

36 Theories of Distribution. [Seniors.] 2 hrs.

Friday, 2.00 to 3.50.

Professor J. B. Clark.

A comparative study of theories of the Distribution of Wealth. An outline of recent theories of Wages, Interest and Profits is presented and is compared with the doctrines of Adam Smith, Malthus, Ricardo, Senior, Mill and Cairnes. A study is made of the relation of changes in the processes of industry and in the structure of society to Economics as a science; and a view is afforded of the natural relation of the deductive method of study to the historical method. It is an object of the course to accomplish a certain constructive work, and to utilize the results of comparative studies in determining positive laws of distribution.

 

38 United States Financial History. [Seniors.] 1 hr.

Wednesday, 12.30, E2 O.

Professor Schwab.

An investigation course in the financial history of the United States. The periods selected for study are the years 1873–1900; and the topics investigated are those connected with the silver agitation.

 

40 The Science of Society. [Seniors.] 2 hrs.

Monday and Thursday, 8.30, A1 O.

Professor Sumner.

An elementary course, with text-book lessons and examinations, in Anthropology and Ethnology, with the origin of civilization and the development of institutions. In connection with this will be a course of lectures on Systematic Sociology [Societology]. Topics are: The organization of society; the individual and the social; social forces; militarism and industrialism; property; marriage, family, and the status of women; primitive notions in religion and philosophy; civil government, law and rights; slavery and classes; economic interests and their collisions; conditions of welfare; origin of moral standards; reaction of reason on experience. These topics are treated exclusively in the light of Historical Anthropology and Ethnology.

 

41 The Science of Society. [Seniors.] 2 hrs., to count as 3 hrs.

Monday and Thursday, 8.30, A1 O.

Professor Sumner.

A course with a German text-book (Lippert’s Kulturgeschichte, 2 vols., Stuttgart, 1887), for those who are able to read difficult German. The exercises are coincident with those of course 40, including the lectures as above.
[Those who take this course are responsible for providing themselves with the text-book before Sept. 28.]

 

45 Jurisprudence and Law. [Seniors.] 2 hrs.

First term: Friday and Saturday, 12.30, A1 O.

Mr. Gager.

Lectures, recitations, private readings, and examinations on the following subjects: law in its relations to the origin, development, and government of political society; origin and development of customary law; relation of statute law to customary law; formation and development of codes of law; nature and origin of legal rights; principles of the law governing rights in land; principles of the law governing contract rights; the law of remedies for the violation of rights; origin and procedure of courts of law and equity; criminal law. The instruction in this course is designed to present an historical and philosophical view of the law in its great outlines, as common to all nations, and particularly as developed in the Anglo-Saxon race. In addition it is designed to show the practical methods which obtain in modern commercial transactions and the law as applied to them, and to point out the principal rights acquired, the duties owed, and the liabilities incurred in the every-day conduct of affairs.
To those exhibiting satisfactory evidence of having read the four books of Blackstone’s Commentaries in connection with this course, a special examination in Blackstone will be given. All who satisfactorily pass such special examination will be entitled to a certificate of having completed the reading of Blackstone.

Second term; Friday and Saturday, 12.30, A1 O.

Professor E. J. Phelps.

Lectures upon American Constitutional Law and upon International Law. Text-books are read in connection with the lectures. This course is not intended merely for those who are contemplating the study of the law as a profession, but for all who may be interested in the subjects as a branch of general education. Students who pursue the course and pass the graduating examination thereon, are entitled to a certificate which in many States is accepted as counting a year in the period of study required for admission to the bar.

* * * *

Catalogue Yale University 1899/1900, pp. 210-14

II. ECONOMICS AND SOCIAL SCIENCE, HISTORY, LAW
[Graduate School]

President Hadley, LL.D. George P. Fisher, D.D., LL.D.
Edward J. Phelps, LL.D. William H. Brewer, Ph.D.
Arthur M. Wheeler, LL.D. William G. Sumner, LL.D.
Charles H. Smith, LL.D. George B. Adams, Ph.D.
Henry W. Farnam, R. P. D. John B. Clark, Ph.D., LL.D.
William F. Blackman, Ph.D. Edward G. Bourne, Ph.D.
John C. Schwab, Ph.D. Irving Fisher, Ph.D.
George L. Fox, M.A. Edwin B. Gager, B.A.
Frederick Wells Williams, B.A. Walter I. Lowe, Ph.D.
William B. Bailey, Ph.D. Edward D. Collins, Ph.D.
John M. Gaines, B.A. Albert G. Keller, Ph.D.

ECONOMICS AND SOCIAL SCIENCE

Professor Sumner :—

1 Anthropology. 2 hrs.

A careful study of Ranke’s Der Mensch (2d ed.), with an examination of the separate topics by means of all the appropriate material.
[Not given in 1899–1900.]

2 Systematic Societology; Section IV. a. 2 hrs.

An ethnological study of the development of the Mental Operations and of the growth and contents of the Mental Outfit of the human race, in the earlier stages; knowledge and pseudo-knowledge, world-philosophy, otherworldliness, industrial theories, mores, codes, mental training, traditional wisdom.
[Not given in 1899–1900.]

3 Politics and Finance in the History of the United States. 2 hrs.

A study of the evolution of the institutions of the democratic republic, of the societal organization, and of the history of the money of account.
[Not given in 1899–1900.]

4 The Industrial Revolution of the Renaissance Period. 2 hrs.

A chapter in the history of the development of the industrial organization. The industrial element in the Renaissance. The transition from medieval to modern society in its causes, new elements, effects on classes, effects on economic doctrine. Changes imposed on the industrial organization; world-commerce, land-tenure, handicrafts, banking, and money.
[Monday, 10.30 A.M. and Wednesday, 9.30 A. M.]

5 The Beginnings of the Industrial Organization. 2 hrs.

An ethnological study of the industrial organization from its earliest beginnings. Division of labor between the sexes and the special functions of each; regulation of industry; slavery; formation of capital; discoveries and inventions; domestication of animals and plants; money, etc.
[Wednesday and Thursday, 10.30 A.M.]

*6 The Science of Society. 2 hrs.

[See Course 40, page 68.]

*6a The Science of Society. 2 hrs.

[See Course 41, page 69.]

 

Professor J. B. Clark :—

7 History of Theories of Distribution.

A comparative study of theories of the Distribution of Wealth. An outline of recent theories of Wages, Interest and Profits is presented and is compared with the doctrines of Adam Smith, Malthus, Ricardo, Senior, Mill and Cairnes. A study is made of the relation of changes in the processes of industry and in the structure of society to Economics as a science; and a view is afforded of the natural relation of the deductive method of study to the historical method. It is an object of the course to accomplish a certain constructive work, and to utilize the results of comparative studies in determining positive laws of distribution.
[Friday, 2.00 to 3.50.]

 

Professor Farnam:—

8 Pauperism. 2 hrs. 1st term.

An examination of the nature and causes of indigence, the history of efforts to deal with it, and some of the modern problems arising in connection with it.
[Not given in 1899–1900.]

9 The Modern Organization of Labor. 2 hrs. 2d term.

These lectures treat of the historical antecedents and the development during the nineteenth century of associations of wage-receivers. They therefore include an account of the structures, aims, and methods of such societies in different countries, together with a discussion of their relations to socialism, the factory system, labor disputes, labor legislation, workingmen’s insurance, provision for the unemployed, and other features of the modern industrial world.
[Not given in 1899–1900.]

10 The Principles of Public Finance. 2 hrs.

A systematic survey of the means by which the expenditures of government are met, being had both to the economic principles involved and to the fiscal systems of modern states. Leading topics are: the budget, taxation (national and local), public debts, and state banks considered as aids to public credit.
[Not given in 1899–1900.]

 

President Hadley and Professor Schwab :—

*11 Economics. 2 hrs.

[See Course 30, page 66.]

*12 United States Industrial History. 2 hrs.

[See Course 33, page 67.]

 

Professor Schwab :-

*13 Finance. 2 hrs.

[See Course 32, page 66.]

*14 United States Financial History. 1 hr.

[See Course 38, page 68.]

15 The Finances of the Confederate States, 1867-65. 1 hr.

A course of lectures upon the financial and industrial history of the South during the Civil War.
[Tuesday, 10.30 A.M.]

 

Professor Blackman :—

16 Social Science. 2 hrs.

A study of some important problems of American life, such as the negro; the immigrant; the defective, dependent, vicious and criminal classes (charities and correction); the city; the wage and factory system; the family; and communism, socialism, and anarchism. The lectures are supplemented by reports and book-reviews by the students, and (probably) by a visit to the charity and correctional institutions of New York. As introductory to the course, a few lectures are given on the study and literature of Sociology.
[Wednesday and Saturday, 8.25 A. M.]

 

17 The Literature of Sociology. 2 hrs. 1st term.

A classification of the principal writers in “schools,” and a comparison and contrast of their points of view and methods: contractual (Rousseau), positivist (Comte), evolutionary (Spencer, Drummond), biological (Schäffle), psychological (Tarde, Durkheim, Le Bon, Simmel, Ward, Giddings, Baldwin), “groupwise” (Gumplowicz), observational, and statistical (Le Play, Quetelet), theocratic (Old Testament).
[Thursday, 10 A. M.]

18 A Sociological Study of the Family. 1 hr. 2d term.

Its biological and psychological bases; its history; matriarchy and patriarchy; polyandry, polygyny, monogamy; heredity, physical and social; prostitution, and divorce; the moral and social significance of the family.
[Thursday, 10 A. M.]

19 The Social Teaching and Influence of Christianity. 1 hr.

Selected portions of the following works will be studied and discussed: Friedländer’s Sittengeschichte Roms, Sienkiewicz’s Quo Vadis, Mathews’s Social Teaching of Jesus, Schmidt’s Social Results of Early Christianity, Uhlhorn’s Conflict of Christianity with Heathenism and Die Christliche Liebesthätigkeit, Nash’s Genesis of the Social Conscience, Lecky’s History of European Morals, Dennis’s Christian Missions and Social Progress.
[Thursday, 8.25 A.M.]

 

Dr. Bailey :-

20 The Economic System of Classical Antiquity. 1 hr.

A critical study is made of the political and social institutions of Greece and Rome. The lectures treat of the income and expenditure of the state, the currency, credit instruments, poor relief, slavery, land tenure, commerce, trade regulations, marriage institutions, etc.
[Tuesday, 9.30 A.M.]

*21 Statistics. 2 hrs.

[See Course 31, page 66.]

 

Mr. Gaines :—

*22 Mathematical Economics. 2 hrs.

[See Course 34, page 67.]

 

Dr. Keller :—

23 Homeric Social Life.

A systematic study of Homeric social life from the direct documentary evidence of the Iliad and Odyssey; National Environment, Industrial Organization, Religion, Property, Marriage, Government and Classes will be studied in the light of Sociology and Culture-history. The comparative method will be used as far as possible, and an attempt will be made to “place” the Homeric Age in its various relations to general culture-development. The course will afford practice in the interpretation of historical documents and will be most profitably pursued by those able to read German or French.

 

 Image Source:  “Old Library, Yale Coll., New Haven, Conn.”The Miriam and Ira D. Wallach Division of Art, Prints and Photographs: Photography Collection, The New York Public Library. The New York Public Library Digital Collections. 1898 – 1931.

Categories
Curriculum Economists Harvard Undergraduate

Harvard. Undergraduate Economics and WWII, 1942

 

 

In an earlier post Economics in the Rear-view Mirror provided the syllabus and readings for the Harvard course Economics 18b “Economic Aspects of War” offered in the Spring term of 1940. Today’s post provides information about course changes and faculty leaves that were early parts of “broad plans to orient its [i.e., the Department of Economics] program to the nation’s wartime needs” two years later.

Marking the 70th anniversary of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, the Harvard Gazette (Nov 10, 2011) posted a bullet point list “to recount Harvard’s role in World War II“.

_____________________

Harvard Crimson
March 18, 1942

Training for War Work Offered by Economics
By J. ROBERT MOSKIN

This is the sixth in a series of articles to appear during the coming weeks discussing the effects of the present war on the departments of concentration, their courses, enrollment, and Faculties.

Pointing directly at the preparation of undergraduates for war work in Washington and in the quartermaster corps of the armed services, the Economics Department has developed broad plans to orient its program to the nation’s wartime needs. Although in the blueprint stage now, concrete advancements will be made this summer and next fall.

Economics, of all the non-scientific fields, has organized most fully to adapt its students to the emergency. Upon receiving their bachelor degree, students will be ready to take Civil Service examinations for such positions as junior economist, which pays $2,000 annually, or to complete further graduate work and then enter the supply division of the armed services. There is a large demand for college trained men in both these fields.

Prepared for Peace

Students in the war preparation course for government jobs, the department insists, will not be unfit for peacetime work. They will receive the usual foundation in economics but on a more concentrated and demanding scale with added emphasis on techniques. All students studying for government work, for example, will probably be required to take Math A and courses in Statistics and Accounting. At the present time, these courses are entirely voluntary.

Under the proposed plan, concentrators who wish to prepare along pre-war lines will find the field little altered and a full opportunity to study as in the past. The demands of the current crisis, however, have thrown business as usual into the background and opened the way for the development of an objective service branch in Economics.

Students in this latter portion of the field will also be required to take more economics courses. Now they must have History I, Government I, and four Economics courses including Ec A. While retention of the History and Government requisites is being debated, this minimum will surely be raised.

Two New Courses Planned

Two new courses, bearing directly on war problems, are already scheduled for next fall under the direction of Professor Abbott P. Usher. Bracketing Economic History 1750-1914, 36, Professor Usher will offer two half courses in successive semesters: Location of Economic Activity, General Principles and Current Problems, 65a, and Economic Imperialism and Allied Problems, 44b. Moreover, the contents of current courses will be supplemented to answer questions arising from the war.

The 12-week summer program presents the department with a more complicated situation. Under serious consideration both here and in Washington is a plan to extend instruction in Economics to government workers during the summer term. Courses for these men will be open to undergraduates and in fact will be very often the usual department subjects. The program will probably feature such courses as Money and Banking, Economics of War, and a new course in Commodity Consumption, Distribution and Prices.

Changes Few So Far

But all the planning is still “on order.” While the Economics Department has developed a more revolutionary and extensive war program than many others, its adjustments already in effect are much less extensive.

In the past three years there has been a violent reduction in the number of concentrators in Economics with the 372 of November 1939 down to 267 last November. The department attributes the drop, in the main, to the parallel decline of long terms for younger staff members. This rapid turnover has made for a less experienced Faculty and a slackening of student interest.

This year the department has suffered the loss of two important professors to the war effort. Professor William L. Crum is now working for the Navy and the Treasury and Professor Edward S. Mason is in the Office of the Coordinator of Information in Washington. To replace Mason, who has been absent the entire year, Corwin D. Edwards of the Department of Justice and now visiting lecturer on Economics is giving graduate Instruction in Industrial Organization and Price Policies.

Neither graduate nor undergraduate Instruction has as yet been radically affected by the war, but drastic reductions in graduate enrollment are predicted by the department. Among undergraduate courses, Economics of Agriculture, 71, has been dropped from the roster because Visiting Instructor Albert A. Thornbrough was called to Washington last September. Instructor Lloyd A. Metzler is replacing Professor Mason in Industrial Organization and Control, 62b, while Economic Aspects of War and Defense, 18b, offered in the first half year, has been extended to this semester as 18c and made available to men whether or not they have completed the previous half year’s work.

Image Source.“Harvard goes to war, University’s key role in World War II helped the Allies to triumph” Harvard University Archives, Harvard’s 1943 Commencement. Included in: Corydon Ireland,  Harvard Gazette, November 10, 2011.

Categories
Columbia Curriculum

Columbia. School of Political Science. Faculty and Curriculum, 1890-91

 

 

I have included everything in this Circular that describes the graduate program offered by the School of Political Science at Columbia except for a list of the trustees and a time-slots by day-of-the-week schedule matrix of courses for the three year program. This shows how political economy was embedded within a broad public policy framework at Columbia. Because of the length of the circular, I have provided visitors with a linked table of contents.

Information for the School of Poltical Science for 1882-83 is available in a previous post.

___________________________

Columbia College
School of Political Science
Circular of Information 1890-91

Officers of Instruction and Government

General Statement

Purposes of the School
Admission
Matriculation and Tuition Fees

Course of Instruction General Scheme

Undergraduate Courses

Graduate First Year

First Session
Second Session

Graduate Second Year

First Session
Second Session

Graduate Third Year

First Session
Second Session

Course of Instruction in Detail

I. Constitutional History

II. Constitutional and Administrative Law

III. Political Economy and Social Science

IV. History of European Law and Comparative Jurisprudence

V. Diplomacy and International Law

VI. History of Political Theories

Prizes

Preparation for the Civil Service

Admission to Other Courses

Library

Examinations and Degrees

Examination Fees
Commencement

Academy of Political Science

Prize Lectureships

Calendar

 

OFFICERS OF INSTRUCTION AND GOVERNMENT.

Seth Low, President of Columbia College.

John W. Burgess, Ph.D., LL.D.,

Professor of Constitutional and International History and Law.

Richmond Mayo Smith, A.M.,

Professor of Political Economy and Social Science.

Edmund Munroe Smith, A.M., J.U.D.,

Adjunct Professor of History and Lecturer on Roman Law and Comparative Jurisprudence.

Frank J. Goodnow, A.M., LL.B.,

Adjunct Professor of Administrative Law. Secretary of the Faculty.

Edwin R. A. Seligman, LL.B., Ph.D.,

Adjunct Professor of Political Economy.

Frederick W. Whitridge, A.M., LL.B.,

Lecturer on the Political History of the State of New York.

William A. Dunning, Ph.D.,

Lecturer on Political Theories.

A. C. Bernheim, LL.B., Ph.D.,

Prize Lecturer, 1888-91, on New York State and City Politics.

Frederic Bancroft, Ph.D.,

Prize Lecturer, 1889-92, on Diplomatic History of the United States.

_____________

Prize Lecturer, 1890-93.

William B. Nye,

Registrar.

 

 

GENERAL STATEMENT.

 

PURPOSES OF THE SCHOOL.

The School of Political Science was opened on Monday the fourth day of October, 1880.

The purpose of the school is to give a complete general view of all the subjects, both of internal and external public polity, from the threefold standpoint of history, law, and philosophy. Its prime aim is therefore the development of all the branches of the political sciences. Its secondary and practical objects are:

a. To fit young men for all the political branches of the public service.

b. To give an adequate economic and legal training to those who intend to make journalism their profession.

c. To supplement, by courses in public law and comparative jurisprudence, the instruction in private municipal law offered by the School of Law.

d. To educate teachers of political science.

            To these ends the school offers a course of study of sufficient duration to enable the student not only to attend the lectures and recitations with the professors, but also to consult the most approved treatises upon the political sciences and to study the sources of the same.

 

ADMISSION.

Any person may attend any or all of the courses of the School of Political Science by entering his name with the registrar and paying the proper fee.

Students proposing to enter the school are desired to present themselves for matriculation on the Friday next before the first Monday in October.

The names of students intending to become members of the school may be entered at the room of the president on the Monday immediately preceding commencement day in June, or on the day appointed as above for matriculation.

Students desiring the degree of Ph.B. or A.B. must matriculate in the first year of the school, and follow faithfully the studies of that year, or part of the studies of that year, together with studies in the senior year of the School of Arts. For the courses in the senior year of the School of Arts, see infra, ” Admission to Undergraduate Courses.” Any combination desired by the student is allowed, provided that he takes not less than fifteen hours per week.

Students desiring the degree of A.M. must matriculate in the second year of the school, and follow faithfully all the studies of the second year. But students who are at the same time students in the School of Law, or students in the graduate department of philosophy, philology, and letters, taking courses which offer at least six hours per week, shall not be required to take more than nine hours per week in the School of Political Science. Any combination desired by the student is allowed.

Students desiring the degree of Ph.D. must matriculate in the third year of the school, and follow faithfully all the studies of the third year. But students who are at the same time students in the School of Law, or students in the graduate departments of philosophy, philology, and letters, taking courses which offer at least six hours per week, shall not be required to take more than nine hours per week in the School of Political Science. Any combination desired by the student is allowed, but he must pass a satisfactory examination on all the subjects he has chosen, and must present an acceptable thesis on some subject previously approved by the faculty.

Students not candidates for any degree may, after matriculating, attend any of the courses of the school.

 

MATRICULATION AND TUITION FEES.

Matriculation fee. — A fee of five dollars is required for matriculation at the beginning of each scholastic year.

Tuition fee. — The annual tuition fee of each student of the school taking the full course is one hundred and fifty dollars, payable in two equal instalments of seventy-five dollars each, the first at matriculation, and the second on the first Monday of February of each year. For single courses of lectures the fee regulates itself according to the number of lectures per week; during the first year the annual fee for a one-hour course being ten dollars; for a two-hour course, twenty dollars; for a three-hour course, thirty dollars; for a four-hour course, forty dollars; and during the second and third years, the annual fee for a two-hour course, thirty; for a three-hour course, forty-five; for a five-hour course, seventy-five; for a six-hour course, ninety dollars. In every case the fee covers the specified number of hours throughout the year — no student being received for a less period than one year. Such fees, when not more than one hundred dollars, are payable in advance; otherwise, in half-yearly instalments at the same time as regular fees.

 

COURSE OF INSTRUCTION GENERAL SCHEME.*

[*For details of each course and schemes of lectures — infra, “Course of Instruction in Detail.”]

 

UNDERGRADUATE COURSES.
(Hours per week per half year)

Outline of Mediaeval History (2 hours).
Outline of Modern History (2 hours).
Outline of European History since 1815 (2 hours).
Elements of Political Economy (2 hours).

 

[GRADUATE] FIRST YEAR

FIRST SESSION.

Physical and political geography; Ethnography; General political and constitutional history of Europe (4 hours).
Political and constitutional history of England to 1688 (2 hours)
Political economy: historical and practical (3 hours)
Seminarium in political economy (2 hours)
History of political theories (3 hours)
Historical and political geography (1 hour)
Political history of the State of New York (1 hour)
The relations of England and Ireland (1 hour)

 

SECOND SESSION.

Political and constitutional history of the United States (4 hours)
Political and constitutional history of England since 1688 (2 hours)
Political economy: taxation and finance (3 hours)
Seminarium in political economy (2 hours)
History of political theories (3 hours)
Historical and political geography (1 hour)
Political history of the State of New York (1 hour)

 

[GRADUATE] SECOND YEAR.

FIRST SESSION.

Comparative constitutional law of the principal European states and of the United States (3 hours)
History of European law (3 hours)
Comparative administrative law of the principal European states and of the United States (3 hours)
Social science: communistic and socialistic theories (2 hours)
History of political economy (2 hours)
Financial history of the United States (2 hours)
Seminarium in political economy (1 hour)

 

SECOND SESSION.

Comparative constitutional law of the several commonwealths of the American union (3 hours)
History of European law (3 hours)
Comparative administrative law of the principal European states and of the United States — Financial administration and administration of internal affairs (3 hours)
Social science: communistic and socialistic theories (2 hours)
History of political economy (2 hours)
Financial history of the United States (1 hour)
Tariff history of the United States (1 hour)
Seminarium in political economy (1 hour)

 

[GRADUATE] THIRD YEAR.

FIRST SESSION.

General history of diplomacy (2 hours)
International private law (1 hour)
Comparative jurisprudence (2 hours)
Local government (2 hours)
Social science: statistics, methods, and results (2 hours)
Seminarium in political economy (1 hour)
Ethnology and social institutions (1 hour)
New York city politics (1 hour)

 

SECOND SESSION.

Public international law (2 hours)
International private law (1 hour)
Comparative jurisprudence (2 hours)
Municipal government (2 hours)
Social science: statistics, methods, and results (2 hours)
Railroad problems (1889-90) (3 hours)
Seminarium in political economy (1 hour)
Ethnology and social institutions (1 hour)
Diplomatic history of the United States (1 hour)

 

 

COURSE OF INSTRUCTION IN DETAIL.

I.—CONSTITUTIONAL HISTORY.

The student is supposed to be familiar with the outlines of European history, ancient and modern. Students who are not thus prepared are recommended to take the undergraduate courses in mediaeval and modern history. The courses of lectures held in the school are as follows:

  1. General political and constitutional history, comprehending in detail: a view of the political civilization of imperial Rome; the history of the development of the government of the Christian church into the form of papal monarchy; the overthrow of the Roman imperial system and the establishment of German kingdoms throughout middle, western, and southern Europe; the character and constitution of these kingdoms; the conversion of the Germans to the Christian church, and the relations which the Christian church assumed towards the Germanic states; consolidation of the German kingdoms into the European empire of Charlemagne: character and constitution of the Carolingian state; its disruption through the development of the feudal system and the independent hierarchic church, and division into the kingdoms of Germany, France, and Italy; character and history of the feudal system as a state form; reestablishment of the imperial authority by the re-connection of Germany with Italy; conflict of the middle ages between church and state; the political disorganization and papal despotism resulting from the same: the development of the absolute monarchy and the reformation; the limitation of absolute kingly power and the development of constitutionalism — first in England, then in the United States, thirdly in France, and fourthly in Germany; lastly, the realization of the constitutional idea of the nineteenth century. [Professor Burgess]
  1. Political and constitutional history of England. — This course supplements the general course above outlined, giving a fuller view of the constitutional development of England from the Anglo-Saxon period to the present day. [Professor R. M. Smith]
  1. Political and constitutional history of the United States. — This course of lectures covers the history of the colonies and of the revolutionary war; the formation and dissolution of the confederate constitution; the formation of the constitution of 1787, and its application down to the civil war; the changes wrought in the constitution by the civil war, and the resulting transformation of the public law of the United States. [Professor Burgess]
  1. The political and constitutional history of Rome is contained in the general history of Roman law. The topics to which especial attention is paid are: the probable origin of the city and its relation to the Latin confederacy; the character and mutual relation of the gentes and the kingship; the Servian constitution and the aristocratic reaction; the establishment of the aristocratic republic; the struggle between the orders and the modification of the constitution; the conquest of Italy and the relations established between Rome and the conquered states; the increase of the powers of the Roman senate; the conquest of the Mediterranean basin and the organization and government of the provinces; the social and economic effects of the conquest upon the Roman people; the struggle between the senatorial clique and the party of reform; the social and civil wars and the establishment of the principate; the development, in the third century after Christ, of the absolute empire; the alliance of the empire with the Christian church; the conquest of Italy by the Germans. [Professor Munroe Smith]
  1. Political history of the State of New York. — The purpose of this course is to give a knowledge of the constitutional development and political history of the State of New York, beginning with the foundation of the colony by the Dutch and extending to the present time. It gives a brief account of the condition of the colony of New York, and the constitution of its government; then of the constitution made in 1777, and of each of the constitutions of 1821 and 1846, the amendments of 1875, together with the conventions in which each of these constitutions was made; also the history of political parties in the State of New York, showing their particular relation to these constitutions, and showing finally the methods of procedure of those parties and the influence exercised by them upon the legislation and procedure, or “practical politics,” of other states and of the great national political parties. [Mr. Whitridge]
  1. Historical and Political Geography. — The purpose of this course is to give a description of the physical geography of Europe; to point out the various sections into which it is divided; to trace the territorial growth of modern European states; to describe the various geographical changes that have been made in the history of Europe; and to point out the ethnic conditions of the present states of the continent. [Professor Goodnow]
  1. The relations of England and Ireland. — In a general way the Irish question has been the question of imposing upon the last and most persistent remnant of the old Celtic race the Teutonic ideas and institutions that have been developed in England. Three phases of the process are clearly distinguishable in history — the political, the religious, and the economical. It is designed in the lectures to follow out in some detail the modifications in the relations of the two islands affected by the varying prominence of these different phases. The long struggle for English political supremacy over all Ireland, from the twelfth to the seventeenth century, the religious wars, and the ruthless suppression of the Catholic population during the two succeeding centuries, and the origin and development of the land question out of the circumstances of both these periods, are described with special reference to their influence on the modern state of Irish affairs. Incidentally to these leading topics, the questions of governmental organization that have been prominent from time to time since the conquest are discussed, and the history of the Irish parliament is followed out in such a way as to illustrate the nature and importance of the agitation for home rule. [Dr. Dunning]
    1. New York City politics. — This course treats of the relations of the city to the state, showing the growth of municipal independence. The early charters conferred but few rights on the city, the selection of the most important city officials being made at Albany. Tammany Hall has been the most important and powerful party organization. A brief history of the Tammany organization, its rulers, and its method of nominating public officers will be given. The “Tweed Ring” and the efforts of purifying city politics since its downfall will be described, including the reform charter of 1873, the amendments of 1884, the report of the Tilden Committee in 1875, and of the Roosevelt and Gibbs investigating committees. [Dr. Bernheim]

 

II.— CONSTITUTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW.

  1. Comparative constitutional law of the principal European states and of the United States; comprehending a comparison of the provisions of the constitutions of England, United States, France, and Germany, the interpretation of the same by the legislative enactments and judicial decisions of these states, and the generalization from them of the fundamental principles of public law, common to them all. [Professor Burgess]
  1. Comparative constitutional law of the several commonwealths of the American Union. — In this course of lectures comparison is made in the same manner of the constitutions of the thirty-eight states of the Union.
  1. Comparative administrative law of the principal European states and of the United States. — The purpose of this course of lectures is to give a description of the methods of administration in the United States, France, Germany, and England. Special attention will be given to the laws both of Congress and of the different state legislatures, while the laws of foreign countries will be referred to for the purpose of instruction and comparison. The following list of topics will give a general idea of the subject, for which the name of administrative law has been chosen, because both in France and Germany, where this special part of the public law has been selected as the object of a thorough course of instruction, a similar name has been made use of.

General Part.

The separation of powers; the executive power; administrative councils; heads of departments; their tenure of office, their powers and duties; the general system of local government; officers, their appointment or election, their duties, their rights, removal from office; the administration in action; the control over the administration. This control is threefold in its character. I. — Administrative control. This is exercised by the superior over the inferior administrative officers by means of the power of removal and the power (given in many cases) to annul or amend administrative acts. II. — Judicial control. This is exercised by the courts, to which recourse is often granted against the action of the administration. Here the new courts will be examined, which have been established in France and Germany during this century, and to which the name of administrative courts has been given. III. — Legislative control. This is exercised by the legislature by means of its power to inform itself of the acts of the administration, and, if need be, to impeach administrative officers. [Professor Goodnow]

Special Part.

This part of the lectures will treat of the relations of the administrative authorities, both general and local, with the citizens. BOOK I. Financial administration. The management of public property, taxation, and public accounts, considered from the administrative rather than from the financial standpoint.— BOOK II. Internal administration. The legal provisions which aim at the prevention of evil, and which are sometimes designated as police measures — measures tending to prevent public disorder, public immorality, and disease. Further, provisions of a more positive character, whose purpose is to promote the public welfare; thus measures taken to provide means of public communication; to further the interests of trade, commerce, and industry; to ensure the control of the state over enterprises of a quasi-public character, such as railway companies and institutions of credit; to assist the poor, and educate the ignorant.

Each topic which will come under consideration will be treated historically, and with reference to the positive existing law: and for matters of special interest the comparison of systems of legislation will be extended to other countries than the four mentioned, when it is thought that this may be done with profit. In general, however, the comparison will be limited to the United States, France, Germany, and England.

  1. Local government. — This course will be devoted to the consideration of the various important systems of local government in the rural districts. The organization of the town and county and their corresponding divisions in other countries will be treated; and special attention will be directed to the historical development of existing systems, and to the question of administrative centralization. [Professor Goodnow]
  2. Municipal administration.— -The subjects to which special attention will be directed in these lectures are: the growth and importance of cities; the independence of cities from state control; the city as a public organ, and as a juristic person— a corporation; city organization and municipal elections; municipal civil service; city property and local taxation. In these lectures special attention is given to American cities and the City of New York; but the experience of foreign cities will be appealed to whenever it is thought that any thing may be learned therefrom. [Professor Goodnow]
  3. Seminarium in constitutional and administrative law.

 

III.— POLITICAL ECONOMY AND SOCIAL SCIENCE.

It is presumed that students possess a knowledge of the general principles of political economy as laid down in the ordinary manuals by Walker or Mill, before entering the school. Students who are not thus prepared are recommended to take the undergraduate course on the elements of political economy.

The courses of lectures held in the school are as follows:

  1. Historical and practical political economy.— This course is intended to give the student a knowledge of the economic development of the world, in order that he may understand present economic institutions and solve present economic problems. The principal topics are: Introduction, concerning the study of political economy and its relation to political science; general sketch of the economic development of the world; the institutions of private property, bequest, and inheritance, and the principle of personal liberty as affecting the economic condition of the world; the problems of production, such as land tenure, population, capital, different forms of productive enterprise, statistics of production, particularly the natural resources of the United States; problems of exchange, such as free trade and protection, railroads money, bimetallism, paper-money, banking, commercial crises, etc.; problems of distribution, such as wages, trades-unions, co-operation, poor relief, factory laws, profit and interest, rent, progress and poverty; and finally a consideration of the function of the state in economic affairs. [Professor R. M. Smith]
  1. Science of finance.— This course is also historical as well as comparative and critical. It treats of the expenditure of the state, and the methods of meeting the same among different civilized nations. It describes the different kinds of state revenues, especially taxes, and discusses the principles of taxation. It considers also public debt, methods of borrowing money, redemption, refunding, repudiation, etc. Finally it describes the financial organization of the state, by which the revenue is collected and expended. Students are furnished with the current public documents of the United States treasury, and expected to understand all the facts in regard to public debt, banking, and coinage therein contained. [Professor Seligman]
  1. Financial history of the United States. — This course endeavors to present a complete survey of American legislation on currency, finance, and taxation, as well as its connection with the state of industry and commerce. Attention is called in especial to the financial history of the colonies, (colonial currency and taxation); to the financial methods of the revolution and the confederation; to the financial policy of the Federalists and the Republicans up to the war of 1812, including the refunding and payment of the debt, the internal revenue, and the banking and currency problems; to the financial history of the war with England; to the changes in the methods of taxation, and the crises of 1819, 1825, 1837; to the distribution of the surplus and the United States bank; to the currency problems up to the civil war; to the financial management of the war; to the methods of resumption, payment of the debt, national banks, currency questions, and problems of taxation; and finally to the recent development in national, state, and municipal finance and taxation. [Professor Seligman]
  1. Industrial and tariff history of the United States. — The arguments of extreme free-traders as of extreme protectionists are often so one-sided that an impartial judgment can be formed only through a knowledge of the actual effects of the tariffs. It is the object of this course to give a detailed history of each customs tariff of the United States from the very beginning, to describe the arguments of its advocates and of its opponents in each case; to trace as far as possible the position of each of the leading industries before and after the passage of the chief tariff acts, and thus to determine how far the legislation of the United States has developed or hampered the progress of industry and the prosperity of the whole country. Attention is called in especial to the industrial history of the colonies; to the genesis of the protective idea and to Hamilton’s report; to the tariffs from 1789 to 1808; to the restriction and the war with England; to the tariffs of 1816, 1824, and the “tariff of abominations” of 1828; to the infant-industry argument; to the compromise and its effect on manufactures; to the era of moderate free trade; to the tariff of 1857, to the war tariffs; to their continuance, and to the pauper-labor argument; to the changes up to the present time. [Probably Professor Seligman]
  1. History and criticism of economic theories. — This course comprises two parts. In the first the various systems are discussed, attention being directed to the connection between the theories and the organization of industrial society. In the second, the separate doctrines — e. g, of capital, rent, wages, etc. — are treated in their historical development. [Professor Seligman]

The first part is subdivided as follows:

I. Antiquity: Orient, Greece, and Rome.
II. Middle ages: Aquinas, Glossators, writers on money, etc.
III. Mercantilists: Stafford, Mun, Petty, North, Locke; Bodin, Vauban, Forbonnais; Serra, Galiani, Justi, etc.
IV. Physiocrats: Quesnay, Gournay, Turgot, etc.
V. Adam Smith and precursors: Tucker, Hume, Cantillon, Stewart.
VI. English school: Malthus, Ricardo, Senior, McCulloch, Chalmers, Jones, Mill, etc.
VII. The continent: Say, Sismondi, Hermann, List, Bastiat, etc.
VIII. German school: Roscher, Knies, Hildebrand.
IX. Recent development: Rogers, Jevons, Cairnes, Bagehot, Leslie, Toynbee; Wagner, Schmoller, Held, Brentano; Cherbuliez, Leroy-Beaulieu, De Laveleye; Cossa, Nazzani, Loria; Carey, George, Walker.

  1. Communistic and socialistic theories: — The present organization of society is attacked by socialistic writers, who demand many changes, especially in the institution of private property and the system of free competition. It is the object of this course to describe what these attacks are, what changes are proposed, and how far these changes seem desirable or possible. At the same time an account is given of actual socialistic movements, such as the international, social democracy, etc. Advantage is taken of these discussions to make the course really one on social science, by describing modern social institutions, such as private property, in their historical origin and development, and their present justification. [Prof. R. M. Smith]
  1. Statistical science; methods and results.— This course is intended to furnish a basis for a social science by supplementing the historical, legal, and economic knowledge already gained by such a knowledge of social phenomena as can be gained only by statistical observation. Under the head of statistics of population are considered: race and ethnological distinctions, nationality, density, city, and country, sex, age, occupation, religion, education, births, deaths, marriages, mortality tables, emigration, etc. Under economic statistics: land, production of food, raw material, labor, wages, capital, means of transportation, shipping, prices, etc. Under the head of moral statistics are considered: statistics of suicide, vice, crime of all kinds, causes of crime, condition of criminals, repression of crime, penalties and effect of penalties, etc. Finally is considered the method of statistical observations, the value of the results obtained, the doctrine of free will, and the possibility of discovering social laws. [Prof. R. M. Smith]Railroad problems; economical, social, and legal. — These lectures treat of railroads in the fourfold aspect of their relation to the investors, the employees, the public, and the state respectively. A history of railways and railway policy in America and Europe forms the preliminary part of the course. All the problems of railway management, in so^ far as they are of economic importance, come up for discussion. Among the subjects treated are: financial methods, railway construction, speculation, profits, failures, accounts and reports, expenses, tariffs, principles of rates, classification and discrimination, competition and pooling, accidents, employers’ liability, etc. Especial attention is paid to the methods of regulation and legislation in the United States as compared with European methods, and the course closes with a general discussion of state versus private management. [Professor Seligman]
  1. Ethnology and social institutions of the people of the United States — This course is an analysis of the ethnic elements in the population of this country, of the influences affecting the character of the people, and deals with pertain social institutions that are neither purely economic, nor political, nor legal. It treats particularly of the effects of immigration in the past and at the present time. [Prof. R. M. Smith]

An outline of the course is as follows:

I. The original ethnic elements in the population; the process of colonization; influence of climate and geographical position; influence of slavery; present distribution of population, by areas, by altitude, rain-fall, temperature, etc.
II. The elements added by immigration; history of immigration; political economic and social effects of immigration; legislation restricting immigration, etc.
III. Social institutions and customs; marriage and divorce; poor relief and pauperism; charitable institutions, public and private; penology, prisons, convict labor; religious associations; social classes.

  1. Seminarium in political economy. — Outside of the regular instruction in political economy and social science, it is the intention to furnish the students of the school an opportunity for special investigation of economic and social questions under the direction of the professor. This is done by means of original papers prepared by such students as choose to engage in this work. The papers are read before the professor and the students, and are then criticised and discussed. The number of meetings and the topics to be discussed are determined each year. During the coming year it is proposed to investigate various aspects of the labor problem.

 

IV— HISTORY OF EUROPEAN LAW AND COMPARATIVE JURISPRUDENCE.

  1. History of European law.

BOOK I. Primitive law. The following topics are discussed from the comparative standpoint: evolution of the primitive state; the sanction of law, the redress of wrongs in primitive society, and the evolution of criminal and civil jurisdiction and procedure; early family and property law. — BOOK II. Roman law: the national system. (Royal and republican period.) The struggle between the orders and the development of a common law (XII Tables). The leading principles and juristic technique of the national system (jus civile). — BOOK III. Roman law: the universal system. Chapter I. Later republican period. The conquest of the entire civilized world, and the social, economic, and legal changes produced by the conquest. Reform of criminal law and procedure. The development of a universal commercial law by means of the praetorian edicts. The praetorian formulae of action. Chapter II. Early imperial period. The empire under republican forms. Development of criminal and civil procedure extra ordinem. The classical jurisprudence. Chapter III. Later imperial period. Social, economic, and legal decadence. Codification of the law by Justinian.— BOOK IV. Mediaeval law. Chapter I. German law. Character of early German law; the reforms of Charles the Great; maintenance of Carolingian institutions in Normandy, and further development of these institutions in Norman England; general disappearance of the Carolingian institutions on the continent, and arrest of the legal development. Chapter II. Roman law. Survival of the Roman law (i) in the Byzantine empire; (2) in the new German kingdoms, as personal law of the conquered Romans; (3) in the Christian church. Establishment and extent of the ecclesiastical jurisdiction; the development and the codification of the Canon Law; influence exercised by this law upon the subsequent development of Europe. Revival of the study of the Justinian or Civil Law in Italy; influx of foreign students. The theory of imperium continuum. Reception of the Justinian law in the German empire; partial reception in France and Spain; failure of the Roman law to gain footing in England. Influence of the Roman law in other countries: the ”scientific” as distinguished from the “practical” reception.— BOOK V. Modern law. The reaction against the Roman law (1) among the people; (2) among the jurists; (3) in modern legislation. The great national codes of the 18th and 19th centuries. Relation of these codes to the Roman and German law. [Professor Munroe Smith]

  1. Comparative jurisprudence. — This course of lectures presents succinctly the leading principles of modern private law. The order of treatment is as follows: BOOK I. Law in general: conception, establishment, and extinction, interpretation and application. BOOK II. Private legal relations in general: nature of private rights; holders of rights (physical and juristic persons); establishment, modification, and extinction of rights (legal acts, illegal acts or torts, operation of time); enforcement of rights. BOOK III. Legal relations concerning things. BOOK IV. Legal relations arising from executory contracts. BOOK V. Family relations and guardianship. BOOK VI. Relations mortis causâ (inheritance). [Professor Munroe Smith]
  1. International private law. — In this course the theories of the foreign authorities are noticed, and the practice of the foreign courts in the so-called conflicts of private law is compared with the solution given to these questions by our own courts. [Professor Munroe Smith]
  1. Seminarium for studies in comparative legislation. — The courses above described lay the basis for the comprehension of foreign legislations. The object of the seminarium is to train the student in the practical use of these legislations. Participation in the seminarium is optional. The work is to be done by the students themselves, under the direction and with the assistance of the professor in this department. It is intended that they shall devote themselves to the study of questions of practical interest de lege ferenda, and that they shall collate and compare the solutions given to these questions in our own and in foreign countries.

 

V.— DIPLOMACY AND INTERNATIONAL LAW.

  1. The history of diplomacy from the peace of Westphalia to the treaty of Berlin. — The object of this course is to present, in their historical connection, the international treaties and conventions framed between these two periods, and to trace through them the development of the principles of international law. [Professor Burgess]
  1. International law. — In this course the principles attained through usage, treaty, and convention are arranged in systematic form. [Professor Burgess]
  1. Diplomatic history of the United States. — The purpose of this course is to treat primarily of the diplomatic history of Lincoln’s and Johnson’s administration. An outline and characterization of the policies of Marcy, Cass, and Black will also be given. [Professor Burgess]

 

VI.— HISTORY OF POLITICAL THEORIES.

Every people known to history has possessed some form, however vague and primitive, of political government. Every people which has attained a degree of enlightenment above the very lowest has been permeated by some ideas, more or less systematic, as to the origin, nature and limitations of governmental authority. It is the purpose of this course to trace historically the development of these ideas, from the primitive notions of primitive people to the complex and elaborate philosophical theories that have characterized the ages of highest intellectual refinement. [Dr. Dunning]

BOOK I., after a short survey of the theocratical system of the Brahmans and the rationalistic doctrine of Confucius, treats mainly of the political philosophy of Greece and Rome, with especially attention to the profound speculations of Plato and Aristotle.

BOOK II. discusses the political doctrines of early Christianity and the Christian church, with the controversy of Papacy and Empire, and the elaborate systems of St. Thomas Aquinas and his adversaries.

BOOK III. treats of that age of renaissance and reformation in which Machiavelli and Bodin, Suarez and Bellarmino, Luther and Calvin worked out their various solutions of the great problem, how to reconcile the conflicting doctrines of theology, ethics, and politics.

BOOK IV. covers the period of modern times, as full of great names in political philosophy, as of great events in political history. Here are examined the doctrine of natural law, as developed by Grotius and Puffendorf, the doctrine of divine right of kings with its corollary of passive obedience, as in Filmer and Bossuet, the theory of the constitutionalists, Locke and Montesquieu, the idea of social contract, made most famous by Rousseau, and the various additions to and modifications of these doctrines down to the present day.

 

PRIZES.

PRIZE FELLOWSHIPS.

In 1886 Mr. Jesse Seligman founded four fellowships of the annual value of two hundred and fifty dollars each. These fellowships are awarded at the discretion of the faculty to students of the third year in the School of Political Science, under the sole condition that the recipient of the fellowship be a candidate for the degree of doctor of philosophy.

PRIZE IN POLITICAL ECONOMY.

An annual prize of one hundred and fifty dollars for the best essay on some subject in political economy has been established by Mr. Edwin R. A. Seligman, of the class of 1879. Competition for the prize is open to all members of the School of Political Science. The topic selected must be approved by the faculty, and the essay itself must not be less than twenty thousand words in length.

 

PREPARATION FOR THE CIVIL SERVICE.

Young men who wish to obtain positions in the United States Civil Service—especially in those positions in the Department of State for which special examinations are held — will find it advantageous to follow many of the courses in the School of Political Science. Some of the subjects upon which applicants for these positions are examined are treated very fully in the curriculum of the school. Thus, extended courses of lectures are given on political geography and history, diplomatic history and international law, government and administration.

Full opportunity is given in the School of Arts for the study of the principal modern languages, and all the courses in that school are open to the students of the School of Political Science.

 

ADMISSION TO OTHER COURSES.

ADMISSION TO UNDERGRADUATE COURSES.

Any student of the School of Political Science may attend any or all of the courses of the School of Arts, with the permission of the instructors concerned, without the payment of any further tuition fee than that due to the School of Political Science.

ADMISSION TO GRADUATE COURSES.

The trustees have provided that courses of instruction shall be given in the college to graduates of this and other colleges in a large variety of subjects. Students of the School of Political Science, who may be bachelors of arts, of letters, or of science at entrance, or who, after having completed their first year in the School of Political Science, shall have received their first degree, may be admitted without additional tuition fee to the graduate classes, in such subjects as they may desire to pursue.

Among the cognate courses which may be taken without conflict of hours are:

History of Philosophy, two hours a week. Ethics, two hours a week. Readings in Gaius and Ulpian, one hour a week. Courses in the various modern languages, and others.

Students who are candidates for the degrees of Ph.B., A.B., A.M., and Ph.D., and who take senior and graduate studies in the School of Arts to the amount of six hours per week, are not required to take more than nine hours a week in the School of Political Science.

Information in regard to the undergraduate courses and a list of the subjects embraced in the scheme of graduate instruction for the ensuing year will be furnished on application to the registrar of Columbia College, Madison avenue and 49th street, New York City.

ADMISSION TO THE COURSES OF THE SCHOOL OF LAW.

Those students who intend to make law their profession may combine the ordinary course of study required for admission to the bar with the course in political science. The hours of lectures in the two schools are so arranged as to make this combination feasible; and experience has shown that the satisfactory completion of both courses within three years is not beyond the powers of an industrious student of fair ability.

The instruction offered in the School of Political Science upon constitutional, administrative, and international law, and upon Roman law and comparative jurisprudence, furnishes the natural and necessary complement to the studies of the School of Law. Law is, with us, the chief avenue into politics; and for this, if for no other reason, a complete legal education should include the science of politics. But the importance to the lawyer or the subjects above mentioned does not depend simply on the prospect of a political career. To become a thorough practitioner, the student must acquire a thorough knowledge of public law; and if he wishes to be any thing more than an expert practitioner, if he wishes to know law as a science, some knowledge of other systems than our own becomes imperative. From this point of view the Roman law is of paramount importance, not merely by reason of its scientific structure, but because it is the basis of all modern systems except the English. Elsewhere than in our own country these facts are uniformly recognized, not in the schemes of legal instruction only, but in the state examinations for admission to the bar.

In order to encourage, by the combination of the two courses, the acquisition of a well-rounded juristic training, the trustees have provided that any student of the School of Political Science may attend any or all of the courses of the School of Law, without the payment of any further tuition fee than that due to the School of Political Science; and, conversely, that any student of the School of Law may attend any or all of the lectures in the School of Political Science, without payment of any further tuition fee than that due to the School of Law; and that the student registered in both schools may be a candidate for degrees in both schools at the same time.

Students in the School of Law are required to take only nine hours per week in the School of Political Science. For further information see law school circular.

 

LIBRARY.

The special library of political science was begun in 1877, and it was intended to include the most recent and most valuable European and American works in this department. Particular attention was, and is, given to providing the material needed for original investigation.

The total number of volumes in the department of history and political science is at present (1890) more than 18,000. In the department of law the total number of volumes is about 10,000. The original material requisite for the study of foreign law has been largely increased during the last two years.

The students of the School of Political Science are entitled to the use, subject to the rules established by the library committee, of the entire university library. The library is open from 8½ A.M. to 10 P.M. Information concerning the sources and literature of the political sciences is given in the various courses of lectures held in the schools. The students can obtain supplementary information and general guidance and assistance in their investigations, from the librarian in special charge of law, history, and political science.

 

EXAMINATIONS AND DEGREES.

No student of the school can be a candidate for any degree unless he have successfully pursued a course of undergraduate study in this college, or in some other maintaining an equivalent curriculum, to the close of the junior year.

Students thus qualified, who shall satisfactorily complete the studies of the first year or their equivalent in the senior year in the School of Arts, shall be entitled, on examination and recommendation of the faculty, to receive the degree of bachelor of philosophy or the degree of bachelor of arts. The latter degree requires the concurrence of the Faculty of Arts, and is not conferred unless the student has taken courses, in the first year of the School of Political Science, or courses in that year and in the senior year of the School of Arts, amounting to fifteen hours a week.

Students of the school who have obtained the degree of bachelor of arts at this or at any other college maintaining an equivalent curriculum, and who are at the same time students in the School of Law, or who have pursued studies in the graduate department of philosophy, philology, and letters, to the amount of six hours per week, will, after passing satisfactorily through courses in the school, amounting to nine hours per week, be recommended by the faculty of the school for the degree of master of arts. The purpose of this provision is to allow students to pursue a course either mainly in law or mainly in economics. These courses may be continued through the third year, so that students who have obtained the degree of bachelor of arts are offered a two years’ course in either law or economics. (See supra, “Course of Instruction in General and in Detail.”) Students in the School of Political Science alone are required to pursue all of the studies of the second year, and to pass a satisfactory examination in them, in order to obtain the degree of master of arts.

Students in the School of Political Science who are at the same time students in the School of Law, or who are taking at least six hours a week in the graduate departments of philosophy, philology, and letters, who elect and satisfactorily complete courses in the third year of the School of Political Science embracing nine lectures per week, shall be entitled, on recommendation of the faculty of the school, to receive the degree of doctor of philosophy. Students who are in the School of Political Science only must take the entire work of the third year of the school.

To obtain recommendation for the last degree, the candidate will be required:

1. To prepare an original dissertation, not less than 20,000 words in length, upon a subject approved by the faculty.
2. To defend such dissertation before the faculty.
3. To pass collateral examinations (reading at sight) upon Latin and either French or German.
4.Candidates who have obtained the degree of bachelor of arts or bachelor of philosophy in this school, or bachelor of arts in this or any other college maintaining an equivalent curriculum, will be required to pass, further, an oral examination on their work in the last two years of the school; candida tes who have obtained the degree of master of arts from this school will be required to pass an oral examination on their work in the last year of the school. Candidates who have none of these degrees will be required to pass an oral examination on the entire work of the school.

The candidate for the degree of doctor of philosophy may present himself for examination at any time when the college is in session, excepting the month of June. The subject chosen by the candidate for his dissertation, which may be presented to the faculty before or after the examination on the work in the school, should be made known to the faculty at least four months before the proposed time of examination thereupon. A printed (or type-written) copy of the dissertation must be submitted to each member of the faculty at least one month before the day of such examination. The title-page must contain the name of the candidate and the words “Submitted as one of the requirements for the degree of doctor of philosophy in the School of Political Science, Columbia College.”

The successful candidate must present a copy of his dissertation to the college library.

All degrees awarded will be publicly conferred at commencement.

 

EXAMINATION FEES.

Examination fees are as follows: For the degree of bachelor of arts, fifteen dollars; for the degree of bachelor of philosophy, twenty-five dollars; for the degree of master of arts, twenty-five dollars; for the degree of doctor of philosophy, thirty-five dollars. The examination fee must in each case be paid before the candidate presents himself for examination for the degree.

 

COMMENCEMENT.

The commencement exercises of the college take place annually on the second Wednesday of June.

 

ACADEMY OF POLITICAL SCIENCE.

This institution is devoted to the cultivation and advancement of the political sciences. It is composed mainly of graduates of the Schools of Law and Political Science of Columbia College, but any person whose previous studies have fitted him to participate in the work of the academy is eligible to membership.

Meetings of the academy are held on the first and third Mondays of each month. At these meetings papers are read by members presenting the results of original investigation by the writers in some department of political science.

 

PRIZE LECTURESHIPS.

The trustees have established in the School of Political Science three prize lectureships of the annual value of five hundred dollars each, tenable for three years. The power of appointment is vested in the faculty. One of these three lectureships becomes vacant at the close of each academic year. The previous holder may be reappointed. The conditions of competition are as follows:

1. The candidate must be a graduate of the School of Political Science or of the Law School of Columbia College. In the latter case he must have pursued the curriculum of the School of Political Science for at least two years.
2. He must be an active member of the Academy of Political Science.
3. He must have read at least one paper before the Academy of Political Science during the year next preceding the appointment.

The duty of the lecturer is to deliver annually, before the students of the School of Political Science, a series of at least twenty lectures, the result of original investigation.

 

[3 pages of hour by weekday tables of course schedules for six semesters over three years]

 

CALENDAR.

1890 —

. — Examinations for admission begin, Monday.
Oct. . — Matriculation, Saturday.
Oct. 6. — Lectures begin, Monday.
Nov. 4. — Election day, holiday.
Nov. . — Thanksgiving day, holiday.
Dec. 22. — Christmas recess begins, Monday.

1891 —

Jan. 3. — Christmas recess ends, Saturday.
Feb. 4. — First session ends, Wednesday.
Feb. 5. — Second session begins, Thursday.
Feb. 11. — Ash-Wednesday, holiday.
Feb. 22. — Washington’s birthday, holiday.
Mar. 27. — Good-Friday, holiday.
May 18. — Examinations begin, Monday.
June 10. — Commencement, Wednesday.

 

Source: Columbia College. School of Political Science. Circular of Information 1890-91.

Image Source: Art and Picture Collection, The New York Public Library. “Columbia College, Madison Ave., New York, N.Y.” New York Public Library Digital Collections. Accessed January 27, 2017. http://digitalcollections.nypl.org/items/510d47e0-cc61-a3d9-e040-e00a18064a99

 

 

Categories
Chicago Curriculum

Chicago. Foreign Language Requirements for Ph.D. 1931-68

 

This post is a fairly straightforward pair of memos from 1968 that provide a chronology of the foreign language requirement for the Ph.D. in the Division of Social Sciences from 1931 to 1968 as well as a particular substitution of additional foreign language training for matrix algebra in 1968.

Language requirements at Columbia in 1950.

___________________________

January 12, 1968

TO: Faculty, Division of the Social Sciences

FROM: D. Gale Johnson, Dean Division of the Social Sciences

In re: Foreign Language requirements for the Ph.D.

At a meeting of the faculty of the Division of the Social Sciences held November 18, 1931, the following statement was adopted as one of the requirements for admission to candidacy for the Ph.D.:

“The ability, demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Board of Examiners, to read two foreign modern languages approved by the department or interdepartmental committee, one of which must be French or German. It is advised that this requirement be met as early as possible in the student’s program of study.”

On January 15, 1943, the faculty of the Division modified the language requirement and made it read as follows:

“Demonstration of the ability to use one or more foreign languages effectively toward the objective of the student’s academic program. This ability in the case of at least one language will be tested by: (I) the passing of an examination administered and evaluated by the Board of Examinations; and (II) in addition to the examination, the writing of the paper or series of papers, or oral work, judge satisfactory by the Department in connection with the student’s program of study, in which extensive use is made of works in the foreign language. Departments may at their discretion specify the particular foreign language or languages required of their candidates for the doctorate. Exceptions in individual cases may be made by the Dean of Students on the recommendation of aDepartment.”

At its meeting on December 4, 1967, the faculty of the Division approved the following motion:

“That each Department or Committee in the Division should have the right to substitute for the divisional language requirement for the Ph.D. degree a requirement that the student demonstrate proficiency in a substantive field other than that of the department in question. The degree of proficiency to be required in such a field should be comparable or superior to that represented by the present divisional language requirement. The department at its option, may require that proficiency be demonstrated in a particular substantive field or may leave to the student, in some or all cases, the option of deciding whether to demonstrate proficiency in a language or a substantive field.”

If a department or committee wishes to act under the motion approved by the faculty of the Division Mr. Zimring and I urge that it do so with reasonable promptness to permit students to make their plans with full information concerning the requirements. Until a department or committee has taken action and so informs the Office of the Dean, it will be assumed that the language requirement as it existed on December 1, 1967, shall continue in force.

At the time a department or committee takes action, if any, to modify its language requirement, it should indicate the date on which any changes become effective and that date could be within a few days after action has been taken. I feel that before a departmental or committee action is made effective that Mr. Zimring should be given time to study it and to determine if his interpretation is the one that has been intended.

Mr. Zimring and I strongly urge that departments and committees accept a self-denying ordinance, namely the changes in the requirements will not be made more than once a year and the changes affecting 1968-69 be made by March 15, 1968.

The action taken with respect to the divisional language requirement does not change current procedures with respect to examination if the department retains a language requirement. It is my interpretation that while departments can require a supplementary or additional examination to be administered by the department, it cannot dispense with the examinations given by the Office of the University Examiner.

DGJ:BP

___________________________

 

Department of Economics                             University of Chicago

May, 1968

 

To: Graduate Students, Department of Economics

From: Arnold C. Harberger, Chairman

Re: Revision in Foreign Language/Mathematics Requirement

Foreign Language and Mathematics Requirement

Each Ph.D. candidate, before admission to candidacy for the Ph.D., must demonstrate effective command of relevant mathematical tools, including calculus and matrix algebra. The Department of Economics will accept three courses in calculus (mathematics 151, 152, and 154, or equivalent), and one course in linear algebra (mathematics 250, 252, Business 372, or equivalent) as meeting, respectively, the calculus and matrix algebra requirements.

In place of demonstration of competence in matrix algebra, students may opt to demonstrate proficiency at a high level in a foreign language by means of an examination administered by the Office of the University Examiner and must demand to the satisfaction of the Department ability to translate at site with reasonable ease material in economics in the foreign language. Any foreign language other than Chinese, French, German, Italian, Japanese, Russian, Spanish, or Swedish must be approved by the Department.

 

Source: Hoover Institution Archives. Papers of Milton Friedman, Box 194, Folder “194.9 Economics Dept. A-G”.

Image: Lecture Hall 1, Social Science Research Building. University of Chicago Photographic Archive, apf2-07482, Special Collections Research Center, University of Chicago Library.

Categories
Curriculum Fields Harvard Undergraduate

Harvard. Taussig Reports to Alumni About the Special Needs of the Economics Department, 1915

 

A recent post provided Harvard President Lowell’s interpretation (1916) of the results of a recently completed study on economics instruction at Harvard (subsequently published in 1917). In this post we see how Professor Frank W. Taussig spins his reception of the ongoing study for a pitch to Harvard alumni to get over their edifice complexes (i.e. their revealed preference to fund new structures) and to create more endowments to fund graduate students and post-docs who are an important link between the research and instructional missions of the University in general and the department of economics in particular.

______________________________

 

THE DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS.
PROF. F. W. TAUSSIG, ’79.

The most striking change that has taken place during the last fifty years in the content of the College curriculum has been the dominance acquired by the political and economic subjects. What Greek, Latin, Mathematics were a half-century ago, that Economics, Government, History are now, — the backbone of the ordinary undergraduate’s studies. I will not undertake to say whether on the whole the change is or is not to be welcomed. It has its good sides and its bad sides. In one respect it is undoubtedly good. The main cause behind it is a great awakening of public spirit, — a consciousness that the country is confronted with pressing political and economical problems, and that we must gird our loins to meet them. And an assured consequence will be that the new generation of College men, who are being graduated every year by the thousands and tens of thousands, all trained in these subjects, will constitute a leavening force which must in time affect profoundly and beneficially the conduct of public affairs. At all events, so far as university teachers and administrators are concerned, the plain fact must be faced: instruction in these subjects has to be provided on a large scale.

The responsibility thus devolving on the Harvard Department of Economics among others was impressed on its members by the outcome of the new system of concentration introduced in 1910. It appeared that in some years this department had the largest number of concentrations of any; and in every year the number was very large. Its only rival was the English Department. These figures — familiar enough to Harvard men — set the economists to thinking. Under the able leadership of the chairman, Prof. C. J. Bullock, a deliberate inspection of the Department’s work was decided on. Obviously, the surest way to get at the unvarnished facts was to enlist the services of outside critics. To this end the Department of Education was asked to come to our aid. Its members were invited to attend lectures and recitations, to read examination books and theses, to learn by questionnaires what the students themselves said and thought, to suggest improvements. In addition, some members of the Visiting Committee appointed by the Board of Overseers really visited, attending systematically the exercises in some courses and preparing valuable critical reports. The Educators responded to the appeal with gratifying heartiness, and the two Departments have cooperated cordially in a course of action which is unique in the history of the University.

Already this movement has borne fruit; and it will bear still more. The introductory course Economics A (which has successively borne the names Philosophy 6, Political Economy 1, Economics 1, and now Economics A) has been systematically visited. New methods of instruction have been suggested, old methods have been tested, promising devices are on trial. It should be added that the more expensive and effective methods of instruction tried in it, and started even before the educational survey, were made possible only by generous financial support from the Visiting Committee. This is the largest elective course in College, having over 500 students; here is the most important teaching task. In the next tier of courses, two are being conducted on new lines; in these cases on the department’s own initiative rather than in consequence of advice from outside. They are the undergraduate courses on accounting and statistics, in which something closely akin to a laboratory system is being applied. That is, the assigned tasks are done, not in the student’s room and at his own (procrastinated!) hour, but in special quarters equipped for the purpose, at times appointed in advance, and under the supervision and with the aid of well-trained assistants. Other courses, especially those having considerable numbers, are now under similar inspection, and we have every hope that in them also good advice will be secured and good results obtained.

The problems of instruction in this subject, as in so many others, are far from being solved. How far lecture, how far enlist discussion, how far recite? In what way bring it about that the students shall think for themselves? In what way communicate to them the best thinking of others? Almost every department of the University, not excepting the professional schools, is asking itself these questions and is experimenting with solutions. Undoubtedly, different methods will prove advantageous for different subjects. Within the Department of Economics itself there is occasion for variety in methods. Some courses, especially those dealing with matters of general principle and of theoretic reasoning, are best conducted by discussion. Others, dealing with concrete problems, with the history of industry and of legislation, with description and fact, call for a judicious admixture of required reading, lectures, written work. In all, the great thing to be aimed at is power and mastery: training in thinking for yourself, in reaching conclusions of your own, in expressing clearly and effectively what you have learned and thought out. The courses that deal with industrial history, with the labor problems, with railways and combinations, taxation and public finance, money and banking, need something in the nature of laboratory work, such as I have just referred to; an extension and improvement, supervision and systematization, of the familiar thesis work.

Now, throughout all such endeavor and experimentation, the indispensable thing is a staff of capable and well-trained instructors. We need able men, effective personalities. We need them throughout, from top to bottom, — professors, assistant professors, instructors, assistants. The ideal man is one having a good head, good judgment, good teaching power, good presence, good training, the spirit of scholarship and research. Men who possess all these qualities are rare birds; we are in luck when we get the perfect combination. Often we have to accept men not up to the ideal. But we know what we ought to have, and we should strive to get as nearly to its height as we can.

In no subject is there greater need of good teachers and of trained thinkers than in economics. The subject is difficult, and it abounds with unsolved problems. Some things in its domain are indeed settled, — more than would be inferred from current popular controversies or from the differences in the ranks of the economists themselves. But on sundry important topics it is useless to maintain that we have reached demonstrable conclusions. There are pros and cons; conflicting arguments must be weighed; only qualified propositions can be stated. Differences of temperament, of upbringing, of environment, will cause the opinions of able and conscientious men to vary. Hence there is need above all of teachers who can think, weigh, judge; who are aware of the inevitable divergencies of opinion and of the causes that underlie them. There is abundant room for conviction, for enthusiasm, for the emphatic statement of one’s own views. But also there is need, above all in the teacher, of patience, discrimination, charity for those whose views are different.

It is thus of the utmost importance that young men of the right stamp should be drawn into the profession. I say the profession, because it has come to be such. And it is a profession with large possibilities, one that may well tempt a capable, high-spirited, and ambitious young man. Twenty-five years ago, when I was in the early stage of my teaching career, it would have been rash to encourage such a youth to train himself to be an economist. Then academic positions were but ill-paid, and were not held in assured high esteem. The situation has changed. Though salaries are still meager, they are rising; and the public regard for scientific work is increasing for all subjects, and not least for this one. Quite as important is the circumstance that the services of trained economists are now in demand for the public service, and that in this direction there are large opportunities for usefulness and for distinction. The possible range of work has come to be much wider than the academic field. And no large pecuniary bait is necessary to enlist men of the needed quality. Those who are interested primarily in money-making cannot indeed be advised to enter the profession; but they are also not of the sort to be welcomed in it. I am convinced that nowadays there are more young men than ever, in Harvard and elsewhere, to whom something nobler appeals. The spirit of service is abroad in the land, and moves students not only in their choice of college courses, but in their choice of a career. Yet a career should be in sight. There should be a reasonable prospect of promotion, a decent income according to the standards of educated men.

To enlist men of the right stamp in the service of the University there must be still another sort of inducement. There must be a stimulating atmosphere, a pervasive spirit of initiative and research. To mould the thoughts of students and so the opinions of the coming generation is an attractive task; but no less attractive, often more so, — much will depend on temperament, — is the opportunity to influence the forward march of thought, the solution of new problems. As I have just said, economics offers unsolved problems in abundance. There are high questions of theory, concerned with the very foundations of the social order and tempting to the man of severe intellectual ambition. There are intricate questions of legislation and administration, calling for elaborate investigation and pressing for prompt action; these will tempt the man of practical bent. For either sort of work, there must be something more inspiring than the opportunity for routine teaching. The advanced student needs the clash of mind on mind, the companionship of eager inquiry. It is this way that the Graduate School most serves Harvard College, and indeed is indispensable to the College. Without the opportunity and the stimulus of independent scientific work by the graduate students as well as by the teaching staff, it would be hopeless to try to enlist in the University service promising men of the desired quality.

I dwell for a moment on this aspect of the situation, because it is not understood by those among the alumni who believe that too much of the University’s money and too much of the professors’ time are given to graduate instruction. The late Professor Child, one of the most distinguished scholars as well as one of the most delightful men in the annals of Harvard, is said to have remarked that Cambridge would be a most attractive place were it not for the students. The remark reflects the weariness which in time comes over the professor whose teaching is confined to the routine instruction of undergraduates. It is astonishing how much scholarly work of high quality was achieved by Child and others of the older generation, under the untoward conditions of their day; sometimes, there is ground for suspecting, — not, by the way, in Child’s case, — because they simply slighted their routine teaching. Under the new conditions and the new competition in the academic world, we may be sure that if this were the only sort of work expected of the staff, the staff would be made up in the main of men qualified for this work only. It is the opportunity of doing creative work that tempts the highest intellectual ability; and creative work needs a creative atmosphere.

It is to be noted, further, that the source from which Harvard College and all the colleges must draw their teaching staffs is in these graduate schools. The experience of the Department of Economics convinces its members that the only way to secure a good staff of junior teachers, — instructors and assistants, — is to train them in a graduate school. The staff of the Department has been very much improved during the last ten years, and the improvement has come almost exclusively by recruiting from its own advanced students. We are confident that the training we give them is thoroughly good; we even cherish the belief that nowhere else can so good a training be secured. At all events, we try to retain the best of our advanced students in our service; if not indefinitely, at least for considerable stretches of time. And among the inducements which lead them to stay with us are the opportunities not only for teaching, but for research of their own, made possible by a moderate stint of stated work and enriched by the wealth of material in our great library.

What the Department of Economics most needs, then, and indeed what the University most needs in every department, is men. The University must have buildings, laboratories, libraries; but most of all it must have ripe scholars, inspiring teachers, forward thinkers. As it happens, external and mechanical facilities count less in economics than in many other subjects. There is no need of expensive laboratories, such as are indispensable for physics, chemistry, biology, the medical sciences. Like the Law School, we use chiefly collections of books and documents, and convenient lecture and conference rooms. The one fundamental thing is the men, and the one way to get them is to have free money, — enough money to pay good salaries to those on the ground, and to draw to the University the rare genius whenever by good fortune he is to be found. The specific way in which the generous-minded graduate can serve the needs of such a department is by the endowment of instruction and research.

The endowment of instruction ordinarily takes the form of the establishment of a professorship; and this will doubtless remain the most effective way of achieving the end. But there are other ways also. Professor Bullock has recently called attention in these columns to the possibilities of the endowment of economic research. I venture to offer a suggestion for something analogous, — something which may combine the endowment of research with that of instruction, and which has the further merit of not requiring so formidable a sum as is necessary nowadays for the foundation of a professorship. The University has at its disposal a not inconsiderable number of fellowships for training young men of promise. I believe that it could use with high advantage similar posts, more dignified and more liberally endowed, for mature men who are more than promising, — whose powers are proved, whose achievements are assured. Research fellowships they might be called, or professorial fellowships, if you please. An endowment of a moderate amount would enable the incumbent of such a post, if a young unmarried man, to give his whole time to research; if an older man, to limit his teaching hours within moderate bounds and so to give a large share of his time and energy to research and publication. The appointments would be made, I should suppose, for a specified term of years; and they would go preferably to scholars in the full vigor of early manhood. They would be highly honorable, and they would be tempting to men of high ideals and of quality coming up to our own ideals of University service. Will not some of our friends, not of the multi-millionaire class, desirous of doing what they can for our benignant mother, and perhaps of perpetuating a cherished name, reflect on this possibility?

 

Source: The Harvard Graduates’ Magazine. Vol. 24, No. 94 (December, 1915), pp. 274-279.

 

Categories
Curriculum Harvard Undergraduate

Harvard College President Lowell on Instruction in Economics Department, 1917

In 1912 the economics department of Harvard initiated a major study of economics instruction in the University that was completed in 1916 and published as: 

The Teaching of Economics in Harvard University. A Report Presented by the Division of Education at the Request of the Department of Economics. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1917. 248 pages.

I will of course rummage through the report for tidbits to post in Economics in the Rear-View Mirror, but for now, visitors at least have a link that will take them directly to the published study together with the following reflections of the President of Harvard College at the time A. Lawrence Lowell that were stimulated by the study. One does not really feel 100 years away from Lowell’s time, give-or-take a presentation software package, a MOOC or some learning platform (e.g. “Blackboard”).

___________________________

From the Annual Report for 1915-16 of the President of Harvard College, A. Lawrence Lowell:

One of the most interesting things done in the College during the last few years has been an invitation given by the Department of Economics to the Department of Education to investigate the undergraduate instruction in economics with a view to its improvement. Such a request to another body was not needed to prove the open mind, the desire to improve, the willingness to change its methods and to deal with its instruction as a systematic whole, which has been conspicuous in the case of the Department of Economics; but it is highly significant and full of promise. The investigation, which occupied a couple of years, has been very elaborate, making a large use of statistics, of questionnaires to instructors, students and graduates, of examination questions designed to test the progress of students in their capacity to deal with problems, and of other methods of inquiry that need not be described here. It has touched many different aspects of instruction, some of them of value far beyond the department immediately concerned. These things will appear when the report is published, but it may not be out of place to mention a couple of them here.

The fundamental questions in all education are the object sought and the result attained. Is economics studied in college for the sake of its general educational value in training the mind and preparing for good citizenship, or with a view to its vocational utility in the student’s subsequent career; and how far does it actually fulfil each purpose? An answer to these questions was sought by means of questionnaires addressed to all students taking economic courses and to a thousand graduates, beginning as far back as the Class of 1880 and comprising men engaged in every kind of occupation. Of course all the persons addressed did not reply, and many of the answers were too vague to be of use. Yet among the replies there were a large number definite enough to be of great value. Of the students, about one-third intended to take up a business of some kind; more than one-half as many were looking forward to the law; while the rest were distributed among all the different careers of which an undergraduate can conceive. Of all these men, about two-fifths gave as their chief reason for electing economics its value in training the mind or in understanding public and social problems; while even of those intending to adopt some occupation for which the subject is popularly supposed to offer a preparation, only about one-fifth expected to find what they learned directly helpful, although many more trusted that it would be of indirect assistance.

More interesting still are the replies from the graduates, for they had been enabled to measure what they had acquired by the light of experience in their various pursuits. The men in almost every occupation speak more commonly of the general cultural or civic benefit that they obtained than of vocational profit. This is notably true of the lawyers, and in a less degree also of the business men. The only two classes of graduates who speak with equal frequency of the two kinds of benefit derived are the journalists and the farmers; but they are few in number, and their answers do not appear to have been closely discriminating in this respect.

Results like those brought out by the inquiry of the Department of Education have a direct bearing upon the teaching of Economics, and the position of the subject in the undergraduate course of study. If the chief value of economics, is vocational, it ought to be taught mainly from that point of view, and undergraduates ought not to be generally encouraged to elect it who will not pursue some vocation to which it leads. But if, on the other hand, its principal benefit lies in training men to think clearly, and to analyze and sift evidence in the class of problems that force themselves upon public attention in this generation, then the greater part of the courses ought to be conducted with that object, and it is well for every undergraduate to study the subject to some extent. An attempt to aim at two birds with the same stone, is apt to result in hitting neither. Moreover, a confusion of objectives is misleading for the student. An impression often arises, without any sufficient basis, that some particular subject is an especially good preparation for a certain profession, and the theory is sometimes advocated warmly by the teachers of the subject from a laudable desire to magnify the importance of their field. Students naturally follow the prevailing view without the means of testing its correctness; not infrequently, as they afterwards discover, to the neglect of something they need more. The traditional path to eminence at the English bar has been at Oxford the honor school in literae humaniores, at Cambridge the mathematical tripos, and since the strongest minds in each university habitually took these roads, the results appeared to prove the proposition. It is well, therefore, that we should seek the most accurate and the most comprehensive data possible on the effect of particular studies upon men in various occupations, and upon different classes of minds. Such data are not easy to procure and are still more difficult to interpret, but when obtained they are of great value, and would throw light upon pressing educational questions about which we talk freely and know almost nothing.

Another matter with which the Department of Education dealt in their inquiry, again by the use of the questionnaire, is the relative value attached by students to the various methods of instruction. These were classified as lectures, class-room discussion, assigned reading, reports, essays or theses prepared by the student, and other less prominent agencies. Taken as a whole the students ascribed distinctly the greatest value to the reading, the next to the class-room discussion, placing lectures decidedly third, with reports and other exercises well below the first three. This order was especially marked in the case of the general introductory course known as Economics A. In the more advanced courses the order is somewhat changed. Even here the required reading is given the highest value, but the lectures in these courses are deemed more important than the class-room discussion. Among the better scholars in the advanced courses the value attributed to the lectures is, in fact, nearly as great as that ascribed to the assigned reading. These men also give to the reports, essays and theses a slightly greater importance than do the elementary and the inferior advanced students, although they do not place them on a par with the other three methods of instruction.

Answers of this kind are not infallible. There are always a considerable number of students who express no opinions, or whose opinions are not carefully considered. Nevertheless the replies are highly significant as indicating an impression—the impression of persons who, imperfect as their judgment may be, are after all the best judges, if not indeed the only judges, of what they have obtained from the different methods of instruction. In some ways the answers are unexpected. One would have supposed that class-room discussion would be of more value in an advanced course than in an elementary one. For it would presumably be remunerative in proportion as the members of the class possess information about the subject and a grasp of the principles involved. Probably the real reason for the relatively small importance attached to it by students in advanced courses is to be found in the fact that many of these courses are conducted mainly as lecture courses without much class-room discussion. The most illuminating fact that appears from the replies is the high value attached to the assigned reading as compared with the lectures. Even in the cases of the better scholars in the advanced courses it is not safe to assume an opinion that the lectures are of equal value with books, because they may be referring strictly to the reading formally assigned which is only a part of the reading that they do.

The problem of the relative value of books and lectures in higher education, or, for that matter, of books and direct oral teaching at school, is one that ought to receive very careful attention. The tendency for more than a generation, from the primary school to the university, has been to throw a greater emphasis on oral instruction as compared with study of the printed page. Half a century ago the boy at school and the student in college were habitually assigned a certain task, and the exercise in the class-room was in the main a recitation, the work of the teacher consisting chiefly in ascertaining whether the task had been properly performed, the set number of pages diligently and intelligently read, and in giving help over hard places or removing confusion in the pupil’s mind. But since that time the whole trend of education in all its grades has been towards in increase in the amount of direct instruction by the teacher. At school he or she talks to the class more and listens less than formerly, teaches it more directly, imparts more information. In the college or university the recitation has almost entirely disappeared, giving place mainly to lectures and in a smaller degree to class discussion. In fact, the impression among the general public, and in the minds of many academic people, is that the chief function of a professor is to give lectures, — not of course in the literal sense of reading something he has written, but imparting information directly to the class by an oral statement throughout the lecture hour.

Lectures are an excellent, and in fact an indispensable, part of university work, but it is possible to have too many of them, to treat them as the one vital method of instruction. This has two dangers. It tends to put the student too much in a purely receptive attitude of absorbing information poured out upon him, instead of compelling him to extract it from books for himself; so that his education becomes a passive rather than an active process. Lectures should probably be in the main a means of stimulating thought, rather than of imparting facts which can generally be impressed upon the mind more accurately and effectively by the printed page than by the spoken word.

Then again there is the danger that if lecture courses are regarded as the main object of the professors’ chair, the universities, and the departments therein, will value themselves, and be valued, in proportion to the number of lecture courses that they offer. This matter will bear a moment’s consideration, for it is connected with certain important general considerations of educational policy. To make the question clear, and point out its bearing upon our own problems, something may be said about the relations that exist between instruction in the College and in other departments of the University.

Many American universities have adopted a combined degree, whereby the earlier portion of the professional instruction in law, medicine, and other technical subjects, is taken as a part of the college course; and at the same time they maintain separate faculties for the college, or undergraduate academic department, and for the graduate school of arts and sciences. At Harvard we have gone on the opposite principle in both cases. We have separated each of the professional schools almost wholly from the college, with a distinct faculty and a distinct student life of its own. We have done this on the ground that a strictly professional atmosphere is an advantage in the study of a profession, and we believe that the earnestness, the almost ferociously keen interest, of the student body in our Law School, for example, has been largely due to this fact. We believe that the best results in both general and professional education are attained by a sharp separation between the two. On the other hand, we have not established a distinct faculty for the graduate school, but have the same faculty and to a great extent the same body of instruction for undergraduates and graduates, each man being expected to take such part of it as fits his own state of progress. We have done this because we have not regarded the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences as exclusively or distinctly a professional school for future teachers. If it were so, it would probably be necessary to give it more of a pedagogical character than it has today. Indeed there has appeared to be no serious disadvantage, such as exists in the case of a purely professional school, in our practice of not separating the graduate school wholly from the college. Although there is a single faculty the two bodies of students are quite distinct, and the graduates take no part in the athletics or social activities of the men in college. They are in no danger of any lack of industry, nor do they suffer from contact with the college students taking courses primarily for graduates. The best Seniors who have reached the point of electing advanced courses are by no means inferior in capacity, education, or earnestness to the average graduate. And, on the other hand, competent undergraduates benefit greatly by following instruction that would not otherwise be open to them.

Our system, by closing professional education to undergraduates, obliges them to devote their college course entirely to academic studies; and at the same time it opens all academic instruction to undergraduates and graduates alike. By so doing it treats the whole list of academic courses as one body of instruction whereof the quantity can be readily measured and the nature perceived. In this way our system brings into peculiar prominence a question that affects the whole university policy in this country. A university, as its name implies, is an institution where all branches are studied, but this principle easily transforms itself into the doctrine that a university ought to offer systematic instruction in every part of every subject; and in fact almost all departments press for an increase of courses, hoping to maintain so far as possible a distinct course upon every sub-division of their fields. This is in large measure due to the fact that American graduate students, unlike German students, tend to select their university on account of the number and richness of the courses listed in the catalogue on their particular subjects, rather than by reason of the eminence of the professors who teach them. Some years ago it happened that a professor of rare distinction in his field, and an admirable teacher, who had a large number of graduate students in his seminar, accepted a chair in another university. His successors at his former post, however good, were by no means men with his reputation. Under these circumstances, one would have supposed that many of his pupils would have followed him, and that fresh students would have sought him in his new chair. But in fact the seminar at the place he left was substantially undiminished, and he had a comparatively small body of graduate students in the university to which he migrated.

The real reason for increasing the list of courses, though it is often not consciously recognized, is quite as much a desire to attract students as a belief in the benefit conferred on them after they come. The result has been a great expansion within the last score of years in the number of courses offered by all the larger universities. Counting two half-courses as equivalent to one full course, our Faculty of Arts and Sciences offered last year to undergraduates or graduates 417½ courses running throughout the year. Of these 67 were designated as seminars, where advanced students work together in a special field under the guidance of the professors. More will be said of these later. Some of the remaining 350½ were in reality of the same character, and others involved purely laboratory work; but most of them were systematic courses of instruction, mainly what are called, not always accurately, lecture courses. In addition, there were 119 more courses listed in the catalogue, but marked as being omitted that year. These are in the main courses designed to be given in alternate years, where the number of applicants is not large enough to justify their repetition annually. A student has thus an opportunity to take them at some time during his college career. They entail upon the instructor almost as much labor in preparation as the others, and are an integral part of the courses of instruction provided by the University. The total number of courses, therefore, offered by the Faculty of Arts and Sciences was 536½, whereby something over 73 were in the nature of seminars.

Some years ago a committee of the Board of Overseers suggested that there were needless courses provided, and the Committee of the Faculty on Instruction examined the whole list, making careful inquiries of the members of the several departments, and reported that with one or two exceptions there were no courses for which good and sufficient reasons could not be given. The result of a similar inquiry would be the same today. There are few, if any, courses that could be seriously considered by anyone as useless or superfluous in themselves. Almost every one of them is intrinsically valuable, and a distinct contribution to the instruction in the subject. Nevertheless, it is a proper subject for consideration whether the policy of offering courses of instruction covering every part of every subject is wise. No European university attempts to do so. No single student can take them all in any large field and his powers would be deadened by a surfeit of instruction if he did. For the undergraduates a comparatively small array of staple courses on the most important portions of the subject, with a limited number of others on more highly specialized aspects thereof, is sufficient. For the graduate students who remain only a year to take the degree of Master of Arts, and who are doing much the same work as the more advanced Seniors, the same list of courses would be enough; and for those graduates who intend to become professors in universities and productive scholars it would probably be better, — beyond these typical specialized courses, which would suffice to show the method of approaching the subject — to give all the advanced instruction by means of seminars where the students work together on related, but not identical paths, with the aid of mutual criticism and under the guidance of the professors. Fewer courses, more thoroughly given, would free instructors for a larger amount of personal supervision of the students, would be better for the pupils; and would make it possible for the University to allow those members of the staff who are capable of original work of a high order more time for productive scholarship. Many a professor at the present day, under the pressure of preparing a new course, cannot find time to work up the discoveries he has made, or to publish a work throwing a new light on existing knowledge.

In making these suggestions there is no intention of urging a reduction of our existing schedule. But it is time to discuss the assumption, now apparently prevalent in all American universities, that an indefinite increase in the number of courses provided is to be aimed at in higher education. The question is whether that policy is not defective in principle, and whether we are not following it to excess, thereby sacrificing to it other objects equally, if not more, important.

Courses are merely a means to an end, and that end is the education of the student. One method of placing courses in their true light as a means of education is the provision of comprehensive examinations for graduation, covering the general field of the student’s principal work beyond the precise limits of the courses he has taken. This has long been done in the case of the doctorate of philosophy; and in the year covered by this report it was applied for the first time to undergraduates concentrating in the Division of History, Government and Economics. Only 24 students of the Class of 1917, who finished their work in three years and concentrated in this field, came under its operation; but they were numerous enough to give a definite indication of the working of the plan. To that extent the results were satisfactory. The examination papers were well designed for measuring the knowledge and grasp of the subject, with a large enough range of options to include the various portions of the field covered by the different candidates; and the examiners themselves were satisfied with the plan as a fair means of testing the qualification of the students. During the coming year a much larger number of men will come up for this comprehensive examination, which promises to mark a new departure in American college methods.

 

Source: Harvard University. Reports of the President and the Treasurer of Harvard College 1915-16 (Cambridge, 1917), pp. 11-19. Reprinted in Harvard Crimson, January 19, 1917.

Image Source: Harvard President A. Lawrence Lowell from Harvard Class Album 1920.

 

Categories
Chicago Courses Curriculum Economic History

Chicago. Proposal for interdisciplinary MA courses on Capitalism and Democracy. Hoselitz, 1947

With the election of Donald J. Trump to the U.S. Presidency, it is perhaps time well-spent to yet again reflect upon the relation between capitalism and democracy. Today I post a 1947 proposal for the creation of a complementary pair of interdisciplinary seminars on problems of capitalism and democracy to be taught in the University of Chicago’s Divisional Social Science M.A. program. The proposal was written by a 34 year old Austrian, Berthold Franz Hoselitz ( the future founding editor of the journal Economic Development and Cultural Change), and presumably circulated among the respective departments of the Division of Social Science for approval. The copy transcribed here comes from Milton Friedman’s papers at the Hoover Institution together with the agenda for the faculty meeting when the proposal was scheduled to be discussed. We see from the course announcements that the proposal was accepted.

The poor image of Hoselitz from 1940 is partially compensated for by the fact that it is (up to now) the only image I have been able to find of him at all.

_____________________________

Fun Fact: Hoselitz taught John Nash

Q. …Did you have any teacher through your period at university which was particularly a role model to you?…

John Nash: I certainly had some good teachers who were very helpful to me and influential. For example, in economics I only took one economics course and I was an undergraduate study in Pittsburgh at what is now called Carnegie Mellon, but by coincidence the person who taught the course, it was a course in international economics, and by coincidence this was someone who came from Austria. So there’s actually to consider Austrian economics is like a different school than typical American or British. So I was by coincidence influenced by an Austrian economist [Bert F. Hoselitz, Associate Professor of Economics appointed October 1, 1947, resigned September 1948, Carnegie Institute of Technology.] which may have been a very good influence.

Source: Interview with Dr. John Nash at the 1st Meeting of Laureates in Economic Sciences in Lindau, Germany, September 1-4, 2004.    Interviewer: Marika Griehsel.

_____________________________

Biographical Note

Bert F. Hoselitz was born Berthold Frank Hoselitz in Vienna, Austria in 1913. He received his doctor of law degree in 1936 from the University of Vienna. He left Austria in 1938, traveling first to England, then to the U.S., where he taught briefly at Manchester College in North Manchester, Indiana. He enrolled in the University of Chicago , receiving an M.A. in Economics in 1945. Hoselitz joined faculty at Chicago as an instructor in 1945, and became emeritus in 1978.

Hoselitz advocated interdisciplinary scholarship and his work pushed the common wisdom within economics at the time by considering the role of cultural and sociological factors on economic development. In pursing this line of inquiry, he developed professional relationships with scholars around the globe, though particularly in Asia, and participated in both a research and advisory capacity for a broad spectrum of academic research projects that spanned traditionally distinct social science disciplines. In 1962, Hoselitz supervised a pair of National Science Foundation sponsored studies examining the social and economic entailments of developments in science and technology within Asia, primarily India. At a broader level, he was also active in efforts to bring diverse social science disciplines into conversation with one another. In 1958 began participating in an editorial and authorial capacity for the International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences.

Hoselitz’s scholarly activities were not confined to academic research and teaching. He was also active and engaged in policy discussions concerning development and the developing world. In the early phase of his career Hoselitz participated in an array of applied research projects, advising work and professional associations related to economic development and development policy more broadly. For example, he wrote for the United Nations on issues related to economic development, beginning with a 1952 technical-assistance mission to El Salvador, and in the late fifties he served on a team of advisors to the government of India concerning the plan for the national capital region.

In addition to his global professional engagements, Hoselitz also remained an active participant and organizer in the scholarly community of his home institution at Chicago. In 1952 Hoselitz founded the Research Center in Economic Development and Cultural Change at Chicago as well as the affiliated interdisciplinary journal Economic Development and Cultural Change, published through the University of Chicago Press. Hoselitz served as editor from the journal’s inception until 1985. He also served on the committee of the Norman Wait Harris Memorial Foundation based at the University of Chicago which focuses on issues of international interest and works to facilitate the exchange of knowledge about the diverse peoples of the world. In this capacity, Hoselitz organized visits by lecturers, funded conferences and facilitated the foundation’s publishing efforts.

Considered an interdisciplinary pioneer and an expert on the social and cultural dimensions of economic development, Professor Emeritus Bert Hoselitz died in Chicago on February 14, 1995.

 

Source: University of Chicago Library. Guide to the Bert F. Hoselitz papers, 1923-1987.

_____________________________

 

DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS

A G E N D A
Tuesday, June 3, 1947, at 1. p.m. in Room SS 424

 

  1. Students’ Business:
    1. Tom, Chiu-Faat Joseph: Petition to take Chinese as second language.
    2. Berkman, Herman G.: Petition to take Planning as major field of specialization; to take intensive examination in French only.
    3. Murphy, J. Carter: Petition to substitute Mathematics for second language.
    4. Schwitzer, Selma: Petition for Mathematics to be one of secondary fields of specialization for A.M. (alternative). Other fields statistics and theory.
    5. Weil, R.A.: Petition to waive residence requirement.
      Recommendation to Candidacy. Tentative approval of thesis topic: “Federal Aid to Achieve State-Local Co-operation in a Counter-Cyclical Fiscal Policy.”
  2. Weil, R.A.: Petition to waive residence requirement.
    Recommendation to Candidacy.
    Tentative approval of thesis topic: “Federal Aid to Achieve State-Local Co-operation in a Counter-Cyclical Fiscal Policy.”
  3. Seminar, course and staff for “Problems of Capitalism and Democracy”
  4. Plans for counseling students during summer and next fall.
  5. New business.

_____________________________

 

OUTLINE FOR A PROGRAM ON THE “PROBLEM OF CAPITALISM AND DEMOCRACY”

I. Background

Some two years ago the History Department of the University of Chicago discussed the possibility of instituting in their Department so-called “problem-courses”. Instead of subdividing the subject matter of history on the basis of time periods and countries or regions, they felt that major problems, notably those of capitalism and democracy, should be studied in their historical perspective. These plans were thought over for some time but were not put into effect during the war, chiefly because of lack of suitable personnel who could be charged with the preparation and execution of these courses.

When, a few months ago, the Divisional Masters Committee met, and when it was decided that the Divisional Master’s program should provide for a more generalized program than that provided by departmental courses, the suggestion was made that the courses on the history of capitalism and the history of democracy might be worked out in a manner in which not only the historical sweep of the two institutions would be under consideration, but where also the problems arising in the two areas would be studied. The courses were thus conceived by the Divisional Masters Committee as comprising an analysis of historical background as well as the “nature” and problems of capitalism and of democracy.

When these courses were discussed it was the feeling of some members of the Divisional Masters Committee that what was needed to be stressed more and made more explicit than could be done by giving two apparently unrelated courses in isolation, was the problem of the interrelations of capitalism and democracy, or (in different words) the relationship of economic organization and the realization of political values of liberty, equality, and justice. This dilemma was met by the Masters committee by declaring the courses to be long into one “field” of study and by suggesting that the students be asked to take the courses simultaneously, by providing for parallel planning and teaching of the courses, as much as possible, and by providing an examination over the two courses (the field) in which the interrelations between economic organization and political values was stressed.

This plan was submitted to the Executive Committee of the Division of the Social Sciences and accepted as part of a program for the Divisional Masters Degree. At a later meeting between representatives of the Divisional Masters Committee and members of the Department of Economics, Political Science, and History, the problem was discussed again, and reasons for combination of the two courses, as well as reasons against brought forward. In addition the proposal was made and accepted that a faculty seminar be established which concern itself with the whole problem raised by the relationship of economic and political organization, notably the interrelations of capitalist, free enterprise, economic organization and political democracy.

 

II. Some Thoughts on a Program for Studying the Problem of Capitalism and Democracy.

A seminar or a combined course on the problems of capitalism and democracy seem to me to involve two sub-problems which ought to be separated from each other. One is the examination of the relationship of given economic institutions in the particular political framework and the processes which would be set in motion both in the political and economic field by attempts to realize certain aims of human welfare, or other chiefly political values, such as justice, freedom, etc.

The other problem would involve a study of actual processes of the interaction of political and economic institutions, their mutual interrelations in the past under different conditions in their dependence upon it given set of values in the particular hierarchies in which these values were accepted in certain countries and at certain times.

Both approaches may be dynamic but the first would primarily be analytical in that it would study the probable consequences of economic and political policies upon each other and therefore would in part deal with the study of how the existing institutions would be shaped by policies designed to meet social objectives in a more adequate way then is being done at present. In this analysis existing institutions such as constitutional arrangements, legal rules, the whole economic structure and possibly the international power structure as they affect the various countries, would be the starting point of the examination. This analysis would deal with problems which are of the utmost importance in the light of the discussion going on currently. It would have to take up those problems which presently are generally assumed under the heading of the relationship of freedom and planning. I think that it might be well for the Department to arrange the questions of a general and wide character affecting the whole social structure be included as well as more limited problems dealing with very specific economic or political policies in particular fields and their repercussions on the whole social structure.

The historical part could be used, it appears to me, for the following purposes.

(1) It could throw light on the coexistence of particular economic and political institutions especially on the historical coexistence of capitalism and democracy.

(2) It could provide evidence to show how and to what extent changes which either of the two institutions undergo undergoes in industrial civilization, have affected the other, and therefore could provide a basis for making certain analogies which present policies actually in operation or proposed.

(3) It would have to be supplemented by an analysis of the influence of the institutions of industrial capitalism and democratic political organization upon the formation of human personality, and vice versa the influence of human motivations and psychological factors upon the social, economic and political organization of the time.

(4) I am not certain whether an analysis of the origins of capitalism would be fruitful in this connection, but I think that it would be useful in the historical part to provide for a comparison between the social structure of the 19th century in the economic organization which it manifested in political values which it claimed to realize, and other societies, their economic and technological equipment and their political organization. If this can be supplemented by a comparison of the “basic personalities” in the two cultures, this might throw additional light on the question whether industrial capitalism and political democracy are bound up with each other, whether the ties exist in the social field exclusively, what ties are provided by the personality structure of the individuals composing the society and what evidence is provided by the historical incidence of attempts simultaneously to realize certain economic and political aims.

It seems to me, therefore, a defect that in the original planning of the program social psychologists and social anthropologists did not participate and I would think that both of these have important contributions to make.

Although it would be difficult clearly to separate the analytical approach which is concerned with examination of concrete presently existing problems confronting us in America and European countries as well as some of the “backward” countries, from the historical problems, I don’t think that such a separation would be necessary as long as it is logically plain that in the one area we are dealing with the application of generalizations drawn from history and other social sciences on practical policies, whereas in the other field we deal with an attempt to give a comprehensive examination of why particular processes occur, when and where they occurred and what factors were responsible for their occurrence. In other words, the two approaches would complement each other and would give opportunity to representatives of all the social science disciplines to make a contribution.

We frequently talk about the problem of modern society and I think we mean primarily by this the set of problems outlined above. Although as individuals we feel inclined that we must provide answers of what will be the probable effects of concrete policies, all of us attempt to build those answers into a logical framework which comprises the totality of social arrangements in which, therefore, is colored by our conception of political and cultural processes as well as economic ones. Any clarification of the relationships of these processes in present-day society which can be deduced by analytical study or by an examination of historical periods from which analogies for present-day action can be provided might therefore give at least a partial answer. I would like to see both the seminar and a course or combination of courses be carried on on the basis of these thoughts. If a more complete outline is desirable I shall gladly provide one.

Respectfully submitted
Bert Hoselitz

May 22, 1947

Source: Hoover Institution Archives, Milton Friedman Papers, Box 79, Folder “79.1 University of Chicago, Minutes, Economics Department 1946-1949”.

_____________________________

DIVISIONAL COURSES

[…]

Social Science 300A,B,C. The Nature and Problems of Capitalism. A study of the economic institutions of capitalist society in the more critical phases of their development up to the present, with particular emphasis on the social and political context in which economic change occurs. Closely correlated with Social Science 301A, B,C, which is taken concurrently. Enrolment limited to students under the Divisional Master’s Program. Aut, Win, Spr: MWF 10:30; Staff.

Social Science 301A,B,C. The Nature and Problems of Democracy (identical with Political Science 300A,B,C). Examination of the political institutions of Western society, especially in their relation to the development of democratic ideals and practices. Major concern is with American institutions as they operate in the context of both democratic ideals and political reality. Taken concurrently with Social Science 300 A, B, C. Enrolment limited to students under the Divisional Master’s Program. Aut, Win, Spr: MWF 10:30; Staff.

 

Source: University of Chicago, Announcements Vol. XLIX, No. 9 (July 1, 1949). The Division of the Social Sciences, Sessions of 1949-1950. p. 10.

Image Source: Declaration of Intention to apply for U.S. citizenship by Bertold Franz Hoselitz (alias Hazlitt), August 8, 1940.

Categories
Columbia Curriculum

Columbia. Comments on Programs of Study in Economics and Business. Shoup, 1944

The Columbia Provost, Frank D. Fackenthal, must have sent out a request to department chairs to answer a set of questions regarding their departments’ educational programs early in 1944. I have found a copy of a letter dated April 10, 1944 in which Carl S. Shoup (1902-2000) provides his reply in which he was able to comment both on graduate economics as well as business education. Shoup refers to an “accompanying memorandum” in which his thoughts are spelled out more precisely. That memorandum was not filed with the copy of the letter I found, so it must be left to another archival visit to see if there might not be some copy filed elsewhere.

Note to self (or others): the “accompanying memorandum” might be found in Provost Fackenthal’s papers.

____________________

Letter to Provost Frank D. Fackenthal from Professor Carl Shoup on the educational programs in economics and business at Columbia University
April 10, 1944

COPY
[Omitting some minor points, as explained in letter to Professor Mills, April 18, 1944]

April 10, 1944

Mr. Frank D. Fackenthal
Provost of the University
Low Memorial Library

Dear Mr. Fackenthal:

This letter and the accompanying memorandum are in reply to your request of February 18 for suggestions on the educational program of the University.

It so happens that during some spare moments last summer and fall when I was in Washington with the Treasury Department, I drew up a memorandum on graduate instruction in the American universities in the fields of economics and public finance, with special but not exclusive reference to Columbia. I had for some time been of the opinion that the training given to graduate students was falling short of what it might accomplish, and this memorandum was an attempt to systematize my thoughts. Upon returning to Columbia I found that Professor Mills, as head of the Department of Economics, was planning to appoint a curriculum committee and also hold a series of Department meetings in which the curriculum of the Department would be analyzed and suggestions for improvement made. I showed him my memorandum, and he thought it advisable to circulate mimeographed copies among the members of the Department. Since this memorandum contains most of what I have to say on the educational program, I am enclosing a copy; but I also add a few remarks below, addressed more specifically to some of the questions raised in your letter, and to Columbia rather than graduate schools in general.

My remarks here and in the mimeographed memorandum, rest upon three general assumptions: (1) that graduate students in economics and public finance are willing and even eager to assume a more responsible and professional attitude toward their work, which involves more hours of work and more intense work, the satisfying of more exacting standards in examination, and a realization of the damage they can cause if they go into government or private research, or teaching, without adequate training; (2) that many, perhaps most, faculty members (including certainly myself) have not been fully aware how small have been our direct efforts to challenge the graduate student to higher standards, and to help him reach them, perhaps because we have to readily assumed that by continually improving ourselves through research and study we could help the mature student about as well as we could in any other way; (3) that, finally, there is indeed no real conflict between this value we customarily put on faculty research and the producing of highly trained graduate students, but that the faculty member’s research experience needs to be made more available to the graduate student through participation by the latter at least some of the research carried on by the faculty. Unfortunately for the chances of formulating a specific program, I have not yet been able to devise a mechanism (to train the graduate by participation in research) that will be highly effective in a graduate department which, like Columbia’s, already has a long history of development along somewhat different lines. It may be that the idea is impracticable except for a graduate department that is founded primarily with this end in view. The problem of mechanism is discussed in some detail in the accompanying memorandum. In any case it would be essential to guard against the development of the research work into an element of so-called (“prestige” whereby it became necessary to grind out a certain amount of published product regularly for the public view. The results should be good enough to warrant publication, but not on any monthly or other periodic schedule.

To turn out to the specific subjects suggested in your letter of February 18, 1944:

            (1) Comment on the Department of which I am a member (I am a member of the School of Business and also of the Faculty of Political Science).

(A) The most troublesome problem facing the graduate Economics Department in curriculum construction is in my opinion caused by the wide variety in background and in aims of our graduate students. The difficulty takes this specific form: shall we introduce so-called “first graduate-year courses” (or “intermediate courses”) in subjects like public finance, international trade, and monetary theory, for students who have had few if any undergraduate courses in economics, or who, having majored in economics, have not had courses in one or more of these particular subjects? There are diverse views on the principles we should follow, but my present inclination – subject to change, of course, as we debate the matter further – is that we cannot do work on this intermediate level without forgoing a good deal of work on the higher level, and that we therefore should not attempt to make good the undergraduate’s course deficiencies except by special reading assignments and special examinations. If we had a much larger faculty, we might be able to offer a satisfactory selection of “intermediate” courses without decreasing our advanced offerings. Even so, I should doubt the desirability of going far in that direction. Before we realized it, we might find ourselves taking over much of the work of undergraduate colleges. From a long run point of view, the effect would be to weaken undergraduate work, not strengthen it.

The School of Business is revamping its entire curriculum. I am a member of a central curriculum committee that has been appointed to suggest what changes should be made, and since we are in the middle of our deliberations at the moment, I have nothing specific to report at this time. I am also a member of a curriculum sub-committee of the Department of Economics, but this sub-committee is awaiting the close of a series of conferences now being held by the Department, before assembling to consider whether specific changes in the curriculum should be recommended.

(B) I believe that it might be good practice for the Department of Economics and the School of Business to appoint a two or three-man committee to become thoroughly acquainted with the record, and to assess the possibilities of, any individual – within or outside the University – who is suggested as a possible member of the Department. This small committee would make an extended report to the Department after some period of time, perhaps six months or so. I think we need some much practice as this to avoid letting ourselves drift into accepting someone largely because there is a general impression that he seems to be the best one readily available at the moment. Perhaps it would be better to appoint a small committee whenever there is a vacancy, with the instructions to search carefully throughout the country to find the best possible prospect and to report back a year later. It is, I think, worth our while to take unusual pains in this respect, for the University has great pulling power, and should not waste it.

(C) As to relations with other departments, the major point, both for the School of Business and for the Department of Economics, is the relation between these two. Fortunately, the two faculties are keeping in close touch with each other. There is almost surely substantial duplication of effort at the present time, more of it than is desirable in some fields, especially, in my opinion, in money and credit theory. It is to be hoped that the two curriculum committees will suggest ways of eliminating needless duplication.

(D) I know very little about present methods of finding, and opening the way for, the brilliant student in the undergraduate group who should devote himself to scholarship and research, but I suspect that the supply of brilliant scholars could be substantially increased if some general effort were made to call to the attention of A-grade undergraduates the possibilities of careers and research and in college or university teaching.

(E) I have no suggestions on scholarships and fellowships, since I happen to have had very little to do with choosing from among the candidates or with examining the general system of selection.

 

            (2) Comment on the programs of study.

(A) In my opinion the program both of the School of Business and the Graduate Department of Economics have lacked sufficiently definite aims and standards, in standards sufficiently high. There is no specific suggestion I should want to venture at the moment, pending completion of the discussions in our two curriculum committees, but some of the suggestions and the accompanying mimeographed memorandum will indicate in a general way what I have in mind. We do not want rigidity in curriculum and teaching; indeed, we need experimentation, but it needs to be experimentation by the department or school as a whole, with some agreement on what we are trying to do. During the 1930’s, particularly, I have the impression that both the School of Business and the Economics Department rather drifted along, each faculty member being concerned chiefly with his own work as it affected himself, not in its relation to the group as a whole (at least I am sure I fell into that habit). We are beginning to overcome this tendency, as a result of frequent group meetings, but the former attitude has become so deeply ingrained in us that I am not optimistic for the future unless there is somewhat more concerned over the problem of training the graduate student then I have noticed thus far. The lack of regimentation, the freedom given at Columbia to each faculty member to go his own way, is a fine thing in we must of course be careful not to decrease it much, if at all. It is a prerequisite for outstanding work in research. The group action that I have particularly primarily in mind is designed rather (1) to provoke in each of us a greater feeling of individual responsibility for (a) ascertaining what our shortcomings are with respect to the training of graduate students and (b) using our imagination to devise improvements; and (2) to create the mechanism for cooperative effort where cooperative effort is deemed essential to making the improvements. But if the group action – in the form of the group discussions we are now engaged in – turns out not to have the effect described in objective (1) above, it would be dangerous to try to move on rapidly to objective (2). A widespread and fairly strong sense of dissatisfaction with our present degree of achievement in training graduate students is a prerequisite to the success of any thoroughgoing change. It remains to be seen whether such a feeling exists. If the current discussions show that it does not, we must conclude either that after all there is no real ground for substantial change or that the change must start elsewhere.

(B) I do not get the impression that competition with or imitation of the programs of other institutions have lowered our standards or over-extended our efforts. Rather, we have probably failed to learn as much as we should about what other institutions are doing.

(C) There is now – in contrast to the situation some years ago, as noted above – ample opportunity for the general discussion of educational matters.

(D) The faculty members’ participation in outside work has benefited the University. It is essential that a considerable amount of outside work be allowed. Such work has however, in my opinion, been carried well of beyond the optimum point in many cases (including my own). In the accompanying mimeographed memorandum I discuss this problem in some detail. My present opinion is that the University should create “research professorships”. Such professorships would not call for any lowering of the teaching schedule beyond the four hours a week now prevailing in the graduate department (but would call for a change in the School of Business’ minimum of eight hours). Anyone accepting such a professorship would agree to engage in no outside work for pay to himself except, say, during one year out of seven. He would be free to undertake any other outside paid work, but the fees would be paid into the University. Such professorships would carry his salary substantially higher than at present obtain – perhaps 75 per cent to 100 per cent higher at the lower salary levels, and 50 per cent higher at the higher salary levels. (I understand that the University of Chicago is offering, or may shortly offer, contracts on the basis something like that suggested for these “research professorships”).

 

            (3) Comment on the facilities for research.

(A) the School of Business library, through which I work, is, in my opinion, doing an excellent job. My only reservation for the library as a whole has to do with the availability of works in foreign languages. We may need to develop a better system for guarding against gaps here and there, after the war, for I have found some omissions that have hampered my work a little. I am not yet, however, prepared to make any recommendations.

(B) I have not encountered any of the resources of the metropolitan area that were not open to me.

(C) I have had limited experience, especially in recent years, with undergraduate teaching, so had little to say on this subject. My impression is that undergraduate teaching, while not incompatible with research, is not exactly conducive to it.

(D) Probably the most important steps that could be taken to increase the research accomplishment of the University staff are:

(a) Slightly lighter teaching schedules (in the School of Business not the Department of Economics).

(b) The introduction of research professorships as suggested in 2 (D) above.

(c) Full pay for the entire sabbatical year with an understanding of the faculty member will use the time in study or in some activity, paid or not (unless he is on one of the research professorships) of direct importance to his long-term product program of self-development. The present system of granting full pay for a half-year’s leave induces almost everyone to take a half-year leave. In most cases this cost the university more money than the full-year half-paid leave, and results in less uninterrupted time for research.

                       (E) As to sources of financial support I have no suggestions (aside from the fees that would come to the University under the research professors’ outside work (2 (D) above), which would be needed to pay the higher salaries) except the general and perhaps impractical one that the University seek mass support from thousands of middle-class sponsors would contribute regularly say $5 to $25 a year and would receive in exchange reports on the progress of the University, special seating privileges at Commencement, exclusive attendance privileges at occasional special lectures by members of the faculty, and any other marks of attention that could make them feel a sense of part ownership in, and pride in, a great University.

Sincerely yours,

Carl Shoup

 

Source: Columbia University Libraries. Manuscript Collections. Columbia University Department of Economics Collection. Carl Shoup Materials, Box 10, Folder “Columbia University—General”.

Image Source: The Columbia Spectator Archive. March 8, 1967.

Categories
Courses Curriculum Harvard Undergraduate

Harvard. Major Expansion of Economics Course Offerings. 1883

Harvard’s decision to significantly increase its course offerings in political economy in 1883 received some national press coverage (that story posted earlier in Economics in the Rear-View Mirror). Today we have the announcement published in the Harvard Crimson. The trio Charles F. Dunbar, J. Laurence Laughlin and Frank W. Taussig were on their way to launch the take-off into a full academic program of economic study.

______________________

POLITICAL ECONOMY.
Courses of Study for 1883-84.

Harvard Crimson
May 24, 1883

Arrangements recently completed have enabled the college to offer a more extended course of study in Political Economy than that which has been announced. A full statements to be substituted for that given on page 14 of the Elective Pamphlet, will be found below.

On page 15 of the pamphlet, line 13, for Course 6 read Course 7.

  1. Mill’s Principles of Political Economy. – Lectures on Banking and the Financial Legislation of the United States. Mon., Wed., Fri., at 9. Prof. Dunbar and Asst. Prof. Laughlin.
  1. History of Economic Theory and a Critical Examination of Leading Writers. – Lectures. Mon., Wed. at 2 and (at the pleasure of the instructor) Fri. at 2. Prof. Dunbar.
  1. Discussion of Practical Economic Questions. – Theses, Tu., Th., at 3, and a third hour to be appointed by the instructor. Assistant Professor Laughlin.
  1. Economic History of Europe and America since the Seven Years’ War. – Lectures. Mon., Wed., Fri., at 11. Professor Dunbar.
    Course 4 requires no previous study of Political Economy.
  1. Economic Effects of Land Tenures in England, Ireland, France and Germany. – Theses. Once a week, counting as a half course. Asst. Professor Laughlin.
  1. History of Tariff Legislation in the United States. – Once a week, counting as a half course. Mr. Taussig.
  1. Comparison of the Financial Systems of France, England, Germany and the United States. – Tu., at 2, counting as a half course. Professor Dunbar.

As a preparation for Courses 2, 3, 5, 6 and 7 it is necessary to have passed satisfactorily in Course 1.

Course 1 is in Examination Group I.; Course 2, in Group V.; Course 3, in Group XII.; Course 4, in Group III.; Course 7, in Group XI.

The first two courses are intended to present the principles of the science, while the remaining five treat the subject in its historical and practical aspects. No. 2 will take up the principal writers of the present day, as Cairns, Carey and George, together with the current literature of the science. No times of recitation have been assigned to courses 5 and 6, as this will be arranged between the instructors and the students choosing the course. The department intend issuing a full descriptive pamphlet describing the different courses, which can be had at the office in a few days.

Image Source:  Charles F. Dunbar (left) and Frank W. Taussig (right) from E. H. Jackson and R. W. Hunter, Portraits of the Harvard Faculty (1892); J. Laurence Laughlin (middle) from Marion Talbot. More Than Lore: Reminiscences of Marion Talbot, Dean of Women, The University of Chicago, 1892-1925. Chicago: University of Chicago (1936).

Categories
Columbia Curriculum Fields

Columbia. J. M. Clark on Teaching “modern tools of economic thinking”, 1942

In my examination of department archives I have been somwhat surprised at the relative scarcity of paper traffic with regard to curriculum reform. Here a short note from Maurice Clark to the executive officer of the economics department (i.e. chairman) Robert M. Haig about Columbia’s hiring strategy and whether two “math. Ec’ist[s]” aren’t enough for the task of teaching the “modern tools of economic thinking.” Looking at the faculty list for that year, I presume Clark meant Harold Hotelling and Abraham Wald. The note sounds as though Clark is looking for a way to get out of the “Current types of economic theory” course that he had taken over from Wesley Clair Mitchell and to teach instead a core theory course again.

_____________________________________

 

COPY

January 9, 1942

Dear Bob [R. M. Haig]:

I heard Lange’s paper. Impressions very favorable per se: but he’s one more high-power mathematical economist, and with three, wouldn’t we be unbalanced? And if it takes a math. Ec’ist to do the job of “modern tools of economic thinking” we had in mind, aren’t two enough?

Another unmatured impression: that part of the gap we’re thinking of would be met by a development and more up-to-date and adequate treatment of the sort of thing I used to do in the course I quit giving when I took Mitchell’s “Types” course:–more specifically, the second half-year where I dealt with the concepts of demand, supply and cost curves in an attempt to relate them to actual behavior. I adumbrated the possibility of treating the distinction between competition and monopoly in terms of slopes of “individual demand schedules” (before Chamberlin’s book). Had ‘em read Foster & Catchings to get the “Income-flow” approach, before Keynes’ books appeared. (I note Neisser of Penn. still finds use for F. & C. in teaching.) Suggested the discrepancy between saving and investment (without, I freely admit, seeing the significances that Keynes developed). And of course I had played with “multipliers”.

A course in which I ruthlessly condensed what used to be my first half-year into two or three lectures, and developed the other kind of material more adequately and systematically, might be considered, while we’re considering things.

Yours,

J. M. Clark

_____________________________________

 

January 13, 1942

Professor John Maurice Clark,
Fayerweather Hall.

Dear Maurice:

Many thanks for your note of January 9th. I am assuming that you have no objection to my showing it to Mitchell, Angell, and Goodrich.

Faithfully yours,

[R.M. Haig]

_____________________________________

January 13, 1942

Memorandum to Professors Angell, Goodrich and Mitchell
from Professor R. M. Haig:

You will be interested in the enclosed comments from Maurice Clark

_____________________________________

 

Source: Columbia University Libraries. Manuscript Collections. Columbiana. Department of Economics Collection. Faculty. Box 2. Folder “Department of Economics—Faculty Beginning January 1, 1944 (sic)”.

Image Source:  John Maurice Clark at The History of Economic Thought Website.