Category: M.I.T.

Categories
Economics Programs M.I.T.

M.I.T. State of the Economics Department and Other Social Sciences. 1960-1961

Paul A. Samuelson, end of 1960 or early 1961, seen here reading between the lines.

 

As the following documents show, by 1961 the M.I.T. administration fully appreciated the development of its department of economics from a humble source of curricular enrichment for engineers and natural scientists to a powerhouse of modern economic analysis that was a respected player in the academic major league. Indeed the hope was for political science, psychology, and linguistics to follow suit. 

_________________________

Other relevant M.I.T. artifacts
from this time

Minutes of the Economics Department Visiting committee, 1958

The Graduate Program in Economics, 1961 brochure

_________________________

REPORT OF THE VISITING COMMITTEE 1960-61
DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS AND SOCIAL SCIENCE

                  In a well-attended, one-day meeting on April 27, 1961, the Visiting Committee of the Department of Economics and Social Science met with a representative group of the senior faculty of the department to discuss the progress of its teaching and research programs. Since the department embraces a number of distinct fields, key faculty members in those fields reported separately on their activities, plans, and problems. A summary of those reports is attached [Perhaps to be found elsewhere in the archives.], with an appended list of persons attending the meeting.

                  The Committee was favorably impressed by the past progress and the future prospects of the Social Sciences at M.I.T. The following highlights may be singled out for the consideration of the Corporation and the administrative officers:

  1. The older Ph.D. program in Economics and the newer one in Political Science are both thriving. Fellowships are a continuing need at the graduate level, especially in fields such as these in which there are limited opportunities for teaching or research assistantships in the first two years. Economics has attracted many students with outside fellowships for their first year, and Political Science has a Carnegie Foundation grant which provides support for graduate students in the area of political development. This leaves an unfilled need for Economics fellowships in the second year and for Political Science fellowships in areas not covered by the Carnegie grant.
  2. Now that the area of political development is as strong as it is, the Political Science Section’s next target is a comparable strength in the areas of government, science, and defense policy. This is an especially appropriate field for the Institute to cultivate, and it deserves support.
  3. The undergraduate “double majors” in a combination of Economics or Political Science with a field of Science or Engineering are holding their own, but the department feels considerable difficulty in dramatizing the attractions of these courses to entering undergraduates — in contrast to its outstanding success in attracting graduate students.
  4. An excellent start has been made toward the introduction of a new Ph.D. program in Psychology. The Institute already has considerable strength not only in that field but also in certain adjacent and supporting fields such as Biology, Mathematics, Linguistics, Communications, and Industrial Management. The next few years will be critical ones for this new graduate program.
  5. When the Ph.D. program in Psychology is solidly established, consideration should be given toward adding the option of Psychology as an undergraduate major within the framework of Course XIV.
  6. The Industrial Relations Section has been an active and constructive part of the department’s overall effort. We note with approval that preliminary steps have been taken to protect the Industrial Relations Fund against excessive drain in support of other departmental activities.
  7. We learn with interest that the department has been experimenting with lectures in the introductory Economics course, as a means of exposing more beginning students to senior faculty. We recommend that other teaching aids also be considered, such as video-recorded lectures and demonstrations.
  8. Since library facilities are so very important in the Social Sciences, continuing and enhanced support is recommended in this area.

                  The foregoing recommendations should be interpreted as tentative rather than definitive; for, in the nature of the case, your Committee’s visit consisted of a friendly hearing of the department’s point of view rather than a searching audit of its performance. At the same time, we should like to express our appreciation for the cooperation shown us by Dean Burchard, Professor Bishop, and the other department members who met with us.

Respectfully submitted,

James M. Barker
David F. Cavers
Jasper E. Crane
Davis R. Dewey
George P. Edmonds
Robert L. Moore
Willard L. Thorp
Teddy F. Walkowicz
Theodore V. Houser, Chairman

Source: M.I.T. Libraries. MIT. Corporation Visiting Committee Records, AC426. Folder: “Visiting Committees Economics 1960-1969”. Item description

_________________________

From the Annual Report of the President of M.I.T. for 1960-61

The Social Sciences

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

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

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

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

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

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

ECONOMICS

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

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

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

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

POLITICAL SCIENCE

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

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

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

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

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

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

PSYCHOLOGY

                  The example of political science has encouraged us to press forward even more vigorously with our plans to establish a psychology section within the Department of Economics and Social Science. The Institute already has great strength in psychology, both within the Department and elsewhere; and we have made marked progress this year in planning for a graduate program. This effort is being led by Professor Hans-Lukas Teuber, whose appointment I reported last year and who has now moved his research projects in physiological psychology from New York to Cambridge. Professor Teuber has brought with him a number of research associates and four postdoctoral fellows. In addition, we hope to make two additional faculty appointments in psychology soon.

                  To provide space for the new Section, the Institute has acquired the Central Scientific Company building at the corner of Amherst and Ames Streets. All three floors of this structure, which is located adjacent to our main academic group, will be devoted to an expansion of our teaching and research in psychology. When the necessary renovations are completed during the coming year, the building will be equipped with undergraduate and graduate laboratories, seminar rooms, animal quarters, and testing, observation, and office facilities.

                  The work of the Psychology Section will encompass three general areas: social and developmental; experimental; and physiological and comparative psychology. Our teaching in all three areas will put special emphasis on the experimental and the mathematical. And in our research we hope to create new opportunities for interdisciplinary cooperation. This hope reflects the fact that psychology, especially in its quantitative aspects, is already intimately associated with many areas of Institute activity.

                  The relations of our experimental group with other M.I.T. activities, for example, have already had an important influence on the development of experimental psychology in this country. Our collaborative efforts include studies in such fields as communication and coding theory, automatic pattern recognition, signal detection theory, computer simulation of intelligent behavior, and others. There are many psychologists at the Institute concentrating on problems of this kind, and there are more at Lincoln Laboratory who are also concerned with problems of perception and observation and man-machine interactions.

                  The new Section’s work in physiological and comparative psychology will have similar opportunities for collaboration with research in progress in the Department of Biology and in the Center for the Communication Sciences, where investigations in communication biophysics are focused on the principles of organization of the central nervous system and on biophysical information handling. There are also a number of psychologists in the School of Industrial Management, and it is to be hoped that the work of the Section in social and developmental psychology will develop complementary ties with this management group. The latter is working on problems of morale and motivation, of executive leadership, and of creativity in the industrial setting; while the former is primarily concerned with the process of socialization.

                  Even a cursory review of the sites of interest in psychology at M.I.T. is impressive. The discipline has prospered on this campus, even though we have taken few systematic steps in the past to promote its growth. It has insisted upon recognition, really, and we are now committed to a sound program of development. No one here doubts the wisdom of this decision. The chief problem, indeed, will be to achieve a sense of professional unity among our psychologists without weakening those productive interdisciplinary ties that have given M.I.T. psychology a stamp and style that is all but unique.

LINGUISTICS

                  The decision was also made this year to offer a program leading to the Ph.D. in linguistics beginning in the fall of 1961, and we are in the process of establishing appropriate new sequences of work in linguistics for both undergraduate and graduate students. This work will be directed by the Department of Modern Languages, which has been carrying out important basic research in linguistics for a number of years. It is significant that among the first students we have accepted for this graduate program are majors in mathematics and physics as well as in linguistics.

                  Our concern with linguistics actually derives from the efforts of Professors Norbert Wiener and Claude Shannon in their pioneering work on the mathematical theory of communication. The study of the logical relationships within languages employs mathematical techniques comparable to those used in the general area of information theory. Moreover, recent developments in computer design, switching theory, and other similar areas are of first importance in the field of applied linguistics and in linguistic analysis.

                  It is not surprising, therefore, that much of our research in linguistics has taken place in the Center for the Communication Sciences, where linguists work in close association with mathematicians, electrical engineers, and physicists as well as with biologists and psychologists. This cooperative research has been carried forward in both theoretical and applied linguistics. We have a central concern with the structure and logic of language. We have also undertaken a number of promising applied projects, including work on mechanical translation and on machine perception and synthesis of human speech. These examples are typical of the kind of research through which M.I.T. has gained an international reputation in linguistics. Now, with our new doctoral program, the prospects for the rapid further development of this field at the Institute are exceedingly bright.

Source: Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Office of the President. President’s Report for the academic year ending July 1, 1961, pp.11-21.

Image Source: MIT Museum Website.

Categories
Economics Programs M.I.T.

M.I.T. Economics Department’s Chair exposition of his department’s philosophy and methods. Freeman, 1952

Paul Samuelson’s Economics triggered a conservative cancel-culture backlash unlike any economics textbook before or after. In the previous post we saw how William F. Buckley, Jr.’s attack on the use by Yale professors of Samuelson’s Keynesian textbook forced the chairman of the Yale economics department to defend the honor of his department before the Old Blues (alumni).

M.I.T., home of the heretic Paul Samuelson, proved to be ground zero of this anti-Keynes reaction. This story is well-known now thanks to Yann Girard. The artifact transcribed for this post is a short essay published by Ralph Freeman who was head of the M.I.T. economics department from 1933 to 1958. In it Freeman defended the honor of his department much as Lloyd Reynolds’ essay did for Yale economics. 

Cf. “Negotiating the ‘Middle-of-the-Road’ Position: Paul Samuelson, MIT, and the Politics of Textbook Writing, 1945-55,” by Yann Girard in MIT and the Transformation of American Economics (Annual Supplement to Volume 46, History of Political Economy, ed. by E. Roy Weintraub). Durham: Duke University Press, 2014.

______________________________

President to Department Chair
“Incoming!” 

November 6, 1951

Professor Ralph E. Freeman
Economics Department

Dear Ralph:

Thank you for the Atlantic Monthly with McGeorge Bundy’s article which I have. I wish that his defense could have a wider circulation than it received in the Atlantic.

The Buckley book concerns me mainly because of its attack on Samuelson’s text and because of the wide distribution the Buckley book is receiving it is going to stir up a lot more people.

I venture to send you some of the things that come to my desk simply by way of keeping, you informed of the steady bombardment on Paul Samuelson’s text. This bombardment has been increasing in intensity. Yesterday a member of the Corporation came to see me about it. He had not previously had contact with the book, but he had been approached by various business people who were bitterly critical of the book and who brought to him a publication issued down south which raked over the old Namm comments [Benjamin Namm, “Would You Enter a Door Marked ‘Socialism’?” in Collier’s Weekly (April 29, 1950), pp. 34-49] upon the book.

I have just received a copy of the Brooking Institution study, “A Survey of Economic Education” by McKee and Moulton. I am afraid that the comments made in this study on page 17 in regard to economics textbooks will still further stir people up despite the qualifications which the authors carefully include in their statement.

I hasten to reassure you that despite the mounting criticism I stand no less steadfastly behind Samuelson’s right to take the point of view that seems right and proper to him. I think our best defense against criticism is the one that I repeatedly make, and which I assume to be wholly true, and that is that in our own teaching of economics at the Institute we do not follow any line, that we seek to present a balanced point of view and to give the student the tools so that he can reach his own conclusions. I was interested in Bundy’s statement in his Atlantic article that in attacking Mr. Buckley’s book, he did not wish to maintain that Yale was perfect and that “it is possible that Yale…..would benefit from the appointment of a strongly right-wing economist.

I am sure that so long as we can show that our own teaching of economics is not distorted in any direction and that we are not subtly indoctrinating students with any biased point of view, that we have an unimpregnable and sound position.

Yours cordially,
J. R. Killian, Jr.

JRK: mh

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

Department Chair to President
“We’re cool kids, really”

Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Department of
Economics and Social Sciences

Cambridge, Mass.
November 19, 1951

President James R. Killian
Room 3-208

Dear Jim:

         As I indicated to you in a recent conversation, a group of the Department staff is preparing a new book of readings to supplement the textbook which we use in Economic Principles (14.01 and 14.02). I have been delaying writing you about this until final decision has been made as to the contents of this new book. However, a tentative table of contents is now available and I enclose it herewith.

         As you will observe, the projected book of readings aims to present a variety of points of view ranging from radical to conservative, from Marx and Engels to Pope Leo XIII. There are also readings from classical economists such as Adam Smith, Ricardo and Bastiat. Articles criticizing recent government policies are included as well as various opinions on the economics of the defense program. The use of this book will enable us to do on a large scale what we are already doing with a limited number of collateral readings.

         I should like to emphasize once more that the members of the Department as a group range around the center in their economic thinking. There are no extreme radicals or extreme conservatives among us. We try to take a view toward economic problems which is balanced and objective, and in class we try to present both sides of the controversial problems that come up for discussion.

         From some of the attacks aimed at Samuelson’s book, I get the impression that economists are to be condemned if they do not unequivocally approve of everything now being done in the name of private enterprise. This attitude, of course, is absurd. If the economic system is to be kept in working order it must be subjected to a critical analysis. In fact it is the job of the economist to do just this.

         Some of the more extreme conservatives who are today attacking the teaching of economics are inclined to adopt an ostrich-like attitude. After all we do live in a mixed economy — one that is partly private enterprise and partly government control. This is a fact. Should this fact be hidden from students? The answer is clear. But some of our critics talk as though any discussion of what they regard as undesirable trends should be eliminated or reduced to a minimum.

         I can assure you that no member of this Department is trying to undermine the system of freedom. In fact, it is quite the reverse. We are all trying to understand it with a view to making it work better and last longer. Though there is disagreement amongst us on particular issues, we are in agreement on that basic issue.

         I am not sure there is much more that I can say. We would be glad to meet any of our critics face to face in a friendly discussion of any points on which they think we are in error. We do not claim to have all the answers. Our analysis might well be improved as the result of more exchange of ideas with intelligent business men.

Yours sincerely,
[signed] Ralph
Ralph E. Freeman

REF:rw

[in pencil]

Copies of this letter sent to:

Mr Gray [Daniel M. Gray?] of Stoner Mudge [Stoner-Mudge Co., Inc. of Pittsburgh]
Bradley Dewey [Life Member of MIT Corporation, 1932-74]
Dr. Warner, Pres. Carnegie Tech [John Christian Warner (1897-1989), President 1950-65]
Donald Carpenter [Life Member of MIT Corporation, 1943-95]
John Hancock [Member of MIT Corporation, 1949-55]
Walter Beadle [Life Member of MIT Corporation, 1943-88]

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

President to Department Chair
“Be like Yale.”

November 28, 1951

Professor Ralph E. Freeman
Economics Department

Dear Ralph:

         Professor Shultz sent me a copy of an article by Lloyd G. Reynolds entitled “The State of Economics at Yale.” This article seemed to me to be a first-rate exposition of the philosophy and methods of the department at Yale. The material is set forth not in a defensive manner at all, and to me was fairly convincing.

         This is the kind of statement that I have been hoping that someone might prepare on our own department program here. I think it would be of great help to the Visiting Committee and to the department and the administration in supporting the interests of the department.

         I have returned the Reynolds article to Professor Shultz. If you haven’t seen it, you may be interested in borrowing it from him.

Yours cordially,

J. R. Killian, Jr.

JRK: mh

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

Department Chairman to President
“You asked for it.”

Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Department of
Economics and Social Sciences

January 17, 1952

Dr. James R. Killian
Room 3-208
M.I.T.

Dear Jim:

I have had sent to you a little article entitled

“Economies at M.I.T.” You may recall that you suggested I try my hand at an article of this sort.

I hope it will be of some help in dealing with correspondence regarding the operations of the Department. Several others of the staff have read and expressed general approval of the contents. It has been suggested that it might be submitted to The Technology Review which might be willing to supply us with some reprints.

I welcome any criticisms or suggestions for additions or omissions.

Yours sincerely,
[signed:] Ralph
Ralph E. Freeman

REF: TW
cc: Dean Burchard

Source: Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Office of the President, Records, 1930-1959, Box 93, Folder “8. Freeman, R.E., 1945-54”

__________________________

Note: the following is a transcription of the printed article found in the archive with Freeman’s letter. The typed draft sent to M.I.T. President Killian is identical, only minor editorial changes were made for publication.

Economics at M.I.T.
[1952]

The Economics Staff, with Diverse Backgrounds and Views, Aims to Impart a Technique of Logic for Solving Economic Problems in a Complex Society

By Ralph E. Freeman

                  One of the most difficult problems confronting the professional teacher of economics is the competition he meets from other and more effective teaching agencies. The writer refers to the educational impact of the home, the press, and the radio, as well as the propaganda coming from special-interest groups of one kind or another. These agencies have a competitive advantage. The teacher may be in contact with his class for only two or three hours a week for a part of a year, while his nonacademic competitors have been working on these students since their early childhood.

                  This disadvantage may seem to raise the question as to whether the economist can really teach the subject at all. Doubts on this score are further increased by the unsettled condition of the world during the last decade — a state of affairs that has created many uncertainties for the individual. A student worried about his future can hardly be blamed for indifference toward a subject which often seems dull and remote from his immediate interests. Another disadvantage is the youth and inexperience of the average college student. Favorable experience with the veterans who came to the Institute after World War II indicates that maturity is a great advantage in the study of economics. All these difficulties in the way of the teacher tend to make him humble when appraising the impression he leaves on the minds of the younger generation.

                  These obstacles, however, are also a challenge to the economist to improve his teaching techniques. The Economics staff at the Institute has been continually experimenting with new materials and methods and, though it is not fully satisfied with the results, progress has been achieved. We have tried to keep up with the increasing mass of quantitative data becoming available and to keep abreast of improvements in analytical techniques and of shifts in emphasis resulting from changing economic conditions.

                  An interesting example of such a shift is to be found in the treatment of unemployment and price levels. Prior to the 1930’s, these problems were of secondary interest to most economists. A great deal of what they wrote and taught was based on the assumption of full employment and relatively stable prices. The attention of economists was directed mainly to the way in which productive agencies were allocated among various industries and enterprises. The leading problem was to discover that distribution of human and material resources which would best promote the material well being of the people.

                  In recent years the economist’s inquiry has focused on economic fluctuations. Unemployment of resources has thus become a major problem for investigation along with a study of changes in the level of prices. Because ups and downs in employment and periods of inflation and deflation are associated with changes in income available to purchase goods and services, the spotlight has been turned on income analysis. The study of national income has been stimulated by the publication of improved statistics emanating chiefly from the Federal Government and by the development of new and better techniques of analysis.

                  These statements are not meant to imply that the traditional subjects have been abandoned. The economist is still trying to explain what the economic system is and how it operates. He is still concerned with the role of prices and profits in organizing economic activity and with the functions of money and markets in assigning labor and capital to their more productive uses. What has happened is a reorientation of these traditional inquiries around the problems of income, employment, and price levels. This new approach seems to have brought the study of economics nearer to the daily lives of people and closer to the problems with which businessmen are most vitally concerned.

                  The fact that the beginner in economics is normally young and inexperienced makes it necessary for the teacher to spend a good deal of time describing the facts of economic life. National income, for example, only becomes meaningful as it is broken down into components and expressed in quantitative terms. It is usually desirable, therefore, to start with a discussion of the income of individuals, corporations, and governments. How is the total income of the nation divided among families and groups? How are corporations organized? How do they compute their earnings? What is the role of government and what changes are taking place in the relation of the government to the individual and to business? These are among the questions with which the student of economics is confronted in the early stages of his study. In addition, in most of the subjects offered, time is devoted to describing various institutions such as banks, labor unions, and farmers’ organizations which help determine the nature and direction of economic activity.

                  The main objective of economic education, however, is not to fill the minds of students with facts and statistics, but to impart to them a technique of thinking by means of which they can analyze and solve economic problems for themselves. General principles must be developed that are applicable to a broad range of situations. Among these principles are those that can be applied in understanding changes in the price of goods, changes in wages, interest, and profits, in the general price level and in the national income.

                  The economist is concerned, for example, not so much with what the price of wheat is or has been, as he is with the forces that interact to determine the price of wheat or any other commodity. Though he may study past changes in national income, he is primarily interested in the reason why the national income shifts from one level to another. In other words, he tries to develop an integrated theoretical framework which can be used in the analysis of economic problems.

                  At M.I.T., the economist is regarded as a teacher, not a preacher. His function is not to radiate his own political views nor to propagandize for his own particular social philosophy. His job is to encourage students to form their own opinions. He is not too concerned with what these opinions are. His main job is to ensure that the opinions, whatever they may be, are reached through a logical process of thought, rather than as a result of prejudice or hearsay.

                  The Economics staff of about 30 full-time members has been recruited with this objective in view. When a new man is taken on, we ask two main questions. Is he equipped by training, experience, and intelligence to carry on creative, scholarly work in his chosen field? Is his personality such as to hold out the promise that he will be a competent teacher and a congenial and co-operative colleague? As the result of this method of selection, the group we now have includes no freaks or extremists. Though there is a broad diversity of view on many of the controversial issues of our times, all of the members of the Department share a desire to preserve and improve the free institutions of America. These men rank high in the profession and compare very favorably with economists in other leading institutions.

                  Some people may find it hard to accept the idea that divergence of opinion should be regarded as a healthy condition. Why, it may be asked, should I tolerate a colleague who disagrees with me on government controls, the merits of labor unions, taxation, monetary policy and other questions? My answer would be that differences of opinion give rise to a lively interchange of ideas which is an important element in the educational process. Progress in economics, or in any other scientific discipline, would be stifled if an effort were made to enforce conformance to a single pattern of thought.

                  No matter how firmly we may believe that a given policy is the correct one, there is always a good chance that the man with a different opinion may have something meritorious to propose on his side. A story is told of Al [Alfred E.] Smith who was traveling in upper New York State with two companions, a Protestant and a Catholic. It was early on a bitterly cold Sunday morning when the two Catholics arose to attend mass. Looking at the Protestant sleeping peacefully in his warm bed, Al Smith said to his friend: “Wouldn’t it be awful if he were right and we were wrong!”

                  The chance that the other fellow may be right, or partly right, makes it inadvisable to strive for unanimity of thought and opinion. Tolerance of diversity is necessary for the preservation of the spirit of free inquiry which is the breath of life of an institution devoted to education and research. Such tolerance is one of the main features distinguishing a democratic from a totalitarian society.

                  As indicated above, this concept is applied in the Institute’s educational practices. In all courses, whether they are offered to undergraduates or graduates, the Department of Economics and Social Science tries to present contrasting views and opinions. In the beginning course in Economic Principles, which has been required of all students at the Institute, this procedure is subjected to severe time limitation. But even here this practice is followed. For several years we have been using supplementary readings presenting divers points of view and a new collection of such readings to accompany the textbook has just been prepared — a compilation that includes extracts from economic writings of all sorts, ranging from Karl Marx to the National Association of Manufacturers.

                  Besides this course in Economic Principles, there are many others, both on the undergraduate and the graduate level. These include several in the fields of labor relations, statistics, finance, theory, and international economics. There are courses in business cycles, technological innovation, and in the economics of particular industries. The Department also offers courses in psychology and international relations. As the name implies, the Department of Economics and Social Science is one that covers a wide field. It is a part of the School of Humanities and Social Studies and has close ties with the activities of historians and others who come under the same administrative direction. The bringing together of a number of different social studies exerts a broadening influence on both staff and students. It tends to make us look at human beings as members of an ever-changing, complex society subject to many influences in addition to those of an economic nature.

                  Virtually every student at the Institute takes economics at some point in his program. In addition to those subjects included in the Humanities Program, designed for the Institute as a whole, other subjects are tailored to fit the needs of professional courses such as those offered by the Department of Business and Engineering Administration. The Department also offers a four-year curriculum for undergraduates — Course XIV — leading to a bachelor’s degree in Economics and Engineering. Through emphasis on relationships among engineering, economics, and human relations problems, this Course aims to provide students with an understanding of both technical and non-technical aspects of our industrial society.

                  There is also a graduate division. There are about 50 students in this group, most of whom are candidates for the Ph.D. degree. Many of these men have come to M.I.T. from liberal arts colleges. They go into government, business, labor unions, and teaching as professional economists.

                  Because the training of the professional economist, normally requiring about seven years, is spent mainly in the classroom and the library, his knowledge of actual business practices is more limited than if he were actively employed in industry. This limitation of experience is a handicap of which the men on the Department’s staff are acutely conscious. We do not have as much direct contact, as might be desired, with what goes on in the factories, banks, railroads, public utilities, and other business enterprises whose activities we study.

                  Efforts are being made to bridge the gap between economic theory and business practice. Graduate students are encouraged to find summer employment in industry. Some of the staff members have had temporary jobs in business or government. Others have had an opportunity to get into close touch with industry through research projects. In recent years they have undertaken investigations in textiles, shoes, coal, housing, electronics equipment, and a variety of other industries. Several of our instructors act as consultants to business firms and have had ample opportunity to rub shoulders with businessmen and get a better idea of their operations and problems.

                  The Department also brings in businessmen to meet with classes and join in round-table discussions. The system of Visiting Committees is also helpful in getting the staff into touch with leaders in industry, finance, and the professions. But more of these contacts are needed. If we are to keep our feet on the ground, we must have the counsel and criticism of men of practical affairs.

                  The development of the new School of Industrial Management should be of material assistance in strengthening our contacts with leaders in the business world. Though the Department of Economics and Social Science will not be administratively a part of this School, it will be housed in the same building and will co-operate in carrying out its educational and research program. E. P. Brooks, ’17, Dean of the School, who is now in charge, is consulting with business leaders and hopes to enlist their aid not only in planning the project but also in executing the plans. The Department of Economics and Social Science should benefit, at least indirectly, from these extensive outside relationships.

                  We are grateful to the Alumni and other friends of the Institute who have taken an interest in our work. The Department is indebted to the companies which have supported our Industrial Relations Section, and have helped finance graduate fellowships and research activities; it hopes for a continuation of this interest and support. Such support will be needed if the Department is to maintain its position and to improve and expand its operations.

                  The number of students being graduated from Course XIV is now relatively small. and the demand for their services is high; but in the future we hope to increase the enrollment, and employment conditions are not likely to continue as favorable as they are today. This Course is new and therefore not yet widely known. Because it combines basic education in engineering and science, as well as in economics, and other social studies, its graduates have a broad background that should make them useful in a wide variety of jobs.

                  This spring the Department of Economics and Social Science expects to move into the recently acquired Sloan Building along with the School of Industrial Management. Readers of this article are invited to come and visit us in our new quarters. We will show you our Industrial Relations Library and our Psychological Laboratory. We will tell you about the Scanlon Plan that is making a valuable contribution to the betterment of employer-employee relations. We will describe research projects under way and point with pride to a growing list of publications by members of the Department. We would like to discuss with you the plans we have for future development in psychology and political science. The reader may be interested in meeting some of the staff or in talking to groups of students and if he can bear it, we will also tell him about some of our trials and tribulations. And perhaps he may have something on his mind he would like to tell us. If so, we will gladly listen. Our new address will be 50 Memorial Drive.

Source: The Technology Review (April 1952), pp. 304-6, 320.

Image Source: This portrait of Ralph Freeman can be found in the 1950 yearbook. The copy used here comes from the MIT Museum website where it no date has been provided. Colorized by Economics in the Rear-view Mirror.

Categories
Economics Programs M.I.T.

M.I.T. Graduate Program in Economics Brochure, 1974-1975

It was fifty years ago this September that I entered the graduate program in economics at M.I.T. This is why the brochure outlining the graduate program as of the academic year 1974-75 is something I am particularly delighted to add as the newest digitized artifact to Economics in the Rear-view Mirror. 

In other news, I just realized that I am now older than everyone seen on the faculty portrait taken in 1976.

_______________________

Most of the faculty members of the MIT department of economics on the steps of the Sloan Building (E52) in 1976.

Names of the assembled have been provided in an earlier post.

_______________________

MIT’s 1961 graduate economics brochure has been transcribed and posted earlier.

_______________________

MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
The Graduate Program in Economics
1974 – 1975

TABLE OF CONTENTS
  1. General Information
    1. Program of Studies
      1. Ph.D. in Economics
      2. Interdepartmental Ph.D. Programs
      3. Master’s Program
    2. Admission to the Graduate School
    3. Fellowships, Scholarships, and Financial Assistance
    4. Foreign Students
    5. Living Arrangements
    6. Graduate Economics Associations
  2. The Ph.D. Program in Detail
    1. General Plan of the Program
    2. The Core of the Graduate Curriculum
      1. Economic Theory
      2. Mathematics
      3. Econometrics
      4. Economic History
    3. Special Fields

Schematic Schedule of Typical Entering Student

    1. Dissertation
  2. Graduate Subjects in Economics
    1. General Economics and Theory
    2. Industrial Economics
    3. Statistics and Econometrics
    4. National Income and Finance
    5. International, Interregional, and Urban Economics
    6. Labor Economics and Industrial Relations
    7. Economic History
    8. Economic Development
  3. The Faculty in Economics
MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
The Graduate Program in Economics
1974–75

    1. General Information
      [Table of Contents]

                  Graduate study in economics began at M.I.T. in 1941 and has since developed to its present size of some 110 full-time students and 33 faculty members. Its major emphasis is on the training of doctoral candidates in a broad program of advanced study and research for professional careers in universities or colleges, in governmental and private research organizations, or in business or financial concerns. At the present time the demands on a professional economist are such that the depth and breadth of the doctoral program have become indispensable training for a successful career. The Department, therefore, ordinarily admits to full-time graduate study only candidates for the Ph.D. In order to maintain a close and continuing contact between students and faculty, the entering class is normally held to 30.

    1. Program of Studies
      [Table of Contents]

      1. Ph.D. in Economics
        [Table of Contents]

                  The doctorate normally requires the full-time concentration of the student for three or four years. Formal requirements are limited in number. The candidate must (1) demonstrate a mastery in five fields of study in economics, one of which is economic theory, both micro and macro; (2) achieve a specified level of competence in economic history, econometrics, and statistics; (3) submit and defend a dissertation that represents a contribution to knowledge; and (4) be in residence for a minimum of two years.

                  These requirements are met not merely by passing some appropriate set of subjects, but through an over-all preparation of subject matter and techniques that goes beyond course work. Candidates may differ in their rate of progress toward the satisfaction of these requirements, depending on their background, preparation, and interests. Normally, however, the satisfaction of requirements, other than the dissertation, is completed by the end of the second year.

                  The dissertation is a test of the candidate’s ability to conduct independent research — to formulate a significant topic and to bring to bear on it the analytic and quantitative tools of economics. The dissertation is prepared under the direction of departmental committee. Upon submission of the completed thesis, the candidate is examined orally by the thesis committee.

                  The Department has no general foreign language requirements. When a foreign language is essential for full access to the literature in the field of the student’s major interest (for example, European Economic History, Communist Economies) or to his thesis research, a language requirement will be imposed by the Department upon the recommendation of the Thesis Supervisor or the Graduate Registration Officer. Such a requirement will be administered by the Department of Foreign Literatures and Linguistics, and can be met by satisfactory course work at other schools, at M.I.T., or by examination.

      1. Interdepartmental Ph.D. Program
        [Table of Contents]

Occasionally students may desire a program that overlaps more than one department, but which in content and depth meets doctoral standards. At the initiative of the student, and with the approval of faculty members of each department, arrangements can be made to have the Dean of the Graduate School appoint a committee to guide the entire Ph.D. program. For details see the Graduate Student Manual. One such program, for instance, has been worked out with the Department of Urban Studies and Planning.

      1. Master’s Program
        [Table of Contents]

                  In very special and rare cases, students are admitted for study programs leading to the M.S. in Economics. This is awarded upon the satisfactory completion of a program, approved by the Graduate Registration Officer, of a year’s full-time study, including the presentation of a satisfactory thesis. The master’s program usually involves completion of the Department’s core requirements (see below), a semester of econometrics, and two semesters of a special field, in addition to the thesis.

    1. Admission to the Graduate School
      [Table of Contents]

                  To be admitted into the program, a student must hold a Bachelor’s degree or its equivalent from an accredited college or university. It is not essential that the undergraduate degree be in economics. Graduate students entering the Department have had a wide variety of major background preparation varying from literature to physics. Some preparation in undergraduate economics, especially in economic analysis, is almost a necessity. Candidates who, upon admission, are deficient in mathematics are strongly urged to take mathematics in the summer before entering the program or work on a recommended self-study program in calculus to prepare for 14.102 Mathematics for Economists.

                  Completed application forms for admission must be submitted to the Admissions Office at M.I.T. by January 15 of the calendar year in which the applicant wishes to enter. In addition to the Institute application forms, the Department expects each applicant to submit a statement (one or two pages) explaining his interest in economics. An informal questionnaire is provided for his general guidance. Entrance is normally in September. February entrance is granted only under exceptional circumstances, since many subjects given in the spring are continuations of work given in the fall.

                  All applicants are urged to take the Graduate Record Examinations no later than the January preceding the September in which they wish to enter. They should take the quantitative and verbal aptitude tests as well as the test in economics. (Information can be obtained by writing to Graduate Record Examinations, Educational Testing Service, Box 955, Princeton, New Jersey 08540. Students in western states or in eastern Asia or the Pacific should write to 1947 Center Street, Berkeley, California 94704.)

                  Decisions regarding admission are the responsibility of the Departmental Graduate Admissions Committee, which bases its judgment on the undergraduate academic record of the applicant, both in general and with respect to particular subjects, on the letters of recommendation, and on the Graduate Record Examinations. Further information may be secured by writing to the chairman of the committee. Notices of acceptance are sent out by April 1, and candidates have until April 15 to notify the Department of their choice.

    1. Fellowships, Scholarships, and Financial Assistance
      [Table of Contents]

                  While in the past virtually all graduate students received financial aid through scholarships, fellowships, or assistantships, the financial situation has changed to such an extent that complete support can no longer be assured. Moreover, the outlook is so uncertain that no definite statement is possible, even about minimum aid. Every effort will be made within the limits of our financial resources to support students who perform effectively. In view of this uncertainty, the Department is making efforts to expand the number of research assistantships, but students should expect to earn or borrow a larger proportion of their support than has been true in the past.

                  The sources of financial support are varied. (1) Many students are assisted by fellowships for which there is a national competition, such as those given by the National Science Foundation (NSF), the Ford Foundation, the Danforth Foundation, the Canada Council, and by foreign governmental agencies. Applications for such fellowships must be made directly to the appropriate foundation or agency, and an application for admission must also be made to M.I.T. (2) Awards of scholarships or fellowships are also made from M.I.T. funds or endowments. These include the Hicks Fellowship in Industrial Relations, the Graduate Economics Alumni Fellowships, endowed Institute fellowships, and a limited number of departmental awards. (3) A third group of students is supported by part time teaching and research assistantships and instructorships. In the past, research and teaching assistantships have been limited to candidates who have passed their general examination and are engaged in thesis research. However, in the light of the present financial stringency, these rules may be relaxed somewhat with respect to limited research assistantships for second year students. (4) Finally, students in good standing can avail themselves of loans through the Office of Financial Aid. U.S. citizens who are planning to be teachers may avail themselves of an NDEA loan, a substantial portion of which is forgiven upon entry into and continuance in teaching. They are also eligible for government-insured loans that are partially subsidized. Foreign students. however, may borrow only through the Graduate Loan Fund at the prime interest rate.

                  Entering students should apply for financial aid not later than January 15 of the calendar year in which they plan to enter. First-year awards are made on April 1, and applicants are given until April 15 to accept. Departmental awards for second and subsequent years are made in June. It is entirely appropriate for students to apply both for national awards and to M.I.T., since the outcome of national competitions is known before our awards are announced. Fellowships normally will include some cash payment toward living expenses, up to $2,000 for a single or married person without dependents, made in two equal installments at the beginning of each term. In offering scholarships and fellowships, the Department takes into account need as well as professional promise.

                  Remuneration for research assistantships varies, but in 1974-75 is normally at the rate of $6,585 per academic year for half-time work, out of which tuition of $3,350 must be paid. A half-time teaching assistantship in 1974-75 covers the tuition and pays $3,510 for the academic year — a total of $6,860. A very few half-time instructorships, for students who have demonstrated conspicuously effective teaching as an assistant, cover tuition plus $4,345 for living expenses — a total of $7,695 for the academic year.

                  As a supplement to academic-year appointments, both interdepartmental and departmental research groups are possible sources of full-time summer employment.

                  The academic performance of the student body is periodically reviewed to determine whether or not normal academic progress is being made. Failure to maintain normal progress may result in reduction or withdrawal of financial support. Students are invited at all times to discuss academic problems with their graduate registration officer, and the Department makes every effort to accommodate the needs of individual students.

    1. Foreign Students
      [Table of Contents]

                  The Department has always welcomed foreign graduate students. They have typically constituted a significant portion of the student body. Some M.I.T. fellowships are available to entering foreign students, though the number is limited and the competition severe. Foreign students have an additional burden of transportation expense to cover and for this reason it is highly desirable to try to obtain at least partial support from other sources as well.

                  General information on scholarships, grants and travel can be obtained from the Institute of International Education, 809 United Nations Plaza, New York, New York, 10017, or from the Cultural Affairs Officer or the United States Information Service Office nearest the student’s place of residence.

                  Foreign applicants are required to submit evidence of their ability to carry on studies in English. Applicants whose native language is not English are required to take the test of English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL). Students whose schooling has been in English may request a waiver from the Advisor to Foreign Students at M.I.T. TOEFL is administered by the Educational Testing Service, Princeton, New Jersey, 08540; registration material and information about the test may be obtained by writing to the above address.

    1. Living Arrangements
      [Table of Contents]

                  The Department is located in the Sloan Building, which, along with the adjoining Hermann Building, contains contiguous faculty offices, classrooms and seminar rooms, and student and faculty lounges. This complex also houses the Sloan School of Management, the Department of Political Science, and the Center for International Studies. The Dewey Library occupies two floors of the Hermann Building and contains the social science collection at M.I.T., reading rooms, and carrels to which thesis writers are assigned individually.

                  On-campus housing for graduate students is limited. Applications should be sent to the On Campus Housing Office, Room E18-307, M.I.T. Help in securing off-campus housing is given by the Community Housing Service, E18-306, M.I.T. Students should be alerted to the fact that Cambridge rental units are limited and in heavy demand. Transportation is convenient; the Sloan Building is located one block from the Kendall Square subway station.

    1. Graduate Economics Associations
      [Table of Contents]

                  The Graduate Economics Association, composed of all graduate students, is a lively organization that sponsors monthly seminars and social events, and is one of the channels through which mutual student-faculty problems are discussed. The seminars permit discussions of current research by distinguished economists and occasional dialogues between faculty members. They are often followed by small dinners to which graduate students and faculty are invited, permitting more discussion among visitors, students and faculty. The Association annually elects nine student representatives to participate as voting members in Department meetings and other Department committees. Student representatives are full participants in all matters except those involving specific, identifiable individuals, or undergraduate matters. This policy at present excludes the discussion of details, but not the general policy, of tenure decisions, review of non-tenure faculty, new appointments, review of student performance, admissions and financial support.

                  The Black Graduate Economics Association provides a forum for the development and utilization of economic tools for solving the problems faced by Black people, encourages policies and programs which help increase the supply of highly qualified Black economists, opens lines of communication with other Black graduate students, Black economists, and the Black community, stimulates academic excellence, and provides outlets for various social activities. The BGEA has helped develop audio-visual aids now in use in many Black colleges’ economics departments, engaged in Institute recruiting projects, and participated in conferences of Black economists and administrators of Black colleges and universities. An econometric model of income and expenditures in Black communities is in its initial stage of development as a research project.

  1. The Ph.D. Program in Detail
    [Table of Contents]

    1. General Plan of the Program
      [Table of Contents]

Students who complete the Ph.D. program should have a thorough understanding of the existing principles of economic theory and of the economic structure; an ability to think systematically about, and apply quantitative methods to, economic problems. The program gives roughly equal emphasis to these two goals, with formal courses and examinations to meet the first, and seminars, workshops, papers and the dissertation to meet the second. The student spends most of his first two years attempting to understand the existing ideas of economics. A basic principle of the program is that these ideas are sufficiently worthwhile so that their study is a necessary prelude to their use or criticism.

                  Throughout the program, there are formal provisions for students to engage in original work. During the first two years, term papers are often required. During the second year each student prepares a research paper as part of the requirement in econometrics. Second-year students are also encouraged to take part in workshops in their fields of primary interest. After passing the general examination, at the end of the second year or earlier, students spend full time in their own independent, original work. Their only formal obligation is to participate actively in the weekly meetings of the workshops in their fields of research.

    1. The Core of the Graduate Curriculum
      [Table of Contents]

                  The Department offers an integrated set of subjects in economic theory, mathematics, econometrics and economic history.

      1. Economic Theory
        [Table of Contents]

                  The core in economic theory consists of two subject-years equally divided between microeconomics (14.121-14.124) and macroeconomics (14.451-14.454). These subjects are described in Section III of this report. The material is divided into half-semester subjects. The microtheory sequence starts in the fall term and runs through the first year, while the macrotheory sequence starts in the spring term and continues through the fall term of the second year. A qualifying examination on these subjects is offered three times a year — in September, December-January, and May — that must be passed in order to satisfy this part of the core requirement. The examination will cover each of the eight portions of the theory core, and a syllabus is available for each.

                  When a student feels sufficiently well qualified in the subject matter of any of the theory core subjects, he may take the qualifying examination, either before or after a particular set of lectures is offered. Only a passing grade is recorded when the examination is taken in advance of the lectures. If he fails to pass, he can then enroll for that particular section of theory and take the examination again at the end of that term. Should he pass some portion of theory by the preliminary examination, he could substitute a subject in advanced economic theory in the half-term in which he would have taken the basic theory subject. In principle, it is possible to pass all eight units of the theory core in this way and to proceed directly to more advanced work.

                  The Schedule for the Qualifying Examination in Theory is as follows:

Subject matter covered in: Preliminary Regular Make-up
14.121-122 Sept.-Year I Dec.-Year I Sept.-Year II
14.123-124, 14.451-452 Jan.-Year I May-Year I Jan. Year II
14.453-454 Sept.-Year II Dec.-Year II Sept.-Year III

      1. Mathematics
        [Table of Contents]

                  The minimal core requirement in mathematics is calculus and linear algebra. Calculus is required for Statistics (14.381). While not stated as a formal prerequisite for the core theory subjects, it is virtually a necessity for mastering them.

                  If a student’s preparation in calculus were inadequate to satisfy the prerequisite for 14.102 Mathematics for Economists, the completion of the statistics and economics core requirements would be postponed a year. Econometrics (14.382 and 14.383 and most advanced theory subjects (14.141-14.149) require linear algebra. Students who have had a year of calculus and who want more mathematical training normally would take Mathematics for Economists (14.102) in the first term.

      1. Econometrics
        [Table of Contents]

                  The econometrics and statistics core requirement can be satisfied by (1) Statistics (14.381); (2) either Econometrics (14.382 and 14.383) or Applied Econometrics (14.388); and the completion of a piece of empirical research the equivalent of a term paper. This paper is due by the end of the fall term of the second year.

                  Entering students who lack calculus, and cannot take 14.102 in the first term, have two choices: either to postpone the three-term sequence: 14.381, 14.382, and 14.383 — to their third through fifth terms, or to take the two-term sequence, 14.381 and 14.388, in their third and fifth terms.

      1. Economic History
        [Table of Contents]

                  The core requirement in economic history is the satisfactory completion of one subject in American Economic History (14.731), European Economic History (14.733), or Russian Economic History (14.781).

    1. Special Fields
      [Table of Contents]

                  In addition to the satisfactory completion of the core requirements, competence in four special fields must be demonstrated, two by passing a general examination and two by either satisfactory course work or a general examination. Preparation for a field examination normally consists of a year’s course work. Satisfaction of a field by course work alone requires the achievement of a grade of B or better in each of the two terms of subject matter. (The econometrics and history requirements can be satisfied with a grade of B-.) The areas in which the Department offers specialization are: advanced economic theory, international economics, labor economics, economic development, urban economics, monetary economics, fiscal economics, statistics and econometrics, economic history, industrial organization, comparative economic systems, Russian economics, human resources and income distribution, and, outside the Department, finance, production, transportation, and operations research. It is possible to use econometrics as a field without preparation beyond the core requirements. Economic history can be offered as a field by adding a second subject to the one satisfying the core requirement.

                  Students normally demonstrate competence in all four fields by the end of their second year. That is, they normally finish their required course work and general examinations by that time. In the event that scheduling or other difficulties interfere with this timing, one field other than theory or econometrics (including the paper — see II.B.3 above), or one subject in a field and in history, may be postponed until the third year. Before making such a deferment, students should consult with their Graduate Registration Officer.

                  Students planning to take the general examination before the end of the second year — the usual time — should consult in advance with their Graduate Registration Officer. In any case, such students would still be held to the above schedule.

Schematic Schedule of Typical Entering Student
[Table of Contents]

[First year] [Second year]
1st [term] 2nd [term] 3rd [term] 4th [term]
Theory: Micro 14.121-2 14:123-4
Theory: Macro 14.451-2 14-453-4
Statistics and Econometrics 14.381

or 14.381

 14.382 14.383

14.388
Mathematics 14.102
Special Fields and History 1 subject 1-2 subjects 2 subjects 4 subjects
Total Number of Subjects 4 4 4 4

*The minimal number of subjects to satisfy the special field and history requirements depends on whether history or econometrics is offered as a special field. If neither are offered, 9 subjects are required; if history, 8 subjects; if econometrics, 7 subjects; if both, 6 subjects.

    1. Dissertation
      [Table of Contents]

                  Upon satisfaction of the core and field requirements, the Ph.D. candidate embarks on original research culminating in a completed dissertation that is defended orally. Thesis writers are required to participate in the workshop most germane to the subject of their thesis over the period of time they are working on it. Upon agreement on a topic with a primary thesis supervisor, a secondary thesis supervisor will be chosen by the student, subject to the approval of the Graduate Committee. A third faculty reader will be appointed by the Graduate Committee in consultation with the candidate when a final draft of the thesis will reasonably be expected to be completed within six months. The third faculty reader will have as his main function the unitary reading of the complete final draft of the thesis. These three faculty members will be the candidate’s thesis committee and are responsible for its acceptance and final defense.

                  In order to give adequate time for the final thesis review and revision, the completed draft must be submitted for final review a month before the Institute dates for submission of the dissertation. In 1975 the formal Institute dates are January 5, May 2, and August 11.

  1. Graduate Subject in Economics
    [Table of Contents]

    1. General Economics and Theory
      [Table of Contents]
14.101 Mathematics for Economists
Prereq.:—————		 Units
Year: G(1) 3-0-6
Elementary calculus. Applications in economics.
(Not offered 1974-75)

 

14.102 Mathematics for Economists
Prereq.: 14.101		 Units
Year: G(1) 3-0-6
Vector spaces and matrices; multivariate calculus and maximization with equality constraints; elementary differential equations. H. A. Freeman

 

14.121 Microeconomic Theory I (A)
Prereq.: 14.04		 Units
Year: G(1) (1st half of term) 2-0-4
Monopoly, oligopoly, product differentiation, monopsony. Comparison with pure competition. Comparative statics. Partial equilibrium welfare analysis. R. L. Bishop

 

14.122 Microeconomic Theory II (A)
Prereq.: 14.121		 Units
Year: G(1) (2nd half of term) 2-0-4
Introduction to the theory of resource allocation and the price system. Emphasis on the use of efficiency prices as a guide to decentralized decision making. M. L. Weitzman

 

14.123 Microeconomic Theory III (A)
Prereq.: 14.122		 Units
Year: G(2) (1st half of term) 2-0-4
Theory of the producer and consumer. Cost functions, expenditure functions. Theory of distribution. Introduction to general equilibrium. H. R. Varian

 

14.124 Microeconomic Theory IV (A)
Prereq.: 14.123		 Units
Year: G(2) (2nd half of term) 2-0-4
Capital theory and welfare economics. P. A. Samuelson

 

14.132 Schools of Economic Thought (A)
Prereq.:14.122		 Units
Year: G(2) 3-0-6
Economic ideas developed by different groups of economists in recent times. R. L. Bishop,
P. A. Samuelson

 

14.141 General Equilibrium Theory
Prereq.:14.124		 Units
Year: G(1) (2nd half of term) 2-0-4
General equilibrium. Existence and stability of competitive equilibrium. The core of an economy. (Not offered in 1974-75) F. M. Fisher

 

14.142 Mathematical Programming and Economic Theory (A)
Prereq.:14.122		 Units
Year: G(2) (1st half of term) 2-0-4
A rigorous treatment of linear and non-linear programming with applications to economic model building, including activity analysis and input-output. M. L. Weitzman

 

14.143 Advanced Theory of the Market III (A)
Prereq.: 14.122		 Units
Year: G(2) (2nd half of term) 2-0-4
Oligopoly and product differentiation, advertising, equilibria with seasonal or cyclical demand shifts. R. L. Bishop

 

14.144 Applied Price Theory
Prereq.:14.122		 Units
Year: G(1) (1st half of term) 2-0-4
Applications of price theory treated topically. Selected topics in price theory, with focus changing from year to year. Current emphasis is on the economics of exhaustible and renewable natural resources. R. M. Solow

 

14.145 Economics of Uncertainty
Prereq.:14.124		 Units
Year: G(2) 3-0-9
Individual behavior under uncertainty. Equilibrium and welfare under uncertainty. Search and information. J. A. Hausman,
P. A. Diamond

 

14.148 Advanced Topics in Microeconomic Theory (A)
Prereq.:14.124		 Units
Year: G(2) Arr.
14.149 Advanced Topics in Microeconomic Theory (A)
Prereq.:14.124
Year: G(2) Arr.
Advanced topics in microeconomic theory of current interest. Staff

 

14.151 Mathematical Approach to Economics (A)
Prereq.:14.122		 Units
Year: G(2) 3-0-6
The use of mathematical methods in all the fields of economics. P. A. Samuelson

 

14.191 Economics Seminar (A)
Prereq.:14.121, 14.122		 Units
Year: G(1) 3-0-6
14.192 Economics Seminar (A)
Prereq.:14.121, 14.122
Year: G(2) 3-0-6
Special economic problems. In 1974-75, 14.192 — Economics of Public Sector. J. Rothenberg

 

14.193 Seminar: Topics in Economics (A)
Prereq.:14.121, 14.451		 Units
Year: G(1) 3-0-6
14.194 Seminar: Topics in Economics (A)
Prereq.:14.122, 14.452
Year: G(2) 3-0-6
Topics in economics of current interest. Staff

 

14.195 Reading Seminar in Economics (A)
Prereq.:14.122		 Units
Year: G(1) Arr.
14.196 Reading Seminar in Economics (A)
Prereq.:14.122
Year: G(2) Arr.
Reading and discussion of special topics in economics. (Open to advanced graduate students by arrangement with individual numbers of the staff.) Staff

 

14.197 First-Year Graduate Seminar (A)
Prereq.: 14.04		 Units
Year: G(1) 2-0-6
Seminar limited to first-year graduate students. Discussion of projects of students, professional literature, methodology, economic policy, extending beyond regular curriculum. J. N. Bhagwati

    1. Industrial Economics
      [Table of Contents]
14.271 Problems in Industrial Economics (A)
Prereq.: 14.04		 Units
Year: G(1) 3-0-6
Small and large enterprises in the American economy; market structures; degrees of monopoly and competition; requisites of public policy. M. A. Adelman

 

14.272 Government Regulation of Industry (A)
Prereq.: 14.271		 Units
Year: G(2) 3-0-6
Follows 14.271. Development of anti-trust policy, generally and in specific cases. “Public utility” price fixing, government ownership as alternative. P. L. Joskow

 

14.291 Industrial Economics Seminar (A)
Prereq.:14.271		 Units
Year: G(1) 3-0-6
14.292 Industrial Economics Seminar (A)
Prereq.:14.271
Year: G(2) 3-0-6
Readings, discussions, reports on such topics as industrial price policies, government regulation of industry, competitive practices, and similar problems in industrial economics. Staff

    1. Statistics and Econometrics
      [Table of Contents]
14.371 Statistical Inference (A)
Prereq.: 18.02		 Units
Year: G(1) 3-0-9
A compact one-term course in elementary probability and statistical Inference. Axiomatic probability, random variables, distribution functions, mathematical expectation, generating functions, transformations of random variables, simple correlation and regression models, the normal distribution, sampling theory, point and interval estimation, maximum likelihood, least squares, testing statistical hypotheses. The exposition is somewhat more mathematical than

14.381.

 H. A. Freeman

 

14.373 Time-Dependent Probability (A)
Prereq.: 14.371 or 18.303		 Units
Year: G(2) 3-0-6
Markov chains and Markov processes, the relevant ergodic theorem, Kolmogorov equations, time series theory; spectral density functions, harmonic representation, autoregressive models. H. A. Freeman

 

14.374 Design and Analysis of Scientific Experiments (A)
Prereq.: 14.381		 Units
Year: G(2) 3-0-6
Application of statistical theory to the design and analysis of scientific experiments. Factorial and fractional factorial designs. Applications to experimentation in the physical, chemical, biological, medical, and social sciences. H. A. Freeman

 

14.381 Statistical Method in Economics (A)
Prereq.: 14.101 or 18.02		 Units
Year: G(1) 4-0-8
Self-contained introduction to probability and statistics which serves as a background for advanced econometrics. Elements of probability theory, sampling theory, asymptotic approximations, decision theory approach to statistical estimation focusing on regression, hypothesis testing and maximum likelihood methods. Illustrations from economics and application of these concepts to economic problems. J. A. Hausman

 

14.382 Econometrics I (A)
Prereq.:14.102, 14.381		 Units
Year: G(2) 4-0-8
14.383 Econometrics II (A)
Prereq.:14.382
Year: G(1) 4-0-8
Theory and economic application of the linear multiple regression model. Identification and structural estimation in simultaneous models. Analysis of economic policy and forecasting in macroeconomic models. A term paper involving substantive original empirical research is required in 14.383. R. F. Engle, R. E. Hall, J. A. Hausman

 

14.386 Advanced Topics in Econometrics (A)
Prereq.: 14.383		 Units
Year: G(2) 3-0-6
Selected topics including specification error, non-linear estimation, simulation, aggregation, and the derivation of economic policy models. (Not offered in 1974-5) R. F. Engle, R. E. Hall, J. A. Hausman

 

14.388 Applied Econometrics (A)
Prereq.: 14.102, 14.381		 Units
Year: G(1) 3-0-9
Theory and practice of econometrics. The linear regression model, tests of hypotheses, generalized least squares, distributed lags, and simultaneous equations. Emphasis on applications. A term paper required. R. F. Engle

 

14.391 Workshop in Economic Research (A)
Prereq.:14.124, 14.454		 Units
Year: G(1) 2-0-10
14.392 Workshop in Economic Research (A)
Prereq.:14.124, 14.454
Year: G(2) 2-0-10
Designed to develop research ability of students through intensive discussion of dissertation research as it proceeds, carrying out of individual or group. research projects, and critical appraisal of current reported research. Workshops divided into various fields, depending on interest and size. Staff

    1. National Income and Finance
      [Table of Contents]
14.451 Macroeconomic Theory I (A)
Prereq.: 14.06		 Units
Year: G(1) (1st half of term) 2-0-4
Macroeconomic analysis of general equilibrium. Financial markets and investment. Intertemporal equilibrium and growth models. S. Fischer

 

14.452 Macroeconomic Theory II (A)
Prereq.: 14.451		 Units
Year: G(2) (2nd half of term) 2-0-4
Determination of aggregate output, employment, and prices under static conditions. Keynes and alternate theories. The Phillips Curve. Inflation in the short and long run. R. E. Hall

 

14.453 Macroeconomic Theory III (A)
Prereq.: 14.452		 Units
Year: G(1) (1st half of term) 2-0-4
Quantitative macroeconomics. Consumption, investment, and other components of aggregate demand. Structure of complete econometric models of the U.S. economy R. E. Hall

 

14.454 Macroeconomic Theory IV (A)
Prereq.: 14.453		 Units
Year: G(1) (2nd half of term) 2-0-4
Growth models. Capital theory. R. M. Solow

 

14.458 Advanced Topics in Macroeconomic Theory (A)
Prereq.: 14.454		 Units
Year: G(1) Arr.
14.459 Advanced Topics in Macroeconomic Theory (A)
Prereq.: 14.454
Year: G(2) Arr.
Advanced topics in macroeconomic theory of current interest. Staff

 

14.462 Monetary Economics I (A)
Prereq.: 14.122, 14.452		 Units
Year: G(2) 3-0-6
Examination of sources and determinants of supply of money with special attention to roles of commercial banks, Federal Reserve System, and Treasury. Discussion of nature of demand for money. Role of monetary policy in determination of level of economic activity. (Not offered in 1974-5; substitute 15.432 Capital Markets and Financial Institutions) F. Modigliani

 

14.463 Monetary Economics II (A)
Prereq.: 14.122, 14.452		 Units
Year: G(1) 3-0-6
General equilibrium theory of money, interest, prices, and output; portfolio problems, cost of capital, and the effects of monetary phenomena on investment and accumulation of wealth with special reference to problems arising from uncertainty. S. Fischer

 

14.471 Fiscal Economics I (A)
Prereq.:14.122, 14.452		 Units
Year: G(1) 3-0-6
14.472 Fiscal Economics II (A)
Prereq.:14.122, 14.452
Year: G(2) 3-0-6
Examination, both theoretic and quantitative, of governmental fiscal institutions and behavior: the budget process, taxation, expenditure, pricing, and debt activities. P. A. Diamond, A. F. Friedlaender

 

14.482 Income Distribution Economics (A)
Prereq.: 14.124		 Units
Year: G(1) 3-0-9
Modern theories and empirical studies of the determinants of the distribution of income and wealth. L. C. Thurow

    1. International, Interregional, and Urban Economics
      [Table of Contents]
14.572J Regional Economic Analysis (A)
Prereq.: 14.03 or 14.05		 Units
Year: G(2) 3-0-6
Analysis of regional economies with emphasis on the sources, characteristics, and implications of spatial concentrations of economic activities. Urban development in its regional setting is examined and the special problems of lagging areas in both developing and developed countries. Methods of integrating national and regional planning. J. R. Harris

 

14.573J Urban Economic Analysis I (A)
Prereq.: 14.03 or 14.05		 Units
Year: G(1) 3-0-6
Patterns and processes of growth and structural change within metropolitan areas. The land use market and the spatial structure of the metropolitan community. The housing market: demand and supply, growth, aging, and renewal. The urban transportation system and its problems. Models of the metropolis. In each of these topics, emphasis on the resource allocation process, its efficiency and implications for income distribution. W. C. Wheaton

 

14.574J Urban Economic Analysis II (A)
Prereq.: 14.573J		 Units
Year: G(2) 3-0-6
Continuation of 14.573J. The nature and problems of government decision-making in metropolitan areas. The economies of segregation, congestion, and pollution in the metropolitan area. Urban-suburban relations; market and government. Welfare economics and the normative theory of local public policy. Applied normative analysis: criteria for public expenditures; cost benefit analysis. Examination of public policy issues in current urban problems; poverty, race, the spatial form of the city, optimal land use patterns, growth and renewal, development and new communities. J. Rothenberg

 

14.581 International Economics I (A)
Prereq.: 14.04, 14.06		 Units
Year: G(1) 4-0-8
Theory of international trade and applications in commercial policy. J. N. Bhagwati

 

14.582 International Economics II (A)
Prereq.: 14.581		 Units
Year: G(2) 4-0-8
Adjustment in international economic relations with attention to foreign exchange markets, balance of payments, and the international monetary system. C. P. Kindleberger

    1. Labor Economics and Industrial Relations
      [Table of Contents]
14.671J Labor Economics (A)
Prereq.: 14.64 or 15.663		 Units
Year: G(1) 3-0-6
Primary emphasis on the structure of labor markets and the determinants of wage levels, unemployment, the distribution of income and employment opportunity. Special attention will also be given to the impact of unions on both wage and non-wage elements of collective bargaining in the light of the characteristics and objectives of particular unions. Other special topics growing out of recent research in labor economics. M. J. Piore,
C. A. Myers

 

14.672J Public Policy on Labor Relations (A)
Prereq.: 14.64, 15.663		 Units
Year: G(1) 3-0-6
Major trends in legislation and other government activities affecting the work place. Topics include wage and price controls, equal opportunity employment, and government regulation of union organization, collective bargaining, industrial disputes, wages and hours of work, and work-place health and safety. The broad economic and social questions raised by these trends also explored. M. J. Piore
D. Q. Mills

 

14.674J Comparative Systems of Industrial Relations and Human Resource Development (A)
Prereq.: 14.64, 15.663		 Units
Year: G(2) 3-0-6
International and comparative analysis of industrial relations systems and systems of human resource development. Concentration on an examination of selected issues involving interest groups and the strategies of economic development, including discussion of the nature and functions of labor and management organization in different contexts; the role of the state in establishing procedures and in shaping the substance of industrial relations; the participation of interest groups in the formulation of economic and social policy: manpower and economic growth in the context of comparative systems of human resource development; worker participation in management, and other topics. C. A. Myers
E. Tarantelli

 

14.691J Research Seminar in Industrial Relations (A)
Prereq.:14.671J or 14.672J		 Units
Year: G(1) 3-0-6
14.692J Research Seminar in Industrial Relations (A)
Prereq.:14.14.691J
Year: G(2) 3-0-6
Discussion of important areas for research in industrial relations, frameworks for research, research techniques, and methodological problems. Centered mainly on staff research and the thesis research of advanced graduate students C. A. Myers

 

14.672J Public Policy on Labor Relations (A)
Prereq.: 14.64, 15.663		 Units
Year: G(1) 3-0-6
Major trends in legislation and other government activities affecting the work place. Topics include wage and price controls, equal opportunity employment, and government regulation of union organization, collective bargaining, industrial disputes, wages and hours of work, and work-place health and safety. The broad economic and social questions raised by these trends also explored. M. J. Piore
D. Q. Mills

 

    1. Economic History
      [Table of Contents]
14.731 American Economic History (A)
Prereq.: 14.121		 Units
Year: G(1) 3-0-6
Survey of the beginnings of American industrialization, emphasizing a quantitative approach and the nineteenth century. Topics include effects of government economic policies, such as land distribution and tariffs, the importance of railroads, profitability of slavery. P. Temin

 

14.732 Russian Economic History (A)
Prereq.: 14.122		 Units
Year: G(2) 3-0-9
A comparative study of the major problems in Russian economic history prior to 1917 both for their own sake and as a background for understanding of the events of 1917 and of the Soviet policies since. The topics covered vary yearly depending on the interests of the participants, but the land and peasant problems and industrialization methods emphasized. E. D. Domar

 

14.733 European Economic History (A)
Prereq.: 14.121		 Units
Year: G(1) 3-0-6
Development of the European economy since 1750 and, especially since 1850, with emphasis on growth and slowdown, the transition from local to national and European-wide institutions, and extra-European relations. C. P. Kindleberger

 

14.734 Problems in Economic History (A)
Prereq.: 14.731, 14.732, or 14.733		 Units
Year: G(2) 3-0-6
Analysis of problems of industrial society, concentrating on the century after 1860 and on the American experience. Topics vary yearly and include effects of wars on welfare and growth, the nature of the long deflation of the late nineteenth century, the contrast in international relations before and after 1914, the depression of the 1930’s. P. Temin

    1. Economic Development
      [Table of Contents]
14.771 Problems of Economic Development (A)
Prereq.: 14.122, 14.452		 Units
Year: G(1) 3-0-6
Analysis of problems of the rural sector in developing countries, urban-rural migration, unemployment, sectoral balance and efficiency of private resource allocation. R. S. Eckaus

 

14.772 Theory of Economic Development (A)
Prereq.: 14.122, 14.452		 Units
Year: G(2) 3-0-6
Analysis of problems of international trade and development; study of structure and use of planning models for development policy and use of cost benefit analysis. J. N. Bhagwati

 

14.773 Optimal Growth Theory (A)
Prereq.: 14.124, 14.454		 Units
Year: G(2) 3-0-9
The optimal growth problem, duality theory, development and application of the maximum principle. The behavior of optimal trajectories for a variety of situations. (Alternate years. Offered 1974-75.) M. L. Weitzman

 

14.774J Transfer and Adaptation of Technology in Developing Countries (A)
Prereq.: Permission of Instructor		 Units
Year: G(2) 3-0-6
Consideration of the problems of transferring and adapting technologies originating and used in the richer countries of the world to the developing nations. Specific topics include: political, institutional, economic, and engineering issues involved in the transfer of technology. R. S. Eckaus, F. Moavenzadeh, N. Choucri

 

14.782 Capitalism, Socialism and Growth (A)
Prereq.: 14.122, 14.452		 Units
Year: G(1) 3-0-6
A comparative study of capitalist and socialist economies mainly from the point of view of development and growth, and with major emphasis on the economy of the Soviet Union. E. D. Domar

 

14.783 Theory of Central Planning (A)
Prereq.: 14.124		 Units
Year: G(2) 3-0-9
Multilevel planning. Decomposition principles and their application. Planning with prices and with quantities. Materials balancing and input-output. Applications of inventory theory. The problems posed by non-convexities. (Alternate years. Not offered 1974-75.) M. L. Weitzman

  1. The Faculty in Economics
    [Table of Contents]

Morris A. Adelman, Ph.D., Harvard; Professor of Economics.

Sidney S. Alexander, Ph.D., Harvard; Professor of Economics.

Jagdish N. Bhagwati, Ph.D., M.I.T.; Professor of Economics.

Robert L. Bishop, Ph.D., Harvard; Professor of Economics; Chairman, Graduate Admissions Committee.

E. Cary Brown, Ph.D., Harvard; Professor of Economics; Head of Department.

Peter A. Diamond, Ph.D., M.I.T.; Professor of Economics; Graduate Registration Officer; Chairman, Department Graduate Committee.

Evsey D. Domar, Ph.D., Harvard; Professor of Economics; Graduate Placement Officer.

Richard S. Eckaus, Ph.D., M.I.T.; Professor of Economics; Graduate Registration Officer; Chairman, Committee on Economic Research.

Robert F. Engle, III, Ph.D., Cornell; Associate Professor of Economics.

Stanley Fischer, Ph.D., M.I.T.; Associate Professor of Economics.

Franklin M. Fisher, Ph.D., Harvard; Professor of Economics (on leave).

Harold A. Freeman, S.B., M.I.T.; Professor of Statistics.

Ann F. Friedlaender, Ph.D., M.I.T.; Professor of Economics.

Robert E. Hall, Ph.D., M.I.T.; Professor of Economics; Graduate Registration Officer.

John R. Harris, Ph.D., Northwestern; Associate Professor of Economics.

Jerry A. Hausman, Ph.D., Oxford; Assistant Professor of Economics.

Karl G. Jugenfeldt, Ph.D., Visiting Professor of Economics (Spring Term).

Paul L. Joskow, Ph.D., Yale; Assistant Professor of Economics.

Charles P. Kindleberger, Ph.D., Columbia; Professor of Economics.

Edwin Kuh, Ph.D., Harvard; Professor of Economics.

Franco Modigliani, D.Jur., Rome, and D.Soc.Sci., New School of Social Research; Institute Professor; Professor of Economics.

Charles A. Myers, Ph.D., Chicago; Professor of Industrial Relations.

Michael J. Piore, Ph.D., Harvard; Associate Professor of Economics (on leave, Spring Term).

Jerome Rothenberg, Ph.D., Columbia; Professor of Economics.

Paul A. Samuelson, Ph.D., Harvard; Institute Professor; Professor of Economics.

Abraham J. Siegel, Ph.D., California (Berkeley); Professor of Industrial Relations; Associate Dean of Management.

Robert M. Solow, Ph.D., Harvard; Institute Professor; Professor of Economics.

Lance J. Taylor, Ph.D., Harvard; Professor of Nutritional Economics.

Peter Temin, Ph.D., M.I.T.; Professor of Economics.

Lester C. Thurow, Ph.D., Harvard; Professor of Economics (on leave, Spring Term).

Hal R. Varian, Ph.D., California (Berkeley); Assistant Professor of Economics.

Martin L. Weitzman, Ph.D., M.I.T.; Professor of Economics.

William C. Wheaton, Ph.D., Penn.; Assistant Professor of Economics.

Source: M.I.T., Institute Archives. MIT Department of Economics Records, Box 2, Folder “Department Brochures”.

Categories
Berkeley Brown Carnegie Institute of Technology Carnegie Mellon Chicago Columbia Cornell Duke Economics Programs Harvard Illinois Indiana Iowa Johns Hopkins Kansas M.I.T. Michigan Michigan State Minnesota North Carolina Northwestern NYU Ohio State Pennsylvania Princeton Purdue Rochester Stanford Texas UCLA UWash Vanderbilt Virginia Virginia Tech Washington University Wisconsin Yale

U.S. Economics Graduate Programs Ranked, 1957, 1964 and 1969

Recalling my active days in the rat race of academia, a cold shiver runs down my spine at the thought of departmental rankings in the hands of a Dean contemplating budgeting and merit raise pools or second-guessing departmental hiring decisions. 

But let a half-century go by and now, reborn as a historian of economics, I appreciate having the aggregated opinions of yore to constrain our interpretive structures of what mattered when to whomever. 

Research tip: sign up for a free account at archive.org to be able to borrow items still subject to copyright protection for an hour at a time. Sort of like being in the old reserve book room of your brick-and-mortar college library. This is needed if you wish to use the links for the Keniston, Carter, and Roose/Andersen publications linked in this post.

___________________________

1925 Rankings

R. M. Hughes. A Study of the Graduate Schools of America (Presented before the Association of American Colleges, January, 1925). Published by Miami University at Oxford, Ohio. (See earlier post that provides the economics ranking from the Hughes’ study)

1957 Rankings

Hayward Keniston. Graduate Study and Research in the Arts and Sciences at the University of Pennsylvania (January 1959), pp. 115-119,129.

Tables from Keniston transcribed here at Economics in the Rear-view Mirror:
https://www.irwincollier.com/economics-departments-and-university-rankings-by-chairmen-hughes-1925-and-keniston-1957/

1964 Rankings

Allan M. Cartter, An Assessment of Quality in Graduate Education Washington, D.C.: American Council on Education, 1966.

1969 Rankings

Kenneth D. Roose and Charles J. Andersen, A Rating of Graduate Programs. Washington, D.C.: American Council on Education, 1970.

Tables transcribed below.

___________________________

Graduate Programs in Economics
(1957, 1964, 1969)

Percentage of Raters Who Indicate:
Rankings “Quality of Graduate Faculty” Is:
1957 1964 1969 Institution Distiguish-
ed and strong		 Good and adequate All other Insufficient Information
Nineteen institutions with scores in the 3.0 to 5.0 range, in rank order
1 1* 1* Harvard 97 – – 3
not ranked 1* 1* M.I.T. 91 – – 9
2 3* 3 Chicago 95 – – 5
3 3* 4 Yale 90 3 – 7
5* 5 5 Berkeley 86 9 – 5
7 7 6 Princeton 82 9 – 10
9 8* 7* Michigan 66 22 – 11
10 11 7* Minnesota 65 19 – 15
14 14* 7* Pennsylvania 62 22 – 15
5* 6 7* Stanford 64 25 – 11
13 8* 11 Wisconsin 63 26 – 11
4 8* 12* Columbia 50 37 – 13
11 12* 12* Northwestern 52 32 – 16
16 16 14* UCLA 41 38 – 21
not ranked 12* 14* Carnegie-Mellon Carnegie-Tech (1964) 39 35 – 26
not ranked not ranked 16 Rochester** 31 39 1 29
8 14* 17 Johns Hopkins 31 56 – 13
not ranked not ranked 18* Brown** 20 52 1 27
15 17 18* Cornell** 21 56 2 21
*Score and rank are shared with another institution.
**Institution’s 1969 score is in a higher range than ist 1964 score.

 

Ten institutions with scores in the 2.5 to 2.9 range, in alphabetical order
(1969)
Duke
Illinois
Iowa State (Ames)
Michigan State
North Carolina
Purdue
Vanderbilt
Virginia
Washington (St. Louis)
Washington (Seattle)

 

Sixteen institutions with scores in the 2.0 to 2.4 range, in alphabetical order
(1969)
Buffalo*
Claremont
Indiana
Iowa (Iowa City)
Kansas
Maryland
N.Y.U.
North Carolina State*
Ohio State
Oregon
Penn State
Pittsburgh
Rice*
Texas
Texas A&M
Virginia Polytech.*
* Not included in the 1964 survey of economics

 

Categories
Economics Programs Economists M.I.T.

M.I.T. Department of Economics Annual Report by E. Cary Brown, 1975-1976

The following annual report of the M.I.T. department of economics was most likely written for the care and feeding of administrators and the members of the department’s visiting committee. This report covers what was my second year of graduate school, so for folks from that time it reads like an annual Holiday newsletter to the family.

_______________________

Department of Economics
1975 – 76

Undergraduate Program

The long-run impact of the past year’s changes in the Institute Requirement in the Humanities, Arts, and Social Sciences is not yet clear. Unquestionably they have increased the Department’s enrollment, but the precise amount is uncertain because simultaneously a major revision was made in the two introductory economics subjects. In the past year enrollments were larger than previously, but smaller than in the transition of the previous year. Nearly 200 of the Class of 1976 concentrated in economics for their Humanities, Arts, and Social Sciences Requirement. Of all students presently enrolled, 327 (primarily juniors and seniors) have elected to concentrate in economics.

Undergraduate majors remain steady in numbers. As in 1974-75, 20 degrees were awarded. In the spring term the Undergraduate Economics Association was reactivated. Its weekly meetings with faculty led to several proposals for revision of the undergraduate program, and several student-faculty socials were organized.

Graduate Program

Enrollment has been remarkably steady in the graduate program. The number of applications for admission was virtually identical to the average of the previous six years. Next year’s entering class of 32 will be slightly larger than average, and will have fewer foreign students and more women, reflecting a shift in the percentage of applications from these groups. Four students from minority groups are expected to be in this class.

Financial support for the graduate student has changed very little over the last several years. We are still fortunate in having from one-third to one-half of the entering students on National Science Foundation Fellowships. For the whole student body, there has been an increase in the support by US foundations (other than NSF) and a decrease in support provided by M.I.T.

The number receiving the Doctor of Philosophy increased somewhat in the past year to 21. For the first time, two American blacks received degrees.* The class fared well in placement, their median salary offer totaling 24 percent above that of 1971. Like the past average, 86 percent went into teaching and 14 percent into non-teaching positions.

*Samuel Myers, Jr. Ph.D. thesis: “A Portfolio Model of Illegal Transfers”, supervised by Robert Solow.
Glenn Loury. Ph.D. thesis: “Essays in the Theory of the Distribution of Income”, supervised by Robert Solow.
See: William Darity Jr. and Arden Kreeger, “The Desegregation of an Elite Economics Department’s PhD Program: Black Americans at MIT“, History of Political Economy 46 (annual suppl.)

The Graduate Economics Association awarded the outstanding teacher in the Department prize to Professor Stanley Fischer.

PUBLIC SERVICE ACTIVITIES

The faculty has always been involved in public service activities tying research to the public interest. In connection with M.I.T.’s participation in the Bicentennial Celebration, Professor Jagdish N. Bhagwati set up a recent conference on the New International Economic Order: Professor Ann F. Friedlaender is planning one for this fall on Air Pollution and Administrative Control. Through the German Marshall Fund, Professor Richard S. Eckaus is organizing a fall conference on economic problems of Portugal. Professor Franco Modigliani arranged a conference through the Bank of Finland on International Monetary Mechanisms.

Various Congressional committees and government agencies have been advised. Professor Peter A. Diamond served on the Consultant Panel on Social Security for the Congressional Research Service. Professors Rudiger Dornbusch and Fischer and Institute Professor Paul A. Samuelson prepared a report for the US Department of Commerce on international financial arrangements. Professor Robert E. Hall was a member of the Advisory Committee on Population Statistics, Bureau of the Census. Professor Jerry A. Hausman served on the Econometrics Advisory Committee to the Federal Energy Administration. Institute Professor Modigliani was a consultant and member of the Committee on Monetary Statistics, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. Institute Professor Samuelson consulted with the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, the US Treasury, and the Congressional Budget Office. Professor Charles A. Myers was a member of the National Manpower Policy Task Force. Institute Professor Robert M. Solow served as Deputy Chairman, Federal Reserve Bank of Boston.

Several faculty members have been involved with the National Academy of Sciences and its related organizations. Professor Eckaus prepared a report, Appropriate Technology for Developing Countries, for the Board on Science and Technology for Developing Countries of the National Academies of Science and Engineering. Professor Franklin M. Fisher served on a National Academy panel on the Effects of Deterrence and Incapacitation; Professor Friedlaender was on the Executive Committee, Assembly of Behavioral and Social Sciences, National Research Council; Institute Professor Modigliani was on the Finance Committee; Institute Professor Samuelson served on the Editorial Board of the Proceedings; and Institute Professor Solow chaired the Steering Committee on Environmental Studies.

Professor Eckaus led an OECD Mission to Portugal that included Professors Lance Taylor and Dornbusch.* Professor Paul L. Joskow was a consultant to OECD in energy. Professor Evsey D. Domar was a member of a delegation of economists sent by the American Economic Association to the Soviet Union. Institute Professor Modigliani, who gave much time to the problems of stabilization in Italy, was a member of the Board of Directors of the Italian Council for Social Sciences.

*Along with several graduate students among whom were Paul Krugman, Andrew Abel and Jeffrey Frankel. Paul Krugman has written a short note about this experience with a picture!

The Brookings Institution Panel for Economic Activity included Professors Dornbusch and Hall, with Institute Professors Modigliani, Samuelson, and Solow as senior advisors to it. Professor Friedlaender served on the examining committee, Graduate Records Examination, Educational Testing Service. Institute Professor Modigliani served on the Committee on Economic Stabilization, Social Science Research Council. Professor Fisher is a member of the Board of Governors of Tel Aviv University. Institute Professor Solow continues as Trustee for the Institute of Advanced Study.

RESEARCH

International topics seem to dominate the research interests of the faculty. Professor Bhagwati, in addition to his work in developing countries and international trade theory, has given attention to a proposal for applying taxation to the brain drain. Professor Eckaus studied the role of financial markets and their regulation and the behavior of income distribution in economic development. Professor Taylor had three major areas of research: the development of nutrition planning models in Pakistan, international food aid and reserve policies, and growth and income distribution in Brazil.

Professor Morris A. Adelman’s continuing research on the world oil market, Professor Joskow’s analysis of the international nuclear energy industry, and Professor Martin L. Weitzman’s examination of OPEC and oil pricing involve applied microeconomics with international implications.

Research in various applied microeconomics areas was responsible for the second largest fraction of faculty effort. Institute Professor Solow continued to research the economics of exhaustible resources, and Professor Weitzman completed his analysis of the optimal development of resource pools. Professor Joskow has explored the future of the electric utility industry and its financing, the future of the US atomic energy industry, and the pattern of energy consumption in the US. He is developing a simulation model of the energy industry, and is reviewing the regulatory activities of government agencies in general and the health care sector in particular. Professor Hausman examined the Project Independence Report and is analyzing the choice of new technologies in energy research.

In the transporation field, Professor Friedlaender surveyed the issues in regulatory policy for railroads and alternative scenarios in federal transporation policy. Professor Jerome Rothenberg examined such problems in urban transportation as pricing policies, demand sensitivity to price, and modeling locational effects. Professor William C. Wheaton considered an optimal pricing and investment policy in highways under a gasoline tax.

Inextricably intertwined with urban transportation are questions of urban location and housing. Professor Rothenberg carried out research in such aspects of this problem as microeconomics of internal migration, supply-demand for housing in multizoned areas, the impact of energy costs on urban location, and the development of a model of housing markets and of metropolitan development and location that can be applied to general policy questions. Professor Wheaton developed an equilibrium model of housing and locational choice based on Boston experience.

Institute Professor Modigliani also conducted research on the housing market, but his interest comes primarily from the side of stabilization policies and similar macroeconomic problems. He also participated in a review after 20 years of his life cycle hypothesis of saving, made monetary policy prescriptions for both the US and Italy, reflected on the description of financial sectors in econometric models, and explored more deeply the application of optimal control to the design of optimal stabilization policies in economic models. Institute Professor Samuelson reviewed the art and science of macromodels over the 50 years of their development. Professor Friedlaender completed a quarterly macromodel of the Massachusetts economy. Professor Hall developed a model to deal with income tax changes and consumption.

Public economics has both macro and micro aspects, both of which are represented in the Department’s research. With Visiting Professor James A. Mirrlees, Professor Diamond theorized about public shadow prices with constant returns to scale, and about the assignment of liability. He also has generalized the Ramsey tax rule and continued his research into an optimal Social Security system. Professor Hausman is reexamining the cost of a negative income tax; Professor Rothenberg analyzed the distributional impact of public service provision; and Professor Wheaton explored intertemporal effects of land taxes, fiscal federalism in practice, and the financial plight of American cities.

Besides such theoretical research, there was significant research of an entirely pure nature. Professor Robert L. Bishop reexamined the measurement of consumer surplus. Professor Fisher extended his exploration of the stability of general equilibrium and of aggregate production functions. Professor Weitzman investigated the welfare significance of national product in a dynamic economy. Professor Hal R. Varian further explored the theory of fairness, non-Walrasian equilibria, and macromodels of unemployment and disequilibrium. Professor Hausman examined the econometric implications of truncated distributions and samples, of probit models, and of simultaneous equation models. In historical research, Professor Domar was concerned with serfdom, while Professor Charles Kindleberger investigated the role of the merchant in nineteenth-century technologic transfer.

Publications

Professor Bhagwati edited Taxing the Brain Drain: A Proposal and Brain Drain and Taxation: Theory and Empirical Analysis, and coauthored Foreign Trade Regimes and Economic Development: India. Professors Dornbusch and Kindleberger published numerous papers on implications of the new international monetary exchange structure for exchange rates, price stability, international trade, and international capital movements. Professor Weitzman continued his study of the Russian economy with a paper on the new Soviet incentive model.

With Visiting Professor of Management Ezio Tarantelli*, Institute Professor Modigliani published Labor Market, Income Distribution and Private Consumption (in Italian) and various papers on stabilization policy in Italy. He also wrote papers on inflation and the housing market and edited New Mortgage Designs for Stable Housing in an Inflationary Environment. Professor Hall’s labor market research resulted in papers on persistence of unemployment, occupational mobility, and taxation of earnings under public assistance. Professor Michael Piore wrote on labor market stratification and the effect on industrial growth of immigration from Puerto Rico to Boston. Professor Fisher had several publications on indexation and adjustment of mortgages to inflationary episodes. In the realm of economic history, Professor Temin published Reckoning with Slavery and Did Monetary Force Cause the Great Depression?

*Ezio Tarantelli was the victim of a Red Brigades’ assassination in 1985.

Institute Professor Samuelson published theoretical papers on factor price equalization and trade pattern reversal. In the realm of pure research, he put out papers on nonlinear and stochastic population analysis, optimal population growth, and the optimal Social Security system implied in a lifecycle growth model. He also brought out the tenth edition of his famous text, Economics: An Introduction Analysis.

FACULTY

Visiting Professor John R. Moroney was here from Tulane University; Visiting Professor Mirrlees came in the spring term from Nuffield College, Oxford University. Regular faculty on leave were Professors Fisher and Joskow in the fall and Professor Weitzman in the spring.

It is a pleasure to report the promotion to Associate Professor of Jerry A. Hausman. A new appointee, Professor Jeffrey E. Harris, with the unusual background of an M.D. and a Ph.D. in economics, will provide long-sought coverage in health economics.

Professor Kindleberger will retire as Ford Professor and become a Senior Lecturer on a half-time basis. Since 1948, when he came as an Associate Professor, Professor Kindleberger has been an effective teacher, scholar, participant in faculty governance, and counselor to governments and the public. He has trained the leading international economists of the next generation; he has produced a dozen books and more than a hundred articles in international trade and finance and in economic history. He epitomizes the highest kind of academician.

Several honors were bestowed on members of the Department. Institute Professor Modigliani will complete his year as President of the American Economic Association. Professor Myers received a Distinguished Alumni award from Pennsylvania State University. Professor Fisher was F.W. Paish Lecturer to the Association of (English) University Teachers of Economics. Institute Professor Solow received a D. Litt. from Warwick University, and Institute Professor Samuelson, a D.Sc. from the University of Rochester.

EDGAR CARY BROWN

Source: MIT Libraries, Institute Archives and Special Collections. MIT Department of Economics Records, Box 1, Folder “Annual Report 1975-6”.

Image Source: Building E52, Alfred P. Sloan Jr. Building, later Morris and Sophie Chang Building

 

https://mitmuseum.mit.edu/collections/subject/building-e52-alfred-p.-sloan-jr.-building-later-morris-and-sophie-chang-building-52

Categories
Economists Funny Business M.I.T.

M.I.T. Economics in the Rear-view Mirror’s collection for Robert Solow at work and play, December 2023

 

Much has been noted and posted across traditional and social media regarding the contributions and reception of the work of Robert Solow who died on December 21, 2023. I was one of the legion of economics apprentices (a.k.a. graduate students) whom Bob Solow introduced to the art and craft of summoning meaning from the chaos of everyday trends and fluctuations. Economics in the Rear-view Mirror has, to date, posted transcriptions of sixteen archival artifacts from his M.I.T. work-and-play-ground.

Bob Solow was like a favorite uncle to those lucky enough to have had him as a teacher. 99 years was one helluva long-run and besides having been a great economist, he was a good man.  

A great interview from March 3, 2023: Robert Solow on growing up in Brooklyn, fighting Nazis, and everything that came after.

___________________________

Solow at Work

Course Outline of Economic Statistics. Robert Solow, 1960

Advanced Economic Theory (Capital and growth). Solow and Phelps, 1962

Advanced Economic Theory Course, Solow, 1962

Advanced Economic Theory. Uncertainty and Capital Theory. Readings and Exam. Solow, 1965

Economic Growth and Fluctuations. Readings and Midterm Exam. Solow, 1966

Suggestions for New Fields. Domar, Kuh, Solow, Adelman, 1967

Core Economic Growth and Dynamics. Readings and Final Exam. Solow, 1968

Student evaluations of second term core macroeconomics. Solow, Foley. 1967-70

Applied Price Theory Readings. Robert Solow, 1971 or 1972

Core Dynamic Macro Half-course. Readings and exam. Solow, 1973

Capital theory. Course outline, suggested readings. Solow, 1975

Solow at Play

Dystopian Faculty Skit by Solow, 1969

Economics faculty M*A*S*H theme skit. Robert Solow, 1977

Faculty skit. Robert Solow as the 2000 year old economist, ca. 1979-80

Rewrite of 1940s blues hit “Why don’t you do right, like some other men do”. Solow, ca. 1983-84

Robert Solow’s Last Skit. “Dr Rudi Tells You How”, Late 1980s.

 

 

Categories
Curriculum Economics Programs Economists M.I.T. Teaching

M.I.T. Charles Kindleberger’s Ruminations on Professional Education, 1966

Charles P. Kindleberger

 

Today’s post was an absolute treat to prepare. It gives us an opportunity to rise above the tactical aspects of economics education (i.e. syllabi and exams) to consider issues of grand strategy in higher education.

Charles Kindleberger was one of my professors in graduate school. Though I did take his course in European economic history, I must confess that I was not ready to absorb much of the intuition and wisdom that he tried to share with us. That said, my classmates and I very much respected his old-school, gentlemanly charm and deeply appreciated the scholar-economist dutifully warning us whipper-snappers that “the second-derivative is the refuge of a scoundrel!”

While this essay from 1966 mostly appears to present a distillation of Kindleberger’s experience at M.I.T. in the economics department and as chairman of the Institute Faculty, in it you will find timeless insights into the nature of higher education in general and of training in economics in particular. 

Research Tip:  I found this jewel of an essay while trawling through the collection of Technology Review ar srchive.org.

_______________________

The following essay was one of three papers having the theme “Innovation in Education” prepared for the 1966 M.I.T. Alumni Seminar.

Charles P. Kindleberger is professor of economics and chairman of the Faculty at M.I.T. He is known for teaching and research on world trade and economic development, and he is a member of the President’s Committee on International Monetary Arrangements. As chairman of the Faculty, Dr. Kindlberger has participated directly in many of the recent developments in professional undergraduate curricula at the Institute.

_______________________

Professional Education:
Towards a Way of Thought

by Charles P. Kindleberger

Technology Review, November 1966

THE age of the amateur is dead. Professionalism rules — in the cockpit of spaceships, in football, and in learning. We have abandoned the British tradition of the amateur who was good at everything for that of the Grandes Ecoles, with rigorous scientific training leading to professional competence. “He’s a pro,” which used to be insulting in Britain, is now a compliment everywhere.

There is some room left for the amateur tradition —  in politics. It is not good enough to duck the question of where the Inner Belt road should be located by saying that these are matters for resolution by experts. In economics, also, the number of distinct opinions on a given issue is frequently greater than one and sometimes approaches the number of experts. Social scientists resent that mere people feel entitled to have opinions on issues on which popular knowledge and capacity for theorizing are limited, but they have found no way to prevent it. And there is claimed to be scope for flair, inspiration and style — the hallmarks of the amateur — at the frontiers of science, when the ordinary professionals have carried the subject as far as they can. On the whole, however, the demand for professionals and professional education is greater than it has ever been.

Part of this demand is wasteful. An economic study some years ago claimed that there was not so much a shortage of scientists and engineers as very wasteful use of those on hand. Some part of the demand for Ph.D.’s today could perhaps be satisfied with M.S.’s, and some of the jobs seeking master’s could be filled by bachelor’s. During the long years of inadequate effective demand and considerable unemployment, we have tended to upgrade job requirements throughout the economy.

But the upgrading of the educational requirements of business and the professions goes well beyond snobbism and cultural lag. Knowledge has expanded. There is 100 times more information to be obtained today than in 1900, and it is estimated that by 2000 A.D. there will be 1000 times as much knowledge. Periodicals have risen in number from 45,000 in 1950 to 95,000 currently. Librarians blanch under the prospect of coping with the accelerating torrent of periodicals, books, monographs. A major problem in research is to find out what has been done by others so as to avoid rediscovering the same information.

The result is more professional education and more specialization. Eighty-five per cent of today’s new doctors are trained as specialists rather than general practitioners. Lawyers are experts in taxation, trusts domestic or international corporate law, or anti-trust. The man who used to be merely an economist is now a specialist in international economics or African trade. The one year of internship in medicine which was normal in 1945 has been extended to two, three or even four. Business recruits directly from the universities but increasingly from graduate schools of business, and even then the bright young graduate in management is put into a training program. Increasingly the practice is to spend a year in post-doctoral work in another university to extend one’s research training even beyond the scope of the doctorate. This stretching of the educational process to the point where the first professional income is not earned until age 25, or in some lines, 30 is expensive in many, as has been widely recognized by foundations, government, and, somewhat earlier, by parents. Together with the knowledge explosion, it is putting enormous pressure on our educational institutions to break out of old patterns and to find new ways of producing and packaging professional education.

These problems can properly be discussed in three Parts — preprofessional education, professional education as such, and mid-career upgrading. The divisions are hard to keep distinct, as will become apparent, but each section presents particular problems for the university in trying to rationalize and increase the efficiency of its professional mission.

BY preprofessional education is meant the provision of the prerequisites for professional training. In some fields such as law these are nothing more than the good general education which used to be required of the British civil servant. But I refer rather to the mathematics and physics which are needed for engineering, to organic chemistry and anatomy which used to be all that were needed as prerequisites for medical school, and to the elementary courses in a given field which must be mastered before a student goes on to the advanced reaches of any subject.

Any subject can be taught as general education, as preprofessional training, and for professional uses freshman mathematics can be taught so that the student learns to differentiate and integrate, which he needs to know preprofessionally outside of professional mathematics, or he can be taught them and mathematical analysis as well, either for general education, which includes a glimpse of the beauties of the mathematician’s universe, or as part of preprofessional work in mathematics. The clash between two of the ways of addressing a subject was neatly illustrated last spring by the resignation of 11 members of the Dartmouth medical school faculty who wanted to teach biochemistry, micro-biology and cytology as professional subjects rather than as preprofessional training for medicine.

The problem in the humanities is easier. One can argue that the ability to write a simple sentence is preprofessional education widely neglected, but for the most part English is taught as general education. But mathematics, physics, and chemistry are general education of a special sort, preprofessional education more narrowly.

The Challenge of Teaching

Most professional mathematicians, physicists, and chemists — and economists, political scientists, and psychologists as well — prefer professional to general preprofessional teaching. Preprofessional teaching for the narrow group or students which you know is going to be drawn further into the professional subject being taught is challenging and fascinating, but as general education, or preprofessional training for other fields, such training often fails to engage the excitement of the ordinary as opposed to the great teacher. The ordinary teacher is more engaged by the subject than by the students as people. The result is that he may succumb to the temptation to neglect this teaching, or to make it interesting to himself by making it more professional, or both. On his side the student is either bewildered or bored, or both. It is on this account that the quality of teaching in the first two years presents a problem of particular difficulty.

The problem is met not only at the university level. In medical school, I understand, the first two years are taken up with some anatomy and physiology but with a great deal of preprofessional training in biophysics, biochemistry, and subjects like pharmacology. It is difficult to have these well taught on the one hand, and well learned on the other, when the main professional mission or the school is clinical medicine.

Articulation: Skip or Repeat?

Articulation is painful. If the superbly trained preprofessional has to follow the regular route he is bored and discouraged. If he tries to skip large portions of early professional training which his preprofessional work presumably covered, he is never quite clear what of the work the others are taking he has mastered and what he has not.

Medical schools’ admissions officers profess to be looking for broad-gauged young men and women with wide-ranging interests developed through general education rather than those who have extensive study and good grades in biology, chemistry, mathematics and physics. In their admissions choices, however, they are likely to favor the science specialist over the generalist on the score or preprofessional advantage. But this leaves the particularly well-trained young scientist likely to waste a great deal of the first two years of medical school while his generalist colleagues catch up. The problem is particularly acute for graduates of such preprofessional curricula as molecular biology at places like M.I.T. for they are catapulted somewhere into the middle of the normal first two years of training in medicine

We have a similar problem in graduate education in economics for those students who come to us with excellent training in social science from their undergraduate institutions. For them to take the first year of graduate training — the regular courses in micro- and macro-economic theory, mathematics, statistics and economic history — involves a duplication of some 60 to 75 per cent of what they have already studied. The second time around, and more systematically, this material is warmed-over porridge and not very appetizing. But to leap right into the second year of graduate work runs the risk of missing vital elements of preparation in the 25 to 40 per cent which has been missed. And we find that the undergraduate teachers have exhausted a considerable portion of the wonder and beauty of first looking into Marshall’s Principles, if I may transliterate a line from Keats; indeed, a small but disturbing fraction of our best-taught young men become sufficiently discouraged to drop out. This can be regarded perhaps a difficulty of articulating professional rather than preprofessional education, but it is a general one.

The Several Routes to a Profession

Some of these difficulties might be overcome if the choice of profession were made earlier and all students followed the same path. But this is impossible. Professional choices are not made consistently by various young people at the same stage, with the result that there must be a variety of avenues to professional education rather than merely one. And if professional choice is made only in the junior year of college, at 21, it is hard to push the preprofessional training to lower levels.

While there are children who have known since the age of five that they wanted to be involved with electricity, or machinery, or the human body as a life’s work, career choice is more and more presenting a difficult problem to American youth. Two generations ago father dominance helped, and hurt, such choice. Today fathers know enough not to push their children in directions of which they approve —  or most of them know enough. The result is that career choice is much more squarely left to youth and is consequently fraught with youthful tension. The college dropout phenomenon is one aspect. Some young men welcome the army, the Peace Corps, or a year of travel, as legitimate means of delay in facing the necessity for career choice. Certain types of graduate training — business and law — are an escape from the need for decision. But even at M.I.T. at least 30 per cent of our undergraduates end up majoring in a different field than they put down as their intended specialization when they were admitted, and 20 per cent actually switch majors after they have chosen one at the end of their freshman year.

The social sciences labor under a considerable disability here, because fixing on a social science as a career comes as a rule much later than comparable decisions in science, engineering, medicine, or humanities. Children are aware of the body, animals, earth, sky, machines, and even prose, poetry, and the existence of the past, long before they become aware of the complexities of human society. The early models for career choice, as is well known, are firemen, policemen, and, in my day, streetcar conductors.

The consequence of late career decision is that one cannot insist that all applicants for professional training have completed their preprofessional work on admission — that all M.I.T. students, for example, come with calculus, or all medical students already have molecular biology, biochemistry, and biophysics. The only equitable, and I may add efficient, system of education is to keep all options open as long as possible. In consequence preprofessional cannot be dumped completely onto other training systems — by the technological institutes on to the schools, and by the graduate training programs on to the colleges. Some preprofessional education must be kept side-by-side with the professional, to offer a chance for the later chooser to catch up. This means that professional education must maintain a several-track system.

To keep preprofessional and professional education side-by-side in the same institution presents problems of teaching, as has already been mentioned. The ordinary instructor finds it easy and productive to take on advanced professional students — undergraduates in their senior year, or graduate students who have mastered the fundamentals. They work together, as members of a scholarly team, able to communicate in two directions. Preprofessional teaching, as I have said is less interesting.

There is no good solution for this problem. To divide the university into upper and lower division, as is sometimes done, creates a two-class system with invidious overtones. To separate preprofessional training off into colleges with dedicated teachers, and admit students to the universities only into graduate school from the four-year colleges and into the upper classes from junior colleges would not only violate traditions — which are important in the lives of institutions — but also compound the problem of articulation. The solution we see at M.I.T. is to strengthen the place of preprofessional teaching in the value system of the Institute, to restore it to the high esteem it enjoyed before it slipped under the pressure on staff of research, consulting, professional service and keeping up with the literature. No one contemplates that it is possible to staff a first-rate technological institution completely with instructors who are first-rate at teaching as they are at research and professional service. But the administration, the faculty, and the students can let all instructing staff know that whatever the professional demands on their time, teaching is not the marginal and dispensable activity.

Professional Education

The central issues in professional education have mostly been touched upon already: the extension or the material to be mastered, the difficulties of starting earlier because of late career choice, the downgrading of the bachelor’s and master’s degrees, the development postdoctoral training, the need for a rigorous scientific (instead of rule-of-thumb and seat-of-the-pants) approach in the applied fields because of the rapid rate of obsolescence, and so on. But I would make three points.

First, there is a risk that the revulsion from the empirical approach to engineering and applied social science in favor of science and pure theory can be carried too far. The simplest solution to a problem is not only the most efficient; it is also the most elegant. While it is true that one can stumble on solutions to applied problems as a by-product of pure theory, it is also true that theory is sometimes pursued for its own sake beyond the point of diminishing returns. It is not clear how much biophysics should be known to the gynecologist, how much topology to the student of fiscal policy, how much communication theory to the professor of the French language. I sometimes characterize these problems by a reference to medieval scholasticism and ask how many angels can dance on the rate of interest. Theory and pure mathematics are at the top or the pecking order in the intellectual world, and this is as it should be, just as the theoretical and mathematical requirements for the lowliest professional specialties have been increased. But high power can be overdone.

Second, the question of interdisciplinary education remains complex. The practitioner continues to be trained in a variety of fields — history, law, economics and political science for the foreign service officer; contracts, property, wills, constitution and international law for the lawyer (although the Yale Law School curriculum has been altered to include a year and a half of specialization); finance, statistics, accounting, marketing, and psychology for business; and so on. At the same time, research is increasingly conducted by centers which bring different specialists to bear on a single problem with the vantage point of their own focus: aeronautical, electrical, and mechanical engineers in instrumentation, for example. But the professional teaching which produces these scholars cannot be widely interdisciplinary. A man must master one social or physical science before attempting to integrate two. In my experience, the joint degree which bridges two or more fields in one Ph.D. is satisfactory neither for the student nor the faculty involved, and not only because of jurisdictional jealousies. Each field has an intellectual integrity as a discipline, much as it may lack in providing the complete answer to a complex research problem. The attempt to master them all ends in a mastery of none.

This is a pat answer which does not fully satisfy me. More and more professional practice is becoming the equivalent of research. Architectural design of a building is no longer a simple problem of drawing and construction engineering; as we at M.I.T. are acutely conscious, an architect needs to master the Venturi principle if his skyscraper is not to set up wind currents or micro-meteorology which makes it difficult to open the building’s doors. The designer of a rehousing project has to understand sociological grouping into communities.

Third, the narrowing distinction between research and practice leads me to question the desirability or intermediate degrees between the master’s and the doctorate, which we have developed at M.I.T. in the engineer degrees. These degrees are awarded to students who have completed the course work for the doctorate but who do not write the thesis. Their justification is that the student has undertaken course work beyond the master’s level and should get academic recognition for it. I can understand awarding the intermediate degree as a consolation prize to a student who is not being allowed to go on for the doctorate because of insufficient research creativity, or to a fully competent student who is unable for one reason or another to finish his thesis and who has gone far beyond the master’s level. But these degrees should not become ends in themselves. Teachers should have had exposure to a substantial research experience. and so. if possible, should practitioners.

IF there is an overpowering amount for professionals to learn, not only in the separate fields but in combining one or more of them, there is no need to learn it all at once, in the four, five, six to ten years between high school and professional practice. One of the most interesting developments in professional education today is mid-career schooling. This began in the business schools and is spreading rapidly. At M.I.T. we have the Sloan School of Management programs for junior and senior executives, the new Center for Advanced Engineering Study, and a host of one- and two-week summer courses. The larger companies — General Motors, General Electric, I.B.M., to cite only those I have lectured to — run training programs for their own executives. The American Bar Association has a Committee on Continuing Legal Education which runs week-long, weekend and day seminars on new problems in the law. The medical associations, national, state, and specialty groups, conduct study sessions of varying length in new techniques, medicines, specialties.

Mid-career education presents serious teaching problems. The engineer returning to the Center for Advanced Engineering Study, or the young executive enrolled in the Sloan Fellowship Program at M.I.T., is likely to need preprofessional brushing up before he can handle the material taught in professional subjects. The Sloan Fellows’ beginning experience is a summer term spent in a specially designed course which gets them up to first-year graduate speed for the regular year. The Center for Advanced Engineering has had design and give special subjects in modern calculus and quantum mechanics. This preprofessional teaching, I can say from experience, has its own special rewards for the teacher, because the students have a fresh point of view, a capacity to relate theory to real situations in a way that the undergraduate and regular graduate student cannot do. But here is another special job of teaching, and that is expensive.

Mid-career education is expensive for the university, for the student (who must uproot his family for the time) and for his company, which normally pays both his salary and tuition charges. Its great contribution is not the correction of obsolescence though this has importance. The real point is to give an opportunity in today’s complex world for a man who has worked his way through one field, and demonstrated his capacity, to introduce a slight shift in orientation and train for wider responsibilities. It used to be that only the armed services were wise enough to see its desirability and budget for the expense of training at all stages of a successful career. The State Department has long had program of sending individuals to do a year of graduate work and is now beginning to operate its own foreign Service Institute course of six months. It seems inevitable that government, industry, the learned professions and, above all others, university instructors must count on continuing education and re-education in a world of changing knowledge and maturing people.

This mid-career training need not be undertaken by the universities. The costs of adding to the diversity of the multiversity are high. It is more cheaply done without uprooting families. And yet there is benefit in bringing people from different companies, backgrounds and experience to rub elbows, in plunging the man of affairs back into the scholarly environment. The profit is mutual, so long as mid-career trainees do not overwhelm the academic tradition. There are obvious limits to how far universities can respond to the demand. If mid-career education grows, as is likely, it is reasonable to expect the development of new institutions which provide the specialized preprofessional training and mix students from different backgrounds.

No pat series of answers emerges from a discussion of professional education. I feel confident in rejecting a number of proposals for major reform. Starting professional studies earlier is undesirable insofar as it cuts general education on the one hand and closes off options for late deciders on the other. Eliminating the doctoral dissertation, or converting it to a longish paper representing a couple of months’ work, abolishes the vital test of whether a man can organize and carry through a substantial research project, a test of increasing importance in a world where the distinction between research and practice is narrowing. Dividing the university into divisions for general education and professional training not only misses the point that the same treatment of a subject can be preprofessional, general, or professional education for students with different abilities, backgrounds, and programs, but divides the faculty into elite and non-elite members in a way which subverts morale and harms the teaching mission of the university. How to improve the university’s performance in discharging the mission of general and preprofessional teaching remains an imposing challenge. Social science is a long way from ability to change value systems, and the real solution to the problem of undergraduate teaching is to restore the prestige accorded to non-professional teaching in the value systems or university staffs.

We have come a long way in American education, I believe, when we recognize that we have serious problems of what, when and how to teach and are prepared to modify the traditional system and to experiment with new techniques. The exact character of the new techniques may be less important than the attitude that the subject is important and that present conditions can be improved.

My basic conclusion is the trite one: professional education is a vastly different process than providing a young man with a hatful of formulas and training him to select the right one for the right occasion. The real task is to teach — if it can be taught, or by example to train — the young to attack a problem as a good experimental physicist, biologist, engineer, or economist would; to have a feel for the data and for the limits of standard analytical techniques; to sense, after a time, the distinction between the run-of-the-mill textbook case and that with new and puzzling complications. It is not enough to do what a professional does: one must think the way a professional thinks. And this capacity is communicated in a complex osmotic process which may be independent of or only very loosely connected with prerequisites, examinations, credits, and theses, much less closed-circuit television, teaching machines, computers, and high-powered mathematics. The educational process is an elusive one, but I venture to predict that in the long run it will be found to resemble more the chemistry of slow-cooking on the back of the stove than that of infrared split-second broiling of steaks from the deep freeze.

Source: MIT, Technology Review, 69(1), November 1966.

Image Source: Portrait of Charles Poor Kindleberger at the MIT Museum website. Colorized by Economics in the Rear-view Mirror.

Categories
Graduate Student Support M.I.T.

M.I.T. Robert Bishop memo on importance of Woodrow Wilson funding for grad students, 1961

Robert L. Bishop, 1964

 

Research documenting a trend (long known by professional economists) that economics professors and policymakers have been trained at a relatively small number of institutions is attracting attention from outsiders looking in. The following 1961 memorandum written by the head of the M.I.T. economics department, Robert L. Bishop, provides evidence of the strength of that department already in 1961 to attract the lion’s share of Woodrow Wilson Fellows in economics. This pattern would be later observed over the coming decades in the graduate school choices of National Science Foundation graduate fellows in economics. 

The history of economics quants will have even more things to keep them busy when they turn to factors such as (i) of the relative quality of the inflow of graduate students and (ii) the educational “value-added” of the “top” programs.

In the meantime Economics in the Rear-view Mirror will add artifact by artifact to the pool of evidence. 

___________________________

Establishing 1961 as the likely year of Bishop’s memorandum

Robert Bishop (below) wrote: “This year we are the initial first choice or eighteen applicants.” Cf. 1961 MIT President’s report

“This year, too, M.I.T. was selected as first choice by more Woodrow Wilson Fellows in economics — eighteen out of eighty — than any other school in the country.”

Robert Lyle Bishop was head of the economics department 1958-1964.

John T. Norton served as acting dean of the graduate school in 1961

Robert Solow went to work at the Council of Economic Advisers as a senior economist 1961-62.

___________________________

To: John Norton and Committee on Graduate School Policy
From: Robert L. Bishop

Subject: Second-year Fellowships Out of Woodrow Wilson Funds

For the purpose of immediate discussion, I should like to submit this brief recapitulation of the major points that I made in our conversation yesterday.

  1. The most important question of policy from the point of view of the Institute as e whole concerns the award of these fellowships to engineering students. There are several questions in my mind about this practice: (a) Has this been done in previous years? If so, I think it must have escaped the attention of our representative on C.G.S.P., since I feel sure he would have protested. (b) Has the Woodrow Wilson Foundation been asked whether they approve this practice, since engineering is a specifically excluded field for Woodrow Wilson Fellowships? I strongly doubt that they would approve, and I am convinced that the Institute should seek their approval before beginning or continuing this practice. Even if the Foundation is neutral on the question, however, I think that the practice Is inadvisable for reasons given below.
  2. Originally, as you know, the humanities and social sciences were the only eligible field for Woodrow Wilson Fellowships. Several years ago, when the program was greatly expanded, certain scientific fields such as mathematics, physics, chemistry, and biology were included. After one year on this basis, hoverer, the sciences were placed under a specially restrictive quota, mainly because N.S.F. Fellowships (usually more attractive than Woodrow Wilsons) were available in those fields. This helps explain why the great majority of Woodrow Wilson Fellows at M.I.T., both at present and prospectively, are in economics rather than in the sciences.
  3. This year there are eleven Woodrow Wilson Fellows in economics and only one in the School of Science. This is an abnormal disproportion, but economics is at least likely to have a majority of M.I.T. Woodrow Wilson Fellows in the visible future. Last year our department was the first choice of fourteen applicants initially, and we ended up with eleven fellows (because of some rejections and after several switches in and out). This year we are the initial first choice or eighteen applicants.
  4. The high proportion of M.I.T. Woodrow Wilsons in economics contrasts With thirty per cent of second-year fellowships awarded out of Woodrow Wilson funds to economics students.
  5. In general, fellowships are very important in our department because, with few exceptions, we are unable to give either teaching or research assistantships to first-year or second- year graduate students. Furthermore, in our area N.S.F. fellowships are available only to mathematical economists, who represent a minority of our graduate students. The availability of N.S.F. Fellowships to scientists and engineers, and on a comparably generous basis at all levels of graduate study, means that other departments at M.I.T. do not have the same kind of need that we have for second-year fellowships out of Woodrow Wilson funds.
  6. The present Institute practice is especially prejudicial to our department in relation to its competitors at other universities. Our chief competitor is Harvard, which has the only other economics department with comparable numbers of Woodrow Wilson Fellows currently. Our other significant competitors include California, Chicago, Yale and Princeton. These other economics departments all belong to divisions of their respective universities in which most If not all other departments have at least roughly comparable numbers of Woodrow Wilson Fellows. Hence these other departments have normal expectations that second-year fellowships out of Woodrow Wilson funds will go to their own students in roughly the same proportion as in the first year.

The availability of second-year fellowships is obviously a vital concern to the Woodrow Wilson Fellows themselves in deciding where to do their graduate work, and this is a question that some of them ask specifically. Clearly, the present Institute practice means that Woodrow Wilson Fellows in economics at M.I.T. would have an appreciably lower chance of receiving second-year fellowships than they would at the predominantly liberal arts universities.

  1. Our problem is all the more acute because, unlike such schools as Harvard, California, and Chicago, we have an appreciably more selective admissions policy. That is to say, we have enjoyed a remarkable increase in both the quantity and quality of applicants in recent years; and, since we have not expanded our numbers, we admit only people who would normally stand in the top half or higher of most other departments. Secondly, we have tightened our own grading standards and now give fewer A’s and more B’s, C’s, etc. than before. This year’s regular first- year graduate students, for example, have an aggregate cumulative slightly less than 4.3. In view of our selective admission policy, this means that students with cumulatives of 4.4 or 4.2 are still doing a highly creditable job, even though they are in the vicinity of the median of their own group. This to why we Feel that current Woodrow Wilson Fellows with such cumulatives deserve renewals of their fellowships.
  2. I apologize for the last-minute character of this plea. I should explain that the tentative decisions of the Scholarship Subcommittee come to us as more of a shock than they perhaps should, because — in Robert Solow’s absence –we thought that Institute policy on this question was nearer to our expectations then it has proved to be. For example, Solow said in his parting memorandum, which listed the eight present Woodrow Wilson Fellows whom we were to recommend for second-year fellowships, “If we do not get these, I would like to hear about it right away, because strong protest is in order.”

I should say finally, that we have several other non-Woodrow Wilsons whom we would have recommended for second-year fellowships, except that we felt — and thought it was general policy — that Woodrow Wilsons should have priority for renewals provided that they performed creditably.

Source: M.I.T. Archives. MIT Department of Economics. Records, 1947- (AC 394), Box 4, Folder “W”.

Image Source: Cropped portrait of Robert L. Bishop from the M.I.T. Museum website. Colorized by Economics in the Rear-view Mirror.

Categories
Bibliography Economists M.I.T.

M.I.T. Writings and addresses of Francis A. Walker, 1857-1897

General Francis Amasa Walker

 

BIBLIOGRAPHY OF THE WRITINGS
AND REPORTED ADDRESSES
OF FRANCIS A. WALKER.

The following bibliography, based upon memoranda and scrap books left by General Walker, has been prepared under the supervision of the Secretary of the [American Statistical] Association. It will be observed that references to newspapers have been included containing reports of addresses delivered on various occasions, but these have been mentioned only when the report was fairly complete, and appeared to be in the main accurate. The Secretary of the Association [David Rich Dewey] will be glad to receive corrections or additions.

1857. More Thoughts on the Hard Times. (Signed W.) National Era (Washington), October 29.

1858. Mr. Carey and Protection. (Not signed.) National Era (Washing top), January 21.

Why Are We Not a Manufacturing People? (Signed F. A. W.) National Era, January 28.
Mr. Carey on the History of Our Currency. (Signed F. A. W.) National Era, June 3.
Mr. Carey’s Letters.-Continued. (Signed F. A. W.) National Era, June 17.

1858-60. Contributions to the Ichnolite: a monthly magazine published by the students of Amherst College. Vols. 5, 6, 7, and 8.

1860. Contributions to The Undergraduate, New Haven. (After No. 1 the name of the magazine was changed to University Quarterly.) Vols. 1 and 2.

1868. On the Extinguishment of The National Debt. By “Poor Richard.” Bankers’ Magazine, July, vol. 23, pp. 20-34.

1868. Mr. Grote’s Theory of Democracy. Bibliotheca Sacra, October, vol. 25, pp. 687-733.

1868. Many editorial articles in the Springfield Republican.

1868-69. Editor of the Monthly Reports of the Bureau of Statistics, Treasury Department, on the Commerce and Navigation of the United States. Series 1868-69, Nos. 21-29, pp. 287. Series 1869-70, Nos. 1-3, pp. 152.

1869. Is It a Gospel of Peace? Lippincott’s Magazine, August, vol. 4, pp. 201-05.

1869. Annual Report of the Deputy Special Commissioner of the Revenue in charge of the Bureau of Statistics on the Commerce and Navigation of the United States for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1868. (Dated August 20, 1869.) Part 1, pp. 729; Part 2, pp. 352; Part 3, pp. 144. Also 40th Congress, 3d Session. House Ex. Doc., vol. 16. Washington.

1869. The National Debt. Lippincott’s Magazine, September, vol. 4, pp. 316-18.

1869. Annual Report of the Operations of the Bureau of Statistics to the Secretary of the Treasury for the Year 1869. (Dated October 13.) Pp. 6. Also 41st Congress, 2d Session. House Ex. Doc. No. 2, vol. 4, pp. 337-42. Washington.

1869. American Industry in the Census. Atlantic Monthly, December, vol. 24, pp. 689-701.

1870. What to do with the Surplus. Atlantic Monthly, January, vol. 25, pp. 72-86.

1870. A Reply to Mr. Kennedy on the Errors of the Eighth Census. Letter in Washington Chronicle, January.

1870. An Oration at the Soldiers’ Monument Dedication in North Brookfield, Mass., January 19. Pph., pp. 5-35. Also in Springfield Republican, January 20.

1870. The Report of the Special Commissioner. Lippincott’s Magazine, February, vol. 5, pp. 223-30.

1870. The Legal Tender Act (With Henry Adams). North American Review, April, vol. 110, pp. 299-327. Also published in Chapters of Erie and Other Essays, by Charles F. Adams, Jr., and Henry Adams, pp. 302-32.

1870. Annual Report of the Deputy Special Commissioner of the Revenue in charge of the Bureau of Statistics on the Commerce and Navigation of the United States for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1869. (Dated February 7, 1870.) Pp. viii. Part 1, pp. 227; Part 2, pp. 436; Part 3, pp. 94. Also 41st Congress, 2d Session. House Ex. Doc., vol. 15. Washington.

1870. Communication from the Superintendent of the Census submitting a draft of an Act amendatory of the Census Act of 1850. (Dated February 17.) 41st Congress, 2d Session. House Ex. Doc. No. 161, pp. 3.

1870. A Statement of the Superintendent of the Census relating to the amount to be saved to the Treasury by dispensing with certain copies of the Census Returns required by the Act of 1850. (Dated April 6.) 41st Congress, 2d Session. Senate Ex. Doc. No. 79, vol. 2, pp. 3. Washington.

1870. The Indian Problem. Review of Keim’s Sheridan’s Troopers on the Borders. The Nation, June 16, vol. 10, p. 389.

1871. Letter from the Superintendent of the Ninth Census addressed to Hon. W. B. Stokes relative to field-work performed by assistant marshals. (Dated January 14.) 41st Congress, 3d Session. House Mis. Doc. No. 31, vol. 1, pp. 3.

1871. Report of the Superintendent of the Census on Estimates of Expenditures, etc. (Dated December 20, 1870.) 41st Congress, 3d Session. House Ex. Doc. No. 29, vol. 7, pp. 4.

1871. Report of the Superintendent of the Census, December 26. Reprinted as a preface to vol. 1 on Population. Pp. xlviii. Washington.

1872. Letter from the Commissioner of Indian Affairs upon the action of the Department relating to the Kansas Indian Lands in the State of Kansas. (Dated December 2, 1871.) 42d Congress, 2d Session. Senate Mis. Doc. No. 10, vol. 1, pp. 4. Washington.

1872. Letter from the Superintendent of the Census containing a report of the number of persons employed in obtaining the Ninth Census, time employed, amount paid to each, etc. (Dated December 6, 1871.) 42d Congress, 2d Session. Senate Ex. Doc. No. 4, vol. 1, pp. 186.

1872. Reports of the Ninth Census, 1870. 3 quarto volumes and Compendium.

1872. Annual Report of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs to the Secretary of the Interior for the year 1872, November 1. Washington. Pp. 471. Also 42d Congress, 3d Session. House Ex. Doc. No. 1, vol. 3, Part 5, pp. 389-847. Washington.

1873. The Indian Question. North American Review, April, vol. 116, pp. 329-88. Also republished in book The Indian Question.

1873. Some Results of the Census of 1870. Read before the Social Science Association, Boston, May 15. Published in Journal of Social Science, No. 5, pp. 71-97. Also printed separately.

1873. American Irish and American Germans. Scribner’s Monthly, June, vol. 6, pp. 172-79.

1873. The Relations of Race and Nationality to Mortality in the United States. Read before the American Health Association. Published in Reports and Papers of the American Public Health Association, vol. 1, pp. 18-35. Also republished in Statistical Atlas, 1874.

1873. Our Population in 1900. Atlantic Monthly, October, vol. 32, pp. 487-95.

1874. Report of the Superintendent of the Census, November 15, 1873. 43d Congress, 1st Session. House Ex. Doc. No. 1, Part 5, vol. 4, pp. 757-63.

1874. Indian Citizenship. International Review, May-June, vol. 1, pp. 305-26. Also republished in book The Indian Question.

1874. Handbook of Statistics of the United States, compiled by M. C. Spaulding. Review in The Nation, May 14, vol. 18, p. 319.

1874. Mr. D. A. Wells and the Incidence of Taxation. Letter in The Nation, June 11, vol. 18, pp. 378-79.

1874. The Wages Question. Address before the Alexandria and Athena Societies of Amherst College, July 8. Published in New York Times, July 9; also Springfield Republican, July 9.

1874. Statistical Atlas of the United States based on the results of the Ninth Census, 1870, with contributions from many eminent men of science and several departments of the Government. Compiled with authority of Congress. (The Preface and Introduction, and of the Memoirs and Discussions, The Progress of The Nation, and Relations of Race and Nationality to Mortality in the United States, were written by General Walker.) Washington. Plates 54.

1874. Legislators and Legislation. Letter in Providence Journal.

1874. Wages and the Wages-Fund. Letter to the Financier, August 29. (In reply to Prof. A. L. Perry.)

1874. The Indian Question. Boston. Pp. 268.

1874. Cairnes’s Political Economy. Review in The Nation, Nov. 12, vol. 19, p. 320.

1874. Our Foreign Population. Chicago Advance, November 12, December 10, and January 14, 1875.

1875. Report of the Superintendent of the Census, November 1, 1874. (Dated New Haven.) 43d Congress, 2d Session. House Ex. Doc. No. 1, Part 5, vol. 6, pp. 721-30. Washington.

1875. The Wage-Fund Theory. North American Review, January, vol. 120, pp. 84-119.

1875. The Hard Times. Address before the New Haven Chamber of Commerce, February 23. Abstract in Springfield Republican, February 25.

1875. The First Century of the Republic: Growth and Distribution of Population. Harper’s Monthly, August, vol. 51, pp. 391-414. Also published in book First Century of the Republic, pp. 211-37.

1875. Our Domestic Service. Scribner’s Monthly, December, vol. 11, pp. 273-78.

1876. Maps (three) in History of the United States, by J. A. Doyle. New York.

1876. Census. Encyclopædia Britannica (9th edition), vol. 5, pp. 334-40.

1876. The Wages Question. A Treatise on Wages and the Wages Class. New York; London, 1877. Pp. iv, 428.

1877. The Philadelphia Exhibition. Part 1. — Mechanism and Administration. International Review, May-June, vol. 4, pp. 363-96.
The Late World’s Fair. Part 2. — The Display. July-August, vol. 4, pp. 497-513.
The Late World’s Fair. Part 3. — The Display. September October, vol. 4, pp. 673-85.
These are also published in The World’s Fair: Philadelphia, 1876; A Critical Account, pp. 68; also in A Critical View of the Great World’s Fair, pp. 68.

1878. The United States. Johnson’s Cyclopædia (1st edition), vol. 4, Part 2, pp. 1029-56.

1878. United States Centennial Commission. International Exhibition, 1876. Editor of Reports and Awards. Philadelphia, 1878; also Washington, 1880. 6 vols.

1878. Money. (Lectures, Johns Hopkins University.) New York and London. Pp. xv, 550.

1878. Remarks addressed to the International Monetary Conference, Paris, August 22. 45th Congress, 3d Session. Senate Ex. Doc. 58, pp. 73-79. Also printed separately.

1878. Report of the Superintendent of the Census, January 17. (Dated New Haven.) Pp. 21. Also 45th Congress, 3d Session. House Ex. Doc. No. 1, Part 5, vol. 9, pp. 839-57. Washington.

1878. Interview of the Select Committees of the Senate of the United States and of the House of Representatives to make provision for taking the Tenth Census, with Prof. Francis A. Walker, Superintendent of the Census, December 16. 45th Congress, 30 Session. Senate Mis. Doc. No. 26; pp. 20.

1879. The Monetary Conferences of 1867 and 1878, and the Future of Silver. Princeton Review, January, vol. 3, N. S., pp. 28-54.

1879. Money in Its Relations to Trade and Industry. (Lectures, Lowell Institute, Boston.) New York and London. Pp. iv, 339.

1879. The Present Standing of Political Economy. Sunday Afternoon, May, vol. 3, pp. 432-41.

1879. Report of the Superintendent of the Census, November 15. Pp. 16. Also 46th Congress, 2d Session. House Ex. Doc. No. 1, Part 5, vol. 10, pp. 307-20. Washington.

1880-82. Census Bulletins, Nos. 1-305. Also Extra Census Bulletins.

1880. The Principles of Taxation. Princeton Review, July, vol. 6, N. S., pp. 92-114.

1881-88. Reports of the Tenth Census, 1880. 22 quarto volumes and Compendium (Parts 1 and 2). Washington.

1881. Report of the Superintendent of the Census, December 1, 1880. 46th Congress, 3d Session. House Ex. Doc. No. 1, Part 5, vol. 10, pp. 423-26. Washington.

1881. Letter to Secretary of Interior giving complete returns of the population of each State and Territory on the 1st day of June, 1880. Letter of January 17 to Hon. S. S. Cox, pp. 5-18. The Alabama Paradox — Letter to Hon. S. S. Cox, January 17, pp. 19-20. The Moiety Question. — Letter to Hon. S. S. Cox, January 15, pp. 20-24. 46th Congress, 3d Session. House Ex. Doc. No. 65, vol. 18, pp. 1-2. (The Moiety Question reprinted in 1891.)

1881. Letter from the Superintendent of the Census respecting the execution of the law for taking the Tenth and subsequent censuses, with accompanying schedules. (Dated January 25.) 46th Congress, 3d Session. Senate Ex. Doc. No. 28, vol. 1, pp. 35.

1881. Report of the Superintendent of the Census, November 1, pp. 65. Also 47th Congress, 1st Session. House Ex. Doc. No. 1, Part 5, vol. 10, pp, 665-727. Washington.

1882. American Agriculture. Princeton Review, May, vol. 9, N. S., pp. 249-64.

1882. The Growth of the United States. The Century, October, vol. 24, pp. 920-26.

1883. Remarks on the Character of President W. B. Rogers, October 12, before the Society of Arts. Published in Proceedings of the Society of Arts, 1882-83, pp. 5-7. Also printed separately.

1883. American Manufactures. Princeton Review, March, vol. 11, N. S., pp. 213-23.

1883. Remarks on Giving the Name of William B. Rogers to the Main Building, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, May 29. (Printed for private distribution.)

1883. Political Economy. New York and London. Pp. iv, 490.

1883. The Unarmed Nation. Our Duty in the Cause of International Peace. Address delivered at Smith College, Northampton, June 20. Published in the Springfield Republican, June 21.

1883. Henry George’s Social Fallacies. North American Review, August, vol. 137, pp. 147-57.

1883. Land and Its Rent. Boston and London. Pp. vi, 232.

1884. President’s Report, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, December 12, 1883. Boston. Pp. 31.

1884. The Second and Third Army Corps. Letter in The Nation, March 27, vol. 38, p. 274.

1884. Political Economy. (Briefer Course, abridged from work of 1883.) New York. Also republished under the title A Brief Political Economy. London, 1886. Pp. iv, 415.

1884. Industrial Education. Read before the American Social Science Association, September 9. Published in Journal of Social Science, No. 19, pp. 117-31.

1884. Public Revenue. Lalor’s Cyclopædia of Political Science, Political Economy, and United States History, vol. 3, pp. 618-29; The Wage Fund, ditto, pp. 1074-77; Wages, ditto, pp. 1077-85.

1884. President’s Report, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, December 10. Boston. Pp. 20.

1885. Letter to the Secretary of the Interior, February 24, regarding the Accounts of Richard Joseph. 49th Congress, 1st Session. House Ex. Doc. No. 127, pp. 5-7.

1885. Shall Silver be Demonetized? North American Review, June, vol. 140, pp. 489-92.

1885. President’s Report, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, December 9. Boston. Pp. 24.

1886. Gettysburg. Lecture in Lowell Institute Course, Boston, March 4. Published in Boston Herald, March 5.

1886. What Industry, if Any, Can Profitably be Introduced into Country Schools? Science, April 15, vol. 9, p. 365.

1886. History of the Second Army Corps in the Army of the Potomac. New York. Pp. xiv, 737. Second edition, 1891, pp. xx, 737.

1886. The Military Character and Services of Major-General W. S. Hancock. Address delivered at the meeting of the Vermont Officers’ Reunion Society, Montpelier, Vt., November 3. Published in Free Press (Burlington), November 5. Read (revised and corrected) before the Military Historical Society of Massachusetts, February 13, 1888. Published in the Papers of the Military Historical Society of Massachusetts, vol. 10, pp. 49-67. Under the title Hancock in the War of the Rebellion, read before the New York Commandery of the Loyal Legion, February 4, 1891. Published in Personal Recollections of the War of the Rebellion. (New York Commandery of the Loyal Legion.). Vol. 1 (1891), pp. 349-64. Published in the Brooklyn Standard Union, February 7 and 14, 1891.

1886. Geography of New England: A Supplement to Maury’s Manual of Geography. Pp. 24.

1886. Sumner at Fair Oaks. National Tribune (Washington), October 14. Couch at Fredericksburg, ditto, October 21. Hancock at Gettysburg, ditto, October 28. Warren at Bristoe, ditto, November 4.

1886. President’s Report, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, December 8. Boston. Pp. 32.

1887. Socialism. Scribner’s Magazine, January, vol. 1, pp. 107-19. Also published in Phillips Exeter Lectures (1885-86). Boston, 1887, pp. 47-78.

1887. A Plea for Industrial Education in the Public Schools. Address to the Conference of Associated Charities of the City of Boston, February 10. Pph., pp. 34.

1887. General Hancock and the Artillery at Gettysburg. The Century, March, vol. 33, p. 803. Also published in Battles and Leaders of the Civil War (The Century Co.), vol. 3, pp. 385-86.

1887. The Source of Business Profits. Read before the Society of Arts, March 24. Published in Proceedings of the Society of Arts, 1886-87, pp. 76-90. Also published, with additions and alterations, in the Quarterly Journal of Economics, April, vol. 1, pp. 265-88. Printed separately, Pph., pp. 26.

1887. Wolseley on Lee. Letters in The Nation, March 31, vol. 44, p. 269; April 28, pp. 362-63.

1887. Arithmetic in Primary and Grammar Schools. Remarks before the School Committee of Boston, April 12. Published as School Document No. 9, 1887. Pp. 20. Also Pph., pp. 29.

1887. Sketch of the Life of Amasa Walker. In History of North Brookfield, Mass. The same expanded in the New England Historical and Genealogical Register, April, 1888, vol. 42, pp. 133-41. Also printed separately, Pph., pp. 14.

1887. Meade at Gettysburg. Battles and Leaders of the Civil War (The Century Co.), vol. 3, pp. 406-12.

1887. Memoir of William Barton Rogers, 1804-82. Read before The National Academy of Sciences, April. Published in Biographical Memoirs of National Academy, vol. 3, 1895, pp. 1-13. Also Pph., pp. 13.

1887. The Socialists. The Forum, May, vol. 3, pp. 230-42.

1887. Political Economy. (Revised and enlarged.) New York and London. Pp. vi, 537.

1887. Reply (before the Boston School Board) to Supervisor Peterson on the Study of Arithmetic in Grammar Schools, June 14. Published in Popular Educator, September, vol. 3, pp. 209-11.

1887. The Labor Problem of Today. Address delivered before the Alumni Association of Lehigh University, June 22. Printed by the Association. New York. pp. 29.

1887. Manual Education in Urban Communities. Address before The National Educational Association, Chicago, July 15. Published in Addresses and Proceedings of The National Educational Association, 1887, pp. 196-205.

1887. What Shall We Tell the Working Classes? Scribner’s Magazine, November, vol. 2, pp. 619-27.

1887. Arithmetic in the Boston Schools. Read before the Grammar School Section of the Massachusetts Teachers’ Association at Boston, November 25. Published in The Academy, Syracuse, N. Y., January, 1888. vol. 2, pp. 433-44. Also printed separately.

1888. United States: Part III.-Political Geography and Statistics. Encyclopædia Britannica (9th edition), vol. 23, pp. 818-29.

1888. President’s Report, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, December 14, 1887. Boston. Pp. 39.

1888. Remarks at the Opening of the Sixteenth Triennial Exhibition of the Massachusetts Charitable Mechanic Association, September 27, 1887. Published in Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of January 18, 1888, p. 56.

1888. The Eleventh Census of the United States. Quarterly Journal of Economics, January, vol. 2, pp. 135-61. Also printed separately, Pph., pp. 27.

1888. The Military Character and Services of Major-General Hancock. (See 1886.)

1888. The Bases of Taxation. Political Science Quarterly, March, vol. 3, pp. 1-16.

1888. A Reply to Mr. Macvane: On the Source of Business Profits. Quarterly Journal of Economics, April, vol. 2, pp. 263-96. Also printed separately; Pph., pp. 36.

1888. Economy of Food. Science, May 18, vol. 11, pp. 233-34.

1888. Efforts of the Manual Laboring Class to Better Their Condition. Address as President, American Economic Association, May 21. Publications of the American Economic Association, vol. 3, pp. 7-26.

1888. The Intermediate Task.—Protection and American Agriculture. The National Revenue. A Collection of Papers by American Economists. Edited by Albert Shaw. Pp. 135-151. (Pp. 137-151 reprinted from the revised edition of Political Economy. New York, 1887.)

1888. The Knights of Labor. Princeton Review, September, vol. 6, N. S., pp. 196-209.

1888. President’s Report, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, December 12. Boston. Pp. 50.

1888. Philip Henry Sheridan. Eulogy delivered before the City Government of Boston, December 18. Published in Sheridan Memorial, pp. 41-117; Boston Herald, December 19. Also printed separately.

1889. Recent Progress of Political Economy in the United States. Address as President, American Economic Association, December 27, 1888. Publications of the American Economic Association, vol. 4, pp. 17-40.

1889. Memoir of E. B. Elliott. Proceedings of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, vol. 24, pp. 447-52.

1889. Census. Johnson’s Cyclopædia (Revised, 1889-90), vol. 1, pp. 78-88 (New edition, 1895); vol. 2, pp. 152-59.

1889. Ventilating Public Buildings. Letter in Boston Post, January 22.

1889. Can Morality be Taught in the Public Schools without Sectarianism? Christian Register, January 31.

1889. The Laborer and His Employer. Lecture delivered at Cornell University, February. Published in Scientific American, June 1, Supplement No. 700.

1889. The Growth of The Nation in Numbers, Territory, and the Elements of Industrial Power. Oration before the Phi Beta Kappa, Brown University, June 18. Published in Providence Journal, June 19.

1889. Indian Schools. Letter to General Armstrong in Southern Workman, October, 1889; quoted in Proceedings of Seventh Annual Meeting, Lake Mohonk Conference, pp. 36-37.

1889. First Lessons in Political Economy. New York; London, 1890. Pp. viii, 323.

1889. The Nation’s Celebration. The Independent (New York), September 26.

1889. Address before the Newton Tariff Reform Club, November 20. Abstract in Springfield Republican, November 22.

1889. Industrial Training. A Talk to the Commercial Club of Providence, November 17. Reported in Providence Journal.

1889. Civil Service Reform. Thanksgiving-Day Discourse. The Independent (New York), November 28.

1890. Annual Report of the President, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, December 11, 1889. Boston. Pp. 48.

1890. The Nation That Was Saved. Oration at Reunion of New Hampshire Soldiers, Weirs, August 29, 1889. Printed in Veteran’s Advocate, Concord, N. H., January, vol. 7, pp. 2-3.

1890. The Study of Statistics in Colleges and Technical Schools. Technology Quarterly, February, vol. 3, pp. 1-8.

1890. Mr. Bellamy and the New Nationalist Party. Atlantic Monthly, February, vol. 65, pp. 248-62. (Address delivered before the Economic Association of Providence, December, 1889. Reported in Providence Journal.) Also printed separately, Pph., pp. 15.

1890. America’s Fourth Centenary. The Forum, February, vol. 8, pp. 612-21.

1890. The Eight-Hour Agitation. Address before the Young Men’s Christian Union, Boston, March 1. Published in Boston Journal, March 3.

1890. Protection and Protectionists. Quarterly Journal of Economics, April, vol. 4, pp. 245-75.

1890. Address at the Memorial Exercises of the Thomas G. Stevenson Post, G. A. R., May 30. Published in Boston Journal, May 31.

1890. The Eight-Hour Law Agitation. Atlantic Monthly, June, vol. 65, pp. 800-10. Also printed separately, Pyh., pp. 22.

1890. The Great Review. Oration before the Society of the Army of the Potomac, Twenty-first Annual Reunion, Portland, Maine, July 3. Published in Report of the Proceedings of the Society of the Army of the Potomac, 1890, pp. 18-32; also in Boston Journal, July 4.

1890. Address on Presenting Diplomas of Graduation, June 3. Boston Journal, June 4; also Technology Quarterly, August, vol. 3, p. 202.

1890. Statistics of the Colored Race in the United States. Publications of the American Statistical Association, September-December, vol. 2 (Nos. 11-12), pp. 91-106.

1890. Democracy and Wealth. The Forum, November, vol. 10, pp. 243-55.

1890. The Changes of the Year. Technology Quarterly, November, vol. 3, pp. 281-86.

1890. Why Students Leave School. Letter in Boston Herald, December 14.

1890. The Tide of Economic Thought. Address as President of the American Economic Association, December 26. Publications of the American Economic Association, vol. 6 (1891), pp. 15-38. Also printed separately, Pph., pp. 24.

1891. Annual Report of the President, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, December 10, 1890. Boston. Pp. 52.

1891. Panic from Coinage. Evidence before the Committee on Coinage, January 29. 51st Congress, 2d Session. House Report 3967, Part 3. Reports and Hearings, pp. 54-58.

1891. Against Free Coinage of Silver. Speech in Faneuil Hall, January 20. Published in Boston Journal, January 21.

1891. Hancock in the War of the Rebellion. (See 1886.)

1891. Testimony before Committee of New York Legislature, March 7, regarding Eleventh Census of the United States in New York. Reported in New York Times, March 8.

1891. Charles Devens. An address delivered before the Commandery of the State of Massachusetts Military Order of the Loyal Legion, March 19. Published in Circular No. 7, Series 1891, March 20; Boston Journal, March 20; also Pph., pp. 20.

1891. Usefulness of a Five-Year Course. Letter in The Tech, April 9, vol. 10, pp. 177-79.

1891. The United States Census. The Forum, May, vol. 11, pp. 258-67.

1891. The Great Count of 1890. The Forum, June, vol. 11, pp. 406-18.

1891. The Place of Schools of Technology in Education. Remarks at the Graduating Exercises of the Worcester Polytechnic Institute, June 18. Published in W. P. I., Worcester, July 15, pp. 79-80.

1891. A Reply to the Article: The Economists and the Public. Letter in Evening Post (New York), June 27.

1891. The Place of Scientific and Technical Schools in American Education. Address delivered at the 29th University Convocation of the State of New York, Albany, July 8. Published in Regents’ Bulletin, No. 8, January, 1893, pp. 375-88; also the larger portion in Technology Quarterly, December, vol. 4, pp. 293-303; and in the Educational Review under the title The Place of Schools of Technology in American Education, October, vol. 2, pp. 209-19.

1891. The Colored Race in the United States. The Forum, July, vol. 11, pp. 501-09.

1891. The Doctrine of Rent and the Residual Claimant Theory of Wages. Quarterly Journal of Economics, July, vol. 5, pp. 417-37.

1891. Immigration and Degradation. The Forum: August, vol. 11, pp. 634-44.

1892. Annual Report of the President, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, December 9, 1891. Boston. Pp. 56.

1892. Growth and Distribution of Population in the United States. The Chautauquan, March, vol. 14, pp. 656-58.

1892. Dr. Böhm-Bawerk’s Theory of Interest. Quarterly Journal of Economics, July, vol. 6, pp. 399-416.

1892. Immigration. Yale Review, August, vol. 1, pp. 125-45.

1892. Normal Training in Women’s Colleges. Educational Review, November, vol. 4, pp. 328-38.

1893. Annual Report of the President, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, December 14, 1892. Boston. Pp. 65.

1893. Massachusetts Institute of Technology. — Length of Course. — Degrees at Scientific Schools. Letter in Engineering News, January 26, vol. 29, pp. 90-91; February 2, p. 108.

1893. Scientific and Technical Schools. Address delivered at opening of Engineering Building, Pennsylvania State College, February 22. Published in Proceedings at the Formal Opening of the Engineering Building, Pennsylvania State College, pp. 23-30; also in Pennsylvania School Journal, April, vol. 41, pp. 435-38.

1893. Remarks on the Dedication of the New Science and Engineering Buildings of McGill University, Montreal, February 24. Published in Technology Quarterly, April, vol. 6, pp. 65-68. Also printed separately.

1893. The Free Coinage of Silver. Journal of Political Economy, March, vol. 1, pp. 163-78.

1893. Sickles at Gettysburg. Letter in The Nation, May 11, vol. 56, p. 346.

1893. College Athletics. Address before the Phi Beta Kappa Society, Alpha of Massachusetts, at Cambridge, June 29. Published in Boston Transcript, June 30; Harvard Graduates’ Magazine, September, vol. 2, pp. 1-18; Technology Quarterly, July, vol. 6, pp. 116-31. Also printed separately, Pph., pp. 16.

1893. How Far Do the Technological Schools, as They Are at Present Organized, Accomplish the Training of Men for the Scientific Professions, and How Far and for What Reasons Do They Fail to Accomplish Their Primary Purpose? Address on opening Congress of Technological Instruction, Chicago, July 26. Published in Addresses and Proceedings of International Congress of Education, Chicago, pp. 528-34.

1893. The Technical School and the University. A Reply to Prof. Shaler. Atlantic Monthly, September, vol. 72, pp. 390-94. Technology Quarterly, October, vol. 6, pp. 223-29. Also printed separately, Pph., pp. 7.

1893. Address on Taking the Chair as Président-Adjoint, International Statistical Institute, Chicago, September 11. Published in Bulletin L’Institut International de Statistique, Tome viii, 1895, pp. xxxvi-ix.

1893. Value of Money. Paper read before the American Economic Association, September 13. Published in Quarterly Journal of Economics, October, vol. 8, pp. 62-76. Also printed separately, Pph., pp. 17.

1893. Annual Report of the President, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, December 13. Boston. Pp. 61.

1894. International Bimetallism. Address delivered before the Liberal Club of Buffalo, N. Y., February 16. Published in book The Liberal Club, pp. 107-38.

1894. [Neo-Bimetallism in Boston.] Letter in Evening Post (New York), February 24.

1894. State House Reconstruction. Remarks at a Hearing at the State House, March 1. Published in Boston Transcript, March 6. Also in Pph. Save the State House, pp. 20-24.

1894. Bimetallism: A Tract for Times. Pph., pp. 24.

1894. Bimetallism. Address delivered before the Boston Boot and Shoe Club, March 28. Published in The Shoe and Leather Reporter, April 5. Also printed separately, Pph., pp. 15.

1894. Par of Exchange. Letter in Evening Post (New York), April 3.

1894. General Hancock. (Great Commanders Series.) New York. Pp. vi, 332.

1894. How May Closer Articulation Between the Secondary Schools and Higher Institutions be Secured? Discussion of the question at the Ninth Annual Meeting of the New England Association of Colleges and Preparatory Schools, October 12. Published in Addresses and Proceedings of the Ninth Annual Meeting of the New England Association of Colleges and Preparatory Schools, pp. 22-25. Also published in School Review, December, vol. 2, pp. 612-15.

1894. The Relation of Professional and Technical to General Education. Educational Review, December, vol. 8, pp. 417-33.

1894. Annual Report of the President, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, December 12. Boston. Pp. 86.

1895. Bimetallism. Address delivered before the Springfield Board of Trade, March 27. Published in Springfield Union, March 28.

1895. The Making of The Nation. (The American History Series.) New York. Pp. xv, 314.

1895. Reply to Criticism on Springfield Address. Letter in Evening Post (New York), April 5.

1895. The Restriction of Immigration. Address delivered at Cornell University, April 12. Published in the Transactions of the Association of Civil Engineers of Cornell University, 1895, pp. 73-85.

1895. The Growth of American Nationality. The Forum, June, vol. 19, pp. 385-400.

1895. Obituary: Samuel Dana Horton. The Economic Journal, June, vol. 5, pp. 304-06.

1895. The Relation of Manual Training to Certain Mental Defects. Paper read at the Sixty-fifth Annual Meeting of the American Institute of Instruction, July 9. Published in Journal of Proceedings of American Institute of Instruction, 1895, pp. 23-32. Also printed separately, Pph., pp. 12.

1895. The Quantity-Theory of Money. Quarterly Journal of Economics, July, vol. 9, pp. 372-79.

1895. The Argument for Bimetallism. The Independent (New York), October 10.

1895. “Severe Work at the Tech.” Letter in Boston Herald, November 20.

1895. The Restriction of Immigration. Address delivered before the Manufacturers’ Club of Philadelphia, December 16. Published in Manufacturers’ Record, December 21.

1896. Annual Report of the President, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, December 11, 1895. Boston. Pp. 74.

1896. Reply to General Greeley Curtis regarding General Hooker. Letter in Boston Herald, February 5.

1896. Bimetallism in the United States. The Bimetallist (London), February, vol. 2, pp. 38-41.

1896. Currency and Prices. Letter in The Economist (London), April 18, vol. 54, pp. 491-92. Also published under the title A Criticism of the Right-Hon. G. J. Shaw-Lefevre, in The Bimetallist (London), May, vol. 2, pp. 97-98.

1896. The Relation of Changes in the Volume of the Currency to Prosperity. Paper read before the American Economic Association, December 28, 1895. Published in Economic Studies (American Economic Association), April, vol. 1, pp. 23-45.

1896. Letter to Senator Teller on the Silver Question, April 13. Quoted as an appendix to Senator Teller’s speech in the Senate, April 29.

1896. On Teaching English Composition in Colleges. Boston (Massachusetts Institute of Technology). Pph., pp. 5.

1896. Something About the Par of Exchange. Letter in Evening Post (New York), May 29.

1896. Money. Dictionary of Political Economy (Edited by R. H. Inglis Palgrave), vol. 2, pp. 787-96. Quantity-Theory of Money. (To be published in vol. 3.)

1896. Henry Saltonstall. Technique, 1897, pp. 32-34.

1896. Restriction of Immigration. Atlantic Monthly, June, vol. 77, pp. 822-29.

1896. Address before the British Bimetallic League, London, July 13. Published in The Bimetallist (London), July, vol. 2, pp. 139-45. Also published in The National Review, under the title The Monetary Situation and the United States, August, vol. 27, pp. 783-92.

1896. International Bimetallism. (Lectures delivered at Harvard University.) New York and London. Pp. iv, 297.

1896. International Bimetallism: A Rejoinder. Yale Review, November, vol. 5, pp. 303-12.

1896. International Bimetallism. Address delivered before the School masters’ Club of Massachusetts, November 7. Published in the Boston Herald, November 7; also in The Bimetallist (London), December, vol. 2, pp. 218-29.

1896. Technical Education. Address delivered at the Dedication of the Thomas S. Clarkson Memorial School of Technology, Potsdam, N. Y., November 30. (To be published.)

1897. Annual Report of the President, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, December 9, 1896. Boston. Pp. 80.

1897. Remarks at the First Meeting of the Washington Members of the American Statistical Association, Washington, December 31, 1896. Publications of the American Statistical Association, March, vol. 5 (No. 37), pp. 180-87.

1897. General Gibbon in the Second Corps. Paper read before the New York Commandery of the Loyal Legion, May 6, 1896. (To be published in Personal Recollections of the War of the Rebellion. New York Commandery of the Loyal Legion. Vol. 2.)

Source: D. R. D. [David Rich Dewey], Bibliography of the Writings and Reported Addresses of Francis A. Walker. in Publications of the American Statistical Association, vol. 5 (1896-1897), pp. 276-290.

Image Source: MIT Museum website. Francis Amasa Walker file. Colorized by Economics in the Rear-View Mirror.

Categories
Bibliography Johns Hopkins M.I.T. Public Finance

M.I.T. History of Public Finance Bibliography. Dewey, 1936

Davis Rich Dewey

As a graduate student at M.I.T. nearly fifty years ago, I spent a good part of my time when on campus at one of the many study desks along the windows at Dewey Library. At that time I had no idea who Davis Rich Dewey (after whom the library had been named) was. I presume this was true for most of my classmates too, M.I.T. not being known for  the study of the history of economics, though Paul Samuelson’s continuous interest in casting old theories in mathematical form was by no means chopped liver. 

As is noted in the short biography below, Dewey’s long career neatly overlapped with the first half-century of economics as a distinct academic discipline in North American universities. Thus it is fitting that Economics in the Rear-View Mirror gather and preserve artifacts left by Dewey in the course of his research and teaching.

Dewey’s magnum opus Financial History of the United States, first published in 1903, went through twelve editions (seven revisions) by 1934. He dedicated the book to the Seminary in History, Politics, and Economics at Johns Hopkins University which he attended from 1883 to 1886. That dedication immediately follows the brief biography. This in turn is followed by a fully-linked fourteen item bibliography of general works on the history of U.S. public finance suggested “for students, teachers, and readers.”. Further suggestions by Dewey will be added sometime sooner or later, so stay tuned.

_____________________________

Davis Rich Dewey, 1858-1942

Davis Rich Dewey was Professor of Economics at M.I.T. and one of several people who helped shape the profession of economics as it is practiced today. Best known for his writings on United states economic history, his professional career spans fifty years (1886-1940), the formative period of the modern economics profession.

In 1883 Davis R. Dewey entered the graduate department of economics at Johns Hopkins University, secured a fellowship, and spent summers working as a correspondent for Bradstreet’s Financial Review. He graduated from Johns Hopkins with the doctorate in 1886 having studied history, economics and political economy. His Ph.D. thesis, entitled “A History of American Economic Literature…” was a survey of the practice of the early U.S. economics profession.

Upon his graduation, Dewey received an appointment as instructor in history and political science at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. From the first he was integrally involved in research, publishing his first articles, “Municipal Revenue from Street Railways” [AEA Publications, Vol. II, No. 6 (1888), pp. 551-562] and “A Syllabus on Political History since 1815…” in 1889.

At M.I.T. Dewey served as an Instructor (1886-1888), then Assistant Professor of Economics and Statistics (1888-1889), Associate Professor (1889-1892) and finally Professor and Department Chairman (1893-1933). He taught a course in engineering administration from 1913- 1931, when a separate department of engineering administration was created, largely due to his efforts. He served as the Chairman of the M.I.T. Faculty from 1911-1913.

Dewey was influential in the internal affairs of two major professional organizations, the American Economic Association and the American Statistical Association. While still a graduate student, he had participated in the founding meeting of the American Economic Association and in 1909 he became its president. When that Association’s journal The American Economic Review was started in 1911, he served as its first editor, a post he held until 1940. The medal on the Dewey Library homepage was awarded to Davis R. Dewey upon the occasion of his retirement as editor of American Economic Review in 1940. Also in his first year of service at M.I.T., he became a member and was elected secretary of the American Statistical Association, an office he held until 1906. As secretary, and as a member of the Publications Committee, Dewey helped to edit the publications of that organization as well.

Davis R. Dewey was interested in the quality of education, as demonstrated by the following quotation,

“The Student will too often leave with…no systematic knowledge of the economic world, nor any well-defined theory of its workings. There must therefore be a far greater insistence upon…methods which will improve the missing experience.”

Davis R. Dewey was an associate of M.I.T. President Francis Amasa Walker whose Discussions in Economics and Statistics [Volume I: Finance and Taxation, Money and Bimetallism, Economic Theory. Volume II Statistics, National Growth, Social Economics] he edited for publication in 1899, shortly after Walker’s death. He was also associated with the editor Albert Bushnell Hart. Davis R. Dewey wrote his acclaimed Financial History of the United States for Hart’s American Citizen Series in 1903, and a volume entitled National Problems for Hart’s American Nation Series in 1907. In 1904 Financial History of the United States won the John Marshall Prize offered by Johns Hopkins. Dewey was a contributor to Palgrave’s Dictionary of Political Economy, the New International Encyclopedia Americana, Encyclopedia Britannica, American Year Book and the Commonwealth History of Massachusetts.

A representative of the modern field of economics, Davis R. Dewey was indifferent to theorizing which had little to do with empirical fact. He was above all a practitioner, insisting that applied knowledge we the true realm of the academic economist. Davis R. Dewey also maintained a lively interest in the politics of academe and followed several academic freedom cases of his day.

He died on December 13, 1942. The Dewey Library was named in his memory.

Written by Keith Morgan, Dewey Library Economics Bibliographer, 1994

Source: Webpage “Davis Rich Dewey, 1858-1942,” MIT Libraries, Dewey Library for Social Sciences and Management. Links added by Economics in the Rear-View Mirror.

_____________________________

Financial History of the United States (12th edition).
New York: Longmans, Green and Co., 1936.
by
Davis Rich Dewey, Ph.D., LL.D.,
Emeritus Professor of Economics and Statistics
Massachusetts Institute of Technology

To the Seminary
of the
Department of History, Politics, and Economics
of Johns Hopkins University,

Of which the author was a member from 1883 to 1886. Under the guidance of Adams, Ely, and Jameson, we read and learned. The first has gone, leaving affectionate memories and organized activities of permanent usefulness; the others are still doing their work in a spirit of broad-minded sympathy and fine scholarship.

_____________________________

Suggestions for Students, Teachers, and Readers

[Following three pages dedicated to general works on U.S. political history and biography, Dewey offers almost seventeen full pages dedicated to the subject of public finance. In this post we begin with the transcription of the most general works in public finance Dewey recommends. The curator of Economics in the Rear-View Mirror has been able to find links to the fourteen annotated items in Dewey’s list.]

II. Financial Histories

There are but few histories devoted exclusively to public finance; only one, indeed, that by Bolles, covers the general field over an extended period. The reader must therefore rely upon works on taxation, the tariff, coinage, and banking, and for special topics and episodes will often find the most satisfactory treatment in the political histories and biographies already referred to. The following volumes represent those which are most general in their treatment; of these the works of Bolles and Noyes are especially to be recommended; the narrative by Bolles stops with 1885, while the smaller work by Noyes is confined to the period 1865-1907. There is a great need of detailed works on the expenditures of the government and the various phases of treasury administration.

Adams, Ephraim D. The Control of the Purse in the United States Government. (Reprinted from the Kansas University Quarterly, April, 1894.) — An academic study of the debates in Congress on the interpretation of constitutional provisions relating to treasury management, loans, taxation, and money bills. Careful references are given.

Bolles, Albert Sidney. American Finance, with Chapters on Money and Banking. (N. Y., 1901.) — Especially valuable on expenditures; treats also of State finance. A discussion of present conditions rather than historical.

Bolles, Albert Sidney. The Financial History of the United States. (2d ed. N. Y., 1884-1886. 3 vols.) — Vol. I includes the period 1774-1789; II, 1789-1860; III, 1861-1885. The only single work which covers an extensive period; it represents research, and is closely restricted to questions of finance; no attempt is made to sketch in the political and social background, and the reader may be confused without preliminary reading. The author leans to protection, and takes the banker’s point of view in questions of currency. The work is especially valuable for chapters on accounting and expenditures. Referred to as Bolles.

1st edition (1879), Vol. I (Frank Taussig’s copy!)
1st edition (1883), Vol. II
1st edition (1886), Vol. III
2nd edition (1884), Vol. I
2nd edition (1885), Vol. II
2nd edition (1885), Vol. III
3rd edition (1892), Vol. I

Bourne, Edward Gaylord. The History of the Surplus Revenue of 1837. (N. Y., etc., 1885.) — A brief, scholarly monograph with abundant references and bibliography. In addition to the historical account, it summarizes the earlier proposals of distribution of surplus funds in the treasury.

Bronson, Henry. Historical Account of Connecticut Currency, Continental Money, and the Finances of the Revolution. (In New Haven Colony Hist. Soc. Papers, Vol. I. New Haven, 1865.) — This is more than a local study; the author is drawn into a general review of the financial measures of the Revolutionary War. The essay is scholarly and the style vigorous.

Bullock, Charles Jesse. Finances of the United States, 1775-1789, with Especial Reference to the Budget. (Madison, 1895. Univ. of Wisconsin. Bulletin, Economics, etc., Vol. I, No. 2.)  — The best monograph on the finances of the Revolutionary period, with bibliographies at the beginning of each chapter. Indispensable to the advanced student.

Kearny, John Watts. Sketch of American Finances, 1789-1835. (N. Y., 1887.) — A brief study of 150 pages, clear and helpful in questions concerning the treatment of the debt. Little attention is given to taxation.

Noyes, Alexander Dana. Thirty Years of American Finance, 1865-1896. (N. Y., etc., 1898.) — Treats the earlier period very briefly, but is of special value for 1878-1895. Relation of public finance to the money market is given prominence. This has been replaced by Forty Years of American Finance (1909), bringing the history down to 1907. The references to the earlier edition have been allowed to stand.

Schuckers, Jacob William. Brief Account of the Finances and Paper Money of the Revolutionary War. (Philadelphia, 1874.) — The style is somewhat rhetorical, and, while the writer has on the whole chosen sound authorities, the essay does not indicate a very wide research. Is an interesting account within a moderate space.

Scott, William A. The Repudiation of State Debts. (N. Y. etc., 1893.) — Chapters 2-6 are historical, describing various acts of repudiation in twelve States. Of value as explaining some of the remote influences affecting federal credit, 1825-1850.

Spaulding, Elbridge Gerry. History of the Legal Tender Paper Money issued during the Great Rebellion. (Buffalo, 1869.) — The title is hardly accurate; the volume is largely a collection of documents, speeches, etc., relating to the legal tender acts.

Sumner, William Graham. The Financier and Finances of the American Revolution. (N. Y., 1891. 2 vols.) — Contains a mine of valuable material, but is not clearly arranged.

Vol. 1 (1892)
Vol. 2 (1892)

Sumner, William Graham. A History of American Currency. (N. Y., 1874.) — A series of topical notes designed for reference rather than consecutive reading.

Wells, David Ames. Practical Economics. (N. Y., etc., 1885.) — Treats of the silver question, tariff revision, and, most valuable of all, experience of the United States in taxing distilled spirits, subsequent to the Civil War.

 

Source: Davis Rich Dewey, Financial History of the United States (Twelfth edition). New York: Longmans, Green and Co., 1936, pp. xi-xiii.

Image Source: Davis Rich Dewey portrait at the MIT Museum website. Retouched and colorized by Economics in the Rear-View Mirror.