Category: M.I.T.

From a cover letter, dated March 25, 1959, written by R. T. Haslam, Chairman of the Visiting Committee for the Department of Economics and Social and Science at M.I.T., it appears that the mimeographed document  transcribed below was described as “the full transcript of the Meeting” sent by the Department of Economics for the report to be submitted by the visiting committee to the M.I.T. Corporation. At that time the department of economics and social studies included sections for economics, industrial relations, psychology, and political science together with a center for international studies. 

_______________________

DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS AND SOCIAL SCIENCE
Meeting of the Visiting Committee
October 7, 1958

Present: Visiting Committee

Robert T. Haslam, Chairman
Consultant and Director, W. R. Grace and Company

James A. Lyles
Senior Vice President, Frist Boston Corporation
Robert L. Moore
Chairman of the Board, Sheraton Corporation of America

Robert V. Roosa
Vice President, Federal Reserve Bank of New York

Willard L. Thorp
Professor, Merrill Center for Economics, Amherst College

Max L. Waterman
Vice President and Director, Singer Manufacturing Company

Clarence Wynd
Eastman Kodak Company

M.I.T.

John E. Burchard
Dean, School of Humanities and Social Studies

Robert L. Bishop
Professor of Economics; Head, Department of Economics and Social Science

Ralph E. Freeman
Professor of Economics; former Head, Department of Economics and Social Science

E. Cary Brown
Professor of Economics; in Charge of the Undergraduate Program

Roger W. Brown
Associate Professor of Psychology

Davis H. Howes
Assistant Professor of Psychology

Norman J. Padelford
Professor of Political Science; Director, Political Science Section

Ithiel deS. Pool
Professor of Political Science

Charles A. Myers
Professor of Industrial Relations; Director, Industrial Relations Section

Max F. Millikan
Professor of Economics; Director, Center for International Studies

Charles P. Kindleberger
Professor of Economics; in Charge of the Graduate Program

As the membership of the Committee is entirely new to the Department of Economics, Professor Bishop opened the meeting by giving a brief resume of its present organization and activities.

Teaching and research cover four main fields: Economics, Industrial Relations, Political Science, and Psychology. In one or more of these four fields, the Department teaches at least five distinguishable types of students: (1) undergraduates who elect one or more of the Department’s four fields as a part of their Humanities and Social Science program; (2) undergraduates who major in Course XIV, in (a) Economics or Political Science and (b) Science or Engineering; (3) graduate students in Course XIV, who are mostly Ph.D. candidates in either Industrial Economics or Political Science; (4) regular graduate students in the School of Industrial Management; and (5) members of the two Executive Development programs administered by the School of Industrial Management, including both Sloan Fellows (who are here for twelve months) and Senior Executives (who are here for ten weeks in either the Fall or Spring).

(1) Until the 1940’s, all juniors at the Institute took two terms of Economic Principles; and this was the substance of the Department’s contribution to the Humanities and Social Science program. Subsequently, we have added the fields of Industrial Relations, Political Science, and Psychology. As a result, the Department now offers four of the ten fields from which all students select their Humanities and Social Science subjects in their junior and senior years. (The attached Tables I and II [only a Table II was present in the departmental records. It is transcribed below] show total enrollments during 1956-57 and 1957-58 in the Department’s four fields and in the individual subjects within those fields. Most of the undergraduate enrollment represents students in the general Humanities and Social Science program). In 1957-58, as Table II shows, total undergraduate enrollments were: Economics 1206, Labor Relations 242, Political Science 378, and Psychology 519.)

(2) For eleven years the Department has had its own undergraduate major in Economics (Course XIV). At first this was just Economics and Engineering; later the option of Economics and Science was added. More recently there has been added an option in Political Science, which is an alternative to Economics but is also joined with Science or Engineering. In the future, Psychology might become a similar option; but Psychology is not now a major subject for undergraduates.

(3) The program for a Ph.D. degree in Economics, now one of the largest in this country, was in operation for some years before the Department had an undergraduate major in Economics. This year for the first time we are offering a program for a Ph.D. in Political Science. Our S.M. program is relatively small, and it is limited to Economics and Engineering (or Science). Unlike the Ph.D. program, it is open only to students who have studied Science or Engineering at the undergraduate level, as in our own undergraduate Course XIV.

(4) The Department offers several special subjects for the regular graduate students in the School of Industrial Management, who are all S.M. candidates. In addition, these students sometimes enroll in the same classes with our own graduate students in Economics; and, indeed, this has increased the size of some of our graduate subjects substantially during the past year or two. Furthermore, a small but increasing number of Industrial Management graduate students are becoming interested in going on to a Ph.D. in a combination of Economics and Industrial Management. Our colleagues in the School of Industrial Management have also been considering the addition of a Ph.D. program of their own. If this should materialize, it is likely that our Department will continue to participate substantially on the Economics side of such a program.

(5) The other teaching activity carried on in cooperation with the School of Industrial Management is in their two executive development programs. The older of these is the Sloan Fellowship program, for which executives in the 32- to 36- year age bracket spend a full calendar year at M.I.T. The other, shorter executive development program in which the Department teaches is aimed at a higher executive level. Our department handles about one-quarter of both of these programs.

Dean Burchard stated what he considers to be the present problems of the Department of Economics.

(1) To have the undergraduate program in Course XIV better known to secondary schools so that students will come to M.I.T. specifically for these combinations of humanities and sciences.

(2) To organize our offering in Psychology. A number of years ago a committee recommended that a Department of Psychology be established in the School of Science; but the latter was not prepared to take on such a department. Although there are courses in Psychology given in other Schools at M.I.T., the largest amount of teaching in Psychology comes under the School of Humanities. Therefore the development and improvement of the Psychology Section within the Department of Economics and Social Science is our responsibility.

(3) The new Political Science Section is fairly well organized; yet it still faces the problem of integration with the work of the Center for International Studies, particularly on research projects.

Undergraduate Program

Professor E. Cary Brown, chairman of the Committee on the Undergraduate Program, reported on his committee’s consideration of possible revisions in the curriculum in Course XIV. Normally the M.I.T. student can spend 80 per cent of his time in Science and Engineering, with the remaining 20 per cent in Humanities or Social Science. In Course XIV, the student spends the equivalent of a year in Economics or Political Science, instead of taking the more advanced or specialized subjects in his field of Science or Engineering.

After reviewing the experience of the past ten years on the Economics side—looking over thesis topics, the electives chosen by our majors, and finally the jobs that our graduates have held—it seems clear that we are dealing mostly with students who become engineers first of all, with social science skills on the side. For these students, we shall continue to offer our option in General Economics. We have also recommended, however, the addition of two other options in Economics. One will be in Industrial Economics, including Industrial Relations. The other will be in Quantitative Economics and Methods.

The program in Industrial Economics will be aimed at the range of problems confronting business firms on an industry-wide basis. We shall aim to turn out students in this option who will be industry analysts in the broadest sense.

The Quantitative Economics option will be even more professional in orientation. Emphasis will be on technical training in analytical methods, with primary attention to statistics, econometrics, and programming and decision theory, including “operations research,” for which there is a rapidly growing demand.

At present, too many of our basic Economics subjects are not taken until the senior year; so we have recommended changes that will allow our majors to take these subjects earlier. We have also recommended several new subjects, including a research seminar as thesis preparation in the first term of the senior year.

There followed a discussion of a variety of departmental problems. One concerns the fact that, in the Economics wing, we have relatively many young full professors, in their early forties, with relatively few associate and assistant professors. The demands of our graduate program and our undergraduate major are such that relatively few senior members of the staff participate at any one time in the elementary subjects, 14.01 and 14.02. There also was discussion of the assistance that can be given by the older members of the Department to graduate students who are carrying out their first teaching assignment in the sections of elementary Economics. As Mr. Haslam pointed out, these are the first instructors that the student meets in the Department of Economics, and a favorable impact is very important.

The Psychology Section (reported by Professors Roger W. Brown and Davis Howes)

At present Psychology teaching is limited to the Humanities program; but within the next year or two we hope to set up a Psychology option in Course XIV. The decision that we have to make with the administrative authorities is whether to be content with a purely routine service in teaching elementary Psychology or whether to have a Psychology Section composed of persons with significant research activities who will develop a broader teaching program.

There are other psychologists at the Institute in both the School of Industrial Management and in the new Communications Center. These people are concerned with a limited set of rather specialized applications of Psychology. Collaboration with these other psychologists would be very fruitful if a graduate program of training Ph.D.’s in Psychology could be set up, and some of them occasionally teach Psychology subjects in the Humanities program; but, for the time being, the responsibility for manning and administering that program rests wholly on the Psychology Section in our Department.

There is a remarkable opportunity at M.I.T. for collaboration between psychologists and other scientists—in computers, to name one example, and also in such fields as electronics and the chemical effects of drugs on human behavior. These potential opportunities will always draw able young research-oriented psychologists to M.I.T.; but they will not stay beyond about three years unless there is more chance for growth and development of the psychology program than at present. Now there is no senior member of the Psychology group; the four psychologists of faculty rank consist of one associate professor and three assistant professors. It was agreed that a constructive step would be the appointment of a full professor of psychology.

The Political Science Section (reported by Professors Norman J. Padelford and Ithiel de S. Pool)

Political Science has gone through some of the problems that Psychology is now facing. Immediately after the war we started out as a purely service group, offering as part of the Humanities program undergraduate courses which have averaged from 350 to 400 students. Three years ago we came to feel, as the psychologists do now, that a mere service function would not satisfy us professionally. As the first step to broaden our base we set up an undergraduate course combining Political Science with Science and Engineering. After this course was launched and operating satisfactorily, there were discussions about a Ph.D. program in Political Science. The same arguments that were used for Economics and for Psychology came up—namely, that the ablest men cannot be recruited and retained unless they have good graduate students around them. We have had to go to Harvard and to Fletcher School for young teachers in our undergraduate courses.

A program for a Ph.D. in Political Science was launched this Fall. We have 13 mature and talented graduate students whose interests are focused on policy problems. We put these students to work on research projects. This is possible with a small group only slightly outnumbered by staff; for each student can work as assistant to a staff member.

As far as our group is concerned, we see no point in simply duplicating what is done at other institution. Our range of interests covers the following major topics:

(1) We are concerned with the growth and evolution of political communities from an elementary stage to maturity, whether in such places as Burma or at the international level, where we have been studying the process by which a group of nations in the so-called Atlantic community can become knitted together.

(2) We have a strong interest in the role of communications in the political process between men and between groups in the political process. This is an important topic, which has been inadequately stressed elsewhere.

(3) The touchstone of our approach is a study of the place of government and the role of public policy against the background of changes in science and technology.

One final word about our needs as we look ahead. We have set up six fields of study: (1) International Relations and Foreign Policy, (2) Political Communications, (3) Defense Policy, (4) Government and Science, (5) Political and Economic Development, and (6) Political Theory and Comparative Politics. In the areas of Defense Policy and Government and Science, we are not provided with faculty as we should be. We need to find individuals for each of these fields and also the wherewithal to support them at the faculty level. Our second need—and the most urgent at the moment—is for fellowships and scholarships. We are encouraging our graduate students to take loans for their education, paying them back afterwards rather than depending on scholarship money.

The Industrial Relations Section (reported by Professor Charles A. Myers)

The Industrial Relations Section is the oldest of the sections in the Department of Economics. Last November we had a 20^th Anniversary Conference in which we reviewed what we have been trying to do. Originally we set up our teaching program solely at the undergraduate level; but we have expanded to include participation in the doctoral program of the Department. Today M.I.T. has more students working for doctor’s degrees in Economics with emphasis on Industrial Relations than has any other university in this country. Our activities include courses for management, both in the programs of the School of Industrial management and in the new Greater Boston program for executive development. As we have no staff of our own but share our teachers with the Department of Economics, we confine our activities to certain areas such as the Scanlon Plan—a union-management cooperation plan, which has annual conferences attracting about 200 participants from all over the country. In addition, we have held conferences on research administration; some trade unions have come here for conferences under our auspices; and we hold each year a one-day workshop in connection with the Boston Chamber of Commerce.

Professor Pigors has pioneered in a method of management training and development called the incident process, which is now used by 800 companies. We think it offers more challenge to students than the case method. The case method presents a problem with all the material supplied; the incident process gives the student only an incident, leaving him to seek out the pertinent facts by questioning the discussion leader. As a teaching device it has had wide impact outside of M.I.T.

Some of our recent research has been on comparative international studies. As we learned more about economic development, we saw its close connection with problems of industrial relations. We obtained a Ford Foundation grant; and my two trips to India and a book have come out of that. We plan to cover India, Mexico, Japan, Western Germany, Indonesia, Sweden, England, France, and Italy in our studies of management in industrial societies.

The Center for International Studies (reported by Professor Max F. Millikan)

Although the CIS has a Visiting Committee of its own, its work is so closely connected with that of the Department of Economics and Social Science that they share each other’s problems. There are two ways in which the Center’s activities are important to the Department of Economics. First, there is a considerable overlap of staff members who conduct research in the Center and teach in the Department; so the Center and the Department have a joint interest in recruiting an outstanding and stable staff. Second, The Center’s research program provides opportunities for graduate students in the Department to undertake thesis work in the international field.

Briefly, the Center was founded in 1951, growing out of a contract which M.I.T. undertook on behalf of the State Department to explore a defense against jamming the Voice of America. Growing out of this study appeared the need for a research organization on problems related to American foreign relationships, as there are many ways in which technology and science have become involved in foreign policy and international relations. The Center then removed itself from government affiliation and became a permanent member of the M.I.T. family.

Since 1952, with the support of the Ford, Rockefeller, and Carnegie Funds, it has carried on projects in four different fields: (1) relations between the United States and the Soviet bloc, especially in the area of Soviet scientific publications and the administrative handling of research and development in the Soviet Union; (2) economic and political development of the underdeveloped countries—especially the process of economic growth in Indonesia, India and Southern Italy; (3) international communications—especially the pattern of information-flow in foreign countries and its effect upon attitudes and decisions of significant political groups; (4) Professor Rostow, who was responsible for the studies on the Soviet Union and on China which we have published, has now turned his attention to the features in American society which influence our attitude toward foreign policy.

Our principal problem for the future is to provide some stability for our research staff. We have drawn key people to M.I.T. who have made a substantial contribution through their research; but many members of our staff are listed as visiting professors because M.I.T. cannot provide tenure positions for them. What we need is a continuing corps to devote half time to research in the Center and the other half to teaching.

The Center is in a position to offer to graduate students research opportunities second to none in this country. In the future we look toward using the Center’s resources at the undergraduate level. In these new areas it is normal for development to begin at the graduate level and work down.

The Graduate Economics Program (reported by Professor Charles P. Kindleberger)

In the first place, our graduate program aims primarily at a Ph.D. degree; we do not offer a Master’s degree except in a combination of Economics with Science or Engineering (mostly as a fifth year for our own Course XIV graduates). In the Ph.D. program we limit ourselves to a small group of high-quality candidates—about 20 to 25 new students each year.

Admission of Graduate Students. These 20 to 25 new students are chosen from a group of about 120 applicants, who have various reasons for wanting to study at M.I.T. Some are attracted by the men on our teaching staff and some by the prestige of M.I.T. in general. We should also face the fact, however, that competitive fellowship offers also play a prominent role in applicants’ decisions to come here or go elsewhere. On the other side of the picture, some would-be applicants are scared away if they are not highly skilled in mathematics, even though only a minority of our graduate students specialize in areas of economics where high-powered mathematical techniques are used.

Financing Graduate Students. There are various ways in which a graduate student can pay his way here: he may get a fellowship from an outside source to be used at any university of his choice—National Science Foundation, Ford Foundation, and Woodrow Wilson Fellowship support comes this way; also, we have some privately endowed “name” fellowships in our department—Goodyear, Westinghouse, and Hicks; and we have some departmental and Institute funds to offer; lastly, a student may pay his own way. Sometimes students who do not qualify for financial assistance at first, but who come on their own, turn out to be very good. We hire no teachers from the group of first-year graduate students, so this source of earning is not open until at least the second year of graduate study, and usually not until the third.

Ph.D. Curriculum. At the end of the second year, the graduate student takes his general examinations—four written and four oral. After this comes his thesis. We are very much interested in the process of writing a thesis, as we believe that it is here that the student acquires professional maturity. We do not go along with the movement to cut down on the time of the Ph.D. degree by reducing the thesis to the proportions of an article.

Post-Doctoral Students. More and more M.I.T. is attracting post-doctoral scholars from abroad—last year a Swede, a Norwegian, a Dutchman, and a Turk; this year two Germans, a Swede, an Italian, a Belgian and a Frenchman. These people add to the scholarly atmosphere; and we need mature students for training at a post-doctoral level. This, however, requires more money; and we have already applied to the Ford Foundation for funds for this purpose.

*  *  *  *  *  *

            In the general discussion of pressing problems Professor Bishop mentioned the following:

The Economics Library Budget. The state of our Dewey Library budget can be held over for discussion at the next meeting of this committee. If we have not been successful in our drive for funds, we shall need to ask the assistance of the committee.

Ours is very much of a library department, as we have no laboratory. Although our library budget is high compared with that of some engineering departments, it is low compared with that of other leading departments in Economics. For example, our library budget stands at $4,000 annually, compared with $6,000 for that of Johns Hopkins. Ours is possibly the best industrial relations library in the country; but it is a second-class economics library. I should like to see the budget figure raised by $2,000.

(Mr. Maslam offered to approach Mr. Bradley Dewy for a donation for this purpose.)

Age Distribution of Department Members. It happens that our department has an unusual age distribution in the field of Economics. There is a great gap between the full professors and the instructors. The former are all in their early forties; and there are few runners-up at the associate professor and assistant professor level. This is a problem of major importance.

*  *  *  *  *  *

            Professor Thorp suggested this kind of Committee report to the Corporation: that the Committee has met; that all its members are new; that they therefore need time to get acquainted with what is going on in the Department; that they find no problems requiring immediate action; and that they are looking forward to a meeting next year. There was also agreement in recommending that there be somewhat more continuity of membership on the Visiting Committee than in the past.

*  *  *  *  *  *

TABLE II
Comparative Numbers of Students Completing Individual Subjects in the Department of Economics and Social Science, 1956-57 and 1957-58
[Note: Course titles provided after Table II]

*  *  *  *  *  *

*  *  *  *  *  *

*  *  *  *  *  *

Source: M.I.T. Archives. MIT Department of Economics Records, Box 4, Folder “V.C. [19]47-64”.

________________________

Course numbers, names and instructors
1957-58*

Source:  The Massachusetts Institute of Technology Bulletin, General Catalogue Issue 1957-58. Chapter 10, Descriptions of Subjects, 14. Economics and Social Science, pp. 233-238.

*For 14.81/14.82/14.84/14.85/14.86/14.88 information from the General Catalogue Issue 1958-59 pp. 237-8.

Image Source:  From Technique (1949), M.I.T. Yearbook cover.