Categories
Harvard Regulations

Harvard Economics Department Votes on Course Rules, 1912

Votes 1, 2 and 3 taken by the Harvard economics department in the Spring of 1912 provide a few details how the courses designated “Group Two: For graduates and undergraduates” were to govern the admission of undergraduates and the differential course requirements for the two types of students.

_______________________________

 

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
(INTERDEPARTMENTAL CORRESPONDENCE SHEET)

Cambridge, Massachusetts
May 8, 1912

Dear Lawrence:

You may be interested in certain votes recently passed by our Department. They are part of a general movement for stiffening our instruction and discipline. With reference to the fifth vote, I may add that we have it in mind to arrange next year for some systematic visiting of our courses for undergraduates (very likely by Hanus) with a view to getting suggestions. The sixth vote (and its corollaries) was intended to give instructors a defense against being pestered by requests for postponements on the part of undergraduates.

Sincerely yours,

[signed]

F. W. Taussig

President A. Lawrence Lowell.

 

[Brief biography of Professor Paul Henry Hanus (1855-1941), Chair of Harvard’s Division of Education, 1906-1912 ]

____________________________

 

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
(INTERDEPARTMENTAL CORRESPONDENCE SHEET)

[Carbon copy]

 

Cambridge, Massachusetts

VOTES PASSED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS [pencil: April + May 1912]

  1. That such undergraduates only as are candidates for honors in the Division, and are in their last year of undergraduate work, shall be admitted to courses primarily for graduates.
  2. That graduate students enrolled in courses of the Second Group (for graduates and undergraduates) shall be exempt from all tests except the mid-year and final examinations, but shall be expected to do additional work, as may be arranged by the several instructors.
  3. That in those courses of this Second Group which meet ordinarily but twice a week, the instructor shall hold conferences at least once a fortnight with the graduate students taking the courses.
  4. That the scope and method of instruction in courses of the First and Second Groups shall be matters for Departmental consideration.
  5. That the Department shall arrange for adequate inspection of courses of the First and Second Groups.
  6. That theses by undergraduates shall not be accepted if handed in at a date later than that set by the instructor for the course, except in case of illness, or other unavoidable reason for postponement accepted as satisfactory by the Chairman of the Department and the instructor.
  7. That the same principle (vote 6) shall apply to written exercises of all kinds, and to stated conferences. Failure to attend a conference for a thesis, unless excused on the grounds above noted, shall preclude acceptance of the thesis.

 

Source: Harvard University Archives. President Lowell’s Papers, 1909-1914 (UAI.5.160), Box 15, Folder 413.

Image Source: U. S. Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Division. Treasure room, Widener Library at Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts, ca. 1915.

Categories
Columbia Regulations

Columbia. Organization of Graduate Education, 1908-10.

Just want to remind/alert readers that the artifacts that I post here on Economics in the Rear-view Mirror are samples from my project on the development of graduate and undergraduate economics education in the United States from the last quarter of the 19th century up through the middle of the 20th century. Besides the syllabi and exams for particular courses, course offerings and staffing that I offer visitors to these pages, I collect and share  information about rules and regulations governing the granting of degrees too.

Today’s posting comes from a Columbia University Bulletin of Information. Faculties of Political Science, Philosophy and Pure Science: Instruction for Candidates for the Degrees of Master of Arts and Doctor of Philosophy, 1908-10. Economics found itself within the Faculty of Political Science that was embedded within the regulations of the larger university. As dull as this sort of reading is, say compared to reading 1910 economics (irony!), it was a part of the world within which young economists were methodologically reared and where they were to refine their tastes to distinguish “good” from “bad” economics as well as “interesting” from “uninteresting” economics.

Let me ask visitors who look at these century-old rules to reflect and share what seems to be the same or different from their own educational experiences. Thanks!

________________________________

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY, 1908-10
ORGANIZATION OF GRADUATE INSTRUCTION

[Definitions]

Departments
Faculties
University Council
Higher Degrees
Freedom of Election

[Divisional grouping of the Departments]

Faculty of Political Science
Faculty of Philosophy
Faculty of Pure Science
Faculty of Fine Arts

Registration and Matriculation

Registration
Matriculation
Summer Session
Non-matriculated Students
Undergraduate Courses
Admission of Women

Character of Graduate Work and Choice of Subjects

Minimum Residence
Essential Qualifications
Major and Minor Subjects
Courses [vs. Subjects]
Course Records
Subjects of the Faculty of Political Science
Subjects of the Faculty of Philosophy
Subjects of the Faculty of Pure Science
Subjects of the Faculty of Fine Arts
Change of Subjects
Faculty Jurisdiction
Students in Professional Schools

The Degree of Master of Arts

The Essay
Period of Residence

The Degree of Doctor of Philosophy

General Examination
Language Requirement
Dissertation
Special Faculty Regulations
Divisional Requirements
Application for Examination
Oral Examination
Recommendation and Award

[Suggestions to Students]

Language Requirements
Preparation for Examinations
Choice of Dissertation Topic
Consultation with Instructors
Professor in Charge of Investigations
Printing of Dissertation
Size of Dissertation
Style of Dissertation
Period of Candidacy
Credit from elsewhere for Residence
Lapse of Candidacy and Restoration
Ph.D. Association

________________________________

 

PART I—ORGANIZATION OF GRADUATE INSTRUCTION

Departments. The instruction given in Columbia University is conducted by Departments created by the Statutes of the University. Of these Departments there are at present fifty-nine. Every person who gives instruction is a member of some one Department; and the senior officer of the highest rank in each Department, who is in active service, is generally its administrative head. For certain administrative purposes the Departments are grouped into Divisions.

Faculties. For legislative purposes, and for the government of the several Schools into which the University is divided, the several Faculties are established by Statute. Each Faculty is composed of the professors and adjunct professors who are assigned to it by the Trustees, and is under the immediate direction of a Dean. The President is the Chairman of each Faculty. A Department or Division may form part of one, two, or more Faculties.

University Council. The University Council is composed of the President, the Deans, and delegates elected by the Faculties. Among other duties, it determines the conditions under which are awarded the degrees of Master of Arts, Master of Laws, and Doctor of Philosophy.

The Higher Degrees. For the conduct of the work leading to the degrees of Master of Arts and Doctor of Philosophy, which are for convenience termed “the higher degrees,” the Trustees have established four Faculties, in charge respectively of the Schools of Political Science (founded 1880), Philosophy (1890), Pure Science (1892), and Fine Arts (1906 — not yet completely organized). These four Faculties correspond to what in many American Universities is called a “graduate department” or “graduate school,” and are responsible for the conduct of advanced instruction not only during the academic year, but in the Summer Session of the University. Their representatives on the University Council form ex-officio a Committee on Higher Degrees, whose functions are indicated by its name. To this Committee the Council has delegated, subject to its own final control, the current administration of its regulations.

All requests for action upon matters which under the Statutes and the Regulations of the Council are within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Council itself should be addressed to the Secretary of the University Council. Requests for action upon matters falling within the jurisdiction of the several Faculties should be addressed to their respective Deans.

Freedom of Election. It should be noted that the division of the field of graduate work among the four Faculties in no wise limits the freedom of the student to make his own combination of studies. Once matriculated as a graduate student he may be registered as a student in two or more Faculties; and in many cases such an arrangement is highly desirable.

 

The distribution of the work leading to the higher degrees among the Faculties, and the divisional grouping oi the Departments, are here shown:

 

Faculty of Political Science

Division of History, Economics, and Public Law—Departments: Economics; History; Public Law and Jurisprudence; Social Science.

 

Faculty of Philosophy

Division of Classical Philology—Departments: Greek; Latin (each including archaeology).

Division of Education—The Faculty of Teachers College (so far as the higher degrees are concerned).

Division of Modern Languages and Literatures—Departments: Comparative Literature; English; Germanic Languages; Romance Languages.

Division of Oriental Languages—Departments: Chinese; Indo-Iranian Languages; Semitic Languages.

Division of Philosophy, Psychology, and Anthropology—Departments: Anthropology; Philosophy; Psychology.

 

Faculty of Pure Science

Division of Biology—Departments: Anatomy; Bacteriology; Biological Chemistry; Botany; Embryology; Physiology; Zoology.

Division of Chemistry—Departments: Chemistry; P ysiological I Chemistry.

Division of Engineering—Departments: Civil Engineering; Electrical Engineering; Engineering Draughting; Mechanical Engineering.

Division of Geology, Geography, and Mineralogy—Departments: Geology; Geography; Mineralogy.

Division of Mathematical and Physical Science—Departments: Astronomy; Mathematics; Physics.

Division of Mining and Metallurgy—Departments: Metallurgy; Mining.

 

Faculty of Fine Arts

Division of Fine Arts—Departments: Architecture; Music; Design.

 

Announcements. Full statements concerning the courses of instruction, laboratories, seminars, etc., are contained in the “Divisional Announcements.” In these are indicated the scope and character of the several courses, the hours of attendance, etc. They may be had on application to the Secretary of the University, to whom, also, all correspondence of a general character should be addressed.

Courses in Professional Schools. Some of the subjects named above are also under the jurisdiction of the Faculties of the professional schools of the University; but of the work that may be offered towards the higher degrees only the four Faculties named here have control, and all students who intend to carry on such work, whether as candidates for higher degrees or not, are required to register under the Faculty or Faculties that have it in charge.

Consultation. Every student is responsible to the Dean of each Faculty under which he is working, for compliance with the Statutes of the University and with the Regulations of the University Council and of the Faculty. To the head of each Department under which he is studying he is responsible for fulfilment of all the requirements of that Department with regard to attendance upon courses, private study, and examinations. Entering students must therefore first of all consult the Dean of each Faculty and the head of each Department under which they expect to work. It should be fully understood that it is not only the right but also the duty of every student to call upon the Dean and other officers under whom his work is to be carried on for information and guidance whenever he needs them, and that he must keep himself duly and fully informed of all that is expected of him by the Dean and the Departments concerned. The offices of the four Deans, of the Registrar, and of the Bursar are all in East Hall. Information of a general character regarding the University may be had in Room 213, Library Building.

 

 

REGISTRATION AND MATRICULATION

Registration. Registration is required when the student first connects himself with the University, and thereafter at the beginning of each academic year. Students are admitted at any time during the academic year. To obtain full credit for residence during any half-year, they must register at the beginning of it, except that registration for the first half-year (September to January) implies registration for the second (February to June) as well, unless the student withdraws.

Matriculation. Matriculation, i. e., admission to candidacy for degrees, is open only to graduates of colleges and scientific schools in good standing, or to those who have an equivalent training. . Professional (other than engineering) degrees do not in themselves entitle the holders to matriculation. The question whether the training of a non-graduate shall be deemed equivalent to that indicated by a first degree is determined in every case by the Committee on Higher Degrees.

Summer Session. Certain courses given in the Summer Session of the University (see Academic Calendar) may be offered toward the higher degrees, and qualified students may matriculate as candidates therefor at the opening of the Summer Session.

Non-matriculated Students. Students of mature age who give evidence of earnest purpose and special fitness may register, with permission of the Dean concerned, for any of the courses under the control of these Faculties without matriculating as candidates for a degree. By special fitness, in the case of students not holding a first degree, is meant an equipment for the course intended to be taken such as would justify candidacy for a degree if the preliminary requirements could be fully met. Of such fitness the head of each Department under which the applicant wishes to study is the judge, and his approval must be expressed in writing to the Dean of the Faculty. Such students are expected to pursue seriously the work of the course for which they are enrolled, and will be required to pass examinations therein at the discretion of the professor giving the course. They may be excluded from any course which they are following if the instructor in charge be satisfied that proper attention is not being given to the work of the course. In general, students who do not hold the first degree or its equivalent are recommended to register in one of the Colleges, the men in Columbia College, the women in Barnard College.

Undergraduate Courses. In these Colleges emphasis is placed upon the quality of the student’s work rather than upon the time spent in residence, and this fact, together with the opportunities offered in the Summer Session, makes it possible for a well prepared candidate to complete the requirements for the bachelor’s degree in three and one-half years, three years, or conceivably in a shorter period for students who by anticipating College work are able to enter with advanced standing

Admission of Women. Women who have the first degree are admitted on equal terms with men, as candidates for a higher degree or as non-candidates, to all Admission courses offered under these Faculties, unless a specific statement to the contrary is made in connection with the announcement of a course.

[…]

CHARACTER OF GRADUATE WORK AND CHOICE OF SUBJECTS

 

Minimum Residence. The minimum period of graduate study which entitles a student to apply for the degree of Master of Arts is one year, for that of Doctor of Philosophy, two years; but these are only minimum periods, and the statements made below in connection with each degree must be carefully noted. No degree may be conferred upon any person who has not been in residence at Columbia University for a full academic year. (See page 15.)

The Essential Qualifications. The work expected of a candidate for one of the higher degrees is different in character from that usually required of undergraduates. Attendance upon courses, the acquisition of knowledge, and the consequent ability to pass examinations, are not the only requirements; and though a very considerable amount of knowledge in the special field of work chosen and in others adjacent to it is demanded, it is not upon such attainment that the chief stress is laid. The essentials are the acquisition of the power to do independent scientific work, and the demonstration of this power by actual performance. For the assistance of the student in his own labors, instruction is given by means of lectures, in which the theoretical side of the subject, its bibliography, and its methods are set forth; and in the seminars or laboratories he is trained in the practical work of investigation, the presentation of results, and the criticism of the work of others.

Major and Minor Subjects. To secure thorough training in some one field of research, and yet avoid over-specialization with the inevitable concomitant of deficient general training, the regulations call for the selection of three “subjects” for study and eventual examination. The candidate must pursue these three subjects during the required period of residence, and the amount of work done in each subject must be satisfactory to the professor in charge. The major subject is that in connection with which the candidate for the master’s degree must prepare his essay, the candidate for the doctor’s degree his dissertation. This subject is expected to occupy approximately half of the time spent by the candidate in study for the higher degree. The first and second minor subjects, which must stand in some reasonable connection with the major and with each other, should each occupy approximately one- quarter of this time of study. The first minor subject will naturally be more closely connected with the major.

Courses. A “subject” must be carefully distinguished from a “course.” A subject is a field of knowledge, in which the candidate is expected to work and to be examined; the courses of lectures, the work in laboratories, and the exercises of the seminars, are simply means of acquiring knowledge in certain parts of the field and aids to the work of the student himself. The subjects are practically permanent, while the courses offered under each may change from year to year. The number of courses and in general the amount of work to be taken in each subject is determined, for each student, by the professor or professors in charge of that subject.

Course Records. It should be noted that the student is expected to keep his own record of courses attended. In the registration-book which is furnished him for this purpose, he enters at the beginning of each half-year the courses which he proposes to attend. At the beginning and end of each course the professor in charge certifies the student’s attendance by his signature. Before presenting himself for examination for any degree, the student must submit his registration-book to the Dean of the Faculty in which his major subject lies in order that the Dean may satisfy himself that the required minimum number of courses has been attended. Lost registration-books may be replaced if the professors are able from their own records or recollection to certify attendance; but if they are unable to do this, the candidate may lose credit for attendance.

The specific regulations of the Council concerning subjects are as follows:

Immediately after registration, each student who declares himself a candidate for the degrees of Master of Arts and Doctor of Philosophy, or either of them, shall designate one principal or major subject and two subordinate or minor subjects. The choice of subjects must in every case be approved by the Dean of the Faculty under which the major subject is taken.

Choice of Subjects. When a candidate designates any subject as his major and first minor, as permitted by the Regulations of the Faculties of Philosophy and Pure Science, no subdivision of that general subject may be chosen by him as a second minor, provided, however, that with the recommendation of the Dean and the head of the Department concerned, by a special vote of the Committee on Higher Degrees, to be taken in every such case, a candidate may be allowed to choose all his subjects under one Department.

The subjects from which the candidate’s selection must be made are:

 

Under the Faculty of Political Science

Group I.—History and political philosophy: (1) Ancient and oriental history; (2) mediaeval history; (3) modern European history from the opening of the 16th century; (4) American history; (5) political philosophy.

Group II.—Public law and comparative jurisprudence: (1) Constitutional law; (2) international law; (3) administrative law; (4) comparative jurisprudence.

Group III.—Economics and social science: (1) Political economy and finance; (2) sociology and statistics; (3) social economy. In his choice of subjects under this Faculty, the candidate whose major subject lies within its jurisdiction is limited by the following rules;

A candidate for the degree of Master of Arts or Doctor of Philosophy must select one minor subject outside of the group which includes his major subject.

A candidate for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy must select one minor subject within the group which includes his major subject.

The candidate for the degree of Master of Arts must take, in each subject, courses occupying at least two hours weekly throughout one year. In his major subject he must also attend a Seminar.

The candidate for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy must take, in his major subject, courses occupying at least four hours weekly during each required year of residence (provided that this number of hours be offered in the subject), and must also attend a Seminar during the period of residence. In each minor subject he must take courses occupying at least two hours weekly during each required year of residence.

 

Under the Faculty of Philosophy

I. Major Subjects: (1) Philosophy; (2) psychology; (3) anthropology; (4) education; (5) linguistics; (6) comparative literature; (7) classical archaeology and epigraphy; (8) Greek language and literature, and, incidentally, Grecian history; (9) Latin language and literature, and, incidentally, Roman history; and the following, including in each case the study of both the language and literature; (10) English; (11) Germanic; (12) Romance; (13) Sanskrit (with Pālī and Iranian); (14) Semitic; (15) Chinese.

Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, and 15 may be offered each as the equivalent of a major and one minor subject.

II. Minor Subjects: (1) Philosophy; (2) psychology; (3) anthropology; (4) education; ( 5) linguistics; (6) comparative literature; (7) Greek; (8) Greek archaeology; (9) Latin; (10) Roman archaeology; (11) Sanskrit; (12) Iranian; (13) English; (14) Anglo-Saxon; (15) Gothic; (16) Germanic philology; (17) German language and literature; (18) Scandinavian languages and literatures; (19) Romance philology; (20) French language and literature; (21) Spanish language and literature; (22) Italian language and literature; (23) Hebrew; (24) Arabic; (25) Assyrian; (26) Syriac; (27) Ethiopic; (28) Semitic epigraphy; (29) Turkish; (30) Armenian; (31) Chinese; (32) Coptic; (33) Celtic; (34) Comparative Religion.

A candidate for the degree of Master of Arts or Doctor of Philosophy may, with the consent of the Dean of the Faculty and of the heads of the Departments concerned, select both minor subjects within the same Department, and may divide a minor subject, taking parts of two subjects germane to his major subject.

The choice of subjects made by a candidate must in every case have the approval of the Dean and the head of the Department under which the major subject is taken before being finally allowed.

 

Under the Faculty of Pure Science

(1) Anatomy; (2) astronomy; (3) bacteriology; (4) botany; (5) chemistry; (6) civil and sanitary engineering; (7) electrical engineering (8) geodesy; (9) geology; (10) mathematics; (11) mechanical engineering; (12) mechanics and electro-mechanics; (13) metallurgy; (14) mineralogy; (15) mining; (16) palaontology; (17) physics; (18) physiological chemistry; (19) physiology; (20) zoölogy .

With the consent of the Dean, the major and one minor subject may be taken under one Department. Both minor subjects may not be taken under one Department without the consent of the Faculty.

 

Under the Faculty of Fine Arts

For specific information see the current Announcement of that Faculty.

 

Change of Subjects. Minor subjects may not be changed except by permission of the Dean to be given only on the written recommendation of the heads of the Departments from which and to which the change is desired; major subjects may not be changed except by a special vote of the Faculty in each case.

Faculty Jurisdiction. The student entering Columbia University as a candidate for a higher degree should first of all decide upon his major-subject. He will be registered under the Faculty which has charge of this subject, and will be primarily under the jurisdiction of its Dean. If he selects a minor subject or attends any course under another Faculty, he will be registered under that Faculty also, and will be subject to the jurisdiction of its Dean so far as such subject or course is concerned. It will be seen that the several Faculties have different regulations regarding the choice and combination of subjects. Regarding the interpretation and effect of these regulations the candidates will obtain all necessary information from the several Deans.

Students in Professional Schools. Students in the professional schools which form part of the University, or are in alliance with it, may, if otherwise qualified, combine work leading to the higher degrees with their professional studies; and in some subjects courses which count toward the professional degrees or certificates may be accepted as part of the work required for the higher degrees. In all such cases the professional student must register himself as a candidate for the higher degrees under one of the four non-professional Faculties, and is subject to the jurisdiction of that Faculty as regards examinations and all other matters pertaining to the higher degrees. To complete the requirements the candidate must take his major subject under one of these Faculties, and must conform to all its rules as regards examinations, essay, and dissertation; but he may offer, as the equivalent of the two minor subjects, such of his professional courses as may be approved for that purpose by the Dean of the Faculty under which the major subject is taken and by the Committee on Higher Degrees. He should, before registering consult the Dean of the non-professional Faculty under whose jurisdiction he proposes to work.

Arrangement of Work. Students who devote all their time to work under a non-professional Faculty will usually find it advantageous to pursue the study of their major and minor subjects simultaneously. This, however, is not required, and students who are pursuing professional courses of study, or who are engaged in work outside of the University, such as teaching, may find it advisable, or even necessary, to take up the major and minor subjects in successive years.

 

THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS

The Essay. As regards candidates for the master’s degree, the custom of the University lays proportionately more stress upon the acquisition of knowledge, as evidenced by examinations, and less upon capacity for investigation shown in seminars or laboratories and in literary production, than is the case as regards candidates for the doctor’s degree. At the same time, seminar or laboratory work must be done by the candidate, and it is expected that the master’s essay shall be something more than a restatement of things well known. [If the candidate intends or hopes to continue his work for the doctor’s degree, and if he has already selected the topic of his dissertation, it will be advantageous for him to make the master’s essay a study in the line of his future dissertation, confining it to a narrow part of the field and presenting such preliminary results as he has reached. If the essay be read in seminar (as is often the case, and is required in the Faculty of Political Science) the candidate gains the benefit of discussion and criticism by his fellow- students as well as by the professor. In those subjects in which field-work is required for a satisfactory essay, the candidate is advised to perform it before entering the University.

The specific regulations of the University Council concerning the essay are as follows:

Each candidate for the degree of Master of Arts shall present an essay on some topic previously approved by the professor in charge of his major subject. This essay must be presented not later than April 15 of the academic year in which the examination is to take place and must be accompanied by formal application for the degree. Such applications must be made on forms provided for this purpose. to be had of the Registrar. When the essay has been approved, the candidate shall file with the Registrar of the University a legibly written or typewritten copy of it. This copy is to be written on firm, strong paper, eleven by eight and a half inches in size, and a space of one and a half inches on the inner margin must be left free from writing. The title page of every such essay shall contain the words: “Submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in the Faculty of ——, Columbia University.”

Period of Residence. The minimum period of study for the master’s degree is one year; and if the candidate in his previous course of study has been adequately prepared for advanced work in the subjects he selects and is able to devote his entire time to university study, he will usually be able to attain the degree within that period. If the student is not adequately prepared, or if he is engaged in outside labor, such as teaching, two or more years may be necessary. The satisfactory completion of work at four consecutive Summer Sessions, or two consecutive Summer Sessions, together with the half year intervening or immediately following, will be accepted in full satisfaction of the requirements for residence and attendance for the degree of Master of Arts.

 

THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

The requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy differ from those established for the degree of Master of Arts (which is not necessary for the acquisition of the doctor’s degree) not only as regards the amount of work, but as regards its character. In the minor subjects the difference is chiefly quantitative, and double the amount of work in attendance upon courses and in collateral reading will in most cases prepare the candidate for the final test. The detailed regulations of each Department under which the candidate expects to study must be ascertained from the head of that Department. As regards the major subject the practice of the University has recently been stated in legislative form by the University Council as follows:

The general examination for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy will not be confined to the courses which the candidate has attended in Columbia University or elsewhere, or even to the field covered by such courses. The candidate is expected to show a satisfactory grasp of his major subject as a whole, and a general acquaintance with the broader field of knowledge of which this subject forms a part.

Examination. The general examination for the doctor’s degree is oral, and is conducted by the professors in charge of the candidate’s major and minor subjects, in the presence of the Faculty or of so many of its members as are designated or may desire to attend.

Language Requirement. The candidate for the doctor’s degree must show his ability to read French and German. When his major subject lies in the Faculty of Political Science or in the Faculty of Philosophy, ability to read Latin also is usually demanded.

The Dissertation. The candidate for the doctor’s degree must also present an acceptable dissertation embodying the results of his investigation of some The topic bearing closely upon his principal subject of study, and must defend this dissertation before the members of the Faculty or so many of them as may be designated or may desire to attend. The dissertation must be printed and 150 copies deposited with the Registrar of the University before the degree is conferred. In cases where the cost to the candidate is excessive, the number of copies to be deposited may be lessened by special vote of the Committee on Higher Degrees. Further formal requirements, established by the University Council, are as follows:

On the title-page of every such dissertation shall be printed the words: “Submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy, in the Faculty of ——, Columbia University. ”

Each dissertation shall contain upon its title-page the full name of the author; the full title of the dissertation; the year of imprint, and, if a reprint, the title, volume, and pagination of the publication from which it was reprinted; and there shall be printed and appended to each dissertation a statement of the educational institutions that the author has attended, and a list of the degrees and honors conferred upon him, as well as the titles of his previous publications.

As regards the order of time in which these requirements must be met, and as regards certain other details, the regulations and practice of the several Faculties are somewhat different.

Special Faculty Regulations. In the Faculty of Pure Science, ability to read Latin is not required. In the Faculty of Political Science this requirement may be waived when the professor in charge of the candidate’s major subject certifies that ability to read Latin is not necessary for the prosecution of the candidate’s researches. In the Faculty of Philosophy also the requirement may be waived on such a certification from the professor in charge of the major subject, but only when the major subject is psychology, anthropology, or education.

In the Faculty of Philosophy, the ability of the candidate to read French, German, and Latin (if required) must be certified by the heads of these Departments, and the examinations in these languages must be passed at least one academic year before the candidate may present himself for the oral examination on his subjects. In the Faculties of Political Science and of Pure Science, ability to read the required languages is certified by the Dean, on the report of such examiners as he may designate. In the Faculty of Political Science, the examination on the required languages may be taken a year in advance of the examination on subjects, and‘ candidates are advised to take it at such earlier time, but they are permitted to take it at the same time with the examination on subjects. In the Faculty of Pure Science, the examination on languages and that on subjects are held at the same time.

In none of the Faculties is a candidate admitted to the final examination for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy except upon recommendation of the professor who has approved the topic selected for his dissertation and of the other professors in charge of his major and minor subjects. In the Faculties of Philosophy and of Pure Science, it is also requisite that the dissertation, in its completed state, should have been definitely approved. In these two Faculties the final examination on the major and minor subjects and the defence of the dissertation must take place at the same time, but it is not required that the dissertation shall have been printed before it is defended. In the Faculty of Political Science the candidate may be admitted to examination upon his major and minor subjects before the dissertation is completed, in case the professor under whose direction he is prosecuting his investigations judges that these have been carried to such a point that a satisfactory dissertation will probably be produced. In this Faculty, the candidate is not admitted to the final test, the defence of the dissertation, until the dissertation has been submitted in printed form.

Before the candidate is admitted to the final oral examination in his subjects, he may be subjected to such other examinations, oral or written, as may be required by the several Departments under which he has taken subjects, and at such times as they may prescribe; and the admission of the candidate to the final examination depends on the result of these previous examinations.

Divisional Requirements. The Divisional Announcements contain full statements of the specific requirements of the several Divisions in regard to examinations. In case of doubt the candidate should confer with the heads of the Departments concerned. The candidate who fails to secure full and precise information on all such points neglects his duty at his own risk.

Application for Examination. Applications for the final oral examinations must be made on special forms to be procured from the Registrar. They must be filed with the Registrar at least three months before one of the three dates at which diplomas are issued (viz., the first week of October and of February respectively, and the annual commencement), in order to secure examination before that date. In the Faculties of Philosophy and of Pure Science, in which the completion of the dissertation is required before admission to the examination on subjects, the complete dissertation should be submitted (preferably in typewritten form) to the Dean not later than March 1, and must be so submitted by April 1, if the candidate desires to receive the degree at the following Commencement. In the Faculty of Political Science, candidates who have previously passed the general examination on subjects may submit printed dissertations even later than April 1, if application for admission to the defence of the dissertation has been made on that date; and if copies of the printed dissertation be submitted two weeks before the date set for its defence, and all other conditions have been fulfilled, the degree may be conferred at the following Commencement. All applications for the general examination must be handed to the Registrar, for transmission to the Dean of the Faculty in which the candidate’s major subject lies, and must be accompanied by the candidate’s registration- book, properly signed and attested. All fees, including the examination-fee, must be paid and the Bursar’s receipt shown to the Dean before the arrangements are made for the examination.

The Oral Examination. The oral examination in the major and minor subjects is never divided, not even when the candidate has subjects under more than one Faculty. In this case the examination is held under the auspices of the Faculty in which the candidate’s major subject lies, With the co-operation of members of the other Faculty delegated for the purpose. When a dissertation, as not unfrequently happens, touches on matters that fall within the jurisdiction of Departments in more than one Faculty, it is customary for the Dean of the examining Faculty to invite members of the other Faculty or Faculties interested to be present at the time when the dissertation is criticised and defended.

Recommendation and Award. When all these requirements have been successfully met, the candidate is recommended to the University Council, and (if the requisite number of printed copies of the dissertation have been deposited with the Registrar of the University) the Council, acting through the Committee on Higher Degrees, recommends to the President of the University that the degree of Doctor of Philosophy be awarded. Such recommendation may be made at any time during the academic year, but degrees are publicly conferred only at the annual Commencement.

 

In the endeavor to prepare himself to meet the formal requirements above outlined, the student will find the following explanations and suggestions of value:

Suggestions as to Language Requirements. As regards the language requirements, it has been noted that in the Faculty of Political Science the examination may be postponed, and that in the Faculty of Pure Science it is usually postponed, until the time of the examination on the major and minor subjects. It is strongly recommended, however, that the student who is unable to read the required languages with ease should take the earliest opportunity of supplementing this defect in his preparation. In many subjects he cannot use the sources without acquaintance with Latin, and in hardly any subject can he use the necessary modern literature without ability to read French and German. Students whose preparation is defective in any of these languages will find reading courses provided in Columbia College or Barnard College, to which they are admitted without additional fee. Courses of this character are also provided for students who find other ancient or modern languages necessary for their researches.

The Faculty of Philosophy, as stated above, does not admit students to full candidacy for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy until the language examinations have been passed, and this must be done a full academic year before the candidates may come up for the final examination, i.e., if the candidate intends to come up in May, by the first week of the preceding October, and sooner in proportion if the candidate wishes to take the final examinations earlier in the academic year.

As regards the character of the linguistic examinations it should be noted that acquaintance with the required languages is demanded, not, as in undergraduate work, from the point of view of general culture, but strictly from the utilitarian point of view. It is necessary, for example, that the mathematical student should be able to read French and German mathematical literature, and that the student of economics should be able to read the economic literature published in these languages. The student of European history must be able to read chronicles, treatises, and laws written in Latin, and the student of philosophy should be able to read mediaeval philosophical writings in the Latin in which they were written. It is not requisite, however, that any of these students shall be able to pass such examinations in Latin, French, or German as may properly be imposed upon those who are specializing in the field of philology or of belles-lettres.

As to Preparation for Examination. As regards preparation for the general examination, candidates are warned against restricting themselves to the minimum of courses prescribed by the Departments in which they are working. It is often advisable, by way of supplement, to take one or more courses of lectures quite outside the fields covered by the subjects, and possibly under another Faculty. Very extensive private reading is almost always necessary, not only in connection with the courses taken and with the writing of the dissertation, but for general preparation. On all such points the advice of professors must be freely sought.

Choice of Topic for Dissertation. In particular, the choice of a topic for the dissertation should receive the most careful consideration; it should be made neither too early, before the student is well informed upon the general outlines and bearings of his major subject, nor so late as to result in a hurried treatment. Often a topic is suggested by the professor in charge of the subject or by some other instructor; sometimes the student’s own reading or experiments will indicate a suitable one; but in every case the approval of the topic rests with the professor in charge of the major subject.

The dissertation must be founded on the author’s own investigations, and must embody a real contribution to the knowledge of the topic or topics treated in it. No amount of erudition displayed in a dissertation will ensure its acceptance if the condition stated here be not fulfilled.

Consultation with Instructors. It may be noted that the most promising topics for investigation are often suggested by a combination of subjects lying under different Departments or even different Faculties. Many of the recognized fields of science are mere clearings, and pioneer work is needed between them. But even where a topic apparently lies entirely in the field of one Faculty or in that of one Division or Department, its investigation often suggests excursions into neighboring territory. In such cases the student should bear in mind that he is entitled to information and counsel, not only from the instructor under whose immediate direction he is prosecuting his researches, nor only from the instructors whose lectures he is attending, but from any instructor in the University; and no serious student will find that such an application is taken as intrusive. In the field of research, instructors and students are co-laborers.

Professor in Charge of Investigations. The immediate direction of the investigation always pertains to a single professor in the Department in which the candidate’s major subject lies. To this professor the candidate should report from time to time and submit the completed dissertation, preferably in typewritten form, for preliminary judgment. The final acceptance of the dissertation occurs only after its formal defence.

Printing of Dissertation. The printing of the dissertation, whether this precedes the defence, as is required by the Faculty of Political Science, or follows the defence, as is permitted by the Faculties of Philosophy and of Pure Science, is placed by the rules or custom of the several Faculties under the direction of the Dean or of the professor who has directed the candidate’s investigations. In every case there is some one authority through whose hands the proof- sheets must pass.

Under the rule of the Faculty of Political Science, noticed above, which permits the oral examination on subjects to be separated from the defence of the dissertation, it is possible and not unusual for candidates to complete, after the expiration of their academic residence, a dissertation which they have carried to a satisfactory stage of development during residence. The candidates who avail themselves of this privilege should remember that the rules above stated regarding the submission of the completed dissertation, preferably in typewritten form, and, after its provisional approval, the submission of the proof- sheets, continue to apply; and that disregard of these rules may entail the rejection of the printed dissertation or the reprinting of certain portions thereof. Strictly speaking, independent publication is not prohibited, but it involves unnecessary risk, and often unnecessary expense, to the candidate himself.

Series, Journals, etc. When a dissertation is accepted for publication in a scientific series or journal, edited at Columbia University or elsewhere, or in the memoirs of a scientific society, or when it is accepted and printed by a general publisher, the same practice should be followed, i.e., the proof-sheets should be sent to the professor in charge of the candidate’s investigations or to the Dean, as the rule or custom of the different Faculties may require. In all such cases the candidate must secure a sufficient number of reprints for deposit with the University, and these reprints must be furnished with the special title-page and the supplementary vita or outline of the candidate’s scholastic record which are required by the regulations of the University Council.

Size of Dissertation. No definite rule as to the extent or size of a dissertation can be laid down; a mathematical or chemical dissertation may well embody important results in 20 or 30 pages, while one on a philological or historical topic may well demand 100 or more pages. One of the mistakes most frequently made by students is the selection of too broad a topic. If then the original plan is carried out, the dissertation becomes either too bulky or too sketchy. It is likely in either case to include so much that is well known that any real contributions to knowledge which it contains are obscured. When the student perceives that he has made such a mistake, he should ask himself in what direction he has obtained results which seem new and important, and he should so narrow his plan of treatment as to confine himself to this part of his field.

Style of Dissertation. The completed dissertation must be written in a clear and acceptable style. “Fine writing ” is not expected or desired, but a slovenly style of composition, or inaccuracies of expression, will operate to the rejection of a dissertation. Technical terms must, of course, be used, and new technical terms must be coined when they are necessary, i.e., when the facts to be stated or the ideas to be presented cannot be expressed in terms intelligible to the layman without sacrifice of accuracy or without awkward circumlocution. The need of using technical terms, like the need of using other than verbal symbols, varies greatly in different sciences. In dealing with subjects which can be made intelligible to the layman, the use of technical terms should be avoided whenever this is possible. Above all, the candidate should eschew the not uncommon practice of giving a false air of profundity to a very simple statement by the use of Greek or Latin compounds when English words are adequate; and he should not fancy that a distinction which is of no importance becomes a contribution to science when expressed in novel technical terms which may not be needed.

Period of Candidacy. Reviewing the matters above set forth, the student will perceive that it is impossible to fix upon any definite number of years as the normal time within which the degree of Doctor of Philosophy should be attained. The regulations demand a minimum period of two years of graduate study, one of which must be spent at this University, before the candidate may be admitted to the general examinations for the degree. It has been found by experience that only an exceptionally gifted student, who has devoted the later years of his undergraduate course largely to studies in the line of his subsequent graduate work, can properly prepare himself for examination on his major and minor subjects within this period; and even in such cases it has rarely happened that a satisfactory dissertation has been completed and printed before the end of a third year. In the great majority of cases three full years of work in residence at Columbia University or elsewhere have been found necessary; and in many cases where a difficult investigation has been undertaken even the best students have been unable to complete the dissertation within three years.

Credit from elsewhere for Residence. Candidates who have spent one or more years in graduate study in other universities should note that the credit given for such work is credit for time of residence only. The acquisition of the master’s degree, at Columbia University or elsewhere, or other certification of courses successfully accomplished and examinations passed, does not exempt the candidate from any part of the examination on his subjects.

As regards the maximum period of candidacy the following regulations have been adopted by the University Council:

No person may continue to be a candidate for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (1) for more than three years after residence at Columbia University has ceased; or (2) for more than six years from the time of initial registration for a higher degree.

Lapse of Candidacy and Restoration. The Committee on Higher Degrees has power to restore to candidacy persons whose time has elapsed under either of the foregoing rules; but this is done only on presentation of cogent reasons, and only for a limited period. The candidate who overruns either of the above periods will act most wisely and in not petitioning for an extension of time until his Restoration dissertation is so nearly completed that he can safely promise its submission before a definite date; for if he exceeds the extended period a request for a second extension of time is unlikely to be favorably regarded. It will also be advisable for him to obtain from the professor under whose direction he has been working a statement that his dissertation promises to be satisfactory.

Ph. D Association. All men who have received the degree of doctor of philosophy from Columbia University are eligible to membership in the Association of Doctors of Philosophy of Columbia University. The objects of the association are to bring the holders of the degree of doctor of philosophy together socially, to keep them in touch with the University and with one another, and to promote the best interests of the doctorate, of the University, and of the members of the association. Three meetings are held each year,—two during the winter and one at Commencement time. A room in East Hall has been set aside for the use of the Association.

 

Source: Columbia University. Bulletin of Information. Faculties of Political Science, Philosophy and Pure Science: Instruction for Candidates for the Degrees of Master of Arts and Doctor of Philosophy, 1908-10. pp. 7-23.

 

Categories
Economists M.I.T. Regulations

MIT. Graduate Economics Program and Fellowships. 1950-51

Already by the academic year 1950-51 the M.I.T. economics department could boast seven economics professors who would still be around over a quarter of a century later, including Samuelson, Solow and Kindleberger. The printed departmental brochure along with a one-page announcement of twelve graduate fellowships, presumably sent to be posted on college and university bulletin boards, have been transcribed for this posting. Minor changes in formatting have been used to enhance readability.

 _________________________

 

Graduate Work in the Department of Economics and Social Science
Massachusetts Institute of Technology

 

THE PROGRAM

 

Our program in Economics is confined to students for the doctorate who are primarily interested in advanced study and research in

Economic Theory
Industrial Economics
Industrial Relations
International Economics
Statistics

We have an active program of continuing research in each of these fields and should like to invite a selected group of graduate students to participate with us in our explorations after they have completed their requirements for the general examinations here.

The work in Economic Theory is under the leadership of Professor Paul A. Samuelson. This includes, in addition to price analysis, the study of national income determination and business cycles. Research in these fields has been vigorous in recent years, and our objective is to train economists capable of understanding and appraising the results of this research and of adding to our empirical and theoretical understanding of these areas.

Industrial Economics, under the guidance of Professors W. Rupert Maclaurin and Max Millikan, is concerned primarily with the economic problems of the individual firm and of particular industries. The work should be enriched by the active research program now under way in the Department on “the economics of innovation,” “the process of business decisions,” and “the economics of the size of the firm.” We are anxious to have some advanced students who would like to participate in these research programs which are being worked out through “laboratory-type” collaboration of particular firms and industries.

Industrial Relations, under the leadership of Professors Charles A. Myers and Douglass V. Brown, is concerned with investigating the fundamentals of labor-management relations in modern industrial society. In addition to basic work in Economics, the program of study centers upon courses in Labor Economics, Collective Bargaining, Public Policy in Labor Relations, Personnel Administration, Social Psychology and Human Relations. A number of research projects are carried on by the Industrial Relations Section, which is a division of the Department.

Our work in International Economics is under the direction of Professors Charles P. Kindleberger and Richard M. Bissell, Jr. (who returns in June to M.I.T. from his position as Deputy Administrator of ECA). Emphasis in International economics is shared between the traditional fields of international trade and finance and that of national economic development. The training is designed to qualify the student for work in departments of government, including international institution., concerned with foreign and international economic problems. While no specialized courses are offered in the practical aspects of foreign trade, it is believed that the broad training will be regarded with increasing interest by American business concerns to aid them in the solution of their complex problems relating to foreign operations.

Instruction in Statistics, under Professor Harold Freeman, is largely centered in three areas: general theoretical statistics; probability and its foundations; modern theories of time series and prediction, particularly as applied in Economics. Some of the courses in these areas are given by the Departments of Economics and some by the Department of Mathematics. Courses are offered at elementary, intermediate, advanced and research seminar levels.

While there is ample opportunity at M.I.T. for the student interested in any one of these five fields to go as far as he wishes with his subject, there is also a common core of basic courses which the student will be expected to take in preparation for his general examinations.

We are also attempting to introduce greater realism into our program by operating a “practice school” in the summer between the first and second years of graduate study, in which we try to arrange internship experience in industry. This activity is under the guidance of Professor Paul Pigors.

For those who are going into university teaching, some pre-doctoral teaching experience will be encouraged and a considerable number of teaching fellowships will be available to students after they have completed their first year.

 

FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO GRADUATE STUDENTS

For the year 1950-51 we will offer up to five fellowships of $2,500, available to outstanding students in the fields mentioned above. These include the Westinghouse Educational Fellowship and the Goodyear Tire and Rubber Fellowship.

In addition, about eight fellowships and teaching scholarships will be available, ranging up to $1,600. This group includes the Clarence J. Hicks Memorial Fellowship in Industrial Relations, given by Industrial Relations Counselors, Inc., of New York.

 

REQUIREMENTS FOR ADMISSION

(a) General requirements: S.B. or A.B. degree with a good academic record from a university of recognized standing. Special emphasis will be placed on recommendations from professors or administrative officers of the college. Only students with high qualifications will be admitted.

(b) Course requirements: Three full-year college courses in social science chosen from the fields of Economics, Psychology, Sociology and History. One full-year course in college mathematics (including at least a half-year of calculus) and a full-year course in college physics are required. However, students who have had no Physics can make up this deficiency by taking a special one-semester course at the Institute. In special cases a deficiency in calculus may also be satisfied in this manner.

At the end of the second year the candidate will normally take a general examination chosen from such fields as the following: Economic Theory, Industrial economics, Economics of Innovation, Labor Economics and Labor Relations, Human Relations, Personnel administration Statistical Methods and Theory, Economic Fluctuations and Fiscal Policy, and International Economics.

Following the Institute rules the candidate for the doctor’s degree will be required to take a minor in a related filed. Possibilities include: Business Administration, History, Regional Planning, Mathematics, or any of the technical fields of specialization at the Institute in which the student is qualified to participate. Exchange arrangements between M.I.T. and Harvard University also make it possible for graduate students at either institution to take advance work at the other without extra tuition.

In addition, the candidate for the Ph.D. degree must meet the usual language and thesis requirements.

 

FURTHER INFORMATION

Those persons who are interested in learning more about the program or who wish to obtain application blanks for fellowships to aid in financing such graduate work may direct inquiries to Professor Robert L. Bishop, Department of Economics and Social Science, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts.

 

INSTRUCTING STAFF
DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS AND SOCIAL SCIENCE

Ralph Evans Freeman, M. A., B. Litt.
Professor of Economics; in charge of the Department

Donald Skeele Tucker, Ph.D.
Professor of Economics

William Rupert Maclaurin, D.C.S.
Professor of Economics

Norman Judson Padelford, Ph.D., LL.D.
Professor of International Relations

Paul Anthony Samuelson, Ph.D.
Professor of Economics

Richard Mervin Bissell, Jr., Ph.D.
Professor of Economics

Charles Andrew Myers, Ph.D.
Professor of Industrial Relations

Paul Pigors, Ph.D.
Associate Professor of Industrial Relations

Harold Adolph Freeman, S.B.
Associate Professor of Statistics

Charles Poor Kindleberger, Ph.D.
Associate Professor of Economics

Max Franklin Millikan, Ph.D.
Associate Professor of Economics

Alex Bavelas, Ph.D.
Associate Professor of Psychology

Robert Lyle Bishop, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor of Economics

Edgar Cary Brown, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor of Economics

Morris Albert Adelman, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor of Economics

George Pratt Shultz, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor of Industrial Relations

Robert Solow, M.A.
Assistant Professor of Statistics

Lecturer

Joseph Norbert Scanlon

Instructors

John Royston Coleman, M.A.
Stanley Martin Jacks, A.B., LL.B.
James Earnest Boyce, A.M.
Louis Cass Young, S.M.
John Lang Rawlinson, A.M.
Gilbert Koreb Krulee, S.B., M.Ed.
Roy Olton, M.A.
Herman Thomas Skofield, M.A.
Jesse Harris Proctor, Jr., M.A.

Research Associates

Robert Keen Lamb, Ph.D.
Kingman Brewster, Jr., LL.B.
Peter Robert Hofstaetter, Ph.D.

Research Assistants

William Theodore Bluhm, M.A.
Sidney Layton Smith, S.M.

Teaching Fellows

Hugh Gilbert Lovell, B.A.
Jack Dean Rogers, B.S., M.B.A.

Assistants

Ralph Haskel Bergmann, A.B.
Kenneth Alden Bohr, S.M.
Daniel Monroe Colyer, B.A.
Harold Emil Dreyer, B.S.
David Allen Eberly, S.B.
Herman Gadon, A.B.
Stuart Lee Knowlton, A.B.
Walter Sparks Measday, A.B.
Beatrice Allen Rogers, A.B., S.B.
George Joseph Strauss, B.A.

Librarian

Barbara Klingenhagen, A.B.

 _________________________

MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
Department of Economics and Social Science

Graduate Fellowship
1950 – 1951

 

In the year 1950-1951 M.I.T. will offer:

Up to five fellowships of $2,500 for students in the following fields:

Economic Theory
Industrial Economics
Industrial Relations
International Economics
Statistics

Up to seven fellowships with stipends up to $1,600 for specialization in these same fields.

Fellowships are available to students who wish to undertake a program of graduate work in Economics leading to the degree of doctor of philosophy. Applicants should have an A.B. or S. B. degree or anticipate the award of such a degree not later than July 1, 1950. Fellowships are awarded for one year, with possibility of renewal. They include the Westinghouse Educational Fellowship , the Goodyear Tire and Rubber Fellowship and the Clarence J. Hicks Memorial Fellowship in Industrial Relations, given by the Industrial Relations Counselors, Inc., of New York.

Fellowships are offered to those who seek career opportunities in university teaching and research, in industrial concerns in this country or abroad, in research departments of unions, and in government agencies concerned with the regulation of industry.

The Institute’s close contacts with industry, and the development within the Department of Economics and Social Science of specialized work in economic theory, the economics of innovation, industrial relations, statistics, and international economics have created a suitable environment for advanced study and research in these particular fields.

Teaching fellowships are also available; but these are normally reserved for second and third-year students.

Requests for further information or for application blanks should be addressed to Professor Robert L. Bishop, Department of Economics and Social Science, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts. Applications should be filed by March 15, 1950.

 _________________________

Source: MIT Archives. Office of the President. Records, 1930-1959. Box 77 (AC4/77), Folder 10: Economics Department 1934-49.

Image Source: MIT, Technique, 1949.

Categories
Columbia Regulations

Columbia. Regulations for Ph.D. candidacy and general examination, 1916

This posting provides the menu of subject choices for the general examination to be admitted to Ph.D. candidacy in economics at Columbia as of 1916. We see that the history of economics and economic theory were still joined at the hip and that economic history was a compulsory field. Also interesting to note: the optional field “The labor problem”  included “Socialism”; two graduate courses in another social science or philosophy were required as was an ability to read at least one of French and German plus one additional language. 

To denote insertions in pencil, I have used bold-italics within square brackets. For text to be cut, I have included the original text, crossed-out.

__________________________________

[p. 410]

May 25, 1916

[…]

Professor Seligman, on behalf of the Committee on Instruction, recommended that the Faculty approve of the regulations governing admission to candidacy and the final examination for the doctorate of Philosophy as proposed by the various departments giving work under the jurisdiction of the Faculty of Political Science. This recommendation was adopted by the Faculty. The regulations of the several departments are as follows:

[…]

[p. 413]

DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS

REQUIREMENTS FOR ADMISSION TO CANDIDACY FOR THE DOCTORATE OF PHILSOPHY

Each [The] applicant for matriculation as a candidate for the degree of Ph.D. whose subject of major interest lies in the field of Economics must satisfy the Department

  1. That he is qualified in the general principles of Economics as taught in Columbia College or a full equivalent thereof.
  2. That he is qualified in such advanced or graduate work in the general field of Economics as is represented by approximately six full graduate courses in Columbia University or the equivalent thereof.
  3. That he is qualified in two full graduate courses as given at Columbia or the equivalent thereof under one of the following Departments:

Politics

Psychology

Public Law

Anthropology

History

Sociology

Philosophy

  1. That he is able to read French and German and to use these languages in seminar work and in research. In the discretion of the Department another language may be substituted for French or German.
  2. That he is able to express himself in correctly written English.

REQUIREMENTS FOR THE FINAL ORAL EXAMINATION

Every student [The candidate] presenting himself for the degree of Ph.D. under the Department of Economics will be examined in the following three topics:

1) The history and theory of Economics

2) Statistics

3) Economic History

He will also be expected to present for examination four out of the following eight topics:

1) Public finance

2) Money and banking

3) The labor problem (including Socialism)

[p. 414]

4) Trade and transportation

5) Corporations and trusts

6) Business economics, including accounting, business organization and allied topics

7) Insurance

8) Agriculture

He will also be examined in such cognate fields as are intimately related to the special topic of his dissertation.

Source: Columbia University Archives. Minutes of The Faculty of Political Science, May 25, 1916.

Image Source: Museum of the City of New York. Kent Hall, Columbia University (1910). McKim, Mead & White.

 

 

Categories
Chicago Regulations

Chicago. Committee on Ph.D. Outlines & Requirements, 1949-50 (3)

This is the third of a series of  items related to the University of Chicago Department of Economics’ Committee on Ph. D. Outlines and Requirements chaired by Milton Friedman (1949-50). The first installment and second installment were previously posted. A fourth installment was published after this post originally appeared.

Two seminar appearances, first as prospective candidates for the Ph.D. and ultimately to provide a definitive report of findings, are seen to constitute book-ends for thesis writers. Scope and quality of a thesis to be “comparable to [a] first-rate journal article” with quality control enforced through essentially an iterated process of revise-and-resubmit under the direction of the thesis committee.

___________________________

[MEMO #6, 13 June 1949]

[Carbon copy]

THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO

[Date]   June 13, 1949

[To]    T. W. Schultz                                                                        [Department] Economics

[From] R. Blough, M. Friedman, D. G. Johnson                             [Department] Economics
and J. Marschak

[In re:]           Report of committee on Ph. D. outlines and requirements.

Your note of December 10 establishing this committee asks us to “prepare a memorandum setting forth the problem of students’ Ph.D. outlines and the procedure to be followed by the Department in appraising and approving Ph.D. thesis projects, including the type of outlines and supporting materials that a student should submit to the Department for its use when it passes upon the petition for admission to candidacy.”

We have interpreted this assignment rather broadly, in the belief that an appropriate procedure for admission to candidacy could be formulated only as part of an integrated program for handling the entire thesis requirement. Accordingly, section 1 below presents our conclusions about the standards to be applied to a thesis, and section 2, about the methods for getting more effective supervision, direction, and criticism of a thesis. Section 3 restates and extends our conclusions in the form of specific proposals for action.

  1. Standards to be applied to a thesis.

It is our feeling that the existing (implicit) standards for a thesis are both too high and too low: too high ex ante and too low ex post. In our opinion, we should seek to stimulate shorter, better organized, and better written theses than those ordinarily submitted. The problems here are first, to avoid simply reducing length without improving quality; second, to enforce the standard and make it part of the mores of the Department.

In order to accomplish these purposes we recommend (a) that a statement on the role of the thesis should be prepared for distribution to candidates; (b) that every thesis should be required to have a central core not to exceed roughly 15,000 words.

(a) Role of the thesis

The thesis, in our view, is to be viewed primarily as part of the training of the economist, not as a means of securing additions to knowledge. Any addition to knowledge is a welcome by-product, not a major objective. Up to the point at which he writes a thesis, the student has been concerned primarily with absorbing substantive material, acquiring tools, and becoming familiar with techniques of analysis. He has only incidentally applied these techniques. Equally important, he has had little occasion to acquire absolute standards of quality; most of his written work has been of a “one-shot” variety involving doing his best once and then being through with it. He has not had the experience of re-doing a thing again and again until it is satisfactory in an absolute sense and not merely the best he can do in an hour or a week.

The role of the thesis is to round out the student’s education by remedying these deficiencies. More specifically it should:

(1) give the student training in research by “doing” and instill in him absolute standards of quality in research.

(2) Deepen the student’s knowledge of the technique and subject matter he has acquired in course work by requiring him to apply what he has learned to a particular problem. In the process, he should think through the material he has been subjected to and make it his own.

These objectives affect both the choice of topic and the character of the thesis. The topic should be chosen less from the point of view of novelty or importance than of the contribution it can make to the student’s education—the opportunity it offers for improving and expanding his capacities. As a general matter, this suggests topics sufficiently narrow and specific to permit the student to do a thorough and exhaustive piece of work in the time available. It argues against broad general topics in which maturity and judgment are the prime requisites.

To accomplish these objectives, the final thesis should satisfy exceedingly high standards of quality; this is far more important than quantity. As a regular matter, it should be expected that a thesis will undergo several substantive revisions before final acceptance, that an absolute standard of excellence rather than a labor-theory of value will be applied. This means that at least the central core of the thesis must be relatively brief. The standard should be a first-rate journal article, no a full-length book.

(b) The scale of the thesis

We recommend that every thesis should be required to contain a central core of not more than roughly 15,000 words. This central core is to be self contained. It may, however, be supplemented by additional chapters or appendices containing more detailed material, expansions of points in the central core, etc.

The central core should, in general, not give much space to the general character of the problem [handwritten note: “suggest to insert ‘methodological’ before ‘character’ or otherwise indicate that while we do want to have the problem stated at the beginning (the 3 lines further below) we don’t want vague methodological discussions on its place in the universe of science.”], earlier work on the problem, and the like; those belong in supporting appendices if anywhere. It should concentrate on the original material developed by the writer. It must contain a precise statement of the problem and its economic analysis, not simply summarize data, report views, or describe events. In this context, of course, economic analysis is to be interpreted broadly, not as synonymous with technical economic theory.

It should be emphasized that the restriction of the central core to 15,000 words is not intended in any way to reduce the quantity or quality of performance expected from the student. Its main objective is to improve quality. One further reason for keeping theses to this scale is the desirability of having every member of the faculty read every thesis and vote for or against its approval. This is not at present feasible but might become so if the scale of the thesis were restricted.

  1. Methods for getting more effective supervision, direction, and criticism of theses.

Our chief recommendation on this topic is that there be established a thesis seminar. This seminar should be attended as a regular matter by all students writing theses in residence. By as many faculty members as can find it possible to attend, and, in any event, by the faculty members on the thesis committee of the student reporting at a particular session. Ideally, some one or more faculty members should have direct responsibility for the seminar as part of his teaching load.

The student scheduled to report at any meeting should prepare a written report sufficiently in advance of the meeting to permit duplication and circulation among all faculty members and all student participants in the seminar. He might then begin the discussion with an introductory summary taking not more than, say, five minutes. The rest of the time would be devoted to critical discussion.

It might be expected that a student would ordinarily appear before the seminar twice: once early in his work for a discussion of the topic and its possibilities on the basis of a brief circulated report (on the scale of a term paper); once, toward the end, for a discussion of his results, on the basis of a more detailed report and possibly a draft of the “central core” of the thesis itself.

We recommend that this thesis seminar be integrated with two other steps in the thesis procedure with which there is at present some dissatisfaction: (a) admission to candidacy, (b) the final examination.

The first appearance of the student before the seminar, and the paper prepared for that purpose, should also be used as a basis for deciding on admission to candidacy. At present, it is the general feeling that we have inadequate evidence on which to judge suggested theses. The suggested change in the scale of the thesis opens up the possibility that more time can be spent in the preparatory stages and more can be asked for from the student in the way of supporting evidence. Something of the scale of a term paper is perhaps not too much to ask. In order to insure faculty participation, a tentative faculty committee should be established prior to the student’s first appearance and those named to it should be expected to attend for the department in addition to as many others as can do so.

Dissatisfaction with the final examination arises from a different source. The exam is in fact a pure formality, in view of the stage at which it comes. Candidates are in practice almost never failed at that stage. Yet the candidate is not told that it is a pure formality; he regards it as a crucial and important test.

In place of dispensing with the final exam, the second appearance of a candidate before the thesis seminar might take its place, not in the sense of an occasion for final approval of the candidate, but in the sense of a public exhibition, as it were, testifying to the candidate’s stage of development. Final approval of the thesis would be based on the decision of the thesis committee plus a poll of the entire faculty.

  1. Summary of specific recommendations

To implement the general recommendations outlined above, it is proposed that the department approve the following actions and rules:

(1) Every Ph.D. thesis submitted for final approval must contain a central core not in excess of 15,000 words in length. This central core must be self-contained but may be supplemented by supporting material. The standard of comparison should be a first-rate journal article.

(2) Preparation of a statement on the role of the thesis and the standards to which it is expected to conform for distribution to candidates.

(3) Establishment of a thesis seminar. Regular participation in this seminar is to be required of all candidates writing theses in residence. One or more faculty members is to have direct responsibility for this seminar as part of his teaching load. All other faculty members shall be encouraged to attend.

(4) A Ph.D. candidate, whether or not he writes his thesis in residence, shall be required to make at least two appearances before this seminar.

(5) The candidate’s first appearance before the seminar shall be part of the procedure for admission to candidacy. In advance of this appearance, the candidate shall prepare a brief report (on the scale of a term paper) explaining his thesis topic, the existing state of knowledge on the topic, its potentialities, and his projected plan of attack on the problem. This report shall be duplicated and circulated to all members of the seminar an all members of the faculty in advance of the meeting of the seminar. This report plus the performance of the student before the seminar shall be the principal evidence for granting admission to candidacy, provided, of course, that other requirements are met.

(6) A candidate shall be permitted to make this first appearance preparatory to admission to candidacy if he has passed at least two of the three Ph.D. preliminary examinations.

(7) A tentative faculty committee shall be named for each candidate prior to this first appearance, and shall be expected to attend the meeting of the seminar at which it takes place.

(8) The candidate’s final appearance before the seminar shall be on the basis of a more detailed report of his findings, preferably on the basis of a draft of the “central core” of the thesis. This report shall be duplicated and circulated to all members of the seminar and all members of the faculty in advance of the meeting of the seminar.

(9) This final appearance before the seminar shall replace the present final examination on the thesis.

(10) The candidates thesis committee shall be expected to attend this final appearance before the seminar.

(11) The central core of the thesis or its equivalent shall be circulated to all members of the faculty before the final acceptance of the thesis. Final acceptance shall be based on approval by the thesis committee plus a vote of all other members of the faculty.

(12) The new procedure for admission to candidacy should apply to all students in residence at the time of its adoption, and to students not in residence who have not been admitted to candidacy prior to January 1, 1950.

___________________________

 

[MEMO #7, 2 February 1950]

[Carbon copy.  Additions to the change in the text are highlighted. Items (7) and (10) are the significant additional changes in the specific recommendations.]

[THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO]

[Date]   February 2, 1950

[To]    T. W. Schultz                                                                        [Department] Economics

[From] R. Blough, M. Friedman, D. G. Johnson                             [Department] Economics
and J. Marschak

SUPPLEMENTARY REPORT OF COMMITTEE ON PH. D. OUTLINES AND REQUIREMENTS

The following summary of specific recommendations is a revision of the summary on pp. 4 and 5 of our earlier report, incorporating comments and suggestions made at the department discussion of the problem. It is proposed that the department approve the following actions and rules:

(1) A Ph.D. thesis submitted for final approval will ordinarily contain a central core not in excess of 15,000 words in length. This central core must be self-contained but may be supplemented by supporting material. In scope and quality, it shall be comparable to first-rate journal article.

(2) Preparation of a statement on the role of the thesis and the standards to which it is expected to conform for distribution to candidates.

(3) Establishment of a thesis seminar. Regular participation in this seminar is to be required of all candidates writing theses in residence. One or more faculty members is to have direct responsibility for the organization and scheduling of this seminar. A session of the seminar will ordinarily be conducted by the chairman of the tentative or final thesis committee of the student presenting a report (see point 7 below). All other faculty members shall be encouraged to attend.

(4) A Ph.D. candidate, whether or not he writes his thesis in residence, shall be required to make at least two appearances before this seminar.

(5) The candidate’s first appearance before the seminar shall be prior to his admission to candidacy. In advance of this appearance, the candidate shall prepare a brief report (on the scale of a term paper) explaining his thesis topic, the existing state of knowledge on the topic, its potentialities, and his projected plan of attack on the problem. This report shall be duplicated and circulated to all members of the seminar an all members of the faculty in advance of the meeting of the seminar.

(6) A candidate shall be permitted to make this first appearance preparatory to admission to candidacy if he has passed at least two of the three Ph.D. preliminary examinations.

(7) The candidate shall have responsibility for applying for the appointment of a tentative thesis committee prior to his first appearance at the seminar. He shall be permitted to make such application at any time after he has passed at least two of the three Ph.D. preliminary examinations. The chairman of the department shall name a tentative faculty committee for each candidate, and this committee shall be expected to attend the meeting of the seminar at which it takes place. At least one member of the tentative committee shall be a person whose major field of interest is outside of the field of the proposed thesis. If admission to candidacy is granted, a final thesis committee shall be appointed by the chairman of the department.

(8) The candidate’s final appearance before the seminar shall be a definitive report of his findings. A brief resume of this report shall be duplicated and circulated to all members of the seminar and all members of the faculty in advance of the meeting of the seminar. The candidate’s thesis committee shall be expected to attend this final appearance before the seminar. [Last sentence was recommendation (10) of previous draft]

(9) The central core of the thesis or its equivalent shall be circulated to all members of the faculty before the final acceptance of the thesis. Final acceptance of the thesis shall be by vote of the members of the faculty upon the recommendation of the thesis committee.

(10) The final examination by the department shall be on the candidate’s major field. The examination shall be a function of the whole department but in any event shall be attended by members of the thesis committee and other faculty members specializing in the field.

(11) The new procedure for admission to candidacy should apply to all students in residence at the time of its adoption, and to students not in residence who have not been admitted to candidacy prior to July 1, 1950.

___________________________

[MEMO #8, undated, almost certainly 1950]

[Mimeographed copy.]

STANDARDS FOR Ph.D. THESIS

(Draft proposal for
circulation among
prospective candidates)

In order to guide candidates for the Ph.D. degree in selection of a thesis topic, the Department of Economics has formulated the following statement of standards which shall apply to doctoral dissertations in the future. Each candidate is urged to familiarize himself with the four main criteria set forth below.

I. The role of the thesis in the educational process is to develop the candidate’s ability to make significant contributions to knowledge in economics. To accomplish this objective the thesis must make a contribution to knowledge.

In addition:

a. The thesis must be concerned with an important and significant problem.

The “importance” and “significance” of a problem are, of course, to some extent matters of individual judgment. Different candidates will have different concepts of what is important what is relatively inconsequential. In selecting a topic, however, the candidate should first ask himself questions such as these: Why is the proposed topic “important”? Why is it worth spending time on? Would research on the topic contribute to general understanding of some central problem of our time? Would it contribute to clarifying or improving the conceptual or logical basis of economics? Questions such as the availability of material, opportunity for utilizing a particular technique, or the possible conclusiveness of findings, though important, are definitely secondary. The candidate should work on something that “matters”.

b. The thesis must involve analysis of an economic problem

Conceivably, any kind of original work, such as for example the mere gathering of statistics which have never been compiled before, might be “a contribution to knowledge”. However, such a task would not meet the requirements for a thesis unless it involved independent analysis of an economic problem. In other words, the compilation of material is not an end in itself; it is only a mans of achieving the objective of the thesis.

II. The topic should be sufficiently limited and specific to permit the candidate to do a thorough and exhaustive piece of work.

The doctoral candidate is not expected to tackle a broad or general problem in its entirety. On the contrary, in most cases, he can make the best contribution to knowledge and develop his capacity for undertaking research by concentrating on a clearly defined segment of an important and significant problem. Since quality rather than quantity will be the main standard for judgment of the thesis, the topic should be limited in scope in order to enable the candidate to concentrate his energies on intensive and exhaustive analysis.

Insofar as possible, the candidate should choose a topic in the broad problem area in which he feels he might want to do further research beyond the thesis. In other words the thesis should be looked upon as a stepping stone to more comprehensive research as the candidate acquires greater maturity and judgment after completing of the formal requirements for the degree. In short, the candidate should avoid choosing a “blind-alley” topic which offers few avenues to future research.

III. Every thesis must contain a central core of not more than roughly 15,000 words, (or approximately 50 typewritten pages.)

This central core is to be self-contained. It may, however, be supplemented by additional chapters or appendices containing more detailed data, expansions of points developed in the central core, etc.

The central core should, in general, not give much space to the general character of the problem, earlier work on the problem, and the like; those belong in supporting appendices, if anywhere. It should concentrate on the original material developed by the writer. It must contain a precise statement of its problem and its analysis, not simply summarize data, report views, or describe events.

IV. The thesis must conform to high standards of quality

The central core of the thesis should be comparable in quality and scope to a first-rate journal article, and the candidate should strive to have the central core of the thesis, or an adaptation thereof, published in a journal.

In order to achieve the standards of quality set forth above, it is assumed, as a regular matter, that the thesis will undergo several substantive revisions before final acceptance. Up to the point of writing a thesis, most candidates have had little occasion to acquire high standards of quality, since most of their written work has been of a “one-shot” variety. The thesis, on the other hand, must be a thorough and well-written piece of research. In other words, it must represent the best work of which the candidate is capable.

The initial reputation of the candidate is made largely on the basis of the excellence of his doctoral dissertation, and his capacity for further research is dependent upon the development of his ability to complete successfully a piece of research requiring analytical capacity, sound judgment and continued application. The thesis, then, is a challenge to the candidate to demonstrate his right to belong to the profession. It is, consequently, a major undertaking, and no something to be brushed off speedily or lightly.

___________________________

Source: Hoover Institution Archives, Papers of Milton Friedman, Box 79, Folder 5 “University of Chicago. Minutes. Ph. D. Thesis Committee.”

Image Source:  T. W. Schultz, University of Chicago Photographic Archive, apf1-07484, Special Collections Research Center, University of Chicago Library.

Categories
Chicago Regulations

Chicago. Committee on Ph.D. Outlines & Requirements, 1949 (2)

After the University of Chicago Economics Department’s Committee on Ph.D. Outlines and Requirements (Blough, Friedman, D.G. Johnson and Marschak) met twice, Milton Friedman, the chair of the committee, circulated a five page summary of the committee’s deliberations. This summary along with brief comments by Blough and Marschak are included in this posting.  

Core sentences: “The standard should be a first-rate journal article, not a full-length book.” “The student scheduled to report at any meeting [of the thesis seminar] should prepare a written report sufficiently in advance of the meeting to permit duplication, and circulation among all faculty members and all student participants in the seminar. He might then begin the discussion with an introductory summary taking not more than, say, five minutes. The rest of the time would be devoted to critical discussion.”

___________________________

[MEMO #3, 23 MAY 1949]

THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO

Date   May 23, 1949

 

To       R. Blough, J. Marschak and                                       Department Economics
D.G. Johnson

From   M. Friedman                                                                Department Economics

In re:   Tentative Agreements reached by committee on Ph.D. outlines and requirements.

[p. 1] In the two meetings our committee has held so far we have concentrated on two main problems: (1) the standards to be applied to a thesis; (2) methods for getting more effective supervision, direction, and criticism of a thesis. The purpose of this memorandum is to summarize the tentative agreements reached on these points.

  1. Standards to be applied to a thesis.

It was our feeling that the existing (implicit) standards for a thesis are both too high and too low: too high ex ante and too low ex post. It was agreed that we should seek to stimulate shorter, better organized, and better written theses than those ordinarily submitted. The problems here are first, to avoid simply reducing length without improving quality; second, to enforce the standard and make it a part of the mores of the Department.

In order to accomplish these purposes it was agreed (a) that a statement should be prepared in the role of the thesis for distribution to candidates; (b) that every thesis should be required to have a central core not to exceed roughly 15,000 words.

(a) Role of the thesis

The thesis, in our view, is to be viewed primarily as part of the training of the economist, not as a means of securing additions to knowledge. Any additions to knowledge is a welcome by-product, not a major objective. Up to the point at which he writes a thesis, the student has been concerned primarily with absorbing substantive material, acquiring tools and becoming familiar with techniques of analysis. He has only incidentally applied [p. 2] these techniques. Equally important, he has had little occasion to acquire absolute standards of quality; most of his written work has been of a “one-short” variety involving doing his best once and then being through with it. He has not had the experience of re-doing a thing again and again until it is satisfactory in an absolute sense and not merely the best he can do in an hour or a week.

The role of the thesis is to round out the student’s education by remedying these deficiencies. More specifically it should:

(1) Give the student training in research by “doing” and instill in him absolute standards of quality in research.

(2) Deepen the student’s knowledge of the techniques and subject matter he has acquired in course work by requiring him to apply what he has learned to a particular problem. In the process, he should think through the material he has been subjected to and make it his own.

These objectives affect both the choice of topic and the character of the thesis. The topic should be chosen from the point of view less of novelty or importance than of the contribution it can make to the student’s education; the opportunity it offers for improving and expanding his capacities. As a general matter, this suggests topics sufficiently narrow and specific to permit the student to do a thorough and exhaustive piece of work in the time available. It argues against broad general topics in which maturity and judgment are the prime requisites.

To accomplish these objectives, the final thesis should satisfy exceedingly high standards of quality; this is far more important than quantity. As a regular matter, it should be expected that numerous re-writings of the thesis will be required, that an absolute standard of excellence rather than a labor-theory of value will be applied. This means that at least the central core of the thesis must be relatively brief. The standard should be a first-rate journal article, not a full-length book.

[p. 3] It should be emphasized that this objective is unlikely to be attained if the students sets out from the beginning the objective of writing not more than, say, 50 pages. A final acceptable thesis containing 50 pages will ordinarily require the writing of several hundred pages in the process. Indeed, it is frequently easier to write 300 pages on a topic than to write 50 pages of high quality, and the 300 pages will frequently be a preliminary step in getting to the 50 pages.

(b) The scale of the thesis

It was agreed to recommend that every thesis should be required to contain a central core of not more than roughly 15,000 words. This central core is to contain an integrated development of the topic and to be self contained. It may, however, be supplemented by such documentary evidence as is required to support it in the form of supporting appendices.

The central core should, in general, not give much space to the character of the problem, earlier work on the problem, and the like; these belong in the supporting appendices if anywhere. It should concentrate on the original material developed by the writer. It must contain an economic analysis of the problem tackled, not simply summarize date, report views, or describe events. In this context, of course, economic analysis is to be interpreted broadly, not as synonymous with technical economic theory.

One further reason for keeping theses to this scale is the desirability of having every member of the faculty read every thesis and vote for or against its approval. This is not at present feasible but might become so if the scale of the thesis were restricted.

 

  1. Methods for getting more effective supervision, direction, and criticism of theses.

Our chief recommendation on this topic is that there be established a thesis seminar. This seminar should be attended as a regular matter by all students writing theses in residence, by as many faculty members as can find [p. 4] it possible to attend, and, in any event, by the faculty members on the thesis committee of the student reporting at a particular session. Ideally, some one or more faculty members should have direct responsibility for it as part of his teaching load.

The student scheduled to report at any meeting should prepare a written report sufficiently in advance of the meeting to permit duplication, and circulation among all faculty members and all student participants in the seminar. He might then begin the discussion with an introductory summary taking not more than, say, five minutes. The rest of the time would be devoted to critical discussion.

It might be expected that a student would ordinarily appear before the seminar twice: once early in his work for a discussion of the topic and its possibilities; once, toward the end, for a discussion of his results.

This thesis seminar might be integrated with two other steps in the thesis procedure with which there is at present some dissatisfaction: (a) admission to candidacy, (b) the final examination.

The first appearance of the student before the seminar, and the paper prepared for that purpose, might also be used as a basis for deciding on admission to candidacy. At present, it is the general feeling that we have inadequate evidence on which to judge suggested theses. The suggested change in the scale of the thesis opens up the possibility that more time can be spent in the preparatory stages and more can be asked for from the student in the way of supporting evidence. Something of the scale of a term paper I perhaps not too much to ask.

Dissatisfaction with the final examination arises from a different source. The exam is in fact a pure formality, in view of the stage at which it comes. Candidates are in practice almost never failed at that stage. Yet the candidate is not told that it is a pure formality; he regards it as a crucial and important test. The entire procedure has an element of sadism about it.

[p. 5] In place of dispensing with the final exam, might the second appearance of a candidate before the thesis seminar take its place, not in the sense of an occasion for final approval of the candidate, but in the sense of a public exhibition, as it were, testifying to the candidate’s stage of development. Final approval of the thesis would be based on the decision of the thesis committee plus a poll of the entire faculty.

___________________________

[MEMO #4, 6 June 1949]

THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO

Date   June 6, 1949

 

To       (R. Blough                                                                              Department of Economics
(M. Friedman
(D. G. Johnson

From   J. Marschak                                                                          Department of Economics

In re:   Ph.D. Theses.

 

M. Friedman’s draft of May 23 seems to express well the views of the Committee, with the following amendments suggested:

p. 3, par. 1. I propose to cancel this paragraph. To write 300 pages, later to be condensed to 50, is one possible method, but neither the most frequent nor a particularly commendable one. I think this should be left to the students and to their immediate advisers.

p. 3, par. 3, sentence 3. I suggest (suggested insertion underlined): “It must contain a precise statement of the problem and its economic analysis…” It is often unclear what the thesis writer proposes to prove.

p. 4, par. 3. I suggest (suggested insertion underlined):

“…once, early in his work for a discussion of the topic and its possibilities, on the basis of a brief circulated report (on the scale of a term paper); once, toward the end, for a discussion of his results, on the basis of a more detailed report and possibly of the draft of the ‘central core’ of the thesis itself.”

(signed)
Jacob Marschak

JM/fs

___________________________

[MEMO #5, 9 June 1949]

THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO

Date   June 9, 1949

 

To       M. Friedman                                                                          Department Economics
D.G. Johnson
J. Marschak

From   Roy Blough                                                                             Department Economics

In re:   Ph.D. Theses.

Milton Friedman’s draft of May 23 seems to be a correct reflection of the views of the Committee. I am in agreement with Mr. Marschak’s suggestions of June 6.

The following afterthoughts are presented for discussion:

  1. I suggest eliminating the reference to sadism in the final examination. I do not so interpret the examination and, in any event, think the reference is a reflection on our colleagues and predecessors.
  2. The reference to frequent rewriting of the theses seems to put the emphasis on writing style. While this is important, there are other factors such as precise formulation of purpose, imaginative use of techniques, and logical organization.
  3. I suggest eliminating any implied criticism of the length of theses except as a criticism of verbosity. The kinds of theses vary so widely that comments which are applicable to one kind of subject would not apply to others. This is not any criticism of the recommendation for a central core for every thesis.
  4. One danger in suggesting that theses should approach articles rather than books in size is that some substitute will then have to be found as evidence that the student has done the equivalent of a year’s work, in general, on the dissertation. It would be most unfortunate if a few glib students should write plausible theses in a month or two and have them accepted. These students would not receive the research training which the thesis is intended to give, and the effects on the morale of other students might be disastrous.

 

 

Source: Hoover Institution Archives. Milton Friedman Papers, Box 79, Folder 5 “University of Chicago Minutes, Ph.D. Thesis Committee”.

Image Source: Roy Blough photo from University of Chicago Photographic Archive, apf1-00758, Special Collections Research Center, University of Chicago Library.

 

Categories
Chicago Regulations

Chicago. Committee on Ph.D. Outlines & Requirements, 1949 (1)

The University of Chicago Department of Economics was dissatisfied with its procedures for appraising and approving dissertation projects in late 1948 and a committe was formed to make recommendations with Milton Friedman as its chairperson. Here I post T.W. Schultz’s official memo naming the members of the committee and Milton Friedman’s initial memo to the committee clearly signalling his intention of having a major rethink about what a Ph.D. thesis is supposed to be about. 

___________________________

[Memo #1, 10 Dec 1948]

THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO

Date   December 10, 1948

 

To      Mr. Friedman, Mr. Blough, Mr. Marschak,                        Department Economics
Mr. Johnson

 

From T. W. Schultz                                                                             Department Economics

 

The faculty of the Department of economics authorized a committee to prepare a memorandum setting forth the problem of students’ Ph.D. outlines and the procedure to be followed by the Department in appraising and approving Ph.D. thesis projects, including the type of outlines and supporting materials that a student should submit to the Department for its use when it passes upon the petition to admission to candidacy.

May I ask you to serve as members of this committee with Professor Friedman acting as chairman?

The report should be directed to the Department to be circulated well in advance of the departmental meeting in which it is to be considered.

___________________________

[Memo #2, early 1949]

[Undated, written sometime after the Schultz memo of December 10, 1948 and the Friedman memo of May 23, 1949 that followed two meetings of this Committee which had taken place.]

TO:                  R. Blough, J. Marschak, G. Johnson

FROM:            Milton Friedman

SUBJECT:       Committee on Ph.D. Thesis Outlines and Requirements

 

The purpose of this memorandum is to provide a basis for discussion by our committee, of which I am chairman. I have been derelict in my duty in not having prepared it much earlier, or not having called a meeting earlier.

 

  1. Our Assignment

To refresh our memories, I quote from Mr. Schultz’s note establishing the committee: “To prepare a memorandum setting forth the problem of students’ Ph.D. outlines and the procedure to be followed by the Department in appraising and approving Ph.D. thesis projects, including the type of outlines and supporting materials that a student should submit to the Department for its use when it passes upon the petition to admission to candidacy.”

Interpreted literally, this assignment would limit us to the steps up to and including admission to candidacy, and would exclude consideration of the characteristics of the thesis itself and the criteria used in its acceptance. Since it seems to me the earlier stages cannot properly be judged except in terms of the desired end product, I suggest that, at least in our own discussions, we interpret the assignment more broadly to include all problems associated with the thesis requirement.

 

  1. Present Procedure

a. Admission to candidacy. As I understand it, we have no very formalized procedure or requirements. Students typically discuss possible thesis topics with one or more faculty members, construct outlines of the projected thesis, ordinarily get the reaction of one or more faculty members to it, revise it accordingly, and then formally submit the thesis topic and outline to the Department for approval and admission to candidacy. The submitted outline is occasionally extremely detailed, occasionally very general, and is sometimes accompanied by a general statement of objective and purpose, sources of material for the thesis, etc.

b. Thesis requirements. Aside from the general and vague requirement that the thesis be an “original contribution to knowledge”, we have, so far as I know, no concrete standards for theses. Among ourselves, we have frequently expressed the view that short theses of high quality were desirable and to be promoted, and have bemoaned the tendency on the part of students to prepare lengthy, pedestrian, theses. It is my feeling, however, that the students themselves think of the thesis in terms of a full-length book, and feel that quantity is an important requirement.

The procedure for guidance of theses is informal and vague. The student ordinarily consults separately with the members of his committee as he feels the need to do so.

 

  1. The Immediate Reason for a Committee

The immediate occasion for the appointment of a committee to consider the problem is primarily the feeling of frustration and incompetence we all feel when we are required to consider thesis topics and outlines and to approve admission to candidacy. The topics are often, if not typically, vague and broad, the outlines have the appearance of being “dreamed up” along rather formal lines in order to get approval rather than of being really working outlines providing a pattern for work or a real prediction of the final organization of the thesis. We are typically reduced to approving or disapproving the tesis larely on the basis of our knowledge of the ability of the student submitting the outline rather than on the merits of the project itself.

 

  1. The More Fundamental Problem

It seems to me that the dissatisfaction with the procedure of approving admission to candidacy reflects a more basic problem—the function of the thesis in the education of the students and the best means of accomplishing that function. I feel that we will make more progress on our particular assignment by considering afresh the general problem.

It is my own feeling that nothing has done so much in the United States to degrade standards of research in economics as the Ph. D. dissertation in its existing form. (These comments do not apply in any special sense to Chicago—indeed, it seems to me that our record in this respect is outstandingly good). The standard which has, in principle, been set for the dissertation is that it be a major piece of work making an original contribution to the field, the model being a book of substantial magnitude. The usual graduate student, expected to begin his dissertation after two years of graduate work and supposed to be able to complete I in another year, is not at all prepared to do a piece of work of this character or quality in the time allotted. He does not have enough background in the field, or broad enough experience, and even if he had, he could hardly complete the dissertation in one year. Equally important, even if the student could do it, faculty advisers would find it impossible to supervise properly more than one or two studies of this magnitude and scope. Proper supervision would mean applying to the work the standards they would apply to their own work; it would mean repeated and detailed consultations with the student, word-by-word and sentence-by-sentence criticism of drafts of pieces of the thesis and of the entire thesis, some independent checking on the student’s work, etc.

The result is naturally a compromise. Faculty advisers do not provide the supervision and critical guidance required, they do not and cannot be expected to go over manuscripts in great detail and require that it be rewritten repeatedly until it meets a high standard. Even aside from the time and effort required, competition prevents such a course of action. The Ph.D. is something of a trade-union card, competition from other schools and the fair treatment of our own graduates requires that they be able to get one on terms that are not intolerably stiffer than those at other institutions. The result is that the theses all of us accept are typically pretty poor products, poorly organized, and full of poor grammar and writing, to say nothing of bad economics and analysis. The student who has a dissertation of this type accepted not only fails to get the training in economic research the thesis should provide, he also goes away, at least to some extent, with the idea that this is the kind of work that is done in economics and that is acceptable and respectable. In latter years, he is not unlikely to produce a flood of additional work no higher in quality than his original effort and even more useless since it does not even provide a trade-union card.

 

  1. The Role of the Thesis in the Education of the Student

There are a number of different functions that can be assigned to the thesis in the educational process:

 (a) To give the student training in research by “doing” and some feeling for standards of quality in research.

 (b) To sharpen the student’s knowledge of the techniques and subject matter he has acquired in course work by requiring him to apply what he has learned to a particular problem in the belief that in the process he will be forced to think through the material he has been subjected to and make it his own.

(c) To establish habits of work and some feeling for research, in the hope thereby of stimulating him to do work on his own in latter years.

(d) To give him the unquestionably important experience of carrying through to completion a major piece of work.

            The thesis might also be viewed, not solely as a part of the educational process, but also as a means of advancing knowledge in economics. I am myself inclined to give this little or no weight. At the stage at which students are not now expected to write their theses, not one student in a hundred is capable of making a “real” contribution to knowledge. Any contribution to knowledge ought in my view to be considered a welcome by-product, not a major objective.

Of the objectives listed, only the first two seem to me capable of accomplishment, with the present general standards about the stage in his career at which the student is expected to write his thesis and the time he is expected to devote to it. The last two, and particularly (d) would require something of a revolution of these standards.

 

  1. Possible Solutions of the Fundamental Problem

There seem to me only two directions in which one can proceed to solve the fundamental problem if one takes as given roughly the present student-faculty ratio.

(a) One approach would be to restrict the Ph.D. degree to many fewer persons and to make it mean something very different from what it now means. As I understand it, this is more or less the approach followed in the Scandinavian countries where the Ph.D. is ordinarily no granted except for a major piece of work done by a man ten, fifteen, or more years after he has begun his professional career. This approach, while promising and desirable if it could be followed, does not seem to me feasible. It consists essentially in saying that one ought to establish a more advanced degree than the present Ph.D. It still leaves the problem of an intermediate degree like our present Ph.D., which would be a mark of certification that an individual is ready to begin his scientific career. It seems hardly possible for one school to do so or to overturn our established custom that a thesis is part of the attainments certified to by such a degree.

(b) The other alternative that seems to me to be open is to make the professed standard of the Ph.D. more modest while raising the attained standard. Instead of a book, the standard would be a journal article. In a way, this does not involve any change, since I do not believe there is anything in our present rules which would prevent us from accepting the equivalent of a journal article as a thesis. However, unless we explicitly make an effort to change our standard and to set a different standard for our students, I doubt very much that they, or we ourselves, will depart from the standard of a book.

What I have in mind is that we should emphasize that the requirement for the Ph.D. would be satisfied by a piece of work not to exceed a specified number of pages in length and of a quality suitable for publication in a professional journal—whether actually published or not is immaterial. The emphasis should be on quality of performance, not on quantity. The expectation would be that the faculty advisers could really go over a piece of moderate length in great detail, that they could if necessary require it to be rewritten any number of times without imposing too great a hardship on the student. It could further be expected that a larger number of members of the faculty would be led to read the thesis before final acceptance, and that in this way higher standards of quality would both be imposed and actually effected. I should be inclined myself to set something like fifty double-spaced typewritten pages as the absolute maximum limit on the size of any dissertation.

 

  1. The Problem of the Thesis Outline

If we were to follow the line just suggested, it seems to me we could appropriately require higher standards in the thesis outline itself. Instead of the present brief and formal statement, we could require something of the order of a brief term-paper. This paper could be expected to contain three items as a minimum: (1) A brief statement of the problem; (2) a succinct but reasonably comprehensive summary of existing literature on the problem; (3) a fairly precise statement of the particular respects in which the student expects to extend or supplement the existing literature. Whether it contained an outline of the present form seems to me immaterial. In addition there ought to be a flat prohibition on any attempts to “justify” the topic in terms of its path-breaking importance for economic science. If we set the training of students as the primary objective, topics should be judged primarily in terms of the training the student will get, only secondarily in terms of their importance to economics.

It should be expected that the student will in general have gone over this statement with some faculty member and have gotten tentative clearance from him.

This is not a very specific recommendation, and I am hopeful that something better will come from the other members of the committee.

Beyond admission to candidacy, there are a number of additional possibilities we should investigate. I mention them only briefly.

(a) There seems to me considerable merit in the suggestion that has been made by Koopmans that the committee as a whole should meet with the candidate shortly after admission to candidacy so that there can be a meeting of minds on the direction his work should take.

(b) I have the feeling that much could be gained by getting the students to help one another by criticism and discussion. This would be valuable training both for the critic and the criticized. Could we set up some sort of a seminar for students writing their theses? In such a seminar, a student would be expected to submit something in written form, duplicated so that the other members have copies in advance. Some students now get the benefit of such discussion through the Cowles Commission and Agricultural Economics groups. Ought we to extend it to all? Or are informal groupings really more effective?

 

Source: Hoover Institution Archives. Milton Friedman Papers, Box 79, Folder 5 “University of Chicago Minutes, Ph.D. Thesis Committee”.

Image Source: Clipping from a photograph from Hoover Institution Archives (Milton Friedman Papers Box 115) in online Wall Street Journal  (18 Oct 2012): Dalibor Rohac’s review of  The Great Persuasion by Angus Burgin.

Categories
Columbia Regulations

Columbia. Ph.D. Memo On Oral Examinations. 1932-33

 

 

The Committee on Instruction of the Columbia University Faculty of Political Science (consisting of the four departments of public law, history, economics and sociology) circulated the following memorandum regarding the oral subject examinations for the Ph.D. degree. One is struck at both the apparent informality and variation of practice in the matter at the time the memorandum was written (most likely sometime during the academic year 1932-33). Of 74 examinations in economics, 52 were passed unconditionally during the three years 1929-30 through 1931-32.

__________________________________________

From the Committee on Instruction to the Members of the Faculty of Political Science
Memorandum on the Procedure of Doctor’s Examinations

At a recent meeting the Committee on Instruction discussed certain questions which seem pertinent in respect of the procedure in and standards of oral subject examinations for the Doctor of Philosophy degree. The Committee has decided to submit to the members of the Faculty certain of these considerations in the hope that the several Departments will discuss in departmental meetings any matters which seem important.

The procedure of oral subject examinations apparently rests in large part on custom. When a candidate is proposed for examination by a Department notices are sent to all the members of the proposing Department who are members of the Faculty of Political Science and a notice goes also to each of the other three Departments. The proposing Department can be represented at the examination by a committee of its members; it may add to the committee Professors who are not on the Faculty of Political Science; and the three non-proposing Departments are expected to designate representatives. In some cases this representative is a junior officer under the Faculty.

These inquiries concerning the conventions of examinations are not intended to suggest that there should be any attempt to draw up detailed rules and regulations. It is not thought that any existing evils—if there are such—can be eliminated by a codification of practices and agreement that the code should be followed. With the procedure based on custom, however, it does seem to the Committee on Instruction worth while for the customs to be recanvassed by informal discussions. This would seem to be the more desirable because of the increase in the number of doctoral candidates and the increased number of professors who serve on examining committees. A few years ago every member of a Department attended every departmental examination. Now there is increasing turnover among examiners. Hence, as has been said, it is more important that pertinent questions be rediscussed In submitting these questions the Committee on Instruction does no more than suggest that they are worthy of consideration. The Committee now expresses no opinion of how the questions should be answered:

1) Should oral examinations be made formal? Manifestly the occasion is an important one for the candidate. Should members of the examining committee smoke during the examination? Should the candidate smoke? Should member of the examining committee bring books, papers or proofs with them and carry on their work save when they themselves are asking questions? Should the presiding officer at the examination attempt to check conversations à deux or à trois between members of the examining committee when they are not asking questions?

2) Is it desirable to have any general understanding concerning the time allotted for the major subject and for the minor subject (a) when both subjects are within the same department, and (b) when the minor subject is in a different Department? Presumably in the case of (a) the matter can be settled within the Department. In the case of (b) the allocation seems to vary greatly, from twenty-five minutes to an hour.

3) Is it desirable to have the time of the examination devoted to questioning by four or five professors or is it desirable to have the questioning by eight or even more professors? If the questioning must be conducted by the larger number is it desirable to allow at least one of them a full half or three quarters of an hour?

4) Should all the professors who have asked questions be present at the conclusion of the examination and participate in the discussion of the candidate’s fate? Is it desirable for a questioner, after finishing his questions, to leave the examination room telling the Chairman his opinion of the candidate on his subject?

5) How should the decision of the examining committee be reached? By majority vote?

6) Should encouragement be given the practice of questions by representatives of other departments? What weight should be attached to the opinions of these representatives? Should efforts be made to give candidates less extemporaneous examinations?

8) Is there any reason for a change in the form of the Dean’s blanks so that on the record of the examination there will appear a list of the professors present and the special subjects on which they examined?

9) In the discussions of whether a student is to be passed or failed references to previous students who have passed or failed rest on the recollections of professors who have been on both examining committees. Is it desirable that notations be made on the blanks giving some indication of the nature of the performance of candidates and would it be possible for the Dean’s office to cumulate these notations and to send over with each new blank a summary of recent performances in that department?

10) Should consideration be given to the question of whether, in the absence of an examining committee of a certain size (including representatives from other departments) the examination should be postponed?

Record of Oral Subjects Examinations for the PhD Degree
Faculty of Political Science

Passed

Failed

Conditioned

1929-30

Public Law

6

10

4

History

13

12

6

Economics

21

2

4

Sociology

7

1

1

1930-31

Public Law

13

6

3

History

20

6
Economics

17

3

5

Sociology

11

2

1931-32

Public Law

12

9

2

History

16

10

Economics

14

5

3

Sociology

7

7

 

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

Categories
Courses Curriculum Economists Johns Hopkins Regulations

Johns Hopkins Economics. Ph.D. Regulations, Courses 1880

Johns Hopkins University began instruction October 3, 1876. The class schedule for the entire university could be printed as a single page matrix of hours by days in 1879.

By the academic year 1880-81 Johns Hopkins University had awarded a single Ph.D. in political science, which is where political economy still was classified.

In this posting  we approach the beginning of the Big Bang of graduate education in economics in the U.S.

General Statements for 1880-81
Information for Graduate Students
Enumeration of Classes

 

________________________

[p. 54]

GENERAL STATEMENTS FOR 1880-81.

Instruction is provided for both Collegiate and University students….

Admission of Students.

Arrangements are made for the reception of the following classes of students:

I.
Graduates.

Young men who have already graduated in this or other institutions of acknowledged standing are received on the presentation of their diplomas, after satisfying the chief instructors in the departments of study which they propose to follow that they are qualified to pursue the courses here given. They may be enrolled as candidates for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy or not, at their option. Those whose years and attainments correspond with those of graduates may also be received as special students.

II.
Matriculates.

Students who wish a collegiate training are expected, unless excused for some special reason, to offer themselves for matriculation at the time of their admission. If they can pass satisfactorily in a considerable part of the required studies, but not in all, they may be admitted as candidates for matriculation, but their names will not be printed as enrolled students until the examination is completed. They will not be considered as candidates for more than one academic year.

Students who present themselves with higher attainments than are requisite for matriculation may, upon examination, receive credit for the same, be admitted to advanced classes, and so graduate in less time than would otherwise be requisite.

III.
Non-Matriculates.

  1. Students in subjects preliminary to a medical course…
  2. Young men of collegiate age…sufficiently advanced in character and attainments to be allowed the privilege, and that there is some good reason why they should not offer themselves for matriculation…
  3. Attendants upon lectures. –The University has extended certain privileges to teachers…, to medical students…, and to other persons…[they] are not enumerated as enrolled students.

Fees for Tuition, Etc.

The charges are as follows, payable in advance, unless, for specific reasons satisfactory to the Treasurer, he permits the payment to be deferred:

For Tuition, $80 per annum.

[…]

Board and lodging in private houses near the University, including care of room, fuel and light, may be obtained at five dollars, an upwards, per week. Some students pay even less.

[p. 55]

 

INFORMATION FOR GRADUATE STUDENTS.

Graduate Courses.

Advanced and graduate students are received with or without reference to their being candidates for a degree, and they are permitted to attend such lectures and exercises as they may individually select…

…The University professors are not absorbed in the details of college routine, but are free to give personal counsel and instruction to those who seek it; books and instruments adapted to investigation and advanced work have been liberally provided; the system of Fellowships secures the presence of twenty special students, imbued with the University spirit, most of them looking forward to academic careers; seminaries limited to a few advanced students, under the guidance of a director, have been organized in Greek, Mathematics, Physics, and History; societies devoted to Philology, to Mathematical, Physical, and Natural Science, and to History and Political Science, afford opportunities for the presentation of memoirs and original communications….

The instruction is carried on by such methods (varying of course with individual scholars, and with the different departments of work) as will encourage the student to become an independent and original investigator, while he is growing more and more familiar with the work now in progress elsewhere, and with the results which have been obtained by other scholars in the same field, and while he is adding to his general intellectual culture…

Degree of Doctor of Philosophy.

The Degree of Master of Arts and Doctor of Philosophy will be conferred in conformity with the following regulations:

Every candidate for the degree of A.M: and Ph.D. will be required:

  1. To have obtained the Baccalaureate degree of this University (or to present the diploma of some other college which the Faculty shall accept as equivalent), and to have subsequently devoted not less than two years to University study in the special department of learning which he may have chosen. The appointment to a Fellowship will be regarded by the faculty as equivalent to the attainment of a Bachelor’s Degree, so far as this is a necessary condition of obtaining a higher degree.
  2. To produce a thesis which shall be approved by the Faculty. This thesis must be the result of original investigation in the main subject for examination, and the subject of the thesis must be submitted for approval to the head of the department, or the chief examiner in it, not less than six months before the degree is conferred.
  3. To pass an examination in one main and one or more subsidiary subjects; the choice of which is to be referred by the candidate to the chief examiner, and through him to the Faculty for final approval. The method of examination will vary according to the subject, and will be written, oral, practical, or all three, as may be deemed best.
  4. To enroll himself as a candidate for the degree, at least one year in advance of the time when he proposes to apply for examination.

Degrees will be conferred by the Trustees on the recommendation of the Faculty, probably twice a year, in the middle of the winter and at the end of the academic term.

The Diploma will indicate the department of study to which the candidate has directed his attention.

Degrees Conferred.—The degree of Doctor of Philosophy has been conferred on the following named persons, who have passed the required examinations:

 

1878 [4 Ph.D. degrees awarded, one in economics  (no other in economics through 1880)]

Henry C. Adams, A.B., Iowa College, 1874; now Lecturer on Political Economy at Cornell University and at the Johns Hopkins University.

 

[…]

 

ENUMERATION OF CLASSES

Which have been instructed during the Academic Year 1879-80.

[pp. 61]

History and Political Science. (33 Students.)

Seminary of American History (15).

Once weekly, two months: Dr. [Austin] Scott.

Comparative Constitutional History (5).

Once weekly, four months: Dr. H. B. Adams.

History of the Renaissance and Reformation (17).

Daily, first half-year, also ten public lectures: Dr. H. B. Adams.

English Constitutional History, Stubbs’ Select Charters (15).

Once weekly, six months: Dr. H. B. Adams.

Political Economy (13).

Four times weekly, two months : Dr. H. B. Adams.

Money and Banking (12).

Four times weekly, two months: Dr. H. C. Adams.

National Debts.

Nine public lectures: Dr. H. C. Adams.

________________________

Source: Johns Hopkins University. University Circulars. No. 5, May, 1880, pp. 54-55, 61.

Categories
Chicago Regulations

Chicago Economics. General Regulations for Ph.D., 1903

University of Chicago
The Regulations of the University of Chicago
(Chicago, 1903)

[p. 24]

ARTICLE VIII. INSTRUCTION.

Section 1.—Courses of instruction provided by the University are organized under the following Departments:

[p. 25]

The Schools and Colleges of Arts, Literature, and Science.

I.           Philosophy.
II.         Political Economy.
III.       Political Science.
IV.       History.
V.         The History of Art.
VI.       Sociology and Anthropology.
VII.      Comparative Religion.
VIII.     Semitic Languages and Literatures-
IX.        Biblical and Patristic Greek.
X.         Sanskrit and Indo-European Comparative Philology.
XI.       The Greek Language and Literature.
XII.      The Latin Language and Literature.
XIII.     The Romance Languages and Literatures.
XIV.     The Germanic Languages and Literatures.
XV.       The English Language and Literature, and Rhetoric.
XVI.     Literature (in English).
XVII.    Mathematics.
XVIIl.   Astronomy and Astrophysics.
XIX.     Physics.
XX.      Chemistry.
XXI.     Geology.
XXIA.  Geography.
XXII.   Zoology.
XXIII.  Anatomy.
XXIV.  Physiology (including Physiological Chemistry and Pharmacology).
XXV.   Neurology.
XXVI.  Palæontology.
XXVII. Botany.
XXVIll. Pathology and Bacteriology.
XXXI.  Public Speaking.
XXXIl. Physical Culture and Athletics.
XXXIII.Military Science and Tactics.

[…]

Section 2. — Courses of instruction are classified as Majors and Minors, and call for a specific number of hours per week, or the equivalent of the same, as follows: The Major course occupies four or five hours weekly for a Quarter (twelve weeks). The Minor course occupies four or five hours weekly for a Term (six weeks). The Double Major or Double Minor occupies double the [p. 26] weekly time for the Quarter or Term respectively.

  1. Major and Minor courses in the Junior Colleges uniformly occupy five hours weekly.
  2. In the Summer Quarter courses in all the Schools and Colleges occupy five hours weekly.
  3. Seminar work is estimated in Majors or Minors not according to the number of hours occupied weekly, but according to the character of the work required. Determination of the credit value of the Seminar lies within the province of the instructor, subject to the approval of the Head of the Department.

 

Section 3. — The normal work of the student is three courses for each Quarter.

  1. The student is permitted to take two Majors or their equivalent, or one Major, provided that he furnishes satisfactory evidence to his Dean that he is making the proper use of his time.
  2. A student may take four Majors of work during a Quarter. In the case of an under- graduate student this is permitted only on approval of his recent instructors and the payment of an additional fee (see Art. XIII, sec. 7, no. 8).

[…]

[p. 30]

Section 13. — The courses of instruction in the Graduate Schools are elective, except as the election is modified by the previous choice involved in candidacy for a particular degree. (See Art. XI, sees. 4, 6, 8.)

  1. Graduate work done in another institution is accepted as resident work in the University, provided that:
    1. The institution in which the work is done is of high standing; and
    2. Sufficient evidence is furnished that the particular work is satisfactorily performed.
    3. No work done in another institution is accepted in lieu of the minimum of one year of residence required for any degree.
  2. Non-resident work may be substituted for resident work for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy under the following conditions:
    1. The non-resident student is expected to matriculate at the University and spend the first year of the time required for the degree in residence, unless he satisfies the Head of the Department concerned that he can do the introductory work in a satisfactory manner though not in attendance.
    2. The non-resident work is performed under the general direction of the Head of the Department concerned.
    3. The final examination in all work leading to a degree is passed at the University.
  3. No non-resident work is accepted in lieu of the minimum residence of one year required for the Master’s degree.

[…]

[p. 32]

Section 17. — At the close of each course of study an examination is held by the instructor, the particular time being officially announced in the Weekly Calendar.

  1. Quarterly examinations are given in graduate courses at the discretion of the instructor. *

*(l) This does not entitle individual graduate students to exemption from the examination in courses in which the quarterly examination is held. (2) In case no examination is held in a graduate course it is understood that some paper, problem, or exercise is substituted for the examination in question.

  1. If quarterly examinations are not given in graduate courses, instruction continues to be given until the last day of the Quarter.

[…]

Section 19. — For regulations governing examinations for higher degrees, see Art. XI, sec. 6, no. 4, and sec. 9.

 

Section 20. — The following terminology is employed in recording the work of students:

 

A = 100 to 91.

B= 90 to 76.

C= 75 to 61.

D= 60 to 51.

E= 50 to 0.

  1. “C” is the passing mark.
  2. “D” requires a second examination…

[p. 33]

[…]

  1. In the Graduate Schools all grades below “C” are equivalent to “not passed.”

[…]

[p. 38]

[…]

ARTICLE XI. GRADUATION, INCLUDING CANDIDACY AND REQUIREMENTS FOR DEGREES.

Section 1. — A diploma or certificate conferring a degree or a title, or testifying to the completion of a course of study, is awarded to each student completing the requirements in a School, College, or Academy as follows:

[…]

  1. The degree of Master of Arts, Philosophy, or Science and of Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate Schools.

[…]

Section 3. — A student is admitted to candidacy for a higher degree in any School on the following general conditions:

  1. If his undergraduate course is equivalent to that in the Colleges of the University (see sees. 4-6).
  2. If he has been in residence one Quarter or more in the School.
  3. On recommendation of the Department or Departments in which he wishes to work he is accepted by the Faculty of the School.
  4. Graduates of approved institutions who become candidates for a higher degree are, as a general rule, allowed to depart from the regulations of the University for the Bachelor’s degree to the extent of three Majors, but no deficiency in quantity is allowed (see sees. 5 and 6).
  5. Substitutes for the specified work required for the Bachelor’s degree of this University, to the amount of eight Majors reckoned by College standards, are granted to candidates for a higher degree:
    1. In the case of a student appointed to a Fellowship or Scholarship, when the substitution is recommended by the Department in which the principal work is done.
    2. In other cases, by a majority vote of the University Senate.

[…]

[p.39]

[…]

Section 4. — The following special regulations condition admission to candidacy for the degrees in question :

[…]

  1. In the case of the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, in any School, the student has a reading knowledge of French and German certified to by the Departments of Romance and Germanic Languages in the University, and the subject for his dissertation is accepted by the Head of his principal Department.
  2. A graduate student holding any Bachelor’s degree and devoting himself to any Department of study is admitted to candidacy for any Master’s degree, provided that, also, he has done the work required for a corresponding Bachelor’s degree in the University.

[…]

Section 6. — Students admitted to candidacy for higher degrees obtain them on the following general conditions :

  1. Resident graduate work as follows : for the Master’s degree, three Quarters ; for the Doctor’s degree, three years, or, in the Graduate Divinity School, four years. (See special provision in sec. 7, nos. 6-8.)
  2. Registration during the Quarter in which the examination for the degree takes place.
  3. The successful completion of a course of study acceptable to the Department in which the work is done. For special curriculum requirements, see sec. 8.
  4. The passing of a final examination, written [p. 40] or oral or both, at the discretion of the examining committee. For special examination requirements see sec. 9.
  5. The preparation and presentation of a satisfactory dissertation, except in the case of the non-specialist Master’s degree (see sec. 8, no. 3). For special dissertation requirements, see sec. 10.
  6. The favorable report of the examining committee, the recommendation of Ruling Bodies concerned, and the conferring of the degree by the Board of Trustees through the President.
  7. Presence in person at the Convocation at which the degree is given.

 

Section 7. — Special regulations governing the term of residence necessary for graduation are as follows :

  1. No degree is given without at least one year (three Quarters) of full resident work.
  2. Students who have taken a degree for two years’ work in schools under the supervision of the University may take the title of Associate after a Quarter of residence at the University.

[…]

  1. Students presenting advanced credit shorten the time required for residence for certain degrees. (See Art. VI, sec. 13 ; Art. VIII, sec. 13, no. I, and sec. 14, no. 7.)
  2. Non-resident work accepted in lieu of work in residence shortens the time required for residence. (See Art. VIII, sec. 13, no. 2, sec. 14, no. 4.) Non-resident work cannot be accepted as affording any time credit in the course for the medical degree.
  3. In exceptional cases the degree of Doctor of Philosophy may be granted after one year of residence at the University of Chicago, work having been done in other institutions.

 

Section 8. — Special regulations governing the curriculum are as follows :

  1. Each Department of instruction decides what courses of instruction are accepted in its Department for higher degrees.
  2. Work done in other universities may be substituted for work in the University according to the regulations found in Art. VI, sec. 13; Art. VIII, sec. 13, no. 1, sec. 14, no. 7.
  3. If the degree of Master in the Graduate Schools be taken as a specialist degree, at least seven Majors of resident graduate work, all falling in one Department, and a dissertation, are required. If it be taken as a non-specialist degree, there are required nine Majors of resident graduate work distributed among three Departments (not more than six Majors falling in any one group of Departments), without a dissertation; but the respective Departments must approve in writing, in advance, at the time of the student’s admission to candidacy, the specific courses to be offered for the degree, and any Department is at liberty to require other courses to be taken as preliminary to those thus approved. In any case Seminar courses are counted toward the Master’s degree only by special consent of the Department concerned.

[…]

[p. 41]

[…]

  1. For the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate Schools the requirements are :
    1. One principal and either one or two secondary subjects are chosen, each acceptable to the head of the Department concerned.
    2. Not more than two-thirds of the work may be done in one Department, and work counting toward the degree in not more than three Departments, except when such work is accepted as equivalent to work done in the Department itself.
    3. The minimum requirement in a secondary subject taken by a candidate for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy is one year (three Quarters) of full work (that is to say, work corresponding, in the judgment of the Department, to nine Majors).
    4. The candidate who has already done in another university the whole or a part of the work which would be accepted by the proposed secondary Department in this University as sufficient, takes, nevertheless, an amount of work in that Department corresponding to at least three Majors; and this work is of a strictly advanced character.
    5. If a candidate for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy takes two secondary subjects, the minimum requirement is two-thirds of a full year’s work in one of them (that is to say, work corresponding, in the judgment of the Department concerned, to six Majors), and one-third of a full year’s work in the other (that is to say, work corresponding, in the judgment of the Department concerned, to three Majors); and of these amounts at least three Majors in each subject are of a strictly advanced character.
    6. A good command of literary expression and such knowledge of subjects considered fundamental as may be prescribed by the several Departments is required.

[…]

Section 9. — Special regulations governing the examination preliminary to obtaining degrees are as follows :

  1. The public oral examination for the degree of Master or of Doctor of Philosophy is conducted by an examining committee (see no. 2), and does not exceed two hours in length in the case of the Master’s degree and three hours in the case of the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Notice of the same is published in the Weekly Calendar at least one week in advance.
  2. The Examining Committee consists of all the instructors of the Departments concerned, ex officio, and one or more members appointed by the President. The President also names the chairman of the Committee. In all examinations for the Doctor’s degree in Greek and Latin the members of all Departments represented in the Classical Group are understood to be included in this regulation as “Departments concerned.”
  3. The oral examination for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy is taken within four months after the approval of the dissertation, unless the time be extended by the Senate upon the recommendation of the Heads of the Departments concerned. (See no. 6 below.)

[p. 42]

  1. The candidate for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy is admitted to final examination only when the thesis is complete and ready for the printer (see also sec. 10). By “complete ” is meant that every chapter or considerable subdivision of the document is worked out with such fulness that it is practicable to make all the necessary corrections and additions on the proof.
  2. No examination for a higher degree is held within the last week before the Convocation at which the degree is to be conferred.
  3. The candidate for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy may present himself for examination in his secondary subject as soon as he has fulfilled the requirements of the Department concerned. The examination is conducted by a committee consisting of the members of the Department, a representative of the principal Department, and a representative of another Department, and the grade attained is reported to the Recorder.
  4. In case a candidate has already taken the examination in his secondary Department, the examination in his principal subject is conducted by an Examining Committee consisting of the members of the Department concerned, an appointed representative of the secondary Department, or each of them, by any other members of the said Department that may choose to attend, and by a member of some other Department appointed by the President.
  5. The candidate for any final examination for the higher degree prepares a typewritten or printed brief of his work, including an analysis of the dissertation, and files with the Recorder copies of the same, sufficient in number for the Examining Committee, one week before the time set for the examination. In case of an examination in the secondary Department, the brief includes the work in this Department. The brief for the final examination includes the work of both Departments.

 

Section 10. — Special regulations governing the dissertation in the case of the higher degrees are as follows:

  1. Students who have reached their third year of graduate study and are, in the judgment of the instructors concerned, prepared to enter upon the direct work of the thesis for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy may, within the judgment of the Department in which the thesis is to be presented, be free for that work. In this case the usual fees are paid.
  2. The subject of the dissertation in the case of the Doctor’s degree in the Graduate Schools is submitted for approval to the Head of the Department at least twelve months before the date of the final examination.
  3. The dissertation itself is submitted in written form four months before the date of the final examination (unless postponement is authorized by the Senate upon recommendation of the Head of the Department concerned).
  4. Dissertation work may be done in collaboration with the instructor on the following conditions:
    1. The student should be given the choice of selecting a second subject on which he is allowed to publish alone.
    2. The student submits a written dissertation on such part of the joint work as was allotted to him for original investigation, on the basis of which he desires to receive the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.
    3. This dissertation should be printed separately.
    4. Should the joint paper appear before the dissertation is printed, or should it be unavoidably delayed, the time allowed for the printing of the dissertation may be suitably extended at the request of the instructor.
  5. Dissertations for the degree of Master and of Doctor of Philosophy, after receiving the approval of the Departments concerned, are [p. 43] deposited in the Library at least three weeks before the date of the Convocation at which the degrees are to be conferred, and notices of the dissertations thus deposited are given to the Faculties concerned.
  6. In the title-page required for all dissertations the official name of the University is placed at the head of the title-page, and the name of the Department to which the dissertation is offered is designated in marks of parenthesis at the end of the statement that the dissertation is offered in candidacy for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. The proper form is as follows :

__________________

The University of Chicago
FOUNDED BY JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER
_____

(Title) ______________________________________

___________________________________________

A DISSERTATION

SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY
OF THE

(GRADUATE SCHOOL OF ARTS AND LITERATURE)
(OGDEN GRADUATE SCHOOL OF SCIENCE)
(GRADUATE DIVINITY SCHOOL)

IN CANDIDACY FOR THE DEGREE OF

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

(Department of___________________)

_____

BY

(Name of Author) ______________________________________

_____

_____

_____

19—

__________________

 

  1. A brief of the dissertation accompanies the brief of work required. (See sec. 9, no. 8.)
  2. A dissertation is required for the Master’s degree in the Graduate Schools when it is taken as a specialist degree. (See sec. 8, no. 3.) In this case the subject is submitted for approval to the Head of the Department in which the principal work is done, at least six months before graduation, and the completed dissertation at least two months before graduation. The title page of the Master’s dissertation must, in form, agree with that of the Doctor’s dissertation. The paper on which the dissertation is written is of uniform size (8½ × 11 inches), and of a quality approved by the Librarian of the University, from whom samples are obtained. Five printed or typewritten copies are deposited in the University Library. A copy for preservation in the Library is bound in dark cloth and shows the title of the thesis, either stamped on the cover in gilt lettering or written out on a slip and pasted on the outside covering.

[…]

[p. 44]

[…]

  1. For the relation of the dissertation to admission to the examination and to recommendation for the degree, see sees. 9, no. 4, and 11, nos. 3 and 4.
  2. After acceptance, one hundred printed copies of the dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy are deposited in the Library within six months after the date of the final examinations. These copies become the property of the University. (See Art. II, sec. 14, no. 15, and Art. XV, sec. 9, no. 2.) Two copies of each thesis are offered bound in boards in a style approved by the Librarian of the University, from whom samples may be secured upon application.

[…]

[p. 45]

[…]

Section 12. — Special regulations governing recommendation for higher degrees are as follows:

  1. The Departments concerned recommend to the proper Faculties, the Faculties to the University Senate, and the Senate to the Board of Trustees.
  2. In no case is a candidate recommended for a higher degree without the consent of all the Departments concerned.
  3. The degree of Master (specialist, and in the Divinity School) is recommended only after the proper number of copies of the dissertation have been deposited with the Librarian. (See sec. 10, no. 8.)
  4. The degree of Doctor of Philosophy is recommended only on a written certificate of the principal Department concerned that the thesis is ready for the printer, and on the written evidence of some responsible journal or publisher that the required number of printed copies will be furnished the University within a reasonable time.

[…]

Section 14. — Four grades of excellence are distinguished for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, namely : (1) rite; (2) cum laude; (3) magna cum laude; (4) summa cum laude. The grading is based both upon the examination and the dissertation.