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

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

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

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

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

___________________________

1925 Rankings

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

1957 Rankings

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

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

1964 Rankings

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

1969 Rankings

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

Tables transcribed below.

___________________________

Graduate Programs in Economics
(1957, 1964, 1969)

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

 

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

 

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

 

Categories
Brown Chicago Columbia Cornell Dartmouth Economics Programs Harvard Illinois Kansas M.I.T. Michigan Michigan State Minnesota Ohio State Pennsylvania Princeton Purdue Rochester Swarthmore Vanderbilt Vassar Virginia Washington University Wellesley Williams Wisconsin Yale

United States. Courses of Study of Political Economy. 1876 and 1892-93.

 

The first article in the inaugural issue of The Journal of Political Economy, “Courses of Study in Political Economy in the United States in 1876 and in 1892-93,” was written by the founding head of the University of Chicago’s department of political economy, J. Laurence Laughlin. This post provides Laughlin’s appendix that provided information about economics courses taught in 65 colleges/universities in the United States during the last quarter of the 19th century. The bottom line of the table is that “aggregate hours of instruction in 1892-3 [were] more than six times the hours of instruction given in 1876”.

__________________________

How little Political Economy and Finance were taught only fifteen years ago, as compared with the teaching of to-day, must be surprising even to those who have lived and taught in the subject during that period…. At the close of the war courses of economic study had practically no existence in the university curriculum; in short, the studious pursuit of economics in our universities is scarcely twenty years old. These considerations alone might be reasons why economic teaching has not yet been able to color the thinking of our more than sixty millions of people. But about the close of the first century of our national existence it may be said that the study of Political Economy entered upon a new and striking development. This is certainly the marked characteristic of the study of Political Economy in the last fifteen years. How great this has been may be seen from the tables giving the courses of study, respectively, in about 60 institutions in the year 1876 and in 1892-3. (See Appendix I.) The aggregate hours of instruction in 1892-3 are more than six times the hours of instruction given in 1876.” [Laughlin, p. 4]

__________________________

Courses of Study in Political Economy in the United States in 1876 and in 1892-93.

Note: Returns could not be obtained from Johns Hopkins University, Amherst College, and some other institutions.

Institution.

Description of Courses.

1876.

1892-3.

No. hours per week.

No. weeks in year. No. hours per week.

No. weeks in year.

University of Alabama.

Text Book and Lectures, Senior Year

Finance and Taxation

4

2

36

36

[Total hours of instruction per year] 216
Boston University. Principles of Political Economy 3 20
[Total hours of instruction per year] 60
Bowdoin College, Brunswick, Maine.

Elementary (Required)

Advanced (Elective)

5

14

4

4

12

10

[Total hours of instruction per year] 70 88
Brown University, Providence, R. I.

Elementary

History of Econ. Thought

Advanced Course

[2nd] Advanced Course

Seminary of History, Pol. Sci., and Pol. Econ.

16-17

3

3

3

3

2

33-34

11-12

11

11

23

[Total hours of instruction per year] 40-42½ 242-250
University of Chicago, Chicago, Ill. 1.     Introductory Political Economy

2.     Descriptive Political Economy

3.     Advanced Political Economy

4.     Industrial and Economic History

5.     Scope and Method

6.     History of Political Economy

7.     Unsettled Problems

8.     Socialism

9.     Social Economics

10.   Practical Economics

11.   Statistics

12.   Railway Transportation

13.   Tariff History of U.S.

14.   Financial History of U.S.

15.   Taxation

16.   Public Debts

17.   Seminary

5

4

5

4

4

5

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

12

12

12

24

12

12

12

12

12

12

12

12

12

12

12

12

36

[Total hours of instruction per year] 996
Colby University, Waterville, Maine.

Elementary [1st]

Elementary [2nd]

Theoretical

Historical

5

7

2

2

4

4

13

10

13

10

[Total hours of instruction per year] 35 138
Columbia College (School of Political Science, New York City. 1.     Principles of Political Economy (Element.)

2.     Historical Practical Political Economy (Advanced)

3.     History of Economic Theory (Advanced)

4.     Public Finance (Adv.)

5.     Railroad Problems (Adv.)

6.     Finan. History of U.S. (Adv.)

7.     Tariff History of U.S. (Adv.)

8.     Science of Statistics (Adv.)

9.     Communism and Socialism (Adv.)

10.   Taxation and Distribution (Adv.)

11.   Seminarium in Political Economy (Element.)

12.   Seminarium in Public Finance and Economy (Adv.)

13.   Law of Taxation (Adv.)

3 and 5, 6 and 7, 8 and 9
given in alternate years.

2

 

 

 

17

 

 

 

2

 

3

2

 

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

 

 

2

2

17

 

34

34

 

34

25

34

17

34

34

17

34

 

34

17

[Total hours of instruction per year] 34 764
Columbian University, Washington, D.C. Elements of Political Economy 5 8
[Total hours of instruction per year] 40
Cornell University, Ithaca, N. Y. 1.     Elementary Political Economy

2.     Advanced Political Economy

3.     Finance

4.     Financial History

5.     Railroad Problems

6.     Currency and Banking

7.     Economic History

8.     Statistics

2

11

3

2

2

2

2

2

2

1

34

34

34

13

11

10

34

34

[Total hours of instruction per year] 22 408
Dartmouth College, Hanover, N.H. 1.     Elementary

2.     Advanced

3.     Advanced Finance and Tariff

6

6

6

6

6

6 2/3

4 1/6

3 1/3

[Total hours of instruction per year] 36 85
University of Denver, Col. 1.     Ely’s Introduction

2.     Ingram’s History

3.     Gilman’s Profit-Sharing

4.     Ely, Labor Movement in America

5.     Kirkup’s and Rae’s Socialism

6.     Finance and Taxation

7.     International Commerce

2

1

1

2

2

4

2

15

5

5

5

5

5

5

[Total hours of instruction per year] 90
DePauw University, Greencastle, Ind.

Economics (Elementary)

Seminarium (Advanced)

4

12

4

2

18

36

[Total hours of instruction per year] 48 144
Drury College, Springfield, Mo. Elementary Course 5 6 5 12
[Total hours of instruction per year] 30 60
Emory College, Oxford, Ga. Jevons’ Text, and Lectures. 5 12
[Total hours of instruction per year] 60
Franklin and Marshall College. Political Economy, (Walker’s) 2 15 2 20
[Total hours of instruction per year] 30 40
Georgetown College, Ky. 1.     General Economics

2.     Special Topics

5

15

3

3

20

20

[Total hours of instruction per year] 75 120
Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass. 1.     Introductory

2.     Theory (Advanced)

3.     Economic History from 1763

4.     Railway Transportation

5.     Tariff History of U.S.

6.     Taxation and Public Debts

7.     Financial Hist. of U.S.

8.     Condition of Workingmen

9.     Economic Hist. to 1763

10.   History of Theory to Adam Smith

Seminary

3

3

30

30

3

3

3

3

2

3

2

3

3

2

2

30

30

30

15

15

30

15

30

30

15

30

[Total hours of instruction per year] 180 735
Haverford College, Pa. Economic Theory 2 40
[Total hours of instruction per year] 80
Howard University, Washington, D. C. Elementary 5 10 5 10
[Total hours of instruction per year] 50 50
Illinois College and Whipple Academy, Jacksonville, Ill. Newcomb’s Polit. Economy, Seniors 5 15
[Total hours of instruction per year] 75
University of Illinois, Champaign, Ill. Senior Class 5 11 5 11
[Total hours of instruction per year] 55 55
Iowa College, Grinnell, Iowa.

Political Economy

Taxation

Railroad Problems

Socialism

5

10

3

3

3

3

37

14

12

11

[Total hours of instruction per year] 50 222
State University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa.

Elements of Economics

Currency and Banking

Industrial Revolutions of 18th Century

Recent Econ. History and Theory

Railroads, Pub. Regulation of

Seminary in Polit. Econ.

5

 

14

 

5

5

2

 

2

2

1

14

11

14

 

11

10

35

[Total hours of instruction per year] 70 230
Kansas State Agricultural College, Manhattan, Kan. Elementary, 4th year 5 8 5 11
[Total hours of instruction per year] 40 55
Kansas State University, Lawrence, Kansas. 1.     Elements of Political Economy

2.     Applied Economics

3.     Statistics

4.     Land Tenures

5.     Finance

5

19

5

3

2

2

2

19

19

19

19

19

[Total hours of instruction per year] 95 266
Lake Forest University, Lake Forest, Ill. 1.     Elementary

2.     Advanced

3

11

3

3

16

13

[Total hours of instruction per year] 33 87
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Boston, Mass. 1.     Political Economy, Elem., Junior Year

2.     Financial Hist. of U.S., Jun. and Sen. Year

3.     Taxation, Junior and Senior Year

4.     History of Commerce

5.     History of Industry, Junior and Senior Year.

6.     Socialism, etc. (Option), Jun. and Sen. Year

7.     History of Economic Theory (Opt.), Senior

8.     Statistics and Graphic Methods, Junior

9.     Statistics and Sociology (Option) Senior

2

 

 

 

15

 

 

 

3

3

 

3

3

 

3

2

 

2

3

15

15

 

15

15

 

15

15

 

15

15

[Total hours of instruction per year] 30 375
Michigan Agricultural College. Primary Course 5 12
[Total hours of instruction per year] 60
University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich. 1.     Elements of Political Economy

2.     Elements of Political Economy

3.     Hist. Devel. of Industr. Society

4.     Finance

5.     Problems in Pol. Econ

6.     Transportation Problem

7.     Land Tenure and Agrarian Movements

8.     Socialism and Communism

9.     Currency and Banking

10.   Tariff History of U.S.

11.   Indust. and Comm. Develop. of U.S.

12.   History of Pol. Econ.

13.   Statistics

15.   Economic Thought

16.   Labor and Monopoly Problems

17.   Seminary in Finance

18.   Seminary in Economics

20.   Social Philosophy with Economic Relations

21.   Current Econ. Legislation and Literature

 

18

 

3

4

3

4

4

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

1

1

1

2

2

1

 

2

18

18

18

18

18

18

18

18

18

18

18

18

18

18

18

18

18

18

 

18

[Total hours of instruction per year] 45 756
Middlebury College, Middlebury, Vermont. 1.     Elementary (Junior Class)

2.     Advanced (Senior Class)

3.     Finance (Senior Class)

4.     Seminary

4

4

10

10

3

2

2

1

35

21

14

21

[Total hours of instruction per year] 80 196
University of Minnesota. 1.     Elementary

2.     Advanced

3.     Am. Pub. Economy

4.     Undergraduate Seminary

5.     Graduate Seminary

5

13

4

4

4

2

1

13

13

10

23

36

[Total hours of instruction per year] 65 226
University of Mississippi, University, Miss. Advanced 5 30
[Total hours of instruction per year] 150
Mt. Holyoke College, South Hadley, Mass.

Polit. Econ. (General)

Polit. Econ. Seminary

4

2

12

12

[Total hours of instruction per year] 72
College of New Jersey at Princeton.

Pol. Econ. (Elem., Elective)

Pol. Econ. (Elem., Required)

Finance (Elective)

Historics—Econ. Semin.

2

13

2

2

2

16

16

15

[Total hours of instruction per year] 26 94
College of the City of New York. 16
[Total hours of instruction per year] 48*
New Hampshire College of Agriculture and Mechanic Arts, Hanover, N. H. Elementary—Perry or Walker 4 10-12 5 10
[Total hours of instruction per year] 48 50
Oberlin College, Oberlin, Ohio. 1.     Elementary Polit. Econ.

2.     Advanced Polit. Econ.

3.     Finance

4.     History Econ. Thought

5.     Economic and Social Problems

6.     “Money,” etc.

5

12

5

5

3

3

3

2

11

12

25

13

12

36

[Total hours of instruction per year] 60 337
Ohio State University.

Elementary

Advanced

Finance

Seminary (Indust. History)

2

2

2

2

38

26

12

38

[Total hours of instruction per year] 228
Ohio Wesleyan University, Delaware, Ohio. 4 12 4 12
[Total hours of instruction per year] 48 48
Penn. Military Academy, Chester, Penn. Elementary 5 13
[Total hours of instruction per year] 65
University of Pennsylvania, Wharton, School of Finance and Economy, Philadelphia, Penn. 1.     Grad. Course in Finance

2.     Grad. Course in Theoretical Polit. Econ.

3.     Grad. Course in Statistics

4.     Elem. Course in Finance

5.     Elem. Course in Theoret. Polit. Econ.

6.     Elem. Course in Statistics

7.     Elem. Course in Practical Polit. Econ.

8.     Course in Money

9.     Course in Banking

10.   Advanced Course in Political Economy

11.   Economic History of Europe

12.   Grad. Course in Practical Polit. Econ.

13.   Econ. and Fin. History of U.S.

14.   Grad. Econ. History of the U.S.

15.   Grad. English Econ. History from 13th to 17th century

16.   Modern Econ. History.

 

 

1

2

3

3

2

2

2

2

1

2

3

2

2

4

 

3

3

30

30

30

30

30

15

15

15

30

30

30

30

30

30

 

30

30

[Total hours of instruction per year] 1020
Purdue University, Lafayette, Ind. Elementary Course 3 19
[Total hours of instruction per year] 57
Randolph Macon College, Ashland, Va. Elementary 2 32 2 32
[Total hours of instruction per year] 64 64
University of Rochester, Rochester, N.Y.

Elementary

Econ. Polit. History U.S.

5

14

5

1

14

20

[Total hours of instruction per year] 70 90
Rutger’s College. Polit. Econ. (Elementary) 3 12 4 22
[Total hours of instruction per year] 36 88
Smith College, Northampton, Mass.

Elementary Course

Adv. Course in Theory

Seminarium

Practical Studies

3

12

3

3

2

2

14

14

10

12

[Total hours of instruction per year] 36 128
South Carolina College, Columbia, S.C.

Polit. Econ. Senior Class

Applied Polit. Econ.

2

2

40

20

[Total hours of instruction per year] 120
Swarthmore College, Swarthmore, Penn.

Polit. Econ. (Walker)

Finance

Protection and Free Trade

Money and Banking

History of Econ. Theories

4

4

4

4

4

20

10

10

10

10

[Total hours of instruction per year] 240
Syracuse University, Syracuse, N.Y.

Elementary

Finance

Industrial Development since 1850

Seminary

3

2

2

2

14

10

12

38

[Total hours of instruction per year] 162
University of Tennessee, Knoxville, Tenn.

Elementary

Advanced (Post-Graduate)

3

2

20

Varies

[Total hours of instruction per year] 100?
University of Texas, Austin, Texas. General 3 36
[Total hours of instruction per year] 108
Trinity College, Hartford, Connecticut.

Elementary

Advanced

Finance

4

13

3

4

2

17

17

17

[Total hours of instruction per year] 52 153
Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee.

Political Economy, Elementary

Political Economy, Advanced

3

36

3

3

36

36

[Total hours of instruction per year] 108 216
Vassar College, Poughkeepsie, New York.

Principles of Economics

Economic History

Railroads, Trusts, and Relation of State to Monopolies

Labor Problem and Socialism

Seminary

 

 

3

3

2

 

2

2

18

18

18

 

18

18

[Total hours of instruction per year] 216
University of Vermont, Burlington, Vermont.

Elementary

Advanced

3

2

20

20

[Total hours of instruction per year] 100
University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Va.

Theory of Economics

Science of Society

3

26

3

16

16

[Total hours of instruction per year] 78 88
Washington and Jefferson College, Washington, Pa. Political Economy 3 11 3 16
[Total hours of instruction per year] 33 48
Washington and Lee University, Lexington, Va.

Elementary

Advanced

3

3

14

26

[Total hours of instruction per year] 120
Washington University, St. Louis. Prescribed Course 3 20 3 20
[Total hours of instruction per year] 60 60
Wellesley College, Wellesley, Mass.

Industrial History

Economic Theory

Statistics (Seminary)

Socialism (Seminary)

3

3

3

3

18

18

18

18

[Total hours of instruction per year] 216
Wesleyan University, Middletown, Connecticut.

General Introductory (Sen.)

General Introductory (Jun.)

Economic Problems

36

2

3

2

36

18

36

[Total hours of instruction per year] 54 198
West Virginia University, Morgantown, West Virginia.

Elementary Pol. Economy

Advanced Pol. Economy

2

2

14

36

[Total hours of instruction per year] 100
Williams College, Williamstown, Mass. Political Economy 6 14 3 15
[Total hours of instruction per year] 84 45
University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wis.

Econ. Seminary

Distribution of Wealth

History of Pol. Econ.

Money

Public Finance

Statistics

Recent Econ. Theories

Synoptical Lectures

Outlines of Economics

2

5

5

5

3

3

3

1

4

37

14½

12

10½

37

12

14½

15

37

[Total hours of instruction per year] 612½
Yale University, New Haven, Conn.

Pol. Econ.**—Elem. (2)

Pol. Econ.—Adv. (3)

Economic History (2)

Finance, Public (2)

Finance, Corporate (2)

Mathematical Theory (1)

Seminary Instruction (2)

3

2

 

36

36

36

4

3

4

2

3

1

1

36

36

36

36

36

36

36

[Total hours of instruction per year] 180 648

* [College of the City of New York] A few hours additional are given in the work of the Department of Philosophy; the whole number amounting to some 52 or 53.

** [Yale University] Figures in brackets represent numbers of courses under each head.

SourceAppendix I to “The Study of Political Economy in the United States” by J. Laurence Laughlin, The Journal of Political Economy, vol. 1, no. 1 (December, 1892), pp. 143-151.

Image Source:  J. Laurence Laughlin drawn in the University of Chicago yearbook Cap and Gown (1907), p. 208.

 

 

Categories
Amherst Barnard Berkeley Brown Chicago Colorado Columbia Cornell Dartmouth Duke Harvard Illinois Indiana Iowa Johns Hopkins Kansas M.I.T. Michigan Michigan State Minnesota Missouri Nebraska North Carolina Northwestern NYU Ohio State Pennsylvania Princeton Radcliffe Rochester Stanford Swarthmore Texas Tufts UCLA Vassar Virginia Washington University Wellesley Williams Wisconsin Yale

U.S. Bureau of Education. Contributions to American Educational History, Herbert B. Adams (ed.), 1887-1903

 

I stumbled across this series while I was preparing the previous post on the political economy questions for the Harvard Examination for Women (1874). I figured it would be handy for me to keep a list of links to the monographs on the history of higher education in 35 of the United States at the end of the nineteenth century. Maybe this collection will help you too.

Contributions to American Educational History, edited by Herbert B. Adams

  1. The College of William and Mary. Herbert B. Adams (1887)
  2. Thomas Jefferson and the University of Virginia. Herbert B. Adams (1888)
  3. History of Education in North Carolina. Charles L. Smith (1888)
  4. History of Higher Education in South Carolina. C. Meriwether (1889)
  5. Education in Georgia. Charles Edgeworth Jones (1889)
  6. Education in Florida. George Gary Bush (1889)
  7. Higher Education in Wisconsin. William F. Allen and David E. Spencer (1889)
  8. History of Education in Alabama. Willis G. Clark (1890).
  9. History of Federal and State Aid to Higher Education. Frank W. Blackmar (1890)
  10. Higher Education in Indiana. James Albert Woodburn (1891).
  11. Higher Education in Michigan. Andrew C. McLaughlin. (1891)
  12. History of Higher Education in Ohio. George W. Knight and John R. Commons (1891)
  13. History of Higher Education in Massachusetts. George Gary Bush (1891)
  14. The History of Education in Connecticut. Bernard C. Steiner (1893)
  15. The History of Education in Delaware. Lyman P. Powell (1893)
  16. Higher Education in Tennessee. Lucius Salisbury Merriam (1893)
  17. Higher Education in Iowa. Leonard F. Parker (1893)
  18. History of Higher Education in Rhode Island. William Howe Tolman (1894)
  19. History of Education in Maryland. Bernard C. Steiner (1894).
  20. History of Education in Lousiana. Edwin Whitfield Fay (1898).
  21. Higher Education in Missouri. Marshall S. Snow (1898)
  22. History of Education in New Hampshire. George Gary Bush (1898)
  23. History of Education in New Jersey. David Murray (1899).
  24. History of Education in Mississippi. Edward Mayes (1899)
  25. History of Higher Education in Kentucky. Alvin Fayette Lewis (1899)
  26. History of Education in Arkansas. Josiah H. Shinn (1900)
  27. Higher Education in Kansas. Frank W. Blackmar (1900)
  28. The University of the State of New York. History of Higher Education in the State of New York. Sidney Sherwood (1900)
  29. History of Education in Vermont. George Gary Bush (1900)
  30. History of Education in West Virginia. A. R. Whitehill (1902)
  31. The History of Education in Minnesota. John N. Greer (1902)
  32. Education in Nebraska. Howard W. Caldwell (1902)
  33. A History of Higher Education in Pennsylvania. Charles H. Haskins and William I. Hull (1902)
  34. History of Higher Education in Colorado. James Edward Le Rossignol (1903)
  35. History of Higher Education in Texas. J. J. Lane (1903)
  36. History of Higher Education in Maine. Edward W. Hall (1903)

Image Source: Cropped from portrait of Herbert Baxter Adams ca. 1890s. Johns Hopkins University graphic and pictorial collection.

Categories
Berkeley Chicago Faculty Regulations Harvard Johns Hopkins M.I.T. Michigan Rochester Stanford Uncategorized Yale

Harvard. Report on the General Examination for an Economics PhD, 1970

 

 

What makes this report on the general examination in the economics PhD program at Harvard particularly valuable is its brief survey of the practice at eight other universities: Yale, MIT, Johns Hopkins, Rochester, Stanford, Berkeley, Michigan, and Chicago. 

_____________________

DRAFT

This draft is distributed in Professor Chenery’s absence to permit discussion at the next Department meeting, January 27, 1970.
Professor Chenery or other members of The Committee might wish to record further comments in preparation [of] a final report.

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS

Cambridge, Massachusetts 02135
January 16, 1970

To: The Department of Economics
From: Committee on Graduate Instruction

REPORT ON THE GENERAL EXAMINATION FOR THE PH.D.

In response to a number of requests from students and faculty, the Committee has reexamined at considerable length the requirements for the General Examination. This report summarizes our general assessment in section I and makes specific recommendations for changes in section II. Some related issues needing further consideration are listed in section III.

Although for the past several years graduate students have criticized various aspects of the generals, the main source of dissatisfaction seems to be with the rigidity of “the system” rather than with any particular aspect of it. We have taken advantage of the fact that the Committee now has three student members to try to understand some of the effects of our present procedures on students’ choices and incentives. We have also tried to strike a better balance between preparation for the general examination and other aspects of a student’s training in his first two years.

As a background for our discussion, the secretary of the Committee compiled a useful summary of the regulations in effect at other leading universities, which is attached.

 

ROLE OF THE GENERAL EXAMINATION

The primary functions [sic] of the General Examination is to evaluate the student’s formal preparation in economics before he proceeds to more advanced phases of teaching and thesis preparation. It also serves as a screening device to weed out weak candidates, as a basis for subsequent recommendations for employers, and as an indirect way of organizing the student’s course work in his first two years. These multiple functions produce much of the debate over requirements at Harvard and elsewhere, since a system that is ideal for one purpose has weaknesses for another.

One of the main criticisms of the existing Harvard system is its psychological impact on the student. The need to satisfy the requirements in all fields within a period of several months inhibits most students from exploring non-required topics until after they have passed the generals. On balance, we are impressed with the desirability of adopting a more flexible timing that will encourage the student to get most of his tool requirements out of the way in the first year and use the second year to explore the fields of his special interest and get some taste of actual research. We have tried to maintain the undoubted benefits of an overall examination, however, as compared to a set of course requirements.

Our survey of other departments shows a significant trend toward breaking down the requirements into separate parts and focusing less on the culminating oral examination. Most departments use the qualifying examination in theory as a device for screening first year students, which also reduces the burden of preparing all fields in the second year. In most departments the minimum proficiency in quantitative techniques and economic history is demonstrated by a satisfactory course grade rather than by inclusions in the general examination. Although we have made our own judgements on these questions, we recommend movement in these directions.

Another consideration which makes greater flexibility desirable is the growing proportion of students who are already well prepared in one or more required fields. For many students, the present system therefore encourages too much review of material they have already covered. We feel that those who are adequately prepared on one of the required fields (theory, quantitative method, history) should have an opportunity to satisfy this requirement in their first year in order to make better use of their time thereafter.

Our recommendations are directed toward achieving greater flexibility in the timing of courses and examinations to allow the student to make more effective use of his time. This should enable many students to get started earlier on their optional fields and to make a better choice of their field of specialization. We do not envision any reduction in the total work done in the first two years or any lowering of standards of performance.

 

SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS

General Principles

  1. The general examination should be separated into four component parts—theory, quantitative method, economic history, and special fields—each of which would be graded separately.
  2. The minimum requirement in quantitative method and economic history should be regarded as a “tool requirement” or “literacy test” as has become the practice in the quantitative field. Students wishing to specialize in these fields may offer them at a higher level as one of their special fields.
  3. The term “general examination” would apply to the oral examination on the special fields. (The question of a general grade on all parts as at present was left open.)
  4. There should be no prescribed timing of the four components, other than the stipulation that the required fields be either completed (or write-off courses in progress) at the time of the oral examination on the special fields. Qualified students would be encouraged to complete one or more requirements in the first year.
  5. Two write-offs should be allowed rather than one.
  6. A subcommittee would be set up for economic history (and retained in theory and quantitative method). The standards and ways of satisfying them in the three required fields should be proposed by the three subcommittees and ratified by the GIC and the Department.

The Theory Requirement

  1. The present coverage (roughly 201a, 201b, 202a) should be retained. The examination would continue to be written.
  2. The examination should be offered two or three times a year. (A straw vote by students showed a preference for June, September and January and a margin for September over January.) Most students would take the examination at the end of their first year—in June or September.

The Quantitative Requirement

  1. The present de facto standard of the written examination should be accepted as the “literacy test”.
  2. The requirement can be met either by the present type of written examination (given twice a year) or by a grade of B+ in 221b or 224a. (It is estimated that roughly 75% would be able to qualify by course examination.)

The Economic History Requirement

  1. The history requirement be made parallel to the quantitative requirement in that:
    1. It can be satisfied by course or special departmental examination.
    2. It can either be offered at a minimum level or at a higher level as a special field.
  2. The minimum requirement would be satisfied by a course grade that would allow a similar proportion to qualify in this way (B+ or A- pending further information).
  3. Alternatives to the present 233 sequence (if any) to be established by the history subcommittee.
  4. Minimum standards in both history and quantitative method could be demonstrated by course examination.

The Requirement in Special Fields

  1. Two special fields would be required as the basis for the oral examination, which would also cover general analytical ability.
  2. Advanced theory, econometrics and economic history would be eligible as special fields, but the first two could not both be included. (In the majority view, one applied field apart from history would be required in order to eliminate the possibility of a candidate offering only the three required fields.)
  3. The candidate would be encouraged (or required?) to submit a research paper to be made part of the subject matter and record of the general examination (He is now “expected” to have presented a paper to a working seminar by the end of his second year.)
  4. The general oral examination would normally be taken at the end of the second year, but could not be taken before the qualifying exams in theory, quantitative and history have been passed (or prospective write-offs are in progress.)

QUESTIONS OF GRADING

  1. Should all examinations be either pass-fail or on a more limited grading scale than at present?
  2. Should the passing standard for the course option in both quantitative methods and history be B+?
  3. Should the four requirements be graded separately or combined (as at present) into an overall grade on the General Examination? (The committee favors first the alternative, but would also require “distinguished” performance in at least one area.)

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

Examination Requirements at Other Places

Below I summarize examination requirements at eight other places, including Yale, MIT, Hopkins, Rochester, Stanford, Berkeley, Michigan and Chicago. The main findings of the survey are:

  1. It appears that the massive type of “generals” (where all fields and theory are combined in one session) has almost disappeared. With the exception of Hopkins, all of the above schools seem to settle the theory examination at the end of the first year, with special fields examined at the end of the second year.
  2. Among the schools surveyed, only Yale has a written examination in history. Hopkins, Stanford, Chicago and Berkeley require a course, with “satisfactory” grade. MIT and Rochester have no requirement.
  3. Only Yale gives a written in quantitative aspect of the generals. All the other schools have course requirements (satisfactory grade) only.
  4. Practices vary with regard to number of special fields and type of examination. MIT and Hopkins require three, the others two special fields. Examinations at Yale are oral, at the other places written, in some cases both written and oral. In most places the special field examinations must be taken together, but in some (Rochester, Chicago) they can be separated. Throughout, these special examinations seem to be given by the department, and not merely as course examination.
  5. Some provisions of special interest:
    1. Chicago and Rochester’s second year research paper as part of general examination
    2. Stanford’s requirement for distinction in at least one field.

 

I. Yale

Comprehensive Examination

  1. Written examination in theory and econometrics, usually August or September after first year.
  2. Written examination on economic history; usually late spring of second year.
  3. Oral examination in two applied fields, chosen from six and in general analytical ability; late spring of second year. Given by four examiners. Student excused from general examination in special field courses at end of second year. Oral examination in theory, history, quantitative or field outside economics may be substituted for one of the applied fields if candidate has done year’s course work in applied field “with sufficient distinction”.

History and Quantitative

  1. History—written, end of second year, and option to substitute for one special field.
  2. Quantitative—written, end of first year, and option to substitute for one special field.

Other requirements

  1. Has apparently been dropped.
  2. One course credit of explicit research training, second year.
  3. Dissertation to be completed in fourth year.

 

II. MIT

General examination

  1. General examination in theory consists of two written papers—micro and macro, given in final exam period of first year. May be substituted for final examinations in theory courses.
  2. General examination normally at end of second year. Consists of:
    1. written examinations on three of 12 special fields. These may include advanced theory, econometrics or economic history.
    2. oral examination in the three fields after written.
    3. a fourth field is required but may be written off by B grade in full year course.

History and Quantitative

  1. History—no requirement. May be a special field.
  2. Quantitative—no generals examination. May be a special field.

Other requirements

  1. Two languages

 

III. Johns Hopkins

First Year Oral Examination

A first year oral examination is given in the spring of the first year, covering the fields in which the student has worked during that year.

Comprehensive Examination

Normally taken in spring of second year. Consists of:

  1. Two written examinations in theory, micro and macro.
  2. Three written examinations in special fields, one of which may be outside economics.
  3. Oral examination: Covers theory, special fields, statistics.

History and Quantitative

  1. History—satisfactory work in course.
  2. Statistics—satisfactory work in course.

Other Requirements

  1. One language.
  2. In addition to the departmental special examination, an examination is given by the graduate board, which includes members of other departments.

 

IV. Rochester

Qualifying Examination

  1. Theory and econometrics courses are required but are not part of Qualifying Examination.
  2. Qualifying Examination taken in May of second year. Consists of
    1. Written examination in two fields. These may include mathematical economics and econometrics. Need not be taken simultaneously.
    2. A second year research paper which is to be presented to a departmental seminar at the end of second year.
    3. After (a) and (b) are met, an oral examination in the special fields.

History and Quantitative

  1. Econometrics and mathematical economics requirements (courses), extent depending on fields.
  2. No history requirement.

Other Requirements

  1. Certain distribution requirement.
  2. Language and mathematics.

 

V. Stanford

Comprehensive Examination

  1. Written in micro and macro theory at end of first year. Cover course materials.
  2. Selection of special fields under two plans:
    1. If no minor subject is taken, student chooses four out of ten fields. These may include history, econometrics, mathematical economics. One field may be outside economics.
    2. Student may choose a minor subject (in another department) and choose only one out of the ten special economics fields.

Comprehensive written examinations for each field scheduled annually, usually at close of course sequence. Must show distinction in at least one field.

History and Quantitative

  1. History—Include at least two courses from offerings in economic history, history of thought, comparative economics, development.
  2. Quantitative—Econometrics course required.

Other Requirements

  1. Language or particular quantitative skills.
  2. Two seminars and research papers.

 

VI. Berkeley

Departmental Examination in Theory

  1. Must be passed by end of first year. Students with strong background take it in November of first term, others in June (end of first year).
  2. Written qualifying examinations given in two out of thirteen special fields at end of second year. Examinations given twice a year, must be taken together.
  3. Within one year after written qualifying examinations are completed, student presents himself for oral, based on prospectus (and interim results) of his thesis. General assessment of competence.

History and Quantitative

  1. Course in economic history at 210 level.
  2. Course in statistics at 240 level.

Other Requirements

  1. No language.

 

VII. Michigan

Preliminary Examination

  1. At end of theory courses in micro and macro, an “augmented examination” is given which serves as preliminary examination in theory.
  2. Two fields of specialization are required. One field is satisfied by satisfactory grades in two courses. For the other field a written preliminary examination is required.
  3. After this, oral examination on research topic and surrounding area.

Economic History and Quantitative

  1. No history requirement.
  2. Course requirement in statistics and econometrics.

Other Requirements

  1. No general language requirement.

 

VIII. Chicago

Preliminary Examination

  1. A “course [sic, “core” probably intended] examination” covering micro and macro theory is given twice a year (separate from course examinations) and is usually taken at end of first or middle of second year.
  2. Two special fields are chosen. Written examinations in these fields, separate from course examinations. Need not be taken together.
  3. Student presents a thesis prospectus before thesis seminar, usually in third year. Must pass on this for candidacy.

History and Quantitative

  1. History course required as part of distribution requirements.
  2. Course work in statistics required.

Other Requirements

  1. Math, no languages.

 

Source: John F. Kennedy Presidential Library. John Kenneth Galbraith Papers. Series 5. Harvard University File, 1949-1990. Box 526. Folder “Harvard University Department of Economics: General Correspondence, 1967-1974 (2 of 3)”.

Image Source: Harvard Class Album, 1946.

Categories
Columbia Rochester

Columbia. Economics PhD Alumnus, Meyer Jacobstein, 1907

 

Today in our continuing historical series “Get to know an economics Ph.D.”, we meet Meyer Jacobstein (1880-1963), a Columbia University Ph.D. (1907) who, before serving as a member of the U.S. House of Representatives (1923-1929), taught economics at the University of North Dakota and the University of Rochester.

Jacobstein’s disssertation was published by the Columbia Faculty of Political Science in its house journal:

Meyer Jacobstein. The Tobacco Industry in the United States. Studies in History, Economics and Public Law (Vol. XXVI, No. 3), 1907.

In his introduction Jacobstein thanks E.R.A. Seligman, H. R. Seager and H.L. Moore for criticism and suggestions.

______________

From: Columbia University Catalogue of Officers and Graduates

Meyer Jacobstein, A.B., 05; A. M., 05; Ph. D, 07; Asst. Prof. Univ. N. Dak. (University, N. Dak.)

Source:  Catalogue of Officers and Graduates of Columbia University from the Foundation of King’s college in 1754.(XVI edition, 1916), p. 200.

______________

From: Biographical Director of the U.S. Congress

JACOBSTEIN, Meyer, a Representative from New York; born in New York City, January 25, 1880; moved with his parents to Rochester, N.Y., in 1882; attended the public schools and the University of Rochester, Rochester, N.Y.; was graduated from Columbia University, New York City, in 1904; pursued postgraduate courses at the same university in economics and political science; special agent in the Bureau of Corporations, Department of Commerce, Washington, D.C., in 1907; assistant professor of economics, University of North Dakota at Grand Forks 1909-1913; professor of economics in the University of Rochester 1913-1918; was a director in emergency employment management at the University of Rochester under the auspices of the War Industry Board 1916-1918; elected as a Democrat to the Sixty-eighth, Sixty-ninth, and Seventieth Congresses (March 4, 1923-March 3, 1929); was not a candidate for renomination in 1928; delegate to the Democratic National Conventions in 1924 and 1932; declined the nomination of mayor of Rochester, N.Y., in 1925; engaged in banking in Rochester, N.Y., 1929-1936; in 1936 became chairman of the board of the Rochester Business Institute; member of the Brookings Institution staff 1939-1946; economic counsel in the legislative reference service of the Library of Congress from 1947 until his retirement May 31, 1952; resided in Rochester, N.Y., until his death there on April 18, 1963; interment in Mount Hope Cemetery.

Source: Biographical Directory of the United States Congress.

______________

Obituary

Dr. Meyer Jacobstein, Noted Economist and Educator, Dies in Rochester
(Apr. 21, 1963)

Funeral services were held here for Dr. Meyer Jacobstein, former member of the U.S. Congress, college professor and publisher of the Rochester Journal-American, who died last Thursday at the age of 83.

Born in New York, Dr. Jacobstein spent most of his life in Rochester. He was elected in 1922 to Congress on the Democratic ticket, and was the second Democratic representative from the 38th Congressional District since the Civil War. He was reelected twice but chose not to run in 1928. He was assistant professor of economics in the University of North Dakota from 1909 until 1913. In 1913 he joined the faculty of the University of Rochester as professor of economics.

Dr. Jacobstein was publisher of The Journal American here, from 1924 until the newspaper suspended in 1937. He then became a research consultant for the Brookings Institute in Washington. In 1944, he was director of a Senate special committee on postwar economic policy and planning. He retired from public life in 1957, after completing a one-year study of Rochester employment at the request of Governor Averell Harriman. He is survived by his widow, Lena (Lipsky), two daughters and eight grandchildren.

Source: Jewish Telegraphic Agency, April 22, 1963.

______________

Image Source: Campaign button from U.S. Congress, History of the House websiteMeyer Jacobstein in Wikipedia.

Categories
Berkeley Carnegie Institute of Technology Chicago Colorado Columbia Cornell Duke Economics Programs Economist Market Harvard Illinois Indiana Iowa Johns Hopkins M.I.T. Michigan Michigan State Minnesota North Carolina Northwestern NYU Ohio State Pennsylvania Princeton Purdue Rochester Stanford Texas Undergraduate Vanderbilt Wisconsin Yale

Size distribution of graduate and undergraduate programs in economics. U.S., 1963-65

 

 

These are the last two statistical tables from the so-called “Cartel” summary report from December 1965 of leading economics departments in the U.S. intended to provide orientation for departmental chairpersons in salary negotiations. Today’s posting gives the numbers of undergraduate and graduate majors reported by 29 departments. 

Earlier postings gave the distribution for full-professors, the distribution for associate professors, and the distribution for assistant professors across departments. Two previous postings have the actual distributions for entering salaries for new Ph.D.’s for 1964-65 and 1965-66 and the anticipated range of salary offers for new Ph.D.’s for 1966-67. Those first five reports from The Cartel provide distributions of median or average incomes or ranges of salary offers by ranks across departments. Table 6c from the summary report that gives the salary distributions by rank for 335 professors, 143 associate professors and 185 assistant professors from all 27 departments.

Refer to the first posting in this series of tables for information about the compiler Professor Francis Boddy of the University of Minnesota and a list of the 30 departments belonging to the Chairmen’s Group.

____________________

 

TABLE 7c
Graduate majors in Economics – 29 institutions:

 

1963-64 1964-65 1965-66
(Estimate)
300 and over 2 2

1

200-299

0 0 2
150-199 3 4

5

100-149

6 5 6
80-99 4 4

3

60-79

5 7 5
40-59 6 4

4

20-39

2 1 0
1-19 1 1

1

Number of departments reporting:

29

28

27

Total number of students:

2,963

3,057

3,118

____________________

 

TABLE 8C
Undergraduate majors in Economics – 29 institutions

 

1963-64 1964-65
300 and over 4

4

250-299

1 1
200-249 3

2

150-199

4 6
100-149 8

5

80-99

1 1
60-79 2

1

40-59

2 3
20-39 1

1

1-19

1

1

Number of departments reporting:

27

25

Total number of students:

4,550

4,312

 

Source: Johns Hopkins University. The Ferdinand Hamburger, Jr. Archives. Department of Political Economy, Series 5, Box 6, Folder 2 “Statistical Information”.

Image Source: quick meme website.

Categories
Berkeley Carnegie Institute of Technology Chicago Colorado Columbia Cornell Duke Economist Market Harvard Illinois Indiana Iowa Johns Hopkins M.I.T. Michigan Michigan State Minnesota North Carolina Northwestern NYU Ohio State Pennsylvania Princeton Purdue Rochester Salaries Stanford Texas Vanderbilt Virginia Wisconsin Yale

Economics Professors’ Salaries by Rank (6), 1965-66

 

 

This is the sixth table from the so-called “Cartel” summary report from December 1965 of 9-10 month salaries paid in U.S. economics departments. In the previous five tables The Cartel reports median or average incomes or ranges of salary offers by ranks across departments. In this posting we have Table 6c from the summary report that gives the salary distributions by rank for 335 professors, 143 associate professors and 185 assistant professors from all 27 departments.

Earlier postings gave the distribution for full-professors, the distribution for associate professors, and the distribution for assistant professors across departments. Two previous postings have the actual distributions for entering salaries for new Ph.D.’s for 1964-65 and 1965-66 and the anticipated range of salary offers for new Ph.D.’s for 1966-67.

Refer to the first posting in this series of tables for information about the compiler Professor Francis Boddy of the University of Minnesota and a list of the 30 departments belonging to the Chairmen’s Group.

Using the BLS web CPI Inflation calculator, one can inflate nominal levels (say for December 1965, the date of the report) to April 2017 using a factor of 7.69.

 

____________________

TABLE 6c

Salaries of Economists (9-10 month, academic year, 1965-66) in 27 of the 29 Departments of Economics (The Cartel):
N = Number of Persons

MID POINT OF RANGE PROFESSORS ASSOCIATE PROFESSORS ASSISTANT PROFESSORS
26,750/and over 2
26,500 0
26,000 2
25,500 1
25,000 8
24,500 0
24,000 4
23,500 2
23,000 7
22,500 2
22,000 12
21,500 7
21,000 10
20,500 5
2,0000 22
19,500 10
19,000 13
18,500 11
18,000 24
17,500 8
17,000 19
16,500 23
16,000 27
15,500 20 1 0
15,000 21 2 1
14,500 14 2 0
14,000 22 10 0
13,500 10 12 0
13,000 10 13 1
12,500 7 18 2
12,000 6 20 1
11,500 3 21 7
11,000 3 13 9
10,500 0 18 18
10,000 0 9 35
9,750 1 9
9,500 2 28
9,250 1 11
9,000 0 24
8,750 0 8
8,500 0 13
8,250 2
8,000 15
7,750 1
N=335 N=143 N=185

 

Source: Johns Hopkins University. The Ferdinand Hamburger, Jr. Archives. Department of Political Economy, Series 5, Box 6, Folder 2 “Statistical Information”.

Image Source:  “Me and my partner” by C. J. Taylor on cover of Punch, December 25, 1889. Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Division Washington, D.C.

 

Categories
Berkeley Carnegie Institute of Technology Chicago Colorado Columbia Cornell Duke Economist Market Harvard Illinois Indiana Iowa Johns Hopkins M.I.T. Michigan Michigan State Minnesota North Carolina Northwestern NYU Ohio State Pennsylvania Princeton Purdue Rochester Salaries Stanford Texas Vanderbilt Virginia Wisconsin Yale

Expected New PhD Starting Salaries in U.S. Economics Departments (5), 1966/67

 

 

This is the fifth table from the so-called “Cartel” summary report from December 1965 of 9-10 month salaries paid in U.S. economics departments. Table 5c give figures for the anticipated range of salaries for “freshly completed PhD’s” for the coming academic year (1966-67) across the departments reporting. Earlier postings gave the distribution for full-professors, the distribution for associate professors, and the distribution for assistant professors. The previous posting has the actual distributions for entering salaries for new Ph.D.’s for 1964-65 and 1965-66. Refer to the first posting in this series of tables for information about the compiler Professor Francis Boddy of the University of Minnesota and a list of the 30 departments belonging to the Chairmen’s Group.

The copy of this table in the Johns Hopkins University archives has a useful handwritten addition. It is noted that the median lower bound of the range is $9,250 and the median higher bound of the range is $10,000. Thus one might say a measure of the range of the anticipated, as of December 1965), 9-10 month salary offers for “freshly completed PhDs” for 1966-67 was ($9,250 — $10,000), though such a range was not necessarily anticipated by any one of the 27 departments responding to that question.

Compared to Table 4c, this table tells us that the range of offers for “freshly completed PhDs” was anticipated to move up $250 about a 2.67% nominal increase from 1965-66 to 1966-67.

Using the BLS web CPI Inflation calculator, one can inflate nominal levels (say for December 1965, the date of the report) to April 2017 using a factor of 7.69.

 

____________________

TABLE 5c
Departments Expect to Have to Offer to Get
“Freshly Completed PhD’s for Next Year, 1966-67

 

MID-POINT OF RANGE

FROM TO
13,000 0

0

12,500

0 0
12,000 0

1

11,500

0 0
11,000 0

6

10,500

0 7
10,000 5

6

9,750

0 0
9,500 8

4

9,250

1 0
9,000 8

2

8,750

1 0
8,500 1

1

8,250

0 0
8,000 3

0

N=

27

27

 

Source: Johns Hopkins University. The Ferdinand Hamburger, Jr. Archives. Department of Political Economy, Series 5, Box 6, Folder 2 “Statistical Information”.

Image Source:  Caption under the drawing: “No class of labor feels the grip of grinding monopoly more than our underpaid, overworked ball-players.”  “The base-ball Laocoon” by L. M. Glackens. Cover of Punch, May 14, 1913. Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Division Washington, D.C.

Categories
Berkeley Carnegie Institute of Technology Chicago Colorado Columbia Cornell Duke Economist Market Harvard Illinois Indiana Iowa Johns Hopkins M.I.T. Michigan Michigan State Minnesota North Carolina Northwestern NYU Ohio State Pennsylvania Princeton Purdue Rochester Salaries Stanford Texas Vanderbilt Virginia Wisconsin Yale

New PhD Starting Salaries in U.S. Economics Departments (4), 1964/5-1965/66

 

 

This is the fourth table from the so-called “Cartel” summary report from December 1965 of 9-10 month salaries paid in U.S. economics departments. Table 4c give figures for the distribution of salaries for “freshly completed PhD’s” across the departments reporting. Previous postings gave the distribution for full-professors, the distribution for associate professors, and the distribution for assistant professors. The next posting has the anticipated (as of December 1965) range of salaries to hire freshly completed PhD’s for the coming academic year, 1966-67. Refer to the first posting in this series of tables for information about the compiler Professor Francis Boddy of the University of Minnesota and a list of the 30 departments belonging to the Chairmen’s Group.

Using the BLS web CPI Inflation calculator, one can inflate nominal levels (say for December 1965, the date of the report) to April 2017 using a factor of 7.69.

______________________

TABLE 4c
Entering Salaries of “Freshly Completed PhD’s” of New Staff Members
in the Fall of 1965-66 1964-65

 

MINIMUM MEDIAN MAXIMUM
MID-POINT OF RANGE 1965-66 1964-65 1965-66 1964-65 1965-66

1964-65

Over 10,999

0 0 0 0 1 0
10,500 0 0 0 0 2

1

10,000

2 0 4 3 7 0
9,750 2 0 4 0 1

0

9,500

4 1 2 0 2 4
9,250 1 2 3 3 1

3

9,000

3 6 0 5 3 6
8,750 1 1 3 5 0

1

8,500

4 5 3 5 2 5
8,250 1 1 0 2 0

1

8,000

2 3 1 0 1 0
7,750 0 0 0 0 0

1

7,500

0 1 1 2 0 1
7,250 1 1 0 0 0

0

N=

21 21 21 25 20 23
Median $9,000 $8,500 $9,250 $8,750 $9,750

$9,000

Mean

$8,952 $8,583 $9,190 $8,820 $9,600

$8,913

 

Source: Johns Hopkins University. The Ferdinand Hamburger, Jr. Archives. Department of Political Economy, Series 5, Box 6, Folder 2 “Statistical Information”.

 

Categories
Berkeley Carnegie Institute of Technology Chicago Colorado Columbia Cornell Duke Economist Market Harvard Illinois Indiana Iowa Johns Hopkins M.I.T. Michigan Michigan State Minnesota North Carolina Northwestern NYU Ohio State Pennsylvania Princeton Purdue Rochester Salaries Stanford Texas Vanderbilt Virginia Wisconsin Yale

Assistant Professors’ Salaries in U.S. Economics Departments (3), 1964/5-1965/66

 

 

This is the third table from the so-called “Cartel” summary report from December 1965 of 9-10 month salaries paid in U.S. economics departments. Tables 3c give figures for the distribution of assistant professor salaries across the departments reporting. Last posting gave the distribution for full-professors and the distribution for associate professors. The next posting has the distribution for entering salaries for new Ph.D.’s. Refer to the first posting in this series of tables for information about the compiler Professor Francis Boddy of the University of Minnesota and a list of the 30 departments belonging to the Chairmen’s Group.

Also there is a table of the anticipated (as of December 1965) range of salaries to hire freshly completed PhD’s for the coming academic year, 1966-67.

Using the BLS web CPI Inflation calculator, one can inflate nominal levels (say for December 1965, the date of the report) to April 2017 using a factor of 7.69.

____________________

TABLE 3c
ASSISTANT PROFESSORS 1965-66, 1964-65

(1)
Median Salaries
All Assistant Professors

MID-POINT
OF RANGE

1965-66 1964-65
Over 11,249 0

1

11,000

0 0
10,500 3

0

10,000

7 1
9,750 2

0

9,500

6 6
9,250 3

2

9,000

4 5
8,750 1

6

8,500

1 2
8,250 1

3

8,000

1 2
7,750 0

0

7,500

0 0
7,250 0

1

N=

29 29
Median $9,500

$8,900

Mean

$9,402

$8,936

 

 

TABLE 3c
ASSISTANT PROFESSORS 1965-66, 1964-65

(2)
Average Salaries
“Superior Assistance Professors”
(Top 1/3)

MID-POINT
OF RANGE

1965-66 1964-65
Over 11,249 4

1

11,000

3 2
10,500 8

5

10,000

7 3
9,750 2

2

9,500 3 4
9,250 0

3

9,000

1 3
8,750 1

3

8,500

0 0
8,250 0

2

8,000

0 0
7,750 0

0

7,500

0 0
7,250 0

1

N=

 

29

 

29

Median $10,250

$9,500

Mean

$10,333

$9,575

 

 

TABLE 3c
ASSISTANT PROFESSORS 1965-66, 1964-65

(3)
Average Salaries
“Average Assistant Professors”
(Lower 2/3)

MID-POINT
OF RANGE

1965-66 1964-65
Over 10,749 0

1

10,500

1 0
10,000 5

0

9,750

2 0
9,500 4

3

9,250 7 1
9,000 2

8

8,750

4 3
8,500 1

5

8,250

2 3
8,000 1

1

7,750

0 2
7,500 0

1

7,250

0 1
N= 29

29

Median

$9,300 $8,800
Mean $9,251

$9,063

 

Source: Johns Hopkins University. The Ferdinand Hamburger, Jr. Archives. Department of Political Economy, Series 5, Box 6, Folder 2 “Statistical Information”.

Image Source: Brussells conference, cartel magnate (detail). Postcard from 1902. Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Division Washington, D.C. 20540 USA.