Tag: Blaug

Categories
Columbia Economists Gender Social Work Socialism

Columbia. Economics Ph.D. Alumna, Vera Shlakman, 1938

 

Vera Shlakman (1909-2017) was born in Montreal to an anarchist mother and social-democratic father, Jewish immigrants born in Vilna and Pinsk, respectively, who named their children after Eleanor Marx, Victor Hugo and the Russian revolutionary Vera Zasulich. “Whenever Emma Goldman and Rudolf Rocker came to Montreal to lecture they stayed with us.”

Vera and her siblings all studied at McGill University but then moved to New York to find jobs. Vera did her Ph.D. thesis work with the economic historian Carter Goodrich at Columbia University. Later at Smith College she worked together with, among other people, Dorothy Douglas (divorced from the economist and later U.S. Senator, Paul Douglas).

Vera Shlakman’s career as an economist was cut short in 1952 as a consequence of the Second Red Scare. She was later rehabilitated and actually received financial compensation for lost pension rights. Of no small interest are the recollections  of the eminent historian of economics, Mark Blaug, included below.

__________________________

Biographical information for Vera Shlakman

Heins, Marjorie. Priests of Our Democracy–The Supreme Court, Academic Freedom, and the Anti-Communist Purge. New York: New York University Press, 2013.

Kessler-Harris, Alice. “Vera Shlakman, Economic History of a Factory Town, A Study of Chicopee, Massachusetts (1935).” International Labor and Working-Class History, no. 69 (2006): 195-200.

Avrich, Paul. Interview with Lena Shlakman, January 23 and 24, 1974, in Anarchist Voices. A Oral History of Anarchism in America. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1995. Pages 325-328.

Vera Shlakman’s New York Times obituary, “Vera Shlakman, Fired in Red Scare, Dies at 108” was published November 29, 2017.

__________________________

Timeline of Vera Shlakman

1909. Born July 15 in Montreal to Louis Shlakman (tailor and shirtwaist factory foreman) and Lena Hendler (glove stitching, shirtwaist factory worker).

1930. B.A. in economics from McGill University in Montreal.

1931. M.A. in economics from McGill University.

1931/32-1932/33. In residence graduate work at Columbia University. Some months employed as research assistant to Professor Arthur R. Burns.

1933/34-1934-35.  Research Fellow to the Council of Industrial Studies, Smith College.

1935. Publishes Economic History of a Factory Town: A Study of Chicopee, Massachusetts as volume 20, Nos. 1-4 (October, 1934-July, 1935)  of the Smith College Studies in History.

Pasted on the title page: “Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, in the Faculty of Political Science, Columbia University.”

1935-37. Instructor in the Department of Economics, Smith College.

1937-38. Instructor in the Department of Economics and Sociology at Sweet Briar College, Virginia.

1938. Ph.D. in economics awarded by Columbia University.

1938. Hired by Queens College as instructor.

1944-46. Reported to have been a member of the Communist Party. One of the reasons why the F.B.I. had placed her on a watch list. [Not aware of any record in which Shlakman had ever confirmed or denied such activity.]

1952. Assistant professor, but summoned as vice-president of the Teachers Union local for a public hearing of the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee. After taking the Fifth Amendment to avoid self-incrimination in response to questions regarding  Communist Party activity, she (along with several others) was dismissed from Queens College.

1953. Unemployed.

1954-58.  Employed as a secretary and bookkeeper with some intermittent teaching.

1959. Hired for an administrative position at Adelphi University.

1960. Teaching position in Social Work at Adelphi University, achieved rank of associate professor..

1966. Hired at the School of Social Work at Columbia University, Associate professor.

1967-68. Supreme Court of the United States declares the New York state laws under which Shlakman and others were dismissed as unconstitutional.

1978. Retired from Columbia University as professor emerita.

1980. Official apology received from City University of New York.

1982. Trustees of the City University announced a financial settlement for its dismissed faculty. Vera Shlakman received $114,599.

2017. Vera Shlakman died November 5 in Manhattan.

__________________________

AEA Listing 1938

Shlakman, Vera, Queen’s Col., Flushing, N.Y. (1938) a Queen’s Col., instr. b B:A:, 1930, M.A., 1931, McGill (Canada); Ph.D., 1938, Columbia. c Economic history of factory town: study of Chicopee, Mass. d American economic history; labor.

Source: American Economic Review, Vol. 28, No. 3, Supplement, Handbook, Who’s Who in the American Economic Association: 1938 (Sep., 1938). List of Members, p. 83.

__________________________

Testimony by the Historian of Economics, Mark Blaug

I doubt whether it would have taken me so many years to throw off the weight of Marxism if it had not been for an encounter in 1952 with the spectre of McCarthyism. McCarthy was riding high in 1952, the product of the anti-Communist hysteria that held America in its grip at the height of the Cold War. And it was a hysteria as the following story will show. I had graduated from Queens College of the City University of New York in 1950 and was in the midst of my preliminary year for the PhD at Columbia University when Arthur D. Gayer, the chairman of the economics department at Queens College, was killed in an automobile accident. The department looked around for someone to take over his courses in the middle of the semester and since I had worked for him as a research assistant, I was asked whether I would have a go. And so I suddenly found myself teaching a full load of courses in microeconomics, consumer economics and marketing, a subject I had never studied. I can remember being so nervous about my first lectures that I literally memorized them in their entirety the night before giving them.

I was just getting on top of all this teaching when the Un-American Activities Committee, chaired by Senator Joseph McCarthy, arrived in New York city to investigate communism in the New York City college system. They called on three well-known professors to appear before them in order, no doubt, to ask them the familiar questions: “Are you now or have you ever been a member of the Communist Party?”. All three refused to cooperate with the committee, pleading the First and Fifth Amendment to the Constitution, which prohibits witnesses from incriminating themselves. Despite the fact that all three were tenured professors, they were promptly and summarily dismissed by their employer, the City University of New York.
One of these three professors was Vera Shlakman, Professor of Labour Economics at Queens College, a former teacher of mine and, at that point in time, a colleague. She was the president of the Teachers’ Union, a left-wing professional union of college teachers in the New York City area, and was herself left-wing and, for all I knew, a fellow-traveler. But having been taught by her, I knew that she was scrupulously impartial and leaned over back wards not to indoctrinate her students. A number of students organized a petition to the President of Queens College demanding Vera Shlakman’s reinstatement but, by the by-laws of the college, student petitions could not be submitted to a higher authority without an endorsing signature of at least one faculty member. The students went right through the economics department, which then numbered 40 professors, associate professors, assistant professors, and lowly tutors like myself, without encountering one person willing to endorse the petition. At the end of the line, they came to me and because of my personal regard for Professor Shlakman, and because I could not bear the thought of being pusillanimous, I signed the petition. Within 24 hours, I received a curt note from President Thatcher of Queens College (odd that I should remember his name after 40 years!) informing me that, unless I resigned forthwith, I would be dismissed, and black-listed for future employment.
For a day or two, I contemplated a magnifi cent protest, a statement that would ring down the ages as a clarion call to individual freedom, that would be read and recited for years to come by American high school students?and then I quietly sent in my letter of resignation.

I was now at my wit’s end. I had planned to apply for a scholarship to begin working on my doctoral dissertation and had been relying on my teaching salary from Queens College to carry me through the application period. I was broke and depressed by the entire experience when suddenly the telephone rang to inform me that I had been offered a grant by the Social Science Research Council to enable me to go abroad to write my PhD thesis: clearly, there were people here and there behind the scenes lending assistance to victims of McCarthyism.

Source: Mark Blaug, Not Only an Economist—Autobiographical Reflections of a Historian of Economic Thought, The American Economist, Fall, 1994, Vol. 38, No. 2 (Fall, 1994), pp. 14-15.

__________________________

Oscar Shaftel Papers

The Oscar Shaftel Collection documents Professor Shaftel’s tenure as a professor at Queens College, including his dismissal and his efforts to reinstate his pension. The bulk of the collection is from 1948 to 1982 and includes correspondence, flyers, printed materials, and hearing transcripts. The collection provides evidence of Oscar Shaftel’s personal experience at Queens College, as well as student activism on campus in the late 1940s and early 1950s. More broadly, the collection provides documentation of the McCarthyism and its effect on the New York City education system.

This series includes correspondence from Queens College President John T. Theobald (1953); a copy of the transcript from Oscar Shaftel’s testimony before the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee; correspondence regarding Shaftel’s appeal of his termination by Queens College; testimony of former Queens College professor Vera Shlankman; court documents of former professors Dudley Straus and Francis Thompson (undated); and a letter written in support of Vera Shlankman and Oscar Shaftel from Queens College alumni.

__________________________

Image Source:  Faculty portrait of Vera Shlakman, Social Work. Alephi University (Garden City, New York), The Oracle 1965.

 

 

Categories
Columbia Economists Exam Questions History of Economics

Columbia. Classical Economics Exam by J.M. Clark. 1951

John Maurice Clark

John Maurice Clark taught a history of economic theory sequence at Columbia University that had its origins in a similar course that had been taught earlier by Wesley Clair Mitchell. On the back of Clark’s examination questions for the first session of the 1950-51 academic year one finds a list of names and grades that we can strongly presume constitute the grade distribution for the course. 43 students were listed by John Maurice Clark in his handwritten grade sheet for the first semester of formative types of economic theory, of whom 26 received grades (3.12 average on a 4 point scale, median 3.17). Mark Blaug, whose magnum opus Economic Theory in Retrospect has served as a staple of the analytic narrative of the evolution of economics, received only a grade of B- (2.67) which put him tied with two other students at rank 21. A few years later Blaug was to find his mentor and dissertation adviser, George Stigler.

The later Congressional Research Service economist John P. Hardt (Columbia Ph.D., 1954) was  on the list but not awarded a grade for the course.

Oops it happens every so often, I have repeated myself. The original posting along with another year’s examination can be found here.

_____________________

Course Announcement

Economics 115-116 — Formative types of economic theory.
3 points each session. Professor Clark.
M. W. 12. 313 Fayerweather.

Readings and critical discussion of outstanding examples of the parent stock of classical economics with some regard to historical setting, and of subsequent outstanding contributions.

Source: Columbia University. Announcement of the Faculty of Political Science for the Winter and Spring Sessions 1950-51, p. 46.

_______________________________

Course Description

Economics 115-116—Formative types of economic theory. 3 points each session. Professor Clark.

M.W. 12.         313 Fayerweather.

Readings and critical discussion of outstanding examples of the parent stock of classical economics, with some regard to historical setting, and of subsequent outstanding contributions.

Source:   Columbia University. Announcement of the Faculty of Political Science for the Winter and Spring Sessions 1950-51, p. 46.

_______________________________

Take-Home Examination Questions

Economics 115
Final Examination
January, 1951

Answer any two questions, taking about the time for the actual writing that a regular examination would take. Those who do the work during Christmas holidays will please return papers January 8; others Friday, January 26, unless otherwise specified.

  1. Do the views of ancient writers (Hebrew, Greek or Roman) afford the same kind of evidence as the writings of modern economists as to economic conditions and practices of their time?
  2. Discuss extent of applicability of medieval doctrine on price; variations or relaxations; and how far the doctrine was effective in practice.
  3. Explain and appraise Quesnay’s “Tableau Économique”.
  4. State key doctrines of the Physiocrats and indicate how they could be regarded as adaptations to an historical situation.
  5. Compare views of Smith and Ricardo on the relation of labor to value.
  6. Compare treatment of rent in Smith, Malthus and Ricardo.
  7. On what grounds did Adam Smith sanction departures from laissez-faire?
  8. Topic: dominant conceptions of what economic activity is for. Compare the dominant conception (or at most a few dominant conceptions) of as many of the following as you feel you can reasonably cover: typical Mercantilists, Physiocrats, Ricardo, John Stuart Mill.
  9. What does Bentham’s theory contribute to the basic rationale of economics, aside from his ideas on economic matters themselves? (Book V of J. S. Mill’s “Principles of Political Economy” might contain hints.)
  10. State doctrines of Ricardo which had roots in historical conditions of the time, and indicate the connection.
  11. Compare Ricardo’s treatment of value with either Adam Smith’s or John Stuart Mill’s.
  12. What were the sources of J. S. Mill’s departure from strict Ricardianism?

_______________________________

Probable Grade Distribution

Letter Grade

 Number of students
A

2

A to A-

 1
A-

5

B+

 5
B

6

B to B-

 1
B-

2

C+

 1
C

3

Note:  Mark Blaug received the B to B- grade.

Source: Columbia University Archives. John M. Clark Papers. Box 24 (Courses Misc.), Unlabeled Folder.

Image Source: Portrait of John Maurice Clark from the collection of portraits of economists presented in 1997 as a gift to the Department of Economics of Duke University by Professor Warren J. Samuels of Michigan State University. Free use of these portraits in Web documents, and for other educational purposes, is encouraged: users are requested to acknowledge that the images come from The Warren J. Samuels Portrait Collection at Duke University.

Categories
Columbia Economists Exam Questions

Columbia. History of Economics Exams. J.M. Clark, 1949-51

John Maurice Clark

The successor to Wesley Clair Mitchell in teaching the history of types of economic theory at Columbia University was John Maurice Clark, the son of John Bates Clark. Because of the identical course descriptions printed in the official University Announcement, I figure it is reasonable transcribing the final exams for the Winter and Spring sessions from two different academic years (the only ones I was able to find for the courses, Econ 115 and 116, respectively). John Maurice Clark was a pack rat, but not a model of consistent filing, so there may be other copies to be found in his papers.

In a handwritten class list for Econ 115 (Fall, 1950) one finds 43 names of attendee–with grades noted for 26 of them. The grade distribution of those 26 students was: A (2), A- (6), B+ (5), B (6), B- (3), C+ (1), C (3). Of more than passing interest for historians of economics is that the author of Economic Theory in Retrospect, Mark Blaug, only received a grade of B minus (rank 22 of 26 graded)! Evidence for the slope of Blaug’s learning curve is seen in his grade for Econ 116 in 1951 where he received an A minus. The only other name I immediately recognize from the list was the later Library of Congress specialist on socialist economies, John P. Hardt (Ph.D., 1954). Hardt’s name will long be associated with the green volumes of Joint Economic Committee reports on the economies of China, USSR, and Eastern Europe) with “(vet)” noted after his name but without a grade.

____________________________

Course Announcement

Economics 115-116—Formative types of economic theory. 3 points each session. Professor Clark.
M. W. 12. [310 Fayerweather in Spring session; 1948/49 in 313 Fayerweather for Winter session, 1950/51]

Readings and critical discussion of outstanding examples of the parent stock of classical economics, with some regard to historical setting, and of subsequent outstanding contributions.

Source: Columbia University. Announcement of the Faculty of Political Science. Winter and Spring Sessions (1948-1949 and 1950-1951).

____________________________

Economics 115
Final Examination
January, 1951

Answer any two questions, taking about the time for the actual writing that a regular examination would take. Those who do the work during Christmas holidays will please return papers January 8; others Friday, January 26, unless otherwise specified.

—————–

  1. Do the views of ancient writers (Hebrew, Greek or Roman) afford the same kind of evidence as the writings of modern economists as to economic conditions and practices of their time?
  2. Discuss extent of applicability of medieval doctrine on price; variations or relaxations; and how far the doctrine was effective in practice.
  3. Explain and appraise Quesnay’s “Tableau Economique”.
  4. State key doctrines of the Physiocrats and indicate how they could be regarded as adaptations to an historical situation.
  5. Compare views of Smith and Ricardo on the relation of labor to value.
  6. Compare treatment of rent in Smith, Malthus and Ricardo.
  7. On what grounds did Adam Smith sanction departures from laissez-faire?
  8. Topic: dominant conceptions of what economic activity is for. Compare the dominant conception (or at most a few dominant conceptions) of as many of the following as you feel you can reasonably cover: typical Mercantilists, Physiocrats, Ricardo, John Stuart Mill.
  9. What does Bentham’s theory contribute to the basic rationale of economics, aside from his ideas on economic matters themselves? (Book V. of J. S. Mill’s “Principles of Political Economy” might contain hints.)
  10. State doctrines of Ricardo which had roots in historical conditions of the time, and indicate the connections.
  11. Compare Ricardo’s treatment of value with either Adam Smith’s or John Stuart Mill’s.
  12. What were the sources of J. S. Mill’s departure from strict Ricardianism?

Source: John M. Clark Papers. Columbia University Libraries. Manuscript Collections. Box 24, Courses: Misc.

____________________________

ECONOMICS 116
Final examination
May, 1949

Answer two questions from the following list:

  1. If things do not exchange in proportion to their labor cost, in what sense does labor cost govern value, under the labor theory? Discuss
  2. Discuss the proper relation between historical and theoretical materials in the equipment of an economist.
  3. (a) What is the meaning of “utility”?
    (b) What difference does it make whether economic theory can or cannot make “interpersonal comparisons” of utility?
  4. State some form of theory of the relation of marginal utility to price. Is this a tautological truth? Approximately true or true with qualifications? Inaccurate enough to be misleading? Discuss.
  5. Define the meaning of marginal productivity as a basis for the division between labor and capital in industry. How, if at all, does it apply to added labor in a plant working below capacity?
  6. How does Marshall treat the problem of differences between different producers and their costs of production, in his theory of value? Compare treatment of same problem in Chamberlin and/or J. B. Clark.
  7. Compare Marshall and Chamberlin as to treatment of the element of time in normal price.
  8. Define various types of welfare economics. Select one and indicate the key problems and difficulties, and methods of dealing with them.
  9. Analyze the logic of the difference between J. B Clark and Veblen as to what are the normal tendencies of a system of business enterprise.
  10. Formulate some other significant question on the material covered in the course, and answer it.

Source: John M. Clark Papers. Columbia University Libraries. Manuscript Collections. Box 35, History of Economic Thought; Folder (tab torn) “??—Cameral. epoch.”

Image Source: Portrait of John Maurice Clark from the collection of portraits of economists presented in 1997 as a gift to the Department of Economics of Duke University by Professor Warren J. Samuels of Michigan State University. Free use of these portraits in Web documents, and for other educational purposes, is encouraged: users are requested to acknowledge that the images come from The Warren J. Samuels Portrait Collection at Duke University.