Categories
Columbia Economists

Columbia. Excerpt from Dean’s Report dealing with faculty of political science. 1930-1931

The previous post was a backward look from October 1930 at the first fifty-years of Columbia’s Faculty of Political Science (home of its graduate economics department). The following excerpts from the annual report of the Dean of the Faculties of Political Science, Philosophy, and Pure Science give us a snapshot of the Faculty of Political Science for the year 1930-31.

__________________________

FACULTIES OF POLITICAL SCIENCE, PHILOSOPHY, AND PURE SCIENCE

REPORT OF THE DEAN
FOR THE ACADEMIC YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 1931

To the President of the University

Sir:

As Dean of the Faculties of Political Science, Philosophy, and Pure Science, I submit the following report for the academic year ending June 30, 1931.

The year was marked by a number of events of interest and importance to the Graduate Faculties. Scarcely was it under way when the University celebrated with appropriate dignity and simplicity the Fiftieth Anniversary of the Founding of the Faculty of Political Science. The details of this celebration, having been elsewhere recorded in print, need not be repeated here. The presence on that occasion of the venerable founder of the Faculty, Emeritus Professor John William Burgess, still in vigor of mind and of personality, gave it peculiarly interesting and dramatic focus. It was a fortunate circumstance that this expression of the University’s homage and debt to him was given at that time. Only a few months thereafter, deservedly honored and mourned, he passed from the earthly scene.

As a permanently useful memento of this celebration there was published a Bibliography of the Faculty of Political Science containing the list of the several thousand books and important articles written by its members as well as the titles of the nearly seven hundred doctoral dissertations that have been prepared and published under its guidance. Important to our University life as the integrity and unity of this Faculty is both historically and presently, it is regrettable that because of this fact this Bibliography falls far short of including the total of our contributions to the field of the social sciences. A complete bibliography of our publications in this wide field would have included numerous books and articles by members of other faculties, notably the Faculties of Business and of Law.

But while the Faculty of Political Science momentarily paused on the threshold of the year to celebrate its semicentenary, to look back upon its achievements and modestly to rejoice in its traditions, its spirit was in 1930, as in 1880, the spirit of youth. Professor Burgess himself was only thirty-five when he fathered the Faculty. And of the early famous small group whom he called to aid him in his high adventure in scholarship Professors Mayo-Smith and Munroe Smith were only twenty-six, and Professors Goodnow and Seligman twenty-four. Even among later arrivals Professor John Bassett Moore was only thirty-one, Professor Dunning thirty-two, Professor Osgood thirty-five, and Professor Giddings thirty-seven, when they joined the Faculty. It was a youthful company courageously and energetically facing the future.

And so this Faculty continues. It was the Department of Economics that was especially called upon this year to take thought of tomorrow. It had suffered severe losses. Professor Henry L. Moore retired in the spring of 1930. Professor Seager died in August of the same year. Professor Seligman retired at the end of the year. Inevitably the School of Business and the Department of Economics have been developing along many related lines of teaching and research. It would have been calamitous had they developed at cross purposes or in ungenerous rivalry. Happily no such misfortune befell. From the inception of the School of Business these two units have been held to common purpose by ties of common sense and of that fine spirit of loyalty and of friendship that is so much a part of the Columbia spirit. But the breach in the ranks of the Department of Economics seemed an appropriate occasion for welding these separate units, at least in so far as graduate work is concerned, into closer organic integration. Everybody recognizes that under our more or less arbitrary, but certainly unavoidable, scheme of departmentalization there are subjects and interests appropriate to a professional school of business that might not properly be included under a graduate department of economics. Conversely, there are manifestly subjects and interests that not only may be, but also should be, included under both. We severed the knot of this difficult problem of University organization by asking five members of the Faculty of the School of Business to become members of the Department of Economics and accept seats in the Faculty of Political Science. These were Professors Bonbright, Haig, McCrea, Mills, and Willis. This is no mere paper arrangement; it means a vital amalgamation of intellectual forces working toward common ends.

In recognition of the growing rapprochement between law and the social sciences it seemed fitting also that two members of the Faculty of Law, whose fields of interest are considerably economic, should be invited into this enlarged departmental membership. Professors Llewellyn and Berle were in consequence drawn into the unit. This was in line with the historic dual relationship that has so long prevailed with profitable results to teaching and scholarship between the Department of Public Law and the School of Law.

In addition to these internal realignments several new members were added to the Department of Economics. These are: Leo Wolman, eminent economist and practitioner in the field of labor problems; Carter Goodrich, whose special field for development will be American economic history; and Harold Hotelling, a distinguished mathematician turned economist. Arthur R. Burns, Lecturer in Economics in Barnard College, will henceforth devote himself to graduate instruction and research upon problems of industrial and business organization. Michael Florinsky, working upon recent economic developments in Europe, and Joseph Dorfman upon the development of American economic thought, have been made Associates in the Department. The remolding of this important Department at a moment of unprecedentedly swift change in the economic world augurs for the years ahead rich results in scholarship and in service.

In the closely related Department of Social Science the appointment of Robert S. Lynd, distinguished sociological investigator and for some years past Secretary of the Social Science Research Council, is likewise an omen of certain promise. It can scarcely fail to quicken, expand, and deepen the activities of our sociologists in this great laboratory of society in which we live, the city of New York.

[…]

I express the deep grief of the University over the death in August, 1930, of Henry Rogers Seager, Professor of Political Economy, and in June, 1931, of Franklin Henry Giddings, Professor Emeritus in Residence of Sociology and the History of Civilization. For a quarter of a century or more here at Columbia, Professor Seager studied with and expounded to his students the problems of labor in a changing industrial society and the economic problems of corporations and trusts. Scholar, teacher, writer, humanitarian, active participant in welfare movements and organizations, he died at the age of sixty, depriving us of many years of companionship and service upon which we had never thought not to count. Beloved of both students and colleagues, his deep personal interest in and influence upon the former will not be easily supplied by another. His loss to the latter is irreparable.

Professor Giddings’ death brought to its close a long, rich life of labor, of profound reflection, and of purposeful achievement. Trail blazer in an almost unexplored and unstaked field of social inquiry he more than any other American gave meaning to the term sociology and direction to its course. His numerous writings attest the catholicity of his interests, the depth of his penetrating scholarship, and the clarity of his thinking on social problems and developments. Scholars the world over acclaimed him, while the large company of his students and the small company of his immediate colleagues held him in the affectionate regard which his rich humanity and his fineness of spirit inspired and compelled.

The end of the academic year brought with it the retirement from active service to the University of Edwin R. A. Seligman, McVickar Professor of Political Economy, and of Edward Delavan Perry, Jay Professor of Greek. Professor Seligman’s enormous and varied contributions to modern economic thought, especially in the field of public finance, as well as his numerous public and quasi-public services are so widely and so favorably known that it seems quite as useless as it is impossible summarily to estimate them here. His name is known and his views are valued wherever informed men in almost any land discuss problems of finance, and many are the important laws embodying fiscal policies of city, state, and nation that bear in their contours the impress of his studious acumen and practical genius. A scholar in affairs he was and continues to be. Happily he tarries with us in residence as active and as interested as ever. For him relief from classroom instruction can but mean an increase of productive scholarship and of public activity, if such a thing be conceivable.

[…]

Respectfully submitted,
Howard Lee McBain,
Dean

June 30, 1931

Source: Columbia University. Annual Report of the President and Treasurer to the Trusteesfor the year ending June 30, 1931. Pp. 202-204; 208-209; 214.

Image Source: Low Memorial Library, Columbia University from the Tichnor Brothers Collection, New York Postcards, at the Boston Public Library, Print Department.

Categories
Columbia Regulations

Columbia. Economics Graduate Student’s Guide, 1957-58

 

The process of awarding a Ph.D. in economics is governed by rules, so every so often I add a program’s rule-book here. The following excerpt from the Graduate Student’s Guide even provides a bit of motivation and interpretation of the rules for economics graduate students at Columbia University in the mid 1950s.

Recently an exam for Gary Becker’s 1965 micro-theory course (already one of the most visited pages in the Economics in the Rear-view Mirror collection) revealed that either the rule for making no-allowance in exams for non-native English speakers  was suspended by 1965 or Gary Becker disregarded the rule, allowing non-native speakers extra time for their written examinations.

________________

Excerpt from Columbia University’s The Graduate Student’s Guide

ECONOMICS

EXECUTIVE OFFICER: Carl S. Shoup, 503 Fayerweather

Office hours:Monday and Wednesday, 10 to 10:30 and 11 to 12. Thursday, 2 to 4
Telephone Extension:2171

DEPARTMENT SECRETARY: Carolyn M. Stedman, 502 Fayerweather

Office hours:Monday through Friday, 9 to 5
Telephone Extension:849

DEPARTMENT BULLETIN BOARD: outside 502 Fayerweather

 

The following remarks supplement or amplify the description of degree requirements found in two places in the Graduate Faculties Bulletin: on pages 14-18 for the Faculty Requirements and on page 37 for the Departmental Requirements. Have these pages of theBulletin at hand when reading the statement below.

GENERAL

The Department takes the view that each graduate student having his particular intellectual interests and methods of satisfying them, flexibility in the departmental procedures intended to assist him is necessary. Hence, no system of departmental advisers has been set up. During his first registration, the student will find all members of the Department available, at hours posted on the bulletin board, for consultation on his course program. Any member of the Department may sign approval of the student’s program card. If a study of the course offerings in the Bulletindoes not give the entering student a clear enough idea of the particular member of the Department by whom he would prefer to be advised on his program, he may obtain suggestions on this score from the Academic Assistant or Professor Shoup.

In succeeding semesters the student’s developing interests and his growing acquaintance with the members of the Department should enable him to select some one or two faculty members as his chief adviser or advisers.

Although no specified courses are required for either degree, all students in the Department are advised to attend Economics 101-102, the basic course in economic theory, unless they enter the Department with an exceptional background in that subject.

 

THE MASTER’S DEGREE

Candidates are expected to study the requirements listed in the Graduate Faculties Bulletinand to plan their work in the light of both A. M. and Ph.D. requirements in case they should later decide to work toward the higher degree.

Not less than six months before he desires to receive the degree, the candidate must select his Essay subject, submit it to the appropriate member of the Department, and, after approval, list the subject with the Academic Assistant of the Department. The Essay need not be completed until after the candidate has satisfied the course requirements for the degree.

The selection of a subject of importance within the field of his interests must be made by the student, and the ability to make a proper choice will be regarded as an essential qualification for the degree.

The completed Essay must be submitted for approval not later than four weeks before the date on which copies are to be filed with the Essay and Dissertation Secretary. The candidate should not proceed beyond the preparation of his detailed program of investigation and the completion of a preliminary chapter or section without submitting his work to his supervisor. An Essay is judged by the manner of its presentation and style as well as by its contents and the employment of original material.

Another foreign language may be substituted for French or for German, with the approval of the Executive Officer, if it is particularly useful for the student’s projected research; but another Romance language may not be offered with French. Failure to pass one of the language examinations or the mathematics examination, as the case may be, before registering for more than 30 points, or failure to pass the other examination before registering for more than 45 points, will result in denial of permission to register until the deficiency is removed.

In 1957-1958 the examinations in languages and mathematics will be held on the following days: Thursday, September 19, 1957, from 10 to 12; Friday, January 17, 1958, from 2 to 4; Friday, May 2, 1958, from 2 to 4 (room numbers will be posted outside Room 502 Fayerweather). At least one week before the examination the student must notify the Academic Assistant of the Department of his intention to take it.

Two years of intensive language work in one of Columbia University’s Institutes, with a grade of B or better throughout, are accepted in lieu of passing the regular language examination. Language examinations taken at other universities are not accepted for this requirement.

Foreign students are asked to bear in mind that a command of the English language is assumed, and that English consequently cannot be accepted as a foreign language satisfying the requirement. Nor can allowance be made in any examination, oral or written, for unfamiliarity with English.

 

THE DOCTORATE

The student must satisfy the Department that he has gained a thorough knowledge of several fields of economics (and, at his option, one field outside economics), to the point where he can demonstrate command of the material in a comprehensive oral examination and can utilize his knowledge in the writing of a doctoral Dissertation. To this end, the Department does not require course examinations of the Ph.D. candidate, nor are particular courses required. Instead, the student must, in addition to meeting the language and proficiency requirements stated in the Bulletin, (a) compete a seminar paper in one of the research courses offered in the Department, and (b) prepare an outline of his dissertation topic.

In practice, the typical Ph.D. candidate does take examinations in a limited number of courses, both to test himself and to build a record on which recommendations for fellowships or employment can be based. Moreover, those doctoral candidates who wish to obtain an A.M. degree en route necessarily take examination in 21 points (seven courses). The student’s decision to earn this degree should be guided by his interests and aims, after consultation with the Executive Officer or other members of the Department. Although the Department approves of a limited amount of examination taking, it asks the doctoral candidate to keep in mind the possible disadvantages of devoting too much time to the preparation for such tests.

Before he registers for more than 45 points, and as soon as possible, the candidate should submit for the Executive Officer’s approval his tentative choice of the three subjects, from the list given in the Graduate Faculties Bulletin, to add to the three required subjects. To ascertain the requirements for obtaining the certifications of proficiency in two of the six subjects, the candidate should, during his first semester, consult those members of the staff in charge of the respective fields. Certification of proficiency is not given for economic theory or for any subject under No. 19 in the Bulletinlist. These subjects may be, and economic theory mustbe, offered only at the oral examination.

The prospective candidate may find it advisable to take Statistics 191-192 and either Economics 153-154 (Economic history of the United States), or Economics 155-156 (Economic history of Europe, 1740-1914), or Economics 151-152 (Economic history of Russia to 1917) during his first year of residence, if he wishes to obtain a certificate of proficiency in statistics, or in one of these three divisions of economic history. No more than one of the three divisions may be offered among the six subjects. The professors in charge of certifying in these divisions are: United States, Professor Goodrich; Europe, Professor Landes (in 1957-1958, Professor Hughes); Russia, Professor Florinsky.

The 6-point research-course requirement cannot be fulfilled by research courses taken in other universities or in other Departments. Students are advised to take a research course in the Department as soon as they have completed 30 points, if not before. The required paper may be written in either of the two semesters of the research course.

Some time before he plans to take the oral examination, the student should select the field in which he intends to write his Dissertation. This field should normally be one of the six chosen for proficiency and oral examination. With the assistance of a member of the Department interested in this field, the candidate should formulate a topic for his Dissertation. As soon as the topic has been approved by the staff member (henceforth the student’s sponsor), the candidate must report to the Academic Assistant the name of the sponsor and the subject of the proposed Dissertation. No change of sponsorship will be recognized unless the candidate notifies the Academic Assistant. Although the Executive Officer may authorize a joint sponsorship, the Dissertation is generally written under a single sponsor.

The candidate is expected to draft a three- or four-page memorandum outlining the proposed Dissertation, indicating also the chief sources to be used, and defending the feasibility of the project. No oral examination will be scheduled until the candidate has deposited with the Academic Assistant his project memorandum, bearing the approval of the sponsor.

Well before the time he expects to apply for the oral examination, the candidate should obtain advice on preparing for this examination from members of the Faculty in charge of the fields he is offering. The oral examination is not an examination on courses, but on subjects (fields).

The formal application for a date for the examination must be made to the Academic Assistant for approval by the Executive Officer. The application will not be received until the requirements discussed above have been met. No exceptions can be made to the rules governing the dates of scheduling the various departmental and faculty examinations.

The reference under No. 19 in the Graduate Faculties Bulletin (page 37) to “any other one subject…approved by the Executive Officer of the Department” may include a subject falling in one of the Departments under the Faculty of Political Science, or in philosophy, or psychology, or in some other discipline dealing with matters relevant to the student’s scholarly interests. A candidate proposing to offer a subject outside the Department of Economics must obtain the approval of the Executive Officer of that other Department in advance. In general, the Department encourages doctoral candidates to devote a part of their efforts to a subject outside the Department.

Candidates for the Ph.D. degree in other Departments who propose to offer a minor in economics at the oral examination must be examined on economic theory and any one other of the subjects listed under Nos. 1-19 in the Bulletin. Such candidates should consult the Executive Officer of the Department of Economics as early as possible.

Candidates in other departments offering a minor in economic history aat the oral examination will be required to show either (a) a knowledge of the economic history of two major regions, or (b) a knowledge of the economic history of one major region and of the field or fields of economics particularly relevant to the subject of the proposed Dissertation.

A few private studies are available in Butler Library for students who are writing their Dissertations in residence; application should be made to the Academic Assistant.

The doctoral candidate may find it advisable to start on a first draft of his Dissertation well before the oral examination, perhaps in one of the research courses. During the writing of his Dissertation, the candidate should not fail to keep in lose touch with his sponsor. Much time will be saved, more assistance will be obtained, and more of the intellectual stimulus that should develop from the writing of a Dissertation will be felt if the candidate remains on or close to the Columbia campus. The candidate is particularly warned against writing a Dissertation in absentia, out of touch with his sponsor, and usually in the unfounded expectation that what he considers his finished draft, suddenly deposited on the desk of the sponsor, will lead speedily to a defense examination and the award of a degree.

If the candidate leaves the campus and makes no progress on his Dissertation, he should in December of each year send an explanatory statement to his sponsor; or, alternatively, notify his sponsor that he has abandoned the project. If the candidate does not apply for an examination in defense of his Dissertation within five years from the time he passed his oral examinations, he will be regarded as having abandoned his Dissertation topic, unless he requests in writing an extension of time and receives written approval of such an extension from his sponsor and the Executive Officer.

The candidate will not be recommended by the Executive Officer for an examination in defense of the Dissertation until the candidate’s sponsor has notified the Academic Assistant that the Dissertation is in acceptable form for final typing.

 

GRADUATE ECONOMICS SOCIETY

Graduate students will enhance their efficiency in learning and their professional interests by frequent discussion among themselves. For this purpose, the Graduate Economics Society, which meets regularly in Fayerweather Lounge, will be found useful. The officers for 1957-1958 are as follows:

President:  Edwin Dean, 419 West 115thStreet, Apt. 52, New York 25.

Vice President: Paul Graeser, 517 Furnald Hall

Secretary-Treasurer: Louise Freeman, 45 East 80thStreet, New York 21.

Telephone: LEhigh 5-6375.

 

SourceThe Graduate Student’s Guide. Columbia University, Bulletin of Information. Series 57, Number 39 (September 28, 1957), pp. 114-119.

Image Source:  Butler Library, 1939. Columbia’s Rare Book & Manuscript Library blog. April 19, 2018.

Categories
Barnard Columbia Economists Gender Salaries

Columbia. Pay raise for Barnard lecturer Clara Eliot supported, 1941

 

Columbia economics Ph.D. alumna (1926), Clara Eliot published her dissertation as The Farmer’s Campaign for Credit (New York: D. Appleton, 1927). Looking at the Columbia Department of Economics budget proposal from 1941, I saw a statement of support for a salary increase for Clara Eliot and promotion to the rank of assistant professor at Barnard. A brief annex to the budget introduces Eliot. I have added at the end of the post her 1976 New York Times’ obituary to round out her life story.

Since I was looking at Columbia economists’ salaries, I thought it worth seeing how her actual 1941-42 salary of $2,700 and the proposed assistant professor salary for 1942-43 of $3,600 fit into the structure of salaries paid to men at those ranks. It turns out (see the attached budget lines for lecturers and assistant professors), there was salary parity at both ranks. I have been unable to confirm yet whether Clara Eliot actually got her promotion with that pay raise at Barnard then.

The other woman economist, Eveline M. Burns, and her husband Arthur R. Burns were both quite unhappy with the ceilings to their respective advancement in 1940/41. Their story is worth a future post or two. Today is dedicated to Clara Eliot.

_____________________________________

Women in the Columbia Economics Department Budget Proposal
November 26, 1941

[…]

(2) Last year my colleagues directed me to inform Dr. Eveline M. Burns that they found themselves unable to offer her any ground for hope that she could be granted professorial status and she indicated her unwillingness to continue on the basis of a full-time lecturer at the stipend available (viz., $3,000). Thereupon a temporary arrangement was entered into for part-time service for the current academic year, with the specification that no commitment was implied beyond June, 1942. In this budget letter it is recommended that the connection of Dr. Burns with the Department be terminated at that date. The question of the future of her field of social insurance in the departmental plans is being studied by the Mitchell Committee mentioned above. Moreover, this is a field in which the School of Business has an interest…It is therefore suggested that for the present the sum that has in previous budgets been allocated to Dr. Burns be tentatively reserved pending the formulation of a definite proposal which should be forthcoming within perhaps a fortnight [reduced from $2,500 to $2,300 reserve in final budget].

[…]

Should the Barnard budget, when submitted, include a recommendation that recognition be given Clara Eliot, such a recommendation would be supported by the department to the extent of promotion to an assistant professorship and an increase in salary of $900 (Miss Eliot is now a lecturer in Barnard College at $2, 700).

(See Annex G)

[…]

ANNEX G

Statement concerning the Professional Preparation
and Experience of Clara Eliot

 

A. B. 1917, Reed College (major in sociology)

1917-1918, Instructor in Sociology, Mills College, Calif.

1918-20, Research Assistant to Prof. Irving Fisher, Yale Univ.

1920-23, Assistant in Economics, Barnard College (salary, $1,000)

1923-28, Instructor in Economics, Barnard College
(salary: 1923-25, $2,000; 1925-27, $2,200; 1927-28, $2,400)

1926, Ph.D. in Economics granted by Columbia.

1928-29 On leave without pay, travel and study abroad — in Germany and Austria.

1929-36, Lecturer in Economics, Barnard (part-time) (salary, $1,200)

From April 1st, leave of absence without pay to join the Consumer Purchases Study (on a salary basis of $5,600). Despite urging by Dr. Monroe, Chief of the Economics Division of the Bureau of Home Economics, leave could not be continued in the Fall because of the situation in the Barnard Department, with others on leave or ill)

1936—to date, Lecturer in Economics , Barnard College (full-time)
(salary: 1936-37, $2,400; 1937-40, $2,400; 1940-41, $2,700)

 

Projected research:

  1. An analysis of family expenditure data (scale of urgency, “income elasticity of demand”, etc.).
  2. Compiling of materials for use in connection with an introductory course in statistics, non-mathematical, stressing the possibilities and limitations of the quantitative method, stating hypotheses in quantitative terms, illustrating problems of interpretation, relating statistics to logic.

 

Source: Department of economics budget proposal for 1942-43 (dated November 26, 1941) submitted to Columbia University President Nicholas Murray Butler by Robert M. Haig, Chairman, Department of Economics (pp. 2, 6 and Appendix G). Columbia University Archives. Central Files 1890-. Box 386, Folder “Haig, Robert Murray 7/1941—6/1942”.

_____________________________________

ANNEX A

DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS
The [Revised] Budget as Adopted for 1941-1942
Compared with the Budget as Proposed for 1941-1942
.
December 30

 

Office or Item

Incumbent 1941-1942
Appropriations

1942-43
Proposals

Assistant Professor Arthur R. Burns

$4,500

$5,0001

Assistant Professor Robert L. Carey

$3,600

$3,600

Assistant Professor Boris M. Stanfield

$3,600

$3,600

Assistant Professor Joseph Dorfman

$3,600

$3,600

1Promotion to rank of associate professor recommended.

 

Office or Item

Incumbent 1941-1942
Appropriations

1942-43
Proposals

Lecturer Carl T. Schmidt

$3,000

$3,000

Lecturer (Winter Session) Robert Valeur

($1,500)

Lecturer Eveline M. Burns

$2,500

1

Lecturer Louis M. Hacker

$3,000

$3,6002

Lecturer Michael T. Florinsky

$2,700

$3,000

Lecturer Abraham Wald

$3,000

$3,6004

1Not to be reappointed.
2Promotion to rank of assistant professor recommended.
3 Promotion to rank of assistant professor recommended.

 

Source: Department of economics revised budget proposal for 1942-43 (dated December 30, 1941) submitted to Columbia University President Nicholas Murray Butler by Robert M. Haig, Chairman, Department of Economics. Columbia University Archives. Central Files 1890-. Box 386, Folder “Haig, Robert Murray 7/1941—6/1942”.

 

_____________________________________

Clara Eliot (1896-1976)

Prof. Clara Eliot, who taught economics and statistics at Barnard College, Columbia University, for almost 40 years until her retirement in 1961, died Saturday in Palo Alto, Calif. She was 80 years old.

Dr. Eliot, who used her maiden name professionally, was the wife of Dr. Robert Bruce Raup, professor emeritus of philosophy of education at Teachers College, Columbia University.

Dr. Eliot contributed to research in consumer economics. She was the author of “The Farmer’s Campaign for Credit,” a study of basic issues in credit theory as they were involved in United States agricultural policies early in this century.

She graduated from Reed College in 1917 and received her doctorate from Columbia in 1926. After teaching at Mills College in 1917-18 she was economics secretary to Prof. Irving Fisher at Yale University from 1918 to 1920.

Surviving, besides her husband, are a son, Robert B. Raup Jr.; three daughters, Joan R. Rosenblatt, Ruth R. Johnson and Charlotte R. Cremin; two brothers, a sister and eight grandchildren.

Source:  New York Times, January 19, 1976 (page 32).

Image Source: Barnard College, Mortarboard 1950.