Tag: Millis

 

 

The following set of memoranda from the head of the department of economics at the University of Chicago provides us with an academic administrator’s perspective of the organization of a doctoral program and the departmental structure by fields. We see to which fields different economics professors were associated (consigned?), none of which we couldn’t guess, but memoranda like these help to nail these things down for sure. It is dull reading, and perhaps next time I make it to the University of Chicago archives, I’ll be able to find some of the actual written responses by field which should provide us more content. Still I find it interesting to see just how underwhelming was the prompt response to the chair’s request to his colleagues to meet with each other and write something up as seen in his three part reminder/nudge/nag memorandum dated about a half-year after his first requests! 

 

__________________________________

Memo #1. Formalizing Academic Advising

THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO
DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS

Memorandum to: P. H. Douglas, H. A. Millis, Jacob Viner C. W. Wright

from L. C. Marshall

October 13, 1926

I am inclined to think it would be a good plan if we arranged for a somewhat decentralized system of advice for our students who are preparing for the doctorate. I refer particularly to their four fields.

When a man has decided that he wishes to use fields a, b, c, d (let us say) for the doctorate, would it not be a good plan for someone in each field to take him in hand and talk the whole situation over with him? What formal previous training has he had? What informal? What practical experience? What courses in Economics here would be useful to him? What courses in other Departments would be useful? What informal reading might wisely be covered, etc., etc.

If such a scheme were carried out there ought to be some sort of formal written record of the comments and recommendations of the group advisor, so that there could be no future misunderstanding and so that a temporary absence of the advisor would not cause any embarrassment.

It would be easy to provide a memorandum pad that would provide an original for the candidate, a duplicate for the registering representative and a triplicate for the group advisor.

Won’t you give me suggestions of the kind of thing that ought to appear on a pad of this kind?

__________________________________

Memo #2. Coordinating Fields within Common Economics & Business Doctoral Program

 

November 22, 1926

Memorandum to all persons mentioned herein:

The problem attacked in this memorandum is that of carrying through effectively the legislation which has established the single Ph.D. degree for work in our group.

The particular aspect of that problem which is taken up below is the matter of securing competent advice and counsel (not compulsion) in the fields in which candidates present themselves for written examinations.

Will the person whose name in underscored in each group undertake (within the next week, if reasonably possible) the responsibility of calling a meeting of the members of his group with the idea of

(a) listing the resources (mainly courses) available in our own offerings
(b) listing the resources (mainly courses) available in other divisions of the University
(c) listing fruitful lines of practical endeavor or outside experience
(d) and in particular, developing any other fruitful lines of counsel and suggestion for candidates in the field.

And will each leader of these group discussions please put the outcome in writing and send it to the undersigned? It is possible that (d) above will yield results that will cause all of us to get together for further discussion.

FIELDS FOR THE SINGLE DEGREE

1. Economic Theory and Principles of Business Administration

(a) Viner, Douglas, Cox, Nerlove, Kyrk [in pencil: “Edie, Schultz, Knight”]
(b) McKinsey, Meech, Stone, Barnes

2. Statistics and Accounting: Theory and Application of Quantitative Method

(a) Cox, Schultz, Nerlove
(b) Rorem, McKinsey, Daines

3. Economic History and Historical Method

Wright, Sorrell, Viner, Palyi

4. The Financial System and Financial Administration

Mints, Cox, Meech, Palyi

5. Labor and Personnel Administration

Millis, Douglas, Stone

6. The Market and the Administration Marketing

Duddy, Palmer, Barnes, Dinsmore

7. Risk and its Administration

Nerlove, Cox, Millis, Mints

8. Transportation, Communication and Traffic Administration

Sorrell, Wright, Duddy, Douglas

9. Resources, Technology and the Administration of Production

Mitchell, Marshall, Schultz, Sorrell

10. Government Finance

Viner, Millis, Douglas, Stone

11. Social Direction and Control of Economic Activity

Spencer, Wright, Millis, Christ, Pomeroy

12. Population and the Standard of Living

Kyrk, Douglas, Viner

13. Field proposed by the candidate

L. C. Marshall

 

__________________________________

Memo #3. Advanced General Survey Courses by Field

November 30, 1926

Memorandum from L. C. Marshall to All Persons Mentioned Herein:

 

The problem attacked in this memorandum is that of carrying through effectively our arrangements with respect to our advanced general survey courses—courses that in the past we have sometimes referred to as “Introduction to the Graduate Study of X,” although we are not now following this terminology.

The following background facts will need to be kept in mind:

1. We are to have introductory point of view courses designed to give an organic view of the Economic Order. These courses are numbered 102, 103, 104.
2. Our next range of courses is designed primarily to deal with method. This range includes: 1. Economic History; 2. Statistics; 3. Accounting; 4. Intermediate Theory.
3. The foregoing seven courses are the only courses for which we assume responsibility as far as the ordinary [pencil: “Arts & Literature] undergraduate is concerned. It may well be that from time to time some member of the staff will be interested in giving for undergraduates a course on some live problem of the day, but this is an exceptional matter and not a matter of our standard arrangement.
4. Our best undergraduates may move on to the type of courses referred to above in the first paragraph, such as courses 330, 340, 335, 345, etc. In general the prerequisites for admission to these courses (as far as undergraduates are concerned) would be a certain number of majors in our work plus 27 majors with an average of B. Under the regulations which the Graduate Faculty has laid down, students who have less than 27 majors could not be admitted to these courses except with the consent of the group and Dean Laing.

It is highly essential that our work in these advanced survey courses such as 330, 340, 335, 345, etc. shall:

1. Really assume the method courses mentioned above: really be conducted at a level which assumes that the student possesses certain techniques
2. Really assume an adequate background of subject-matter content.

Will the person whose name is underscored in each group undertake (as promptly as reasonably may be) the responsibility of conducting conferences designed

1. To lead to explicit definite arrangements looking toward the actual utilization of the earlier method courses in these advanced survey courses.
2. To prepare a bibliography that can be mimeographed and placed in each student’s hands who enters one of these advanced survey courses. This bibliography is not to be a bibliography of the course (that is a separate matter) but a bibliography of what is assumed by way of preparation for the course. Whether a somewhat different bibliography should be made for the Economics course and the Business course in a given field is left for each group to discuss. Personally I hope that it will be a single bibliography for the two. Mr. Palyi suggests the desirability of a bibliographical article (worthy of pulication) for each field. This seems to me an admirable suggestion—one difficult to resist.

Will each leader of the group referred to below please put the outcome of your discussion in writing and send to the undersigned? It is to be hoped that you will find other matters to report upon in addition to the foregoing.

GROUPS

1. The Financial System and Financial Administration

Meech, Mints, Cox, Palyi

2. Labor and Personnel Administration

Douglas, Millis, Stone, Kornhauser

3. The Market and the Administration Marketing

Palmer, Duddy, Barnes, Dinsmore

4. Risk and its Administration

Nerlove, Cox, Millis, Mints

5. Transportation, Communication and Traffic Administration

Sorrell, Wright, Duddy, Douglas

6. Government Finance

Viner, Millis, Douglas, Stone

7. Population and the Standard of Living

Kyrk, Douglas, Viner

8. Resources, Technology and the Administration of Production

Mitchell, Daines, McKinsey

The following fields are not included in this memorandum either because of specific course prerequisites or because of obvious difficulties in the case:

1. Economic Theory and Principles of Administration
2. Statistics and Accounting
3. Economic History and Historical Method
4. Social Direction and Control of Economic Activity

__________________________________

Memo #4. Written Field Examinations

THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO
THE WORK IN ECONOMICS AND BUSINESS

Memorandum to:
Members of the Instructing Staff from L. C. Marshall, January 27, 1927

This communication is directed toward carrying one step farther the work of the various groups which are preparing for the effective administration of the single doctorate.

You will remember that in each functional field an analysis has been made of our resources. This looks in the direction of more competent advice to students concentrating in the various fields. You will also remember that in each functional field certain steps have been taken looking toward the more effective operation of the courses that in the past we have sometimes referred to as “Introduction to the Graduate Study of X.”

The primary purpose of this present memorandum is to suggest to each functional group that it now examine carefully the matter of the written examination in that field; giving attention to the character of the standards which should be insisted upon, the number and type and grouping of questions which should be asked, and any other significant issues. After each group has examined the issues and difficulties in its particular field it may prove necessary to have a general meeting of all groups to determine general policies in these matters. It seems unnecessary to hold a general meeting in advance of the special meeting since we can assume our existing standards and practices as at least a point of departure for the group discussions.

Will the person whose name is underscored undertake as promptly as reasonably may be the responsibility of conducting group conferences on this matter of written examinations for the doctorate.

1. Economic Theory and Principles of Administration (Here is the only really difficult problem in the whole matter. This field is to be required of all candidates and the outstanding problem is how to formulate an examination that will properly cover the case. Probably there will be little or no difficulty in the case of economic theory for students who are primarily interested in Business Administration for they would certainly have covered 301, 302, 309 and they would almost certainly have covered a theoretical course in some special field, e.g., Wages, in the field of Labor. The case is different in the matter of the Business Administration requirement for persons who are primarily interested in orthodox Economics, since Business Administration courses are confessedly not as well organized as courses in Economic Theory. The difficulty may, however, be exaggerated in our minds. Under our new groupings most candidates will automatically have come into contact with an administrative course in one or more functional fields. Probably a little practical wisdom in arranging requirements for a brief transition period will leave us with few problems in this matter after the transition is over.)
   Douglas, Viner, Millis, Cox, Nerlove, Spencer, McKinsey, Meech, Stone
2. Statistics and Accounting; theory and application of quantitative method. (Our general standard has been general knowledge of both fields and detailed knowledge of one in case this field of work is offered.)
   Daines, Wright, Cox, Schultz, Nerlove, Rorem, McKinsey
3. Economic History and Historical Method (Since no particular change is occurring in this field the leader of the group may be able to cover the case by informal conversations.)
   Wright, Sorrell, Viner, Palyi
4. The Financial System and Financial Administration.
   Cox, Mints, Meech, Palyi, Wright
5. Labor and Personnel Administration.
   Stone, Millis, Douglas, Kornhauser
6. The Market and Market Administration
   Barnes, Duddy, Palmer, Dinsmore
7. Risk and its Administration
   Nerlove, Cox, Millis, Mints (Since no particular change is occurring in this field the leader of the group may be able to cover the case by informal conversations.)
8. Transportation, Communication and Traffic Administration. (Since no particular change is occurring in this field the leader of the group may be able to cover the case by informal conversations.)
   Sorrell, Wright, Duddy, Douglas
9. Resources, Technology and Administration of Production. . (Since no particular change is occurring in this field the leader of the group may be able to cover the case by informal conversations.)
   Mitchell, Daines, Schultz, Sorrell
10. Government Finance. . (Since no particular change is occurring in this field the leader of the group may be able to cover the case by informal conversations.)
    Millis, Viner, Douglas, Stone
11. Social Direction and Control of Economic Activity. (Although no great change is taking place in this field, the problem is sufficiently difficult to justify a conference.)
    Pomeroy, Spencer, Wright, Millis, Christ
12. Population and the Standard of Living. (In Mr. Field’s absence let us omit discussion of the written examination.)

__________________________________

Memo #5. Please Respond to Memos #2-#4

May 25, 1927

Follow up Memorandum to persons mentioned herein from L. C. Marshall

On November 22, 1926, a memorandum was sent to certain groups of committees dealing with the problem of securing competent advice and counsel in the fields in which candidates present themselves for written examinations. The committees were asked to list the resources available in the University in each field; to list fruitful lines of practical endeavor or outside experience; and to indicate other fruitful lines of counsel and suggestion for candidates.

It was hoped that data would become available in time to make the circular for 1927-28 more attractive and in time to prepare mimeographed sheets for the use of students this year.

Below is a statement of the committees, with their chairmen. The asterisk indicates that the committee has reported. Will those who have not yet reported please do so as soon as possible.

Theory, Viner
Administration, McKinsey*
Statistics, Cox*
Accounting, Rorem*
Econ. Hist. etc. Wright
Finance etc. Mints
Labor etc. Millis*
Market etc. Duddy*
Risk etc. Nerlove*
Transportation etc. Sorrell
Resources etc. Mitchell*
Govt. Finance, Viner
Social Direction etc. Spencer*
Population etc. Kyrk

* * * * * *

On November 30, 1926, a memorandum was sent to certain groups of committees dealing with the problem of carrying through effectively our arrangements with respect to our advanced general survey courses. Each committee was asked to indicate what definite things can be done in the way of making certain that the preparatory method courses will eventually be utilized; what can be done in the way of mimeographed bibliography indicating what is assumed by way of preparation for each advance survey course; what other things can be done.

It was hope that the data would be available in time to enable us to take quite a long step forward in this matter in connection with the 1927-28 advanced survey courses.

Below is a statement of the committees with their chairmen. The asterisk indicates that the committee has reported. Will those who have not yet reported please do so as soon as possible.

Finance etc. Meech*
Labor etc. Douglas
Market etc. Palmer*
Risk etc. Nerlove*
Transportation etc. Sorrell
Govt. Finance, Viner
Population etc. Kyrk
Resources etc. Mitchell

* * * * * *

On Feb. 3, 1927 a memorandum [Probably the memorandum was that dated January 27, 1927] was sent to certain groups of committees dealing with the problem of the character of the written examination in each functional field.

It was hoped that we could start the year 1927-28 with a clearer view of what should be our positions with respect to these examinations.

Below is a statement of the committees with their chairmen. The asterisk indicates that the committee has reported. Will those who have not yet reported please do so as soon as possible?

Economic Theory and Principles of Business Administration, Douglas
Statistics and Accounting: Theory and Application of Quantitative Method, Daines
Economic History and Historical Method, Wright
The Financial System and Financial Administration, Cox
Labor and Personnel Administration, Stone
The Market and the Administration Marketing, Barns*
Risk and its Administration, Nerlove
Transportation, Communication and Traffic Administration, Sorrell
Resources, Technology and the Administration of Production, Mitchell
Government Finance, Millis
Social Direction and Control of Economic Activity, Pomeroy*

Source: The University of Chicago Archives. Department of Economics. Records. Box 22, Folder 6.