Category: M.I.T.

Categories
Exam Questions M.I.T.

M.I.T. Midterm and final exam questions for first half of international economics. Kindleberger, 1961-1967

 

The two term graduate sequence for international economics 14.581 and 14.582 provided the following course description in the M.I.T. catalogues, unchanged over the better part of the 1950’s and 1960’s:

The foreign exchange market, foreign trade and commercial policy, with emphasis on the relation of the items in the current account to national income, international finance and the achievement and maintenance of equibrium in the balance of payments as a whole; current problems of international economics.

For this post I have transcribed six sets of the 1960’s exams for the first course of the sequence taught by Charles Kindleberger. 

Kindleberger’s exams for both 14.581 and 14.582 for 1954-55 have been posted earlier, as have his exams for 1950-51.

_____________________________

Fall Term 1961-62

14.581 International Economics. Professor C. P. Kindleberger.  3 hours/week, 37 Students.

 

14.581
November 9, 1961
HOUR QUIZ

Answer two questions (equal weight).

  1. Discus some of the choices which balance-of-payments statisticians must make, and illustrate how the outcomes are governed by the purposes to be served on the one hand, and the nature of the raw material on the other.
  2. Indicate the contribution which the establishment of a forward market can make to hedging facilities for foreign traders
  3. Evaluate the Heckscher-Ohlin theorem as an explanation of comparative advantage.

 

14.581 – International Economics
FINAL EXAMINATION
C. P. Kindleberger
January 23, 1962

NO BOOKS ALLOWED.
Answer question 1 and any three of the following five.

  1. (one hour) Discuss the relevance to the theory of international trade taken in the widest sense of any three of the classical assumptions of:

a) full employment
b) mobility of resources within but not between countries
c) perfect competition
d) the labor theory of value
e) Say’s Law of markets

How is the theory modified, and the prescription of free trade altered, if the assumptions you deal with have to be revised?

Answer three questions (forty minutes each).

  1. Which side do you favor in the debate between the elasticities and absorption in the exchange -devaluation problem? Explain.
  2. To what extent, if at all, does international trade theory illuminate the tariff history of some country with which you are familiar? Give details.
  3. How do tariffs affect the distribution of income within and between countries? Illustrate, with reference to the relevant theorems.
  4. Under what circumstances, if ever, are two of the following three weapons of commercial policy justified: a) tariffs; b) quota restrictions; c) foreign exchange control? Compare the measures you treat with alternative means of achieving the same goals, and include in your justification, if you find one, reasons for why the means indicated are superior to the alternatives.
  5. How is the theory of international trade, and of commercial policy, altered by moving from two to a greater number of countries?

_____________________________

Fall Term 1962-63

14.581 International Economics. Professor C. P. Kindleberger. 3 Hours/week, 46 Students.

Quiz
14.581
November 6, 1962

Answer both questions. (25 minutes each)

  1. How does the United States Department of Commerce define a “deficit” in the balance of payments? Comment on the adequacy of this definition.
  2. Evaluate the success of the Heckscher-Ohlin theory in explaining the basis of international trade.

 

 

Tuesday, January 22, 1963
Time 1:30 – 4:30 P.M.

MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
Scheduled Examination in
INTERNATIONAL ECONOMICS 14.581

NOTE: Students are not permitted to use any books, notebooks, or papers in this examination. If brought into the room, they must not be left on the desks

Answer any five questions (36 minutes each).

  1. What difference does the establishment of a forward-exchange market make to the conduct of international trade and exchange?
  2. The underlying theory of international trade is sometimes called a theory of “comparative costs” and sometimes one of “comparative advantage.” Is there any real distinction between these views? Explain in detail.
  3. Explain how trade and restrictions of trade alter the distribution of income within and between countries.
  4. If you were called upon to judge the Alexander-Machlup debate over the adjustment mechanism under changing exchange rates, which side would you favor and why?
  5. What is the “foreign repercussion” in the adjustment mechanism? How does it operate? Evaluate its significance.
  6. What difference does it make, when a country restricts its international trade by a given amount, whether it uses tariffs or quotas?
  7. Do customs unions enlarge welfare?

_____________________________

Fall Term 1963-64

14.581 International Economics. Professor C. P. Kindleberger. 3 Class Hours/Week, 19 Students.

[Note:  one additional section  of 14.581 was taught by L. Lefeber with 22 students]

14.581
One-hour Test
November 14, 1963

Answer both questions, which have equal weight.

  1. What is meant by a deficit in the balance of payments?
  2. Expound the law of comparative advantage in modern economic terms.

 

Tuesday, January 28, 1964
Time: 1.30 – 4.30 P.M.

MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
Scheduled Examination in
INTERNATIONAL ECONOMICS – 14.581

NOTE: Students are not permitted to use any books, notebooks or papers in this examination. If brought into the room they must not be left on the desks.

Answer six (6) questions (one-half hour each).

  1. In balance-of-payments accounting, practice differs or is disputed in connection with the following items, among others. What are the various ways in which a country may treat five of them, and what is the justification for each possible treatment?

i) immigrants’ remittances
ii) payments to own nationals for carriage of imports
iii) foreign aid
iii) reinvested profits of foreign-owned enterprises
iv) new gold production sold abroad
v) short-term U.S. claims of commercial banks on foreigners
vi) prepayments of U. S. government loans to foreign governments,

  1. Provide a geometric demonstration of the effect on the terms of trade of technological change in the export good which economizes the scarce factor. State all necessary assumptions explicitly, making them as neutral as possible.
  2. Does the shift of the analysis of the theory of international trade from two to many countries change the theory? In what respects and to what extent?
  3. Explain how currency devaluation under full employment affects the balance of payments, and the terms of trade
  4. Meade states that the adjustment mechanism in international trade is virtually the same under the gold standard and under flexible exchange rates. How does he justify this assertion? Do you agree or disagree? Explain.
  5. The marginal propensity to spend on home goods out of national income in Country A is 2/3rds, and to spend on imports, 1/6. Country B has similar propensities of 1/2 and 1/4. Country A undertakes new expenditure of 100 divided normally between home and abroad. What amount does B have to change its expenditures to preserve internal balance? What happens to A’s balance of payments?
  6. The Reciprocal Trade Agreement Acts of 1934 and thereafter, and the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 called for reciprocal reductions of trade barriers. Under what circumstances and to what extent is it useful for a single country to reduce its tariffs by itself without matching tariff reductions abroad?
  7. Set out at length and in detail the conditions under which customs unions increase world welfare.

_____________________________

Fall Term 1964-65

14.581 International Economics. Professor C. P. Kindleberger. 3 Class Hours/Week, 29 Students.

HOUR TEST
14.581
November 12, 1964

  1. Define accurately “lags and leads” in the balance of payments, and discuss their significance.
  2. What assumption does the Heckscher-Ohlin theorem make about factor inputs of commodities, and what is the significance of this assumption.

 

Tuesday, January 26, 1965
Time: 9:00 – 12:00 A.M.

MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
Scheduled Examination in
INTERNATIONAL ECONOMICS – 14.581

Answer one question from each of Groups I to IV, and the single question in Group V.

Group I

  1. Expound the theory of comparative advantage as simply and clearly as you can.
  2. Does it make a significant difference to the theory of international trade to move from an analysis of two to more than two countries? Explain.
  3. What are the gains from trade? How are they distributed? How does the gain of a single country change in response to a change in supply abroad? demand at home?

Group II

  1. Is the purchasing-power-parity doctrine best described as a) a truism; b) a fallacy; c) a useful operational hypothesis? Explain.
  2. Discuss the similarities and differences between the gold standard and the flexible exchange system.

Group III

  1. Is free trade the best policy?
  2. Analyze the slogan “There is nothing that a tariff can do that a subsidy cannot do better”.
  3. Argue for or against international commodity agreements.

Group IV

  1. Does a flexible exchange rate make it possible to pursue an independent monetary and fiscal policy internally? Explain.
  2. What happens to the terms of trade when exchange rates alter?

Group V

  1. What is the effect on its balance of payments of an increase in foreign demand for a country’s exports.

_____________________________

Fall Term 1965-66

14.581 International Economics. Professor C. P. Kindleberger. 3 Class Hours/Week, 46 Students.

 

[Note:  No hour midterm exam questions found for the fall term 1965-66.]

Monday, January 24, 1966
Time: 1:30-4:30 p.m.

MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
Scheduled Examination in
INTERNATIONAL ECONOMICS – 14.581

NOTE: Students are not permitted to use any books, notebooks or papers in this examination. If brought into the room they must not be left on the desks

Answer Question 1 and 3 others–all of equal weight. 45 minutes each.

  1. Discuss the significance for the pure theory of international trade of two of the following assumptions:

1) two countries, two commodities, two factors
2) identical linear homogeneous production functions of the first degree
3) the labor theory of value
4) perfect competition in goods and factor markets
5) no transport costs.

  1. What are the effects of a tariff on the distribution of income between countries and within them?
  2. Comment at length on the Meade view that financial policies can be used to achieve internal balance, and exchange-rate variation to achieve external balance.
  3. Write an essay on the “gains from trade,” including, inter alia, a discussion on what countries gain, how much, and under what circumstances.
  4. Argue for or against discrimination in international trade, including, as one case, the customs union.

_____________________________

Fall Term 1966-67

14.581 International Economics. Professor C. P. Kindleberger with P. Bardhan, 3 Class Hours/Week, 39 Students.

Hour Test
14.581
December 1, 1966
10:30 a.m.

Answer one question under each of A and B (two in all, half hour each). Use a separate book for each question. Mark with your name and letter and number of the question.

  1. Describe in detail how a central bank can use forward exchange operations a) to protect its foreign exchange reserves in the event of capital outflow; and b) to gain reserves. What are the benefits of such forward operations? their limits?
  2. For 1964, 1965, and 1966 first nine months at an annual rate, the United States balance of payments showed the following data:
1964 1965 1966*
(in billions of dollars)
Gold sales -0.1 -1.7 -0.6
Liquidity balance -2.8 -1.3 -1.2
Official Reserve Transactions Balance -1.5 -1.3 +0.8

*First nine months of 1966 at an annual rate, seasonally adjusted except for gold sales.

Did the balance of payments improve or worsen each year? If one cannot say, what more would one need to be able to do so? Explain fully.

B

  1. Suppose you have a model with two countries, three goods, three factors, and internationally identical fixed-coefficients production functions for each good. What are the sufficient conditions for factor-price equalization in this model?
  2. In the usual two-by-two trade model if all of wage income is spent on one good and all of rental income from capital is spent on the other good, find out the conditions for uniqueness of static equilibrium in such a model.
  3. Take a small country in a large world with given terms of trade. Suppose in this country capital grows at a higher rate than labour and there is Hicks-neutral technical progress at a uniform rate in all the industries. What will happen to the wage rate and the rental rate on capital?

 

14.581T
24 January 1967
FINAL EXAMINATION

Answer question 1 or question 2 (one hour) and three others (forty minutes each)

  1. Compared to a pre-trade situation how will free trade affect income distribution in the trading countries in terms of the Heckscher-Ohlin model, comment on the assumptions of this model.
  2. What do you think are the most important limitations of the existing theory of international trade? Give suggestions, in as much detail as possible, about how you would go about removing one or two of them.
  3. Defend or refute the view of those who claim that free trade hinders rather than stimulates economic growth.
  4. What difference does it make to the impact of a tariff in general equilibrium what happens to the proceeds of the tariff?
  5. Comment at length on the usefulness of the purchasing-power parity theory.
  6. Suppose you have a country large enough to affect world prices. In that context comment on Samuelson’s proposition that “some trade is better than no trade.”
  7. In a standard two-sector two-factor neoclassical trade model with constant proportions of income being spent on each good, show how patterns of specialization will change with factor accumulation.
  8. Protectionists argue out — occasionally successfully — a case for government intervention, but a case for government intervention is not necessarily a case for tariffs. Illustrate with reference to the case of external economies in production.

Source:  M.I.T. Institute Archives. Charles Kindleberger Papers, 1934-1999. Box 22, Folder “Examinations 14.581, 1949-1966”.

Image Source: Charles P. Kindleberger from the MIT Museum.

Categories
Carnegie Institute of Technology Chicago Economist Market Economists Harvard M.I.T.

Chicago. Three casual letters from Cambridge, Mass. regarding young talent, 1957-59

 

In the three letters to Theodore W. Schultz transcribed for this post we witness the old-boy network at work in Chicago’s search for young talent.  Mason and Harris from Harvard share the enormous respect that Harvard Junior Fellow Frank Fisher had won from the senior professors there.  Evsey Domar hedges somewhat in his assessment of Robert L. Slighton but more or less places him in a spectrum running between Marc Nerlove and Martin Bailey closer to the latter. Other now familiar (and less familiar) names are tossed in for good measure.

____________________________

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
GRADUATE SCHOOL OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION

Office of the Dean

Littauer Center
Cambridge 38, Massachusetts

December 27, 1957

Professor Theodore Schultz
Department of Economics
University of Chicago
Chicago, Illinois

Dear Ted:

In addition to [John] Meyer, [James] Henderson and [Otto] Eckstein, I would also name Franklin Fisher and Daniel Ellsberg as among our really promising young men. Fisher and Ellsberg are, at present, both junior fellows. Fisher is something of a wunderkind, having graduated summa cum laude from Harvard at the age of 18. He published a mathematical article on Welfare Economics when he was a senior, and those who can understand it say it’s good. He is only 20 now, and, of course, it is difficult to say how he is going to turn out. He may be another Paul Samuelson, and on the other hand he may not. Ellsberg is another one of our summas and a very good man, indeed. I don’t think he measures up to John Meyer, but is probably in the Henderson and Eckstein category. Since I promised you six names, I will add that of [???] Miller who came to us this year from California. I have really seen nothing of him, and consequently, can no give you a first-hand judgement. My colleagues, however, think he is very good.

With best wishes, I am

Sincerely yours,
[signed] Ed
Edward S. Mason
Dean

ESM:rrl

____________________________

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS

Office of the Chairman

M-8 Littauer Center
Cambridge 38, Massachusetts

January 5, 1959

Professor Theodore Schultz
Department of Economics
University of Chicago
Chicago 37, Illinois

Dear Ted:

It was good to see you even though it was for a very short period. As you know, we include on our list of available men only those who have requested to be put on the list or who have given us their permission to have their name included in the list. It represents men who are either already Ph.D.’s or will receive their Ph.D. within the year, and who are actually available for the coming year.

[Daniel] Ellsberg will be getting his Ph.D. this year, but he is going to Rand at a salary of about $10,000. [Franklin] Fisher will not have his Ph.D. until June 1960. He is just out of college three years and has been offered an assistant professorship at Carnegie Tech. We have now promised him a similar appointment, and in fact he said he would prefer to be at Harvard.

Among other young men of talent who are now here but are not on our permanent roster are the following: Leon Moses who teaches half time in the department and does research with the [Wassily] Leontief project half time. There is a good chance that Moses will go to Pittsburgh, particularly in order to work on the metropolitan project with [Edgar M.] Hoover. Moses is an excellent man in every way and certainly of permanent quality: the same holds for Alfred Conrad who is in somewhat the same position as Moses. Incidentally, both of them have a leave for next year: There is also André Daniere who will be an assistant professor next year and who works primarily with Leontief. Daniere is another good man, though probably not quite as good as the others.

Then there are Otto Eckstein, James Henderson, Jaroslav Vanek and Louis Lefeber. They are all excellent men and in the running for a permanent appointment. Actually, during the next few years we will have but one or two openings and obviously we cannot keep all these men. There is little to choose among them and we will have a tough time making a decision. Please keep this in the highest confidence.

With kind regard, I am,

Sincerely yours,
[signed] Sey
Seymour E. Harris
Chairman

SHE/jw

____________________________

MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
Department of Economics and Social Science

Cambridge 39, Massachusetts

January 14, 1959

Professor Theodore W. Schultz
Department of Economics
University of Chicago
Chicago 37, Illinois

Dear Ted:

Your letter of January 6, regarding [Robert L.] Slighton is not quite easy to answer. I do not know [Daniel] Elsberg [sic] or [Franklin] Fisher well enough to make comparisons, but I will try to compare Slighton with [Martin J.] Bailey and [Marc] Nerlove. From the point of view of statistical and mathematical ability, Nerlove stands in a class all by himself, and I do not think that Slighton’s comparative advantage is in those fields. As far as Bailey is concerned, he may have flashes of ideas at times superior to Slighton’s. On the other hand, I would credit Slighton with greater solidity, more common sense and better judgment. As far as long-run contributions are concerned, I don’t know on whom of the two I would bet at the moment, but Slighton would be a serious contender in any such betting.

Lloyd [Metzler]’s session went quite well. He was greeted by the audience most warmly and was pleased about the whole works very much. I am very happy that that meeting was arranged and that I could participate in it.

Please let me know if you need any additional information.

Sincerely yours,
[signed] Evsey D
Evsey D. Domar

EDD:jr

Source:  University of Chicago Archives. Department of Economics, Records. Box 42, Folder 9.

Categories
Exam Questions Harvard M.I.T. Suggested Reading Syllabus

Harvard. Basic graduate microeconomic theory. Chamberlin and Samuelson, 1956-1957

 

For some reason, Paul Samuelson was asked to help out with the teaching of Edward H. Chamberlin’s graduate theory course during the 1956-57 academic year. In Paul Samuelson’s papers at Duke I was able to find a letter from the Harvard economics chair, Seymour Harris, confirming his appointment as “Visiting Professor” for co-teaching Economics 201. The actual “allocation of subject matter” between Chamberlin and Samuelson is not clear from Samuelson’s papers, nor from the course outlines. Since the second semester reading list only has Chamberlin’s name on it, it seems likely that Samuelson’s participation was limited to the first semester of the course. Because Robert Bishop’s manuscript on Economic Theory (taught to generations of M.I.T. graduate students) was included in the first section of the fall semester reading list and we find questions for a one hour mid-term exam in Samuelson’s folder for the course, I am led to conjecture that Samuelson taught most or all of the first half of the fall semester of the course. As we can see from the internal M.I.T. department teaching records included below, Paul Samuelson continued teaching his courses at “Tech” that year.

Perhaps a future trip to Duke University’s David M. Rubenstein Rare Book Manuscript Library  to consult the Edward H. Chamberlin papers that were donated in 2019 will help to establish why Samuelson was needed at Harvard that year.

_________________________

Letter from Chairman Seymour Harris to Paul Samuelson
May 25, 1956

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS

Office of the Chairman

M-8 Littauer Center
Cambridge 38, Massachusetts

May 25, 1956

Professor Paul A. Samuelson
Department of Economics and Social Science
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Cambridge 39, Massachusetts

Dear Paul:

Economics 201 meets Tuesday, Thursday, and at the pleasure of the instructor Saturday at 10. It would be hard to change that hour because of the arrangement of other courses, and also because we must have the same hour for the second semester.

I hope that you would get together with Ed and discuss the allocation of subject matter. You can have [Richard] Gill as an assistant, and he would, I am sure, be willing to meet the class once a week when you think it necessary. You will find him a most adequate assistant.

I may add that the Dean has agreed to recommend your appointment as a Visiting Professor, which is an unusual appointment, for most appointments of this kind, inclusive of Tech, are Visiting Lecturers. This suggests the high regard in which we hold you.

Sincerely yours,

[signed] Sey
Seymour E. Harris
Chairman

SEH/c
cc: Professor Chamberlin

P.S. I hope you will remember to bring my article on Saturday and any comments.

 

Source: Duke University. David M. Rubenstein Rare Book and Manuscript Library. Economists’ Papers Archive. Papers of Paul Samuelson, Box 33, Folder “Ec201 Harvard Course, 1955-1956 [sic]”.

_________________________

From the M.I.T. economics department records for 1955-56

Paul Samuelson was teaching full time 1956-57. He taught Economics and Industrial Management (14.117) and Mathematical Approach to Economics (14.151) in the fall semester and Economic Analysis (14.122) and Economics Seminar (14.192) in the Spring semester.

Source:  M.I.T. Archives. M.I.T. Department of Economics Records, 1947—. Box 3, Folder “Teaching Responsibility”.

_________________________

Enrollment figures from Harvard President’s Report

[Economics] 201. Economic Theory. Professor Chamberlin and Professor Samuelson (Massachusetts Institute of Technology). Full course.

(F) Total 38: 26 Graduates, 2 Seniors, 1 Junior, 4 Radcliffe, 5 Others.
(S) Total 39: 27 Graduates, 2 Seniors, 1 Junior, 3 Radcliffe, 6 Others.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College, 1956-1957, p. 70.

_________________________

Economics 201
Economic Theory
Fall 1956
READING LIST

I. Supply, Demand, Revenue and Cost

Marshall, Principles (4th edition or later), Book III, Ch. 3, 4, 6

Mill, Principles, Book III, Ch. 1-6

Chamberlin, Theory of Monopolistic Competition, Ch. 2

Schultz, H., Theory and Measurement of Demand, pp. 5-12

Bishop, Economic Theory Ms., Book II, Ch. 1, 2, 3

Viner, Cost Curves and Supply Curves (1930), AFA or Clemence Readings

Robinson, Economics of Imperfect Competition, Ch. 2

Suggested:

Ricardo, Political Economy (Gonner Edition or Sraffa Edition), Chapter I

Mills’ Autobiography or the Introduction to the Ashley edition of the Principles

Jevons, Theory of Political Economy, Chapters 3, 4

Keynes, “Alfred Marshall,” Economic Journal, September 1924 (Also in Keynes, Essays in Biography)

II. Production and Consumption Analysis

A. Production and Cost

Chamberlin, Theory of Monopolistic Competition, Ch. 8, Appendix B

Knight, Risk, Uncertainty and Profit, pp. 94-109.

Stigler, Production and Distribution Theories, Introduction

Stigler, Theory of Price, Chs. 7, 8

Suggested:

Douglas, P. Theory of Wages

Hicks, Value and Capital, Chs. 6, 7

Carlson, Sune, Theory of Production

Cassels, J. H, “On the Law of Variable Proportions,” in Explorations in Economics, essays in honor of Taussig

Schneider, E., Pricing and Equilibrium

B. Utility and Consumption Theory

Hicks, Value and Capital, Chs. 1, 2, 3

Stigler, Theory of Price, Chs. 5, 6

III. Welfare Economics

Boulding, K., “Welfare Economics,” Survey of Contemporary Economics, Vol. II

Hicks, J.R., “Foundations of Welfare Economics,” Economic Journal, 1939

Pigou, A.C., Economics of Welfare, Preface, Part I., Chs. 3, 7, 8; Part II, Introductory, Ch. 9

Lerner, A. P., Economics of Control, Chs. 3, 5, 6, 7, 9

Source: Harvard University Archives, Syllabi, course outlines and reading lists in Economics, 1895-2003”, Box 6, Folder “Economics, 1956-1957 (2 of 2)”.

_________________________

Economics 201
Hour Exam
November 3, 1956

  1. Define “external” and “internal” economies. What do we mean when we say these economies are (a) “pecuniary,” (b) technological”? (10 min.)
  2. What are the conditions of stable equilibrium of supply and demand as analyzed by (a) Walras and (b) Marshall? Explain the “apparent contradiction” between the Walrasian and Marshallian stability conditions. (20 min.)
  3. In the “Ricardian increasing cost” case, as described by Viner, what would be the effect on price, output, and rent to the fixed factor, of a tax of “x” cents per unit of output? Illustrate graphically. (20 min.)

Source: Duke University. David M. Rubenstein Rare Book and Manuscript Library. Economists’ Papers Archive. Papers of Paul Samuelson, Box 33, Folder “Ec201 Harvard Course, 1955-1956 [sic]”.

_________________________

1956-57
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
Economics 201
Midyear examination. January, 1957.

Answer the first two (2) questions and any three (3) of the others. Be sure to allocate your time approximately as indicated.

  1. (Forty-five minutes). Assume two individuals (who act as pure competitors) and two commodities. Given the “production-possibility” or “transformation” curve for each individual and also his indifference map, indicate graphically: a) the equilibrium price; b) the equilibrium quantities of each good produced by each individual; and c) the quantity of each good exchanged.
  2. (Forty-five minutes). Discuss the scope and limitations of “Welfare Economics.” Illustrate your discussion with reference to one or two specific theoretical problems (e.g., the box-diagram).
  3. (One-half hour). A production function relates product (Q) to two factors, labor (L) and capital (C). Distinguish the “three stages” for each factor, and give an interrelations among them in a) the case of constant returns to scale (homogeneous production function) and b) the general case.
  4. (One-half hour). Distinguish “internal” and “external” economies and analyze the possibility of equilibrium under pure competition in each case.
  5. (One-half hour). A monopolistic firm can buy labor and land at fixed prices but sells its output in an impurely-competitive market. Now let it be subject to a tax of $X per unit of its output. On the oversimplified assumption that the tax leaves its factor prices, the consumer demand for its product, and its production function unchanged, compare the new equilibrium of output, price, and factor hirings with the old.
  6. (One-half hour). Define the “income” effect and “substitution” effect of a price change. Indicate, in terms of these effects, the likelihood of a) a backward-bending supply curve, and b) a positively-sloping demand curve.

Source: Harvard University Archives. Harvard University Final Examinations, 1853-2001. Box 25. Papers Printed for Final Examinations [in] History, History of Religions, …, Economics, …, Naval Science, Air Science. January, 1957.

_________________________

A twitter prayer.

_________________________

Economics 201
Spring Term, 1956-57
Economic Theory—Professor Chamberlin

I. Monopoly and Monopolistic Competition

Chamberlin, Monopolistic Competition, Chapters 1, 4,5, 9.

_________, “Monopolistic Competition Revisited,” Economica, November 1951.

Robinson, J., Imperfect Competition, Foreword, Introduction, Chapter 1.

Monopolistic Competition, Chapter 3, Appendix A.

Triffin, Monopolistic Competition and General Equilibrium T-heory, pp. 78-108.

Hall and Hitch, “Price Theory and Business Behavior,” Oxford Economic Papers, No. 2 (1939). (Also in Oxford Studies in the Price Mechanism, T. Wilson, Editor).

Chamberlin, “‘Full Cost’ and Monopolistic Competition,” Economic Journal, May 1952.

_________, “The Product as an Economic Variable,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, February 1953.

Monopolistic Competition, Appendix C, Chapters 6, 7.

Chamberlin, “Product Heterogeneity and Public Policy,” American Economic Review, May 1950.

Suggested:

Robinson, J., Imperfect Competition, Chapters 3-7.

Fellner, Competition Among the Few, Chapters 1-7.

Holton, Richard H., “Marketing Structure and Economic Development,” Q.J.E., August 1953.

Alsberg, C. L., “The Economic Aspects of Adulteration and Imitation,” Q.J.E., 46:1 (1931)

Brems, “The Interdependence of Quality Variations, Selling Effort, and Price,” Q.J.E., May 1948.

II. Income Distribution—General; Wages.

Readings in the Theory of Income Distribution, 3.

Marshall, Principles, Book VI, Chapters 1-2.

Hicks, Theory of Wages, Chapters 1-4.

Readings, 12.

Monopolistic Competition, Review Chapter 8 and pp. 215-18, 249-52, (5th or later edition).

Hicks, Chapters 5, 6.

Marshall, Book VI, Chapters 3-5.

Taussig, Principles, 4th edition, Chapter 52 (or 3rd revised edition, Chapter 47).

E.H.C., “The Monopoly Power of Labor,” in The Impact of the Union.

Readings, 19.

Hicks, pp. 170-185.

Suggested:

1. Douglas, Theory of Wages, Chapter 2.

2. J.B. Clark, Distribution of Wealth, Chapters 7, 8, 12, 13.

III. Interest

Böhm-Bawerk, Positive Theory, Book I, Chapter 2; Book II; Book V.

Marshall, Principles, Book IV, Chapter 7; Book VI, Chapter 6.

Wicksell, Lectures, Vol. I, pp. 144-171, 185-195, 207-218.

Clark, J.B., Distribution of Wealth, Chapters 9, 20.

Suggested:

Fisher, I., Theory of Interest, Chapters 5, 6.

Readings, Chapters 20, 21.

IV. Rent

Ricardo, Chapter 2.

Marshall, Book V, Chapters 8-11.

Robinson, Imperfect Competition, Chapter 8.

V. Profits

Marshall, Book VI, Chapter 5, Section 7; Chapters 7,8.

Taussig, Principles  (4th edition), Vol. II, Chapter 49, Section 1 (3rd revised edition, Chapter 50, Section 1)

Veblen, Theory of Business Enterprise, Chapter 3.

Henderson, Supply and Demand Chapter 7.

Bernstein, P., “Profit Theory—Where Do We Go From Here?” Q.J.E., August 1953

Monopolistic Competition, Chapter 5, Section 6; Chapter 7, Section 6; Appendices D, E.

Schumpeter, Theory of Economic Development, Chapters 1-4.

Suggested:

1. Readings, 27, 29.

Source: Harvard University Archives, Syllabi, course outlines and reading lists in Economics, 1895-2003”, Box 6, Folder “Economics, 1956-1957 (2 of 2)”.

_________________________

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
Department of Economics
Economics 201
Final Examination
May, 1957

A. Choose two of the following questions, allowing one-half hour for each.

  1. Write a brief article on the subject of “oligopoly” designed for an encyclopedia of the social sciences, and therefore to be consulted and used mainly by non-specialists in the subject. (Consider well your objective before you begin.)
  2. Discuss excess capacity in the economy, its meaning and its compatibility with “equilibrium.” What are the chief forces tending (a) to bring about, and (b) to eliminate, excess capacity?
  3. (a) Discuss the issues involved in distinguishing between production costs and selling costs, and defend your own conclusions. (b) Are selling outlays, like production outlays, subject to the law of diminishing returns? Discuss, and illustrate your conclusion graphically.

B. Choose four of the following questions, allowing one-half hour for each.

  1. “It is inappropriate to say that the marginal productivity of a certain type of labor determines its wage; wages, like the prices of all economic goods, are determined by both supply and demand.” Discuss with particular reference to the role of supply factors in an adequate theory of wages.
  2. Develop the role which you would give to either (a) monopoly, or (b) rent, in your own theory of wages.
  3. “Waiting is certainly not an element of the economic process in a static state, because the circular flow, once established, leaves no gaps between outlay or productive effort and the satisfaction of wants. Both are, following Professor Clark’s conclusive expression, automatically synchronized.” Discuss the several aspects of this quotation.
  4. Outline your own theory of land rent, with some critical discussion of writers with whom you are familiar. (Restrict your discussion to the problem of land income, without extending the analysis to other factors.)
  5. Write on risk as an element in the theory of profits, choosing such subdivisions or aspects of the problem as seem to you most significant. In what respects, if at all, would you regard a risk theory of profits as inadequate?

Source: Harvard University Archives. Harvard University Final Examinations, 1853-2001. Papers Printed for Final Examinations [in] History, History of Religions, …, Economics, …, Naval Science, Air Science. June, 1957. In bound volume Final Exams—Social Sciences—June 1957 (HUL 7000.28, 113 of 284).

Image Sources:

John Simon Guggenheim Memorial Foundation, Edward H. Chamberlin, Fellow 1958.

M.I.T., Paul Samuelson Memorial Information Page/Photos from Memorial Service.  Accessed via the Internet Archive Wayback Machine.

 

Categories
M.I.T. Syllabus Undergraduate

M.I.T. Course outline and readings for undergraduate applied microeconomics. McFadden, 1978

I don’t remember how this particular course outline came into my possession during my graduate student days. I presume my sticky fingers together with an early manifestation of a propensity to hoard papers resulted in these four-pages finding their way into my files of teaching material. Now decades later, this applied microeconomics outline from Daniel McFadden’s first semester on the M.I.T. faculty is digitised. Only wish I had the eight problem sets too…

_________________________

14.03
APPLIED MICROECONOMICS

Daniel McFadden
Fall 1978

MWF 11-12
16-134

General Information:

14.03 is organized around a set of applied microeconomic problems. It is not a course in economic theory, but theoretical topics will be treated as they arise in the applications. Students are expected to know basic microeconomics as taught in 14.01 or another course at the level of R. Leftwich’s The Price System and Resource Allocation. Students are also expected to be able to use calculus with ease. The textbook for 14.03 is Microeconomic Theory: Basic Principles and Extensions, 2nd ed., by Walter Nicholson (Dryden Press, 1978). Various other readings will be assigned.

Problem sets will be handed out on Wednesday and will be due the following Wednesday in class. They will be graded and returned on Friday. Generally, Monday and Wednesday will be devoted to lectures, and Friday to discussion and review, including discussion of the answers to the problems. Every student is expected to complete every problem set within the allocated time. There will be three quizzes in class. Problem sets will account for 40% of the course grade, the quizzes for 30%, and the final for 30%.

I will be available in E52-274B on Wednesday afternoons, and by appointment at other times; my phone is 253-3378. Generally, you should take questions about problem sets and grading to the teaching assistant (his name will be announced later) and questions about the lectures to me.

The problems to be covered are:

    1. the demand for energy,
    2. the demand for air conditioners,
    3. the supply of electricity,
    4. the market for natural gas,
    5. the market for automobiles,
    6. pricing of tugboat services and the anti-trust law,
    7. costs and risks of nuclear and non-nuclear energy development,
    8. public investment in transportation.

The schedule of quizzes is:

Quiz 1—October 11, covering problems 1 & 2.

Quiz 2—November 1, covering problems 3 & 4 plus preceding material.

Quiz 3—November 29, covering problems 5, 6, 7 plus preceding material.

 

READINGS AND SCHEDULE

  1. The demand for energy.

Lectures: Sept. 13, 15, 18, 20.

Discussion: Sept. 22, 29.

Problem Set 1: out Sept. 20; due Sept. 27.

Read: Nicholson 3, 4, 5 (skim 6).

L. Taylor, “The demand for electricity: A survey,” BELL JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS 6 (Spring 1975), 74-110.

D. McFadden et al., “Determinants of the long-run demand for electricity,” PROCEEDINGS OF THE AMERICAN STATISTICAL ASSOCIATION,

A TIME TO CHOOSE, Energy Policy Project of the Ford Foundation (Ballinger, 1974), Chap. 5 and Appendices A, B.

  1. The demand for air conditioners.

Lectures: Sept. 25, 27.

Discussion: Oct. 6.

Problem Set 2: out Sept. 27; due Oct. 4

Read:

J. Hausman, “Consumer choice of durables and energy demand,” MIT, mimeo., 1978.

A. Goett, “Appliance fuel choice: An application of discrete multivariate analysis,” manuscript, 1978.

  1. The supply of electricity.

Lectures: Oct. 2, 4, 13, 16.

Discussion: Oct. 20.

Problem Set 3: out Oct. 11; due Oct. 18.

Read: Nicholson 7, 8, 9.

D. Pearl and J. Enos, “Engineering production functions and technological progress,” JOURNAL OF INDUSTRIAL ECONOICS 24 (1), (Sept. 1975), 55-72.

L. Wipf and D. Bowden, “Reliability of supply equations derived from production functions,” AMERICAN JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS 51 (February 1969), 170-78.

M. Nerlove, “Returns to scale in electricity supply,” in MEASUREMENT IN ECONOMICS, C. Christ (ed.), (Stanford Univ. Press, 1963), pp. 167-98.

T. Cowling, “Technical change and scale economies in an engineering production function: The case of steam electric power,” JOURNAL OF INDUSTRIAL ECONOMICS 23 (1974-75), 135-52.

  1. The market for natural gas.

Lectures: Oct. 18, 23, 25.

Discussion: Oct. 27.

Problem Set 4: out Oct. 18; due Oct. 25.

Read: Nicholson, Part IV, Chap. 10, 11, 12, 13 (skim 14, 15, 16).

P. MacAvoy and R. Pindyck, “Alternative regulatory policies for dealing with the natural gas shortage,” BELL JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS 4 (Autumn 1973), 454-98.

R. Hall and R. Pindyck, “The conflicting goals of national energy policy,” PUBLIC INTEREST 47 (Spring 1977), 3-15.

  1. The market for automobiles.

Lectures: Oct. 30, Nov. 3.

Discussion: Nov. 10.

Problem Set 5: out Nov. 1; due Nov. 8.

Read: Nicholson 17.

G. Akerlof, “The market for ‘lemons’: Qualitative uncertainty and the market mechanism,” QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS 84 (1970), 488-500.

Z. Griliches, PRICE INDICES AND QUALITY CHANGE (Harvard, 1971), Introduction and Chap. 3.

R. P. Smith, CONSUMER DEMAND FOR CARS IN THE USA (Cambridge, 1975), pp. 1-88.

  1. Pricing of tugboat services and the anti-trust law.

Lectures: Nov. 6, 8.

Discussion: Nov. 17.

Problem Set 6: out Nov. 8; due Nov. 15.

Read: Nicholson 18, 19, 20.

P. Areeda and D. Turner, “Predatory pricing and related practices…,” HARVARD LAW REVIEW 88 (1975), 697-733.

F. Scherer et al., “Predatory pricing and the Sherman Act, “ HARVARD LAW REVIEW 89 (1976), 868-902.

D. McFadden and R. Palmer, “The economic foundation for liability and damages from predatory pricing,” manuscript, 1978.

S. Goldman, “Industrial concentration and economic welfare: Some theoretical observations,” Working Paper IP-251 in Economic Theory and Econometrics, Berkeley, October 1977.

  1. Benefits and risks of nuclear and non-nuclear energy development.

Lectures: Nov. 15, 20, 22.

Discussion: Nov. 27.

Problem Set 7: out Nov. 15; due Nov. 22.

Read: Nicholson 6, 18, 19, 20.

S. Rosen and Thaylor, reference to be supplied.

A. Tversky, SCIENCE 185 (Sept. 27, 1974), 1124-31.

Joel Yellen, “The nuclear regulatory commission’s reactor safety study,” BELL JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS 7 (1) (Spring 1976), 317-39.

  1. Public investment in transportation.

Lectures: Dec. 1, 4, 6, 11.

Discussion: Dec. 8.

Problem Set 8: out Nov. 29; due Dec. 6.

Read: Nicholson 21, 22, 23.

D. McFadden, “Revealed preferences of a government bureaucracy: Theory,” BELL JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS 6 (Autumn 1975), 401-16.

D. McFadden, “Criteria for public investment,” JOURNAL OF POLITICAL ECONOMY 80 (1972), 1295-1305.

T. Keeler et al., THE FULL COSTS OF URBAN TRANSPORT,

M. Webber, “The BART experience—What have we learned,” PUBLIC INTEREST 45 (Fall 1976), 79-108.

Final review: December 13.

Source: Personal copy of Irwin Collier.

Image Source: Gonçalo L. Fonseca’s  “Daniel McFadden profile page” at The History of Economic Thought Website.

 

 

 

Categories
Exam Questions M.I.T.

M.I.T. Exams from International Economics, Kindleberger, 1954-1955

 

International trade and finance were covered at M.I.T. in a two semester sequence from the late 1940s through the mid-1970s mostly by Charles Kindleberger who handed off “his” courses to Jagdish Bhagwati and Rudiger Dornbusch. In his papers at the M.I.T. archives we find two folders with many, if not most, of the exams for these courses. Today I add transcriptions of the exam questions from the 1953-54 and 1954-55 years. 

________________

Posted earlier:
M.I.T. International Economics Examinations. Kindleberger, 1950-51

https://www.irwincollier.com/m-i-t-international-economics-examinations-1950-51/

________________

Course Announcement

14.581, 14.582. International Economics. [Kindleberger] The foreign exchange market, foreign trade and commercial policy, with emphasis on the relation of the items in the current account to national income; international finance and the achievement and maintenance of equilibrium in the balance of payments as a whole: current problems of international economics.

Source: Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Catalogue Issue for 1954-1955 (June 1954), p. 147.

________________

14.581 One hour quiz
November 15, 1955

  1. (10 minutes)
    In balance-of-payments accounting, practice differs or is disputed in connection with the following items, among others. What are the various ways in which a country may treat three of them, and what is the justification for each of these.

    1. Immigrants’ remittances
    2. Payments to one’s own nationals for carriage of imports
    3. Official international grants, such as Marshall Plan aid
    4. Profits of a foreign enterprise, located within the reporting country’s borders
  2. (10 minutes)
    Define, sketch the content of discuss the usefulness of the purchasing power parity doctrine.
  3. (30 minutes)
    In what major respects does the classical theory of international trade differ from modern theory, with particular reference to the origin of trade and the mechanism of adjustment?

Source:  MIT Archives. Charles Kindleberger Papers, Box 22, Folder “Examination 14.481, 1949-1966.”

________________

Typed Kindleberger notes
for 14.581 Quiz of November 23, 1954
[Quiz question sheet not available]

  1. True or False

Some ambiguity attached to three questions:

#3. Where purchasing power parity said to relate merely to foreign trade goods. Originators thought of it as much more than this and therefore false. Foreign trade goods always equated through law of one price.

#4 may depend on which multiplier used [this item added as handwritten note]

#5. Is trade possible with identical endowments and tastes: yes because of decreasing costs (answer yes with different states of arts, i.e. different production functions).

  1. What factors determine what goods and services a country will export and import?

Answer should encompass

law of comparative costs or advantage
production possibilities curves and tastes
possibly the many-commodity case
factor endowments underlying the production possibility curve, decreasing costs as a special case
possible qualification for transport costs

No need to discuss question of price, offer curves at any length in the two commodity case. Does become important in the many-commodity case.

  1. Demonstration either mathematical, prose, arithmetic, geometrical

Points should be mentioned: offer curves or average revenue curves
elasticities of supply
initial size of deficit
not partial but complete elasticity (i.e. income effects)

________________

MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
Scheduled Examination in
INTERNATIONAL ECONOMICS 14.581

Wednesday, January 26, 1954
Time 9:00-12:00 A.M.

NOTE: Students are not permitted to use any books, notebooks or papers in this examination. If brought into the room, they must not be left on the desks.

Answer 6 questions. All have equal weight.

  1. Argue for or against including four of the following in the current account of the balance of payments:
    1. Immigrants’ remittances
    2. Payments to own nationals for carrying imports
    3. Domestic gold production
    4. Government shipments of supplies to own troops abroad
    5. Government shipments of supplies to foreign troops abroad under military assistance programs
    6. Increase of inventories abroad held by domestic firms
  2. Discuss the relation of a forward market to the ease and cost of hedging and speculation in foreign exchange under various conditions.
  3. Indicate in what ways the effects of discriminatory state trading can be duplicated by multiple exchange rates and by a system of tariffs and subsidies on exports and imports.
  4. What is the role of demand in the pure theory of international trade?
  5. Describe differences and similarities in the process of adjustment in international trade, starting say with a domestic crop failure in an export commodity, under the fixed-exchange standard on the one hand and the fluctuating exchange standard on the other.
  6. What difference does it make whether a country uses tariffs or quotas in carrying out its commercial policy?
  7. Attack or defend anti-dumping tariffs.
  8. Analyze the forces non engaged in trying to change or modify the tariffs of the United States.

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

[Kindleberger’s typed comments in the margins of examination.
These appear to have been written (at least in part) after having graded the examinations.]

  1. natl income vs fx budget
    treatment of M
    monetary vs non-monet
    residents
    exports and donation
    capital not current
  2. some neglected severance of arbitrage
  3. Question 3 should be reworded effects of state trading can be duplicated by multiple exchange rates and a system of taxes and subsidies
  4. offer curves
    indif curves
    Graham
    not elasticities (pure)
  5. Question five drew 3 blanks of people who looked only at short run mechanism and not at long run.
    [following list spans questions 5 and 6 in the margin]
    income effects
    price effects
    symmetry and dif.
    redistribution
    protective
    but revenue
  6. Question six should include in answer reference to multiplier, potential monopoly
  7. many mercantilists discovered

Source:  MIT Archives. Charles Kindleberger Papers, Box 22, Folder “Examination 14.481, 1949-1966.”

________________

Mid-Term Quiz
14.582

March 22, 1955

(Twenty-five minutes each)

  1. What happens to the terms of trade in the course of a capital transfer?
  2. Evaluate the contribution which direct investment can make to economic development.

or

  1. Discuss the problem of economic stability in an “export economy.”

Source:  MIT Archives. Charles Kindleberger Papers, Box 22, Folder “Examination 14.482, 1951-1976.”

________________

MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
Scheduled Examination in
INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC—14.582

Saturday, May 28, 1955
Time: 9.00-12.00 A.M.

NOTE: Students are not permitted to use any books, notebooks or papers in this examination. If brought into the room, they must not be left on the desks.

Answer 1 and 2; and three of the remaining five questions, but not 5, 6, and 7

  1. Write a review of the monograph on capital movements which you read, setting out in particular what the author was trying to demonstrate, how effectively he (or she) succeeded, and whether the passage of time and the development of economic theory have made it possible to modify his (or her) conclusions.
  2. Discuss the principal problems concerning foreign trade in a country engaged in economic development with which you are familiar.

……………………….

  1. To what extent and under what circumstances can short-term capital movements give rise to or substitute for gold movements under a fixed-exchange standard?
  2. Compare and contrast the International Monetary Fund and the European Payments Union. What are the strengths and limitations of each institution?
  3. Discuss the effects of differential rates of productivity increase on international economic equilibrium.
  4. Compare exchange depreciation and deflation as remedies for balance-of-payments disequilibrium.
  5. To what extent, in your judgment, is the present disequilibrium state of balances of payments due to the failure to create institutions which provide for international, long-term capital movements.

Source:  MIT Archives. Charles Kindleberger Papers, Box 22, Folder “Examination 14.482, 1951-1976.”

Image Source: Charles P. Kindleberger from the MIT Museum.

 

 

Categories
Chicago Funny Business Harvard M.I.T. Princeton

M.I.T. Faculty Skit, Playing Monopoly at Lunch, 1986

 

It has been a while since I have added an artifact to the MIT economics skits wing of the Funny Business Archives here at Economics in the Rear-view Mirror. Apparently the following script was a, if not the sole, late-20th century MIT faculty skit not written by Robert Solow. I can believe that. In any event, today’s post is further grist to the mill for social historians of economics.

Again a grateful tip of the hat to Roger Backhouse is in order.

__________________

1986 FACULTY SKIT

(Skit opens with Dornbusch, Fischer, Diamond, Eckaus and McFadden seated around MONOPOLY board. Farber is standing alongside, watching the game. Fisher and Hausman are in the wings to make walk-on appearances).

ANNOUNCER: One of the most important unwritten rules in the Economics Department is that no one but Bob Solow writes the skit. This year, Bob reportedly outdid himself and wrote a sitcom in which Bob Lucas is struck by a blinding light while driving to work and transformed into a neo-Keynesian. The skit, titled “I’m OK, You’re OK,” follows Lucas’ attempts to explain why he is estimating Phillips curves to Lars Hansen and Tom Sargent.

Unfortunately, Bob is unable to be with us tonight, since he is delivering the presidential address to the Eastern Economic Association in Philadelphia. When we opened the envelope marked “SKIT” which Bob left for us, we were surprised to discover only a copy of his presidential address. We suspect he had a somewhat bigger surprise when he opened his envelope in Philadelphia. [Address published as “What is a Nice Girl Like You Doing in a Place Like This? Macroeconomics after Fifty Years” Eastern Economic Journal, July-September 1986]

We were of course scared skitless when we realized our predicament, and we were tempted to re-run some of the great Solow skits of the past. There was the 1974 Watergate Skit, in which Paul Colson Joskow testifies to Senator Sam Peltzman that he would run over his grandmother to get a t-statistic above two. There was the 1978 Star Wars skit, in which Milton Vader and his minions capture the wookie Jerrybaca and hold him captive in the Chicago Money Workshop. And in the incredible 1973 MASH skit, Hawkeye Hall and Trapper Jerry Hausman find Radar Diamond and Hot Lips Friedlaender cavorting in the Chairman’s office. (If that doesn’t give Solow Rational expectations, what does?)

We guessed that you had all seen these re-runs on late-nite channel 56, however, and therefore decided to try something new and provide a partial answer to the age-old question: What Really Goes On in the Freeman Room at Lunchtime on Wednesdays? We now invite you to join us for a brief look at one of these infamous gatherings…

 

MCFADDEN: (Rolling dice). “Who owns Oriental Avenue?”

DORNBUSCH: Me. That’s six dollars.

FISCHER: My turn? (Rolls dice). Damn. Inflation tax again; Here’s ten percent of my cash balances. I passed go, didn’t I?

DIAMOND: Uh huh. Here’s $186 dollars.

FISCHER: I should get $200.

DIAMOND: Not since Gramm-Rudman. Everything’s reduced seven percent across the board.

DORNBUSCH: My turn. (Rolling dice). Four. (Reaches over and moves marker).

ECKAUS: No way, Rudi—you just moved six places. No overshooting in this game. (Hands Dornbusch Chance card)

DORNBUSCH: Ah. Go directly to Brazil. Do not return until the day classes start.

HAUSMAN: (Walking in from side of stage) How come you guys are playing MONOPOLY? I thought you usually played RISK…

DIAMOND: Oliver [Hart] took that game home. You know, his contract calls for RISK-sharing…

HAUSMAN: Can you believe the graduate students scheduled the skit party for the Friday before income taxes are due? The only people who’ll come are graduate students and people like theorists who file 1040 EZ’s. (walks off)

(FISHER walks in)

DIAMOND: (Rolling dice). My turn. Oriental again. Six more dollars for Dornbusch.

FISCHER: That’s a pretty profitable property, Rudi.

FISHER: How many times do I have to say it! You can’t possibly tell that from accounting numbers! (Pause). Why don’t we ever play fun games, like Consultant?

ECKAUS: I hear Jorgensen and Griliches play that all the time up at Harvard. Maybe you should give them a call.

FISHER: They’re never around.

DIAMOND: Of course not, Frank—that’s how you play consultant.

(FISHER exits.)

FARBER: Speaking of Harvard, how are we doing on graduate recruitment this year? I heard there was some Princeton scandal.

DIAMOND: The AEA put them on probation for recruiting violations. People could look the other way when they offered prospective students money and cars, but this year Joe Stiglitz promised to write a joint paper with all entering students.

FARBER: They’re really giving out cars?

DIAMOND: Sure. Yugo’s.

FARBER: All I got was a motorcycle…

MCFADDEN: Harvard and Princeton have been dumping all over us. Every prospective student has heard that Jerry Hausman cashed in his Frequent Flyer miles for a 727. And some even know that Marty Weitzman has a Harvard offer.

FISCHER: Well, that offer was certainly no surprise. The Harvard deans read THE SHARE ECONOMY and decided they should hire more workers.

DIAMOND: Still, we’re getting the best students. This morning I signed a Yale undergrad by offering him Solow’s office. I figured Bob can share E52-390 with Krugman, Eckaus, and Farber next year. But what happens when we run out of river-view offices?

FARBER: How’s Harvard doing on recruiting?

ECKAUS: Not too well. They’re on a big kick to look relevant. Mas-Collel’s going nuts—Dean Spence has a new rule that any agent in a theoretical model has to have a proper name. Andreu’s having real problems with his continuum papers…

MCFADDEN: I hear the Kennedy School’s helping their visibility. Have you heard about the new Meese Distinguished Service Medal?

DIAMOND: No. Who’s getting them?

MCFADDEN: Sammy Stewart for Distinguished Relief Pitching,
Martin Feldstein for Distinguished Empirical Work,
Larry Summers for Distinguished Dress,
NASA for distinction in Travel Safety,
Bob Lucas and Bob Barro for Distinguished Plausible Assumptions,
Ferdinand Marcos for Distinguished Contributions to Charity,
and John Kenneth Galbraith for Distinguished Use of Mathematics.

DORNBUSCH: Harvard’s visibility campaign’s paying off. Just last week one of their junior guys hit the cover of PEOPLE magazine with a paper about marriage rates among movie stars.

FISCHER: You read PEOPLE?

FARBER: The National Enquirer had a story about a Harvard student who claimed to have a picture of Jeff Sachs in Littauer. Just like the old days with Howard Hughes…

DORNBUSCH: Perhaps we should return to the game.

(MODIGLIANI walks on).

DIAMOND: My turn again? (Rolls dice and moves piece). Community Chest. (Looking at card) You are elected department head. Lose three turns.

(Someone walks up and hands DIAMOND a telephone message. He stands up.)

DIAMOND: I nearly forgot. I’m scheduled to join Mike Weisbach who is taking a prospective student windsurfing this afternoon. Figured it was the least I could do to convince him we were as laid back as Stanford. Franco—do you want to take my place?

MODIGLIANI: (Sitting down in Diamond’s place) So, what are the new developments on the Monopoly front? [Famous Modigliani paper “New Developments on the Oligopoly Front,” JPE, June 1958] (Pause) Now, which of these pieces is Peter’s?

MCFADDEN: The coconut. [Reference here to Diamond’s coconut model of a search economy.]

MODIGLIANI: My turn now?

FISCHER: No Franco—but go ahead. [presumably a reference to Modigliani’s propensity to talk, and talk, and talk.]

MODIGLIANI: (Rolls dice and moves marker). Chance. (McFadden hands him a card). What is this? You have won second prize in a Beauty Contest, Collect $10? This is NOT POSSIBLE. This year I win only FIRST PRIZES [reference to 1985 Nobel Prize for Economics].

DORNBUSCH: (To audience) Wait till he gets the bequest card… [cf. the JEP Spring 1988 paper by Modigliani that surveys the bequest motive]

FISCHER: Franco, I have a deal for you. I’ll trade you Mediterranean and the Water Works for North Carolina and an agreement that you never charge me rent on either property. If you renege, I’ll order Chinese food.

MODIGLIANI: No deal. But what’s this about Chinese food?

FISCHER: It’s a new thing I learned from Garth [Soloner]—it makes the deal sub-gum perfect.

MCFADDEN: My turn. (Rolls and draws a Chance card). My favorite card: Advance Token to the Railroad with the Highest Logit Probability Value. Let me see which one that is… (pulls out a calculator)

FISCHER: While we’re waiting for Dan to converge, how did we do in junior hiring? Did we get that Princeton theorist?

ECKAUS: No dice. All the Princeton guys told him not to come.

DORNBUSCH: Why?

ECKAUS: They said “Go to Yale, go directly to Yale.”

MODIGLIANI: What about senior appointments?

FARBER: Ask Peter [Temin]. He’s on the Search Committee.

MCFADDEN: (Looking up from calculator). I’m having convergence problems. Maybe we should postpone the game for a few minutes while I run down to the PRIME.

[the image of the last page at my disposal is very blurred, fortunately it is only the wrap-up by the announcer]

ANNOUNCER: As you all know, NOTHING takes a few minutes on the PRIME. So until next year, when the [?] [?] Solow who accompanied Stan, 3PO and R2D2 to [?] the [?] [?] from Chicago returns to produce another skit. Good night.

 

Source: Duke University, David M. Rubenstein Rare Book and Manuscript Library. Economists’ Papers Archive. Papers of Robert M. Solow, Box 83.

Categories
Economists FU-Berlin M.I.T. Popular Economics Syllabus

Paul Krugman, academic scribbles and glimpses of yore and not so yore.

 

Adam Tooze’s review of Paul Krugman’s Arguing with Zombies: Economics, Politics and the Fight for a Better Future (London Review of Books, Vol. 43, No. 8, 22 April 2021) has received much deserved social media acclaim.

Since you are here now looking at economics in my rear-view mirror, I thought it as good a time as any to assemble a few links from this blog and Freie Universität Berlin that go back a decade and more. Krugman’s adoring fans and fiercest critics are welcome.

__________________

Dr. h.c. FU-Berlin
(December 4, 1998)

Materials from the ceremony awarding Paul Krugman an honorary doctorate at Freie Universität Berlin are linked at this antique webpage archived by the Wayback Machine.

In case you missed the event…

Laudatio by Irwin Collier

Archived text: Original webpage (includes graphics) 

Audio recording

Paul Krugman’s award lecture: The Return of Demand Side Economics

Archived text: Original webpage

Audio recording

__________________

 “The Failure of Crisis Management”
(October 20, 2010)

Paul Krugman’s Ernst Fraenkel lecture for the John F. Kennedy Institute of North American Studies at Freie Universität Berlin.

Video recording

Image Source: https://www.fu-berlin.de/campusleben/campus/2010/101022_krugman/

__________________

Transcribed Artifacts from
Economics in the Rear-view Mirror:

M.I.T. Economics Department. Graduate Student Skit: “The Wizard of E52-383C” in which Paul Krugman played the role of Paul Samuelson and was co-author (1976).

M.I.T. Economics Department. Slides, Problems Sets, Exams for Principles of Macroeconomics taught by Paul Krugman (1998).

 

Categories
Economics Programs M.I.T. Regulations

MIT. Revising Economics Ph.D. General Examinations. E.C.Brown, 1975

 

What makes this memo from E. Cary Brown particularly useful is that it provides us with a list of the graduate economics fields along with the participating faculty members as of 1975. Also the major revision proposed was to have a system of two major fields (satisfied with general examinations) and two minor fields (satisfied by course work). Interesting to note that graduate student input was clearly integrated into the revision procedure.

________________________

Memo from Chairman E. Cary Brown
on a Revision of General Exams, 1975

April 28, 1975

To: Economics Department Faculty and Graduate Students
From: E. C. Brown
Re: Revision of General Examinations

While it has been left that a Committee would be appointed to review the procedures of the general examination (see minutes of the Department Meeting of April 23, 1975), further informal discussion has moved toward a proposed concept of these examinations that I am submitting for consideration and agreement.

  1. There seems reasonable satisfaction about the structure of the present examinations, subject to clarification of the final 2 field examinations and their relationship to the 2 field write-offs.
  2. It is proposed that the 2 fields satisfied by passing the “general” examinations be designated major The examination will be offered in a field, will cover the field in a general way, and will be separated from course examinations. Minor fields will be satisfied by course work. A somewhat lower standard will be imposed in minor fields than in major fields. The “generals” examination, therefore, would apply to the fields of the candidate’s expected expertise, and emphasis would be on a broad coverage of the field.
  3. Each field should, therefore, describe its general requirements for the field as a major one, and list the subjects that may reasonably be offered as a write-off to satisfy the field as a minor one. There should also be some details on the requirements when fields are closely linked (e.g., the proposal for the transportation field and its relationship to urban economics).
  4. Assuming this proposal to be agreeable, the question of term papers still needs settling.

I propose, therefore, the following procedures:

  1. Would each of you give Sue Steenburg a list of your graduate subjects for this academic year, with an indication of whether or not a term paper was required and, if so, the percentage of final grade it represented.
  2. Would faculty in each field submit a list of subjects that may be used to satisfy major and minor requirements in their field as it would ultimately appear in the brochure. The fields to be covered are as follows, the faculty in the field are listed, and the responsible member underlined.
Advanced Economic Theory Bishop, Diamond, Solow, Fisher, Samuelson, Varian, Hausman, Weitzman
Comparative Economic Systems Domar, Weitzman
Economic Development Eckaus, Bhagwati, Taylor
Economic History Kindleberger, Temin, Domar
Finance Merton
Fiscal Economics Diamond, Friedlaender, Rothenberg, Brown
Human Resources and Income Distribution Thurow, Piore
Industrial Organization Adelman, Joskow
International Economics Kindleberger, Bhagwati
Labor Economics Piore, Myers, Siegel
Monetary Economics Fischer, Modigliani
Operations Research Little, Shapiro
Russian Economics Domar, Weitzman
Statistics and Econometrics Hall, Hausman, Fisher, Kuh
Transportation Friedlaender, Wheaton
Urban Economics Rothenberg, Wheaton

If there are any difficulties with these suggestions, let me know right away. If we can proceed along these lines, it appears to be simply a clarification of our recent past and a substantial timesaver. The reports can be looked at this summer by a student-faculty group, with responsibility for faculty on me and for students on Dick Anderson.

Source:  M.I.T. Archives. Department of Economics Records, Box 2, Folder “Grad Curriculum”.

Image with identifications: Economics Faculty group portrait, 1976.

Categories
Economics Programs M.I.T.

M.I.T. Minutes of the Visiting Committee of Department of Economics and Social Science, 1958

 

From a cover letter, dated March 25, 1959, written by R. T. Haslam, Chairman of the Visiting Committee for the Department of Economics and Social and Science at M.I.T., it appears that the mimeographed document  transcribed below was described as “the full transcript of the Meeting” sent by the Department of Economics for the report to be submitted by the visiting committee to the M.I.T. Corporation. At that time the department of economics and social studies included sections for economics, industrial relations, psychology, and political science together with a center for international studies. 

_______________________

DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS AND SOCIAL SCIENCE
Meeting of the Visiting Committee
October 7, 1958

Present: Visiting Committee

Robert T. Haslam, Chairman
Consultant and Director, W. R. Grace and Company

James A. Lyles
Senior Vice President, Frist Boston Corporation
Robert L. Moore
Chairman of the Board, Sheraton Corporation of America

Robert V. Roosa
Vice President, Federal Reserve Bank of New York

Willard L. Thorp
Professor, Merrill Center for Economics, Amherst College

Max L. Waterman
Vice President and Director, Singer Manufacturing Company

Clarence Wynd
Eastman Kodak Company

 

M.I.T.

John E. Burchard
Dean, School of Humanities and Social Studies

Robert L. Bishop
Professor of Economics; Head, Department of Economics and Social Science

Ralph E. Freeman
Professor of Economics; former Head, Department of Economics and Social Science

E. Cary Brown
Professor of Economics; in Charge of the Undergraduate Program

Roger W. Brown
Associate Professor of Psychology

Davis H. Howes
Assistant Professor of Psychology

Norman J. Padelford
Professor of Political Science; Director, Political Science Section

Ithiel deS. Pool
Professor of Political Science

Charles A. Myers
Professor of Industrial Relations; Director, Industrial Relations Section

Max F. Millikan
Professor of Economics; Director, Center for International Studies

Charles P. Kindleberger
Professor of Economics; in Charge of the Graduate Program

 

As the membership of the Committee is entirely new to the Department of Economics, Professor Bishop opened the meeting by giving a brief resume of its present organization and activities.

Teaching and research cover four main fields: Economics, Industrial Relations, Political Science, and Psychology. In one or more of these four fields, the Department teaches at least five distinguishable types of students: (1) undergraduates who elect one or more of the Department’s four fields as a part of their Humanities and Social Science program; (2) undergraduates who major in Course XIV, in (a) Economics or Political Science and (b) Science or Engineering; (3) graduate students in Course XIV, who are mostly Ph.D. candidates in either Industrial Economics or Political Science; (4) regular graduate students in the School of Industrial Management; and (5) members of the two Executive Development programs administered by the School of Industrial Management, including both Sloan Fellows (who are here for twelve months) and Senior Executives (who are here for ten weeks in either the Fall or Spring).

(1) Until the 1940’s, all juniors at the Institute took two terms of Economic Principles; and this was the substance of the Department’s contribution to the Humanities and Social Science program. Subsequently, we have added the fields of Industrial Relations, Political Science, and Psychology. As a result, the Department now offers four of the ten fields from which all students select their Humanities and Social Science subjects in their junior and senior years. (The attached Tables I and II [only a Table II was present in the departmental records. It is transcribed below] show total enrollments during 1956-57 and 1957-58 in the Department’s four fields and in the individual subjects within those fields. Most of the undergraduate enrollment represents students in the general Humanities and Social Science program). In 1957-58, as Table II shows, total undergraduate enrollments were: Economics 1206, Labor Relations 242, Political Science 378, and Psychology 519.)

(2) For eleven years the Department has had its own undergraduate major in Economics (Course XIV). At first this was just Economics and Engineering; later the option of Economics and Science was added. More recently there has been added an option in Political Science, which is an alternative to Economics but is also joined with Science or Engineering. In the future, Psychology might become a similar option; but Psychology is not now a major subject for undergraduates.

(3) The program for a Ph.D. degree in Economics, now one of the largest in this country, was in operation for some years before the Department had an undergraduate major in Economics. This year for the first time we are offering a program for a Ph.D. in Political Science. Our S.M. program is relatively small, and it is limited to Economics and Engineering (or Science). Unlike the Ph.D. program, it is open only to students who have studied Science or Engineering at the undergraduate level, as in our own undergraduate Course XIV.

(4) The Department offers several special subjects for the regular graduate students in the School of Industrial Management, who are all S.M. candidates. In addition, these students sometimes enroll in the same classes with our own graduate students in Economics; and, indeed, this has increased the size of some of our graduate subjects substantially during the past year or two. Furthermore, a small but increasing number of Industrial Management graduate students are becoming interested in going on to a Ph.D. in a combination of Economics and Industrial Management. Our colleagues in the School of Industrial Management have also been considering the addition of a Ph.D. program of their own. If this should materialize, it is likely that our Department will continue to participate substantially on the Economics side of such a program.

(5) The other teaching activity carried on in cooperation with the School of Industrial Management is in their two executive development programs. The older of these is the Sloan Fellowship program, for which executives in the 32- to 36- year age bracket spend a full calendar year at M.I.T. The other, shorter executive development program in which the Department teaches is aimed at a higher executive level. Our department handles about one-quarter of both of these programs.

Dean Burchard stated what he considers to be the present problems of the Department of Economics.

(1) To have the undergraduate program in Course XIV better known to secondary schools so that students will come to M.I.T. specifically for these combinations of humanities and sciences.

(2) To organize our offering in Psychology. A number of years ago a committee recommended that a Department of Psychology be established in the School of Science; but the latter was not prepared to take on such a department. Although there are courses in Psychology given in other Schools at M.I.T., the largest amount of teaching in Psychology comes under the School of Humanities. Therefore the development and improvement of the Psychology Section within the Department of Economics and Social Science is our responsibility.

(3) The new Political Science Section is fairly well organized; yet it still faces the problem of integration with the work of the Center for International Studies, particularly on research projects.

 

Undergraduate Program

Professor E. Cary Brown, chairman of the Committee on the Undergraduate Program, reported on his committee’s consideration of possible revisions in the curriculum in Course XIV. Normally the M.I.T. student can spend 80 per cent of his time in Science and Engineering, with the remaining 20 per cent in Humanities or Social Science. In Course XIV, the student spends the equivalent of a year in Economics or Political Science, instead of taking the more advanced or specialized subjects in his field of Science or Engineering.

After reviewing the experience of the past ten years on the Economics side—looking over thesis topics, the electives chosen by our majors, and finally the jobs that our graduates have held—it seems clear that we are dealing mostly with students who become engineers first of all, with social science skills on the side. For these students, we shall continue to offer our option in General Economics. We have also recommended, however, the addition of two other options in Economics. One will be in Industrial Economics, including Industrial Relations. The other will be in Quantitative Economics and Methods.

The program in Industrial Economics will be aimed at the range of problems confronting business firms on an industry-wide basis. We shall aim to turn out students in this option who will be industry analysts in the broadest sense.

The Quantitative Economics option will be even more professional in orientation. Emphasis will be on technical training in analytical methods, with primary attention to statistics, econometrics, and programming and decision theory, including “operations research,” for which there is a rapidly growing demand.

At present, too many of our basic Economics subjects are not taken until the senior year; so we have recommended changes that will allow our majors to take these subjects earlier. We have also recommended several new subjects, including a research seminar as thesis preparation in the first term of the senior year.

There followed a discussion of a variety of departmental problems. One concerns the fact that, in the Economics wing, we have relatively many young full professors, in their early forties, with relatively few associate and assistant professors. The demands of our graduate program and our undergraduate major are such that relatively few senior members of the staff participate at any one time in the elementary subjects, 14.01 and 14.02. There also was discussion of the assistance that can be given by the older members of the Department to graduate students who are carrying out their first teaching assignment in the sections of elementary Economics. As Mr. Haslam pointed out, these are the first instructors that the student meets in the Department of Economics, and a favorable impact is very important.

 

The Psychology Section (reported by Professors Roger W. Brown and Davis Howes)

At present Psychology teaching is limited to the Humanities program; but within the next year or two we hope to set up a Psychology option in Course XIV. The decision that we have to make with the administrative authorities is whether to be content with a purely routine service in teaching elementary Psychology or whether to have a Psychology Section composed of persons with significant research activities who will develop a broader teaching program.

There are other psychologists at the Institute in both the School of Industrial Management and in the new Communications Center. These people are concerned with a limited set of rather specialized applications of Psychology. Collaboration with these other psychologists would be very fruitful if a graduate program of training Ph.D.’s in Psychology could be set up, and some of them occasionally teach Psychology subjects in the Humanities program; but, for the time being, the responsibility for manning and administering that program rests wholly on the Psychology Section in our Department.

There is a remarkable opportunity at M.I.T. for collaboration between psychologists and other scientists—in computers, to name one example, and also in such fields as electronics and the chemical effects of drugs on human behavior. These potential opportunities will always draw able young research-oriented psychologists to M.I.T.; but they will not stay beyond about three years unless there is more chance for growth and development of the psychology program than at present. Now there is no senior member of the Psychology group; the four psychologists of faculty rank consist of one associate professor and three assistant professors. It was agreed that a constructive step would be the appointment of a full professor of psychology.

 

The Political Science Section (reported by Professors Norman J. Padelford and Ithiel de S. Pool)

Political Science has gone through some of the problems that Psychology is now facing. Immediately after the war we started out as a purely service group, offering as part of the Humanities program undergraduate courses which have averaged from 350 to 400 students. Three years ago we came to feel, as the psychologists do now, that a mere service function would not satisfy us professionally. As the first step to broaden our base we set up an undergraduate course combining Political Science with Science and Engineering. After this course was launched and operating satisfactorily, there were discussions about a Ph.D. program in Political Science. The same arguments that were used for Economics and for Psychology came up—namely, that the ablest men cannot be recruited and retained unless they have good graduate students around them. We have had to go to Harvard and to Fletcher School for young teachers in our undergraduate courses.

A program for a Ph.D. in Political Science was launched this Fall. We have 13 mature and talented graduate students whose interests are focused on policy problems. We put these students to work on research projects. This is possible with a small group only slightly outnumbered by staff; for each student can work as assistant to a staff member.

As far as our group is concerned, we see no point in simply duplicating what is done at other institution. Our range of interests covers the following major topics:

(1) We are concerned with the growth and evolution of political communities from an elementary stage to maturity, whether in such places as Burma or at the international level, where we have been studying the process by which a group of nations in the so-called Atlantic community can become knitted together.

(2) We have a strong interest in the role of communications in the political process between men and between groups in the political process. This is an important topic, which has been inadequately stressed elsewhere.

(3) The touchstone of our approach is a study of the place of government and the role of public policy against the background of changes in science and technology.

One final word about our needs as we look ahead. We have set up six fields of study: (1) International Relations and Foreign Policy, (2) Political Communications, (3) Defense Policy, (4) Government and Science, (5) Political and Economic Development, and (6) Political Theory and Comparative Politics. In the areas of Defense Policy and Government and Science, we are not provided with faculty as we should be. We need to find individuals for each of these fields and also the wherewithal to support them at the faculty level. Our second need—and the most urgent at the moment—is for fellowships and scholarships. We are encouraging our graduate students to take loans for their education, paying them back afterwards rather than depending on scholarship money.

 

The Industrial Relations Section (reported by Professor Charles A. Myers)

The Industrial Relations Section is the oldest of the sections in the Department of Economics. Last November we had a 20th Anniversary Conference in which we reviewed what we have been trying to do. Originally we set up our teaching program solely at the undergraduate level; but we have expanded to include participation in the doctoral program of the Department. Today M.I.T. has more students working for doctor’s degrees in Economics with emphasis on Industrial Relations than has any other university in this country. Our activities include courses for management, both in the programs of the School of Industrial management and in the new Greater Boston program for executive development. As we have no staff of our own but share our teachers with the Department of Economics, we confine our activities to certain areas such as the Scanlon Plan—a union-management cooperation plan, which has annual conferences attracting about 200 participants from all over the country. In addition, we have held conferences on research administration; some trade unions have come here for conferences under our auspices; and we hold each year a one-day workshop in connection with the Boston Chamber of Commerce.

Professor Pigors has pioneered in a method of management training and development called the incident process, which is now used by 800 companies. We think it offers more challenge to students than the case method. The case method presents a problem with all the material supplied; the incident process gives the student only an incident, leaving him to seek out the pertinent facts by questioning the discussion leader. As a teaching device it has had wide impact outside of M.I.T.

Some of our recent research has been on comparative international studies. As we learned more about economic development, we saw its close connection with problems of industrial relations. We obtained a Ford Foundation grant; and my two trips to India and a book have come out of that. We plan to cover India, Mexico, Japan, Western Germany, Indonesia, Sweden, England, France, and Italy in our studies of management in industrial societies.

 

The Center for International Studies (reported by Professor Max F. Millikan)

Although the CIS has a Visiting Committee of its own, its work is so closely connected with that of the Department of Economics and Social Science that they share each other’s problems. There are two ways in which the Center’s activities are important to the Department of Economics. First, there is a considerable overlap of staff members who conduct research in the Center and teach in the Department; so the Center and the Department have a joint interest in recruiting an outstanding and stable staff. Second, The Center’s research program provides opportunities for graduate students in the Department to undertake thesis work in the international field.

Briefly, the Center was founded in 1951, growing out of a contract which M.I.T. undertook on behalf of the State Department to explore a defense against jamming the Voice of America. Growing out of this study appeared the need for a research organization on problems related to American foreign relationships, as there are many ways in which technology and science have become involved in foreign policy and international relations. The Center then removed itself from government affiliation and became a permanent member of the M.I.T. family.

Since 1952, with the support of the Ford, Rockefeller, and Carnegie Funds, it has carried on projects in four different fields: (1) relations between the United States and the Soviet bloc, especially in the area of Soviet scientific publications and the administrative handling of research and development in the Soviet Union; (2) economic and political development of the underdeveloped countries—especially the process of economic growth in Indonesia, India and Southern Italy; (3) international communications—especially the pattern of information-flow in foreign countries and its effect upon attitudes and decisions of significant political groups; (4) Professor Rostow, who was responsible for the studies on the Soviet Union and on China which we have published, has now turned his attention to the features in American society which influence our attitude toward foreign policy.

Our principal problem for the future is to provide some stability for our research staff. We have drawn key people to M.I.T. who have made a substantial contribution through their research; but many members of our staff are listed as visiting professors because M.I.T. cannot provide tenure positions for them. What we need is a continuing corps to devote half time to research in the Center and the other half to teaching.

The Center is in a position to offer to graduate students research opportunities second to none in this country. In the future we look toward using the Center’s resources at the undergraduate level. In these new areas it is normal for development to begin at the graduate level and work down.

 

The Graduate Economics Program (reported by Professor Charles P. Kindleberger)

In the first place, our graduate program aims primarily at a Ph.D. degree; we do not offer a Master’s degree except in a combination of Economics with Science or Engineering (mostly as a fifth year for our own Course XIV graduates). In the Ph.D. program we limit ourselves to a small group of high-quality candidates—about 20 to 25 new students each year.

Admission of Graduate Students. These 20 to 25 new students are chosen from a group of about 120 applicants, who have various reasons for wanting to study at M.I.T. Some are attracted by the men on our teaching staff and some by the prestige of M.I.T. in general. We should also face the fact, however, that competitive fellowship offers also play a prominent role in applicants’ decisions to come here or go elsewhere. On the other side of the picture, some would-be applicants are scared away if they are not highly skilled in mathematics, even though only a minority of our graduate students specialize in areas of economics where high-powered mathematical techniques are used.

Financing Graduate Students. There are various ways in which a graduate student can pay his way here: he may get a fellowship from an outside source to be used at any university of his choice—National Science Foundation, Ford Foundation, and Woodrow Wilson Fellowship support comes this way; also, we have some privately endowed “name” fellowships in our department—Goodyear, Westinghouse, and Hicks; and we have some departmental and Institute funds to offer; lastly, a student may pay his own way. Sometimes students who do not qualify for financial assistance at first, but who come on their own, turn out to be very good. We hire no teachers from the group of first-year graduate students, so this source of earning is not open until at least the second year of graduate study, and usually not until the third.

Ph.D. Curriculum. At the end of the second year, the graduate student takes his general examinations—four written and four oral. After this comes his thesis. We are very much interested in the process of writing a thesis, as we believe that it is here that the student acquires professional maturity. We do not go along with the movement to cut down on the time of the Ph.D. degree by reducing the thesis to the proportions of an article.

Post-Doctoral Students. More and more M.I.T. is attracting post-doctoral scholars from abroad—last year a Swede, a Norwegian, a Dutchman, and a Turk; this year two Germans, a Swede, an Italian, a Belgian and a Frenchman. These people add to the scholarly atmosphere; and we need mature students for training at a post-doctoral level. This, however, requires more money; and we have already applied to the Ford Foundation for funds for this purpose.

*  *  *  *  *  *

            In the general discussion of pressing problems Professor Bishop mentioned the following:

The Economics Library Budget. The state of our Dewey Library budget can be held over for discussion at the next meeting of this committee. If we have not been successful in our drive for funds, we shall need to ask the assistance of the committee.

Ours is very much of a library department, as we have no laboratory. Although our library budget is high compared with that of some engineering departments, it is low compared with that of other leading departments in Economics. For example, our library budget stands at $4,000 annually, compared with $6,000 for that of Johns Hopkins. Ours is possibly the best industrial relations library in the country; but it is a second-class economics library. I should like to see the budget figure raised by $2,000.

(Mr. Maslam offered to approach Mr. Bradley Dewy for a donation for this purpose.)

Age Distribution of Department Members. It happens that our department has an unusual age distribution in the field of Economics. There is a great gap between the full professors and the instructors. The former are all in their early forties; and there are few runners-up at the associate professor and assistant professor level. This is a problem of major importance.

*  *  *  *  *  *

            Professor Thorp suggested this kind of Committee report to the Corporation: that the Committee has met; that all its members are new; that they therefore need time to get acquainted with what is going on in the Department; that they find no problems requiring immediate action; and that they are looking forward to a meeting next year. There was also agreement in recommending that there be somewhat more continuity of membership on the Visiting Committee than in the past.

*  *  *  *  *  *

TABLE II
Comparative Numbers of Students Completing Individual Subjects in the Department of Economics and Social Science, 1956-57 and 1957-58
[Note: Course titles provided after Table II]

1956-57

 1957-58
Subject Fall Spring Total Fall Spring Total

Net Change
Economics—Undergraduate

14.01

 466 292 758 460 316 776 +18
14.02 58 117 175 94 143 237

+62

14.03

 26 — 26 26 18 44 +18
14.04 — 14 14 — 8 8

-6

14.09

 27 28 55 25 19 44 -11
14.20 — 23 23 — — —

-23

14.30

 — 25 25 — — — -25
14.32 — 20 20 — 17 17

-3

14.33

 18 — 18 16 21 37 +19
14.40 — 20 20 — 20 20

—

14.43

 11 — 11 13 — 13 +2
14.54 — 11 11 — 10 10

-1

Totals

 1156 1206

+50

 

 

1956-57

 1957-58
Subject Fall Spring Total Fall Spring Total

Net Change
Economics—Graduate

14.101

 11 — 11 14 — 14 +3
14.102 — 5 5 — 8 8

+3

14.115

 34 — 34 36 — 36 +2
14.116 — 34 34 — 36 36

+2

14.117

 18 24 42 15 20 35 -7
14.121 32 — 32 31 — 31

-1

14.122

 — 30 30 — 31 31 +1
14.132 — 6 6 — — —

-6

14.151

 6 — 6 11 — 11 +5
14.161 15 — 15 15 — 15

—

14.162

 — 12 12 — 16 16 +4
14.171 11 — 11 8 — 8

-3

14.172

 — 6 6 — 9 9 +3
14.174 — 5 5 — 14 14

+9

14.192

 — 5 5 — 1 1 -4
14.195 10 — 10 1 — 1

-9

14.196

 — 11 11 — 5 5 -6
14.271 11 — 11 7 — 7

-4

14.272

 — 7 7 — 7 7 —
14.281 13 — 13 15 — 15

+2

14.282

 — — — — 18 18 +18
14.292 — 7 7 — 10 10

+3

14.371

 34 — 34 35 — 35 +1
14.372 — 15 15 — 16 16

+1

14.381

 56 — 56 27 — 27 -29
14.382 — — — — 1 1

+1

14.451

 23 — 23 24 — 24 +1
14.461 8 — 8 8 — 8

—

14.471

 — 15 15 — 12 12 -3
14.481 9 — 9 6 — 6

-3

14.581

 20 — 20 23 — 23 +3
14.582 — 16 16 — 17 17

+3
Totals

509

 497

-12
Totals—Economics

1665

 1703

+38

 

*  *  *  *  *  *

1956-57 1957-58
Subject Fall Spring Total Fall Spring Total Net Change
Industrial Relations—Undergraduate
14.61 12 — 12 — — — -12
14.63 86 75 161 80 75 155 -6
14.64 47 75 122 36 51 87 -35
Totals 295 242 -53

 

1956-57 1957-58
Subject Fall Spring Total Fall Spring Total Net Change
Industrial Relations—Graduate
14.671 — 6 6 — 7      7 +1
14.672 10 — 10 — — — -10
14.673 — — — 18 — 18 +18
14.674 — — — 10 — 10 +10
14.681 17 — 17 18 — 18 +1
14.682 — 19 19 — 10 10 -9
14.694 — — — — 16      16 +16
Totals 52 79 +27
Totals—Industrial Relations 347 321 -26

 

*  *  *  *  *  *

1956-57 1957-58
Subject Fall Spring Total Fall Spring Total Net Change
Political Science—Undergraduate
14.51 50 93 143 73 72 145 +2
14.52 29 25 54 31 25 56 +2
14.53 7 — 7 — 25 25 +18
14.90 17 13 30 14 11 25 -5
14.91 25 36 61 26 23 49 -12
14.92 — 18 18 — 42 42 +24
14.93 7 11 18 — 26 26 +8
14.95 22 — 22 — — — -22
14.96 — 14 14 — — — 14
14.97 6 — 6 3 — 3 -3
14.98 — — — — 3 3 +3
14.99 — — — 4 — 4 +4
Totals 373 378 +5

 

1956-57 1957-58
Subject Fall Spring Total Fall Spring Total Net Change
Political Science—Graduate
14.521 6 — 6 — — — -6
14.523 — — — 4 — 4 +4
14.524 — — — — 2 2 +2
14.531 — 15 15 3 — 3 -12
14.533 18 — 18 12 — 12 -6
14.571 — 34 34 — 36 36 +2
14.941 — — — — 8 8 +8
14.953 10 — 10 7 — 7 -3
14.954 — 1 1 — 5 5 +4
14.956 — 5 5 — 8 8 +3
14.957 6 — 6 7 — 7 +1
14.958 — — — — 6 6 +6
Totals 95 98 +3
Totals—Political Science 468 476 +8

 

*  *  *  *  *  *

1956-57 1957-58
Subject Fall Spring Total Fall Spring Total Net Change
Psychology—Undergraduate
14.70 112 175 287 83 126 209 -78
14.73 83 73 156 32 35 67 -89
14.77 47 — 47 27 16 43 -4
14.79 — 42 42 8 29 37 -5
14.81 — 14 14 — 9 9 -5
14.82 — — — 11 43 54 +54
14.84 — — — — 35 35 +35
14.85 — — — 32 — 32 +32
14.86 — — — 18 32 50 +30
14.88 — — — — 3 3 +3
Totals 546 519 -27

 

1956-57 1957-58
Subject Fall Spring Total Fall Spring Total Net Change
Psychology—Graduate
14.771 32 — 32 — — — -32
14.772 — — — — 6 6 +6
14.774 12 — 12 5 — 5 -7
14.791 5 — 5 8 — 8 +3
14.792 — 11 11 — 2 2 -9
Totals 60 21 -39
Totals—Psychology 606 540 -66

 

1956-57 1957-58
Subject Fall Spring Total Fall Spring Total Net Change
Grand Totals for the Department 3086 3040 -46

Source: M.I.T. Archives. MIT Department of Economics Records, Box 4, Folder “V.C. [19]47-64”.

________________________

Course numbers, names and instructors
1957-58*

ECONOMICS (UNDERGRADUATE)
14.01 Economic Principles I (Bishop)
14.02 Economic Principles II (E. C. Brown)
14.03 Prices and Production (A. Williams)
14.04 Industrial Organization and Public Policy
14.09 Economic Problems Seminar (Bishop)
14.20 Building Economics (Maclaurin)
14.30 Elementary Statistics (Ando)
14.32 Statistical Quality Control (H. A. Freeman)
14.33 Elementary Statistics (Ando)
14.40 Money and Income (R.E. Freeman)
14.43 Public Finance (E.C. Brown)
14.54 International Trade (Kindleberger)
ECONOMICS (GRADUATE)
14.101 Mathematics for Economists (H. A. Freeman)
14.102 Mathematics for Economists (H. A. Freeman)
14.115 Economics and Finance: Principles and Policies II (Kindleberger, R.E. Freeman)
14.116 Economics and Finance: Principles and Policies III (Kindleberger)
14.117 Economics and Industrial Management (Solow, E.C. Brown)
14.121 Economic Analysis (Bishop)
14.122 Economic Analysis (Samuelson)
14.132 Schools of Economic Thought (Bishop)
14.151 Mathematical Approach to Economics (Samuelson)
14.161 Economic History (W. W. Rostow)
14.162 Economic History (W. W. Rostow)
14.171 Theory of Economic Growth (Rosenstein-Rodan)
14.172 Research Seminar in Economic Development (Millikan)
14.174 Non-Economic Factors in Economic Growth (Hagen)
14.192 Economics Seminar
14.195 Reading Seminar in Economics
14.196 Reading Seminar in Economics
14.271 Problems n Industrial Economics (Bishop)
14.272 Government Regulation of Industry (N.N.)
14.281 Entrepreneurship, Innovation and Economic Development (Maclaurin)
14.282 Economics of Innovation Seminar (Maclaurin)
14.292 Industrial Economic Seminar
14.371 Statistical Theory (H. A. Freeman)
14.372 Statistical Theory (H. A. Freeman)
14.381 Statistical Method (Houthakker, Durand)
14.382 Economic Statistics (Houthakker)
14.451 National Income (Millikan)
14.461 Monetary and Banking Problems (Higgins)
14.471 Fiscal Policy? (E. C. Brown)
14.481 Business Cycles (Houthakker)
14.581 International Economics (Kindleberger)
14.582 International Economics (Kindleberger)
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS (UNDERGRADUATE)
14.61 Industrial Relations (D. V. Brown)
14.63 Labor Relations (Siegel)
14.64 Labor Economics and Public Policy (A. R. Weber)
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS (GRADUATE)
14.671 Problems in Labor Economics (Miernyk)
14.672 Public Policy on Labor Relations (Myers)
14.673 Labor-Management Relations and Public Policy (D. V. Brown, Myers)
14.674 The Labor Movement: Theories and Histories (Siegel)
14.681 Seminar in Personnel Administration (Pigors)
14.682 Seminar in Personnel Administration (Pigors)
14.694 Seminar in Union-Management Cooperation (N.N.)
POLITICAL SCIENCE (UNDERGRADUATE)
14.51 International Relations (Padelford)
14.52 Principles and Problems of American Diplomacy (Pye)
14.53 Seminar in International Politics (Schilling)
14.90 Government, Politics and Technology (R. C. Wood)
14.91 The American Political System (Tillman)
14.92 Comparative Political and Economic Systems (L. W. Martin)
14.93 Seminar: Issues in Contemporary American Politics
14.95 Politics, Society, and Policy Making (Pool)
14.96 Influences on Policy Decisions (N.N.)
14.97 Political Science Seminar (Padelford)
14.98 Political Science Seminar (Padelford)
14.99 International Political Communication (Davison)
POLITICAL SCIENCE (GRADUATE)
14.521 Strategic and Political Geography (N.N.)
14.523 National Security and Military Technology (McCormack, Schilling)
14.524 Politics and National Defense Policy (Schilling)
14.531 Asian Politics and United States Foreign Policy (Pye)
14.533 Social Science and U. S. Foreign Policy (Millikan)
14.571 Major Problems in Untied States Foreign Policy (Padelford)
14.941 Government and Public Administration (R. C. Wood)
14.953 Mass Media and Communication Systems (Lerner)
14.954 Methods of Communication Research (Lerner)
14.956 Public Opinion and Propaganda (Davison)
14.957 Research Seminar in International Communications (Davison)
14.958 Research Seminar in International Communications (Davison)
PSYCHOLOGY (UNDERGRADUATE)
14.70 Introductory Psychology (Swets)
14.73 Organization and Communication in Groups (Swets, Gleicher)
14.77 Psychology of Language and Communication (N.N.)
14.79 Learning (Howes)
14.81 Psychology of Perception (Swets in 1958-59)
14.82 Psychology of Motivation (N.N. in 1958-59)
14.84 Theories of Personality (R. W. Brown in 1958-59)
14.85 Social Psychology (R. W. Brown in 1958-59)
14.86 Behavior in Groups (M. E. Shaw in 1958-59)
14.88 Advanced Psychology Seminar (Staff in 1958-59)
PSYCHOLOGY (GRADUATE)
14.771 Interpersonal Relations Seminar (N.N.)
14.772 Industrial Sociology Seminar (N.N.)
14.774 Social Psychology Seminar (R. W. Brown)
14.791 Reading Seminar in Social Science
14.792 Reading Seminar in Social Science

 

Source:  The Massachusetts Institute of Technology Bulletin, General Catalogue Issue 1957-58. Chapter 10, Descriptions of Subjects, 14. Economics and Social Science, pp. 233-238.

*For 14.81/14.82/14.84/14.85/14.86/14.88 information from the General Catalogue Issue 1958-59 pp. 237-8.

Image Source:  From Technique (1949), M.I.T. Yearbook cover.

Categories
Economics Programs M.I.T.

M.I.T. Economics and Political Science, excerpt from President’s Report, 1961

 

M.I.T.’s department of economics has done historically well in attracting graduate students who have received third-party funding, e.g. National Science Foundation Graduate Fellowships. Besides offering a top-down report of the position of the economics department at M.I.T., the excerpt from the President’s 1961 Centennial Year Report transcribed below offers the factual nugget: “This year, too, M.I.T. was selected as first choice by more Woodrow Wilson Fellows in economics — eighteen out of eighty — than any other school in the country”.

_____________________

Also from 1961

M.I.T. Graduate Economics Brochure of 1961.

General Examinations in Economic Theory at M.I.T. from 1961: Microeconomics; Macroeconomics.

Fun antique video. Round table discussion with Jerome Wiesner, Jerrold Zacharias, and John Burchard of MIT with Raymond Aron of the Université de Paris-Sorbonne, Isidor Rabi of Columbia University, and Sir Eric Ashby of Cambridge University was filmed as part of the Tomorrow television series produced by CBS Television Network for MIT on occasion of MIT’s Centennial in 1961.

_____________________

From the President’s Report 1961, M.I.T.

The Social Sciences In the light of the concerns of the Centennial for the larger influences of science upon society, I think it appropriate to review this year the state of the social sciences at the Institute. That we should have become occupied with these areas was inevitable, and the Institute has a clear obligation to cultivate especially those that relate most directly to modern developments in engineering, science, and mathematics. M.I.T. has recognized this responsibility and has responded with strong and growing support to work in the social sciences in the School of Humanities and Social Science and elsewhere. These activities are giving to the Institute an entirely new dimension that few not associated intimately with M.I.T. yet appreciate.

It is a simple truth that the interests of the great physical and social sciences were never more interwoven than today. The overriding practical problems of our time — defense; disarmament; the economics of change; the politics of peace; the relationships among industry, science, and government — require joint technical and social analysis. The very progress of science is influenced by the broader social context, and the advances of engineering affect all our human institutions.

In our decision to encourage the growth of certain key social sciences at M.I.T., we determined not only to build on strength, but also to exploit particularly those that have special relevance to our central concerns with science and engineering. We hope to create more points of contact between the social and physical sciences and to foster more fruitful collaboration between them. In this way, in spite of enormous pressures for growth, we can delimit the domain of our interests and the way in which we allocate our resources to them.

We have given special attention to those fields in which mathematics and statistical techniques are playing an increasingly important role. This is, of course, completely compatible with our M.I.T. style, with our desire to be governed in our approach to problems by a sense of the quantitative, the analytical, the mathematical. But by no means are we seeking to build our social sciences in the image of the physical. We recognize full well the many differences in set and attitude that distinguish them. An exaggerated insistence on emphases that are too narrow or criteria that are too rigid will only defeat our long-range objective of making the social sciences an integral part of the modern scientific university. Each field must be free to develop in its own way, to follow with complete freedom its own professional instincts.

From this point of view, the flowering of the social sciences at M.I.T. represents a new experience for us. Accustomed as we are to the demonstrable factual data of the physical sciences, we must accept the larger subjective element of judgment that enters into the social sciences in their present state. Since developments in many of these areas are open to a variety of interpretations, we must foster, within the limits of our aims and resources, a range of views and interests. The ultimate safeguard, however, lies not in seeking an impossible balance among modes of thought, but in recruiting a faculty of the highest intellectual power and integrity. This we have done.

In my report of a year ago I touched on a faculty survey of the social sciences which gave highest priority for development to fields of economics and economic history, political science, and psychology. I want now to comment briefly on the current status of these fields at the Institute and to examine in passing our commitments and our hopes in these areas.

ECONOMICS The oldest social science at M.I.T., economics is still by a sizable margin the largest. The teaching of economics goes back to 1881 and Francis Amasa Walker. General Walker, the Institute’s third president and one of its great builders, was an authority on political economy — as economics was then called — and his understanding of the processes in American industrial development notably influenced his views on the education of engineers. He gave an outstanding lecture course on political economy and was the author of a distinguished text in the field. He also brought other economists to the Institute.

Yet, until well into the modern era of M.I.T., economics remained largely a service department for the School of Engineering. Only since World War II has the department matured and assumed a truly professional character. Today it is universally conceded to be among the most distinguished. Indeed, by any of the usual measures — the stature of its teachers, the quality of its research, the achievements of its graduates — it ranks in the small handful of leaders. This year the president of the American Economic Association [Paul Samuelson] and the presidents-elect of the Econometric Society [Franco Modigliani] and of the Industrial Relations Research Association [Charles A. Myers] are members of this department. This year, too, M.I.T. was selected as first choice by more Woodrow Wilson Fellows in economics — eighteen out of eighty — than any other school in the country. The strengths which have won this kind of recognition within the profession are substantial indeed. They were achieved, essentially, by encouraging economics at M.I.T. to chart its own professional course; by the development of a distinguished graduate curriculum and of a major research program; and by insistence on the same standards of excellence we demand of our scientific and engineering departments. As a consequence, we have accomplished in economics the same kind of comprehensive renovation of purpose that Karl Compton undertook at an earlier date for the School of Science.

Economics at M.I.T. is also an important resource for other areas of teaching and research, and for the School of Industrial Management in particular. Management education at M.I.T. grew out of our teaching in economics, and today the teaching and research of the Department and the School reinforce one another more strongly than ever. Much of the research of the Department bears directly on the interests of the School — research on the economics of particular technologies; on the problems of measurement of productivity and output; on the contribution of technical progress to economic growth; on the origin and growth of new enterprises. Through this close relationship between the Department and the School, we also enjoy a fruitful interchange of theoretical and practical points of view.

The history and current role of economics at M.I.T. is the model for our development of other social sciences. We have now established sections of political science and of psychology within the Department of Economics and Social Science. Both are fields in which student and faculty interest is keen and in which we have unusual opportunities to make important contributions.

POLITICAL SCIENCE Because of the interweaving of technology with all the affairs of the modern world, and especially with those of government, we have set high priority on the development of political science. It is an area in which we have been moving rapidly ahead. This June we awarded our first Ph.D. degrees in this field, and there are now about thirty doctoral candidates within the Section. In addition, some five hundred undergraduates take elective courses in political science each year.

The Section now offers courses in six fields of political science, all of which are related to other interests of the Institute: international relations and foreign policy, political communication, defense policy, government and science, political and economic development, and political theory and comparative politics. Besides providing opportunities for combining work in political science with a scientific or engineering field, the faculty of the Section maintain close ties with their colleagues in economics, psychology, industrial management, and city and regional planning.

In the past two years, we have developed superlative strength in the field of comparative politics of developing areas, and through the association of the Section with the Center for International Studies we probably have as strong a faculty as is to be found anywhere in the politics of development. In support of this work, the Institute received two notable gifts this year. One, the donation of $500,000 from Dr. Arthur W. Sloan and Dr. Ruth C. Sloan of Washington, D.C., establishes a professorship in political science with emphasis on African studies. Not only does this gift provide an important new endowed professorship, but it also recognizes in a most dramatic way the growing stature of political science at the Institute.

The second grant is one of $475,000 from the Carnegie Corporation for research in training on the politics of transitional societies. The grant will make possible expansion of our research on the problems of nation-building in transition countries such as the newly emerged African and Asian nations. It, too, gives substantial recognition to the quality of our program. The Carnegie grant, among other benefits, establishes graduate fellowships both for course work at M.I.T. and for field work towards the doctoral thesis. We are enthusiastic about the values to be derived from this aspect of the grant which will permit us to send our students overseas for on-the-spot research in developing areas.

We have enjoyed magnificent opportunities for field studies in other areas of our political science activities through the generous support of the Maurice and Laura Falk Foundation, the Ford Foundation, and the Rockefeller Foundation. The Ford Foundation has also underwritten much of our work on government and science, and the Rockefeller Foundation this year supported a new seminar on arms control. This seminar brought together some thirty individuals in the Cambridge academic community with strong interests in both the technological and political aspects of this subject. We very much hope that this may prove to be the beginning of a substantial new research program on defense policy.

This brief sampling of our progress in political science is intended only to suggest the vitality of this field at the Institute. It has grown quickly, but without over- stretching itself. It has set high standards in research, and it has developed both its undergraduate and graduate courses in a most creative and constructive spirit. This new venture for M.I.T., in sum, has met with outstanding success.

[Reports on Psychology and Linguistics complete this  section of the President’s Report]

 

Source: Massachusetts Institute of Technology. The President’s Report 1961. pp. 11-16.

Image Source: The M.I.T. mascot beaver on the cover of its yearbook, Technique 1949.