Tag: BrownEC

Categories
Economics Programs Economists M.I.T.

M.I.T. Department of Economics Annual Report by E. Cary Brown, 1975-1976

The following annual report of the M.I.T. department of economics was most likely written for the care and feeding of administrators and the members of the department’s visiting committee. This report covers what was my second year of graduate school, so for folks from that time it reads like an annual Holiday newsletter to the family.

_______________________

Department of Economics
1975 – 76

Undergraduate Program

The long-run impact of the past year’s changes in the Institute Requirement in the Humanities, Arts, and Social Sciences is not yet clear. Unquestionably they have increased the Department’s enrollment, but the precise amount is uncertain because simultaneously a major revision was made in the two introductory economics subjects. In the past year enrollments were larger than previously, but smaller than in the transition of the previous year. Nearly 200 of the Class of 1976 concentrated in economics for their Humanities, Arts, and Social Sciences Requirement. Of all students presently enrolled, 327 (primarily juniors and seniors) have elected to concentrate in economics.

Undergraduate majors remain steady in numbers. As in 1974-75, 20 degrees were awarded. In the spring term the Undergraduate Economics Association was reactivated. Its weekly meetings with faculty led to several proposals for revision of the undergraduate program, and several student-faculty socials were organized.

Graduate Program

Enrollment has been remarkably steady in the graduate program. The number of applications for admission was virtually identical to the average of the previous six years. Next year’s entering class of 32 will be slightly larger than average, and will have fewer foreign students and more women, reflecting a shift in the percentage of applications from these groups. Four students from minority groups are expected to be in this class.

Financial support for the graduate student has changed very little over the last several years. We are still fortunate in having from one-third to one-half of the entering students on National Science Foundation Fellowships. For the whole student body, there has been an increase in the support by US foundations (other than NSF) and a decrease in support provided by M.I.T.

The number receiving the Doctor of Philosophy increased somewhat in the past year to 21. For the first time, two American blacks received degrees.* The class fared well in placement, their median salary offer totaling 24 percent above that of 1971. Like the past average, 86 percent went into teaching and 14 percent into non-teaching positions.

*Samuel Myers, Jr. Ph.D. thesis: “A Portfolio Model of Illegal Transfers”, supervised by Robert Solow.
Glenn Loury. Ph.D. thesis: “Essays in the Theory of the Distribution of Income”, supervised by Robert Solow.
See: William Darity Jr. and Arden Kreeger, “The Desegregation of an Elite Economics Department’s PhD Program: Black Americans at MIT“, History of Political Economy 46 (annual suppl.)

The Graduate Economics Association awarded the outstanding teacher in the Department prize to Professor Stanley Fischer.

PUBLIC SERVICE ACTIVITIES

The faculty has always been involved in public service activities tying research to the public interest. In connection with M.I.T.’s participation in the Bicentennial Celebration, Professor Jagdish N. Bhagwati set up a recent conference on the New International Economic Order: Professor Ann F. Friedlaender is planning one for this fall on Air Pollution and Administrative Control. Through the German Marshall Fund, Professor Richard S. Eckaus is organizing a fall conference on economic problems of Portugal. Professor Franco Modigliani arranged a conference through the Bank of Finland on International Monetary Mechanisms.

Various Congressional committees and government agencies have been advised. Professor Peter A. Diamond served on the Consultant Panel on Social Security for the Congressional Research Service. Professors Rudiger Dornbusch and Fischer and Institute Professor Paul A. Samuelson prepared a report for the US Department of Commerce on international financial arrangements. Professor Robert E. Hall was a member of the Advisory Committee on Population Statistics, Bureau of the Census. Professor Jerry A. Hausman served on the Econometrics Advisory Committee to the Federal Energy Administration. Institute Professor Modigliani was a consultant and member of the Committee on Monetary Statistics, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. Institute Professor Samuelson consulted with the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, the US Treasury, and the Congressional Budget Office. Professor Charles A. Myers was a member of the National Manpower Policy Task Force. Institute Professor Robert M. Solow served as Deputy Chairman, Federal Reserve Bank of Boston.

Several faculty members have been involved with the National Academy of Sciences and its related organizations. Professor Eckaus prepared a report, Appropriate Technology for Developing Countries, for the Board on Science and Technology for Developing Countries of the National Academies of Science and Engineering. Professor Franklin M. Fisher served on a National Academy panel on the Effects of Deterrence and Incapacitation; Professor Friedlaender was on the Executive Committee, Assembly of Behavioral and Social Sciences, National Research Council; Institute Professor Modigliani was on the Finance Committee; Institute Professor Samuelson served on the Editorial Board of the Proceedings; and Institute Professor Solow chaired the Steering Committee on Environmental Studies.

Professor Eckaus led an OECD Mission to Portugal that included Professors Lance Taylor and Dornbusch.* Professor Paul L. Joskow was a consultant to OECD in energy. Professor Evsey D. Domar was a member of a delegation of economists sent by the American Economic Association to the Soviet Union. Institute Professor Modigliani, who gave much time to the problems of stabilization in Italy, was a member of the Board of Directors of the Italian Council for Social Sciences.

*Along with several graduate students among whom were Paul Krugman, Andrew Abel and Jeffrey Frankel. Paul Krugman has written a short note about this experience with a picture!

The Brookings Institution Panel for Economic Activity included Professors Dornbusch and Hall, with Institute Professors Modigliani, Samuelson, and Solow as senior advisors to it. Professor Friedlaender served on the examining committee, Graduate Records Examination, Educational Testing Service. Institute Professor Modigliani served on the Committee on Economic Stabilization, Social Science Research Council. Professor Fisher is a member of the Board of Governors of Tel Aviv University. Institute Professor Solow continues as Trustee for the Institute of Advanced Study.

RESEARCH

International topics seem to dominate the research interests of the faculty. Professor Bhagwati, in addition to his work in developing countries and international trade theory, has given attention to a proposal for applying taxation to the brain drain. Professor Eckaus studied the role of financial markets and their regulation and the behavior of income distribution in economic development. Professor Taylor had three major areas of research: the development of nutrition planning models in Pakistan, international food aid and reserve policies, and growth and income distribution in Brazil.

Professor Morris A. Adelman’s continuing research on the world oil market, Professor Joskow’s analysis of the international nuclear energy industry, and Professor Martin L. Weitzman’s examination of OPEC and oil pricing involve applied microeconomics with international implications.

Research in various applied microeconomics areas was responsible for the second largest fraction of faculty effort. Institute Professor Solow continued to research the economics of exhaustible resources, and Professor Weitzman completed his analysis of the optimal development of resource pools. Professor Joskow has explored the future of the electric utility industry and its financing, the future of the US atomic energy industry, and the pattern of energy consumption in the US. He is developing a simulation model of the energy industry, and is reviewing the regulatory activities of government agencies in general and the health care sector in particular. Professor Hausman examined the Project Independence Report and is analyzing the choice of new technologies in energy research.

In the transporation field, Professor Friedlaender surveyed the issues in regulatory policy for railroads and alternative scenarios in federal transporation policy. Professor Jerome Rothenberg examined such problems in urban transportation as pricing policies, demand sensitivity to price, and modeling locational effects. Professor William C. Wheaton considered an optimal pricing and investment policy in highways under a gasoline tax.

Inextricably intertwined with urban transportation are questions of urban location and housing. Professor Rothenberg carried out research in such aspects of this problem as microeconomics of internal migration, supply-demand for housing in multizoned areas, the impact of energy costs on urban location, and the development of a model of housing markets and of metropolitan development and location that can be applied to general policy questions. Professor Wheaton developed an equilibrium model of housing and locational choice based on Boston experience.

Institute Professor Modigliani also conducted research on the housing market, but his interest comes primarily from the side of stabilization policies and similar macroeconomic problems. He also participated in a review after 20 years of his life cycle hypothesis of saving, made monetary policy prescriptions for both the US and Italy, reflected on the description of financial sectors in econometric models, and explored more deeply the application of optimal control to the design of optimal stabilization policies in economic models. Institute Professor Samuelson reviewed the art and science of macromodels over the 50 years of their development. Professor Friedlaender completed a quarterly macromodel of the Massachusetts economy. Professor Hall developed a model to deal with income tax changes and consumption.

Public economics has both macro and micro aspects, both of which are represented in the Department’s research. With Visiting Professor James A. Mirrlees, Professor Diamond theorized about public shadow prices with constant returns to scale, and about the assignment of liability. He also has generalized the Ramsey tax rule and continued his research into an optimal Social Security system. Professor Hausman is reexamining the cost of a negative income tax; Professor Rothenberg analyzed the distributional impact of public service provision; and Professor Wheaton explored intertemporal effects of land taxes, fiscal federalism in practice, and the financial plight of American cities.

Besides such theoretical research, there was significant research of an entirely pure nature. Professor Robert L. Bishop reexamined the measurement of consumer surplus. Professor Fisher extended his exploration of the stability of general equilibrium and of aggregate production functions. Professor Weitzman investigated the welfare significance of national product in a dynamic economy. Professor Hal R. Varian further explored the theory of fairness, non-Walrasian equilibria, and macromodels of unemployment and disequilibrium. Professor Hausman examined the econometric implications of truncated distributions and samples, of probit models, and of simultaneous equation models. In historical research, Professor Domar was concerned with serfdom, while Professor Charles Kindleberger investigated the role of the merchant in nineteenth-century technologic transfer.

Publications

Professor Bhagwati edited Taxing the Brain Drain: A Proposal and Brain Drain and Taxation: Theory and Empirical Analysis, and coauthored Foreign Trade Regimes and Economic Development: India. Professors Dornbusch and Kindleberger published numerous papers on implications of the new international monetary exchange structure for exchange rates, price stability, international trade, and international capital movements. Professor Weitzman continued his study of the Russian economy with a paper on the new Soviet incentive model.

With Visiting Professor of Management Ezio Tarantelli*, Institute Professor Modigliani published Labor Market, Income Distribution and Private Consumption (in Italian) and various papers on stabilization policy in Italy. He also wrote papers on inflation and the housing market and edited New Mortgage Designs for Stable Housing in an Inflationary Environment. Professor Hall’s labor market research resulted in papers on persistence of unemployment, occupational mobility, and taxation of earnings under public assistance. Professor Michael Piore wrote on labor market stratification and the effect on industrial growth of immigration from Puerto Rico to Boston. Professor Fisher had several publications on indexation and adjustment of mortgages to inflationary episodes. In the realm of economic history, Professor Temin published Reckoning with Slavery and Did Monetary Force Cause the Great Depression?

*Ezio Tarantelli was the victim of a Red Brigades’ assassination in 1985.

Institute Professor Samuelson published theoretical papers on factor price equalization and trade pattern reversal. In the realm of pure research, he put out papers on nonlinear and stochastic population analysis, optimal population growth, and the optimal Social Security system implied in a lifecycle growth model. He also brought out the tenth edition of his famous text, Economics: An Introduction Analysis.

FACULTY

Visiting Professor John R. Moroney was here from Tulane University; Visiting Professor Mirrlees came in the spring term from Nuffield College, Oxford University. Regular faculty on leave were Professors Fisher and Joskow in the fall and Professor Weitzman in the spring.

It is a pleasure to report the promotion to Associate Professor of Jerry A. Hausman. A new appointee, Professor Jeffrey E. Harris, with the unusual background of an M.D. and a Ph.D. in economics, will provide long-sought coverage in health economics.

Professor Kindleberger will retire as Ford Professor and become a Senior Lecturer on a half-time basis. Since 1948, when he came as an Associate Professor, Professor Kindleberger has been an effective teacher, scholar, participant in faculty governance, and counselor to governments and the public. He has trained the leading international economists of the next generation; he has produced a dozen books and more than a hundred articles in international trade and finance and in economic history. He epitomizes the highest kind of academician.

Several honors were bestowed on members of the Department. Institute Professor Modigliani will complete his year as President of the American Economic Association. Professor Myers received a Distinguished Alumni award from Pennsylvania State University. Professor Fisher was F.W. Paish Lecturer to the Association of (English) University Teachers of Economics. Institute Professor Solow received a D. Litt. from Warwick University, and Institute Professor Samuelson, a D.Sc. from the University of Rochester.

EDGAR CARY BROWN

Source: MIT Libraries, Institute Archives and Special Collections. MIT Department of Economics Records, Box 1, Folder “Annual Report 1975-6”.

Image Source: Building E52, Alfred P. Sloan Jr. Building, later Morris and Sophie Chang Building

 

https://mitmuseum.mit.edu/collections/subject/building-e52-alfred-p.-sloan-jr.-building-later-morris-and-sophie-chang-building-52

Categories
Economics Programs M.I.T. Undergraduate

M.I.T. Economics department committee (re-)organization. 1976-78

During my second year in graduate school at M.I.T. (1975-76), the economics department professors were engaged in a discussion about reforming the administration of their department. At the time I was completely unaware of this discussion that had been provoked by the following memorandum written by then Department Head, Professor E. Cary Brown, based on his experience with the growing overload of administrative chores and responsibilities in a department with the scale of that attained by M.I.T.’s economics department.

Brown’s memo to the faculty is followed by a transcription of a copy of the letter Brown wrote to Robert Solow, who as an administrative reorganization committee member, must have been asked for some further testimony. The entire committee’s (Peter A. Diamond, Stanley Fischer, Jerry Hausman, Paul Joskow, Robert M. Solow) report was completed two months after Brown’s memo. In the same departmental file from the M.I.T. archives, one finds a copy of the actual assignment of administrative responsibilities for the academic year 1977/78.

Many, if not most, of the administrative tasks had been allocated and faithfully executed before this “reorganization”. I know that Evsey Domar had long been covering the placement of new Ph.D.’s and also proudly serving as the departmental representative for library-related affairs. I sense reading these documents that the truly neglected child all along was the undergraduate program for which some arm-twisting was required to achieve equitable burden-sharing among the faculty. But perhaps there were other specific items that had been sore points too. Maybe Brown simply wanted an explicit organization chart to forestall “whataboutism” from the mouths of relatively uncooperative colleagues. But like I wrote above, this was a discussion that was invisible to me (appropriately so) at the time.

Cf. The committee assignments in the Harvard economics department during the 1972-73 academic year. 

__________________________

MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS
CAMBRIDGE, MASSACHUSETTS 02139

March 12, 1976

Economics Department Faculty

Dear [blank]

For some time I have become increasingly dismayed at the increase in the administrative burden in the Department, and now find the present job as Head to be a nearly impossible one. If the job is to be made tolerable, it must have substantial additional faculty support in some form to cut it down to a scope manageable either by me or a successor.

There are two basic ways that this can be achieved: (1) by spreading the administrative activities and responsibilities more widely among the faculty; or (2) placing these tasks on essentially an associate departmental head, whose precise title could take various forms Executive Officer, Academic Officer (e.g., Tony French in Physics), or Associate Head. I personally would favor the Associate Head route, but regard it as an open question subject to further discussion and consideration, and to Administration approval. This new structure should be treated as an experiment, to last no longer than until the next Head is chosen, and to be reconsidered at that time.

My own thinking about the administrative tasks of the Department separates them into four major areas: undergraduate programs, graduate programs, research programs, and personnel and budgeting. While these can be headed by an administrator or by faculty, it seems to me that the first two programs should have formal faculty control regardless of the form the administrative reorganization takes. The graduate program nearly has that form now and largely runs itself, with the exception of a few odds and ends that now lie outside the responsibility of the graduate registration officers. The undergraduate program is a long way from this structure and will require a good deal of imagination, initiative and effort to resuscitate the Undergraduate Economics Association and provide more guidance and support for majors. The research programs (student and faculty) focus more or less clearly under the Committee on Economic Research. Personnel and budgeting are an administrative responsibility. They have involved increasing amounts of time as budgets have tightened, space has tightened, and the search for new faculty has expanded.

The administrative structure is an important matter to the Department. Because it involves departmental administration and the role of the Department Head, it concerns the Administration through Dean Hanham. He has asked me to appoint the following committee to consider these questions of reorganization and to make recommendations: Bob Solow, Peter Diamond, Stan Fischer, Paul Joskow, and Jerry Hausman. Please give your views to members of the committee as soon as you can.

Sincerely,
[signed “Cary”]
E. Cary Brown, Head

ECB/sc

__________________________

Brown to Solow

March 16, 1976

Professor Robert Solow
E52-383

Dear Bob:

I shrink from making organization charts, but the following diagram is intended to give some idea of the orders of magnitude of faculty involvement in departmental chores.

Chairman, Committee on Undergraduate Studies

  1. Faculty counselors (we have agreed with the UEA to keep members to 10 or less, and let faculty build up expertise by staying adviser for freshman, sophomore, junior, or senior year).

—10 faculty: 2 for each class. 4 for seniors

  1. Faculty adviser for humanities concentration in economics (advises and signs up students); also considers the eligibility of economics subjects, what we consider concentration, etc.
  2. Closely related to (2) is possible membership on the so-called Humanities Committee that approves and reviews the whole Humanities, Arts, and Social Science requirement and program. (We have no one on this year but as the largest concentration will surely need to have a presence.)
  3. Approval of transfer of credits from other schools to M.I.T.
  4. Advising with Undergraduate Economic Association in matters academic, professional, social.
  5. Undergraduate placement, while an Institute responsibility, could be supervised and assisted by a faculty member who would keep up to date on summer placement, interning possibilities, salaries. The experience our students have applying to graduate schools, actual jobs offered and taken.
  6. Design of curriculum, cooperative program, etc.
  7. Various activities, such as providing information to undergraduates in their choice of major (Midway in fall, seminar in spring), Open House activities, Alumni activities, etc.
  8. Relations with other Departments at undergraduate level, such as subject offerings, subject content, etc.
  9. Supervision and staffing of undergraduate subjects with multiple sections — 14.001, 14.002, 14.03, 14.04, 14.06, 14.30, 14.31.
  10. Catalog copy.

Chairman, Committee on Graduate Studies

  1. Graduate Registration Officers, so far one each for first two years, and one for thesis writers. Has been suggested that we have an additional adviser for foreign students and minority and women?
  2. Admissions Committee has, in the past, had three members.
  3. Placement, both summer and permanent.
  4. Supervision of core subjects.
  5. Ph.D. and M.S. requirements, program, size.
  6. Financial aid — coordinating various GRO; Admissions Committee, and Budget limitations.
  7. Graduate School Policy Committee meetings.
  8. Annual revision of brochure.
  9. Graduate Economics Association, Black Graduate Economics Association.
  10. Catalog copy.
  11. Various activities — professional and social that are not contained within a particular class.

Chairman, Committee on Economic Research (I faculty)

  1. Organized list of faculty projects requiring research assistants and the supply of them (both graduate and undergraduate). Assignment of R.A.’s.
  2. Assistance in research proposals.
  3. Inventory of internships and off-campus research.
  4. Supervision of unscheduled subjects, such as UROP, Undergraduate Seminar, and thesis.
  5. Supervision of M.I.T. Working Paper Series.
  6. Allocation of computer funds, developing rules, developing alternative sources.

Personnel and Budgeting (Administrative Officer and a large chunk of my time)

  1. Personnel
    1. Nonfaculty is supervised by the Administrative Officer.
    2. Faculty Personnel

(1) Employment — new Ph.D.’s and senior faculty
(2) Review and promotion
(3) Assignments, leaves, research

    1. Postdoctoral personnel
  2. Space allocations, revisions.
  3. Budget Proposals
  4. a. Proposals
    b. Implementation

Telephone
Xerox & Ditto
Supplies
Equipment

There may be other matters that I am leaving out – routine meetings average probably a day a week, and things like that. Consultations with faculty, students, and other Departments, would probably add a couple more days.

If there are questions, I’ll oblige, of course.

Sincerely,
E. Cary Brown, Head

ECB/sc

__________________________

MEMORANDUM

May 10, 1976

TO:       Department Faculty
FROM: Committee on Reorganization (PAD, SF, JH, PJ, RMS) [Peter A. Diamond, Stanley Fischer, Jerry Hausman, Paul Joskow, Robert M. Solow]

SUBJECT:         Reorganization

ECB’s [E. Cary Brown] letter of March 12, which created this committee, starts from the premise that the administrative burden on the Department Head has become essentially impossible. This seems clearly to be the case. It has happened because the department has increased in size and complexity without any corresponding adaptation of its administrative arrangements. Every new function has fallen into the Head’s lap. (Top that, anyone.) Apart from the sheer burden of work thus created, another problem is the difficulty of communications, because that is also time-consuming.

After some palaver and negotiation, we have a reorganizational package to suggest. It rests on two conditions; since it is something of an interconnected web, it will probably unravel if the two conditions can not be met. (1) Since the only way to correct an excessively centralized structure is to decentralize it, we propose to diffuse administrative responsibility more widely through the department; there will be at least one serious administrative post for everyone, or perhaps two minor posts instead, but everyone will have to participate. (2) The administrative load attached to the undergraduate program has increased with the size of the enrollment and the improvement of the curriculum; no one wants to manage an inadequately staffed program. We propose, therefore, that the normal teaching load for everyone in the department be agreed to be half graduate and half undergraduate teaching. This definition should be extended to everyone on the departmental budget: joint appointees, visiting professors, etc. As soon as there are a couple of exceptions to this understanding, there will be more. Then the management of the undergraduate program will break down, and it will revert or default to the Department Head, and that is what we are trying to stave off.

The particular organization we have in mind is as follows.

  1. The central functions (budgeting, space, leaves, relations with the MIT hierarchy, etc.) will be in the hands of the Department Head and an Associate Head namely PAD [Peter A. Diamond]). In addition, one of them (probably ECB [E. Cary Brown]) will be an ex officio member of the Committee on Undergraduate Studies to be proposed below, and the other will be an ex officio member of the Committee on Graduate Studies. The precise division of labor is obviously a matter of taste; for the moment, ECB [E. Cary Brown] will probably do most of the relations with the MIT structure and PAD [Peter A. Diamond] will concentrate on intra-departmental matters.
  2. There will be a Director of Undergraduate Studies (PT [Peter Temin]), who will be chairman of a Committee on Undergraduate Studies (with 2 or 3 additional members, possibly RD [Rudiger Dornbusch], PJ [Paul Joskow] and one other). This committee will be responsible for revisions of the undergraduate curriculum adding and subtracting subjects, staffing them, degree requirements, etc. In recent discussions with the Undergraduate Economics Association, the proposal has merged that there should be a larger number of Undergraduate Advisors (i.e., registration officers) than there is now, with each taking care of at most 10 students. That suggests we would need about 8 such advisors. The members of the Committee might serve as advisors, plus others. Merely serving as registration officer for 10 undergraduates is by itself not an onerous job.
  3. There seems to be no need for change in the organization of graduate studies in the department. We suggest that there be a Director of Graduate Studies (RSE [Richard S. Eckaus]) and a Committee on Graduate Studies which would, as now, consist of the other two Graduate Registration Officers. Things are going very well now with REH [Robert E. Hall] handling the first-year students. MJP [Michael J. Piore] the second-year students and RSE [Richard S. Eckaus] the thesis-writers. REH [Robert E. Hall] is prepared to take on the task or devising a scheme to keep track of post-generals students, and see that they find themselves a reasonable thesis topic in a reasonable amount of time. The scheme may need another person to look after it.
  4. We suggest the creation of Committee on Staffing whose functions would include looking after the hiring of assistant professors, the dovetailing of visiting professors with faculty leaves, and the rationing of visiting scholars. The picture we have is that the members of committee would do the interviewing and preliminary screening of new Ph.D.’s at the annual meetings, and decide which of them to invite to come and give seminars. At that stage and thereafter, the whole department faculty would be in on the act, and final decisions would be made, as they are now, in a department meeting. The main time-consumer for this committee would be the correspondence in connection with hiring. Since that would fall on the Chairman, that post would be a major one. For the other members of the committee, the burden would be relatively light. We suggest REH [Robert E. Hall] as chairman, plus perhaps 3 others.
  5. There seems to be no reason to change the way the Admissions Committee now functions.
  6. We see no need for major change in the Placement process. Our only suggestion are (a) perhaps to provide EDD [Evsey D. Domar] with another person to share the load, and (b) to have a pre-season department meeting, analogous to the post-generals meeting, at which each graduate student entering the market could be discussed by the full facuIty, and information and ideas collected.
  7. There are other details. RLB [Robert L. Bishop] is functioning as advisor to MIT undergraduates thinking about economics as part of their Humanities requirement, and we are happy to preserve that human capital. MAA [Morris A. Adelman] who has been our representative to CGSP is to begin a term on the CEP, which should count as a major administrative burden. We need his successor on CGSP.

One last point: we hope that each committee chairman will promptly send a written notice of each substantive decision to the Head and Associate Head for distribution to the department faculty, so that communications are well looked after. That plus rational expectations should do the trick.

Source: MIT Archives. MIT Department of Economics Records. Box 2, Folder “Department Organization”.

__________________________

DEPARTMENTAL ADMINISTRATIVE RESPONSIBILITIES:
ECONOMICS DEPARTMENT 1977-78
  1. UNDERGRADUATE COMMITTEE
Chairman: Peter Temin
Members: Cary Brown Senior Faculty Counsellor, Ex Officio
Jerry Rothenberg Senior Faculty Counsellor
Peter Temin Senior Faculty Counsellor
Rudiger Dornbusch Junior Faculty Counsellor
Jeffrey Harris Junior Faculty Counsellor
Jagdish Bhagwati Sophomore Faculty Counsellor (Fall)
Henry Farber Sophomore Faculty Counsellor (Spring)

Summer Jobs: Jeffrey Harris
Humanities Adviser: Robert Bishop
Transfer of Credits: Cary Brown

  1. GRADUATE COMMITTEE
Chairman: Richard Eckaus Thesis, Graduate Registration Officer
Members: Paul Joskow/Mike Piore Second Year Graduate Registration Officer
Marty Weitzman First Year Graduate Registration Officer
Jerome Rothenberg CGSP Representative
Stan Fischer, Ex Officio

Admissions Committee:

Chairman: Robert Bishop
Members: Frank Fisher and Lance Taylor

Placement: Evsey Domar
Harvard-MIT Theory Seminar: Eric Maskin
Theory Workshop: Kevin Roberts

  1. OTHER DEPARTMENTAL ACTIVITIES

Staffing Committee: Chairman: Rudiger Dornbusch

(For New Ass’t Profs.) Members:

Paul Joskow
Jerry Hausman
Stan Fischer, Ex Officio
(Added for Temporary Visitors: Robert Solow)

Independent Activity Period: Jeffrey Harris/Marilyn Simon
Unstructured Subjects Committee: Peter Temin, Undergraduate; Richard Eckaus, Graduate
Computer Allocation: Richard Eckaus

ADDENDUM: INSTITUTE COMMITTEES

CEP: Morris Adelman
Associate Chairman of the Faculty: Michael Piore
Visual Arts: Jerry Rothenberg
Library System, Chairman: Evsey Domar

Image Source:  For this portrait of members of the M.I.T. economics department in 1975 see the Economics in the Rear-view Mirror post that provides identifications.

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
M.I.T. Regulations Teaching Undergraduate

M.I.T. Dean’s request for writing requirements for elective subjects in economics department, 1953

 

The following exchange between the M.I.T. Dean of Humanities and Social Studies (John E. Burchard) and the representative of the chairperson of the Economics Department (Charles A. Myers covering for Ralph E. Freeman) gives us a short list of undergraduate courses that would have regularly had non-economics B.S. students attending to satisfy their distributional requirements in 1953. Dean Burchard’s informational request seems to be a fishing expedition with the hope of landing any evidence that some instructor in some course was helping to improve M.I.T. undergraduate writing skills. It is also interesting to see that sociology, psychology, and political science were all subjects  administered by the economics department.

____________________________

Dean Reminding Economics Department about Information Request

May 6, 1953

Memorandum to Professor [Charles Andrew] Myers:

I asked Ralph [Evans Freeman] a while ago to get me some information but have not heard from him and imagine it got left and wonder if you could undertake this survey for me in the near future and give me an answer.

The problem is that those of us who were worried about the English style of our students at M.I.T. are pretty certain that we will never get a good overall performance on the mere basis of instruction in the first two years where writing is required and read and criticized. The burden of continuously upholding the standard obviously is going to rest with the professional departments and I have no doubt there are great inconsistencies in this throughout the Institute, and I also have no doubt most of them are pretty remiss in this obligation.

Before starting any campaign on this question, however, it is obvious that I need to know whether the house of my own School is in point of fact in order, or if not how far it is out of order.

I accordingly asked Professor [Howard Russell] Bartlett and Professor [Ralph] Freeman to get me an indication of the amount of writing required in the various subjects which might be elected by students in the School. In the History Department this was obviously limited to non-professional subjects and for the moment I am more interested in the general electives in the Department of Economics than I am in what policing you do of your own majors. It would be more helpful to know about both.

What Professor Bartlett did was write me a general answer which told me how many papers were required each semester, the approximate length, and how many written examinations. I wonder if it would be possible for you to dig out the same information for the various appropriate subjects in the Department of Economics and report to me fairly soon. I would like to be thinking about this problem during the summer.

Sincerely yours,
[unsigned]
John E. Burchard
Dean of Humanities and Social Studies

Jeb/h

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

Economics Department’s First Response to Dean’s Request for Information

Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Industrial Relations Section
Department of Economics and Social Science
Cambridge, Massachusetts

May 11, 1953

Memorandum to Dean John E. Burchard

Dear John:

This is in answer to your memorandum of May 6th. I guess this is something Ralph was unable to compete before he left and I thought I should get done promptly since I will be leaving tomorrow for the annual research meeting of the Committee on Labor Market Research of the Social Science Research Council in Minneapolis. George Shultz is one of the invited guests.

Perhaps the best way to answer your question is to list what the various people in charge of the various undergraduate subjects reported:

14.01 [Economic Principles I] ([Robert Lyle] Bishop) — 3 or 4 written hour examinations, mostly of the essay type
14.02 [Economic Principles II] ([Edgar Carey] Brown) — 4 written hour examinations, no term papers
14.03 [Prices and Production] ([Robert Lyle] Bishop) — 2 to 3 hour examinations; no term papers
14.09 [Economic Problems Seminar] ([Paul Anthony] Samuelson) — no written exams, but 2 written papers, one long and one short, plus oral presentation of the content of the paper prior to the submission of the written paper
14.51 [International Relations] ([Norman Judson] Padelford) — 8 written quizzes of 35 to 40 minutes in length; no term paper, except that sometimes there are written projects.
14.61 [Industrial Relations] (Doug [Douglass Vincent] Brown and [John Royston] Coleman) — 3 hour examinations and 3 written case reports
14.63 [Labor Relations] ([George Pratt] Shultz) — 3 written hour examinations and one term paper
14.64 [Labor Economics and Public Policy] ([George Benedict] Baldwin) — 3 hour examinations and one written term paper
14.70 [Introductory Psychology] ([George Armitage] Miller) — 2 or 3 written hour examinations, partly objective in character; no term paper
14.72 [Union-Management Relations] ([Joseph Norbert] Scanlon) — 2 hour examinations and a special paper on a particular case
14.73 [Organization and Communications in Groups] ([Alex] Bavelas and [Herbert Allen] Shepard) — 2 objective-type examinations and one written essay-type examination
14.75 [Experimental Psychology] ([Joseph Carl Robnett] Licklider) — no examinations, but a written paper on the experiment, suitable for publication — this latter test is never quite met but students are expected to write with that end in view
14.77 [Psychology of Communication] ([George Armitage] Miller) — 3 objective-type examinations
14.91 and 14.92 [The American Political System;
Comparative Political and Economic Systems]		 ([Jesse Harris] Proctor and [Roy] Olton) — 3 written hour exams, no term paper in the first term — 3 written hour exams plus a written term paper in the second term
15.30 [Personnel Administration] ([Paul] Pigors) — 4 written cases, one term paper and one hour examination

 

I think this pretty well covers the principal courses which are taken by undergraduate students in other departments. I think my own experience in teaching such undergraduate courses as 14.61 and 14.63 is similar to that of most of the staff, in that I have called attention to students of misspelled words, poor grammar, and generally poor organization and expression of written answers and papers. I really doubt if we can do much more or should do much more. It would be quite a task to go over each written examination with each student in detail, or even to do this after they have submitted a term paper. From time to time I have done this with some theses but not as a general rule, since the student is warned in advance that his grade will depend not only on content, but on expression.

I hope this gives you the information you need.

Sincerely
[signed] Charlie
Charles A. Myers

m:g

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

Follow-up Request by Dean

May 12, 1953

Memorandum to Professor Myers

Dear Charlie:

Your memorandum of yesterday answers my question about the writing in part.

I guess I agree, though I wish I didn’t have to, that people in the department cannot be expected to act as writing critics for students who are still defective in their English. Though I wish more people required papers and fewer examinations, this is obviously a matter of individual teachers’ methods.

The remaining question which I think is not answered is I believe a critical one, namely, does poor writing really result in a lower grade, and if it does is that single comment written on to the paper when it is returned with the grade to the student?

I hate to trouble you further but wonder if you would be able to explore this with the same group of people.

Sincerely yours,
[unsigned]
John E. Burchard
Dean of Humanities and Social Studies

Jeb/h

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

Economics Department’s Response to Follow-up Request by the Dean

Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Industrial Relations Section
Department of Economics and Social Science
Cambridge, Massachusetts

June 1, 1953

Memorandum to Dean John E. Burchard

Dear John:

These are some further thoughts on your memo of May 12th, asking me to check again on whether poor writing really results in a lower grade in our courses and whether comments are written on the papers when they are returned with grades to the students.

Nearly everyone with whom I have talked here agrees that poor writing does result in a lower grade, if by “poor writing” is meant poor organization, hasty sentence construction, and confusing or fuzzy thinking as expressed in written words. Poor spelling apparently does not count so much, although Bob Bishop and I specifically do encircle misspelled words on written exams and papers. Comments on poor organization, etc., are specifically written on papers and exams when returned to students, and I know that many of us have stressed to students before writing exams and papers that their grades will depend in part on the way in which their material is organized and presented.

One further experience might be of interest in connection with your comment that you wish more people would require papers and fewer examinations. During the past term Jim Baldwin gave term papers in 14.64 and found that the pressure of senior theses on the students was so great that they did a very poor job on the papers. His grades reflect this, but he is bothered about the apparent conflict between the senior thesis and the term paper requirement in senior Humanities and Social Studies courses. Maybe we ought to place more emphasis on good writing in the senior thesis in the Department and in other Departments.

Sincerely,
[signed] Charlie
Charles A. Myers

CAM:dg

Source: M.I.T., Institute Archives and Special Collections, School of Humanities and Social Sciences. Office of the Dean, Records, 1934-1964. Box 3, Folder “103, Economics Department, General, March 1951-1956”.
For [first and middle names of instructors] and [course titles]: Course Catalogue of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1952-53.

Image Source: (Left) John Burchard ; (Right) Charles A. Myers. MIT Museum Legacy Website (People Collection).

Categories
AEA Berkeley Chicago Cornell Economist Market Economists Johns Hopkins M.I.T. Princeton Stanford Yale

M.I.T. Memo regarding potential hires to interview at AEA Dec meeting, 1965

 

This artifact provides us a glimpse into the demand side of the market for assistant professors of economics in the United States as seen from one of the mid-1960’s peak departments. The chairperson of the M.I.T. economics department at the time, E. Cary Brown, apparently conducted a quick survey of fellow department heads and packed his results into a memo for his colleagues who in one capacity or the other would be attending the annual meeting of the American Economic Association held in New York City in the days following the Christmas holidays of December 1965. The absence of Harvard names in the memo probably only indicates that Brown presumed his colleagues were well aware of any potential candidates coming from farther up the Charles River.

From Brown’s memo, Duncan Foley (Yale) and Miguel Sidrauski (Chicago) ended up on the M.I.T. faculty as assistant professors for the 1966-67 academic year. John Williamson was a visiting assistant professor that year too.

_____________________________

Dating the Memo

The folder label in the M.I.T. archives incorrectly gives the date Dec. 28-30, 1969, where the 1969 has been added in pencil.

Two keys for dating the memo.  Brown’s comment to John Williamson (York): “Wants a semester here, Jan.-June 1967″.  “Solow is hearing paper at meetings” (Conlisk of Stanford) who presented in the invited doctoral dissertation session “The Analysis and Testing of the Asymptotic Behavior of Aggregate Growth Models” (affiliation given as Rice University (Ph.D., Stanford University) where Solow was listed as a discussant. AEA’s 78th Annual Meeting was held in New York City at the end of December 1965.

_____________________________

Memo from E. Cary Brown to M.I.T. faculty going to Dec. 1965 AEA meeting

[Pencil note: “Put in beginning of 1966-7”]

Memorandum Regarding Personnel Interviews in New York

To: Department Members Attending AEA Convention
From: E. C. Brown

University of Chicago

Sidrauski, Miguel (26). International Trade, Monetary Theory, Economic Growth, Mathematical Economics

Thesis—“Studies in the Theory of Growth and Inflation” under Uzawa
References: Harberger, Johnson, Lewis

[He came here a year ago to ask about a short-term appointment before he returned to Argentina. Griliches believes him to be tops. Had him in class myself and he was first rate. Called him on phone last week and he still wants to be had.]

 

Thornber, Edgar H. (24). [H. = Hodson] Econometrics, Mathematical Methods, Computers

Thesis—“A Distributed Lag Model: Bayes vs. Sampling Theory Analyses” under Telser
References: Griliches, Zellner

[Supposed to be equal of Sidrauski. Heavily computer oriented. Doesn’t sound interesting for us, but we should talk to him.]

 

Treadway, Arthur. Mathematical Economist

Thesis on the investment function

[A younger man who, according to Svi [sic], regards himself as the equal of the above. Stronger in mathematics, and very high grades. Wasn’t on market because thesis didn’t appear as completable. Now it seems that it will be and he wants consideration.]

 

Evenson, Robert E. (31). Agricultural Economics and Economic Growth, Public Finance

Thesis—“Contribution of Agricultural Experiment Station Research to Agricultural Production” under Schultz
References: Gale Johnson, Berg

[He is just slightly below the others. Mature and very solid and combines agriculture and economic growth where we need strength.]

 

Gould, John (26).

(Ph.D. in Business School)

[Bud Fackler mentioned him as their best. Uzawa and Griliches are trying to get the Econ. Dept. to hire him. Franco knows him and is after him.]

 

Princeton

Klevorick, Alvin (22). Mathematical Economics, Econometrics, Economic Theory

Thesis: “Mathematical Programming and the Problem of Capital Budgeting under Uncertainty” (Quandt)
References: Baumol, Kuhn

[Apparently the best they have had for some time. Young and very brash.]

 

Monsma, George N. (24). Labor Economics, Economics of Medical Care, Public Finance

Thesis: Supply and Demand for Medical Personnel” (Harbison)
References: Patterson, Machlup

[Dick Lester was high on him. While not a traditional labor economist, he works that field.]

Silber, William L. (23). Monetary Economics, Public Finance, Econometrics

Thesis: “Structure of Interest Rates” (Chandler)
References: Goldfeld, Musgrave, Quandt

[One of their best four. Not sure he sounds like what we want in fields, however.]

 

Grabowski, Henry G. (25). Research and Development, Econometrics, Mathematical Economics

Thesis: “Determinants and Profitability of Industrial Research and Development” (Quandt)
References: Morgenstern, Baumol

[Lester says he is good all around man. His field makes him especially interesting.]

 

Stanford

Conlisk [John]— Economic growth and development

[Arrow has written about him, recommending him highly. His field should be interesting. Solow is hearing paper at meetings.]

 

Bradford [David Frantz]— Public finance

[Has been interviewed up here, but more should see him who wish to.]

 

Yale

Foley [Duncan Karl] (Probably not at meetings. Best Tobin’s had.]

Bryant [Ralph Clement] (Now at Federal Reserve Board. Number 2 for Tobin]

 

York

Williamson, John

[Wants a semester here, Jan.-June 1967. Alan Peacock at meetings.]

 

Johns Hopkins

[Ask Bill Oakland]

 

University of California, Berkeley

[Ask Aaron Gordon or Tibor Scitovsky.]

 

Cornell

Bridge [John L.] — Econometrics, Foreign Trade

Lindert [Peter]— International Economics

[Their two best as indicated in their letter to Department Chairman.]

 

Buffalo

Mathis, E.J. [Ask Mitch Horwitz if it’s worth pursuing.]

 

Columbia U.

[Ask Bill Vickrey]

 

Pittsburgh

Miller, Norman C. (26). International Economics; Money, Macro, Micro and Math Economics

Thesis: “Capital Flows and International Trade Theory” (Whitman)
References: Marina Whitman, Jacob Cohen, Peter Kenen, Graeme Dorrance

[Letter to Evsey Domar from Mark Perlman (Chm.) recommending him to us for further training.]

 

Source: Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Institute Archives and Special Collections. MIT Department of Economics records, Box 1, Folder “AEA Chairmen MEETING—Dec. 28-30, 1969 (sic)”.

Image Sources:  Duncan Foley (left) from his home page. Miguel Sidrauski (right) from the History of Economic Thought website.

Categories
Berkeley Economics Programs M.I.T. Race

M.I.T. Economics Chair’s Account of Early Efforts of Affirmative Action for Black Graduate Students. Cary Brown, 1974

 

Starting with the 1970/71 academic year, the M.I.T. economics department launched an initiative to increase the enrollment of black students in its graduate program. E. Cary Brown, the head of the M.I.T. economics department described the first four years experience of the initiative in his response to an inquiry from the chairperson of the Berkeley economics department, Albert Fishlow.

For considerably more on this subject, see:

William Darity, Jr. and Arden Kreeger. The Desegregation of an Elite Economics Department’s PhD Program: Black Americans at MIT in MIT and the Transformation of American Economics (Annual Supplement to Volume 46 of History of Political Economy, edited by E. Roy Weintraub. Duke University, 2014) pp. 371-335.

____________________________

M.I.T. Economics Department’s Experience With Expanding Graduate Enrollment of Black Students, 1970-74

September 18, 1974

Professor Albert Fishlow, Chairman
Department of Economics
University of California
Berkeley, California 94720

Dear Professor Fishlow:

This letter is in reply to your letter of August 9, 1974, requesting information on our procedures with respect to qualified minority students.

As background, you should know that we had no special programs for minority candidates (although we had a few such students) until the entering class of 1970. At that time we took seriously an experiment to see if the number in our student body could be expanded. In the admissions process we set aside criteria we had used in the past, on the assumption that they were not as relevant to minority candidates. With the help and advice of several of our Deans for Minority Students and our own contacts with minority groups, we selected three students that first year (1970-71). Subsequently we admitted 3 blacks in 1971, 4 in 1972, 2 in 1973 and 4 this year.

Initially we organized a summer tutorial program that worked on the development of their mathematical skills and gave them a serious taste of what was to come in theory and statistics. This was supervised and participated in by several faculty and graduate students. We now make this a standard offering at students’ options, and this summer, for example, only one entering student requested this special help.

The tutorial program was extended into the regular academic year when students required it. We are still prepared to carry this out, but, in general, it has diminished essentially to zero.

There has been no modification in the academic program or requirements for minority students, nor any tempering of standards. They have been urged to take a less heavy program than the ordinary student—to stretch out preparation for their examinations. Typically they added about a year to the preparations time, but that, too, seems to be less necessary.

We have had many discussions with black students to try to achieve better communication and awareness of mutual problems. What started as essentially a student-faculty committee has evolved into a Black Graduate Economics Association. This association, on its own volition, prepared a video tape presentation for the purposes of encouraging minority high school students to go on to college in economics, to encourage minority college student to go on to graduate school, and to encourage this group to come to M.I.T. There was much informal recruiting by the black students. When admitted candidates visited Cambridge to determine what graduate school to attend, the program would be essentially organized by some of our black students. They have been extremely important in establishing an environment congenial to black students, and conveying their enthusiasm about the program.

The relations have been good with the black students, especially as between faculty and black students. There have been some student problems, feelings of exclusion and the like, that existed last year. The precise source of these difficulties we have not been able to ascertain. We are also aware that black women have had special complaints that neither the black males nor the faculty could fully understand. Our keeping communications open has perhaps depended on luck, but certainly also depended heavily on particular black students here and on particular faculty and the administrative officer who have made substantial amounts of time available to them and who have helped with their social and living problems.

One problem should be pointed out to you. Much of graduate instruction is self instruction by students in study groups. The black students complained at first that they had no leader, no one they could emulate, no one who could answer their problems. This has changed as the quality of preparation has improved, but it is something that I would urge you to keep in mind. A second problem with high incidence is the difficulty of family adjustment (and most of our minority students have families) to the demands of academic life (including work for many of the wives).

We have no special departmental resources for minority students. M.I.T. has some resources, usually for new students, and there are the national minority fellowships that many of our students have won. Otherwise, they are supported by general graduate financial aid at M.I.T. or in the Department.

Finally, you might look briefly at the record of the minority students. Of the three who entered in 1970, on went to another University to get a Master’s degree (after two years here), another transferred to a Master’s program in Urban Studies at M.I.T. (after two years). The third passed his general examinations a year ago, but has made little progress on his dissertation. Of the second year admittees, two have passed generals and are at work on theses, the third is still in school after being out for a year. The 1972 group includes two who partially failed their generals, two who will be taking them this year. Of the 1973 group, one transferred to another graduate school and one will take generals this year.

I am not sure how I would describe our program. It is viable; there are enough students as a group so they do not feel they should drop out or transfer; morale seems to be high. On the other hand, we have put much time and resources into the program and do not yet have candidates who have completed the program. We have had the satisfaction of seeing the quality of preparation and the enthusiasm rise. We are also sure that we will have a half dozen Ph.D.’s from this minority group in the next three or four years.

I am sending you a copy of our current graduate brochure which contains more detailed information than the catalogue. Professor Robert L. Bishop is Chairman of the Graduate Committee on Admissions, and Professor Peter A. Diamond is Chairman of the Graduate Committee.

Sincerely yours,

E. Cary Brown, Head

ECB/ss
Enclosure

 

Source: Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Institute Archives and Special Collections. Department of Economics Records. Box 1, Folder “Women + Minorities”.

Image Source: “E. Cary Brown, fiscal policy expert, dies at 91“. M.I.T. News. June 27, 2007.

Categories
Exam Questions Johns Hopkins M.I.T. Suggested Reading Syllabus

M.I.T. Readings and exam questions for fiscal and monetary policy. Domar, 1957

Evsey Domar’s first semester at M.I.T. was as a visiting professor according to the teaching records of the economics department. He taught one seminar on Russian Economics (14.292) and a graduate course with the nominal title “Fiscal Policy”. That course had been taught previously by E. Cary Brown (Spring 1954, 1955) and R. A. Musgrave, visiting Professor (Spring 1956).

Inspection of the ten-page course bibliography and the final examination questions along with two note-cards filed with these course materials, it appears that well over half the course was in all likelihood dedicated to fiscal policy topics with monetary policy for stabilization topics accouting for perhaps one-third of the course. Just as the length of the course bibliography (typical for Domar) is daunting, his use of asterisks to designate recommended reading was exceedingly liberal. An examination of the final examination questions leads me to conclude that it should be rather easy to reduce the course reading list (for examination purposes!) to less than two pages.

___________________________

Course Enrollment
(Second term, 1956-57

Instructor

Domar, E. D.
Rank

Prof. (Visit.)
Subj. No.

14.472
Subj. Title

Fiscal Policy
No. Class Hours/Week

3
No. Students

22

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

___________________________

Typed notecards for an introduction to or a review of course.

The traditional arguments regarding the purposes of Monetary Policy:

  1. Stabilization of general prices or of factor earnings—the Wicksell-Davidson controversy. The instrument was the relation between the natural and the market rates.
  2. Stabilization of prices or of employment. Recent literature is full of this.
  3. Stabilization of the general prices or of prices of Federal securities. See Douglas’s and other reports on this recent controversy.
  4. Stabilization of employment or the achievement of growth. Any conflict?
  5. Discretionary methods or automatic provisions? See Simons’ article in Readings in Monetary Theory.
  6. To provide credit and currency, sound and in sufficient quantity.
  7. To protect the international position of the country.
  8. To have special effects, such as:

a. by region
b. by industry
c. by commodity consumed (such as tobacco) or housing
d. on population (by giving exemptions or subsidies for dependents)

  1. Provide revenue [handwritten addition]
  2. Distribution of income [handwritten addition]

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

The following limitations, some real, other imaginary, explain why Fiscal Policy is not as simple as Lerner makes it:

Income distribution
Size of the deficit
Size of the budget
Balance of payments
Special regional and industrial effects
Effects on incentives to work (in inflation)
Automaticity of the system (built-in-flexibility)
Monetary effects (on reserves, deposits)
Long-run effects (on growth and development)

Their presence complicates things and explains all the ingenious articles and tax devices frequently suggested. If not for them, fiscal policy would be very simple indeed: cut taxes or increase taxes, and the same with expenditures.

___________________________

READING LIST
14.472 Fiscal Policy
Spring Term 1956-57

Professor E. D. Domar

PART I—MONETARY POLICY

The purpose of this list is to suggest to the student the sources in which the more important topics in Monetary Policy are discussed from many points of view. His objective should be the understanding of these topics and not the memorization of who said what.

Most of the sources listed here, and particularly the Congressional materials, discuss a number of questions not only in Monetary but in Fiscal Policy as well. Hence it is difficult to classify them.

Items marked with an * are strongly recommended. (I don’t like to use the expression “required” in a graduate reading list.)

  1. Factual Materials on Monetary Problems

Federal Reserve Bulletin.

Treasury Bulletin.

Annual Reports of the Secretary of the Treasury and of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.

Historical Statistics of the United States, 1789-1945, and the Continuation to 1952.

Congressional Hearings, Reports and other Materials listed below.

  1. Introduction

Hart, Albert Gailord, Money, Debt and Economic Activity, New York 1948.

Hicks*, J. R., “A Suggestion for Simplifying the Theory of Money,” Economica, 1935; reprinted in Readings in Monetary Theory.

Lerner*; Abba P., “Functional Finance and the Federal Debt,” Social Research, 1943, and Readings in Fiscal Policy, p. 468, also Chapter 24 in his Economics of Control, New York, 1944.

Poole, Kenyon E., ed. Fiscal Policies and the American Economy.

Sproul* Allan, “Changing Concepts of Central Banking,” Money, Trade and Economic Growth in Honor of John Henry Williams, New York, 1951.

  1. Monetary Theory and Growth

Gurley*, John G. and Shaw, E. S., “Financial Aspects of Economic Development,” American Economic Review, September 1955, pp. 515-538.

  1. Effectiveness of the Interest Rate

Ebersole*, J. F., “The Influence of Interest Rates,” Harvard Business Review, XVII, i, 1938, pp. 35-39.

Henderson*, R. D., “The Significance of the Rate of Interest,” Oxford Economic Papers, October 1938, I, pp. 1-13.

*Meade, J. E. and Andrews, P. W. S., “Summary of Replies to Questions on Effects of Interest Rates,” Oxford Economic Papers, October 1938, I, pp. 14-31.

Sayers, R. S. “Business Men and the Terms of Borrowing,” Oxford Economic Papers, Feb. 1940, III, pp. 23-31.

Andrews, P. W. S., “A Further Inquiry into the Effects of Rates of Interest,” Oxford Economic Papers, Feb. 1940, III, pp. 32-73.

White*, William H., “Interest Inelasticity of Investment Demand—The Case from Business Attitude Survey Re-Examined,” American Economic Review, September 1956, pp. 565-87.

Lutz, Friedrich A., “The Interest Rate and Investment in a Dynamic Economy,” American Economic Review, Dec. 1945.

  1. General Surveys of Monetary Policy

Federal Reserve Board*, Tenth Annual Report for 1923. See pp. 29-39 particularly.

Chandler*, Lester V., “Federal Reserve Policy and the Federal Debt,” American Economic Review, 1949, and Readings in Monetary Theory, p. 394.

Hardy, Charles O., “Fiscal Operations as Instruments of Economic Stabilization,” American Economic Review, Supplement, 1948, pp. 395-403 and Readings in Monetary Theory, p. 394.

Hart, Albert Gailord, “Monetary Policy for Income Stabilization,” Income Stabilization for a Developing Democracy, ed. by Max F. Millikan, New Haven, 1953.

Williams, John H., “The Implications of Fiscal Policy for Monetary Policy and the Banking System,” AER Proceedings, March 1942; Readings in Fiscal Policy, p. 185.

Smith*, Warren L., “On the Effectiveness of Monetary Policy,” American Economic Review, September 1956, pp. 588-606.

  1. Suggested Objectives and Policies

Hammarskjold, Dag, “The Swedish Discussion on the Aims of Monetary Policy,” reprinted in International Monetary Papers, No. 5, pp. 145-154.

Simons*, Henry C., “Rule versus Authorities in Monetary Policy,” JPE, 1936, and Readings in Monetary Theory, p. 337.

Simons, Henry, “On Debt Policy,” JPE, Dec. 1944, and Readings in Fiscal Policy.

Mints*, Lloyd, W., “Monetary Policy,” Review of Econ. and Stat., 1946 and Readings in Fiscal Policy, p. 344.

Bach*, G. L., “Monetary-Fiscal Policy Reconsidered,” JPE, Oct. 1949, and Readings in Fiscal Policy.

Friedman*, Milton, “A Monetary and Fiscal Framework for Economic Stability,” American Economic Review, 1949, and Readings in Monetary Theory, p. 369.

*United Nations. National and International Measures for Full Employment. Report by a group of experts appointed by the Secretary-General (Lake Success, New York, December 1949).

Viner*, Jacob, “Full Employment at Whatever Cost,” QJE, August 1950, pp. 385-407. Reproduced with omissions in Economic Policy, Readings in Political Economy, edited by William D. Grampp and Emanuel T. Weiler, Homewood, Ill., 1956, pp. 54-65.

Samuelson* Paul A., “Principles and Rules in Modern Fiscal Policy: A New-Classical Reformulation,” Money, Trade and Economic Growth in Honor of John Henry Williams, New York, 1951.

Seltzer* Lawrence H., “Is a Rise in Interest Rates Desirable or Inevitable,” American Economic Review, Dec. 1945; Readings in Fiscal Policy, p. 202.

Roosa, Robert V., “Interest Rates and the Central Bank,” Money, Trade and Economic Growth in Honor of John Henry Williams, 1951.

Roosa*, Robert V., “Integrating Debt Management and Open Market Operations,” American Economic Review, 1952, and Readings in Fiscal Policy, p. 265.

Hansen*, Alvin H., “Monetary Policy,” The Review of Economics and Statistics, May 1955, pp. 110-119.

  1. Commodity Money

Graham, Benjamin, World Commodities and World Currency, New York 1944.

Graham*, Frank D., “Full Employment without Public Debt, Without Taxation, Without Public Works, and without Inflation,” Planning and Paying for Full Employment, edited by Abba P. Lerner and Frank D. Graham, 1946.

  1. Congressional Materials

Joint Committee on the Economic Report. Money, Credit, and Fiscal Policies. Hearings before the Subcommittee on Monetary, Credit and Fiscal Policies of the Joint Committee on the Economic Report, 81st Congress, First Session, September 23, November 16,17,18,22,23 and December 1,2,3,5,7, 1949.

Joint Committee on the Economic Report. Monetary, Credit, and Fiscal Policies. A Collection of Statements Submitted to the Subcommittee on Monetary, Credit and Fiscal Policies by Government Officials, Bankers, Economists, and Others. 1949.

Joint Committee on the Economic Report (The Douglas Subcommittee). A Compendium of Materials on Monetary, Credit, and Fiscal Policies. A Collection of Statements Submitted to the Subcommittee on Monetary, Credit, and Fiscal Policies by Government Officials, Bankers, Economists, and Others. 81st Congress, 2ndSession, Senate Document No. 132, 1950.

Joint Committee on the Economic Report*. Monetary, Credit, and Fiscal Policies. Report of the Subcommittee on Monetary, Credit, and Fiscal Policies of the Joint Committee on the Economic Report. 81st Congress, 2ndSession, Senate Document No. 129, 1950.

Joint Committee on the Economic Report. Monetary Policy and the Management of the Public Debt Hearings before the Subcommittee on General Credit Control and Debt Management of the Joint Committee on the Economic Report, 81st Congress, 2nd Session, March 1952.

Joint Committee on the Economic Report. Monetary Policy and the Management of the Public Debt. Their Role in Achieving Price Stability and High-Level Employment. Replies to questions and other material for the use of the subcommittee on general credit control and debt management. 82nd Congress, 2nd Session, Senate Document No. 123, 1952.

Joint Committee on the Economic Report. Monetary Policy and the Management of the Public Debt Report of the Subcommittee on General Credit Control and Debt Management of the Joint Committee on the Economic Report, 82nd Congress, 2nd Session, 1952.

Joint Committee on the Economic Report. United States Monetary Policy: Recent Thinking and Experience Hearings before the Subcommittee on Economic Stabilization of the Joint Committee on the Economic Report. 83rd Congress, 2nd Session, December 6 and 7, 1954.

Joint Committee on the Economic Report. January 1956 Economic Report of the President. Hearings before the Joint Committee on the Economic Report. 84th Congress, 2nd Session, January 31, February 1,2,3,6,7,8,9,14,15,17 and 28, 1956.

Joint Committee on the Economic Report*. Conflicting Official Views on Monetary Policy; April 1956. Hearings before the Subcommittee on Economic Stabilization of the Joint Committee on Economic Report, 84thCongress, 2nd Session, June 12, 1956.

  1. Readings for Amusement

Outside Readings in Economics, second edition. Selected by Hess, Arleigh P. Jr., Gallman, Robert E., Rice, John P., and Stern, Carl, New York, 1956. The “Dialogue on Money,” by D. H. Robertson; “The Island of Stone Money,” by William H. Furness III; “The Paper Money of Kubla Khan,” by Marco Polo; and “The Edict of Diocletian,” by Humphrey Mitchell, pp. 314-335 are very amusing and instructive.

 

PART II—FISCAL POLICY

See the remarks in Part I.

  1. Factual Materials of General Character

Joint Committee on the Economic Report.* The Federal Revenue System: Facts and Problems, 1956

Treasury Bulletin

Annual Reports of the Secretary of the Treasury and of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue

Statistical Abstract of the United States

Historical Statistics of the United States, 1789-1945 (published by the U. S. Bureau of the Census)

U. S. Treasury Department, Internal Revenue Service, Statistics of Income (an annual publication in two volumes)

U. S. Bureau of the Census, Summary of Governmental Finances (annual series)

The Budget of the U. S. Government

Commerce Clearing House, Inc., Tax Systems

West Publishing Co., Federal Tax Regulations, 1956

Congressional Hearings and Reports, listed in Part I and below

Textbooks on Public Finance and Fiscal Policy

  1. Historical Studies

Ratner, S., American Taxation: Its History as a Social Force in a Democracy, New York, 1942

Fabricant*, S., The Trend of Government Activity in the United States since 1900, New York, 1952, Chapters 1, 6, 7

Studenski, P. and H. E. Kroos, Financial History of the United States, New York, 1952

Musgrave*, R. A. and J. M. Culbertson, “The Growth of Public Expenditures in the United States,” National Tax Journal, June, 1953, pp. 97-115

Paul, R. E., Taxation in the United States, Boston, 1954

  1. Fundamental Assumptions

Hansen*, A. H., “The Stagnation Thesis,” Fiscal Policy and the Business Cycle, New York, 1941, pp. 38-46, and Readings in Fiscal Policy

Schumpeter*, J. A., “Economic Possibilities in the United States,” Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy, 1947, and Readings in Fiscal Policy

Domar*, E. D., “The Problem of Capital Accumulation,” The American Economic Review, December, 1948

Fellner*, W., “Relative Emphasis in Tax Policy on Encouragement of Consumption or Investment,” Federal Tax Policy for Economic Growth and Stability, Joint Committee on the Economic Report, Washington, D.C., November 9, 1955, p. 210

Hansen*, A. H., “Economic Stability and Growth,” Federal Tax Policy for Economic Growth and Stability, Joint Committee on the Economic Report, Washington, D. C., November 9, 1955, p. 14

Smithies*, A., “Economic Growth as a Policy Objective,” Federal Tax Policy for Economic Growth and Stability, Joint Committee on the Economic Report, Washington, D. C., November 9, 1955, p. 32.

  1. General Objectives and Policies

Keynes* J. M., “An Open Letter,” The New York Times, 1933, and Readings in Fiscal Policy

Lerner*, A. P., “Functional Finance and the Federal Debt,” Social Research, 1943, and Readings in Fiscal Policy. Also Chapter 24 in his Economics of Control, New York, 1944

Hart, A. G., “’Model-Building’ and Fiscal Policy,” American Economic Review, 1945, and Readings in Fiscal Policy

Committee for Economic Development, “Taxes and the Budget: A Program for Prosperity in a Free Economy,” Readings in Fiscal Policy, 1947

Colm* G., “The Government Budget and the Nation’s Economic Budget,” Public Finance, 1948, and Readings

Friedman*, M., “A Monetary and Fiscal Framework for Economic Stability,” American Economic Review, 1948, and Readings

National Planning Association, “Federal Expenditure and Revenue Policy for Economic Stability,” 1949, Readings

Bach*, G. L., “Monetary-Fiscal Policy Reconsidered,” Journal of Political Economy, October, 1949, and Readings

United Nations*, National and International Measures for Full Employment (report by a group of experts appointed by the Secretary-General), Lake Success, New York, December, 1949

Simons*, H. C., Federal Tax Reform, Chicago, 1950

Viner*, J., “Full Employment at Whatever Cost,” The Quarterly Journal of Economics, August, 1950

Samuelson*, P. A., “Principles and Rules in Modern Fiscal Policy; A Neoclassical Reformulation,” Money, Trade, and Economic Growth: in Honor of John H. Williams, New York, 1951

Millikan, M., ed., Income Stabilization for a Developing Democracy, Yale, 1953

Rolph, E.R., The Theory of Fiscal Economics, Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1954

U. S. Congress, Joint Committee on the Economic Report, Federal Tax Policy for Economic Growth and Stability, December, 1955, Hearings

American Economic Association* Readings in Fiscal Policy, Homewood, Illinois, 1955

National Bureau of Economic Research, Policies to Combat Depression, a conference of the Universities-National Bureau Committee for Economic Research, 1956

Council of Economic Advisers*, the latest Annual Report

  1. Institutional Factors

Bailey, S. K., Congress Makes a Law: the Story behind the Employment Act of 1946, New York, 1950

Bailey, S. K. and H. D. Samuel, Congress at Work, New York, 1952

Blough, R., The Federal Taxing Process, New York, 1952

Smithies*, A., The Budgetary Process in the United States, Committee for Economic Development, New York, 1955

  1. Tax Incidence

Musgrave*, R. A., et al, “Distribution of Tax Payments by Income Groups,” National Tax Journal, March, 1951

Little, I. M. D., “Direct versus Indirect Taxes, Economic Journal, September, 1951

Musgrave*, R. A., “On Incidence,” Journal of Political Economy, August, 1953

Bach*, G. L., “The Impact of Moderate Inflation on Income and Assets of Economic Groups,” Federal Tax Policy for Economic Growth and Stability, Joint Committee on the Economic Report, Washington, D. C., November 9, 1955, p. 71

Musgrave*, R.A., “Incidence of the Tax Structure and its Effects on Consumption,” Federal Tax Policy for Economic Growth and Stability, Joint Committee on the Economic Report, Washington, D. C., November 9, 1955, p. 96

  1. Cyclical Aspects

Slichter*, S. H., “The Economics of Public Works,” American Economics Review, 1934, and Readings in Fiscal Policy

Lutz, H. L., “Federal Depression Financing and its Consequences,” Harvard Business Review, 1938, and Readings

Myrdal* G., “Fiscal Policy in the Business Trade,” American Economic Review Supplement, 1939, and Readings

Hagen, E. E., “Timing and Administering Fiscal Policy,” American Economic Review, May, 1948

Committee on Public Issues of the American Economic Association*, “The Problem of Economic Instability,” American Economic Review, 1950, and Readings

Smithies*, A., “The American Economic Association Committee Report on Economic Instability,” American Economic Review, 1951, and Readings

Phillips, A. W., “Stabilization Policy in a Closed Economy,” The Economic Journal, June, 1954, pp. 290-323

Committee for Economic Development*, Problems in Anti-Recession Policy, September 1954

  1. Alternative Budgets for Full Employment

Kaldor*, N., Appendix C in W. H. Beveridge, Full Employment in a Free Society, 1945

Musgrave*, R. A., “Alternative Budget Policies for Full Employment,” American Economic Review, 1945, and Readings

Musgrave*, R. A. and M. H. Miller, “Built-In Flexibility,” American Economic Review, 1948 and Readings

Bishop*, R. L., “Alternative Expansionist Policies,” Income, Employment and Public Policy: Essays in Honor of Alvin H. Hansen, New York, 1948

Stein, H., “Budget Policy to Maintain Stability,” Problems in Anti-Recession Policy, Committee for Economic Development, September, 1954

Hagen*, E. E., “Federal Taxation and Economic Stabilization,” Federal Tax Policy for Economic Growth and Stability, Joint Committee on the Economic Report, November 9, 1955, pp. 58-70

Lusher, D. W., “The Stabilizing Effectiveness of Budget Flexibility,” Policies to Combat Depression, a conference of the Universities-National Bureau Committee for Economic Research, Princeton, 1956

  1. Balanced Budget Multiplier

Wallich*, H. C., “Income-Generating Effects of a Balanced Budget,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, November, 1944

Haavelmo*, T., “Multiplier Effects of a Balanced Budget,” Econometrica, 1945, and Readings

Haberler, G., “Multiplier Effects of a Balanced Budget,” Econometrica, April, 1946

Baumol, W. J. and M. H. Preston, “More on the Multiplier Effects of a Balanced Budget under Full Employment,” American Economic Review, March, 1955

  1. The National Debt

Studenski, P., “The Limits of Possible Debt Burdens—Federal, State, and Local,” American Economic Review, Supplement, 1937

Haley*, R. F., “The Federal Budget: Economic Consequences of Deficit Financing,” American Economic Review, 1941, and Readings

Williams*, H. H., “Deficit Spending,” American Economic Review, February, 1941 and Postwar Monetary Plans and other Essays, 1944

Ratchford, B. U., “The Burden of a Domestic Debt,” American Economic Review, 1942, and Readings

Williams, J. H., “The Implications of Fiscal Policy for Monetary Policy and the Banking System,” Proceedings of the American Economic Association, 1942, and Readings

Domar*, E. D., “The ‘Burden of the Debt’ and the National Income,” American Economic Review, 1944, and Readings

Simons*, H., “On Debt Policy,” Journal of Political Economy, 1944, and Readings

Seltzer, L. H., “Is a Rise in Interest Rates Desirable or Inevitable?” American Economic Review, 1945, and Readings

Wallich, H. C., “Debt Management as an Instrument of Economic Policy,” American Economic Review, June, 1946

Roosa, R. V., “Integrating Debt Management and Open Market Operations,” American Economic Review, 1952, and Readings

Burkhead*, J., “The Balanced Budget,” Quarterly Journal of Economic, 1954, and Readings

  1. Inflation and War Finance

Sprague, O. M. W., “Loans and Taxes in War Finance,” American Economic Review, Proceedings, 1917, and Readings

Keynes*, J. M., How to Pay for the War, London, 1940

Smithies*, A., “The Behavior of Money National Income under Inflationary Conditions,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, 1942, and Readings

Fellner*, W. J., “Postscript on War Inflation: A Lesson from World War II,” American Economic Review, 1947, and Readings

Fetter*, F., “The Economic Reports of the President and the Problem of Inflation,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, 1949, and Readings

Wald, H. P., “Fiscal Policy, Military Preparedness, and Postwar Inflation,” National Tax Journal, 1949, and Readings

Hart, A. G., Defense Without Inflation, New York, 1951

  1. Effect on Incentives: Incentive Taxation

Domar*, E. D., and R. A. Musgrave, “Proportional Income Taxation and Risk Taking,” Quarterly Journal of Economic, May, 1954

Butters, J. K., and J. Lintner, Effect of Federal Taxes on Growing Enterprises, Boston, 1945

Groves*, H. M., Postwar Taxation and Economic Progress, New York, 1946, Chapter 11

Shelton, J. P., and G. Ohlin, “A Swedish Tax Provision for Stabilizing Business Investment,” American Economic Review, June, 1952

Brown*, R. S., “Techniques for Influencing Private Investment,” Income Stabilization in a Developing Democracy, M. Millikan, ed., 1953, pp. 416-432

Domar*, E. D., “The Case for Accelerated Depreciation,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, February, 1953

Butters*, J. K., “Taxation, Incentives, and Financial Capacity,” American Economic Review, Supplement, 1954, and Readings

Brown, E. C., “The New Depreciation Policy under the Income Tax: An Economic Analysis,” National Tax Journal, March, 1955

Goode*, R., “Accelerated Depreciation Allowances as a Stimulus to Investment,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, May, 1955

Break*, G. F., “Effects of Taxation on Work Incentives,” Federal Tax Policy for Economic Growth and Stability, Joint Committee on the Economic Report, Washington, D. C., November 9, 1955, p. 192

Brown*, E. C., “Weaknesses of Accelerated Depreciation as an Investment Stimulus,” Federal Tax Policy for Economic Growth and Stability, Joint Committee on the Economic Report, Washington, D. C., November 9, 1955, p. 495

Butters*, J. K., “Effects of Taxation on the Investment Capacities and Policies of Individuals,” Federal Tax Policy for Economic Growth and Stability, Joint Committee on the Economic Report, Washington, D. C., November 9, 1955, p. 126

Greenewalt*, C. H., “Effect of High Tax Rates on Executive Incentive,” Federal Tax Policy for Economic Growth and Stability, Joint Committee on the Economic Report, Washington, D. C., November 9, 1955, p. 185

Long*, C. D., “Impact of Federal Income Tax on Labor Force Participation,” Federal Tax Policy for Economic Growth and Stability, Joint Committee on the Economic Report, Washington, D. C., November 9, 1955, p. 153

Kaldor*, N., “An Expenditure Tax,” London, 1955

  1. Particular Taxes

Simons, H., Personal Income Taxation, Chicago, 1938

Brown*, E. C., “Analysis of Consumption Taxes in Terms of the Theory of Income Determination,” American Economic Review, March, 1950

Goode*, R., Corporation Income Tax, New York, 1951

Royal Commission on the Taxation of Profits and Income, First Report, February, 1953; Second Report, April, 1954; Final Report, June, 1955

Due, J. F., “Economics of Commodity Taxation and the Present Excise Tax System,” Federal Tax Policy for Economic Growth and Stability, Joint Committee on the Economic Report, Washington, D. C., November 9, 1955, p. 547

Keith*, G., “Economic Impact of the Corporation Income Tax,” Federal Tax Policy for Economic Growth and Stability, Joint Committee on the Economic Report, Washington, D. C., November 9, 1955, p. 658

Goode, R., “The Corporate Income Tax in a Depression,” Policies to Combat Depression, a conference of the Universities-National Bureau Committee for Economic Research, 1956

Merriam, I. C., “Social Security Programs and Economic Stability,” Policies to Combat Depression

Pechman, J. A., “Yield of the Individual Income Tax During A Recession,” Policies to Combat Depression

  1. Inter-Governmental Fiscal Relations

Maxwell*, J. A., “Intergovernmental Fiscal Devices for Economic Stabilization,” Federal Tax Policy for Economic Growth and Stability, Joint Committee on the Economic Report, Washington, D. C., November 9, 1955, p. 807

Heer*, C., “Stabilizing State and Local Finance,” Policies to Combat Depression, 1956

U. S. Treasury Department, Committee on Inter-Governmental Fiscal Relations, Federal, State, and Local Government Fiscal Relations, 78th Congress, 1st Session, Senate Document No. 69, 1943

U. S. Bureau of the Census, Compendium of State Government Finances (an annual series)

Same source, Compendium of City Government Finances (an annual series)

Tax Institute, Federal-State-Local Tax Correlation (A Symposium), December, 1953

The Council of State Governments, Federal Grants-in-Aid, 1949

  1. Growth and Economic Development

Bernstein*, E. M. and I. G. Patel, “Inflation in Relation to Economic Development,” International Monetary Fund, Staff papers, II, 1951-52

United Nations*: Fiscal Division, “Taxation and Economic Development in Asian Countries,” Economic Bulletin for Asia and the Far East, Vol. IV, November, 1953

Gurley, J. A., “Fiscal Policy in a Growing Economy,” Journal of Political Economy, December, 1953

Papers and Proceedings of the Conference on Agricultural Taxation and Economic Development, H. P. Wald, and J. N. Froomkin, eds., Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1954 (Harvard University Law School, International Program in Taxation)

  1. Special Problems

Clark*, C., “Public Finance and Changes in the Value of Money,” The Economic Journal, December, 1945

Clark*, C., “The Danger Point in Taxes,” Harper’s Magazine, December, 1950

Goode*, R., “An Economic Limit on Taxes: Some Recent Discussion,” National Tax Journal, September, 1952

Caplan, B., “A Case Study: The 1948-1949 Recession,” Policies to Combat Depression, 1956

Fox, K. A., “The Contribution of Farm Price Support Programs to General Economic Stability,” Policies to Combat Depression, 1956

Gordon, R. A., “Types of Depressions and Programs to Combat Them,” Policies to Combat Depression

Grebler, L., “Housing Policies to Comat Depression,” Policies to Combat Depression

Johnson, D. G., “Stabilization of International Commodity Prices,” Policies to Combat Depression

Owen, W., “Self-Liquidating Public Works to Combat Depression,” Policies to Combat Depression

Source: Duke University, David M. Rubenstein Rare Book and Manuscript Library. Economists’ Papers Archive. Box 17, Folder “Fiscal and Monetary Policy”.

___________________________

FINAL EXAMINATION
14.472 Fiscal Policy
Monday, May 20, 1957

E. D. Domar

ANSWER ALL QUESTIONS. THE QUALITY OF YOUR REASONING IS THE MOST IMPORTANT PART OF YOUR ANSWERS.

  1. [35%] Compare and contrast monetary and fiscal policies as methods of achieving a steadily expanding economy (without inflation or depression). Include, but don’t limit yourself to, the following points:
      1. The theoretical foundation of each.
      2. Methods used.
      3. Effects on distribution of income and wealth.
      4. Social and political repercussions of each.
      5. The effectiveness and limitations of each.

Do they overlap? Can you work out a synthesis?

  1. [20%] “Government spending tends to be like a drug, in that it takes larger and larger doses to get results, and all the time debt and taxes get higher and higher.”
    Analyze this statement and comment as fully as you can. Compare the effect of government expenditures with that of private.
  2. [15%] “The best cure against inflation is increased production.”
    Analyze this statement and comment on it. Include in your comments the monetary and fiscal implications of this statement.
  3. [15%] What are the so-called “Built-in-Stabilizers?” Discuss fully and indicate how they operate in (a) depression and (b) inflation.
  4. [15%] “The purpose of taxation is never to raise money but to leave less in the hands of the taxpayer.”
    Comment fully and indicate the limitations of this statement. Can you identify the author? (No great penalty if you cannot.)

Source: Duke University, David M. Rubenstein Rare Book and Manuscript Library. Economists’ Papers Archive. Box 16, Folder “Examination. Public Finance and Fiscal Policy”.

Notes on Final Exam:

Question II comes from a review of Stuart Chase, Where’s the Money Coming From? Published in the Monthly Bulletin of the National City Bank of New York that I was fortunate to find inserted into the Congressional Record Volume 93—Part 4 (May 8, 1947, p. 4827);

Question III. Domar liked this question enough to have used it at least twice. See January 23, 1958 Exam at Johns Hopkins; January 26, 1966 at M.I.T.;

Question V. The sentence quoted comes from Abba Lerner’s The Economics of Control, p. 307.

___________________________

Image Source: Evsey D. Domar at the MIT Museum legacy website.

 

Categories
Economics Programs Economist Market Gender M.I.T. Placement UCLA

M.I.T. Stats on women economics Ph.D.s, 1960-72

 

Besides documenting the figure of 5.8% of the MIT economics Ph.D.s granted during the period 1960-1972 going to women, the correspondence between the heads of the UCLA and MIT departments transcribed for this post indicates that there could be up to 14 other departmental responses to the UCLA request in 1972 regarding the gender breakdown of economics Ph.D.s. Can somebody check the UCLA archives for us?

_________________

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, LOS ANGELES

DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90024

19 September 1972

Chairman
Department of Economics
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139

Dear Sir:

The Administration of the University has requested that I obtain from the fifteen best Departments of Economics (as judged by the Roose-Anderson Report) data concerning women Ph.D.s. First, how many women Ph.D.s did you produce from 1960-65, 1965-70, and 1970-72? Second, our Administration wishes specific information on those women with Ph.D.s, or those nearing completion, whom you would recommend for academic appointments.

While it might appear that this Department is about to initiate a policy of discrimination in favor of women, I want to emphasize that we shall continue to select our faculty solely on the basis of merit. Therefore, this year, as in past years, we should very much appreciate information concerning all of your Ph.D.s available for employment in 1973-74.

Sincerely,

[signed]
J.C. La Force
Chairman

JCL:aa

 

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

_________________

 

Carbon copy of E. Cary Brown’s response

September 28, 1972

Professor J. C. La Force
University of California, Los Angeles
Department of Economics
Los Angeles, California 90024

Dear Professor La Force:

The data you requested are as follows:

Ph.D. Awarded
Women

Men
July 1, 1960—June 30, 1965

5

76
July 1, 1965—June 30, 1970

7

95
July 1, 1965—June 30, 1972

1

40
[Total]

13

211

We have not yet compiled a list of the potential supply of Ph.D.’s for next year. I will ask Professor Evsey Domar to call to your attention such women candidates as he would recommend to you. If the list is a sgood as last year’s, they could all be enthusiastically supported.

Very truly yours,

E. Cary Brown, Head

ECB/jfc

Source:  M.I.T. Institute Archives. MIT Department of Economics Records, Box 2, Folder Ph.D. Program Statistics

Categories
Funny Business M.I.T.

M.I.T. Economics faculty M*A*S*H theme skit. Robert Solow, 1977

 

Dating an undated skit script or assigning skit characters to actual faculty members requires textual analysis skills not taught in economics graduate school. But puzzle solving is, so let’s see what we can do with the following skit written by Robert Solow.

Current events and transitory cohorts of graduate students are our main clues to work with.

  • The TV-series M*A*S*H began its run of many years in September 1972.
  • Andrew Abel, Jeff Frankel and Dick Startz, mentioned in the script, all entered the M.I.T. graduate economics program in September 1974, so the earliest they could have been mentioned would have been in the January 1975 show.
  • David Lilien belonged to the previous year’s cohort so he would have been around in 1975-1977.
  • I was in that cohort with Messrs. Abel, Frankel, and Startz, and I am honestly surprised that I do not remember this faculty skit at all. However I do remember well that the faculty, as well as our cohort, wrote and performed independent Wizard of Oz skits in 1976. So it appears that either 1975 or 1977 were likely years for the following skit.
  • Rudiger Dornbusch taught at the University of Chicago Graduate School of Business 1974-75 before coming to M.I.T. in 1975.

Solow’s authorship is firmly established in the prologue to the 1986 faculty skit, where it is written:

“…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 [a coming attraction here at Economics in the Rear-View Mirror], 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 [sic] MASH skit [below], Hawkeye Hall and Trapper Jerry Hausman find Radar Diamond and Hot Lips Friedlaender cavorting in the Chairman’s office…”

We can see how memory plays tricks even on professors, since there is really no way except in a perfect foresight world that in 1973 Robert Solow would have alluded to members of the cohort of 1974-75. 

The Synopsis below was printed on an unattached page and while it clearly leads into the M*A*S*H skit, I somewhat doubt that it was actually recited in performance. The idea of a faculty skit of graduate students trying to write a skit seems undeveloped. Still this synopsis’ characterization of our cohort’s skits as “a series of separate episodes in which they make fun of the idiosyncrasies of the faculty” fits the data well. Thus if forced to choose a single date for the following skit, I would probably go with 1977. 

_____________

Synopsis

It is Friday afternoon and the tenth year class still hasn’t thought of a good idea for a skit. A group including Able Andrew [Andrew Abel], Jacob Frankel [Jeffrey Frankel], “Skinny” Lilien [David Lilien], Dick Stops [Dick Startz]…, are meeting in desperation. Finally they decide that the best they can do is to have a series of separate episodes in which they make fun of the idiosyncrasies of the faculty.

  1. Marty Weitzman (Jeff Harris can do this perfectly. He will write his part).
  2. Jerry Hausman. Lecture to be given very fast. Stop after each point and grin.
  3. Frank Fisher. Obvious.
  4. Bob Hall. This character lectures with one toe on top of the other and his arms folded. Then he hops around the room in that position.
  5. Rudi Dornbusch. This depends on being able to do the accent.

And so on. At the end, someone says this isn’t a very good idea after all and a second skit, based on “mash” is tried.

_____________

Announcer: We are about to tell you a heartwarming story that almost nobody knows. It is the story of a devoted, selfless, kind, hardworking people who are yet charming, humorous, sexy, brilliant and lighthearted even while they tend the youthful victims of a heartless bloody War, the famous WOE or War on Error, perhaps more accurately called the War on Other People’s Error or WOOPE. The warm, sympathetic, lovable heroes of this story are the Doctors of the Massachusetts Economics Students Hospital or M.E.S.H.

As the scene opens, we observe the crusty but kindly commanding officer of MESH, Col. Brown [E. Cary Brown], looking at latest casualty lists.

BROWN: (broad smile, laughing, etc.) Able Andrew [Andrew Abel], flunked; Dick Stops [Dick Startz], flunked; Ray Hartman [Raymond S. Hartman], Ray Hartman, flunked, flunked. This is awful, hohoho. Here’s one who lost his Fellowship. Here’s one who lost both his Fellowships. War is hell.

(PAD [Peter Diamond?] comes in and puts sheet of paper on desk)

BROWN: (shouts) Radar.

PAD: Yessir.

BROWN: Where is that new duty roster for next month?

PAD: Just gave it to you, sir.

BROWN: Hmmm, I see Major Samuelson is doing the history of surgical thought. How far does he go?

PAD: Up to Marx’s transplantation problem.

BROWN: I suppose someone’s assigned to each ward: yes, someone for G-1, and for G-2, G-3, M-2, M-3—say how come nobody’s assigned to M-1?

PAD: Demand for M-1 has dropped off a lot lately.

BROWN: Oh, yes, another outbreak of Goldfeld’s Syndrome. How well I remember the first case I ever saw, back at old Fort Sam Brookings in the old days. Why, boy, they had real cash balances in the Regular Army.

(Enter Hawkeye Hall [Robert Hall] and Trapper Jerry [Jerry Hausman].)

PAD: Hi Hawk, Hi Trapper. What’s up?

HH: Up, down, what difference does it make. It’s all a random walk anyway. I’ve got kids out there dying of underconsumption and all I can tell them is that their consumption is way below trend, but there’s no reason to expect it ever to get back to trend. Properly discounted, they’re already dead.

BROWN: Couldn’t you just amputate a bit of the life cycle—maybe they’re just suffering from Modigliani’s Disease—you know the symptoms, compulsive talking, recurrent forecasting errors, complete absence of bequests—why I remember back at old Fort Sam Brookings…

HH: Modigliani’s Disease? There’s no such thing. That stuff all went out with, with, with econometrics. Nowadays it’s all up down up down. Well, maybe a totally unexpected amputation might work. But only once. No, it’s hard telling those innocent soldiers that everything they were taught up until yesterday, even by me, is all wrong.

TJ: I think the smart ones realize that tomorrow it will appear that what we’re telling them today is wrong too. That’s rational expectations for you. Once you get on it’s hard to get off. I hear that over at the Illinois Economics Graduates Hospital or IEGH the surgeons have stopped doing econometric operations altogether. They’d rather let everybody die at the natural rate. One of our enlisted men, Olivier Lawrence [Olivier Blanchard?], is supposed to have suggested that at least time was an exogenous variable, so maybe you could do a few econometric operations. But Major Lucas [Robert Lucas], the executive surgeon at IECH, told him that only the deviations of time from trend can possibly matter and that’s…

PAD: Up down up down….

TJ: Thanks, Radar. According to Lucas’s method of surgery, all coefficients are either zero or one—dealer’s choice.

(Enter HotLips [Anne Friedlander] and Major Frank [Frank Fisher])

HL: Colonel, I’d like to have this crumb courtmartialed. He almost killed one of our students by disconnecting the MPS transfusion from the main computer. He said that if anyone ever put the peripheral equipment and the main-frame in the same market, he’d never be able to go near Yorktown Heights again. Hark! Do I hear a chopper?

PAD: No, Major HotLips it’s just one of the students with Modigliani’s disease.

HL: Radar, just stay in the supply room and out of the women’s shower.

HH and TJ: Up down up down.

HL: Colonel you’ve got to do something about these clods. And as for Frank here, when I think…what did I ever see in him?

F: Well, I’m a little hard not to see. But I’ll get even with you all. I got out of econometric surgery while there were still exogenous variables. Anti-anti-trust is where the money is now. You’ll regret your temper, HotLips. When these creeps are starving and broke, unemployed econometric surgeons, doing illegal surprise amputations for peanuts, I will be dancing in Yorktown Heights, testifying in the fifty-third year of the IBM case, on one side or the other. Colonel, if you can’t have some discipline in this MESH, I’m going to file a complaint with Judge Edelstein.

BROWN: I think I’ll apply for reassignment to old Fort Sam Brookings.

(Enter Corporal Klingenbusch, dressed in his usual.)

TJ: Gorgeous outfit you’ve got there Klingenbusch [Rudiger Dornbusch?].

K: Victory at last. I’ll be in old Fort Sam Brookings before you. It worked. At last I get to leave this nut house. I’ve been discharged. I’m going home to Japan.

HH: How did you work it Klingenbusch?

K: Easy. I didn’t satisfy the transvestality condition.

ANNOUNCER: And so we leave the dedicated Doctors of MESH. Perhaps you are wondering why none of the beloved students, for whom MESH lives and breathes, actually appeared in this story. The reason is simple and typical, not to say rationally expected. There was no space.

[Handwritten note at the end of the typed text:]

J. Harris (appears): My name is Jeff Harris. I am a chest-cutter by profession. This is the most ridiculous hospital I have ever seen. It makes the University of Pennsylvania look like heaven. I wouldn’t trust these people to do veterinary surgery although, in fact, I think some of them may be veterinarians, at best.

 

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

Image Source: Robert Solow in his office, MIT Museum Website.