Category: Curriculum

Categories
Columbia Curriculum Gender Undergraduate

Columbia. Economics and social science curriculum as of Dec. 1898

Columbia 1890-1898

 

One of the duller parts of my project that covers roughly a century’s development (1870-1970) of undergraduate and graduate economics education is gathering information on the nuts-and-bolts of curriculum structure. Today, looking at a report of the Faculty of Political Science published in the December 1898 issue of Columbia University Quarterly, I saw the announcement that 1898-99 was the first time that women were admitted to graduate courses in history and economics. The report also presented an easy to follow outline of the four or five year curriculum in economics and the social sciences. The idea behind the curriculum was to provide an orderly and logical sequence of courses, yet with sufficient flexibility to serve the needs of undergraduates, graduates (a.k.a. specialists), and special students (those from outside the Faculty of Political Science).

_____________________________

Other Relevant Columbia University Artifacts

_____________________________

Highlights from the December 1898 report of the Faculty of Political Science

“For the first time in its history women are admitted to its courses in history and economics, but only women who are graduates and who are competent to carry on the work of the courses. No women are admitted as special students or to the courses given to the undergraduates, the idea being to put the women graduate students on the same footing as the men, giving them the same opportunities.” p. 75.

“Several new volumes in the series of Studies in History, Economics, and Public Law are now completed, including volumes eight and nine. These studies comprise the most successful of the dissertations which are submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the doctor’s degree.”

Economics and social science curriculum (four or five years)

“Columbia University has attempted thus to formulate in the Department of Economics and Social Science a programme that shall be systematic, in the sense of orderly development and logical sequence (the course covers four or five years), and at the same time flexible, for the purpose of meeting the just demands of a great variety of students—the undergraduate, the specialist, and the special student.” p. 77.

Junior year economics:

“The undergraduate begins with the Economic History of England and America (Economics 1), which gives him that understanding of the evolution of economic institutions, such as the systems of land tenure, the factory system, the institutions of commerce and trade, which is necessary for any approach to economic discussion. That is followed by the Elements of Political Economy (Economics A), where the fundamental principles of the science are laid down and illustrated by contemporary events. These courses are usually taken during the Junior year, but may be taken a year earlier by students desiring to specialize in this direction. The lettered course is required of every student, and is in the nature of logical discipline for clear reasoning and a preparation for good citizenship. The College is held thereby to have discharged its duty to itself, in fulfilling the minimum required for the degree of A.B., and to the community, in inculcating sound principles in its graduates.” p. 76.

Senior year economics:

“For the majority of undergraduates these courses are but the preliminary sketch, the details of which are to be filled out by the more intensive study of Senior year. For this abundant opportunity is offered in the course on modern industrial problems, money, and labor (Economics 3), in the treatment of finance and taxation (Economics 4) and in the critical consideration of theories of socialism and projects of social reform (Economics 10 and 11). At the same time the elements of sociology (Sociology 15) furnish a broader foundation for generalization in regard to the fundamental principles of social life, and afford the student on the eve of graduation an opportunity to coordinate his knowledge of history, economics, philosophy, and ethics into a theory of society.

These courses of Senior year constitute the fundamental university courses, and are frequented by graduates of other colleges and by many students from the law school, the theological seminaries, and Teachers College, who find them valuable as auxiliary to their main lines of study. For the specialist and special student these courses in their turn are preliminary. They form the introduction to the university courses proper.” pp. 76-77.

Graduate (or specialist) economics:

“Here the specialist finds opportunity for development in economic theory (Economics 8, 9, and 10) and for further practical work (Economics 5 and 7), for sociological theory (Sociology 20, 21, and 25), for the treatment of problems of crime and pauperism (Sociology 22 and 23). and for the theory and practice of statistics as an instrument of investigation in all the social sciences (Sociology 17, 18, and 19). Crowning the whole are the seminars in political economy and sociology, and the statistical laboratory, where the student is trained for original work.” p. 77.

_____________________________

Faculty of Political Science
[Full Report for Dec. 1898 Columbia University Quarterly]

Department of History.—The late war seems to have had its effect on educational matters, and several resulting tendencies have been particularly marked at Columbia University. Thus, in the School of Political Science the attendance of students in the course on the general principles of international law has been very large and much interest is being manifested in the subject. Ordinarily this course, as well as a number of others treating of kindred subjects, is given by Professor Moore, who is at present in the service of the United States government. In his absence the course is being conducted by Mr. Edmond Kelly, who has lectured before the school on numerous occasions. Professor Moore’s course on diplomatic history is now being given by Dr. Frederic Bancroft, formerly librarian of the State Department, and a former lecturer in this Faculty.

The Faculty of Political Science has commenced the term with every indication of a most prosperous year. For the first time in its history women are admitted to its courses in history and economics, but only women who are graduates and who are competent to carry on the work of the courses. No women are admitted as special students or to the courses given to the undergraduates, the idea being to put the women graduate students on the same footing as the men, giving them the same opportunities.

The number of publications from the members of this faculty is constantly increasing, and several important works have recently been published or are in preparation. The Macmillan Company will soon publish Professor John B. Clark’s two-volume work on the distribution of wealth and the new edition of Professor Seligman’s Shifting and Incidence of Taxation. Several new volumes in the series of Studies in History, Economics, and Public Law are now completed, including volumes eight and nine. These studies comprise the most successful of the dissertations which are submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the doctor’s degree. Professor Robinson has just published a volume entitled Petrarch’s Letters, and Professor Munroe Smith’s Study of Bismarck has been issued from the University Press.

As Wednesday, October 19, was appointed Lafayette Day, President Low arranged for an address on “The Life and Services to this Country of Lafayette,” by Professor J. H. Robinson.

The department of history has enrolled about four hundred students from Columbia and Barnard. It offers a total of thirty-three courses. The new circular which explains fully its resources and gives a detailed account of its work can be had on application to the Secretary of the University. Professor Dunning is absent on leave. He is spending the winter in Rome, engaged in certain researches connected with the history of political theories and ancient institutions.

W. M. S. [William M. Sloane]

 

Department of Economics and Social Science.—The courses in this department have been so systematized as to meet the needs of both undergraduate and graduate students, while offering to other members of the University and of allied institutions the opportunity to broaden their studies by some knowledge of social theory and social problems.

The undergraduate begins with the Economic History of England and America (Economics 1), which gives him that understanding of the evolution of economic institutions, such as the systems of land tenure, the factory system, the institutions of commerce and trade, which is necessary for any approach to economic discussion. That is followed by the Elements of Political Economy (Economics A), where the fundamental principles of the science are laid down and illustrated by contemporary events. These courses are usually taken during the Junior year, but may be taken a year earlier by students desiring to specialize in this direction. The lettered course is required of every student, and is in the nature of logical discipline for clear reasoning and a preparation for good citizenship. The College is held thereby to have discharged its duty to itself, in fulfilling the minimum required for the degree of A.B., and to the community, in inculcating sound principles in its graduates.

For the majority of undergraduates these courses are but the preliminary sketch, the details of which are to be filled out by the more intensive study of Senior year. For this abundant opportunity is offered in the course on modern industrial problems, money, and labor (Economics 3), in the treatment of finance and taxation (Economics 4) and in the critical consideration of theories of socialism and projects of social reform (Economics 10 and 11). At the same time the elements of sociology (Sociology 15) furnish a broader foundation for generalization in regard to the fundamental principles of social life, and afford the student on the eve of graduation an opportunity to coordinate his knowledge of history, economics, philosophy, and ethics into a theory of society.

These courses of Senior year constitute the fundamental university courses, and are frequented by graduates of other colleges and by many students from the law school, the theological seminaries, and Teachers College, who find them valuable as auxiliary to their main lines of study. For the specialist and special student these courses in their turn are preliminary. They form the introduction to the university courses proper.

Here the specialist finds opportunity for development in economic theory (Economics 8, 9, and 10) and for further practical work (Economics 5 and 7), for sociological theory (Sociology 20, 21, and 25), for the treatment of problems of crime and pauperism (Sociology 22 and 23). and for the theory and practice of statistics as an instrument of investigation in all the social sciences (Sociology 17, 18, and 19). Crowning the whole are the seminars in political economy and sociology, and the statistical laboratory, where the student is trained for original work.

Columbia University has attempted thus to formulate in the Department of Economics and Social Science a programme that shall be systematic, in the sense of orderly development and logical sequence (the course covers four or five years), and at the same time flexible, for the purpose of meeting the just demands of a great variety of students—the undergraduate, the specialist, and the special student.

R. M.-S. [Richmond Mayo-Smith]

 Source: Columbia University Quarterly, Vol. 1 (December 1898), pp. 74-77.

Image Source:  Art and Picture Collection, The New York Public Library. (1890). Columbia University Retrieved from http://digitalcollections.nypl.org/items/510d47e0-cc6c-a3d9-e040-e00a18064a99

 

Categories
Courses Curriculum Harvard

Harvard. Rich economics course descriptions, 1884-85

 

Harvard’s expansion of its course offerings in political economy starting in 1883-84 was a major milestone in university instruction in economics in the United States. A report from the Harvard Crimson and another from New York Post have been posted earlier in Economics in the Rear-view Mirror. Following up the previous post that provided J. Laurence Laughlin’s thoughts from 1885 about how to best teach economics, thick descriptions of the Harvard courses in political economy listed for 1884-85 can be found below. The chapter from which the excerpts have been transcribed is in the same volume in which Richard Ely contributed a chapter, “On Methods of Teaching Political Economy” that was cited by Laughlin.  

__________________

Excerpts from:

THE COURSES OF STUDY IN HISTORY, ROMAN LAW, AND POLITICAL ECONOMY, AT HARVARD UNIVERSITY.1
By Henry E. Scott, Harvard University.

A DESCRIPTION of the ground covered and of the methods used in the various courses in History and Political Science at Harvard must necessarily be preceded by a brief statement of the circumstances under which these studies are pursued there.

In the first place, all the courses offered in these branches — and in almost all other branches as well — are purely elective. The University requires each year a certain amount of work from every undergraduate who is a candidate for the degree of Bachelor of Arts; but, with the exception of about two-fifths of the work of the Freshman year, and certain prescribed written exercises in English in the Sophomore, Junior and Senior years, the undergraduate has full liberty to select any course in any subject which his previous training qualifies him to pursue. The courses in History and in Political Science may therefore be elected by any undergraduate, by the Freshman as well as by the Senior; and they are also, it may be added, open to the students of the various professional schools embraced in the University, to resident graduates, and to special students whether graduates or not.

1In the preparation of the following article, the writer has been greatly assisted by the instructors in the several courses described, and their statements have been incorporated in the text with but little change.

[168]
In order to provide suitable recognition for those students who have confined their college work to one or two special fields, Honors of two grades — Honorsand Highest Honors — are awarded at graduation in almost all branches in which instruction is offered. The candidate for Honors in History or in Political Science must have taken in the department selected six full courses or their equivalent, i.e., he must have devoted to it about one-half of his last three years as an undergraduate, four full courses or their equivalent being the amount of elective work required each year of Sophomores, Juniors, and Seniors; and he must have passed with great credit the regular examinations in those courses, and also, shortly before Commencement, a special examination covering all the six courses in question. Students who do not care to specialize to the extent necessary to obtain Honors can yet, by doing creditably about one-half as much work (i.e., by taking three full courses) in any one subject, receive at graduation Honorable Mention in that subject.

To pursue with advantage studies in History or in Political Science, the student must have easy access to books; and, in order to place within his reach the principal sources, authorities, and other helps necessary for the study of a given course, the system of “reserved books” was established some years ago in the Harvard College Library. The instructors in the various departments request the Library authorities to place upon the shelves of certain alcoves, assigned for this purpose in the reading-room of the Library, the books used by their classes for collateral reading and reference. The books thus reserved can be taken from the shelves by the students themselves without the formality of oral or written orders, and can be consulted in the Library during the day. At the close of library hours, they may, if properly charged, be taken out for the ensuing night only, [169] the borrowers promising to return them at 9 a.m. the next day. The right to use the reserved books is not limited to those students who take the particular course for which certain books have been reserved, but all persons entitled to the privileges of the Library are likewise entitled to use all the reserved books, the purpose of the system being not to withdraw the works from general use for the benefit of a narrow circle, but rather so to regulate their use that the greatest possible number of students may be able to consult them. Persons engaged in special investigations can, if necessary, obtain cards of admission to the shelves where the material they wish to use is stored; but, for the ordinary student, the reserved books, together with those ordered from the Library in the usual way, are sufficient.

The courses of instruction which are now to be described are classified — as are all courses offered in the College — as courses or half-courses, according to the amount of work required of the student and the number of exercises a week, a course having either three or two exercises a week, a half-course either two or one.1 Some of the courses are given every year, others every two years, others twice in three years. The more advanced courses can be taken only by special permission of the instructors, to obtain which students must give evidence of their ability to do the work expected of them. There are announced this year (1884-85) in the official pamphlet sixteen courses and two half-courses in History, one course and two half-courses in Roman Law, and four courses and four half-courses in Political Economy. There are actually given this year eleven courses and two half-courses in History, one course in Roman Law, and four courses and three half-courses in Political Economy,

1In the following description the half-courses are especially designated as such.

[170] the remaining courses being omitted in accordance with the arrangements mentioned above or for special reasons. The average number of hours of instruction per week devoted this year to History is thirty; to Roman Law, three; to Political Economy, fifteen.

[…]

THE COURSES IN POLITICAL ECONOMY.

Political Economy 1 (Mill’s “Principles of Political Economy “; Lectures on Banking and the Financial Legislation of the United States; three hours a week, Professor Dunbar and Assistant-Professor Laughlin) is designed (1) to provide for those students who intend to continue their economic studies for more than one year a suitable introduction to the elementary principles of the science, and their application to questions of practical interest; and (2) to furnish students whose time is chiefly devoted to other departments of study with that general knowledge of and training in Political Economy which all men of liberal education should desire. It has, therefore, its theoretical and its practical side. In the present year (1884-85) the new edition of Mill, prepared by Professor Laughlin, serves as a text-book for the main part of the course, and the remaining time is occupied by lectures on the elements of banking and the public finance of the United States (especially in the last quarter of a century). The instructor holds that for a course in the elements of Political Economy, where it is eminently desirable that the student should assimilate principles rather than memorize explanations of each subject, neither the recitation system nor the lecture system is best fitted, but that a judicious mixture of both is necessary; for the object of the instruction is in general not merely to give men facts, but to lead them to think. The text-book is supposed to furnish to the student a clear statement of the principles that are to be taken up at a given exercise. Then in the class-room the instructor, by questions, and by drawing the men into discussion and the free expression of difficulties, endeavors as much as possible to fix the knowledge of principles in the mind of the students, and to direct their attention to the workings of these principles in concrete cases. Graphic [186] representations of facts (such, for example, as are given by the charts in the text-book referred to) are often used to make the relation between theory and practice still clearer; and statements from the newspapers in regard to economic matters are sometimes read in the class-room, in order to test the student’s ability in applying abstract principles to the affairs of every-day life. To give the students practice in making accurate statements, questions are now and then written on the blackboard and answered in writing within fifteen minutes, and at the next hour these answers are criticised and discussed.

In the lectures on the elements of banking and finance in the latter part of the year, the three functions of banking — deposit, issue, and discount — are illustrated by references to the system of National Banks, of the old United States Banks, and of the Bank of England; and the sub-treasury system, the national debt, the methods of raising revenue during the war, the issue of legal tender paper, the resumption of specie payments, etc., are some of the topics discussed, Professor Dunbar’s pamphlet entitled “Extracts from the Laws of the United States relating to Currency and Finance” serving as a basis for the lectures on finance.

 

Political Economy 2 (History of Economic Theory — Examination of Selections from Leading Writers, three hours a week, Professor Dunbar) was in former years conducted by taking up, in the earlier part of the year, Cairnes’s “Leading Principles,” and, in the later part, some book of which the discussion and criticism would bring out more clearly the meaning of the generally accepted doctrines. Carey’s “Social Science,” [three volumes: Vol. 1, Vol. 2, Vol. 3] George’s “Progress and Poverty,” Shadwell’s ”Principles” — books which put the “orthodox” student in a defensive attitude — were used for this purpose. In addition, lectures were given on the history of political economy, and on examples of the working in practice of its principles, such as the working of the principles of international trade in the payment of the Franco-German indemnity in 1871-73, the commercial crisis of 1857, etc.

For the present year (1884-85) the course is remodelled. Nothing in the nature of a text-book is used. The subject is treated by topics. Such questions as the wages-fund controversy, the theory of international trade, the method of political economy, the theory of value, are to be taken up in succession. On each topic references to leading writers will be submitted to the students for examination and discussion. On the wages-fund question, for example, Mill’s retractation in the “Fortnightly Review” of his original views, Cairnes’s restatement of the theory, F. A. Walker’s position as found in his “Wages Question” and his “Political Economy,” George’s criticism of current views in “Progress and Poverty” will be read and discussed. The history of political economy is to be taken up in a similar way, by reference to characteristic extracts from the writings of the Physiocrats, Adam Smith, Malthus, Ricardo, Senior, Say, Bastiat, and their successors and critics in England and on the Continent. These extracts, read beforehand by the students and discussed in the class-room, will be supplemented by the comments and explanations of the instructor. By this method it is hoped that some familiarity with the literature of the subject will be obtained, as well as a more exact comprehension of its doctrines than can come from an elementary study like that of Course 1.

 

In Political Economy 3 (Discussion of Practical Economic Questions — Lectures and Theses, three hours a week, Assistant-Professor Laughlin) it is expected that the student, who is supposed now to have grasped firmly the general principles of political economy by at least one year’s previous study, will apply these principles to the work of examining [188] some of the prominent questions of the day, such as the navigation laws and American shipping, bimetallism, reciprocity with Canada, government and national bank issues, etc. At the beginning of each topic a general outline of the subject and its principal divisions is given by the instructor, together with more or less particular references to the most important authorities; but a complete list of books is not always furnished, the student being rather encouraged to hunt for material himself. The exercise in the class-room takes the form rather of a discussion than a formal lecture, references to authorities being given previous to each meeting, as the following examples will show: —

Standards of Value, see Jevons, “Money and the Mechanism of Exchange,” chaps, iii, xxv; S. Dana Horton, “Gold and Silver,” chap.iv, p. 36; F. A. Walker, “Political Economy,” pp. 363-368, “Money, Trade, and Industry,” pp. 56-77; Wolowski, “L’Or et l’Argent,” pp. 7, 22, 207; Mill, “Principles of Political Economy,” book iii, chap, xv; Walras, “Journal des Économistes,” October, 1882, pp. 5-13.

The third hour of the week (and also the mid-year examination) can be omitted by men who promise to prepare one considerable thesis (due in April) on a subject connected with some practical question of the day which has not been discussed in the class-room. Examples of such subjects are: the warehousing system; a commercial treaty with Mexico; the public land system; the remedy for our surplus of revenue; municipal taxation; characteristics of socialism in the United States; co-operation in the United States (productive and distributive co-operation, industrial partnerships, and cooperative banks); advantages and disadvantages of small holdings.

 

Political Economy 4 (Economic History of Europe and America since the Seven Years’ War, three hours a week, Professor Dunbar) serves to connect Political Economy with  [189] History. It requires no previous study of Political Economy, although some historical knowledge of the period is presupposed. Among the more prominent subjects taken up are: the rise of the modern manufacturing system, more particularly in cottons, woolens, iron; the steam engine; the economic effects of American Independence and of the French Revolution; the factory system; the migration of labor; improved transportation by railroads and steamships; the application of liberal ideas to international trade; the new gold of California and Australia; the economic effects of the Civil War in the United States; American grain in Europe; the Suez Canal; the crisis of 1873, and commercial crises in general; the development of banking; and the resumption of specie payments in the United States.

The course is chiefly narrative, and is carried on by lectures, supplemented by references for collateral reading. A printed list of topics is distributed to the students, containing a summary of the lectures and references to books reserved in the Library. An extract from this list will most clearly indicate its character and purpose. It gives the topics and references for the first lecture on the new gold supply: —

Lecture XLVII. — The discovery of gold in California: “Robinson’s California” (see Larkin’s and Mason‘s Reports, pp. 17, 33); also Exec. Doc. of U. S., 1848, i, 1. — The discovery in Australia: Westgarth, “Colony of Victoria,” 122,315. — Establishment of miners’ customs: Wood,”Sixteen Months in the Gold Diggings,” 125; Lalor’s “Cyclopaedia,” ii, 851. — Increased supply of precious metals in sixteenth and seventeenth centuries small in proportion to that in nineteenth century: Soetbeer, “Edelmetall-Production” (in Petermann’s “Mittheilungen”), Plate 3; “Walker on Money,” Part I, chaps, vii, viii. — The discoveries of 1848 and 1851 needed to give effect to influences already stimulating trade and commerce.

Similar topics and references are given for each of the eighty or ninety lectures.

 

[190] In Political Economy 5 (Economic Effects of Land Tenures in England, Ireland, France, and Germany—Lectures and Theses, one hour a week, counting as a half-course, Assistant-Professor Laughlin) a branch of the science that has been but slightly considered in Course 1 is taken up, and, as in the other practical courses, an attempt is made to apply principles to facts. The following extract from the official pamphlet, describing the courses of study in Political Economy, will indicate the ground covered: —

“This course covers the questions now of political importance in England, Ireland, France, and Germany in their economic aspects, and embraces the following subjects: — In England: the land laws; relative position of landlord, tenant, and laborer in the last one hundred years; tenant-right; leases; prices and importation of grain; repeal of the corn-laws; American competition; peasant proprietorship. In Ireland: the ancient tribal customs; English conquests; relations of landlord and tenant; security of tenure; Ulster tenant-right; absenteeism; parliamentary legislation; acts of 1869, 1870, 1881, 1882; population; prices of food and labor. In France: feudal burdens on land; relation of classes, and condition of peasantry and agriculture before the Revolution; small holdings and the law of equal division; present condition of peasantry and agriculture; growth of population; statistics of production, wages, prices; peasant proprietorship. In Germany: reforms of Stein and Hardenberg; condition of agriculture; peasant proprietors; statistics of wages and prices.”

A subject taken up (for example, English land tenures) is divided into topics, some of which are treated by the instructor by means of lectures, others are assigned to the individual members of the class, who are expected to present the results of their study in writing. These short theses are criticised and discussed by the instructor and the class, authorities that have been overlooked are pointed out, and suggestions are made as to the way in which the question can be better handled. Perhaps five or six of these papers [191] are required from each student during the year, the intention being that at least one shall be handed in each week. As the natural tendency of such work is to “compile,” much more consideration is given to the quality than to the quantity of the thesis.

 

In Political Economy 6 (History of Tariff Legislation in the United States, one hour a week, counting as a half- course, Dr. Taussig) the history of tariff legislation from 1789 to the present day is studied. The method of instruction is by lectures and collateral reading, specific references being given beforehand on the subjects to be taken up; for example, the references on the tariff act of 1789 are as follows: Hamilton’s “Life of Hamilton,” iv, 2-7; Adams, “Taxation in United States,” 1-30, especially 27-30; Sumner, “History of Protection,” 21-25; Young’s “Report on Tariff Legislation,” pp. iv-xvi. Similar references are given when the economic effects of the tariff, more particularly in recent years, are discussed. The class-room work is based on the assumption that the passages referred to have been read by the students, and, though mainly carried on by lectures, includes questioning and discussion on the references. The economic principles bearing on tariff legislation are taken up in connection with the more important public utterances on the subject, such as Hamilton’s “Report on Manufactures,” Gallatin’s “Memorial of 1832,” Walker’s “Treasury Report of 1845,” and the speeches of Webster, Clay, and others. These are read by the students, and discussed in the class; and at the same time with them are considered the views of writers on the theory of economic science. In the course of the year the various arguments pro and con in the protection controversy are, in one shape or another, encountered and discussed. Towards the close of the year lectures are given on the tariff history of England, France, and Germany.

 

[192] Political Economy 7 (Comparison of the Financial Systems of France, England, Germany, and the United States, one hour a week, counting as a half-course, Professor Dunbar) deals with the principles of finance, and with the financial systems of the more important civilized countries. The budgets of France, Germany, and England are examined and compared, the financial methods of the United States are noted, and the principles of finance and the advantages and disadvantages of different taxes are discussed. The instruction is mainly by lectures. The course is not given in the present year (1884-85), and may be omitted in future years, though it will be retained on the elective list.

 

In Political Economy 8 (History of Financial Legislation in the United States, one hour a week, counting as a half- course, Professor Dunbar) the funding of the Revolutionary debt, the establishment and working of the first Bank of the United States, the financial policy of Hamilton and Gallatin, the effect of the War of 1812 on the finances and the currency, the establishment of the second Bank of the United States, the fall of the bank in Jackson’s time, and the years 1836-40, the independent treasury, the State banking system, the growth of the public debt during the Civil War, and its reduction and conversion since, the establishment and working of the National Bank system, — are the topics successively considered. The method of instruction is by lectures and by reference to the public documents and other writings bearing on the subject. It is advised by the instructors that Courses 6 and 8 in Political Economy be taken together; and this advice has been followed, most students who take one of these courses being also members of the other.

 

Source:  Henry E. Scott, “The Courses of Study in History, Roman Law, and Political Economy at Harvard University”  Vol. I. Methods of Teaching History (pp. 167-170, 185-192) in the series Pedagogical Library, edited by G. Stanley Hall. Boston: D.C. Heath & Company, second edition, 1885.

Image Source:  Charles F. Dunbar (left) and Frank W. Taussig (right) from E. H. Jackson and R. W. Hunter, Portraits of the Harvard Faculty (1892); J. Laurence Laughlin (middle) from Marion Talbot. More Than Lore: Reminiscences of Marion Talbot, Dean of Women, The University of Chicago, 1892-1925. Chicago: University of Chicago (1936).

Categories
Curriculum Gender Radcliffe

Radcliffe. Economics Course Offerings, 1906-1910

 

Pre-Radliffe economics course offerings and the Radcliffe courses for  1893-94,  1894-1900 , 1900-1905 have been posted earlier.

____________________________________

1905-1906
ECONOMICS.

Primarily for Undergraduates:—

1. Asst. Professor ANDREW. — Outlines of Economics. — Production, Distribution, Exchange, Industrial Organization, Foreign Trade, Banking, Socialism, and Labor Questions. 3 hours a week.

17 Undergraduates, 3 Special students. Total 20.

 

For Undergraduates and Graduates:—

62. Asst. Professor GAY.— The Economic History of the United States. Half-course. 3 hours a week, 2d half-year.

1 Graduate, 2 Undergraduates. Total 3.

11. Asst. Professor GAY.— The Modern Economic History of Europe.  2 hours a week (and usually a third hour).

3 Graduates. Total 3.

14a1. Professor CARVER.— The Distribution of Wealth. Half-course. 2 hours a week, 1st half-year.

1 Graduate, 3 Undergraduates, 4 Special students. Total 8.

14b2. Professor CARVER.— Methods of Social Reform. — Socialism, Communism, the Single Tax, etc. Half-course. 2 hours a week, 2nd half-year.

3 Graduates, 2 Undergraduates, 4 Special students. Total 9.

 

Primarily for Graduates:—

COURSE OF RESEARCH

20a.  Asst. Professor GAY. — The Expansion of English Trade in the Mediterranean, and the Levant Company.  1 hour a week.

1 Graduate. Total 1.

20.  Professors CARVER and RIPLEY. — Seminary in Economics. Thesis subjects: “The Basis of Taxation” and “The Industrial Education of the Fourteen Year Old Girl.”

1 Graduate (1st half-year only), 1 Special student. Total 2.

 

Source:   Radcliffe College. Report of the President, 1905-06, pp. 44-45.

____________________________________

1906-1907
ECONOMICS.

Primarily for Undergraduates:—

1. Asst. Professors ANDREW and Mr. DAGGETT. — Outlines of Economics. — Production, Distribution, Exchange, Industrial Organization, Foreign Trade, Banking, Socialism, and Labor Questions. 3 hours a week.

25 Undergraduates. Total 25.

 

For Undergraduates and Graduates:—

3. Mr. J. A. FIELD.— Principles of Sociology.—Theories of social progress. 2 hours a week, and a third hour at the pleasure of the instructor.

3 Undergraduates. Total 3.

6a1. Asst. Professor GAY.— European Industry and Commerce in the Nineteenth Century. Half-course. 2 hours a week, and a third hour at the pleasure of the instructor, 1st half-year.

2 Graduates, 6 Undergraduates. Total 8.

6b2. Asst. Professor GAY.— Economic and Financial History of the United States. Half-course. 2 hours a week, and a third hour at the pleasure of the instructor, 1st half-year [sic].

2 Graduates, 3 Undergraduates. Total 5.

20a. Asst. Professor GAY. — (a) Foreign Merchants in England in the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Centuries.  1 Graduate. (b) The Finances of English Boroughs in the Middle Ages.  1 Graduate.

Total 2.

 

Source:   Radcliffe College. Report of the President, 1906-07, p. 46.

____________________________________

1907-1908
ECONOMICS.

Primarily for Undergraduates:—

1. Dr. DAGGETT. — Outlines of Economics. — Production, Distribution, Exchange, Socialism, Railroads, Trusts, Foreign Trade, Banking, and Public Finance.

19 Undergraduates, 2 Special students. Total 21.

 

For Undergraduates and Graduates:—

3. Professor CARVER.— Principles of Sociology.—Theories of social progress. 2hours a week, and a third hour at the pleasure of the instructor.

1 Graduate, 2 Undergraduates. Total 3.

6a1. Professor GAY.— European Industry and Commerce in the Nineteenth Century. Half-course. 2 hours a week, and a third hour at the pleasure of the instructor, 1st half-year.

2 Graduates, 6 Undergraduates. Total 8.

6b2. Professor GAY.— Economic and Financial History of the United States. Half-course. 2 hours a week, and a third hour at the pleasure of the instructor, 2nd half-year.

3 Graduates, 11 Undergraduates, 1 Special student. Total 15.

8b2.  Asst. Professor ANDREW. — Banking and Foreign Exchange.  Half-course. 2 hours a week, and a third hour at the pleasure of the instructor, 2nd half-year.

2 Undergraduates. Total 2.

14b1.  Professor CARVER. — Methods of Social Reform.—Socialism, Communism, the Single Tax, etc.  Half-course. 2 hours a week, 1st half-year.

1 Graduate, 3 Undergraduates. Total 4.

 

Primarily for Graduates:—

101. Professor GAY.— Mediaeval Economic History of Europe. Half-course. 2 hours a week, and a third hour at the pleasure of the instructor, 1st half-year.

3 Graduates. Total 3.

COURSE OF RESEARCH

20a. Professor GAY. — (a) The Florentine Period of Italian Trade in Mediaeval England.  1 Graduate.
(b) The Finances of English Boroughs in the Middle Ages. 1 Graduate.
(c) Ad firmam manors in Domesday. 1 Graduate (2d half year).

1 hour a week each. Total 3.

20.  Professor RIPLEY. — Statistics. Theory, method, and practice. Half-course.

1 Graduate. Total 1.

 

Source:   Radcliffe College. Report of the President, 1907-08, pp. 50-51.

____________________________________

1908-1909
ECONOMICS.

Primarily for Undergraduates:—

1. Dr. DAGGETT. — Outlines of Economics. — Production, Distribution, Exchange, Socialism, Labor, Railroads, Trusts, Foreign Trade, Money, Banking, and Public Finance.

15 Undergraduates. Total 15.

 

For Undergraduates and Graduates:—

3. Professor CARVER.— Principles of Sociology.—Theories of social progress. 2 hours a week, and a third hour at the pleasure of the instructor.

10 Undergraduates, 1 Special student. Total 11.

6a1. Professor GAY.— European Industry and Commerce in the Nineteenth Century. Half-course. 2 hours a week, and a third hour at the pleasure of the instructor, 1st half-year.

4 Graduates, 2 Undergraduates, 1 Special student. Total 7.

6b2. Professor GAY.— Economic and Financial History of the United States. Half-course. 2 hours a week, and a third hour at the pleasure of the instructor, 2nd half-year.

3 Graduates, 3 Undergraduates, 1 Special student. Total 7.

14a1. Professor CARVER. — The Distribution of Wealth.  Half-course.2 hours a week, 1sthalf-year.

2 Graduates, 3 Undergraduates. Total 5.

14b2.  Professor CARVER. — Methods of Social Reform.—Socialism, Communism, the Single Tax, etc.  Half-course. 2 hours a week, 2nd half-year.

2 Graduate, 3 Undergraduates. Total 5.

 

Primarily for Graduates:—

COURSE OF RESEARCH

20a. Professor GAY. — (a) The Finances of English Boroughs in the Middle Ages. 1 Graduate (2nd half-year).
(b) Ad firmam manors in Domesday. 1 Graduate

1 hour a week each. Total 2.

 

Source:   Radcliffe College. Report of the President, 1908-09, pp. 48-49.

 

____________________________________

1909-1910
ECONOMICS.

Primarily for Undergraduates:—

1. Dr. HUSE. — Outlines of Economics. — Production, Distribution, Exchange, Socialism, Labor Problems, Trusts, Money, Banking, and Public Finance.

29 Undergraduates, 9 Special students, 1 Unclassified student. Total 39.

 

For Undergraduates and Graduates:—

3. Professor CARVER.— Principles of Sociology.—Theories of social progress. 2 hours a week, and a third hour at the pleasure of the instructor.

15 Undergraduates, 1 Special student. Total 16.

6a1. Professor GAY.— European Industry and Commerce in the Nineteenth Century. Half-course. 2 hours a week, and a third hour at the pleasure of the instructor, 1st half-year.

2 Undergraduates. Total 2

6b2. Professor GAY.— Economic and Financial History of the United States. Half-course. 2 hours a week, and a third hour at the pleasure of the instructor, 2nd half-year.

9 Undergraduates, 2 Special students. Total 11.

14a1. Professor CARVER. — The Distribution of Wealth.  Half-course. 2 hours a week, 1st half-year.

1 Graduate, 5 Undergraduates, 3 Special students. Total 9.

14b2.  Professor CARVER. — Methods of Social Reform.—Socialism, Communism, the Single Tax, etc.  Half-course. 2 hours a week, 2nd half-year.

8 Undergraduates, 5 Special students. Total 13.

 

Primarily for Graduates:—

COURSE OF RESEARCH

20a. Professor GAY. — The Administration of the Factory Legislation of Massachusetts.

1 Graduate, Total 1.

 

Source:   Radcliffe College. Report of the President, 1909-10, pp. 47-48.

Image Source:   Detroit Publishing Co., Publisher. Radcliffe College, gymnasium & Fay House, Cambridge, Mass. Cambridge Cambridge. Massachusetts United States, 1904. [?] Photograph. https://www.loc.gov/item/2016809164/.

 

Categories
Chicago Curriculum Iowa Statistics

Chicago. Henry Simons argues for an undergraduate sequence of mathematics/statistics for economists, 1937

 

 

The letter below written by Henry Simons to Henry Schultz in 1937 is evidently a typed copy of what was originally a letter on official University of Chicago stationary. The typed header matches the printed header of University of Chicago stationary and there is no signature at the end.

Simons appears to be seeking Schultz’s support for the introduction of a “Mathematics for Economists” course into the undergraduate economics curriculum as well as for providing different courses for students who intend to go on to more advanced economics training versus the sort of survey courses that would constitute the entirety of the life-time economics education of non-econ-majors. An interesting aside: Simons problematized the lack of analytical preparation displayed by the students coming from Social Services Administration that he saw reducing the standards in the economics courses that they were required by their program to attend.

_____________________________

The University of Chicago
The Department of Economics

Memorandum to Members of the Department from Henry Schultz. July 8, 1937

The attached letter from Mr. Henry C. Simons might very well serve as a basis of discussion. It may be necessary to call a meeting to discuss this question before the quarter is over.

*  * *  *  *  *

THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO
Department of Economics

June 4, 1937

Dear Mr. Schultz:

Out at Ames last week I heard about some plans of their economics department which made me very envious. They are getting ready to offer next year a sequence of three courses combining elementary mathematics and statistics; and they expect afterwards to make these courses prerequisites to their advanced (divisional) courses in economics. Moreover, they seem to be facing squarely the task (1) of providing a significant amount of training in the calculus, (2) of eliminating or cutting down those parts of the usual freshman mathematics which are of little use for their students, and (3) of mixing in with the formal mathematics perhaps as much statistics as is covered in a one-Quarter course.

If they carry out these plans, their students will soon be better prepared for substantial economics training than are even those few students here who complete Math. 104, 105, and 106—not to mention those who meet only our minimum requirement of one course in college mathematics. Meantime, nothing is being done to improve our situation here. Mrs. Logdon’s courses were a slight improvement over the old elementary mathematics; but they represent only a small beginning toward what might be done. The 104 course has its merits; but the two following courses, I gather, largely compensate for any departures from tradition which the first course involves. We still have not faced the fact that the traditional freshman mathematics, however suitable for students who will specialize in mathematics or physics, is very ill-suited to the needs of students going into other divisions or of those concluding their formal education at the college level.

I feel that we should face now the responsibility of providing a suitable minimum of training in mathematics, formal and applied, for all students in the College. Nothing can more easily be defended as a part of general education or as intellectual preparation for serious work in the Divisions. The need here might well be met by a three-course sequence of the kind which they are planning at Ames—although I am not competent to prescribe, or disposed to quarrel, about details. There are obvious advantages in mixing a certain amount of applied mathematics with the more formal training; and the fundamentals of statistics can be taught to best advantage only as mathematics and in the atmosphere of mathematics courses. As regards these fundamentals, there is no need for differentiation of courses according to divisions or departments—except possibly in the case of the physical sciences. With appropriate work in the College, divisional statistics courses in the various departments might then achieve their proper emphasis upon special applications in the special fields.

Our own Division probably could not now be induced to impose such a requirement for admission. Some departments would doubtless oppose it vigorously. This situation, however, does not argue against developing in the College the sequence of courses which would be most useful. If the proper courses were available, we could make them prerequisite for divisional work in economics; and, at the least, we could urge the advisers in the College to explain that students coming to us without such preparation would be somewhat handicapped on that account. Some other departments and divisions might go along with us. The Division of Biology certainly should do so; the School of Business and the Law School would probably cooperate eventually; and the School of Social Services Administration needs this sort of thing badly, both to protect their own standards and to guard us against the demoralization of standards which a large influx of their ill-prepared students can produce in the economics courses which they require.

It remains to point out that an important step could be taken now by our own department. Our announcements indicate that “Social Science II or equivalent” is prerequisite for divisional courses in economics. The policy here involved is, I believe, grossly mistaken. Instead of requiring this sequence, we should recommend against it in the case of students preparing for divisional work with us, or, at least, indicate clearly that the existing mathematics sequence is distinctly preferable as preparation. The typical student now gets a survey of social science in the first year, another in the second year, and still another (the five 201 courses) in the first two quarters of the third year. This represents an outrageous squandering of the student’s time, considering the alternatives actually sacrificed. Social Science II has perhaps a proper function; but it is not that of preparing students for divisional work. It may be appropriate to offer such a sequence for students who will enter other divisions and who will have no further work in social science fields. Our own students, however, should be getting more fundamental education—should be taking courses involving the more rigorous intellectual discipline in which their subsequent training will be somewhat  deficient.

If there be disagreement on some of these suggestions, there should be little opposition to my minimum proposal, namely, that Math. 106 be indicated in our announcements as a prerequisite alternative to Social Science II. Frankly, this is what it is in fact now, when I am acting as departmental counselor.

In passing, I will mention another suggestion which I have urged repeatedly in meetings and in memoranda. Something should be done to stop this concentrating of the 201 courses in the first two quarters of the student’s divisional work. These courses should not constitute merely another hurdle which students must get over before they are permitted to concentrate upon departmental courses. They should be spread throughout the last two years, as a continuing correction against narrow departmental specialization in outlook and interest—not studied hastily in a lump and forgotten.

The advisers in the College have finally discovered that Math. 104 is useful for students going into economics. They should all be told now to recommend105 and 106 as well and to suggest that good and serious students should be prepared to take at least some calculus after they leave the College (if not before). It is surprising how many of our seniors now complain bitterly because their College advisers failed to offer such suggestions.

I trust that some of these suggestions will seem to merit discussion.

Sincerely,

Henry C. Simons

 

Source: The University of Chicago Archives. Department of Economics. Records. Box 41, Folder 12.

Image Source: Henry Calvert Simons portrait at the University of Chicago Photographic Archive, apf1-07613, Special Collections Research Center, University of Chicago Library.
Henry Schultz from “[Photograph]: Henry Schultz 1893-1938.” Econometrica 7, no. 2 (1939).

Categories
Columbia Curriculum Regulations

Columbia. Economics graduate students’ memo of suggestions, 1939

 

The following memo with its cover letter was later attached as “Exhibit B” to a general statement submitted October 25, 1939 to Professor Austin P. Evans, Chairman, Committee on Instruction, Faculty of Political Science, Columbia University.

“There is appended a confidential memorandum submitted to the executive officer of the Department by a graduate student committee which contains interesting comment and suggestions. (Exhibit B).”

__________________

Cover letter for the graduate students’ memo

Columbia University
May 9, 1939

Dean R. C. McCrea,
Columbia University,
New York City.

Dear Dean McCrea:
As we agreed at luncheon with you and Professor Mills the other day, we are sending you the typed notes of student suggestions to the Department of Economics. We believe that these represent the concurrence of general student opinion, plus the thought we have given these matters.
Hoping that the notes will prove useful to you,

Sincerely yours,

WYLLIS BANKDLER
DICKSON RECK
VON DUSEN KENNEDY
FRANK PIERSON

* * *  *

Notes on some student suggestions for the operation of the Department of Economics, Columbia Graduate Faculty. 5/7/39.

The suggestions concern chiefly gaps that are felt to exist in the offering of the department. There are also a few notes on the method of conducting various types of course, and on the requirements placed on students, and on the allotment of credits.

1) History of Economic Thought. Intrinsic interest in this subject is amplified by a) Oral requirement, and b) the fact that many students feel that they will some day be called upon to teach it. Some feel that the subject is already overemphasized. In any case, there is the feeling that students should not be held responsible for so large a topic unless it is offered.
Various treatments are possible. a) A mere recital of doctrines. b) A tracing of current ideas. c) A combination with Economic History, concerned with the influence of the times on the theories, and vice versa. Treatment (c) is that followed by Professor Mitchell in his former course, and in the extremely useful Lecture Notes made from it.
Student feeling is against being held for “all the doctrines, man by man, and all the men, doctrine by doctrine”. A combination of (b) and (c) above would probably be well received.

2) Economic theory. Statements in the first paragraph under (1) above hold here. This topic is understood to include (a) Systematic presentation of current schools of thought, and (b) in particular, the structure of Neo-Classical (and derivative) Theory. The material under (b) is very well handled by Milton Friedman’s Extension course. Convenience would be served by bringing this into the Graduate Catalogue, so that it would count, without special action, for the 15 central points for Master’s candidates.
Further particular large branches include c) Socialist Theory and d) Institutionalism. Student objection to the existing offering of Socialist Theory falls under two heads. First, it is claimed that the subject matter is not covered adequately in class, that the treatment is diffuse, incomplete and wandering. Second, it is protested that the treatment is not either so fair or so sympathetic as that given, say, Neo-Classical Doctrine.
Institutionalism is handsomely handled by Dr. Dorfman. There is some feeling that the material might be expanded to cover modern Institutionalists and their work and problems more intensively.

3) Economic History. Dr. Hacker’s treatment of American Economic History is very popular, as is Professor Burn’s course in modern capitalism. A course in Modern European Economic History, from the breakdown of Feudalism, would be very well received in addition, although the Burns course could be expanded to fill this need.
There is dissatisfaction with the existing Seminar. Auspices that would concentrate more closely on the material are rather widely held to be desirable. Professor Stockder’s seminar might fill this gap were it admitted to graduate economics standing. A suggestion for procedure should this prove impossible is included under “Catalog” below.

4) Labor. This may be discussed under two heads, a) Offering for the student specializing elsewhere, and b) Specialization in Labor Economics.

a) A General Survey Course in Labor Economics under capable, sympathetic auspices will be subject to very wide demand. Students whose major interest is elsewhere seem to feel quite generally that so important a branch of economics should not be left blank in their education. A large demand will also be forthcoming from first-year students who have not previously studied labor, either at all or adequately, whether or not they intend to specialize here. Such a course is of necessity a large lecture type, and requires in its instructor the specific technique relevant.
A counter-suggestion by the Faculty is that Professor Wolman expand the subject-matter of his course. A very wide and almost unopposed sector of student feeling would prefer bringing in an outsider more cordial to the material and more tolerant of the viewpoints and questions of the members of the class.
b) A Seminar in Labor Relations for the specialist would find many applicants. Student desires as to the auspices are in agreement with the above comments. No university adequately specializes in training labor economists, and it is suggested that Columbia might consider filling this more than local gap.

5) Public Economic Policy. It is safe to say that no subject arouses wider interest among students. At present, public policy is dealt with piecemeal among the several courses, with by no means all the most important aspects being covered at all. (The most thoroughly considered section is monetary policy, both existing and proposed.) It is submitted that this is an important need which Columbia is well fitted to meet without much extra trouble.
Suggestions on this score represent the fusion of two streams of thought; a) The proposal of a joint seminar to explore specific areas of planning and policy, and to be conducted by academic experts in the various fields (Angell, Bonbright, Gayer, Orchard, Macmahon, Lynd, etc.); b) The feeling that contact with people actually engaged in forming and executing public policy would provide a realistic knowledge of problems actually faced (economically, politically, administratively, etc.), as well as valuable personal relations. The suggestion under (b) would involve the invitation to Columbia for one, several, or all meetings of the seminar such men as Berle, Ezekiel, Currie, Tugwell, Mumford, Wallace, etc. etc.
Experience with the mere importation of outside lecturers, as in an instance in the Public Law Department, seems to show that a course so built lacks continuity and depth in grappling with such problems as would be considered under (a) above.
Yet to define the benefits of (b) to the membership of a seminar of manageable size would be wasteful and otherwise undesirable. Two solutions have been advanced, which are not mutually exclusive. The first involves the holding of “public” and “private” meetings in the manner of the Banking Seminar. This could be assisted by co-operation with the Economics Club, that is, the visitors could partially be drained off into luncheon meetings. This solution suffers from several difficulties including the discontinuity of having each outsider only once. The second solution is embodied in the suggestion for Panel Seminars below.
Students would greatly like to co-operate in the organization of this seminar.

6) Agricultural Economics. While this is already a subject of inter-university specialization, a survey course is part of a rounded general offering.

7) Population. Students do not feel that this is ably handled. The suggestion has been made that Professor Goodrich’s course in Internal Migration could be expanded to cover this, and also Regionalism (see under (8) below).

8) Economic Geography. The offering in the School of Business is excellent, and needs only to be given graduate economics status. See also under (7) above and “Catalogue” below.

9) Method and Technique of Research. This includes a thousand little troublesome matters that each professor assumes that the student learns elsewhere. What are the Journals in economics and related fields? How do we keep up with current developments in economics? What are the basic sources in various branches? Where are all these things scattered in the library? How do we begin the investigation of a new topic? How doe we prepare a bibliography? And many others.
The suggestions here fall under three heads. First, it is felt that a booklet answering the above and related questions would prove extremely helpful. Second, instructors should keep this need in mind, and clarify the portions of techniques and bibliography that fall in their sphere. Third, careful bibliographies already existing for various courses, and others that may arise, could be assembled and sold at cost.

10) Panel Seminar. This refers to a method of conducting seminars that shows promise of solving the dilemma of the unwieldiness of large numbers on the one hand, and the wastes of exclusiveness on the other. The discussion is conducted by a panel, consisting of one or more instructors and visitors and a carefully selected small group of students. Where student reports are to be presented, the selection is keyed to guaranteeing excellence and pointedness. An “audience” of students interested in the topic may ask occasional questions from the floor, but does not act to lower the tone of the discussion nor to encumber its progress. The “audience” may be regularly enrolled, receiving attendance credit, or may vary with the particular meeting’s content. Large and varying “audiences” are probably too much for this structure to carry.
It is felt that this method would meet the need in several situations. It should operate to raise the quality of the reports, doing away with the boredom and consequent loss of enthusiasm and tempo that so often assails large seminars now. But at the same time, it would avoid the narrow exclusiveness that operates to keep interested students from an organized study of subjects offered only in seminars.
The seating arrangements suggested by the above description seem rather stiff and stilted and disruptive. In point of fact, they are not a necessary corollary of this division of labor. Ordinary seminar seating can be used, the only requirement being that there is a staff of students who are considered capable, intelligible and interesting, and who do the reporting.
The panel seminar method is especially suggested for the discussion of public economic policy advocated in (5) above, where it is felt that wide student interest would be aroused and should be encouraged.

11) Doctor’s Oral Examinations. Under existing conditions, orals engender a period of rather heavy strain in most students. This period is of the order of two weeks or so, and is not related to the quantity of work being done, but rather to the crisis quality of the examinations. No useful purpose is served by this strain, in fact it is generally considered a hindrance to efficiency.
The remedy seems to be a removal of some of the critical focus upon orals. This may be accomplished, with no loss of academic standards or relevant rigor, by the process of having the true examination take place informally with each of the professors involved before the formal oral is taken. The formal assembled examination then assumes the character of a more official formality, in which passing is nearly certain barring a strong reason to the contrary. This division between the investigation of proficiency and ability on the one hand, and the ceremonial opportunity to forbid the banns on the other, should not only relieve most of the strain on the candidate, but also afford the faculty a more intensive chance to satisfy itself as to the student’s competence.
There are some indications that the present situation approximates this suggestion more closely than appears on the surface. Insofar as this is true, all that is necessary is to let this true state of affairs become clear to the candidates. In any event, more could be done along these lines with benefit and relief to all concerned.

12) Training for Careers. It is important periodically to review the types of career for which students in economics at Columbia are acquiring training, and at the same time to survey the curriculum with respect to the kind of training it chiefly affords. The student body is divided in proportions unknown at present* mainly among those preparing for teaching, for research, and for government service. The curriculum is skewed in the direction of training research workers. This fundamental educational divergence is worth noting, and worth investigating in its effects upon the value of the Economics offering to the students.

*One of the questions on this year’s questionnaire will be directed to this problem.

Many of the curricular suggestions above are directed as much to the problem “what kind of work” as to the problem “research in what field”, and are worthy of reconsideration in this light.

13) Catalog. The arrangement of the catalog, and the standing given by it to various courses, can prove a powerful aid in broadening the area of endeavor for which preparation may be secured here, as well as filling many of the lesser holes mentioned above.
In regard to the standing given courses in other departments, particularly in the School of Business, the effort has been made above to mention fields in which benefit would accrue to Master’s candidates if Graduate Economics Standing were given to certain courses. Particularly does this apply to the offerings of Brissenden, Stockder, perhaps Morgan, and to the advanced courses in Economic Geography. Where this is not feasible, something can be done by way of the advisory committee, see below.
Positive encouragement rather than permission can be given to students to broaden the scope of their studies if the catalog, or if necessary a separate printed or mimeographed announcement, would list as fully as possible all courses in related fields, or isolated courses of interest, that would be profitable to economists. In this way many gaps that the Economics Department cannot hope to fill itself would be plugged, and the benefits of intra-University division of labor would be received.

14) Advisory Committee. This has proved itself useful this year, and should certainly be continued. Its mention here is in connection with the potentialities of cooperation between it and the administration and faculty.
Many of the suggestions in these notes that may prove impossible of fulfillment, particularly those which come together under “Catalog”, may be aided by the unofficial action of the advisory Committee. If the committee is in possession of information concerning related courses, for instance, then even in the absence of official action the broadening of courses of study can be advanced. In this and many similar cases, the worthwhileness of the Department to new students can be increased.

 

Source:  Columbia University Archives. Columbiana. Department of Economics Collection. Box 1 “General departmental notices, memoranda, etc. Curriculum material”, Folder “Committee on Instruction”.

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

Categories
Columbia Curriculum

Columbia. Proposed plan to review economics curriculum, 1944

 

A transcription of a 1945 memo from the curriculum committee of the department of economics at Columbia University regarding curricular issues brought up during discussions during the spring of 1944  was posted earlier. In a different box of departmental records I found the following memo that initiated the series of meetings and that provides us some of the backstory for the 1945 memo. I find the curious ordering of the meetings by topics rather random, e.g. theory courses only to be discussed in the second to last session. 

As the note stapled to the bottom of the memo indicates, the proposed days for the meeting were suggested to be shifted to Mondays. The penciled dates shown in square brackets in the transcription are all Mondays.

______________________

Plan to review Columbia’s economics curriculum

January 13, 1944

To the Members of the
Graduate Department of Economics

At our meeting on December 6th there was, we think, general agreement on the need of reviewing our course offerings and some of our present methods of graduate instruction. For such review, and for a more careful consideration of the problems we shall face in the Department during the years immediately following the war, we suggest that a series of meetings be held during the Spring Session. Each meeting could be devoted to consideration of a particular subject or group of subjects in our present curriculum. One meeting could be given to economic theory, another to economic history, another to labor and industrial relations, and so on. It would be desirable, of course, that at each session we have, not the casual and rather unfocussed discussion that was inevitable at our first meeting, in December, but intensive examination of what we are doing, and a consideration of what we should and can do.

As an indication of what might be covered, we list certain matters that might be given attention, each time:

—the substance of our present offering (i.e. a summary account of what is given in our present courses, including an indication of the subjects covered and of the manner in which each course is organized.
—chief present problems in this field of knowledge, and prospective problems in the post-war period.
—relation of work in this field to other fields and the curriculum as a whole.
—teaching procedures employed, and appraisal of results (If seminar system, how effective? If lecture system, or modified lecture system, how effective?)
—relation of our work to what is done elsewhere (in several other leading graduate schools) in this field.
—needs of this field, in the way of equipment of trained men (What equipment is needed by men undertaking work in this field? What are the best means of providing the needed equipment and research experience?)
—recommendations, if any, as to what we should do in the future in this field at Columbia.

This list is, of course, suggestive only; it is not intended to be an outline that should be followed each time. We should doubtless, throughout, keep the whole curriculum in mind, and the relations among activities in different fields, although the discussion at each meeting would center on a particular topic.

Following is a provisional grouping of subjects for discussion at successive meetings:

  1. Labor and industrial relations (including labor law and social insurance) [February 14]
  2. Economic history (excluding the courses on capitalism and investment, which are placed in group #6) [February 21]
  3. International trade and finance [February 28]
    Banking, and monetary economics
  4. Industrial organization [March 6]
    Capitalism in the 19thand 20thcenturies
    Investment and economic change
    Economics of business enterprises
  5. Business cycles[March 13]
    Structure of the American Economy
    Prices
  6. Types of economic organization [March 20]
    …Socialism
    …Types of national planned economy
  7. Statistics[March 27]
    Accounting
  8. Economic theory (including all courses on theory, the history of theory, institutional economics and mathematical economics) [April 3]
  9. Public finance and taxation [April 10]
    Corporation finance
    Public utilities

This tentative grouping is subject to modification, if the general plan is approved by the Department. We hesitate to suggest covering several important topics at a single meeting, but we can see no other way to keep the time schedule within reasonable limits.

Our purposes in holding these meetings would perhaps be better served by afternoon meetings, running for two hours, than by evening sessions. As a possibility we suggest Wednesday, from 3 to 5 o’clock in 304 Fayerweather, beginning on February 9th. We should probably plan to have the discussion of each topic opened with a statement from the Department member concerned—a statement that might run from 20 to 40 minutes, depending on the number of subjects to be covered at that meeting. Thereafter time should be given for general discussion. Particular attention would be given in this discussion to the relation of the topic in question to other subjects covered in our curriculum.

The Curriculum Committee would be glad to have the judgment of the members of the Department on this proposal. If you approve the general plan, will you let us know whether you could attend meetings on Wednesday afternoon from 3 to 5 o’clock?

Sincerely yours,

CARTER GOODRICH
FREDERICK C. MILLS
CARL S. SHOUP
WESLEY C. MITCHELL, Chairman

[added] NOTE: We find that a Wednesday afternoon schedule for the proposed meetings would involve at least one serious conflict. Accordingly, we suggest that the meetings be held on Monday afternoon from 4 to 6. Is this time suitable? If so, our first session might be held on Monday, February 14th.

Curriculum Committee

 

Source:  Columbia University Archives. Columbiana. Department of Economics Collection. Box 2 “Faculty”, Folder “Department of Economics—Faculty, Beginning January 1, 1944”.

Categories
Courses Curriculum M.I.T.

M.I.T. Student evaluations of second term core macroeconomics. Solow, Foley. 1967-70

 

The economic theory core courses at M.I.T. during the four academic years 1966/67 through 1969/70 consisted of two terms of microeconomic theory (“Economic Analysis”, 14.121 and 14.122) and two terms of macroeconomic theory (“Theory of Income and Employment”, 14.451, and “Economic Growth and Fluctuations”, 14.452). The instructors for the course by academic year were: 

 14.121 (Term 1) 14.122 (Term 2) 14.451 (Term 1) 14.452 (Term 2)
1966/67 Bishop Samuelson Eckaus

Solow

1967/68

 Bishop Samuelson Domar Solow
1968/69 Bishop Samuelson Domar

Foley

1969/70

 Bishop Samuelson Domar

Foley

A retrospective evaluation survey of these four courses was conducted (probably) sometime in late-1970. The original student responses wound up in Evsey Domar’s files and can be found today in his papers in the Economists’ Papers Archive at Duke University.

Previous posts provided the responses for Robert Bishop’s Economic Analysis (14.121), Paul Samuelson’s term of Economic Analysis (14.122) and Evsey Domar’s National Income and Employment (14.451).

In this post we’ll have a look at Robert M. Solow and Duncan Foley’s course, Economic Growth and Fluctuations (14.452) covering the topics:

Growth theory
Empirical Aspects of growth
Cycle theory
Empirical aspects of cycles
Monetary aspects of growth.

First I provide the information about the course found in the announcement in the MIT course catalogues that essentially remained unchanged for the years from which the evaluations were solicited. From the departmental course staffing reports in the M.I.T. archives, we discover that the course announcements for 1968/69 and 1969/1970 incorrectly listed Miguel Sidrauski and Solow as instructors of 14.45. Duncan Foley replaced Solow as instructor of this course in those two years. Here is an example where having the ex post staffing reports allows us to identify some inaccuracies found in the catalogues.

 Next I include the cover letter for the questionnaire sent out along with a tabulation of responses to the qualitative questions regarding the amount of economics presumed, the amount of mathematics and the balance of the course among the topics nominally covered.

 Finally, and very much worth reading!, the interested visitor will find transcriptions of the written student comments concerning the course. Of the four courses that together made up the economic theory core at M.I.T. in the late 1960’s, students were clearly the most satisfied with their Economic Growth and Fluctuations  course.

____________________

Announcement in the Course Catalogues

14.452T Economic Growth and Fluctuations (A)

[Solow]
Prereq.: 14.451
Year: G (2) 4-0-8

Application of theory of income and employment to analysis and measurement of changes in level of economic activity over time, and to study of inflation. Solow

MIT. Catalogue 1966-67: p. 292.

page 219:

“ ‘T’ at the end of a subject number indicates that (1) a change has been made in the content or units of the subject or (2) the number was previously assigned to a different subject.
‘(A)’ following the name of a subject indicates that it is an approved subject for a graduate degree…
‘G’ is a graduate subject.
The time distribution of the subject, showing in sequence the units allotted to: recitation and lecture; laboratory, design, or field work; and preparation. Each unit represents 15 hours of work. The total unit credit for a subject is obtained by adding together all the units shown. One unit of recitation or lecture credit, and two units of laboratory or design credit, are each equivalent to one semester hour.”

Catalogue 1967-68: Course number drops T, p. 307

Catalogue 1968-69: course instructor listed as Sidrauski [Note: Duncan Foley actually taught the course, see below], p. 312

Catalogue 1969-70:  course instructor listed as Solow [Note: Duncan Foley actually taught the course, see below],p. 294.

____________________

Course staffing and enrollments 14.452
Second terms of 1966/67 through 1969/70

1967: Term II. 3 hours/week. 39 regular students, 1 Listeners.

Professor R. M. Solow with Instructor M. Sidrauski

1968: Term II. 3 hours/week 52 regular students, 2 Listeners.

Professor R. M. Solow with Instructor M. Sidrauski

1969: Term II.  3½ hours/week, 49 regular students, 1 Listeners

Assistant Professor D. K. Foley with Michael Rothschild

1970: Term II. 3 Hours/week. 43 regular students, 0 Listeners.

Associate Professor D. K. Foley with Instructor S. Kennedy (grader)

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

____________________

THEORY QUESTIONNAIRE

There are two problems that the theory sequence must continually face if it is going to be as useful as possible. The first of these is adjusting to the changing background of the incoming students. The second is adjusting to the changing needs of students who will use the theory course as background for other courses and research. This questionnaire is an attempt to gather information of the current state of the theory sequence relative to these two questions. The enclosed forms contain an outline of each of the theory courses and asks three questions.

These pertain to each heading in the course outline:

Does the course assume too much or too little economics background in this area?
Does the course use too much or too little mathematics in this area?
Given the overall constraint of time, is this area gone into too deeply or not deeply enough?

For each of the questions there is room to check too much or too little, no check at all to be given if the course is about right. Please put the year in which you took the theory courses at the top of each page. There is also room in each area for more detailed comment. Use this space to be specific on the changes in the given areas which you feel would be improvements—particularly in answer to question 3. Use the space at the bottom of each page to comment on topics that are not on the list, but should appear in the course; or to make other comments we haven’t thought to ask for.

Please return to 52-380 (Miss Pope) before Tuesday, October 21.

 

[Summary for Robert Solow from 10 student responses:
of which 2 from 1966-67; 8 from 1967-68]

Ec 452:

 Economic background Math

Coverage

Growth theory

 Too little: 1

Too much: 0

 Too little: 0

Too much: 0

 Too deep: 1

Not deep enough: 1

Empirical Aspects of growth

 Too little: 1

Too much: 0

 Too little: 0

Too much: 0

 Too deep: 0

Not deep enough: 0

Cycle theory

 Too little: 1

Too much: 0

 Too little: 0

Too much: 0

 Too deep: 0

Not deep enough: 0

Empirical aspects of cycles

 Too little: 0

Too much: 0

 Too little: 0

Too much: 0

 Too deep: 0

Not deep enough: 0

Monetary aspects of growth

 Too little: 0

Too much: 0

 Too little: 0

Too much: 0

 Too deep: 0

Not deep enough: 2

From the student comments on Solow’s course
Each bullet point from a different student

YEAR TAKEN: 1966-67

  • Cycle theory: Should be dropped.
    Monetary aspects of growth: Needs to be intensified.

 

YEAR TAKEN: 1967-68

  • An excellent course.
  • This course is very adequate—except more could be done perhaps by going faster with no loss of comprehension.
  • Well-done course.
  • As these courses were taught two years ago there was too little integration of the two terms. Partly this reflects a real gap in macro theory itself; I would like to see an integration of the Patinkin-type of analysis into growth theory.

 

[Summary for Duncan Foley from 12 student responses:
of which 10 from 1968-69; 2 from 1969-70]

Ec 452:

 Economic background Math

Coverage

Growth theory

 Too little: 0

Too much: 0

 Too little: 0

Too much: 1

 Too deep: 3

Not deep enough: 1

Empirical Aspects of growth

 Too little: 0

Too much: 0

 Too little: 0

Too much: 0

 Too deep: 0

Not deep enough: 4

Cycle theory

 Too little: 0

Too much: 0

 Too little: 0

Too much: 0

 Too deep: 0

Not deep enough: 4

Empirical aspects of cycles

 Too little: 0

Too much: 0

 Too little: 0

Too much: 0

 Too deep: 0

Not deep enough: 5

Monetary aspects of growth

 Too little: 0

Too much: 1

 Too little: 0

Too much: 2

 Too deep: 1

Not deep enough: 3

 

From the student comments on Foley’s course
Each bullet point from a different student

YEAR TAKEN: 1968-69

  • Cycle theory and Empirical aspects of cycles: little done but that’s probably a good think.
  • 452 is, by and large, a very good course
    Growth theory: very good
    Empirical aspects of growth:  good
    Cycle theory: We covered difference eq. cycle models in one day which is what they deserve. Some other approach might be worthwhile.
    Empirical aspects of cycles: Not covered at all
    Monetary aspects of growth: very good
  • Growth theory: course devoted almost solely to this topic.
    Difference equations ought to be specifically covered, with some applications [noted for both 14.451 “multiplier and accelerator” topic and 14.452 “Cycle theory”.
  • General comment: Heuristic “proofs” and extensive examples to tie in reality would have been most useful.
    The course was not as satisfying as it undoubtedly could have been. This was an obvious case of the teacher trying too hard in a new course. Too much of the Socratic method was employed.
  • Foley let students ask irrelevant questions.
  • Empirical aspects of growth: data was almost nonexistent!
    Cycle theory: difference equations in 2 days! Monetary aspects of growth: This was covered but a little more would have suited my personal taste only.
  • In general 452 was good; 451 seemed weak.

 

YEAR TAKEN: 1969-70

  • I do not like the Socratic method, especially when applied to solving differential equations.
    Monetary aspects of growth: good.

Source:  Duke University. David M. Rubenstein Rare Book and Manuscript Library, Economists’ Papers Archive. Evsey D. Domar Papers.Box 16, Folder “Student Evaluations (1 of 2)”.

Image Sources: Duncan Foley  from his homepage. Robert Solow from the website MIT Museum.

 

 

Categories
Courses Curriculum M.I.T. Uncategorized

M.I.T. Student evaluations for first term core micro theory. Bishop, 1966-69

 

The economic theory core courses at M.I.T. during the four academic years 1966/67 through 1969/70 consisted of two terms of microeconomic theory (“Economic Analysis”, 14.121 and 14.122) and two terms of macroeconomic theory (“Theory of Income and Employment”, 14.451, and “Economic Growth and Fluctuations”, 14.452). The instructors for the course by academic year were: 

 14.121 (Term 1) 14.122 (Term 2) 14.451 (Term 1) 14.452 (Term 2)
1966/67 Bishop Samuelson Eckaus

Solow

1967/68

 Bishop Samuelson Domar Solow
1968/69 Bishop Samuelson Domar

Foley

1969/70

 Bishop Samuelson Domar

Foley

A retrospective evaluation survey of these four courses was conducted (probably) sometime in late-1970. The original student responses wound up in Evsey Domar’s files and can be found today in his papers in the Economists’ Papers Archive at Duke University.

In other posts we have the responses for Paul Samuelson’s term of Economic Analysis (14.122), Evsey Domar’s National Income and Employment (14.451) and Robert Solow’s/Duncan Foley’s Economic Growth and Fluctuations (14.452).

In this post we’ll look at Robert Bishop’s course, Economic Analysis (14.451), that covered the topics:

Preliminary view of General Equilibrium
Revenue and cost equilibrium of the firm and industry:

Monopoly and pure competition
Imperfect competition.

Factor-employment equilibrium of the firm and distribution of income.

First I provide the information about the course found in the announcement in the MIT course catalogues that essentially remained unchanged for the years from which the evaluations were solicited. The official course staffing and enrollment data that follow the course announcement confirm that Robert Bishop taught 14.121 in the four consecutive years surveyed. We also learn the names of the instructors who taught the recitation sections for Bishop’s course as well as those of several of the graduate assistant graders. Incidentally, two of his section leaders went on to win Nobel prizes in economics (Stiglitz and Engle)!

Next I include the cover letter for the questionnaire sent out along with a tabulation of responses to the qualitative questions regarding the amount of economics presumed, the amount of mathematics and the balance of the course among the topics nominally covered.

Finally, and very much worth reading!, the interested visitor will find transcriptions of the written student comments concerning Bishop’s course.

____________________

Announcement in the Course Catalogues

 

14.121T Economic Analyis I (A)

[Bishop]
Prereq.: 14.03
Year: G (1) 4-0-8

14.122T Economic Analyis I (A)

[Samuelson]
Prereq.: 14.121
Year: G (2) 4-0-8

General theory of equilibrium under competition and monopoly. Theory of consumer choice, of demand, of the firm, of production and distribution, of welfare economics.
Bishop (14.121), Samuelson (14.122).

MIT. Catalogue 1966-67: p. 289.

page 219:

“ ‘T’ at the end of a subject number indicates that (1) a change has been made in the content or units of the subject or (2) the number was previously assigned to a different subject.

‘(A)’ following the name of a subject indicates that it is an approved subject for a graduate degree…

‘G’ is a graduate subject.

The time distribution of the subject, showing in sequence the units allotted to: recitation and lecture; laboratory, design, or field work; and preparation. Each unit represents 15 hours of work. The total unit credit for a subject is obtained by adding together all the units shown. One unit of recitation or lecture credit, and two units of laboratory or design credit, are each equivalent to one semester hour.”

M.I.T. Catalogue 1967-68: Course number drops T, p. 305

M.I.T. Catalogue 1968-69: Prerequisite for 14.121 changed to 14.04T, p. 310

M.I.T. Catalogue 1969-70:  Prerequisite for 14.121 dropped ‘T’, p. 293.

____________________

Course staffing and enrollments 14.121
First term of 1966-1969

1966: Term I. 3 hours/week. 50 regular students, 5 Listeners.

Professor R. L. Bishop with Instructor J. Stiglitz and Teaching Assistant D. E. Black (grader)

1967: Term I. 3 hours/week 62 regular students, 0 Listeners.

Professor R. L. Bishop with Instructor C. D. MacRae

1968: Term I.  4 hours/week, 62 regular students, 0 Listeners

Professor R. L. Bishop with V. Snowberger (grader)

1969: Term I. 3 Hours/week. 47 regular students, 5 Listeners.

Professor R. L. Bishop with Assistant Professor R.F. Engle (recitation) and J. Herrero (grader)

 

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

____________________

THEORY QUESTIONNAIRE

There are two problems that the theory sequence must continually face if it is going to be as useful as possible. The first of these is adjusting to the changing background of the incoming students. The second is adjusting to the changing needs of students who will use the theory course as background for other courses and research. This questionnaire is an attempt to gather information of the current state of the theory sequence relative to these two questions. The enclosed forms contain an outline of each of the theory courses and asks three questions.

These pertain to each heading in the course outline:

Does the course assume too much or too little economics background in this area?
Does the course use too much or too little mathematics in this area?
Given the overall constraint of time, is this area gone into too deeply or not deeply enough?

For each of the questions there is room to check too much or too little, no check at all to be given if the course is about right. Please put the year in which you took the theory courses at the top of each page. There is also room in each area for more detailed comment. Use this space to be specific on the changes in the given areas which you feel would be improvements—particularly in answer to question 3. Use the space at the bottom of each page to comment on topics that are not on the list, but should appear in the course; or to make other comments we haven’t thought to ask for.

Please return to 52-380 (Miss Pope) before Tuesday, October 21.

 

[Summary from 22 student responses:
of which 2 from 1966-67; 8 from 1967-68; 10 from 1968-69; 2 from 1969-70]

Ec 121: Economic background Math Coverage
Preliminary view of General Equilibrium Too little: 0

Too much: 0

 Too little: 4

Too much: 0

 Too deep: 1

Not deep enough: 4
Revenue and cost equilibrium of the firm and industry:
Monopoly and pure competition Too little: 11

Too much: 0

 Too little: 14

Too much: 0

 Too deep: 4

Not deep enough: 5
Imperfect competition Too little: 5

Too much: 1

 Too little: 8

Too much: 1

 Too deep: 5

Not deep enough: 4
Factor-employment equilibrium of the firm and distribution of income Too little: 6

Too much: 0

 Too little: 12

Too much: 0

 Too deep: 2

Not deep enough: 9

 

From the student comments
Each bullet point from a different student.

YEAR TAKEN: 1966-67

  • Not enough emphasis on distribution theory.

 

YEAR TAKEN: 1967-68

  • Need to emphasize modern production theory rather than Marshallian theory. Neither of the courses [121 nor 122] give any mention to the modern treatments (esp., set-theoretic approach) of this material.
  • Both these courses [121 and 122] are excellent for covering the technical aspects of price theory—but both fail to provide a “total picture” of what price theory is about.
  • 121 spends too much time working out the solution to particular cases and too little time developing tools of analysis more sophis. treated than simple calculus.
  • more general equilibrium needed.
    little or no attention given to disequil
  • In general, I thought both terms [121 and 122], despite their widely differing methods, were quite good.
  • [note from secretary: “not in tabulation—she just gave it to me”]. Math in this part assumed we hardly knew a thing—could have assumed more.
    Preliminary view of General Equilibrium: [not deep enough checked with following comment:] but if this is going to be more thorough, shouldn’t be very first thing taught.

 

YEAR TAKEN: 1968-69

  • Was tedious at times but is worth doing—in fact has to be done. Perhaps the disc. of externalities could be related to Samuelson on pubic goods. And the part on distortions to the HG Johnson-Bhagwati-Ramaswamy literature on this in trade theory.
    Should have also included at least SOME reference to more modern theories of the firm (behavioral etc) and to more recent devs in other parts of micro theory (e.g. Becker on costs of time JPE 1966(?), Stigler et al on information and its costs and Lancaster on consumer theory.
    Imperfect competition: too much on the oligopoly stuff, overly simplified Stackelberg warfare etc.
  • Bishop should make more use of the mathematical techniques applicable to the general case and less of the geometry and prose of special instances. This, I think, would clarify rather than obscure. As it is, one tends to get lost in a mass of detail. Still, however, the course was very useful.
  • Monopoly and pure competition: slight shift of emphasis desirable.
  • General Comment: While analysis of this kind (the entire course) is an enjoyable mental exercise, I feel that its actual practical use for anything but expository purposes is severely limited. At all stages, an attempt should be made to make economics more relevant. At the least, areas of realistic extension and limitations should be pointed out to the class as each topic is considered.
    Factor-employment equilibrium of the firm and distribution of income: done a little too quickly near the end more time should have been allotted.
    Game theory à la Nash…What was presented here was obviously quite complicated, but given such a cursory treatment that it would have best been left out. I feel that more time should have been spent on more basic analyses such as min-max. and espec. an introduction to the practical aspects of game theory.
  • Preliminary view of General Equilibrium: excellent
    Too much oligopoly theory, too much game theory.
  • Factor-employment equilibrium of the firm and distribution of income: Fine in classic sense, yet more of income dist. needed.
  • The last part of the course, that connecting the results of partial analysis of production and distribution with the simple general equilibrium model of the first lectures, seems to me very illuminating and I feel it should be given more emphasis. A posteriori, I would have suggested one lecture less on duopoly and one more on that cost part.
  • I think a more thorough and rigorous treatment of the theory of partial welfare economics (consumers surplus etc) would be very helpful in 121.
    Preliminary view of General Equilibrium:This material should be eliminated from the course, and covered in 122.
    Revenue and Cost equilibrium: covered too slowly
    Imperfect Competition: Never seemed clear. Either cut it down or spend more time on it.
    Factor-employment equilibrium of the firm and distribution of income: More time should have been spent in this area.

 

YEAR TAKEN: 1969-70

  • 121—A good course, not very enjoyable but worthwhile.
  • 121 is an incredibly dull course. And irrelevant.

 

Source:  Duke University. David M. Rubenstein Rare Book and Manuscript Library, Economists’ Papers Archive. Evsey D. Domar Papers.Box 16, Folder “Student Evaluations (1 of 2)”.

Image Source: Robert Bishop obituary in MIT News, February 13, 2013.

Categories
Courses Curriculum M.I.T.

M.I.T. Student evaluations of first term core macroeconomics. Domar, 1967-69

 

The economic theory core courses at M.I.T. during the four academic years 1966/67 through 1969/70 consisted of two terms of microeconomic theory (“Economic Analysis”, 14.121 and 14.122) and two terms of macroeconomic theory (“Theory of Income and Employment”, 14.451, and “Economic Growth and Fluctuations”, 14.452). The instructors for the course by academic year were: 

 14.121 (Term 1) 14.122 (Term 2) 14.451 (Term 1) 14.452 (Term 2)
1966/67 Bishop Samuelson Eckaus

Solow

1967/68

 Bishop Samuelson Domar Solow
1968/69 Bishop Samuelson Domar

Foley

1969/70

 Bishop Samuelson Domar

Foley

A retrospective evaluation survey of these four courses was conducted (probably) sometime in late-1970. The original student responses wound up in Evsey Domar’s files and can be found today in his papers in the Economists’ Papers Archive at Duke University.

In other posts we have the responses for Robert Bishop’s Economic Analysis (14.121), Paul Samuelson’s term of Economic Analysis (14.122), and Robert Solow’s/Duncan Foley’s Economic Growth and Fluctuations (14.452).

In this post we’ll look at Evsey Domar’s course, Theory of Income and Employment (14.451),  that covered the topics:

national income,
general aggregative systems,
price flexibility and employment,
theory of interest and demand for money,
consumption and savings,
investment,
multiplier and accelerator,
employment and inflation.

First I provide the information about the course found in the announcement in the MIT course catalogues that essentially remained unchanged for the years from which the evaluations were solicited. The official course staffing and enrollment data that follow the course announcement confirm that Evsey Domar taught 14.122 in the last three years surveyed. We also learn the names of the two instructors who taught the recitation sections for Richard Eckaus and Evsey Domar.

Next I include the cover letter for the questionnaire sent out along with a tabulation of responses to the qualitative questions regarding the amount of economics presumed, the amount of mathematics and the balance of the course among the topics nominally covered.

Finally, and very much worth reading!, the interested visitor will find transcriptions of the written student comments concerning Domar’s course.

____________________

Announcement in the Course Catalogues

14.451T Theory of Income and Employment(A)

[Eckaus]
Prereq.:14.05
Year:G (1) 4-0-8

Examination of principal determinants of aggregate levels of income and employment.

Source: MIT. Catalogue 1966-67: p. 291.

page 219:

“ ‘T’ at the end of a subject number indicates that (1) a change has been made in the content or units of the subject or (2) the number was previously assigned to a different subject.
(A)’ following the name of a subject indicates that it is an approved subject for a graduate degree…
‘G’ is a graduate subject.
The time distribution of the subject, showing in sequence the units allotted to: recitation and lecture; laboratory, design, or field work; and preparation. Each unit represents 15 hours of work. The total unit credit for a subject is obtained by adding together all the units shown. One unit of recitation or lecture credit, and two units of laboratory or design credit, are each equivalent to one semester hour.”

Catalogue 1967-68: Course number drops T; Domar is the instructor, p. 307

Catalogue 1968-69:  Prerequisite for 14.451 changed to 14.06T, p. 312

Catalogue 1969-70:  no change, p. 294.

____________________

Course staffing and enrollments 14.451
First term of 1966-1969

1966: Term I. 3 hours/week. 44 regular students, 2 Listeners.

Professor Eckaus with Instructor J. R. Harris

1967: Term I. 3 hours/week 55 regular students, 4 Listeners.

Professor Domar with Instructor J. R. Harris

1968: Term I.  3 hours/week, 55 regular students, 3 Listeners

Professor Domar with Assistant S. Lewis  (1 hour per week recitation)

1969: Term I. 3 Hours/week. 51 regular students, 2 Listeners.

Professor Domar with Assistant Professor J.R. Harris (1 hour per week recitation)

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

____________________

THEORY QUESTIONNAIRE

There are two problems that the theory sequence must continually face if it is going to be as useful as possible. The first of these is adjusting to the changing background of the incoming students. The second is adjusting to the changing needs of students who will use the theory course as background for other courses and research. This questionnaire is an attempt to gather information of the current state of the theory sequence relative to these two questions. The enclosed forms contain an outline of each of the theory courses and asks three questions.

These pertain to each heading in the course outline:

Does the course assume too much or too little economics background in this area?
Does the course use too much or too little mathematics in this area?
Given the overall constraint of time, is this area gone into too deeply or not deeply enough?

For each of the questions there is room to check too much or too little, no check at all to be given if the course is about right. Please put the year in which you took the theory courses at the top of each page. There is also room in each area for more detailed comment. Use this space to be specific on the changes in the given areas which you feel would be improvements—particularly in answer to question 3. Use the space at the bottom of each page to comment on topics that are not on the list, but should appear in the course; or to make other comments we haven’t thought to ask for.

Please return to 52-380 (Miss Pope) before Tuesday, October 21.

 

[Summary from 20 student responses:
of which 8 from 1967-68; 10 from 1968-69; 2 from 1969-70]

Ec 451:

 Economic background Math

Coverage
National Income Too little: 4

Too much: 0

 Too little: 1

Too much: 1

 Too deep: 10

Not deep enough: 2
General Aggregative systems Too little: 3

Too much: 1

 Too little: 2

Too much: 0

 Too deep: 1

Not deep enough: 4
Price Flexibility and employment Too little: 2

Too much: 1

 Too little: 1

Too much: 0

 Too deep: 3

Not deep enough: 4
Theory of interest and demand for money Too little: 2

Too much: 1

 Too little: 1

Too much: 0

 Too deep: 1

Not deep enough: 7
Consumption and savings Too little: 3

Too much: 0

 Too little: 1

Too much: 0

 Too deep: 2

Not deep enough: 5
Investment Too little: 2

Too much: 0

 Too little: 1

Too much: 0

 Too deep: 0

Not deep enough: 9
Multiplier and accelerator Too little: 2

Too much: 0

 Too little: 2

Too much: 0

 Too deep: 0

Not deep enough: 5
Employment and inflation Too little: 2

Too much: 1

 Too little: 1

Too much: 0

 Too deep: 0

Not deep enough: 13

 

Note: the responses from Richard Eckaus’ time (first term, 1966-67) have been excluded from this table, so the above are solely for the three years Evsey Domar taught the theory of national income and employment.

 

From the student comments
[each bullet point from a different student]

YEAR TAKEN: 1967-68

  • The Worst Course of the sequence, especially the section’s instructor. Applies to all these points. Tries to cover too much; being an authority in (almost) nothing. Applies to both instructors.
  • I don’t remember 451 very well—it was an awfully unstructured course (+ remains so in my mind), mybe because of the variety and profuseness of the subject matter. Too little guidance from Professor Domar + Harris—i.e., their considered opinion should be given more often.
    National income: Too much on statistics, tho I agree some is needed. That problem in class was a pile of crap—I can’t add anyway.
    General aggregative systems: more tournaments needed.
    Theory of interest and demand for money: more needed, and more guidance from profs.
    Investment: more needed and more guidance from profs.
  • Price flexibility and employment: I thought the section of the course on Patinkin was extremely interesting and well done.
    Consumption and saving: A unified treatment of the competing theories would be preferred to the n-th repetition of Duesenbery, Friedman, Modigliani.
    [for both 451 and 452]: As these courses were taught two years ago there was too little integration of the two terms. Partly this reflects a real gap in macro theory itself; I would like to see an integration of the Patinkin-type of analysis into growth theory.

 

YEAR TAKEN: 1968-69

  • National income: good that this is done, even if not very pleasant at the time
    Price Flexibility and employment: Too much on Patinkin.
    Employment and inflation: More important to cover this Phil curve., monet v. fiscal pol debate etc. than Patinkin
    Perhaps 451 could have assumed more backgrd as it tended to be slow going sometimes. But that’s a minor point. And better that way than to blur over the material too fast. 14.451 exam questions tended to be well-set + testing e.g. the opera + arias.
  • National Income: The index no. prob. was discussed at too great length and too little depth.
    General Aggregative systems/Price flexibility and employment: These two topics were covered fairly well.
    Theory of interest and demand for money: coverage sketchy
    Consumption and savings: very well discussed
    Investment: All I know about investment I learned in other courses—14.452, monetary, econometrics.
    Multiplier and accelerator: The Samuelson multiplier-accelerator article is read in 14.452; all of the items covered in 14.451 under this heading are silly.
    Employment and inflation: no coherent coverage at all.
  • Multiplier and accelerator: Difference equations ought to be specifically covered, with some applications.
  • National Income “+index numbers”: Time should have been more carefully allocated in order to include appropriately the last part of the course.
  • National Income and General aggregative systems: too much, need new, simpler national income.
    Pretty good presentation of money topics.
    No coverage of Investment/Multiplier+Accelerator/employment and inflation at the end.
  • National income: Although this certainly should be covered—too much time is spent on this topic.
    General aggregative systems: Nothing is done in the course on modern macro-static models & e.g.—the Correspondence Principle. The course must assume a complete background in standard macro—because this is hardly covered.
    Much too much time is spent on Patinkin—which could be sued for covering Modern Macro-Static models.
  • Price flexibility and employment: the basics of Keynes should be discussed more.
    Employment and inflation: inflation models of newer sort should be included.
  • I don’t want N.I. removed from 451, just reduced!
    [comment for all topics besides national income]: I realize that this is an impossible preference [to have more depth in all the other topics of 451], maybe the answer is another course in macro theory! or less of other things in 452.
  • [For both 451 and 452]: I do not like the Socratic method, especially when applied to solving differential equations. All courses tend to move too slowly at the beginning.
  • National income: It was a mistake to spend so much time on this + none on inflation—change priorities.
    Investment: Treated a little superficially
    Multiplier and accelerator: Use difference equation techniques.
    Employment and inflation: This was not covered at all unfortunately.
    In general 452 was good, 451 seemed weak.

 

Source:  Duke University. David M. Rubenstein Rare Book and Manuscript Library, Economists’ Papers Archive. Evsey D. Domar Papers.Box 16, Folder “Student Evaluations (1 of 2)”.

Image Source: MIT Museum website

Categories
Courses Curriculum Pennsylvania

Pennsylvania. Economics Course Offerings, 1897-98

 

The Department of Philosophy at the University of Pennsylvania in 1897/98 corresponded to what today is generally called the Graduate Faculty of Arts and Sciences. The subjects of economics, politics, sociology, and statistics constituted the tenth group of the sixteen groups making up the Department of Philosophy. A Ph.D. candidate would select a major subject from the group and two minor subjects (recommended that “at least one minor be taken outside the group in which the major lies”). The course offerings and their short descriptions for group X have been transcribed below.

___________________

Departments of the University of Pennsylvania
as of 1897/98
and the year they were established.

(1740. Charitable School; out of which grew, in)
1751. The College.
1765. The Department of Medicine.
1 790-1850. The Department of Law.
1865. The Auxiliary Department of Medicine.
1874. The University Hospital.
1878. The Department of Dentistry.
1883. The Department of Philosophy.
1884. The Department of Veterinary Medicine.
1885. The Veterinary Hospital.
1885. The Department of Physical Education.
1889. The Museum of Archaeology and Paleontology.
1891. The University Library. (Building erected)
1892. The Laboratory of Hygiene.
1892. The Wistar Institute of Anatomy and Biology.

Department of Philosophy

  1. Semitic Languages
  2. American Archaeology and Languages
  3. Indo-European Philology
  4. Classical Languages
  5. Germanic Languages
  6. Romanic Languages
  7. English
  8. Philosophy, Ethics, Psychology and Pedagogy
  9. History
  10. Economics, Politics, Sociology and Statistics
  11. Mathematics
  12. Astronomy
  13. Physics
  14. Chemistry
  15. Botany and Zoölogy
  16. Geology and Mineralogy

 

The degrees conferred in the Faculty of Philosophy are Doctor of Philosophy, (Ph. D. ), Master of Arts, (A. M.), and Master of Science, (M.S.).

___________________

Faculty: 10. Economics, Politics, Sociology and Statistics

Simon N. Patten, Ph.D., Professor of Political Economy
Roland P. Falkner, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Statistics
John Quincy Adams, Ph.D., Assistant Professor of Political Science
Emory R. Johnson, Ph.D., Assistant Professor of Transportation and Commerce.
Samuel McCune Lindsay, Ph.D., Assistant Professor of Sociology
Leo S. Rowe, Ph.D., Assistant Professor of Political Science
Henry R. Seager, Ph.D., Assistant Professor of Political Economy
James T. Young, Ph.D., Lecturer, Administration

___________________

X. ECONOMICS, POLITICS, SOCIOLOGY AND STATISTICS.

Professor Patten, Chairman; Associate Professor Falkner; Assistant Professors Adams, E. R. Johnson, Lindsay, Rowe and Seager; Dr. Young.

Majors —

Political Science, Economics, Transportation and Commerce, Statistics, Sociology.

Minors —

1. Political Science; A 1, 4; B 10.
2. Public Finance; A 3, and B 1, 2, or C 1, 2.
3. Administration; A 8, 6, 3, or A 9, 2, 4b; and C 5d.
4. Economic Theory; B 1, 2, and, B 10, or Mill’s Political Economy(2 hours a week).
5. History of Economic Thought; B 1, 2, 3, 4.
6. Economic History; B 10, and Group IX. C 2, 4.
7. Transportation and Commerce; B 11, 12, and A 4, or B 1, 2, or C 1, 2.
8. Statistics; C 1, 2, 3, 4, or C 1, 2, 3, and A3 (one term), or B 11.
9. Sociology; C 5c, 6, B 1, or C 5b, 6, 1, or C 5c 5d, A 4.

A.—POLITICAL SCIENCE, FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION.

Assistant Professor Adams.

  1. History of Modern Political Ideas (2 hours per week)

Lectures covering the period from Bodin to the present, supplemented by prescribed reading. Relation between political thought and economic and social conditions will be studied, with special reference to the recent political development of England.

  1. Readings in Political Science (1 hour per week)

Reading and discussion of a few recent works on special phases of political problems.

  1. Public Finance (2 hours per week)

Taxation; the classification, incidence and effect of the several taxes. Methods of raising federal revenue in the United States; the revenue systems of the leading States (Second Term).

Assistant Professor Rowe.

  1. The Individual and the State (2 hours per week)

(a) (First Term.) The concept of individual liberty at different periods of political development. Relation to law and government. Distinction between civil and political liberty.  Guarantees, legal and political. The idea of social liberty in democratic communities.

(b) (Second Term.) Relation of the State to industrial action. Socialism and Individualism. Influence of economic and social changes on the sphere of activity of the State. Growth of free contract. Effect of recognition by the State of new forms of association.

  1. History and Theory of the State (2 hours per week)

(a) (First Term.) The general principles of political science. Its province and problems. Relation to the social sciences. Nature of political association; origin of the State; source and function of law. (Omitted in 1897-98.)

(b) (Second Term.) The concept of the State at different epochs. Growth of the distinction between State and government. Ends of the State; sphere of its authority; forms of the State and of government. (Omitted in 1897-98.)

  1. Municipal Government and Institutions (2 hours per week)

(a) (First Term.) The city and conditions of city life in the ancient, mediaeval and modern world. The relation between city and State in Europe and the United States.

(b) (Second Term.) Problems of modern city life. Relation to quasi-public works. Social problems.

  1. The Analytical School of Jurisprudence in its Relation to Political Science. (Second Term) (2 hours per week)

Selected readings from Bentham, Austin, Holland, Maine and Pollock. Relation of this school of thought to the doctrine of natural law and natural rights. Contrast between the historical and analytical concepts in political science.

Dr. Young.

  1. Administration (1 hour per week)

Local rural administration. A comparison of the organization and methods of local administration in Europe and America. Provinz, Bezirk, Kreis; Department, Arrondissement ; County, Township, etc. Modern growth and tendencies.

  1. Practical Problems in Administration (1 hour per week)

Studies in special questions, such as the formation and growth of systems of Civil Service; the development of boards and commissions of administrative control; the administration of factory legislation.

 

B. — ECONOMIC THEORY, ECONOMIC HISTORY, AND TRANSPORTATION AND COMMERCE.

Professor Patten.

  1. History of Political Economy (First Term) (2 hours per week)

The rise and development of the classical school of economists. Adam Smith and Ricardo form the natural centre of the study. Especial attention is given to the sources on which Smith’s Wealth of Nationsis based; and, in the latter part of the course, to the interpretation of Ricardo’s writings.

  1. Recent Development of Political Economy (Second Term) (2 hours per week)

The American economists are carefully studied. Prominence is given to the recent development of the theory of rent, to the theory of marginal utility, to the new aspects of the science resulting from an emphasis of the dynamic causes of social progress, to recent attempts to substitute consumption for production as the starting point of investigation and the basis of theory.

  1. The Relation of English Philosophy to Economics in the Eighteenth Century (First Term) (2 hours per week)

Philosophy and economics have in England been intimately related. The purpose of this course is to bring out the facts, character and extent of this relation and its results on both  sides.

  1. Scope and Method of Political Economy (Second Term) (2 hours per week)

Limitations of scope in economic investigation; its causes as deducible from the history of the science. The method of this science will be compared with that of others. The processes by which the great writers established their characteristic doctrines will be particularly considered. (Omitted in 1897-98.)

  1. Practical Applications of Economic Theory (First Term) (2 hours per week)

The object is to show the practical importance of the new theories, and the changes they will work in public opinion. Among the topics considered will be: taxation, wages, money, retail prices, population, the causes of poverty, the standard of life, co-operation, trades unions, the dependent classes. The distribution of the surplus will be specially considered, along with its proper weight as a factor in practical problems. (Omitted in 1897-98.)

  1. The Problems of Sociology (Second Term) (2 hours per week)

The possibility of a science of sociology; the attempts to found such a science, and the obstacles encountered; the relation of economics to sociology.

  1. Investigation of Special Topics (2 hours per week)

To promote original work and aid in the preparation of theses, special hours are assigned for the discussion of these investigations. Each student must select a topic, and give three hours a week to it throughout the year.

Assistant Professor Seager.

  1. Economic Conference (2 hours per week)

Assigned portions of the following works will be read and discussed: Böhm-Bawerk, Positive Theory of Capital; Hadley, Economics; Smart, Studies in Economics. Reports will be made on cognate topics of special interest.

  1. Advanced Reading in German and French Economics (2 hours per week)

Roscher, Grundlagen der Nationalökonomieand Philippovich, Allgemeine Volkswirthschaftslehre.
Leroy-Beaulieu, Traité théorique et pratique d’économie politique.

  1. The Industrial History of England and the Development of Economic Theory from 1750 to 1870 (2 hours per week)

The main features of the industrial revolution will be described, and the effects of the growth of the factory system on the position of the wage-earner, on legislation and on economic thought, will be considered. Then attention will be directed to the Corn-Law agitation, growing out of the Napoleonic war period; and the results of the Free Trade policy, inaugurated in 1846, will be discussed. Topics will be assigned for special reports. Lectures and assigned reading.

Assistant Professor E. R. Johnson.

  1. Theory of Transportation (1 hour per week)

General Theory of Transportation. The economic functions and the ideal organization of transportation. Competition and co-operation in railway management. The past and present functions of traffic associations. Relation of the State to transportation. Theories underlying governmental regulation in the United States and other countries. The theory of rates. Lectures accompanied by an outline of assigned readings.

  1. American Railway Transportation (2 hours per week)

Seminary, based mainly upon documentary sources. The work comprises (1) an examination of the salient features of the organization and management of railway transportation in the United States; and (2) a special study of railway regulation by the States and by the Federal government.

  1. Transportation Systems of the United Kingdom and Germany (1 hour per week)

Organization, relation to the government, results of regulation of railways in the United Kingdom, and of State ownership in Germany. (Omitted in 1897-98.)

  1. History of Commerce since 1500 (1 hour per week)

Lectures, assigned readings and investigations. Special attention will be given to the causes that have given the United Kingdom the commercial supremacy of the world. (Omitted in 1897-98.)

 

C. — SOCIOLOGY AND STATISTICS.

Associate Professor Faulkner.

  1. Introduction to Statistics (First Term) (2 hours per week)

A study of the statistics of population will serve to develop the general aspects of the science, the organization of statistical work, and the possibilities and limitations of statistical argument. Familiarity with the literature and the sources of statistical information will be the chief aim.

  1. Statistics of Economic Problems (Second Term) (2 hours per week)

This course supplements course 1: foreign commerce, railroads, banks, coinage, prices, strikes, wages, cost of living, will be studied from a statistical point of view. The literature will be reviewed and criticised.

  1. History and Theory of Statistics (First Term) (2 hours per week)

Summary of statistical efforts and statistical theory, culminating in the elaboration of statistical methods. Consideration of statistics as a science of method; the basis and form of  statistical judgments. (Open to students who have taken courses 1 and 2.)

  1. Statistical Organization (Second Term) (2 hours per week)

The history, organization and function of statistical agencies at home and abroad will be surveyed. The factors that contribute to the efficiency of census departments, labor bureaus, etc., will be studied. The statistical offices of the United States will be studied and their methods criticised. (Open to students who have taken courses 1 and 2.)

Assistant Professor Lindsay.

  1. Theory of Sociology (Two Years) (2 hours per week)

A systematic course in four parts; each part requiring two hours per week for half a year, and constituting an independent course.

(a) Methodology of the social sciences; their relations to economics. The problems of sociology. Brief review of the leading attempts to construct sociology as a science — Aristotle, Montesquieu, Comte, Spencer, Ward and Giddings.

(b) Primitive Society. Evolution of social organization and social control among primitive men. Special study of the forms of the family, and of the psychology of primitive society. Particular attention is given to the records of the American Indians.

(c) Structure of Modern Society. A study of the forms of social organization and social control resulting from modern demogenic association. The basis and relative strength of educational, political, religious and philanthropic factors.

(d) Social Movements of Modern Times. A discussion of the leading practical social problems of to-day, with a view to establishing a consistent theoretical point of view, and a method as a guide to the study of temporary and changing social conditions.

Note. — 5 d is open only to students who have had parts a, bor c, or an equivalent.

  1. Social-Debtor Classes (2 hours per week)

This course deals with those groups and individuals in modern society who contribute nothing to the social surplus, but who participate in it, and hence are social debtors. They are considered under the heads of (1) the reclaimable class; (2) the naturally dependent class; (3) the pauper class; (4) the criminal classes. The methods of dealing with these groups are likewise classified and discussed.

  1. Sociological Field Work (2 hours per week)

For special investigation of local social conditions and institutions. Opportunities for visiting industrial, educational and philanthropic institutions are afforded. Each student is expected to select a topic and make a careful study of some concrete social problem, with special reference to conditions in Philadelphia. Meetings for private conference and discussion are assigned.

Note. — In the academic year 1896-97, a special sociological investigation of the condition of the Negroes in the Seventh Ward of Philadelphia, is being carried on under the direction of William E. Burkhardt Du Bois, A. B., Ph. D., who was appointed for the year Assistant in Sociology for this purpose. The College Settlement of Philadelphia is co-operating in this investigation, and has appointed Miss Isabel Eaton, B. L., Fellow in charge of its work.

 

SEMINARY.

Seminary in Political Science, Economics and Sociology (2 hours per week)

The seminary meets each Monday evening during the academic year, for the presentation and discussion of papers prepared by the members under the direction of the professors in charge of the several topics in Group IX.

 

Source: Catalogue of the University of Pennsylvania. Fasciculus of the Department of Philosophy. Announcements for Session 1897-98, pp. 44-50.