Within an academic year there is often a natural ordering for a two-semester or three-quarter course sequence that allows the later courses to build on the course(s) that preceded it. With the growing depth of economic theory by the 1920s at the latest, more than a single course year was understood to be required to get up to research speed. We can add to this the further complicating fact of graduate programs being fed from a variety of undergraduate programs. It then becomes necessary to get excruciatingly explicit about the course content of prerequisites.
The memos transcribed below make it clear that a “stiff” sophomore-level “value and distribution theory” course as taught in the College at the University of Chicago would constitute the minimum preparation to begin the study of neo-classical economics à la Viner in 1928. It is also noteworthy that the “powwow” of Chicago economists named in L. C. Marshall’s first memo below appeared to consider the course on “Contemporary Continental Economic Thought” a different species altogether, not requiring even intermediate microeconomic theory as a prerequisite.
________________
Economic Theory Course Numbers and Titles
General Survey Course [undergraduate]
102, 103, 104. The Economic Order I, II, III. Professor [Leon Carroll] Marshall and Others.
Intermediate Course [undergraduate]
201. Intermediate Economic Theory. Professor [Paul Howard] Douglas, Associate Professor[Lewis Carlyle] Sorrel and Assistant Professor [Garfield V.] Cox
[Graduate Theory Core]
301, 302, 303. Introduction to the Graduate Study of Economic Theory
301. Neo-Classical Economics. Professor [Jacob] Viner
302. History of Economic Thought. Professor [Frank Hyneman] Knight
303. Modern Tendencies in Economics. Professor [Jacob] Viner
309. Contemporary Continental Economic Thought. Mr. [Paul Howard] Palyi
Source: University of Chicago, Annual Register with Announcements for the Year 1927-1928, pp. 162-163.
________________
3 Memos: Marshall to Viner to Marshall to Viner
The University of Chicago
Department of Economics
January 13, 1928
Memorandum
To: J. Viner
From L. C. Marshall
Before Knight left us we had a long powwow about the theory situation as it seemed to have developed through the autumn quarter. [Frank Hyneman] Knight, [Lionel D.] Edie, [Theodore Otte] Yntema, [Henry] Schultz, [William Homer] Spencer and myself participated.
Here are the results of the conference:
1) It was agreed that neither 201 nor 301 should be regarded prerequisite to 309.
2) It was agreed that a person taking 301 could not wisely take 309.
3) It was agreed that 201 could not properly be made prerequisite for 301 since most of the students taking 301 do not come up through our own organization.
Do you see any difficulties with this arrangement?
[signed]
L. C. Marshall
LCM:GS
* * * * * * * * *
The University of Chicago
The Department of Economics
Memorandum to L. C. Marshall from J. Viner. Jan. 20, 1928
(1) I do not know enough about the purposes and scope of 309 to be able to express an intelligent opinion.
(2) Do. [ditto]
(3) I do not see why 201 or its equivalent should not be demanded as a prerequisite for 301, any stiff undergraduate course in price and distribution being regarded as the equivalent of 201. For undergraduates wanting to take 301 as undergraduates it seems to me clear that 201 should be insisted upon as a prerequisite.
J.V.
* * * * * * * * *
[Memorandum to] Mr. Jacob Viner [from] Mr. L. C. Marshall. Feb. 9, [192]8
In reply to your note of January 20 in which you say “I do not see why 201 or its equivalent should not be demanded as a prerequisite for 301, any stiff undergraduate course in price and distribution being regarded as the equivalent of 201. For undergraduates wanting to take 301 as undergraduates it seems to me clear that 201 should be insisted upon as a prerequisite.”
I judge that this means that no substantial difference of opinion exists between you and the group that talked the matter over. Apparently you would regard a sophomore course in the principles of economics (the usual thing in American colleges) as being an equivalent of 201 for purposes of stating the prerequisite for 301. This being true, what would you think of stating the prerequisite thus:
Prerequisite: a good undergraduate course in value and distribution.
It seems wise specifically to mention value and distribution for the expression “principles of economics” has no one meaning as far as undergraduate instruction is concerned.
LCM:GS
Source: University of Chicago Archives. Department of Economics. Records.Box 35, Folder 14 “Economics Department. Records & Addenda”.
Image Source: University of Chicago Photographic Archive, apf1-08488, Special Collections Research Center, University of Chicago Library. The photograph is dated 14 June 1944.