Categories
Uncategorized

Swarthmore. Economic Theory Honors Exam Questions by Samuelson. 1943

____________________________________

Harvard economics alumnus Wolfgang Stolper (Ph.D. 1938)  was able to leverage his friendships and connections from graduate school to obtain a flow of external examiners for Swarthmore College’s honors examinations in economics. For today’s post I have transcribed the examination questions in economic theory provided by Paul Samuelson.

I find particularly interesting the early use by Samuelson of the term “neoclassical synthesis” under which he grouped “Marshall, Walras, Wicksell, Cassel or the Austrians” and that he considered distinct from the later synthesis of “orthodox economic thought” by Hicks.

I have also attached to this post a most delightful artifact, Paul Samuelson’s remembrance sent to the seventieth birthday celebration for James Tobin’s wife, Elizabeth (a.k.a. Bess, Betty) Ringo, who had been a graduate student of Samuelson’s at M.I.T. after having been one of his (probably January) examinees that year at Swarthmore.

____________________________________

Samuelson’s Remembrance of Being a Swarthmore External Examiner

“Success has a thousand fathers. Failure is an orphan.” John F. Kennedy said that, and so before him did Mussolinis son-in-law. I claim some credit for bringing Bess Ringo to Cambridge and into Jim Tobin’s orbit.

It was Wolfi Stolper who persuaded me to be an external Swarthmore examiner. I never worked a harder weekend. Janet Goodrich and John Chapman, Peter and Freddie Kuh, Bess, and many more were part of that intense honors group. Even the faculty lobbied our Olympian outside group.

No good deed goes unrewarded. My booty from the countryside was Ringo’s promise to come to MIT’s new graduate program in economics, which was starved for draft-proof students. Nuns cannot be trusted except in pairs and to Betty’s indignation we admitted a female from Hunter College to be her buddy.

The rest is history.

Blessed history—for Betty and Jim and theirs have enriched the lives of us happy many.

[signed] Paul Samuelson

Paul Samuelson (and, by proxy, Marion Crawford Samuelson)

1 August 1992

 

Source: Duke University, Rubenstein Library. Papers of Paul A. Samuelson, Box 73, Folder “Tobin, James”

____________________________________

 

SWARTHMORE COLLEGE
1943
Department of Economics

 

Honors Examination                       Division of the
Thursday, January 28                     Social Sciences

ECONOMIC THEORY

Examiner: Professor Paul A. Samuelson
Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Answer one question from each of four sections.

Section I

Write an hour essay on one of the following subjects.

  1. The use of a pricing system in a completely planned and socialized society.
  2. The difficulties faced in the classification of monopoly and competition, with a provisional, constructive solution of them.
  3. The significant meanings of the term “exploitation of a factor of production.”
  4. The marginal productivity theory and its difficulties.
  5. The relationship between firms and industry, between cost and supply, in the long and in the short run.
  6. Conflicting views as to the true nature of profit.

Section II

  1. Discuss price determination and allocation of supply between more than one market, under simple and discriminating
  2. “Edgeworth is wrong when he says that Giffen’s Paradox, positively inclined demand curve, is highly unrealistic and not to be found in practice. I have often observed that poor people eat more bread and potatoes than the wealthy, precisely because their income is less.” (Marshall) Comment upon this quotation bringing out the analytical point at issue.
  3. Why is it said that price is indeterminate under oligopoly and duopoly?
  4. Why has the Marshallian concept of consumer’s surplus been under attack? What did it attempt to do and under what conditions was it valid?

Section III

  1. “It is illogical that the Keynesians should speak of a future possibility of inadequate investment relative to saving since they insist on the necessary equality of these magnitudes.” Examine the issue raised here, making reference to other schools of thought. If you dare, attempt a synthesis of divergent theories and definitions.
  2. “Labor is like any other commodity. If its supply is excessive relative to its demand, lower its price and you will clear the market.” Comment.
  3. “I deny the very existence of a business cycle, and challenge anyone to produce evidence of its reality.” Meet this challenge.
  4. “The business cycle is monetary in origin, being nothing more than the ‘dance of the dollar’.” Comment.
  5. “The interest rate is a purely monetary phenomenon.” Comment.

Section IV

  1. Discuss the revolution in population outlook after World War I, and the economic problems raised.
  2. Will our major post-war problem be that of controlling a boom or combating a depression? Defend your stand.
  3. Disillusioned with monetary controls, governments have turned to fiscal policy to combat the business cycle. Give reasons and implications.
  4. When we have solved the problem of unemployed resources, there will arise the necessity to allocate resources in their optimal What are the criteria by which correct decisions are made in this sphere, and how is the perfection of competition involved?

____________________________________

 

Professor Paul A. Samuelson
Massachusetts Institute of Technology

SWARTHMORE COLLEGE

            Honors Examination                        May 19, 1943                       Division of the
Department of Economics               Social Sciences

 

ECONOMIC THEORY

Answer one question from each of four sections.

Section I

Write an hour essay on one of the following subjects.

  1. The relationship between firms and industry, between cost and supply, in the long and in the short run, under perfect and imperfect competition.
  2. The scope and method of economics.
  3. We have had at last four syntheses of orthodox economic thought: (a) that of Smith; (b) that of John Stuart Mill; (c) the neo-classical synthesis (Marshall, Walras, Wicksell, Cassel or the Austrians); (d) Hicks. Write a critical contrast of at least two of these.

Section II

  1. Discuss discriminatingly the multitude of meanings of the term “excess capacity.”
  2. What bearing does the use of indifference curves have upon
    1. the problem of the measurability of utility
    2. the definition of complementarity, independence, competitiveness; joint demand and substitutability
    3. Giffen’s paradox and “inferior” goods?
  3. “Since each worker is paid the productivity of the last worker, (marginal productivity), a really smart and unscrupulous employer would hire so many workers as to cause the wage to be zero, or at least only enough above zero to support a physiological minimum of existence.” Comment.

Section III

  1. “Everybody talks about the disparity between saving and investment, but nobody attempts to measure it.” Discuss the theoretical and statistical problems involved here.
  2. “There is an inherent instability in the banking system, and this gives rise to the business cycle which is essentially ‘the dance of the dollar.’” Analyze.
  3. Describe the “multiplier doctrine,” its fields of application, its validity and shortcomings.

Section IV

  1. Weigh the arguments for and against secular stagnation.
  2. Defend or attack the thesis that there will be a post-war boom. Give your characterization of the post-war economy.
  3. The business cycle is a misnomer; it is a question of many cycles not of one.” Discuss the historical, statistical, and theoretical issues raised by this statement.
  4. Describe the cyclical behavior and importance of
    1. the building industry or
    2. consumers credit and installment institutions.

 

Source: Duke University, Rubenstein Library. Papers of Wolfgang Stolper, Box 22, Folder1.

Image Source: Elizabeth Fay Ringo from Swarthmore’s Halcyon 1943. Paul Samuelson (1940) from M.I.T. Memorial.

Categories
Columbia Regulations

Columbia. Memo from the Dean on Registration-Books, 1909

While Economics in the Rear-View Mirror  is focussed on the content of graduate education in economics (including both the transmission of the tools and norms of economic science and scholarship), from time to time I’ll be adding artifacts related to the certification function of degree-granting institutions that have established rules to regulate the “paper-chase” of their graduate students. Examples: degree rules at Harvard for 1911-12, Chicago for 1903, Columbia University for 1908-10.

Today’s posting is a 1909 memo written by the founding Dean of Columbia’s Faculty of Political Science, John W. Burgess. Instead of having instructors filing grade reports to a central registrar’s office that performed the bookkeeping of course credits, Deans relied on student registration-books in which instructor signatures were collected, analogous to the German system in which students individually collected their Seminar Scheine (certificates) issued professor by professor, course by course as proof of their academic work. In Wolfgang Stolper’s papers at Duke University one sees that he carefully kept his Scheine from his course work at the University of Bonn before he went to Harvard.  

_______________________

If you find this posting interesting, here is the complete list of “artifacts” from the history of economics I have assembled thus far. You can subscribe to Economics in the Rear-View Mirror below.  There is also an opportunity for comment following each posting…

________________________

[Registration books]

Course Records. It should be noted that the student is expected to keep his own record of courses attended. In the registration-book which is furnished him for this purpose, he enters at the beginning of each half-year the courses which he proposes to attend. At the beginning and end of each course the professor in charge certifies the student’s attendance by his signature. Before presenting himself for examination for any degree, the student must submit his registration-book to the Dean of the Faculty in which his major subject lies in order that the Dean may satisfy himself that the required minimum number of courses has been attended. Lost registration-books may be replaced if the professors are able from their own records or recollection to certify attendance; but if they are unable to do this, the candidate may lose credit for attendance.

Source: Course Regulations, 1908-10. Columbia University.

________________________

 

Columbia University
in the City New York

FACULTIES OF POLITICAL SCIENCE, PHILOSOPHY AND PURE SCIENCE

Office of the Dean

September 23, 1909

My dear Professor:

The Dean’s attention has recently been called to the fact that there is some misunderstanding, or at least some difference of understanding, among the officers of instruction of the Graduate Faculties in regard to the signification of their signatures to the courses in the registration-books. Inasmuch as these books are the only evidence which the Dean has of the attendance of students upon the courses of instruction for which they are registered, and of the fulfillment of the requirements in regard to attendance whereby they become qualified to attain a higher degrees, the Dean deems it his duty to make known to the officers of instruction the interpretation placed in his office upon their signatures. The Dean understands that they certify that, to the best knowledge and belief of the officers signing, the student has generally attended the course in person, and that no substitution of work done or said to be done in absentia from the lecture room or conference room of the officer has been allowed for the certified attendance upon the courses of instruction. The Dean’s office will adhere to this interpretation of the requirement of attendance, until otherwise instructed by the Council of the University; or, of course, by the Trustees.

Very truly yours,

John W. Burgess

Dean

 

Source: Columbia University Archives. Rare Book and Manuscript Library. Central Files, 1890- (UA#001), Box 318, Folder “1.1.14 5/8; Burgess, John William; 1/1909-6/1910”.

Image Source: Universities and their Sons, Vol. 2. Boston: R. Herndon Company, 1899,  p. 481.

Categories
Courses Economists Harvard

Harvard. Mathematical Economics Rescheduled. Petitions, E. B. Wilson, 1935

One of the iron statistical laws of scheduling classes is that the probability of finding a Pareto improvement to a scheduling conflict ex post semester-start rapidly tends to zero with the size of the class that needs to be rescheduled. Here is a case of one such rare Pareto-improvement.

For the second semester of the academic year 1934-35 at Harvard E. B. Wilson’s Mathematical Economics rescheduled to eliminate the conflict with Fritz Machlup’s Money and Banking course.

What happens to make this particular case interesting in the history of economics is the list of distinguished (ex post) names among the undersigned of three foreign visitors to Harvard, namely Oskar Lange, Nicholas Georgescu, and Gerhard Tintner along with the graduate student Wolfgang Stolper and the undergraduate Sidney S. Alexander.

Six of the undersigned went on to receive Harvard Ph.D.’s in economics, they were:

  • Sidney Stuart Alexander.D. 1946. Financial structure of American corporations since 1900. (note: Harvard S.B. 1936, so undergraduate)
  • James Pierce Cavin, 1938 Ph.D. The sugar quota system of the United States, 1933-1937.
  • Wolfgang Stolper, 1938 Ph.D. British monetary policy and the housing boom, 1931-1935
  • Albert Leonard Meyers, 1936 Ph.D. Future trading on organized commodity exchanges
  • Chih-Yu Lo, 1937 Ph.D. A statistical study of prices and markets for electricity
  • Wilfred Malenbaum, Ph.D. 1941. Equilibrating tendencies in the world wheat market.

_______________________________________

[Memo: Econ. Chair to Dean, Carbon copy]

February 7, 1935

Dear Dean Murdock,

Because of the conflict of Economics 13b (Mathematical Economics) and Economics 50 (Principles of Money and Banking), which are scheduled for 3:00 on Tuesday and Thursday, Professor Wilson has requested that the hour for Economics 13b be changed to 2:00 on Tuesday and Thursday. I understand from Miss Higgs that rooms are available at this hour. The students registered in the course agree to this change.

I shall appreciate it if the change can be arranged before the next meeting of the class on Tuesday.

Sincerely yours,

H. H. Burbank

 

Dean Kenneth B. Murdock
20 University Hall

_______________________________________

 

[Memo: Dept. Secretary to E. B. Wilson, Carbon copy]

February 5, 1935

Dear Professor Wilson,

Dr. Machlup tells me that because of the conflict of Economics 13b and 50 you are willing to change the hour of meeting Economics 13b to 2:00 on Tuesday and Thursday. Until I am sure that the students who are taking the course for credit are agreeable, I cannot notify Dean Murdock of this change.

The simplest way to do this, I think, is for you to ask the class at its meeting on Thursday. There will be no trouble, I am sure, about securing a room at that hour. If you will let me know the outcome as soon as possible, I will make the necessary arrangements at the office.

Sincerely yours,

Secretary

 

Professor E. B. Wilson
55 Shattuck Street
Boston, Massachusetts

_______________________________________

[Petition signed by students/auditors in Econ 13b]

[Penciled in upper right:Econ 13b]

[typed] We should like to attend both, unfortunately conflicting, courses: Economics 13b (Mathematical Economics) and Economics 50 (Money and Banking). It would be much appreciated if a change in schedule could be arranged.

[signed] Oskar Lange
[signed] Nicholas Georgescu
[signed] Gerhard Tintner

[added in handwriting] We also, though not taking Ec. 50, would be willing to change hours.

[signed] S. S. Alexander

Source: Harvard University Archives. Department of Economics. Correspondence & Papers 1902-1950 (UAV.349.10). Box 23, Folder “Course Offerings 1932-37-40”.

_______________________________________

[Petition signed by students/auditors in Econ 50]

[Penciled in upper right:Econ 50]

[typed] We should like to attend both, unfortunately conflicting, courses: Economics 13b (Mathematical Economics) and Economics 50 (Money and Banking). It would be much appreciated if a change in schedule could be arranged.

[signed] W. Stolper
[signed] J. P. Cavin
[signed] A. L. Meyers
[signed] C. Y. Lo
[signed] T. Y. Wu [?]
[signed] S. Bolts [?]
[signed] P. Chanten [?]
[signed] W. Malenbaum

Source: Harvard University Archives. Department of Economics. Correspondence & Papers 1902-1950 (UAV.349.10). Box 23, Folder “Course Offerings 1932-37-40”.

_______________________________________

[Economics 13b: Course enrollment]

[Economics] 13b 2hf. Professor E. B. Wilson.—Mathematical Economics.

2 Graduates, 1 Junior. Total 3

 

[Economics] 50. Professors Williams and Dr. Machlup-Wolf.—Principles of Money and Banking.

16 Graduates., 10 Seniors, 1 Junior, 8 Radcliffe. Total 35.

 

Source: Annual Report of the President and the Treasurer of Harvard College 1934-35, pp. 81-2.

 

Categories
Economists Michigan

Michigan. Organization of Behavioral Sciences. Report to Ford Foundation, 1954

Here an except from the University of Michigan’s Survey of the behavioral sciences, the fourth university of five participating in the Ford Foundation Project of 1953-54 on the behavioral sciences. Harvard, Chicago, Stanford and Michigan’s reports are in the public domain and available at hathitrust.org. I have been unable to locate the University of North Carolina’s report but perhaps some kind visitor to Economics in the Rear-View Mirror (attention colleagues at Duke!) can track that one down for us sometime. These reports provide a very nice set of artifact-bookends for my project on graduate economics education in the United States that I truncate around mid-twentieth century. Link to Michigan’s Economics-Pantheon here.

___________________________________

[p. 11]

THE ORGANIZATION OF
BEHAVIORAL SCIENCE ACTIVITIES

At the University of Michigan there is no general administration of Behavioral Science or of Social Science as such. The teaching activities of the University are organized in a College of Literature Science and the Arts, a Graduate School, and 13 professional schools. Research and special services are carried on in each of the teaching units, and also in special bureaus, institutes and centers which are authorized for particular continuing operations and which, depending on their scope, may report to a department, a school, or to the central university administration.

Since 1934 there has been a Division of the Social Sciences1, comprised of representatives from the relevant departments and schools. Its function is primarily advisory and it has no budget or administrative responsibility. The General Committee of the Division nominates a Research Committee which advises the Board of the Graduate School on allocations for research projects in the field of social science.

The administrative units concerned with the Behavioral Sciences are described in the following sections:

1) Departments of the College of Literature, Science and the Arts
2) Professional Schools
3) Institutes and Research Agencies.

[p. 12]

DEPARTMENTS OF THE COLLEGE
OF LITERATURE, SCIENCE AND THE ARTS
 

Anthropology

The present organization of the Department of Anthropology, in a sense a transitional one, involves a staff of 15 members of whom five hold full-time teaching appointments in the Department of Anthropology and five hold full-time appointments in the Museum of Anthropology. Of the other five, two hold joint appointments with the Department of Sociology, one with the Department of Near Eastern Studies, one with the Institute of Human Biology, and one with the English Department. These complicated administrative arrangements are the result of a long-standing and well established tradition of separation of Museum and Department, and a general overlap of research interests with other disciplines.

In 1939 the Department had a staff of three men, one of whom devoted most of his time to his duties as Director of the Museum of Anthropology and of the University Museums, while the others taught full-time. It offered an undergraduate major and an A. M. degree. Museum staff members, not including the Museum Director, were three men who devoted themselves to research and curatorial work, their chief contact with students being consultation on research topics involving Museum collections. Owing to war absences in 1944-45, the Museum staff members were called upon to participate in the regular teaching program of the Department, and shortly thereafter this practice was formalized by granting them professorial titles, although no change was made in budgetary arrangements. This growth of departmental resources made possible a considerably expanded curriculum, and it was decided to press for further expansion of staff with a view to establishing a full-fledged doctoral program. This goal was achieved in 1948.

Joint appointments, particularly in the specialized fields of social organization, culture and personality, and linguistics, materially aided the rapid staff expansion. A fairly well rounded representation of the various areas of special interest within anthropology has resulted, although the staff and administrative structure are by no means thought to have attained any final or ideal form. The development of smoothly functioning working arrangements among the units involved in anthropology is an important problem; presumably these arrangements will evolve [p. 13] in response to problem situations as they arise. No difficulties have as yet come up which are insoluble under the present organization.

Research in anthropology at Michigan reflects several currents of influence. Traditional, individual research in descriptive ethnography and culture theory is well represented by the work of White and Titiev, and in prehistoric archaeology by the Museum staff; Beardsley, Schorger, and others participate in area interdisciplinary team research through such programs as those of the Center for Japanese Studies and the Department of Near Eastern Studies; and topical research interest in the problems of kinship and social organization is represented by Aberle and Miner. There does not appear to be any strong “official” emphasis along any of these lines from the standpoint of the insider, but the outside image of Michigan research is probably still influenced by the pre-expansion situation when the archaeological work of the relatively large Museum staff was especially visible.

No well defined trend is now evident, and it seems likely that Michigan anthropological research will be as difficult to characterize sharply in ten years as it is now. Presumably the archaeological research collections of the Museum will continue to be exploited, the dominant interest of the Michigan physical anthropologists in population genetics will persist, and the various area programs will continue to operate.

 

Economics

The Department of Economics has been in the forefront of the post war development of economics in two principal and interrelated directions, increased attention to economics as part of the study of human behavior as a whole, and greater emphasis on quantitative economics and econometrics.

Five members of its staff of 17 hold joint appointments with other departments and institutes, and 10 teaching fellows and predoctoral instructors are engaged in elementary course teaching.

Student enrollment consists of about 127 undergraduate concentrates and 62 graduate students of whom about two-thirds are working at the doctoral level.

The fields of economics in which research is being carried on are:

Economic Theory: Ackley, Boulding, Dickinson, Katona, Morgan, Palmer, Suits
[p. 14]
Money and Banking: Musgrave, Watkins
Labor: Haber, Levinson
International Economics: Remer, Stolper
Public Control and Regulation: Peterson, Sharfman
Public Finance: Ford, Musgrave
Quantitative Economics, Statistics and Research Methods: Katona, Klein, Suits
Economic History: Dickinson
Interdepartmental, Interdisciplinary, Area Programs, etc.: Ackley, Boulding, Remer, Stolper, Suits

The trend at Michigan to relate the study of economics to human behavior as a whole and thus to integrate it with the problems and results of other disciplines is shown in many activities of its staff. Of particular interest is the work of George Katona on the psychological foundations of economic behavior, and Kenneth Boulding’s explorations into problems in the integration of the social sciences. Members of the economics staff participate in the interdisciplinary seminars in the Japanese, Near Eastern and Latin American area programs, and in the Metropolitan Community Seminar and the Seminar on Land Utilization.

Considerable emphasis is placed upon quantitative economics and econometrics. The number of courses in this field has been increased from the two courses in economic statistics formerly available, to include a semester’s work in mathematical economics, now required of all doctoral candidates, a year’s work in econometrics under Klein, a semester of research methods under Katona, and a continuing research seminar in quantitative economics. In addition, an increasing amount of quantitative research is being carried on in the substantive seminars. Particularly notable are the recent studies in the incidence of taxation carried out by Musgrave in his seminar on Fiscal Policy, and studies of interregional development directed by Stolper.

The location of the Survey Research Center here has greatly encouraged and facilitated the development in these two directions by providing personnel, materials and additional methodology for the conduct of quantitative research. It has stimulated graduate student interest in these problems through participation in research and in many cases through employment. The annual appointment of two post doctoral visiting economists as research associates of the Center, broadening the area over which ideas are interchanged, was made possible by Carnegie Corporation funds.

[p. 15] The Interdisciplinary Program in Mathematics and the Social Sciences and the Detroit Area Study, both established under the 1950 Ford Foundation grant, have made important contributions to mutual understanding of problems by mathematicians and social scientists. The Detroit program makes an annual sample survey of the population in that area, providing training for graduate students as well as a research facility for faculty members.

These developments have had a natural effect on the interests and work of graduate students. Five students at the doctoral level are now employed by the Survey Research Center as study directors. Five others are engaged as half-time research assistants in the research seminar in quantitative economics. One student is engaged in an independent sample survey project growing out of the interregional studies mentioned above, and two students are pursuing independent research utilizing data obtained from the Survey of Consumer Finances conducted annually for the Federal Reserve Board by the Center.

Quantitative research by graduate students is limited by two factors. In the first place, the costs involved in processing quantitative data in any volume discourage such activity except where the expenses can be met by the research institute, program or seminar in which the student is participating. No free departmental funds are available for this purpose.

Secondly, the department itself has not yet overcome the “cultural lag” between its encouragement of quantitative research on the one hand and its formal doctoral program on the other. Traditionally the department has placed primary emphasis on theory rather than research. The student has been required to familiarize himself with economic theory and the institutional background of economic activity. Introductory courses in statistics and accounting have long been required as research “tools” for graduate students, but although further study has always been encouraged, no formal place in the graduate curriculum has been provided for it. The members of the Economics faculty are well aware of this contradiction and it is expected that it will be resolved in the near future.

 

Political Science2

[p. 16] Although lectures in political science were given as early as 1860 (by members of the law faculty) and courses in political institutions were found in the history department from 1870 on, a political science department as such was not established until 1910. An abortive “Institute of Political Science” had been established in 1887, but administrative difficulties caused it to disappear from the scene in a few years.

The department gradually grew in size until its faculty by 1933 numbered 12. In the post war days this number doubled, and there are now 24 members on the department staff. In the early days the department expanded by adding new courses in public law, political theory, municipal government and administration, and foreign governments. The work in public administration increased gradually from 1914, when a special curriculum was organized, until 1937 when an Institute of Public and Social Administration was created, which in turn led to a separate Institute of Public Administration in 1945. From the mid-thirties on the department has expanded primarily by the addition of staff in the fields of international relations and politics.

Today there are 1887 student enrollments in a total of 43 courses. There are 71 graduate students, and 176 undergraduate concentrates. Fifteen graduate students are in the process of writing dissertations.

The department divides its program into the following six fields of specialization: American government and constitutional law, foreign governments, political parties and public opinion, political theory, public administration, international law and relations. The staff is divided unequally in these fields, reflecting the demands of undergraduate and graduate instruction. The largest number of courses in the department, according to a recent report of its Curriculum Committee, are of the institutional-descriptive type (about 40). The political theory courses follow the traditional pattern of chronological analysis of great ideas. Two methodology courses are given each for one semester only: Scope and Method of Political Science, and Bibliography and Methods of Research. A growing interest in political behavior is indicated by three courses in this area and by the use of behavioral methods and materials in other courses.

The content and method of doctoral dissertations reflects an orientation of staff and courses toward institutional-descriptive materials. Of the 56 dissertations completed since 1947 or now being written, about one-half are legal-structural studies in American national, state or local government. Another 10 [p. 17] are in the international field, with half of them in international law. Six are traditional political theory studies. Eight can be classified strictly as behavioral and these have been written in the last two or three years.

The department has several interdisciplinary linkages, both formal and informal. Four members of its staff are involved in the Japanese Research Center, the Russian Studies Program, the Latin-American Program, and the Near Eastern Studies Program. The department regularly participates in the Metropolitan Community Seminar and the Land Use Seminar. By invitation of the government and the University of the Philippines, and supported by a government contract, it organized and operates a Public Administration Training Center in Manila. It has set up special courses in conjunction with the schools of Public Health, Forestry, and Education. Its linkages with Sociology are close on occasion. The Institute of Public Administration has had a sociologist on its staff for the past year. Political science staff and graduate students were on the staff of the Detroit Area Study during two of the three years it has been going on. The Political Behavior Program has granted a research assistantship to a Sociology graduate student for the past two years. The Phoenix Project in the Institute of Public Administration, includes a sociologist as well as economists on its staff.

The most significant behavioral developments in the department, especially from a student-training standpoint, are the Political Behavior Research Program inaugurated in 1950 with Ford funds, and the Phoenix project in public administration and legislative aspects of atomic energy control. Currently several members of the department are planning a collaborative program of research on the representative process. A program of behavioral research and training is thus seen to have a substantial and promising start. It will develop by the addition of staff members in this area and by the inclusion of more research training for graduate students, in proportion as the demonstrated achievement of the current activities earn departmental support and succeed in gaining financial support.

 

Psychology3

A major development in the Department of Psychology was undertaken in the years following 1946. Prior to the war the [p. 18] department had been small, with primary emphasis in experimental work. Walter Pillsbury retired as chairman in 1943 and during the war there was greatly restricted activity. After the war, with the establishment of a training program in clinical psychology, and with the expansion in social research, the staff was trebled and the graduate program greatly broadened.

The staff now consists of 55 members, only a few of whom are appointed full time on the teaching budget. The sum of their fractional teaching appointments is 24. The other parts of their appointments are in the Institute for Social Research, on research grants, and in clinical agencies.

The main directions of activity in graduate research and training may be conveniently considered as three; clinical, social, and general experimental. There is a certain amount of administrative separation of the three, and the students tend to group in these categories, but a deliberate effort has been made to integrate their work. Four-fifths of the work of the first graduate year is common for all students; specialization begins in the second year; after prelims many of the seminars again find all kinds of students together.

There are about 110 graduate students working toward the doctoral degree in Psychology. The number is arbitrarily limited by the admission of not more than 25 or 30 graduate students each year. They are selected from 200 or more qualified applicants. Admissions are planned so that there will be about the same number of students in clinical, social and general. Only two or three a year drop out for personal or academic reasons. The Department undertakes to find half-time positions for practically all students in research, teaching or clinical work which will contribute to their training. There are 30 appointments in the Veterans Administration, 5 to 8 in other clinical agencies, 5 on United States Public Health Service stipends, about 20 in teaching, and 10-20 on research projects. Ordinarily two students hold University fellowships and two to nine hold outside fellowships. The capricious inflexibility of this system is obvious, and it is frequently impossible to provide the job most appropriate for the student’s level and direction of training.

Active research programs are carried on in the following fields, usually with some assistance from outside grants:

Visual psychophysics: Blackwell, Kristofferson
Physiological: McCleary, Smith
Learning: Walker, Birch
[p. 19]
Motivation: Atkinson, Clark
Perception: Brown
Therapy: Bordin, Raush, Hutt, Segal
Counseling and Psychodynamics: Blum, Miller, McNeil, Allinsmith
Personality Assessment: Kelly
Mathematical Methods: Coombs, Milholland, Hays
Attitude Change: Katz, Newcomb, Peak, Rosenberg
Teaching Process: McKeachie
Industrial Human Relations: Maier
Others in Institute for Social Research

Laboratory and practicum facilities, in addition to the I.S.R., include the well equipped Vision Research Laboratory, a 10- room animal research laboratory, and a 10-room experimental laboratory in addition to a 10-room teaching laboratory, all in Mason Hall. A three-room machine and wood shop is fully equipped. In the Bureau of Psychological Services is a Psychological Clinic directed by Frederick Wyatt, and a Student Counseling Service directed by Edward Bordin, both extensively used for training. Hospital facilities are favorable for training in Pediatrics, less so in Psychiatry.

One of the continuing objectives of the Department of Psychology is to realize a reasonable balance of strengths. Before the war the emphasis was almost exclusively on laboratory experimental work. With the advent of the Veterans Administration program in 1946 the emphasis became heavily clinical. The establishment in 1948 of the Institute for Social Research created an immediate emphasis in social psychology. Only in the last year or two has general experimental psychology been strengthened by new appointments, new laboratories, and outside research grants to the point where reasonable balance has been attained.

 

Sociology

Courses in sociology have been taught at Michigan for about 60 years. During half of that period the leading figure was Charles Horton Cooley, an outstanding exponent of the psychological approach to the analysis of social life. In 1930, after Cooley’s death, sociology became a separate department, under the leadership of Roderick D. McKenzie. McKenzie’s interest in human ecology was a counterfoil to the Cooley tradition. Both approaches, developed through the years, are reflected in the current work of the department.

[p. 20] The major areas of research and graduate training concern four fields: Social Organization, Human Ecology and Population, Social Psychology, and Methodology. A series of substantive courses and seminars are offered in each of these areas. Some of the principal research areas in which graduate and faculty research go on within each of these general fields are as follows:

Social Organization

Social Stratification: Landecker, Lenski, Swanson
Political Sociology: Janowitz, Campbell
Social Integration: Angell
Industrial Sociology: Carr
Comparative Community Structure: Miner
Family and Kinship: Aberle, Blood
International Social Organization: Angell and Landecker
Collective Behavior: Swanson, Aberle
The Urban Community: Hawley, Janowitz, Freedman
Religious Institutions: Lenski
The Dynamics of Small Groups: Lippitt, Swanson

Population and Human Ecology

Population Distribution: Hawley, Kish
Fertility Trends: Freedman
Migration: Freedman, Hawley

Social Psychology (see next section of report)

Methodology

Survey Research Techniques: Likert, Campbell, Kish
Group Dynamics Methodology: Lippitt
General Quantitative Methodology: Williams

The department has major responsibilities in undergraduate teaching. In the fall semester of 1953 there were 1708 course elections in sociology. Most of the undergraduate elections are in introductory courses. In the fall of 1953 there were 60 undergraduate concentrates in sociology and 24 concentrates in pre-professional social work. There were approximately 50 graduate students.

Many ties with other University units are maintained. Two staff members have joint appointments in anthropology; three have joint appointments in psychology; and four are on the staff of the Institute for Social Research. Twelve of the 24 graduate courses offered for credit during the current semester are also listed by at least one other department.

[p. 21] There has been considerable revision in the graduate curriculum during the post-war period. Outstanding trends have been increasing emphasis on (1) systematic theory, oriented to the empirical testing of hypotheses and (2) training in and utilization of new methodological developments for empirical work. Illustrative of the first trend is a seminar in Theories of Social Organization required of all doctoral candidates. Illustrative of the second trend is the required participation in the Detroit Area Study of all first year graduate students.

At the present time approximately one-third of all graduate students have their primary orientation in the field of Human Ecology and Population; the remaining two-thirds in Social Organization. Students whose major orientation is in Social Psychology generally enter the special doctoral program in that field. The department now has rather large groups of students trained for work in these three fields.

Continuing research programs involving students and faculty in these areas compose the chief development needs felt at the present time.4 These needs are reflected in part in the proposal for a social organization research program, presented elsewhere in this report. The Department assigns the highest priority to the continuation of the Detroit Area Study as a central focus for its training of first year graduate students.

Work in the area of Social Psychology is carried on mainly through the special doctoral program in Social Psychology and is described in the next section of the report. The Sociology Department makes a special contribution to this program in its emphasis on the relationship between aspects of social organization and psychological variables. Illustrative of this contribution are courses in mass communication, personality and culture, and collective behavior. Eight members of the department do teaching directly related to the social psychology program.

 

Doctoral Program in Social Psychology

In 1947 the Departments of Psychology and Sociology, wishing to avoid overlapping and competition in the field of common interest, and hoping to provide better advanced training jointly than either could provide alone, were authorized by the Graduate School to create the jointly sponsored Doctoral Program in Social Psychology. Its policies are determined by an Executive [p. 22] Committee appointed by the Dean of the Graduate School from the faculties of the two departments. The chairman, Theodore Newcomb, holds a professorship in each department.

The Program has its own requirements for admission, for courses of study and examination, and recommends candidates for the Ph.D. degree. It has no teaching staff of its own and there is no formal faculty status labeled “Social Psychology.” Instruction is provided by staff members from the Sociology and Psychology Departments. There are about 20 staff members holding graduate faculty status in one or both of the two departments who regard social psychology as their primary specialization and who give instruction in this area. Several of these people hold full-time teaching appointments; most of the rest hold primary appointments in the Institute for Social Research, characteristically teaching a one-semester course each year.

Because social psychology draws heavily upon both sociology and psychology, early specialization is discouraged. Admission to the Social Psychology Program presupposes at least one year of graduate work in one of the two “parent” fields. Certain advanced theory courses in the field which was not the student’s previous specialty are required in the program. Another important way in which students are kept in close touch with the parent fields is through the preliminary examinations; two of the four which are required in Social Psychology (Personality, Social Organization) are the same as those taken in Psychology and Sociology respectively.

Curricular requirements include a series of units in theory (mostly in small seminars), one year of advanced statistics, and three methods courses, two of which involve active experience in gathering and analyzing data. A paid assistantship, most commonly in research, less often in teaching, is found for every student for at least one of his years in the Program. Many of these are provided by the Institute for Social Research.

Only about ten students are admitted to the Program each year, roughly half from each of the two parent fields, out of a much larger number who apply. Very few of them have been Michigan undergraduates, but about half have begun their graduate study here. One advantage of selecting among applicants who have already completed a year of graduate work is that mortality is very small. The nine or ten Ph.D’s granted each year make this Program the fourth largest in the University.

Of the 35 persons who completed their degrees during the Program’s first four years, more than half now hold full-time or part-time research positions; the next largest number (about [p. 23] one-quarter) have academic teaching positions. There has been no greater difficulty in finding suitable positions for these people — perhaps less — than for Ph.D’s in Psychology or Sociology.

 

PROFESSIONAL SCHOOLS

The University’s constituent schools have strength and considerable autonomy. In addition to the College of Literature, Science, and the Arts and the Horace H. Rackham School of Graduate Studies there are 13 professional schools: Architecture and Design, Business Administration5, Dentistry, Education, Engineering, Law, Medicine, Music, Natural Resources6, Pharmacy, Public Health and Social Work. The Deans of the various schools meet together at the Deans’ Conference—an important agency in the formation of overall University policies. The major part of this report is concerned with activities centered in the College of Literature, Science and the Arts and in the School of Graduate Studies. However, every professional school in the University also has certain activities with a behavioral science aspect. A special study of these activities is reported in Chapter X.

 

INSTITUTES AND RESEARCH AGENCIES

Institute for Social Research7

The Institute for Social Research, consisting of the Survey Research Center and the Research Center for Group Dynamics, [p. 24] was established by Regents’ action in 1948. It is organized on a University-wide basis, administratively independent of the teaching departments and schools, but closely allied with many of them through research, teaching, and professional interests. The Board of Regents specified that “the Institute shall be under the direction of a Director (Dr. Rensis Likert) appointed by the Board of Regents on recommendation by the President and assisted by an Executive Committee.” It provided further that “the Executive Committee shall be responsible for the determination of general policies regarding the nature and scope of the activities of the Institute…” In keeping with the broad relevance of the Institute’s activities, members of the Executive Committee have been drawn from various schools of the University.

From the time of its establishment the Institute has conceived its objective as having four main aspects: (1) the conduct of fundamental research on a variety of problems of both practical and theoretical significance, (2) the dissemination of research results in ways that maximize the usefulness of the research to other scientists and to the public at large, (3) the development of behavioral science through the training of research people and the provision of assistance and consultation to researchers at Michigan and elsewhere, and (4) the development of improved methods for social research.

The Institute conducts a broad program of quantitative research on economic and political behavior, social organization and leadership, group functioning, human relations, the process of planned and unplanned change, and the effects of group membership on individual motivation and adjustment. The research undertaken employs recently developed techniques of sampling, interviewing, quantification of verbal materials, observation and quantification of group functioning, and the experimental control and manipulation of variables determining the phenomena under investigation.

The Institute contributes to graduate training through participation in formal teaching and by providing opportunities for graduate students to take part in ongoing research projects. During the year 1953-54 eighteen members of the Institute staff held joint appointments with seven teaching departments or schools, and taught twenty-five courses. Ordinarily about forty graduate students hold appointments in the Institute, and many of these complete doctoral dissertations in conjunction with this employment.

[p. 25] The research of the Institute is administered within the two major Centers in a number of program areas under the supervision of senior professional staff members. This senior staff consists, in the Survey Research Center, of Angus Campbell, Director, and Charles F. Cannell, Robert L. Kahn, George Katona, Leslie Kish, and Stephen Withey. In the Research Center for Group Dynamics it is composed of Dorwin Cartwright, Director, and John R. P. French, Jr., Ronald Lippitt, and Alvin Zander. The regular staff of the Institute consists of about fifty research scientists, a central clerical and administrative staff of about sixty persons, and a staff of part-time field interviewers located throughout the country numbering over two hundred.

The major portion of the Institute’s financial support comes through research contracts with governmental agencies, private business firms, and professional organizations/ and through grants from research supporting foundations. The Institute during recent years has operated on a budget of approximately $800,000 per year.

 

Institute of Human Biology8

The Institute of Human Biology is a research unit of the University devoted to “the discovery of those fundamental principles of biology which may be of importance for man and the application of biological principles to human affairs.” It is supported in part by general funds of the University and in part by grants from outside sources. Its regular scientific staff of 16, supplemented by 12 other research associates or collaborators, is organized around specific research projects as research teams.

Certain Institute projects have directly significant implications for behavioral science. The Heredity Clinic functions as an outpatient clinic for the University Hospital, giving advice to referred patients on medical problems of hereditary origin and conducting research on the genetics of various defects. The Community Dynamics section conducts ecological studies with particular emphasis on communities in which man is a conspicuous member. The Assortative Mating Study is investigating the effects on the heredity of a city population which may be produced by the tendency of persons with similar traits to marry [p. 26] more or less frequently than would be expected by chance. The Hereditary Abilities Study is an elaborate investigation of human heredity using the method of comparison of identical twin, fraternal twin, and sibling pairs on a large number of psychological, bio-chemical and anthropometric variables.

 

Institute for Human Adjustment

The Institute for Human Adjustment was established by Regents’ action in 1937, its purpose being “to discover means of applying the findings of science to problems of human behavior, to train professional workers, to disseminate new information and techniques among professional workers, and as far as staff, funds, and selection of problems permit, to perform distinct social services. The actual program of the Institute is carried out through five operating units, each administratively responsible to Dean Ralph Sawyer of the Graduate School who serves also as Director of the Institute.

(1) The Division of Gerontology, Wilma Donahue, Director, engages in research in the psychosocial aspects of aging; offers educational programs for older adults in conjunction with communities, business, and industry; assists in the training of professional and volunteer workers through institutes, workshops, conferences, and publications; and serves as a consultation and information center about the problems of aging.

(2) The Fresh Air Camp, Edward Slezak, Director, provides courses in sociology, education and social work, experience in organizing group programs with children, and opportunity for systematic, supervised observation of child behavior.

(3) The Social Science Research Project, Amos Hawley, Director, is a facility for giving students of the social sciences actual field experience in research. The laboratory is the metropolitan community of Flint.

(4) The Speech Clinic, Harlan Bloomer, Director, provides opportunity for the observation, diagnosis, and treatment of all types of speech disorders, for experience in the rehabilitation of persons with hearing loss, and for research in speech pathology.

(5) The Bureau of Psychological Services, E. Lowell Kelly, Director, carries out its program through four divisions as follows:

[p. 27]
(a) Evaluation and Examining (E. J. Furst, Chief) is responsible for all university testing programs and through consultation is of service to individual staff members as well as schools and departments in improving programs of student evaluation.

(b) Student Counseling (E. S. Bordin, Chief) is designed to help students in solving their problems of educational, vocational and social adjustment.

(c) Reading Improvement (Donald Smith, Chief) provides noncredit training in reading speed and comprehension.

(d) Psychological Clinic (Frederick Wyatt, Chief) serves the general public and is especially interested in the early identification and treatment of psychological problems in the family.

Most of the units of the Institute are affiliated directly or indirectly with one or more of the teaching units of the University, and have planned their programs to contribute to the training of specialists in the fields of human adjustment as well as to provide services to individuals. Financial support for the several programs is derived from endowments of the Horace H. and Mary A. Rackham Funds, from general funds, private contributions and fees for services. In general, the funds available from these combined sources are not sufficient to provide any substantial research support in addition to the service and training functions.

 

Museums

One unit of the University Museums, the Museum of Anthropology, is concerned with social science. It is administratively distinct from the Department of Anthropology, although its curatorial staff hold academic appointments and ranks in the Department and teach two or three courses each year.

The scientific staff of the Museum consists of a director and three curators who are responsible for the collections of the Museum and who conduct research in addition to their teaching. They act only in an advisory capacity with regard to the exhibits of the Museum which are installed and maintained by a special department. The research activities of the Museum curators are in the fields of archaeology and ethnobotany and hence do not fall within a strict definition of behavioral science.

Two series of publications are issued by the Museum; any topic within the general field of anthropology is acceptable for these publications and several members of the Department staff [p. 28] have used this outlet for publications in behavioral science.9 The Museum maintains an anthropological library which is used by students and the staff of the Department.

 

The Institute of Public Administration10

The Institute of Public Administration integrates instruction, research, and service in the field of public administration. The major instructional emphasis of the Institute is its full-time graduate program for people who wish to enter the public service. The Institute also develops inservice training courses for persons already employed in public positions. Through its Bureau of Government, the Institute undertakes a governmental research program and provides technical advice and assistance on problems of local, state, and national government.

The graduate program in public administration is conceived as a training course for administrative generalists. The positions which graduates are likely to fill are those which involve staff assistance to key administrators, administrative research and procedures analysis, or personnel and fiscal management. The curriculum in public administration leads to the degree of Master of Public Administration and utilizes courses throughout the University.

The Bureau of Government is the research and public service unit of the Institute of Public Administration. One of the oldest organizations in this country devoted to governmental research, the Bureau of Government was established in 1914 as a center of information on government. Its activities now include (1) a program of research on governmental problems, (2) bulletins and pamphlets based on research findings, (3) an information service on public problems which may be used by any citizen or governmental agency, and (4) the research training of the graduate students holding research assistantships in the Institute of Public Administration.

[p. 29] Recent research publications11 have dealt with career attitudes of the personnel of a federal agency, the use of admissions and income taxes by municipalities, and the public personnel activities of professional and technical associations. Problems outside Michigan are being examined in current research on civil-military leadership and an analysis of recent changes in state constitutions. Research now being done on Michigan problems concerns highway finance, elections, and the preparation of an assessors manual to be used by all the assessors in the state.

The Bureau is undertaking a study of “Public Administration Aspects of the Atomic Energy Program,” with a special staff of research associates and assistants, under a grant from the Michigan Memorial Phoenix Project.

The Institute of Public Administration, in cooperation with the University of the Philippines and the Foreign Operations Administration of the Federal Government, is now engaged in the operation of a new Institute in Manila, Philippine Islands. Under the terms of the agreement the initial personnel of the Philippine Institute are supplied by the University of Michigan, and the University of the Philippines will gradually assume complete direction. Financial support is provided jointly by the Foreign Operations Administration and the Philippine government.

 

Area Research and Training Programs

Area research and training programs at the University of Michigan include the Program in Far Eastern Studies, the Center for Japanese Studies, the Program in Latin American Studies, and the Department of Near Eastern Studies.

As the title indicates, the program in Near Eastern Studies is organized as a full department offering a concentration program to undergraduates and the M.A. and Ph.D. degrees to graduate students and having an independent staff and course list. Its basic program consists primarily of historical and linguistic training, but a close association with other departments is maintained and students are expected to develop skills in traditional disciplines. Interdisciplinary field training sessions in the Near East are held in alternate years under the guidance of two faculty members. These sessions last for a [p. 30] full year and are flexible in organization to permit the student to specialize in his particular interest.

The remaining area programs are staffed by members of various departments, and the listed courses are compilations from the offerings of those departments. Undergraduate concentration is permitted only in the Program in Far Eastern Studies. All three offer the M.A. degree and some students preparing for business or government service stop there; students continuing in graduate school transfer to one of the regular departments for the Ph.D. degree.

The Center for Japanese Studies12 maintains a special library on the campus, a field station at Okayama in Japan, and has an extensive publication program for the research of faculty and students.13

The activities of the area programs are by no means confined to the behavioral sciences. All have literary and historical interests, and elementary linguistic training is an important phase of the student’s training. Behavioral science is fostered however; community studies, for example are a characteristic activity, and the integrated multidisciplinary approach is well exemplified in the faculty seminar conducted in each program.

 

FACILITIES AND SERVICE AGENCIES

Statistical Services

The University has a variety of statistical facilities located in a number of different units.

A major facility is the Tabulating Service which is well equipped with IBM machines. These machines are available to those research projects having budgets adequate to meet the service charges. The bulk of the work done by Tabulating Service is for the Registrar’s Office and the Business Office. A significant portion is devoted to tabulations for the Institute for Social Research. Only a small part is for other research projects on the campus. In addition to the customary IBM equipment, the Tabulating Service has a 602A Calculating Punch which is used a great deal. In the spring of 1952 an IBM Card Programmed Electronic Calculator (CPC) was acquired on a trial [p. 31] basis, but there has been insufficient demand from contract research to meet the full costs of this relatively expensive machine.

The Statistical Research Laboratory exists for the express purpose of assisting faculty members and graduate students with their individual statistical problems. The laboratory maintains a small but fairly complete IBM installation (including a 602A Calculating Punch). Automatic desk calculators are also available. Most of this equipment may be used without charge provided the use is for pure, (unsponsored) research, such as doctoral dissertations.

Small IBM installations, consisting of little more than a punch and sorter, are located in other units of the University. Of major relevance to behavioral science research are those in the Institute for Social Research and in the School of Public Health.

High speed, large capacity automatic computing machines are available at the Willow Run Research Center. These are of both the analog and digital types. These facilities appear to be capable of handling statistical problems as complex as behavioral scientists are likely to encounter for some time. They are primarily used at the present time by those conducting research in engineering, natural sciences, and mathematics.

Recently a group of staff members closely associated with the various statistical services of the University submitted an unofficial report to the administrative authorities urging that steps be taken toward establishing a centralized facility for both training and research in all aspects of computation, and it is hoped that the development of the North Campus will include such a computation center more readily available to all interested University personnel.

 

Photographic Services

The University has an adequate and efficient Photographic Service, equipped to handle a wide variety of work in the field of photography. It is prepared to produce slides of all sizes in black and white or color, film strips, motion pictures, and prints. It does photomacography and photomicography. It also does a large volume of photo-offset work.

The Photographic Service has a photostating section which is equipped to handle many kinds of duplicating processes. Its Ozalid facilities are used extensively for reproducing transcripts and theses. Its map service may be used for photographing maps and modifying their scale.

[p. 32] These services are available at cost to anyone connected with the University. At the present time 11 people are engaged in the work of the Photographic Service.

 

Publication Facilities

The University has very limited facilities for scholarly publication. Some funds are regularly available from the University budget for publications, but only a very small portion of this sum is available to the behavioral sciences. Editorial facilities are so limited that few scholars are willing to endure the publication lag involved in obtaining editorial help. The Institute for Social Research has employed a full-time editor to facilitate its own publications.

The University of Michigan Press, organized in 1930, is currently undergoing study and reorganization and there is widespread hope that it will become a more significant and effective agency in Michigan scholarship.

 

The Library

The University has a large library with a competent and efficient staff. Lack of sufficient space, however, has operated to reduce the efficiency of library service. The University General Library Building is badly overcrowded. Many acquisitions of research materials cannot be made easily available because of inadequate shelves and files. Lack of space has also led to an excessive dispersion of materials in numerous special collections housed in various buildings about the campus. The groupings of materials at separate locations has not always been functional from the point of view of the behavioral scientist with an interdisciplinary interest. The University administration regards the improvement of library facilities as a first priority in general development plans, and important steps are now being taken to relieve the overcrowding by the construction of a stack building on the North Campus and of the Kresge Medical Library building.

 

Audio-Visual Education Center

The University has a well-equipped Audio-Visual Education Center, with a large collection of sixteen-millimeter sound and silent motion pictures, filmstrips, tape recordings, and art reproductions. It also is prepared to produce a variety of audio-visual materials and to provide consultation on the use of audio-visual [p. 33] materials. The staff of the Center offer graduate and undergraduate courses in audio-visual methods in the School of Education and in the Extension Service. Instructors in schools and departments on the campus may obtain materials from the Center without charge for instructional purposes. Projection service is also available without charge for any regularly scheduled University class.

 

GENERAL LEVEL OF BEHAVIORAL SCIENCE ACTIVITY

In order to bring together the relevant data about the departments the following table has been prepared. These data are for the year 1953-54. They are provided for confidential use and should not be published in any form. Figures on numbers of students and on class enrollments are particularly difficult to use in comparisons between universities because of the differences in methods of calculation.

1954_Michigan_BehSciencesTable

 

[NOTES]

 

  1. Appendix item 5; The Division of the Social Sciences: Reprinted from “The University of Michigan, An Encyclopedia Survey” Ann Arbor, Univ. Mich. Press, 1942, Vol. I, pp 304-306. Appendix item 6; List of Members, General Committee of the Division of the Social Sciences, University of Michigan, 1953-54. Appendix item 7; News Letters of the Division of Social Sciences, University of Michigan, April, 1950, June, 1952, January, 1953, May, 1953. Appendix item 8; List of Faculty Members in the Social Sciences, University of Michigan, 1953.
  2. Appendix item 9; The Department of Political Science. Reprinted from “The University of Michigan: An Encyclopedia Survey” Ann Arbor, Univ. Mich. Press, Part IV, 1944, pp 702-708.
  3. Appendix item 10; The Department of Psychology, Reprinted from “The University of Michigan: An Encyclopedia Survey” Ann Arbor, Univ. Mich. Press, Part IV, 1944, pp 708-714.
  4. Appendix item 11; Suggestions to the Dean and Executive Committee from the Department of Sociology on the Development Council Request.
  5. Appendix item 12; Publications, School of Business Administration, Bureau of Business Research, Bureau of Industrial Relations, Univ. of Michigan, 1953.
  6. Appendix item 13; Dept. of Conservation: The First Three Years (1950-1953) Univ. of Mich. School of Natural Resources. Appendix item 14; The School of Natural Resources and the Social Sciences, 1951.
  7. Appendix item 15; Institute for Social Research, Survey Research Center, Research Center for Group Dynamics, Univ. of Mich., 1952. Appendix item 16; Executive Committee and Staff of the Institute for Social Research, 1953. Appendix item 17; Publications of the Institute for Social Research, September, 1952 through November, 1953.
  8. Appendix item 18; Institute of Human Biology, Univ. of Mich. Appendix item 19; Publications, Institute of Human Biology, March 1, 1953.
  9. Culture and Agriculture by Horace M. Miner, Occasional Contributions from the Museum of Anthropology of the University of Michigan, No. 14, 1949; Araucanian Culture in Transition by Mischa Titiev, Occasional Contributions from the Museum of Anthropology of the University of Michigan, No. 15, 1951; Spanish-Guarani Relations in Early Colonial Paraguay by Elman R. Service, Anthropological Papers, Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, No. 9, 1954.
  10. Appendix item 20; Institute of Public Administration, 1954- 55 Announcement, University of Michigan, Official Publication.
  11. Appendix item 21; Publications. Bureau of Government, Institute of Public Administration, February, 1953.
  12. Appendix item 22; Center for Japanese Studies, Announcement, June 11, 1954.
  13. Appendix item 23; Publications, Center for Japanese Studies and Near Eastern Studies, 1953.

 

Source: University of Michigan. Survey of the Behavioral Sciences. Report of the Faculty Committee and Report of the Visiting Committee. Ann Arbor, Michigan: July 1, 1954.

 

Categories
Economists Harvard Transcript

Harvard. Wolfgang Stolper’s Coursework. 1934-37

The picture shows the economics department of Swarthmore ca. 1942:
Standing: John W. Seybold (1916-2004), Frank Pierson (1911-1996)
Seated: Wolfgang F. Stolper (1912-2002), Clair Wilcox (1898-1970), Herbert F. Fraser (1890-1953).

One can read about them and others in One Hundred Years of Economics at Swarthmore by Joshua Hausman (Swarthmore, Class of 2005)

Below is the course record of the first author of the classic paper “Protection and Real Wages,” Review of Economic Studies, 1941. The second author was the economist seen in center of this blog’s rear-view mirror.

____________________________________

HARVARD UNIVERSITY

THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF ARTS AND SCIENCES

24 UNIVERSITY HALL, CAMBRIDGE, MASSACHUSETTS

May 23, 1938

 

Transcript of the record of Mr. Friedrich Wolfgang Stolper

 

Course

1934-35

GRADE

Economics 11
[Economic theory]

(1 course)
[Taussig, Schumpeter]

Excused

Economics 51
[Business cycles and economic forecasting]

(1 course)
[Schumpeter]

A

Economics 1a1
[Introduction to economic statistics]

(½ course)
Frickey

A

Economics 10a1
[History of commerce, 1450-1750]

(½ course)
[Usher]

A

Economics 10b2
[History of industry and agriculture, 1450-1750]

(½ course)
[Usher]

A minus

Economics 31b2
[Theory of economic statistics]

(½ course)
[Crum]

Excused

1935-36

Mathematics A

(1 course)

C plus

Economics 121
[Monopolistic competition and allied problems in value theory]

(½ course)
[Chamberlin]

A minus

Economics 20
[Economic research]
(1 course)
Mason

A

1936-37

Economics 20
[Economic research]

(1½ courses)
Schumpeter

A

Economics 147a hf
[Seminar: Selected problems in money and banking]

(½ course)
[Harris]

A

Mr. Stolper received the degree of Master of Arts in June, 1935.

 

The established grades are A, B, C, D, and E.

A grade of A, B, Credit, Satisfactory, or Excused indicates that the course was passed with distinction. Only courses passed with distinction may be counted toward a higher degree.

*Courses marked with an asterisk are elementary and therefore may not be counted toward a higher degree.

[signed] Lawrence S. Mayo
Assistant Dean

 

Source: Wolfgang F. Stolper papers. Duke University, Rubenstein Rare Book & Manuscript Library, Box 23 c. 1.

Image Source: p. 15 of The Halcyon 1943 (Swarthmore Yearbook).

Categories
Economists Michigan Research Tip

Michigan Economics

The University of Michigan’s Faculty History Project provides brief biographies of its economics faculty and/or good portraits.

Hint: To get all the economists, when you search faculty, only enter “economics” into the space provided for “Position”.

A few examples:

Henry Carter Adams (1880-1921)

Frederick Manville Taylor (1893-1930)

Kenneth Eward Boulding (1949-1968)

Richard A. Musgrave (1947-1959)

Wolfgang F. Stolper (1949-1982)

 

 

 

Categories
Courses Economists Harvard

Harvard Economics. Hansen and Williams Fiscal Seminar 1937-1944

Motivation
Fiscal Policy Seminar 1937-38
Fiscal Policy Seminar 1938-39
Fiscal Policy Seminar 1939-40
Fiscal Policy Seminar 1940-41
Fiscal Policy Seminar 1941-42
Fiscal Policy Seminar 1942-43
Fiscal Policy Seminar 1943-44
Fiscal Policy Seminar 1944-45

___________________________

 

From the first annual report of the Graduate School of Public Administration by Dean John H. Williams for 1937-1938

[p. 298] Concerning the seminars which constitute our program of work little further comment seems necessary. A statement of last year’s program and that being followed this year is given in the appendix, where we have sought to describe in detail the content of the seminars and our methods of conducting them. Since properly qualified students carrying on graduate study in other schools and departments of the University may also participate in our seminars the program of the School embraces a student body many times larger than the number of fellows formally registered in the School. Thus at the present time there is a total enrollment of one hundred and eighty-eight students in the various seminars of the School. We began last year with five seminars and have expanded the program this year to eleven, of which five are full-year and six half-year seminars. In selecting the subjects we have been guided in large measure by our own interests and competence, but within these limits we have sought for subjects presenting problems of large public importance, problems both of policy and of procedure, requiring the combined efforts of different disciplines within the social sciences and permitting of effective cooperation between the University and the public service. Especially we have sought to find subjects that are at the research stage, and to put the emphasis upon investigation rather than upon formal instruction. Our interest is quite as much in learning for ourselves as in attempting to teach others…

[p. 314]

Fiscal Policy.
Professors WILLIAMS and HANSEN.

This seminar is concerned with public finance in relation to economic, political, and social institutions and systems. It deals with the monetary aspects of expenditures and revenues, with public finance as a compensatory mechanism in the business cycle, and with the social and political implications of government spending.

___________________________

 

FISCAL POLICY SEMINAR, 1937-1938

Source:
Official Register of Harvard University, Vol. XXXVI February 28, 1939, No. 4.

Issue containing the report of the President of Harvard College and reports of departments for 1937-38, pp. 307-310.

The Fiscal Policy Seminar in 1937-1938 was conducted on two planes: (1) a general meeting which included active members of the seminar as well as others in the University, both graduate students and faculty members, who had a special interest in one or more of the fields covered at these meetings; (2) a meeting restricted to the working members of the seminar.

The general seminar session met each week on Friday from four to six and was addressed by a visiting consultant of the School. The afternoon session was followed by dinner with the visiting guest attended mainly by selected members from the working seminar who were especially interested in the particular topic under discussion, the dinner in turn being followed by an extended discussion, lasting frequently until 10 or 10:30 o’clock. The visiting speakers were for the most part government officials, but there were also included various officials in the Treasury, Federal Reserve Bank of New York, Federal Reserve Board in Washington, Social Security Board, Works Progress Administration and the Federal Housing Administration….

The general seminar session with visiting consultants proved extremely valuable from various standpoints. It proved a means by which government officials on their part came into closer contact with the Faculty and students of the Graduate School of Public Administration and accordingly acquired a personal interest in its problems, and on the other side a means of presenting to the School in a more vital way the problems confronting the government. This type of close contact, moreover, is believed to be a useful means of developing placement openings for the graduates of the School in Washington. The discussions with the visiting consultants in the Friday sessions, moreover, proved extremely stimulating as a background for the research work done by the working members of the restricted seminar group.

The working seminar met each week on Monday from four to six. At these sessions papers were presented by various members of the seminar. Out of these papers a number of articles were prepared for submission for publication in various economic journals. It appears that out of the year’s work perhaps some four or five articles in leading journals are likely to materialize. Some have already been accepted.

The combined work of these two seminar meetings forms the background of a research project in Fiscal Policy, which it is planned will eventuate in a volume exploring the problem in a general way and raising important problems for further research.

Program of Friday Meetings

October 15. F. J. BAILEY — “The Work of the Federal Bureau of the Budget.”

October 22. CARL SHOUP — “General Over-All View of the American Tax System.”

October 29. EUSTACE SELIGMAN — “The Effect of the Capital Gains Tax on the Investment Market.”

November 12. GEORGE C. HAAS, JOSEPH S. ZUCKER, L. H. SELTZER and A. F. O’DONNELL — “The Federal Tax Structure.”

November 26. LAWRENCE SELTZER — “The Undistributed Profits Tax.”

December 3. GERHARD COLM — “Economic Consequences of Recent American Tax-Policy.”

December 10. GEORGE O. MAY — “The 1936 Federal Tax Legislation.”

December 17. JACOB VINER — “The General Relations between Fiscal Policy and the Business Cycle.”

February 11. DANIEL W. BELL — “Treasury Financing”; W. R. BURGESS – “Relations of the Reserve Banks and the Treasury.”

February 18. E. A. GOLDENWEISER — “Relations of Deficit Financing to the Banking System.”

February 25. WOODLIEF THOMAS — “Fiscal Policy and the Money Market.”

March 4. LAUCHLIN CURRIE — “Federal Income -Creating Expenditures.”

March 18. A. J. ALTMEYER and WILBUR J. COHEN — “Old Age Insurance and Old Age Assistance: Current and Future Prospects.”

March 25. MERRILL G. MURRAY and JOHN J. CORSON — “The Social Security Taxes.”

April 1. ERNEST M. FISHER — “The Federal Housing Administration.”

April 15. ARTHUR R. GAYER — “Compensatory Spending.”

April 22. CORRINGTON GILL — “Administrative and Fiscal Problems of the Relief Administration.”

April 29. LEWIS DOUGLAS — “Government Fiscal Policy.”

May 6. GUNNAR MYRDAL — “Fiscal Policy in Sweden.”

Program of Monday Meetings

October 18. R. A. MUSGRAVE — “The Twentieth Century Fund Report on Facing the Tax Problem.”

October 25. G. G. JOHNSON — “The Capital Gains Tax.”

November 1. R. V. GILBERT — “The Price of Common Stock as an Element in the Interest Price Structure.”

November 8. EMILE DESPRES — “The Effect of the Capital Gains Tax upon Capital Formation.”

November 15. Dr. HEINRICH BRUENING — “Monetary and Fiscal Policies in Germany during the Depression.”

November 22. WALTER SALANT — “The Effect of Securities Market Regulations upon Capital Formation.”

November 29. K. E. POOLE — “Tax Remission as a Compensatory Device.”

December 6. E. P. HERRING — “Administrative Problems in the Formulation and Execution of Fiscal Policy.”

December 13. E. N. GRISWOLD — “Legal Aspects of the Undistributed Profits Tax.”

February 14. ROBERT FRASE — “Economic Effects of Social Insurance Reserves, with particular reference to Unemployment Insurance Reserves.”

February 21. D. W. LUSHER — “The Relation of the Structure of Interest Rates to Investment.”

February 28. R. A. MUSGRAVE — “Limits in Public Debt and Taxation.”

March 7. WALTER SALANT — “Effects of Fiscal Policy on Business Stability.”

March 14. HERMAN M. SOMERS — “Future Fiscal Burdens Arising from the Social Security Program.”

March 21. MARTIN KROST — “Tax Variability as a Compensatory Stabilizing Device.”

March 28. NORTON LONG — “Some Aspects of Fiscal Planning under Democratic Government.”

April 11. S. J. DENNIS — “The Relation of the Undistributed Profits Tax and the Soldiers’ Bonus to the 1937 Depression.”

April 25. EMILE DESPRES — “Ezekiel’s Proposal to Secure Full Employment.”

May 2. G. G. JOHNSON — “The Trend Toward Treasury Control of Credit in the United States.”

May 9. GUNNAR MYRDAL — “Fiscal and Monetary Policy in Sweden.”

 

___________________________

 

FISCAL POLICY SEMINAR, 1938-1939.
Professors Williams and Hansen

Source:
Official Register of Harvard University, Vol. XXXVII March 30, 1940, No. 12.

Issue containing the report of the President of Harvard College and reports of departments for 1938-39, pp. 342-345.

The Fiscal Policy Seminar was conducted in 1938-1939 on substantially the same plan as in 1937-1938; that is, the general seminar sessions, which met on Fridays from four to six, were addressed by a visiting consultant and were attended by the active members of the seminar, as well as by faculty members and graduate students who were especially interested in the topics under discussion. Smaller meetings were held on Monday afternoons from four to six and were attended only by students engaged in research in the field of fiscal policy.

The general sessions were held less frequently than last year – usually twice a month – and on two occasions were conducted jointly with the Administrative Process Seminar. These joint meetings were on the subjects of the capital budget and federal grants to states, in which both seminars had an interest.

At the three December meetings, “previews” were held of round table discussions which were conducted later in the month at the annual meeting of the American Economic Association. The round tables covered the topics “The Role of Public Investment and Consumer Capital Formation,” “Divergencies in the Development of Recovery in Various Countries,” and “The Workability of Compensatory Devices.” In each case three guest speakers presented papers covering different aspects of the problem and providing the basis for general discussion….

As last year, dinners attended by the visiting guest and a small group of students followed the Friday afternoon session, and in the evening informal meetings were held for further discussion.

At each Monday session, a paper was presented by a member of the group doing active research in fiscal policy. The paper was discussed by the other members of the seminar. These papers and discussions formed the basis for theses which were submitted at the close of the year by students who were taking the seminar for academic credit.

The research project begun last year has resulted in a preliminary manuscript on “Fiscal Policy in Relation to the Business Cycle and Chronic Unemployment.” During the coming year, it will be revised and expanded with a view to publication.

The following is a list of the Monday meetings of the seminar:

October 3.            An Over-all View of the Current United States Tax System: Federal, State and Local.

October 10.          An Over-all View of Governmental Expenditures, 1913-1938: Federal, State and Local.

        An Over-all View of the Rise of Public Debt, 1913-1938: Federal, State and Local.

October 17.          The 1938 Revenue Act.

October 24.          Issues Raised by the Colm-Lehmann Pamphlets.

October 31.          The Economic Consequences of Retirement of the Public Debt.

November 14.      The Theoretical and Practical Implications of Separating the Investment Budget from the Current Budget.

November 21.      New York City’s Experience.

November 28.     A Re-examination of the Stabilization of Consumer Income.

December 5.        A Program for the Cyclical Stabilization of Investment and Current Expenditures.

December 12.      Public Investment: History and Program for Future.

December 19.      An Analysis of Governmental Expenditures with a View to Showing the Effects of the Volume and Types of Different Expenditures on Consumption, Saving and Investment.

February 6.          Canadian Fiscal Relations.

February 13.        Japanese Monetary and Fiscal Recovery Policies.

February 20.       The Development of Budgetary Organization.

February 27.        Balkan Credit and Fiscal Policy.

March 6.               The Economic Implications of a Rising Public Debt.

March 13.             Consumption, Saving and Investment and Relief and Social Security.

March 20.            A Re-examination of the Stabilization of Consumer Income.

March 27.            Deficit Financing and the Banking System.

April 10.              Government Loans and Subsidies as a Stimulus to Private Investment.

April 17.               The Economic Effects of the Income Tax.

April 24.              Federal Aid to the States.

May 1.                   Some Attempts at the Statistical Determination of the Multiplier and the Propensity to Consume.

The non-resident consultants and the meetings which they attended were as follows:

October 7.            J. ROY BLOUGH, Director of Tax Research, Division of Tax Research, United States Treasury Department. Tax Policy in the United States Today.

October 28.         LAWRENCE H. SELTZER, Assistant Director, Division of Research and Statistics, United States Treasury Department. Tax Policy with Reference to Capital Accumulation.

November 7.       FRITZ LEHMANN, New School for Social Research. The German Situation.

November 18.     CHARLES W. ELIOT, 2nd., Executive Officer, National Resources Committee. Current and Capital Budgets.
GUNNAR MYRDAL, University of Stockholm. Swedish Budgetary Procedure.
This was a joint meeting with the Administrative Process Seminar.

November 25.     ROSWELL MAGILL, former Under Secretary of the Treasury. The Formulation of a Revenue Bill.

December 2.        Preview of American Economic Association Round Table on The Role of Public Investment and Consumer Capital Formation.

GERHARD COLM, New School for Social Research. The Government as Investor.

BENJAMIN W. LEWIS, Oberlin College. The Government as Competitor.

GRIFFITH JOHNSON, United States Treasury Department. The Effect of the Social Security Taxes on Consumption and Investment.

December 9.        Preview of American Economic Association Round Table on Divergencies in the Development of Recovery in Various Countries.

GOTTFRIED HABERLER, Harvard University. Recovery Policies in Democratic Countries.

GEORGE N. HALM, Tufts College. Recovery Policies in Totalitarian States.

EMIL LEDERER, New School for Social Research. Is There a World-wide Drift Toward Regimented Control of Industry?

December 16.      Preview of American Economic Association Round Table on the Workability of Compensatory Devices.

PAUL T. ELLSWORTH, University of Cincinnati. The Efficacy of Central Bank Policy.

PAUL A. SAMUELSON, Junior Fellow, Harvard University. The Theory of Pump-Priming Re-examined.

EMILE DESPRES, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, Washington, D. C. The Proposal to Tax Hoarding.

February 17.        LAUCHLIN CURRIE, Assistant Director, Division of Research and Statistics, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. The Problem of the Multiplier and the Propensities to Save and Consume and the Outlook for Capital Expenditures.

March 10.             GARDINER MEANS, Director, Industrial Section, National ResourcesCommittee. Discussion of preliminary edition of “Patterns of Resource Use” by the National Resources Committee.

March 17.             E. A. GOLDENWEISER, Director, Division of Research and Statistics, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. The Problems of the Quantity and Quality of Money from the Point of View of Monetary Regulation.

April 14.               EWAN CLAGUE, Director, Bureau of Research and Statistics, Social Security Board. Federal Grants to States.

April 21.                J. DOUGLAS BROWN, Princeton University. A Survey of the Social Security Program in the United States.

April 28.               MARRINER ECCLES, Chairman of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. Financial and Fiscal Problems Faced by Capitalistic Democracies Today.

 

___________________________

 

THE FISCAL POLICY SEMINAR, 1939-1940
Professors Williams and Hansen

Source:
Official Register of Harvard University, Vol. XXXVIII April 10, 1941, No. 20.
Issue containing the report of the President of Harvard College and reports of departments for 1939-40, pp. 324-326.

 

The Fiscal Policy Seminar continued its plan of holding meetings on Mondays from four to six, at which students actively engaged in research in the field of fiscal policy presented papers for discussion, and on occasional Fridays, when visiting consultants addressed the group. The Friday meetings, held usually twice a month, were attended by interested faculty members and graduate students as well as by the active members of the seminar. …Following the more formal afternoon presentation on Fridays, a part of the seminar usually met with the speaker in the evening for further informal discussion of the topic.

On October 20, the seminar met with the Administrative Process Seminar to hear Mr. Robert H. Rawson, a former Littauer Fellow, speak on the work of the Federal Bureau of the Budget. Two meetings were held jointly with the Price Policies Seminar – one in November at which Mr. Leon Henderson discussed price rigidities in our economy, and one in February at which Mr. Richard V. Gilbert, Chief of the Industrial Economics Division of the Department of Commerce, spoke on “War Inventories and the Current Economic Outlook.”

Discussion at the first five Monday meetings was based on the manuscript Fiscal Policy in Relation to the Business Cycle, a research project which has grown out of the meetings during the past two years. The subsequent Monday sessions were devoted to the presentation of papers by members of the group. These papers were discussed by the seminar and presented as theses at the end of the year by those receiving academic credit for the course.

The program of Monday meetings was as follows:

Professor ALVIN H. HANSEN

The Consumption Function.

Current Trends in Economic Theory with Special Reference to the Business Cycle.

Secular Trends in Investment and Saving.

Professor JOHN H. WILLIAMS.

Shifts in Control of Depressions.

Theories of Compensatory Spending.

Budgeting and Fiscal Policy.

The Marginal Propensity to Import.

The Australian Multiplier.

Investment in the American Economy, 1850-1940.

Fiscal Aspects of Ireland’s Economic Nationalism.

The Power of the Federal Reserve System to Restrict Expansion.

Wartime Corporation Finance.

Wartime Finance in Great Britain.

Unemployment Insurance Funds.

The Effect of Deficit Financing on the Banking System.

Public Health.

The Capital Budget.

The Implications of the Growth of Life Insurance for Full Employment.

Taxation in the Business Cycle.

Public Investment.

Redistribution of Income as a Result of Federal Expenditures.

The following is a list of the non-resident consultants and the topics which they discussed:

October 6.     ISADOR LUBIN, Commissioner of Labor Statistics, United States Department of Labor.

Subject: The Position of Labor Relations and Labor Costs in the Current Situation.

October 20.  HARRY D. WHITE, Director, Division of Monetary Research, United States Treasury Department.

Subject: Gold and Foreign Exchange.

October 30.  ROBERT H. RAWSON, Junior Administrative Analyst, Bureau of the Budget.

Subject: Organization and Methods of the Federal Bureau of the Budget.
(Joint meeting with the Administrative Process Seminar.)

November 13.LEON HENDERSON, Commissioner, Securities and Exchange Commission, and member of the Temporary National Economic Committee.

Subject: Price Rigidities in the American Economy.
(Joint meeting with the Price Policies Seminar.)

December 8. RAYMOND W. GOLDSMITH, Assistant Director, Research and Statistical Section, Securities and Exchange Commission.

Subject: The Volume and Components of Saving in the United States.

February 26. RICHARD V. GILBERT, Chief, Industrial Economics Division, United States Department of Commerce.

Subject: War Inventories and the Current Economic Outlook.

March 1.        WARD SHEPARD, Bureau of Agricultural Economics, United States Department of Agriculture.

Subject: A Proposed Forest Policy for the United States.

March 8.       EMILE DESPRES, Senior Economist, Division of Research and Statistics, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.

Subject: Internal Expansion and the International Position of the United States.

March 29.     GARDINER MEANS, Economic Adviser, National Resources Planning Board.

Subject: The Structure of the American Economy.

April 12.        M. A. HEILPERIN, Institute for Higher International Studies, Geneva.

Subject: The International Monetary System and the Business Cycle.

May 3.           GERHARD COLM, Economist, Division of Industrial Economics, United States Department of Commerce.

Subject: Some Problems of Long-Run Tax Policy.

 

___________________________

 

THE FISCAL POLICY SEMINAR, 1940-1941.
Professors Williams and Hansen 

Source:
Official Register of Harvard University, Vol. XXXIX February 25, 1942, No. 5.
Issue containing the report of the President of Harvard College and reports of Departments for 1940-41, pp. 323-326.

The Fiscal Policy Seminar continued its established practice of including in its program meetings at which visiting consultants discussed various topics of interest to the group, and sessions devoted to the presentation of student reports. The reports were presented in the second semester and were discussed at length by the other members of the seminar….

Seven of the meetings were held jointly with other seminars – four with the International Economic Relations Seminar and three with the Agricultural, Forestry, and Land Policy Seminar.

 

The program of meetings was as follows:

September 30. Professor HANSEN.

October 7.      Professor WILLIAMS.

October 11.   SVEND LAURSEN, Student, Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, Harvard University.

Subject: International Trade and the Multiplier.
(Joint meeting with International Economic Relations Seminar.)

October 21. Professor HANSEN and Professor WILLIAMS.

October 25. MARTIN KROST, Senior Economist, Division of Research and Statistics, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.

Subject: The Excess Profits Tax.

October 28. RICHARD A. MUSGRAVE, Instructor, Department of Economics, Harvard University.

Subject: Report of the Canadian Royal Commission on Dominion Provincial Fiscal Relations.

November 4. Professor HANSEN.

November 8. GEORGE TERBORGH, Senior Economist, Division of Research and Statistics, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.

Subject: Prospective Accumulated Backlog in Capital Goods and Durable Consumers’ Goods Industries in the Post-Defense Period.

November 18. ELIZABETH B. SCHUMPETER.

Subject: Fiscal and Monetary Policy in Japan.

November 25. BENJAMIN H. HIGGINS and RICHARD A. MUSGRAVE, Instructors, Department of Economics, Harvard University.

Subject: The Savings-Investment Problem Re-examined.

December 2. Professor HANSEN.

December 9. DAN T. SMITH, Associate Professor of Finance and Taxation, Graduate School of Business Administration, Harvard University.

Subject: The Role of Borrowing in the Defense Program.

December 16. Professor HANSEN.

December 20. GUY GREER, Federal Housing Administration.

Subject: The Organization of the Federal Housing Program.

February 3.   Student Report.

Subject: National Income and Military Effort.

February 10. Student Report.

Subject: United States Housing Program During and After the Defense Program.

February 17. ERIC ENGLUND, Assistant Chief, Bureau of Agricultural Economics, United States Department of Agriculture.

Subject: Alternatives in Financing of the Agricultural Programs.

(Joint meeting with Agricultural, Forestry and Land Seminar.)

February 21. HARRY D. WHITE, Director, Division of Monetary Research, United States Treasury Department.

Subject: Blocked Balances.

(Joint meeting with International Economic Relations Seminar.)

February 24. J. KEITH BUTTERS, Instructor, Department of Economics, Harvard University.

Subject: Discriminatory Features in Federal Corporation Income Taxes.

March 3. J. KENNETH GALBRAITH, National Defense Advisory Commission.

Subject: The Farm Credit Administration and Related Farm Credit Problems.

(Joint meeting with Agricultural, Forestry, and Land Policy Seminar.)

March 10. Student report.

Subject: Trends in the Fiscal Incapacity of State and Local Governments and Their Impact on Defense and Post-Defense Policy.

March 17. Student Report.

Subject: The Effect of the Tax Structures on Economic Activity in the United States and Great Britain, 1929-1937.

March 21. RICHARD V. GILBERT, National Defense Advisory Commission.

Subject: The American Defense Program.

(Joint meeting with International Economic Relations Seminar.)

March 24. Student Report.

Subject: Essays on Fiscal Policy and the Building Cycle.

I.  Transport Development and Building Cycles.
II. Monetary Control of the Building Cycle.

April 7. Student Report.

Subject: The Monetary Powers of Some Federal Agencies outside the Federal Reserve System.

April 14. Student Report.

Subject: Incentive Taxation.

April 18. Student Reports.

Subjects: The Use of Credit as an Instrument of Social Amelioration in Agriculture. Credit for a Solvent Agriculture.

(Joint meeting with Agricultural, Forestry, and Land Policy Seminar.)

April 25. CARL SHOUP, Professor of Economics, Columbia University.

Subject: Defense Financing.

April 28. Student Report.

Subject: The Economic Development of a War Economy.

May 2. GUSTAV STOLPER, Financial Adviser.

Subject: Financing the American Defense Program.

(Joint meeting with International Economic Relations Seminar.)

 

___________________________

 

FISCAL POLICY SEMINAR, 1941-1942
Professors Williams and Hansen

Source:
Official Register of Harvard University, Vol. XLI, September 26, 1944, No. 23.
Issue containing the report of the President of Harvard College and reports of the departments for 1941-42, pp. 340-343.

 

Fiscal problems arising out of the war and plans for the post-war period were of dominant interest in the Fiscal Policy Seminar program during 1941-42. With regard to post-war problems particular attention was paid to the question of federal-state-local fiscal relations, and a special section of the seminar library was devoted to books and pamphlets on this topic.

Meetings were held on Mondays and Fridays, the latter being given over mainly to visiting consultants, with reports and discussions by student and faculty members of the seminar concentrated on Mondays. As in previous years, several meetings were held jointly with other Seminars, eight with the International Economic Relations Seminar, and two with the Agricultural, Forestry, and Land Use Policy Seminar….

The program of meetings was as follows:

September 29. The Development of Fiscal Policy.

October 6.     Defense Financing.

October 17.   The Relation Between Fiscal Policy and Inflation.

October 20.  The Problem of Federal, State and Local Relationships.

HARVEY S. PERLOFF, Associate Economist, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.

October 24.  The United States Housing Authority.

NATHAN STRAUS, Administration, United States Housing Authority.

October 27.  Fiscal Policy and Business Cycles.

October 31.   Urban Redevelopment.

GUY GREER, Senior Economist, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.

November 3. Fiscal Policy and Business Cycles.

November 10. The Present State of Fiscal Policy.

November 17. The Multiplier.

November 21. The Federal Advisory Council.

WALTER LICHTENSTEIN, Vice-President, First National Bank of Chicago.

November 24. The Multiplier.

PAUL SAMUELSON, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and Professor HABERLER.

November 28. Economic Warfare.

NOEL HALL, British Embassy.

December 1. The Multiplier.

PAUL SAMUELSON, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

December 5. International Economic Relations with Special Reference to the Post-War Situation.

ROBERT BRYCE, Department of Finance, Canada.

December 8. Post-War Problems.

Professors HABERLER and HARRIS as well as Professors WILLIAMS and HANSEN.

December 12. The Revenue Act of 1941.

J. KEITH BUTTERS, Department of Economics, Harvard University.

December 15. The Theory of Public Investment.

Professor HARRIS.

December 19. The 1942 Revenue Act.

ROY BLOUGH, Director of Tax Research, Treasury Department.

January 26. The Problem of Post-War Reconstruction.

PER JACOBSSEN, Economist, Bank for International Settlements.

February 2.  Economic Philosophy and Post-War Fiscal Policy.

ALEJANDRO SHAW, Argentina.

February 9.   Equalization Grants and Their Role in Fiscal Policy (student report).

February 13. Monopolistic Trading and International Relations.

JACOB VINER, Chicago University.

February 16. War Finance and Inflation (student report).

February 20. The Effect of Federalism on Fiscal Policy.

LUTHER GULICK, National Resources Planning Board.

March 2.       Agriculture in the Post-War Period.

LEONARD ELMHIRST, Elmhirst Foundation.

March 9.       War Finance and Direct Taxation (student report).

March 13.     Post-War Domestic and International Investments.

RICHARD M. BISSELL, Department of Commerce.

March 16.     Monetary Implications of Fiscal Policy.

March 20.     The Present Fiscal Situation.

ALBERT GAYLORD HART, Iowa State College.

March 23.     Problems of Monetary Control.

ROBERT V. ROSA, Massachusetts Institute of Technology and

PETER L. BERNSTEIN, Federal Reserve Bank of New York.

March 27.     The Public Work Reserve.

BENJAMIN H. HIGGINS, Economic Consultant, Public Work Reserve.

April 6.          A High-Consumption vs. a High-Savings Economy (student report).

April 10.        Post-War Surpluses and Shortages in Plant and Equipment.

GEORGE TERBORGH, Senior Economist, Division of Research and Statistics, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.

April 13.        Private Industry Post-War Planning.

DAVID C. PRINCE, Vice-President, General Electric Company.

April 17.        Commodity Taxation in a Progressive Tax System (student report).

April 24.       Government Lending Agencies.

ROBERT V. ROSA, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and

PETER L. BERNSTEIN, Federal Reserve Bank of New York.

April 27.        The Impact of War Expenditures on State and Local Government (student report).

May 1.            The Inflationary Gap.

WALTER SALANT, Chief, Price and Economic Policy Section, Division of Research, Office of Price Administration.

May 21.         The Problem of Britain’s Food Supply.

E. M. H. LLOYD, Chairman, British Food Mission.

 

___________________________

 

FISCAL POLICY SEMINAR, 1942-43
Professors Williams and Hansen

Source:
Official Register of Harvard University, Vol. XLI, September 28, 1944, No. 25.
Issue containing the report of the President of Harvard College and reports of the departments for 1942-43, pp. 243-245.

 

War and post-war fiscal problems were the main consideration in the Fiscal Policy Seminar in 1942-43. This included national aspects of inflationary and tax problems and post-war tax adjustments, as well as federal-state-local fiscal relations.

Meetings were held on Mondays and Fridays, the latter being given over mainly to visiting consultants, with reports and discussions by student and faculty members of the seminar concentrated on Mondays. As formerly, several meetings Were held jointly with other seminars….

The program of meetings was as follows:

October 5.     Professor HANSEN.

Subject: A Survey of the Fiscal.War Picture.

October 9.    MILTON GILBERT, Director of National Income Division, Department of Commerce.

Subject: Concepts of National Income and Its Statistical Measurement.

October 19.   Professor WILLIAMS.

Subject: The Present Status of Fiscal Policy.

October 23.  Professor PAUL SAMUELSON, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Subject: Consumption Function.

October 26. Professor WILLIAMS.

Subject: Changes in the Banking System.

October 30.  Professor LAWRENCE H. SELTZER, Wayne University.

Subject: Possible Techniques for the Working of the PostWar Economic System.

November 2. Professor A. P. LERNER, Amherst College.

Subject: Rate of Interest.

November 9. Professor HANSEN.

Subject: War Financing in the United States, Canada, and the United Kingdom.

November 13. Professor FRITZ MACHLUP, Buffalo University. (Joint meeting with International Economic Relations seminar.)

Subject: National Income, Employment and International Relations.

November 16. Professor HANSEN.

Subject: Federal, State, Local Fiscal Relations.

November 20. DAVID E. LILIENTHAL, Director, Tennessee Valley Authority.

Subject: The Tennessee Valley Authority.

November 23. Dr. JOHN KEITH BUTTERS, Harvard University.

Subject: Revenue Act of 1942.

November 27. Hon. GRAHAM F. TOWERS, Governor, Bank of Canada. (Joint meeting with International Economic Relations seminar.)

Subject: Canadian War Economic Measures.

November 30. Professor WILLIAMS.

Subject: Basic Issues of Fiscal Policy.

December 4. LYNN R. EDMINSTER, Vice-Chairman, U. S. Tariff Commission.

(Joint meeting with International Economic Relations seminar.)

Subject: The Reconstruction of World Trade After War.

December 7. Professor WILLIAMS.

Subject: Basic Issues of Fiscal Policy.

December 1. Professor SEYMOUR E. HARRIS. (Joint meeting with International Economic Relations seminar.)

Subject: War Problems of International Trade.

December 14. Professor HANSEN.

Subject: The Beveridge Report.

February 1.  Honorable HAROLD STASSEN, Governor of Minnesota.

Subject: Decentralized Government.

February 8.  HARVEY S. PERLOFF, Federal Reserve Board, Washington.

Subject: State-Local Fiscal Relations.

February 12. THOMAS MC KITTRICK, President of the Bank for International Settlements.

Subject: The Bank for International Settlements.

February 15. Professor HANSEN.

Subject: The Beveridge Plan and a Post-War Minimum Budget.

February 24. Dr. LEO PASVOLSKY, State Department. (Joint meeting with International Economic Relations seminar.)

Subject: Post-War Problems in International Trade.

March 1.        Dr. HANS STAEHLE, Harvard University.

Subject: Consumption and National Income in Post-War.

March 12.     Dr. RICHARD MUSGRAVE, Federal Reserve Board, Washington.

Subject: Revenue Bill-1943.

March 26.     Dr. PAUL STUDENSKI, Professor of Economics, New York University.

Subject: State-Local Fiscal Policies in New York in War-Time.

April 12.        EMILE DESPRES, Office of Strategic Services, Washington. (Joint meeting with International Economic Relations seminar.)

Subject: The Transfer Problem and the Over-Saving Problem in the Pre-War and Post-War Worlds.

April 16.        Dr. ALBERT HAHN. (Joint meeting with International Economic Relations seminar.)

Subject: Planned or Adjusted Post-War Economy.

May 8.           GUY GREER, Editor of Fortune Magazine.

Subject: Urban Redevelopment.

 

___________________________

 

FISCAL POLICY SEMINAR, 1943-44
Professors Williams and Hansen

Source:
Official Register of Harvard University, Vol. XLIV, July 7, 1947, No. 20.
Issue containing the report of the President of Harvard College and reports of departments for 1943-4, pp. 269-270.

 

Fiscal problems of the war and in the postwar period were the general topics under discussion in the Fiscal Policy Seminar in I943-44. More specifically this included national aspects of consumption and saving, taxation, budgeting, and the public debt. Emphasis was also placed on the international financial and monetary problems. Several of the meetings were devoted to discussion of the special fiscal and monetary problems in a number of Latin American countries.

Meetings were held on Mondays and Fridays and consisted of reports by student and faculty members of the seminar and of discussions led by outside consultants and by Dean Williams and Professor Hansen. As in other years, a number of meetings were held jointly with other seminars….

The program of meetings was as follows:

November 8. Professor WILLIAMS.

Subject: General Survey of Fiscal Policy.

November 15. Professor WILLIAMS.

Subject: General Survey of Fiscal Policy (cont.).

November 19. Dr. J. ROY BLOUGH, Director of Tax Research, Treasury Department.

Subject: Some Administrative Aspects of Taxation.

November 22. G. NEIL PERRY, Director, Bureau of Economics and Statistics, British Columbia.

Subject: Fiscal Policy and the Canadian Economy.

November 29. Professor WILLIAMS.

Subject: Problems of International Monetary Stabilization.

December 6. HANS ADLER.

Subject: Population Growth and Fiscal Policy.

December 13. Professor WILLIAMS.

Subject: Problems of International Monetary Stabilization.

December 17. Dr. HARRY WHITE, Director of Monetary Research, Treasury Department.

Subject: Problems of International Stabilization.

December 20. Professor HANSEN.

Subject: Consumption and Saving during the War.

January 3.    Professor HANSEN.

Subject: Consumption and Saving in the Postwar.

January 10.  Professor GOTTFRIED HABERLER.

Subject: Reparations.

January 14.  Dr. N. NESS, Member of Mexican-U. S. Economic Committee.

Subject: Mexico.

January 17.  Dr. BEARDSLEY RUML, Federal Reserve Bank, New York.

Subject: Economic Budget and Fiscal Budget.

January 21.  Dr. P. T. ELLSWORTH, Economic Studies Division, Department of State.

Subject: Chile.

January 24.  Dr. DON HUMPHREY, Special Adviser on Price Control to Haitian Government.

Subject: Haiti.

January 31.  Dr. ROBERT TRIFFIN, Member of U. S. Economic Commission to Paraguay.

Subject: Money, Banking, and Foreign Exchanges in Latin America.

February 4.  Dr. MIRON BURGIN, Office of Coördinator of Inter-American Affairs.

Subject: Argentina.

March 31.     Mr. HENRY WALLICH.

Subject: Fiscal Policy and International Equilibrium.

April 14.        Mr. EVSEY DOMAR, Federal Reserve Board.

Subject: Limitation of Public Debt in Relation to National Income.

May 5.           Dr. J. KEITH BUTTERS and Dr. CHARLES ABBOTT, Harvard Business School.

Subject: Business Taxes.

May 19.         Mr. GUY GREER, Board of Editors, Fortune.

Subject: Urban Redevelopment.

 

___________________________

 

FISCAL POLICY SEMINAR, 1944-45
Professors Williams and Hansen

Source:
Official Register of Harvard University, Vol. XLV, December 1, 1948, No. 30.
Issue containing the report of the President of Harvard College and reports of departments for 1944-45, pp. 282-284.

 

Fiscal problems of the war and in the postwar period were the general topics under discussion in the Fiscal Policy Seminar in 1944-1945. More specifically this included national aspects of consumption and saving, taxation, budgeting, and the public debt. Emphasis was also placed on the international financial and monetary problems. Several of the meetings were devoted to discussion of the special fiscal and monetary problems in a number of Latin American countries.

Meetings were held on Mondays and Fridays and consisted of reports by student and faculty members of the seminar and of discussions led by outside consultants and by Dean Williams and Professor Hansen. As in other years, a number of meetings were held jointly with other seminars….

Three of the papers presented at these meetings were subsequently published in economic journals. The program of meetings was as follows:

*Sept. 11.       J. W. BEYEN, former president of the International Bank at Basle, Chairman of Netherlands Delegation at Bretton Woods.

Subject: Bretton Woods Conference.

*Sept. 18.      RAGNAR NURKSE of Economic and Financial Section of League of Nations.

Subject: Bretton Woods Conference.

*October 30. Professor DOUGLAS COPLAND, University of Melbourne, Australia.

Subject: Australian Problems in the Transition from War to Peace.

*The dates in September and October, while part of the Summer Term, were integrated in the year’s program.

November 6. Professor JOHN H. WILLIAMS.

Subject: Estimates of Postwar National Income and Employment.

November 13. Professor ALVIN H. HANSEN.

Subject: Wartime Fiscal Problems.

November 15. RANDOLPH PAUL, formerly with the U.S. Treasury.

Subject: Postwar Federal Taxation.

November 20. Dr. FREDERICK LUTZ, Princeton University.

Subject: Corporate Cash Balances, I914-1943.

December 4. Professor JOHN H. WILLIAMS.

Subject: The Bretton Woods Agreements.

December 11. EDWARD M. BERNSTEIN, Assistant Director, Division of Monetary Research, Treasury Department.

Subject: The Scarcity of Dollars. (Published in The Journal of Political Economy, March I945.)

December 15. Dr. FRANCIS MC INTYRE, Representative of the Foreign Economic Exchange on Requirements Board of the War Production Board.

Subject: International Distribution of Supplies in Wartime.

January 8.    DAVID E. LILIENTHAL, Chairman of the Tennessee Valley Authority.

Subject: Tennessee Valley Authority.

January 15. Dr. OLIVER M. W. SPRAGUE (Professor Emeritus).

Subject: Postwar Corporate Taxation.

January 22. Dr. WALTER GARDNER, Federal Reserve Board.

Subject: Some Aspects of the Bretton Woods Program.

January 26. Dr. WILLIAM FELLNER, University of California.

Subject: Types of Expansionary Policies and the Rate of Interest.

January 29. Professor WALTER F. BOGNER, Dr. CHARLES R. CHERINGTON, Professors CARL J FRIEDRICH, SEYMOUR E HARRIS, TALCOTT PARSONS, ALFRED D. SIMPSON, AND Mr. GEORGE B. WALKER.

Subject: The Boston Urban Development Plan.

March 5.       Dr. ROBERT TRIFFIN, Federal Reserve Board.

Subject: International Economic Problems of South America.

March 9.       Dr. PAUL J. RAVER, Bonneville Power Administration.

Subject: Bonneville Power Administration.

March 12.     Professor ALVIN H. HANSEN.

Subject: Murray Employment Bill.

March 16.     H. L. SELIGMAN.

Subject: Bank Earnings and Taxation of Bank Profits.

March 19.     Dr. LOUIS RASMINSKY, Foreign Exchange Control Board, Ottawa, Canada.

Subject: British-American Trade Problems from the Canadian Point of View. (Published in the British Economic Journal, September 1945.)

March 26.    Dr. HERBERT FURTH, Federal Reserve Board.

Subject: Monetary and Financial Problems of the Liberated Countries.

April 2.         Dr. LLOYD METZLER, Federal Reserve Board.

Subject: Postwar Economic Policies of the United Kingdom. (An article based on this paper and written in collaboration with Dr. RANDALL HINSHAW was published in The Review of Economic Statistics, November 1945.)

April 13.        s. s. PU [sic]

Subject: Fiscal Policies and Income Generation.

April 16.        Professor EDWARD S. MASON, State Department, Washington.

Subject: Commodity Agreements.

April 20.       HECTOR TASSARA.

Subject: The Role of the Central Bank in the Argentine Economy.

April 23.       Dr. ABBA P. LERNER, New School for Social Research, N. Y.

Subject: Postwar Policies.

April 27.       Professor JOHN VAN SICKLE, Vanderbilt University.

Subject: Wages and Employment: A Regional Approach.

April 30.       Professor ALVIN H. HANSEN.

Subject: Postwar Wage Policy.

May 14.         Dr. E. M. H. LLOYD, United Relief and Rehabilitation Administration, British Treasury.

Subject: Inflation in Europe.

May 21.         AXEL IVEROTH, Swedish Legation, Washington.

Subject: Postwar Plans in Sweden.

May 28.         Professor LEON DUPRIEZ, University of Louvain, Belgium.

Subject: Problem of Full Employment in View of Recent European Experience.

May 29.        Professor SEYMOUR E. HARRIS, Professor WASSILY W. LEONTIEF, Professor GOTTFRIED HABERLER, Professor ALVIN H. HANSEN.

Subject: The Shorter Work Week and Full Employment.