Ph.D. Program Learning and Job Demands: How Close Is the Match?

Abstract

The types of knowledge, skills, and proficiencies that should be imparted to students in graduate economics programs are a matter of long-standing controversy. A 1953 American Economic Association (AEA) report cataloged major shortcomings in graduate economic education and recommended changes to enhance the quality and effectiveness of economics Ph.D. programs (Howard R. Bowen, 1953). By the 1980’s, the perception grew that economics Ph.D. programs devoted excessive attention to theoretical work at the expense of real-world application (Wassily Leontief, 1982). This development triggered David Colander and Arjo Klamer (1987) to conduct an independent study based on interviews with graduate students at elite Ph.D. programs. Their study reinforced the views of many, including leaders in the AEA, the National Science Foundation, and several private foundations, that something was amiss. In 1988, the AEA established the Commission on Graduate Education in Economics (COGEE) to undertake a thorough study of graduate training. The Commission’s major concern, based on extensive surveys and interviews of graduate students, faculty, and employers, was that graduate education in economics had removed itself from real-world economic problems (Anne O. Krueger et al., 1991). The COGEE study is distinguished by its attempt to determine the emphasis given to cultivating a set of economic proficiencies in graduate school and the importance of an array of skills for success in graduate school and later on the job (Hansen, 1991). The proficiencies included in the COGEE study were: providing rigorous training in economic theory, providing training in econometrics and measurement, applying theory to real-world problems, using economic theory in empirical applications, and conducting independent economic research. For this study, we added three proficiencies to the COGEE list: understanding economic institutions and history and understanding the history of economic ideas, to capture concerns about curriculum changes that eliminated or scaled back training in these two fields, and developing teaching skills, to reflect recent emphasis on improving the quality of instruction (William E. Becker, 2003). The skills included in the COGEE study were: critical judgment (analyzing ideas, reviewing literature, formulating pertinent comments), analytics (understanding and solving problems, making and analyzing logical arguments), application (seeing practical implications of abstract ideas, analyzing real-world policies and processes), mathematics (constructing and analyzing proofs, manipulating mathematical abstractions), computation (effectively and quickly finding and manipulating relevant data, estimating economic relationships using statistical software), communication (speaking and writing effectively, quickly understanding spoken and written ideas of others, explaining ideas clearly), and creativity (conceiving interesting questions, finding new means of analysis). We added instruction (being an effective classroom teacher) to the skills list for the same reason mentioned above.