Graduate Faculty Committee Doc. No. 1075A Approved April 20, 2009

Transcription

1 Graduate Faculty Committee Doc. No. 1075A Approved April 20, 2009 TWO-YEAR FOLLOW-UP REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON GRADUATE PROGRAM REVIEWS FOR THE REVIEW OF THE MASTER OF SCIENCE AND DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY PROGRAMS IN ECONOMICS (Site Visit: February 11-13, 2007) The original report, GFC Document No. 1075, was approved May 14, This report on the M.A. and the Ph.D. in Economics at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee is a component of the periodic review process overseen by the Dean of the Graduate School. Below are the recommendations for both graduate programs. General Information The consultants report was prepared by Barry R. Chiswick, UIC Distinguished Professor, Research Professor and Head, Department of Economics, and Director, Center for Economic Education, University of Illinois at Chicago, and Timothy J. Kehoe, Distinguished McKnight Professor and Adviser to the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, University of Minnesota Recommendations 1. The current director of graduate studies (DGS) seems to be overburdened with administration responsibilities. It is imperative that other members of the tenured faculty come forward to nurture and provide leadership skills for the short term, and the long term, good of the department. Some of the lack of leadership among other members of the tenured faculty can be attributed to low levels of morale due to salary compression, and even salary inversion. To relieve some of the burden currently on the DGS, the department should provide more secretarial support. Departmental Response (April 27, 2007): None Departmental Update (November 11, 2008): As suggested in this recommendation, additional secretarial support and colleague coverage is being implemented to aid the director of the graduate studies. GPR (4/16/09): In addition to additional secretarial support, the Director of Graduate Studies is no longer the Chair of the Department. This change in departmental leadership has effectively redistributed program responsibilities among faculty. 2. The faculty and the graduate students appear to hold low aspirations for the graduate program and for the career paths open to the typical graduate students. Departmental Response (April 27, 2007): As indicated, the program has been successful in placing the graduate students. Obviously, the quality of jobs obtained by the graduate students depends partially on the quality of students and partially on the faculty. We note that there exists a wide range in the quality of our graduate students but emphasize that given the competitive job market in which big schools have greater resources and produce many economists, our placement has been very good. Most of our graduates join the market with both publications and

2 Graduate Faculty Committee Doc. No. 1075A p. 2 Approved April 20, 2009 substantial teaching experience. They acknowledge that these aspects of our program help them in the job market and in their future career development. We anticipate expanding on our annual workshop so that graduate students will have stronger guidance in preparing for the job market. Departmental Update (November 10, 2008): In addition to workshops that we hold for our graduate students to prepare them better for the job market, their own advisors are actively involved in giving mock interviews, etc. We try to do our best. GPR (4/16/09): The program has taken measures to better prepare their graduate students for the job market. Meetings are held with graduate teaching assistants to provide them with critical feedback based on their departmental teaching evaluations. In addition, faculty meet in early fall with individual doctoral candidates as they prepare their entry into the job market. 3. MA/PhD Programs. The exchange programs with Gissen and Potsdam are unique and innovative and should be continued. There should be one standard for admission into the MA and PhD programs, and the first year program should consist of year long sequences in micro economics, macro economics, and econometrics. The current MA level micro and macro courses stretch out the number of semesters in which students take courses. Students with only the MA theory courses who enroll in PhD level elective courses dilute the academic quality of these courses. Students who require remedial courses could take them in the year or even the summer prior to entering the program. Elective courses for the MA Program could be taken in the summer and a third semester. Departmental Response (April 27, 2007): Before fall 2006, we had two theory courses for our MA students (Econ. 701 and 702) and two additional theory courses for PhD students (Econ. 801 and 802). All four courses were required by PhD students and this created the problem that consultants elude us. To improve the quality of the PhD program, match our peers and to catch up with new advances in economic theory, department added two more courses for PhD program (Econ. 803 and 804). Beginning with fall 2006, Econ. 701 and 702 are required only for MA students who seek a terminal MA degree. Doctoral students are now required to take econ. 801, 802, 803, and 804. After completing these four courses, they are required to take their comprehensive exams in theory.1 Thus, incoming PhD students are advised to take the following sequences of courses: First Year Second Year Fall Semester Econ. 801 (micro) Econ. 802 (macro) Econ. 706 (math. Econ.) Or 513 (Econometrics) Field 1 (first course) Field 2 (first course) Econ. 706 (math. Econ.) Or 513 (Econometrics) Spring Semester Econ. 803 (micro) Econ. 804 (macro) Econ. 806 (math. Econ.) Or 710 (Econometrics) Field 1 (second course) Field 2 (second course) Econ. 806 (math. Econ.) Or 710 (Econometrics) 1 Note that Ph.D. students are required to have two fields of specialty for which they must pass two comprehensive exams.

3 Graduate Faculty Committee Doc. No. 1075A p. 3 Approved April 20, 2009 Of course, the above schedule is suitable for the majority of students who join our Ph.D. program with an MA degree. In case a student is admitted directly to Ph.D. program with only a BA degree, the first year will include remedial courses such as Mathematical Economics 506 and 606, theory courses 701 and 702, a Mathematical Statistics course 413, and a first course in Econometrics 513. An alternative that moves further in the direction isolated by the reviewers would be to eliminate the terminal MA degree. We would then admit students only to the Ph.D. degree making sure that any student in the field courses had completed the core first year sequence identified above. While this deserves some thought, it is in direct conflict with maintaining our highly successful relationships with Giessen and Potsdam which are predicated on a terminal MA degree in which students can take field courses. The resources to provide separate field course to MA and Ph.D. students are simply prohibitive. GPR (4/16/09): The concerns expressed by the outside reviewers have been largely addressed by the addition of two new Ph.D. level courses. In addition, the Department successfully secured an additional faculty member with a specialty in econometrics who will join the Department in June At the current time, there are not sufficient resources available to separate MA and Ph.D. students in the field course. 4. Financial Support. The department should commit to five years of financial support for PhD students. In order to facilitate completing the program in a timely manner, students should not be assigned to teach more than one independent course per semester. Program Response (April 27, 2007). Usually no graduate student is assigned to teach independently more than one course. Academic year was an exceptional year during which six members of the department were on leave (sabbatical or leave of absence). This is at least double the typical number. Unable to hire visiting replacements, graduate students were asked if they like to teach two courses. Those who volunteered were assigned two courses. No graduate student was forced to teach two courses. We plan not to assign two courses for any graduate student. As for the duration of financial support, we anticipate following the recommendation of the reviewers and extending the support to five years to those who joined the Ph.D. program with a BA degree and to four years to those who join us with an MA degree. This plan will go into effect beginning with fall Program Update (November 10, 2008). The above plan is now implemented. GPR (4/16/09): The recommendation of the reviewers regarding financial support for Ph.D. students has been implemented by the department. The recommendation regarding student teaching loads is already the normal practice in the department. 5. Training for Teaching. The department needs to develop a systematic program for training graduate students for working as teaching assistants and, especially, instructors in

4 Graduate Faculty Committee Doc. No. 1075A p. 4 Approved April 20, 2009 independent session. This training will stand them in good stead when they teach UWM undergraduates and when they enter the academic job market. This training should take place both prior to, and, with faculty mentoring, concurrent with, teaching independent sections. Program Response (April 27, 2007). Current training of TAs takes place using two avenues. First, all new TAs are required to participate in two-days training by the CIPD prior to the fall semester. This is campus-wide training for all TAs at UWM. In economics, all TAs are initially assigned to lead discussion sections of the mass lecture courses that are taught by regular faculty members. TAs are required to sit through the lecture with the professor so that they are both abreast of what is being taught and also learn how to teach. Since our teaching award winners teach the mass lectures, TAs are believed to be at good hands as far as their training are concerned. By the time they get to their own classes, their teaching evaluations are nearly as strong as those of our regular faculty members. Nonetheless, we recognize that additional oversight of our TAs may be warranted. Thus, as part of that oversight and to better train our TAs, we will initiate a process in which a faculty member routinely visits a TA s class and provides a written evaluation and suggestions for improvement. This process will go into effect next fall for those TAs newly assigned to their own course. Program Update (November 10, 2008). Same as above. Program Follow-up Memo (February 17, 2009). We review and monitor each TA in a number of ways. First, in those classes in which graduate students are used as teaching assistants, there is direct communication between the instructors and TAs, both before the course begins and regularly throughout the semester. The instructor gains feedback through contacts with the TAs, by regular meetings as the semester unfolds, and classroom visits, and with prompt follow-up to student feedback regarding the performance of TAs. The individual instructor of a class that has teaching assistant is responsible for visiting the classes taught by their TAs and monitoring their progress. These instructors make recommendations to the Director of Graduate Studies for those graduate students who can be entrusted with their own classes in our curriculum. Those instructors have been carefully chosen, and do well in the teaching evaluations we conduct. Any time there is a problem we discuss the matter with the graduate student, visit the class, and when necessary, reassign the class to a different teacher. GPR (4/16/09): There is support and communication between new TAs in discussion sections and the instructors with whom they work, and only qualified TAs are selected to teach their own classes. However, there is no regular process in which faculty members routinely visit classes and evaluate TAs, as proposed in the April 27, 2007 Program response. 6. Seminars and Workshops. The graduate students need to be compelled to present the research on their dissertations before small, nurturing groups and then be compelled to present in the department seminar. This should be done frequently, and prior to, entering the job market. Program Response (April 27, 2007). The department has regular seminar series offered every Friday afternoon. Prior to each semester, all graduate students are currently encouraged to present their job market papers as preparation for their job talk. Some participate and some do not. Last semester two graduate students participated and next fall, four will present their papers.

5 Graduate Faculty Committee Doc. No. 1075A p. 5 Approved April 20, 2009 It may be that this forum is too intimidating for those graduate students who are less sure of themselves. The suggestion by consultants of smaller informal groups is well taken. Indeed, the labor economics group within the department has already initiated a brown-bag lunch seminar series last fall. Students specializing in labor economics participate and several have presented their research. We will consider adding additional brown-bag seminars in other areas and will further consider making it a requirement to all Ph.D. students to participate. Furthermore, we will even more strongly encourage all Ph.D. students to present their job market papers in our regular Friday seminar series. Program Update (November 10, 2008). The following motion was recently passed by the department: MOTION: It was moved and seconded that within two years of completing core courses all Ph.D. students who enter the program in fall 2008 and thereafter must establish a dissertation advisor and produce a paper on a topic clearly defined. Program Follow-up Memo (February 17, 2009). All the students who plan to go to the job market have an opportunity to make a presentation of their job-market paper in our weekly seminar series, and in smaller group settings if that is deemed more productive in individual cases. Furthermore, we now require Ph.D. students to establish a dissertation advisor and produce a paper under the direction of that advisor within two years of completing core courses. GPR (4/16/09): The department has addressed the issues raised in this recommendation by implementing the above policy. Although students are not required to make a presentation of their job-market paper, they are strongly encouraged to do so and most students take advantage of this opportunity. 7. Meeting with graduate students. The chair and the DGS should meet at least once per academic year with the graduate students (at a pizza lunch) to provide information to them on new developments in the department and to learn from the graduate students their thoughts on the program. Program Response (April 27, 2007). Director of Graduate Studies (DGS) has an open door policy. Any student can meet him at any time. The exchange is on 24-7 basis. Furthermore, any time there is a new development or change in rules and regulations, all graduate students are informed via . In addition, all students are encouraged to attend our introductory reception and orientation each fall. We agree an additional meeting between the DGS and students once a semester may be a good idea. We will have such meetings on a trial basis this year and evaluate. Program Update (November 10, 2008). Same as above. GPR (4/16/09): The newly elected chair has implemented the once-per-semester meetings with graduate students. In the fall, a pre-job market meeting is held and in the spring a meeting is held to solicit feedback from graduate students on programmatic issues. In addition, he has sought feedback from undergraduate students on matters related to instruction by teaching assistants.

6 Graduate Faculty Committee Doc. No. 1075A p. 6 Approved April 20, 2009 Additional Information Econ. 513 (econometrics) which was a U/G course, is now changed to only a U course. A new course 703 is introduced which is required for all MA students. Additionally, 703 and 710 (both econometrics) are now required by all Ph.D. students who do not major in econometrics. GPR 2009 Recommendations for Action: 1. The MA and Ph.D programs in Economics should be continued. 2. Efforts to showcase the program s attributes should be pursued rigorously. 3. The next full review should take place during the standard review schedule. Program Review Participants Graduate Program Review Sub-Committee Review Team for Follow-Up Review Kathleen Wheatley, Department of Spanish & Portuguese Maureen Keyes, Department of Exceptional Education Committee on Reviews Review Team for Regular Review James Moyer, Department of Psychology Brian Schermer, Department of Architecture Consultants Barry R. Chiswick, UIC Distinguished Professor, Research Professor and Head, Department of Economics, and Director, Center for Economic Education, University of Illinois at Chicago, and Timothy J. Kehoe, Distinguished McKnight Professor and Adviser to the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, Department of Economics, University of Minnesota School/College Representative (ex officio) Associate Dean Rodney Swain, College of Letters and Science