================ HES POSTING ==================== 
 
[Since this message may initiate a different line of discussion than the 
origin of terms thread, I have given this message a new subject line. --  
RBE] 
 
Following on this thread of the origins of the coinage of the term 
"neoclassical", I wonder if anyone can point me to any research that has 
been done on the origin, and development of, the rise to dominance in 
U.S. especially of neoclassical economics in graduate education.   
 
I am not referring to the development of ideas, but rather to the 
development of institutions.  How exactly did the neoclassical guys do 
it? How could they gain so much institutional power?  How is it that 
virtually every PhD program now is of the same mold, even if that means 
being a fourth rate MIT?  And this, despite the strong recommendations for 
diversity by COGEE nine years ago?  
 
A recent draft report of ICARE by John Adams (ICARE is the International 
Confederation of Associations for the Reform of Economics, reprots that 
its member associations total 5000 members.  The AEA has roughly 22,000 
members today.  How exactly are so many excluded from graduate education. 
And how exactly did this institutionalization of neoclassical economics 
happen? 
 
Steve Cullenberg 
[log in to unmask] 
 
============ FOOTER TO HES POSTING ============ 
For information, send the message "info HES" to [log in to unmask]