Category: Education

Wisconsin DEI markets in everything

by  Tyler Cowen in

In a deal months in the making, the University of Wisconsin System has agreed to “reimagine” its diversity efforts, restructuring dozens of staff into positions serving all students and freezing the total number of diversity positions for the next three years.

In exchange, universities would receive $800 million for employee pay raises and some building projects, including a new engineering building for UW-Madison.

“This is an evolution, and this is a change moving forward,” UW System President Jay Rothman told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. “But it does not in any way deviate from our core values of diversity (and) inclusion.”

Here is the full story, via HB, it is rare that the real world is actually so Coasean.

The University presidents

by  Tyler Cowen in

Here is three and a half minutes of their testimony before Congress.  Worth a watch, if you haven’t already.  I have viewed some other segments as well, none of them impressive.  I can’t bring myself to sit through the whole thing.

I don’t doubt that I would find their actual views on world affairs highly objectionable, but that is not why I am here today.  Here are a few other points:

1. Their entire testimony is ruled by their lawyers, by their fear that their universities might be sued, and their need to placate internal interest groups.  That is a major problem, in addition to their unwillingness to condemn various forms of rhetoric for violating their codes of conduct.  As Katherine Boyle stated: “This is Rule by HR Department and it gets dark very fast.”

How do you think that affects the quality of their other decisions?  The perceptions and incentives of their subordinates?

2. They are all in a defensive crouch.  None of them are good on TV.  None of them are good in front of Congress.  They have ended up disgracing their universities, in front of massive audiences (the largest they ever will have?), simply for the end goal of maintaining a kind of (illusory?) maximum defensibility for their positions within their universities.  At that they are too skilled.

How do you think that affects the quality of their other decisions?  The perceptions and incentives of their subordinates?

What do you think about the mechanisms that led these particular individuals to be selected for top leadership positions?

3. Not one came close to admitting how hypocritical private university policies are on free speech.  You can call for Intifada but cannot express say various opinions about trans individuals.  Not de facto.  Whether you think they should or not, none of these universities comes close to enforcing “First Amendment standards” for speech, even off-campus speech for their faculty, students, and affiliates.

What do you think that says about the quality and forthrightness of their other decisions?  Of the subsequent perceptions and incentives of their subordinates?

What do you think about the mechanisms that led this particular equilibrium to evolve?

Overall this was a dark day for American higher education.  I want you to keep in mind that the incentives you saw on display rule so many other parts of the system, albeit usually invisibly.  Don’t forget that.  These university presidents have solved for what they think is the equilibrium, and it ain’t pretty.

Who is responsible for grade inflation at Yale? (economists are meanies?)

by  Tyler Cowen in

If you click on the tweet you can see the full lists, as it gets much worse than what makes it on the screen here.  Via T. Greer.

My excellent Conversation with John Gray

by  Tyler Cowen in

I had been wanting to do this one for a while, and now it exists.  Here is the audio and transcript, here is the episode summary:

Tyler and John sat down to discuss his latest book, including who he thinks will carry on his work, what young people should learn if liberalism is dead, whether modern physics allows for true atheism, what in Eastern Orthodoxy attracts him, the benefits of pessimism, what philanthropic cause he’d invest a billion dollars in, under what circumstances he’d sacrifice his life, what he makes of UFOs, the current renaissance in film and books, whether Monty Python is still funny, how Herman Melville influenced him, who first spotted his talent, his most unusual work habit, what he’ll do next, and more.

Excerpt:

COWEN: Do you think that being pessimistic gives you pleasure? Or what’s the return in it from a purely pragmatic point of view?

GRAY: You are well prepared for events. You don’t expect —

COWEN: It’s a preemption, right? You become addicted to preempting bad news with pessimism.

GRAY: No, no. When something comes along which contradicts my expectations, I’m pleasantly surprised. I get pleasant surprises. Whereas, if you are an adamant optimist, you must be in torment every time you turn the news on because the same old follies, the same old crimes, the same old atrocities, the same old hatreds just repeat themselves over and over again. I’m not surprised by that at all. That’s like the weather. It’s like living in a science fiction environment in which it rains nearly all of the time, but from time to time it stops and there’s beautiful sunlight.

If you think that basically there is beautiful sunlight all the time, but you’re just living in a small patch of it, most of your life will be spent in frustration. If you think the other way around, as I do, your life will be peppered, speckled with moments in which what you expect doesn’t happen, but something better happens.

COWEN: Why can’t one just build things and be resiliently optimistic in a pragmatic, cautionary sense, and take comfort in the fact that you would rather have the problems of the world today than, say, the problems of the world in the year 1000? It’s not absolute optimism where you attach to the mood qua mood, but you simply want to do things and draw a positive energy from that, and it’s self-reinforcing. Why isn’t that a better view than what you’re calling pessimism?

And:

COWEN: Under what circumstances would you be willing to sacrifice your life? Or for what?

GRAY: Not for humanity, that’s for sure.

Recommended, interesting throughout.  John is one of the smartest and best read thinkers and writers.  He even has an answer ready for why he isn’t short the market.  And don’t forget John’s new book — I read all of them — New Leviathans: Thoughts After Liberalism.

Why Housing is Unaffordable: The Elasticity of Supply

by  Alex Tabarrok in

We have a great new MRU video on housing and why it’s so expensive in many dynamic cities. The video is a good introduction to the economics and also to the politics of housing supply. A highlight is a wonderful animation illustrating how increasing demand coupled with inelastic supply leads to competitive bidding among buyers, driving up prices. Anyone teaching economics should take a look.

Of course, the video pairs perfectly with our textbook, Modern Principles. Indeed, this is the initial video in a two-part series exploring the elasticity of supply, transforming a traditionally mundane topic into a relevant and fun discussion. Check it out!

Does studying economics make you more selfish?

by  Tyler Cowen in

Maybe not:

It is widely held that studying economics makes you more selfish and politically conservative. We use a difference-in-differences strategy to disentangle the causal impact of economics education from selection effects. We estimate the effect of four different intermediate microeconomics courses on students’ experimentally elicited social preferences and beliefs about others, and policy opinions. We find no discernible effect of studying economics (whatever the course content) on self-interest or beliefs about others’ self-interest. Results on policy preferences also point to little effect, except that economics may make students somewhat less opposed to highly restrictive immigration policies.

That is from a newly published paper by Daniele Girardi, Sai Madhurika Mamunuru, Simon D. Halliday, and Samuel Bowles.  This is a good example of a myth that got started with relatively little basis in fact.  At the very least it now has to be filed under “unconfirmed, likely false.”  Via Stefan Schubert.

Those who graduate from college late in life

by  Tyler Cowen in

It is generally agreed upon that most individuals who acquire a college degree do so in their early 20s. Despite this consensus, we show that in the US from the 1930 birth cohort onwards a large fraction – around 20% – of college graduates obtained their degree after age 30. We explore the implications of this phenomenon. First, we show that these so-called late bloomers have significantly contributed to the narrowing of gender and racial gaps in the college share, despite the general widening of the racial gap. Second, late bloomers are responsible for more than half of the increase in the aggregate college share from 1960 onwards. Finally, we show that the returns to having a college degree vary depending on the age at graduation. Ignoring the existence of late bloomers therefore leads to a significant underestimation of the returns to college education for those finishing college in their early 20s.

That is from a new NBER paper by Zsófia L. Bárány, Moshe Buchinsky, and Pauline Corblet.

The hypocrisy at the core of America’s elite universities

by  Tyler Cowen in

That is the title of my latest Bloomberg column, the piece is best read as a whole.  Nonetheless here is one excerpt:

As someone who stands to the political right of most of my fellow university faculty and administrators, I have no qualms accepting the argument that colleges and universities need to grow wealthier. That can mean tolerating various inequalities in the short run, because in the longer run academia will produce more innovation that benefits virtually everyone, including the poor.

This is not the kind of argument many on the political left find appealing. In tax policy, for example, such reasoning — the idea that short-run inequality can bring longer-run benefits — is often derided as “trickle-down economics.” And yet virtually any fan of the Ivies has to embrace this idea. The best defense of the admissions policies of America’s most prestigious universities is a right-leaning argument that they are deeply uncomfortable with.

So instead they tie themselves into knots to give the impression that they are open and egalitarian. To boost their image, minimize lawsuits and perhaps assuage their own feelings of institutional guilt, America’s top schools adopt what are known as DEI policies, to promote diversity, equity and inclusion.

The “inclusion” part of that equation is hardest for them to defend. Top-tier universities accept only a small percentage of applicants — below 4% at Stanford last year, for example. How inclusive can such institutions be? Everyone knows that these schools are elitist at heart, and that they (either directly or indirectly) encourage their students and faculty to take pride at belonging to such a selective institution. Most of all, the paying parents are encouraged to be proud as well. Who exactly is being fooled here?

And to close:

I thus have the luxury of opposing the new anti-legacy-admissions bill for two mutually reinforcing reasons. First, it reflects an unjustified expansion of federal powers over higher education. Even if you are anti-legacy, or want to rein in the Ivy League, you may not be happy about how those federal powers will be used the next time around.

Second, I do not mind a world where America’s top schools practice and implicitly endorse trickle-down economics. Someone has to carry the banner forward, and perhaps someday this Trojan horse will prove decisive in intellectual battle. In the meantime, I have my cudgel — hypocrisy among the educational elite — and I, too, can feel better about myself.

Recommended.

That was then, this is now

by  Tyler Cowen in

…the first German pogroms of the modern age, the so-called Hep-Hep riots, took place in 1819.  Jews were attacked on the streets and Jewish stores were ransacked.  It was a new and as yet unknown phenomenon in the German-speaking lands.  The riots were led by students, ostensibly the anti-absolutist and progressive force in German society.

That is from Shlomo Avineri’s Herzl’s Vision: Theodor Herzl and the Foundation of the Jewish State.  Here is a new bulletin from MIT.

Returns to Education for Women in the Mid-20th Century: Evidence from Compulsory Schooling Laws

by  Tyler Cowen in

Abstract: Women had a similar level of schooling to men during the mid-twentieth century United States, but research on the returns to education for women is scarce. Using compulsory schooling laws as instrumental variables, this paper examines the causal effect of education on women’s labor market and marriage market outcomes. I examine both outcomes because women frequently traded off employment and marriage due to marriage bars and gender norms against married women working. I show that an additional year of schooling increases women’s probability of gainful employment by 7.9 pp. and women’s wage earnings by 15 percent, which can be explained by women’s entry into skilled occupations. Given the large returns on earnings, education surprisingly does not increase women’s probability of never marrying, but it does increase the probability of divorce and separation. In addition, women’s education positively affects the husband’s and the household’s labor supply and earnings, conditional on marriage formation and the husband’s education.

That is from Sophie Li, who is on the job market from Boston University.  Her actual job market paper is: “The Effect of a Woman-Friendly Occupation on Employment: U.S. Postmasters Before WWII .”  Some of you will wince to hear me say this, but many of the most interesting job market papers this year are on the economics of gender.

My Conversation with Harriet Karimi Muriithi

by  Tyler Cowen in

This is another CWT bonus episode, recorded in Tatu City, Kenya, outside of Nairobi.  Harriet is a 22-year-old waitress.  Here is the audio, video, and transcript.  Here is the episode summary:

Harriet is a 22-year-old hospitality professional living and working in Tatu City, a massive mixed-used development spearheaded by Jennings. Harriet grew up in the picturesque foothills of Mount Kenya before moving to the capital city as a child to pursue better schooling. She has witnessed Nairobi’s remarkable growth firsthand over the last decade. An ambitious go-getter, Harriet studied supply chain management but and wishes to open her own high-end restaurant.

In her conversation with Tyler, Harriet opens up about her TikTok hobby, love of fantasy novels, thoughts on improving Kenya’s education system, and how she leverages AI tools like ChatGPT in her daily life, the Chinese influence across Africa, the challenges women face in village life versus Nairobi, what foods to sample as a visitor to Kenya, her favorite musicians from Beyoncé to Nigerian Afrobeats stars, why she believes technology can help address racism, her Catholic faith and church attendance, how COVID-19 affected her education and Kenya’s recovery, the superstitions that persist in rural areas, the career paths available to Kenya’s youth today, why Nollywood movies captivate her, the diversity of languages and tribes across the country, whether Kenya’s neighbors impact prospects for peace, what she thinks of the decline in the size of families, why she enjoys podcasts about random acts of kindness, what infrastructure and lifestyle changes are reshaping Nairobi, if the British colonial legacy still influences politics today, and more.

Here is one excerpt:

COWEN: How ambitious are you?

MURIITHI: On a scale of 1 to 10, I will say an 8.5.

This episode is best consumed in combination with the episode with the village elder Githae Gitinji.  The contrast between the two perspectives is startling.  And here is my CWT episode with Stephen Jennings, concerning Tatu City itself.

My Conversation with Githae Gitinji

by  Tyler Cowen in

This is a special bonus episode of CWT, Githae is a 58-year-old village elder who mediates disputes and lives in Tatu City, Kenya, near Nairobi.  Here is the audio, video, and transcript.  Here is the episode summary:

In his conversation with Tyler, Githae discusses his work as a businessman in the transport industry and what he looks for when hiring drivers, the reasons he moved from his rural hometown to the city and his perspectives on urban vs rural living, Kikuyu cultural practices, his role as a community elder resolving disputes through both discussion and social pressure, the challenges Kenya faces, his call for more foreign investment to create local jobs, how generational attitudes differ, the role of religion and Githae’s Catholic faith, perspectives on Chinese involvement in Kenya and openness to foreigners, thoughts on the devolution of power to Kenyan counties, his favorite wildlife, why he’s optimistic about Kenya’s future despite current difficulties, and more.

Excerpt:

COWEN: What do you do that the court system does not do? Because you’re not police, but still you do something useful.

GITHINJI: What we normally do, we as a group, we listen to one another very much. When one person reaches that stage of being told that you are a man now, you normally have to respect your elder. Those people do respect me. When I call you, when I tell you “Come and we’ll talk it out,” with my group, you cannot say you cannot come, because if you do, we normally discipline somebody. Not by beating, we just remove you from our group. When we isolate you from our group, you’ll feel that is not fair for you. You come back and say — and apologize. We take you back into the group.

COWEN: If you’re isolated, you can’t be friends with those people anymore.

GITHINJI: When we isolate you, we mean you are not allowed to interact in any way.

COWEN: Any way.

GITHINJI: Any business, anything with the other community [members]. If it is so, definitely, you have to be a loser, because you might be needing one of those people to help you in business or something of the sort. When you are isolated, this man tells you, “No. Go and cleanse yourself first with that group.”

If you find his Kikiyu accent difficult, just read the transcript instead.  This episode is best consumed in a pair with my concurrently recorded episode with Harriet Karimi Muriithi, a 22-year-old Kenyan waitress — the contrasts in perspective across a mere generation are remarkable.