Print

Print


The Economist should also read McCloskey's The Rhetoric of Economics.
And if the social science methodologists are concerned about the
cross-disciplinary discourse skills of their students, then courses that
emphasize the analysis of a wide range of genres like litcomp should be
supported by them.  If they are hardcore empiricists then they should pay
attention to the GRE table of "Average Scores Classified by Intended
Broad Graduate Major Field" published by the Educational Testing
Service:  Humanities students averaged 549 on the Verbal part, 533 on
Quantitative ability, and 577 on Analytical ability; Social Sciences
students averaged 494 on the Verbal, 527 on Quantitative, and 555 on
Analytical.  Out of the fields of the Life Sciences, Physical Sciences,
Engineering, Social Sciences, Humanities, Education, and Business the
Humanties students have the highest average verbal scores and the third
highest scores in Analytical ability.  Now I am reluctant to make these
comparative averages the main warrants for your defensive claims, and I
agree that you need to go on the offensive by asking why any
practical-minded economist would not want to hone their communicative
skills in composition courses -- but for those who need to use a clear
testing instrument to account for the educative effectiveness of English
courses, language study, literature, comp., etc. the GRE scores provide
proof that the Humanities make a difference.

Glenn Deer:  DEPT. OF ENGLISH, The University of British Columbia
             #397 - 1873 East Mall, Vancouver, B.C. V6T 1Z1
             Tel: (604) 822-5122  Fax: (604) 822-6906
            email: [log in to unmask]