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]