Steve:
Hello and welcome to UO Today. Our first guest is Joe Stone,
the dean of the College of Arts and Sciences and the W. E. Miner Professor
of Economics. Dean Stone did his undergraduate work at the University
of Texas at El Paso and earned his master's and doctorate in economics
at Michigan State University. He came to the University of Oregon
in 1979. In 1984, Professor Stone left the university for a year when
he was asked to become the senior economist for international trade
policy on President Reagan's Council of Economic Advisors. After serving
as the interim dean of the College of Arts and Sciences for a year,
Joe Stone was appointed dean in 1998.
Joe is the author
of two books, Wage and Employment Adjustment in Local Labor Markets
(1992) and Unions and Public Schools: the Effects of Collective
Bargaining on American Education (1984). He is the author of numerous
articles published in economic journals. His research has focused
on comparisons between public and private schools, analysis of the
trucking industry, and a study of labor trends.
Steve:
Speaking of economics, in general, what do you think are some of the
most pressing issues today?
Joe: Well,
I think within the U.S., the most important issue is why it is that
as our economy continues to grow -- certainly the last fifteen years,
if not more like twenty years -- the gap between the bottom quarter
of the workforce and the top quarter has grown so that those of us
who are earning more than the average worker in the economy have done
well over that period, more or less. Whereas, people who are toward
the bottom end in terms of wages -- the lower 10 or 20 percent of
workers -- their wages have actually gone down in purchasing power.
And understanding all of the factors that are involved can be quite
complicated. Many people have one or two easy answers -- that it's
international trade, foreign competition, technology, or this or that
factor. But as you get into it, it is very hard to find a silver bullet,
single explanation that really carries enough weight to explain why
that has been occurring.
Steve:
Do you have any special insight or things you would like to investigate
in this regard -- the reasons for this distressing reality?
Joe: I
have my own personal opinion. I think it is a complicated issue, there
are multiple explanations that tend to reinforce each other. Within
that though, I would probably pick out one thing and that is technology.
The premium on education, on skills, on training, and expertise is
much higher than it used to be and those skills carry a greater premium
than they once did. Jobs that don't require very many skills or much
education or expertise are not nearly as well paid as they once were.
Steve:
Well, talking about the value of education -- certainly the economic
value of education -- I want to move from there to an article in the
Register-Guard a few weeks ago which noted, if I am accurately
paraphrasing it, that the UO graduates are ranked last in the state
in terms of starting salaries for new jobs. I guess this is in relationship
to the other institutions. Tell me the ways you would respond to this
kind of statistic.
Joe: Well,
I think there are two responses. One is why it is misleading. Second
is why we ought to be concerned about it. There are many reasons why
it is misleading. First of all, are the earnings that graduates have
on their very first job, the very first year after their degree. The
proportion of the people at the UO who go on to graduate school, is
the highest in the state, and certainly, graduate school is not noted
for its high wages. At least it wasn't my experience; maybe it was
yours.
Steve:
No, not at all. The low $2000 as I remember that first year.
Joe: So,
that's one factor. The second factor is that the UO is very much the
dominant liberal arts university in the state. The typical career
path for liberal arts graduates is to take two, three or four years
finding their niche, finding the things they are good at, finding
the ways to apply the deeper, broader skills that a liberal arts degree
brings them. But then, past that, their earnings often outpace those
who receive more vocationally oriented degrees. So the very short
time horizon, I think, is particularly misleading for liberal arts
graduates.
Steve:
So, what do you think was behind the article -- was it malice or ignorance
that someone would publish an article to just grab people's attention?
To sell papers by making startling claims?
Joe: It
is always tempting for anyone, including myself, to look for simple
answers to complex problems. How good is a college degree? How well
are the universities doing? First year out, how well did the graduates
do? It's not that the information is irrelevant, it's just that it
can be misleading.
Steve:
Well, I am glad people have heard your response to that. I think the
air needs to be cleared on this issue. Tell me your objectives as
dean. What do you hope to have accomplished in your tenure?
Joe: I'd
identify three broad academic objectives. One is to help build programs
of distinctive excellence within arts and sciences. We're not a mega-university
on the scale of UCLA, Berkeley, or Michigan, and so the things we
do in particular programs will necessarily need to be more focused.
The kinds of decisions we make from how to invest our resources to
the faculty we hire are even more important for us in order to try
to be distinctive and excellent in what we do.
A second objective
is to sustain and build the strength of the liberal arts. I am a strong
believer in the power of the liberal arts in building a prosperous
and happy society. I think there are lots of things on the positive
side both in terms of increasing the visibility of what we do and
the strength of the liberal arts. On perhaps a more negative side,
we have been complacent about some things in the liberal arts that
we can pay more attention to.
Steve:
For example?
Joe: Oh,
take the period when the liberal arts graduate receives a degree,
and unlike an accountant or someone who has a very vocationally oriented
degree, the graduate is not trained for a very specific job -- for
a job of today. Our hope is that we are training for the jobs of tomorrow.
That they will have the kinds of deep skills and abilities that will
put them in a position to be ready for the really productive jobs
that will come into the economy five, ten or fifteen years down the
road. But having said that, I know it is still true that in the first
two to four years, liberal arts graduates do often struggle finding
their niche, what is it they are good at, where their luck is. I think
there are things we can do as a liberal arts college to make that
transition easier. Such as helping people find a first run somewhere
as they get their degree. Not to change the nature of the liberal
arts degree but to complement it in small ways.
Steve:
…to be concerned about what actually happens to these students
at their next stage. And your third objective?
Joe: Well,
I believe that the system of higher education in general in Oregon,
and particularly at the UO, should play a greater role in trying to
set a higher standard of achievement for Oregon in terms of helping
with the K-12 system and also setting high standards of achievements
for ourselves. I think an excellent step this year for the UO was
moving to a very broad-based generous system of merit-based scholarships
for both resident and nonresident students to make it clear that we'd
like to reward the efforts of students who have tried to reach some
level of distinctive achievement. And also, that we want to make a
place for them at the UO.
Steve:
So when you say raise the level, you're talking about undergraduates
not faculty members, is that right?
Joe: That,
too!
