<p>I disagree that:</p>

<p>a) The core curriculum should not include things that are relevant only for those pursuing graduate school.</p>

<p>b) A university degree should necessarily focus only on career outcomes for students.</p>

<p>c) There are only two relevant careers and therefore the only thing worth teaching is how to handle different types of data.</p>

<p>The core curriculum needs to provide a <em>foundation</em> for <em>all</em> future paths of students, which includes those going to graduate school.</p>

<p>Further, a university degree is foremost a scientific (or at times artistic) pursuit within a field and not a trade school. That is why professors are scientists (or at times artists) and not industry professionals. After a bachelor's degree a graduate should at least understand the basics of that field. Sure, many of those skills learned at university can partially be transferable to a job in the real world. However, that's a different story, which often does not involve the actual material learnt, but other skills learnt along the way, such as critical thinking and writing.</p>

<p>The Solow model is the foundation for beginning to understand economic growth and development. That is at the core of what the economics field aims to understand. Even  most policy debates will inevitably involve growing the economy or creating jobs. I would argue any student that is not interested in that question at all has no business studying economics. That is why the Solow model is in the core curriculum.</p>

<p>Lastly, there is a reason not everyone studies statistics and IT so that we can all become data analysts (for business or otherwise). The reason is that there are many other career paths.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-02-04T17:13:18.570Z
“Even most policy debates will inevitably involve growing the economy or creating jobs. I would argue any student that is not interested in that question at all has no business studying economics.” - I think you hit the nail right on the head. I would even say that any kid that ever dreamt of becoming economist did so to understand this question - even if you later switch into behavioral economics, micro or any other subfield most students that I know got interested in economics precisely to understand why some countries grow and some don’t, why unemployment is somewhere high and elsewhere low
1muflon1
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-02-04T20:44:32.233Z
"I would argue any student that is not interested in that question at all has no business studying economics."- Can you elaborate on this?
EconJohn
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-02-04T15:43:08.273Z
2020-02-04T16:16:25.747Z
2020-02-04T16:16:25.747Z
BB King
<p>Adding to previous answers ...</p>
<p>The basic Solow model is an example of a class of long-term macroeconomic models in which output is a function of inputs of two or more factor inputs and the ratios of the inputs may vary over time or between countries.  Other examples include:</p>
<ul>
<li>The <a href="https://eml.berkeley.edu/%7Edromer/papers/MRW_QJE1992.pdf" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Mankiw-Romer-Weil model</a> which treats physical and human capital as separate inputs, in addition to labour, and explores the implications for the comparative growth rates of countries starting with different amounts of the two forms of capital.</li>
<li>The <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0928765511000066" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Dasgupta-Heal-Solow-Stiglitz model</a> which includes a nonrenewable natural resource as an additional input.</li>
</ul>
<p>An understanding of such models (both their implications and their limitations) is useful in a variety of policy contexts, especially those concerning development and sustainability.  And I would add that, even for the 'educated lay person' it surely is, or should be, of considerable interest to have some awareness of how much future economic growth is possible, so that if little growth is achieved and living standards stagnate, they can have an informed view as to whether that represents a failure of government policy, or is simply because faster growth was never feasible. From where can such an awareness come, other than from those who have studied economics?</p>
<p>Having said that, from a <em>pedagogical</em> point of view the basic two-input Solow model, despite and indeed because of what it leaves out, is probably the best starting-point in introducing students to this type of theory</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-02-05T23:38:34.470Z
2021-03-29T14:36:17.813Z
2021-03-29T14:36:17.813Z
Adam Bailey
<p>I think that the main reason why the Solow model is a must in every undergrad curriculum is the Solow residual.</p>

<p>The fact that the bulk of the differences of per capita income between countries is not due to capital intensity or human capital is on face value paradoxical. </p>

<p>Among non-economists this is the most underappreciated insight from economic research that I can think of. Therefore no-one should get a degree without having studied this and there is no simpler framework than the Solow model to do this.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-02-06T00:18:10.513Z
2020-02-06T00:18:10.513Z
Grada Gukovic
<p>I second/third/whatever the objection to the "ideal careers" put forth here.</p>

<ol>
<li><strong>Data Analyst</strong> - Most of these jobs will go to comp-sci graduates, especially as artificial intelligence and machine learning methods become more widely adopted.  Tools such as deep learning, generative adversarial networks, and reinforcement learning <em>explicitly</em> require no or little subject-matter expertise for pattern recognition as they are "black box" algorithms.  As an economics student you will pick up some of the understanding needed to do this work, but inefficiently, and the odds that faculty at your school will see the connections are dodgy at best.  As you note, you don't need Solow to program what is essentially a nested probit model, but that's a bit like pointing out that you don't need quantum mechanics to operate a telescope - yet QM is typically core to a physics undergrad, whereas astronomy is typically not.</li>
<li><strong>Business Analyst</strong> - There are at least three billion MBAs in the world.  They will be hired before you in nearly any industry for which you do not have a personal connection.  Frankly, unless you're vying for a C-level position along this line, it would be a waste of your training.  Much of what passes for "business analysis" is just sophisticated Googling.</li>
</ol>

<p>What you're missing here is a crucial third path, and I speak from direct personal experience on why actually understanding economics - including Solow and its derivative models - is important:</p>

<ol start="3">
<li><strong>Policy Analyst</strong> - This is my field.  To put it politely, the amount of policy that is developed on the strength of, at best, a second-year understanding of economic theory is remarkable.  Knowing more and being able to communicate it well is a fast way to get ahead.  An example of where Solow fits in is in the area of innovation policy - one encounters a lot of decision makers who bandy-about terms like "total factor productivity" without really grasping what it is.  You will encounter this term as you go on to study derivatives of the Solow model and it will help yield insights that have direct real-world consequences (e.g., Romer's technological change model can be used to argue that overly restrictive intellectual-property rules can slow or even reverse the rate of technological change, something that has been the subject of much recent empirical study).</li>
</ol>

<p>In short, there's a lot more to the Solow model than what you're being shown in class.  Perhaps you've just got a dry lecturer who isn't giving enough context for the lessons, but at the level at which you're encountering it, you should be fully capable of asking your own questions and pursuing them (which you're sort of doing here, but you're encumbering yourself with too many assumptions about the answer).</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-02-04T20:43:28.397Z
"_Perhaps you've just got a dry lecturer who isn't giving enough context for the lessons, but at the level at which you're encountering it, you should be fully capable of asking your own questions and pursuing them (which you're sort of doing here, but you're encumbering yourself with too many assumptions about the answer)_"- I have made zero assumptions about the answer. not sure what you're saying here. Additionally I'm asking this question as an educator not someone who is studying this material for the first time.
EconJohn
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-02-04T22:23:13.007Z
@EconJohn that was probably important context for your question, then.  I admit to being puzzled that an educator in economics would not be equipped to answer questions about the usefulness of learning the Solow model. Together with the rather surprising choice of "ideal" careers to pursue with an economics education, I admit to making an (in my view) defensible assumption that you were a frustrated student asking the question.  Apologies.
heh
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-02-04T22:32:13.993Z
@EconJohn reading some of your other comments, and through the lens of understanding you're an educator, it might be worth posting a new question to the forum to investigate the differences between econometrics and "big data".  There are some very important ones that your students would probably benefit from hearing.  Some of them may realize that indeed, economics is not the best path to pick up the skills they're interested in.  As someone who tangentially studied machine learning once I noticed the overlap, I'd be happy to engage that topic.
heh
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-02-04T23:06:43.100Z
"_I admit to being puzzled that an educator in economics would not be equipped to answer questions about the usefulness of learning the Solow model._". Im sorry I dont know everything. This model is a description of macroeconomic growth with no specific policy implications or meaning for those who dont go into working for a goverment body or ngo. Thats my current understanding.
EconJohn
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-02-05T15:07:14.110Z
@EconJohn I don't think it's unfair to hold prior beliefs that someone charged with teaching the Solow growth model to students would also know why the model continues to be taught.  I respect that you've asked for that insight, but it doesn't change the fact that this is a reasonable prior expectation to have.
heh
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-02-05T15:19:24.107Z
When you put it that way, I agree with you.
EconJohn
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-02-05T15:24:18.730Z
Excellent.  Please accept my apology for the misunderstanding.
heh
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-02-04T16:06:10.553Z
2020-02-04T16:06:10.553Z
heh
<p>I've been looking at the economics undergraduate curriculum and have been thinking and wondering as to what specific skillset we want to equip undergraduate students with in the working world.</p>

<p>One can think about this by thinking about the ideal career outcomes of economics undergraduates. Most undergraduates with economics degrees should ideally end up in two occupations<sup>*</sup> (ideally meaning that their education will correspond to a desired occupation):</p>

<ol>
<li>Data Analyst (using exclusively data to identify actionable information)</li>
<li>Business Analyst (using data and qualitative information regarding the economic environment relevant to a given business to identify actionable information).</li>
</ol>

<p>With these two ideal career outcomes in mind its very clear as to why intermediate microeconomics, econometrics and market macro makes a difference. However as to why the Solow Growth model is taught on the undergraduate level is a bit confusing for me and Im left with any satisfactory answer.This is a relevant question because its a part of the core undergraduate macroeconomics education so its relevant for even those not intending to go to graduate school.</p>

<p>In terms of specific career outcomes (it could be that this list is lacking) why is studying the Solow model relevant for the undergraduate student who does not intend to go to graduate school? </p>

<p><strong>EDIT:</strong> Im not coming to say the solow model is useless, im asking why this is a part of the core economics curriculum. I myself am interested in economic growth in terms of understanding the economy and its fluctuations. Additionally I'm an economics educator not a student so these questions do come up in classes where im responsible to respond to them. </p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-02-04T02:12:26.383Z
@KennyLJ im wondering how its relevant for the student not interested in persuing graduate school. I understand why its relevant for people going into policy or research, but to be educating so many people on this topic. Why is this the case?
EconJohn
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-02-04T20:59:21.400Z
If the goal is to narrowly support these two carrier paths, why teach micro, macro and game theory? Shouldn't we simply stick to statistics and probability theory? (Perhaps add a dash of Powerpoint Basics.)
Giskard
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-02-04T21:05:01.743Z
@Giskard this list is obviously incomplete and is very broad. The reason why micro and market macro is taught (i.e. intermediate macroeconomics 2) is because often when one is seeking actionable information its not in a data set. There isn't a comprehensive data set for everything and more often than not you wont find the data you are looking for. _What this theory allows you to do is provide a framework for analyzing these problems with only knowledge of the structure of your problem_ i.e prices, expenditure and  some general market information.
EconJohn
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-02-04T21:06:39.603Z
@Giskard some of my students find this concept hard to understand in an era of the big data revolution.
EconJohn
<history-economic-thought><soft-question>
Why does the Solow Model matter for undergraduate students?
EconJohn
# Why does the Solow Model matter for undergraduate students?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2020-02-04)

I've been looking at the economics undergraduate curriculum and have been thinking and wondering as to what specific skillset we want to equip undergraduate students with in the working world.

One can think about this by thinking about the ideal career outcomes of economics undergraduates. Most undergraduates with economics degrees should ideally end up in two occupations\* (ideally meaning that their education will correspond to a desired occupation):

1. Data Analyst (using exclusively data to identify actionable information)
2. Business Analyst (using data and qualitative information regarding the economic environment relevant to a given business to identify actionable information).

With these two ideal career outcomes in mind its very clear as to why intermediate microeconomics, econometrics and market macro makes a difference. However as to why the Solow Growth model is taught on the undergraduate level is a bit confusing for me and Im left with any satisfactory answer.This is a relevant question because its a part of the core undergraduate macroeconomics education so its relevant for even those not intending to go to graduate school.

In terms of specific career outcomes (it could be that this list is lacking) why is studying the Solow model relevant for the undergraduate student who does not intend to go to graduate school?

**EDIT:** Im not coming to say the solow model is useless, im asking why this is a part of the core economics curriculum. I myself am interested in economic growth in terms of understanding the economy and its fluctuations. Additionally I'm an economics educator not a student so these questions do come up in classes where im responsible to respond to them.

**Tags:** history-economic-thought, soft-question
> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: @KennyLJ im wondering how its relevant for the student not interested in persuing graduate school. I understand why its relevant for people going into policy or research, but to be educating so many people on this topic. Why is this the case?  
> **username_1**: If the goal is to narrowly support these two carrier paths, why teach micro, macro and game theory? Shouldn't we simply stick to statistics and probability theory? (Perhaps add a dash of Powerpoint Basics.)  
> **username_0**: @Giskard this list is obviously incomplete and is very broad. The reason why micro and market macro is taught (i.e. intermediate macroeconomics 2) is because often when one is seeking actionable information its not in a data set. There isn't a comprehensive data set for everything and more often than not you wont find the data you are looking for. _What this theory allows you to do is provide a framework for analyzing these problems with only knowledge of the structure of your problem_ i.e prices, expenditure and  some general market information.  
> **username_0**: @Giskard some of my students find this concept hard to understand in an era of the big data revolution.  

---

## 4 answers

### Answer by username_2 on 2020-02-04. Score: 17

I disagree that:

a) The core curriculum should not include things that are relevant only for those pursuing graduate school.

b) A university degree should necessarily focus only on career outcomes for students.

c) There are only two relevant careers and therefore the only thing worth teaching is how to handle different types of data.

The core curriculum needs to provide a *foundation* for *all* future paths of students, which includes those going to graduate school.

Further, a university degree is foremost a scientific (or at times artistic) pursuit within a field and not a trade school. That is why professors are scientists (or at times artists) and not industry professionals. After a bachelor's degree a graduate should at least understand the basics of that field. Sure, many of those skills learned at university can partially be transferable to a job in the real world. However, that's a different story, which often does not involve the actual material learnt, but other skills learnt along the way, such as critical thinking and writing.

The Solow model is the foundation for beginning to understand economic growth and development. That is at the core of what the economics field aims to understand. Even most policy debates will inevitably involve growing the economy or creating jobs. I would argue any student that is not interested in that question at all has no business studying economics. That is why the Solow model is in the core curriculum.

Lastly, there is a reason not everyone studies statistics and IT so that we can all become data analysts (for business or otherwise). The reason is that there are many other career paths.

> **Comments:**
> **username_3**: “Even most policy debates will inevitably involve growing the economy or creating jobs. I would argue any student that is not interested in that question at all has no business studying economics.” - I think you hit the nail right on the head. I would even say that any kid that ever dreamt of becoming economist did so to understand this question - even if you later switch into behavioral economics, micro or any other subfield most students that I know got interested in economics precisely to understand why some countries grow and some don’t, why unemployment is somewhere high and elsewhere low  
> **username_0**: "I would argue any student that is not interested in that question at all has no business studying economics."- Can you elaborate on this?  

---

### Answer by username_6 on 2020-02-04. Score: 10

I second/third/whatever the objection to the "ideal careers" put forth here.

1. **Data Analyst** - Most of these jobs will go to comp-sci graduates, especially as artificial intelligence and machine learning methods become more widely adopted. Tools such as deep learning, generative adversarial networks, and reinforcement learning *explicitly* require no or little subject-matter expertise for pattern recognition as they are "black box" algorithms. As an economics student you will pick up some of the understanding needed to do this work, but inefficiently, and the odds that faculty at your school will see the connections are dodgy at best. As you note, you don't need Solow to program what is essentially a nested probit model, but that's a bit like pointing out that you don't need quantum mechanics to operate a telescope - yet QM is typically core to a physics undergrad, whereas astronomy is typically not.
2. **Business Analyst** - There are at least three billion MBAs in the world. They will be hired before you in nearly any industry for which you do not have a personal connection. Frankly, unless you're vying for a C-level position along this line, it would be a waste of your training. Much of what passes for "business analysis" is just sophisticated Googling.

What you're missing here is a crucial third path, and I speak from direct personal experience on why actually understanding economics - including Solow and its derivative models - is important:

3. **Policy Analyst** - This is my field. To put it politely, the amount of policy that is developed on the strength of, at best, a second-year understanding of economic theory is remarkable. Knowing more and being able to communicate it well is a fast way to get ahead. An example of where Solow fits in is in the area of innovation policy - one encounters a lot of decision makers who bandy-about terms like "total factor productivity" without really grasping what it is. You will encounter this term as you go on to study derivatives of the Solow model and it will help yield insights that have direct real-world consequences (e.g., Romer's technological change model can be used to argue that overly restrictive intellectual-property rules can slow or even reverse the rate of technological change, something that has been the subject of much recent empirical study).

In short, there's a lot more to the Solow model than what you're being shown in class. Perhaps you've just got a dry lecturer who isn't giving enough context for the lessons, but at the level at which you're encountering it, you should be fully capable of asking your own questions and pursuing them (which you're sort of doing here, but you're encumbering yourself with too many assumptions about the answer).

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: "_Perhaps you've just got a dry lecturer who isn't giving enough context for the lessons, but at the level at which you're encountering it, you should be fully capable of asking your own questions and pursuing them (which you're sort of doing here, but you're encumbering yourself with too many assumptions about the answer)_"- I have made zero assumptions about the answer. not sure what you're saying here. Additionally I'm asking this question as an educator not someone who is studying this material for the first time.  
> **username_6**: @EconJohn that was probably important context for your question, then.  I admit to being puzzled that an educator in economics would not be equipped to answer questions about the usefulness of learning the Solow model. Together with the rather surprising choice of "ideal" careers to pursue with an economics education, I admit to making an (in my view) defensible assumption that you were a frustrated student asking the question.  Apologies.  
> **username_6**: @EconJohn reading some of your other comments, and through the lens of understanding you're an educator, it might be worth posting a new question to the forum to investigate the differences between econometrics and "big data".  There are some very important ones that your students would probably benefit from hearing.  Some of them may realize that indeed, economics is not the best path to pick up the skills they're interested in.  As someone who tangentially studied machine learning once I noticed the overlap, I'd be happy to engage that topic.  
> **username_0**: "_I admit to being puzzled that an educator in economics would not be equipped to answer questions about the usefulness of learning the Solow model._". Im sorry I dont know everything. This model is a description of macroeconomic growth with no specific policy implications or meaning for those who dont go into working for a goverment body or ngo. Thats my current understanding.  
> **username_6**: @EconJohn I don't think it's unfair to hold prior beliefs that someone charged with teaching the Solow growth model to students would also know why the model continues to be taught.  I respect that you've asked for that insight, but it doesn't change the fact that this is a reasonable prior expectation to have.  
> **username_0**: When you put it that way, I agree with you.  
> **username_6**: Excellent.  Please accept my apology for the misunderstanding.  

---

### Answer by username_4 on 2020-02-05. Score: 8

Adding to previous answers ...

The basic Solow model is an example of a class of long-term macroeconomic models in which output is a function of inputs of two or more factor inputs and the ratios of the inputs may vary over time or between countries. Other examples include:

* The [Mankiw-Romer-Weil model](https://eml.berkeley.edu/%7Edromer/papers/MRW_QJE1992.pdf) which treats physical and human capital as separate inputs, in addition to labour, and explores the implications for the comparative growth rates of countries starting with different amounts of the two forms of capital.
* The [Dasgupta-Heal-Solow-Stiglitz model](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0928765511000066) which includes a nonrenewable natural resource as an additional input.

An understanding of such models (both their implications and their limitations) is useful in a variety of policy contexts, especially those concerning development and sustainability. And I would add that, even for the 'educated lay person' it surely is, or should be, of considerable interest to have some awareness of how much future economic growth is possible, so that if little growth is achieved and living standards stagnate, they can have an informed view as to whether that represents a failure of government policy, or is simply because faster growth was never feasible. From where can such an awareness come, other than from those who have studied economics?

Having said that, from a *pedagogical* point of view the basic two-input Solow model, despite and indeed because of what it leaves out, is probably the best starting-point in introducing students to this type of theory


---

### Answer by username_5 on 2020-02-06. Score: 7

I think that the main reason why the Solow model is a must in every undergrad curriculum is the Solow residual.

The fact that the bulk of the differences of per capita income between countries is not due to capital intensity or human capital is on face value paradoxical.

Among non-economists this is the most underappreciated insight from economic research that I can think of. Therefore no-one should get a degree without having studied this and there is no simpler framework than the Solow model to do this.


---

