Many Thanks to Doyle Arnold ’ 70 !
We would like to offer our sincere thanks to Mr . Doyle Arnold , a 1970 Rice Economics ( and Mathematics ) alum , who recently established an endowment to finance in perpetuity our RISE Nobel Laureate Lecture Series , a departmental highlight that he has been supporting since 2015 . Mr . Arnold currently serves on the RISE Council , is the Chair of the Dean ’ s Advisory Board for Rice ’ s School of Social Sciences , and is a Trustee Emeritus on the Rice University Board of Trustees . He served in several executive positions at Zions Bancorporation from 2001 until retiring in 2015 as vice chairman and chief financial officer . RICE ECON recently had a chance to visit with Mr . Arnold .
What prompted you to endow the RISE Nobel Laureate Lecture Series ?
When former Economics Department Chair , Antonio Merlo , came to Rice and , with Rob Ladd , was forming the RISE Council , he asked about my undergraduate experience at Rice and what could have made it better . I told him how impressed I was that the elite schools in the Northeast , and Stanford , where I got my MBA , always seemed to be on the distinguished lecture circuit . In addition to great academics , which Rice also had , those schools had a constant stream of practitioner / academics — former members of the Federal Reserve Board , Cabinet secretaries , etc .— giving guest lectures , joining an institute for a time , and so forth . Rice , being on the “ third coast ” didn ’ t seem to be in that flow , and students did not get as much of that exposure . I also told Antonio that my only personal “ claim to fame ” in economics was to have had the pleasure and privilege of studying at the graduate level under two future Nobel Prize winners in Economics — and to have gotten “ A ’ s ” from both !
Out of those two observations came our joint idea of developing this lecture series . We decided to make the series a combination of ( 1 ) a public lecture on a topic of the speaker ’ s choice , but one that should be of interest to and understandable by a well-educated lay audience , and ( 2 ) time spent discussing current economic topics and research with faculty and students — particularly graduate students . It has been a personal pleasure to have had both of my former teachers deliver these lectures at Rice .
How does such a lecture series fit in with your hopes for the future of Rice ?
We had several objectives in starting the series : ( 1 ) to increase Rice ’ s visibility in the Houston and donor communities , as a place grappling with some of the major economic policy issues of our day ; ( 2 ) to give Rice students and faculty a chance to interact with and learn from these pathbreaking economists ; and finally ( 3 ) to thereby expose these economists to the extremely high quality of Rice students and faculty , which they might then talk about and increase Rice ’ s visibility back at their university homes . I think we ’ ve partially achieved all of these objectives , but we still have room to improve , particularly in using these lectures to increase Rice ’ s public visibility and stature .
You have been associated with Rice for many years . In what ways has the university changed and in what ways has it remained the same ?
What has stayed the same is what I hope never changes : ( 1 ) the great faculty devoted not just to research , but to outstanding teaching ; ( 2 ) the talented , interesting students ; and ( 3 ) the residential college system , which breaks down an already modest-sized undergraduate student body into even smaller social groups that are noncompetitive to join and give everyone — from the most introverted to the most extroverted — a way to find a place and a role . What has changed for the better is greatly increased diversity , on multiple dimensions — race and ethnicity , and international .
What I ’ m concerned about is the elimination of a required classical liberal education , which the undergraduate “ distribution requirements ” approach does not really foster . I know it has fallen out of favor to require any grounding in history , Western Civilization , or English literature . Nor are students required to get much if any exposure to the incredible breadth of Eastern histories , political systems and cultures . However , I fear that this is resulting in graduates who lack a degree of historical perspective and have moral certainty about their own positions that is not warranted . If I could make one change at Rice , it would be to institute a two-year , required undergraduate course sequence — one year in Western history / civilization and one year in Eastern history / civilization . This would give all our graduates — both U . S . and international — a much better foundational basis to understand and deal with , but also respectfully disagree with , those from other cultural backgrounds . Unfortunately , I don ’ t hold out much hope of seeing this change soon !
What about the Economics Department ?
Like the university , it seems to me that Economics at Rice has grown , both in substance and in stature . I hope and trust that will continue — and certainly support the ongoing effort to strengthen macroeconomics , for example . And , I am extremely pleased that the introductory survey course in economics is the most popular undergraduate course by far . Economics gives one a practical grounding in thinking rigorously , rather than just emotionally , about societal problems and how to address them .
What are your favorite memories of your time at Rice ?
That ’ s an easy question : the professors who changed my understanding of and ways of thinking about the world around me !
4