John A. Griswold
The typical finance curriculum (banking, corporation finance, and investments), which has already gone through the period of course proliferation that still exists in several other business fields, needs no further consolidation. Principal needs in the finance field are (1) improved student background in mathematics, economic theory, and behavioral studies, (2) application of these and other subjects to the dynamic aspects of financial administration, and (3) provision for the preparation of additional and more realistic teaching materials.
This report on the teaching of finance in collegiate schools of business is an analytic study of the content, principles, and approaches used in the presentation of the subject. It is not a statistical study. The material derives from analysis of catalog information of one hundred collegiate schools of business, from personal visits to twenty-three leading business schools of different types in various parts of the country, and from interviews at these schools with some seventy teachers of finance subjects. The first part of this discussion traces the development of the content and structure of the' present finance curricula. Then certain weaknesses are analyzed and a curriculum suggested, undergraduate and graduate, which is designed to help correct the faults. Finally the problems of integration and instructional materials are discussed.
The term "finance" as applied to a field of study is somewhat more limited in scope than common usage implies. Finance has been limited by the American Association of Collegiate Schools of Business (Standards of Membership, No. 4) to include courses in or derived from money and banking, business finance, corporation finance, and investment. The following section on the history of the field will show why some subjects having the word "finance" as part of the title, "public finance" for example, are not included in this discussion.