Abstract not found

Abstract not found

you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at

This paper evaluates (1) whether the exogenous component of financial intermediary development influences economic growth and (2) whether cross-country differences in legal and accounting systems (e.g., creditor rights, contract enforcement, and accounting standards) explain differences

in public policies, political stability, and other economic indicators. In the case of Sub-Saharan Africa, economic growth is associated with low schooling, political instability, underdeveloped financial systems, distorted foreign exchange markets, high government deficits, and insufficient infrastructure

positive and normative implications for growth. In positive terms, the prospect of a high level of research in the future can deter research today by threatening the fruits of that research with rapid obsolescence. In normative terms, obsolescence creates a negative externality from innovations, and hence

Evidence from a broad panel of countries shows little overall relation between income inequality and rates of growth and investment. However, for growth, higher inequality tends to retard growth in poor countries and encourage growth in richer places. The Kuznets curve—whereby inequality first

Abstract not found

"He who can, does. He who cannot, teaches. “ 1 don't know in what fit of pique George Bernard Shaw wrote that infamous aphorism, words that have plagued members of the teach-ing profession for nearly a century. They are found in "Maxims for Revolutionists, " an appendix to his play Man and Superman. "He who can, does. He who cannot, teaches" is a calamitous insult to our profes-sion, yet one readily repeated even by teachers. More worrisome, its philosophy often appears to under-lie the policies concerning the occu-pation and activities of teaching. Where did such a demeaning im-age of the teacher's capacities ori-ginate? How long have we been bur-dened by assumptions of ignorance and ineptitude within the teaching corps? Is Shaw to be treated as the last word on what teachers know and don't know, or do and can't do? Yesterday's Examinations We begin our inquiry into concep-tions of teacher knowledge with the tests for teachers that were used in this country during the last century This paper was a Presidential Ad-dress at the 1985 annual meeting of

Andrew Warner for generously sharing their data with us. We are particularly grateful to Ben-David, Frankel, Romer, Sachs, Warner and Romain Wacziarg for helpful e-mail exchanges. We have benefited greatly from discussions in seminars at the University of California at Berkeley,