Skip to main content

Assessing Research-Doctorate Programs A Methodology Study (2003) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:

7. General Conclusions and Recommendations
Pages 61-64

The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.


From page 61...
... For most programs, it maintained continuity with the NRC study carried out 10 years earlier. Finally, it should be noted that the study was a useful tool for doctoral programs to improve themselves and hence to 61 improve doctoral education.
Read the entire page →
From page 62...
... The Committee believes that Web-based data gathering should be a part of the next study and suggests the establishment of an updateable database on graduate programs. Further, once a statistical analysis of the relationship between quantitative measures and the reputational measure has been conducted for each field, it will be possible to construct a "synthetic reputational measure," constructed under the assumption that the parameters that relate the quantitative measures to reputation have held steady over time, but that the values themselves have changed.
Read the entire page →
From page 63...
... The education of doctoral students for a wide range of employment beyond that in academia has become an object of growing attention in the educational policy community and among the students themselves. In addition to collecting data on educational practices and resources, the Committee proposes that the next NRC study collect data from advanced-to-candidacy students in a small number of fields in order to assesses their educational experiences, their research productivity, program practices, and institutional 63 and program environments.
Read the entire page →
From page 64...
... Furthermore, a Web-based release makes it possible to provide analytical tools to users so that they can compose and rate programs using a la carte quantitative weights of their own choosing. The Committee believes strongly that publication of the data alone, without an exploration of its strengths and limitations, should not happen again.
Read the entire page →

Key Terms

  • quantitative measures
  • quantitative data
  • reputational measure
  • scholarly quality
  • student outcomes

  • reputational rankings
  • rater confidentiality
  • quantitative indicators
  • researchdoctorate programs
  • educational practices

  • proposed study
  • reputational ratings
  • professional schools
  • fields outside
  • encouraged users

  • rankings appear
  • rate programs
  • highly reputed
  • limited set
  • quantitative information

  • whenever significantly
  • agricultural sciences
  • committee constructed
  • confounded research
  • committee proposes

  • invisible costs
  • immediately publish
  • greatly disappoint
  • earlier chapters
  • reflected changes


    • This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
    More information on Chapter Skim is available.