Assessing Research-Doctorate Programs A Methodology Study (2003) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
1. Introduction
1. Introduction
Pages 9-14
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 9... ...
the expected change in relative position of a program in the next 5 to 10 years.2 In 1966, when Cartter's first study appeared, slightly over 19,000 Ph.D.s were being produced annually in over 150 institutions. Ten years later, following a replication of the Cartter study by Roose and Anderson in 1970, another look at the methodology to assess doctoral programs was undertaken under the auspices of the Conference Board of Associated Research Councils.3 A conference on assessing doctoral iGoldberger, et al., eds.
|
From page 10... ...
At the same time, the number of students earning doctoral degrees in the humanities and social sciences started a decade-long drop, often encouraged by professional associations worried by gloomy job prospects and life decisions based on reactions to the Vietnam War (for a period graduate school insured military service deferment)
|
From page 11... ...
The committee signaled the need to pay attention to the plight of postdoctoral fellows, employment opportunities in a variety of fields, and the importance of attracting talented international students.7 Three years later the Pew Charitable Trust funded the first of three examinations of graduate education. Re-envisioning the Ph.D., a project headed by Professor Jody Nyquist and housed at the University of Washington, began by canvassing stakeholders students, faculty, employers, funders, and higher education associations.
|
From page 12... ...
The program assumed that "for too many individuals, developing the capacity for teaching and learning about fundamental professional concepts and principles remain accidental occurrences. We can and should do a better job of building the faculty the nation's colleges and universities need."~5 In light of recent surveys and studies, the Preparing Future Faculty program is quickly becoming the Preparing Future Professionals program, modeled on programs started at Arizona State University, Virginia Tech, University of Texas, and other universities.
|
From page 13... ...
Where agreement exists it centers on the need for versatile doctoral programs; on a greater sense of what students expect, receive, and value; on emphasizing the need to know, publicize, and control time to degree and degree completion rates 13 as well as on the conclusion that a student's assessment of a program should play a role in the evaluation of that program. This conclusion points to the possibility that a national assessment of doctoral education can contribute to an understanding of practices and outcomes that goes well beyond the attempts to assess the effectiveness of doctoral education undertaken in past NRC studies.
|
Key Terms
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.