Skip to main content

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

Executive Summary
Pages 1-8

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 1...
... The reputational measure of program effectiveness in graduate education, derived from a question asked of faculty raters, confounded research reputation and educational quality. · Emphasis on the reputational measure of scholarly quality.
Read the entire page →
From page 2...
... In addition, it was to devise approaches intended to characterize interdisciplinary programs. iThese were: John D'Arms, president, American Council of Learned Societies; Stanley Ikenberry, president, American Council on Education; Craig Calhoun, president, Social Science Research Council; and William Wulf, vice-president, National Research Council.
Read the entire page →
From page 3...
... Recommendation 2: Although scholarly reputation and the composition of program faculty change slowly and can be assessed over a decade, quantitative indicators that are related to quality may change more rapidly and should be updated on a regular and more frequent basis than scholarly reputation. The Committee recommends investigation of the construction of a synthetic measure of reputation for each field, based on statistically derived combinations of quantitative measures.
Read the entire page →
From page 4...
... In addition, interdisciplinary programs will vary from university to university in whether their status ASSESSING RESEARCH-DOCTORATE PROGRAMS is stand-alone or whether they are a specialization in a broader traditional program. The Committee believes that it would assist potential students in identifying these programs, regardless of location, if it introduced a new category: emerging fields)
Read the entire page →
From page 5...
... but that the proposed NRC study should only administer a questionnaire, targeting students admitted to candidacy in selected fields. Recommendation 5.1: The proposed NRC study of research-doctorate programs should conduct a survey of enrolled students in selected fields who have advanced to candidacy for the doctoral degree regarding their assessment of their educational experience, their research productivity, program practices, and institutional and program environment.
Read the entire page →
From page 6...
... The possibility of embedding experiments using different sets of cues given to random subsets of peer raters should be seriously considered in order to increase the understanding of the effects of cues. Different raters have different degrees of information about the programs that they are asked to rate, even if all they are given is a list of faculty names.
Read the entire page →
From page 7...
... Linguistics Political Science Psychology Sociology Emerging Field Science and Technology Studies
Read the entire page →

Key Terms

  • quantitative measures
  • emerging fields
  • scholarly quality
  • reputational ratings
  • scholarly reputation

  • nrc assessment
  • peer raters
  • medical schools
  • proposed nrc
  • student processes

  • basic biomedical
  • student outcomes
  • educational environment
  • science psychology
  • american council

  • data presentation
  • graduate schools
  • technology studies
  • reputational measures
  • sexuality studies

  • program effectiveness
  • selected fields
  • professional schools
  • interdisciplinary programs
  • spurious inference

  • sociology emerging
  • program faculty
  • scholarly productivity
  • response rates
  • major groupings


    • 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.