An Assessment of Research-Doctorate Programs in the United States Humanities (1982) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
8 Linguistics Programs
8 Linguistics Programs
Pages 115-128
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 115... ...
In addition to the 35 institutions represented in this discipline, another 4 were initially identified as meeting the criteria3 for inclusion in the assessment: University of Arkansas -- Fayetteville Columbia Teachers College Columbia University Illinois Institute of Technology Linguistics programs at these four institutions have not been included in the evaluations in this discipline, since in each case the study coordinator either indicated that the institution did not at that time iData from the NRC's Survey of Earned Doctorates indicate that 854 research doctorates in linguistics were awarded by U.S. universities between FY1976 and FY1980.
|
From page 116... ...
These individuals constituted 70 percent of those asked to respond to the survey in this discipline and 21 percent of the faculty population in the 35 research-doctorate programs being evaluated.5 More than two-fifths of the survey participants had earned their highest degree since 1970, and approximately half were full professors. To assist the reader in interpreting results of the survey evaluations, estimated standard errors have been computed for mean ratings of the scholarly quality of faculty in 35 linguistics programs (and are given in Table 8.1~.
|
From page 117... ...
117 accuracy of the mean ratings of higher-rated programs than lower-rated programs. This generalization results primarily from the fact that evaluators are not as likely to be familiar with the less prestigious programs, and consequently the mean ratings of these programs are usually based on fewer survey responses.
|
From page 118... ...
NOTE: On the first line of data for every program, raw values for each measure are reported; on the second line values are reported in standardized form, with mean = 50 and standard deviation - 10. "NAT indicates that the value for a measure is not available.
|
From page 119... ...
2.6 1.6 0.5 1.2 1.8 .11 .08 .07 .07 48 49 33 50 60 020. 2.2 1.1 1.1 1.0 1.2 .09 .12 .07 .06 44 41 51 46 54 NOTE: On the f irst line of data for every program, raw values for each measure are reported; on the second line values are reported in standardized f orm, with mean = 50 and standard deviation = 10.
|
From page 120... ...
indicates program was initiated since 1970. NOTE: On the first line of data for every program, raw values for each measure are reported; on the second line values are reported in standardized form, with mean = 50 and standard deviation = 10.
|
From page 121... ...
2.2 1.3 1.2 0.9 1.6 .10 .08 .11 .06 45 44 54 44 58 035. 2.9 1.4 0.9 1.3 2.1 .10 .08 .07 .06 52 46 45 53 63 NOTE: On the first line of data for every program, raw values for each measure are reported; on the second line values are reported in standardized form, with mean = 50 and standard deviation = 10.
|
From page 122... ...
TABLE 8.2 Summary Statistics Describing Each Program Measure -- Linguistics Number of Programs Standard D E C I L E S Measure Evaluated Mean Deviation 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Program Size 01 Raw Value 35 14 9 6 7 9 9 11 12 14 21 27 Std Value 35 50 10 41 42 44 44 46 47 50 57 64 02 Raw Value 35 19 12 4 8 10 12 16 18 24 31 33 Std Value 35 50 10 38 41 43 45 48 49 54 60 62 03 Raw Value 35 34 24 10 12 17 21 33 37 40 51 60 Std Value 35 50 10 40 41 43 45 50 51 52 S7 61 Program Graduates 04 Raw Value 26 .36 .18 .09 .20 .27 .29 .35 .38 .40 .49 .57 Std Value 26 50 10 35 41 45 46 49 51 52 57 62 05 Raw Value 24 7.9 1.2 9.5 8.9 8.5 8.4 8.1 7.9 7.5 6.9 6.1 Std Value 24 50 10 37 41 45 46 48 50 53 58 64 06 Raw Value 25 .62 .13 .48 .56 .57 .58 .62 .65 .70 .73 .75 Std Value 25 50 10 39 45 46 47 50 52 56 58 60 07 Raw Value 25 .28 .15 .10 .13 .19 .20 .27 .30 .37 .42 .45 Std Value 25 50 10 38 40 44 45 49 51 56 59 61 Survey Results 08 Raw Value 35 2.8 1.0 1.1 2.0 2.2 2.6 2.8 2.9 3.4 3.8 3.9 Std Value 35 50 10 34 43 45 48 50 51 56 60 61 09 Raw Value 35 1.6 .6 .7 1.1 1.3 1.5 1.6 1.7 Std Value 35 50 10 34 41 45 48 50 52 2.2 61 1n Raw Value 33 1.1 .3 .5 .8 .9 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.2 1.3 1.5 Std Value 33 50 10 32 41 44 47 50 53 53 56 62 11 Raw Value 35 1.2 .5 .4 .7 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.6 1.7 Std Value 35 50 10 33 40 46 48 50 53 55 59 61 University Library 12 Raw Value 33 .8 1.0 -.6 -.3 .1 .4 .8 .9 1.5 1.7 2.0 Std Value 33 50 10 36 39 43 46 50 51 57 59 62 NOTE: Standardized values reported in the preceding table have been computed from exact values of the mean and standard deviation and not the rounded values reported here.
|
From page 123... ...
123 TABLE 8.3 Intercorrelations Among Program Measures on 35 Programs in Linguistics Measure 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 Program Size 01 .57 .38 .07 -.37 -.11 -.12 .51 .46 -.02 .38 .36 02 .74 -.10 -.34 .03 .05 .50 .53 -.30 .49 .12 03 -.27 -.35 .04 -.04 .36 .39 -.05 .39 -.10 Program Graduates 04 .24 .36 .29 .33 .25 -.16 .30 .20 05 .53 .46 .2S .25 .21 .27 -.38 06 .63 .49 .49 .25 .59 -.01 07 .57 .57 .10 .65 .04 Survey Results 08 .98 .29 .96 .23 09 .35 .95 .16 10 .24 -.16 11 .29 University Library 12 NOTE: Since in computing correlation coefficients program data must be available for both of the measures being correlated, the actual number of programs on which each coefficient is based varies.
|
From page 124... ...
* r ~ .54 4 9 16 25 36 49 Measure 01 (square root scale)
|
From page 125... ...
O O +/+++++++++++++/+++++++++++++/+++++++++++++/+++++++++++++/+++++++++++++/+++++++++++++/+++++++++++++/ 1 4 9 16 25 36 49 64 Measure 02 (square root scale)
|
From page 126... ...
126 TABLE 8.4 Characteristics of Survey Participants in Linguistics Respondents N % Field of Specialization Linguistics 97 92 Other/Unknown 8 8 Faculty Rank Professor 52 50 Associate Professor 35 33 Assistant Professor 18 17 Year of Highest Degree Pre-1950 5 5 1950-59 13 12 1960-69 42 40 Post-1969 44 41 Unknown 1 1 Evaluator Selection Nominated by Institution 85 81 Other 20 19 survey Form With Faculty Names 94 90 Without Names 11 11 Total Evaluators 105 100
|
From page 127... ...
The broken lines ( -- -) indicate a confidence interval of +1.5 standard errors around the reported mean (x)
|
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.