Skip to main content

Currently Skimming:

4 Classics Programs
Pages 47-60

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 47...
... In addition to the 35 institutions represented in this discipline, another 6 were initially identified as meeting the criteria3 for inclusion in the assessment: University of Dallas Saint Louis University SUNY at Albany Tufts University Western Conservative Baptist Seminary -- Oregon Yeshiva University Classics programs at these six institutions have not been included in the evaluations in this discipline, since in each case the study t Date from the NRC's Survey of Earned Doctorates indicate that 316 research doctorates in classical languages and literature were awarded by U.S. universities between FY1976 and FY1980.
From page 48...
... 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 classics programs (and are given in Table 4.11. For each program the mean rating and an associated "confidence interval" of 1.5 standard errors are illustrated in Figure 4.3 (listed in order of highest to lowest mean rating!
From page 49...
... 49 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 50...
... (07) NA NA .08 6.0 36 61 .17 8.0 42 48 .31 8.0 52 48 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA .42 6.0 60 61 NA NA .29 7.5 51 51 .25 8.5 48 45 NA NA NA NA NA .40 36 NA NA NA NA .46 .15 41 38 .42 .25 38 45 .69 .62 58 70 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA .58 .33 50 51 NA NA .71 .54 60 65 .42 .25 38 45 NA NA NA NA .10 35 NA .20 NA .70 .40 45 59 55 .07 11.2 .75 .25 35 28 63 45 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 51...
... 4.1 2.3 1.1 1.7 1.8 .07 .05 .07 .05 61 63 57 62 59 020. 2.4 1.5 1.0 1.0 1.2 .10 .09 .10 .07 44 48 56 45 52 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 52...
... 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 a 10.
From page 53...
... .14 .11 .06 .10 .08 .05 .09 .07 .08 .07 .08 .07 .11 .09 .10 .08 .08 .04 .06 .06 0.7 -0.7 36 32 0.9 0.7 39 48 0.8 1.5 38 55 1.0 1.6 44 56 1.7 2.1 62 62 — (11) · 09 e 06 .07 .07 .08 .06 .07 .08 .06 .06 .08 .05 .08 .07 .09 .07 .09 .06 .07 .05 .10 .09 .06 .11 .11 .09 .06 .10 .09 .09 .06 .10 .08 .06 .07 .07 .06 .08 .05 NOTE: On the first are reported; on the second line values are reported in standardized form, with mean = 50 and standard deviation a 10.
From page 54...
... 54 TABLE 4.2 Summary Statistics Describing Each Program Measure -- Classics 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 11 4 6 8 8 9 10 11 12 12 16 Std Value 35 50 10 38 43 43 46 48 51 53 53 64 02 Raw Value 35 10 7 3 4 6 7 8 9 11 13 15 Std Value 35 50 10 40 42 45 46 48 49 52 55 58 03 Raw Value 3S 17 10 5 8 11 13 15 16 18 25 30 Std Value 35 50 10 38 41 44 46 48 49 51 58 63 Program Graduates 04 Raw Value 16 .28 .14 .08 .17 .20 .23 .25 .28 .29 .31 .44 Std Value 16 50 10 36 42 44 46 48 50 51 52 61 05 Raw Value 14 7.7 1.6 10.9 9.0 8.4 8.0 7.8 7.5 6.5 6.0 6.0 Std Value 14 50 10 30 42 46 48 49 51 57 60 60 06 Raw Value 16 .58 .13 .39 .42 .45 .53 .58 .63 .67 .70 .73 Std Value 16 50 10 35 38 40 46 50 54 57 59 62 07 Raw Value 16 .32 .14 .13 .20 .21 .25 .25 .31 .40 .46 .52 Std Value 16 50 10 36 41 42 45 45 49 56 60 64 Survey Results 08 Raw Value 35 2.9 1.0 1.4 1.9 2.3 2.6 2.8 3.2 3.6 3.8 4.1 Std Value 35 50 10 35 40 44 47 49 53 57 59 62 09 Raw Value 35 1.6 .5 .9 1.0 1.2 1.5 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.0 2.3 Std Value 35 50 10 36 38 42 48 50 54 58 58 63 10 Raw Value 35 .9 .2 .7 .7 .8 .9 .9 1.0 1.1 1.1 1.2 Std Value 35 50 10 40 40 44 49 49 54 59 59 63 11 Raw Value 35 1.2 .4 .7 .8 1.0 1.1 1.3 1.4 1.4 1.6 1.7 Std Value 35 50 10 35 38 44 46 52 54 54 60 62 University Library 12 Raw Value 31 1.0 1.0 -.4 -.1 .4 .8 .9 1.1 1.6 1.8 2.0 Std Value 31 50 10 36 39 44 48 49 52 57 59 61 NOTE: Standardized values reported in the preceding table have been computed of the mean and standard deviation and not the rounded values reported from exact values here.
From page 55...
... 55 TABLE 4.3 Intercorrelations Among Program Measures on 35 Programs in Classics Measure 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 Program Size 01 .63 .64 .04 -.30 .45 .49 .81 .80 .52 .71 .69 02 .58 -.05 -.03 .21 .25 .66 .72 .07 .61 .44 03 -.38 -.12 .18 .32 .65 .66 .28 .61 .53 Program Graduates 04 .29 .38 .49 .10 .17 -.20 .14 .27 05 -.02 .21 .18 .14. -.05 .26 -.29 06 .70 .34 .44 .24 .29 .59 07 .64 .69 .21 .48 .71 Survey Results 08 .96 .31 .95 .59 09 .30 .88 .59 10 .25 .33 11 .45 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 56...
... O O +/++++++++++++++++++++++++/++++++++++++++++++++++++/++++++++++++++++++++++++/++++++++++++++++++++++++/ 1 4 9 16 25 Measure 01 (square root scale)
From page 57...
... r ~ .76 O O +/+++++++++++++++/+++++++++++++++/+++++++++++++++/+++++++++++++++/+++++++++++++++/+++++++++++++++/ 1 4 9 16 25 36 49 Measure 02 (square root scale)
From page 58...
... 58 TABLE 4.4 Characteristics of Survey Participants in Classics Respondents N Field of Specialization Classics 93 93 Other/Unknown 7 7 Faculty Rank Professor 47 47 Associate Professor 32 32 Assistant Professor 21 21 Year of Highest Degree Pre-1950 8 8 1950-59 17 17 1960-69 39 39 Post-1969 35 35 Unknown 1 1 Evaluator Selection Nominated by Institution 79 79 Other 21 21 Survey Form With Faculty Names 88 88 Without Names 12 12 Total Evaluators 100 100
From page 59...
... indicate a confidence interval of +1.5 standard errors around the reported mean (x) of each program.


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.