Skip to main content

Currently Skimming:

1 Origins of Study and Selection of Programs
Pages 1-14

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 1...
... During the past two decades increasing attention has been given to describing and measuring the quality of programs in graduate education. It is evident that the assessment of graduate programs is highly important for university administrators and faculty, for graduate students and prospective graduate students, for policymakers in state and national organizations, and for private and public funding 1
From page 2...
... The widespread criticisms of ratings in graduate education were carefully considered in the planning of this study. At the outset consideration was given to whether a national assessment of graduate programs should be undertaken at this time and, if so, what methods should be employed.
From page 3...
... The Educational Testing Service, with the sponsorship of the Council of Graduate Schools in the United States and the Graduate Record Examinations Board, has recently developed a set of procedures to assist institutions in evaluating their own graduate programs .4 3Council on Postsecondary Accreditation, The Balance Wheel for Accreditation. Washinoton.
From page 4...
... J Andersen, A Rating of Graduate Programs, American Council on Education, Washington, D.C., 1970.
From page 5...
... As long as our most prestigious source of information about postsecondary education is a vague popularity contest, the resultant ignorance will continue to provide a cover for the repetitious acing ~ ~ ~ At: ~ At, ~ ~~, V- ~ - ~~ _= 11lV~C_ e e e e All the attempts to change higher education will ultimately be strangled by the "legitimate" evaluative processes that have already programmed a single set of responses from the start.9 A number of other criticisms have been leveled at reputational rankings of graduate programs.~° First' such studies inherently reflect perceptions that may be several years out of date and do not take into account recent changes in a program. Second, the ratings of individual programs are likely to be influenced by the overall reputation of the university -- i.e., an institutional "halo effect." Also, a disproportionately large fraction of the evaluators are graduates of and/or faculty members in the largest programs, which may bias the survey results.
From page 6...
... Clark, Harnett, and Baird, in a pilot study 2 of graduate programs in chemistry, history, and psychology, identified as many as 30 possible measures significant for assessing the quality of graduate education. Glowers 3 has ranked engineering schools according to the total amount of research spending and the number of graduates listed in Who's Who in Engineering.
From page 7...
... On the one hand, Pa substantial majority of the Conference [participants believed] that the earlier assessments of graduate education have received wide and important use: by students and their advisors, by the institutions of higher education as aids to planning and the allocation of educational functions, as a check on unwarranted claims of excellence, and in social science research." 6 On the other hand, the Conference participants recognized that a new study assessing the quality of graduate education "would be conducted and received in a very different atmosphere than were the earlier Cartter and Roose-Andersen reports.
From page 8...
... (2) The multidimensional approach represents an explicit recognition of the limitations of studies that make assessments solely in terms of ratings of perceived quality provided by peers -- the so-called reputational ratings.
From page 9...
... Initially the committee planned to include no more than five or six humanities disciplines in the assessment. However, because of the large number of disciplines within the humanities and because of the particular interests in this area on the part of a principal sponsor of the study the committee decided to assess programs in as many as nine disciplines: art history, classics, English language and literature, French language and literature, German language and literature, linguistics, music, philosophy, and Spanish language and literature.
From page 10...
... Differences in field definitions account for discrepancies between the ETS and NRC data. 2 Data from ETS include doctorates in Italian languages and literatures.
From page 11...
... : Art History -- 5 or more doctorates Classics -- 3 or more doctorates English Language & Literature -- 13 or more doctorates French Language & Literature -- 5 or more doctorates German Language & Literature -- 4 or more doctorates Linguistics -- 5 or more doctorates Music -- 9 or more doctorates Philosophy -- 6 or more doctorates Spanish Language & Literature -- 5 or more doctorates A list of the nominated programs at each institution was then sent to a designated individual (usually the graduate dean) who had been appointed by the university president to serve as study coordinator for the institution.
From page 12...
... m e number of programs evaluated varies considerably by discipline. A total of 106 English programs have been included in the study; in linguistics and classics fewer than one-third this number have been inTABLE 1.2 Number of Programs Evaluated in Each Discipline and the Total FY1976-80 Doctoral Awards from mese Programs Discipline Art History 41 Classics 35 English Language ~ Literature 106 French Language & Literature 58 German Language & Literature 48 Linguistics 35 Music 53 Philosophy 77 Spanish Language & Literature 69 Programs FY1976-80 Doctorates*
From page 13...
... m e committee wishes to emphasize that there are limitations associated with each of the measures and that none of the measures should be regarded as a precise indicator of the quality of a program in educating humanists for careers in research. me reader is strongly urged to consider the descriptive material presented in Chapter II before attempting to interpret the program evaluations reported in subsequent chapters.


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.