Assessing Research-Doctorate Programs
A Methodology Study
Published on 19. November 2003
Book
Paperback/Softback
164 pages
978-0-309-09058-2 (ISBN)
Description
How should we assess and present information about the quality of research-doctorate programs? In recommending that the 1995 NRC rankings in Assessing the Quality of Research-Doctorate Programs: Continuity and Change be updated as soon as possible, this study presents an improved approach to doctoral program assessment which will be useful to administrators, faculty, and others with an interest in improving the education of Ph.D.s in the United States. It reviews the methodology of the 1995 NRC rankings and recommends changes, including the collection of new data about Ph.D. students, additional data about faculty, and new techniques to present data on the qualitative assessment of doctoral program reputation. It also recommends revision of the taxonomy of fields from that used in the 1995 rankings.
More details
Language
English
Place of publication
Washington
United States
Target group
Professional and scholarly
Product notice
Paperback (trade)
Unsewn / adhesive bound
Dimensions
Height: 277 mm
Width: 217 mm
Thickness: 11 mm
Weight
490 gr
ISBN-13
978-0-309-09058-2 (9780309090582)
Copyright in bibliographic data and cover images is held by Nielsen Book Services Limited or by the publishers or by their respective licensors: all rights reserved.
Schweitzer Classification
Persons
Jeremiah P. Ostriker and Charlotte V. Kuh, Editors, Assisted by James A. Voytuk, Committee to Examine the Methodology for the Assessment of Research-Doctorate Programs, National Research Council
Content
1 Front Matter; 2 Executive Summary; 3 1. Introduction; 4 2. How the Study Was Conducted; 5 3. Taxonomy; 6 4. Quantitative Measures; 7 5. Student Education and Outcomes; 8 6. Reputation and Data Presentation; 9 7. General Conclusions and Recommendations; 10 8. References; 11 Appendix A: Biographical Sketches: Committee and Panels; 12 Appendix B: Program-Initiation Consultation with Organizations; 13 Appendix C: Meetings and Participants; 14 Appendix D: Sample Questionnaires; 15 Appendix E: Taxonomy of Fields and Their Subfields; 16 Appendix F: Fields for Ph.D.s Granted During 1996-2001; 17 Appendix G: Technical and Statistical Techniques