Assessing research-doctorate programs : a methodology study
- Responsibility
- 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, Policy and Global Affairs Division, National Research Council of the National Academies.
- Language
- English. English.
- Digital
- data file.
- Imprint
- Washington, D.C. : National Academies Press, ©2003.
- Physical description
- 1 online resource (xi, 153 pages)
More options
Description
Creators/Contributors
Contents/Summary
- Bibliography
- Includes bibliographical references (pages 65-66).
- Contents
-
- 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.
- (source: Nielsen Book Data)
- Summary
-
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.
(source: Nielsen Book Data)
Subjects
- Subject
- Research > United States > Evaluation.
- Doctor of philosophy degree > United States > Evaluation.
- Science > Study and teaching (Higher) > United States > Evaluation.
- Engineering > Study and teaching (Higher) > United States > Evaluation.
- Humanities > Study and teaching (Higher) > United States > Evaluation.
- Education, Professional.
- Health Care Evaluation Mechanisms.
- Science.
- Quality of Health Care.
- Natural Science Disciplines.
- Education.
- Health Services Administration.
- Analytical, Diagnostic and Therapeutic Techniques and Equipment
- Health Care Quality, Access, and Evaluation
- Disciplines and Occupations
- Delivery of Health Care.
- Anthropology, Education, Sociology and Social Phenomena
- Evaluation Studies as Topic.
- Program Evaluation.
- Investigative Techniques
- Research.
- Evaluation Studies
- Universities.
- Biological Science Disciplines.
- Education, Graduate.
- United States.
- SCIENCE > Research & Methodology.
- Doctor of philosophy degree > Evaluation.
- Engineering > Study and teaching (Higher) > Evaluation.
- Humanities > Study and teaching (Higher) > Evaluation.
- Research > Evaluation.
- Science > Study and teaching (Higher) > Evaluation.
- United States.
- Onderzoeksprojecten.
- Beoordeling.
- Recherche.
- Évaluation.
- Doctorat.
- Sciences (Disciplines scientifiques)
- Ingénierie.
- Recherche universitaire.
- États-Unis.
Bibliographic information
- Publication date
- 2003
- ISBN
- 0309527082 (electronic bk.)
- 9780309527088 (electronic bk.)
- 1280179465
- 9781280179464
- 9786610179466
- 6610179468
- 030909058X (pbk.)
- 9780309090582 (pbk.)
