Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-dfsvx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T11:35:37.519Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Rising Tide Lifts All Boats: Political Science Department Reputation and the Reputation of the University

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2013

Robert C. Lowry  and
Brian D. Silver
Robert C. Lowry
Affiliation:
Michigan State University
Brian D. Silver
Affiliation:
Michigan State University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The publication of the latest rating of doctoral programs by the National Research Council (NRC 1995) has sparked great interest among university faculties. For some, the results vindicated years of focused efforts to improve their department's capacity, performance, and image. For others, it generated frustration because of the small change in scores from previous NRC rankings. And for still others, the NRC report occasioned soul-searching or defensive rationalization, including complaints that the reputational rankings did not reflect the “true” quality of the faculty (Magner 1995).

The NRC study conducted surveys of faculty in each of 41 scientific fields to learn about each doctoral-granting faculty's reputation for scholarly quality (93Q) and for the effectiveness of their doctoral program (93E). In addition, the NRC gathered information about the performance of departments (number of publications, citations to the publications of faculty, and external funding) as well as some other characteristics of the faculty (number of faculty, number of full professors) and doctoral student enrollments (number of students enrolled, number of Ph.D.'s granted in recent years). With these data, it is possible to explore the extent to which reputations are responsive to the performance of the faculty as well as to other department characteristics.

Type
Research Article
Information
PS: Political Science & Politics , Volume 29 , Issue 2 , June 1996 , pp. 161 - 167
Copyright
Copyright © The American Political Science Association 1996

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

We would like to thank Mark Jones, Robert Jackman, Paul Abramson, and Randy Siverson for their comments, Kyle Jen for research assistance, and the Political Institutions and Public Choice Program at Michigan State University for financial support.

References

American Chamber of Commerce Researchers Association [ACCRA]. 1992. ACCRA Cost of Living Index. Fall.Google Scholar
Jackman, Robert W., and Siverson, Randolph M. 1996. “Rating the Rating: An Analysis of the National Research Council's Appraisal of Political Science Ph.D. Programs.” PS: Political Science Politics 29 (June): 155–60.Google Scholar
Lowry, Robert C. 1995. “Pricing Policies for Public Higher Education: Do Governance Systems Matter?” Manuscript, Michigan State University.Google Scholar
Magner, Denise. 1995. “Ratings War: A New Ranking of Doctoral Programs Spurs a Flurry of Departmental Damage Control.” Chronicle of Higher Education, October 27, A19.Google Scholar
National Research Council [NRC]. 1995. Research-Doctorate Programs in the United States: Continuity and Change. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
Pindyck, Robert S., and Rubenfeld, Daniel. 1981. Econometric Models & Economic Forecasts. 2d ed. New York: McGraw-Hill Publishing Company.Google Scholar
Research Associates of Washington. 1994. Higher Education Revenues and Expenditures: Institutional Data 1991–92. Washington, DC.Google Scholar