Research in Higher Education

, Volume 14, Issue 4, pp 305–320 | Cite as

Ranking academic departments: Empirical findings and a theoretical perspective

  • David E. Drew
  • Ronald Karpf
Article

Abstract

Evaluations of academic departments through peer review rankings have assumed importance in decision making by government officials, university administrators, and department chairpersons. This article reviews the history of these highly publicized rankings and subsequent attempts to identify empirical correlates of the ratings. New findings are presented which indicate that the ACE rankings can be predicted almost perfectly (r=.91) with one measure—departmental rate of publication in highly cited journals. The implications of this finding are discussed, since it both supports the notion of peer rankings but also reveals some inherent weaknesses in the academic assessment process. Finally, it is suggested that concepts from social stratification theory can illuminate our understanding of evaluation in higher education.

Keywords

High Education Decision Making Social Stratification Education Research Empirical Finding 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Astin, A. Undergraduate achievement and institutional ‘excellence.’Science 1968,16 661–668.Google Scholar
  2. Bayer, A. and Folger, J. Some correlates of a citation measure of productivity in science.Sociology of Education 1966,39 381–390.Google Scholar
  3. Beyer, J. and Snipper, R. Objective versus subjective indicators of quality in graduate education.Sociology of Education 1974,47 511–557.Google Scholar
  4. Carter, G. M..Peer review, citations and biomedical research policy: NIH grants to medical school faculty. Santa Monica, CA.: The Rand Corporation, 1974.Google Scholar
  5. Cartter, A.An assessment of quality in graduate education. Washington, D.C.: American Council on Education, 1966.Google Scholar
  6. Cole, J. R., and Cole, S. Scientific output and recognition: a study in the operation of the reward system in science.American Sociological Review 1967,32 377–390.Google Scholar
  7. Cole, J. R., and Cole, S. Measuring the quality of sociological research: problems in the use of the science citation index.American Sociologist 1971,6 23–30.Google Scholar
  8. Cole, J. R., and Cole, S. The Ortega Hypothesis,Science 1972,178 368–375.Google Scholar
  9. Cole, J. R., and Cole, S.Social stratification in science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1974.Google Scholar
  10. Coleman, J., et al.Equality of educational opportunity. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1966.Google Scholar
  11. Crane, D.Invisible colleges: diffusion of knowledge in scientific communities. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1972.Google Scholar
  12. Dolan, W.The ranking game: the power of the academic elite. Lincoln, Neb.: Evaluation of Higher Education Committee of the Study Commission on Undergraduate Education and the Education of Teachers, 1976.Google Scholar
  13. Drew, D. E.Science development: an evaluation study. Washington, D.C. National Academy of Sciences, 1975.Google Scholar
  14. Drew, D. E., and Karpf, R. Evaluating science departments: a new index, Santa Monica, CA: The Rand Corporation, 1975.Google Scholar
  15. Elton, C., and Rodgers, S. Physics department ratings: another evaluation.Science 1971,184 565–568.Google Scholar
  16. Hagstrom, W. Inputs, outputs, and the prestige of science departments.Sociology of Education 1971,44 375–397.Google Scholar
  17. Hartnett, R. T., Clark, M. J. and L. L. Baird, Reputational ratings of doctoral programs.Science 1978,199 1310–1314.Google Scholar
  18. Inhaber, H. Is there a pecking order in physics?Physics Today 1974,27 39–43.Google Scholar
  19. Jencks, C., et al.Inequality: a reassessment of the effect of family and schooling in America. New York: Basic Books, 1972.Google Scholar
  20. Kuhn, T.Structure of scientific revolutions. International Encyclopedia of Science, Vol. II, No. 2. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1970.Google Scholar
  21. Pirsig, R.Zen and the art of motorcycle maintenance. New York: William Morrow & Co., 1974.Google Scholar
  22. Price, D. J. de S. and Beaver, D. de B. Collaboration in an invisible college.American Psychologist 1966,21 1011–1018.Google Scholar
  23. Robey, J. S. Political science departments: reputations versus productivity.P S: Political Science 1979,12 202–209.Google Scholar
  24. Roose, K. and Andersen, C.A rating of graduate programs. Washington, D.C.: American Council on Education, 1970.Google Scholar
  25. Warner, W. and Lunt, P.The social life of a modern community. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1941.Google Scholar
  26. Williams, R., and Ware, J. An extended visit with Dr. Fox: validity of student ratings after repeated exposure to a lecturer.American Educational Research Journal 1977,14 449–457.Google Scholar
  27. Zoellner, R. Are teaching professors automatically ‘losers’?Chronicle of Higher Education, 1976,40.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Agathon Press, Inc. 1981

Authors and Affiliations

  • David E. Drew
    • 1
  • Ronald Karpf
    • 2
  1. 1.Claremont Graduate SchoolUSA
  2. 2.Insurance Institute for Highway SafetyUSA

Personalised recommendations