| Author | Post |
|---|
Descartes
Super Moderator
|
Posted: Sat Feb 3rd, 2007 03:31 pm |
|
Unlike ratings that use reputation based on faculty surveys about the relative strengths of departments, these ratings are primarily based on measures of publication frequency and number of citations in other publications (under the premise that the more publications that cite a given work, the more important that work is).
http://www.academicanalytics.com/
These have some surprises in them and, as is to be expected, are quite controversial.
|
Daaaad
Member
| Joined: | Sat Jun 3rd, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 104 |
| Mana: |    |
|
Posted: Sat Feb 3rd, 2007 03:46 pm |
|
No kidding about the surprises.
But the list does appear to be based on objective measures. Nevertheless, I'll bet there are more than a few academics and administrators with their shorts in a knot about these lists. To which, I'll give them some solace from Disraeli: "lies, damned lies and statistics."
Last edited on Sat Feb 3rd, 2007 03:48 pm by Daaaad
|
Descartes
Super Moderator
|
Posted: Sat Feb 3rd, 2007 04:07 pm |
|
There have been questions raised about the accuracy of some of their results. For example, they might have omitted some researchers who work closely with given departments but are actually listed under other departments in their institutions. In some cases they might have relied on out-of-date member lists, etc.
And, of course, there is the question of whether or not this is the best measure of faculty quality. It doesn't necessarily get at breadth of interest across a department. It might be inordinately affected by staffs with many younger members, who haven't had time to build their publications lists, or by staffs with more senior members, whose publications might have decreased in recent years but whom still make valuable intellectual contributions via informal discussions and criticisms. And some of those more senior members are often expected to make administrative contributions to both their departments and their institutions (some one has to do this work) which decreases their research contributions but not necessarily the "strength" of their department.
Finally, it isn't crystal clear that grad students in all disciplines (and, even more so, undergraduates) are always best served by faculty who are spending time writing and researching but not teaching. Still, as a measure of intellectual productivity in institutions where productivity is supposed to be primary, these are very interesting results.
|
mackinaw
Member
| Joined: | Mon Mar 6th, 2006 |
| Location: | Michigan |
| Posts: | 784 |
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Sat Feb 3rd, 2007 06:31 pm |
|
We are laughing and crying at these new rankings. My university is said to have the strongest architecture program in the country. Only problem: we don't have an architecture program.
This ranking will remain controversial because it's just too off the wall, and it's just a money making operation.
Currently in the works is another version of the National Academy of Sciences/National Research Council (NAS/NRC) rankings of doctoral programs. At this time, however, it's not certain how much the NAS/NRC will do rankings as such, or rather just provide information about programs (size, publications by faculty, and so on). That's controversial, too. The last version of this, which appeared in 1996 was, in my judgment, pretty useful for identifying relatively strong and weak programs; but it relied, as most rankings of graduate programs do, on reputations (surveys of experts).
Reputations have some meaning and do tend to reflect the visibility of the faculty (reputations correlate positively, for example, with the frequency with which faculty research is cited -- more so than with the number of publications as such, which is what AcademicAnalytics mistakenly uses). But they are also contaminated by "halo effects" and other biases that keep the rankings of individual departments from being independent of extraneous factors.
I'm writing this note while sitting in my dean's conference room reading promotion and tenure files in my college. (Procrastinating here, in other words.) And I know enough to look beyond lists of publications to try to find evidence of scholarly quality, impact, and peer recognition. This includes citations to the work and other signs of recognition of achievement.
Last edited on Sat Feb 3rd, 2007 06:38 pm by mackinaw
|
Descartes
Super Moderator
|
Posted: Sat Feb 3rd, 2007 06:50 pm |
|
Hmmm. I did notice that MSU has a Department of Landscape Architecture. I wonder if that accounts for the datapoints? Anyway, an excellent example of how numbers can lead you astray.
Still, professors, in my experience, are just as liable to be swayed by their allegiances, affiliations, and peers as are anyone else, making reputation-based surveys suspect, too. But I suppose if you want a job in a field, you'll want to know what the prevailing opinion is, justified or not.
|
mackinaw
Member
| Joined: | Mon Mar 6th, 2006 |
| Location: | Michigan |
| Posts: | 784 |
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Sat Feb 3rd, 2007 07:15 pm |
|
Landscape Architecture: that is an outstanding program.
I agree that peer review has its biases, as I mentioned. But it correlates fairly highly with peer citations, which is, I believe, much less a matter of fashion and group-think than general peer assessments. Even this indicator (citations) isn't perfect, but it's a whole lot better than mere publication counts, since the latter have a huge amount of dross in them.
Later: I'm going to try to upload a .pdf file that illustrates the lack of correlation between publication numbers and "reputation" in contrast to the correlation between citations and reputation. Don't know whether this will work -- file may be too big. Result: too big, though it's just a few pages long. Anyone interested can send me a message here and I'll try to send it to them via email to a separate email address that they may provide. The article has a statistical analysis of NAS/NRC reputational rankings in one discipline, and shows that overall, raw publication numbers don't matter to reputation, though "quality publications" (in high impact journals) do matter.
Last edited on Sat Feb 3rd, 2007 09:15 pm by mackinaw
|
CarolynLawrence
Administrator
| Joined: | Sun Mar 5th, 2006 |
| Location: | USA |
| Posts: | 3279 |
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Sun Feb 4th, 2007 02:20 am |
|
Mack, Would you mind sending me a copy of the file? My email is CZLAW@aol.com
I think this is a fascinating topic, but how would you say faculty reputation/publication relates to undergraduate teaching/experience? And, my academic friends already feel enormous "publish or perish" pressure. How do you think this sort of independent research/evaluation will add to that?
Last edited on Sun Feb 4th, 2007 02:22 am by CarolynLawrence
|
mackinaw
Member
| Joined: | Mon Mar 6th, 2006 |
| Location: | Michigan |
| Posts: | 784 |
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Sun Feb 4th, 2007 04:49 am |
|
Hi Carolyn, I sent it.
There remain many questions about the relation between department or faculty quality rankings and the quality of undergraduate programs or teaching. One obvious question is that those graduate (doctoral or professional school) rankings don't tell us anything about the many colleges that don't have doctoral programs. And so, for example, when such rankings come out you hear discussions among prospective undergrads about the relative strength of the economics departments of Stanford, Chicago, MIT, NYU, etc. But who's to say that undergrad econ is taught any better at those universities than at, say, Swarthmore or Carleton (take a look at PhD yields from the LAC's and you can learn something, IMO).
I think nobody has come up with an effective evaluation of the quality of undergrad education at any college or university, let alone separately by department/major, or in a way that allows comparison across colleges.
I'm a fan of liberal arts colleges though I teach at a large university. But I think kids can get a great undergrad education even at research-intensive large universities if they make smart choices of courses, get into classes that are smaller or encourage more research and writing or experiential learning, any number of other ways. Find honors courses, residential programs, and the like. Also I think some inspirational teachers are also known as outstanding researchers, so there's no necessary trade-off between teaching and research; nonetheless, I think there generally is such a trade-off, especially at universities.
(There's that old joke about Berkeley faculty -- though not really just about them -- that Berkeley faculty can only be successful in at most two out of the following three things: research, teaching, and staying married.)
Last edited on Sun Feb 4th, 2007 01:59 pm by mackinaw
|
CarolynLawrence
Administrator
| Joined: | Sun Mar 5th, 2006 |
| Location: | USA |
| Posts: | 3279 |
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Sun Feb 4th, 2007 04:43 pm |
|
Mackinaw,
As usual, you put things into clear perspective. I always appreciate your well-considered contributions here. Thank you.
|
DesperateDad
Member
| Joined: | Tue Mar 14th, 2006 |
| Location: | California USA |
| Posts: | 840 |
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Sun Feb 4th, 2007 05:15 pm |
|
mack:
I guess Glenn Seaborg was the exception that proved the rule. Unlike many nobelists that 'don't find time for undergrads,' Glenn purposely chose to teach Frosh chem for many years. Even after he 'retired' from daily teaching, he still dropped by the frosh chem labs and offered to "help" -- of course, the 18 year-olds just stared at the only living-person-with-his-name-on-the-Periodic-Table like deer in headlights. By Glenn's thinking, if he couldn't get Freshmen excited about Chem, his second love (his wife of many years was #1), then no one could. 
|
mackinaw
Member
| Joined: | Mon Mar 6th, 2006 |
| Location: | Michigan |
| Posts: | 784 |
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Sun Feb 4th, 2007 05:58 pm |
|
Good story. My brother had the privilege of taking his frosh physics at Caltech from Richard Feynman. Physics I was required of all students, and thus was a "large lecture" by Caltech standards (ca. 200 students).
|
CarolynLawrence
Administrator
| Joined: | Sun Mar 5th, 2006 |
| Location: | USA |
| Posts: | 3279 |
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Mon Feb 5th, 2007 02:23 am |
|
mackinaw wrote: Good story. My brother had the privilege of taking his frosh physics at Caltech from Richard Feynman. Physics I was required of all students, and thus was a "large lecture" by Caltech standards (ca. 200 students).
Oh God. My son will die of jealousy when I tell him this. He has read all of Feynman's books, and constantly mentions tidbits of "Feynman knowledge" at the dinner table. What a hoot.Last edited on Mon Feb 5th, 2007 02:24 am by CarolynLawrence
|
GladHi
Member
| Joined: | Wed Jun 21st, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 41 |
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Mon Feb 5th, 2007 03:00 am |
|
Carolyn,
My older D would have the same jealous reaction (I know I did). She is a huge Feynman fan, and she is an English major, not science. My husband and I have also read some of his writings, and I recommend them highly. Feynman is such an incredible individual, it doesn't matter whether you understand any science at all, his stories are entertaining as well as educational.
|
bc
Member
| Joined: | Fri Dec 29th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 13 |
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Mon Feb 5th, 2007 04:05 am |
|
mack But I think kids can get a great undergrad education even at research-intensive large universities if they make smart choices of courses, get into classes that are smaller or encourage more research and writing or experiential learning, any number of other ways.
I could not agree more.
My younger D attends a very large, very public, and very non-selective university. In other words, she goes to a school that is not likely to impress anyone who's reading this. But by pure accident, she, discovered a school-within-a-school that limits class size, has an interdisciplinary curriculum, and bases its assessments on acquisition of competencies rather than performance on exams.
Long story short, my previoulsy passion-less D has experienced academic success and has had more than one professor she perceives as an advocate. She now has well-defined undergraduate and graduate study plans and I'm fairly confident that she'll follow through.
A few years ago, had you told me that my D would be on the campus that she is now residing, I would have conisdered myself a dismal failure as a parent. Today, I simply consider myself grateful
|
scoop
Member
| Joined: | Wed Oct 4th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 563 |
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Mon Feb 5th, 2007 11:07 am |
|
bc,
I loved hearing about your daughters success at her school. When my oldest daughter was in first and second grade she was assigned to attend a mid-point school a little farther from home. At least 50% of children were bussed in from a low income area. We were living in a brand new development and we were the only family that chose to attend our "neighborhood" school. Every other family chose to send their children elsewhere until the new local elementary school was built. My daughter had the best two years of education in that school and I felt she was challenged more academically than she was at the school we were eventually transferred to.
I believe that a good education can be found most anywhere if the educators are passionate about teaching and the student is interested in learning. What did your daughter decide she was most interested in?
|
bc
Member
| Joined: | Fri Dec 29th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 13 |
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Mon Feb 5th, 2007 04:58 pm |
|
Her current game plan is to finish an interdisciplinary degree in family studies and then move into a grdaute program in education in which she can earn licensure in early chidhood education, early childhood special education and English as a Second Language. Keeping all my fingers and toes crossed that she doesn't stray one inch off that path.
|
mathmom
Member
| Joined: | Fri Apr 14th, 2006 |
| Location: | USA |
| Posts: | 260 |
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Thu Feb 8th, 2007 03:26 pm |
|
I never got to take Physics with Feynman, but I did see him in a production of Lady's Not for Burning.
|
CarolynLawrence
Administrator
| Joined: | Sun Mar 5th, 2006 |
| Location: | USA |
| Posts: | 3279 |
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Thu Feb 8th, 2007 06:47 pm |
|
bc,
I love stories like your daughter's because it puts in perspective that this isn't at all about the "name" on the diploma, but the education that goes into getting the diploma that matters.
|
Current time is 06:23 pm | |
|
