How to Understand the Ratings

How to Understand the Ratings

Rankings will be reported in ranges and will show the 5th and 95th percentile values.

Each program will receive a range of rankings for 5 types of illustrative rankings:

Two Overall Rankings

According to measures based on faculty input on a field by field basis:

  1. direct ranking (S)
  2. regression-derived ranking (R)

Based on 20 variables:

  • Data provided by institutions
  • Enrollment in 2006
  • Numbers of faculty in 2006
  • Female faculty
  • International students
  • U-MR faculty
  • International students
  • Number of Ph.D.s in 2003-2006
  • % of a cohort completing in 6 years and in 8 years
  • Median time to degree
  • Student funding
  • Total enrollment
  • Female enrollment
  • URM enrollment
  • GRE score (if required)
  • Student “treatment” variables
  • Data obtained by NRC
  • Faculty grants
  • Faculty honors and awards
  • Faculty publications
  • Faculty citations (except for Humanities fields)
  • Student placement

Three Dimensional Rankings

  1. Student Treatment and Outcomes
    • Number of Ph.D.s
    • Percent receiving financial support in first year
    • Median time to degree
    • Percent of entering cohort(s) completing within six years (eight for the humanities)
    • Percent of graduates with definite employment or postdoc plans (from NSF)
  2. Diversity of the Academic Environment
    • Faculty:
      • Gender diversity
      • Racial/ethnic diversity
    • Students
      • Gender diversity
      • Racial/ethnic diversity
      • International diversity
  3. Research activity of Program Faculty
    • Publications per faculty member going back to 1981
    • Citations per publication (except for humanities fields) in 2005-6 with pubs going back to 1981
    • Percent of faculty with grants (from NRC faculty questionnaire)
    • Honors and awards per faculty member (from honorary and scholarly societies)

Visit the National Academies website for current information on the methodology for the NRC study. A revised report is expected September 20.

Questions to Guide Your Interpretation of the Ratings

  • Each program has its own weights. Do these put you at an advantage or disadvantage?
  • Look at variables with largest coefficients. These have the largest effect on the range of ratings.
  • Compare your variable values with programs in other institutions.
  • Are there areas of strength in the ratings (e.g., program is strong in student completion rates)?
  • Have there been changes in your program since 2005-2006 (e.g., new faculty, revisions to graduate program)? Have you already identified changes to be made?
  • Are there other demonstrations of program strength (assessments by professional organizations, recent faculty honors and awards) that may support or modify the NRC assessment?
  • Does your program have a unique focus or strengths that should be featured in a discussion of program quality?
  • Remember that ratings are one measure of quality among many and cannot account for the full range of strengths and approaches in graduate education.