Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 71
v
Geography Programs
In this chapter 49 research-doctorate programs in geography are
assessed. These programs, according to the information supplied by
their universities, have accounted for 762 doctoral degrees awarded
during the FY1976-80 period.) ~ ~~ ~ ~
~ ~ _ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .
On the average, 22 full-time and part-
clme students Intending to earn doctorates were enrolled in a program
in December 1980, with an average faculty size of 13 members.2 Four
programs were initiated since 1970, and no two programs are located in
the same university. In addition to the 49 institutions represented
in this discipline, another 3 were initially identified as meeting the
criteria3 for inclusion in the assessment:
Arizona State University--Tempe
Oklahoma State University--Stillwater
University of Pennsylvania
.
Geography programs at these three institutions have not been included
in the evaluations in this discipline, since in each case the study
coordinator either indicated that the institution did not at that time
have a research-doctorate program in geography or failed to provide
the information requested by the committee.
Before examining individual program results presented in Table 5.1,
the reader is urged to refer to Chapter II, in which each of the 16
~ Summary statistics de-
scribing every measure are given in Table 5.2. For nine of the mea-
measures user in the assessment is discussed.
data from the NRC's Survey of Earned Doctorates indicate that 728
research doctorates in geography were awarded by U.S. universities be-
tween FY1976 and FY1980. Since the NRC figure is based on field of
degree and not department, it may exclude some doctorates included in
the numbers reported by the institutional coordinators.
2 See the reported means for measures 03 and 01 in Table 5.2.
3As mentioned in Chapter I, the primary criterion for inclusion was
that a university had awarded at least 1 doctorate in geography during
the FY1976-78 period.
71
OCR for page 72
72
sores, data are reported for at least 43 of the 49 geography programs.
For measures 04-07, which pertain to characteristics of the program
graduates, data are presented for only approximately three-fourths of
the programs; the other fourth had too few graduates on which to base
statistics.4 As mentioned in Chapter II, data on the total university
expenditures for research (measure 14) are not available in geography.
With respect to measure 13, the fraction of faculty with research
grants from the Alcohol, Drug Abuse, and Mental Health Administration,
the National Institutes of Health, or the National Science Foundation,
and measure 18, the fraction of program faculty with one or more pub-
lished articles during the 1978-80 period, data are reported for ap-
proximately three-fourths of the geography programs.5
Intercorrelations among the 15 measures (Pearson product-moment
coefficients) are given in Table 5.3. Of particular note are the high
positive correlations of reputational survey ratings {08, 09) with both
the total number of 1978-80 articles by program faculty (measure 17)
and the total number of FY1976-80 program graduates (measure 023. Fig-
ure 5.1 illustrates the relation between the mean rating of the schol-
arly quality of faculty (measure 08) and the number of faculty members
(measure 01) for each of 49 programs in geography. Figure 5.2 plots
the mean rating of program effectiveness (measure 09) against the total
number of FY1976-80 program graduates (measure 021. Although in both
figures there is a significant positive correlation between program
size and reputational rating, it is quite apparent that some of the
smaller programs received high mean ratings and that some of the larger
programs received low mean ratings.
Table 5.4 describes the 106 faculty members who participated in the
evaluation of geography programs. These individuals constituted 71
percent of those asked to respond to the survey in this discipline and
17 percent of the faculty population in the 49 research-doctorate pro-
grams being evaluated.6 As mentioned in Chapter II, the timing and
circumstances of the survey of evaluators in geography differed from
the surveys of other disciplines since geography was added at a late
date to the list of disciplines to be included in the assessment; sur-
vey forms were mailed to geographers in September 1981. More than
three-fifths of the survey participants had earned their highest degree
prior to 1970, and a majority held the rank of full professor.
To assist the reader in interpreting results of the survey evalua-
tions, estimated standard errors have been computed for mean ratings
of the scholarly quality of faculty in 49 geography programs (and are
given in Table 5.1~. For each program the mean rating and an associ-
ated "confidence interval" of 1.5 standard errors are illustrated in
4As mentioned in Chapter II, data for measures 04-07 are not reported
if they are based on the survey responses of fewer than 10 FY1975-79
program graduates.
5Data for measures 13 and 18 are not reported for any programs that
had fewer than 10 faculty members.
6 See Table 2.3 in Chapter II.
OCR for page 73
73
Figure 5.3 (listed in order of highest to lowest mean rating). In com-
paring two programs, if their confidence intervals do not overlap, one
may conclude that there is a significant difference in their mean rat-
ings at a .05 level of significance.7 From this figure it is also
apparent that one should have somewhat more confidence in the accuracy
of the mean ratings of higher-rated programs than lower-rated programs.
This generalization results primarily from the fact that evaluators are
not as likely to be familiar with the less prestigious programs, and
consequently the mean ratings of these programs are usually based on
fewer survey responses.
7 See pp. 30-32 for a discussion of the interpretation of mean ratings
and associated confidence intervals.
OCR for page 74
74
TABLE 5.1 Program Measures (Raw and Standardized Values) in Geography
Characteristics of
Prog Program Size Program Graduates
No. University - Department/Academic Unit (01) (02) (03) (04) (05) (06) (07)
001. Arizona, University of-Tucson 11 1 12 NA NA NA NA
Geography and Regional Devel opment * 46 34 44
002. Boston University 13 5 23 NA NA NA NA
Geography 50 38 50
003. California, University of-Berkeley 13 29 36 .42 7.9 .74 .29
Geography 50 65 59 61 55 52 51
004. California, University of-Davis 8 5 18 NA NA NA NA
Geography 39 38 47
005. California, University of-Los Angeles 23 33 60 .31 8.1 .57 .29
Geography 71 69 74 54 54 39 51
006. California, University of-Riverside 5 10 8 .17 8.0 .58 .08
Earth Sciences 33 44 41 44 55 40 35
007. Chicago, University of 9 13 24 .43 10.5 .86 .43
Geography 41 4 7 51 62 3 7 60 62
008. Cincinnati, University of 8 11 12 .20 7.5 .50 .20
Geography 39 45 44 46 58 34 44
009. Clark University 21 37 37 .44 8.3 .94 .33
Geography 6 7 74 59 63 53 66 54
010. Colorado, University of 13 23 76 .15 6.8 .63 .26
Geography 50 5 8 84 43 63 43 49
011. Columbia University 12 9 39 NA NA NA NA
Geography 48 43 61
012. Denver, University of 5 4 2 NA NA NA NA
Geography 33 3 7 3 7
013. Florida, University of-Gainesville 18 12 14 .43 8.0 .53 .07
Geography 61 46 45 62 55 36 34
014. Georgia, University of-Athens 15 18 11 .17 8.8 .83 .33
Geography 54 53 43 44 49 5 8 54
015. Hawaii, University of 23 20 22 .13 12.5 .75 .13
Geography 71 55 50 41 23 52 3 8
016. Illinois, University-Urbana/Champaign 19 23 25 .39 7.6 .85 .52
Geography 63 58 52 59 57 60 69
017. Indiana State University-Terre Haute 19 7 23 .18 8.3 .55 .09
Geography 63 41 50 45 53 3 7 35
018. Indiana University-Bloomington 15 17 30 .00 7.5 .83 .33
Geography 54 52 55 32 58 58 54
019. Iowa, University of-Iowa City 10 -21 25 .15 7.1 .54 .23
Geography 43 56 52 43 61 3 7 46
020. Johns Hopkins University 4 18 35 .25 6.3 .83 .17
Geography and Environmental Engineering 31 53 58 50 67 58 41
* indicates program was initiated since 1970.
NOTE: On the first line of data for every program, raw values for each measure are reported;
on the second line values are reported in standardized form, with mean = 50 and
standard deviation = 10. "NA" indicates that the value for a measure is not available.
OCR for page 75
75
TABLE 5.1 Program Measures (Raw and Standardized Values) in Geography
University Research Published Survey Ratings
Prog Survey Results Library Support Articles Standard Error
No. (08) (09) (10) (11) (12) (13) (14) (17) (18) (08) (09) (10) (11)
001. 2.4 1.3 1.1 1.1 0.9 .09 NA 13 .55 .09 .08 .08 .06
46 44 53 46 56 46 46 52
002. 2.6 1.4 1.4 1.1 -0.4 .08 NA 18 .31 .10 .07 .08 .06
48 46 64 48 42 44 51 37
003. 4.2 2.4 1.0 1.6 2.2 .39 NA 23 .62 .09 .06 .07 .05
66 67 50 64 70 72 55 57
004. 2.3 1.3 1.1 0.9 0.6 NA NA 23 NA .10 .08 .06 .06
45 43 54 42 53 55
005. 4.0 2.2 1.3 1.6 2.0 .13 NA 42 .65 .09 .06 .06 .05
64 63 61 64 68 49 73 59
006. 1.5 1.1 0.6 0.8 -1.0 NA NA 2 NA .14 .10 .07 .07
36 3 8 39 39 35 36
007. 4.3 2.3 0.4 1.7 0.9 NA NA 30 NA .09 .06 .05 .05
67 64 32 67 56 62
008. 2.1 1.4 0.8 1.1 -0.2 NA NA 4 NA .10 .07 .07 .06
43 45 44 4 7 43 3 8
009. 3.8 2.2 1.0 1.6 NA .14 NA 22 .33 .09 .06 .06 .05
62 62 52 63 50 55 39
010. 3.0 1.8 1.3 1.2 -0.9 .39 NA 19 .46 .08 .07 .07 .05
53 54 61 51 37 72 52 47
011. 2.1 1.2 0.6 0.9 1.7 .08 NA 4 .25 .09 .07 .07 .07
42 42 39 43 65 45 3 8 33
012. 1.2 0.9 1.0 0.7 NA NA NA 5 NA .12 .10 .07 .07
32 35 51 35 39
013. 2.0 1.2 0.8 0.8 0.8 .06 NA 5 .22 .10 .08 .09 .07
41 42 44 38 55 42 39 32
014. 3.2 1.9 1.2 1.3 0.4 .13 NA 29 .80 .08 .07 .07 .06
55 55 5 8 53 51 49 61 69
015. 2.9 1.8 1.2 1.0 -0.1 .17 NA 27 .48 .10 .07 .06 .06
52 54 58 46 45 53 59 48
016. 3.4 2.0 1.6 1.5 2.0 .21 NA 37 .63 .08 .06 .07 .05
58 59 68 61 67 56 68 58
017. 1.6 1.0 1.0 0.7 NA .05 NA 13 .26 .12 .09 .07 .06
3 7 36 51 35 42 46 34
018. 2.9 1.8 1.3 1.2 0.9 .13 NA 21 .53 .10 .07 .08 .06
52 54 59 52 56 49 54 52
019. 3.3 2.1 0.7 1.3 0.3 .30 NA 11 .50 .08 .06 .06 .06
5 7 60 39 55 49 64 45 49
020. 3.5 1.9 0.9 1.4 -0.4 NA NA 15 NA .12 .09 .06 .06
59 56 46 56 42 48
NOTE: On the first line of data for every program, raw values for each measure are reported;
on the second line values are reported in standardized form, with mean = 50 and
standard deviation = 10. "NA" indicates that the value for a measure is not available.
OCR for page 76
76
TABLE 5.1 Program Measures (Raw and Standardized Values) in Geography
Character ist ics of
Prog Program Size Prouram Graduates
No. University - Department/Academic Unit (01) (02) (03) (04) (05) (06) (07)
021. Kansas, University of 18 27 25 .27 10.9 .64 .33
Geography and Mleteorol ogy 61 63 52 51 34 44 54
022. Kent State University 10 13 20 .15 9.0 .69 .23
Geography 43 47 49 43 48 48 46
023. Kentucky, University of 11 7 7 NA NA NA NA
Geography * 46 41 40
024 . Louisiana State University-Baton Rouge 17 12 8 . 18 7.3 . 64 . 55
Geography and Anthropology 58 46 41 45 59 44 71
025. Maryland, University of-College Park 15 9 60 NA NA NA NA
Geography 54 43 74
026. Michigan State University-East Lansing 17 29 34 .21 9.2 .82 .18
Geography 58 65 57 47 47 57 43
027. Michigan, University of-Ann Arbor 13 21 35 .50 6.8 .40 .25
Geography 50 56 58 67 63 26 48
028. Minnesota, University of 20 28 26 .38 8.8 .79 .29
Geography 65 64 52 59 49 55 51
029. Nebraska, University of-Lincoln 17 12 6 .36 9.0 .85 .39
Geography 58 46 40 57 48 59 59
030. North Carolina, University of-Chapel Hill 11 15 8 .14 11.5 .77 .08
Geography 46 49 41 42 30 53 34
031. Northern Colorado, University of-Greeley
Geography *
032. Northwestern University
Geography
033. Ohio State University-Columbus
Geography
034. Oklahoma, University of-Norman
Geography
035. Oregon State University-Corvallis
Geography
8 7
39 41
5 8
33 42
4
38
4
38
14 31 26
52 67 52
12 22
48 57
12 28
48 64
NA NA
NA NA
41
62
14 .18
45 44
.14 6.3
42 67
.11 9.0
40 48
NA NA
NA NA
.90 .59
63 74
.65 .19
45 43
9.8 .74
42 51
.26
49
036. Oregon, University of-Eugene 9 19 9 .14 8.0 .57 .21
Geography 41 54 42 42 55 39 45
037. Pennsylvania State University 13 16 15 .53 7.8 .81 .31
Geography 50 50 45 69 56 57 53
038. Pittsburgh, University of 7 18 12 .23 9.5 .64 .21
Geography 37 53 44 48 44 44 45
039. Rutgers, The State University-New Brunswick 20 8 20 NA NA NA NA
Geography 65 42 49
040. SUNY at Buffalo 12 3 20 NA NA NA NA
Geography * 48 36 49
* indicates program was initiated since 1970.
NOTE: On the first line of data for every program, raw values for each measure are reported;
on the second line values are reported in standardized form, with mean = 50 and
standard deviation = 10. "NA" indicates that the value for a measure is not available.
OCR for page 77
77
TABLE 5.1 Program Measures (Raw and Standardized Values) in Geography
University Research Published Survey Ratings
Prog Survey Results Library Support Articles Standard Error
No. (08) (09) (10) (11) (12) (13) (14) (17) (18) (08) (09) (10) (11)
021. 3.3 2.0 1.1 1.3 0.1 .06 NA 15 .56 .08 .06 .07 .06
56 58 53 53 47 42 48 53
022. 1.6 1.0 0.9 0.8 - 1.8 .10 NA 9 .40 .10 .08 .06 .06
37 37 46 38 27 46 43 43
023. 2.1 1.2 1.3 1.1 - 0.1 .00 NA 24 .73 .10 .08 .08 .07
42 40 61 4 7 45 3 7 56 64
024. 3.2 1.9 1.0 1.0 - 0.3 .00 NA 14 .53 .10 .06 .05 .07
55 5 7 50 45 42 3 7 4 7 51
025. 2.3 1.4 1.1 1.1 0.2 .07 NA 6 .27 .09 .07 .06 .07
45 45 53 47 48 43 40 35
026. 2.8 1.7 0.9 1.2 0.3 .12 NA 20 .53 .09 .07 .07 .07
51 52 47 51 50 48 53 51
027. 2.9 1.7 0.1 1.6 1.8 .08 NA 14 .54 .12 .07 .04 .05
52 51 22 63 65 44 47 52
028. 4.6 2.6 1.3 1.8 1.2 .20 NA 43 .70 .07 .06 .06 .05
71 70 59 69 59 55 74 62
029. 2.7 1.7 1.4 1.1 -0.5 .24 NA 10 .35 .08 .06 .07 .07
49 51 62 4 7 41 59 44 40
030. 2.6 1.6 1.1 1.1 1.0 .00 NA 11 .73 .09 .07 .06 .06
49 50 54 47 57 37 45 64
031. 0.8 0.7 0.9 0.4 NA NA NA 8 NA .10 .08 .06 .06
28 30 47 25 42
032. 2.6 1.2 0.2 1.5 0.3 NA NA 6 NA .13 .08 .05 .06
4 8 41 25 59 49 40
033. 3.9 2.4 0.8 1.6 0.9 .43 NA 37 .71 .09 .06 .07 .05
63 66 43 63 56 76 6 8 63
034. 2.3 1.4 1.0 1.1 - 0.6 .17 NA 17 .25 .09 .07 .09 .06
45 45 50 48 40 52 50 33
035. 2.0 1.4 1.0 0.9 NA .00 NA 5 .33 .10 .09 .06 .06
42 45 51 40 37 39 39
036. 2.3 1.4 0.8 1.0 - 0.9 NA NA 1 NA .10 .08 .06 .07
45 45 44 44 36 35
037. 4.3 2.4 1.2 1.7 0.7 .23 NA 30 .54 .07 .06 .06 .05
68 66 57 66 54 58 62 52
038. 1.4 0.9 0.5 0.8 0.1 NA NA 1 NA .10 .08 .06 .06
35 36 33 39 47 35
039. 2.9 1.6 1.2 1.2 0.8 .05 NA 24 .55 .10 .06 .07 .06
51 49 5 8 50 55 42 56 53
040. 3.2 1.7 1.6 1.3 0.3 .08 NA 27 .67 .09 .07 .07 .06
55 52 70 54 49 45 59 60
NOTE: On the first line of data for every program, raw values for each measure are reported;
on the second line values are reported in standardized form, with mean = 50 and
standard deviation = 10. "NA" indicates that the value for a measure is not available.
OCR for page 78
78
TABLE 5.1 Program Measures (Raw and Standardized Values) in Geography
Character istics of
Prog Program Size Program Graduates
No. University - Department/Academic Unit (01) (02) (03) (04) (05) (06) (07)
041. Southern Illinois University-Carbondale 12 12 12 .08 9.2 .83 .42
Geography 48 46 44 38 47 58 61
042. Syracuse University 13 24 22 .32 8.3 .62 .23
Geography 50 59 50 54 53 42 46
043. Tennessee, University of-Knoxville 12 8 17 .54 9.3 .85 .15
Geography 4 8 42 4 7 70 45 59 40
044. Texas A & M University 8 2 17 NA NA NA NA
Geography 3 9 35 4 7
045. Texas, University of-Austin 12 7 10 .46 11.3 .73 .27
Geography 4 8 41 42 64 32 50 50
046. Utah, University of-Salt Lake City 10 5 5 NA NA NA NA
Geography 43 38 39
047. Washington, University of-Seattle 15 14 14 .21 9.8 .68 .26
Geography 54 48 45 47 42 47 49
048. Wisconsin, University of-Madison 19 30 55 .31 8.5 .83 .49
Geography 63 66 71 53 51 58 66
049. Wisconsin, University of-Milwaukee 14 11 11 .00 10.0 1.00 .30
Geography 52 45 43 32 41 70 52
* indicates program was initiated si
ince 1970.
NOTE: On the f irst line of data for every program, raw values for each measure are reported;
on the second line values are reported in standardized form, with mean = 50 and
standard deviation = 10. "NA" indicates that the value for a measure is not available.
OCR for page 79
79
TABLE 5.1 Program Measures (Raw and Standardized
. Values) in Geography
University Research Published Survey Ratings
Prog Survey Results Library Support Articles Standard Error
No. (08) (09) (10) (11) (12) (13) (14) (17) (18) (08) (09) (10) (11)
041. 1.9 1.1 0.6 0.9 -0.2 .17 NA 7 .33 .11 .09 .08 .07
40 38 38 40 44 52 41 39
042. 3.6 2.0 1.1 1.5 -0.3 .23 NA 29 .54 .08 .05 .06 .06
59 59 53 60 42 58 61 52
043. 2.2 1.4 1.3 1.0 -0.4 .17 NA 13 .50 .10 .07 .07 .06
44 45 5 8 45 42 52 46 49
044. 2.2 1.2 1.1 1.1 -0.5 NA NA 6 NA .11 .09 .08 .07
44 41 53 46 41 40
045. 2.5 1.4 0.7 1.2 1.6 .00 NA 13 .50 .09 .07 .06 .06
48 44 40 49 64 37 46 49
046. 1.7
38
047. 3.6
59
048. 4.1
66
049. 3.0
53
NOTE: On Ah
1.0 0.7
49 34
0.9 1.5
48 60
0.9 1.6
47 65
1.2 1.3
56 53
1.0
37
2.2
62
2.5
68
1.8
53
_ ~ first line of data for every program, raw values for each measure are reported;
on the second line values are reported in standardized form, with mean = 50 and
standard deviation = 10. "NA" indicates that the value for a measure is not available.
-0.6 .00
39 37
1.5 .20
62 55
1.6 .11
63 47
NA .29
63
NA
NA
NA
NA
6 .50
40 49
30 .67
62 60
26 .74
58 65
18 .57
51 54
.09 .08 .06 .06
.08 .06 .06 .06
.08 .05 .07 .05
.08 .06 .05 .06
OCR for page 80
80
TABLE 5.2 Summary Statistics Describing Each Program Measure--Geography
Measure
Number
of
Programs Standard
Evaluated Mean Deviation
Program Size
01 Raw Value 49 13 5
Std Value 49 50 In
D E ~ I T. ~ S
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
7 9 11 12 13 13 15 17 19
37 41 46 48 50 50 54 58 63
02 Raw Value 49 16 9 5 7 9 12 13 17 20 23 29
Std Value 49 50 10 38 41 43 46 47 52 55 58 65
03 Raw Value 49 22 16 6 9 12 14 19 22 25 34 39
Std Value 49 50 10 40 42 44 45 48 50 52 57 61
Program Graduates
04 Raw Value 36 .26 .14 .10 .14 .15 .18 .21 .26 .33 .41 .45
Std Value 36 50 10 39 41 42 44 46 50 55 61 64
05 Raw Value 36 8.7 1.4 11.0 9.8 9.2 9.0 8.5 8.2 8.0 7.5 7.0
Std Value 36 50 10 34 42 46 48 51 53 55 58 62
06 Raw Value 36 .72 .14 .54 .57 .64 .67 .74 .78 .83 .83 .85
Std Value 36 50 10 37 39 44 46 51 54 58 58 59
07 Raw Value 36 .28 .13 .09 .17 .21 .23 .26 .29 .32 .33 .45
Std Value 36 50 10 35 42 45 46 48 51 53 54 63
Survey Results
08 Raw Value 49 2.8 .9 1.6 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.7 2.9 3.2 3.5 4.0
Std Value 49 50 10 37 41 44 46 49 52 55 59 64
09 Raw Value 49 1.6 .5 1.0 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.6 1.7 1.9 2.1 2.3
Std Value 49 50 10 37 41 43 45 50 52 56 60 64
10 Raw Value 49 1.0 .3 .6 .8 .9 .9 1.0 1.1 1.1 1.2 1.3
Std Value 49 50 10 37 44 47 47 50 54 54 57 60
11 Raw Value 49 1.2 .3 .8 .9 1.0 1.1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.5 1.6
Std Value 49 50 10 38 41 45 48 48 51 54 61 64
University Library
12 Raw Value 43 .4 .9 -.9 -.5 -.3 -.1 .3 .6 .9 1.1 1.7
Std Value 43 50 10 36 40 43 45 49 53 56 58 65
Research Support
13 Raw Value 38 .14 .11 .00 .05 .07 .09 .12 .14 .17 .22 .29
Std Value 38 50 10 37 42 44 45 48 50 53 57 64
Publication Records
17 Raw Value 49 17 11 4 6 9 13 15 18 23 27 30
Std Value 49 50 10 38 40 43 46 48 51 55 59 62
18 Raw Value 38 .51 .16 .26 .33 .43 .50 .53 .54 .57 .66 .72
Std Value 38 50 10 34 39 45 49 51 52 54 59 63
NOTE: Standardized values reported in the preceding table have been computed from exact values
of the mean and standard deviation and not the rounded values reported here.
OCR for page 81
81
TABLE 5.3 Intercorrelations Among Program Measures on 49 Programs in Geography
Measure
01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 17 18
Program Size
01 .48 .39 .15 -.17 .15 .25 .46 .51 .44 .35 .40 .00 N/A . 56 .06
02 .52 .09 .19 .13 .30 .60 .68 .00 .57 .30 .42 N/A . 46 .22
03 .07 .34 - .06 .11 .42 .43 .14 .41 .23 .30 N/A . 33 -.11
Program Graduates
04 .05 -.02 .05 .36 .29 -.07 .43 .43 -.07 N/A .23 .01
05 -.23 .23 .16 .18 -.07 .21 -.02 .43 N/A . 06 .02
06 .44 .36 .35 .39 .29 .12 .27 N/A .37 .25
07 .51 .53 .10 .47 .29 .27 N/A .45 .37
Survey Results
08 .98 .19 .94 .52 .52 N/A .78 .59
of .22 .89 .50 .56 N/A .77 .57
10 .04 -.05 .06 N/A .45 .24
11 ·59 .51 N/A .73 .58
University Library
12 .05 N/A .48 .38
Research Support
13
14
Publication Records
17
18
N/A .42 .17
N/A N/A
.67
NOTE: Since in computing correlation coefficients program data must be available for both of the measures
being correlated, the actual number of programs on which each coefficient is based varies.
OCR for page 82
82
s . o _
*
* *
*
4.0++ *
+ *
+
+ * *
+ *
+ *
+ * *
+ * * *
Measure +
3.0++
08 +
+ *
+ *
+ * * *
+ *
+ *
+ * * * *
+ * *
+ * * *
2.0++ * *
+ *
+ *
+ * *
+ *
+
+ *
+
1. 0++
*
O-0 +/++++++++++++++++++++++++/++++++++++++++++++++++++/++++++++++++++++++++++++/++++++++++++++++++++++++/
1 4 9 16 25
Measure 01 (square root scale)
FIGURE S.1 Mean rating of scholarly quality of faculty (measure 08) versus number of faculty members
(measure 01 ) --49 programs in geography.
OCR for page 83
83
3. 0++
+
+
+
2 . 0++
Measure +
09 +
+*
1 .0++
+
*
*
*
*
*
*
* *
* *
** *
* * * *
* *
*
*
*
* *
*
* *
*
* * *
* *
*
* *
* *
*
*
*
* *
r - .66
O-0 +/+++++++++++++++/+++++++++++++++/+++++++++++++++/+++++++++++++++/+++++++++++++++/+++++++++++++++/
1 4 9 16 25 36 49
Measure 0 2 t square root scale )
FIGURE 5.2 Mean rating of program effectiveness in educating research scholars/scientists (measure 09)
versus number of graduates in last f ive years (measure 02) --49 programs in geography.
OCR for page 84
84
TABLE 5.4 Characteristi-
of Survey Participants in Geography
Respondents
.
N
Field of Specialization
Geography 104 98
Other/Unknown 2 2
Faculty Rank
Professor 55 52
Associate Professor 32 30
Assistant Professor 19 18
Year of Highest Degree
,
Pre-1950 2 2
1950-59 24 23
1960-69 41 39
Post-1969 39 37
Evaluator Selection
Nominated by Institution 103 97
Other 3 3
Survey Form
With Faculty Names 92 87
Without Names 14 13
Total Evaluators 106 100
OCR for page 85
85
S.0 4.0
Mean Survey Rating (measure 08)
FIGURE 5.3 Mean rating of scholarly quality of faculty in 49 programs in geography.
_ . _
NOTE: Programs are listed in sequence of mean rating, with the highest-rated program appearing at the
top of the page. The broken lines (---) indicate a confidence interval of +1.5 standard errors
around the reported mean (x) of each program.
OCR for page 86
Representative terms from entire chapter:
std value
