This study is based on a survey of all faculty members in 66 qualifying doctorate-granting special education programs in the United States. Seventy-two percent of the faculty responded to the survey. Faculty members were asked to rate the quality of each program except their own. The top 10 programs are reported in the study. Additionally, data on several productivity and output variables were gathered, including publication records from a computer data base for each of the 700 faculty members. Using multiple regression analysis, it was, determined that 73% (R = .85, p <.001) of the variance in program reputation could be explained by four variables, where research productivity contributed most to the prediction. The implications of these results are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Astin, A.W., & Henson, J.W. (1977). New measures of college selectivity. Research in Higher Education, 6, 1–8.
2.
Bowen, H., & Schuster, J. (1986). American professors: A national resource in peril. New York: Oxford University Press.
3.
Cardinal, D.N. (1986). A composite of influencing variables to program quality in higher education over the past fifty years. The Claremont Graduate School, Claremont, CA.
4.
Cardinal, D.N. (1987). An assessment of quality in doctorate granting special education departments within U.S. universities. The Claremont Graduate School, Claremont, CA.
5.
Cartter, A.M. (1966). An assessment of quality in graduate education. Washington, DC: American Council on Education.
6.
Conrad, C.F., & Blackburn, R.T. (1985). Correlates of departmental quality in regional colleges and universities. American Educational Research Journal, 22, 279–295.
7.
Cox, W.M., & Catt, V. (1977). Productivity ratings of graduate programs in psychology based on publications in the journals of the American Psychological Association. American Psychologist, 32(10), 793–813.
8.
Dent, P.L., & Lewis, D.J. (1976). The relationship between teaching effectiveness and measures of research quality. Educational Research Quarterly, 1(3), 3–15.
9.
Drew, D.E. (1975). Science development: An evaluation study. Washington, DC: The National Academy of Sciences.
10.
Drew, D.E. (1985). Strengthening academic science. New York: Praeger.
11.
Drew, D.E., & Karpf, R.S. (1981). Ranking academic departments: Empirical findings and a theoretical perspective. Research in Higher Education, 14(4), 305–319.
12.
Eash, M. (1983). Educational research productivity of institutions of higher education. American Educational Research Journal, 20(1), 5–12.
13.
Elton, C.F., & Rodgers, S.A. (1971). Physics department ratings: Another evaluation. Science, 174, 565–568.
14.
Elton, C.F., & Rose, H.A. (1972). What are the ratings rating?American Psychologist, 27, 197–201.
15.
Glower, D.D. (1980). A rational method for ranking engineering departments. Engineering Education, 70, 788–794, 842.
16.
Guba, E.G., & Clark, D.L. (1978). Levels of R&D productivity in schools of education. Educational Researcher, 7(5), 3–9.
17.
Hagstrom, W.O. (1971). Inputs, outputs, and the prestige of university science departments. Sociology of Education, 44, 375–397.
18.
Hoyt, D.P. (1974). Interrelationships among instructional effectiveness, publication record, and monetary reward. Research in Higher Education, 2, 81–88.
19.
Hughes, R.M. (1925). A study of the graduate schools in America. Oxford, OH: Miami University Press.
20.
Jones, L.V., Lindzey, G., & Coggeshall, P.E. (Eds.). (1982). An assessment of research-doctorate programs in the United States: Social and behavioral sciences. Washington, DC: The National Academy Press.
21.
Keniston, H. (1959). Graduate studies and research in the arts and sciences at the University of Pennsylvania. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
22.
King. S., & Wolfle, L.M. (1987). A latemvariable causal model of faculty reputational ratings. Research in Higher Education, 27(2), 99–106.
23.
Knudsen, D.D., & Vaughn, T.R. (1969). Quality in graduate education: A re-evaluation of the rankings of sociology departments in the Cartter report. American Sociologist, 4, 2–19.
24.
Kroc, R.J. (1984). Using citation analysis to assess scholarly productivity. Educational Researcher, 13(6), 17–22.
25.
Linsky, A.S., & Straus, M.A. (1975). Student evaluations, research productivity, and eminence of college faculty. Journal of Higher Education, 46(1), 89–102.
26.
Manis, J.G. (1951). Some academic influences upon publication productivity. Social Forces, 29, 267–272.
27.
Meltzer, B.M. (1949). The productivity of social scientists. American Journal of Sociology, 55, 25–29.
28.
Saunier, M.E. (1985). Objective measures as predictors of reputational ratings. Research in Higher Education, 23, 227–244.
29.
Schloss, P.J., & Sindelar, P.T. (1986). Publication frequencies of departments conferring the Ph. D. in special education. Teacher Education and Special Education, 9(3), 123–127.
30.
Sindelar, P.T., & Schloss, P.J. (1986). The reputation of doctoral training programs in special education. The Journal of Special Education, 20(1), 49–59.
31.
Sindelar, P.T., & Schloss, P.J. (1987). A citation analysis of doctoral-granting programs in special education and relationships among measures of program quality. Remedial and Special Education, 8(5), 58–62.
Stallings, W.M., & Singhal, S. (1970). Some observations on the relationships between research productivity and student evaluations of courses and teaching. American Sociologist, 5(2), 141–143.
34.
Tan, D.L. (1990, September). Is there a better way to measure quality of programs? Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the European Association for Institutional Research, Lyon, France.
35.
Voeks, V.W. (1962). Publications and teaching effectiveness. Journal of Higher Education, 33(4), 12–15.
