Graduate Training, Current Affiliation and Publishing Books in Political SciencePS: Political Science & Politics
Publication VersionPublished Version
AbstractScores of studies have measured the quality of political science departments. Generally speaking, these studies have taken two forms. Many have relied on scholars' survey responses to construct rankings of the major departments. For example, almost 50 years ago Keniston (1957) interviewed 25 department chairpersons and asked them to assess the quality of various programs, and, much more recently, the National Research Council (NRC 1995) asked 100 political scientists to rate the “scholarly quality of program faculty” in the nation's political science doctoral departments. In response to these opinion-based rankings, a number of researchers have developed what they claim to be more objective measures of department quality based on the research productivity of the faculty (Ballard and Mitchell 1998; Miller, Tien, and Peebler 1996; Robey 1979). While department rankings using these two methods are often similar, there are always noteworthy differences and these have generated an additional literature that explores the relationship between the rating systems (Garand and Graddy 1999; Jackman and Siverson 1996; Katz and Eagles 1996; Miller, Tien, and Peebler 1996).
Copyright OwnerCambridge University Press
Citation InformationTom W. Rice, James M. McCormick and Benjamin D. Bergmann. "Graduate Training, Current Affiliation and Publishing Books in Political Science" PS: Political Science & Politics Vol. 35 Iss. 4 (2002) p. 751 - 755
Available at: http://works.bepress.com/james-mccormick/4/