Click for next page ( 32


The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



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 31
m Art Story Programs In this chapter 41 research-doctorate programs in art history are assessed. mese programs, according to the information supplied by their universities, have accounted for 752 doctoral degrees awarded during the FY1976-80 period. On the average, 33 full-time and part- time students intending to earn doctorates were enrolled in a program in December 1980, with an average faculty size of 13 members.2 Most of the 41 programs, listed in Table 3.1, are located in art history or art history and archaeology departments. found in departments of fine arts or art. Approximately one-third are As many as 9 of the programs were initiated since 1970, and no two programs are located in the same university. In addition to the 41 institutions represented in this discipline, another 4 were initially identified as meeting the criteria3 for inclusion in the assessment: Illinois State University--Normal North Texas State University Texas Tech University--Lubbock Union for Experimenting Colleges and Universities The last institution chose not to participate in the assessment in any discipline. Art history programs at the other three institutions have not been included in the evaluations in this discipline, since in each data from the NRC's Survey of Earned Doctorates indicate that 758 research doctorates in history and criticism of art were awarded by U.S. universities between 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. 2See the reported means for measures 03 and 01 in Table 3.2. 3As mentioned in Chapter I, the primary criterion for inclusion was that a university had awarded at least 5 doctorates in art history during the FY1976-78 period. 31

OCR for page 31
32 case the study coordinator either indicated that the institution did not at that time have a research-doctorate program in art history or failed to provide the information requested by the committee. Before examining individual program results presented in Table 3.1, the reader is urged to refer to Chapter II, in which each of the 12 measures used in the assessment is discussed. Summary statistics describing every measure are given in Table 3.2. For eight of the measures, data are reported for at least 38 of the 41 art history programs. For measures 04-07, which pertain to characteristics of the program graduates, data are presented for only approximately half of the programs; the other half had too few graduates on which to base statistics .4 Intercorrelations among the 12 measures (Pearson product-moment coefficients) are given in Table 3.3. Of particular note are the high positive correlations of the measures of faculty size (01) and the number of recent graduates (02) with reputational survey ratings (08, 09~. Figure 3.1 illustrates the relation between the mean rating of the scholarly quality of faculty (measure 08) and the number of faculty members (measure 01) for each of 41 programs in art history. Figure 3.2 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 3.4 describes the 94 faculty members who participated in the evaluation of art history programs. These individuals constituted 63 percent of those asked to respond to the survey in this discipline and 18 percent of the faculty population in the 41 research-doctorate programs being evaluated.5 Almost half of the survey participants had earned their highest degree since 1970, and a majority held the rank of full professor. Two exceptions should be noted with regard to the survey evalua- tions in this discipline. It has been called to the attention of the committee that the faculty list (used in the survey) for the Department of Art at Florida State University was missing the names of 11 members and that the faculty list for the Department of History of Art at Johns Hopkins University was missing the names of 2 members. m e committee has decided to report the survey results for these two programs, but with the caution that the reputational ratings may have been influenced by the omission of these names. To assist the reader in interpreting results of the survey evalua- tions, estimated standard errors have been computed for mean ratings of 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 FYI975-79 program graduates. s see Table 2.3 in Chapter II.

OCR for page 31
33 the scholarly quality of the faculty in 41 art history programs (and are given in Table 3.1~. For each program the mean rating and an as- sociated "confidence interval" of 1.5 standard errors are illustrated in Figure 3.3 (listed in order of highest to lowest mean rating). In comparing two programs, if their confidence intervals do not overlap, one may conclude that there is a significant difference in their mean ratings at a .05 level of significance.6 From this figure it is also apparent that one should have somewhat more confidence in the ac- curacy 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 usu- ally based on fewer survey responses. 6 See pp. 28-30 for a discussion of the interpretation of mean ratings and associated confidence intervals.

OCR for page 31
34 TABLE 3.1 Program Measures (Raw and Standardized Values) in-Art History Characteristics of Prog Program Size Prouram Graduates No. University - Department/Academic Unit (01) (02) (03) (04) (05) (06) (07) 001. Boston University 15 9 32 .00 NA .40 .20 Art History 54 45 50 28 24 31 002. Brown University 8 13 40 NA NA NA NA Art 41 4 7 52 003. Bryn Mawr College 8 15 31 .36 9.0 .46 .27 History o f Art 41 4 8 49 53 53 29 40 004. California, University of-Berkeley 14 33 38 .32 9.5 .63 .33 Art and History of Art 52 58 51 51 48 46 48 005. California, University of-Los Angeles 14 32 18 .21 9.5 .62 .35 Art 52 5 7 46 43 48 45 50 006. Case Western Reserve University 13 5 9 NA NA NA NA Art 51 43 44 007. Chicago, University of 10 18 53 .41 9.5 .65 .41 Art 45 50 55 57 48 48 58 008. Columbia University 27 75 268 .23 10.0 .65 .39 Art History and Archaeology 76 80 99 44 44 48 55 009. Cornell University-Ithaca 14 6 11 NA NA NA NA History o f Art and Archaeol ogy 52 44 45 010. Delaware, University of-Newark 9 12 24 NA NA NA NA Art History 43 47 48 011. Florida State University-Tallahassee 15 7 10 NA NA NA NA Art * 54 44 45 012. Georgia, University of-Athens 7 7 8 NA NA NA NA Art 40 44 44 013. Harvard University 18 61 98 .40 8.8 .70 .35 Fine Arts 60 72 65 56 55 53 51 014. Indiana University-Bloomington 12 23 40 .21 10.3 .84 .42 Fine Arts 49 52 52 43 42 66 60 015. Iowa, University of-Iowa City 10 5 41 NA NA NA NA Art and Art History 45 43 52 016. Johns Hopkins University 7 21 10 .39 8.0 .80 .53 History o f Art 40 51 45 55 62 62 74 017. Kansas, University of 14 7 34 NA NA NA NA Art History 52 44 50 018. Maryland, University of-College Park 15 6 22 NA NA NA NA Art 54 44 4 7 019. Michigan, University of-Ann Arbor 20 43 22 .29 10.9 .65 .27 History of Art 64 63 47 48 36 48 40 020. Minnesota, University of 13 11 18 NA NA NA NA Art History 51 46 46 * 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. nNA" indicates that the value for a measure is not available.

OCR for page 31
35 TABLE 3.1 Program Measures (Raw and Standardized Values) in Art History University Survey Ratings Prog Survey Results Library Standard Error No. (08) (09) (10) (11) (12) (08) (09) (10) (11) 001. 2.6 1.4 1.4 1.2 -0.4 .10 .08 .10 .07 49 48 64 52 40 002. 3.1 1.9 1.2 1.3 -1.1 .09 .05 .07 .07 54 55 55 54 33 003. 3.5 2.3 0.6 1.5 NA .09 .06 .07 .07 57 61 24 59 004. 4.3 2.3 1.0 1.7 2.2 .07 .06 .09 .06 64 61 47 64 65 005. 3.2 1.7 1.3 1.3 2.0 .09 .07 .08 .06 54 53 58 56 63 006. 1.5 0.8 0.9 0.7 -1.3 .12 .08 .10 .07 40 39 39 41 30 007. 3.0 1.8 0.8 1.3 0.9 .08 .05 .08 .07 53 54 37 54 52 008. 4.7 2.5 1.0 1.8 1.7 .06 .06 .07 .05 68 66 43 66 61 009. 2.9 1.8 1.0 1.0 1.6 .09 .08 .11 .07 52 53 45 48 59 010. 2.7 1.8 1.5 1.1 NA .10 .07 .08 .07 50 53 67 51 011. 1.2 0.7 1.1 0.8 -0.4 .14 .09 .12 .07 37 37 50 43 39 012. 1.4 0.7 1.3 0.5 0.4 .13 .10 .13 .06 39 37 59 37 48 013. 4.9 2.7 0.9 1.9 3.0 .04 .05 .08 .03 69 68 41 68 73 014. 2.9 1.6 1.2 1.2 0.9 .09 .07 .08 .07 52 51 53 53 53 015. 2.3 1.2 1.1 1.0 0.3 .11 .09 .05 .07 47 45 51 49 46 016. 3.5 2~0 1.6 1.5 -0.4 .08 .06 .08 .07 58 57 73 59 39 017. 2.1 1.4 1.1 0.8 0.1 .12 .09 .08 .07 45 48 50 43 44 018. 2.6 1.4 1.2 1.1 0.2 .10 .07 .08 .07 49 48 52 49 45 019. 3.6 2.2 1.1 1.5 1.8 .09 .06 .06 .06 58 60 48 59 61 020. 2.3 1.4 1.0 0.9 1.2 .11 .09 .08 .08 47 47 47 45 55 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 31
36 TABLE 3.1 Program Measures (Raw and Standardized Values) in Art History Prog No. University - Department/Academic Unit 021. Missouri, University of-Columbia Art History and Archaeol ogy * 022. New Mexico, University of-Albuquergue Art * 023. New York University Fine Arts 024. North Carolina, University of-Chapel Hill Art 025. Northwestern University Art History * 026. Ohio State University-Columbus History o f Art * 027. Ohio University-Athens Comparative Arts 028. Oregon, University of-Eugene Art History 029. Pennsylvania State University Art History 030. Pennsylvania, University of History o f Art 031. Pittsburgh, University of Fine Arts 032. Princeton University Art and Archaeol ogy 033. Rutgers, The State University-New Brunswick Art History * 034. Southern California, University of Fine Arts* 035. Stanford University Art 036. Texas, University of-Austin Art * 037. Virginia, University of Art 038. 039. 040. Washington University-Saint Louis Art and Archaeol ogy Washington, University of-Seattle Art History Wisconsin, University of-Madison Art History * indicates program was initiated since 1970. Program Size (01) (02) (03) 6 5 38 43 10 7 45 44 26 84 75 84 14 18 52 50 8 10 41 46 14 7 52 44 3 22 32 52 8 3 41 42 8 11 41 46 11 23 47 52 10 12 45 47 20 34 64 58 12 3 49 42 5 2 36 41 17 14 58 48 16 2 56 41 11 10 47 46 10 5 45 43 14 9 52 45 8 13 41 47 12 45 NA 71 59 17 46 9 44 37 51 21 47 5 43 12 45 26 48 19 47 35 50 79 61 11 45 23 48 17 46 17 46 43 43 26 48 Characteristics of Program Graduates (04) (05) (06) (07) NA NO NA NA .21 10.6 43 39 .67 8.5 74 57 .30 10.0 49 44 NA NA .12 12.3 36 24 NA NA NA 9~5 48 .44 8.4 58 58 .54 7.3 65 68 .28 9.3 47 50 NA NA NA NA .18 8.7 40 56 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA .40 9.0 56 53 NA NA NA NA 78 .33 60 47 59 .32 42 46 70 .20 53 31 NA NA 75 .38 57 54 NA NA NA NA 73 .32 55 46 62 .39 45 55 71 .31 54 46 NA NA NA NA 69 .38 52 54 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 69 .39 52 55 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 31
37 TABLE 3.1 Program Measures (Raw and Standardized Values) in Art History University Survey Ratings Prog Survey Results Library Standard Error No. (08) (09) (10) (11) (12) (08) (09) (10) (11) 021. 1.3 0.7 0.7 0.6 -0.2 .16 .11 .13 .07 38 37 28 38 41 022. 1.4 0.9 1.1 0.5 -1.0 .13 .11 .11 .07 39 40 48 37 33 023. 4.9 2.7 1.1 1.9 0.5 .04 .05 .08 .03 70 69 52 69 48 024. 3.0 1.8 1.5 1.2 1.0 .08 .07 .07 .01 53 53 68 53 53 025. 2.5 1.4 1.3 1.2 0.3 .10 .09 .09 .08 48 48 60 52 46 026. 1.8 1.0 1.1 0.8 0.9 .11 .09 .07 .07 42 42 50 43 52 027. 0.3 0.3 NA 0.2 NA .10 .09 NA .05 29 32 30 028. 1.4 0.8 1.3 0.5 -0.9 .14 .11 .10 .07 39 39 60 37 34 029. 2.4 1.4 0.9 1.0 0.7 .11 .07 .06 .07 47 47 42 47 50 030. 3.5 2.0 1.3 1.4 0.7 .08 .05 .08 .06 57 58 58 58 50 031. 3.0 1.6 1.1 1.1 0.1 .09 .07 .10 .08 53 52 48 50 44 032. 4.5 2.5 1.2 I.8 0.9 .06 .06 .08 .05 66 65 53 66 52 033. 2.4 1.4 1.3 1.0 0.8 .09 .08 .08 .07 48 48 59 49 52 034. 0.5 0.3 1.0 0.4 0.4 .10 .07 .14 .06 32 32 45 34 47 035. 3.7 2.1 1.1 1.4 2.0 .07 .05 .05 .07 59 60 48 57 63 036. 2.1 1.1 1.3 0.8 1.6 .11 .11 .10 .07 45 44 58 44 59 037. 2.6 1.5 1.2 1.2 0.7 .09 .07 .11 .06 50 50 53 52 52 038. 2.1 1.1 0.9 0.7 -0.4 .11 .10 .07 .07 45 43 38 42 39 039. 1.6 0.9 1,0 0.5 1.5 .13 .11 .14 .07 40 40 45 35 58 040. 1.7 1.2 0.9 0.7 1.6 .12 .09 .08 .07 42 45 39 42 59 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 31
38 TABLE 3.1 Program Measures (Raw and Standardized Values) in Art History Characteristics of Prog Program Size Program Graduates No. University - Department/Academic Unit (01) (02) (03) (04) (05) (06) (07) 041. Yale University 26 49 68 .35 7.7 .78 .43 History of Art 75 66 58 53 65 60 61 * 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 31
39 TABLE 3.1 Program Measures (Raw and Standardized Values) in Art History University Survey Ratings Prog Survey Results Library Standard Error No. (08) (09) (10) (11) (12) (08) (09) (10) (11) 041. 4.7 2.7 1.1 1.8 2.1 68 68 48 67 64 05 .05 .08 .04 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 31
40 TABLE 3.2 Summary Statistics Describing Each Program Measure--Art History Number of Programs Standard D E C I L E S Measure Evaluated Mean Deviation 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Program Size 01 Raw Value 41 13 5 7 8 9 10 12 14 14 15 20 Std Value 41 50 10 40 41 43 45 49 52 52 54 64 02 Raw Value 41 18 19 3 5 7 9 11 13 18 23 42 Std Value 41 50 10 42 43 44 45 46 47 50 52 62 03 Raw Value 40 33 43 8 10 12 18 22 26 34 40 68 Std Value 40 50 10 44 45 45 46 47 48 50 52 58 Program Graduates 04 Raw Value 20 .32 .14 .12 .21 .21 .28 .30 .35 .39 .40 .44 Std Value 20 50 10 36 42 42 47 49 52 55 56 59 05 Raw Value 20 9.3 1.1 10.9 10.3 10.0 9.5 9.5 9.0 8.8 8.5 8.0 Std Value 20 50 10 36 41 44 48 48 53 55 57 62 06 Raw Value 20 .67 .10 .46 .62 .63 .65 .69 .70 .71 .75 .78 Std Value 20 50 10 29 45 46 48 52 53 54 58 61 07 Raw Value 20 .35 .08 .20 .27 .32 .33 .35 .38 .39 .39 .42 Std Value 20 50 10 31 40 46 48 50 54 55 55 59 Survey Results 08 Raw Value 41 2.7 1.1 1.3 1.6 2.1 2.3 2.6 2.9 3.1 3.5 4.5 Std Value 41 50 10 38 41 45 47 49 52 54 57 66 09 Raw Value 41 1.5 .6 .7 .9 1.2 1.4 1.4 1.7 1.8 2.1 2.5 Std Value 41 50 10 37 40 45 48 48 53 54 59 65 10 Raw Value 40 1.1 .2 .9 .9 1.0 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.3 Std Value 40 50 10 40 40 45 50 50 50 55 60 60 11 Raw Value 41 1.1 .4 .5 .7 .8 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.5 1.8 Std Value 41 50 10 36 41 43 48 50 53 55 60 67 University Library 12 Raw Value 38 .7 1.0 -1.0 -.4 .1 .4 .7 .9 1.1 1.6 2.0 Std Value 38 50 10 33 39 44 47 50 52 54 59 63 NOTE: Standardized values reported in the preceding table have been computed of the mean and standard deviation and not the rounded values reported from exact values here.

OCR for page 31
41 TABLE 3.3 Intercorrelations Among Program Measures on 41 Programs in Art History Measure 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 Program Size 01 .72 .58 -.16 .05 .10 -.04 .69 .67 .00 .66 .49 02 .68 -.14 -.22 .33 .13 .76 .74 -.06 .75 .49 03 -.13 -.10 .04 .16 .52 .50 -.13 .50 .34 Program Graduates 04 .68 .05 .23 .12 .17 -.03 .10 .02 05 -.16 .31 .36 .36 .14 .32 -.11 06 .60 .10 .09 .19 .08 .13 07 .08 .07 .02 .00 .09 Survey Results 08 .99 .05 .98 .54 09 .03 .97 .55 10 .09 -.14 11 University Library 12 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 31
42 5 . 0 . 4.0++ * * * * * Measure + * 3.0++ * * 08 + * * 2.0 1 . 0_ * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * r = .69 O. O +/+++++++++++++++++++/+++++++++++++++++++/+++++++++++++++++++/+++++++++++++++++++/+++++++++++++++++++/ 1 4 9 16 25 36 Measure 01 (square root scale) FIGURE 3.1 Mean rating of scholarly quality of faculty (measure 08) versus number of faculty members (measure 01)--41 programs in art history.

OCR for page 31
43 3. 0++ + + + + 2.0++ + Measure + 09 + + + 1 .0++ + + * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * + * * + + + * * + + O. O +/++++++++++/++++++++++/++++++++++/++++++++++/++++++++++/++++++++++/++++++++++/++++++++++/++++++++++/ 1 4 9 16 25 36 49 64 81 100 Measure 02 (square root scale) FIGURE 3.2 Mean rating of program effectiveness in educating research scholars/scientists (measure 09) versus number of graduates in last f ive years (measure 02) --41 programs in art history.

OCR for page 31
44 TABLE 3.4 Characteristics of Survey Participants in Art History Respondents N Field of Specialization Art History & Appreciation 94 100 Facul Rank Professor 52 55 Associate Professor 24 26 Assistant Professor 17 18 Other/Unknown 1 1 Year of Highest Degree Pre-1950 5 5 1950-59 17 18 1960-69 31 33 Post-1969 41 44 Evaluator Selection Nominated by Institution 76 81 Other 18 19 Survey Form With Faculty Names 85 90 Without Names 9 10 Total Evaluators 94 100

OCR for page 31
45 Mean Survey Rating (measure 08) FIGURE 3.3 Mean rating of scholarly quality of faculty in 41 programs in art history. 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 31