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 32
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 33
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 34
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 35
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 36
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 37
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 38
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 39
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 40
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 41
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 42
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 43
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 44
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 45
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 46
Representative terms from entire chapter:
program size
