The National Academies Press

Currently Skimming:

VII. Physiology Programs
Pages 123-144

The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.

From page 123... ... Each of seven institutions -- University of Arizona, University of California (San Diego) , Iowa State University, University of Kansas, Ohio State University, Oklahoma State University, and SUNY at Buffalo -- has two physiology programs included in the assessment. Read the entire page →
From page 124... ... The programs not evaluated on measures 12, 13, and 14 are typically smaller -- in terms of faculty size and graduate student enrollment -- than other physiology programs. Were data on these three measures available for all 101 programs, it is likely that their reported means would be appreciably lower (and that some of the correlations of these measures with others would be higher) Read the entire page →
From page 125... ... To assist the reader in interpreting results of the survey evaluations, estimated standard errors have been computed for mean ratings of the scholarly quality of faculty in 94 physiology programs (and are given in Table 7.11. For each program the mean rating and an associated "confidence interval" of 1.5 standard errors are illustrated in Figure 7.3 (listed in order of highest to lowest mean rating) Read the entire page →
From page 126... ... (07) 79 .71 48 60 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 78 .52 47 47 83 .66 52 56 84 .79 54 65 NA NA NA NA 95 .75 64 62 NA NA NA NA 90 .70 59 59 NA NA NA NA NA NA 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. Read the entire page →
From page 127... ... (09) .14 .10 .21 .10 .13 .11 NA NA .13 .09 .18 .14 .12 .08 .15 .14 .12 .12 .13 .08 Survey Ratings Standard Error (10) Read the entire page →
From page 128... ... 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. Read the entire page →
From page 129... ... 2.6 1.5 NA 0.3 -0.5 .06 5287 8 .26 .19 NA .07 44 41 42 43 30 44 45 43 040. 3.4 2.1 1.3 1.1 0.3 .70 7088 48 .12 .09 .11 .08 56 57 56 65 50 57 47 67 61 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. Read the entire page →
From page 130... ... 8 .90 44 65 12 NA 47 9 45 4 .06 42 31 30 60 10 46 6 43 17 51 6 43 14 49 11 47 44 4 42 8 .46 44 47 19 .19 52 36 8 44 42 35 .67 63 55 15 49 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 56 5.5 51 57 NA NA 78 6.1 60 50 NA NA NA NA 52 6.5 49 46 (06) NA .80 50 NA NA NA 7.2 .67 38 36 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA .78 47 NA 6.1 .54 50 24 6.3 .84 48 53 .87 56 NA NA 9.0 .64 17 34 .75 45 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. Read the entire page →
From page 131... ... 3.5 1.9 1.1 0.8 1.2 .63 13696 12 .14 .10 .12 .09 57 53 48 57 59 54 58 47 48 060. 3.6 2.2 1.1 0.7 -0.2 .60 4628 NA .12 .08 .10 .09 58 60 48 54 46 53 43 NA 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. Read the entire page →
From page 132... ... NA NA NA NA 6.0 .92 4. 65 .53 5.8 50 54 .56 5.3 51 60 NA NA .24 4.5 38 70 NA NA NA NA NA NA 33 5.5 42 57 75 7.0 59 40 46 5.7 47 55 83 7.2 62 38 56 5.5 51 58 09 6.5 32 46 NA NA NA NA NA NA .83 52 53 NA NA .75 69 45 .77 46 .61 31 NA .95 65 NA NA NA .68 38 .88 57 .91 60 .92 61 .81 51 .82 51 NA NA 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. Read the entire page →
From page 133... ... 2.8 1.8 NA 0.4 NA .54 NA 8 .15 .14 NA .07 4 7 4 8 45 51 45 44 080. NA NA NA 0.2 0.3 .00 6799 6 NA NA NA .06 38 50 28 47 44 42 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. Read the entire page →
From page 134... ... Washington State University-Pullman 8 8 7 NA NA NA NA Zoophysiol ogy 42 45 44 096. Washington University-Saint Louis 44 9 33 NA NA NA NA Biol ogy and Boomed ical Sciences * Read the entire page →
From page 135... ... 2.5 NA NA 0.3 NA .33 NA 2 .14 NA NA .06 43 42 42 42 42 100. 3.0 2.0 1.2 0.5 1.6 .64 19738 24 .16 .04 .17 .08 SO ~J 52 47 6J 55 68 54 52 N~E: On the f irst line of data for every program, raw values for eacb measure are reported; on the second line values are re~rted in standardized form, with mean = 50 and standard deviation = 10. Read the entire page →
From page 136... ... indicates program was initiated since 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. Read the entire page →
From page 137... ... 101. 4.3 2.5 1.4 1.3 2.1 .73 4337 64 .10 .07 .10 .08 68 67 59 74 68 59 43 76 82 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. Read the entire page →
From page 138... ... Since the scale used to compute measure 16 is entirely arbitrary, only data in standardized form are reported for this measure. Read the entire page →
From page 139... ... 139 TABLE 7.3 Intercorrelations Among Program Measures on 101 Programs in Physiology Measure 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 li 12 13 14 15 16 Program Size 01 .43 .49 .12 -.15 -.01 .08 .64 .62 .53 .63 .36 .18 .36 .52 .52 02 .54 -.09 .19 .14 .15 .46 .51 .19 .32 .25 .04 .30 .16 .17 03 .01 -.11 -.09 -.08 .42 .43 .29 .34 .41 .16 .37 .12 .14 Program Graduates 04 .01 .15 .28 .47 .38 -.25 .60 .43 .60 .31 .51 .50 05 .19 .22 -.11 -.16 .00 -.17 -.13 -.17 -.16 -.15 -.12 06 .68 .27 .37 -.03 .22 .01 .17 .14 .30 .29 07 .30 .33 -.01 .32 .10 .32 .23 .32 .33 Survey Results 08 .95 .38 .89 .49 .57 .51 .69 .71 09 .40 .84 .53 .47 .51 .63 .65 10 .29 .18 .06 -.01 .23 .20 11 .58 .57 .46 .80 .81 University Library 12 .23 .50 .34 .37 Research Support 13 14 Publication Records IS 16 .28 .48 .51 .43 .48 .97 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. Read the entire page →
From page 140... ... FIGURE 7.1 Mean rating of scholarly quality of faculty (measure 08) versus number of faculty members (measure 01) Read the entire page →
From page 141... ... FIGURE 7.2 Mean rating of program effectiveness in educating research scholars/scientists (measure 09) versus number of graduates in last five years (measure 02) Read the entire page →
From page 142... ... 142 TABLE 7.4 Characteristics of Survey Participants in Physiology Respondents N ield of Specialization Biophysics 11 8 Physiology, Animal/Human 113 77 Other/Unknown 22 15 Faculty Rank Professor 73 50 Associate Professor 45 31 Assistant Professor 28 19 Year of Highest Degree Pre-1950 8 6 1950-59 38 26 1960-69 57 39 Post-1969 42 29 Unknown 1 1 Evaluator Selection Nominated by Institution 120 82 Other 26 18 Survey Form With Faculty Names 136 93 Without Names 10 7 Total Evaluators 146 100 Read the entire page →
From page 143... ... NOTE: Programs are listed in sequence of mean rating, with the highest-rated program appearing at the top of the page. The broken lines ( -- -) Read the entire page →

From page 123...

... Each of seven institutions -- University of Arizona, University of California (San Diego) , Iowa State University, University of Kansas, Ohio State University, Oklahoma State University, and SUNY at Buffalo -- has two physiology programs included in the assessment.

VII. Physiology Programs Pages 123-144

VII. Physiology Programs
Pages 123-144