An Assessment of Research-Doctorate Programs in the United States Engineering (1982) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
IV. Civil Engineering Programs
IV. Civil Engineering Programs
Pages 51-68
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 51... ...
universities in this five-year span.t On the average, 35 full-time and part-time students intending to earn doctorates were enrolled in a program in December 1980, with an average faculty size of 20 members.2 Only 5 of the programs were initiated since 1970, and only one institution -- Vanderbilt University -- had two civil engineering programs included in the assessment. In addition to the 73 institutions represented in this discipline, another 2 were initially identified as meeting the criteria3 for inclusion in the assessment: Harvard University University of North Chapel Hill Carolina-Civil engineering programs at these two institutions have not been included in the evaluations in this discipline, since in each case the study coordinator either indicated that the institution did not at - in civil engineering or by the committee.
|
From page 52... ...
These individuals constituted 58 percent of those asked to respond to the survey in this discipline and 9 percent of the faculty population in the 74 researchdoctorate programs being evaluated.S Approximately one-fourth of the survey participants had earned their highest degree since 1970, and a majority held the rank of full professor. 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 74 civil engineering programs (and are given in Table 4.1~.
|
From page 53... ...
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 usually based on fewer survey responses.
|
From page 54... ...
15 45 12 44 30 .18 49 57 187 .13 91 50 .10 46 82 63 15 45 15 45 8 43 76 61 15 85 47 63 24 51 25 47 9 11 45 44 73 60 20 46 29 48 177 88 21 46 NA NA NA NA .04 7.9 38 41 NA NA NA NA NA .09 6.9 44 50 .05 7.2 40 47 .11 5.5 47 64 .08 7.5 44 44 .23 62 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA .82 62 7.2 .72 47 52 6.3 .65 56 46 NA NA 6.9 .82 51 61 .27 57 .18 48 .25 55 .73 .19 53 50 NA NA NA NA NA .68 .18 48 49 .83 .44 63 73 .50 32 .91 70 .17 47 .27 57 .21 51 NA NA NA NA .22 7.8 .58 .13 61 41 40 44 .15 9.0 .77 .15 53 30 57 46 17 NA NA 45 10 43 NA NA .00 6.5 .58 .08 33 54 . 40 40 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.
|
From page 55... ...
(11) .11 .06 .10 .08 .04 .08 .07 .05 .08 .07 .08 .08 .08 .07 .13 .12 .08 .06 .06 .07 .07 .14 .08 .09 .08 38 .12 .11 .12 .07 .09 .06 .07 .07 .17 .13 .12 .07 71 49 41 55 60 ~4 45 .12 .08 .11 .07 .12 .11 .15 .07 .09 .05 .09 .07 .15 .12 .11 .07 .16 .11 .10 .07 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.
|
From page 56... ...
indicates program was initiated s ince 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.
|
From page 57... ...
( .07 .05 .07 .13 .08 .13 .09 .28 .19 .14 .10 .11 .07 .07 .12 .08 .10 (11) .06 .07 .07 .15 .07 .09 .07 .08 .06 .07 .07 .07 .06 .11 .07 .09 .07 .13 .11 .15 .09 .06 .07 .13 .09 .10 .07 .09 .09 .08 .20 .12 .13 .10 .09 NA .09 .11 .07 .08 .07 .07 .07 .06 .07 .07 .11 .07 .08 .07 .17 .10 .13 .07 .11 .07 .09 .06 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.
|
From page 58... ...
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.
|
From page 59... ...
3.2 1.8 1.2 0.8 -0.5 .03 18988 7 .10 .08 .09 .07 56 55 59 53 44 3 8 62 45 45 060. 1.7 1.0 1.1 0.4 NA .18 5513 5 .15 .12 .09 .07 39 37 53 40 49 47 43 46 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.
|
From page 60... ...
45 NA 56 NA 7.5 44 7.5 44 NA NA .27 7.0 69 49 .05 6.4 40 55 NA NA .08 5~5 44 64 .15 6. 53 NA 52 NA .21 7.5 61 44 .24 6.7 64 53 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.
|
From page 61... ...
2.2 1.3 1.2 0.6 NA .25 4618 13 .13 .10 .09 .06 44 44 57 45 53 46 51 48 074. 3.4 2.0 1.1 0.9 1.6 .17 9919 21 .08 .04 .08 .07 59 59 54 53 64 48 52 59 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.
|
From page 62... ...
62 TABLE 4.2 Summary Statistics Describing Each Program Measure -- Civil Engineering Measure Program Size 01 Raw Value Std Value 02 Raw Value Std Value 03 Raw Value Std Value Program Graduates 04 Raw Value Std Value 05 Raw Value Std Value 06 Raw Value Std Value 07 Raw Value Std Value Survey Results 08 Raw Value Std Value 09 Raw Value Std Value 10 Raw Value Std Value 11 Raw Value Std Value University Library 12 Raw Value Std Value Research Support 13 Raw Value Std Value 14 Raw Value Std Value Publication Records 15 Raw Value Std Value 16 Std Value Number of Programs Standard Evaluated Mean Deviation 74 74 73 73 72 72 45 45 45 45 44 44 44 44 74 74 74 74 72 72 74 74 56 56 61 61 67 67 74 74 74 20 13 50 10 22 25 50 10 35 37 50 10 .13 .08 50 10 6.9 1.0 50 10 .69 .11 50 10 .19 .11 50 10 2.7 .9 50 10 1.6 .5 50 10 1.0 .2 50 10 .7 .4 50 10 .2 1.0 50 10 .20 .14 50 10 7998 8804 50 10 12 50 50 10 10 10 NOTE: Standardized values reported in D E C I L E S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 8 10 41 42 5 7 43 44 7 10 43 43 .01 .07 35 43 8.8 7.8 31 41 .55 .58 37 40 .06 .10 38 42 1.6 1.9 38 41 1.0 1.1 38 40 .7 .8 37 41 .4 .5 40 43 —1.1 45 15 45 13 45 9 .09 45 7.5 44 .62 44 .13 45 2.2 45 1.3 44 .9 45 .5 43 46 -.7 -.5 -.4 37 41 43 44 14 16 46 47 12 13 46 47 17 22 45 47 .10 .11 46 48 7.0 6.8 49 51 .67 .70 48 51 .16 .19 47 50 2.3 2.5 46 48 1.4 1.5 46 49 .9 1.0 45 50 .6 .6 46 .1 49 .00 .06 .10 .16 .19 36 40 43 47 49 1869 2626 3499 4338 5214 43 44 45 46 47 1 4 39 42 38 41 6 7 44 45 44 46 .23 52 5644 47 9 10 47 48 48 50 19 49 17 48 26 48 15 53 .6 53 73 54 21 52 A., 50 1.6 51 1.1 54 .7 49 .3 51 7 3.0 54 1.7 53 1.1 54 · · ~ 49 52 20 25 50 54 20 26 49 52 32 42 49 52 18 .21 56 60 .4 6.2 55 57 74 .75 55 55 25 .28 55 58 3.3 57 2.0 59 1.2 58 .8 1.0 57 36 63 50 61 81 62 .23 63 5.7 62 .83 63 .32 62 3.9 64 2.3 66 1.3 63 1.3 66 .7 .9 1.' 55 57 65 .29 .31 .38 56 58 63 7788 10278 18482 50 53 62 13 17 51 55 51 55 27 65 66 ~ the preceding table have been computed from exact values of the mean and standard deviation and not the rounded values reported here. Since the scale used to compute measure 16 is entirely arbitrary, only data in standardized form are reported for this measure.
|
From page 63... ...
63 TABLE 4.3 Intercorrelations Among Program Measures on 74 Programs in Civil Engineering Measure 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Program Size 01 .83 .65 .02 .08 .07 .15 .73 .70 .42 .74 .37 .28 .56 .74 .69 02 .71 .01 .16 -.11 .05 .72 .73 .18 .75 .39 .39 .51 .73 .65 03 .03 -.02 -.12 .02 .57 .57 .20 .57 .47 .31 .38 .56 .52 Program Graduates 04 -.12 .15 -.10 .18 .17 .00 .11 .12 .03 .16 .19 .17 05 -.25 .00 .25 .26 -.06 .24 -.03 .24 -.02 .04 -.05 06 .43 .05 .02 .18 .03 -.11 -.16 -.02 .09 .10 07 .21 .22 .08 .18 -.13 .04 .21 .05 .05 Survey Results 08 .98 .35 .94 .54 .62 .57 .62 .57 09 .30 .92 .53 .62 .55 .62 .57 10 .34 .20 .14 .04 .34 .35 11 .52 .63 .58 .63 .58 University Library 12 .54 .26 .32 .32 Research Support 13 14 Publication Records 15 16 .29 .27 .26 .44 .36 .95 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.
|
From page 64... ...
1.0++ r = .72 + + + + + * v ~ O +/+++++++++++/+++++++++++/+++++++++++/+++++++++++/+++++++++++/+++++++++++/+++++++++++/+++++++++++/ 1 4 9 16 25 36 49 64 81 Measure 01 (square root scale)
|
From page 65... ...
FIGURE 4.2 Mean rating of program effectiveness in educating research scholars/scientists (measure 09) versus number of graduates in last f ive years (measure 02)
|
From page 66... ...
66 TABLE 4.4 Characteristics of Survey Participants in C N Field of Specialization ivil Engineering Respondents Civil Engineering 104 81 Sanitary/Environ. Engineering 15 12 Other/Unknown 10 8 Faculty Rank Professor 89 69 Associate Professor 24 19 Assistant Professor 16 12 Year of Highest Degree Pre-1950 7 5 1950-59 14 11 1960-69 70 54 Post-1969 36 28 Unknown 2 2 Evaluator Selection Nominated by Institution 113 88 Other 16 12 Survey Form With Faculty Names 118 92 Without Names 11 9 Total Evaluators 129 100
|
From page 67... ...
indicate a conf idence interval of +1. 5 standard errors around the reported mean (x)
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.