Transcript Reputation Among Graduate Programs: Comparing Correlates

The Correlates of Prestige Across
Graduate and Professional Schools
Kyle Sweitzer
Data Resource Analyst
Michigan State University
Fred Volkwein
Professor and Senior Scientist
Center for the Study of Higher Education
Penn State University
Paper presented at the 48th Annual Forum of the Association
for Institutional Research
Seattle, WA May 27, 2008
©2008 Kyle V. Sweitzer
1
Why study reputation ratings?
Prospective graduate students use graduate
program ratings to inform their application
and admissions decisions.
Administrators use graduate program ratings
to inform resource allocation decisions.
(Ehrenberg and Hurst, 1996)
2
Existing studies on rankings/ratings
Most of the studies have examined institutions’
graduate programs as a whole, via aggregating
individual program ratings (Volkwein, 1986;
Grunig, 1997).
Few studies have examined graduate program
ratings at the department or school level.
Even fewer have looked at the U.S. News
graduate school ratings (most have examined
the NRC ratings).
3
Research Questions
What variables relate to the U.S. News peer
assessment ratings of graduate programs in the
professional school disciplines of business,
education, engineering, law, and medicine?
Are there variables relating to prestige that are
common across all of the disciplines in the
study, and are there variables that are specific
to certain disciplines?
4
Conceptual Framework
See paper
5
Population
Schools/Colleges appearing in the lists of
“The Top Schools” in business, education,
engineering, law, and medicine in the 2008
edition of U.S. News’ America’s Best
Graduate Schools.
50 Schools of Business
52 Schools of Education
51 Schools of Engineering
104 Schools of Law
51 Schools of Medicine
6
Variables / Data Sources
DEPENDENT VARIABLE – Peer assessment survey of
deans, faculty, program directors
INDEPENDENT VARIABLES – Data from U.S. News
--standardized admissions tests
--program acceptance rates
--full-time graduate enrollment in the school
--non-resident tuition
--student/faculty ratio
--undergraduate GPA
--variables specific to a discipline
7
Variables / Data Sources
Research activity is measured in terms of faculty
publications per capita.
Institute for Scientific Information Web of Science
Science and Social Science Citation Indices
Search on “Subject Category” for journals specific
to a discipline.
8
Descriptive Statistics, Schools of Business
Variable Name
• Peer assessment score
• Average undergraduate GPA
• Average GMAT
• Acceptance rate for school
• Avg starting salary of grads
• Pct grads employed at graduation
• Non-resident tuition
• FT graduate enrollment in school
• FT faculty in school
• S-F ratio for school
• Total publications 2001-05
• Pubs / full-time faculty 2001-05
Mean
3.71
3.37
666
0.40
93,160
0.74
32,692
449
156
2.95
454
3.15
Std Dev
0.54
0.10
27.0
0.13
13,167
0.08
6,338
369
65.6
1.71
239
1.51
9
Descriptive Statistics, Schools of Education
Variable Name
• Peer assessment score
• Average GRE
• Doctoral acceptance rate for school
• Doctoral degrees granted 2005-06
• Pct students in doctoral program
• Research expendit’s 2006 (millions)
• Rsch exp / FT fac 2006 (thousands)
• Non-resident tuition
• FT graduate enrollment in school
• FT faculty in school
• S-F ratio for school
• Total publications 2001-05
• Pubs / full-time faculty 2001-05
Mean
3.68
1151
0.34
58.4
0.41
15.37
236.0
21,732
516
75
7.74
155
2.53
Std Dev
0.41
86.2
0.15
44.6
0.13
7.75
129.6
5,772
338
40.4
5.21
78.6
1.41
10
Descriptive Statistics, Schools of Engineering
Variable Name
• Peer assessment score
• Average quantitative GRE
• Acceptance rate for school
• Pct faculty in Natl Academy of Eng
• Doctoral degrees granted 2005-06
• Research expendit’s 2006 (millions)
• Rsch exp / FT fac 2006 (thousands)
• Non-resident tuition
• FT graduate enrollment in school
• FT faculty in school
• S-F ratio for school
• Total publications 2001-05
• Pubs / full-time faculty 2001-05
Mean
3.72
760
0.28
0.06
99.9
88.77
482.5
24,309
1380
294
3.77
1384
5.16
Std Dev
0.54
11.6
0.11
0.04
66.1
53.31
186.5
6,593
855
165
0.88
782
2.61
11
Descriptive Statistics, Schools of Law
Variable Name
• Peer assessment score
• Median undergraduate GPA
• Median LSAT
• Acceptance rate for school
• Bar passage rate
• Pct grads employed at graduation
• Non-resident tuition
• FT enrollment for school
• FT faculty for school
• S-F ratio for school
• Total publications 2001-05
• Pubs / full-time faculty 2001-05
Mean
3.09
3.52
162
0.24
0.86
0.79
29,005
722
51
14.29
59.9
1.02
Std Dev
0.77
0.14
4.20
0.07
0.08
0.13
6,032
281
21.5
2.68
65.3
0.83
12
Descriptive Statistics, Schools of Medicine
Variable Name
• Peer assessment score
• Average undergraduate GPA
• Average MCAT
• Acceptance rate for school
• NIH rsch expendit’s 2006 (millions)
• Rsch exp / FT fac 2006 (thousands)
• Non-resident tuition
• Total enrollment for school
• FT faculty for school
• Faculty-student ratio
• Total publications 2001-05
• Pubs / full-time faculty 2001-05
Mean
3.73
3.70
10.86
0.07
241.8
163.2
37,332
581
1486
2.79
7244
5.27
Std Dev
0.56
0.07
0.57
0.03
176.1
65.3
6,683
177
985
2.07
4159
2.39
13
Regression Analysis
• Using the conceptual framework as a guide, we used the
peer assessment score as the dependent variable and
estimated a blocked (set-wise) regression model for
each of the five separate graduate/professional school
disciplines.
• In the first block, we entered the institutional
characteristics, such as the size and wealth of the
school. In the second block, we entered the faculty and
student indicators. In the third block we entered the
variables reflecting faculty and student outcomes.
• We avoided collinearity by picking the strongest indicator
from each set of variables.
14
Regression Results, Schools of Business
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Standardized Betas of Significant Coefficients
Variables
Full-time enrollment
Non-resident tuition
Student-faculty ratio
Avg GMAT score
Pubs per faculty 2001-2005
Starting salary of grads
Model 1
.624***
.330***
Model 2
.407***
.228*
ns
.388***
Model 3
.267*
.253**
ns
.596***
Adjusted R-Square
.736
.807
.878
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------*Significant at .05 level; **Significant at .01 level; ***Significant at .001 level.
ns = non-significant when entered into model
15
Regression Results, Schools of Education
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Standardized Betas of Significant Coefficients
Variables
Full-time enrollment
Non-resident tuition
Student-faculty ratio
Avg GRE score
Pubs per faculty 2001-2005
Model 1
.366**
.514***
Model 2
.354*
Model 3
.535**
ns
ns
.421*
Adjusted R-Square
.368
.377
.474
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------*Significant at .05 level; **Significant at .01 level; ***Significant at .001 level.
ns = non-significant when entered into model
16
Regression Results, Schools of Engineering
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Standardized Betas of Significant Coefficients
Variables
Full-time enrollment
Non-resident tuition
Student-faculty ratio
Avg GRE score
Pubs per faculty 2001-2005
Model 1
.664***
.327**
.443***
Model 2
.576***
Model 3
.792***
ns
.226*
.468***
Adjusted R-Square
.447
.619
.721
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------*Significant at .05 level; ***Significant at .001 level.
ns = non-significant when entered into model
17
Regression Results, Schools of Law
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Standardized Betas of Significant Coefficients
Variables
Full-time enrollment
Non-resident tuition
Student-faculty ratio
Median LSAT score
Pubs per faculty 2001-2005
Employment rate at graduation
Model 1
.213*
.508***
Model 2
.159*
– .207***
.712***
Model 3
.163**
– .174***
.530***
.264***
ns
Adjusted R-Square
.397
.795
.849
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------*Significant at .05 level; **Significant at .01 level; ***Significant at .001 level.
ns = non-significant when entered into model
18
Regression Results, Schools of Medicine
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Standardized Betas of Significant Coefficients
Variables
Full-time enrollment
Non-resident tuition
Faculty-student ratio
Avg MCAT score
Pubs per faculty 2001-2005
Model 1
ns
ns
Model 2
.224*
Model 3
.342***
ns
.701***
.313**
.637***
.374***
Adjusted R-Square
.016
.540
.653
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------*Significant at .05 level; **Significant at .01 level; ***Significant at .001 level.
ns = non-significant when entered into model
19
Summary of Results
Variables with the largest beta coefficient:
Business
Education
Engineering
Law
Medicine
Starting salary of graduates
Enrollment size
Enrollment size
Admissions selectivity (LSAT)
Admissions selectivity (MCAT)
20
Summary of Results
The SIZE variable (full-time enrollment) is
the only variable that remained significant
in the final model for all 5 disciplines.
However, size has the greatest beta
coefficient in only 2 of the 5 disciplines
(education and engineering).
So for schools of education and engineering,
enrollment size is the strongest predictor
of reputation!
21
Summary of Results
• ADMISSIONS SELECTIVITY (average
entering test score) remains significant in
the final model for 4 of the 5 disciplines,
and has the greatest beta coefficient for 2
of those 4 – Law schools and Med schools.
• So for Law schools and Med schools, the
tested “quality” of the admitted students is
the strongest predictor of reputation!
• Education is the one discipline for which
the Admissions Test score is not signif.
related to reputation.
22
Summary of Results
• FACULTY PRODUCTIVITY (pubs per
faculty) also remained significant in 4 of the
5 disciplines, and had the 2nd greatest beta
coefficient in all 4.
• The 4 disciplines were: engineering,
education, law, and medicine.
• Not surprising that faculty productivity is
significant in explaining graduate reputation.
23
Summary of Results
• The business schools may be the most
surprising all around --- not only is it the
one discipline in which faculty productivity
does not influence reputation, but the
factor with the greatest influence on
reputation is the starting salary of the
graduates …..a factor determined by
external (market) forces!!
24
Summary of Results
• TUITION (our only measure of wealth) did
not remain significant in the final model for
any of the 5 disciplines.
• Student-faculty ratio only remained
significant in 2 of the 5 disciplines (Law
and Med), and was one of the weaker
predictors even for them.
25
Implications
These results confirm prior studies on graduate
reputation that analyzed the 1995 NRC ratings, as
well as findings that analyze the correlates of
institutional reputation at the UG level.
The question remains as to how well the
U.S. News ratings measure the concept of quality.
Is the magazine really determining
“America’s Best Graduate Schools?”
26