Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
A latest ranking of communication studies, communication science and mass communication doctoral programs of US universities. This file is for informational purpose only. Courtesy:Barnett, G. A., Danowski, J. A., Feeley, T. H. and Stalker, J. (2010), Measuring Quality in Communication Doctoral Education Using Network Analysis of Faculty-Hiring Patterns. Journal of Communication, 60: 388–411. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2010.01487.x
Citation preview
Measuring Quality in Communication Doctoral Education G. A. Barnett et al.
Tab
le2
Cen
tral
ity
Mea
sure
sof
Hir
ing
Net
wor
kof
Com
mu
nic
atio
nP
hD
Pro
gram
s
Un
iver
sity
/Pro
gram
Ou
t-D
egre
e(R
ank)
In-D
egre
e(R
ank)
NE
GO
PY
(Ran
k)C
entr
alit
yE
igen
valu
e(R
ank)
Cen
tral
ity
Wis
con
sin
-Mad
ison
,J&
MC
68.0
0(1
)25
.00
(6)
−1.7
5(1
)32
.99
(1)
Mic
hig
anSt
ate,
C48
.00
(2)
17.0
0(1
9)−1
.71
(2)
31.6
4(2
)Il
linoi
s,U
rban
a–C
ham
paig
n,S
C37
.00
(3)
20.0
0(1
1)−1
.44
(5)
26.2
0(5
)T
exas
-Au
stin
,CS
37.0
0(3
)11
.00
(49)
−1.5
3(3
)27
.98
(3)
Stan
ford
,C36
.00
(5)
3.00
(88)
−0.9
9(1
2)19
.82
(14)
Flor
ida,
MC
33.0
0(6
)30
.00
(3)
−1.0
3(9
)22
.13
(10)
Wis
con
sin
-Mad
ison
,CA
32.0
0(7
)14
.00
(29)
−0.7
6(2
1)17
.34
(26)
Min
nes
ota,
J&M
C31
.00
(8)
13.0
0(3
6)−0
.90
(14)
19.3
8(1
6)N
orth
wes
tern
,CS
30.0
0(9
)12
.00
(37)
−1.2
6(7
)22
.84
(8)
USC
,C29
.00
(10)
18.0
0(1
4)−1
.21
(8)
23.5
8(7
)Io
wa,
CS
29.0
0(1
0)11
.00
(49)
−1.3
5(6
)23
.65
(6)
Illin
ois,
Urb
ana–
Ch
ampa
ign
,IC
R29
.00
(10)
11.0
0(4
9)−0
.81
(19)
17.5
3(2
5)In
dian
a,M
C28
.00
(13)
15.0
0(2
7)−0
.72
(25)
17.3
0(2
7)K
ansa
s,C
S28
.00
(13)
12.0
0(3
7)−0
.99
(12)
19.6
1(1
5)M
ich
igan
Stat
e,M
C24
.00
(15)
27.0
0(5
)−1
.03
(9)
22.8
0(9
)N
orth
Car
olin
a-C
hap
elH
ill,M
C24
.00
(15)
16.0
0(2
3)−0
.76
(21)
18.9
2(2
0)W
ash
ingt
on,C
23.0
0(1
7)2.
00(9
1)−0
.58
(29)
15.2
6(3
5)Io
wa,
MC
22.0
0(1
8)9.
00(5
8)−0
.05
(52)
12.7
9(4
3)M
inn
esot
a,C
S21
.00
(19)
12.0
0(3
7)−0
.81
(19)
19.0
8(1
8)P
urd
ue,
C19
.00
(20)
25.0
0(6
)−0
.90
(14)
19.1
0(1
7)O
hio
Stat
e,J&
C17
.00
(21)
17.0
0(1
9)−0
.72
(25)
18.9
0(2
1)M
isso
uri
,J17
.00
(21)
15.0
0(2
7)0.
05(5
8)11
.65
(50)
Indi
ana,
CC
u16
.00
(23)
12.0
0(3
7)−0
.72
(25)
17.8
5(2
3)
(con
tinu
edov
erle
af)
398 Journal of Communication 60 (2010) 388–411 © 2010 International Communication Association
G. A. Barnett et al. Measuring Quality in Communication Doctoral Education
Tab
le2
(Con
tinu
ed)
Un
iver
sity
/Pro
gram
Ou
t-D
egre
e(R
ank)
In-D
egre
e(R
ank)
NE
GO
PY
(Ran
k)C
entr
alit
yE
igen
valu
e(R
ank)
Cen
tral
ity
Pen
nsy
lvan
ia,C
16.0
0(2
3)11
.00
(49)
−0.2
7(3
9)12
.19
(47)
Tex
as-A
ust
in,J
15.0
0(2
5)12
.00
(37)
−0.3
1(3
6)15
.37
(33)
Tex
as-A
ust
in,M
eS15
.00
(25)
5.00
(78)
−0.2
3(4
3)10
.82
(55)
Pen
nSt
ate,
CA
Sc14
.00
(27)
41.0
0(1
)−1
.48
(4)
27.9
1(4
)G
eorg
ia,S
p14
.00
(27)
16.0
0(2
3)−1
.03
(9)
20.5
6(1
1)G
eorg
ia,M
C13
.00
(29)
36.0
0(2
)−0
.76
(21)
20.2
9(1
2)A
laba
ma,
CIn
Sc13
.00
(29)
18.0
0(1
4)−0
.49
(31)
14.4
8(3
8)O
klah
oma,
C13
.00
(29)
12.0
0(3
7)−0
.40
(33)
15.2
9(3
4)A
rizo
na,
C13
.00
(29)
9.00
(58)
−0.2
3(4
3)14
.66
(36)
Flor
ida
Stat
e,C
12.0
0(3
4)16
.00
(23)
−0.8
5(1
6)19
.01
(19)
Ten
nes
see,
C10
.00
(35)
30.0
0(3
)−0
.85
(16)
20.1
2(1
3)Sa
nta
Bar
bara
,C10
.00
(35)
14.0
0(2
9)−0
.31
(36)
14.6
1(3
7)O
hio
,MC
10.0
0(3
5)14
.00
(29)
−0.4
0(3
3)14
.32
(39)
Mic
hig
an,M
C10
.00
(35)
4.00
(83)
−0.2
7(3
9)12
.34
(45)
Neb
rask
a,C
S10
.00
(35)
3.00
(88)
0.36
(70)
8.02
(67)
Ari
zon
aSt
ate,
C9.
00(4
0)23
.00
(8)
−0.4
5(3
2)16
.68
(28)
S.Il
linoi
s,M
eA9.
00(4
0)8.
00(6
4)−0
.05
(52)
8.59
(62)
Pit
tsbu
rgh
,C9.
00(4
0)8.
00(6
4)0.
18(6
6)8.
30(6
5)N
YU
8.00
(43)
5.00
(78)
0.49
(73)
6.70
(76)
San
Die
go,C
8.00
(43)
2.00
(91)
0.05
(58)
8.37
(64)
Bow
ling
Gre
en,C
S7.
00(4
5)23
.00
(8)
−0.7
6(2
1)18
.08
(22)
Oh
io,C
S7.
00(4
5)22
.00
(10)
−0.6
3(2
8)15
.38
(32)
Uta
h,C
7.00
(45)
19.0
0(1
3)−0
.85
(16)
17.7
2(2
4)
(con
tinu
edov
erle
af)
Journal of Communication 60 (2010) 388–411 © 2010 International Communication Association 399
Measuring Quality in Communication Doctoral Education G. A. Barnett et al.
Tab
le2
(Con
tinu
ed)
Un
iver
sity
/Pro
gram
Ou
t-D
egre
e(R
ank)
In-D
egre
e(R
ank)
NE
GO
PY
(Ran
k)C
entr
alit
yE
igen
valu
e(R
ank)
Cen
tral
ity
Indi
ana,
TC
7.00
(45)
12.0
0(3
7)−0
.58
(29)
15.6
4(3
0)T
empl
e,M
Me&
C7.
00(4
5)11
.00
(49)
−0.0
5(5
2)12
.07
(48)
Syra
cuse
,MC
7.00
(45)
8.00
(64)
0.67
(76)
8.09
(66)
Pen
nSt
ate,
MC
7.00
(45)
0.00
(96)
1.17
(82)
5.54
(80)
Ken
tuck
y,C
6.00
(52)
17.0
0(1
9)−0
.40
(33)
15.9
5(2
9)C
olor
ado,
C6.
00(5
2)12
.00
(37)
−0.1
8(4
6)13
.17
(42)
S.Il
linoi
s,Sp
C6.
00(5
2)11
.00
(49)
0.00
(56)
9.98
(57)
Mas
sach
use
tts-
Am
her
st,C
6.00
(52)
9.00
(58)
0.14
(61)
7.95
(68)
Ken
tSt
ate,
CS
6.00
(52)
8.00
(64)
0.45
(71)
6.47
(78)
Cor
nel
l,C
6.00
(52)
7.00
(69)
0.49
(73)
8.57
(63)
RP
I,L
L&
C6.
00(5
2)6.
00(7
4)0.
49(7
3)6.
62(7
7)M
aryl
and,
J&P
C6.
00(5
2)4.
00(8
3)0.
27(6
9)7.
93(6
9)W
ayn
eSt
ate,
C5.
00(6
0)7.
00(6
9)0.
14(6
1)8.
61(6
1)N
orth
wes
tern
,PA
5.00
(60)
1.00
(74)
3.32
(95)
0.95
(96)
Mar
ylan
d,C
4.00
(62)
14.0
0(2
9)0.
00(5
6)11
.51
(51)
Ore
gon
,C&
Soc
4.00
(62)
14.0
0(2
9)0.
14(6
1)10
.27
(55)
Col
orad
o,Sc
hoo
lofJ
4.00
(62)
12.0
0(3
7)0.
14(6
1)9.
99(5
6)R
utg
ers,
C&
LS
4.00
(62)
11.0
0(4
9)−0
.09
(49)
11.9
7(4
9)M
isso
uri
,C4.
00(6
2)9.
00(5
8)−0
.14
(48)
10.5
8(5
4)T
exas
A&
M,C
3.00
(67)
18.0
0(1
4)−0
.18
(46)
13.8
2(4
1)N
orth
Car
olin
a-C
hap
elH
ill,C
S3.
00(6
7)12
.00
(37)
−0.0
9(4
9)9.
17(5
9)O
hio
,MC
&T
3.00
(67)
12.0
0(3
7)0.
14(6
1)7.
86(7
1)L
SU,C
S3.
00(6
7)11
.00
(49)
0.23
(67)
7.93
(69)
(con
tinu
edov
erle
af)
400 Journal of Communication 60 (2010) 388–411 © 2010 International Communication Association
G. A. Barnett et al. Measuring Quality in Communication Doctoral Education
Tab
le2
(Con
tinu
ed)
Un
iver
sity
/Pro
gram
Ou
t-D
egre
e(R
ank)
In-D
egre
e(R
ank)
NE
GO
PY
(Ran
k)C
entr
alit
yE
igen
valu
e(R
ank)
Cen
tral
ity
Nor
thw
este
rn,M
eTSo
c3.
00(6
7)0.
00(9
6)2.
02(9
2)2.
46(9
2)L
SU,M
C&
PA
2.00
(72)
20.0
0(1
1)−0
.23
(43)
14.0
7(4
0)N
ewM
exic
o,C
2.00
(72)
18.0
0(1
4)−0
.27
(39)
12.5
5(4
4)W
ash
ingt
onSt
ate,
C2.
00(7
2)18
.00
(14)
−0.0
9(4
9)12
.30
(46)
Sou
thC
arol
ina,
MC
2.00
(72)
17.0
0(1
9)−0
.31
(36)
15.4
3(3
1)U
C-B
erke
ley,
Rh
2.00
(72)
1.00
(94)
2.83
(94)
1.24
(95)
Mia
mi,
C1.
00(7
7)14
.00
(29)
−0.0
5(5
2)9.
62(5
8)So
uth
Flor
ida,
C1.
00(7
7)11
.00
(49)
0.09
(60)
8.91
(60)
Bu
ffal
o,C
1.00
(77)
9.00
(58)
0.23
(67)
7.55
(73)
S.M
issi
ssip
pi,M
C1.
00(7
7)7.
00(6
9)1.
75(8
8)4.
40(8
4)H
owar
d,C
Cu
1.00
(77)
5.00
(78)
1.75
(88)
2.91
(91)
How
ard,
MC
&J
1.00
(77)
5.00
(78)
1.89
(90)
2.25
(93)
Geo
rgia
Stat
e,C
S0.
00(8
3)16
.00
(23)
−0.2
7(3
9)11
.46
(52)
Mar
quet
te0.
00(8
3)14
.00
(29)
0.72
(78)
7.40
(74)
Nor
thD
akot
a,P
uD
isco
urs
e0.
00(8
3)12
.00
(37)
0.45
(71)
7.63
(72)
Wes
tV
irgi
nia
,C&
Inst
0.00
(83)
9.00
(58)
0.94
(80)
4.80
(82)
Den
ver,
HC
S0.
00(8
3)8.
00(6
4)0.
67(7
6)5.
94(7
9)Il
linoi
s-C
hic
ago,
C0.
00(8
3)7.
00(6
9)0.
76(7
9)6.
76(7
5)A
lban
y,So
ciol
ogyC
0.00
(83)
7.00
(69)
n/a
5.09
(81)
Mem
phis
,C0.
00(8
3)6.
00(7
4)1.
03(8
1)4.
43(8
3)C
onn
ecti
cut,
C0.
00(8
3)6.
00(7
4)1.
44(8
5)3.
67(8
6)
(con
tinu
edov
erle
af)
Journal of Communication 60 (2010) 388–411 © 2010 International Communication Association 401
Measuring Quality in Communication Doctoral Education G. A. Barnett et al.
Tab
le2
(Con
tinu
ed)
Un
iver
sity
/Pro
gram
Ou
t-D
egre
e(R
ank)
In-D
egre
e(R
ank)
NE
GO
PY
(Ran
k)C
entr
alit
yE
igen
valu
e(R
ank)
Cen
tral
ity
Min
nes
ota,
Rh
&Sc
C0.
00(8
3)6.
00(7
4)1.
57(8
7)3.
09(9
0)D
uqu
esn
e,R
0.00
(83)
5.00
(78)
2.38
(93)
2.03
(94)
Haw
aii,
CIn
Sc0.
00(8
3)4.
00(8
3)1.
39(8
3)4.
13(8
5)S.
Mis
siss
ippi
,SC
0.00
(83)
4.00
(83)
1.39
(83)
3.51
(87)
How
ard,
MC
-RT
F0.
00(8
3)4.
00(8
3)1.
89(9
0)3.
17(8
9)R
egen
t,C
S0.
00(8
3)3.
00(8
8)1.
48(8
6)3.
30(8
8)M
IT0.
00(8
3)2.
00(9
1)n/
a0.
00(9
7)C
olu
mbi
a,C
S0.
00(8
3)0.
00(9
6)n/
a0.
00(9
7)N
orth
Dak
ota
Stat
e,C
0.00
(83)
0.00
(96)
n/a
0.00
(97)
Tot
alm
ean
10.7
811
.74
0.00
12.2
1SD
12.2
97.
71.
007.
27
Not
e:O
ut-
degr
eedo
esn
otin
clu
dese
lf-h
ires
ina
depa
rtm
ent.
A=
arts
;C
=co
mm
un
icat
ion
;C
u=
cult
ure
;H
=h
um
an;
I=
inst
itu
te;
ILS
=in
form
atio
nan
dlib
rary
scie
nce
s;In
=in
form
atio
n;J
=jo
urn
alis
m;M
=m
ass;
Me=
med
ia;P
A=
publ
icaf
fair
s;P
u=
publ
ic;R
=re
sear
ch;
Rh
=rh
etor
ic;R
TF
=ra
dio,
tele
visi
on,fi
lm;S
=st
udi
es;S
c=
scie
nce
s;So
c=
soci
ety;
Sp=
spee
ch;T
=te
leco
mm
un
icat
ion
.NE
GO
PY
cen
tral
ity
can
beco
mpa
red
wit
hth
eei
gen
valu
ece
ntr
alit
ybe
cau
seth
ere
was
only
one
grou
pid
enti
fied
.NE
GO
PY
does
not
hav
ea
cen
tral
ity
inde
xfo
rn
odes
base
don
the
enti
ren
etw
ork.
402 Journal of Communication 60 (2010) 388–411 © 2010 International Communication Association
