The National Research Council’s Rankings of Doctoral Programs in Public Affairs

ABSTRACT

Using the National Research Council (NRC) data, this study aimed to answer two questions: What are the factors that contributed the most to the rankings of public affairs programs? Are there more specific patterns in the rankings of the doctoral programs in public affairs? The results indicate that faculty research productivity is the most important predictor of the rankings of the doctoral programs in the NRC dataset. The results of cluster analyses show that there are programs at large public universities, which are ranked highly and have highly diverse faculty and students.

KEYWORDS:

• Doctoral programs in public affairs
• educational quality
• faculty productivity
• public affairs education

Notes

^1. We will refer to this study and rankings by the National Research Council as the “2005 NRC study.” Actually the data collection for this study began in 2003 and the planning for it had begun a few years earlier than that. The data were collected primarily in 2005 and 2006 and the first documents about the methodology and initial findings of the study were published in 2010 and 2011.

^2. See these rankings and information about them at the following links: Shanghai Jiao Tong University’s “Academic Rankings of World Universities” at http://www.shanghairanking.com/; the Times Higher Education of England rankings at https://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/news/academic-ranking-of-world-universities-2013-released/2006515.article; the U.S. News’ “Best Global Universities Rankings” at http://www.usnews.com/education/best-global-universities/rankings.