by Jon Lackman | 22 April 2008 | Uncategorized
We belatedly take note of the third annual rankings of the Faculty Scholarly Productivity Index, published by the Chronicle of Higher Education. The index, designed to compare faculty using objective measures such as books published or times cited, has been criticized most for using faulty data. “Many want to see the National Research Council’s long-anticipated new data … before deciding how much legitimacy to grant the council’s more commercial rival.” The council’s data, much delayed, is now scheduled for release in September.
Without further ado, the latest Faculty Scholarly Productivity Index ratings for programs in “Art History and Criticism”:
1. Harvard U.
2. Columbia U.
3. U. of Pennsylvania
4. New York U.
5. Yale U.
5. U. of Virginia
7. U. of Texas at Austin
8. U. of California at Berkeley
9. U. of Chicago
10. U. of Pennsylvania
(A reader points out that U. of Pennsylvania appears twice! Hmmm. We’ll have to email the Index and see if we can find out why.)
