NRC releases revised data table

On April 21, 2011, the NRC released a revised data table for their Assessment of Research-Doctorate Programs. Revised NRC data table Following the release of the original data table, the NRC received a number of questions about the data, and in their follow-up, discovered four substantive errors:

  1. Average Citations per Publication. Publications for 2002 used to obtain citations per publication had been mislabeled in all non-humanities fields. 2002 publications were corrected, and the “citation per publication” variable (which is averaged over the years 2000 to 2006) was re-calculated.
  2. Awards per Allocated Faculty Member. The NRC undercounted honors and awards. Data for this variable were re-compiled from faculty lists and the variable was re-calculated.
  3. Percent with Academic Plans. The response rate to this question, which was calculated from the NSF Survey of Earned Doctorates, varied considerably across programs. It was agreed that a more accurate measure based on survey data was percent of respondents with academic positions or post-docs, not percent of total Ph.D.s. This variable was re-calculated with the changed definition.
  4. Percent of First-Year Students with Full Financial Support. This variable had been given the value “0” when a program had no first year students. The NRC now uses an asterisk to indicate that a program has no first year students. When no data were reported, there is an "N/D".

According to the NRC, these changes typically did not have a large effect on program rankings.  We have not yet determined the effect on our programs at Ohio State, as we wished to get this information to you as quickly as possible following its release today.

We also wanted you to know that the NRC held a meeting in Washington, D.C., last month on “Assessing Research-Doctorate Programs:  A Convocation on Analytic Uses and Future Directions.”  Transcripts and video from that meeting are available on the NRC’s website at  Julie Carpenter-Hubin, Ohio State’s director of institutional research and planning, and her colleague Lou McClelland from University of Colorado Boulder presented “Data Comparability, Utility, and Collection Methods of the 2010 NRC Assessment of Doctorate Programs: Limitations and Suggestions for Improvement.” Their paper is online at The  NRC link to the transcript is titled “Making the Study More Useful: Data Collection.” 

For more information, contact Patrick S. Osmer, vice provost for graduate studies and dean of the Graduate School, or Julie Carpenter-Hubin, director of Institutional Research.



Need help?

Contact staff members in the Graduate School using the staff directory, or call (614) 292-6031.

Follow us

Facebook Facebook
Twitter Twitter