Athletic Training Education Programs: To Rank or Not to Rank?

Journal of Athletic Training

Volumn 34, Issue 1, 1999, Pages 48-52

  Voll Jr , Craig A ^a   Goodwin, Jeff E ^b   Pitney, William A ^c  

^a PURDUE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b EASTERN MICHIGAN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c NORTHERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Graduate program ranking; Prestige ranking; Productivity ranking; Undergraduate program ranking

Indexed keywords

EID: 0141644723     PISSN: 10626050     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Keating MJ, Bell GW. Evaluation and comparison of the thirteen graduate level athletic training education programs. J Athl Train. 1996;31(suppl): S-45.
2. Jennings ET. Accountability, program quality, outcome assessment, and graduate education for public affairs and administration. Public Adm Rev. 1989;49:438-446.
3. Spirduso WW. Graduate program ranking in physical education. Quest. 1987;39:103-112.
4. Massengale JD. Current status of graduate physical education: program demography and the issue of program ranking. Quest 1987;39:97-102.
5. Caplow T, McGee RJ. The Academic Marketplace. New York, NY: Basic Books; 1958.
6. Berelson B. Graduate Education in the United States. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill; 1960.
7. Cartter AM. An Assessment of Quality in Graduate Education. Washington, DC: American Council on Education; 1966.
8. Hasbrook CA, Loy JW. Assessment of doctoral programs in physical education: reports, rankings, and recommendations. Quest. 1983;35:131-144.
9. Massengale JD, Sage GH. Departmental prestige and career mobility patterns of college physical educators. Res Q Ex Sp. 1982;53:305-312.
10. Roose KD, Anderson CJ. A Rating of Graduate Programs. Washington, DC: American Council on Education; 1970.
11. Cox WM, Catt V. Productivity ratings of graduate programs in psychology based on publication in the journals of the American Psychological Association. Am Psychol. 1977;32:793-813.
12. Endler NS. Research productivity and scholarly impact of Canadian psychology departments. Can Psychol Rev. 1977;18:152-168.
13. Endler NS, Rushton JP, Roediger HL. Productivity and scholarly impact (citations) of British, Canadian, and U.S. departments of psychology (1975). Am Psychol. 1978;33:1064-1082.
14. Kroll W. Graduate Study and Research in Physical Education. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics; 1982.
15. Long JS. Productivity and academic position in the scientific career. Am Sociol Rev. 1978;43:889-908.
16. Schaeffer DL, Sulyma IM. Productivity in publication and the quality of psychology departments. Am Psychol. 1979;34:441-443.
17. Smith DL, Roche T, Snizek W. Quality of graduate productivity in sociology as measured by the citation index: a longitudinal overview. Res Higher Educ. 1980;13:343-352.
18. Webster DS. Advantages and disadvantages of assessing quality. Change. 1981;13:20-24.
19. Cole J, Cole S. Measuring the quality of sociological research: problems in the use of the science citation index. Am Sociol. 1971;6:23-28.
20. Margulies RZ, Blau PM. The pecking order of the elite: America's leading professional schools. Change. 1973;5:21-28.
21. Hartnett RT, Clark MJ, Baird LL. Reputational ratings of doctoral programs. Science. 1978;199:1310-1314.
22. Wyer JC, Conrad CF. Institutional inbreeding reexamined. Am Educ Res J. 1984;21:213-225.
23. Hurlbert BM. Status and exchange in the profession of anthropology. Am Anthropol. 1976;78:272-284.
24. McGinnis R, Allison PD, Long JS. Postdoctoral training in bioscience: allocation and outcomes. Social Forces. 1982;60:701-722.
25. Hurlbert JS, Rosenfeld RA. Getting a good job: rank and prestige in academic psychologists' careers. Social Educ. 1992;65:188-207.
26. Crane D. The academic marketplace revisited: a study of faculty mobility using the Cartter ratings. Am J Sociol. 1970;75:953-964.
27. Grimes MD, Pinhey TK, Phifer JA. Departmental prestige in rural sociology: its measurement and comparison with general sociological prestige hierarchies. Rural Sociol. 1978;43:7-16.
28. Gross GR. Organizational prestige and academic career patterns. Dissert Abst Int. 1971;32:1641A.
29. Hargens LL. Patterns of mobility of new PhDs among American academic institutions. Sociol Educ. 1969;42:18-37.
30. Hargens LL, Hagstrom WO. Sponsored and contest mobility of American academic scientists. Sociol Educ. 1967;40:24-38.
31. Gordon RA. The advantages of a simple system of optional published refereeing. Specul Science Technol. 1980;3:607-609.
32. Youn TIK, Zelterman D. Institutional career mobility in academia. In: Breneman D, Youn TIK, eds. Academic Labor Markets and Careers. New York, NY: Falmer Press; 1988:52-73.
33. Allison P, Long JS. Inter-university mobility of academic scientists. Am Sociol Rev. 1987;2:643-652.
34. Garfunkel JM, Ulshen MH, Hamrick HJ, Lawson EE. Effect of institutional prestige on reviewers' recommendations and editorial decisions. JAMA. 1994;272:137-138.
35. Crane D. Scientists at major and minor universities: a study of productivity and recognition. Am Sociol Rev. 1965;30:699-714.
36. Merton RK. The Matthew effect in science: the reward and communication systems of science are considered. Science. 1968;159:56-37.
37. Baker JAW. Determination of common characteristics of outstanding doctoral programs in physical education in the united states. Dissert Abst Int. 1979;40:6186A.
38. Baker JAW. Rating of doctoral programs in physical education in the United States. Int J Phys Educ. 1980;17:31-32.
39. Duncan KM, Wright KE. A national survey of athletic trainer roles and responsibilities in the allied clinical setting. J Athl Train. 1992;27:311-316.
40. Gieck J, Lephart S, Saliba E. NATA certification: a 5- and 10-year follow-up. J Athl Train. 1986;21:120-121,163.
41. Miller DA, Ray R, Schrader, JW. Preliminary recommendations of the NATA Education Task Force. NATA News. February 1996:1-4.
42. Rachal JR, Sargent SF. Publication productivity of North American institutions in selected adult education journals 1983-1992. Adult Educ Q. 1992;45:63-78.