Postscript on Program Rankings

摘要

LIS program assessments based on White's perception data and Pettigrew and Nicholls' publication measures converge (broadly speaking) in terms of the leading schools, but they diverge (clearly) in terms of individual rankings. The ranking discrepancies we have highlighted raise an interesting and complex question. Why do some schools (e.g., Illinois) have relatively low publication records but relatively high perception rankings, and why do others (e.g., Western Ontario) have relatively high publication records, but relatively low perception rankings? One answer could be that some schools which have relatively low publication rates, have relatively high citation counts. According to Brace (1992, p. 122), measuring the "productivity of graduate schools of library and information science by publication does not correlate well with measuring productivity by citation." (Illinois was ranked 1 in Brace's (1992, p. 119, Table 2) citation analysis of White's ten "best schools," as it happens.) On the other hand, it could be that "intangible notions of size and age" (McGrath, 1993, p. 195) exercise greater influence on faculty judgements than universalistic measures of quality.