That the methodology is "thin" is only part of it.  While it's always  
a good idea to have the opportunity to talk candidly about the things  
we feel are good as well as the other things that "need development"  
in our programs, this type of study should never be used on its own to  
judge program quality.  It's unfortunate that it is being touted as  
such.

If anyone out there in JESSE land is interested in partnering to  
develop a worthwhile methodology (and eventual dataset) to assess LIS  
programs, I would really like to be part of that.  There is quite a  
bit of information out there to start with actually.  Danny Wallace's  
data might be one place to start.

Jennifer Sweeney

Program evaluation consultant
Smith & Lehmann Consulting
[log in to unmask]
www.smithlehmann.com

Adjunct faculty
iSchool @ Drexel University
[log in to unmask]



On Mar 18, 2011, at 8:21 AM, Michael Zimmer wrote:

> I recall when these were first announced in 2009. The methodology  
> seems quite thin. Asking deans, program directors and a single  
> senior faculty from each school to rank all schools is little more  
> than a reputational measurement limited by those few individual's  
> (likely uneven) knowledge of the current status of other programs.
>
> Compared to the robust (yet not uncontroversial) methodology used by  
> US News for other school rankings -- which include empirical  
> measures of placement rates, acceptance rates, expenditures per  
> student, mean GPAs, student/faculty ratio, etc -- this is almost  
> comical.
>
> -mz
>
> -- 
> Michael Zimmer, PhD
> Assistant Professor, School of Information Studies
> Co-Director, Center for Information Policy Research
> University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
> e: [log in to unmask]
> w: www.michaelzimmer.org
>
>
> On Mar 17, 2011, at 6:53 PM, Gretchen Whitney wrote:
>
>> Greetings,
>>   I bring this to your attention because these two msgs are making  
>> the rounds of Web4Libs and other discussion lists tonite.
>>   The first is at
>> http://tinyurl.com/4dert6f which is a tiny version of the full URL at
>> http://grad-schools.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-graduate-schools/top-library-information-science-programs/library-information-science-rankings/page+2
>> The original msg represented here seemed to be unaware of t he fact  
>> that this data appears to be posted/gathered in 2009 - three years  
>> ago. But it is being posted as current (2011).
>>  The second is at
>> http://tinyurl.com/4r25skm
>> which is a tiny version of the full URL at
>> http://www.usnews.com/education/best-graduate-schools/articles/2011/03/14/library-and-information-studies-rankings-methodology-2012
>>  The original posting seems to be based on three-year old data,  
>> which appears to be current, except for the little date of data  
>> collection of 2008.
>>
>>  While this indeed old data, I bring this to your attention because  
>> it is appearing in my mailbox tonite as if it were current  
>> information.
>>  And I've not seen anything in ALISE or ASIST literature to dispute  
>> the US News claims. Or to provide any other rankings according to  
>> more reliable criteria however stated.
>>  --gw
>>
>>
>> < 
>> > 
>> < 
>> > 
>> < 
>> ><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
>> Gretchen Whitney, PhD, Retired
>> School of Information Sciences
>> University of Tennessee, Knoxville TN 37996 USA           [log in to unmask]
>> http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/
>> jESSE:http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/jesse.html
>> SIGMETRICS:http://web.utk.edu/~gwhitney/sigmetrics.html
>> < 
>> > 
>> < 
>> > 
>> < 
>> ><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
>>
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2011 14:02:27 -0400
>> From: Robert Balliot <[log in to unmask]>
>> To: [log in to unmask], Publib <[log in to unmask]>
>> Subject: [Web4lib] Library Science rankings
>>
>> I have heard the phrase "When you are number 2, you try harder" :
>>
>> http://grad-schools.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-graduate-schools/top-library-information-science-programs/library-information-science-rankings
>>
>>
>> With University of Rhode Island ranking last at 44, the phrase "No  
>> place to
>> go but up" comes to mind.
>>
>> I would like to see the survey upon which they base these results.   
>> But,
>> given that there is really no consequence for a failure to be  
>> competitive,
>> the results of the survey would be merely academic.
>>
>> http://www.usnews.com/education/best-graduate-schools/articles/2011/03/14/library-and-information-studies-rankings-methodology-2012
>>
>> Sigh,
>> R. Balliot
>> _______________________________________________
>> Web4lib mailing list
>> [log in to unmask]
>> http://lists.webjunction.org/web4lib/
>>
>