Health Rankings Methodology
How we rank graduate health programs
All the health rankings are based solely on the results of peer assessment surveys sent to deans, other administrators, and/or faculty at accredited degree programs or schools in each discipline. All schools surveyed in a discipline were sent the same number of surveys. Respondents rated the academic quality of programs on a 5-point scale: outstanding (5), strong (4), good (3), adequate (2), or marginal (1). They were instructed to select "don't know" if they did not have enough knowledge to rate a program. Only fully accredited programs in good standing during the survey period are ranked. Those schools with the highest average scores appear.
In the fall of 2007, surveys were conducted for the 2008 rankings of Pharm.D. pharmacy programs accredited by the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (56 percent of those surveyed responded); of doctoral programs in clinical psychology accredited by the American Psychological Association (response rate: 28 percent); graduate programs in occupational therapy accredited by the American Occupational Therapy Association (53 percent); audiology programs and speech-language-pathology programs accredited by the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (57 percent and 42 percent, respectively); physical therapy programs accredited by the Commission on Accreditation in Physical Therapy Education (33 percent); and master of social work programs accredited by the Commission on Accreditation of the Council on Social Work Education (56 percent).
In the fall of 2006, surveys were conducted for the 2007 rankings of schools of public health accredited by the Council on Education for Public Health (response rate: 78 percent); healthcare management programs accredited by the Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Management Education (72 percent); master's programs in nursing accredited by either the Commission on Collegiate Nursing or the National League for Nursing Accrediting Commission (40 percent); graduate nurse anesthesia programs accredited by the Council on Accreditation of Nurse Anesthesia Educational Programs of the American Association of Nurse Anesthetists (61 percent); graduate nurse-midwifery programs accredited by the American College of Nurse-Midwives Division of Accreditation (74 percent); physician assistant programs accredited by the Accreditation Review Commission on Education for the Physician Assistant (56 percent); rehabilitation counselor education programs accredited by the Commission on Standards and Accreditation: Council on Rehabilitation Education (53 percent); and veterinary schools accredited by the American Veterinary Medical Association (80 percent).
Nursing specialty rankings are based solely on ratings by educators at peer schools. Nursing educators nominated up to 10 schools for excellence in each area.
All peer surveys were conducted by the market research firm Synovate.
Reader Comments
rankings
This information is the equivalent of hearsay. There's nothing objective or analytical about the rankings. People crave a meaningful way to evaluate and compare programs, but this is not it. The US News and World Report gets a lot of attention it doesn't deserve.
This is total BS
Do you realize students use this to determine where they want to go to school. I cannot believe administrators actually pick up to 10 schools to 'nominate'. Next time I hear someone bragging about the program they are in, I'm sending them to this article and will let them know they were just scammed and should feel like a moron for letting bogus reports and processes get to them. Honestly, since this is happening in America, I'm not surprised. This country is full of big headed, too smart for their own good, over marketed bums. I can't believe (I really can) that World News and Reports publish this garbage!
Speech Pathology Rating Basis???
This methodology information is inadequate.
It appears that an administrator or faculty was asked simply to "Rate this program". There is no information on what factors were used for the rating, whether on what the person thought he or she knew about the program's doctoral education, the research activity, the faculty expertise, the master's curriculum or clinical training experiences, the faculty-student ratio, the Praxis performance, or anything.
If the rating really is based on a global "rate this program" statement without any information on the basis for the rating, then, this survey is meaningless. If the ratings are based on better information, but the reader does not know this information, then the survey results are still meaningless.
GARBAGE IN = GARBAGE OUT
advertisement
