Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Hauptverfasser: Lund, Brady D., Wang, Ting, White, Danica E.
Format: Recurso educativo Open Access
Sprache:en
Veröffentlicht: 2019
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1237598
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
_version_ 1867181012362985472
author Lund, Brady D.
Wang, Ting
White, Danica E.
author_facet Lund, Brady D.
Wang, Ting
White, Danica E.
Lund, Brady D.
Wang, Ting
White, Danica E.
collection Education Resources Information Center
contents University Program Rankings in the United States: Failures in Assessing Important Factors for Library and Information Science Students Lund, Brady D. Wang, Ting White, Danica E. Achievement Rating Universities Library Schools Information Science Education Library Science Educational Quality Sustainability Costs College Choice Periodicals Accreditation (Institutions) Measurement Validity This article presents an overview of the popular rankings (US News and World Report, QS World Rankings) of U.S.-based library and information science (LIS) education programs and the shortcomings of each ranking. It calls for a new, more objective ranking of LIS programs that will more accurately assess quality and sustainability of these programs and provide more relevant information for future students in choosing a program. The uniqueness of the library and information professions is discussed as an impetus for producing more useful rankings and providing open data on student costs and outcomes in LIS programs. Statistics comparing relationships between the major LIS school rankings and factors identified from the literature as important for LIS student college choice are presented. New criteria for the creation of more representative rankings of LIS programs is presented.
format Recurso educativo Open Access
id eric_EJ1237598
institution ERIC Institute of Education Sciences
language en
publishDate 2019
record_format eric
spellingShingle University Program Rankings in the United States: Failures in Assessing Important Factors for Library and Information Science Students
Lund, Brady D.
Wang, Ting
White, Danica E.
Achievement Rating
Universities
Library Schools
Information Science Education
Library Science
Educational Quality
Sustainability
Costs
College Choice
Periodicals
Accreditation (Institutions)
Measurement
Validity
University Program Rankings in the United States: Failures in Assessing Important Factors for Library and Information Science Students Lund, Brady D. Wang, Ting White, Danica E. Achievement Rating Universities Library Schools Information Science Education Library Science Educational Quality Sustainability Costs College Choice Periodicals Accreditation (Institutions) Measurement Validity This article presents an overview of the popular rankings (US News and World Report, QS World Rankings) of U.S.-based library and information science (LIS) education programs and the shortcomings of each ranking. It calls for a new, more objective ranking of LIS programs that will more accurately assess quality and sustainability of these programs and provide more relevant information for future students in choosing a program. The uniqueness of the library and information professions is discussed as an impetus for producing more useful rankings and providing open data on student costs and outcomes in LIS programs. Statistics comparing relationships between the major LIS school rankings and factors identified from the literature as important for LIS student college choice are presented. New criteria for the creation of more representative rankings of LIS programs is presented.
title University Program Rankings in the United States: Failures in Assessing Important Factors for Library and Information Science Students
topic Achievement Rating
Universities
Library Schools
Information Science Education
Library Science
Educational Quality
Sustainability
Costs
College Choice
Periodicals
Accreditation (Institutions)
Measurement
Validity
url https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1237598