IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/usppxx/v6y2019i1p87-97.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An Alternative to the Carnegie Classifications: Identifying Similar Doctoral Institutions With Structural Equation Models and Clustering

Author

Listed:
  • Paul Harmon
  • Sarah McKnight
  • Laura Hildreth
  • Ian Godwin
  • Mark Greenwood

Abstract

The Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education is a commonly used framework for institutional classification that classifies doctoral-granting schools into three groups based on research productivity. Despite its wide use, the Carnegie methodology involves several shortcomings, including a lack of thorough documentation, subjectively placed thresholds between institutions, and a methodology that is not completely reproducible. We describe the methodology of the 2015 and 2018 updates to the classification and propose an alternative method of classification using the same data that relies on structural equation modeling (SEM) of latent factors rather than principal component-based indices of productivity. In contrast to the Carnegie methodology, we use SEM to obtain a single factor score for each school based on latent metrics of research productivity. Classifications are then made using a univariate model-based clustering algorithm as opposed to subjective thresholding, as is done in the Carnegie methodology. Finally, we present a Shiny web application that demonstrates sensitivity of both the Carnegie Classification and SEM-based classification of a selected university and generates a table of peer institutions in line with the stated goals of the Carnegie Classification.

Suggested Citation

  • Paul Harmon & Sarah McKnight & Laura Hildreth & Ian Godwin & Mark Greenwood, 2019. "An Alternative to the Carnegie Classifications: Identifying Similar Doctoral Institutions With Structural Equation Models and Clustering," Statistics and Public Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(1), pages 87-97, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:usppxx:v:6:y:2019:i:1:p:87-97
    DOI: 10.1080/2330443X.2019.1666761
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/2330443X.2019.1666761
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/2330443X.2019.1666761?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:usppxx:v:6:y:2019:i:1:p:87-97. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/uspp .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.