The National Academy of Kinesiology 2015 Review and Evaluation of Doctoral Programs in Kinesiology

in Kinesiology Review
View More View Less

In this article we present the results of the 2015 review and ranking of U.S. doctoral programs in kinesiology conducted by the National Academy of Kinesiology (NAK) and based on data for the calendar years 2010 through 2014. This is the third consecutive five-year review and represents the only continuous effort to create rankings for the field of kinesiology today. As in previous reviews, this evaluation was built, using objective measures, on a norm-referenced survey of kinesiology doctoral programs in the United States. Of the 77 programs invited to participate, 52 provided complete sets of the required data. The raw data comprised 9 faculty indices contributing 66% of the total score, and 7 doctoral student indices, which made up the remaining 34%. Raw data for individual indices were converted to normative values by first transforming them into z-scores and then converting the z-scores into T-scores, to which weightings were applied. From the total T-scores, two sets of rankings were determined: unadjusted and adjusted to number of faculty members in each program. Rankings based on total T-scores are presented as well as T-scores for individual indices for each program. We also share raw data means and standard deviations for individual variables, organized into subgroups based on total T-scores. Finally, we compare the outcomes of this review with the previous review conducted by the NAK.

Ulrich (NAK Fellow #375) is a Professor and Dean Emerita with the School of Kinesiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, and served as Chair of the NAK Doctoral Program Committee 2011–2015. Feltz (NAK Fellow #340) is a University Distinguished Professor in the Department of Kinesiology, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, and served as Chair of the NAK Doctoral Program Committee 1999–2002 and as a member 2012–2015.

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 1059 0 0
Full Text Views 2041 779 101
PDF Downloads 886 469 48