As most readers probably know, the 2014 Philosophical Gourmet Report (PGR), a "Ranking of Graduate Programs in Philosophy in the English-Speaking World," was recently published; the rankings purport to be "primarily measures of faculty quality and reputation." Mitchell Aboulafia has done a series of postings analyzing the 2014 PGR. If Aboulafia's analyses are accurate, which they seem to me to be, they show why the rankings produced by the 2014 PGR ought not to be relied on.
The postings:
- Not With a Bang But With a Whimper—Falling Rates of Participation in the Philosophical Gourmet Report - with the rates of participation by women particularly low
- With a Bang–The PGR in Free Fall - Focusing on philosophy of language in particular
- A Portrait of the 2014 Philosophical Gourmet Report by the Numbers - Various statistical problems with the PGR
- The Philosophical Gourmet Report, by the Experts - "Experts" reviewing particular areas may have only published one paper in the relevant area (some have published none)
Some might think that some of these problems are at least partially the result of the September Statement. However, the editors of the PGR made the decision to publish the report and seem to stand by it, so the reasons behind the problems (whatever they might be) seem beside the point.
Readers might also be interested in:
- Before You Consult the 2014 Philosophical Gourmet Report, Consider Leiter’s Words: “Reputation tends to be yesterday’s news”
- Why Did Leiter Give Up Reputational Surveys in Law, but Not in Philosophy? The Mystery Deepens
(Edit: the above two links have now been fixed).
Recent Comments