Browsing by Subject "Universities and colleges -- United States -- Finance"
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item An investigation of the perceptions of research administrators regarding the validity, reliability, and usefulness of selected research productivity indicators(Texas Tech University, 1986-05) Schulze, William EdwardThe quantitative tools relating to the research mission are limited. An acceptable set of measures does not exist with which to describe condition or relative status of sponsored research programs. The discovery of viable indicators must begin with the investigation of the validity, reliability, and usefulness of those indicators currently in use. The purpose of this study was to investigate the validity, reliability, and usefulness of twelve selected indicators of sponsored research productivity. A nation-wide survey of mid to upper level research administrators solicited numerical ratings and general comments for each indicator in nine rating categories — validity, reliability, and usefulness for the organizational settings of the department, college/school, and institution as a whole. The indicators consisted of one set of six indicators commonly used in reports and in the literature and another set of six less used indicators describing certain aspects of the research process as defined by a specific institution or suggested by a particular theoretician. The findings revealed a mixture of mean ratings that ranged from moderately high to moderately low for validity, reliability, and usefulness at the three organizational levels. Among the twelve, the six common indicators rated higher than the six uncommon indicators. Many indicator component variables were perceived as being highly discipline-dependent, and the measures derived from them were considered to have little value unless disciplinary differences were considered. Indicators comprised of gross measures were perceived as more valuable as institutional indicators. Indicators with variables describing individual productivity were perceived as more important at the departmental level. No single indicator or indicator composite emerged as a quintessential descriptor of sponsored research productivity. The findings indicate a perception that the indicators used in combination with others could present an accurate description of the condition and/or status of sponsored research in a university.