<p>Ramaswami, as you relate more about these conversations, I am struck by how different they seem from how you first characterised them: </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>They don’t sound completely ignorant. And the way you’re now describing their limitations, I don’t understand how those are the basis for declaring the NRC rankings rubbish. There may be other reasons to question the NRC findings, but it’s not clear to me why their reticence to discuss undergrad education is one of them.</p>
<p>For the benefit of others who may not know the study as well as you do, the survey was called “The National Survey of Graduate Faculty” and was specifically geared towards research-doctorate programs alone. Furthermore, the survey wouldn’t have gone to some of the people you’re describing as having disappointed you with their knowledge. It went to faculty in research-doctorate programs alone, not staff. The heading above the five evaluative questions for institutions was “ASSESSMENT OF RESEARCH-DOCTORATE PROGRAMS.” Each of the five questions also offered the option of “little or no familiarity” or “Don’t know well enough to evaluate,” which give faculty who also don’t know the graduate program an “out” for every single item.</p>