Understanding and Using the New Carnegie Classifications

1
Understanding and Using the New Carnegie
Classifications

• Alexander C. McCormick
• The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of
  Teaching
• SHEEO/NCES Network Conference
• May 9, 2006

2
A Little History

• 1970 The Carnegie Commission on Higher Education
  creates a classification system to serve its
  research needs
• 1973 Classification published to assist research
  on higher education
• 1976, 1987, 1994, 2000 revised editions
• 2005-06 major overhaul

3
Original Design Principles

• Seek comparability with respect to
• Functions of the institutions
• Characteristics of students and faculty
• Use empirical data about what institutions do
• Secondary analysis of existing data
• Enacted mission

4
Evolution of Meanings and UsesLiabilities of
Success

• Classification as
• identity
• marker of
• quality
• prestige
• market position
• object of strategic action

• Institutionalization
• research
• funding
• U.S. News rankings
• reification of categories
• Expectations of
• precision
• holistic assessment

5
Why Change the Classification?

• 1970 framework has limitations
• Higher education has changed
• A single framework is no longer sufficient
• Value in acknowledging complexity
• Concerns about
• Excessive dominance
• Unintended driver of change

6
Summary of Changes

• Comprehensive (all-inclusive) schemes
• Basic, with changes
• Instructional Program
• Undergraduate
• Graduate
• Student Profile
• Overall
• Undergraduate
• Size Setting

• Elective (voluntary) schemes
• Community Engagement
• Undergraduate Education Inquiry Support

7
Basic Classification

• Associates subcategories
• Doctorate-granting index of research activity
• Masters finer distinctions
• Baccalaureate liberal arts to arts
  sciences
• Special focus sharper definition
• Fewer exceptions

8
New Classifications

• Organized around three questions
• What is taught?
• To whom?
• In what setting?

9
Instructional Program

• Undergraduate
• Degree level
• Balance between arts sciences and professional
  fields
• Correspondence with graduate programs

• Graduate
• Degree levels
• Mix of offerings
• Comprehensive
• Focused
• Single field

10
Student Profile

• Overall student profile
• Mix of undergraduate graduate/professional
  enrollments

• Undergraduate profile
• Proportion full- part-time
• Achievement characteristics of first-year
  students
• Transfer-in percentage

11
Size and Setting

• Total enrollment
• Residential character

12
Elective (voluntary) Schemes

• Community Engagement
• Mix of outreach and engagement activities

• Undergraduate Education Inquiry Support
• Efforts to learn about undergraduate education
• Support for assessing improving teaching
  learning

13
Challenges

• Limitations of the national data
• Coverage
• Quality
• Timing issues
• Boundary issues

14
Implications

• Complexity
• Flexibility
• More nuanced classification
• Better matching of classification to purpose
• Possibilities for customization
• Responsibility
• Make justify choices

15
Using the New Classifications

• Web-based tool allowing users to
• Look up individual classifications
• Identify schools sharing common classification(s)
• Generate listings
• Customize classifications
• Aggregate categories
• Examine intersections
• Filter results for subsets of interest
• Level, control, accreditation, special
  populations, etc.
• Download listings

16
Whats Next?

• Finalize web updates
• Continue work on elective classifications
• Monitor uses
• Writing projects

17
To Learn More

• www.carnegiefoundation.org/classifications
• Copies of slides
• email classification_at_carnegiefoundation.org