Philosophy of Religion Rankings
The new (2006-2008) edition of the Philosophical Gourmet Report is out today here. The PGR is the most widely used rankings of philosophy graduate programs in the English-speaking world, and it ranks programs both in terms of overall quality and by strenth in various areas of philosophy (philosophy of language, philosophy of mind, metaphysics, epistemology, etc.). I thought some GOTT readers might be interested in the philosophy of religion rankings. Since some people seem to find the ranking of academic programs distasteful, I’ll put the rankings below the fold. That way, nobody should be unwillingly subjected to them. (My own enthusiasm for rankings is partly explained in this letter I wrote to the then Executive Secretary of the American Philosophical Assosiciation.) So here, but below the fold, are the programs that made the rankings:
(within Groups departments are listed alphabetically):
Philosophy of Religion
Group 1
Oxford University
University of Notre Dame
Group 2
Saint Louis University
Group 3
Purdue University
Group 4
Cornell University
Group 5
Baylor University
Claremont Graduate School
Fordham University
Georgetown University
Indiana University, Bloomington
University of California, Riverside
University of Colorado, Boulder
University of New England (Australia)
University of Oklahoma, Norman
University of Rochester
University of St. Andrews
University of Texas, Austin
University of Wisconsin, Madison
Yale University
In my own opinion, Rutgers should also have made the rankings.
Posted by Keith DeRose in Philosophy | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/446774/6786204
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Philosophy of Religion Rankings:
Comments
Most programs make it into the specialty rankings through the surveys. When evaluators do the surveys, they give programs scores overall, and also for the specialty areas that the evaluator specializes in. The surveys, though, only cover programs that are thought to have a chance of making it into the top 50 (in the US), and Fordham was not included in the surveys. But some programs, though not strong enough overall to be included in the surveys, do have specialty areas of strength, and are inserted into the specialty rankings by the members of the advisory board who specialize in the area in question. That must be what happened with Fordham in medieval. Perhaps the relevant board members should have placed them in a higher group — I really don’t know the area well enough to say one way or the other. But I think that, in general, when they’re inserting a program that didn’t make it in through the surveys, they’re quite hesitant to put them in anything other than the lowest group. In philosophy of religion, for instance, four programs were inserted by the board, and all of them were placed in the bottom group.
Posted by: Keith DeRose | November 11, 2006 at 01:10 PM
Ok, that makes more sense to me now.
Posted by: shane wilkins | November 11, 2006 at 02:35 PM
I’d like to send out three cheers for my home state of Indiana: We’ve got three schools represented in the top 5 groups.
That’s some serious religious brain power coming out of these corn fields!
Posted by: Jonathan Erdman | November 13, 2006 at 12:09 PM
Is anyone familiar with the University of Oklahoma on here? Is it listed simply because of Linda Zagzebski, or is there someone else?
Posted by: Matt | November 16, 2006 at 09:17 AM
Matt: For some areas of specialization, one good person working in the area can get a program ranked. Philosophy of religion is one such area, and I think U-Oklahoma is in there just on the strength of Zagzebski’s presence.
Posted by: Keith DeRose | November 16, 2006 at 11:46 AM
I wonder if anyone has ever tried to create a similar ranking of theology programs?
Posted by: shane | November 17, 2006 at 02:28 AM
Shane: You must have missed the R.R. Reno controversy. Go to the first post in Sept. 2006 on GOTT to read more.
Posted by: D. W. Congdon | November 22, 2006 at 03:50 PM
I was a bit surprised that Fordham wasn’t ranked higher in the Medieval Philosophy category. In fact, the star says that Fordham was “inserted by the board” in its current position. I’m a little unclear on how this methodology works. For example, the University of Southern Florida ranked 14th on this list (4 higher than Fordham) even though they have only one medievalist, Thomas Williams. Don’t get me wrong, Williams is a sharp guy, but Fordham has 3 top-notch medievalists in Gyula Klima, Brian Davies, and Giorgio Pini. How can Williams’ reputation outweigh all three of them?
Posted by: shane wilkins | November 11, 2006 at 04:32 AM