A Case Study to Examine Three Peer Grouping Methodologies. Professional File. Article 142, Summer 2017
Saved in:
| Title: | A Case Study to Examine Three Peer Grouping Methodologies. Professional File. Article 142, Summer 2017 |
|---|---|
| Language: | English |
| Authors: | D'Allegro, Mary Lou, Association for Institutional Research (AIR) |
| Source: | Association for Institutional Research. 2017. |
| Availability: | Association for Institutional Research. 1435 East Piedmont Drive Suite 211, Tallahassee, FL 32308. Tel: 850-385-4155; Fax: 850-383-5180; e-mail: air@airweb.org; Web site: http://www.airweb.org |
| Peer Reviewed: | N |
| Page Count: | 23 |
| Publication Date: | 2017 |
| Document Type: | Reports - Research |
| Education Level: | Higher Education Postsecondary Education |
| Descriptors: | Institutional Characteristics, Private Colleges, Selection, Selection Tools, Proximity |
| ISSN: | 2155-7535 |
| Abstract: | This study considered three selection indices to choose institutional peers: (a) proximity, (b) percentile, and (c) normative. Although conceptually similar, only the proximity selection index had been previously studied. The purpose of this paper is threefold. First, the procedures used to generate the peer sets for each selection index are provided. Second, an empirical investigation was conducted to compare the institutional peers chosen by each selection index using those procedures. Third, the stability of peer selection over time was also ascertained from that enquiry. Compiled separately from two data sets extracted three years apart, the three selection indices under investigation yielded remarkably different sets of peers. Fewer than half of the institutions used in this study were identified as peers at both points of time. Additional analyses revealed that the underlying distributions of the characteristics used to select peers might be just as influential as the characteristics themselves. The results did not produce sufficient evidence to endorse any one of the selection indices, but instead suggest that a combination of selection indices might be superior to any one selection index alone. [This paper is an update to "A Case Study to Examine Peer Grouping and Aspirant Selection. Professional File. Article 132, Fall 2013" (ED573093). For the other three articles in the Summer 2017 issue, see ED594959, ED594956, and ED594958.] |
| Abstractor: | As Provided |
| Entry Date: | 2019 |
| Accession Number: | ED594960 |
| Database: | ERIC |
| FullText | Text: Availability: 0 CustomLinks: – Url: https://eric.ed.gov/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?accno=ED594960 Name: ERIC Full Text Category: fullText Text: Full Text from ERIC |
|---|---|
| Header | DbId: eric DbLabel: ERIC An: ED594960 AccessLevel: 3 PubType: Report PubTypeId: report PreciseRelevancyScore: 0 |
| IllustrationInfo | |
| Items | – Name: Title Label: Title Group: Ti Data: A Case Study to Examine Three Peer Grouping Methodologies. Professional File. Article 142, Summer 2017 – Name: Language Label: Language Group: Lang Data: English – Name: Author Label: Authors Group: Au Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22D'Allegro%2C+Mary+Lou%22">D'Allegro, Mary Lou</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Association+for+Institutional+Research+%28AIR%29%22">Association for Institutional Research (AIR)</searchLink> – Name: TitleSource Label: Source Group: Src Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Association+for+Institutional+Research%22"><i>Association for Institutional Research</i></searchLink>. 2017. – Name: Avail Label: Availability Group: Avail Data: Association for Institutional Research. 1435 East Piedmont Drive Suite 211, Tallahassee, FL 32308. Tel: 850-385-4155; Fax: 850-383-5180; e-mail: air@airweb.org; Web site: http://www.airweb.org – Name: PeerReviewed Label: Peer Reviewed Group: SrcInfo Data: N – Name: Pages Label: Page Count Group: Src Data: 23 – Name: DatePubCY Label: Publication Date Group: Date Data: 2017 – Name: TypeDocument Label: Document Type Group: TypDoc Data: Reports - Research – Name: Audience Label: Education Level Group: Audnce Data: <searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Higher+Education%22">Higher Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Postsecondary+Education%22">Postsecondary Education</searchLink> – Name: Subject Label: Descriptors Group: Su Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Institutional+Characteristics%22">Institutional Characteristics</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Private+Colleges%22">Private Colleges</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Selection%22">Selection</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Selection+Tools%22">Selection Tools</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Proximity%22">Proximity</searchLink> – Name: ISSN Label: ISSN Group: ISSN Data: 2155-7535 – Name: Abstract Label: Abstract Group: Ab Data: This study considered three selection indices to choose institutional peers: (a) proximity, (b) percentile, and (c) normative. Although conceptually similar, only the proximity selection index had been previously studied. The purpose of this paper is threefold. First, the procedures used to generate the peer sets for each selection index are provided. Second, an empirical investigation was conducted to compare the institutional peers chosen by each selection index using those procedures. Third, the stability of peer selection over time was also ascertained from that enquiry. Compiled separately from two data sets extracted three years apart, the three selection indices under investigation yielded remarkably different sets of peers. Fewer than half of the institutions used in this study were identified as peers at both points of time. Additional analyses revealed that the underlying distributions of the characteristics used to select peers might be just as influential as the characteristics themselves. The results did not produce sufficient evidence to endorse any one of the selection indices, but instead suggest that a combination of selection indices might be superior to any one selection index alone. [This paper is an update to "A Case Study to Examine Peer Grouping and Aspirant Selection. Professional File. Article 132, Fall 2013" (ED573093). For the other three articles in the Summer 2017 issue, see ED594959, ED594956, and ED594958.] – Name: AbstractInfo Label: Abstractor Group: Ab Data: As Provided – Name: DateEntry Label: Entry Date Group: Date Data: 2019 – Name: AN Label: Accession Number Group: ID Data: ED594960 |
| PLink | https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=ED594960 |
| RecordInfo | BibRecord: BibEntity: Languages: – Text: English PhysicalDescription: Pagination: PageCount: 23 Subjects: – SubjectFull: Institutional Characteristics Type: general – SubjectFull: Private Colleges Type: general – SubjectFull: Selection Type: general – SubjectFull: Selection Tools Type: general – SubjectFull: Proximity Type: general Titles: – TitleFull: A Case Study to Examine Three Peer Grouping Methodologies. Professional File. Article 142, Summer 2017 Type: main BibRelationships: HasContributorRelationships: – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Association for Institutional Research (AIR) – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: D'Allegro, Mary Lou IsPartOfRelationships: – BibEntity: Dates: – D: 01 M: 01 Type: published Y: 2017 Identifiers: – Type: issn-print Value: 2155-7535 Titles: – TitleFull: Association for Institutional Research Type: main |
| ResultId | 1 |
