• July 29, 2014

Doctoral Programs by the Numbers

Select a Field:

Aerospace Engineering | Agricultural and Resource Economics | American Studies | Animal Sciences | Anthropology | Applied Mathematics | Astrophysics and Astronomy | Biochemistry, Biophysics, and Structural Biology | Biology/Integrated Biology/Integrated Biomedical Sciences | Biomedical Engineering and Bioengineering | Celland Developmental Biology | Chemical Engineering | Chemistry | Civil and Environmental Engineering | Classics | Communication | Comparative Literature | Computer Engineering | Computer Sciences | Earth Sciences | Ecology and Evolutionary Biology | Economics | Electrical and Computer Engineering | Engineering Science and Materials | English Language and Literature | Entomology | FoodScience | Forestry and Forest Sciences | French and Francophone Language and Literature | Genetics and Genomics | Geography | German Language and Literature | History | History of Art, Architecture and Archaeology | Immunology and Infectious Disease | Kinesiology | Languages, Societies and Cultures | Linguistics | Materials Science and Engineering | Mathematics | Mechanical Engineering | Microbiology | Music | Neuroscience and Neurobiology | Nursing | Nutrition | Oceanography, Atmospheric Sciences and Meteorology | Operations Research, Systems Engineering and Industrial Engineering | Pharmacology, Toxicology and Environmental Health | Philosophy | Physics | Physiology | Plant Sciences | Political Science | Psychology | Public Affairs, Public Policy and Public Administration | Public Health | Religion | Sociology | Spanish and Portuguese Language and Literature | Statistics and Probability | Theatre and Performance Studies

Linguistics

The National Research Council assessed programs according to 21 different criteria. Here are the NRC's five major ratings summarizing those criteria. For a detailed explanation, see our FAQ.

S-Rank: Programs are ranked highly if they are strong in the criteria that scholars say are most important.
Research: Derived from faculty publications, citation rates, grants, and awards.
Students: Derived from students' completion rates, financial aid, and other criteria.
Diversity: Reflects gender balance, ethnic diversity, and the proportion of international students.
R-Rank: Programs are ranked highly if they have similar features to programs viewed by faculty as top-notch.
Institution, program S-Rank High S-Rank Low Research High Research Low Students High Students Low Diversity High Diversity Low R-Rank High R-Rank Low
Boston U.
Applied Linguistics
29 48 10 24 50 52 33 46 21 48
Carnegie Mellon U.
Modern Languages
9 22 32 45 1 5 1 1 30 51
City U. of New York Graduate Center
Linguistics
38 50 21 34 47 50 11 26 22 42
Cornell U.
Linguistics
28 41 40 47 11 29 2 14 7 23
Georgetown U.
Linguistics
23 32 24 37 26 39 19 34 30 46
Harvard U.
Linguistics
4 19 6 27 3 16 24 42 3 24
Indiana U. at Blooming-
ton

Linguistics
5 13 5 13 18 37 34 43 23 42
Indiana U. at Blooming-
ton

Second Language Studies
37 51 47 50 36 46 8 24 44 52
Johns Hopkins U.
Cognitive Science
1 1 1 1 4 20 43 50 1 19
Massachu-
setts Institute of Technology

Linguistics
9 21 13 23 2 9 25 37 1 17
Michigan State U.
Linguistics
21 30 39 48 4 25 2 10 35 50
New York U.
Linguistics
14 25 19 32 29 43 22 34 4 28
North-
western U.

Linguistics
4 16 6 22 6 23 49 52 17 44
Ohio State U. Main Campus
Linguistics
8 22 19 32 9 27 26 37 5 25
Purdue U. Main Campus
Linguistics
6 20 9 20 3 17 4 21 33 47
Rice U.
Linguistics
38 51 41 49 12 34 19 34 19 39
Rutgers U. at New Brunswick
Linguistics
27 41 28 40 17 33 13 31 4 29
San Diego State U. and U. of California at San Diego
Language and Communicative Disorders
4 16 3 10 8 27 11 27 6 29
Stanford U.
Linguistics
7 21 7 19 9 34 35 45 2 15
State U. of New York at Stony Brook
Linguistics
26 41 18 32 22 39 3 14 17 39
U. at Buffalo (SUNY)
Linguistics
39 51 26 41 42 48 14 31 19 41
U. of Arizona
Linguistics
11 23 12 22 12 27 30 39 13 34
U. of California at Berkeley
Linguistics
5 16 10 23 6 25 43 49 2 20
U. of California at Los Angeles
Applied Linguistics
2 2 2 3 2 15 13 30 12 50
U. of California at Los Angeles
Linguistics
23 32 29 41 9 24 42 49 2 15
U. of California at San Diego
Linguistics
24 38 20 39 23 38 47 51 3 20
U. of California at Santa Barbara
Linguistics
30 46 26 41 39 45 37 47 21 40
U. of California at Santa Cruz
Linguistics
27 43 38 49 2 15 51 52 7 34
U. of Chicago
Linguistics
15 27 4 14 45 50 35 44 1 14
U. of Colorado at Boulder
Linguistics
13 29 4 19 29 40 34 45 18 43
U. of Connec-
ticut

Linguistics Ph.D.
36 49 35 46 18 33 6 25 9 31
U. of Delaware
Linguistics
8 22 10 24 18 33 3 19 9 37
U. of Florida
Linguistics
42 51 47 50 24 42 2 14 41 51
U. of Georgia
Linguistics
35 47 41 47 8 25 40 48 47 52
U. of Hawaii-
Manoa

Linguistics
49 52 50 51 46 51 9 26 16 41
U. of Hawaii-
Manoa

Second Language Acquisition
45 52 35 46 9 33 8 25 33 50
U. of Illinois at Urbana-
Champaign

Linguistics
9 22 5 14 39 46 5 18 22 43
U. of Iowa
Second Language Acquisition
39 52 47 50 3 42 2 15 30 49
U. of Kansas
Linguistics
13 29 23 42 15 43 2 13 19 39
U. of Louisiana at Lafayette
Applied Language and Speech Sciences
N/R N/R N/R N/R N/R N/R N/R N/R N/R N/R
U. of Maryland at College Park
Linguistics
3 6 2 10 2 14 19 33 2 26
U. of Massachu-
setts at Amherst

Linguistics
3 5 4 12 3 15 8 22 6 27
U. of Michigan at Ann Arbor
Linguistics
11 23 14 23 6 26 43 50 11 32
U. of Minnesota-
Twin Cities

Linguistics
29 42 31 41 32 44 26 37 38 50
U. of New Mexico Main Campus
Linguistics
35 49 23 37 49 52 32 43 6 33
U. of Oregon
Linguistics
26 42 24 39 22 46 9 25 28 44
U. of Pennsyl-
vania

Linguistics
6 19 4 12 15 33 32 42 2 18
U. of South Florida
Second Language Acquisition/ Instructional Technology
24 40 51 52 1 8 12 28 47 52
U. of Southern California
Linguistics
10 23 5 16 26 40 2 9 14 40
U. of Texas at Austin
Linguistics
28 44 22 37 47 51 18 33 2 17
U. of Washing-
ton

Linguistics
28 45 28 40 30 46 40 49 19 46
U. of Wisconsin at Madison
Linguistics
27 47 17 33 37 47 15 29 10 45
Yale U.
Linguistics
33 49 29 44 28 42 10 27 15 40
Methodology: This interactive tool is based on rankings developed by the NRC. For a complete explanation of the methods the research council used, go to its site; registration may be required.

Comments

1. penguin17 - October 03, 2010 at 12:24 pm

Worth noting that publications in books and conference proceedings appear to have been entirely disregarded by the NRC, along with citations of such publications. Also, publications by graduate students without a faculty co-author (a big deal in linguistics, and part of the culture of the field) were disregarded as well. Evidently, how much grad students publish was considered irrelevant to PhD program quality.

Add Your Comment

Commenting is closed.

subscribe today

Get the insight you need for success in academe.