How Admission Committees Judge"Merit":The Disciplinary Logic of Doctoral Admission at a Top University
In order to better understand how disciplines shape the evaluation criteria and practice of doctoral admissions,a comparative case study based on evaluation sociology was conducted in eight departments in the natural sciences,humanities and social sciences at the B University.By developing teacher evaluation models of three"high consensus"disciplines,the study finds that institutionalized assumptions underpin disciplinary logics in admissions assessment,and that dominant theories,epistemologies,methodologies and practical priori-ties of the disciplines all have an impact on assessment and admissions outcomes.The func-tion of disciplinary logic in admissions assessment is to limit the scope of teachers'attention to individual elements of applicant characteristics,to provide justification and boundaries for constructing criteria of"Merit",and to impose appropriate norms for admissions decisions.Disciplinary logic legitimizes quality standards and evaluation practices within the academic community by constructing rational models.
万方数据
