Carnegie’s Basic Classification Revised and Available for Review
January 3, 2006
The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching has released a preview of its major revision to the original 1970 classification framework. Documentation of the classification methodology and a tool allowing users to look up classifications of individual institutions are available online. (Viewers must agree not to circulate the classifications in publications, e-mail, and other media.) The preview period is intended to provide opportunity for comment and identification of data errors. The review period will close Wednesday, January 25; a final release is slated for February.
Noteworthy changes to the basic classification include:
- Associate's Colleges are broken into subcategories;
- A new measure of research activity is used for doctorate-granting institutions;
- Master's-level institutions are split into three subcategories; and
- The threshold levels of degree production separating Baccalaureate Colleges, Master's Colleges and Universities, and Doctoral-level institutions have been increased.
In November, five new classification schemes—based on undergraduate program, graduate program, enrollment profile, undergraduate profile, and size/setting—were released by the foundation. Work on a set of "elective" classifications, in which institutions will participate on a voluntary basis, is ongoing and will continue into 2006.
- Federal Court Postpones Effective Date of Overtime Rule
- 1098-T Box 1 Reporting Will Not be Required Until 2018 Tax Year
- EPA Issues Hazardous Waste Generator Improvements Rule
- 2017 Intermediate Accounting and Reporting - Winter
January 23-24, 2017
- 2017 Endowment and Debt Management Forum
February 1-3, 2017
- ON-DEMAND: The CBO's Role in Diversity and Inclusion on Campus
- ON-DEMAND: The Clery Act: Strategic Planning to Mitigate Institutional Risk
- ON-DEMAND: Title IX: Key Issues Surrounding Institutional Compliance
- ON-DEMAND: NACUBO Live! Higher Education Accounting Forum
- ON-DEMAND: Responsibility Center Management: Two Different Perspectives