Well, technically, it’s a ranking.
[UPDATE Dec. 9: the specialty list on the Gourmet site now shows the updated, 2011 information — the same as below.]
The actual specialty list on the Gourmet site should be updated soon — currently it has the 2009 list — but Brian Leiter, who administers the rankings procedure and the site, provides this update on his Leiter Blog:
Due to the small number of evaluators, we are not printing scores, but just a list of programs, broken into two groups based on the scores received:
Group 1 (1-2)
University of Utah
Group 2 (3-9)
National University of Singapore
University at Buffalo, State University of New York
University of British Columbia
University of California, Riverside
University of Hawaii, Manoa
University of Hong Kong
University of Oklahoma, Norman
Evaluators: P.J. Ivanhoe, Bryan Van Norden, David Wong.
Given the small number of evaluators, I myself would completely disregard the separation into two ranked groups. In my own professional opinion, neither Utah nor Duke offers any clear advantage to a student than any of the others — whether we’re talking about the quality of training, success in job placement, or (non-Gourmet Report) reputation of the program. The same could be said for any of the other schools in comparison to the others on the list. Intellectual fit between a student and the interests/specializations of the person or people at the institution is probably the most important thing to consider.
The list should be useful for prospective graduate students who are interested in either specializing or getting competence in Chinese and comparative philosophy by working with a faculty member who is either partially or wholly within a Philosophy department. There are, of course other universities where excellent Asian studies programs exist alongside Philosophy departments. Much of this has already been discussed on this blog.
Comments welcome, of course.