Thomas Nadelhoffer

« Redefining “Borders”: Part 2 (guest post) | Main | Hypatia’s "Radical" Politics. Or, Some Things Never Change »



Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


thank you very much for this guest post. Disability is seldom considered in these discussions about prestige bias.

I wanted to underscore the point that the lack of disabled faculty at "elite" institutions, including the lack of disabled philosophers at these institutions, affects disabled students in a multitude of ways and also means that these institutions reproduce oppressive ideas, stereotypes, and beliefs about disability.

I wrote an earlier blogpost about the attempts by disabled students at Yale to get their administration to address issues of inaccessibility on that campus, as well as the lack of disabled faculty at Yale, and the need for courses in critical disability studies.

You will find the earlier post at the link below:


thank you for this, i look forward to reading the article. i never really knew what class i was in until i began studies at my phd institution in the U.S. articles/posts like this help me process that and subsequent realizations. take care.

Arguedas Gabriela

Helen, this is a great commentary. Would you give me permission to translate it into Spanish? My email is Thanks!

Helen De Cruz

It is OK to translate it in Spanish - please do mention the original source and please also provide a link to it. Many thanks

Alan  White

Helen, that graphic by itself is very powerful! Thank you for this work.

Filippo Contesi

Thanks for this, Helen. I do not understand why the diagram (and your data?) jumps from PGR 21--50 to PGR unranked. Are the PGR 51--75 programmes included in PGR unranked?

Helen De Cruz

Hi Filippo, yes, the rankings on the PGR (at least the one I consulted) only had info for programs ranked up until 50. The current rankings do give programs outside of the top-50 in the US and UK, but these aren't given a specific rank, just a mean score.

Filippo Contesi

Hi, Helen, many thanks. I'm not sure I understand. (Sorry for being slow!) There have been no changes in this respect between current and (at least the most recent) previous editions of the PGR. Both do rank programmes beyond the 50th, although they do so only by geographic region (US, UK, Australasia and Canada). In other words, they do not include an explicit 'global' table beyond the 50th programme. However, since the 'global' table is simply an ordering by mean, a PGR 51--75 (and perhaps even beyond given the presence of means for some unranked programmes) table can be easily put together. Or am I missing something here?

But, anyway, is your answer that you included in 'PGR unranked' all data for those programmes which the PGR ranks locally (or provides means for) and are outside of the 'global' top 50?

Filippo Contesi

APPENDIX: This is the kind of ranked PGR 51-downwards I mean:

51st: Birmingham, Bristol, Johns Hopkins, Maryland
55th: California Davis, Sheffield, Warwick, Western Ontario
59th: Illinois Chicago, Monash
61st: Durham, Manchester, York, Boston, Florida State, Texas A&M, California Santa Barbara, Minnesota Minneapolis-St Paul
69th: St Louis, Rochester, Calgary, Melbourne, (Birkbeck, Glasgow, Reading)
76th: (Nottingham, Utah)
78th: Auckland, (Arizona State, Purdue, U. at Buffalo, Missouri Columbia)

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)