<p>I study political science. I think there has to be a line drawn between political sicence as a subject towards the advancement of other ends (political career, law etc) and an end unto itself (academic rigor and scholarship). I think the Hix article tries to measure the latter via citations and influential scholarship. I studied political science at UCSD as an undergrad and I am surprised to find the extent of UCSD professors such as Lijphart, Jacobson, Kernell, Popkin, Cox, Shugart...etc. are read and thought of at Oxford where I am a grad student. UCSD normally may not be thought of a Poli Sci powerful house though in academia, they are. USC is trying to build towards that I think though it has yet to establish a reputation per se in academia as a school of thought. UCSD/UCI for example for awhile have been (and still is) trending Lijphartian and rationalist and is particularly strong in comparative politics. UMich is particularly strong in US politics. Departments like Yale and Harvard are strong throughout. On the other hand if you measure the former, in instances where poli sci helps launch political careers or at least is a starting point, Yale, Harvard, rest of the Ivies and Oxbridge will be the natural place you gravitate to. But that is also misleading because undergraduate degree in that sense I would argue correlates much more the overall prestige of the institutions rather than evaluating them on the merits of their department.</p>
<p>nice, finally a post that makes sense. good stuff.</p>