Overview

The survey was publicized in the Chronicle of Higher Education, Science, Science's Next Wave (an online AAAS publication for young scientists), the HMS Beagle (an online publication for life scientists), through the National Association of Graduate-Professional Students' (NAGPS) network of graduate student associations, and on the PhDs.org web site. Survey participants were encouraged to tell others about the survey, and we enabled participants to send an invitation to their colleagues by completing an online form.

The survey is an observational study, not a controlled experiment. Although the participants were self-selected, we have important evidence that our results represent widely held student opinions rather than a small but outspoken set of negative voices.

1. Our survey reached a broad cross section of the graduate student population. The demographics of the survey participants, after controlling for discipline, bear a close resemblance to the demographics of recent cohorts of Ph.D.s. [SED95][SED96]
2. Far from being disgruntled, the vast majority of students expressed satisfaction with their overall educational experiences and with their advisors. Most would recommend their programs to others.
3. A number of our questions are based on a recent national study conducted at the University of Wisconsin-Madison and funded by the Pew Charitable Trusts [GOLDE99]. The Golde study obtained responses from roughly 40% of all students in 11 disciplines at 28 leading research universities. Student assessments of their educational experiences as measured in the Madison study were nearly uniformly more negative than those we found, which suggests that our results, if anything, may be positively biased.

Detailed survey findings may be obtained from http://www.phds.org/survey/results.

Summary of Findings

• 85% of respondents say they are satisfied with their overall educational experiences.
• 78% of respondents say they are satisfied with their advisors.
• 76% would recommend their programs to others.

Nevertheless, the participants raise a number of important concerns, concerns that echo those raised in recent reports from the National Science Board [NSB98], the National Academies [COSEPUP95] [NRC98], the Association of American Universities [AAU98], and others.

Student Perspectives on Existing Policy Recommendations

Career Information & Guidance

• 50% of respondents say their program did not provide enough information during the application process for them to make an informed decision about choosing to pursue a Ph.D.

"[U]niversities have a responsibility to collect and evaluate information about the placement of their doctoral students.... In addition to placement data, universities should maintain comprehensive data on time-to-degree and completion rates.... [I]nformation on program performance and student placement should be available to all students who are considering applying to graduate programs." [AAU98]

• 63% of respondents report that their program did not inform them of where recent program graduates were employed after graduation.

"It is worth noting that even the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) now publishes graduation rates for athletes; an equivalent requirement for these heavily recruited prospective scholars does not seem so unreasonable!" [KENNEDY97]

• 71% of respondents report that their programs did not inform them of the percentage of students who complete the program with a Ph.D.

"The Federal government and universities are responsible for developing relevant experience and training to meet expanding workforce needs and to prepare the student for his or her chosen career. More should be done to inform graduate students of the full range of employment opportunities and to offer a choice of options for expanding career-related training." [NSB98]

• 37% of respondents report that effective career guidance is not available from their department or university career services center for academic careers.
• 49% of respondents report that effective career guidance is not available from their department or university career services center for non-academic careers.

Curricular Breadth & Flexibility

• 11% of students believe that their programs are not doing a good job of preparing them for an academic career.
• 36% believe their programs are not doing a good job of preparing them for a non-academic career.

"More students should ... have off-campus experiences to acquire the skills desired by an increasing number of employers, especially the ability to communicate complex ideas to nonspecialists and the ability to work in teams of interdependent workers." [COSEPUP95]

• 51% of students report that their program does not encourage them to broaden their education through such activities as coursework outside the department, industrial internships, and external workshops.

Mentoring

• 21% of respondents feel that their advisor sees them as a source of cheap labor to advance his/her research.
• 28% of respondents say that graduate students in their program are there primarily to help faculty fulfill their research and teaching obligations.

"A student's progress should be the responsibility of the department rather than of a single faculty member; a small supervisory group (including the student's adviser) should determine when enough work has been accomplished for the Ph.D. degree." [COSEPUP95]

• 48% of respondents report that there is no faculty member other than their advisor who keeps track of their research.

Teaching & Professionalism

• 50% of respondents report that teaching assistants do not receive effective preparation and training before they enter the classroom.

"Graduate students learn to teach... by performing these activities under faculty mentorship. Apprenticeship teaching experiences at progressively more advanced levels, augmented by workshops and other pedagogical training programs, are extremely effective ways to teach prospective teachers how to teach." [AAU98]

• 63% of respondents report that their program or institution does not carefully supervise teaching assistants to help them improve their teaching skills.

Diversity

• 37% of respondents say their department does not actively seek to recruit talented students from underrepresented groups.

"If it appears that the numbers of women and minority-group members are low in particular fields, an effort must be made to determine whether there are barriers to entry, including issues perceived as barriers by members of the group in question. If so, steps to encourage increased participation should be devised and implemented." [COSEPUP95]

• 34% of respondents say their department does not provide a supportive environment for members of underrepresented groups who are enrolled in the program.
• 38% of women (vs. 28% of men) and 49% of underrepresented minority students (vs. 31% of Caucasian and Asian students) report that their department does not provide a supportive environment for members of underrepresented groups.

Future Surveys

The 2000 National Doctoral Program Survey

This second-generation survey contains a number of important improvements:

• The new survey is being expanded to cover the humanities and social sciences in addition to the sciences and engineering. Canadian doctoral programs will be included as well.
• The survey questions have been clarified, expanded, and reviewed by both students and higher education researchers.
• Department chairs and university administrators will be more directly involved in the data gathering process.
• Expanded publicity efforts will seek to substantially increase student participation in and faculty awareness of the survey.
• Students will have more control over the dissemination of their data, and a more detailed privacy policy clearly explains how student data will be used.
• Improved security mechanisms offer the possibility of secure verification of student enrollment status and will greatly reduce the possibility of multiple entries.

This new survey will provide results at the level of individual departments for those departments from which there is sufficient student participation. Department-level data will be provided to students, faculty, and administrators for the departments in question and will also be made publicly available on the web.

How the National Science Board Can Help

Bibliography

[AAU98]

Report and Recommendations, Committee on Graduate Education, Association of American Universities, October 1998.

[COSEPUP95]

Reshaping the Graduate Education of Scientists and Engineers, National Academy of Sciences, 1995.

[GOLDE99]

The Survey on Doctoral Education and Career Preparation, Chris M. Golde, Wisconsin Center for Education Research, 1999.

[KENNEDY97]

Academic Duty, Donald Kennedy, Harvard University Press, 1997.

[NRC98]

Trends in the Early Careers of Life Scientists, Office of Scientific and Engineering Personnel, National Research Council, National Academy Press, 1998.

[NSB98]

The Federal Role in Science and Engineering Graduate and Postdoctoral Education, National Science Board, NSB 97-235, February 1998.

[SED95]

1995 Survey of Earned Doctorates, National Research Council.

[SED96]

1996 Survey of Earned Doctorates, National Research Council.