Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 53
APPENDIX
B
Questionnaires
53
PREPUBLICATION COPY—UNEDITED PROOFS
OCR for page 54
OCR for page 55
National Research Council
Assessment of Research Doctorate Programs
2006
Institutional Questionnaire
Every ten or so years, the National Research Council conducts a study of national importance
regarding the quality and characteristics of doctoral programs in the United States. This comparative
assessment is designed to assist prospective doctoral students with selecting programs that best fit their
interests and to permit programs to benchmark themselves against similar programs.
The 2006 Assessment of Research Doctorate Programs collects data about the doctoral programs in
over 60 areas of study in American universities. This Institutional Questionnaire is designed to collect
data about institution-wide policies and practices.
A. Health Benefits and Services
A1. Is university-supported health care insurance part of the financial support provided to
enrolled doctoral students?
Yes
No If no, skip to question A3
A2. Does the university-supported health insurance for doctoral students cover mental health
services?
Yes
No
NOTE: For questions that follow about postdoctoral scholars, please use this definition of a
postdoctoral scholar developed by the Association of American Universities:
• The appointee was recently awarded a Ph.D. or equivalent doctorate (e.g., Sc.D., M.D.) in an
appropriate field; and
• the appointment is temporary; and
• the appointment involves substantially full-time research or scholarship; and
• the appointment is viewed as preparatory for a full-time academic and/or research career; and
• the appointment is not part of a clinical training program; and
• the appointee works under the supervision of a senior scholar or a department in a university or
similar research institution (e.g., national laboratory, NIH, etc.); and
• the appointee has the freedom, and is expected, to publish the results of his or her research or
scholarship during the period of the appointment.
(See: http://www.aau.edu/reports/PostDocRpt.html. Accessed 6/27/06)
A3. Is university-supported health care insurance part of the financial support provided to
postdoctoral scholars?
Yes
No If no, skip to question B1
55
PREPUBLICATION COPY—UNEDITED PROOFS
OCR for page 56
A4. Does the university-supported health insurance for postdoctoral scholars cover mental
health services?
Yes
No
B. Collective Bargaining
B1. Is there a collective bargaining agreement for teaching assistants on your campus?
Yes
No If no, skip to question B2
B1a. Does the collective bargaining agreement for teaching assistants cover:
Some teaching assistants
All teaching assistants
B2. Is there a collective bargaining agreement for research assistants on your campus?
Yes
No If no, skip to Question C1
B2a. Does the collective bargaining agreement for research assistants cover:
Some research assistants
All research assistants
C. New Ph.D. Programs
C1 . What new Ph.D. programs have been added to the university since 1995?
Please list all programs added since 1995, even if not included in this study
D . Research Location
D1. Please list all of the zip code(s) that your institution or faculty members use when submitting
proposals to potential sponsors.
a.
b.
c.
d.
56
PREPUBLICATION COPY—UNEDITED PROOFS
OCR for page 57
[Note: The web version of the questionnaire will allow the respondent to add as many zip codes as
needed.]
E. Academic Year
E1. How is an academic year defined at this institution?
From July 1st to June 30th
Other, please specify:_______________________________
F. Doctoral Student Representation in 5 Selected Fields
This section collects outcomes by race/ethnicity on the full-time doctoral students who are U.S.
citizens or permanent residents in each of five broad fields 1) Life Sciences, 2) Physical Sciences
and Mathematics, 3) Engineering, 4) Social and Behavioral Sciences, and 5) Arts and
Humanities.
• If the numbers in these tables are too small to release for reasons of confidentiality, please
provide the raw data to the NRC and we will aggregate over cohorts so that the size of any
cell is always greater than or equal to 5.
• For purposes of this question only, "Physical Sciences, Mathematics, and Engineering" in
the taxonomy have been disaggregated into two separate broad fields: "Physical Sciences
and Mathematics" and "Engineering."
• Do not include Emerging Fields unless they are also included as part of a program in an
established field within the taxonomy
• Include doctoral students enrolled in your doctoral programs, whether or not they have
been admitted to candidacy.
• Do not include doctoral students who have declared that they only intend to earn a master's
degree.
• Doctoral students who "left the program" are those who are no longer enrolled at this time.
• Doctoral students who "stopped out" (left but later enrolled again) should not be counted as
students who left if they are currently enrolled or completed the doctoral degree.
57
PREPUBLICATION COPY—UNEDITED PROOFS
OCR for page 58
Native Americans/Alaska Natives in the Life Sciences
F1a. Please record the number of Native American/Alaskan Natives who entered the Life
Sciences programs included in this study between 1996 and 2005.
Number of Number of students Number of Number of
entering doctoral who left the students who students
students program without a left the program admitted to
If none: enter master’s or after receiving a doctoral
zero doctoral degree master’s degree candidacy
1996-1997
1997-1998
1998-1999
1999-2000
2000-2001
2001-2002
2002-2003
2003-2004
2004-2005
2005-2006
F1b. Of the Native American/Alaska Natives admitted to candidacy in the Life Sciences, record
the number of students from each cohort listed below who completed degrees within the
given number of years after enrolling.
Number still
3 years 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 enrolled after
or less years years years years years years years 10 years
1996-
1997
1997-
1998
1998-
1999
1999-
2000
2000-
2001
2001-
2002
2002-
2003
2003-
2004
2004-
2005
58
PREPUBLICATION COPY—UNEDITED PROOFS
OCR for page 59
2005-
2006
Non-Hispanic Blacks in the Life Sciences
F2a. Please record the number of Non-Hispanic Blacks who entered the Life Sciences programs
included in this study between 1996 and 2005.
Number of Number of students Number of Number of
entering doctoral who left the students who students
students program without a left the program admitted to
If none: enter master’s or after receiving a doctoral
zero doctoral degree master’s degree candidacy
1996-1997
1997-1998
1998-1999
1999-2000
2000-2001
2001-2002
2002-2003
2003-2004
2004-2005
2005-2006
F2b. Of the Non-Hispanic Blacks admitted to candidacy in the Life Sciences, record the
number of students from each cohort listed below who completed degrees within the given
number of years after enrolling.
Number still
3 years 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 enrolled after
or less years years years years years years years 10 years
1996-
1997
1997-
1998
1998-
1999
1999-
2000
2000-
2001
2001-
2002
2002-
2003
2003-
2004
59
PREPUBLICATION COPY—UNEDITED PROOFS
OCR for page 60
2004-
2005
2005-
2006
Non-Hispanic Whites in the Life Sciences
F3a. Please record the number of Non-Hispanic Whites who entered the Life Sciences
programs included in this study between 1996 and 2005.
Number of Number of students Number of Number of
entering doctoral who left the students who students
students program without a left the program admitted to
If none: enter master’s or after receiving a doctoral
zero doctoral degree master’s degree candidacy
1996-1997
1997-1998
1998-1999
1999-2000
2000-2001
2001-2002
2002-2003
2003-2004
2004-2005
2005-2006
F3b. Of the Non-Hispanic Whites admitted to candidacy in the Life Sciences, record the
number of students from each cohort listed below who completed degrees within the given
number of years after enrolling.
Number still
3 years 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 enrolled after
or less years years years years years years years 10 years
1996-
1997
1997-
1998
1998-
1999
1999-
2000
2000-
2001
2001-
2002
2002-
2003
60
PREPUBLICATION COPY—UNEDITED PROOFS
OCR for page 61
2003-
2004
2004-
2005
2005-
2006
Hispanics in the Life Sciences
F4a. Please record the number of Hispanics who entered the Life Sciences programs included
in this study between 1996 and 2005.
Number of Number of students Number of Number of
entering doctoral who left the students who students
students program without a left the program admitted to
If none: enter master’s or after receiving a doctoral
zero doctoral degree master’s degree candidacy
1996-1997
1997-1998
1998-1999
1999-2000
2000-2001
2001-2002
2002-2003
2003-2004
2004-2005
2005-2006
F4b. Of the Hispanics admitted to candidacy in the Life Sciences, record the number of
students from each cohort listed below who completed degrees within the given number of
years after enrolling.
Number still
3 years 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 enrolled after
or less years years years years years years years 10 years
1996-
1997
1997-
1998
1998-
1999
1999-
2000
2000-
2001
2001-
2002
61
PREPUBLICATION COPY—UNEDITED PROOFS
OCR for page 62
2002-
2003
2003-
2004
2004-
2005
2005-
2006
Asians and Pacific Islanders in the Life Sciences
F5a. Please record the number of Asians and Pacific Islanders who entered the Life Sciences
programs included in this study between 1996 and 2005.
Number of Number of students Number of Number of
entering doctoral who left the students who students
students program without a left the program admitted to
If none: enter master’s or after receiving a doctoral
zero doctoral degree master’s degree candidacy
1996-1997
1997-1998
1998-1999
1999-2000
2000-2001
2001-2002
2002-2003
2003-2004
2004-2005
2005-2006
F5b. Of the Asians and Pacific Islanders admitted to candidacy in the Life Sciences, record the
number of students from each cohort listed below who completed degrees within the given
number of years after enrolling.
Number still
3 years 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 enrolled after
or less years years years years years years years 10 years
1996-
1997
1997-
1998
1998-
1999
1999-
2000
2000-
2001
62
PREPUBLICATION COPY—UNEDITED PROOFS
OCR for page 63
2001-
2002
2002-
2003
2003-
2004
2004-
2005
2005-
2006
Native Americans/Alaska Natives in the Physical Sciences and Mathematics
F6a. Please record the number of Native Americans and Alaska Natives who entered the
Physical Sciences and Mathematics programs included in this study between 1996 and
2005.
Number of Number of students Number of Number of
entering doctoral who left the students who students
students program without a left the program admitted to
If none: enter master’s or after receiving a doctoral
zero doctoral degree master’s degree candidacy
1996-1997
1997-1998
1998-1999
1999-2000
2000-2001
2001-2002
2002-2003
2003-2004
2004-2005
2005-2006
F6b. Of the Native Americans and Alaskan Natives admitted to candidacy in the Physical
Sciences and Mathematics, record the number of students from each cohort listed below
who completed degrees within the given number of years after enrolling.
3 Number still
years 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 enrolled after
or less years years years years years years years 10 years
1996-
1997
1997-
1998
1998-
1999
1999-
2000
63
PREPUBLICATION COPY—UNEDITED PROOFS
OCR for page 154
Part E: Background Information
E1. Are you:
Male
Female
E2. What is your marital status?
Mark one only
Married
Living in a marriage-like relationship
Widowed
Divorced
Separated
Never married
E3. Not including yourself or your spouse/partner, how many dependents do you have—that is,
how many others receive at least one half of their financial support from you?
If No Dependents: Mark this box:
Number
a. 5 years of age or younger.........
b. 6 to 18 years.............................
c. 19 years or older ......................
E4. Including children, elderly parents or others, as appropriate, for how many people are you
a primary caregiver?
Number:
E5. What is the highest educational attainment of your mother and father (or guardian)?
Mark one for each
Mother Father
a. Less than high/secondary school graduation ..........................................
b. High/secondary school graduate .............................................................
c. Some college...........................................................................................
d. Bachelor’s degree ...................................................................................
e. Master’s degree (e.g., MA, MS, MBS, MSW, etc.)................................
f. Professional degree (e.g., JD, LLB, D.Min, MD, DDS, etc.) .................
g. Doctoral degree.......................................................................................
h. Not applicable .........................................................................................
154
PREPUBLICATION COPY—UNEDITED PROOFS
OCR for page 155
E6. In what year were you born?
Year of Birth:
E7. What is your citizenship status?
Mark one only
U.S. Citizen
Since birth
Naturalized
Non-U.S. Citizen
With a Permanent U.S. Resident Visa (“Green Card”)
With a Temporary U.S. Visa
E8. Are you Hispanic (or Latino)?
Yes
No (skip to E10)
E9. Which of the following best describes your Hispanic origin or descent?
Mark one only
Mexican or Chicano
Puerto Rican
Cuban
Other Hispanic – Specify Hispanic descent:
_____________________________
E10. What is your racial background?
Mark all that apply
American Indian or Alaska Native
Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander
Asian
Black or African-American
White
Thank you for your time!
155
PREPUBLICATION COPY—UNEDITED PROOFS
OCR for page 156
Admitted to Candidacy Student Questionnaire
Question Rationale
General Rationale for Questionnaire
The data collected from the student questionnaire will provide important information for prospective
students seeking to compare programs within a field; academic administrators seeking to examine
program quality within a field, within an institution, or across institutions; and education policy
researchers seeking to explore changes or potential changes in doctoral education and their implications.
Since this is the first time a student questionnaire has been administered as part of the Assessment of
Doctoral Programs, its administration will be limited to five fields: English, economics, chemical
engineering, physics, and neuroscience/neurobiology.
Part A. Education
The questions in this section are designed to collect information on your area of research, your
educational progress and financial support.
Time to Degree: Questions 1-3 obtain data on when you enrolled, what your research specialty is, when
you were admitted to candidacy and when you expect to complete. In combination with completion data
provided by programs, these data will provide a picture of how students progress through their programs.
Post-Baccalaureate Credentials: Questions 4-8 obtain data on the master’s and other degrees and
certificates you may have obtained before or en route to the doctorate. This information provides a fuller
picture of the post-baccalaureate credentials that students in a given program obtain in order to
matriculate into a program or to prepare themselves for their career.
Research Opportunity: Questions 9-10 obtain data on the number of research publications you may
have written and presentations given. These data provide an indication of the research experiences that
students obtain in a program and offer an indicator of the extent to which students are encouraged to
develop their own research interests and skills
Financial Support: Questions 11-13 obtain information on the level and type of financial support that
students in a program have. This information, in combination with other data on the program and
institutional questionnaires, will provide valuable information on financial support.
156
PREPUBLICATION COPY—UNEDITED PROOFS
OCR for page 157
Part B: Postgraduation Plans
The questions in this section are designed to collect information on the career plans and goals of doctoral
students and whether and how they have changed over time.
Career Goals: Questions 1-2 obtain data on career goals both when the respondents entered the program
and now. Similarly, questions 4-5 obtain data on the type of employer the respondents expected to work
for when they entered their program and now. These questions will provide a picture of the kinds of
career goals students in different programs have and how they change over time.
Faculty Support for Career Goals: Question 3 is designed to obtain information on how supportive
faculty are of students who seek a variety of career aspirations, particularly those outside of academia.
Part C: Program Characteristics
This section obtains data on program characteristics and the respondent’s perception of program quality.
Career Skills: Numerous reports, beginning with the COSEPUP’s Reshaping the Graduate Education of
Scientists and Engineers (1995), have advocated that graduate students learn a variety of career skills in
addition to the substance of their discipline. Question 1 will collect data on the opportunity to acquire
written and oral communication skills, proposal writing, teamwork, independent research, project
management, ethics, pedagogy, and others. Question 2 focuses more specifically on opportunities to
acquire teaching skills and experience.
Academic Progress: Questions 3-8 and 14 collect data on how students acquire information about the
expectations of their program for academic progress and the kinds and quality of feedback on their
progress that they receive.
Mentoring and Career Counseling: The availability of a mentor has been identified as an important
key to success in graduate education. Question 9 asks whether respondents have a faculty member they
consider a mentor. The availability of career advice—particularly advice that covers the range of
potential employment sectors is important potentially for both student retention and career preparation.
Questions 10-13 obtain data on the availability and source of career advice for doctoral students.
Question 15 also asks respondents about the quality of the relationships they have with their advisors.
Social Integration: Barbara Lovitts’ book, Leaving the Ivy Hall, identified the degree to which a student
feels part of a department as a critical factor in determining whether a student completes a doctoral
program. Questions C15, C16, C17, C18, C20, C21, and D1 collect data on the degree to which students
feel supported by faculty and peers, have opportunities to interact with faculty and students, and the
quality of the interaction.
157
PREPUBLICATION COPY—UNEDITED PROOFS
OCR for page 158
Program Quality: Questions 19-24 provide respondents with an opportunity to provide their perceptions
of program quality (curriculum, research experience, faculty teaching ability, dissertation supervision, and
intellectual environment).
Part D: Resources
This section collects data on respondent perceptions of the adequacy of the resources and benefits
available for doctoral students.
Education and Research Resources: The availability of adequate resources is important to both the
speed and quality of a student’s academic progress. Questions 1-4 collect data on respondents’
perceptions of the resources available (from the institution or program) to support their education and
research. They ask for perceptions of the adequacy of computer resources, research, laboratory, or studio
facilities, library resources, and on-campus work-space.
Social Integration: As noted above, the degree to which a student feels part of a department as a critical
factor in determining whether a student completes a doctoral program. Question D5, along with other
questions, collects data on opportunities for social interaction.
Quality of Life: In addition to financial support and health care benefits, support for doctoral students
may also include provision of housing or housing assistance, provision of child care or financial support
for child care, and recreational facilities. These pieces of the support package a doctoral student can
expect—particularly students with children—may affect the ability of students to matriculate, complete in
a timely manner, or complete at all. Questions 6-8 collect data on respondent perceptions of these
benefits.
Part E: Background Information
The information collected in this section of the questionnaire will allow analysts to examine the
comparative demographics of programs, and also examine how the answers to questions in Parts A-D of
the questionnaire may vary across such dimensions as age, gender, race/ethnicity, citizenship status,
family background, marital status, and responsibility for dependents. The participation in doctoral
education of students from a variety of backgrounds is important to the academic enterprise, the conduct
of research, and society in general, so understanding how doctoral education works for students across
groups will provide the opportunity to evaluate success to date and areas where further progress is
necessary.
158
PREPUBLICATION COPY—UNEDITED PROOFS
OCR for page 159
The National Academies
National Research Council
Assessment of Research Doctorate Programs
Survey of Program Quality
Thank you for agreeing to participate as a rater in {taxonomy field name} in the Survey of
Program Quality, a critical component of the National Research Council’s Assessment of
Research Doctorate Programs. This survey asks for your judgment—and the judgment of other
faculty members like you—about the quality of a sample of doctoral programs in your field.
How your judgments will be used. The judgments of over 200 raters in each field will be used
to calculate ratings of perceived quality for a sample of the programs, rather than all the
programs in a field. Previous research (Ostriker & Kuh, 20031) has shown us how to use faculty
views on the strength of different PhD programs combined with objective data concerning
program characteristics to produce ratings of additional programs. These new ratings are based
on objectively measured characteristics, such as publications, citations and time to degree, but
imitate, to the extent achievable, the judgment criteria of the initially surveyed faculty.
Thinking about your perception of a program’s quality. As part of this survey, you will be
asked to rate 15 programs on a scale of 1 to 6 (1=a program not sufficient for graduate education,
6=a distinguished program). We urge you to keep two things in mind as you decide on your
ratings:
• Prior to rating these 15 programs, you will have the opportunity to view a list of all
programs in your field. Keep this “universe” of programs in mind as you rate each of the
15 programs relative to this universe, not to each other.
• Please reflect on what you consider important in a doctoral program as you decide on
your ratings. To assist you, a link below each program’s name goes to an information
page that lists several program and faculty characteristics, a list of the program’s faculty
and a link to the program’s web site as well, should you want to seek additional
information before finalizing your rating.
Your efforts will improve doctoral education through benchmarking and better information about
programs. The survey is being conducted by Mathematica Policy Research (MPR), an
organization experienced in the conduct of confidential surveys. Your responses will be
compiled by MPR and provided to the NRC for their analyses. The National Research Council
staff who analyze the data will sign non-disclosure confidentiality agreements to protect the
identity of individuals participating in the survey. The survey will be conducted using secure
web-based survey technology and any information that could be used to identify or link
responses to an individual respondent for any survey question will be maintained in storage that
is secure. Your identity will be known only to the National Research Council and Mathematica
Policy Research who have signed non-disclosure agreements. Only aggregate information from the
survey, such as means and distributions of ratings for programs, will be included in publications from the
1
Link to citation url.
159
PREPUBLICATION COPY—UNEDITED PROOFS
OCR for page 160
project. If you have any questions about the study or this questionnaire, please email us at NRC-
Assessment@mathematica-mpr.com.
I provide my informed consent to participate in this study Yes No
160
PREPUBLICATION COPY—UNEDITED PROOFS
OCR for page 161
Instructions
1. Listed below are the 15 programs in your field that you are being asked to rate. Given the
range of programs within some fields, you may or may not be familiar with all of the
programs you are being asked to rate. Consequently, you will be asked two questions about
each program. The first asks how familiar you are with the program and the second asks
you to rate its quality.
2. Before considering programs individually, please take a moment to familiarize yourself with
the larger range of programs in your field. To do so, please click on this link:
Click here for a list of all institutions in the study with programs in this field:
3. To begin considering programs individually, click on the link provided for each institution.
You will be taken to that program’s information page. If it was provided to the NRC, the
information pages will also list a link to that program’s home page.
NOTE: The two rating questions for each program will appear at the bottom of that
program’s information page. Your rating will only be considered valid if both
questions are answered.
4. Finally, after you have rated all 15 programs, a summary page will appear with all of your
responses. Please review your responses and make any final changes at that point. Once
submitted, your responses are final.
Names of Programs to be Rated Information Link
Cornell University link to information page
Duke University link to information page
Etc.
SAVE—GO TO
SAVE
SUMMARY PAGE
QUIT FOR NOW
161
PREPUBLICATION COPY—UNEDITED PROOFS
OCR for page 162
Institution: {name} Location: {place}
Program: {name} Program URL: {URL}
Two types of information are presented about this program – the names of the faculty who are
currently working with doctoral students, followed by a few facts about the program and its
faculty.
Faculty Names (Faculty spreadsheet)
Core2 New3 Associated4
2
There will be a link to explain this term.
3
There will be a link to explain this term.
4
There will be a link to explain this term.
162
PREPUBLICATION COPY—UNEDITED PROOFS
OCR for page 163
Some Facts about the Program
• Number of Ph.D.s 2001-2006: _____
• % PhDs in academic positions (average 2001-2005) : ____
• Percent of entering cohort who complete in eight years or less (average for Ph.D.s
admitted between 1996-97 and 1997-1998) : _____
• Median Time to Degree (average 2004-2006): ____
• Faculty % Female : ____
• Faculty % Non-white : _____
The Rating Questions
1. On a scale from 1 to 3, where 1 means you have little or no familiarity with this
program and 3 means that you have considerable familiarity, how familiar are you with
this program?
Little or
None Some Considerable
1 2 3
2. On a scale from 1 to 6, where 1 equals not adequate for doctoral education and 6
equals a distinguished program, how would you rate this program?
Not Adequate
For Doctoral Don’t Know
Education Marginal Adequate Good Strong Distinguished Well Enough
1 2 3 4 5 6 9
SAVE—GO TO SAVE/GO TO NEXT
SAVE
SUMMARY PAGE PROGRAM
QUIT FOR NOW
163
PREPUBLICATION COPY—UNEDITED PROOFS
OCR for page 164
Listed below are your responses to the rating questions you answered. Please review them carefully.
• NOTE - If you wish to review a program’s information sheet once again, click on the link
under the university’s name
• If you wish to change a response, you can do so by making the change on this page.
The correct question will be updated automatically for you
University/Program Name Familiarity Rating Quality Rating
{name-link to info page} {inserted automatically} {inserted automatically}
CAUTION: Please make sure you have thoroughly reviewed your answers.
Once you click the “submit button” your responses are final.
SUBMIT MY FINAL
RESPONSES
164
PREPUBLICATION COPY—UNEDITED PROOFS
