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 R1
Summary Report 1996 Doctorate Recipients from United States Universities The Survey of Earned Doctorates is conducted for the following agencies of the U.S. government: National Science Foundation U.S. Department of Education National Institutes of Health National Endowment for the Humanities U.S. DeparDnent of Agriculture Peter H. Henderson Project Manager Julie E. Clarke Research Associate Cynthia Woods Senior Analyst OFFICE OF SCIENTIFIC AND ENGINEERING PERSONNEL NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS Washington, D.C. 1998
OCR for page R2
Highlights The following data characterize recipients of research doctorates awarded by U.S. universities from July I, 1995, through June 30, 1996. This infonnation is taken from the 1996 Survey of Earned Doctorates, an annual census of new doctorate recipients: The 392 colleges and universities in the United States that conferred research doctorates in 1996 awarded a record 42,415 doctorates, continuing the upward trend in Ph.D.s awarded that began in I 986. The growth rate in the number of doctorates ranged between I .5 and 5. I percent during the period 1986 to 1996. · Engineering had the fastest growth among broad fields from 1986 to 1996, bringing it to a level near that of other, once much larger, fields. The number of doctorates awarded by broad field in 1996 were 8,255 in life sciences; 6,814 in social sciences, 6,772 in education; 6,675 in physical sciences, 6,305 in engineering; 5,! 16 in humanities; and 2,478 in professional/other fields. Women earned a record ~ 6,945 Ph.D.s and constituted 40 percent of all doctorate recipients in ~ 996. Women constituted 47 percent of U.S. citizens earning doctorates. As in past years, women outnumbered men in education and, for the second year in a row, in social sciences. Men outnumbered women in every other broad field and by a large margin in engineering. As in 1995, U.S. citizen minoritie~blacks, Asians, Hispanics, and American Indians-earned 13 percent of doctorates awarded to U.S. citizens in ~ 996, up from ~ ~ percent in ~ 994. The number of blacks earning Ph.D.s in 1996 (l,315) sustained the 19 percent increase of 1995 (l,309) over 1994 (l,101~. The number of Asians earning Ph.D.s decreased Mom 1995 to 1996, but the 1996 figure of I ,091 is still 15 percent more than in 1994. Hispanics earned a record 950 doctorates, and the number of American Indians jumped from 149 in 1995 to a record IS6 in ~ 996. The fields with the largest percentage of minorities were education, in which blacks were the predominant minority group, and engineering, in which Asians were. U.S. citizens earned over two-thirds of the doctorates awarded in 1996, but the growth in the number of non-U.S. citizens accounts for nearly t~vo-thirds of the growth in doctorates since 1986. After a one-year dip in 1995, the number of non-U.S. citizens earning Ph.D.s increased again in ~ 996. The percentage of doctorates awarded to non-U.S. citizens varied by field, from 58 percent in engineering and 47 percent in physical sciences to 10 percent in education. · Median time to degree since the baccalaureate for Ph.D. recipients peaked at 10.9 years in 1995 and declined slightly in 1996 to 10.S years. Median time to degree since first enrollment in any graduate program peaked at 7.2 years in ~ 992, where it has remained since. University funding was the primary source of support for the majority of ~ 996 Ph.D.s. Almost half of Ph.D.s reported debt related to undergraduate and graduate education. · The proportion of Ph.D.s reporting definite postgraduation commitments declined from almost three-quarters in the 1970s to two-thirds in the mid-199Os. Meanwhile, ofthose doctorates with definite commitments, a smaller proportion planned to be employed and a larger proportion plannecl postdoctoral study in ~ 996. Among those with employment commitments, the proportion headed for academia decreased and the proportion going into industry increased.
OCR for page R3
NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The survey project is part of the program of the Office of Scientific and Engineering Personnel (OSEP). The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to He furtherance of science and technology and to their use for He general welfare. Under authority of the charter granted by Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Bruce M. Alberts is president of the National Academy of Sciences. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in He selection of its members, sharing with He National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes He superior achievements of engineers. Dr. William A. Wulf is president of the National Academy of Engineering. The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by He National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, areas of research, and topics for education. Dr. Kenned I. Shine is president of the Institute of Medicine. The National Research Council (NEtC) was organized by He National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the AcademY's ourDoses of furthering knowledge and of advising He federal government. ~_ ~" ~ A A ~ Functioning in accordance win general policies determined by the Academy, He Council has become the principal operating agency of bow He National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to He government, He public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and He Institute of Medicine. Dr. Bruce M. Alberts and Dr. William A. Wulf are chairman and vice-chairman, respectively, of He National Research Council. This report is based on research conducted by OSEP win He support of He National Science Foundation (NSF), the National Institutes of Heals KNIN, the National Endowment for Me Humanities CASH), the U.S. Department of Education (U.S. Dept. of Ed.), and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) under NSF Conhact No. SRS-9309720. Opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of OSEP and do not necessarily reflect Me views of He sponsoring agencies. - Recommended citation: Henderson, P.H., J.E. Clarke, and C. Woods. 1998. Summary Report 1996: Doctorate Recipients from United States Universities. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press. (The report gives the results of data collected in Be Survey of Earned Doctorates, sponsored by five federal agencies: NSF, NIH, NEH, U.S. Dept. of Ed., and USDA and conducted by the NRC.) Available fi om: Doctorate Records Project National Research Council OSEP Room TJ 2006 2101 Constitution Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20418 Material in this publication is in the public domain and, with appropriate credit, may be reproduced without · . permlsslon. Printed in the United States of America i.
OCR for page R4
111 OFFICE OF SCIENTIFIC AND ENGINEERING PERSONNEL ADVISORY COMMITTEE M. R. C. Greenwood (Chair), University of California David Breneman, University of Virginia Nancy Cantor, University of Michigan CarIos Gutierrez, California State University Stephen I. Lukasik, Independent Consultant William H. Miller, University of California (ex officio) Barry Munitz, California State University Janet Norwood, The Urban Institute John D. Wiley, University of Wisconsin Tadataka Yamada, SmithKline Beecham Corporation A. Thomas Young, Lockheed Martin Corporation (retired) SURVEY OF EARNED DOCTORATES ADVISORY PANEL Georgine M. Pion (Chair?, Vanderbilt University Brenda G. Cox, Mathematica Policy Research Terrence S. Millar, University of Wisconsin Don A. DilIman, Washington State University Roy Radner, New York University Judith Tanur, State University of New York Karen A. Holbrook, University of Florida Maresi Nerad' University of California
OCR for page R5
OCR for page R6
v PREFACE AND ACKNOVVLEDGMENTS This report presents a summary of the results of the 1995-1996 Survey of Earned Doctorates (SED), which has been conducted each year since 1958 by the National Research Council's (NRC) Office of Scientific and Engineering Personnel (OSEP) and its predecessor orgm~ations. Questionnaires distributed with the cooperation of the graduate deans of U.S. universities are filled In by graduates as they complete requirements for Weir doctoral degrees. The doctorates are reported by academic year (from July ~ of one year through June 30 of the following year) and include research and applied-research doctorates in all Welds. Doctoral degrees such as the Ph.D., D.Sc., and Ed.D. are are covered by this survey; professional degrees (e.g., M.D., D.D.S., J.D., Psy.D.) are not. A full list of included degrees can be found inside the back cover. For convenience throughout this report, "Ph.D." is used to represent anv of He doctoral decrees coverers by the survey. This Summary Report is the thirtieth In an annual series of reports that began In 1967.2 All survey responses become part of the Doctorate Records File (DRF), a virtually complete database on doctorate recipients from 1920 to 1996. Ahnost 90 percent of the I,22S,496 records now in the DRF were created from results of the 1958-1996 surveys. For doctorates granted during the 1920-1957 period, information was compiled from commencement bulletins, registrars' records, and other published material. The conduct of the SED, the maintenance of the resulting data file, and the publication of this report are funded jointly by the National Science Foundation (NSF), the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH), the U.S. Department of Education (U.S. Dept. of Ed.), and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). The survey's relevance to national policy issues has increased, thanks to constructive reviews of the design and analysis of the survey by Paul Seder (NDH), Nancy Schantz (U.S. Dept. of Ed. Peter Muscato (USDA). Jeffrey Thomas (NEH), and Mary Goliaday (NSF). Mary Golladay and Carolyn Shettle (NSF) served as the project officers for the five sponsoring agencies during the 1995-1996 survey cycle. We would also like to acknowledge the graduate deans and Heir assistants in the _ , , ~_ , , , doctorate-granting institutions for their interest and assistance. It is through their cooperation that He DRF continues to serve as a useful resource for monitoring developments In graduate education in He United States. Finally, we Hank all of He doctorate recipients who have completed He SED over He years. The 1995-1996 Survey of Earned Doctorates was conducted under He administrative supervision of Peter Henderson. Eileen MiIner supervised data preparation and entry, survey closure, and He annual DRF update. Julie Clarke reviewed survey The Survey of Earned Doctorates collects information on research doctorates only. This differs from the institutional collection of numbers of degrees done by the U.S. Department of Education on all doctorates. For an evaluation of the differences, see National Science Foundation, 1993, Science and Engineering Doctorates 1960-1991, NSF 93-301, Detailed Statistical Tables, Washington, D.C., pp. 2-6. 2 Trend data from earlier periods can be found in Lindsey R. Harmon, 1978, A Century of Doctorates: Data Analysis of Growth arm Change, National Academy of Sciences, Washington, D.C.
OCR for page R7
V1 closure. Dr. Henderson collaborated with Ms. Clarke and Cynthia Woods on the development of this year's report. Dr. Henderson analyzed He survey results and drafted all text in the body of the report. He and Ms. Clarke produced the figures. Ms. Woods generated the data from the DRF. Martha Bohman prepared the final tables for the report. Ms. Clarke drafted the technical notes. Ms. Clarke and Ms. Bohman reviewed the manuscript for accuracy. Special appreciation is expressed to the following NRC staff members: Eileen MiIner, manager of the unit responsible for collecting and processing the survey forms; John Hines, institutional coordinator; Gedamu Abraha and Kevin Kocur, coordinators of He follow-up effort; Kevin Williams, quality control coordinator; Tom Arnold, full-t~me coder; and He many hourly coders who contributed to processing He survey. Special thanks are also expressed to Joseph Fijian and Cynthia Woods for their service on application development, project programming, database management, and computer operations. This report has been reviewed by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise, in accordance with procedures approved by He NRC's Report Review Committee. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments Hat will assist the authors and the NRC in making the published report as sound as possible and to ensure that the report meets institutional standards for objectivity and evidence. The content of the review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process. We wish to thank the following individuals for Heir participation in the review of this report: Terrence S. Miliar, University of Wisconsin; William H. Miller, University of California; and Leslie B. Sims, University of Iowa. While the individuals listed above provided many constructive comments and suggestions, responsibility for the final content of this report rests solely with the authors and He NRC. The work of this project alas overseen by the Advisory Committee of the Office of Scientific and Engineering Personnel, which is concerned with those activities of the NRC that contribute to effective development and utilization of He nation's scholars and research personnel. In addition, an advisory pane! made recommendations on the improvement of this important survey. Charlotte Kuh, Executive Director of OSEP, and Marilyn Baker, Associate Executive Director, also provided helpful guidance. Suggestions for ~nprovement of the content or format of the report, over comments, and questions are welcome and may be directed to the authors of this report. M. R. C. Greenwood, Chair Office of Scientific and Engineering Personnel Advisory Committee