American Historical Association

The Education of Historians for the Twenty-first Century

Appendix C: Survey Instrument and Numerical Results, AHA Survey of Doctoral Programs in History (Spring 2001)

Note: The format of the questionnaire has been altered somewhat for inclusion in this report. A copy of the questionnaire as distributed is available from the AHA Web site at http://www.theaha.org/grad-survey/grad-survey.pdf . Unless otherwise indicated, all results are based on 105 survey responses and averages are presented as means. Some results do not add up to 100 percent because of rounding. Narrative responses are only summarized in those cases where there was a clear pattern to the responses.

Home Acknowledgements Intro Chapter 1 Chapter 2 Chapter 3 Chapter 4 Appendix A Appendix B Appendix C Biblography Index

Section I: About Your Department

      I.1. Please use the grid below to indicate how many full-time faculty members were employed by your department during the 2000-2001 academic year, how many part-time faculty members were employed by the department, and how many of each group had responsibilities for teaching and/or advising graduate students. (For these purposes, a tenured or tenure-track faculty member with a joint appointment should be considered "full-time"; emeritus faculty members who teach but do not carry a full course load should be considered "non-tenure-track" and "part-time.") [N = 101]

 

      I.2A. In the past five years, has the size of your department (calculated in FTE's) grown? 35% larger, 20% smaller, 44% remained about the same, 1% no answer

      

      I.2B. In the past five years, has the number of faculty members who teach and/or advise graduate students grown? 38% larger, 18% smaller, 43% remained about the same, 1% no answer

      

      I.3. In your department, what are the minimum requirements to be a member of the graduate faculty (i.e., be allowed to teach and/or advise graduate students)?

      

      I.4. Does your department have a terminal master's program (or programs) in addition to its doctoral program? (74% yes, 26% no) If Yes, list these other master's program(s).

      

      Note: Questions 5 through 11 pertain to all of the graduate education that takes place in your department.

      

      I.5A. How many enrolled graduate students did your department have during the 2000-2001 academic year? (range: 11-300, mean: 81, median: 60) 61% Check here if that number includes graduate students enrolled in a terminal master's degree program.

      

      I.5B. How many undergraduate history majors did your department have during the 2000-2001 academic year? (range: 0-1,356, mean: 285, median: 226)

      

      I.6. Taking into consideration all of the instructional activities carried out by your department (classes, preparation, advising, etc.), what percentage of the department's instructional time would you say is devoted to graduate students? 3% 10% or less, 40% between 10% and 25%, 49% between 25% and 50%, 2% more than 50%, 3% more than 75%, 1% don't know, 3% no answer

      

      I.7. Taking into consideration all of the administrative activities carried out by your department (faculty meetings, committee meetings, preparing reports, etc.), what percentage of the department's administrative time would you say is devoted to its graduate program? 7% 10% or less, 38% between 10% and 25%, 42% between 25% and 50%, 5% more than 50%, 4% more than 75%, 2% don't know, 3% no answer

      

      I.8. In your department, is training graduate students considered to be 20% more important than teaching undergraduates, 7% less important than teaching undergraduates, or 68% just about as important as teaching undergraduates? (2% don't know, 4% no answer)

      

      I.9. Within the past five years, has your department conducted an internal evaluation of its graduate program(s)? (67% yes, 31% no, 2% don't know, 1% no answer) Is your department planning to conduct an internal evaluation during the next five years? (49% yes, 17% no, 16% don't know, 18% no answer) If Yes to either question, what prompted the evaluation?

      

      I.10. Within the past five years, has your department undergone an external evaluation of its graduate program(s)? (54% yes, 41% no, 3% don't know, 2% no answer) If Yes, who conducted the evaluation (graduate school, visiting committee, state or regional accrediting board, etc.)?

      

      I.11. Compared to five years ago, would you say that graduate training in your department receives 51% more attention, 11% less attention, or 35% about the same level of attention from the administration (graduate school, division, etc.) of your university? (1% don't know, 2% no answer) If there has been a change, what do you think is/are the reason(s)?

      

      I.12. Please describe the main goals of your department's doctoral program.

      

      I.13. Is there consensus about these goals among the faculty members in your department who teach and/or advise doctoral students? (91% yes, 4% no, 3% don't know, 2% no answer)

      

      I.14. Do you think the main goals of your department's doctoral program are being met? (90% yes, 4% no, 4% don't know, 3% no answer)

 

Section II: Recruitment/Admission of Graduate Students

      II.1. In the spaces below, tell us about the size and composition of the most recent cohort of students admitted to your doctoral program (i.e., students admitted during the 2000-2001 academic year who intend to begin their studies in fall 2001). If your department has separate doctoral and master's programs, do not include the students explicitly admitted to a terminal master's degree program. Do include all graduate students who apply to your department with the expectation of continuing through to a doctoral degree.

      

 

      II.1B. Entering doctoral students only:

Gender:      54% male      based on the entire entering cohort                   46% female }      as described by 101 respondents

      Race/ethnic origin:

      African American (range: 0-10, median: 0, total: 59)

      Asian/Pacific American (N = 91 surveys; range: 0-9, Median: 0, total: 63)

      Caucasian (range: 0-41, median: 6, total: 682)

      Latino/a (range: 0-12, median: 0, total: 64)

      Native American (range: 0-2, median: 0, total: 9)

      *Other (range: 0-33, median: 0, total: 84)

      [*Includes at least one program that refused to characterize the racial/ethnic origin of its students.]

      

      Citizenship:      U.S. (range: 0-40, mean: 9.15, median: 8)

            Non-U.S. (N = 99 surveys; range: 0-12, mean: 1.67,             median: 1)

      

      Intended field(s) of geographic specialization (N = 95 surveys):

       2.2%      Africa       4.8%      Asia

       27.3%      Europe        5.9%      Latin America

       2.0%      Middle East       49.3%      North America

       1.4%      World       7.2%      Region unspecified

      

      II.2. Are doctoral students generally admitted to your department with an intended area of geographic specialization? (91% yes, 9% no) What other fields of specialization do you offer the entering students?

      

      II.3. Considering the graduate cohorts that your department has admitted during the past five years, would you consider the cohort of entering students described above as typical? (50% yes, 43% no, 4% don't know, 3% no answer) If No, how is it different?

      

      II.4. During the past five years, would you say that the pool of applicants for graduate study in your department has gotten 37% better in quality, 21% worse, or 37% remained about the same? (5% no answer) If there has been a change, what do you think is/are the reason(s)? [Larger doctoral programs—based on graduate enrollment and Ph.D. production—were more likely to report that the pool of applicants had become worse. By region, the doctoral programs in the Southeast were significantly more likely to make this complaint. No clear difference emerged between public and private institutions.]

      

      II.5. During the past five years, has recruiting graduate students for your department become 54% harder, 10% easier, 31% or remained about as difficult? (1% don't know, 4% no answer) If there has been a change, what do you think is/are the reason(s)?

      

      II.6. Does your department make any special efforts to recruit female graduate students? (23% yes, 74% no, 3% no answer) If Yes, briefly describe.

      

      II.7. Does your department make any special efforts to recruit minority graduate students? (73% yes, 20% no, 7% no answer) If Yes, briefly describe.

      

      II.8. As part of the admissions process for potential doctoral students, which of the following does your department require or recommend? (check all that apply)

 

      II.9. Does your department admit part-time students to its doctoral program? (66% yes, 31% no, 3% no answer)

      

      II.10. In general, would you say that the faculty members in your department are satisfied with the recruitment and selection of entering graduate students? (47% yes, 43% no, 6% don't know, 4% no answer) If No, why not?

      

      II.11. In the past five years, has your department made any changes in the way it recruits or admits graduate students to its doctoral program? (70% yes, 28% no, 1% don't know, 1% no answer) Do you anticipate any changes in the next few years? (42% yes, 34% no, 18% don't know, 6% no answer) If Yes to either question, briefly describe the changes.

 

Section III: Funding and Financial Support

      III.1. What is the full cost of tuition for a year of graduate study in your department? (Please distinguish, as necessary, between in-state and out-of-state tuition charges, charges for pre- and post-general examination graduate students, etc.)

 

      III.2. Consider the "entering doctoral students" that you described in the previous section of this survey.

      

      III.2A. How many of these students will receive financial aid (of any sort) during their first year of study? 79% [Ninety-one percent for private institutions, 75% for public institutions.]

      

      III.2B. What kinds of aid will they receive? (check all that apply)

       89%      tuition aid/remission?

       68%      stipend?

       19%      guaranteed loan?

       75%      teaching assistantship?

       34%      research assistantship?

       34%      other financial assistance?

      

      III.2C. Use this grid to describe the range of outright awards (i.e., not loans or employment offers) made to the entering cohort of graduate students. [Respondents were asked to list the highest award, the lowest award, and the average award.]

 

      III.2D. Considering the graduate cohorts that your department has admitted during the past five years and the aid packages they were offered, is this a typical year of financial aid packages? (60% yes, 30% no, 2% don't know, 8% no answer) If No, how is it different?

      

      III.3. If a student is admitted without aid, will they typically receive aid at a later point? (57% yes, 24% no, 1% don't know, 18% no answer). If Yes, when? [mode: second year] [Thirty-one percent of doctoral programs at private institutions answered "yes" to this question versus 67% of the programs at public institutions.]

      

      III.4. Do you think that entering graduate students have a realistic sense of the costs that they will incur on the way to a doctoral degree? (2% always, 54% usually, 27% sometimes, 5% rarely, 0% never, 9% don't know, 4% no answer)

      

      III.5. Are entering students routinely provided with information about the following financial aspects of graduate school? (check all that apply)

       89%      the history department's financial aid policies

       78%      the graduate school's/university's financial aid policies

       83%      opportunities for subsequent employment as T.A.'s or R.A.'s

       38%      the availability of guaranteed loans

       38%      the availability of government grants

       32%      the availability of outside (private) grants

       50%      cost of living information for the community

       70%      information about health insurance costs

       35%      opportunities for summer employment (or other financial assistance)

       11%      employment opportunities for partners/spouses

       7%      other

      

      III.6A. How many years of guaranteed funding do you typically offer entering graduate students? [range: 0-6 years, mean: 3.5 years, median: 4 years] [Large doctoral programs (i.e., those producing an average of eight or more Ph.D.'s per year over the past five years) offer an average of 4.1 years of funding versus 3 years for small doctoral programs (i.e., those producing fewer than three Ph.D.'s annually during the past five years). Departments at private institutions offer an average of 4.2 years of funding versus 3.2 years for departments at public institutions.]

      

      III.6B. Are continuing students typically offered 56% single-year aid packages or 31% multiyear aid packages? If multiyear packages, how many years does the aid package cover? [mode: 4 years]

      

      III.6C. Can students exhaust their financial aid eligibility? (81% yes, 6% no, 8% don't know, 6% no answer) If Yes, at what point does this happen? [range: 3-6 years, mode: 5 years]

      

      III.7. What percentage of graduate students in your doctoral program have outside (private, state, or federal) fellowships? 13% (feel free to approximate) [N = 89; responses averaged]

      

      III.8. What form(s) of financial assistance are available to continuing graduate students after their first year? (check all that apply)

       83%      tuition aid/remission

       70%      stipends

       52%      merit fellowships (awarded by department)

       58%      merit fellowships (awarded by graduate school or institution)

       57%      research assistantships

       92%      teaching assistantships

       41%      other program-related employment

       38%      guaranteed loans

       33%      free health care/health insurance

       21%      subsidized housing

       8%      other

      

      III.9. History departments rely on a variety of criteria for awarding funds to their graduate students. Which criteria play a significant role in your department's decision-making? (check all that apply and then circle the most important factor) [Twenty-eight percent of respondents did not indicate the "most important" factor.]

       96%      academic merit [63% marked this as "most important"]

       61%      assessment of future potential in the profession [7%]

       25%      financial need

       46%      incumbency (i.e., how long the student has been enrolled)

       19%      field of specialization

       32%      the history department's teaching needs [1%]

       52%      diversity issues

       5%      other

      

      III.10. In your department, who makes the decisions about graduate student financial aid? (check all that apply and circle the most important decision-maker) [Nineteen percent of respondents did not indicate the "most important" decision-maker.]

       28%      the department chair [2% marked this as "most important"]

       54%      the DGS [11%]

       79%      a faculty committee [55%]

       18%      faculty members in the student's particular field [2%]

       25%      the faculty as a whole [8%]

       26%      the graduate school/dean/administration [3%]

       8%      other [1%]

      

      III.11. Does your department (or institution) have special provisions for funding graduate students who are not U.S. citizens and thus are ineligible for some varieties of financial aid? (14% yes, 75% no, 8% don't know, 6% not applicable/no answer) If Yes, what are these provisions?

      

      III.12. These six questions are about the debts that graduate students may incur while studying for a doctoral degree. Please provide approximate answers if you do not have precise data available to you.

      

      III.12A. Does your department maintain information about the debt levels of its graduate students? (3% yes, 92% no, 4% don't know, 2% not applicable/no answer)

      

      III.12B. About how many graduate students in your program rely on loans to finance all or part of their studies? 44.5% percent [Average based on 30 responses.]

      

      III.12C. About how many graduate students in your program rely on consumer debt (e.g., credit cards) to finance part of their studies? 22.5% percent [Average based on 8 responses.]

      

      III.12D. How much debt, on average, do graduate students carry into your department from their undergraduate studies? $3,336 [Average based on 6 responses.]

      

      III.12E. How much debt, on average, do graduate students incur while enrolled in your doctoral program? $14,547 [Average based on 11 responses.]

      

      III.12F. Do you think that graduate students in your program incur excessive debt on the way to completing their degrees? (0% always, 9% usually, 29% sometimes, 15% rarely, 3% never, 41% don't know, 2% no answer)

      

      III.13A. Given the cost of living in your area, do you think that your department is able to offer an adequate financial aid package to most of its graduate students? (42% yes, 52% no, 1% don't know, 5% not applicable/no answer)

      

      III.13B. Will the typical financial aid package fully support a single parent and child? (4% yes, 85% no, 8% don't know, 4% not applicable/no answer)

      

      III.13C. Will it fully support a married graduate student with a family? (0% yes, 90% no, 7% don't know, 3% not applicable/no answer)

      

      III.14. Is additional funding available for foreign language training? (43% yes, 55% no, 2% no answer) If Yes, list the source(s).

      

      III.15. Is additional funding available for computer, multimedia, or other technical training? (17% yes, 81% no, 2% no answer) If Yes, list the source(s).

      

      III.16. Is additional funding available for dissertation travel/research? (92% yes, 5% no, 3% no answer) If Yes, list the source(s).

      

      III.17. About how many graduate students in your department receive outside funding for dissertation travel/research? [range: 0-100%, mean: 25%, N = 97]

      

      III.18. What concerns, if any, do the graduate students in your department raise about funding issues? Have these concerns changed in the past five years?

      

      III.19. In general, would you say that faculty members in your department are satisfied with the way graduate students are funded? (30% yes, 59% no, 8% don't know, 1% no answer) If No, why not?

      

      III.20. In the past five years, has your department implemented any changes in the funding of graduate students? (60% yes, 31% no, 1% don't know, 8% no answer) Do you anticipate any changes in the next few years? (35% yes, 30% no, 17% don't know, 18% no answer) If Yes to either question, briefly describe the change(s).

      

      III.21. What do you think is the most important issue facing the historical profession when it comes to funding graduate students?

      

      III.22. What do you think the AHA can do to change (and improve) the funding of graduate students in history? [In general, responses to this question fell into one of five categories: (1) the AHA cannot do very much; (2) it should lobby the government (at state and federal levels); (3) it should create fellowships of its own or encourage corporations and foundations to do so; (4) it should act as an information-gathering agency; (5) it should apply moral persuasion to departments, administrators, and others, perhaps in the form of suggested funding guidelines.]

 

Section IV: Sharing Information and Expectations

      IV.1. Do you think the graduate students in your department have a clear understanding of the formal requirements for completing your doctoral program? (15% always, 75% usually, 8% sometimes, 0% rarely, 0% never, 0% don't know, 2% no answer)

      

      IV.2. Do the graduate students express concern about the formal requirements of the doctoral program? (50% yes, 43% no, 4% don't know, 3% no answer) If Yes, what concerns do they express? [According to the respondents, the most common concerns among graduate students revolve around foreign-language requirements and comprehensive exams.]

      

      IV.3. Do you think the faculty members in your department have a clear understanding of the formal requirements of your doctoral program? (10% always, 59% usually, 24% sometimes, 6% rarely, 0% never, 0% don't know, 2% no answer)

      

      IV.4. Do the faculty members express concern about the formal requirements of the doctoral program? (49% yes, 45% no, 5% don't know, 1% no answer) If Yes, what concerns do they express? [Respondents at public institutions were more likely to note faculty concerns than were their colleagues at private institutions, 53% versus 38%. According to the narrative responses, the most common causes of faculty dissatisfaction are: (1) the nature, timing, and commensurability (across fields) of comprehensive exams; (2) the difficult balance between disciplinary breadth and a timely dissertation; and (3) foreign language requirements.]

      

      IV.5. How do the graduate students in your department learn about the formal requirements of the doctoral program? (check all that apply, then circle the most important source of information) [Forty-one percent of respondents did not indicate the "most important" factor.]

       97%      history department publication (student handbook, etc.) [25% marked this as "most important"]

       72%      university publications [1%]

       90%      history department Web site [5%]

       46%      university Web site [0%]

       82%      orientation (or other) meetings held by the department [3%]

       81%      formal meeting(s) with the director of graduate studies [10%]

       93%      informal interactions with the director of graduate studies [4%]

       89%      research/dissertation advisors [2%]

       46%      mentors (i.e., other faculty members with a formal responsibility to advise graduate students) [7%]

       54%      other faculty members [0%]

       89%      other graduate students [1%]

       47%      graduate student organizations (including unions) [0%]

       0%      don't know [0%]

       10%      other [3%; in all cases, "other" = administrative staff]

      

      IV.6. In the past five years, have there been any changes in the formal requirements of your doctoral program? (71% yes, 27% no, 1% don't know, 1% no answer) Do you anticipate any changes in the next few years? (32% yes, 37% no, 20% don't know, 14% no answer) If Yes to either question, briefly describe the change(s).

      

      IV.7. Moving beyond formal program and degree requirements, do you think the graduate students in your department have a clear sense of what the faculty expect from them as students? (1% always, 78% usually, 19% sometimes, 0% rarely, 0% never, 0% don't know, 2% no answer)

      

      IV.8. Do you think that faculty members' expectations about the performance of the graduate students in your department have changed in the past five years? (35% yes, 53% no, 9% don't know, 3% no answer) If Yes, briefly describe the change(s). [Of 34 narrative responses to this question, 33 indicated that expectations had risen during the past five years.]

      

      IV.9. Do you think that faculty members in your department have a clear sense of what the graduate students expect from them as teachers and advisors? (70% always, 24% usually, 1% sometimes, 1% rarely, 0% never, 1% don't know, 2% no answer)

      

      IV.10. Do you think that graduate students' expectations about the faculty in your department have changed in the past five years? (17% yes, 49% no, 31% don't know, 3% no answer) If Yes, briefly describe the change(s). [The most common narrative response was that students "expect more mentoring" now than in the past.]

 

Section V: Completion and Attrition Patterns

      V.1. Does your institution collect formal data on graduate student completion and attrition rates? (52% yes, 27% no, 19% don't know, 2% no answer)

      

      V.2. How does your department obtain information about the completion and attrition patterns of its own graduate students? (check all that apply)

       44%      formal data collection

       66%      informal reporting

       10%      exit interviews

       5%      other

       10%      we don't obtain this information

       2%      don't know

       5%      no answer

      

      V.3. Use the grid to describe the completion and attrition patterns of graduate students in your department in the last decade. At each stage, you should indicate how many students from a typical cohort of entering graduate students are still actively pursuing doctoral degrees. It is not necessary to provide a detailed numerical breakdown, but please give us the best estimates you can.

 

      [Question V.3 did not yield statistically reliable data. The only firm conclusion that can be drawn from the survey responses is that students are more likely to depart from doctoral training early rather than later—that is, during the first year of a doctoral program and just before or after general/qualifying examinations.]

      

      V.4. Based on the experience of graduate students who entered your department in recent years, what percentage of the graduate students entering in fall 2001 do you expect will complete a Ph.D.? [range: 10-100%, mean: 65%, N = 86]. Just complete a master's degree? [range: 1-100%, mean: 59%, N = 59] [Doctoral programs at public institutions and smaller doctoral programs have higher implicit attrition rates. On average, respondents at private institutions expected a completion rate for the Ph.D. of 81% versus 59% at public institutions. Respondents from large doctoral programs (i.e., those producing an average of eight or more Ph.D.'s per year over the past five years) expected a completion rate for Ph.D.'s of 70% versus 61% at smaller programs. Finally, respondents from doctoral programs in the upper two quartiles of the 1993 National Research Council rankings expected a completion rate of 72% versus programs in the bottom two quartiles.]

      

      V.5. What is the average time to complete a Ph.D. degree in your department (from the time that a graduate student enters the department)? [range: 4-11 years, mean: 6.9 years, median: 7 years, N = 90]

      

      V.6. Compare the history department to other departments that train doctoral students at your institution. Are history graduate students: 4% more likely to leave before completing a doctoral degree, 16% less likely to leave before completing a doctoral degree, or 18% just about as likely? (50% don't know, 11% not applicable/no answer)

      

      V.7. Based on your department's experience during the past few years, are female graduate students 4% more likely, 10% less likely, or 68% about as likely as male graduate students to leave the department before completing a doctoral degree? (13% don't know, 9% no answer)

      

      V.8. Based on your department's experience during the past few years, are minority graduate students 14% more likely, 15% less likely, or 47% about as likely as other graduate students to leave the department before completing a doctoral degree? (13% don't know, 10% no answer)

      

      V.9. What do you think is/are the main reason(s) graduate students leave your department before completing their degrees? (check all that apply, then circle the most important reason) [Thirty-five percent of respondents did not indicate a "most important" reason.]

       68%      financial strain of graduate school [13% marked this as "most important"]

       90%      personal reasons [22%]

       66%      family reasons [4%]

       41%      inadequate preparation for graduate school [2%]

       63%      unable to do the level of work expected by our department [9%]

       14%      foreign language requirements [0%]

       29%      they switch to another school [0%]

       17%      they switch to another academic field [0%]

       64%      they decide to pursue another career [11%]

       52%      pessimism about career opportunities for historians [2%]

       8%      dissatisfied with intellectual content of program [2%]

       18%      dissatisfied with advisor/can't find an advisor [0%]

       4%      dissatisfied with other faculty members [0%]

       3%      dissatisfied with other graduate students [0%]

       3%      dissatisfied with other aspects of the program [0%]

       9%      don't know [0%]

       10%      other [2%] [The two reasons listed under "other" as most important were "[students] don't finish the dissertation" and "inability to complete dissertation[s], primarily because they find full-time employment during dissertation-writing phase."]

      

      V.10. In the past five years, has your department made any special efforts to retain students once they enter graduate school? (46% yes, 47% no, 4% don't know, 4% no answer) If Yes, briefly describe. [According to the narrative responses, the most important changes have been increased funding and closer attention to formal mentoring arrangements, though many respondents also noted general revisions to their graduate programs—such as revamping field requirements—that had a secondary effect of reducing attrition.]

 

Section VI: Graduate Curricula, Exams, and Dissertations

      VI.1. In the 2000-2001 academic year, how many graduate courses did your department offer? (please count each course just ONCE) [Results are given as arithmetical averages.]

       16      combined undergraduate/graduate courses [range: 0-61]

       3      graduate lecture courses [range: 0-36]

       11      graduate seminars [range: 0-47]

       4      graduate research seminars [range: 0-26]

       9      independent reading courses [range: 0-60]

       5      independent research courses [range: 0-72]

       2      thesis preparation/prospectus-writing seminar or course [range: 0-5]

       1      other methodology/historiography/pedagogy courses (not counted above) [range: 0-5]

      <1 other [range: 0­13]

      49 total number of courses [range: 7­164]

VI.2. Looking back over the past five years, would you consider this a typical year of graduate course offerings in terms of both number and variety? (84% yes, 10% no, 3% don't know, 3% no answer) If No, please explain.

VI.3A. How many courses (or credits of coursework) are students required to complete for a Ph.D. degree in your department? Courses: [range: 4­27, mean: 14, N = 32] Credits: [range: 30­135, mean: 60.5, N = 48]

VI.3B. Does your department have a course (or courses) that all doctoral students are required to take? (79% yes, 20% no, 0% don't know, 1% no answer) If Yes, briefly describe.

VI.4. Would you say that faculty members in your department are 10% very satisfied, 62% somewhat satisfied, 23% somewhat dissatisfied, or 2% unsatisfied with the current number and variety of graduate course offerings? (2% don't know, 2% no answer) If "somewhat dissatisfied" or "unsatisfied," what would they like to see changed? [Most of the narrative responses to this question were a variation on the theme "Faculty would like to offer more graduate seminars in fields of specialization."]

VI.5. Would you say that graduate students in your department are 4% very satisfied, 63% somewhat satisfied, 25% somewhat dissatisfied, or 1% unsatisfied with the current number and variety of graduate course offerings? (6% don't know, 2% no answer) If "somewhat dissatisfied" or "unsatisfied," what would they like to see changed? [A typical narrative response to this question was "doctoral students would like more reading seminars and more variety"; several respondents also noted student dissatisfaction with the frequency of some course offerings.]

VI.6. Within the past five years, has your department implemented any significant changes in the number and/or variety of its graduate course offerings? (57% yes, 40% no, 1% don't know, 2% no answer) Do you anticipate any changes in the next few years? (32% yes, 37% no, 17% don't know, 13% no answer). If Yes to either question, briefly describe the change(s).

VI.7. For each of the subdisciplines or approaches to history listed (see grid), please indicate if graduate courses are available or unavailable in your department, whether students are required to take a course in the area, and whether the students are encouraged or discouraged to take a course in the area (if students are neither encouraged nor discouraged, do not check either box). We are not interested in the chronological or geographical focus of the courses, just the historical approaches that are engaged. For the purposes of this question, a course is "available" if it has been offered within the past three years or will be offered in the next three years.

VI.8. We are also interested in learning more about the opportunities that graduate students in history have for interdisciplinary education. The grid contains a list of various interdisciplinary opportunities that a graduate student might pursue as part of his/her training. In each case, please check whether the indicated activity is required, encouraged, allowed, discouraged, or not accepted by your department.

Question VI.8: Interdisciplinary opportunities for graduate students

 

VI.9A. What foreign language requirement(s) does your department have for doctoral students? (Be sure to indicate if different fields of specialization have different requirements.) [Typically, one language for graduate students in U.S. history, 2 languages (or more) in other fields]

VI.9B. Has the language requirement changed within the past five years? (24% yes, 68% no, 5% don't know, 4% no answer) If Yes, describe the change. [There were 21 narrative responses to this question: 3 respondents indicated a stiffening of language requirements and 12 indicated a reduction in the requirements usually from two to one required languages for Americanists; the other responses indicated that "technical changes" had taken place.]

VI.10A. Typically, when do graduate students in your department take their general (or qualifying) examinations? [Responses ranged from "third semester" to "fifth year"; the most common answers were "the end of the second year" and "during the third year."]

VI.10B. Has this changed in the past five years, either as a matter of policy or in actuality? (14% yes, 82% no, 3% don't know, 1% no answer) If Yes, describe the change.

VI.11. How many fields are graduate students in your department asked to prepare for general examinations? Major: [range: 1­4, mode: 1, N = 97] Minor: [range: 0­3, mode: 2, N = 87] (___ Check here if your department does not require a general exam for students pursuing a doctorate. In the space below, briefly describe the evaluation procedure(s) that take the place of general exams in your department.) [No respondent checked this option.]

VI.12. Do you require 11% a written examination, 12% an oral examination, or 73% both? (3% no answer)

VI.13. The following questions relate to the minor examination field(s).

VI.13A. Are all minor fields subject to a written exam? (55% yes, 43% no, 11% not applicable/no answer)

VI.13B. Are all minor fields subject to an oral exam? (56% yes, 28% no, 16% not applicable/no answer)

VI.13C. Can the written exam in a minor field be "replaced" by another qualification (e.g., a research course, a foreign language, etc.)? (15% yes, 67% no, 18% not applicable/no answer) If Yes, explain. [In 13 narrative responses, the two most common "replacements" were coursework and a research/bibliographical essay.]

VI.13D. Are students expected to be able to conduct original research in their minor field(s)? (18% yes, 65% no, 17% not applicable/no answer)

VI.13E. Are students expected to be able to teach their minor field(s) at the undergraduate level? (74% yes, 10% no, 15% not applicable/no answer)

VI.14. Are graduate students in your department provided with set bibliographies for any or all of their general examination fields? (74% always, 10% sometimes, 10% never, 15% not applicable/no answer)

VI.15. Are written guidelines available to graduate students and faculty describing the format and purpose of the general examination? (70% yes, 28% no, 3% no answer)

VI.16. For this question, consider all of the general examinations that your department has administered in the past decade or so.

VI.16A. Have you noticed a shift in the graduate students' historical interests (geographic, chronological, thematic, etc.), as reflected in their choice of examination fields? (52% yes, 28% no, 14% don't know, 6% no answer)

VI.16B. Have you noticed a shift in the faculty's interests? (52% yes, 27% no, 15% don't know, 6% no answer) If Yes to either part A or B, describe the shift(s) in the space at the end of question 16. If Yes to both A and B, indicate whether the graduate students' and faculty's interests have shifted in the same direction(s). [There is a very strong correlation between the answers to questions VI.16A and VI.16B, with more than 82% of the respondents giving the same reply to both questions.]

VI.16C. Has there been an increase in examination fields with a thematic focus (as opposed to a geographic and/or chronological focus)? (51% yes, 29% no, 8% don't know, 12% no answer)

VI.16D. Has there been an increase in examination fields with a comparative or transnational focus? (57% yes, 27% no, 9% don't know, 8% no answer) [For each part of question VI.16, respondents from large doctoral programs were significantly more likely to report a shift in the examination fields Based on the 49 narrative responses to questions VI.16A and VI.16B, the most common changes in the examinations fields have been (in order of frequency): more thematic fields; more transnational, comparative, or transatlantic fields; more cultural and social history; more "theory"; more "world history"; and less European history.]

VI.17. When it comes to the breadth and depth of their historical knowledge at the time of general examinations, would you say that graduate students in your department today are 29% more knowledgeable, 11% less knowledgeable, or 30% just about as knowledgeable as their counterparts a decade ago? (25% don't know, 6% no answer)

VI.18. In the past five years, has your department changed the number and/or character of examination fields for doctoral students? (33% yes, 61% no, 1% don't know, 5% no answer) Have you implemented any other changes to the examination process? (21% yes, 50% no, 2% don't know, 27% no answer) If Yes to either question, briefly describe the change(s).

VI.19. Would you say that faculty members in your department are 18% very satisfied, 62% somewhat satisfied, 11% somewhat dissatisfied, or 2% unsatisfied with the current approach to general exams? (4% don't know, 4% no answer) If "somewhat dissatisfied" or "unsatisfied," what would they like to see changed?

VI.20. Would you say that graduate students in your department are 14% very satisfied, 62% somewhat satisfied, 14% somewhat dissatisfied, or 1% unsatisfied with the current approach to general exams? (5% don't know, 4% no answer) If "somewhat dissatisfied" or "unsatisfied," what would they like to see changed?

VI.21. Does your department offer its graduate students training in digital, Web-based, or multimedia research methods? (21% yes, 72% no, 2% don't know, 5% no answer). Does your department offer its graduate students training in digital, Web-based, or multimedia teaching methods? (31% yes, 54% no, 2% don't know, 12% no answer)

VI.22A. Does your department require graduate students to submit a formal dissertation proposal? (87% yes, 10% no, 3% no answer) If No, skip to question 23. If Yes, at what point in the graduate program do students usually submit the proposal? [Based on 51 narrative responses to this question, the average time to submit a dissertation proposal ranges from "year 1" to "end of third year, beginning of fourth"; the most common answer was "within a semester of completing comprehensive exams."]

VI.22B. Are students required to formally defend their dissertation proposals? [N = 99]

36% yes, before a committee of faculty members

25% yes, before a committee drawn from the student's intended dissertation field

7% no

13% no, but it must be approved by the student's advisor

17% no, but it must be approved by a committee of faculty members

1% our department uses another approval procedure (please describe)

VI.23. Over the past decade or so, have the graduate students in your department been taking 7% more time to complete their dissertations, 19% less time to complete their dissertations, or 58% about the same amount of time? (11% don't know, 5% no answer). How would you explain the change, if any?

VI.24. In general, do you think the dissertations completed by students in your department today are 46% stronger, 3% weaker, or 34% about the same in quality as they were a decade ago? (17% no answer) In general, do you think the dissertations completed by all graduate students in history are 14% stronger, 9% weaker, or 40% about the same in quality as they were a decade ago? (37% no answer) How would you explain the changes, if any?

VI.25. In the past five years, has your department revised the list of research fields in which a dissertation can be submitted? (30% yes, 65% no, 1% don't know, 5% no answer) Do you anticipate making any changes in the next few years? (18% Yes, 49% No, 15% don't know, 18% no answer) If Yes, briefly describe the changes. [Most of the 31 narrative responses to this question were a variation on the theme "We have revised the list of fields for study... to reflect changes in the department's personnel."]

VI.26. In the past five years, has your department made any other changes in its doctoral dissertation requirements or procedures? (23% yes, 70% no, 2% don't know, 5% no answer) Do you anticipate making any changes in the next few years? (7% yes, 55% no, 14% don't know, 24% no answer) If Yes, briefly describe the changes.

VI.27. In the past five years, has your department introduced any new policies or procedures designed to reduce the average time to degree for its graduate students? (44% yes, 51% no, 5% no answer) If Yes, briefly describe. [Based on 46 narrative responses to this question, the most common new policies (in order of frequency) are: better student funding; stricter enforcement of deadlines, coupled with closer monitoring of student progress; new examination formats; more emphasis on workable dissertation proposals; more emphasis on mentoring.]

Section VII: Advising and Mentoring

Note: in this section, "advisor" refers to a faculty member with formal and primary responsibility for directing a particular graduate student's academic work (e.g., an academic advisor or dissertation supervisor.

VII.1. For each activity listed in the grid below, please check the most important source of information and assistance for the graduate students in your department. These should be the most important sources in practice, not necessarily the sources suggested in departmental guidelines or other official statements. [The responses to this question are presented as whole numbers, based on 105 questionnaires.]

 

VII.2. Which of the following best describes the way that graduate students in your department usually match up with their advisors?

21% graduate students enter the department planning to work with particular faculty members

7% graduate students are assigned to advisors

26% graduate students are initially assigned to advisors but they are expected to pick another advisor when they begin their dissertations

33% graduate students pick their own advisors

3% faculty members select the graduate students they want to advise

4% other

6% no answer

VII.3. In general, would you say that graduate students in your department are 51% very satisfied, 40% somewhat satisfied, 5% somewhat dissatisfied, or 0% unsatisfied with the current system of matching students and advisors? (3% don't know, 2% no answer) What concerns, if any, do graduate students express about the current system?

VII.4. In general, would you say that faculty members in your department are 50% very satisfied, 43% somewhat satisfied, 4% somewhat dissatisfied, or 1% unsatisfied with the current system of matching students and advisors? (1% don't know, 1% no answer) What concerns, if any, do faculty members express about the current system?

VII.5A. Do the graduate students in your department tend to change advisors in the course of their studies? (0% frequently, 59% sometimes, 39% rarely, 1% never, 1% don't know/no answer)

VII.5B. Does your department have policies that make it difficult to change advisors? (1% yes, 99% no)

VII.5C. Based on your experience over the past few years, are female graduate students in your department 5% more likely, 70% about as likely, or 4% less likely to change advisors than male graduate students? (19% don't know, 2% no answer)

VII.5D. Based on your experience over the past few years, are minority graduate students in your department 10% more likely, 53% about as likely, or 13% less likely to change advisors than other graduate students? (20% don't know, 4% no answer)

VII.6A. In the past year, has your doctoral program experienced any serious conflicts between individual graduate students and their advisors (i.e., serious enough to require the involvement of a third party)? (27% yes, 67% no, 5% don't know, 2% no answer)

VII.6B. Does your department have a formal procedure for resolving conflicts between graduate students and their advisors? (36% yes, 55% no, 5% don't know, 4% no answer) If Yes, briefly describe the procedure.

VII.7. On the whole, would you say that graduate students are 27% very satisfied, 57% somewhat satisfied, 9% somewhat dissatisfied, or 0% unsatisfied with the advising/mentoring they receive in your department? (6% don't know, 2% no answer) What concerns, if any, do they express about advising/mentoring? [Based on 33 narrative responses to this question, the most significant concern is faculty availability/access.]

VII.8. On the whole, would you say that faculty members are 25% very satisfied, 64% somewhat satisfied, 7% somewhat dissatisfied, or 0% unsatisfied with the advising/mentoring of graduate students in your department? (2% don't know, 3% no answer) What concerns, if any, do they express about advising/mentoring? [Based on 26 narrative responses to this question, the most significant concerns are an uneven distribution of advising responsibilities among faculty members and the unwillingness of some students to follow the advice that is offered to them.]

VII.9. In the past five years, has your department made any changes in graduate advising? (24% yes, 70% no, 4% don't know, 2% no answer) Do you anticipate making any changes in the next few years? (8% yes, 51% no, 10% don't know, 31% no answer) If Yes to either question, briefly describe the changes. [Based on 30 narrative responses to this question, three common changes have been: more advising by committees, as opposed to individual advisors; a stronger role for the director of graduate studies; and more formal reviews of student progress.]

VII.10. In the past decade or so, have you seen any significant changes in the relationship between history graduate students and their advisors especially in the expectations that either side brings to the relationship? (18% yes, 56% no, 22% don't know, 4% no answer) If Yes, briefly describe the changes. [Based on 19 narrative responses to this question, the most significant change has been rising expectations on the part of students and faculty alike.]

Section VIII: Social and Cultural Factors in
Graduate Training

VIII.1. Every history department tries to make its graduate students "feel more at home" through a variety of formal and informal practices. Some of these practices are listed in the following grid. (Note: The list is not exhaustive, and no department will be able to answer "yes" to every question on it.) Please indicate whether each practice is followed in your own department. [For this question, the lack of a response has been calculated as a "no" answer.]

VIII.2. In addition to the practices listed above, what else does your department (or graduate program) do to make graduate students feel welcome and valued as members of the department? [There were 47 narrative responses, with a range of practices that cannot be easily summarized.]

VIII.3. In your experience, do faculty members generally consider the departmental culture to be welcoming and supportive? (70% yes, 14% no, 9% don't know, 4% no answer) What concerns, if any, do faculty members raise about the social or cultural climate in your department? Have these concerns changed during the past five years?

VIII.4. In your experience, do graduate students generally consider the departmental culture to be welcoming and supportive? (74% yes, 9% no, 15% don't know, 2% no answer) What concerns, if any, do graduate students raise about the social or cultural climate in your department? Have these concerns changed during the past five years?

VIII.5. In general, do you think that foreign graduate students feel 22% less comfortable, 1% more comfortable, or 55% about as comfortable as other students in the social and cultural climate of your department? (17% don't know, 5% no answer)

VIII.6. In general, do you think that minority graduate students feel 28% less comfortable, 2% more comfortable, or 52% about as comfortable as other students in the social and cultural climate of your department? (15% don't know, 3% no answer)

VIII.7. In general, do you think that female graduate students feel 9% less comfortable, 2% more comfortable, or 82% about as comfortable as other students in the social and cultural climate of your department? (4% don't know, 4% no answer)

VIII.8. In the past five years, have any complaints of sexual harassment, whether formal or informal, arisen in your department? (9% yes, 11% no, 7% don't know, 73% no answer) If Yes, was your department's procedure for addressing such issues satisfactory to all parties involved? ( Yes, No, don't know) [Insufficient number of responses.]

VIII.9. In the past five years, has your department made any specific efforts to improve the social and cultural climate for graduate students? (63% yes, 30% no, 5% don't know, 2% no answer) If Yes, briefly describe the efforts. [Based on 36 narrative responses to this question, the most common improvements (in order of frequency) have been: creating (or upgrading) a graduate student lounge or office space; more student-faculty social functions; more opportunities for student-faculty intellectual exchanges (such as departmental colloquia or brown bag lunches); the encouragement of student associations; and smaller student cohorts.]

VIII.10. In the past five years, has your institution made any specific efforts to improve the social and cultural climate for all of its graduate students? (47% yes, 27% no, 25% don't know, 2% no answer) If Yes, briefly describe the efforts. [Based on 32 narrative responses to this question, the most common improvements (in order of frequency) have been: campus-wide social events; new (or improved) orientation activities; better funding; increased support for graduate student associations; seminars/workshops on professional development and/or teaching; cross-disciplinary student colloquia.]

Section IX: Graduate Students as Teachers

IX.1A. Is teaching a degree requirement for graduate students in your doctoral program? (15% yes, 84% no, 1% no answer) If No, are graduate students nonetheless encouraged to teach? (87% yes, 2% no, 11% no answer, N = 89)

IX.1B. If your department also has a separate master's program (or programs), is teaching a degree requirement for the master's degree? (1% yes, 82% no, 1% not applicable, 16% no answer) If No, are students in the master's program(s) nonetheless encouraged to teach? (29% yes, 48% no, 23% no answer, N = 86)

IX.2. About how many graduate students in your doctoral program teach undergraduates at some point during their time in graduate school? 2% 10% or less, 5% between 10% and 25%, 7% between 25% and 50%, 10% more than 50%, 25% more than 75%, 50% more than 90% (2% no answer) [There was no significant difference in these responses between public and private institutions.]

IX.3. Considering all of the undergraduate instruction offered by your department, about how much of that instruction is performed by graduate students? (For this question, you may combine the teaching done by doctoral and master's degree candidates.) 28% 10% or less, 48% between 10% and 25%, 15% between 25% and 50%, 1% more than 50%, 0% more than 75%, 0% more than 90% (8% no answer)

IX.4. Compared to five years ago, do graduate students in your department now teach 31% a greater percentage of undergraduates, 4% a smaller percentage of undergraduates, or 58% about the same percentage of undergraduates? (4% don't know, 3% not applicable/no answer)

IX.5. Does the administration of your school exert pressure on the history department to increase the amount of undergraduate teaching done by graduate students? (2% yes, a great deal of pressure, 14% yes, some pressure, 66% no, 12% no, they want to decrease the amount of teaching done by graduate students, 1% don't know, 4% not applicable/no answer) [There was no significant difference in these responses between public and private institutions.]

IX.6. Use the grid to describe the different varieties of undergraduate teaching that graduate students in your department are asked (or required) to perform. Is any particular kind of undergraduate teaching required for the doctoral degree? At what point in their training are your graduate students usually expected to undertake each kind of teaching mentioned on the list?

IX.7. Do your graduate students engage in any kind(s) of undergraduate teaching not listed in the grid for question 6? (13% yes, 74% no, 12% no answer) If Yes, briefly describe.

IX.8. For how many years can a graduate student teach in your department after reaching ABD status? [range: 0­7 years, median: 2 years, mode: 2 years, N = 43] Are any other limits imposed on how much undergraduate teaching an advanced doctoral student can do? (34% yes, 40% no, 4% don't know, 22% no answer) If Yes, briefly describe.

IX.9. Would you say that teaching responsibilities significantly delay the progress of your graduate students toward the completion of doctoral degrees? (47% yes, 40% no, 8% don't know, 5% no answer)

IX.10. On average, how much compensation do graduate students in your department receive for each kind of teaching they perform? (If your department's pay scale does not t neatly into the categories provided, please describe it in more detail below.)
A. grading (per course) $________ See

B. teaching assistant (per course) $________ } note
C. independently taught courses (per course) $________ below

D. average annual stipend for a TA $_10,494_ [range:

$2,400­18,900, median: $10,400, N = 95]

[It was not possible to calculate averages (or even ranges) for these values, because the respondents gave their answers in incommensurable units: some recorded the teaching compensation per course, some the compensation per semester, some provided an hourly rate (especially for graders), and some provided a figure for the average annual stipend without distinguishing among different kinds of teaching activities.]

IX.11. How much teaching must a graduate student in your department do to secure employment benefits (such as health care) from your institution?

12% one-quarter time (or 10 hours/week or one course/semester)

2% one-third time (or 15 hours/week)

17% one-half time (or 20 hours/week or two courses/semester)

3% full appointment (specific terms of appointment not identified)

10% all T.A. appointments come with benefits

13% benefits are not tied to employment but to graduate fellowships, enrollment status, registration, or other student fees (implicitly, only available to currently enrolled graduate students)
20% insurance benefits not available (or TA's must pay out of pocket)

5% other

1% don't know

16% no answer

IX.12A. Do graduate students in your department routinely teach at other institutions while pursuing their doctoral degrees? (54% yes, 45% no, 1% no answer)

IX.12B. If Yes, how do they learn about teaching opportunities at other institutions? [Based on 56 narrative responses to this question, students learn about teaching opportunities at other institutions through informal means ("the grapevine") and formal means (announcements by the director of graduate studies, a departmental e-mail list, postings on a departmental bulletin board, etc.) with about the same frequency.]

IX.12C. Does your department maintain a formal relationship with any neighboring institutions as a way to provide different kinds of teaching opportunities for your graduate students? (15% yes, 82% no, 3% no answer) If Yes, what type of neighboring school(s) do you work with (e.g., community colleges, comprehensive colleges, etc.)?

IX.12D. Do your graduate students receive any special mentoring or other professional support from their home department when they are teaching elsewhere? (10% yes, 69% no, 3% don't know, 18% not applicable/no answer) If Yes, briefly describe.

IX.13. Which of the following methods does your department use to train graduate students as college teachers? (check all that apply)

67% personal supervision ("apprenticeship") by a student's advisor

88% personal supervision ("apprenticeship") by other faculty member(s)

51% teaching workshop(s) run by the history department

55% teaching workshop(s) run by another department/program at your institution

22% a voluntary course or seminar in teaching

36% a required course or seminar in teaching

14% "Preparing Future Faculty" program

7% other

[Doctoral programs at public institutions are twice as likely as those at private institutions to have a required course on teaching (42% vs. 21%).]

IX.14A. Does your institution have a "teaching center" or other facility devoted to improving undergraduate instruction? (71% yes, 22% no, 5% don't know, 2% no answer) If No, skip to the next question. [Ninety-four percent of respondents from large doctoral programs (i.e., an average of eight or more Ph.D.'s per year) reported the presence of a teaching center versus 63% of respondents from smaller doctoral programs.]

IX.14B. If Yes, does the "teaching center" offer programs designed specifically for graduate students? (31% yes, 7% no, 11% don't know, 5% no answer, N = 75)

IX.14C. Does your department work with the "teaching center" to devise programs specifically for history graduate students? (31% yes, 57% no, 9% don't know, 3% no answer, N = 75)

IX.14D. Would you say that the "teaching center" is effective in training history graduate students for college teaching? (37% yes, 23% no, 37% don't know, 3% no answer, N = 75)

IX.15A. Do your graduate students have any opportunities to receive formal training in teaching with technology? (50% yes, 46% no, 1% don't know, 3% no answer) If Yes, briefly describe.

IX.15B. Does your department maintain its own computer or multimedia lab? (50% yes, 49% no, 2% no answer)

IX.15C. Does your institution have a "center" or other facility devoted to teaching with computer or multimedia technologies? (81% yes, 12% no, 3% don't know, 4% no answer)

IX.15D. Would you say that graduate students in history have adequate access to the computer and multimedia resources at your institution? (82% yes, 11% no, 6% don't know, 1% no answer)

IX.15E. Do your graduate students have regular opportunities to teach with computer or multimedia technologies? (44% yes, 40% no, 12% don't know, 4% no answer)

IX.16. Do the graduate students in your department have regular opportunities to teach in collaborative settings? (15% Yes, 75% No, 7% don't know, 3% no answer) If Yes, briefly describe.

IX.17. As part of their graduate training, do your students receive any exposure to teaching in the liberal arts (or humanities), broadly defined? (26% yes, 60% no, 9% don't know, 6% no answer) Is there institutional support for training history graduate students as teachers in the liberal arts? (19% yes, 67% no, 6% don't know, 8% no answer) If Yes to either question, briefly describe.

IX.18. As part of their graduate training, do your students receive any exposure to history teaching at the K­12 level? (5% yes, 88% no, 3% don't know, 5% no answer) At the community college level? (15% yes, 61% no, 7% don't know, 17% no answer)

IX.19A. Does or would your department accept a graduate research project (e.g., a seminar paper) that has an explicitly pedagogical focus? (25% yes, 44% no, 28% don't know, 4% no answer)

IX.19B. Does or would your department accept a dissertation with an explicitly pedagogical component? (10% yes, 64% no, 22% don't know, 5% no answer)

IX.19C. If Yes to either A or B, can you provide an example? [Most of the 23 narrative responses to this question reiterated that a pedagogy-focused project might be accepted but did not provide actual examples.]

IX.20. Traditionally, doctoral programs in history have included training for both research and teaching, but the relative emphasis on these activities has varied from place to place. On a scale of 0 to 10 (where 0 means "no research, all teaching" and 10 means "all research, no teaching"), how would you describe the goal of your department's doctoral program?

(more teaching) 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 (more research)

0% 0 (i.e., no research, all teaching)

0% 1

0% 2

1% 3

1% 4

18% 5 (i.e., balance between research and teaching)

15% 6

26% 7

28% 8

8% 9

2% 10 (i.e., all research, no teaching)

2% no answer

IX.21. Which of the following phrases best describes the Ph.D. awarded by your department right now?

44% "a research degree"

41% "a research-based teaching degree"

0% "a teaching degree"

12% "a general-purpose degree, preparing the holder for a variety of professional settings"

1% other

2% no answer

[There were significant disparities in these answers between different groups of doctoral programs. The strongest disparity appeared when the programs were cross-tabulated by National Research Council rankings: 60% of the programs in the top quartile were characterized as offering "research degrees," while only 31% of the programs in the lowest quartile were so characterized. Fifty-three percent of large doctoral programs (i.e., an average of 8 or more Ph.D.'s a year) were described as offering "research degrees" (all of the rest selected "a research-based teaching degree"), as compared to just 37% of the small doctoral programs. The disparities between public and private institutions were not significant]

IX.22. Several different kinds of educational institutions are listed below. At the time your departments' graduate students enter the job market, how well trained are they to teach at each kind of institution? Use a scale from 1 to 5, where 5 means "very well prepared to teach in this setting," 3 means "adequately prepared to teach in this setting," and 1 means "not adequately prepared to teach in this setting." (We recognize that different students have various aptitudes and career goals as teachers and that different graduate programs have various expectations about where their students will ultimately teach. Here, we are interested in the typical preparation for teaching that doctoral students actually receive from your department.)

IX.23. Considering what you know about other doctoral programs in history, are the students from your program 43% better prepared for college teaching, 45% about as well prepared for college teaching, or 2% not as well prepared for college teaching as most history graduate students entering the academic job market? (10% don't know, 1% no answer)

IX.24. In general, compared to their counterparts ten years ago, are the graduate students in your department today 54% better prepared, 30% about as well prepared, or 2% not as well prepared for college teaching when they enter the academic job market? (10% don't know, 3% no answer)

IX.25. In general, are you 30% very satisfied, 60% somewhat satisfied, 7% somewhat dissatisfied, or 2% unsatisfied with the training that doctoral students in your department receive for college teaching? (2% no answer) If "somewhat dissatisfied" or "unsatisfied," what changes would you like to see in their training? [Based on 17 narrative responses to these questions, the most significant change that respondents would like to see is more attention to issues of pedagogy.]

IX.26. In the past five years, has your department made any changes in how it trains doctoral students for college teaching? (50% yes, 43% no, 3% don't know, 4% no answer) Do you anticipate any changes in the next few years? (27% yes, 39% no, 13% don't know, 21% no answer) If Yes to either question, briefly describe the changes. [Based on 55 narrative responses to this question, the most significant changes (in order of frequency) have been: the creation (or expansion) of formal seminars and/or workshops for teaching assistants; closer evaluation of TA's; participation in the "Preparing Future Faculty" program; and better mentoring of T.A.'s.]

Section X: Professional Development and
Career Preparation

X.1A. Would you say that graduate students in your department consider membership in professional organizations (such as the AHA) an important part of their preparation for careers as historians? (58% yes, 15% no, 26% don't know, 1% no answer)

X.1B. Are the graduate students in your department actively encouraged to join professional organizations of historians? (69% yes, 30% no, 2% no answer)

X.1C. About how many of your graduate students do join professional organizations of historians during the course of their doctoral studies? (16% nearly all, 23% most, 23% some, 10% a few, 0% almost none, 28% don't know, 1% no answer)

X.1D. Are they more likely to join 10% cross-disciplinary organizations (such as the AHA, the Organization of American Historians, etc.) or 30% organizations in their particular research fields? (35% about as likely to join either, 24% don't know, 10% no answer)

X.1E. Is financial assistance available to subsidize the cost of graduate students' membership dues? (4% yes, 95% no, 1% no answer)

X.2. Is financial assistance available for graduate students who want to attend academic conferences or other professional meetings? (95% yes, 4% no, 1% no answer) If Yes, briefly describe the amount and conditions of such assistance (e.g., does a student have to present a paper in order to receive support?).

X.3. Are the graduate students in your department actively encouraged to subscribe to the major journal(s) in their particular field(s)? (46% yes, 50% no, 4% no answer) Is financial assistance available to subsidize the cost of subscriptions? (0% yes, 93% no, 7% no answer)

X.4. Do the graduate students in your department receive a formal introduction to professional ethics? (25% yes, 69% no, 6% don't know, 1% no answer) If Yes, what form does this introduction take (part of a seminar, a separate workshop, etc.)?

X.5. Are graduate students in your department invited to serve on departmental committees? (65% yes, 34% no, 1% no answer) If Yes, on which committee(s) do they serve? [Based on 61 narrative response to this question, graduate students are most frequently invited to serve on search committees and committees that direct graduate programs.]

X.6. Are graduate students invited to play a role in faculty searches? (88% yes, 12% no) If Yes, what role do they play? [Based on 77 narrative responses to this question, graduate student roles vary widely, from very limited (e.g., informal conversations with visiting job candidates) to very active (e.g., as voting members of search committees).]

X.7. Do the graduate students in your department play an active role in program decisions that affect them? (10% always, 32% usually, 35% sometimes, 5% rarely, 16% never, 5% don't know, 2% no answer) What concerns, if any, do they express about their role in making program decisions?

X.8A. Are the graduate assistants at your institution organized into a union? (21% yes) If No, skip to question 9.

X.8B. How long ago was the union formed? [range: "2 months ago" to "the mid-1970s," with most having been formed within 3 years of the survey.]

X.8C. Has unionization had a significant impact on any aspect of the teaching or research activities of your department? (36% yes, 45% no, 9% don't know, 9% no answer, N = 22). If Yes, briefly describe the impact.

X.9. Compared to their counterparts a decade ago, would you say that today's graduate students have a different view of their identities as professional historians? (26% yes, 27% no, 46% don't know, 2% no answer) If Yes, how is it different? [Based on 25 narrative responses to this question, the major change is that students today are "more professional" or "more professionalized."]

X.10. The last several years have been marked by rising expectations of the publishing record required for tenure. In general, would you say that graduate students in your department are aware of this change in expectations? (78% yes, 10% no, 9% don't know, 4% no answer) If Yes, how does this awareness affect them (e.g., in their attitudes toward teaching or future employment)? (Note: For questions 11­13, "professional development" refers to all of the skills and habits that a professional historian ought to acquire and practice other than research and teaching skills narrowly defined These might include [but certainly are not limited to] a familiarity with professional ethics and standards, a sense of appropriate interactions with colleagues and students, a familiarity with the structures and responsibilities of academic governance, an appreciation of history's place within a broader liberal arts curriculum, the role of historians in public debates outside of the academy, etc.)

X.11. On the whole, would you say that faculty members are 16% very satisfied, 58% somewhat satisfied, 12% somewhat dissatisfied, or 1% unsatisfied with the level of professional development that graduate students attain by the time they receive a doctoral degree from your department? (10% don't know, 3% no answer) What concerns, if any, do they express about professional development?

X.12. On the whole, would you say that graduate students are 16% very satisfied, 46% somewhat satisfied, 22% somewhat dissatisfied, or 0% unsatisfied with the level of professional development they reach by the time they receive a doctoral degree from your department? (13% don't know, 3% no answer) What concerns, if any, do they express about professional development?

X.13. In the past five years, has your department made any efforts to enhance the professional development of its graduate students? (57% yes, 31% no, 7% don't know, 5% no answer) Do you anticipate any such efforts in the next few years? (30% yes, 25% no, 20% don't know, 25% no answer) If Yes to either question, briefly describe the efforts. [Based on 57 narrative responses to this question, the most significant changes (in order of frequency) have been: more workshops, colloquia, etc., devoted to issues of professional development (including mock interviews for job seekers); encouraging students to participate more actively in the profession (by attending conferences, giving papers, etc.); more opportunities for students to meet with nonacademic historians; more teaching opportunities for graduate students.]

X.14. Does your department have a placement officer for its doctoral students (i.e., a faculty member, other than the director of graduate studies, with responsibility for helping students find appropriate employment)? (31% yes, 68% no, 1% no answer)

X.15A. Do graduate students have access to a "career services office" designed to serve a variety of student populations at your school? (81% Yes, 11% no, 8% don't know)

X.15B. If Yes, does the office provide resources to help graduate students find 9% academic jobs, 13% nonacademic jobs, or 60% both? (14% don't know, 4% no answer) [N = 85]

X.15C. Have history graduate students generally found the office to be a useful source of information and assistance? (14% yes, 35% no, 44% don't know, 7% no answer) [N = 85]

X.16. Would you say that graduate students in your department are aware of the range of professional opportunities for historians outside the academy? (15% yes, very aware, 58% yes, somewhat aware, 21% no, not very aware, 1% no, hardly aware at all, 4% don't know, 1% no answer)

X.17. Would you say that faculty members in your department are aware of the range of professional opportunities for historians outside the academy? (12% yes, very aware, 47% yes, somewhat aware, 3% no, not very aware, 3% no, hardly aware at all, 3% don't know, 1% no answer)

X.18. A variety of different institutions routinely hire professional historians. However, most history departments concentrate on training their graduate students for careers in some but not all of these institutional settings. Use the grid below to tell us about the priorities in your own department. Which professional activities do you most actively train your doctoral students to pursue? And which receive less (or less explicit) attention?

X.19. Is there consensus about the training priorities summarized in question 18 among the faculty members in your department who teach and/or advise doctoral students? (61% yes, 15% no, 21% don't know, 3% no answer)

X.20. Over the past decade or so, have you noticed any significant changes in the career expectations of the doctoral students in your department? (19% yes, 61% no, 15% don't know, 5% no answer) If Yes, briefly describe the changes. What do you think caused the changes?

X.21. Over the past decade or so, have you noticed any significant changes in the career expectations that faculty members have for their graduate students? (20% yes, 62% no, 14% don't know, 4% no answer) If Yes, briefly describe the changes. What do you think caused the changes?

X.22. Do you think that faculty members and graduate students in your department share a similar set of expectations about the career opportunities new history Ph.D.'s will face over the next few decades? (29% very similar, 57% somewhat similar, 4% not very similar, 6% hardly the same at all, 9% no answer) Briefly describe the divergence in expectations, if any.

X.23. Do you expect today's graduate students to follow career paths as historians roughly similar to your own career path? (41% yes, 44% no, 12% don't know, 3% no answer) If No, why not?

Section XI: Placement and Employment

XI.1. Is information about the job placement record of recent graduates readily available to the current graduate students in your department? (71% yes, 25% no, 1% don't know, 3% no answer)

XI.2A. In the 2000­2001 academic year, how many of your doctoral students including recent Ph.D.'s were"on the job market" (i.e., actively seeking professional employment as historians)? [range: 0­81, mean: 10.3, median: 6, N = 93]

XI.2B. About how many of those students conned their job search to positions within the academy? (feel free to provide a percentage estimate) [range: 0­100%, mean: 82%, median: 90%, N = 84]

XI.2C. During the past five years, has there been a significant change in the number of doctoral students from your department entering the job market? (10% yes, 72% no, 7% don't know, 11% no answer) If Yes, briefly describe the change.

XI.3. For those students who were seeking academic positions, about how many positions did each one apply for? [range: 1 to "many," mean: 16, median: 13, N = 51; not a reliable statistic]

XI.4. During the 2000­2001 academic year, how many of your department's doctoral students (including recent Ph.D.'s) found and accepted positions in each of the following professional settings? (Please count only the students who were seeking their first professional employment out of graduate school.) [Results based on 92 responses.]

204 research universities

210 comprehensive four-year colleges

92 liberal arts colleges

63 community colleges

16 secondary schools

12 academic administration

13 archives/research libraries

15 museums/historical societies/historic sites

3 historical consulting firms

1 historic preservation agencies

5 historical editing projects

1 documentary lm projects

3 nonprofit organizations

18 government agencies

3 publishing (including electronic publishing)

7 other businesses

40 post-docs

30 other

736 total

XI.5. Considering all of the doctoral students from your department who have sought professional employment during the past decade, would you consider this distribution of new jobs to be typical? (48% yes, 24% no, 12% don't know, 16% no answer) If No, how does it differ? [Based on 19 narrative responses to this question, 2000­2001 was a better year than average for academic placement, especially at research institutions.]

XI.6. Over the past decade, have doctoral students from your department 48% become more competitive, 2% become less competitive, or 37% remained about as competitive as before in the academic job market? (8% don't know, 6% no answer)

XI.7. On average, how many years do doctoral students from your department remain on the job market before they receive (and accept) an academic position? [range: 0­4 years, mode: 2 years, N = 83]

XI.8A. How much, if anything, does your department (or your institution's registrar, etc.) charge a graduate student to send his/her dossier to a prospective employer? [Thirty-five (33%) of the directors of graduate studies did not know or did not respond to this question; 42 (40%) reported that students do not have to pay for dossiers; 28 (27%) reported that dossiers cost between $1.00 and $12.00, with a median price of $5.00 per dossier.]

XI.8B. Is there a limit to how many dossiers a student can send out each year? (0% yes, 56% no, 27% don't know, 17% no answer) If Yes, what is the limit? [n.a.]

XI.8C. Is there a limit on how many years after enrollment (or after the completion of a degree, etc.) your department will continue to maintain a student's employment dossier? (8% yes, 44% no, 33% don't know, 15% no answer). If Yes, what is the limit? [range: 5­10 years, mode: 10 years, N = 6]

XI.9. Is funding available to support graduate student travel to job interviews at professional meetings? (23% yes, 73% no, 4% no answer) If Yes, how much funding is available?

XI.10A. Does your department offer its graduate students a formal opportunity to practice their job interviewing techniques? (42% yes, 47% no, but informal practice interviews are common, 10% no, 2% no answer)

XI.10B. Does your department offer its graduate students a formal opportunity to practice their job talks? (44% yes, 43% no, but informal practice interviews are common, 11% no, 3% no answer)

XI.11. What concerns, if any, do the graduate students in your department raise about the current prospects for employment as a professional historian? Have these concerns changed in the past five years?

XI.12. What concerns, if any, do the faculty members in your department raise about the current prospects for employment as a professional historian? Have these concerns changed in the past five years?

[Based on 85 narrative responses to question XI.12 and 81 narrative responses to question XI.13, graduate students and faculty members alike are far more concerned about the general weakness of the academic job market for historians than about any specific factors that have contributed to that weakness.]

XI.13. During the past five years, has your department increased or changed its efforts on behalf of graduate students seeking academic jobs? (43% yes, 44% no, 7% don't know, 7% no answer) Do you anticipate any changes in the next few years? (21% yes, 36% no, 28% don't know, 15% no answer) If Yes to either question, briefly describe the changes. [Based on 47 narrative responses to this question, the most important changes (in order of frequency) have been: more workshops to help prepare students for the job market (including mock interviews); improvements in how job postings are advertised and dossiers are distributed; more attention to the issue of placement on the part of individual departments.]

XI.14. During the past five years, has your department increased or changed its efforts on behalf of graduate students seeking jobs outside the academy? (10% yes, 75% no, 9% don't know, 6% no answer) Do you anticipate any changes in the next few years? (10% yes, 55% no, 19% don't know, 15% no answer) If Yes to either question, briefly describe the changes. [Based on 18 narrative responses to this question, the most significant change has been a greater awareness of nonacademic opportunities, with increased efforts to make students aware of these opportunities.]

Section XII: After the Graduate Students Leave

XII.1. Does your department maintain a mailing list of its former graduate students? (66% yes, 28% no, 6% don't know, 1% no answer)

XII.2. Does your department stay in regular touch with its graduate alumni? (58% yes, 33% no, 4% don't know, 5% no answer) If Yes, how do you stay in touch with them? (check all that apply) [Percentages are based on all respondents, N = 105.]

49% a departmental newsletter for graduate alumni

18% other mailings

8% a listserv (or other e-mail communications)

19% a reception at the annual meeting of the AHA (or other professional conferences)

4% periodic reunions

6% other [Response here include informal networking and periodic questionnaires.]

XII.3. Does your department solicit feedback from graduate alumni about how to improve its current graduate program? (36% yes, 59% no, 4% don't know, 1% no answer)

XII.4. Does your department track the placement of its Ph.D.'s beyond their first professional employment? (19% yes, 61% yes, but only informally, 14% no, 2% don't know, 4% no answer)

XII.5. Are graduate alumni invited back to discuss their postgraduate school careers with current graduate students? (31% yes, 63% no, 2% don't know, 4% no answer)

XII.6. Does your department advertise the accomplishments of its graduate alumni? (67% yes, 27% no, 4% don't know, 3% no answer) If Yes, how and where does it advertise their accomplishments? [Based on 49 narrative responses to this question, the most common means of advertising alumni accomplishments (in order of frequency) are: departmental newsletters, Web sites, graduate program brochures, and local bulletin boards.]

XII.7. Does your department ask graduate alumni to help place current students in academic jobs? (30% yes, 51% no, 13% don't know, 7% no answer) Does your department ask graduate alumni to help place current students in non-academic jobs? (14% yes, 42% no, 15% don't know, 29% no answer)

XII.8. Does your department solicit financial contributions from its graduate alumni? (46% yes, 41% no, 7% don't know, 3% not allowed to, 4% no answer)

XII.9. Does your institution solicit financial contributions from the history department's graduate alumni? (68% yes, 9% no, 20% don't know, 4% no answer) If Yes, does the history department directly benefit from their contributions? (35% yes, 23% no, 28% don't know, 14% no answer, based on N = 71)

Section XIII: Graduate Training and the
Historical Profession

XIII.1. Considering the historical profession as a whole, would you describe the present moment as:

29% a time of exceptional scholarly creativity in the field of history

50% a time of average creativity, roughly the same as a generation ago

9% a time of somewhat diminished accomplishment in historical scholarship

7% none of the above

6% no answer

XIII.2A. In the past decade, do you think that morale in the historical profession has gotten 9% better, 29% worse, or 48% remained about the same? (11% don't know, 4% no answer)

XIII.2B. In the past decade, do you think that morale in your own department has gotten 44% better, 28% worse, or 20% remained about the same? (5% don't know, 4% no answer)

XIII.3. Is the rewards system of the profession, as you understand it, generally supportive of the goals and needs of your own department? (49% yes, 17% no, 24% don't know, 10% no answer) If No, what changes would you like to see in the rewards system?

XIII.4. Is the rewards system in force at your institution supportive of the goals and needs of the history department? (48% yes, 40% no, 6% don't know, 7% no answer) If No, what changes would you like to see? [Based on 35 narrative responses to this question, the most significant changes that respondents would like to see at their home institutions (in order of frequency) are: more emphasis on the humanities as opposed to the sciences (including a decreased emphasis on external research funding); more support for graduate students; more pay for faculty members (especially merit pay); and more support in general (in the form of sabbaticals, library resources, building space, etc.]

XIII.5. What would you say has been the most significant change in graduate training for historians over the past decade or so? [The 78 narrative responses to this question describe six broad changes: (1) more-sophisticated approaches to historical analysis; (2) the development of new research fields (sometimes under the broad heading of "social history"); (3) increased emphasis on teaching skills and pedagogy; (4) mounting pressures for early professionalization (along with rising expectations for graduate students' written work); (5) more use of electronic resources for research and teaching; and (6) growing emphasis on interdisciplinary, transnational, and comparative work.]

XIII.6. What issue(s), if any, would you like to see the American Historical Association address in the area of graduate education?

XIII.7. What, if anything, do you think the AHA can do to improve graduate education in history?

XIII.8A. When did you complete your Ph.D.? [range: 1961 to 1998, median: 1982, N = 99]

XIII.8B. Considering all of the changes that have occurred in the profession since then, would you choose to become a graduate student in history today? (60% yes, 10% no, 21% don't know/not sure, 9% no answer)

XIII.8C. Would you choose to become a graduate student in another field or discipline? (10% yes, 55% no, 24% don't know/not sure, 11% no answer) Briefly explain your decision.

XIII.9. If you were asked to defend the value of doctoral education in history beyond the university to a more general public, what points would you make?

XIII.10. Later this year (2001), the AHA's Committee on Graduate Education will conduct site visits to a number of graduate programs around the country. The Committee is interested in departments that have adopted innovative approaches to any aspect of graduate education at either the doctoral or master's level. Can you recommend any department(s) for the Committee to visit? [Relying in part on the advice of the respondents, the Committee visited the following history graduate programs in 2001­2002: Northeastern University, Howard University, Florida International University, Columbia University, University of Michigan, Arizona State University, University of South Carolina, Ohio State University, and Stanford University.]

 

 

Previous

Next

---

Last Updated: May 11, 2007