initiative for optimal doctoral completion. how are uga programs performing with respect to doctoral...
DESCRIPTION
How are UGA programs performing? We examined the performance of one cohort: the 474 doctoral students who entered programs between Fall of 1998 and Summer of 1999.TRANSCRIPT
Initiative for Optimal Doctoral Completion
How are UGA programs performing with respect to
doctoral completion figures?
All of this leads to the question:
How are UGA programs performing?
We examined the performance of one cohort: the 474 doctoral students who entered programs between Fall of 1998 and Summer of 1999.
Completion for All Doctoral Programs
1998-1999 & 1999-2000
COHORT
1999-20001998-1999
Cou
nt
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
STATUS
Withdraw
Currently Enrolled
Graduated
30%
4%
33%
66%
7%
60%
Completion Status for All Doctoral Programs
1998-1999 Cohort (N=475)
20%
40%
80%
100%
60%
N=144
N=18
N=313
Withdrew
30%
4%
33%
66%
7%
60%
30%
6%
64%
30%3%
68%
34%
6%60%
25%
1%
74%
57%43%
Completion Status by Broad Field
1998-1999 (N=475)
%
BRDFIELD
Social Sciences
Physical Sciences
Life Sciences
Humanities
Mea
n
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
WITHDREW
ENROLLED
GRADUATE
33513138
64
45
6562
30%
4%
33%
66%
7%
60%
Time to Degree for All Programs 1998-1999 Cohort
(Graduates Only N=313)
TTD
9.008.50
8.007.50
7.006.50
6.005.50
5.004.50
4.003.50
3.002.50
2.00
50
40
30
20
10
0
Std. Dev = 1.39
Mean = 4.79
N = 355.00
Median=4.67
# Students
Years
30%
4%
33%
66%
7%
60%
Time To Degree by Broad Field1998-1999 Cohort
(N=313)Broad Field Median Mean SDHumanities 4.33 4.67 1.32Life Sciences 4.33 4.52 1.35Math&Physical Sci 4.02 4.42 1.36Social Sciences 4.67 4.97 1.39All Programs 4.67 4.79 1.39
30%
4%
33%
66%
7%
60%
Time to Withdraw for All Programs1998-1999 Cohort
(Non-completers Only. N=144)
TTW
7.507.00
6.506.00
5.505.00
4.504.00
3.503.00
2.502.00
1.501.00
.50
50
40
30
20
10
0
Std. Dev = 1.68
Mean = 2.07
N = 166.00
Median=1.67
# Students
Years
30%
4%
33%
66%
7%
60%
Time To Withdraw by Broad Field1998-1999 Cohort
(N=144)Discipline Mean SD MedianHumanities 2.34 1.91 1.67Life Sciences 1.95 1.56 1.67Mathematics 1.25 0.46 1.33Physical Sciences 1.35 1.34 1.00Social Sciences 2.23 1.61 2.00Total 2.07 1.68 1.67
How Does UGA Compare to Other Universities?
Broad Field Percent CompletionUGA
1998-1999CGS
National 1992-1995
Duke1991-1995
Humanities 62 49 61Life Sciences 65 63 73Math and Physical Sciences
45 55 60
Social Sciences 64 56 50ALL PROGRAMS
66 57 64
What the UGA Graduate School will do during the Initiative
• Create Data Systems to help faculty understand the performance of their programs.
• Provide faculty members with Web-based Information Resources to foster self-study and program improvement.
• Provide Direct Support to those programs most in need of improvement.
Creating Data SystemsTwo things have become clear during our preliminary work:
1. In general, most faculty members do not know how well their programs are performing with respect to doctoral completion.
2. In general, programs do not keep track of reasons for non-completion.
Three Data Activities• Drillable Data Set for faculty investigation and
program self assessment
• Non-Completion Reasons systematically collected, tabulated, and shared with programs
• Follow-up questionnaire data collected from completers and non-completers
Drillable Database• The Graduate School worked with the Office of
Institutional Research to construct a data base that faculty could use to understand their program performance.
• Starting this week, that data base is available to faculty to study patterns in their own programs and compare them with other university programs.
Completion Figures for All Programs
Completion Figures for One High Performing
Program
Completion Figures for One Low Performing
Program
The Need for Interpretive Benchmarks
No one involved in higher education believes that 100% of admitted students should graduate.
But how does a program determine whether or not it is performing well?
– By comparing itself with other programs in the nation and
– By comparing itself with other programs at UGA.
30%
4%
33%
66%
7%
60%
Benchmark Graduation (%)Top 1/5 >92.024/5 70.67-92.023/5 57.20-70.662/5 43.10-57.10Bottom 1/5 <43.20
Interpretive Benchmarks: Graduation1998-1999 Cohort
(N=75 Programs)
30%
4%
33%
66%
7%
60%
Benchmark Range of TTD (Years)Top 1/5 <3.674/5 3.67-4.323/5 4.33-4.992/5 5-5.99Bottom 1/5 >5.99
Interpretive Benchmarks: Time to Degree
1998-1999 Cohort(N=75 Programs)
30%
4%
33%
66%
7%
60%
Interpretive Benchmarks: Time to Withdraw
1998-1999 Cohort(N=75 Programs)Benchmark Range of TTW (Years)
Top 1/5 <0.674/5 0.67-1.323/5 1.33-1.992/5 2-3.52Bottom 1/5 >3.53
Establishing Benchmarks
This Spring, the Graduate School will convene an advisory committee on benchmarks.
We would welcome volunteers with expertise to help us create quality benchmarks that are: – technically defensible and– of maximum acceptability to the graduate
faculty.
Non-Completion Reasons• The Graduate School will distribute a “Non-
completer List” to all Graduate Coordinators for their respective doctoral programs.
• Graduate Coordinators will be asked to visit a web site to complete a very brief report stating the reason for each non-completion.
Follow-up Student Questionnaires
• The questionnaires will collect data that will help us better understand doctoral completion and non-completion.
• Separate web-based surveys will be conducted for
completers and non-completers twice a year.
• Results will be shared with faculty. Pilot administration will begin this Spring.
Information Activities Through a website and email, information will be
provided to all members of the graduate faculty to enable them to:
– Understand the issues surrounding the use of doctoral completion figures as an indicator of program quality
– Engage in program level self-study and program improvement
Direct Support to Programs
For programs who recognize the need to improve their doctoral completion figures, the Graduate School will work collaboratively with faculty to develop and carry out a plan of action.
Actions YOU can take
After this session, go back and investigate your own program’s performance using the drillable database.
Share the data with your colleagues and discuss at upcoming faculty meetings.
Framework for Action
• At the Graduate School, we developed a Framework for Action that sets forth conditions that are likely to lead to high doctoral completion. (See green handout.)
• We urge you to use the framework to assess your program with respect to the four conditions in the framework.
Does Your Program Fulfill the Four Conditions in the Framework?
Condition #1: The right people apply for doctoral study.
Do you have a high quality website?
Do you provide potential applicants with realistic information about academic demands, funding, and time to completion?
Condition #2: The right applicants are admitted as doctoral students.
Does the admissions process rely on faculty judgment and insight about an applicant’s likelihood of success?
Or is it largely a clerical task?
Assessing your Program
Does Your Program Fulfill the Four Conditions in the Framework?
Condition #3: Students and faculty form productive working relationships.
How are students matched with major professors? Is there a process to remedy a bad match?
How do new professors learn to mentor doctoral students?
Condition #4: Students experience social support from fellow students.
Do students have the opportunity to interact professionally (seminars, mini-conferences)?
Do students have a location where they can interact socially (lunchroom, lounge, etc.)?
Assessing Your Program
If the statistics and your own inquiries point to a need for improvement . . .
• Review the four strategy sheets (handouts) to see ideas for improving your program.
• Visit our website to see strategies that other programs have used in the past.
• Contact the graduate school to ask for our help.
Program Improvement
Questions, Comments and Concerns?