PhD Program Best Practices
at the University of Florida
A Provost Fellowship Project
Spring 2006
Prepared by Sylvia Chan-Olmsted
Professor and Associate Dean for Research
College of Journalism and Communications
Background of the Project
• Synopsis: Examine the
recruitment, admission, and
mentoring practices of PhD
programs to identify best
practices
• Rationale: Low completion
and high attrition rates
mean loss of talent
resources/public investment
Project Objectives
• Identify the characteristics
of the high/low performing
PhD programs
• Explore the factors
associated with aboveaverage program
completion patterns
• Recommend specific
practices in PhD
recruitment, admission,
and mentoring
Project Process
1. Analysis of secondary
program data from the
graduate school and CGS
2. In-depth personal interviews
with the graduate
coordinators of selected
programs
(Botany, Chemical Engineering,
Chemistry, Civil Engineering, Computer
Engineering, Economics, English, History,
Microbiology, Psychology, Physics, and
Sociology)
Major Findings: Program Performance
PhD Completion Rates
• Three tiers of performers (some underperformed
their CGS peers – NCSU & UGA)
Ten-Year Completion Rate by Department 1992-2002
History
English
Computer Engineering
Mathematics
Physics
Economics
Department
Sociology
Botany
Civil Engineering
Chemistry
Chemical Engineering
Psychology
Microbiology
0
10
20
30
40
50
Completion Rate
60
70
80
90
Major Findings: Program Performance
PhD Attrition Rates
• Three tiers of performers (four underperformed
their CGS peers)
Ten Year Attrition Rate by Department 1992-2002
History
Mathematics
Computer Engineering
English
Sociology
Physics
Department
Botany
Economics
Psychology
Civil Engineering
Chemistry
Chemical Engineering
Microbiology
0
5
10
15
20
Attrition Rate
25
30
35
40
Major Findings: Program Performance
PhD Time-to-Degree
• Sociology, computer engineering, and civil
engineering led the group (one underperformed)
PhD Time to Degree by Department 1992-2002
Sociology
Computer Engineering
Civil Engineering
Microbiology
Department
Chemistry
Economics
Chemical Engineering
Psychology
Mathematics
English
Physics
Botany
History
0
10
20
30
40
50
Months (1 year =12 months; 1 semster=4 months)
60
70
80
Major Findings: Recruitment
• Communication and
Information Dissemination
– Web rules, cold mass mailing
considered ineffective
• Recruitment Activities
– No systemic off-campus
recruitment
– Limited marketing efforts; peer
schools and personal
recruitment
Notable Recruitment Practices
• An extensive Web site that features indepth program information, online tools
for self-assessment of program readiness,
and helpful guides on effective
applications and success in graduate
school.
• A formal “partner schools” program which
institutionalizes the recruitment practices
that would benefit all partnered schools
• A proactive recruitment practice that
follows up inquiries with phone calls and
waives application fees for eligible
domestic students.
• A proactive investigation (e.g., survey) of
the reasons behind an admitted student’s
decision not to attend UF.
Major Findings: Admissions
• Admission procedures vary greatly
among programs (e.g., geographic
division of applications)
• Notable admission practices
– Separation of the recruitment and
admission functions
– Provision of financial support for oncampus visits after admissions
– Preference for a program’s own
undergraduate students
– Lack of a sponsored on-campus
visit/interview program
– Limited emphasis on the factor of “fit”
Major Findings: Mentoring
It is a highly individualized endeavor, but
leaders may cultivate an environment that
encourages certain productive mentoring
practices
Notable positive practices:
• The institutionalization of a formal, wellthought-out advisor–student matching
system that emphasizes the process of
mutual selection and gives junior faculty the
needed research assistance.
• Assignments of faculty advisors after the
PhD students have a chance to become
acquainted with the faculty.
Notable negative practices:
• Very uneven distribution of PhD advising
loads
Major Findings: Program Characteristics
• Programs vary greatly in size of applications
Number of Applications by Department
700
600
Microbiology
Mathematics
Botany
Psychology
Civil Engineering
Computer Engineering
Chemical Engineering
Economics
Physics
History
English
Chemistry
Sociology
No. of Applicants
500
400
300
200
100
0
2002
2003
2004
2005
Major Findings: Program Characteristics
• Programs vary greatly in acceptance rates
PhD Acceptance Rate by Department 2002-2005
90.0%
80.0%
70.0%
Microbiology
Mathematics
Botany
Psychology
Civil Engineering
Computer Engineering
Chemical Engineering
Economics
Physics
History
English
Chemistry
Sociology
Acceptance Rate
60.0%
50.0%
40.0%
30.0%
20.0%
10.0%
0.0%
2002
2003
2004
Year
2005
Major Findings: Program Acceptance
Rates by Gender & Test Scores
• Computer Engineering and Physics –
higher acceptance rates for male
applicants; Civil Engineering & Chemistry
– higher rates for female applicants
• Chemical Engineering – Highest
increase in female acceptance rates
• Economics, English, Botany, and
Psychology – high GPA
• Computer Engineering, Civil
Engineering, Economics, Physics, and
Chemical Engineering – high GRE scores
Major Findings: Program Student-to-Faculty Ratio
• Computer Engineering had the highest ratio
Graduate Student-Teacher Ratio by Department
45
40
35
Ratio
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Student-Teacher Ratio Student-Teacher Ratio Student-Teacher Ratio Student-Teacher Ratio Student-Teacher Ratio Student-Teacher Ratio
('98)
('99)
('00)
('01)
('02)
('03)
Year
Botany
Economics
Physics
Chemical Engineering
English
Psychology
Chemistry
History
Sociology
Civil Engineering
Mathematics
Computer Engineering
Microbiology
Major Findings: Relative Size of PhD Programs
• History, Computer Engineering, and to a lesser
degree, Civil Engineering had the smallest
proportions of PhD degrees awarded
No. of Doctoral Degree to Total/Graduate Degree Awarded
Doctoral Degree to all Degrees Awarded ('04-05)
Doctoral Degree to All Graduate Degrees ('04-05)
Sociology
Psychology
Physics
Microbiology
Department
Mathematics
History
English
Economics
Computer Engineering
Civil Engineering
Chemistry
Chemical Engineering
Botany
0.00
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.40
0.50
0.60
0.70
0.80
0.90
Notable Program Characteristics
• Positive Characteristics:
competitive stipend,
comparably balanced
graduate/undergraduate
programs, mid-size program,
and mid-range student-tofaculty ratio
• Negative Characteristics:
low stipend, lack of office
space, high student-to-faculty
ratio, unstructured curriculum,
and very large program size
Recommendations - Recruitment
• Develop an informative and
interactive program website
• Establish a program to identify
and take advantage of “partner
schools”
• Proactively recruit by initiating
follow-ups with more personal
approaches
• Waive the application fee for
attractive domestic students
• Proactively investigate the
reasons behind an admittee’s
decision not to attend UF
Recommendations-Admissions
• Divide the functions of
recruitment and admission
• Provide financial support for oncampus visits of admittees
• Avoid preferential admission for a
program’s own undergraduate
students
• Emphasize the factor of “fit”
between students and
faculty/program
• Monitor acceptance rates to
avoid comparatively very high
acceptance rates
Recommendations: Mentoring
• Institutionalize a formal advisor–
student matching system that
emphasizes the process of mutual
selection and the factor of “fit”
• Create opportunities for new PhD
students to become acquainted
with the faculty before assigning
advisors
• Develop a reward system to
ensure a more even distribution of
the PhD student advising loads
Recommendations-Program
• Raise stipend levels to be
comparable with peer
institutions.
• Provide adequate office space.
• Control program size and
student-to-faculty ratio.
• Offer a curriculum that is in line
with that of the peer institutions
and provides both structure
and freedom.