Graduate Studies Metrics 2008



Graduate Studies Metrics 2008

Department of Psychology

Dan Lapsley

Director of Graduate Studies

danlapsley@nd.edu

I. Overview of Enrollment and Graduation

|Program |Current Enrollment |No. Incoming Students |No. Graduating |

|Developmental |14 |8 |4 |

|Counseling |19 |4 |2 |

|Cognitive |8 |4 |0 |

|Quantitative |9 |2 |1 |

|Total |52 |18 |7 |

II. Quality of Incoming Graduate Students

Appropriate recruitment strategies

The Department of Psychology conducts on-campus interviews of prospective students. The two-day schedule includes meetings with individual faculty and current students and research presentations by current advanced doctoral students. The program includes an orientation to the department and graduate studies presented by the DGS, the department chair, and by representatives of the Graduate School. Prospective students tour the departmental facilities and campus, and take meals with the program faculty and students. We are able to offer stipend increases for qualified applicants, so that we can match competitive offers.

Diversity Information

The diversity status of incoming students is indicated in the following table:

|Program |Diversity Status |Diversity Fellowship |

|Developmental |1 (Canadian) | |

|Counseling |3 (2 Asian; 1 Hispanic) |1 |

|Cognitive |0 | |

|Quantitative |2 (Asian) | |

|Total |6 | |

The Department made offers of 3 diversity fellowships to incoming students. One student elected not to accept our offer of admission. The remaining two students did accept our offer, although only one was awarded a Diversity Fellowship.

GRE Scores and Undergraduate GPA

GRE scores and undergraduate GPA of incoming students is indicated in the following table, by program area.

|Program |GRE Scores |GPA |

| |Verbal |Quant. |V + Q |Analytic |V + Q + A | |

|Developmental |570 |681 |1251 |5 |1256 |3.57 |

|Counseling |625 |693 |1318 |5 |1322 |3.73 |

|Cognitive |585 |718 |1303 |5 |1307 |3.34 |

|Quantitative |595 |780 |1375 |5 |1380 |3.80 |

|Dept. Average |588 |703 |1291 |5 |1296 |3.61 |

Incoming Students from Leading Universities and Liberal Arts Colleges

Fifty percent (50%) of incoming students who received their undergraduate education in the United States are graduates of leading universities. Two students who received their undergraduate education in the Peoples Republic of China are graduates of its premier universities (Beijing University, Guangdong University). Across all students, 61% are graduates of leading universities. The following table summarizes these undergraduate institutions.

|Undergraduate Institution |N |

|Florida State University |1 |

|Baylor University |1 |

|University of Notre Dame |2 |

|Michigan State University |2 |

|University of California-Los Angeles |1 |

|University of Colorado, Boulder |1 |

|The Ohio State University |1 |

|Beijing University |1 |

|Guangdong University |1 |

|Total |11/18 |

Not included in the above calculation are two incoming students who are graduates of top 100 liberal arts colleges.

Number of Applications per Enrolled Student, Acceptance Ratios and Yield

Total Number of Applications: 147

Number of Offers: 27

Acceptance Ratio: 18%

Number Accepting Offer: 18

Yield 67%

Universities Selected by Applicants who declined an ND Offer

We have information on 4 students who declined our offer. They accepted offers, respectively, from The Ohio State University, Michigan State University, MIT and Columbia University. Clearly we are competing with top-tier universities for the most talented students.

III. Placements of Graduates at Leading Institutions

| |Program Area |

| |(with ’08 Graduates) |

|2008 Graduates |Counseling |Developmental |Quantitative |

|N of Graduates |2 |4 |1 |

|N securing post-doctoral positions |1 |2 | |

|N securing T & R positions |1 |2 | |

|% securing T & R positions |50% |50% |-- |

|N securing T & R positions at 100 research |1 (Columbia) |1 (Connecticut College) | |

|universities or top 50 liberal arts colleges | | | |

|N securing post-docs at top 100 research | |2 | |

|universities | |(Vanderbilt & U. Pittsburgh) | |

|% accepting T &R or post-doc positions (all |100% |100% |(private sector) |

|institutions) | | | |

The Department graduated 7 doctoral students in 2008. One student will enter the private sector. Of the remaining 6 graduates, all of them (100%) secured a T & R position or post-doctoral position.

Three graduates secured T & R positions, two of which are at top 100 research universities (Columbia University) or top 50 liberal arts colleges (Connecticut College), which are distinctive placements, indeed.

Three secured post-doctoral positions. Of these three, two post-doctoral positions were at highly regarded research universities (Vanderbilt and the University of Pittsburgh). The other post-doctoral position was with the Counseling and Psychological Services unit at Cal State-Fullerton. This is a staff position.

IV. Quality of Departmental Leadership, Graduate Studies

Evidence of recently implemented initiatives and their impact, at the graduate student level

Evidence that the department recognizes its weaknesses and is working toward addressing them

Specific plans for improvement and enhancement with clearly defined targets and assessment strategies

Program areas undertook initiatives to address certain perceived weaknesses in graduate studies. For example, the Cognitive Program conducted a curriculum review that resulted in a revised curriculum organization that strikes a better balance between breadth and depth for students. In addition, the Cognitive Program undertook a new set of course requirements that are more in line with the recently revised total number of hours for the doctoral degree. A third initiative was a survey and interview of Cognitive Program graduate students. The purpose of this effort was to get feedback on the way(s) the program could be improved. As a result of the feedback, the program intends to implement initiatives that are responsive to the needs expressed by students. For example, a student representative will be added to program meetings; and specific procedures will be identified to provide feedback to the Program and Department. A second initiative is to have one or more occasions where program faculty and students can interact in less formal social situations. A third initiative is to provide appropriate extra-curricular professional development opportunities for students. A follow-up survey will be conducted near the end of AY ’08-’09 to gauge the success of these initiatives. Finally, the Cognitive Program added a new element to the department’s annual Interview Day for prospective graduate students. The program added a new afternoon tour of laboratory facilities to the schedule. Feedback from students and faculty was that this tour was a worthwhile addition to the schedule. Perhaps coincidently, the Cognitive Program also enjoyed a very strong recruiting class this year.

The Developmental Program also implemented initiatives in response to perceived weaknesses in the program. It revised the reading list as well as the study questions for the comprehensive preliminary examinations. It expanded the range of prelim options (written examination questions, a grant application, and a substantial scholarly review of the literature suitable for publication). It formalized the aforementioned Developmental Studies Group weekly ‘brown bag’ colloquia. Moreover, with wide consultation with students and faculty, the program faculty will explore possible changes to how the weekly meetings are run (e.g., to include more presentations by faculty, graduate students leading discussions of articles, multiple presentations, etc.). The program has made it a policy that those who read prelim exams must provide written feedback; and that advisors must evaluate their students in writing within a month at the close of the spring semester. The program has begun a bi-monthly social gathering to facilitate interactions among students and faculty outside of the formalities of classroom and laboratory. The reaction to these initiatives has been positive. Students are pleased to have more consistency and predictability with respect to the prelim questions and readings. Moreover, a Developmental Studies Group website now exists on which all major prelim documents, all of the Psychology Department and Developmental Program documents, as well as updates of faculty and student accomplishments are posted. This has eased graduate student anxiety and is making the prelim process more transparent.

The Quantitative Program, in consultation with its graduate students, decided to change the format of its preliminary examinations, primarily by replacing one written component with an oral component. The oral component will consist of open questions by current quantitative faculty members, which the program believes will better evaluate a candidate’s knowledge and preparation. The program also updated the reading list, primarily to reflect changes in faculty expertise. The program has also begun a conversation about how to enhance the quantitative curriculum with the impending arrival of new faculty next fall.

The Counseling Program undertook a number of initiatives this past academic year. For example,

it voted to move the first practicum from the 2nd year of the program into the 3rd year, in order to solidify student research programs before embarking on clinical training (there are a number of issues to resolve before this gets implemented). It made a number of curricular revisions, including the decision to offer the Research Methods in Counseling Psychology course every year rather than every other year; and making the major paper project in that course culminate in a master’s thesis proposal.  Because this course is in the 2nd year of the curriculum, that assures a completed master’s proposal by the end of fall semester of the 2nd year of the program.

The Counseling Program also altered the dissertation proposal deadline. Whereas the program used to permit students to apply for internship (~ October 31) with an “adviser approved” dissertation proposal, we now require it to be formally approved by their dissertation committees before applying to internship.

 

This year two Program “Town Hall” meetings were convened each semester.  These are agenda-free meetings between faculty and students for the purpose of discussing student-nominated topics, primarily concerning program requirements, documenting clinical cases and hours, the future clinical program and how that will affect current students, confidentially accessing the graduate student Counseling Center mental health benefit, and the like.  Many misperceptions were cleared-up with these meetings.  The students cancelled the final meeting of the year because they had no concerns at all!

 

The Program initiated conversations with the APA Commission on Accreditation about how to convert the APA-accredited Counseling program into an APA-accredited Clinical program.  This conversation will culminate in a action plan and timeline being set next year.

 

Using George Walker et al.’s “Importance of Intellectual Community” from the Chronicle of Higher Education as an impetus, we have begun a Program-wide discussion about how to create a “Research Community”, by getting students and faculty to more job talks, creating journal clubs, meeting regularly (like Developmental’s Brown Bag), and recognizing/rewarding research achievements more often.  This discussion will continue through next year. 

 

The Program successfully petitioned the Department to accept the Program’s Research Methods course as satisfying the Department’s Research Methods requirement. It is in the process of revising the prelim exam review paper option, to disallow the grant application format and to specify what it means to be “broad and comprehensive.”

 

The program added “Professionalism” to its student evaluation rubric.

 

The Program successfully petitioned the Graduate Studies Committee to create a “General” program in the Department, through which students removed from a specific program can pursue a doctoral degree.

 

Finally, the Program is working with the Counseling Center to increase the ratio of direct service hours to total hours achieved by our practicum students there.

 

V. Quality of Graduate Experience

Effective, clearly articulated and up-to-date graduate manual, with appropriate strategies for orientation of new students.

Each program has written their curriculum, standards, and evaluation procedures into a formal program document. The department also provides a written General Requirements Document. The program documents and General Requirements Document are frequently updated and are kept current. Program and departmental requirements documents are provided on the departmental website for easy and immediate student and faculty access. The program and department documents provide comprehensive and clear descriptions of behaviors and standards so that Graduate Students know what is expected. An orientation packet is mailed to incoming students during the summer before their arrival on campus. A “welcome packet” is also sent to students to assist their transition to South Bend (finding apartments, restaurants) and to Notre Dame (getting a net ID, parking). We also conduct a formal orientation and welcome during the first week of classes in August

Evidence of high-quality educational opportunities and professional development

The goal of the Department’s graduate training is to develop academics that function well in all areas of academic evaluation, including research productivity, teaching excellence and service.

The professional formation of graduate students is based on intensive laboratory-based mentorship and matriculation through a well-defined academic curriculum. Students learn to conduct high-quality research under the guidance of their mentors and in collaboration with laboratory colleagues. They gain experience in all areas of the research process, including scholarly publication, presentations at professional meetings, and the grant submission process.

Induction into research training occurs in the first-year. In addition to participating in on-going research in one’s lab, each student is required to complete a first-year project that is presented to the department the following year.

Educational opportunities for professional development are also formalized by program-based “studies groups” (e.g., Cognitive Studies Group, Developmental Studies Group, Quantitative Studies Group, Counseling Studies Group) that meet regularly (often weekly) and take the form of “brown bag” colloquia and reading groups. At these meetings students present their on-going research, proposals for masters or doctoral research; or they practice delivering conference papers or job talks.

Studies Group meetings also provide a forum to discuss new and cutting edge research. The Studies Group meetings of the four programs are open to the whole department, so that students and faculty from all areas can have exposure to the work of the various labs. In addition, each program area also sponsors at least one colloquium that features nationally prominent scholars. In practice, there are typically several more additional colloquia of this type offered by the Department during the year. In all of these events graduate students are given significant opportunity to meet with the distinguished guests in both formal and informal settings to advance professional socialization and networking opportunities.

The Department funds graduate student travel to conferences and workshops; and there is a supportive culture for students to attend conferences

There is substantial evidence of the effectiveness of the Department’s commitment to professional formation. For example, 88% of graduate students (49/56) reported a scholarly publication, or a conference paper or a paper submitted for publication in their annual report for AY 07-08. Hence the culture of scholarly research and publication within the Department is pervasive. It is also deep, as illustrated by the quantity of scholarly work produced by our graduate students in the past year (see table below, with qualification).

|Psychology Graduate Student Productivity for AY 07-081 |

|(Across all currently enrolled students) |

|Articles/Chapters |Conference Papers |Ms. Submitted for Publication |

|33 |91 |27 |

|1These numbers were compiled from student CVs submitted for their annual AY 07-08 report; and are simply a count of ’08 publications. |

|As such, the data under-reports actual level of productivity insofar as Fall ’07 activity is not represented in the count. |

In addition to research, graduate students have many opportunities to engage in teaching and teaching-related training, including service as a Teaching Assistant or Instructor of Record. We encourage students to seek Certification in Teaching through a collaborative arrangement the Department has established with the Kaneb Center (whereby the Department offers courses on teaching).

This year four doctoral students were recognized for their teaching excellence:

Greg Davis: Kaneb Outstanding Graduate Student Award for Excellence in Teaching

Brad Dobrzenski: “Striving for Excellence” Teaching Certificate (Kaneb Center)

Diane Lickenbrock: Certificate in the Practice and Philosophy of Teaching (Psychology Dept)

Nick Lynchard: Kaneb Outstanding Graduate Student Award for Excellence in Teaching

VI Efficient Use of Resources

Number of Graduate Students Supported by External Grants

14 graduate students are supported by external grants:

|Students Supported by External Grants in AY 07-08 |

|Tina Merriless |

|Marcia Braun |

|Naomi Ekas |

|Jody Nicholson |

|Beth Blodgett |

|Brad Dobrezenski |

|Chrystyna Kouros |

|Stephen Tueller |

|Xiaoling Zhong |

|Stacey Scott |

|Lori Peterson |

|Carolyn Heitzmann |

|Melissa (Ward) George |

|Andrea Tamplin |

Evidence of Effective Use of Tracking Procedures for Quality Control of Graduate Students

Each program in the department conducts annual evaluations, with more frequent formal evaluations as needed for students who are having difficulty. All programs provide specific written feedback as part of their annual evaluations; and the Developmental Program requires written feedback on preliminary examinations.

Each program has written their curriculum, standards, and evaluation procedures into a formal program document. The department also provides a written General Requirements Document. The program documents and General Requirements Document are frequently updated and are kept current. Program and departmental requirements documents are provided on the departmental website for easy and immediate student and faculty access.

Each program maintains specific deadlines which conform to a 5-year plan of training. The department’s Graduate Curriculum Committee has approved each program’s documents and deadlines. In 2006, the department instituted the “3rd year invitation to the PhD” gate as a departmental requirement. Each program conducts a specific formal evaluation of a student following the successful defense of the Master’s Thesis. This evaluation ordinarily occurs within weeks of the Master’s defense, and the goal is to determine if the student should embark on work specific to the PhD, including preliminary examinations. The evaluation occurs no later than the end of the third year. Ultimately, the goal of this requirement is to facilitate early departure of those not suited for the PhD.

Attrition: % and Average Year of Attrition

|Attrition and Average Year of Attrition, by Program: 2003-2008 |

| |Cognitive |Counseling |Developmental |Quantitative |

|N |5 |2 |2 |6 |

|Average Year of Attrition|2.2 |3.5 |3.0 |2.83 |

|N (%) withdraw with |2 (40%) |2 (100%) |2 (100%) |3 (50%) |

|Masters | | | | |

Fifteen students left their respective programs from 2003-2008. To provide context, the department typically has 60-70 enrolled doctoral students per year. Across all programs 60% of graduate students who withdrew did so after earning a Masters degree. An examination of withdrawal by year is informative:

|Attrition by Year of Withdrawal and Program |

|Program |2003 |2004 |2005 |2006 |2007 |2008 |

|Cognitive | | |1 |2 |2 | |

|Counseling | | |1 |1 | | |

|Developmental |1 | | |1 | | |

|Quantitative | | |2 | |2 |2 |

In the Cognitive Program, 80% (4/5) students withdrew over this time period in ’06 and ’07. In the Quantitative Program, 67% (4/6) withdrew over this period in ’07 and ’08. In both programs the years that saw the most withdrawals were associated with faculty transitions; with students leaving to accompany their mentors to new positions.

Average Time to Degree

|Average Time to Degree, by Program, 2003-2008 |

|Cognitive |Counseling |Developmental |Quantitative |Joint |Departmental/Social |

|(N = 3) |(N = 14) |(N = 23) |(N = 6) |(N = 8) |(N = 2) |

|5.67 |6.79 |5.78 |6.17 |7.75 |7.00 |

Our time-to-degree statistics are consistent with disciplinary standards. Note that Counseling and Joint Counseling/Developmental students need to complete a year of nonresident internship before graduating with the PhD, thus these are at minimum typically 6-year programs.

Contribution to Teaching

|Distribution of Assistantship Assignments AY 07-08 |

| |TA |RA |Consultant |Departmental |

|N |24 |27 |3 |1 |

|% of Total (55) |44% |49% |5% |2% |

Typically, about half of our students serve as TAs each year. Our students also serve as statistical and computer consultants, and as the departmental administrative assistant. On average, about 4 students serve as instructor of record each year.

Enrollment Management of Graduate Classes

| |Fall, 2007 |Spring, 2008 |

|N of Graduate Classes |20 |24 |

|Range of Enrollment |1 to 19 |2 to 17 |

|Mean Class Size |5.85 |6.05 |

|Thesis Direction1 |18 |16 |

|Reading/Special Topics1 |18 |16 |

|Research/Dissertation1 |16 |18 |

|Non-Resident Dissertation1 |4 |3 |

|1Enrollment summed across all instructors |

Meaningful Distribution of Graduate Studies Responsibilities (Including Advisees)

The responsibility for graduate studies in the Department of Psychology is distributed widely. Administratively, the Director of Graduate Studies works with a Graduate Studies Committee that has a representative from each program areas (Cognitive, Counseling, Developmental, Quantitative). In addition, important decisions about curriculum, comprehensive examinations, degree requirements, reading lists and training models are made within programs by program faculty.

Supervision and mentorship is also widely distributed across department (program) faculty. The following table summarizes the distribution of faculty advising across program areas for AY 07-08

|Cognitive Program |Counseling Program |Developmental Program |Quantitative Program |

|Advisor |N of Students |Advisor |N of Students |Advisor |N of Students |Advisor |N of Students |

|Gibson |4 |Corning |2 |Bergeman |3 |Zhang |1 |

|Lapsley |1 |Howard |1 |Turner |2 |Yuan |4 |

|Radvansky |3 |Gibson |1 |Braungart-Rieke|3 |Maxwell |3 |

| | | | |r | | | |

|Crowell/Villano |1 |Merluzzi |2 |Cummings |3 |Lubke |1 |

| | |Monroe |1 |Borkowski |1 | | |

| | |Kim |1 |McNeil |1 | | |

| | |Kelly |2 |Day |1 | | |

| | |Cummings |1 |Gondoli |1 | | |

| | |Smith |5 | | | | |

| | |Pope-Davis1 |4 | | | | |

| | |Narvaez |1 | | | | |

|1Includes two advisees in the General Departmental category |

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download