PBA Home > Institutional Research & Analysis > Surveys > Graduate Student Survey 2005 > Report

Graduate Student Survey, Fall 2005

• Quality of CU-Boulder, Programs, and Faculty
• Likelihood of Staying in Program, Selecting Same Field of Study, and Selecting CU-Boulder Again
• Likelihood of Recommending CU-Boulder
• Research
• Teaching
• Program Support: Participation and Satisfaction
• Thesis/Dissertation, Advising
• Social Activities
• Satisfaction with Housing
• Obstacles to Academic Progress
• Witnessing and Experiencing Prejudice
• University Resources -- Frequency of Use and Quality
• Perceived Safety
• Importance of Skills and Degree to Which They Were Enhanced
• Financial Support
• Employment Expectations

• Introduction
  
• All Respondents
  
• Sub-Groups of Respondents

In November 2005, the second all-campus Graduate Student Survey was delivered, via the Web, to 3,829 students currently enrolled in the Graduate School. Fifty percent of surveyed graduate students responded. This project was a collaborative effort of the Graduate School and the Office of Planning, Budget, and Analysis.

The 2005 Graduate Student Survey collects extensive information on graduate student satisfaction with program and coursework quality; program support; teaching, research, and publications; financial support; satisfaction with university resources; the campus climate, including social interaction and encounters with different types of prejudice; and the overall CU-Boulder experience.

The Graduate Student Survey was last administered in fall 2003. The 2003 and 2005 surveys differ in several ways. The 2003 survey was designed by the Higher Education Data Sharing Consortium (HEDS) and was selected by this campus, in part, because peer data from other AAU public institutions were intended to be available for comparison purposes. These data ultimately were not available, however, due to internal changes at HEDS. Moreover, the 2003 survey was modified in a collaborative effort involving several AAU institutions, including MIT. MIT took over administration of the survey from HEDS but provided, as did HEDS, an option for colleges to copy the questionnaire for the survey from MIT's web site and administer it themselves. CU-Boulder elected to self-administer the survey.

In consultation with staff members from the Graduate School, some modifications were made to the questionnaire used in the survey, both in order to maintain consistency with questions asked in the 2003 administration and to ensure that all questions were applicable to the Boulder campus. The final version of the 2005 questionnaire was longer than the 2003 questionnaire, and it had considerable overlap in questions, which is useful for comparisons of student responses over time.     Return to Top

As in 2003, not all graduate students were surveyed. Law, MBA, and non-degree seeking students, and those who requested a privacy flag on their records were not included in the survey. Unlike the population surveyed in 2003, however, all other current graduate students were surveyed, even recent graduate students who had just begun their graduate study in fall of 2005.

Students were sent an e-mail from the dean of the Graduate School explaining the purpose of the survey and inviting them to participate by clicking on an enclosed link. As an incentive to respond, the invitation also explained that four of the respondents would be randomly chosen and each would receive a $250 Graduate Student Survey Award.

During the three-week period of the survey, two e-mail reminders were sent to graduate students who had not yet responded. The first of these was sent one week after the survey announcement, and the second was sent the following week. Of the 3,829 students surveyed, 10 of them were unreachable and did not have current or working e- mails. The overall response rate after the first reminder was approximately 29%. After the second reminder, the overall response rate increased to about 44%. The final response rate for all master's and doctoral students combined was 50%. Data collection ended on November 23, 2005.

The response rate is somewhat lower than that of the 2003 survey (55%) and could be associated with such factors as questionnaire length (there were noticeably more questions in 2005 than in 2003) and the re-surveying of graduate students in 2005 (many graduate students who took the 2003 survey were still enrolled in 2005 and might not have wanted to respond again within a two-year interval). Doctoral students responded to the survey at a higher rate than did master's students (52 % vs. 47%, respectively). Across schools, colleges, and divisions, response rates ranged from 34% (Education) to 64% (Business). Response rates by major program also varied considerably.   

Most graduate students (and most respondents) are enrolled in the colleges of Arts and Sciences and Engineering and Applied Science. In fact, two thirds of responding doctoral students are in these two colleges. A graph of the numbers of respondents, by college and student level (i.e., master's, doctoral) illustrates this situation.

Over one-half (57%) of all graduate students reported their current year of study as their first or second year in their program: 78% of master's students and 42% of doctoral students indicated this. An additional 12% of master's students are in their third year of study, with only 9% taking longer than that. An additional 28% of doctoral students are in their third or fourth year of study, with only about 16% being in their fifth or later year. Half as many doctoral students (20%) as master's students (40%) reported being in the final year of their graduate program.

Not surprisingly, almost all master's students (93%) indicated that their current program status was that of still taking courses. Very few (8%) have completed coursework, passed qualifying exams (5%) or are doing thesis work (5%). As would be expected, the picture for doctoral students is much different. Slightly over two-thirds (69%) are still taking courses, one-fifth (19%) have completed coursework, almost one-fourth (23%) have passed qualifying exams, and 15% are starting or completing their dissertation work. Only 1% each of master's and doctoral students indicated they had defended their thesis or dissertation at the time of the survey.

Prior research conducted by the Office of Planning, Budget, and Analysis indicates that the average time to degree is 2 1/2 years for a master's student and 6 years for a doctoral student. Graduate students' responses to the survey suggest that their expectations are consistent with these averages: eighty-nine percent of master's students reported that their best estimate of how long it would take them to earn a degree, from the time they started their program to completion, was three years or less. Ninety-five percent of doctoral students reported that degree completion would likely occur within six years.   

Slightly more females (51%) than males responded to the survey; in fact, female doctoral students (56%) were even more likely to respond than were male doctoral students (49%). About 28% of graduate students indicated that they are married, and another 6% reported that they are with a domestic partner. According to the reported zipcode of their current residence, over half of graduate students live in Boulder (56%), with the majority (81%) living in the Boulder/Denver area or within a close commute, in places such as Golden or Nederland. Only about 1% live in more distant cities (e.g., Greeley and Colorado Springs). Sixteen percent did not give a current zipcode and another 1% listed an out-of-state zipcode for their residence.

Overall, racial/ethnic minority graduate students (43%) were less likely to respond to the survey than were white students (51%). However, Asian-American students (47%) were more likely than other racial/ethnic minority students (41%) to respond. Surprisingly, Asian-American master's students (53%) were much more likely to respond  o the survey than were other minority master's students (33%), whereas Asian- American doctoral students (41%) were less likely than other minority doctoral students (48%) to respond. Foreign students (47%) were slightly less likely than white students (51%) to respond, and doctoral foreign students (47%) were even less likely respond than were white doctoral students (53%).

The majority of responding graduate students (72%) said that they are U.S. citizens. Student records show that 70% of them report their race/ethnicity as white, 4% each of the respondents are either Asian American or Hispanic/Latino, 14% have foreign status, another 1% are Black/African-American (.75%) or Native American (.37%); for the remaining respondents, race/ethnicity is unknown.

Thirty-one percent of responding graduate students reported that they were undergraduates immediately before starting graduate school. An additional 16% reported that they had been in another graduate program before beginning their current one. Almost half (46%) of the respondents had been working before starting their graduate program: 29% indicated they were employed in a field related to their current field of study; 17% were also employed, but in an unrelated field. Two percent of respondents said that they had been traveling immediately before starting their graduate program.   

Comparing 2003 and 2005

In 2003, the graduate student population was defined so as to exclude beginning graduate students from the survey. When comparing 2003 and 2005 results, therefore, data for students who were beginning graduate students in the fall of 2005 were excluded, in order to make the 2005 data comparable with that of 2003.

Approximately 45 questions on the 2003 and 2005 surveys were either identical in wording and scale, or at least similar enough in these characteristics as to be judged directly comparable. For most of these questions, the difference between graduate students' mean responses in 2003 and 2005 was negligible. For the remainder, the differences were generally small.

A graph of differences, in which only those questions having a standardized difference¹ between mean responses of .20 or greater are illustrated, shows that the largest difference occurred for a question pertaining to housing. The mean for master's students in 2005 to the question "how satisfied are you with the cost of housing" was somewhat higher than in 2003 (2.2 versus 1.8, respectively; scale: 4 = very satisfied, ... , 1 = very dissatisfied). Similarly, master's students' reported levels of satisfaction with housing availability were slightly higher in 2005. The same was true of doctoral students.

Both master's and doctoral students' reported perceptions of program academic standards declined slightly, on average, in 2005. In addition, program structure and requirements were slightly more likely to be considered obstacles to academic progress in 2005 by both master's and doctoral students. Master's students also considered the thesis topic and research to be more of an obstacle in 2005, compared with their perceptions of them in 2003.

To determine whether it made any difference, in terms of the results, to include beginning graduate students in the survey, the 2003 and 2005 data were compared again. This time, data for students who were beginning graduate students in the fall of 2005 were included. The means and effect sizes that resulted from the inclusion of beginning graduate students differed very little from those described above. For example, the effect size for master's students' reported satisfaction with the cost of housing (with beginning 2005 graduates students included in the analysis) was .44, rather than .43. This suggests that in future graduate surveys, beginning graduate students may be included without having any significant overall effect on the survey results or their interpretation. 

Results for the Entire Campus, by Master's Versus Doctoral

• Quality of CU- Boulder, Programs, and Faculty: The overall quality of the CU-Boulder academic experience is highly rated, with about three-fourths of both master's and doctoral students reporting that this experience has been good, very good, or excellent. In addition, students gave high ratings to overall program quality. Similar percentages of master's and doctoral students (86 % and 88%, respectively) rated the overall quality in their respective programs as good, very good, or excellent. Students gave even higher ratings to the intellectual quality of faculty, with 94% of master's students and 96% of doctoral students indicating that intellectual quality is good, very good, or excellent. When asked about the overall experience at CU-Boulder (not just the academic experience), about three-fourths of both master's and doctoral students gave ratings of good, very good, or excellent.   
  
  
• Likelihood of Staying in Program, Selecting Same Field of Study, and Selecting CU- Boulder Again: Large percentages of master's and doctoral students (80% and 79%, respectively) reported that it is somewhat or very likely that they will stay in their program until completing their degree. Similarly, large percentages reported that they would probably or definitely select the same field of study (81% master's, 82% doctoral). About two-thirds of responding graduate students (67% of master's, 64% of doctoral) indicated that they would probably or definitely select CU-Boulder again.   
  
  
• Likelihood of Recommending CU-Boulder: Two-thirds or more of both master's (66%) and doctoral (68%) students reported that they would either definitely or probably recommend CU-Boulder to someone considering their program. Over half of the respondents (58% master's 54% doctoral) said that they would definitely or probably recommend CU- Boulder to someone in another field.  
  
  
• Research: Most master's and doctoral students reported being generally or very satisfied with training in research methods (62% and 77%, respectively). At least half of responding doctoral students reported that they had participated in the following research activities: conducted independent research since starting their programs, received adequate research training before beginning their own research, received adequate faculty guidance in formulating a research topic, and conducted research in collaboration with faculty. As might be expected, the reported rates of participation in these activities were higher for doctoral students than for master's students (50%-67% for doctoral, 22%- 38% for master's). Smaller percentages of both master's and doctoral students reported assisting faculty in writing a grant proposal (4% and 19%, respectively). Satisfaction with these research activities was high for both master's and doctoral students, with reported satisfaction for each activity at 89% or greater.
  
  Two-thirds or more of doctoral students reported that they had opportunities to present research at seminars or colloquia, to attend national or regional meetings, to attend professional conferences, or to present papers or posters at such conferences. About half of doctoral students said that they had an opportunity to co-author in refereed journals with faculty or to publish as sole/first author in a refereed journal.
  
  Doctoral students' frequency of presentations and publications is high, relative to that of master's students. Doctoral students reported two to three times more often than did master's students that they had presented papers or posters at professional conferences, co-authored in refereed journals with faculty, or published as sole/first author in a refereed journal. About one-half of doctoral students reported that they had presented papers or posters at professional conferences between one and three times. About one-third of them reported that they had not made any paper or poster presentations, and the remainder reported making such presentations four or more times. Forty-five percent of doctoral students said that they had co-authored in refereed journals with faculty between one and three times. Only 5% reported engaging in this activity four or more times. Nearly one-third of doctoral students (29%) said that they had published once as sole or first author in a refereed journal. Smaller percentages reported publishing in this manner either two, three, or four or more times (8%, 3%, and 3%, respectively). From these percentages, we can conclude that 43% of doctoral students published at least once.  



• Teaching: About one-third of master's students and two-thirds of doctoral students said that they entered their program intending to pursue a career in academia. Slightly more than one-half of these students reported that their graduate school experience had increased their interest in teaching (56% of master's students, 54% of doctoral). However, some indicated that their interest had, in fact, decreased (14% of master's students, 15% of doctoral).
  
  Two-thirds of doctoral students and nearly one-third of master's students said that they had held a teaching appointment while in graduate school. Of those master's and doctoral students who taught, most (88% and 75%, respectively) indicated that they had assisted in a faculty member's course between one and three semesters. Twenty-five percent of doctoral students and 12% of master's students reported assisting in a faculty member's course for 4 or more semesters. Similarly, of those students who taught, most (85% master's and 70% doctoral) reported that they had been primary course instructors themselves between one and three semesters. The remainder reported engaging in this activity for four or more semesters.
  
  Doctoral students viewed both departmental training in teaching skills and Graduate Teacher Program (GTP) training as useful (57% reported departmental training to be generally or very useful versus 52% for GTP training). The same was true of master's students (63% versus 58%, respectively).   



• Program Support -- Participation and Satisfaction: Roughly one-third of master's and doctoral students reported that they had received advice on how to avoid plagiarism, and the majority of these students were either generally or very satisfied with that advice. Similar proportions of students reported receiving assistance in developing professional contacts outside of their respective programs, and most were either generally or very satisfied with that assistance. About one-quarter of students indicated that they had received advice on how to search for a job or on how to prepare a résumé or vita. Student's satisfaction with the advice they received on these topics was generally high. Somewhat smaller percentages of students (17% master's, 16% doctoral) reported that they had received advice on how to prepare for an interview. Most of those receiving advice indicated that they were generally or very satisfied with it.
  
  About three-quarters of master's and doctoral students said they had received advice on degree requirements and most of them were satisfied with that advice. About two-thirds of doctoral students and one-third of master's students reported receiving feedback on their research. Most of these students said that they were generally or very satisfied with the feedback received.
  
  Graduate students were asked several other questions related to program support and satisfaction. The percentage of doctoral students who reported receiving advice on preparing for candidacy, the process to select a thesis advisor, standards for academic writing in their respective fields, writing grant proposals, publishing their work, career options in academia, career options outside academia, and research positions ranged from 23% (advice on career options outside academia) to 45% (advice on publishing work). Doctoral students reported the least satisfaction with advice on career options outside academia (19% reported being either generally or very dissatisfied).
  
  For master's students, the percentages who reported receiving advice in these areas ranged from 15% (advice on research positions; advice on writing grant proposals) to 34% (advice on standards for academic writing in their respective fields). Master's students' highest reported level of dissatisfaction in these areas pertains to receiving advice on the process required to select a thesis advisor (18% reported being either very or generally dissatisfied).   
  
  
• Thesis/Dissertation, Advising About one-fourth of master's students indicated that a thesis or dissertation was required for their respective degrees. As expected, the percentage was considerably higher for doctoral students (87%). When asked whether the university or their program provided coaching or workshops for writing doctoral dissertations, about one-third of doctoral students said "yes." However, only 3% reported attending such workshops.
  
  The percentage of doctoral students who agreed with the statement that coursework, seminars, labs, reading courses, etc. had adequately prepared them for thesis/candidacy examinations was somewhat larger than that of master's students (62% versus 55%, respectively). Similar percentages of master's and doctoral students agreed that the process of selecting the thesis/dissertation committee was satisfactory (58% and 59%, respectively).
  
  Eighty-seven percent of both master's and doctoral students reported being either generally or very satisfied with their relationship with their thesis/dissertation supervisor/advisor. Note that these percentages exclude those students who either did not respond to this question or reported that it was not applicable to them. The percentages of master's and doctoral students who reported that their advisors were either somewhat or very helpful in such areas as preparing for oral examinations, finding a thesis topic, writing a prospectus, doing research for the thesis, and writing the thesis were large, ranging from 71% (master's; help preparing for written qualifying exams or comprehensive exams) to 90% (doctoral; help finding a thesis topic). Students reported meeting fairly often with their thesis advisors. Most doctoral students reported meeting with their advisors at least weekly (27%) or monthly (46%) concerning the writing of the prospectus. Weekly or monthly meetings with advisors to discuss research and results were reported by 77% of master's students and 89% of doctoral students. Somewhat smaller percentages reported meeting weekly or monthly concerning the writing of the thesis draft (67% master's, 72% doctoral).
  
  Thesis advisors were considered knowledgeable about formal degree requirements by three quarters of both master's and doctoral students. A majority of students reported that their advisors served as advocates when necessary, helped secure financial support for graduate work, gave constructive feedback, returned work promptly, and promoted professional development. Smaller percentages of students reported that their advisors provided information about multiple career paths (37% master's, 39% doctoral) and the search for employment (25% master's, 41% doctoral). About one-quarter of master's students and one-third of doctoral students agreed or strongly agreed with the statement that their advisors considered them a source of labor for the advisor's research. Seventy percent or more of both master's and doctoral students reported that they would probably or definitely select the same thesis supervisor again.   
  
  
• Social Activities: Doctoral students said that they attended social activities either within their department or with their advisor or research group more often than did master's students (73% and 55%, respectively, for departmental activities; 51% and 30% for advisor/research group activities).   
  
  
• Satisfaction with Housing: Three-quarters of master's and doctoral students indicated that they lived in off-campus housing that was not owned by CU-Boulder. On a scale ranging from 1 = very dissatisfied to 4 = very satisfied, both master's and doctoral students indicated general satisfaction with the availability of housing (means = 2.8), but some general dissatisfaction with its cost (means = 2.2).   
  
  
• Obstacles to Academic Progress: For both master's and doctoral students, work/financial commitments were considered, on average, to be relatively large obstacles to academic success (master's mean = 2.3, doctoral mean = 2.0; scale consists of 1 = not an obstacle, 2 = a minor obstacle, and 3 = a major obstacle). Other, minor obstacles for doctoral students included family obligations, program structure or requirements, dissertation topic/research (mean = 1.7 for each), and course scheduling (mean = 1.6). For master's students, course scheduling was a larger obstacle to academic progress than it was for doctoral students (mean =1.8). In fact, 54% of master's students reported this as an obstacle, whereas only 38% of doctoral students did. Other minor obstacles reported by master's students included program structure or requirements, the availability of faculty, and family obligations (means=1.7, 1.6, and 1.6 respectively).   



• Witnessing and Experiencing Prejudice: For doctoral students, gender prejudice was witnessed somewhat more often than were other forms of prejudice (mean = 1.4; scale consists of 1 = never, 2 = occasionally, 3 = frequently). Twenty-five percent of doctoral students reported witnessing gender prejudice occasionally, and 4% of them reported witnessing it frequently. For master's students, in comparison, gender, race or ethnicity, and religion prejudice (mean = 1.2 for each) were witnessed only somewhat more often than were country of origin, sexual orientation, and disability prejudice (mean = 1.1 for each). Sixteen percent of master's students reported witnessing gender prejudice occasionally, and 2% of them reported witnessing it frequently.
  
  Gender prejudice was experienced somewhat more often by both master's and doctoral students than were other forms of prejudice (means = 1.2 and 1.3, respectively; same scale as that of the "witnessed" items). Fourteen percent of doctoral students reported that they had been the target of gender prejudice occasionally; only 1% reported having this experience frequently. For master's students, these percentages were 10% and 1%, respectively.

  As might be expected, female graduate students were more likely to report that they experienced gender prejudice. This was true for both female master's students and female doctoral students (means = 1.3 and 1.5, respectively, versus 1.0 and 1.1 for males).

  African-American, Hispanic, and Native American graduate students reported witnessing race or ethnicity prejudice somewhat more often (mean = 1.5) than did Asian-American (1.4), foreign (1.3), or white (1.2) graduate students. Similarly, African-American, Hispanic, and Native American graduate students reported experiencing race or ethnicity prejudice about as often (mean = 1.4) as did Asian-American (1.4) graduate students and somewhat more often than did foreign (1.3) or white (1.0) graduate students.
  
  Of those graduate students who answered "frequently" or "occasionally" to any of the questions concerning prejudice, the most often reported action taken in response to an incident was to discuss it with friends (52% master's, 61% doctoral). Other reported actions included speaking with victims (21% of responding graduate students) or perpetrators (20%) of prejudice, or speaking with faculty or staff (20%). Only 1% of graduate students reported that they contacted the affirmative action office or ombudsperson in response to either witnessing or being the target of prejudice.   
  
  

• University Resources -- Frequency of Use and Quality: Graduate students were asked to rate the frequency with which they used 22 different university resources. Some of the more commonly used resources included library facilities/buildings/space, Web-based campus computer services, and on-campus computer facilities. Means for these items ranged from 2.1 (on-campus computer facilities; doctoral students) to 2.5 (Web-based campus computer services; master's students). The scale for these items consisted of 1 = never, 2 = occasionally, and 3 = frequently.
  
  Students were also asked to rate the quality of university resources (scale: 1 = poor, 2 = fair, 3 = good, 4 = very good, 5 = excellent). The more highly rated resources include other library services (interlibrary loan, databases, etc.; mean for all responding students = 3.9), Web-based campus computer services (3.8), access to on- and off-campus Web-based computing facilities (3.9 and 3.8, respectively), and the Office of International Education (4.0). Services receiving somewhat lower ratings included health-care services (3.2) and health insurance (2.5).   



• Perceived Safety: On average, graduate students reported feeling at least reasonably safe under several circumstances, including when walking alone on or off campus, by day or at night; being alone in their current homes or residences; parking their cars on or near campus; and using public transportation to and from campus. The scale for these items was: 1 = unsafe, 2 = somewhat unsafe, 3 = reasonably safe, 4 = very safe. Means for responding graduate students ranged from 2.9 (walking alone at night off campus; master's) to 3.9 (walking alone by day on campus; both master's and doctoral). Five percent of graduate students reported feeling unsafe when walking alone at night off campus.   



• Importance of Skills and Degree to Which They Were Enhanced: Graduate students were asked to rate the importance of skills in research, writing, critical thinking, ethical issues, leadership, teamwork, communication, and time management (scale: 1 = not important, 2 = somewhat important, 3 = very important). In addition, they were asked to rate the degree to which their abilities in each of these skill areas were enhanced (scale: 1 = not at all, 2 = very little, 3 = somewhat, 4 = greatly). Critical thinking, writing, and communication skills were rated as important by both master's and doctoral students, on average (means range from 2.7 to 2.9). Doctoral students gave a high importance rating to research skills (2.9). Students' abilities in each of these skill areas were reported as being enhanced at least somewhat, with means ranging from 3.0 (writing, communication) to 3.4 (critical thinking).   



• Financial Support: A little more than two-thirds of both master's and doctoral students reported that the criteria for eligibility for financial support within their respective programs were either sometimes or usually available. Among the more popular types of financial support, with relatively large percentages of students reporting receiving such support for at least one or two semesters, were university-funded non-service fellowships (23%); research assistantships (32%); teaching assistantships (53%); need- based financial aid (34%); and loans, savings, or family assistance (39%). Forty-seven percent of graduate students estimated that they will have no undergraduate educational debt to repay when they have completed their CU-Boulder graduate degree. Thirty-seven percent estimated that they will have no graduate educational debt to repay. Total educational debt (undergraduate plus graduate) was reported to be somewhere in the neighborhood of $10,000, on average.   



• Employment Expectations: Noticeable percentages of doctoral students reported their expectation for professional employment immediately after graduating to be either a tenure-track faculty member (28%), a postdoctoral researcher (30%), or a researcher in a non-academic setting (19%). A large percentage of master's students said that their employment expectation is a "professional position for which their respective programs had prepared them" (40%). Another 15% of master's students reported that they expect to be employed in some type of teaching position (other than tenure-track or non- tenure track positions). Eighty-five percent of graduate students indicated that the expected position they had selected on the questionnaire was directly related to their respective graduate degrees.
  
  Among the types of expected employers, colleges or universities were popular with doctoral students, with 56% indicating this choice. Smaller percentages of doctoral students indicated their expected employer as either industry or business (16%), or the U.S. federal government (13%). Most master's students, in comparison, expected to go into industry or business (35%); elementary, secondary, or special focus schools (15%); or colleges or universities (14%). Eighty-three percent of all graduate students indicated that their expected employer is in the U.S. A smaller percentage of foreign graduate students (69%) indicated this. Twenty percent of foreign students reported that their expected employer is located overseas.
  
  Nearly half of doctoral students and slightly more than half of master's students reported that they are satisfied or very satisfied with current employment opportunities. Of those students who had already been hired, 59% reported that their starting salaries would be between $30,000 and $54,999 per year. Nineteen percent reported starting salaries between $55,000 and $79,999 per year. Only 10% reported starting salaries of $80,000 or more per year.   

Last revision 03/05/09