This is a report on the results of a survey carried out by the Graduate Directorate in March 2004 of the graduate students in the Biology Department and their attitudes to the program and their supervision. In format it is largely a repeat of surveys carried out in 1999, 1996, 1992 and 1989. The preamble to the survey, which explains its rationale and the instructions for completing it, is given in Appendix I. A somewhat similar survey was carried out by the Biology Organization of Graduate Students (BOGS) in 1993-4. In this report on the results of the 2004 survey I reproduce the basic questions, giving a numerical breakdown of responses (comparing them with the 1989, 1992, 1996 and 1999 results), and then summarize the written comments of the respondents. I end with a summary and our general conclusions drawn from the survey results.
Thirty-eight students (of 109, i.e. ca. 35%) completed the survey as compared to 21/82 (26%) in 1999, 31/90 (34%) in 1996, 59/110 (54%) in 1992, 65/110 (59%) in 1989, and 27/100 (27%) for the BOGS 1993-4 survey. The rate of completing these surveys seems to have rebounded a little following a declining trend in the 1990's (perhaps partially because I sent a reminder message to the students by email).

GENERAL SUMMARY OF ANSWERS

This is a list of the questions, with the number of respondents to each answer and percent of students giving each answer. Not all students answered all questions. Percentage responses to the same question in the 1999, 1996, 1992 and 1989 surveys (in that order) are given in parentheses ("-", indicates the question was not in the earlier surveys).

General Information

SUMMARY AND GENERAL CONCLUSIONS

In March 2004 the Graduate Directorate of the Biology Department carried out a survey of the attitudes of graduate students to the program and their supervision, a repeat of surveys carried out in 1989, 1992, 1996, and 1999.
Thirty-eight students of 109 (35%) completed the survey as compared to 26% in 1999, 34% in 1996, 54% in 1992, and 59% in 1989.

The results of this survey were generally similar to those from the previous surveys, although there were some differences.

• Graduate courses offered by the Biology Department in the students' area of interest were described as "too few" or "much too few" by 79% of the respondents, more than in any previous survey (range: 55-76%).
• Additional courses were requested, particularly in statistics and ecology/population biology, and several students requested classes that were not cross-listed as undergraduate classes.
• Similarly, modules offered by the Biology Department in the students' area of interest were described as "too few" or "much too few" by 50% of the respondents.
• Students were generally happy with the quality of the courses and modules that were offered, but several noted that the modules varied considerably in quality.
  
• Students continue to be positive about the Admission to Candidacy Examination with 87% of respondents describing them as "useful" or "very useful" (82-93% in previous surveys).
  
• From the results of the survey, there appear to be larger labs than in the past with 57% of labs having four or more students (versus 44%, 41%, 45%, and 43% in previous surveys).
• There are indications that interactions between students and supervisors are rather poorer than in the past:
  Two students reported "poor" (1 student) or "very poor" (1) relations with their supervisor.
  
• Interactions between students and supervisors appear to have become less frequent with 57% of respondents estimating that their supervisors spent an average of less than 3 hours per month interacting with them (includes time spent by supervisor reading proposals, reports, thesis drafts, etc.) which compares with 21-58% in previous surveys.
  
  
• Students would increasingly prefer more
  
  • contact with supervisors (38% in 2004 vs 17-36% in previous surveys)
  • guidance from supervisors (40% in 2004 vs 6-34% in previous surveys)
  • Students seem to have less access to their supervisors (21% having to set up an appointment and having to wait days vs 11-18% in previous surveys
    
    
• In counselling incoming graduate students, the respondents would
  increasingly recommend them not to work with their supervisor (11% in 2004 vs 0-3% in previous surveys)
  
• be less likely to describe their supervisor as "a good supervisor for almost anyone" (44% in 2004 vs 53-60% in previous surveys)
  
• There is generally more dissatisfaction with supervisors from outside the Biology Department, and students from large labs may have fewer interactions and less guidance than those in smaller labs. However, some students from small labs with internal supervisors also perceive problems in their student-supervisor relationship.
  
  
• One quarter of the respondents had problems with the payment of their monthly stipends which were either frequent, difficult to resolve, or both. Assuming they had to pay regular fees of about $7,000 per year, students estimated they would need a median of $20,500 per year (IQR $19,000-22,000).
  
  
• Most respondents felt at least somewhat welcomed to the Department when they began their degree (77%), and that they are currently a part of the Department (68%). Social events, FISH seminars, and the Communications Class were mentioned several times as promoting these feelings of inclusion. Externally-supervised students and those starting in January or May felt generally less included.
  
  
• General reaction to the graduate program in Biology has improved, with 55% of students being "pleased" or "very pleased" (vs 47% in 1999, 48% in 1996, 27% in 1992, and 31% in 1989).
  

APPENDIX I--Preamble to Survey

2004 SURVEY OF BIOLOGY DEPARTMENT GRADUATE STUDENTS
from Graduate Directorate

This survey was carried out by the graduate directorate in 1989, 1992, 1996 and 1999. It was felt important to find out from the graduate students how they view their supervision and the graduate program in general, and to try and pinpoint current or potential problems (Are supervisors with many graduate students doing a poor job? Are some externally supervised students receiving little help?). The purpose of the survey was to try and find out students' views on your experience here. We think it is time to repeat the survey, to see how attitudes may have changed.

The survey is anonymous. The original form will only be seen by Hal Whitehead, the graduate coordinator, and he will keep any information which might identify individual respondents confidential. He will also analyze the statistical information. We will analyze the survey in the usual ways, giving the distribution of answers to the questions by graduate students, examining some correlations (e.g. number of graduate students supervised by satisfaction of students with supervisor), and comparing results with those from previous years. Great care will be taken to ensure that no answer can be attributed to a particular individual student by anyone, but please do not answer any questions you do not feel comfortable with. We will produce a report on the results of the survey which will be placed on the Biology Department web site, and, maybe, discussed at COW.

Do not answer any questions that you feel may identify you, that do not apply to you, or that you do not wish to answer, for any reason.
Answer multiple choice questions by blocking-in on the computer answer sheet, put written comments directly on the questionnaire (use the backs of sheets, or attached sheets, if you need more space).

On the computer answer sheet only fill in questions 1-38 on the right hand side of SIDE 1 (do not fill in personal data on left hand side of SIDE 1, or SIDE 2).

Please return the completed survey (this form plus computer answer sheet) to Hal Whitehead by 15 March. Thank you for your time.