Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
1
Agricultural and Resource Economics Ph.D. Students: Who are They and What Do They Want?
Jerrod Penn
Doctoral Student
Agricultural Economics
Barnhart Building
University of Kentucky
Lexington, KY 40546
e-mail: [email protected]
H. Mikael Sandberg, Ph.D.
Lecturer
Food and Resource Economics
McCarty Hall A
University of Florida
Gainesville, FL 32611
e-mail: [email protected]
Selected Paper prepared for presentation at the Agricultural & Applied Economics Association’s
2013 AAEA & CAES Joint Annual Meeting, Washington, DC, August 4 – 6, 2013
Copyright 2013 by Jerrod Penn and H. Mikael Sandberg. All rights reserved. Readers may
make verbatim copies of this document for non-commercial purposes by any means, provided
that this copyright notice appears on all such copies.
2
Acknowledgments: The authors are indebted to the cooperation of graduate coordinators and
staff of various Agricultural and Resource Economics departments at various land grant
universities all over the United States in distributing electronic surveys to their graduate students;
we truly appreciate their assistance and support. We are also grateful for helpful comments and
input from participants at the Southern Agricultural Economics Association's annual meeting in
Orlando, February 2013. Finally, we would like to extend our gratitude towards the over 500
agricultural economics graduate students at American universities that took part our survey.
Paper Summary: In the fall of 2012, a survey was distributed among current students in
agricultural and resource economics or affiliated graduate programs at 30 major U.S.
universities. The purpose of this survey was to elicit the thoughts and opinions of the graduate
student population with regards to their background, view of their programs, future career
goals, and what advice they would give to potential applicants considering a graduate degree in
the field. This paper provides a summary of the findings of this survey. The results suggest that
current Ph.D. students are well-aware of the nature of graduate schools; they have clear goals
about post-graduation careers. There seems to be a structural mismatch between the field of
interest and the current hiring trends in the profession; and students feel strongly about the
importance of quantitative preparation prior to enrollment. Furthermore, the findings indicate
that students are pragmatic about applying for, and ultimately choosing, graduate schools.
Introduction
Every year, in the United States and elsewhere, thousands of students apply for
admissions to graduate programs. This is also the case in the field of agricultural and resource
economics. Naturally, graduate students in agricultural and resource economics have diverse
academic backgrounds and goals. To be sure, these characteristics are not trivial, as graduate
committees often have to make admittance and subsequent funding decisions based on the
background information and intended goals of their prospective graduate students. However,
records on the prevalence of the goals, opinions, and aspirations of graduate students in the field
are scarce. Furthermore, agricultural and resource economics students attain diverse positions
3
after graduation, but data on their ideal job choices and the relative importance of certain traits to
secure those job are limited.
The purpose of this study is to assess and analyze the backgrounds, goals, and opinions of
current doctoral students in the field.1 Specifically, we aim to identify the background and
reasons why Ph.D. students enter graduate school, what skills and experiences they find most
valuable to succeed academically, and differences from their past undergraduate or Master’s
Student experiences. Additionally, we provide a snapshot their opinions on preparing for a Ph.D.
program and what career choice they envision to lie ahead.
While there is respectable body of literature addressing the rank and reputation of
available graduate programs in the discipline, the future of the field-specific graduate education,
as well as the career and salary prospects of Ph.D. recipients (e.g., Foltz 1991; Hilmer and
Hilmer 2007; Kinnucan 2012; Marchant and Zepeda 1995; Perry 2010; Reed 2010; Schrimper
1985; Stock and Siegfried 2006; and Tauer and Tauer 1984), inquiries into the thoughts and
opinions of the graduate student population are scarce (e.g., Mark, Lusk, and Daniel 2004; Perry
1994). This study aims at beginning to fill this gap in the literature by conducting a survey of
current graduate students in agricultural and resource economics in the United States.
In the fall of 2012, a survey was distributed, via student listservs, to graduate students
enrolled in agricultural and resource economics programs throughout the land grant system –
both students enrolled at the master’s and the doctoral levels were invited to participate. A
1 We recognize the heterogeneity of the US graduate student population in agricultural and resource economics; not all graduate students are pursuing Ph.D.s. In fact, a significant enrollment can be found in a variety of master’s
degree programs in the field, ranging from academically oriented programs, often requiring the completion of
independent research or a thesis, to more professionally oriented programs, such as Master of Agribusiness degrees.
For simplicity, this paper will focus on current doctoral students.
4
Qualtrics survey was distributed to graduate program coordinators and they in turn e-mailed their
students encouraging the completion of the survey. Close to 500 responses were received.2
This paper will proceed as follows. The reminder of this section will review some of the
relevant literature in the field. The next section will introduce the reader to the survey design
and contents. Subsequently, the third section presents the results of the survey. The final section
concludes with remarks and an epilogue. In addition, Appendix A contains the actual survey
instrument.
In the past, studies of current graduate students have focused on measuring productivity
and ranking PhD programs (Perry 1994; Tauer & Tauer 1984) or the evolution of graduate
programs such as number of enrolled students, domestic versus international, research areas and
placement (Boland & Crespi 2010; Marchant & Zepeda 1995). Some have studied post-
matriculation outcomes. Hilmer and Hilmer (2007) examined the relationship of early-career
publication productivity to PhD advisor. Others have studied job placement and determinants of
salary within agricultural economics (Golden, Tsoodle, Odeh, & Featherstone 2006; McGraw,
Popp, Dixon, & Newton 2012; and Stock & Siegfried 2006).
Relatively few studies have characterized the attitude and outlook of current PhD
students. Mark, Lusk & Daniel (2005) focused on current students’ preferences and tradeoffs to
select a graduate program such as department rank, assistantship salary, and related amenities
such as office space. Perry (1995) surveyed PhD students’ attitudes of their programs including
course instruction and availability, research opportunities, financial support or other amenities
and program culture. While this gives some indication agricultural economics graduate students
and their preferences for a graduate program, but many characteristics and perceptions are still
unknown.
2 This paper presents the results of the doctoral sample from the surveyed population.
5
Survey Design and Implementation
While there has been some consideration of current graduate students’ attitudes toward
program satisfaction and program selection, this is a more extensive exploration of students’
perceptions and opinions. In particular, the survey instrument was designed to include thesis and
non-thesis Master’s students as well as Ph.D. students. The survey begins with undergraduate
characteristics of the student such as major, minor, as well as participation and helpfulness of
related undergraduate extracurricular activities. The next section elicits preparation and selection
of a graduate program. It includes inquiries into the number of applications submitted, the
relative importance of various aspects to select their particular graduate program, and the value
of various skills to prepare for graduate school in agricultural economics.
The following section considers the most important reasons why students entered
graduate school, and how their graduate school experience compares to their previous academic
experiences. The final major section asks students about their ideal job after graduating, the
most important categories in order to obtain that job, and their desired area of focus. The survey
concludes with some basic questions on their publication and presentation productivity, their
work experience, regional affiliation, and if their graduate program matched their expectation.
We contacted 45 departments were contacted that maintain a program focus on
agricultural and resource economics, including those that only offer master’s degrees. Thirty
schools responded and agreed to include their graduate students in the survey, see Table 1. It
was stressed that individual student and departmental identities would be completely anonymous.
Of course, anonymity encourages participation from as many institutions as possible, but also
means that inference about school differences is impossible. The only identifying information
was self-ascribed affiliation to the regional associations; the Western Agricultural Economics
6
Association, the Southern Agricultural Economics Association, and the Northeastern
Agricultural Economics Association.
Table 1: Schools Participating in the Survey
Colorado St University University of Delaware
Cornell University University of Florida
Louisiana State University University of Georgia
Michigan State University University of Idaho
Mississippi State University University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign New Mexico State University University of Kentucky
North Dakota State University University of Minnesota-Twin Cities
Oklahoma State University University of Missouri-Columbia
Oregon State University University of Nebraska-Lincoln
Pennsylvania State University University of Tennessee
Purdue University University of Wyoming
Southern Illinois University Carbondale Utah State University
Texas A & M University Virginia Tech.
Texas Tech University Washington State University
University of Arkansas West Virginia University
Similarly to what was pointed out by J.C. Foltz (1991), some included institutions (i.e.,
Washington State University, Utah State University, University of Minnesota, etc.) have
agricultural economics programs housed within or combined with traditional economics
departments. It is possible that some traditional economics students are represented in the
survey. Lastly, a number of historically well ranked programs (G.M. Perry 1994; L.W. Tauer
and J.R. Tauer 1984) are not represented in the sample. While we may have underrepresented
departments who have the greatest historical placement of Ph.D. students into universities, it is
still valuable to know the intentions of the remaining field of students.
Data was collected using an online survey instrument via Qualtrics. A graduate program
‘representative’ was identified and contact for each school, i.e., staff-level graduate program
coordinators, faculty-level directors of graduate studies, or department chairs. Each contact
7
person was encouraged to use their graduate student listserv to contact their enrolled students
with a link to the survey. The survey was formally distributed in October 2012.3
Analysis of Results
A total of 482 students completed the survey; this number includes both master’s and doctoral
students. Table 2 provides a breakdown of the respondents based on their classification.
Master’s programs fall into either one of two categories, the more academic, thesis-based M.S.
programs and professional oriented M.S. programs in agribusiness, or Master of Agribusiness,
often abbreviated as M.A.B.4 In our sample, 248 students classified themselves as Ph.D.
students and 224 self-identified as master-level students, the majority of which pursue a thesis-
based M.S. degree. This study, however, will focus on the responses of the Ph.D. students.5
Table 2: Description of the Sample
Program Completed Surveys Percentage
Ph.D. 248 42.5%
M.S. ‘thesis-based’ 205 51.5
M.S. ‘professional’ 29 6
Total Responses 482 100%
In our sample, 63 (25%) were first year Ph.D. students, 53 (21%) were in their second
year, 95 (38%) were in their third year, and, finally, 37 (15%) had been in their programs four
years or longer. Thus, it appears that our respondents capture a broad cross-section of Ph.D.
enrollment at participating schools.
3 Follow-up messages were sent to the contact person of each department in mid and late November.
4 Many M.A.B. programs market themselves as alternatives, or substitutes, to the traditional Master of Business
Administration degree (M.B.A.).
5 The analysis of the M.S. responses will be the discussion of a forthcoming paper.
8
As is illustrated by figure 1, out of our respondents, 99 (40%) can be classified as
domestic U.S. students, 135 (54%) as international students with undergraduate degrees from
non-U.S. institution, and a third category as international students (i.e., non-U.S. nationals) with
an undergraduate degree from a U.S. university or four-year college, comprising 12 responses
(5%). Finally, two participants did not answer this question. It seems reasonable to assume that
our sample is fairly representative of a typical graduate program in the field.
Figure 1: Nationality of Respondents
When it comes to background and preparation, of the 248 respondents, 52% earned an M.S.
degree (or its equivalent) in agricultural economics or a related field (e.g., economics or
agribusiness) prior to applying to the Ph.D. program, see figure 2. We assume that the
requirements for the M.S. degree were completed prior to enrollment. It appears that 55% of the
respondents obtained professional work experience prior to enrolling in the Ph.D. program, see
figure 3, whereas 45% did not.6 We assume, for simplicity, that these employment opportunities
are post-undergraduate experiences.
6 One respondent chose not to answer the question, which corresponds to 0.4% of the sample.
9
Figure 2: Completion of an M.S. degree prior to
applying for admission to the Ph.D.
Figure 3: Professional Work Experience before
Starting the Ph.D. Program
Whereas these professional endeavors were after the baccalaureate or the master’s
degree, we do not know. It is possible that some of the respondents gained worked experience
between their B.S. and M.S. degrees and not necessarily between the M.S. degree and Ph.D.
enrollment. We found this interesting, in that more than half of students seem to, at least at some
point, participated in other ventures before entering a Ph.D. program rather than continuing their
education right away.
The evidence suggests that traditional economics, by far, is the most common academic
preparation of the students in our sample (figure 4 presents the undergraduate background of the
respondents), with agricultural economics coming a distant second. Economics, as a discipline,
evidently does a good job in instilling intellectual curiosity and the desire for further study. The
other majors cited are the ‘usual suspects,’ such as mathematics, statistics, political science,
business administration, agricultural operations management, soil science/agronomy,
respectively. Note that the scale for this question is presented as the number of responses for
each major, rather than a percentage, since 44 students indicated have pursued multiple majors.
We were surprised to see the number of quantitatively based majors being so low, particularly
since we allowed for the accounting of double-majors.
10
Figure 4: Undergraduate Background of Respondents
Respondents also had the option of selecting ‘other’ and in a free-response format could indicate
their particular undergraduate preparation. The ‘other’ category includes such responses as
anthropology, environmental science, forestry, international relations, and geography, to mention
the most frequently cited majors. Our sample, in terms of academic background, is similar to
that of Perry (1994).
After establishing who the students in the sample are, it is useful to consider their
application habits. Table 3 presents some of the application details. It appears that students are
not afraid to catch a wide net, as more than half of them applied to four or more graduate
programs. In fact, one in eight students applies to more than ten different schools. A motivating
factor might be to secure a competitive funding offer, an issue addressed later. Yet, one of out of
five students only applies to one singular program. Perhaps they have personal connection to the
department or were told by program coordinators that their admission was a ‘safe bet,’ or
perhaps they are currently working on an M.S. in the same department.
11
Table 3: Application Details
How Many Schools Did you
Apply for?
Did you Visit the University
Before Enrolling?
Were you Required to Complete
Additional Coursework Before
Enrolling?
N Percent N Percent N Percent
Only 1 52 21.0% Yes 74 29.8% Yes 40 16.1%
2-3 62 25.0 No 127 51.2 No 207 83.5
4-5 47 19.0 Already a
Student at
the School
46 18.5 No Answer 1 0.4
6-10 55 22.2 No Answer 1 0.4
11-15 27 10.9
16 or
more
5 2.0
The results find that 18.5% of students were already enrolled at the university where they
ended up going for a Ph.D. – convenience, the relationship established with faculty, and potential
funding seem to be factors. Not surprisingly, only 29.8% reported visiting the department prior
to enrolling – this number is probably high due to the prevalence of international students in the
sample. 16% of respondents reported that they were instructed to complete additional
coursework prior to enrolling; presumably they received a conditional acceptance into the
program given the successful completion of certain courses (perhaps in quantitative methods and
economic theory, as many students come from non-quantitative academic backgrounds).
So then why did students ultimately decide on their respective graduate programs?
Figure 5 outlines the responses to the most important factors for choosing a particular program.
Students were asked to rank the following factors on a scale from 1 to 5, where 1 being ‘not
important at all’ and 5 being ‘extremely important.’ Funding seems to be of major concern to
most students, with an average ranking of 4.5, meaning most students ranked funding
opportunities as very or extremely important determinants for choosing a program. It also
appears that students value prospects of future job placement, the opportunity to work with
specific professors, and the overall prestige of the department rather highly as well.
12
Figure 5: Important Factors in Choosing a Graduate Program
Geographic location and the convenience of remaining at the same school as prior
degree(s) were less desirable factors. Thus, the evidence suggests that while students take their
selection of graduate programs seriously by looking closely at future career prospects and faculty
with whom to collaborate, they are also pragmatic, with funding being a major concern. We
have taught our students well – in all, they seem to be good economists! The findings regarding
factors for school selection seems to corroborate Mark, Lusk and Daniel (2004), in that funding,
the single most important factor, can overcome school reputation. However, given that we do
not include some of the top rank programs, one must be cautious about such inferences.
Table 4 looks at the factors as to why students decide to enter a Ph.D. program in the first
place. Students were asked to choose the three most important reasons why they decided to
pursue a Ph.D. and then they were asked to rank these three factors. Students are seemingly
pragmatic, or overly optimistic depending on how you look at it, about their choice, with
improved future job prospects topping the list. Conversely, other students have a passionate
interest in research (which, perhaps, is a function of self-selection – students pursuing advanced
degrees would be more inclined towards the pursuit of knowledge) or they simply enjoy the
13
culture fostered by the agricultural economics profession. Students also listed a range of ‘other’
motivating factors, such as choices as to teach (a sometimes novel concept at the research-
intensive institutions), a passion for learning, the desire for prestige, disliking current job,
working with poverty alleviation programs, family pressure, or wanting a lucrative future in
commodity trading.
Table 4: Most Important Factors for Entering a Ph.D. Program Over-all Assigned Rank To Factors
1 Having an advanced degree would help in getting a better job
2 Passion for research
3 The culture and environment of agricultural economics
4 Advisor encouraged Doctoral studies
5 Othera
6 Difficult job market
7 Wasn’t really sure what else to do
a) ‘Other’ includes such choices as to teach, passion for learning, prestige, disliked current job, working with
poverty alleviation programs, family pressure, commodity trading
Students to indicate their primary field of specialization; the results are presented in table
5. The evidence suggest that the most common Ph.D. field is environmental and natural resource
economics with economic development, in which agricultural economics plays a primary role as
most developing economies are highly agrarian, coming in a close second.8 Keeping with the
applied, empirical nature of the discipline, econometrics was the third most commonly cited
field. Perry (2010) found similar results. It is interesting to note that while a significant portion
of available tenure-track jobs at the land grant universities are in the field of agribusiness, as
indicated by, for instance, the job openings on the AAEA website, only 5.2% of respondents
specialize in the area. Perhaps this is indicative of structural issues on the horizon, as a potential
for mismatch exists between the needs of departments and the available job candidates.
8 That economic development is a frequently cited specialization should not come as a surprise, given the high
percentage of foreign enrollment in U.S. graduate programs and the sizeable foreign-born contingency in our
sample. It can be stipulated that these students are from developing economies, many facing agricultural problems,
and this may influence the desired field for the Ph.D.
14
Table 5: Primary Field of Interest
Primary Field N Percent
Agribusiness 13 5.2%
Econometrics 44 17.7
Finance 8 3.2
International Trade 19 7.7
Marketing 13 5.2
Development 53 21.4
Environmental/Resource Economics 58 23.4
Production 18 7.3
Extension 3 1.2
Othera 18 7.3
No Answer 1 0.4
a) ‘Other’ includes such choices as labor economics and industrial organization (the two most common answers).
When it comes to desired future job placement, table 6 summarizes the desired post-
Ph.D. employment. Again, respondents were asked to rank the desirability of potential
employment, which gives us further insight into what motivates students to enroll in graduate
programs in the first place. Not surprisingly, students are looking for academic employment,
primarily in the U.S. or Canada. A doctoral degree is effectively mandatory to enter the
profession, so it would be natural to be so highly ranked. Government employment such as the
USDA or the ERS, rank below both NGOs and industry employment.
Table 6: Ranking the Desirability of Post-graduation Employment
Over-all Assigned Rank to Career Possibilities
1 Academic position at a university in the U.S. or Canada
2 Position with NGO, such as the World Bank or the IMF
3 Position with industry
4 Academic position at a university outside of the U.S. and Canada
5 Position with the government, such as the USDA or the ERS
6 Othera
a) ‘Other’ includes such choices as consulting, entrepreneurship, or a position with 'think tanks.'
Possibly students do not fully realize the extensive employment opportunities within
government until later in the graduate careers – keeping in mind that more than 80% of our
sample are within their first three years on the Ph.D., and a clearer picture of future employment
opportunities might appear during the latter part of the dissertation phase.
15
It also appears that a subset of students are actively pursuing their scholarly agendas
early, as more than 40% of students have some peer-reviewed publications or professional
meeting presentation experience, see table 7. It is safe to assume that these self-reported
publications and presentations include co-authored work (with major advisors, professors, or
fellow graduate students).10
Nevertheless, as students are ranking academic careers highly, it is
promising that some students are pursuing research aggressively.
Table 7: Peer-reviewed Publications and Professional Presentations
Peer-reviewed Publicationsa
Professional Presentations
N Percent N Percent
0 143 57.7% 88 35.5%
1 49 19.8 52 31
2 24 9.7 31 12.5
3a 31 12.5 29 11.7
4 or more NA NA 47 19
No Answer 1 0.4 1 0.4
a) For the number of Peer-reviewed Publications, the value 3 refers to ‘3 or more.’
Suppose a Ph.D. student was to give advice to prospective undergraduates considering
applying to a doctoral program. We asked respondents to rank eight recommendations (see
figure 6) on a scale from 1 to 5, with 1 being ‘not important at all’ and 5 being ‘extremely
important.’ Students are unequivocal: quantitative skills are extremely valued by graduate
students – strong calculus, statistics, and linear algebra skills receiving ratings over 4.0 (with
calculus skills being the most valued). This clearly lends support to the high threshold of
quantitative coursework required for admission to most doctoral program – it necessary to do
more advanced work in economics.11
Given the nature of research, it was also refreshing to see
that strong writing skills ranked highly.
10 We cannot verify the accuracy of this information since surveys were completed anonymously. It is plausible that
students’ reported answers included mimeos, trade publications, extension work, or seminar participation.
11 When graduate program brochures state that a minimum of a year of calculus and statistics courses are required to
qualify for admissions, it seems these courses are required for good reason!
16
Figure 6: Recommendations to Prospective Undergraduates Considering a Ph.D. Program in Agricultural
Economics
The undergraduate research or conference experience ranked lower and having an M.S. in
agricultural economics prior to Ph.D. enrollment only ranked as ‘somewhat important.’ This is
interesting, as most doctoral programs in agricultural economics require an M.S. before
eligibility – unlike, for instance, traditional economics where Ph.D. programs commonly accept
students directly with an undergraduate preparation only.
The notion that graduate education is more rigorous and demanding than undergraduate
degree programs is reinforced when we ask students to compare the Ph.D. experience with their
undergraduate and master’s-level tenure. We asked students to react to the following six
statements, as presented in table 8, by ranking them from 1 to 5, where, 1 means ‘strongly
disagree’ and 5 means ‘strongly agree.’ Unequivocally, students perceive that Ph.D. programs
are both more challenging and time-consuming than their undergraduate training; students
similarly perceive that the Ph.D. is significantly more demanding than the M.S.
17
Table 8: Compared to Being an Undergraduate/a Masters Student, Being a Ph.D. Student…
Compared to being an undergraduate
student, being a Ph.D. student…a Compared to being a Masters
student, being a Ph.D. student…a
…takes a lot more time 4.56 4.29
…means I work more closely with
professors
4.38 3.80
…will help me get a job more
quickly
3.35 3.18
…will help me get a better starting
salary
3.96 3.68
…means I am more involved in my
department
3.91 3.50
…is much more challenging 4.69 4.42
a) Where 5 = Strongly agree; 4 = Agree; 3 = Neither Agree nor Disagree; 2 = Disagree; 1 = Strongly disagree.
It is also apparent that students realize the value of being a graduate student, in that they seem to
expect a higher paying job upon graduation and they feel a stronger connection with their
department, since they perceivably work more closely with faculty. The value placed on a
graduate degree in securing a satisfying job is reinforced when considering the reasons for
applying to a Ph.D. program in the first place (recall the information in table 4). Surprisingly,
the findings suggest that students perceive that there are quite a few perks associated with each
level of study, not realized at the previous degree level.
Finally, in a perhaps too broadly formulated question, we ask whether the doctoral
experience in agricultural economics is what students expected it to be. An overwhelming 77%
agree that their Ph.D. program met their expectations, which only 23% disagreeing; see figure 7.
Our survey finds that students are entering their graduate programs with a realistic view of what
the experience will be like, perhaps not all that surprising since the majority of students hold
M.S. degrees in the field prior to embarking on the Ph.D. In short, our M.S. programs prepare
our students well, in terms of anticipation, for more advanced studies.
18
Figure 7: Is the Ph.D. Program in Agricultural Economics What you Expected it to Be?
Concluding Remarks
Our survey of current agricultural and resource economics was an illuminating exercise.
We gained insight into the thoughts, opinions, and backgrounds of the graduate student
population in the field. Our sample of students is seemingly diverse, with students coming to
American graduate schools from a variety of backgrounds, both in terms of national origin, but
also in terms of previous academic experience. While a majority of students have degrees in
economics, agricultural economics, and business administration, other fields are also well
represented.
The findings suggest that graduate students are highly pragmatic in their choice of school,
since funding ranks the most important factor of school selection, with prospects for job
placement and major professor following. Ph.D. students also seem to be very open to going to
any school, pending funding and future career prospects, since the location and the convenience
of staying at the same program for school selection ranked much lower.13
13 This might be somewhat counter to Mark, Lusk and Daniel (2004) who found that schools physically closer to
home could offer students less lucrative financial support packages. This, however, is probably highly dependent on
if the student is domestic or international.
19
Our results suggest that there might be a long-term structural problem within the
discipline. Environmental and resource economics, development, and quantitative analysis were
cited as the most prevalent fields of interest, conforming to previous studies. However, many
available jobs in the academic community are in the field of agribusiness, which ranks relatively
low as the primary field of choice in our sample. It seems that, at least anecdotally, graduate
programs would be well served by better marketing and recruiting qualified graduate students in
the agribusiness area. How this would be accomplished and implemented, is, of course, a
different discussion. As mentioned in our analysis, that economic development is a frequently
cited specialization should not come as a surprise, given the high percentage of foreign
enrollment in U.S. graduate programs and the sizeable foreign-born contingency in our sample.
It can be stipulated that these students are from developing economies, many facing agricultural
problems, and this may influence the desired field for the Ph.D.
Students seem opinionated when it comes to giving advice to potential applicants.
Overwhelmingly, students feel that having strong quantitative skills is of utmost importance to
being successful in a Ph.D. program. Having a prior M.S. degree in agricultural economics
ranked surprisingly low on the list of recommendations. Not surprisingly, students feel that
Ph.D. programs are much more intensive and rigorous compared their undergraduate training.
Reassuringly, students seem to pursue the Ph.D. for the ‘right reasons,’ i.e., they are
pursuing advanced training to become the next generations of academics and researchers, and not
because they’re unsure of what to do. Furthermore, students seem well-informed and have
realistic expectations about obtaining their degrees; only a fraction of respondents believe a
Ph.D. isn’t what they expected and ‘getting a job fast’ ranks relatively low in the motivation for
enrolling in graduate training.
20
Future extension of our research would be to perform a breakdown of comparing the
responses of domestic versus international graduate students to test for differences across the two
groups. Moreover, performing a similar analysis of the master’s degree respondents would also
be fruitful. Yet another extension would be to incorporate the opinions and thoughts of current
faculty in the field to see if their perceptions are different from their students. However, that
would be a future endeavor.
21
List of References
Foltz, J.C. 1991. "Doctoral Program Characteristics and Rankings in Agricultural Economics."
Review of Agricultural Economics, 13(2), 215-21.
Golden, B.B.; L.J. Tsoodle; O.O. Odeh and A.M. Featherstone. 2006. "Determinants of
Agricultural Economic Faculty Salaries: A Quarter of a Century Later." Applied
Economic Perspectives and Policy, 28(2), 254-61.
Hilmer, C.E. and M.J. Hilmer. 2007. "On the Relationship between the Student-Advisor Match
and Early Career Research Productivity for Agricultural and Resource Economics Ph.
Ds." American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 89(1), 162-75.
Kinnucan, H.W. 2012. "Thoughts on International Students." Journal of Agricultural and
Applied Economics, 44(3), 293.
Marchant, Mary A and Lydia Zepeda. 1995. "The Agricultural Economics Profession at the
Crossroads: Survey Results of Faculty Salary, Employment, and Hiring Prospects."
American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 77(5), 1322-28.
Mark, Darrell R; Jayson L Lusk and M Scott Daniel. 2004. "Recruiting Agricultural Economics
Graduate Students: Student Demand for Program Attributes." American Journal of
Agricultural Economics, 86(1), 175-84.
Perry, G.M. 1994. "Ranking Ms and Ph. D. Graduate Programs in Agricultural Economics."
Review of Agricultural Economics, 16(2), 333-40.
____. 2010. "What Is the Future of Agricultural Economics Departments and the Agricultural
and Applied Economics Association?" Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, 32(1),
117-34.
Reed, Michael R. 2010. "The Status of Agricultural Economics Profession: Evidence from
Graduate Education." Journal of Agricultural & Applied Economics, 42(3), 385.
Schrimper, Ronald A. 1985. "Trends and Characteristics of Ph. D. Degrees in Agricultural
Economics in the United States." American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 67(5),
1200-06.
Stock, W.A. and J.J. Siegfried. 2006. "The Labor Market for New Agricultural and Natural
Resource Economics Ph. Ds." Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, 28(1), 147-63.
Tauer, L.W. and J.R. Tauer. 1984. "Ranking Doctoral Programs by Journal Contributions of
Recent Graduates." American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 66(2), 170-72.
22
Appendix A: Survey Instrument
Note: This survey instrument was designed to be taken online via Qualtrics for both Master’s and
Ph.D. students. All questions below were completed by PhD students, but some questions only
appeared based on the responses of the Ph.D. students. “◊” indicates a “page separation” between
the adjoined questions.
What is your current graduate degree program? ○ MS thesis track ○ PhD ○ MS non-thesis track such as a Master's of Agribusiness or Agriculture
◊
Including undergraduate, how many different universities have you attended for your various degree programs. ○ 1 ○ 3 or more ○ 2
◊
Did you complete a Master's degree in Agricultural Economics before entering a PhD program? ○ Yes ○ No How long have you been in your current PhD program? ○ Less than 12 months ○ 25 months to 48 months ○ 12 to 24 months ○ More than 48 months
◊
What was your major as an undergraduate? Check all that apply. ○ Agricultural Economics ○ Business Administration ○ Economics ○ Agricultural Production/Operations ○ Mathematics or Statistics ○ Soil Science/Agronomy ○ Political Science ○ Other (Please specify): ____________________ What was your minor as an undergraduate? Check all that apply. ○ No minor ○ Business Administration ○ Agricultural Economics ○ Agricultural Production/Operations ○ Economics ○ Soil Science/Agronomy ○ Mathematics or Statistics ○ Other (Please specify): ____________________ ○ Political Science
◊
As an undergraduate, were you involved in extracurricular activities related to Agricultural Economics? Check all that apply. ○ None ○ Quiz Bowl ○ Agribusiness/Ag Economics Club ○ Senior or Honor's Thesis ○ National AgriMarketing Association (NAMA) ○ Other (Please Specify): ____________________ Do you think the extracurricular activities you mentioned helped you find, select or prepare for graduate school? ○ Yes ○ Did not participate in any of the above activities ○ No
◊
23
A prospective undergraduate asks you for advice about your PhD program in Agricultural Economics. Indicate how much you agree or disagree with each statement. "If you're trying to prepare for a PhD program in Agricultural Economics, I recommend having..."
Not at all Important
Not very Important
Somewhat Important
Very Important
Extremely Important
Strong calculus skills
Strong statistics skills
Strong linear algebra skills
Strong writing skills
Undergraduate conference experience
Undergraduate research experience
Statistics software experience (e.g. SAS, Stata)
A Master's degree first
◊
How important were the following categories in helping you select your PhD program?
Not at all Important
Not very Important
Somewhat Important
Very Important
Extremely Important
Location
Funding/Finances
Major Professor
University or Department Prestige
Size of the graduate program
Convenience of staying at the same University
Prospective job placement
◊
24
How many schools did you apply to for the PhD program? ○ 1 ○ 4-5 ○ 11-15 ○ 2-3 ○ 6-10 ○ 16 or more Did you visit the University and department before deciding to enter your PhD program? ○ Yes ○ I was already a student at the school ○ No
◊
Were you instructed to take extra coursework before being allowed to enter or continue in the PhD program? ○ Yes ○ No Do you think the additional courses have benefited you in the PhD program? ○ Yes ○ No
◊
Please drag and drop the 3 most important reasons for entering your PhD program, then rank them from first (1) to third (3) most important. Please use "Other" if you have another reason in mind.
3 Most important Reasons
__ Difficult job market __ The culture and environment of Agricultural Economics
__ Passion to do research __ Wasn't really sure what to do
__ My advisor encouraged me to continue __ Other (Please Specify):
__ Having an advanced degree would help get me get a better job
◊
State how much you agree or disagree with the following statements. "Compared to being an undergraduate, being a PhD Student..."
Strongly Disagree
Disagree Neither Agree nor Disagree
Agree Strongly Agree
...takes a lot more time
...means I work more closely with professors
...will help me get a job more quickly
...will help me get a better starting position or salary
...means I am more involved in my department
...is much more challenging
◊
25
State how much you agree or disagree with the following statements. "Compared to being a Master's student, being a PhD Student..."
Strongly Disagree
Disagree Neither Agree nor Disagree
Agree Strongly
Agree
...takes a lot more time
...means I work more closely with professors
...will help me get a job more quickly
...will help me get a better starting position or salary
...means I am more involved in my department
...is much more challenging
◊
Please drag and drop the 3 most desirable positions or occupations after completing your PhD program, then rank them from first (1) to third (3) most desirable. Please use "Other" if you have another occupation in mind.
3 Most Desirable Positions
__ An academic position at a University in the US or Canada __ Take a job in industry
__ An academic position at a University outside the US or
Canada
__ Take a job with a non-governmental organization
such as the IMF
__ Take a government job such as the USDA __ Other (Please Specify):
How likely do you think you will attain your ideal position? ○ Very Likely ○ Unlikely ○ Likely ○ Very Unlikely ○ Unsure
◊
What percent do you think the following categories contribute to getting a job? (Answer must sum to 100) __Coursework and Grades __ Major Professor __ Presentations & Publications __ Other (Please Specify): __ Professional Networking
◊
What general topic area are you most interested in working on in your job? ○ Agribusiness ○ Development ○ Econometrics & Data Analysis ○ Environmental/Resource Economics ○ Finance ○ Production Economics ○ International Trade ○ Extension ○ Marketing ○ Other (Please Specify): ____________________
◊
26
Is the PhD program in Agricultural Economics what you expected it to be? ○ Yes ○ No
◊
Would you consider yourself an international or domestic student? ○ Domestic ○ International with non-US undergraduate degree ○ International with US undergraduate degree How many peer-reviewed publications do you currently have? ○ 0 ○ 2 ○ 1 ○ 3 or more
◊
How many presentations have you made at professional meetings such as AAEA? ○ 0 ○ 3 ○ 1 ○ 4 or more ○ 2
◊
Did you have prior work experience in industry or in government before starting your PhD program? ○ Yes ○ No
◊
What Regional Agricultural Economics Association is your university most closely associated with? Southern Agricultural Economics Association (SAEA) Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association (NAREA) Western Agricultural Economics Association (WAEA) None of the above Unsure Thank you for completing this survey. Any other thoughts or comments you may have are appreciated!
Boland, M. A., & Crespi, J. M. (2010). From farm management to agricultural and applied economics: the expansion of a professional society as seen through a census of its dissertations from 1951 to 2005. Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, 32(3), 456-471.
Golden, B. B., Tsoodle, L. J., Odeh, O. O., & Featherstone, A. M. (2006). Determinants of agricultural economic faculty salaries: A quarter of a century later. Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, 28(2), 254-261.
Hilmer, C. E., & Hilmer, M. J. (2007). On the Relationship between the Student-Advisor Match and Early Career Research Productivity for Agricultural and Resource Economics Ph. Ds. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 89(1), 162-175.
Marchant, M. A., & Zepeda, L. (1995). The Agricultural Economics Profession at the Crossroads: Survey Results of Faculty Salary, Employment, and Hiring Prospects. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 77(5), 1322-1328.
27
McGraw, K., Popp, J. S., Dixon, B. L., & Newton, D. J. (2012). Factors Influencing Job Choice among Agricultural Economics Professionals. Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, 44(02).
Perry, G. M. (1994). Ranking MS and Ph. D. graduate programs in agricultural economics. Review of Agricultural Economics, 16(2), 333-340.
Perry, G. M. (1995). Objective measures of Ph. D. program quality in agricultural economics. Review of Agricultural Economics, 17(3), 395-408.
Stock, W. A., & Siegfried, J. J. (2006). The Labor Market for New Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics Ph. Ds. Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, 28(1), 147-163.
Tauer, L. W., & Tauer, J. R. (1984). Ranking doctoral programs by journal contributions of recent graduates. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 66(2), 170-172.
