STUDENTS

 

by

 

Jerry D. Saye and Katherine M. Wisser

 

 

                Part Two of the ALISE statistical questionnaire requested schools provide data dealing with student enrollment and characteristics, class size, degrees awarded, financial aid, and tuition and fees.  This part of the questionnaire collected primarily aggregated data reported on 11 data input tables.  These data input tables were used to generate the tables that constitute the core of this chapter.

 

            In working with the data reported by the schools, some incomplete or inconsistent data were encountered.  In a few cases, errors were recognized by schools soon after mailing the data and revised figures were submitted.  In the later stages of data entry and analysis, schools were contacted by email, fax, and phone to resolve what appeared to be either inconsistencies or reporting errors.  In some cases, data requested were not in the possession of schools (this is particularly true for the program categories “Other Undergraduate” and “Other Graduate”) or the schools elected not to provide the requested data for a variety of reasons.  Footnotes have been provided whenever possible to explain inconsistencies.  Although no guarantee can be made that all errors have been identified and corrected, it is believed that the accuracy of the data reported by the schools as reflected in the tables that follow is high.

 

            The fact that data for similar data elements, e.g., enrollment by program level or degree, international student enrollment, etc., were submitted by schools on separate tables, it is possible that some subtotals and totals vary slightly from table to table due to differences in data supplied.  To minimize this problem every effort has been made to make these data agree, but it is recognized that inconsistencies have not been totally removed from the tables.  In a few cases, editorial changes were made to tables to obtain agreement among them.  These editorial changes have been footnoted.  This inconsistency should not cause major problems in that the numbers usually vary only slightly.

 

            Allof the 56 schools with ALA‑accredited master’s programs (LS and/or IS) participated in the survey (7 Canadian and 49 US).  In all but a few instances, all schools that reported enrollment for a specific program or degree level are listed in all tables for that program level regardless of whether data were reported.  In those situations where data were not reported, a footnote to the table is used to indicate the schools with enrollment not reporting data.  In addition, footnotes have been supplied indicating schools not included in totals and means.  Schools which offer a particular program that had no enrollment in that program this year are not included in any tables for that program level.

 

            All data submitted by the schools are represented in the relevant tables unless the data were clearly inconsistent with the data requested.  In these latter cases, a footnote is provided explaining the situation and giving the data reported by the school.  A dash “-----” has been used throughout this chapter to indicate no response.  In a number of cases no data were reported by a school when a “0” would have been the more appropriate response; conversely, in other situations a “0” was reported when no input would have been appropriate.  In preparing the tables, the context of the data to be reported was evaluated against the data schools submitted and, in some cases, zeros were changed to “-----“ and “-----“ changed to zeros.

 

            Consideration has been given to the meaning conveyed by the numbers in the tables.  Totals for rows and columns were calculated and checked against the totals provided by the schools.  When a discrepancy was encountered, the person reporting that data for the school was contacted to try to resolve the difference.  In a number of cases the total number of schools reporting will be different from the number used to calculate the mean.  For example, if it is known that not all schools provided ethnic data, then in calculating the mean for any ethnic group, the number of students in any particular ethnic category was divided by the number of schools reporting ethnic data rather than dividing by the number of schools offering that program.  When totals and means are calculated, the number of schools included in the calculation is stated, and a footnote is provided indicating which schools were excluded, or in some cases included.

 

            In order to make data in the tables understandable, particularly when a school’s submission provided an explanation of the data or an explanation of how the data reported differed from the data requested, footnotes have been provided liberally with the tables.  Additionally, some general comments have been made at the beginning of a section of tables if those comments are pertinent to all tables in that section.

 

 

Enrollment by Program and Gender  (Table II-1)

 

            Enrollment figures for the 2003 Fall term were requested for each of eight program levels:

 

·         Bachelor’s

·         ALA‑accredited Master’s – Library Science

·         Master’s – Information Science

·         Other Master’s

·         Post-Master’s

·         Doctoral

·         Other Undergraduate

·         Other Graduate

 

 

To ensure that each school interpreted the program levels the same way, the following program definitions and instructions for their use were provided:

 

Bachelor's:  Include here only those students who are working toward a bachelor's degree in library and information science, regardless of whether offered on or off campus.  Do not include students taking courses as cognate or service courses.  Report them as “Other Undergraduate.”

 

ALA‑accredited Master's -- Library Science:  Include here only those students working towards a separate master's degree in library science or a combined library and information science degree accredited by ALA, regardless of whether offered on or off campus.  Do not include students taking courses as cognate or service courses.  Report them as “Other Graduate.”

 

Master's -- Information Science:  Include here only those students working towards a separate master's degree in information science, whether accredited by ALA or not.  Include students taking course on or off campus.  Do not include students taking courses as cognate or service courses.  Report them as “Other Graduate.”

 

Other Master’s:  Include here those students working towards a separate master's degree other than the ALA‑accredited Master’s -- Library Science or Master’s -- Information Science (either ALA‑accredited or not) offered by your school, regardless of whether offered on or off campus.  Do not include students taking courses as cognate or service courses.  Report them as “Other Graduate.”

 

Post-Master's:  Include here only those students who are working toward a post-master's degree or certificate in library and information science, regardless of whether offered on or off campus.  Do not include students taking courses as cognate or service courses.  Report them as “Other Graduate.”

 

Doctoral:  Include here only those students who are working toward a doctoral degree in library and information science, regardless of whether offered on or off campus.  Do not include students taking courses as cognate or service courses.  Report them as “Other Graduate.”

 

Other Graduate:  Include here students taking library and information science courses as cognate or service courses or for professional development, regardless of whether offered on or off campus.

 

Other Undergraduate:  Include here students taking library and information science courses as cognate or service courses for undergraduate credit, regardless of whether offered on or off campus.  Do not include students who are in an established undergraduate program in library and information scienc

 

            Schools were requested to provide separate counts for full‑time and part‑time students, differentiated by gender.  For part‑time students, FTE (Full Time Equivalent) figures were also requested.  The directions instructed each school to use its institution’s method for computation of FTE or, if no such method existed, to use the following formula:

 

Consider a student full‑time if the course load will enable requirements for the degree to be completed within the normal length of time.  For example, if the normal time to complete the degree is 12 courses in 4 quarters, a student carrying 3 courses during the quarter should be counted as 1.00 FTE; a student carrying 2 courses during the quarter should be counted as 0.67 FTE (2/3 = .067).  Students carrying an overload should be counted as only 1.00 FTE.  In the space below, continue on the back if necessary, please supply the formula you used to compute the FTE.  If the FTE formula is differs by program level please give each formula used and the program level with which it is associated.

 

Although on-campus and off-campus students were to be included in the enrollment data submitted, the questionnaire also asked for separate FTE data for off-campus students.

 

            Table II-1-a-1 is a summary table that presents total enrollment figures for Fall 2003 as well as the number and percentage of full‑time and part‑time students, divided by gender, for each of the eight program levels.  The total Fall 2003 enrollment of 26,521 is up 10 percent from the 24,112 reported last year.  Total enrollment for the 6 degree programs was. 22,786.  This represents an enrollment increase of 7.4 percent increase over the 21,212 reported for Fall 2002.  ALA‑accredited master’s – LS programs account for the majority (74.1 percent) of total degree enrollment.  Master’s – IS enrollment represents 4.9 percent of total enrollment while “other master’s” is 3.1 percent.  Bachelor’s degree witnessed a decline of 3.3 percent from that of Fall 2002.  This follows a number of years of increases.  Bachelor degree enrollment now constitutes 12.8 percent of degree program enrollment.   The 29 schools reporting doctoral enrollment (up from 28 last year) indicate of 920 students are seeking that degree. This is a 13.6 percent increase over Fall 2002 doctoral enrollment.  Doctoral students constitute 4 percent of total degree enrollment.  Post-master’s students comprise but 1.1 percent of enrollment.  Overall, only the ALA‑accredited master’s – LS and doctoral programs increased their percentage of total program enrollment. 

 

            All degree levels, except bachelor’s, master’s – IS, and doctoral degrees, had the majority of their students in a part‑time status.  At the bachelor’s degree level, 81 percent of the students are full‑time.  Doctoral programs have 60 percent of their students in a full‑time students status.  This year the percentage of master’s – IS who are full‑time rose to 53.3 percent from the 50.3 percent reported last year.  Over two-thirds (68.6 percent) of all ALA‑accredited master’s – LS students are part‑time as are 56.8 percent of “other master’s” degree and 89.2 percent of post-master’s students.  The percentage of part‑time students for all three degree programs increased in Fall 2003.

 

            When distribution by gender is examined, female students are found to comprise 79 percent of ALA‑accredited master’s – LS enrollment.  Gender distribution is equal for the master’s – IS degree, at 50 percent for males and females.  Female doctoral students are in the majority at 56.1 percent as they are for “other master’s” degrees where they comprise 55.2 percent of the enrollment..

 

            Sixteen of the 56 schools (28.6 percent) currently offer a bachelor’s degree.  This is the same number of schools reporting bachelor’s degree enrollment in Fall 2002, although Louisiana State did not report enrollment in Fall 2003 while North CarolinaChapel Hill reported enrollment for that degree for the first time.  Table II-1-c-1a provides school-by-school enrollment figures.  It reveals that 2,971 students were pursuing a bachelor’s degree in Fall 2003.  This is a decline of 3.3 percent from bachelor’s degree enrollment in Fall 2002 and follows upon a 3.4 percent decrease from Fall 2001.  Only six of the 15 schools reporting enrollment for 2003 experienced an enrollment increase – Emporia, Florida State, North Texas, Oklahoma, Southern Mississippi, and Washington.  It should be noted, however, that only Florida State and Washington had previous enrollments exceeding 25 students.  A large percentage of bachelor’s degree enrollment is concentrated at three schools -- Drexel (771), Florida State (616), and Syracuse (513).  Their enrollment comprises 64.1 percent of all enrollment for that degree.  While this is a large percentage, bachelor’s enrollment at other schools is not insignificant.  Four other schools, Pittsburgh (206), Albany (203), WisconsinMilwaukee (152), and Rutgers (125), have enrollments over 100.

 

            Table II-1-c-2a-LS reports 16,876 students enrolled for the ALA‑accredited master’s – LS degree at the 55 schools offering that degree.  This represents an increase of 11.6 percent over Fall 2002 enrollment for that degree.  The table illustrates the wide range of program sizes across the schools – from the five largest programs, San Jose (1,228), North Texas (771), Dominican (730), Simmons (646), and Kent State (641), to the one school with less than 75 students: Albany (66).  Five schools (9.1 percent) have ALA‑accredited master’s – LS enrollment of fewer than 100 students (Albany, Alberta, Clark Atlanta, Dalhousie, and Iowa).

 

            The distribution of full‑time to part‑time students reported for the ALA‑accredited master’s – LS degree shows wide variation among the schools.  Five schools (9 percent) have more than three-fourths of their ALA‑accredited master’s – LS students in a full‑time status:  North Carolina – Chapel Hill (89.2 percent), Michigan (85.3 percent), Dalhousie (83 percent), McGill (81.8 percent), and CaliforniaLos Angeles (75.3 percent).  Alberta ranks close at 71.3 percent.  Four schools (Western Ontario, Texas, Toronto and WisconsinMadison) have full‑time enrollments in the 60 percent range.  It is noteworthy that many of these nine schools with the highest percentages of full‑time enrollment have two-year master’s programs, although they do not represent all schools with such programs.  The next percentage tier of schools begins with Texas at 58.7 percent.  Eleven schools (20 percent) have 80 percent or more of their ALA‑accredited master's enrollment as part‑time.  The schools with the highest percentages of part‑time enrollment are Southern Connecticut (94.6), Long Island (93.3), and Queens (91.8).  Two of the three schools with largest percentages of part‑time enrollment are located in a major metropolitan area – New York City.  The next tier of schools with higher part‑time enrollments begins with Dominican at 84.9 percent which is also located in a major metropolitan area – Chicago..

 

            The variation in full‑time versus part‑time enrollment can have a considerable impact on a school’s enrollment figures when enrollment is viewed in terms of FTE (Full‑time Equivalent).  From that perspective who the largest schools are changes somewhat.  Four of the five ALA‑accredited master’s – LS programs with the highest head count enrollments are also the schools with the highest FTE enrollments although their rank order changes slightly:  San Jose (521.2), North Texas (466.3), Kent State (446.1), and Dominican (429.7).  Simmons experienced the greatest change going from ranking fourth in head count enrollment to eleventh when considered in terms of FTE (307.3).  Four schools (7.5 percent) have their ALA‑accredited master’s – LS FTE enrollment  under 75.  They are Albany (41.9), Iowa (54.7), St. John’s (58), and Clark Atlanta (72).

 

            Table II-1-c-2a-IS reports Fall 2003 master’s – IS enrollment for the 7 schools that offer that degree -- four of those degrees are accredited by ALA and three are not.  The total enrollment for this degree numbers 1,114 students, compared to 1,156 students in Fall 2002 – a 3.6 percent decline.  This compares to the 11.6 percent increase for the ALA‑accredited master’s – LS degree.

 

            Four of the schools offering the master’s – IS degree have the majority of their students in a full‑time status – Montréal (90.4 percent), North Carolina – Chapel Hill (77.7 percent), Albany (64.9 percent), and Syracuse (57.6 percent).  Conversely, Drexel and Pittsburgh have the great majority of their master’s – IS students in a part‑time status – 85.3 and 62.6 percent respectively.  Indiana’s Master’s -- IS students are evenly divided between full and part‑time status.

 

            Seventeen schools (30.4 percent) of the 56 schools reporting indicated enrollment for “other master’s” degrees (Table II-1-c-3a) for Fall 2003 in addition to their ALA‑accredited master’s – LS and or master’s – IS enrollments.  Missouri has by far the largest “other master’s” program with 146 students followed by Syracuse (86), Rutgers (80), and British Columbia (79).  A number of  “other master’s” programs are relatively small.  Five schools (29.4 percent) have enrollments of 10 or fewer students for these degrees – Emporia (10), CaliforniaLos Angeles (4), Dominican(4), Oklahoma (4), and St. John’s (1).

 

            Post-master’s programs historically have had comparatively low enrollments.  Table II-1-c-4a confirms that this continues.  Total post-master’s enrollment in Fall 2003 was 249 students  This is a decline of 34.6 percent from Fall 2002 post-master’s enrollment.  Of the 25 schools (44.6 percent) reporting Fall 2003 enrollment data for their post-master’s program eight schools (32 percent) had had enrollments of 10 or more students.  By far the highest enrollment is at Rutgers (66).  The program with the next largest enrollment is Florida State (30).  Eleven of the 25 post-master’s programs (44 percent) have enrollments of but one or two students.  The high percentage of part‑time students in post-master’s programs (89.2 percent) results in a very low mean 1.1 FTE (Table II-1-c-4b) compared to the mean 9.9 head count.

 

            Slightly more than half (29) of the 56 schools offer a doctoral program (Table II-1-c-5a).  The 29 schools reporting doctoral enrollment for Fall 2003 is an increase of one school (British Columbia) over the 28 reporting such enrollment in Fall 2002.  Total doctoral enrollment in Fall 2003 was 920 students.  This is an increase of 13.6 percent over Fall 2002 doctoral enrollment.  As has been characteristic of the other degrees, doctoral students are distributed quite unevenly across the schools.  The doctoral program at Pittsburgh continues to be the largest (100 students).  The school with the next highest doctoral enrollment is North Texas (70).  There is a tier of schools (7) with enrollments between 43 and 54 students:  (in order of decreasing enrollment) Florida State, Missouri, Syracuse, Illinois, Long Island, North Carolina – Chapel Hill, and Toronto.  Ten schools (34.5 percent) have doctoral enrollments of fewer than 20 students.  Five schools have enrollments of 10 or fewer -- Montréal (10), Arizona (8), Tennessee (7), British Columbia (6), and Alabama (5).  The distribution of full‑time to part‑time doctoral students is divided at 60 vs. 40 percent respectively.  The full‑time to part‑time distribution varies widely from school to school.  Five schools (British Columbia, McGill, Michigan, Montréal, and Washington) report that all their doctoral students are full‑time.  Conversely, Long Island reports that all its doctoral students are part‑time. Drexel and Simmons also report high part‑time doctoral enrollment (94.6 and 92.3 percent respectively).  Caution needs to be exercised in examining full‑time vs. part‑time distribution in doctoral programs in that it can be easily skewed by low enrollment at some schools.

 

            Table II-1-e provides the number of FTE off-campus students each school had registered for the 2003 Fall term.  Thirty-three, or slightly more than three-quarters (58.9 percent), of the 56 schools reported having  off‑campus enrollment using one of several approaches to delivery available.  This number is an decrease from the 42 schools reporting off‑campus enrollment for Fall 2002.  At several schools off-campus FTE enrollment was very sizeable.  By far the largest off-campus enrollments are at Missouri (284.1 FTE) and Florida State  (283 FTE).  Three other schools have FTE enrollments exceeding 200 students:  San Jose (223 FTE), North Texas (217.7), and Kent State (202.8 FTE).  A further six schools has off-campus FTE enrollments exceeding 100 students.  The total FTE off-campus enrollment for Fall 2003 of 2,684.2 represents a decrease of 13.2 percent increase over the number of FTE students reported the previous year.  When a mean enrollment is calculated limited to those schools with off-campus enrollment (33), the mean enrollment is 81.3 FTE students also up from the mean 56.4 FTE of Fall 2002.

 

Course Enrollments  (Table II-2)

 

            Schools were requested to report the number of students enrolled in courses or sections of courses during the 2003 Fall term.  Enrollments were reported in increments of five students.  Independent study and reading courses were not to be included in those counts.  Data are reported for all 56 schools with accredited-ALA master’s programs.

 

            Table II-2-a-1 reports course and section enrollment distributed across the 11 enrollment groups for courses offered in Fall 2003 by each school.  The number of courses/sections offered that term ranged from 11 (Dalhousie) to 143 (Florida State) with a mean of 46.5 courses/sections offered per school.  Eight schools (14.3 percent) offered fewer than 20 courses/sections that term.  This is down from the mean of 20 percent that offered fewer than 20 courses/sections in the Fall of both 2001 and 2002.  At the other end of the spectrum, 19 schools (33.9 percent) offered more than 50 courses/sections in Fall 2003.  Again, the number is an increase from the 29 percent of schools who offered more than 50 courses/sections in the Fall of 2001 and 2002.  Five schools offered more than 100 courses/sections that term (Florida State (143), Missouri (139), Syracuse (123), Indiana (115), and San Jose (106)).  That compares to three schools offering more than 100 courses/sections in Fall 2002 and only one doing so in Fall 2001.

 

            The majority of courses/sections offered in Fall 2003 have enrollments of 6-10,11-15, 16-20, and 21-25.  These four course/section enrollment groups account for 60.3 percent of all courses/sections offered.  The course/section size with the highest frequency was the 16-20 students group followed by the 6-10 group.  The total number of courses/sections offered with large enrollments, i.e., 36-40, 41-45, and 46-50 students, was relatively small (108, 43, and 24 respectively) in comparison to the frequencies of the other enrollment groups.  Courses/sections offered in these three larger enrollment groups account for only 6.7 percent of all courses/sections offered.  This is down from the 7.9 and 7.3 percent reported for Fall of 2002 and 2001 respectively.  The number of courses/sections offered with more than 50 students in Fall 2003 was 87.  This is an increase from the 69 such courses/sections offered in Fall 2002.  The questionnaire requested schools to comment on courses with enrollments of over 50 students.  From these comments (Table II-2-a-2), it is apparent that courses with enrollments of over 50 students continue to be used primarily to present core material, distance education or undergraduate courses.

 

            Schools were asked not to include independent studies or individual reading courses in their submission of course enrollment data.  Rather they were requested to report separately the total number of students enrolled in those courses.  Table II-2-a-3 shows the number of students enrolled in independent study or reading courses reported by each school.  More than one student can be enrolled in this kind of course.  A total 1,350 students were enrolled in Fall 2003.  The table reveals the wide variation in the number of students enrolled in independent study or reading courses from none at six schools (Dalhousie, Montréal, North Carolina Central, Pratt, Puerto Rico, and South Carolina ) to 123 at Florida State and 113 at Pittsburgh.  The mean number of students enrolled in independent study or reading courses is 24.1.

 

 

Degrees and Certificates Awarded  (Table II-3)

 

            For Table II-3 schools were asked to report the total number of degrees and certificates awarded during the 2002-2003 academic year, including summer sessions, for the six degree categories:

 

·         Bachelor’s

·         ALA‑accredited Master’s -- Library Science

·         Master’s -- Information Science

·         Other Master’s

·         Post-Master’s

·         Doctoral

 

                In supplying these data, schools were requested to report the number of degrees and certificates aggregated by the gender and ethnic origin of their graduates.  In reporting ethnic origin the following five categories, as defined by the US Department of Labor, were to be used. [1]

 

AI           American Indian or Alaskan Native -- a person having origin in any of the original peoples of North America, and who maintains cultural identification through tribal affiliation or community recognition.

 

AP          Asian or Pacific Islander -- a person having origin in any of the original peoples of the Far East, Southeast Asia, the Indian subcontinent, or the Pacific Islands.  This area includes, for example, China, Japan, Korea, the Philippine Islands, Samoa, and Taiwan.  The Indian subcontinent includes the countries of India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Sikkim, and Bhutan.

 

B             Black, not of Hispanic Origin -- a person having origin in any of the black racial groups of Africa.

 

H             Hispanic -- a person of Cuban, Central or South American, Mexican, Puerto Rican, or other Spanish culture or origin, regardless of race.  Only those persons from Central and South American countries who are of Spanish origin, descent, or culture should be included in this category.  Persons from Brazil, Guyana, Surinam, or Trinidad, for example, would be classified according to their race and would not necessarily be included in the Hispanic category.  In addition, the category does not include persons from Portugal, who would be classified according to race.

 

W            White, not of Hispanic origin -- a person having origin in any of the original peoples of Europe, North America, or the Middle East.

 

Additionally, two other reporting categories were also used:

 

I              International students -- all students who are not U. S. (or Canadian, for Canadian schools) citizens, permanent residents, or landed immigrants.

 

 

NA          Information not available.  Please use this category sparingly.  Where at all possible, report ethnicity.

 

Canadian schools were not required to provide ethnic data, although they could elect to do so.  They were required, however, to provide totals.

 

            Table II-3-a reports the number of degrees awarded for each of the six degrees distributed by gender and ethnic origin for the 2002-2003 academic year.  Table II-3-a-1 reports these same data by school.  A total of 7,247 bachelor’s, ALA‑accredited master’s -- LS, master’s -- IS, “other master’s”, post-master’s, and doctoral degrees were awarded by schools during 2002‑2003.  This is an increase of 7.7 percent (515 degrees) over the number awarded the previous academic year.  While female graduates accounted for 70.9 percent of all degrees awarded, the male/female distribution varies considerably among the different degrees.  Females are in the majority for five of the six degrees.  This ranges from highs of 82.8 percent for the post-master’s and 80.8 percent for ALA‑accredited master’s – LS degree to 55.3 and 53.1 percent for master’s -- IS and “other master’s” degrees respectively.  The only degree where males are the majority of graduates is the bachelor’s degree (63.6 percent).  It is perhaps noteworthy that this degree is closely associated with information science.  Similarly one of the two degrees that has the smallest female majority is the master’s – IS.

 

            Table II-3-a also reveals that graduates of 2002-2003 continue to be predominately White (68.9 percent).  Blacks are the most represented non-White ethnic group (5.8 percent).  Asian or Pacific Islanders represented 4.3 percent of graduates followed by Hispanics at 3 percent.  Native Americans constitute less than one-half percent (0.3) of all graduates of the six degrees.  All minority groups except Asian and Pacific Islanders are underrepresented as graduates in relation to their percentage of the US population.  Asian and Pacific Islanders were above that percentage as graduates in 2002-2003 (4.3 percent of all graduates compared to 3.7 percent of the US population).

 

            Black graduates accounted for 11.1 percent of bachelor’s degrees awarded in 2002-2003.  Blacks were 10.9 percent of graduates of the “other master’s” degrees.  The degrees in which Black graduates had the lowest representation in 2002-2003 were doctoral (2.4 percent) and ALA‑accredited master’s – LS (4.5 percent) followed by the master’s -- IS (4.7 percent).  Black representation in the 2000 US census was 12.1 percent.

 

            Hispanic representation was lower than that of Blacks for five of the six degree fields.  The one exception is the post-master’s where Hispanics received 9.4 percent of the degrees awarded in 2002-2003.  While this might seem worthy of praise the percentage is greatly influenced by the small number of post‑master’s graduates (6).  Five of the 6  post-master’s degrees awarded were bestowed by Puerto Rico.  The next highest percentage of graduates of Hispanic representation drops to 5.8 percent for the bachelor’s degree.  Hispanics received only 2.7 percent of the ALA‑accredited master’s – LS awarded, 1.5 percent of the “other master’s,” and 0.5 percent of the Master’s – IS.  Hispanic representation in the 2000 US census was 12.5 percent.  Most disturbing is that only one Hispanic (1.2 percent) was awarded a doctoral degree in 2002-2003.

 

            While constituting only 6 percent of all degrees awarded in 2002-2003 international students represent a considerable percentage of graduates for three of the six degree programs.  They received more than a third (35.4 percent) of the doctoral degrees and 25.5 percent of the master’s -- IS degrees.  Their representation as graduates of “other master’s” follows at 15.9 percent.  These figures are in marked contrast to international student graduation figures for the bachelor’s and ALA‑accredited master’s – LS degrees.  For these programs international students represent only 6.2 and 2.8 percent respectively of graduates.

 

            A total of 1,037 bachelor’s degrees were awarded during the 2002-2003 academic year (Table II-3-c-1).  This is a notable increase (19.1 percent) over the 871 awarded in 2001-2002.  For each degree the number of degrees and certificates awarded varies widely from school to school.  Fourteen of the 16 schools (87.5 percent) that reported bachelor’s degree enrollment for Fall 2003 awarded degrees at that level in 2002-2003.  Syracuse (210), Drexel (189), Florida State (173), and Pittsburgh (143) awarded 68.9  percent of the 1,037 degrees conferred.  This is down from the 84.9 percent of the degrees these four schools awarded the previous academic year indicating increased graduation rates for the other schools.  Of the remaining ten schools Albany (103), Rutgers (83), WisconsinMilwaukee (47), and Washington (43) had more than 30 baccalaureate graduates.  The previous year only one school other than the top four had more than 30 graduates. Five schools (Clarion, North Carolina – Chapel Hill, North Texas, Southern Connecticut, and Southern Mississippi) had fewer than ten graduates.  Four of these schools were in this status last year.  North CarolinaChapel Hill reported bachelor’s degree graduates for the first time in 2002-2003.

 

            Fifty-four of the 55 schools with ALA‑accredited master’s – LS programs reported graduates for 2002-2003 (Table II-3-c-2-LS).  Albany reported no graduates.  A total of 5,175 ALA‑accredited master’s --  LS degrees were awarded during the 2002-2003 academic year.  An increase of 252 degrees (5.1 percent) over 2001-2002.  Five schools had more than 200 graduates receiving this degree:  Kent State and Simmons (230 each), Illinois (217), San Jose (205), and North Texas (201).  Additionally, four schools had ALA‑accredited master’s – LS recipients in the 151-200 range:  Queens (189), Wayne State (180), Dominican (160), and South Carolina (152).  This past academic year 12 schools conferred fewer than 50 degrees.  Four of these 12 schools awarded 30 or fewer ALA‑accredited master’s – LS degrees – Clark Atlanta (26), St. John’s (25), Southern Mississippi (24), and Puerto Rico (11).

 

            A total of 587 master’s – IS degrees were awarded during the 2002-2003 academic year.  This is a notable increase (13.1 percent) over the 510 awarded in 2001-2002 (Table II-3-c-2-IS).  Of this total, 224– were awarded by the four schools with ALA‑accredited IS master’s degree (Albany, Indiana, Montréal, and North Carolina – Chapel Hill) and 363 by the three schools (Drexel, Pittsburgh, and Syracuse) that did not seek that accreditation.  The number of degrees varied widely from 128, 122, and 113 awarded by Syracuse, Pittsburgh, and Drexel respectively to 39 conferred by North CarolinaChapel Hill.  The mean number of master’s – IS degrees awarded by those schools with ALA-accreditation for the degree is, on average, noticeably lower (56.1) than the mean number of graduates of the schools without that accreditation (121).  Those latter schools have had these separate degrees for a longer period.

 

            A total of 339 other master’s degrees were awarded during the 2002-2003 academic year (Table II-3-c-3).  This is very similar to the 303 degrees conferred in 2001-2002.  Eleven of the 14 schools (78.6 percent) reporting enrollment in “other master’s” degrees in Fall 2003 awarded degrees the preceding academic year.  Missouri awarded by far the greatest number of “other master’s” degrees (85) followed by Syracuse (45), North Carolina Central (41), and Rutgers (41).  Three schools conferred fewer than ten “other master's” degrees:  Southern Connecticut (6), Alabama (3), and Drexel (1).  With the exception of British Columbia (16), the remaining three schools had sizeable “other master’s” graduating classes, numbering from 29 to 36 graduates.

 

            A total of 64 post-master’s degrees were awarded during the 2002-2003 academic year (Table II-3-c-4).  Missouri and South Carolina granted the greatest number of these degrees (10 each).  They were followed by Rutgers (6), Pittsburgh and Southern Connecticut (6 each), and Puerto Rico (5).  The remaining schools conferred from one to three post-master’s degrees.

 

            A total of 82 doctoral degrees were awarded by 20 of the 28 schools with doctoral programs in the 2002-2003 academic year.  This is a notable increase (26.2 percent) over the 65 awarded in 2001-2002.  For the schools with doctoral graduates this year the number of graduates ranges from ten to one.  Pittsburgh awarded the greatest number of doctoral degrees (10), followed by Rutgers (9) and North Texas with eight graduates.  Three schools (Albany, Maryland, North Carolina – Chapel Hill) awarded six degrees and another three schools five degrees (Florida State, Illinois, Missouri).  Five schools awarded two doctoral degrees and three schools one degree each.

 

 

Enrollment by Gender and Ethnic Origin  (Table II-4)

 

            Enrollment figures for the 2003 Fall term were requested for each of the degrees defined for Table II-1 divided by gender and ethnic origin using the ethnic origin classifications used for Table II-3.  Data are reported for all 56 schools with accredited-ALA master’s programs.  Table II-4 is similar to Table II-3 in that both deal with distributions by gender and ethnic origin.  However, Table II-3 addressed these distributions for graduates of degrees, while Table II-4 reports enrolled students.

 

            Table II-4-a indicates the number of students enrolled in Fall 2003 in schools for each degree level distributed by gender and ethnic origin categories.  These figures show that enrollments remain predominately White (68.8 percent) [2].  The 1,133 Black students represent the next largest ethnic group (5.6 percent).  Hispanic enrollment remains low at 3.7 percent, as does Asian or Pacific Islander representation at 4.4 percent.  The 83 American Indian students constitute 0.4 percent of total enrollment.

 

            Table II-4-a-1 reports student enrollment by ethnic origin for all degrees by school.  In viewing these data one can observe that Florida State (148) has by far the highest Black student enrollment of the 56 schools reporting data.  Four schools constitute the next tier of schools and have very similar Black enrollments: North Carolina Central (98), Drexel (79), Syracuse (70), and Clark Atlanta (66).  Of these schools North Carolina Central and Clark Atlanta have the status of Historically Black University (HBU).  No other school reports more than 47 Black students.  Hispanic enrollment is greatest, as one might expect, at Puerto Rico (158).  It is followed by six schools; all but one are located in states with notable Hispanic populations: San Jose (101), Florida State (71), North Texas (45), Syracuse (34), Texas (30), Texas Woman’s (28).  Drexel reports by far the highest Asian or Pacific Islander enrollment with 231 students.  San Jose has the next largest Asian or Pacific Islander representation with 73 students followed by Rutgers (70).  Two schools report double-digit American Indian enrollment – Arizona and Oklahoma (10 each).  The next largest Native American enrollment is reported by North Texas and Syracuse (7 each).

 

            While these raw numbers are interesting, it is perhaps more informative and meaningful to look at what percentage students of a particular ethnic group constitute of a school's total enrollment.  This might more effectively indicate how a school is meeting its obligation to provide diversity in its student enrollment.  When viewed as a percentage of total enrollment, the two HBUs, Clark Atlanta and North Carolina Central, are found to have the largest percentage of Black students at 81.5 and 41.4 percent respectively.  Pratt follows distantly at 15.9 percent Black enrollment followed by Louisiana State (14 percent), Florida State (13 percent), and Southern Mississippi (11.1 percent).  These six constitute the only schools whose Black enrollment exceeds, meets, or comes close to the 2000 population data of the US Census Bureau of Blacks (12.3 percent). [3]  No other schools have Black enrollments as high as 10 percent.

 

            The 2000 census data for the Hispanic population in the US (12.5 percent) is exceeded only by Puerto Rico (95.8 percent).  It is nearly equaled by Arizona with 12.4 percent.  Only a few other schools have Hispanic enrollments in excess of 7 percent.  These schools are: CaliforniaLos Angeles (11 percent), Texas (10.3 percent), South Florida (9.9 percent), Texas Woman’s (9.7) percent, and San Jose (9.4 percent).  No other school has a Hispanic enrollment above 7 percent.  Sixteen schools, in addition to Hawaii (56.1 percent), have Asian or Pacific Islander student enrollment that exceeds the 2000 US Census Bureau data for Asian or Pacific Islanders (3.7 percent).  Four of these schools have Asian or Pacific Islander representation in the double digits:  Drexel (16.4 percent), CaliforniaLos Angeles (15.5 percent), Washington (13.2 percent), and Pratt (10.5 percent).  The American Indian census data of 0.9 percent is equaled or exceeded by eight schools.  The school with the greatest percentage of American Indian students is Arizona (5.4 percent) followed by Oklahoma (3.5 percent).  The next highest American Indian representation occurs at North Carolina Central with 2.2 percent.

 

            Enrollment at the bachelor's degree level (Table II-4-c-1) represents the most even distribution of students across the different ethnic categories in terms of their percentages in the 2000 US population.  At the 15 schools offering a bachelor's degree that reported ethnic data, White students constitute 63.1 percent of the enrollment.[4]  Asian or Pacific Islander students are 13.5 percent of enrollment for the bachelor’s degree, followed by Black students comprising 9.9 percent.  Hispanic enrollment continues low at 3.9 percent.

 

            The ethnic distribution of students pursuing the ALA‑accredited master’s – LS degree in Fall 2002 is presented for each school in Table II-4-c-2-LS.  For the 48 schools reporting ethnic data, their 11,127 White students constitute 78.2 percent of the students in those programs.[5]  Black students comprise 4.8 percent of that enrollment, roughly two-fifths of their 12.3 percent of the 2000 US population determined by the US Census Bureau to be Black.  Hispanic students and Asian or Pacific Islanders comprise 4 and 2.8 percent respectively of ALA‑accredited master’s – LS enrollment compared to their 12.5 and 3.7 percents respectively of the 2000 US population.  Based on the comparison of their percentage of the population to enrollment in ALA‑accredited master’s – LS programs, students of Hispanic origin continue to be the most under-represented ethnic group, followed by Blacks.

 

            When the ethnic composition of each school’s ALA‑accredited master’s – LS enrollment is examined (Table II-4-c-2-LS), some interesting distributions become evident.  Schools with a higher number of Black students (more than 25) are primarily programs located at historically Black universities and at universities situated in large metropolitan areas.  Florida State is the notable exception.  Pittsburgh (84) has the highest Black enrollment followed by Clark Atlanta (77), an historically Black university. The next tier includes Florida State (55), North Carolina Central (48) and Wayne State (47) followed by San Jose (41), Texas Woman’s (38) and Queens (32).  No other schools have Black enrollments numbering in the 30s.  There are six schools in the next tier of Black enrollment (20-29 students).  Five of the 49 schools (10.2 percent) reporting ethnic data indicated their Black student enrollment was either zero (Arizona, Hawaii, and Puerto Rico) or one student (Albany and Iowa).  This is nearly identical with the 10.4 percent of schools reporting zero or one Black student enrolled in Fall 2002.

 

            The two HBUs that have ALA‑accredited master's programs (Clark Atlanta and North Carolina Central) also have the highest percentage of Black students in their student body although there is a wide difference in those percentages (85.6 and 28.1 percent respectively).  It is interesting to note that, although an HBU, North Carolina Central has a White student enrollment of 60.8 percent.  In terms of Black students constituting a percentage of total enrollment, following the two HBUs, the next highest percentages are at Pittsburgh (25.5 percent), Southern Mississippi (12.7 percent), and Louisiana State (12.2 percent).

 

            Figures for the 659 Hispanic students pursuing the ALA‑accredited master’s – LS degree reveal that Puerto Rico (104) has the largest number of Hispanic students followed closely by San Jose (94).  These two schools account for 30 percent of the Hispanic enrollment for this degree. The next highest Hispanic enrollments are at North Texas (73), Texas Woman’s (55), and South Florida (41).  Four of the 49 schools (8.2 percent) reporting ethnic data indicate they have no Hispanic students while eight other schools (16.3) report only one each.  Taken together these 12 schools constitute 24.5 percent of schools reporting ethnic data at the ALA‑accredited master’s – LS level.  This is an encouraging decreasse from the percentage figure for schools with zero or one Hispanic students reported for Fall 2002 (31.3 percent).  While Hispanic enrollment has increased noticeably in numbers this past year it is evident that the increase has still occurred at a relatively few schools.

 

            When viewed in terms of percentage of total ALA accredited master's–LS enrollment, Puerto Rico also has by far the highest percentage of Hispanic students (94.5 percent).  Only three other schools have Hispanic enrollments that exceed 10 percent – Texas Woman’s (11.4 percent), Arizona (11.2 percent), and South Florida (10.4 percent).  All three schools are located in parts of the country with high Hispanic populations.  Schools with a percentage of Hispanic enrollment exceeding 6 percent also possess this same demographic characteristic – CaliforniaLos Angeles (9.9 percent), Texas (9.8 percent), North Texas (9.5 percent), and San Jose (7.7 percent).

 

            The distribution of the percentage of White students enrolled for the ALA‑accredited

Master’s – LS degree at the 49 schools reporting ethnic data ranges from 95.8 percent (Kentucky) to 0 percent (Puerto Rico).  No school besides Kentucky has a White enrollment exceeding 95 percent, although nine other schools (18.4 percent) have White enrollments above 90 percent.  Conversely, three schools, in addition to Puerto Rico, report White enrollment of less than 50 percent – Clark Atlanta (12.2 percent), Hawaii (37.2 percent), and Buffalo (40.9 percent).

 

            All seven schools offering the master’s – IS degree, including the one Canadian school, Montréal, reported ethnic data for Fall 2003 (Table II-4-c-2-IS).  The percentage that Whites, Blacks, and Hispanics constitute of the student population for this degree is lower than it is for the ALA‑accredited master’s – LS (Whites: 59.6 vs. 73.3 percent; Blacks: 3.0 vs. 4.4 percent; and Hispanics: 1.4 vs. 3.9 percent).  This variation compared to the ALA‑accredited master’s – LS is attributable somewhat to the higher Asian/Pacific Islander percentage (6.2 vs. 3.0 percent), but primarily to the much larger international student presence (22.5 vs. 3.1 percent).  These enrollment comparisons are consistent from the data reported in Fall 2002.

 

            Black enrollments for the master’s – IS degree is somewhat evenly distributed across 3 of the 7 schools (Albany (4.6 percent), Drexel (4.5 percent), and North CarolinaChapel Hill (4.3)).  Conversely, Montréal (0 percent) and Pittsburgh (1.6 percent) are notable for the opposite reason.  The number of Hispanic students enrolled for this degree is so small (10) that little meaningful analysis can be done in terms of individual schools.  The exception to this is Syracuse whose five students constitute 50 percent of all Hispanic students seeking this degree in the US and Canada.  Asian and Pacific Islanders enrolled for the master’s – IS degree represent a relatively sizeable portion of students seeking that degree at three schools:  Drexel (11.6 percent), Pittsburgh (11.4 percent), and North CarolinaChapel Hill (9.6 percent).  White enrollment is highly predominate for the master’s – IS degree at Montréal (97 percent), White students is less than half that degree enrollment at one school (Syracuse (33.2 percent)).

 

            The 402 White students constitute 43.7 percent of doctoral student enrollment (Table II-4-c-5) in Fall 2003 at the schools reporting ethnic data. [6]  This percentage is down from the 44 percent reported for Fall 2002 and 50.7 percent reported for Fall 2001.  The continued lower percentage of White student enrollment for this degree is not accounted for by increased enrollment of other US ethnic groups, but rather by the higher percent of international doctoral students.  In Fall 2003 international students constituted 34.3 percent of doctoral student enrollment.  The 44 Black students comprise 4.8 percent of doctoral enrollment, while Hispanic doctoral enrollment is 1.9 percent and Asian or Pacific Islander 2.4 percent.  Overall, the involvement of all non-White ethnic groups at the doctoral level is minimal (9.6 percent).  As was the case with the ALA‑accredited master’s – LS degree, the distribution of non-white ethnic groups among the 25 schools with doctoral programs reporting ethnic enrollment data is uneven.  Florida State, with seven students, has the largest enrollment of Black doctoral students followed by North CarolinaChapel Hill with five.  Seven schools report enrollment of only one Black doctoral student and seven report having none.  Texas reports that it has four Hispanic doctoral students.  Ten schools report having one Hispanic doctoral student each while 12 schools ethnic data indicate that they have none.  The representation by Asian or Pacific Islanders also is low at most programs.  One school (Drexel) reports having six doctoral students of that ethnicity.  Two schools indicate they have three students (Pittsburgh and Indiana) and two schools two Asian or Pacific Islander doctoral students (North Carolina – Chapel Hill and Syracuse).  Six schools have but one such student each while, unfortunately, 14 indicate they have none.

 

            Considerable caution must be exercised when evaluating the percentages of ethnic minority doctoral students given the number of doctoral programs that are relatively small in size.  In smaller programs the presence of one or two students within an ethnic minority can greatly change a school's ethnic distribution.  The following analysis is thus limited to schools with ten or more doctoral students. 

 

            Florida State has the highest percentage of Black doctoral students with 13 percent followed by North CarolinaChapel Hill (11.6 percent).  No other school has more than 10 percent of its doctoral enrollment as Black.  Only one school, Texas (10.8 percent), reports having more than 5 percent of their doctoral enrollment as Hispanic.  Similarily, only one school, Drexel (16.2 percent) reports having an Asian or Pacific Islander doctoral enrollment exceeding 10 percent.  The next closest schools is Indiana (8.1 percent).  No other school exceeds 5 percent.

 

 

In-State/In-Province and Out-of-State/Out-of-Province Students  (Table II-5)

 

            For Table II-5 schools were requested to report the number of students officially enrolled in the Fall 2002 term relative to the students’ in-state/in-province and out-of-state/out-of-province status for each degree defined for Table II-1.  Data are reported for the 56 schools with accredited-ALA master’s programs.

 

            Tables II-5-c-1 to II-5-c-5 report enrollments for each degree on a school-by-school basis.  The information for the bachelor’s degree (Table II-5-c-1) is less than ideal because, as has been the case in the past, two of the schools with largest programs did not identify the status of their bachelor’s degree students.  Not reporting were Syracuse, Pittsburgh, and Dalhousie, the 3rd, 4th, and 8th largest bachelors degrees respectively.  The students in these three programs number 786 and account for over a quarter (26.9 percent) of students enrolled in bachelor’s programs at the 16 schools.  For the reporting 13 schools, enrollment at the bachelor's level reflects what is believed to be typical of enrollment at that level -- a larger proportion of students from in-state (61.8 percent).  When the three schools that did not report in-state/in-province status are removed from the percentage calculation, the percent of bachelor’s students who are in-state rises to 84.7 percent.  This pattern of the majority of students having in-state/in-province status is true for all 11 public universities and the two private universities reporting these data.

 

            At the ALA‑accredited master’s – LS level the data reveal the local or regional nature of enrollments at most schools (Table II-5-c-2-LS).  For the 51 schools that reported in-state/in-province requested data, a mean 79.3 percent of their students are from in-state/in-province.  Five schools (Catholic (60.9 percent), Michigan (57.7 percent), Emporia (57.3 percent), Dalhousie (56.4 percent), and Rhode Island (51.9 percent)) report more than half of their ALA‑accredited master’s – LS students were from out-of-state/out-of-province.  Six additional schools (WisconsinMilwaukee (49.8 percent), Southern Connecticut (49.2 percent), Toronto (48.7 percent), Drexel (48.6 percent), McGill (47.3 percent), and Southern Connecticut (40.7 percent)) reported that at least 40 percent of their students pursuing that degree were from out-of-state/out-of-province.  Seventeen schools have less than 10 percent of their ALA‑accredited master’s – LS enrollment from out-of-state/out-of-province.  Indeed, five of these schools report out-of-state/out-of-province enrollments of under 3 percent for their ALA‑accredited master’s – LS degree – Puerto Rico (0 percent), San Jose (0.7 percent), Kent State (2.3 percent), Queens (2.4 percent), and Dominican (2.7 percent).

 

            Two schools offering the master’s – IS degree (Pittsburgh and Syracuse) did not report in‑state/out-of-state data for their students seeking that degree (Table II-5-c-2-IS).  The enrollments at these two schools totals 340 or 30.5 percent of the enrollment of the seven schools offering this degree.  For the remaining five schools the mean percentage of in-of-state/in-province was 78 percent.  The distribution ranged from 97 and 86.3 percent at Montréal and Indiana respectively to 58.5 percent at Drexel.

 

            Table II-5-c-5 reports the in-state/in-province status of doctoral students.  As has been true for other degrees a few schools, Pittsburgh, Syracuse, and Western Ontario, did not report the in‑state/in‑province status of their doctoral students.  The doctoral student enrollment at these three schools totals 170 students and represents 18.5 percent of all doctoral student enrollment.  The data for the remaining 26 schools reflects what one might expect of a research degree -- the willingness of students to travel out-of-state/out-of-province to pursue their education.  More than two-fifths (42.1 percent) of doctoral students are pursuing their education out-of-state/out-of-province.  One should note that this figure, in fact, may be low given that it can be affected by the ability at some schools of students to change their residency status while enrolled in a program.  Eight schools (British Columbia, Illinois, Maryland, Michigan, Missouri, Rutgers, Washington, and WisconsinMadison) have at least 50 percent of their doctoral enrollment from out-of-state.  This ranges from 82.1 percent at Michigan to 52.2 percent at Washington.  Two schools report  out-of-state/out-of-province doctoral enrollment at 0 percent (Alabama and Long Island). No other school reports an out-of-state/out-of-province doctoral enrollment less than 10 percent.

 

 

International Students  (Table II-6)

 

            For Table II-6 schools were requested to indicate the number and gender of their international students officially enrolled in the Fall 2003 term for each degree defined for Table II-1.  Data are reported for all 56 schools with accredited-ALA master’s programs.

 

            The 1,329 international students seeking any of the six degrees in Fall 2003 nearly identical to the number present in Fall 2002 (1,335).  When compared with the enrollment figures reported in Table II-1, constitute 5.9 percent of the 22,786 students enrolled in the six degree levels at the 56 schools.  Although the greatest number of international students (516) are enrolled in the ALA‑accredited master’s – LS degree level, they constitute only 3.1 percent of the total enrollment of that degree.  By contrast, international students are a very notable component of master’s – IS and “other master’s” degrees (22.5 percent and 19.7 percent respectively).  The presence of international students is even more pronounced at the doctoral level where the 316 international students comprise more than a third (34.3 percent) of doctoral student enrollment.  International student enrollment in bachelor’s degrees remains minimal at 3.2 percent.  International student participation in post-master's programs is similarly low at 4.8 percent.

 

            Several schools stand out for the total number of international students enrolled in the degrees they provide (Table II-6-a-1) – Syracuse (221), Pittsburgh (148), and Drexel (96).  No other school has more than 65 international students.  Albany (65), Michigan (61), Illinois and Indiana (49 each), and Missouri (43) comprise the next tier of schools.  The remaining schools have a wide range of international students – from 39 at Rutgers to one at Clark Atlanta, Kentucky, and Pratt  Two schools reported no international students (Rhode Island and Southern Connecticut).  27 schools (48.2 percent) have fewer than ten international students.  Sixteen of these 27 schools have fewer than five international students.

 

            When examined at the degree level, some noticeable differences in international student representation exist.  Only half (8) of the 16 schools with enrollment in bachelor’s degree programs have international student representation in them (Table II-6-c-1).  For those with such enrollment the distribution of the 94 international bachelor’s degree students is in rather unevenly distributed.  The 46 international students at Drexel constitute 48.9 percent of all international enrollment for that degree. The 23 international students at Syracuse comprise another 24.5 percent.  Of the remaining six schools only Albany (13) has more than 10 international students pursuing a bachelor’s degree.

 

            Fifty-three of the 55 schools (96.4 percent) offering the ALA‑accredited master’s – LS degree have international student enrollment (Table II-6-c-2-LS).  Michigan has the highest international student enrollment (47) followed by McGill (31), Simmons (29), Illinois and Toronto (27 each), and Texas (23.).  Fifteen other schools have ten or more international students pursuing this degree.

 

            One of the three non-ALA accredited master’s – IS programs (Table II-6-c-2-IS) has by far the largest international student enrollment – Syracuse (102).  The three programs non-ALA accredited programs at Drexel, Pittsburgh, and Syracuse combined account for nearly three-quarters (66.9 percent) of all international student enrollment for the IS master’s degree.  This is likely due to their longer established IS master’s programs being better known internationally.  By comparison, Indiana (34) and Albany (33) have the largest international student population of the ALA‑accredited IS master’s programs.

 

            Only 10 of the 17 schools (58.8 percent) reporting enrollment for an “other master’s” degree have international student enrollment in that degree (Table II-6-c-3).  Syracuse and Pittsburgh have by far the highest international student enrollment with 49 and 30 students respectively.  Together these two school account for 56.4 percent of all international student enrollment for “other master’s” degrees.  Missouri has the next highest international student enrollment with 16 students.  Five of the ten schools reporting international student enrollment have fewer than 10 international “other master’s” students.

 

            Historically, and understandably given the relative small size of their post-master’s programs, schools have had very modest representation in these programs by international students.  This continues to be the case in Fall 2003 (Table II-6-c-4).  Only six of the 25 schools (24 percent) reporting post-master’s student enrollment indicated having international students registered for the degree.  None of the schools having international enrollment for this degree had five or more international students.  One school had four international students (Florida State), one school three (North Carolina – Chapel Hill), and one school two (Pittsburgh).

 

            Twenty-six of the 29 schools (89.7 percent) with doctoral programs report having international students enrolled in those programs (Table II-6-c-5).  Pittsburgh continues its strong international student presence at the doctoral level with 66 international students.  Syracuse (30), Missouri (24), and Illinois (21) are the only other doctoral programs with more than 20 international students.  Nine schools report their doctoral programs have five or fewer international students, while as mentioned above, three schools have none.

 

 

International Students’ Country of Origin  (Table II-7)

 

            For Table II-7 schools were asked to report the country of origin of their international student enrollment for the 2003 Fall term for each of the six degrees defined for Table II-1.  The data in Table II-7-a are arranged first by continent, and then sub-arranged alphabetically by country name.  Asia, which covers a wide area of the world ranging from the Middle East to the Far East, has been further sub-divided into four regions to allow for more detailed analysis.  Data are reported for all 56 schools with accredited-ALA master’s programs.

 

            As might be expected, international students represent all continents except Antarctica.  Asia is the continent that accounts for the majority of international students, providing nearly three-fourths (62.7 percent) or 833 of the 1,329 international students.  This is down from the 74.5.percent Asian students represented of international student enrollment in Fall 2002.  When the regions of Asia are examined, the region of Far East, Southeast Asia is found to contribute the greatest percentage of international students (47.5 percent – 631 students).  South Asia is a distant second with 11.3 percent (150 students).  European countries contribute 7 percent (93 students) of international student enrollment, while South America continues to have minimal representation in LIS programs at 2 percent (26 students).  Africa representation has remained relatively constant over the past few years at 3.6 percent  (48 students) in Fall 2003.  Australia and Other Parts of the World has the lowest level of international students representation with 0.3 percent (4 students).

 

            When the number of students from individual countries is examined, it becomes readily apparent that China, India, and South Korea are the countries contributing the greatest number of international students (266, 129, and 126 respectively).  Together these three countries provide 39.2 percent of all international students seeking LIS degrees in the US and Canada.  Two other Asian countries, Taiwan (81) and Thailand (49), form the next tier of countries contributing the most students.  This excludes the 52 US “international” students attending school in Canada.  These five Asian countries have provided a strong student presence for a number of years.  This year their role was 49 percent of international enrollment.

 

            Given the relatively small international student enrollment in bachelor's degrees (94), it is not surprising that no country has a large number of students represented in these programs.  It should be noted that 32 (34 percent) of the 94 international bachelor’s degree students are categorized as “unknown” in terms of country of origin.  A similar high percentages of unknowns was reported in previous years.  This very likely may be due to student record access limitations by schools for their undergraduate students.  The country with the largest representation was India with 16 bachelor’s degree students.  The next highest representation was from South Korea (6).  No other country had more than three bachelor’s degree students.

 

            China provided by far the greatest number of international students (136) pursuing the ALA‑accredited master’s – LS degree in Fall 2003.  South Korea (45), India (27), and Japan and Taiwan(26 each)  have the next largest representation.  No country other than Trinidad & Tobago (17) provides more than 12 students for this degree.  These data exclude US enrollment in Canadian schools and Canadian enrollment in US schools.

 

            India (52) provided the largest number of students enrolled for the master’s – IS degree in Fall 2003 followed by China (32), and South Korea and Taiwan (18 each).  These four countries provide 47.8 percent of all international students enrolled for a master’s – IS degree.  No other country provides more than five students for the this degree.

 

            In Fall 2003 India (23) provided the largest number of students enrolled for “other master’s” degrees.  India was followed by Taiwan (15), and China and Thailand (12 each).  These four countries provide 44.3 percent of all international students enrolled for “other master’s” degrees.  Excluding South Korea (6) and US students in Canada, no other country provides more than three students for the “other master’s” degree.

 

            International doctoral student enrollment is led by China (80) and South Korea (49), Thailand (28), and Taiwan (20).  Together these four countries provide over half (56 percent) of all international doctoral student enrollment.  No other country other than India (11) sends more than 10 doctoral students to US or Canadian schools.

 

 

Enrollment by Age and Gender  (Table II-8)

 

                        For Table II-8 schools were asked to report Fall 2003 enrollment divided by gender across nine age groups for each of the degree levels defined for Table II-1.  Data are reported for all 56 schools with accredited-ALA master’s programs.

 

            Table II-8-a provides a summary for all degree levels by age group and gender.  For the ALA‑accredited master’s – LS, the Master’s – IS, and “other master’s” programs, the 25-29 age group had by far the greatest percentage of students (22.8, 28.4, and 23.7 percent respectively).  As one might expect for a program that is focused on the further education of practicing professionals, the post-master’s, the highest frequency of students was for a higher age group, 50-54 (18.5 percent) followed closely by the 45-49 age group (16.5 percent).  Prior to 2002, doctoral students had rather evenly distributed among the four groups that cover ages 25-44.  This year, that has changed.  This year the 36.2 percent of doctoral students are in the 30-34 and 25-29 age groups (19.3 and 16.8 percent respectively).  The 45-49 and 35-39 still constitute the next age cluster with 12.8 and 12.3 percent of all doctoral students.

 

 

Students by Gender and Highest Degree Held  (Table II-9)

 

            This table is not currently in use.  The table was last used in 1980.

 

 

Students by Undergraduate Major, Gender, and Program Level  (Table II-10)

 

            This table is not currently in use.  The table was last used in 1980.

 

 

Scholarship and Fellowship Aid  (Table II-11)

 

            Data for the number and amount of scholarship or other non-work-related financial aid awarded in fiscal year 2002-2003 were requested for each of the six degrees as defined for Table II-1.  Each school was asked to separate the data by the gender of awardee.  The instructions for compiling the data stated that awards directly administered by the school (regardless of whether the funds were from the school, the parent institution, federal or non-federal external sources) were to be included in the report, but awards (including assistantships and work/study) made by outside sources directly to the student were to be excluded.  Additionally, schools were asked to indicate whether they offered scholarship and fellowship aid to part‑time students.  Data are reported for all of the 56 schools with accredited-ALA master’s programs.

 

            Given the difference in the value of Canadian and US dollars, separate means are provided for Canadian and US schools.  In comparing Canadian and US figures it may be convenient to use the exchange rate given in the footnote below.[7] Similarly, with the costs associated with attending a public university generally being quite different from those at a private university, it is reasonable to suspect that the amount of financial aid awarded by these different types of schools would also differ.  Accordingly, for US schools, separate means are reported for public and private universities as well as a combined mean. [8]

 

            Table II-11-a provides a summary of aid awarded for each of the six degrees for fiscal year 2002-2003.  The total value of awards, $8,245,259, represents a 25.1 percent decrease ($1,653.193) in funding over 2001-2002.  The total value of awards for the ALA‑accredited master’s – LS degree funding increased 22.5 percent ($1,109,243) from the level of funding the previous fiscal year.  Funding for the master’s – IS  degree increased but at a lower rate than for the ALA‑accredited master’s – LS.  The master’s – IS increased 8.8 percent ($26,965).  “Other master’s” programs also experienced a healthy increase of 15.5 percent ($69,881) in scholarship funding this past year.  The amount of money invested in doctoral students this year ($1,313,221) represents a 55.9 percent increase ($471,139).  This is only the second year, the other being 1999-2000, in which doctoral scholarship funding increased since 1997-1998.  Even in the one other year in which funding increased, that increase was small – 2.9 percent.  It is likely the IMLS funding has played a role in this year’s improvement.  Hopefully it is the beginning of a positive trend.

 

            Schools were asked whether they provided scholarship and fellowship aid to part‑time students.  This was a general question not limited to any specific degree.  Thirty of the 53 schools (56.6 percent) that responded to this question indicated that scholarships are available for part‑time students (Table-II-11-a-2).  None of the seven Canadian schools provide this type of aid for part-time students compared to 65.2 percent of US schools.  Private US universities make scholarships and fellowship aid available to part‑time students to a greater degree than do US public universities (77.8 vs. 62.2 percent respectively).

 

            Table II-11-c-2-LS reports scholarship and fellowship aid for the ALA‑accredited master’s – LS degree.  The mean number of awards given by Canadian and US schools was 40 and 33.6 respectively.  The mean amount awarded was $3,162 per Canadian school ($2,389 USD).  This compares to $3,135 per US public university and $3,323 per US private university.

 

            All seven schools (85.7 percent) offering the master’s – IS degree reported that they had provided scholarship and fellowship aid to the students seeking that degree in 2002-2003 (Table II-11-c-2-IS).  The size of the mean award at the one Canadian school offering this degree was $1,088 ($822 USD) compared to a mean of $7,659 at the four US public universities and $4,681 at the two US private universities.  The number of scholarships varies widely by school from a high of 19 at Syracuse, 12 to 14 at Indiana, Montréal, and North Carolina – Chapel Hill, down to from one to three at Albany, Drexel and Pittsburgh.  The mean value of the awards also varies considerably at the US schools.  It ranges from a high of $11,131 at Indiana to a low of $2,929 per award at North CarolinaChapel Hill.

 

            The figures in Table II-11-c-3 for “other master’s” is informative in that only nine of the 17 schools (52 percent) offering those programs provided any scholarship or fellowship aid for students pursuing these degrees.  This form of assistance is even scarcer for students pursuing the post-master’s degree (Table II-11-c-4).  Only two of the 25 schools (8 percent) that have post-master’s enrollment indicate that they provided scholarship or fellowship aid to students pursuing this degree in 2002-2003.

 

            Table II-11-c-5 reports on scholarship and fellowship aid for doctoral students for the 2002-2003 fiscal year.  On average the scholarship and fellowships aid for a doctoral student at Canadian and US schools is considerably different.  At a Canadian university the mean award is greatly different, $13,111 ($9,907 USD), compared to $6,171 for the mean doctoral award at a US university.  The average size of a scholarship or fellowship award from a private US university for doctoral study is $5,815 compared to a similar average award at a public university of $6,212.

 

 

 

Assistantships  (Table II-12)

 

                Data were requested for the number and value of assistantships awarded in fiscal year 2002-2003 by each school, divided by the gender of the awardee, using the degree definitions of Table II-1.  Data are reported all of the 56 schools with accredited-ALA master’s programs.

 

            Similar to the reporting for Table II-11 the presentations of Table-II-12 include a calculation of separate means for Canadian and US schools, with a further division of US schools into public and private institutions.  In comparing Canadian and US figures it may be convenient to use the exchange rate given in the footnote below.[9]

 

 

            Table II-12-a provides a summary of assistantships awarded for each of the six degrees.  The total value of awards, $18,682,406, represents a 5.5 percent decrease ($1,084,835) in funding from that reported for fiscal year 2001-2002.  This follows upon an increase in assistantship funding of 29.4 and 21.2 percent the previous two years.  ALA‑accredited master’s – LS assistantship funding also increased by 7.3 perecent.  Master’s – IS funding decreased greatly by 64.6 percent, bachelor’s students funding decreased by.45.4 percent, “other master’s” down 35.4 percent , but doctoral down only 1.9 percent.

 

 

            As was the case for scholarships and fellowship aid, schools were asked whether they provided assistantships to part‑time students.  This was a general question not limited to any specific degree.  Nineteen of the 48 schools that responded to this question (39.6 percent) that reported that assistantships were available for part‑time students (Table-II-12-a-2).  The availability of assistantships for part‑time students is not nearly as plentiful as it is for scholarship and fellowship aid for these students (56.6 percent) noted previously (Table II-11-a-2).  Assistantships are available to part‑time students at two Canadian schools (28.6 percent).  The awarding of assistantships to part‑time students at US private and public universities varies (57.1 vs. 38.2 percent respectively) as it did for scholarship and fellowship aid for these students.[10]

 

 

            Table II-12-c-2-LS reports assistantships awarded in fiscal year 2002-2003 for the ALA‑accredited master’s – LS degree.  The mean number of awards given by Canadian and US schools continues to be very different (8 vs. 28.3 respectively).  While scholarships and fellowships on average were awarded in far greater numbers at US private universities (68.8) compared to US public universities (25.5), that relationship was reversed for assistantships.  US public universities awarded an average of 20.4 assistantships per school compared to 7.4 by US private schools.  The great difference in the mean amount of assistantships awarded by a Canadian school ($2,629 (USD $1,986)) versus a US school $11,906  ($12,156 public, $8,511 private).

 

 

            Five of the seven schools offering the master’s – IS degree (71.4 percent) reported that they had provided assistantship aid to the students seeking that degree in Fall 2003 (Table II-12-c-2-IS).  The size of the mean award at the one Canadian school, Montréal, was $1,626 ($1,229 USD) compared to a mean of $9,485 at the four US public universities.  The US mean is somewhat skewed by the size of the mean assistantship award at Indiana of $16,072.

 

 

            Only 9 of the 17 schools (52.9 percent) reported awarding any assistantship aid for students pursuing these degrees (Table II-12-c-3).  That form of assistance is even more scarce for students pursuing the post-master’s degree.  Only four of the 25 schools (16 percent) having post-master’s enrollment indicate that they provided assistantship aid to these students (Table II-12-c-4).

 

 

            Table II-12-c-5 reports the number and value of assistantships awarded doctoral students in 2002-2003.  A difference exists in the mean number of assistantships awarded by Canadian versus US universities (11.5 and 12.3 respectively).  That difference very large, however, in terms of the average amount of an assistantship award -- $3,813 Canadian ($2,881 USD) vs. $28,545 for the US.  There are notable differences in the average number of assistantships awarded to doctoral students at US public and private universities (13.1 vs. 7.3 respectively).  There is also a $7,155 difference in the value of an average award between the two types of universities -- $28,997 public vs. $21,842 private.

 

 

 

 

 

Tuition and Fees  (Table II-13)

 

            Tuition and fee data for the 2003 Fall term were requested.  These data included

 

·                                                                     total cost of a degree obtained without transfer credit

·                                                                     cost of tuition only for one credit

 

In reporting fees schools were asked not to include those fees associated with individual courses or labs.  Data were requested separately for in-state/in-province and out-of-state/out-of-province students for each of the six degrees defined for Table II-1.  Data are reported for the 56 schools with accredited-ALA master’s programs.

 

            Given the difference in the value of the Canadian and US dollars, separate means are provided for Canadian and US schools.  In comparing Canadian and US figures it may be convenient to use the exchange rate given in the footnote below.[11]  Differences between in-state and out-of-state charges are valid only for public universities in the United States.  Private universities charge the same fee regardless of residency status.[12]  This is true for all nine private schools except Catholic, which does vary those rates.  Catholic charges lower rates for out-of-state, i.e., off-campus, students.

 

            Table II-13-c-2-LS presents the full degree costs and tuition for one-credit for the ALA‑accredited master’s – LS degree.  As one would expect, the cost for the full degree in the US is generally higher at private schools with a mean cost of $25,742[13] compared to $9,762 for in-state and $23,753 for out-of-state students at public universities.  The least expensive ALA‑accredited master’s – LS programs at private universities are provided by Clark Atlanta ($19,018) and Dominican ($20,700).  The most expensive are offered by Catholic ($31,265) and Drexel ($33,000).  One might expect that the cost of obtaining an ALA‑accredited master's degree at a private US university would be higher than at any of the 40 US public schools at an in-state tuition level.  This expectation is true although in-state tuition at Michigan ($25,151) is nearly the same as the mean cost of a degree at a private university ($25,742).  No other public university has an in-state tuition exceeding the tuition of that of any of the 9 private universities.

 

            One public US university is able to offer the ALA‑accredited master’s – LS degree to its in-state students for under $4,000 in 2003 (Puerto Rico, $3025). , Two others, North CarolinaGreensboro ($4,253), and San Jose ($4,700) were able to do so for under $5,000 and two at under $6,000 (North Carolina Central ($5,049) and Texas Woman’s ($5,405)). The most expensive program for in-state students is at Michigan ($25,151).  Maryland ($14, 237), WisconsinMadison ($14,237), WisconsinMilwaukee ($14,805) and Pittsburgh ($15,564) are the next most expensive programs for in-state students.  Their tuition and fees, however, remain roughly $10,000 less than Michigan’s.

 

 

            Out-of-state students are able to obtain the ALA‑accredited master’s – LS degree for under $11,000 at one public US university in 2003:  San Jose ($9,030).  One other school, North Texas, is able to do so for $12,000.  Twenty US public universities have out-of-state tuition and fees exceeding $20,000.  This compares to 16 schools at this level in 2002.  Of these by far the highest costs are at Michigan ($51,039), WisconsinMilwaukee ($43,537), and WisconsinMadison ($42,869).  The school with the next highest out-of-state tuition is CaliforniaLos Angeles at $37,615.  All other schools have out‑of‑state tuition and fees under $34,000.  Thirteen public universities have out-of-state tuition that exceeds the mean cost of this degree at private universities ($25,742).  Viewed from the financial aspect only, it appears that private universities continue to be competitive for out-of-state students in their costs to degree with a number of public universities.

 

 

            The cost of obtaining the master’s – IS degree at Albany, Drexel, North Carolina – Chapel Hill, and Pittsburgh (Table II-13-c-2-IS) is identical with the  cost for the ALA‑accredited master’s–LS at those schools.  However, at Indiana and Syracuse tuition and fees for the master’s – IS are higher.  Indiana’s tuition and fees for in‑state IS master’s students of $9,513 is $1,350 higher than for the ALA‑accredited master’s – LS ($8,163).  For out‑of‑state students IS master’s students the cost of $27,741 is $3,963 higher than for the ALA‑accredited master’s – LS ($23,778).  Syracuse’s tuition and fees of $31,161 for the IS degree compares to $27,712 for the comparable LS degree.  A difference of $3,452.

 

 

            Table II-13-c-5 provides 2003 tuition and fee information for the doctoral degree.  Schools were requested to report only the cost for course work.  The mean cost to an in-state doctoral student at a US public university is $18,369.  This mean is an increase of $1,979 over the mean cost reported for 2002 and follows upon an increase of $3,083 the previous year..  The least expensive US public university programs for in-state doctoral students are provided by Florida State ($4,710), Texas Woman’s ($7,540), and Emporia ($7,540).  In-state doctoral students encounter the highest cost to degree is at Michigan ($51,254) followed by Illinois ($33,304).  No other US public universities have a cost of tuition and fees that exceeds $27,300.  The mean cost to an out-of-state doctoral student at a US public university is $41,615.  This is an increase of $4,105 over the mean cost in 2002 and follows upon an increase of $5,015 the previous year.  For out-of-state students, the doctoral programs with the lowest degree costs are at Texas Woman’s ($16,659), Florida State ($17,539), and Texas ($18,451).  No other school has a  doctoral program with cost to degree under $20,000.  The most expensive program for out-of-state doctoral students is at Illinois ($77,744).  The cost of the Illinois doctoral degree is closely followed by those at Michigan ($67,599) and CaliforniaLos Angeles ($75,230).  Two schools offer doctoral programs for out-of-state students with costs in the mid to upper $60,000 range – Tennessee ($67,599) and Washington ($66,180).  The costs at these five schools are well above the mean for out-of-state doctoral students at US public universities ($48,880).  For out-of-state doctoral students the next tier of schools in terms of costs begins in the upper $40,000 range (North CarolinaChapel Hill, $48,800).

 

 

            Doctoral programs at private US schools are considerably more expensive than similar programs at most public universities.  Only four of the 23 doctoral programs in the US are offered by private universities (Drexel, Long Island, Simmons, and Syracuse).  Their mean cost to degree for 2003 is $41,574, an increase of $3,087 over the mean for 2002.  The tuition and fees range from $25,920 (Simmons) to $57,876 (Syracuse).  The mean cost of a doctoral program at a private university is $41,615, although this cost is considerably less that the cost for a doctoral degree for out-of-state students at the more expensive US public universities.

 



[1]  For ease of reading the following terms are used in this chapter:  White, Black, Hispanic, Asian or Pacific Islander, and American Indian.

[2]  The total enrollment figure of 20,033 in Table II-4-a includes data reported by the 6 of the 7 Canadian schools that did not report ethnic data.  Only Montréal elected to provide those data.  In calculating percentages in this paragraph the data of the other 6 schools were not included.  Thus a divisor of 20,033 was used in the calculation rather than the total enrollment of 21,212.

[3]  U. S. Census Bureau. United States Census 2000.  Population and Housing Tables (PHC-T Series).  Available:  http://www.census.gov/population/www/cen2000/tablist.html

[4]  The total enrollment figure of 3,015 in Table II-4-c-1 includes data reported by the 1 Canadian school offering the bachelor’s degree, Dalhousie.  It did not, however, report ethnic data.  In calculating percentages in this paragraph Dalhousie’s data were not included.  Thus a divisor of 2,905 was used in the calculation rather than the total bachelor’s enrollment of 3,015.

[5]  The total enrollment figure of 15,117 in Table II-4-c-2 includes data reported by all 6 Canadian schools offering the ALA‑accredited master’s – LS degree.  Those schools, however, did not report ethnic data.  In calculating percentages in this paragraph those data were not included.  Thus a divisor of 14,220 was used in the calculation rather than the total ALA‑accredited master’s – LS degree enrollment of 15,117.

[6]  The total enrollment figure of 810 in Table II-4-c-5 includes data reported by all 4 Canadian schools offering the doctoral degree.  Three of these 4, however, did not report ethnic data.  Montréal was the sole school electing to report these data.  In calculating percentages in this paragraph the data for the 3 schools not reporting were not included.  Thus a divisor of 744 was used in the calculation rather than the total doctoral enrollment of 810.

[7]   Exchange Rate October 15, 2003:                              1 US Dollar (USD)             =   1.32410 Canadian Dollar (CAD)

                                                        1 Canadian Dollar =   0.75560 US Dollar

[8]  The following nine universities were defined as private:  Catholic, Clark Atlanta, Dominican, Drexel, Long Island, Pratt, St. John’s, Simmons, and Syracuse.  Some schools treated as public have a quasi public/private relationship.  For the purposes of this report, if such a school had different tuition levels for in-state versus out-of-state students it was classified as a public university.  When viewing this definition against the tuition and fee tables it would appear that one exception must be made for Catholic, which is clearly a private school, but does report having a different tuition structure for "in-state" and "out-of-state."

[9]   Exchange Rate October 15, 2003:                              1 US Dollar (USD)             =   1.32410 Canadian Dollar (CAD)

                                                        1 Canadian Dollar =   0.75560 US Dollar

[10]  The following nine universities were defined as private:  Catholic, Clark Atlanta, Dominican, Drexel, Long Island, Pratt, St. John’s, Simmons, and Syracuse.  Some schools treated as public have a quasi public/private relationship.  For the purposes of this report, if such a school had different tuition levels for in-state versus out-of-state students it was classified as a public university.  When viewing this definition against the tuition and fee tables it would appear that one exception must be made for Catholic, which is clearly a private school, but does report having a different tuition structure for "in-state" and "out-of-state.""

[11]  Exchange Rate October 15, 2003:                             1 US Dollar (USD)             =   1.32410 Canadian Dollar (CAD)

                                                        1 Canadian Dollar =   0.75560 US Dollar

[12]   The following nine universities were defined as private:  Catholic, Clark Atlanta, Dominican, Drexel, Long Island, Pratt, St. John’s, Simmons, and Syracuse.  Some schools treated as public have a quasi public/private relationship.  For the purposes of this report, if such a school had different tuition levels for in-state versus out-of-state students it was classified as a public university.  When viewing this definition against the tuition and fee tables it would appear that one exception must be made for Catholic, which is clearly a private school, but does report having a different tuition structure for "in-state" and "out-of-state."

[13]  The difference in the total and mean for private US universities is attributable to Catholic having different tuition and fees rates for in-state and out-of state, i.e., on-campus and off-campus students.  For comparisons in the text the mean was calculated based on the tuition and fee data for in-state students at Catholic.