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.

 

            Fifty-five of the 56 schools with ALA-accredited master’s programs (LS and/or IS) participated in the survey (7 Canadian and 48 US).  Rhode Island did not respond to the initial request for data nor to a number of follow-up requests.  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 has been 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 felt the need to explain data that differs slightly 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 2002 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 science.

 

            Data are reported for 55 of the 56 schools with accredited-ALA master’s programs.  Rhode Island reported no data for the ALISE statistics in 2002.

 

            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 as well as the total FTE enrollment.  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 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 2002 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 2002 enrollment of 24,112 is up 5.4 percent from the 22,883 reported last year.  Total enrollment for the 6 degree programs was 21,212.  This represents an enrollment increase of 5.9 percent increase over the 20,033 reported for Fall 2001.  ALA-accredited master’s – LS programs account for the majority (71.3 percent) of total degree enrollment.  Master’s – IS enrollment represents 5.4 percent of total enrollment while “other master’s” is 3.5 percent.  Bachelor’s degrees continue to rise in the percentage their students constitute of total enrollment – 14.2 percent this year.  The 28 schools reporting doctoral enrollment indicate of 810 students are seeking that degree.  They constitute or 3.8 percent of total degree enrollment.  Post-master’s students comprise 1.8 percent of enrollment.

 

            All degree levels, except bachelor’s, Master’s – IS, and doctoral degrees, have the majority of their students in a part-time status.  At the bachelor’s degree level, 81.4 percent of the students are full-time.  Doctoral programs have 56 percent of their students in a full-time students status.  This year the percentage of master’s – IS who are full-time rose to 50.3 percent from the 41.7 percent reported last year.  Over two-thirds (69.6 percent) of all ALA-accredited master’s – LS students are part‑time as are 51.8 percent of “other master’s” degree and 81.6 percent of post-master’s students.

 

            When distribution by gender is examined, female students are found to comprise 80.2 percent of ALA-accredited master’s – LS enrollment.  Gender distribution becomes more equal for the master’s – IS degree, where males constitute 51.8 percent of students.  Female doctoral students are in the majority at 53.8 percent as they are for “other master’s” degrees where they comprise 55.3 percent of the enrollment.

 

            Sixteen of the 56 schools (28.6 percent) currently offer a bachelor’s degree.  Table II-1-c-1a provides school-by-school enrollment figures.  It reveals that 3,015 students were pursuing a bachelor’s degree in Fall 2002.  This is a decline of 3.4 percent despite one additional school offering this degree this year over last.  A large percentage of enrollment is concentrated at three schools.  The bachelor’s enrollment at Drexel (847), Florida State (557), and Syracuse (513) comprise 63.6 percent of all enrollment for that degree.  While this is a large percentage, bachelor’s enrollment at other schools is growing.  Five other schools, Pittsburgh (229), Albany (205), WisconsinMilwaukee (181), Rutgers (164), and Dalhousie (110) have enrollments over 100.

            Table II-1-c-2a-LS reports ALA-accredited master’s – LS enrollment for each of the 54 [1] schools offering that program.  It illustrates the wide range of program sizes across the schools – from the five largest programs, San Jose (1,074), Dominican (663), Kent State (633), North Texas (604), and Wayne State (537) to the one school with less than 75 students: Clark Atlanta (73).  Six schools (11.1 percent) have ALA-accredited master’s – LS enrollment of fewer than 100 students (Alberta, Clark Atlanta, Dalhousie, Iowa, Puerto Rico, and Southern Mississippi.

 

            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 (9.4 percent) have more than three-fourths of their ALA-accredited master’s – LS students in a full-time status:  (North CarolinaChapel Hill (85.9 percent), McGill (83 percent), Michigan (82.4 percent), Dalhousie (81.4 percent), and Alberta (77.6 percent).  Two other schools approach that level:  Western Ontario (73.6 percent), and CaliforniaLos Angeles (72.4 percent).  It is noteworthy that these seven schools with the highest percentage of full-time enrollment have two-year master’s programs, although they do not represent all the schools with such programs.  The next percentage tier of full-time students begins with Texas at 58.7 percent.  Five schools (28.3 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 Long Island (94.2), Queens (91.4), Catholic (89.6), and Oklahoma (86.3).  Three of the four schools with large percentages of part-time enrollment are located in major metropolitan areas.

 

            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.  The programs with the largest ALA‑accredited master's–LS enrollment in terms of FTE are San Jose (475), Kent State (424.9), Dominican (397.2), North Texas (361.9), and Illinois (351.7).  At four schools (7.5 percent), the ALA‑accredited master’s – LS FTE enrollment  is under 75.  These schools are Clark Atlanta (47.7), Southern Mississippi (53), St. John’s (58.3), and Iowa (79).  This is down from the 11 schools with FTE enrollments under 75 reported last year.

 

            Table II-1-c-2a-IS reports Fall 2002 master’s – IS enrollment for the 7 schools (12.5 percent) that offer these degrees -- four that are accredited by ALA and three that are not.  Enrollment for this degree range from 304 at Drexel to 81 at Albany.  Two of the three non-ALA accredited programs, Drexel and Syracuse, have the largest enrollments.  This is a change from the previous year when the three schools with non-ALA accredited programs (Drexel, Pittsburgh, and Syracuse), who are also the oldest IS master’s programs, had the largest enrollments.

 

            The distribution of full-time to part-time students reported for the master’s – IS shows wide variation among the schools as was seen for the ALA-accredited master’s – LS degree.  Four of the schools have the majority of their master’s – IS students in a full-time status – Montréal (94.6 percent), North Carolina – Chapel Hill (75.7 percent), Albany (69.1 percent), and Syracuse (58.2 percent).  Conversely, Drexel and Pittsburgh have most of their IS -- Master’s students in a part-time status – 87.8 and 56.6 percent respectively.  Indiana’s Master’s -- IS students are divided evenly between full and part-time status.  The variation in full-time versus part-time enrollment has some impact on the school enrollment figures when enrollment is viewed in terms of FTE (Full-Time Equivalent).  From that perspective Syracuse has the largest program with 152 FTE, followed by Montréal (143 FTE), Indiana (127 FTE), Drexel (113.9 FTE).  Albany, North CarolinaChapel Hill, and Pittsburgh have FTE enrollments for their master’s – IS programs under 100.

 

            Fourteen schools (25.9 percent) of the 54 schools reporting indicated enrollment for “other master’s” degrees (Table II-1-c-3a) for Fall 2002 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 196 students followed by Rutgers (84),  North Carolina Central (78), and Syracuse (77).  A number of  “other master’s” programs are relatively small.  Six schools (42.9 percent) have enrollments of 20 or fewer students for this degree – Drexel (18), Alabama (14), Southern Connecticut (13), CaliforniaLos Angeles (4), Dominican (3), and St. John’s (1).

 

            Post-master’s programs historically have had comparatively low enrollments.  Table II-1-c-4a confirms that this continues.  Of the 25 schools reporting Fall 2002 enrollment data for their post-master’s program only ten schools (40 percent) had more than 10 students in their programs.  The high percentage of part-time students in post-master’s programs (81.6 percent) results in a low mean 9 FTE (Table II-1-c-4b) compared to the mean 15.2 head count.

 

            Half (28) of the 56 schools offer a doctoral program (Table II-1-c-5a).  As has been characteristic of the other degrees, the 810 doctoral students enrolled in Fall 2002 are distributed quite unevenly across the schools.  The doctoral program at Pittsburgh continues to be the largest (84 students) followed closely this year by North Texas (79).  No other school has more than 50 doctoral students.  Eleven schools (39.3 percent) have enrollments of fewer than 20 students.  Five schools have enrollments of 10 or fewer doctoral students -- Montréal (8), Simmons (6), Tennessee (5), Arizona (3), and Alabama (1).  Although the distribution of full-time vs. part-time doctoral students continues to be rather evenly divided at 56 vs. 44 percent respectively, the distribution varies widely from school to school.  Indeed, two schools (Montréal and Washington) report that all their doctoral students are full-time.  Conversely, two schools (Long Island and Simmons) report all their doctoral enrollment as part-time.  Caution needs to be exercised in examining full-time vs. part-time distribution in that it can be easily skewed by schools with only a few doctoral students.

 

            Table II-1-e provides the number of FTE off-campus students each school had registered for the 2002 Fall term.  Forty-two, or slightly more than three-quarters (76.4 percent), of the 55 schools had off‑campus enrollment using one of several approaches to delivery available.  This number is an increase from the 32 schools that reported off‑campus enrollment for Fall 2001.  At several schools off-campus FTE enrollment was very sizeable.  By far the largest off-campus enrollments are at Missouri (314.5 FTE) and Florida State  (296.4 FTE).  Six other schools have FTE enrollments exceeding 100 students:  San Jose (227 FTE), Kent State (188 FTE), South Florida (164 FTE), Southern Connecticut (126 FTE), Illinois (108.8 FTE), and Wayne State (101 FTE).  It should be commented upon that some schools, which have had sizeable off‑campus enrollments in the past, did not report those data this year.  Six schools had off-campus enrollment of ten or fewer FTE students.  Twenty-four schools either reported they had no off-campus students or elected not to report these data.  The total FTE off-campus enrollment for Fall 2002 of 2,370.5 represents an decrease of 2.2 percent.  This follows, however, upon 26.4 and 14.1 percent increases the previous two years.  When a mean enrollment is calculated limited to those schools with off-campus enrollment (42), the mean enrollment is 56.4 FTE students down from the mean 65.5 FTE of Fall 2001.

 

           

Course Enrollments  (Table II-2)

           

 

            Schools were requested to report the number of students enrolled in courses or sections of courses during the 2002 Fall term.  Enrollments were reported in increments of five students.  Independent study and reading courses were not to be included in these counts.  Data are reported for 55 of the 56 schools with accredited-ALA master’s programs.  Rhode Island reported no data for the ALISE statistics in 2002.

 

            Table II-2-a-1 reports course and section enrollment distributed across the 11 enrollment groups for courses offered in Fall 2002 by each ALA school.  The number of courses/sections offered that term ranged from 13 (Dalhousie) to 152 (Florida State) with a mean of 43.1 courses/sections offered per school.  Eleven schools (20 percent) offered fewer than 20 courses/sections that term.  That is the same number reported for Fall 2001.  At the other end of the spectrum, 16 schools (29.1 percent) offered more than 50 courses in Fall 2002.  Again, the number is identical to Fall 2001.  Three schools (Indiana, Syracuse, and Florida State) offered more than 100 courses that term.  This compares to only one school offering more than 100 courses the previous fall.

 

            The majority of courses/sections offered in Fall 2002 have enrollments of 6-10, 11-15, 16-20, and 21-25 students.  These four course/section enrollment groups account for 60.2 percent of all courses offered.  The course/section size with the highest frequency was the 11-15 students group followed by the 16-20 group.  The total number of courses/sections offered with large enrollments, i.e., 36-40, 41-45, and 46-50 students, was relatively small (106, 42, and 38 respectively) in comparison to the frequencies of the other enrollment groups.  This is up from the 85, 52, and 30 reported for those groupings for Fall 2001.  Courses/sections offered in these three larger enrollment groups account for only 7.9 percent of all courses offered.  Up from the 7.3 percent reported for the previous year’s term.  The number of courses/sections offered with more than 50 students in Fall 2002 was 69.  The number of courses offered in this size group has remained relatively constant for the past few years:  2002, 69; 2001, 66; 2000, 66.  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 independent study or reading courses reported by each school.  This table reveals the wide variation in the number of independent study or reading courses offered from none at two schools (St. John’s and South Carolina) to 157 at Florida State and 114 at Pittsburgh.  Seven schools did not report any data.  The mean number of independent study or reading courses offered by the 49 schools in Fall 2002 was 23.7.

 

           

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 2001-2002 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. [2]

 

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.  Rhode Island reported no data for the ALISE statistics in 2002.

 

            Table II-3-a reports the number of degrees awarded for each of the six degrees distributed by gender and ethnic origin.  Table II-3-a-1 reports these same data by school.  A total of 6,732 bachelor’s, ALA-accredited master’s -- LS, master’s -- IS, “other master’s”, post-master’s, and doctoral degrees were awarded by schools during 2001‑2002.  This is an increase of 4.4 percent (282 degrees) over the number awarded the previous academic year, but down from the 7.6 percent increase of the previous of that year.  While female graduates accounted for 70.3 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 85 percent for the post-master’s and 79.8 percent for ALA-accredited master’s – LS degree to 52.2 and 50.5 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 (66.2 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 2001-2002 continue to be predominately White (69.2 percent).  Blacks are the most represented non-White ethnic group (5.3 percent).  Asian or Pacific Islanders represented 3.5 percent of graduates followed by Hispanics at 3.1 percent.  The Hispanic percentage of graduates is particularly noteworthy rising this year from the 2.6 percent reported last year.  Native Americans constitute one-half percent (0.5) of all graduates of the six degrees.  All minority groups are underrepresented as graduates in relation to their percentage of the US population.  Asian and Pacific Islanders come the closest to their percentage of the US population (3.5 vs. 37 percent).

 

            Black graduates accounted for 11.1 percent of bachelor’s degrees awarded in 2001-2002.  They were 10.2 percent of graduates of the “other master’s” degrees, and 7.7 percent of doctoral degree graduates.  The degrees in which Black graduates have the lowest representation is master’s – IS (2.9 percent) followed by the ALA-accredited master’s -- LS (4.2 percent).  Black representation in the 2000 US census was 12.1 percent.

 

            Hispanic representation is lower than that of Blacks for five of the six degree fields.  The one exception is the post-master’s where Hispanics received 35 percent of the degrees awarded in 2001-2002.  While this might seem worthy of praise when the data are examined more closely the percentage of post-master’s degrees awarded to Hispanics is in fact disturbing.  Twenty of the 21 post-master’s degrees awarded were bestowed by Puerto Rico.  The other schools with post-master’s degrees had but one Hispanic recipient of the degree.  Their next highest percentage of graduates drops to 5.1 percent for the bachelor’s degree.  Hispanics received only 3 percent of the ALA-accredited master’s – LS awarded, 1.7 percent of the “other master’s,” and 1 percent of the Master’s – IS.  Hispanic representation in the 2000 US census was 12.5 percent.  Most disturbing is that no Hispanics were awarded a doctoral degree in 2001-2002.

 

            International students represent a considerable percentage of graduates of three degrees.  They received more than a third (35.4 percent) of the doctoral degrees and 31.8 percent of the master’s -- IS degrees awarded in 2001-2002.  Their representation as graduates of “other master’s” follows at 28.4 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 4.6 and 3.5 percent respectively of graduates.

 

            For each degree the number of degrees and certificates awarded varies widely from school to school.  Twelve of the 16 schools that reported bachelor’s degree enrollment for Fall 2002 awarded degrees at that level in 2001-2002 (Table II-3-c-1).  Florida State (244), Syracuse (182), Pittsburgh (165), and Drexel (144) awarded 84.4 percent of the 871 degrees conferred.  No other school approached the number of graduates of these four schools.  Of the remaining eight schools only Albany (55) had more than 30 baccalaureate graduates.  Five schools (Clarion, North Texas, Rutgers, Southern Connecticut, and Southern Mississippi) had fewer than ten graduates.

 

            At the ALA-accredited master’s – LS degree level (Table II-3-c-2-LS) 4,923 degrees were awarded in 2001-2002.  Two schools had more than 200 graduates receiving this degree:  Illinois and Simmons (214 each).  Six schools had ALA-accredited master’s – LS recipients in the 151-200 range:  Dominican (192), Kent State (186), South Florida (183), Wayne State (168), Florida State (163), and South Carolina (152).  This past academic year 13 schools conferred fewer than 50 degrees.  Five of these 13 schools awarded 30 or fewer ALA-accredited master’s – LS degrees – Dalhousie (30), Clark Atlanta (27), St. John’s (26), Alberta (22), and Puerto Rico (9).

 

            Table II-3-c-2-IS provides graduation data for 2001-2002 by school for the master’s – IS degree.  A total of 510 of these degrees were awarded by seven schools -- 141 by the four schools with ALA-accredited IS master’s degree (Albany, Indiana, Montréal, and North Carolina – Chapel Hill) and 369 by the three schools (Drexel, Pittsburgh, and Syracuse) that did not seek that accreditation.  The total number of degrees awarded is nearly identical to the number awarded the previous year (513).  The number of degrees vary widely from 144, 121, and 104 awarded by Syracuse, Pittsburgh, and Drexel respectively to eight conferred by Albany.  The number of master’s – IS degrees awarded by those schools with ALA-accreditation for the degree is, on average, noticeably lower (35.3) than the mean number of graduates of the schools without that accreditation (123).  Those latter schools have had these separate degrees for a longer period.

 

            Eleven of the 14 schools reporting enrollment in “other master’s” degrees in Fall 2002 awarded degrees in 2001-2002.  The total number of degrees conferred was 303 (Table II-3-c-3).  Syracuse awarded the highest number of “other master’s” degrees (55) followed by Missouri (54).  Four schools conferred fewer than ten “other master's” degrees:  Drexel (6), Alabama (4), Southern Connecticut (3), and CaliforniaLos Angeles (2).  With the exception of British Columbia (15), the remaining four schools had sizeable “other master’s” graduating classes, numbering from 36 to 45 graduates.

 

            Fourteen of the 25 schools (53.6 percent) having enrollment in a post-master’s program in Fall 2002 had graduates of their programs in 2001-2002.  A total of 60 of these degrees were awarded (Table II-3-c-4).  By far Puerto Rico (20) granted the largest number of these degrees followed by Missouri (9), Florida State (6), South Carolina (5), and Alabama (4).  The remaining nine schools conferred from one to three post-master’s degrees.

 

            Sixty-five doctoral degrees were conferred in 2001-2002 by 22 of the 28 schools (78.6 percent) having enrollment in a doctoral program in Fall 2002 (Table II-3-c-5).  This is a decline of 23.5 percent from the 85 degrees awarded in 2000-2001.  Unlike the previous academic year when two schools accounted for 41.2 percent of all doctoral graduates, this year the distribution of awarded degrees is much more even.  Florida State (7), Pittsburgh (6), and Rutgers (5) awarded the largest number of doctoral degrees.  However, five schools each awarded four doctoral degrees, two schools three degrees , nine schools two, and three schools one doctoral degree.

 

           

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

 

            Enrollment figures for the 2002 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 55 of the 56 schools with accredited-ALA master’s programs.  Rhode Island reported no data for the ALISE statistics in 2002.  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 2002 in schools for each degree level distributed by gender and ethnic origin categories.  These figures show that enrollments remain predominately White (68.8 percent) [3] .  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 55 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 are 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). [4]   No other schools have Black enrollments as high as 10 percent.

 

            The 2000 census data of the Hispanic population in the US (12.5 percent) is exceeded, as one might expect, 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 Oklahoma (5.7 percent) followed by Arizona (5.2 percent).  The next highest American Indian representation occurs at North Carolina Central with 1.7 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. [5]   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. [6]   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.  Excluding, Clark Atlanta, an historically Black university, Florida State (48) and San Jose (47) have the highest Black enrollment followed by Wayne State (42), and Pratt (40).  North Carolina Central, the other historically Black university, has a Black enrollment of 44 students.  No schools have Black enrollments numbering in the 30s.  There are five schools in the next tier of Black enrollment (20-29 students).  Five of the 48 schools (10.4 percent) reporting ethnic data indicated their Black student enrollment was either zero (Arizona, Hawaii, and Puerto Rico) or one student (Emporia and Iowa).  This is nearly identical with the 10.2 percent of schools reporting zero or one Black student enrolled in Fall 2001.

 

            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 (79.5 and 27.7 percent respectively).  It is interesting to note that, although an HBU, North Carolina Central has a White student enrollment of 65.4 percent.  In terms of Black students constituting a percentage of total enrollment, following the two HBUs, the next highest percentages are at Pratt (15.9 percent), Louisiana State (14.3 percent), and Southern Mississippi (10.4 percent).

 

            Figures for the 563 Hispanic students pursuing the ALA-accredited master’s – LS degree reveal that San Jose (101) has the largest number of Hispanic students followed closely by Puerto Rico (94).  These two schools account for one-fifth of the Hispanic enrollment for this degree. [The next highest Hispanic enrollments are at North Texas (39), South Florida (34), and Florida State (31).  Seven of the 48 schools (14.6 percent) reporting ethnic data indicate they have no Hispanic students while eight other schools (16.7) report only one each.  Taken together these 15 schools constitute 31.3 percent of schools reporting ethnic data at the ALA-accredited master’s – LS level.  This is a disappointing increase from the percentage figure for schools with zero or one Hispanic students reported for Fall 2001 and the 32.7 percent of Fall 2000.  While Hispanic enrollment has increased noticeably in numbers this past year it is evident that the increase has occurred at a relatively few schools while at others their representation had regressed.

 

            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 percent).  Only four other schools have Hispanic enrollments that exceed 10 percent – Arizona (12 percent) California – Los Angeles (11 percent), Texas (10.6 percent), and Texas Woman’s (10.3 percent).  All four 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 – South Florida (9.9 percent), San Jose (9.4 percent), Pratt (6.8 percent), North Texas (6.5 percent), and Florida State (6.1 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 97.6 percent (Kentucky) to 0 percent (Puerto Rico).  No school besides Kentucky has a White enrollment exceeding 95 percent, although 11 other schools (22.9 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 (16.4 percent), Queens (35.9 percent), and Hawaii (40.2 percent)

 

            All seven schools offering the master’s – IS degree, including the one Canadian school, Montréal, reported ethnic data for Fall 2002 (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 vs. 78.2; Blacks: 3.6 vs. 4.8 percent; and Hispanics: 1.4 vs. 4 percent).  This variation compared to the ALA-accredited master’s – LS is attributable somewhat to the higher Asian/Pacific Islander percentage (6.3 vs. 2.8 percent), but primarily to the much larger international student presence (23.8 vs. 4.3 percent).

 

            Black enrollments for the master’s – IS degree is somewhat evenly distributed across 4 of the 7 schools.  North CarolinaChapel Hill does stand out with its 5.6 percent Black enrollment.  Conversely, Montréal (0 percent) and Syracuse (1.3 percent) are notable for the opposite reason.  The number of Hispanic students enrolled for this degree is so small (16) that little meaningful analysis can be done in terms of individual schools.  The exception to this is Syracuse whose ten students constitute 37.5 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:  Pittsburgh (20.3 percent), North CarolinaChapel Hill (12.1 percent), and Drexel (10.5 percent).  White enrollment is highly predominate for the master’s – IS degree at Montréal (97.3 percent), White students are less than half that degree enrollment at three schools:  Syracuse (37.6 percent), Albany (43.2 percent), and Pittsburgh (46.8 percent).

 

            The 356 White students constitute 44 percent of doctoral student enrollment (Table II-4-c-5) in Fall 2002 at the schools reporting ethnic data. [7]   This percentage is down from the 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 2002 international students constituted 37.5 percent of doctoral student enrollment.  The 39 Black students comprise 5.2 percent of doctoral enrollment, while Hispanic doctoral enrollment is 1.9 percent and Asian or Pacific Islander 3.1 percent.  Overall, the involvement of all non-White ethnic groups at the doctoral level is minimal (10.6 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 6.  Eight schools report enrollment of only one Black doctoral student and six report having none.  Texas reports that it has three Hispanic doctoral students.  Eleven 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.  Two schools (Drexel and North Texas) report having four doctoral students of that ethnicity.  Two schools indicate they have three students and two schools two Asian or Pacific Islander doctoral students.  Five schools have but one such student each while, unfortunately, 13 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.

 

            Texas Woman’s has the highest percentage of Black doctoral students with 17.6 percent followed by Washington (15.4 percent), Florida State (14 percent), and North CarolinaChapel Hill (13 percent).  No other school has more than 10 percent of its doctoral enrollment as Black.  Only one school, Texas (8.3 percent), reports having more than 5 percent of their doctoral enrollment as Hispanic.  Only two schools report Hispanic doctoral enrollment above 4 percent – WisconsinMadison (4.8 percent) and CaliforniaLos Angeles (4.2 percent).  Two schools, Drexel (15.4 percent) and WisconsinMadison (14.3 percent) report having an Asian or Pacific Islander doctoral enrollment exceeding 10 percent.  Five additional schools have Asian or Pacific Islander enrollment exceeding 5 percent -- CaliforniaLos Angeles (8.3 percent), Emporia (7.1 percent), Long Island (6.7 percent), Maryland (5.6 percent), and North Texas (5.1 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 55 of the 56 schools with accredited-ALA master’s programs.  Rhode Island reported no data for the ALISE statistics in 2002.

 

            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 Pittsburgh, Syracuse, and Dalhousie, the 3rd, 4th, and 8th largest bachelors degrees respectively.  The students in these three programs number 852 and account for over a quarter (28.3 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 (65.6 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 88.4 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 81.2 percent of their students are from in-state/in-province.  Only two schools (Michigan (57.1 percent) and Emporia (51.4 percent)) report more than half of their ALA-accredited master’s – LS students were from out-of-state/out-of-province.  Four additional schools (WisconsinMilwaukee (41.6 percent), McGill (40.9 percent), and North CarolinaChapel Hill and Southern Connecticut (40.1 percent each)) reported that at least 40 percent of their students pursuing that degree were from out-of-state/out-of-province.  Sixteen schools have less than 10 percent of their ALA-accredited master’s – LS enrollment from out-of-state/out-of-province.  Indeed, four of these schools report out-of-state/out-of-province enrollments of under 2 percent for their ALA-accredited master’s – LS degree – Puerto Rico (1 percent), Kent State (1.1 percent), North Carolina Central (1.3 percent), and San Jose (1.8 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 349 or 30.2 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 77.2 percent.  The distribution ranged from 94.6 and 88.9 percent at Montréal and Albany respectively to 55 and 67.3 percent at Drexel and North CarolinaChapel Hill respectively.

 

            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 130 students and represents 16 percent of all doctoral student enrollment.  The data for the remaining 25 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 (44.7 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.  Nine schools (Florida State, Illinois, Indiana, Maryland, Michigan, North Texas, Rutgers, Washington, and WisconsinMadison) have at least 50 percent of their doctoral enrollment from out-of-state.  This ranges from 78.8 percent at Michigan to 50 percent at Florida State.  Two schools have out-of-state/out-of-province doctoral enrollment at less than 10 percent (Long Island (4.4 percent) and North Texas (7.1 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 2002 term for each degree defined for Table II-1.  Data are reported for 55 of the 56 schools with accredited-ALA master’s programs.  Rhode Island reported no data for the ALISE statistics in 2002.

 

            The 1,335 international students seeking any of the six degrees in Fall 2002 is a 4 percent increase over the 1,284 reported for Fall 2001.  When compared with the enrollment figures reported in Table II-1, constitute 6.3 percent of the 21,212 students enrolled in the six degree levels at the 55 schools.  Although international students have their highest enrollment at the ALA‑accredited master’s – LS degree level, they constitute only 3.2 percent of its total enrollment.  By contrast, international students are a very notable component of master’s – IS and “other master’s” (18.9 percent) degrees.  The presence of international students is even more pronounced at the doctoral level where the 279 international students comprise more than a third (34.4 percent) of doctoral student enrollment.  International student enrollment in bachelor’s degrees remains minimal at 4.2 percent.  International student participation in post-master's programs is similarly low at 3.9 percent.

            Several schools stand out for the total number of international students enrolled in the degrees they provide (Table II-6-a-1) -- Syracuse (222), Drexel (148), and Pittsburgh (145).  No other school has 60 or more international students.  Michigan (59), Illinois (53), Florida State (51), and Missouri (50) comprise the next tier of schools.  The remaining schools have a wide range of international students -- from 44 at Albany to one at Alabama, Dominican, Kentucky, and South Florida  Thirty schools (54.5 percent) have fewer than ten international students.  Twelve of these 30 school have fewer than five international students.  Unlike last year, no school lacks international student representation in its student body.

            When examined at the degree level, some noticeable differences in international student representation exist.  Only nine 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 127 international students is in rather unevenly distributed.  The 77 international students at Drexel constitute 60.6 percent of all international enrollment for that degree.  Of the remaining eight schools with international enrollment only Syracuse (18) and Pittsburgh (14) have more than 10 international students pursuing a bachelor’s degree.

            For the ALA-accredited master’s – LS (Table II-6-c-2-LS) Michigan has the highest international student enrollment (43) followed by Illinois and McGill (33 each), Texas (31), and Florida State (22).  Ten other schools have ten or more international students pursuing this degree.  All of the 54 schools reporting have at least one international student in their ALA-accredited master's–LS program.

            Two of the three non-ALA accredited master’s – IS programs (Table II-6-c-2-IS) have by far the largest international student enrollment -- Syracuse (111) and Drexel (57).  The three programs combined account for nearly three-quarters (72.7 percent) of all international student enrollment for this degree.  This is likely due to their longer established IS master’s programs being better known internationally.  By comparison, Indiana (32) and Albany (25) have the largest international student population of the ALA-accredited IS master’s programs.

            Only eight of the 14 schools (57.1 percent) having 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 50 and 43 students respectively.  Together these two school account for 57.4 percent of all international student enrollment for “other master’s” degrees.  Missouri has the next highest international student enrollment with 27 students.  No other school has more than 13 international “other master’s” students.  Seven schools have no international student enrollments for that degree.

            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 2002 (Table II-6-c-4).  None of the schools having international enrollment for this degree had more than three international students.  One school had three international students, three schools two each, and six schools each had one international student.  Fifteen schools reported having no international students for their post-master’s programs.

            Twenty-three of the 28 schools (82.1 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 58 international students.  Syracuse (25), Florida State (21) and Missouri, North Texas, Rutgers (20 each) are the only other doctoral programs with more than 20 international students.  Eight schools report that their doctoral programs have five or fewer international students, while as mentioned above, five 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 2002 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 55 of the 56 schools with accredited-ALA master’s programs.  Rhode Island reported no data for the ALISE statistics in 2002.

 

            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 (74.5 percent) or 994 of the 1,335 international students.  This is up from the 64.8 percent Asian students represented of international school enrollment in Fall 2001.  When the regions of Asia are examined, the region of Far East, Southeast Asia is found to contribute the greatest percentage of international students (53.3 percent -- 712 students).  This compares to their 47.8 percent last year.  South Asia is a distant second with 17.1 percent (228 students).  European countries contribute a only 6.9 percent (92 students) of international student enrollment, while South America continues to have minimal representation in LIS programs at 2.4 percent (32 students).  Africa representation has remained relatively constant over the past few years at 4 percent  (54 students) in Fall 2002.  Australia and Other Parts of the World has the lowest level of international students representation with 0.1 percent ( 4 students).

 

            When the number of students from individual countries is examined, it becomes readily apparent that China, South Korea, and India are the countries contributing the greatest number of international students (260, 206, and 157 respectively).  Together these three countries provide 46.7 percent of all international students seeking LIS degrees in the US and Canada.  This is up from the 39.5 percent these countries had in Fall 2001.  Two other Asian countries, Taiwan (103) and Thailand (64), form the next tier of countries contributing the most students.  These five countries have provided a strong student presence for a number of years.  Overall, combined enrollments for these five countries contributed approximately half of all international student enrollment for the period 1999-2001.  This year their role has risen to 59.2 percent.

 

            Given the relatively small international student enrollment in bachelor's degrees (127), it is not surprising that no country has a large number of students represented in these programs.  It further should be noted that 22 (17.3 percent)  of the 127 international bachelor’s degree students are categorized as “unknown” in terms of country of origin.  A similar percentage of unknowns was reported in previous years.  This very likely may be due to student record access limitations by schools for their undergraduate students.

 

            China provided by far the greatest number of international students (108) pursuing the ALA-accredited master’s – LS degree in Fall 2002.  South Korea (51), India (32), and Japan (30)  have the next largest representation.  When US enrollment in Canadian schools and Canadian enrollment in US schools is discounted no other countries other than those mentioned and Taiwan (28) and Trinidad & Tobago (24) provide more than 11 students for this degree.

 

            India (96) provided the largest number of students enrolled for the master’s – IS degree followed by China (56), Taiwan (26), and South Korea (21).  India (46), Taiwan (24), Thailand (21), South Korea (19), and China (10) provide 74.1 percent of all international students enrolled for a “other master’s” degree.  Excluding US students in Canada and Canadian students in the US no other country provides more than three students for the “other master’s” degree.

 

            International doctoral student enrollment is led by China (73) and South Korea (43) distantly followed by Thailand (27).  Together these three countries provide slightly over half (51.3 percent) of all international doctoral student enrollment.  No other country other than Taiwan (19) sends more than 13 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 2002 enrollment divided by gender across nine age groups for each of the degree levels defined for Table II-1.  Data are reported for 55 of the 56 schools with accredited-ALA master’s programs.  Rhode Island reported no data for the ALISE statistics in 2002.

 

            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 (21.3, 27.2, and 24.3 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 (17.1 percent) followed closely by the 40-44 age group (16.5 percent).  In previous years, doctoral students had rather evenly distributed among the four groups that cover ages 25-44.  This year, that has changed.  This year the 35.6 percent of doctoral students are in the 25-29 and 30-34 age groups (17.2 and 18.4 percent respectively).  The 35-39 and 40-44 still constitute the next age cluster with 12.3 and 10.9 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 2001-2002 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 55 of the 56 schools with accredited-ALA master’s programs.  Rhode Island reported no data for the ALISE statistics in 2002.

 

            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. [8] 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. [9]

           

 

            Table II-11-a provides a summary of aid awarded for each of the six degrees for fiscal year 2001-2002.  The total value of awards, $6,592,066, represents a .8 percent decrease ($54,827) in funding over 2000-2001.  This decrease is disturbing given the increases in the cost of degrees and an increase the previous fiscal year of 4.5 percent.  The total value of awards for the ALA-accredited master’s – LS degree funding decreased 1.1 percent ($55,661) from the level of funding the previous fiscal year.  That year funding had risen 5.1 percent.  For the first time we can compare the value of funding for the master’s – IS to a previous year.  This year that funding increased 5.7 percent ($16,593).  While the percentage increase is greatly affected by the overall small total value of funding it nonetheless is noteworthy.  “Other master’s” programs experienced a healthier increase of 5.9 percent ($25,369) this past year.  The reason for this percentage change is similar to those that affected master’s – IS funding.  The amount of money invested in doctoral students this year ($842,082) represents a 9.1 percent decrease.  This follows upon a 12.2 percent decrease the previous year.  More discouraging is that these decreases continue an annual decline in doctoral funding first observed in 1997‑1998.  The only year in which this downward trend was broken was in 1999-2000 that witnessed a small 2.9 percent increase.

 

            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.  Twenty-nine of the 51 schools (56.9 percent) that responded to this question indicated that such aid is available for part-time students (Table-II-11-a-2).  None of the five Canadian schools responding to this question provide this type of aid compared to 63 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 (88.9 vs. 56.8 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 37 and 31.2 respectively.  The mean amount awarded was $3,130 per Canadian school ($1,999 USD).  This compares to $3,257 per US public university and $2,528 per US private university.

 

            Six of the 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 2001-2002 (Table II-11-c-2-IS).  The size of the mean award at the one Canadian school was $2,417 ($1,514 USD) compared to a mean of $3,564 at the two US public universities and $9,033 at the two US private universities.  The mean US public university mean award declined $1,235 from the mean for the previous fiscal year.  Even the mean award of $3,564 is deceptive.  Indiana awards nearly twice as many scholarships and fellowships as do the other two schools: North CarolinaChapel Hill and Pittsburgh.  Moreover, Indiana’s awards are far larger.  Indiana’s mean award is $5,056 compared to a mean of $2,200 for the other two schools.

 

            The figures in Table II-11-c-3 for “other master’s” is informative in that only seven of the 14 schools (50 percent) offering that program 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 2001-2002.

 

            Table II-11-c-5 reports on scholarship and fellowship aid for doctoral students for the 2001-2002 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, $2,966 ($1,895 USD), compared to $31,201 for the mean doctoral award at a US university.  This difference in mean size of scholarship and fellowship awards at Canadian and US universities is a departure from what was seen last year when the USD means were very similar.  The difference this year lies not in an increase in the mean size of the Canadian awards, but rather a decline of nearly $2,000 in the mean size of US awards.  The average size of a scholarship or fellowship award from a private US university for doctoral study is $7,130 compared to a similar average award at a public university of $5,038.  This compares to the average size of such awards in 2000-2001 of $11,778 at a private US university and $6,630 at a public university.  There has been a noticeable decline in the average size of doctoral scholarship and fellowship awards over the past six years.  The average awards were:  $12,326 in 1996-97 to the present state.  2000-2001 did experience a very slight upturn, but clearly scholarship and fellowship support for doctoral students continues to ebb.  This decline is most likely attributable to the withdrawal of much US federal support for doctoral students in library and information science.  New initiatives recently by the Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS) may stem this continued decline in support.

 

           

Assistantships  (Table II-12)

 

                Data were requested for the number and value of assistantships awarded by each school, divided by the gender of the awardee, using the degree definitions of Table II-1 for students enrolled in Fall 2002. Data are reported for 55 of the 56 schools with accredited-ALA master’s programs.  Rhode Island reported no data for the ALISE statistics in 2002.

 

            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. [10]

 

            Table II-12-a provides a summary of assistantships awarded for each of the six degrees for students enrolled in Fall 2002.  The total value of awards, $19,467,504, represents a 29.4 percent increase ($4,420,908) in funding over that reported for students enrolled in Fall 2001.  This follows upon an increase of 21.2 percent the previous year.  The increase in the total value of assistantship awards is attributable to sizeable percentage increases in support for several degrees: bachelor’s, Master’s – IS, “other master’s”, and doctoral.  Awards to bachelor’s students increased by 2,962.8 percent.  While this percentage change is huge it is skewed by the small numbers involved.  In fact, the number of assistantships awarded for those pursing the bachelors degree rose from 1 to 46.  This follows a decline of such awards for this degree of 48.1 percent the previous year.  Master’s – IS funding increased 41.5 percent, “other master’s” 104.4 percent, and doctoral 50.6 percent.  The smallest increase was for the ALA-accredited master’s – LS (8.1 percent), while post-master’s experienced a 0.2 percent decline in assistantship funding.  Clearly schools, witnessing a decline in scholarship and fellowship aid for doctoral students are attempting to provide aid to their doctoral student by assistantships instead.

 

            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.  Seventeen of the 49 schools that responded to this question (34.7 percent) that reported awarding assistantship indicated that they 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 (56.9 percent) noted previously (Table II-11-a-2).  Assistantships are available to part-time students at only one Canadian schools (16.7 percent).  The awarding of assistantships to part-time students at US private and public universities varies considerably (71.4 vs. 30.6 percent respectively). [11]   Although the pattern is the same, there is a notable contrast in the percentage of scholarship and fellowship aid available to part-time students at these two types of US public universities (56.8 respectively).  The percentage of scholarship and fellowship aid at private universities is nearly identical to that for assistantships (88.9 percent).

 

            Table II-12-c-2-LS reports assistantships awarded to students registered in Fall 2002 for the ALA-accredited master’s – LS degree.  The mean number of awards given by Canadian and US schools continues to be very different (5.7 vs. 20.5 respectively).  While scholarships and fellowships on average were awarded in far greater numbers at US private universities (50.5) compared to US public universities (24.8), that relationship was reversed for assistantships.  US public universities awarded an average of 24.1 assistantships per school compared to 6.9 by US private schools.  The great difference in the mean amount of assistantships awarded by a Canadian school versus a US school continues:  $2,730 ($1,744 USD) compared to $10,638 ($11,082 public, $9,622 private).

 

            All seven schools offering the master’s – IS degree reported that they had provided assistantship aid to the students seeking that degree in Fall 2002 (Table II-12-c-2-IS).  The size of the mean award at the one Canadian school was $786 ($502 USD) compared to a mean of $4,974 at the four US public universities and $17,450 at the two US private universities.

 

            The figures in Table II-12-c-3 for “other master’s” is informative in that only seven of the 15 schools (46.7 percent) reported awarding any assistantship aid for students pursuing these degrees.  That form of assistance is even scarcer for students pursuing the post-master’s degree.  Only three of the 25 schools (12 percent) having post-master’s enrollment indicate that they provided assistantship aid to these students in Fall 2002 (Table II-12-c-4).

 

            Table II-12-c-5 reports the number and value of assistantships awarded doctoral students enrolled in Fall 2002.  There continues to be a difference in the mean number of assistantships awarded by Canadian versus US universities (8.7 and 13.4 respectively), although the number for both is an increase over that reported for Fall 2001.  That difference is more extreme in terms of the average size of an assistantship award -- $2,966 Canadian ($1,895 USD) vs. $31,295 for the US.  There are differences in the average number of assistantships awarded to doctoral students at US public and private universities (13.5 vs. 10.3 respectively).  There is also a $13,828 difference in the value of an average award between the two types of universities -- $32,660 public vs. $19,864 private.  Overall US private and public universities witnessed a large increase in the amount of funds allocated to assistantships for doctoral students.  Private university funding increased 54.8 percent over the previous year, while public universities support increased 55.9 percent.  This compares to an increase of but 0.6 percent in assistantship funding by Canadian universities.  These increases in assistantship funding by US universities helps offset the continued decline in fellowship and scholarship aid available to doctoral students.

 

           

Tuition and Fees  (Table II-13)

 

            Tuition and fee data for the 2002 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 55 of the 56 schools with accredited-ALA master’s programs.  Rhode Island reported no data for the ALISE statistics in 2002.

 

            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. [12]   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. [13]   This is true for all nine private schools except Catholic, which does vary those rates.

 

            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 $24,509 [14] compared to $8,765 for in-state and $21,320 for out-of-state students at public universities.  The least expensive ALA-accredited master’s – LS programs at private universities are provided by Dominican ($18,620), Clark Atlanta ($19,018), and Long Island ($22,032).  The most expensive are offered by Drexel ($30,900) and Catholic ($30,274).  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 except in the case of Michigan where in‑state tuition and fees ($24,395) is very near the mean cost of a degree at a private university ($24,509).

 

            Three public US universities, Puerto Rico ($3,045), North CarolinaGreensboro ($3,100), and North Carolina Central ($3,128) were able to offer the ALA-accredited master’s – LS degree to their in-state students for under $4,000 in 2002.  One additional school, Texas Woman’s ($4,544) is able to offer the degree for under $5,000.  This compares with seven schools who were able to do so in 2001 and ten schools in 2000.  The most expensive program for in-state students is at Michigan ($24,395).  Pittsburgh ($15,564) and WisconsinMilwaukee ($15,055) are the next most expensive programs for in-state students.  However, their tuition and fees are but are roughly $9,000 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 2002:  San Jose ($10,303).  This compares with three schools that were able to do so in 2001.  Sixteen US public universities have out-of-state tuition and fees exceeding $20,000.  Of these by far the highest costs are at Michigan ($49,035), WisconsinMilwaukee ($47,378), and WisconsinMadison ($41,532).  All other schools have out-of-state tuition and fees for the degree under $33,000.  A total of ten schools, Michigan, WisconsinMadison, Pittsburgh, WisconsinMilwaukee, and Washington have the cost for degree for out-of-state students that exceed $26,000.  That figure is well above the mean cost of this degree for both out-of-state students at public universities ($21,320) and students at private universities ($24,509).  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, Pittsburgh, and Syracuse (Table II-13-c-2-IS) is identical with those for the ALA-accredited master’s–LS.  However, at Indiana tuition and fees for the master’s – IS are higher.  Indiana’s cost for in‑state IS master’s students of $8,738 is $1,248 higher than for the ALA-accredited master’s – LS ($7,490).  For out‑of‑state students IS master’s students the cost of $25,449 is $3,635 higher.

 

            Table II-13-c-5 provides 2002 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 $16,390.  This mean is an increase of $3,083 over the mean cost reported for 2001.  The least expensive US public university programs for in-state doctoral students are provided by Florida State ($4,278), Texas Woman’s ($5,422), and Emporia ($6,579).  In-state doctoral students encounter the highest cost to degree is at Michigan ($47,717) followed by Illinois ($31,856).  No other US public universities have a cost of tuition and fees that exceeds $27,000.  The mean cost to an out-of-state doctoral student at a US public university is $37,510.  This is an increase of $5,015 (15.4 percent) over the mean cost for 2001.  For out-of-state students, the doctoral programs with the lowest degree costs are at Texas Woman’s ($14,578), and Florida State ($16,102).  Four other schools (Emporia, Texas, Albany, and Rutgers) have doctoral programs with cost to degree under $20,000.  The most expensive program for out-of-state doctoral students is at Michigan ($72,357).  Three schools (Tennessee, Washington, and Illinois) have costs to degree in the low to mid $60,000 range).  The costs at these four schools are well above the mean for out-of-state doctoral students at US public universities ($35,771).

 

            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 2002 is $38,487, an increase of $2,608 over the mean for 2001.  The tuition and fees range from $24,840 (Simmons) to $54,108 (Syracuse).



[1]   54 of the 55 schools reporting offer the ALA-accredited master’s - LS.  Montréal offers only the Master’s - IS at the master’s degree level.  Rhode Island did not report.

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

[3]   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.

[4]   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

[5]   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.

[6]   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.

[7]   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.

[8]   Exchange Rate October 25, 2002:                              1 US Dollar (USD)             =   1.56540 Canadian Dollar (CAD)

                                                        1 Canadian Dollar =   0.63881 US Dollar

[9]   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."

[10]   Exchange Rate October 25, 2002:                             1 US Dollar (USD)             =   1.56540 Canadian Dollar (CAD)

                                                        1 Canadian Dollar =   0.63881 US Dollar

[11]   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.""

[12]   Exchange Rate October 25, 2002:                             1 US Dollar (USD)             =   1.56540 Canadian Dollar (CAD)

                                                        1 Canadian Dollar =   0.63881 US Dollar

[13]    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."

[14]   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 students.  For comparisons in the text the mean was calculated based on the tuition and fee data for in-state students at Catholic.