U.S. Department of Education 

NCES 2007-162 

The Path Through 

Graduate School: 

A Longitudinal 

Examination 10 Years 

After Bachelor’s Degree 

Postsecondary Education 

Descriptive Analysis Report 
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 

U.S. Department of Education 

Institute of Education Sciences 

NCES 2007-162 

The Path Through 

Graduate School: 

A Longitudinal 

Examination 10 Years 

After Bachelor’s Degree 

Postsecondary Education 


Descriptive Analysis Report 


February 2007 

Stephanie C. Nevill 

Xianglei Chen 

MPR Associates, Inc. 

C. Dennis Carroll 

Project Officer 

National Center for 

Education Statistics 
 

 

U.S. Department of Education 

Margaret Spellings 

Secretary 

Institute of Education Sciences 

Grover J. Whitehurst 

Director 

National Center for Education Statistics 

Mark Schneider 

Commissioner 

The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) is the primary federal entity for collecting, analyzing, 

and reporting data related to education in the United States and other nations. It fulfills a congressional 

mandate to collect, collate, analyze, and report full and complete statistics on the condition of education 

in the United States; conduct and publish reports and specialized analyses of the meaning and 

significance of such statistics; assist state and local education agencies in improving their statistical 

systems; and review and report on education activities in foreign countries. 

NCES activities are designed to address high-priority education data needs; provide consistent, reliable, 

complete, and accurate indicators of education status and trends; and report timely, useful, and highquality data to the U.S. Department of Education, the Congress, the states, other education policymakers, 

practitioners, data users, and the general public. Unless specifically noted, all information contained 

herein is in the public domain. 

We strive to make our products available in a variety of formats and in language that is appropriate to a 

variety of audiences. You, as our customer, are the best judge of our success in communicating 

information effectively. If you have any comments or suggestions about this or any other NCES product or 

report, we would like to hear from you. Please direct your comments to 

National Center for Education Statistics
 

Institute of Education Sciences 


U.S. Department of Education 


1990 K Street NW
 

Washington, DC 20006-5651 


February 2007 


The NCES World Wide Web Home Page address is http://nces.ed.gov. 


The NCES World Wide Web Electronic Catalog is http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch. 


Suggested Citation 

Nevill, S.C., and Chen, X. (2007). The Path Through Graduate School: A Longitudinal Examination 10 Years 

After Bachelor’s Degree (NCES 2007-162). U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC: National Center 

for Education Statistics. 

For ordering information on this report, write to 

U.S. Department of Education 


 ED Pubs
 

P.O. Box 1398 


Jessup, MD 20794-1398 


or call toll free 1-877-4ED-Pubs or order online at http://www.edpubs.org. 

Content Contact 

Aurora D’Amico 

(202) 502-7334 

aurora.d’amico@ed.gov 
 

 

 

Executive Summary
 

The benefits of graduate education are wide 

ranging. Individuals gain notable financial returns 

as well as personal and intellectual benefits. For 

society, well-educated and highly trained 

professionals contribute to economic and 

technological development (McMahon 1998). It is 

important, therefore, to understand the potential 

barriers that prevent access to and persistence in 

graduate education. 

This report addresses several important 

questions about graduate education: Who enrolls 

in graduate school? What degrees do they pursue? 

What are their completion rates? Which factors 

are related to students’ enrollment in and 

completion of graduate education? 

The report uses data from the 1992–93 

Baccalaureate and Beyond Study (B&B:93/03), a 

longitudinal study of students who earned a 

bachelor’s degree during the 1992–93 academic 

year. Base-year information on this cohort was 

collected as part of the 1992–93 National 

Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:93). 

Graduates were interviewed again in 1994, 1997, 

and 2003. The estimates in this report are based 

on results of surveys with approximately 9,000 

bachelor’s degree recipients, representing about 

1.2 million bachelor’s degree completers from 

1992 to 1993. This report focuses on 1992–93 

bachelor’s degree recipients’ persistence in and 

completion of graduate education within 10 years 

of earning a bachelor’s degree. All comparisons 

made in the text were tested using Student’s t 

statistic. All differences cited were statistically 

significant at the p < .05 level. The major findings 

are summarized below. 

Graduate Enrollment 

About 40 percent of 1992−93 bachelor’s 

degree recipients had enrolled in a graduate 

degree program by 2003 (figure A, table 1). For 

31 percent of graduates, their highest level of 

graduate enrollment by 2003 was a master’s 

degree program; for 5 percent, it was a firstprofessional degree program; and for 4 percent, it 

was a doctoral degree program. 

To get a more complete picture of the graduate 

enrollment experiences of 1992–93 bachelor’s 

degree recipients, this analysis grouped students 

who enrolled in more than one program separately 

from those who enrolled in a single program. 

About 30 percent of all bachelor’s degree 

recipients enrolled in a single graduate or firstprofessional degree program, and 10 percent of 

graduates enrolled in more than one program. 

Specifically, 5 percent enrolled in more than one 

master’s degree program; 2 percent enrolled in a 

master’s and doctoral degree program; and 3 

percent enrolled in a first-professional degree 

program and another graduate degree program 

(figure B, table 2).1 

1 Multiple programs were determined over the course of the 

10-year period. For example, a student may have initially 

enrolled in one master’s program early after completing a 

bachelor’s degree, left the program, and subsequently 

returned to enroll in another master’s program. Enrollment in 

a master’s and doctoral or a first-professional and other 

program should not suggest that the student first enrolled in a 

master’s degree program and then went on to pursue a 

doctoral or first-professional degree program. For example, a 

student may have enrolled in a doctoral degree program, but 

instead decided to finish with a master’s degree. The opposite 

could be true as well: a student may have enrolled in a 

master’s degree program and later decided to pursue a 

doctoral degree. The sequence of enrollment in multiple 

programs is not discussed in this report. 

iii 
—

Executive Summary 

Figure A. Percentage distribution of 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients’ highest graduate enrollment 

Percent 

40 

31 

7 9 

14 

5 4 

60 

0 

20 

40 

60 

80 

100 

No Any Any MBA MEd Other First- Doctoral 

 enrollment enrollment master’s master’s professional 

Highest graduate enrollment 

NOTE: Estimates include students from the 50 states, DC, and Puerto Rico. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. 


Standard error tables are available at http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp.
 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993/03 Baccalaureate and Beyond 


Longitudinal Study (B&B:93/03). 

Graduate enrollment was related to a number 

of demographic and academic characteristics, such 

as students’ race/ethnicity, age, undergraduate 

major and grade point average (GPA), and 

parents’ education. For example, Asian/Pacific 

Islander students were more likely to enroll in a 

first-professional degree program than students in 

other racial/ethnic groups (14 vs. 4 to 5 percent, 

table A). Younger students were more likely than 

older students (48 vs. 27 to 36 percent) to enroll in 

a graduate degree program. The same was true for 

single students; they were more likely than 

married students (43 vs. 32 percent) to enroll in a 

graduate degree program (table 3). Students who 

had majored in biological sciences as 

undergraduates were more likely to enroll in a 

graduate degree program than students who had 

majored in other subjects (67 vs. 25 to 55 percent, 

figure C). Academic characteristics that students 

displayed as undergraduates were also important. 

Higher achieving students (with GPAs of 3.5 or 

above) were more likely to enroll in a graduate 

program than lower achieving students (52 vs. 23 

to 43 percent, table A). 

Time to Enrollment 

On average, most 1992−93 bachelor’s degree 

recipients waited between 2 and 3 years to enroll 

for the first time in a graduate degree program 

(table 6). Students entering MBA programs 

typically waited longer (about 4 years) than 

students entering any other type of degree 

program, and doctoral degree students typically 

waited the least amount of time (under 2 years) 

(table B). Students who enrolled in multiple 

programs (both doctoral and master’s degree 

programs or first-professional and another 

graduate degree program) entered a graduate 

program within 1 year of completing a bachelor’s 

degree, on average. Students age 22 or younger 

iv 
—

Figure B.—

Executive Summary 

Figure B. Percentage of 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients who had enrolled in single and multiple 

graduate degree programs by 2003, by type of graduate degree program 

Percent 

Single enrollment Multiple 

enrollments 

5 

2 

6 

13 

6 

1 

0 

5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

30 

3 

3 

Doctoral 

First-professional
 

Other master’s
 

MEd
 

MBA
 

First-professional and other 

Master’s and doctoral 

More than one master’s 

NOTE: Estimates include students from the 50 states, DC, and Puerto Rico. Standard error tables are available at
 

http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp.
 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993/03 Baccalaureate and Beyond 


Longitudinal Study (B&B:93/03).
 

and those age 30 or older at the time they were 

awarded bachelor’s degrees waited less time to 

begin a graduate program than students in their 

mid-20s (table 6). Other factors such as students’ 

race/ethnicity, undergraduate major and GPA, and 

marital and parental status and parents’ education 

were related to the amount of time it took to enter 

graduate school (tables 6 and 7). 

Characteristics of Enrollment 

About one-half of 1992–93 bachelor’s degree 

recipients who enrolled in a graduate degree 

program attended exclusively full time (table 11). 

When students who had enrolled in a graduate 

degree program were asked whether they took a 

semester or term off during their studies other than 

for summer sessions, about one-half indicated that 

they had done so. Rates of full-time enrollment 

were higher among men than women (54 vs. 46 

percent), and among students whose highest 

graduate enrollment was a first-professional or 

doctoral degree (84 and 73 percent vs. 29 to 50 

percent). Students whose parents had graduate 

degrees were more likely to enroll full time than 

students whose parents had less education (58 vs. 

40 to 51 percent), and students who had higher 

GPAs (3.5 or above) as undergraduates were more 

likely to enroll full time than students with GPAs 

lower than 3.0 (55 vs. 41 to 44 percent). 

v 
—

Table A.—

Executive Summary 

Table A. Percentage distribution of 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients’ highest graduate enrollment, by 

race/ethnicity and age: 2003 

Student and institution 

characteristics 

No

enrollment 

Total 

 any 

enrollment 

Highest graduate enrollment 

FirstOther profesMBA MEd master’s sional Doctoral

 Total 60.0 40.0 7.3 8.8 14.4 5.0 4.5 

Race/ethnicity1

 White 

Black 

 Hispanic 

 Asian/Pacific Islander 

60.8 

54.6 

56.3 

58.5 

39.2 

45.4 

43.7 

41.5 

7.0 9.2 14.2 4.5 4.3

8.3 7.5 19.1 5.3 5.2

9.4 9.7 13.9 4.7 6.1

8.3 3.3 12.7 13.6 3.7 

Age at bachelor’s degree completion

 22 or younger 

23–24 

25–29 

 30 or older 

51.8 

67.9 

72.8 

63.8 

48.3 

32.1 

27.2 

36.2 

7.8 9.4 16.9 7.7 6.5

5.8 8.2 11.2 3.3 3.6

6.5 5.8 11.5 2.0 1.6

8.2 9.9 14.6 1.9 1.6 

Bachelor’s degree GPA

 Under 2.5 

2.5–2.99 

3.0–3.49 

 3.5 or above 

76.5 

64.4 

56.6 

47.8 

23.5 

35.6 

43.4 

52.2 

4.4 6.3 9.9 1.6 1.3

7.3 8.3 13.8 3.3 3.0

7.6 9.7 15.0 6.2 4.9

9.0 10.1 17.7 7.5 7.8 

1 Black includes African American, Pacific Islander includes Native Hawaiian, and Hispanic includes Latino. Included in the
 

totals but not shown separately are data for American Indian/Alaska Native respondents and those who identified themselves
 

with another race not shown. Race categories exclude Hispanic origin unless specified.
 

NOTE: Estimates include students from the 50 states, DC, and Puerto Rico. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.
 

Standard error tables are available at http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp.
 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993/03 Baccalaureate and Beyond 


Longitudinal Study (B&B:93/03).
 

Persistence and Attainment 

Among 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients 

who had enrolled in a graduate degree program 

between 1993 and 2003, some 62 percent had 

earned at least one graduate degree by 2003 (table 

C). Looking at the highest degree earned, 47 

percent had earned a master’s degree, 10 percent a 

first-professional degree, and 5 percent a doctoral 

degree. About 15 percent were still enrolled in a 

graduate degree program in 2003, and 23 percent 

were no longer enrolled and had not obtained a 

graduate degree. Degree attainment was related to 

the type of graduate degree program in which 

students had enrolled. First-professional students 

were more likely than master’s or doctoral 

students to have obtained a degree: 71 percent of 

graduate students who enrolled in a firstprofessional degree program had earned a firstprofessional degree by 2003, compared with 60 

percent of master’s students and 43 percent of 

doctoral students who earned degrees in their 

respective programs. 

vi 
—

Figure C.—

Executive Summary 

Figure C. Percentage of 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients who had enrolled in a graduate degree 

program by 2003, by undergraduate major and graduate degree program 

 Business and 

management 

 Education

 Engineering

 Health professions

 Public affairs/social 

services

 Biological sciences

 Mathematics and 

other sciences

 Social science

 History

 Humanities

 Psychology

 Other

34 

55 

41 

52 

48 

49 

67 

36 

36 

39 

50 

25 

2 

7 

5 

4 

6 

15 

22 

1 

2 

5 

3 

0 

5 

5 

5 

8 

10 

5 

23 

2 

4 

2 

2 

2 

27 

42 

31 

39 

33 

29 

22 

32 

32 

45 

22 

31 

Master’s 

First-professional 

Doctoral 

Any enrollment 

0 20 40 60 80 100

Percent 

NOTE: Estimates include students from the 50 states, DC, and Puerto Rico. Standard error tables are available at
 

http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp.
 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993/03 Baccalaureate and Beyond 


Longitudinal Study (B&B:93/03).
 

vii 
—

Table C.—

Table C.—

—

Table B.—

Table B.—

Executive Summary 

Table B.	 Among 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients who had enrolled in a graduate degree program by 

2003, percentage distribution of time and average time between bachelor’s degree receipt and first 

graduate enrollment, by type of graduate enrollment and degree program 

Percentage distribution Average 

1 year More than More than More than number of 

Graduate degree program or less 1 to 3 years 3 to 5 years 5 years years 

All graduate enrollment 35.9 28.3 16.2 19.5 2.7

 Single enrollment

 MBA 16.1 21.3 22.8 39.8 4.2

 MEd or post-master’s certificate 

 in education 23.9 28.9 21.1 26.2 3.4

 Other master’s 30.6 30.1 16.7 22.5 2.9

 First-professional 44.3 27.5 13.2 15.0 2.2

 Doctoral 54.0 22.1 11.8 12.1 1.8

 Multiple enrollment

 More than one master’s 48.7 34.2 15.2 2.0 1.5

 Master’s and doctoral 67.9 21.4 7.2 3.5 1.1

 First-professional and other 63.3 32.0 3.8 1.0 0.9 

NOTE: Estimates include students from the 50 states, DC, and Puerto Rico. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. 


Standard error tables are available at http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp.
 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993/03 Baccalaureate and Beyond 


Longitudinal Study (B&B:93/03).
 

Table C.	 Among 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients who had enrolled in a graduate degree program by 

2003, percentage distribution of attainment and enrollment status in 2003, by highest graduate 

enrollment 

Attained Enrolled No 

Highest graduate 

enrollment Total Master’s1 

Firstprofessional Doctoral Total Master’s Firstprofessional Doctoral degree, 

no longer 

enrolled

 Total	 61.9 47.1 10.0 4.8 14.7 10.5 1.3 2.9 23.4 

Master’s 60.1 60.1 † † 13.4 13.4 † † 26.6 

First-professional2 74.8 3.4 71.4 † 10.7 1.6 9.0 † 14.5 

Doctoral2 60.2 9.3 7.5 43.4 28.4 0.9 1.7 25.9 11.4 

† Not applicable.
 

1

 Students who have attained a master’s degree are identified as having a master’s degree if no higher degree was attained and
 

the student was not enrolled in a doctoral or first-professional degree program in 2003.
 

2

 Includes students who have earned a master’s degree.
 

NOTE: Estimates include students from the 50 states, DC, and Puerto Rico. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. 


Standard error tables are available at http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp.
 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993/03 Baccalaureate and Beyond 


Longitudinal Study (B&B:93/03).
 

viii 
—

Figure D.—

Figure D.—

Executive Summary 

Rates of graduate persistence and degree 

attainment were related to a number of 

demographic characteristics, such as students’ 

gender, race/ethnicity, and age and parents’ 

education. Specifically, women were more likely 

than men to have earned a master’s degree (49 vs. 

44 percent), while men were more likely than 

women to have earned a first-professional (13 vs. 

8 percent) or a doctoral degree (7 vs. 3 percent; 

table 14). The likelihood of earning a graduate 

degree was related to parents’ highest education 

level as well, with the rate increasing from 53 

percent among those whose parents had less than a 

high school education to 67 percent among those 

whose parents had a graduate degree. 

There was a strong relationship between a 

student’s family responsibilities and graduate 

persistence and attainment. Students who were 

single or had no children before graduate 

enrollment were more likely to have earned a 

graduate degree, particularly a first-professional or 

doctoral degree, while students who were already 

married or had children were more likely to be 

still enrolled (table 15). Parenthood seemed to 

have a stronger negative effect for women than for 

men. For example, among men, having a child 

before graduate enrollment was negatively related 

only to their likelihood of attaining a firstprofessional degree; while it does appear that men 

having no children were more likely to attain a 

graduate degree, no statistical difference was 

detected (figure D). Among women, having a 

Figure D.	 Among 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients who had enrolled in a graduate degree program 

by 2003, percentage who had attained a graduate degree by 2003, by gender and parental status 

1 year before graduate enrollment 

Percent

100 

80 

65 63 

56 60 

46 

40
 

20
 14 

9 7	 7 

2 4 4 1 

0 

Men Women Men Women Men Women 

Any attainment First-professional Doctoral 

 No children One or more children 

NOTE: Estimates include students from the 50 states, DC, and Puerto Rico. Standard error tables are available at
 

http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp.
 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993/03 Baccalaureate and Beyond 


Longitudinal Study (B&B:93/03).
 

ix 
—

Figure E.—

Figure E.—

Executive Summary 

child was negatively related to overall graduate Time to Graduate Degree 

degree attainment, especially of a firstprofessional and doctoral degree. 

Graduates’ degree attainment did not 

necessarily align with students’ educational 

expectations at the time they completed a 

bachelor’s degree in 1992–93. This pattern was 

especially evident among those with doctoral 

degree aspirations: 11 percent of graduate students 

who expected to earn a doctoral degree had done 

so by 2003, while 41 percent had earned a 

terminal master’s degree (table 16). About 46 

percent of graduate students with firstprofessional degree expectations had earned a 

first-professional degree, and 57 percent of those 

with master’s degree expectations had earned a 

master’s degree. 

Among students who completed a graduate 

degree within the 10-year study period, master’s 

degree students took an average of 3 years to 

complete a degree, first-professional students took 

about 4 years, and doctoral students took about 6 

years (figure 2 and figure E). The time it took 

students to complete a graduate degree was related 

to several student characteristics. For example, 

Hispanic students took longer than Asian/Pacific 

Islander, Black, and White students to finish a 

master’s degree (table 18a). Among students who 

had completed a master’s degree, younger 

students (age 22 or younger) took less time to 

complete a degree than older students (age 30 or 

older). Not surprisingly, master’s and firstprofessional degree recipients who interrupted 

Figure E.	 Among 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients who had earned a graduate degree by 2003, 

average number of years between first graduate enrollment and attainment of highest 

graduate degree, by highest graduate degree earned 

Number of years 

Master’s First-professional Doctoral 

Highest graduate degree earned 

3 

4 

6 

0 

2 

4 

6 

8 

10 

NOTE: Estimates include students from the 50 states, DC, and Puerto Rico. Standard error tables are available at
 

http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp.
 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993/03 Baccalaureate and Beyond 


Longitudinal Study (B&B:93/03).
 

x 
 

Executive Summary 

their enrollment took more time to complete a 

degree than those who did not take a break 

between degrees (tables 18c and 19c). Because so 

few students had earned a doctoral degree by 2003 

(only 5 percent of all graduate students; see table 

12), comparisons between many subgroups of 

doctoral degree recipients were not possible due to 

small sample sizes. 

Factors Related to Graduate 

Enrollment, Persistence, and 

Attainment 

Three multivariate commonality analyses were 

performed to gain a better understanding of how 

graduate enrollment, persistence, and attainment 

were related to various demographic and academic 

characteristics.2 The first analysis focuses on 

factors related to students’ likelihood of enrolling 

in a graduate degree program after receiving a 

bachelor’s degree. After controlling for other 

factors, several demographic and academic 

characteristics maintained a significant 

relationship with enrollment in graduate school. 

For example, enrollment rates among students age 

22 or younger were higher than those among 

students ages 23–29 (table 21). Students with 

GPAs of 3.5 or above were more likely to enroll 

than those with lower GPAs. 

The second analysis examines factors related to 

the likelihood of students in a graduate degree 

program completing a degree by 2003. After 

controlling for all other variables, several 

2 A commonality analysis is an approach in which a multiple 

linear regression is used to look at the relationship between an 

independent variable and an outcome variable while adjusting 

for the common variation among a group of independent 

variables. For more information, see Technical Notes and 

Methodology in appendix B. 

enrollment characteristics, such as entry time, 

enrollment status, and graduate degree program, 

retained a significant relationship with graduate 

degree completion. Rates of completion were 

higher among students who entered graduate 

school immediately after earning a bachelor’s 

degree than among those who waited more than 5 

years to enroll (table 22). Students who enrolled 

full time, enrolled continuously, and enrolled in 

multiple programs were more likely than their 

counterparts to complete a graduate degree. In 

addition, students who had ever received grants, 

employer assistance, or a tuition waiver to help 

pay for their graduate education also had a higher 

completion rate than those who had never received 

any of these types of financial aid. 

The third analysis broadens the definition of 

degree completion to include students who 

completed a graduate degree by 2003 or were still 

enrolled in a graduate program as of 2003. 

Enrollment characteristics and financial aid 

continued to play an important role in students’ 

persistence: students who entered a graduate 

program immediately after earning a bachelor’s 

degree, attended full time and did not take time 

off, enrolled in multiple programs, and had 

received grants, employer assistance, or a tuition 

waiver had higher persistence rates than their 

counterparts who waited more than 5 years to 

enroll, attended part time, took time off, enrolled 

in a single degree program, and had never 

received any grants, employer assistance, or a 

tuition waiver (table 22). 

xi 
Foreword 


This report uses data collected from the 1993/03 Baccalaureate and Beyond Longitudinal 

Study (B&B:93/03) over a 10-year period to examine characteristics related to graduate degree 

enrollment, persistence, and completion among 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients. B&B 

includes students who were identified in the 1992–93 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study 

(NPSAS:93) as having earned a bachelor’s degree during the 1992–93 academic year. NPSAS is 

based on a nationally representative sample of students enrolled in postsecondary education and 

provides detailed information on how students and their families pay for college, including the 

types and amounts of financial aid received. In the B&B Study, the 1992–93 bachelor’s degree 

recipients were interviewed in 1994 (B&B:93/94), 1997 (B&B:93/97), and 2003 (B&B:93/03) to 

learn about their education and employment experiences after graduation. 

The estimates presented in this report were produced using the B&B:93/03 Data Analysis 

System (DAS). The DAS is a computer application that allows users to specify and generate their 

own tables and produces the design-adjusted standard errors necessary for testing the statistical 

significance of differences between numbers shown in the tables. It is available for public use on 

the NCES website at http://nces.ed.gov/das. Appendix B of this report contains additional 

information on the DAS. 

xii 
Acknowledgments 


The authors wish to acknowledge important contributions to this report by many 

individuals. At MPR Associates, Ellen Bradburn and Laura Horn provided guidance throughout 

the process. Donna Fowler and Andrea Livingston edited the report, Annabelle Yang formatted 

the tables and prepared the figures, and Barbara Kridl managed the production process from 

beginning to end. 

At NCES, Dennis Carroll oversaw the development of the report and shepherded it through 

the review process. Paula Knepper and Marilyn Seastrom provided thorough technical, 

methodological, and substantive reviews. We are grateful for thoughtful comments from a 

number of other reviewers, including Kenneth Redd (National Association of Student Financial 

Aid Administrators), Joan Burrelli (National Science Foundation), Larry Suter (National Science 

Foundation), Jacqueline King (Center for Policy Analysis), Carol Fuller (National Association of 

Independent Colleges and Universities), Catherine Millett (Educational Testing Service), Pat 

Smith (American Association of State Colleges and Universities), and Clifford Adelman (Office 

of Vocational and Adult Education). Duc-Le To of the Institute of Education Sciences also 

provided thoughtful comments and gathered and synthesized helpful comments from two 

anonymous external reviewers. 

xiii 
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 

Contents
 

Page 


Executive Summary ................................................................................................................. iii
 

Foreword 

List of Figures............................................................................................................................ xxi
 

.................................................................................................................................... xii
 

Acknowledgments...................................................................................................................... xiii
 

List of Tables ............................................................................................................................. xvii
 

Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 1 


Data ....................................................................................................................................... 5 


Organization of the Report.................................................................................................... 6
 

Characteristics Related to Graduate Degree Enrollment ..................................................... 7 


Demographic Characteristics ................................................................................................ 7 


Undergraduate Education Characteristics ............................................................................. 10 


Enrollment in Multiple Graduate Degree Programs.............................................................. 11 


Marital and Parental Status ................................................................................................... 14 


Educational Expectations ...................................................................................................... 17 


Timing of Entry Into Graduate School.................................................................................. 18
 

Sources of Financial Aid and Borrowing for Graduate School............................................. 23 


Characteristics of Enrollment .................................................................................................. 29 


Enrollment Intensity and Continuity of Enrollment.............................................................. 29 


Graduate Persistence and Attainment .................................................................................... 33 


Demographic Characteristics ................................................................................................ 34 


Marital and Parental Status ................................................................................................... 37 


Educational Expectations ...................................................................................................... 37 


Enrollment Characteristics .................................................................................................... 40 


Reasons for Leaving.............................................................................................................. 40 


Time to Graduate Degree ......................................................................................................... 43 


Master’s Degree .................................................................................................................... 44 


First-Professional Degree ...................................................................................................... 47 


Doctoral Degree .................................................................................................................... 49 


xv 
Contents 

Page 


Factors Related to Graduate Enrollment, Persistence, and Attainment.............................. 55 


Graduate Enrollment ............................................................................................................. 56 


Completion of Graduate Degrees.......................................................................................... 58 


Persistence............................................................................................................................. 61 


Summary and Conclusions....................................................................................................... 63
 

References .................................................................................................................................. 65 


Appendix A—Glossary ............................................................................................................. A-1
 

Appendix B—Technical Notes and Methodology .................................................................. B-1
 

xvi
 
List of Tables 


Table	 Page 

Executive Summary 

A 	 Percentage distribution of 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients’ highest graduate 

enrollment, by race/ethnicity and age: 2003.................................................................... vi 

B	 Among 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients who had enrolled in a graduate program 

by 2003, percentage distribution of time and average time between bachelor’s degree 

receipt and first graduate enrollment, by type of graduate enrollment and degree 

program ........................................................................................................................... viii 

C 	 Among 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients who had enrolled in a graduate degree 

program by 2003, percentage distribution of attainment and enrollment status in 2003, 

by highest graduate enrollment ....................................................................................... viii 

Text 

1 	 Percentage distribution of 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients’ highest graduate 

enrollment, by student and institution characteristics: 2003 ........................................... 8 

2 	 Percentage distribution of 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients’ graduate enrollment, 

by student and institution characteristics: 2003 .............................................................. 12 

3 	 Percentage distribution of 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients’ graduate enrollment, 

by gender and marital and parental status at bachelor’s degree completion and in 

1997................................................................................................................................. 15 

4 	 Percentage distribution of 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients’ graduate enrollment, 

by educational expectations at bachelor’s degree completion......................................... 17 

5 	 Percentage distribution of 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients’ graduate enrollment, 

by gender, change in educational expectations, and educational expectations in 1997 .. 19 

6 	 Among 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients who had enrolled in a graduate program 

by 2003, average time and percentage distribution of time between bachelor’s degree 

receipt and first graduate enrollment, by student and institution characteristics............. 20 

xvii 
List of Tables 

Table	 Page 

7 	 Among 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients who had enrolled in a graduate program 

by 2003, average time and percentage distribution of time between bachelor’s degree 

receipt and first graduate enrollment, by gender and marital and parental status 1 year 

before graduate enrollment.............................................................................................. 22 

8 	 Among 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients who had enrolled in a graduate program 

by 2003, average time and percentage distribution of time between bachelor’s degree 

receipt and first graduate enrollment, by type of graduate enrollment and degree 

program ........................................................................................................................... 23 

9 	 Percentage of graduate and first-professional students who received various types of 

financial aid, by student and institution characteristics: 2003–04................................... 25 

10 	 Among 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients with graduate degree enrollment, 

percentage who borrowed for graduate education and, among borrowers, average 

amount borrowed for graduate education, by student and institutional characteristics: 

2003................................................................................................................................. 27 

11 	 Among 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients who had enrolled in a graduate program 

by 2003, percentage distribution of enrollment intensity while enrolled and percentage 

taking time off, by student and institution characteristics............................................... 30 

12 	 Among 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients who had enrolled in a graduate degree 

program by 2003, percentage distribution of attainment and enrollment status in 2003, 

by highest graduate enrollment ....................................................................................... 34 

13 	 Percentage distribution of major field of study for the highest graduate degree earned 

by 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients ........................................................................ 35 

14 	 Among 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients who had enrolled in a graduate degree 

program by 2003, percentage distribution of attainment and enrollment status in 2003, 

by selected student characteristics................................................................................... 36 

15 	 Among 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients who enrolled in a graduate degree 

program by 2003, percentage distribution of attainment and enrollment status in 2003, 

by gender and marital and parental status 1 year before graduate enrollment ................ 38 

16 	 Among 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients who had enrolled in a graduate degree 

program by 2003, percentage distribution of attainment and enrollment status in 2003, 

by educational expectations at bachelor’s degree completion......................................... 39 

17 	 Among 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients who had enrolled in a graduate degree 

program by 2003, percentage distribution of attainment and enrollment status in 2003, 

by graduate enrollment characteristics ............................................................................ 41 

xviii 
List of Tables 

Table	 Page 

18a 	 Among 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients who had earned a master’s degree by 

2003, average number of years and percentage distribution of time from first graduate 

enrollment to completion of master’s degree, by selected student characteristics.......... 45 

18b 	 Among 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients who had earned a master’s degree by 

2003, average number of years and percentage distribution of time from first graduate 

enrollment to completion of master’s degree, by gender and marital and parental 

status 1 year before graduate enrollment......................................................................... 46 

18c 	 Among 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients who had earned a master’s degree by 

2003, average number of years and percentage distribution of time from first graduate 

enrollment to completion of master’s degree, by graduate enrollment characteristics ... 47 

19a 	 Among 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients who had earned a first-professional 

degree by 2003, average number of years and percentage distribution of time from 

first graduate enrollment to completion of first-professional degree, by selected 

student characteristics ..................................................................................................... 48 

19b 	 Among 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients who had earned a first-professional 

degree by 2003, average number of years and percentage distribution of time from 

first graduate enrollment to completion of first-professional degree, by gender and 

marital and parental status 1 year before graduate enrollment........................................ 50 

19c 	 Among 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients who had earned a first-professional 

degree by 2003, average number of years and percentage distribution of time from 

first graduate enrollment to completion of first-professional degree, by graduate 

enrollment characteristics................................................................................................ 51 

20a 	 Among 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients who had earned a doctoral degree by 

2003, average number of years and percentage distribution of time from first graduate 

enrollment to completion of doctoral degree, by selected student characteristics .......... 52 

20b 	 Among 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients who had earned a doctoral degree by 

2003, average number of years and percentage distribution of time from first graduate 

enrollment to completion of doctoral degree, by gender and marital and parental status 

1 year before graduate enrollment................................................................................... 53 

20c 	 Among 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients who had earned a doctoral degree by 

2003, average number of years and percentage distribution of time from first graduate 

enrollment to completion of doctoral degree, by graduate enrollment characteristics.... 54 

21 	 Among 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients, percentage who had enrolled in a 

graduate or first-professional degree program by 2003 and least squares coefficients 

and standard errors, by selected student characteristics .................................................. 57 

xix 
List of Tables 

Table	 Page 

22 	 Among 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients who had enrolled in a graduate degree 

program by 2003, percentage who had attained a graduate degree by 2003 and 

percentage who had attained a graduate degree or were still enrolled in a graduate 

program by 2003 and least squares coefficients and standard errors, by selected 

student characteristics ..................................................................................................... 59 

Appendix B 

B-1 	 Standard errors for table 1: Percentage distribution of 1992–93 bachelor’s degree 

recipients’ highest graduate enrollment, by student and institution characteristics: 

2003................................................................................................................................. B-6 

xx 
 

List of Figures 


Figure Page 

Executive Summary 

A 	 Percentage distribution of 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients’ highest graduate 

enrollment........................................................................................................................ iv 

B Percentage of 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients who had enrolled in single and 

multiple graduate degree programs by 2003, by type of graduate degree program......... v 

C Percentage of 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients who had enrolled in a graduate 

degree program by 2003, by undergraduate major and graduate degree program .......... vii 

D Among 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients who had enrolled in a graduate degree 

program by 2003, percentage who had attained a graduate degree by 2003, by gender 

and parental status 1 year before graduate enrollment .................................................... ix 

E Among 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients who had earned a graduate degree by 

2003, average number of years between first graduate enrollment and attainment of 

highest graduate degree, by highest graduate degree earned........................................... x 

Text 

1 	 Among 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients who enrolled in a graduate degree 

program between 1997 and 2003, percentage who left for various reasons.................... 42 

2 	 Among 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients who had earned a graduate degree by 

2003, average number of years between first graduate enrollment and attainment of 

highest graduate degree, by highest graduate degree earned........................................... 43 

xxi 
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 

 

 

Introduction 


Benefits of access to graduate education are wide-ranging. For the individual, there are 

notable financial returns as well as personal and intellectual benefits. For society as a whole, 

well-educated and highly trained professionals contribute to economic and technological 

development. It is important therefore, to understand the potential barriers that prevent access to 

and persistence in graduate education. The variety of choices that students face after earning a 

bachelor’s degree may affect their future educational and career paths. For example, decisions 

about employment, marriage, and whether to have children may be related to graduates’ 

likelihood of enrolling in graduate school. The financial burden of undergraduate debts may also 

carry some weight in whether bachelor’s degree recipients choose to pursue a graduate education 

or enter the workforce. Once students enroll in a graduate degree program, completion of that 

program is not guaranteed. The same factors listed above as well as other variables are 

investigated in this report as they relate to the likelihood of graduate enrollment and degree 

completion. 

This report uses data from the Baccalaureate and Beyond Longitudinal Study (B&B), which 

includes students who had completed or expected to complete a bachelor’s degree between July 

1992 and June 1993. These graduates were interviewed in 1993, then located and surveyed again 

in 1994 and 1997. The final follow-up took place in 2003, 10 years after the cohort had 

completed a bachelor’s degree. This report provides a descriptive analysis of this cohort’s 

entrance into graduate school and persistence in and completion of a graduate degree program 10 

years after bachelor’s degree completion.1 

An examination by demographic characteristics, such as gender and race/ethnicity, of 

enrollment in graduate school is addressed in this report. It is clear that women represent an 

increasing percentage of graduate degree completers than they did just 25 years ago (U.S. 

Department of Education 2006; Bowen and Rudenstine 1992). In 2003–04, women earned 59 

percent of all master’s degrees and 48 percent of all doctoral degrees. Figures from 1979–80 

indicate that women earned 49 percent of all master’s degrees and 30 percent of all doctoral 

degrees (U.S. Department of Education 2006). 

1 Graduate degree can refer to a master’s, doctoral, and/or a first-professional degree. 

1 

Introduction 

Using data from the B&B:93/97 follow-up, Perna (2004) showed that a larger proportion of 

women than men enrolled in programs at the master’s degree level and that a smaller proportion 

enrolled in doctoral (2 vs. 4 percent) and first-professional degree programs (5 vs. 10 percent). 

After controlling for several financial, academic, and demographic variables using multinomial 

logit analyses (undergraduate education debt, dependency status and income, cumulative 

undergraduate grade point average (GPA), SAT/ACT quartile, parents’ educational attainment, 

primary language spoken at home, and the value students place on financial success and family 

ties), differences in men and women’s enrollment patterns disappeared at the master’s level but 

remained at the first-professional and doctoral level. 

Researchers have reported differences in graduate enrollment patterns among students 

across racial/ethnic groups. Looking specifically at the 1993/97 Baccalaureate and Beyond 

Longitudinal Study (B&B:93/97) follow-up, Perna (2004) reported that a higher proportion of 

Asian/Pacific Islander students enrolled in a first-professional degree program (7 percent) than 

students in any other racial/ethnic group by 1997. Even after controlling for the same variables 

mentioned above, Asian/Pacific Islander students were more likely to enroll in a firstprofessional degree program than White students. Perna also reported that an equal proportion of 

Black and White students enrolled in master’s and first-professional degree programs. After 

controlling for several variables (major field of study, marital status, parental status, amount of 

undergraduate debt, income and dependency status in 1992–93, cumulative undergraduate gradepoint average, SAT/ACT quartile, parents’ highest education, whether English was spoken in the 

home, a derived factor measuring success in the labor market, a derived factor measuring the 

importance of doing intellectually stimulating work, and parental involvement), however, the 

odds of Black students enrolling in a master’s or first-professional degree program to not 

enrolling is higher than it is for White students. 

Age may also be a factor when students are considering enrolling in graduate school. Older 

students may feel pressure to begin a family and career. Clune, Nuñez, and Choy (2001) reported 

that age was an important factor in graduate enrollment. Students who were age 22 or younger 

when they earned their bachelor’s degree were more likely than older students to enroll in a 

graduate degree program during the 4 years following graduation (Clune, Nuñez, and Choy 2001; 

Bradburn et al. 2003). 

Family responsibilities, such as those associated with being married or having children, 

may impose limitations on graduates’ time and their likelihood of applying to, enrolling in, and 

completing a graduate degree program. Clune, Nuñez, and Choy (2001) found that marriage and 

parenthood were related more to graduate enrollment and attainment for women than for men. 

Among women, rates of enrollment in and completion of a first-professional or doctoral degree 

2 

 Introduction 

program were higher among those who were single before earning a bachelor’s degree than 

among those who were married. Similar patterns were reported for women who were parents. 

Among men, those who were married before earning a bachelor’s degree had lower rates of 

enrollment in a first-professional or doctoral degree program than single men. Although marriage 

and parenthood were not generally related to men’s graduate degree attainment, Price (2005) 

reported a positive relationship between the time of graduate enrollment and degree completion 

among married men. Men who were married at the time they began graduate school were on 

average 4 percent more likely to graduate than their unmarried counterparts, and they completed 

their degree about 4 months faster than unmarried men. Married women were not any more likely 

to graduate than single women, but they did complete their degree about 2.5 months sooner. 

Factors related to a student’s undergraduate education, such as undergraduate major, grade 

point average, and selectivity of the undergraduate institution may contribute to a student’s 

likelihood of enrolling in and success in graduate school. Graduates with bachelor’s degrees in 

the life, social, and physical sciences were more likely to enroll in a graduate degree program 

before entering the labor force than graduates with degrees in engineering or computer science 

(Tsapogas and Cahalan 1996). This finding is consistent with the one reported by Millett (2003) 

that undergraduates who had majored in specific disciplines as opposed to applied fields were 

twice as likely to apply to graduate or first-professional school. 

Ethington and Smart (1986) reported that the selectivity of the undergraduate institution 

attended had a positive effect on graduate enrollment for men: those men who had attended more 

selective institutions were more likely than their peers in less selective institutions to enroll in 

graduate school. Academic achievement (average undergraduate GPAs) and social integration 

(involvement with peers and faculty) at the undergraduate institution were reported to be strong 

predictors of entry into a graduate program regardless of gender (Ethington and Smart 1986; 

Millett 2003; Choy and Geis 1997; Hearn 1987). High undergraduate GPAs for men, however, 

were a stronger predictor for them, whereas high levels of social integration were a stronger 

predictor for women (Ethington and Smart 1986). 

The price of earning a bachelor’s degree is continually rising, and as a consequence 

students are borrowing more money to complete their undergraduate education (The College 

Board 2003). Several researchers have examined the role of debt in the transition to graduate 

school. Among 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients 1 year after graduation, Choy and Geis 

(1997) found that graduates without undergraduate education loans were slightly more likely to 

be enrolled than those with loans, after controlling for age at bachelor’s degree attainment, GPA, 

and bachelor’s degree major. Results from the 1997 Baccalaureate and Beyond (B&B:93/97) 

follow-up suggest that the percentage of 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients who applied for 

3 

 

Introduction 

admission to a doctoral or first-professional degree program was slightly less among those who 

borrowed than among those who did not borrow (38 vs. 42 percent) (McCormick et al. 1999). 

Millett (2003) confirmed these findings after controlling for several variables. Students with debt 

ranging between $10,000 and $15,000 were one and a half times less likely to apply to a graduate 

degree program than students with no debt.2 When looking at enrollment in, not just admittance 

to, graduate school, Choy (2000) and Millett (2003) found that the effect of undergraduate 

borrowing diminished when examining data from up to 4 years later. That is, there was no longer 

a measurable difference between borrowers and nonborrowers in the percentage who enrolled in 

a graduate degree program. Weiler (1991) also showed that indebtedness did not have an effect 

on entry into graduate school. 

Perhaps one of the biggest choices that students are faced with after earning a bachelor’s 

degree is the choice between entering the workforce or pursuing a graduate education. Results 

from the 1994 Baccalaureate and Beyond follow-up showed that 88 percent of students entered 

the work force and were not attending graduate school (Heller 2001). Among those working in 

1994, 63 percent were working in a professional field and 32 percent were working in a clerical 

or other technical position. By 1997, the percentage of graduates working in professional 

occupations increased to 79 percent (Heller 2001). 

The cost of pursuing a graduate degree can be estimated by the direct cost of tuition and 

fees, less any financial aid, and the estimated wages that students lose by not entering the 

workforce immediately after college graduation. Weiler (1991), using data from the third followup of the High School and Beyond Longitudinal Study of 1980 Seniors (HS&B-Sr:80/86), 

investigated the relationship between estimated forgone wages, based on bachelor’s degree 

major, and graduate degree enrollment. Estimated forgone wages have a negative effect on 

enrollment in a master’s degree program, but no effect on enrollment in a doctoral or firstprofessional degree program. 

Andrieu and St. John (1993) did a similar type of study although they investigated the 

relationship between expected earnings and graduate persistence for students attending public 

universities. In their study, graduate students enrolled in fields in which expected earnings were 

low were less likely to stay enrolled than students enrolled in fields in which expected earnings 

were high. 

2 Millett’s work examined the experiences of applying to and enrolling in graduate school for students who indicated they 

wanted to earn a doctoral degree. 

4 

 Introduction 

Data 

This report uses data collected over a 10-year period from the 1993/03 Baccalaureate and 

Beyond Longitudinal Study (B&B:93/03) to examine characteristics related to graduate degree 

enrollment, persistence, and completion among 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients. Base-year 

information on this cohort was collected as part of the 1992–93 National Postsecondary Student 

Aid Study (NPSAS:93). Graduates were interviewed again in 1994, 1997, and 2003. 

NPSAS:93 included about 1,100 institutions and was based on a nationally representative 

sample of all students enrolled in postsecondary education institutions, including undergraduate, 

graduate, and first-professional students. One of a series of similar studies conducted every 4 to 5 

years since 1987, NPSAS:93 includes a sample from more than 16 million undergraduates who 

were enrolled at some time between July 1, 1992 and June 30, 1993. The survey frames for 

NPSAS were built from the 1990–91 “Institutional Characteristics Survey” of the Integrated 

Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS-IC), and lists of students were obtained from each 

participating institution. The estimates presented in this report are based on the results of 

interviews with approximately 9,000 bachelor’s degree recipients each year (1994, 1997, and 

2003) from a sampling frame of about 12,500; these bachelor’s degree recipients represent the 

approximately 1.2 million bachelor’s degree recipients in the United States (U.S. Department of 

Education 2004). Excluded from the final sample were 760 students who, during the B&B 

interview or from transcripts, were determined not to have earned a bachelor’s degree during the 

1992–93 academic year (see appendix B for more detail). The weighted overall response rate was 

74 percent, reflecting an institution response rate (in 1992) of 88 percent and a student response 

rate (in 2003) of 83 percent. The data presented in this report cover the 50 states, District of 

Columbia (DC), and Puerto Rico. 

All comparisons made in the text were tested using Student’s t statistic. All differences 

cited were statistically significant at the .05 level. Appendix B provides information about the 

formula used and more detail on significance levels. Standard errors for all estimates are 

available at http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp. 

The sample used for this analysis consists of the NPSAS:93 respondents who earned a 

bachelor’s degree in 1992–93 and participated in all three B&B interviews: 1994, 1997, and 

2003. The report focused on highest degree program enrolled in, and information that was 

missing in 1994 or 1997 was updated in 2003 when possible. A panel weight was created based 

on respondents to all three surveys. Consequently, some estimates presented here may differ 

slightly from previously published data. 

5 

Introduction 

Organization of the Report 

This report contains five additional sections. The first of these describes characteristics 

related to graduate enrollment, the type of programs in which students enrolled, the extent to 

which 1992–93 graduates had enrolled in a graduate program, and the average amount of time it 

took them to enroll in a graduate program after completing a bachelor’s degree. The second 

examines the enrollment characteristics of those who entered a graduate degree program. The 

third is a discussion of graduate persistence and attainment. The fourth discusses the average 

time taken to complete a graduate degree. The final section explores important characteristics 

related to students’ likelihood of enrolling in and completing a graduate degree program while 

controlling for other factors. For the sake of convenience graduate and first-professional degree 

programs are referred to as graduate degrees in the body of the report. Graduate refers to 

education at the master’s, doctoral, and first-professional degree levels. 

6 

 

Characteristics Related to Graduate Degree Enrollment 


Among the 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients,3 29 percent had enrolled in a master’s, 

doctoral, or first-professional degree program within 4 years of completing college, with 

enrollment the highest during the first year after receiving a bachelor’s degree (Clune, Nuñez, 

and Choy 2001). Of those who had enrolled, about three-fourths (76 percent) were in a master’s 

degree program, 14 percent in a first-professional degree program, and 10 percent in a doctoral 

degree program (McCormick et al. 1999). In fact, by 1997, 15 percent had attained a master’s, 

doctoral, or first-professional degree (Clune, Nuñez, and Choy 2001). 

By 2003, a decade after completing a bachelor’s degree, 40 percent of 1992–93 graduates 

had enrolled in a graduate degree program (table 1). Table 1 looks at the highest graduate 

enrollment among 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients. Master’s degree programs were the 

most common, with 31 percent of bachelor’s degree recipients enrolled in them, compared with 5 

percent in first-professional degree programs and 4 percent in doctoral degree programs.4 

Looking specifically at graduates who enrolled in a master’s degree program, 7 percent enrolled 

in an MBA program (Master of Business Administration), 9 percent enrolled in an MEd program 

(Master of Education), and 14 percent enrolled in another type of master’s degree program. This 

section describes the characteristics related to graduate enrollment, the type of programs in which 

the 1992–93 graduates enrolled, and the extent to which they had enrolled in a graduate degree 

program. 

Demographic Characteristics 

It is important to consider the demographic characteristics related to graduate enrollment. 

Differences in graduate enrollment by race, gender, and age are addressed in this section. 

Graduate enrollment was related to a number of demographic characteristics, such as graduates’ 

gender, race/ethnicity, and age and parents’ education. Although gender differences were not 

apparent in graduate enrollment as a whole, there was a relationship between gender and 

3 Bachelor’s degree recipients or graduates refer to people who responded to this study. Students refer to bachelor’s degree 

recipients who enrolled in a graduate or first-professional degree program. Graduate degree can refer to a master’s, doctoral, 

and/or a first-professional degree. 

4 In this report first-professional degree programs include the following degree programs: chiropractic, dentistry, law, medicine, 

optometry, osteopathic medicine, pharmacy, podiatry, divinity/theology, or veterinary medicine. MBA programs are treated as 

master’s degree programs in this report. 

7 

—

Table 1.—

Characteristics Related to Graduate Degree Enrollment 

Table 1. Percentage distribution of 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients’ highest graduate enrollment, by 

student and institution characteristics: 2003 

No

Student and institution enrollcharacteristics ment 

Total 

 any 

enrollment 

Highest graduate enrollment 

FirstOther profesMBA MEd master’s sional Doctoral

 Total 60.0 40.0 7.3 8.8 14.4 5.0 4.5 

Gender

 Male 61.4 

 Female 58.9 

38.6 

41.1 

8.9 4.0 13.9 6.2 5.5

5.9 12.8 14.9 4.0 3.6 

Race/ethnicity1

 White 60.8 

Black 54.6 

 Hispanic 56.3 

 Asian/Pacific Islander 58.5 

39.2 

45.4 

43.7 

41.5 

7.0 9.2 14.2 4.5 4.3

8.3 7.5 19.1 5.3 5.2

9.4 9.7 13.9 4.7 6.1

8.3 3.3 12.7 13.6 3.7 

Age at bachelor’s degree completion

 22 or younger 51.8 

23–24 67.9 

25–29 72.8 

 30 or older 63.8 

48.3 

32.1 

27.2 

36.2 

7.8 9.4 16.9 7.7 6.5

5.8 8.2 11.2 3.3 3.6

6.5 5.8 11.5 2.0 1.6

8.2 9.9 14.6 1.9 1.6 

Highest education level by either parent

 Less than high school 66.3 

 High school or equivalency 66.4 

 Some postsecondary 61.0 

 Bachelor’s degree 60.3 

 Advanced degree 51.5 

33.7 

33.7 

39.1 

39.7 

48.5 

8.7 8.7 10.5 2.8 2.9

6.8 9.4 12.0 3.2 2.2

8.3 8.8 14.6 4.3 3.0

6.0 7.9 15.4 5.0 5.3

8.2 9.0 16.4 7.6 7.3 

Bachelor’s degree-granting institution

 Public 4-year

 Non-doctoral-granting 64.8 

 Doctoral-granting 60.8 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year

 Non-doctoral-granting 58.7 

 Doctoral-granting 49.6 

 Other 66.7 

35.2 

39.2 

41.3 

50.4 

33.3 

5.5 12.2 12.9 2.6 2.1

6.4 7.8 14.2 5.4 5.4

8.4 9.0 15.1 4.4 4.4

10.5 7.0 17.2 9.4 6.3

11.0 4.3 13.7 2.2 2.1 

See notes at end of table. 

8 

—

Table 1.—

Characteristics Related to Graduate Degree Enrollment 

Table 1. Percentage distribution of 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients’ highest graduate enrollment, by 

student and institution characteristics: 2003—Continued 

Highest graduate enrollment 

Total 

No any FirstStudent and institution enroll- enroll- Other profescharacteristics ment ment MBA MEd master’s sional Doctoral 

Baccalaureate degree major

 Business and management 74.8 25.3 14.1 2.8 5.5 2.4 0.5

 Education 49.9 50.1 1.8 32.3 10.5 2.4 3.1

 Engineering 60.8 39.2 11.7 0.5 19.8 1.8 5.4

 Health professions 63.8 36.3 3.2 3.2 24.8 3.6 1.6

 Public affairs/social services 64.0 36.0 3.4 3.1 26.0 2.2 1.3

 Biological sciences 33.2 66.9 3.1 2.7 16.2 22.7 22.1

 Mathematics and other sciences 51.4 48.6 6.0 6.5 16.4 5.2 14.6

 Social science 52.1 47.9 10.0 5.0 17.5 9.9 5.5

 History 48.2 51.9 5.2 18.2 15.9 8.1 4.4

 Humanities 59.3 40.7 4.1 7.7 19.2 5.1 4.8

 Psychology 45.1 55.0 7.1 14.2 21.0 5.2 7.5

 Other 65.7 34.3 4.3 8.5 14.1 5.1 2.4 

Bachelor’s degree GPA

 Under 2.5 76.5 23.5 4.4 6.3 9.9 1.6 1.3

 2.5–2.99 64.4 35.6 7.3 8.3 13.8 3.3 3.0

 3.0–3.49 56.6 43.4 7.6 9.7 15.0 6.2 4.9

 3.5 or above 47.8 52.2 9.0 10.1 17.7 7.5 7.8 

Undergraduate debt

 Did not borrow 60.1 39.9 7.0 8.2 14.3 5.5 4.8

 $1–4,999 61.7 38.3 8.4 8.1 14.1 3.8 3.9

 $5,000–9,999 59.3 40.7 7.8 9.9 15.4 3.9 3.7

 $10,000–14,999 61.4 38.6 6.2 11.1 12.2 4.8 4.4

 $15,000 or more 58.7 41.3 7.2 8.4 16.2 5.2 4.4 

1 Black includes African American, Pacific Islander includes Native Hawaiian, and Hispanic includes Latino. Included in the
 

totals but not shown separately are data for American Indian/Alaska Native respondents and those who identified themselves
 

with another race not shown. Race categories exclude Hispanic origin unless specified.
 

NOTE: Estimates include students from the 50 states, DC, and Puerto Rico. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. 


Standard error tables are available at http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp.
 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993/03 Baccalaureate and Beyond 


Longitudinal Study (B&B:93/03).
 

enrollment in specific types of degree programs (table 1). As an example, men were more likely 

than women to enroll in MBA (9 vs. 6 percent), first-professional (6 vs. 4 percent), and doctoral 

degree programs (6 vs. 4 percent), and women were much more likely than men to enroll in MEd 

programs (13 vs. 4 percent). 

9 

Characteristics Related to Graduate Degree Enrollment 

Black graduates were more likely than White graduates to enroll in a graduate degree 

program (45 vs. 39 percent). However, using data from the B&B:93/97 follow-up, McCormick et 

al. (1999) reported that among students who applied to a graduate degree program, Black 

graduates were admitted at a lower rate than Asian/Pacific Islander, Hispanic, and White 

graduates. Looking at enrollment in first-professional programs specifically, Asian/Pacific 

Islander graduates were more likely than graduates in other racial/ethnic groups to enroll within 

10 years of earning a bachelor’s degree (14 vs. 5 percent). 

The likelihood of enrolling in a graduate degree program was also related to age at 

bachelor’s degree completion. In general, younger graduates were more likely to enroll than older 

graduates. For example, 48 percent of graduates age 22 or younger at the time of bachelor’s 

degree completion enrolled in a graduate or first-professional degree program, compared with 36 

percent of those age 30 or older. However, graduates age 30 or older when they completed a 

bachelor’s degree were just as likely to enroll in an MBA or MEd program as their peers age 22 

or younger (MBA: 8 percent each and MEd 10 percent vs. 9 percent). 

Bachelor’s degree recipients’ enrollment in a graduate degree program was related to their 

parents’ highest education level. Enrollment in a graduate degree program increased from 34 

percent among graduates whose parents had a high school education or less to 49 percent among 

those whose parents had a graduate degree. 

Undergraduate Education Characteristics 

Undergraduate education may often be seen as the foundation for preparing students for 

graduate education. What might students do to prepare themselves for a graduate education 

during their undergraduate study? Some factors, such as undergraduate grade point average 

(GPA), undergraduate institution type, and field of study are related to the likelihood of a student 

enrolling in a graduate degree program. 

The cumulative GPAs of graduates were positively related to their rates of graduate 

enrollment. Higher achieving bachelor’s degree recipients were more likely to have enrolled in a 

graduate degree program by 2003 than their lower achieving counterparts (52 vs. 24 to 43 

percent, table 1). 

Graduates of private not-for-profit 4-year doctorate-granting institutions were more likely 

to have enrolled in a graduate degree program by 2003 than those who attended any other type of 

institution. Fifty percent of graduates from these types of institutions had enrolled in a graduate 

or first-professional degree program, compared with 33 to 41 percent of graduates from other 

10 

 

 

Characteristics Related to Graduate Degree Enrollment 

types of institutions. This was especially apparent among graduates enrolling in first-professional 

degree programs, where graduates in private not-for-profit doctorate-granting institutions were 

more likely to enroll as students in other types of institutions (9 vs. 2 to 5 percent). 

The frequency of enrollment in a graduate or first-professional degree program was also 

related to undergraduate major. Graduates who had majored in business as undergraduates were 

less likely to enroll in a graduate degree program than graduates with other majors (25 vs. 34 to 

67 percent), while graduates who had majored in biological sciences were more likely to enroll 

than graduates who had majored in other fields (67 vs. 25 to 55 percent). This was especially 

apparent among graduates who enrolled in a first-professional or doctoral degree program. 

Graduates who had majored in biological sciences as undergraduates were more likely to enroll 

in a first-professional or doctoral program than graduates who had majored in any other field (23 

and 22 percent, respectively, vs. 2 to 10 percent and .5 to 15 percent, respectively). Furthermore, 

graduates who had majored in mathematics as undergraduates were generally more likely than 

graduates with other majors to enroll in a doctoral degree program (15 vs. .5 to 7 percent). 

Enrollment in Multiple Graduate Degree Programs 

To get a more complete picture of the enrollment experiences of 1992–93 bachelor’s degree 

recipients, this analysis looks at whether students enrolled in more than one graduate degree 

program. The sequence of students’ enrollment in various programs, their original degree 

expectations, and specific details about each program are not discussed, however. For example, 

students who enrolled in both master’s and doctoral degree programs may have originally been 

on a doctoral degree track, but decided to switch to a master’s degree program to expedite entry 

into the workforce. Conversely, some students working toward a master’s degree may have 

decided that earning a doctoral degree would prove to be more valuable, and for some, 

completing a master’s degree is a prerequisite for acceptance into a doctoral degree program 

while for others, completing a master’s degree is a by-product of a doctoral program. 

Over the 10-year study period, 1 in 10 of the bachelor’s degree recipients enrolled in more 

than one graduate degree program: 5 percent enrolled in multiple master’s degree programs, 2 

percent enrolled in both a master’s and a doctoral degree program,5 and 3 percent enrolled in 

both a first-professional and another graduate degree program (table 2). Younger graduates were 

more likely than older graduates to enroll in multiple degree programs (13 vs. 5 to 8 percent), as 

5 In some institutions and programs, the master’s degree is required before admission to the doctoral program. B&B considers 

these to be two separate programs. During each follow-up interview (1994, 1997, and 2003), students were asked to report each 

program in which they enrolled. 

11 

—

 

Table 2. Percentage distribution of 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients’ graduate enrollment, by student and institution characteristics: 2003 

Single enrollment Multiple enrollments

FirstNo First- More Master’s profesenroll- Other profes- than one and sional

Student and institution characteristics ment Total MBA MEd master’s sional Doctoral Total master’s doctoral and other

Total 60.0 29.8 5.7 6.5 13.3 3.3 1.0 10.2 5.1 2.4 2.8

Gender 

Male 61.4 28.4 7.2 3.0 12.9 4.1 1.3 10.2 3.8 2.8 3.6

Female 58.9 31.0

4.5 9.4 13.6 2.6 0.8 10.2 6.1 2.0 2.1

Race/ethnicity1 

W

hite 60.7 29.5 5.7 6.7 13.2 3.0 1.0 9.8 4.9 2.3 2.6

Black 54.6 34.8 5.8 6.0 17.9 3.8 1.3 10.6 5.2 3.3 2.2

Hispanic 56.3 29.6 6.9 8.2 11.1 2.1 1.4 14.2 6.8 2.4 4.9Asian/Pacific Islander 58.5 30.1 6.2 1.7 11.7 9.9 0.7 11.4 4.7 2.4 4.3

Age at bachelor’s degree completion 

22 or younger 51.7 35.1 6.3 6.9 15.2 5.0 1.7 13.1 5.6 3.2 4.3

23

–24 67.9 23.9

4.8 5.9 10.3 2.4 0.5 8.2 4.2 2.1 1.9

25–29 72.8 21.9 4.9 4.4 10.8 1.4 0.5 5.3 3.6 0.9 0.830 or older 63.8 28.3 6.1 7.0 14.1 0.9 0.3 8.0 5.6 1.4 1.0

Highest education level by either parent 

Less than high school 66.3 25.6 5.7 7.3 9.3 2.1 1.1 8.1 5.6 0.5 2.0

High school or equivalency 66.4 25.8 5.3 6.9 11.2 2.1 0.4 7.8 4.9 1.5 1.5

Some postseco

n

dary 60.9 30.0 6.9 6.2 13.7 2.5 0.7 9.0 5.0 1.6 2.4

Bachelor’s degree 60.3 29.2 4.8 5.5 14.2 3.6 1.1 10.5 4.8 3.2 2.5Advanced degree 51.5 34.9 6.5 6.8 14.8 5.0 1.9 13.6 5.5 3.5 4.7

Bachelor’s degree-granting institution

Public 4-year 

Non-doctoral-granting 64.8 27.4

4.3 8.9 12.0 1.7 0.5 7.9 5.3 1.1 1.4

Doctoral-gra

nting 60.8 28.9 5.0 6.0 12.9 3.6 1.5 10.3 4.5 2.7 3.0

Private not-for-profit 4-year 

Non-doctoral-granting 58.7 29.6 6.1 6.1 13.7 2.7 1.0 11.7 6.7 2.5 2.6

Doctoral-granting 49.6 37.0 8.8 5.0 16.1 6.1 1.0 13.4 4.7 3.7 5.0

Other 66.7 28.6 10.3 2.5 13.7 1.9 0.2 4.7 2.6 1.1 1.0

Characteristics Related to Graduate Degree Enrollment 

12
 

See notes at end of table. 
—

Table 2.—

 

Table 2. Percentage distribution of 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients’ graduate enrollment, by student and institution characteristics: 2003

—Continued 

Single enrollment Multiple enrollments

FirstNo 

First- More Master’s profesenrollOther profes- than one and sional

Student and institution characteristics ment Total MBA MEd master’s sional Doctoral Total master’s doctoral and other 

Baccalaureate degree major

Business and management 74.8 21.1 11.9 2.1 5.3 1.8 0.1 4.1 3.1 0.4 0.6

Ed

ucation 49.9 37.8 1.3 24.5 9.5 1.7 0.7 12.3 9.3 2.2 0.8

Engineering 60.8 31.2 9.5 0.4 18.8 1.1 1.4 8.0 3.3 3.6 1.2

Health 

professions 63.8 27.9 2.1 1.1 22.3 2.0 0.4 8.4 5.7 0.7 2.1

Public affairs/social services 63.7 29.5 1.9 1.9 24.3 1.5 # 6.8 4.4 0.7 1.7

Biological sciences 33.1 38.0 3.1 2.6 14.6 12.9 4.9 28.9 1.7 6.7 20.5

Mathematics and other sciences 51.4 31.5 4.3 4.3 14.6 4.1 4.3 17.1 5.7 7.4 4.0

Social science 52.1 36.8 8.6 3.8 16.2 6.8 1.4 11.1 3.9 3.0 4.2

History 

48.2 35.4 3.4 11.2 15.7 5.2 # 16.4 9.1 3.8 3.5

Humanities 59.3 29.4 3.2 5.5 17.2 2.8 0.7 11.4 5.0 3.6 2.8Ps

ychology 45.1 36.6 2.8 9.6 18.5 2.9 2.9 18.4 11.3 3.5 3.5

Other 65.6 26.4 2.8 6.7 12.9 3.7 0.3 8.0 4.5 1.5 2.0

Bachelor’s degree GPA 

Under 2.5 76.5 18.6 3.5 4.4 8.8 1.4 0.4 5.0 3.9 0.8 0.3

2.5–2.99 64.4 28.1 6.1 6.5 12.9 2.2 0.5 7.5 3.9 1.8 1.83.0–3.49 56.6 31.1 6.2 6.6 13.6 4.0 0.7 12.4 6.0 2.8 3.6

3.5 or above 47.8 38.4 6.6 7.7 16.6 4.9 2.6 13.8 5.9 3.6 4.3

Undergraduate debt 

Did not borrow 60.1 29.7 5.5 6.2 13.2 3.9 1.0 10.2 4.7 2.7 2.8$1-$4,999 61.6 28.8 7.6 5.2 12.8 2.0 1.1 9.6 5.0 1.9 2.7

$5,0

00-$9,999 59.3 29.7 5.5 6.7 14.3 2.4 0.9 11.0 6.7 1.6 2.7

$10,000-$14,999 61.4 29.3 5.2 8.9 11.1 3.0 1.2 9.3 4.3 2.3 2.7$15,000 or more 58.7 31.4 5.7 5.8 15.0 3.9 0.9 9.9 5.2 2.8 1.9

# Rounds to zero.


1 Black includes African American, Pacific Islander includes Native Hawaiian, and Hispanic includes Latino. Included in the totals but not shown separately are data for American


Indian/Alaska Native respondents and those who identified themselves with another race not shown. Race categories exclude Hispanic origin unless specified.
NOTE: Estimates include students from the 50 states, DC, and Puerto Rico. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Standard error tables are available at


http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp.


SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993/03 Baccalaureate and Beyond Longitudinal Study (B&B:93/03).
 

Characteristics Related to Graduate Degree Enrollment 

13
 
 

 

Characteristics Related to Graduate Degree Enrollment 

were those who had majored in biological sciences than those with other majors (29 vs. 4 to 18 

percent).6 

Marital and Parental Status 

Family responsibilities, such as those associated with being married or having dependent 

children, may impose limitations on graduates’ time and their likelihood of applying to and 

enrolling in graduate school. Regardless of gender, graduates who were married at the time they 

completed a bachelor’s degree were less likely to enroll in a graduate degree program than 

graduates who were single (never married), divorced, separated, or widowed (32 vs. 42 to 43 

percent; table 3).7 The trend also was true for marital status in 1997. That is, graduates who were 

married 4 years after completing a bachelor’s degree were less likely to enroll in a graduate 

degree program than their unmarried counterparts (35 vs. 45 percent). To gain a better 

understanding of the differences in enrollment patterns of single, unmarried graduates and 

married graduates, enrollment among these groups was examined at the program level. When 

examining enrollment (in single programs) by type of program, single graduates were more likely 

to enroll in a first-professional or doctoral degree program than married graduates (firstprofessional: 10 vs. 3 percent; doctoral: 3 vs. 1 percent). However, no detectable differences were 

found between married graduates and single graduates in their likelihood of enrolling in an MBA 

program (14 and 15 percent, respectively), but married graduates were more likely to enroll in an 

MEd program (21 vs. 14 percent). 

Among single graduates, there were some gender differences in enrollment patterns. Single 

women were more likely than single men to enroll in a graduate degree program (45 vs. 40 at 

bachelor’s degree and 48 vs. 42 percent in 1997). 

Parenthood was negatively associated with enrollment in graduate school. Graduates who 

reported having dependent children in 1997 were less likely to enroll in a graduate degree 

program by 2003 than their counterparts who did not report having children (33 vs. 42 percent). 

This pattern was especially prevalent among bachelor’s degree recipients who enrolled in firstprofessional, doctoral, and multiple degree programs that included a first-professional degree and 

a master’s graduate degree program. Although no significant difference was detected, there was 

an apparent difference in enrolling in graduate school between women and men with dependent 

6 Enrollment in multiple degree programs is defined as enrolling in more than one graduate degree program. Students could 

enroll in more than one master’s, doctoral, or first-professional degree program, or could enroll in a combination of master’s, 

doctoral, or first-professional degree programs. 

7 Twenty-four percent of students were married or cohabiting at the time they earned their bachelor’s degree, 60 percent were 

single, never married, and 3 percent were divorced, widowed, or separated. 

14 

—

Table 3.—

 

Table 3. Percentage distribution of 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients’ graduate enrollment, by gender and marital and parental status at

bachelor’s degree completion and in 1997

Total Single enrollment Multiple enrollments

any First- More Master’s FirstenrollOther profes- than one and professional

Gender and marital and parental status ment MBA MEd master’s sional Doctoral Total master’s doctoral and other

Total 40.0 14.3 16.1 33.2 8.2 2.6 25.6 12.6 6.0 6.9

Marital status at bachelor’s degree

Single, never married 42.8 14.0 14.1 32.3 10.1 3.1 26.4 12.1 6.2 8.0 

Married or cohabiting 32.1 15.2 21.4 36.7 3.0 1.2 22.5 14.4 4.2 4.0 Divorced/separated/widowed 42.3 17.7 22.4 35.9 2.1 # 21.9 12.2 8.4 1.3 

Number of dependents at bachelor’s degree 

None 

40.4 1

4.0 15.5 32.8 9.0 2.9 25.9 12.4 6.1 7.4

O

ne or more 37.9 17.4 21.6 36.5 3.1 0.4 21.0 13.5 4.0 3.5

Marital status in 1997

Single, never been married 45.0 14.3 12.0 31.8 10.8 3.7 27.3 11.9 6.7 8.7 

Married or cohabiting 35.1 14.1 20.8 34.0 5.9 1.4 23.8 13.3 5.1 5.4 Divorced/separated/widowed 44.9 16.1 18.1 39.0 2.6 2.3 22.0 14.5 6.0 1.5 

Number of dependents in 1997 

None 

42.3 13.6 14.9 33.0 9.3 3.0 26.2 12.0 6.4 7.8

One or more 33.2 16.9 21.0 33.9 4.3 0.9 22.9 15.2 4.3 3.4

Male 

Total 38.6 18.6 7.7 33.3 10.6 3.4 26.5 10.0 7.3 9.2

Marital status at bachelor’s degree

Single, never married 40.5 17.9 6.7 31.7 12.1 4.2 27.3 10.3 6.4 10.6 

Married or cohabiting 32.0 20.8 11.0 40.7 5.6 0.6 21.4 9.1 7.3 5.0 

Divorced/separated/widowed 44.4 ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ 

Number of dependents at bachelor’s degree 

None 39.2 17.8 7.5 32.9 11.1 3.7 27.0 10.2 6.9 9.9

One or more 34.7 27.3 9.7 37.9 6.1 0.5 18.6 6.8 9.0 2.7

Characteristics Related to Graduate Degree Enrollment 

15
 

See notes at end of table. 
—

Table 3.—

 

Table 3. Percentage distribution of 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients’ graduate enrollment, by gender and marital and parental status at

bachelor’s degree completion and in 1997—Continued

Total Single enrollment Multiple enrollments

any First- More Master’s FirstenrollOther profes- than one and professional

Gender and marital and parental status ment MBA MEd master’s sional Doctoral Total master’s doctoral and other 

Marital status as of April 1997

Single, never been married 42.0 17.4 6.9 30.4 12.0 4.8 28.4 10.1 6.6 11.8 

Married or cohabiting 34.6 19.6 8.4 37.0 9.0 1.9 24.1 9.9 7.5 6.8 Divorced/separated/widowed 47.2 23.4 10.7 33.1 7.9 # 25.0 8.8 15.3 1.0 

Number of dependents in 1997 

None 

41.0 17.7 7.2 32.9 11.3 3.7 27.2 9.9 6.9 10.4

One or more 30.1 23.1 10.2 34.9 7.0 1.7 23.1 10.2 9.2 3.7

Female 

Total

41.1 11.0 22.7 33.1 6.4 2.0 24.8 14.8 5.0 5.0

Marital status at bachelor’s degree

Single, never married 44.9 10.7 20.3 32.7 8.5 2.2 25.6 13.7 6.1 5.9 

Married or cohabiting 32.1 11.3 28.6 33.9 1.2 1.7 23.3 18.1 2.0 3.3 Divorced/separated/widowed 41.6 16.9 28.2 38.1 # # 16.8 13.8 1.7 1.3 

Number of dependents at bachelor’s degree 

None 

41.4 10.8 22.1 32.7 7.2 2.3 24.9 14.2 5.5 5.2

One or more 39.9 12.3 27.8 35.7 1.6 0.3 22.2 16.9 1.5 3.8

Marital status as of April 1997

Single, never been married 47.9 11.7 16.3 33.1 9.8 2.7 26.4 13.5 6.8 6.1 

Married or cohabiting 35.4 10.0 30.0 31.8 3.6 1.0 23.6 15.8 3.4 4.4 Divorced/separated/widowed 43.9 12.6 21.7 41.8 # 3.4 20.6 17.3 1.6 1.7 

Number of dependents in 1997 

None 

43.4 10.3 21.4 33.0 7.5 2.5 25.3 13.8 6.0 5.5

One or more 35.3 13.4 27.3 33.4 2.8 0.4 22.8 18.1 1.5 3.2

# Rounds to zero.

Reporting standards not met. (Too few cases for a reliable estimate.)
 ‡

NOTE: Estimates include students from the 50 states, DC, and Puerto Rico. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Standard error tables are available at


http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp.


SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993/03 Baccalaureate and Beyond Longitudinal Study (B&B:93/03).
 

Characteristics Related to Graduate Degree Enrollment 

16
 
—

Table 4.—

Characteristics Related to Graduate Degree Enrollment 

children. Thirty-five percent of men who were parents when they completed a bachelor’s degree 

later enrolled in a graduate degree program, compared with 41 percent of women. 

Educational Expectations 

Although graduate degree enrollments have increased since the 1970s (U.S. Department of 

Education 2002), the percentage of bachelor’s degree recipients who enroll in graduate school is 

less than the percentage who state they would like to attain a graduate degree at the time of 

bachelor’s degree completion in 1992–93. Among 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients, less 

than one-half (35 percent) of graduates who expected to earn a master’s degree enrolled in a 

graduate degree program. This gap between expectations and enrollment was especially evident 

among those with doctoral degree aspirations. While 63 percent of bachelor’s degree recipients 

who expected to earn a doctoral degree enrolled in graduate school, they were more likely to 

enroll in a master’s than a doctoral degree program: a total of 41 percent had their highest 

enrollment in a master’s degree program (6 percent in an MBA program, 12 percent in an MEd 

program, and 23 percent in another master’s degree program), compared with 15 percent whose 

highest enrollment was in a doctoral degree program (table 4). However, graduates with doctoral 

degree aspirations were more likely than graduates with bachelor’s and master’s degree goals to 

enroll in a doctoral degree program. 

Table 4.	 Percentage distribution of 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients’ graduate enrollment, by 

educational expectations at bachelor’s degree completion 

Highest graduate enrollment 

Total 

No any Total Master’s enrollment FirstEducational expectations at enroll- enroll- any Other profesbachelor’s degree completion ment ment master’s MBA MEd master’s sional Doctoral

 Total	 60.0 40.0 30.5 7.3 8.8 14.4 5.0 4.5 

Bachelor’s degree or less 83.3 16.7 13.4 3.1 3.7 6.5 2.4 1.0 

Master’s degree 64.6 35.4 32.7 9.0 9.8 13.9 1.5 1.2 

First-professional degree 30.5 69.5 21.5 6.3 3.8 11.4 36.1 12.0 

Doctoral degree 37.0 63.0 40.9 6.0 11.6 23.2 7.4 14.7 

NOTE: 15 percent of all graduates had educational expectations of a bachelor’s degree or less, 58 percent expected to earn 


a master’s degree, 6 percent expected to earn a first-professional degree, and 21 percent expected to earn a doctoral degree.
 

Estimates include students from the 50 states, DC, and Puerto Rico. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.
 

Standard error tables are available at http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp.
 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993/03 Baccalaureate and Beyond 


Longitudinal Study (B&B:93/03).
 

17 

Characteristics Related to Graduate Degree Enrollment 

Similarly, the majority (70 percent) of bachelor’s degree recipients with first-professional 

degree aspirations enrolled in a graduate degree program, and 36 percent enrolled in a firstprofessional degree program as their highest enrollment. A larger proportion of graduates with 

first-professional degree aspirations enrolled in that program than those with other degree 

expectations. Of graduates with master’s degree expectations, just over one-third (35 percent) 

enrolled in graduate school, and 33 percent enrolled in a master’s degree program. 

In looking at changes in graduates’ educational expectations from 1993 to 1997 and the 

impact of those changes on rates of graduate and first-professional degree enrollment, graduates 

whose educational expectations increased from the 1993 to 1997 interviews were more likely 

than all other groups of graduates to enroll in a graduate degree program (59 vs. 30 to 42 percent) 

(table 5). 

Graduates with doctoral and first-professional degree expectations in 1997 were more 

likely to have enrolled in a graduate degree program than their counterparts with lower 

educational expectations (83 and 84 percent, respectively, vs. 7 and 42 percent). There were 

some gender differences in enrollment patterns, however. Women with master’s degree 

expectations in 1997 were more likely to have enrolled in a graduate program than men with 

these expectations (44 vs. 39 percent), while men with first-professional degree expectations 

were more likely to have enrolled than women with similar expectations (91 vs. 73 percent). 

Graduates’ educational expectations and completion of a graduate degree program are discussed 

in a later section of this report. 

Timing of Entry Into Graduate School 

Of 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients who had enrolled in a graduate degree program by 

2003, some 36 percent enrolled within 1 year of earning a bachelor’s degree; 28 percent took 

between 1 and 3 years; 16 percent took between 3 and 5 years; and 20 percent took more than 5 

years (table 6). On average, students enrolled within 2 or 3 years of earning a bachelor’s degree. 

The average time between bachelor’s degree receipt and first graduate enrollment was related to 

various student and institution characteristics, for example: gender, race/ethnicity, undergraduate 

major, age, undergraduate institution type, and marital status. There appeared to be some 

differences in how long students waited to enroll based on their gender and race/ethnicity. On 

average, men waited less time to enroll than women (2.5 vs. 2.8 years). Asian/Pacific Islander 

students enrolled within 2.1 years, on average. However, it has been shown that male and 

Asian/Pacific Islander students were more likely to major in undergraduate fields in which 

students typically take less time off between bachelor’s degree completion and graduate 

enrollment (such as life and physical sciences and engineering) (Bradburn et al. 2003). 

18 

—

Table 5.—

Characteristics Related to Graduate Degree Enrollment 

Table 5. Percentage distribution of 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients’ graduate enrollment, by gender, 

change in educational expectations, and educational expectations in 1997 

Highest graduate enrollment 

Total 

No any Total Firstenroll- enroll- any Other profesEducational expectations ment ment master’s MBA MEd master’s sional Doctoral

 Total 60.0 40.0 30.5 7.3 8.8 14.4 5.0 4.5 

Change in degree expectations from

 bachelor’s to 1997

 Expectations lowered 70.2 29.9 21.4 4.4 5.3 11.8 5.5 2.9

 Expectations raised 40.9 59.1 42.5 9.9 12.9 19.7 7.9 8.7

 Remained the same 58.1 42.0 33.1 8.3 9.9 15.0 4.3 4.6 

Educational expectations in 1997

 Bachelor’s degree 93.2 6.8 5.4 1.2 1.1 3.2 0.8 0.7

 Master’s degree 58.2 41.8 39.6 10.5 11.3 17.7 1.1 1.2

 First-professional degree 17.0 83.0 8.4 2.4 1.0 5.1 65.8 8.8

 Doctoral degree 16.2 83.9 54.7 8.4 17.8 28.5 3.6 25.6 

Male

 Total 61.4 38.6 26.9 8.9 4.0 13.9 6.2 5.5 

Change in degree expectations from

 bachelor’s to 1997

 Expectations lowered 70.9 29.1 18.4 4.3 1.8 12.3 7.0 3.8

 Expectations raised 45.4 54.6 32.7 8.7 6.9 17.2 9.3 12.5

 Remained the same 59.2 40.8 30.0 11.4 4.4 14.2 5.4 5.4 

Educational expectations in 1997

 Bachelor’s degree 93.3 6.7 5.2 1.7 0.3 3.3 0.8 0.7

 Master’s degree 60.6 39.4 36.8 14.0 5.1 17.7 1.2 1.4

 First-professional degree 8.9 91.1 9.9 3.8 0.2 5.9 71.4 9.7

 Doctoral degree (PhD, EdD, DPH) 19.0 81.0 44.9 7.6 9.5 27.8 4.0 32.1 

Female 

 Total 58.9 41.1 33.6 5.9 12.8 14.9 4.0 3.6 

Change in degree expectations from

 bachelor’s to 1997

 Expectations lowered 69.7 30.3 23.8 4.4 8.0 11.4 4.2 2.3

 Expectations raised 37.5 62.5 49.8 10.7 17.4 21.7 6.8 5.9

 Remained the same 57.0 43.0 35.9 5.6 14.7 15.6 3.3 3.9 

Educational expectations in 1997

 Bachelor’s degree 93.0 7.0 5.5 0.7 1.8 3.0 0.7 0.7

 Master’s degree 56.3 43.7 41.8 7.9 16.1 17.8 1.0 1.0

 First-professional degree 26.9 73.1 6.6 0.7 1.9 4.1 58.9 7.6

 Doctoral degree (PhD, EdD, DPH) 13.7 86.3 62.9 9.1 24.8 29.0 3.2 20.2 

NOTE: Estimates include students from the 50 states, DC, and Puerto Rico. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. 


Standard error tables are available at http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp.
 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993/03 Baccalaureate and Beyond 


Longitudinal Study (B&B:93/03).
 

19 

—

Table 6.—

Table 6.—

Characteristics Related to Graduate Degree Enrollment 

Table 6.	 Among 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients who had enrolled in a graduate program by 2003, 

average time and percentage distribution of time between bachelor’s degree receipt and first 

graduate enrollment, by student and institution characteristics 

Student and institution characteristics 

Average 

number of 

years 

1 year 

or less 

More than More than 

1 to 3 years 3 to 5 years 

Percentage distribution 

More than 

5 years

 Total 2.7 35.9 28.3 16.2 19.5 

Gender

 Male 

 Female 

2.5 

2.8 

39.5 

33.0 

27.3 

29.2 

14.5 

17.5 

18.7

20.2 

Race/ethnicity1

 White 

Black 

 Hispanic 

 Asian/Pacific Islander 

2.7 

3.0 

2.8 

2.1 

35.9 

28.5 

38.6 

44.0 

28.1 

31.0 

24.5 

31.0 

16.4 

16.3 

14.9 

15.7 

19.6

24.3

22.1

9.2 

Age at bachelor’s degree completion

 22 or younger 

23–24 

25–29 

 30 or older 

2.5 

2.9 

3.1 

2.5 

37.0 

33.5 

32.2 

38.4 

29.0 

25.6 

28.3 

30.4 

16.2 

18.6 

13.4 

13.5 

17.9

22.3

26.2

17.6 

Highest education level by either parent

 Less than high school 

 High school or equivalency 

 Some postsecondary 

 Bachelor’s degree 

 Advanced degree 

3.1 

2.9 

2.9 

2.7 

2.4 

30.1 

32.5 

36.8 

34.4 

39.0 

32.8 

27.6 

25.6 

29.2 

29.0 

15.8 

15.5 

13.8 

18.6 

16.4 

21.3

24.4

23.8

17.9

15.7 

Bachelor’s degree-granting institution

 Public 4-year

 Non-doctoral-granting 

 Doctoral-granting 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year

 Non-doctoral-granting 

 Doctoral-granting 

2.5 

3.0 

2.8 

2.5 

38.7 

31.7 

30.3 

38.2 

29.0 

25.3 

30.8 

29.3 

14.9 

21.1 

18.9 

12.8 

17.4

21.9

20.0

19.7 

Baccalaureate degree major

 Business and management 

 Education 

 Engineering 

 Health professions 

 Public affairs/social services 

 Biological sciences 

 Mathematics and other sciences 

 Social science 

 History 

 Humanities 

 Psychology 

 Other 

3.3 

2.8 

2.0 

2.9 

3.5 

1.8 

2.0 

2.5 

2.3 

2.8 

2.8 

2.8 

28.0 

32.0 

46.5 

35.3 

31.7 

47.6 

47.7 

33.1 

34.9 

36.5 

36.0 

34.5 

22.3 

32.4 

30.2 

26.8 

27.3 

31.3 

26.7 

31.0 

30.8 

25.2 

30.2 

28.0 

22.2 

15.3 

12.7 

17.5 

10.6 

9.9 

10.9 

20.8 

22.2 

15.5 

14.3 

15.6 

27.6

20.2

10.6

20.5

30.3

11.2

14.7

15.1

12.2

22.8

19.5

21.9 

See notes at end of table. 

20 
—

Table 6.—

Table 6.—

Characteristics Related to Graduate Degree Enrollment 

Table 6.	 Among 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients who had enrolled in a graduate program by 2003, 

average time and percentage distribution of time between bachelor’s degree receipt and first 

graduate enrollment, by student and institution characteristics—Continued 

Average Percentage distribution 

number of 1 year More than More than More than 

Student and institution characteristics years or less 1 to 3 years 3 to 5 years 5 years 

Bachelor’s degree GPA

 Under 2.5 3.2 26.8 27.6 22.3 23.3

 2.5–2.99 3.1 28.8 28.2 18.9 24.1

 3.0–3.49 2.5 38.0 30.0 14.4 17.7

 3.5 or above 2.3 42.9 27.1 13.7 16.3 

1 Black includes African American, Pacific Islander includes Native Hawaiian, and Hispanic includes Latino. Included in the
 

totals but not shown separately are data for American Indian/Alaska Native respondents and those who identified themselves
 

with another race not shown. Race categories exclude Hispanic origin unless specified.
 

NOTE: Estimates include students from the 50 states, DC, and Puerto Rico. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. 


Standard error tables are available at http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp.
 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993/03 Baccalaureate and Beyond 


Longitudinal Study (B&B:93/03).
 

Students with undergraduate majors in biological sciences and in engineering and 

mathematics generally waited fewer years to enroll (1.8 and 2.0 years each, respectively) than 

students with other majors (2.3 to 3.5 years). Younger students and those age 30 or older waited 

less time to enroll in a graduate degree program than students ages 23–24 (2.5 vs. 2.9 years). 

Students who had attained a bachelor’s degree from a public 4-year doctorate-granting 

institution typically waited longer to enroll in a graduate degree program than their counterparts 

at public 4-year non-doctorate-granting institutions (3.0 vs. 2.5 years). The opposite was true in 

the private sector. Students who had attended private not-for-profit doctorate-granting 

institutions typically waited less time to enroll than those at private not-for-profit non-doctorategranting institutions (2.5 vs. 2.8 years). 

Students who were single 1 year before graduate enrollment waited less time, on average, 

to enroll than students who were married, divorced, separated, or widowed regardless of gender 

(2.1 vs. 3.7 to 3.8 years; table 7). Also, regardless of gender, students who had no children 1 year 

before graduate enrollment typically took less time to enroll than those with children. 

Compared with students in any other type of graduate degree program, doctoral degree 

students typically waited the least amount of time between earning a bachelor’s degree and 

enrolling in graduate school, while students in an MBA program waited the most time to enroll 

(table 8). The majority (65 percent) of students who enrolled in a doctoral degree program 

enrolled within 1 year of earning a bachelor’s degree, as did about one-half of students who 

enrolled in a first-professional degree program. 

21 

—

Table 7.—

Table 9.—

Characteristics Related to Graduate Degree Enrollment 

Table 7.	 Among 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients who had enrolled in a graduate program by 2003, 

average time and percentage distribution of time between bachelor’s degree receipt and first 

graduate enrollment, by gender and marital and parental status 1 year before graduate enrollment 

Gender and marital and parental status 

Average 

number of 

years 

1 year 

or less 

More than More than 

1 to 3 years 3 to 5 years 

Percentage distribution 

More than 

5 years

 Total 2.7 35.9 28.3 16.2 19.5 

Marital status year before graduate 

 enrollment

 Single 

 Married/cohabit as married 

 Divorced/separated/widowed 

2.1 

3.8 

3.7 

42.4 

22.5 

28.4 

31.1 

23.4 

19.9 

14.0 

20.7 

20.4 

12.5

33.4

31.4 

Number of dependent children year 

 before graduate enrollment

 None 

 One or more 

2.5 

3.7 

37.3 

27.8 

29.0 

24.3 

16.6 

13.2 

17.1

34.7 

Male

 Total 2.5 39.5 27.3 14.5 18.7 

Marital status year before graduate 

 enrollment

 Single 

 Married/cohabit as married 

 Divorced/separated/widowed 

2.0 

3.7 

3.1 

45.1 

26.2 

36.0 

30.0 

21.3 

11.6 

12.4 

18.3 

30.6 

12.5

34.2

21.8 

Number of dependent children year 

 before graduate enrollment

 None 

 One or more 

2.4 

3.1 

40.4 

32.7 

27.7 

24.8 

14.4 

14.2 

17.5

28.3 

Female

 Total 2.8 33.0 29.2 17.5 20.2 

Marital status year before graduate 

 enrollment

 Single 

 Married/cohabit as married 

 Divorced/separated/widowed 

2.2 

3.9 

4.0 

40.1 

20.1 

24.9 

32.0 

24.7 

23.6 

15.4 

22.3 

15.8 

12.6

32.9

35.7 

Number of dependent children year 

 before graduate enrollment

 None 

 One or more 

2.6 

4.0 

34.6 

25.3 

30.2 

24.0 

18.4 

12.7 

16.8

38.0 

NOTE: Estimates include students from the 50 states, DC, and Puerto Rico. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. 


Standard error tables are available at http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp.
 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993/03 Baccalaureate and Beyond 


Longitudinal Study (B&B:93/03).
 

22 

—

Table 8.—

Table 8.—

Characteristics Related to Graduate Degree Enrollment 

Table 8.	 Among 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients who had enrolled in a graduate program by 2003, 

average time and percentage distribution of time between bachelor’s degree receipt and first 

graduate enrollment, by type of graduate enrollment and degree program 

Average Percentage distribution 

number of 1 year More than More than More than 

Graduate degree program years or less 1 to 3 years 3 to 5 years 5 years

 Total 2.7 35.9 28.3 16.2 19.5 

Highest graduate enrollment

 MBA 3.5 24.4 25.4 21.4 28.8

 MEd 3.0 28.1 31.4 19.2 21.3

 Other master’s 2.8 32.8 29.4 16.6 21.2

 First-professional 1.8 49.2 30.5 10.2 10.1

 Doctoral 1.2 65.4 22.2 7.3 5.1 

All graduate enrollment 

 Single enrollment

 MBA 4.2 16.1 21.3 22.8 39.8

 MEd or post-master’s certificate 

 in education 3.4 23.9 28.9 21.1 26.2

 Other master’s 2.9 30.6 30.1 16.7 22.5

 First-professional 2.2 44.3 27.5 13.2 15.0

 Doctoral 1.8 54.0 22.1 11.8 12.1

 Multiple enrollment

 More than one master’s 1.5 48.7 34.2 15.2 2.0

 Master’s and doctoral 1.1 67.9 21.4 7.2 3.5

 First-professional and other 0.9 63.3 32.0 3.8 1.0 

NOTE: Estimates include students from the 50 states, DC, and Puerto Rico. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. 


Standard error tables are available at http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp.
 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993/03 Baccalaureate and Beyond 


Longitudinal Study (B&B:93/03).
 

Students who pursued multiple degree programs generally waited less time to enroll in a 

graduate degree program than those who enrolled in a single degree program. Students who 

enrolled in both a master’s and doctoral degree program and those who enrolled in both a firstprofessional and other graduate degree program typically waited about 1 year to enroll. 

Sources of Financial Aid and Borrowing for Graduate School 

As mentioned previously (table 6), 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients waited an average 

of 2 to 3 years to enroll in graduate school. Because a lack of financial resources may have 

contributed to their delay in enrolling, it is important to consider how students finance their 

graduate education. Information on tuition and costs of graduate attendance is not available for 

B&B; however, there is some information on sources of financial aid for graduate education that 

23 

Characteristics Related to Graduate Degree Enrollment 

will be discussed below. Choy and Moskovitz (1998) used data from the 1995–96 National 

Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:96) to examine patterns of financial aid receipt among 

students in graduate degree programs. Because 1992–93 graduates waited 2 to 3 years to enroll in 

graduate school, the data from NPSAS:96 approximately coincide with their typical entry year. 

Among all students who enrolled in a graduate or first-professional degree program in 1995–96, 

some 52 percent received some form of aid, 30 percent received grants, and 25 percent received 

loans. Students enrolled in first-professional programs were the most likely to receive aid (80 

percent), followed by doctoral students (65 percent) and master’s degree students (51 percent). 

At each follow-up, B&B students who enrolled in graduate school were asked if they ever 

received research or teaching assistantships, tuition waivers, employer assistance, grants, 

scholarships or fellowships, and loans. Table 9 presents information on highest graduate 

enrollment and various undergraduate characteristics (institution type, major, and GPA) as they 

relate to overall graduate school financing during the 10-year period. Loans were the most 

common source of financing for graduate school (45 percent), followed by grants, scholarships, 

or fellowships (23 percent), assistance from employers (19 percent), tuition waivers (10 percent), 

teaching assistantships (9 percent), and research assistantships (7 percent). Students whose 

highest graduate enrollment was in a doctoral degree program were the most likely, among all 

graduate students, to report receiving a research assistantship, teaching assistantship, tuition 

waiver, and grants or scholarships. Students enrolled in MBA programs (43 percent) were more 

likely to receive support for graduate education from an employer compared with students 

enrolled in other degree programs (5 to 18 percent). Similar to the findings reported by Choy and 

Moskovitz (1998), first-professional students (71 percent) were the most likely to receive loans 

to help pay for their graduate education, followed by doctoral students (63 percent) and master’s 

degree students (35 to 40 percent). 

Undergraduate major was related to graduate financing. Students who majored in biological 

sciences as undergraduates were generally more likely to receive grants, scholarships, or 

fellowships and more likely to take out loans than students who majored in other fields. Business 

and management and engineering majors were more likely than other majors to receive funding 

for their graduate education from an employer. Compared with other majors, students who 

majored in mathematics and other sciences were more likely to receive a teaching assistantship 

and tuition waiver. 

Student’s undergraduate performance, measured by GPA, was also related to graduate 

school financing. Students who earned a GPA of 3.5 or above were more likely to receive 

teaching assistantships, tuition waivers, and grants, scholarships, or fellowships. In short, 

24 

—

Table 9.—

Characteristics Related to Graduate Degree Enrollment 

Table 9. Percentage of graduate and first-professional students who received various types of financial 

aid, by student and institution characteristics: 2003–04 

Research 

Student and institution assistantcharacteristics ships 

Teaching 

assistantships Tuition 

waivers 

Employer 

assistance Grants1 Loans

 Total 7.3 8.9 10.0 19.5 22.6 45.0 

Highest graduate enrollment

 MBA 1.9 

MEd 1.2 

 Other master’s 5.5 

 First professional 4.6 

 Doctorate 37.3 

3.5 

2.4 

7.7 

3.5 

40.4 

3.1 

8.9 

7.8 

4.5 

36.3 

43.0 

16.0 

17.9 

5.1 

9.1 

10.1 

14.3 

21.6 

32.7 

51.2 

36.6

35.5

40.5

71.4

63.1 

Bachelor’s degree-granting institution

 Public 4-year

 Non-doctoral-granting 4.3 

 Doctoral-granting 8.8 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year

 Non-doctoral-granting 6.0 

 Doctoral-granting 9.1 

 Other 4.9 

6.1 

9.7 

9.5 

10.1 

6.1 

6.5 

12.1 

9.3 

9.4 

10.5 

22.1 

18.2 

20.4 

20.4 

6.1 

15.2 

24.1 

24.4 

27.9 

10.3 

40.3

46.7

46.8

45.3

39.2 

Baccalaureate degree major

 Business and management 1.8 

 Education 3.1 

 Engineering 12.5 

 Health professions 2.0 

 Public affairs/social services 4.0 

 Biological sciences 15.9 

 Mathematics and other science 19.8 

 Social science 9.2 

 History 10.6 

 Humanities 6.1 

 Psychology 4.7 

 Other 7.3 

4.0 

4.8 

13.7 

6.2 

2.3 

15.3 

23.2 

9.2 

3.2 

12.6 

10.4 

5.6 

6.5 

11.2 

6.2 

6.1 

2.4 

15.5 

20.0 

7.8 

13.2 

12.1 

8.5 

9.5 

33.3 

15.9 

29.3 

24.0 

18.3 

9.7 

23.2 

16.7 

8.7 

13.9 

14.0 

15.6 

12.1 

18.9 

21.3 

28.5 

24.9 

36.5 

25.4 

23.3 

22.2 

31.5 

21.2 

20.3 

33.8

34.7

31.8

33.7

55.2

65.9

43.8

54.1

53.2

47.0

56.4

53.6 

Bachelor’s degree GPA

 Under 2.5 2.5 

2.5–2.99 5.2 

3.0–3.49 8.1 

 3.5 or above 9.8 

4.3 

7.1 

8.5 

12.6 

8.8 

8.5 

8.7 

13.0 

22.9 

22.2 

19.5 

15.9 

16.5 

16.7 

22.8 

28.6 

41.3

42.2

46.4

46.4 

1

 Grants include scholarships and fellowships.
 

NOTE: Estimates include students from the 50 states, DC, and Puerto Rico. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. 


Standard error tables are available at http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp.
 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993/03 Baccalaureate and Beyond 


Longitudinal Study (B&B:93/03).
 

25 

 

Characteristics Related to Graduate Degree Enrollment 

students who were high achievers as undergraduates were more likely to receive merit-based8 

funding for graduate school. 

In Dealing With Debt: 1992–93 Bachelor’s Degree Recipients 10 Years Later, Choy and Li 

(2006) used data from the 1993/03 Baccalaureate and Beyond Longitudinal Study (B&B:93/03) 

to further explore the financing of undergraduate, graduate, and first-professional education with 

this cohort. The results of that study show that 45 percent of bachelor’s degree recipients who 

enrolled in graduate degree programs took out loans to help pay for that education and had 

borrowed an average of $33,200 by 2003 (table 10). Similar to findings among this cohort that 

undergraduate borrowing does not affect enrollment in graduate school, undergraduate borrowing 

did not appear to affect borrowing for graduate education (Millett 2003; Choy 2000). Choy and 

Li (2006) reported that students who borrowed $5,000 or more (55 to 58 percent) as 

undergraduates were more likely to borrow for graduate school than those who did not borrow at 

all (36 percent) or those who borrowed less than $5,000 (46 percent). Given that master’s degree 

programs are typically shorter than first-professional or doctoral degree programs (see “Time to 

Graduate Degree,” below), students whose highest degree was a master’s were the least likely of 

all graduate students to borrow to finance their education and they had borrowed the smallest 

amount. 

8 Merit-based aid is defined as aid in the form of tuition waivers, grants, scholarships, or fellowships. These forms of aid do not 

have to be repaid by students. 

26 

—

Table 10.—

Table 10.—

Characteristics Related to Graduate Degree Enrollment 

Table 10.	 Among 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients with graduate degree enrollment, percentage who 

borrowed for graduate education and, among borrowers, average amount borrowed for 

graduate education, by student and institution characteristics: 2003 

Percent 

who Average 

Student and institution characteristics borrowed amount

 Total 44.8 $33,200 

Type of degree-granting institution

 Public 4-year 44.4 31,200

 Non-doctorate-granting 40.0 25,000

 Doctorate-granting 46.5 33,900

 Private not-for-profit 4-year 45.9 36,600

 Non-doctorate-granting 46.1 31,300

 Doctorate-granting 45.7 42,300

 Other 41.3 31,900 

Baccalaureate degree major

 Business and management 34.3 28,700

 Education 34.3 23,000

 Engineering, mathematics, or computer science 47.1 47,400

 Humanities or social sciences 52.8 32,800

 Other 47.4 28,100 

Amount borrowed (undergraduate)

 Did not borrow 36.0 36,900

 Less than $5,000 45.7 30,300

 $5,000–9,999 56.3 29,200

 $10,000–14,999 54.7 28,700

 $15,000 or more 58.4 35,100 

Highest enrollment after bachelor’s

 degree by 2003

 Master’s degree 37.9 19,900

 Doctoral degree 63.1 43,700

 First-professional degree 71.8 69,200 

Highest degree earned by 2003

 Bachelor’s degree 32.3 23,300

 Master’s degree 45.4 22,900

 Doctoral degree 64.3 44,100

 First-professional degree 78.8 75,500 

NOTE: Estimates include students from the 50 states, DC, and Puerto Rico. Standard error tables are available at
 

http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp.
 

SOURCE: Choy, S.P., and Li, X. (2006). Dealing With Debt 1992–93 Bachelor’s Degree Recipients 10 Years Later ,
 

(NCES 2006-156), table 4. Data from U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993/03 


Baccalaureate and Beyond Longitudinal Study (B&B:93/03).
 

27 

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 

Characteristics of Enrollment 


Enrollment Intensity and Continuity of Enrollment 

Whether or not students enroll part time or full time or remain continuously enrolled may 

have a relationship with their likelihood of success. Among 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients 

who had enrolled in a graduate degree program by 2003, about one-half attended exclusively full 

time, and 52 percent took off at least one semester or term (table 11). Students who had majored 

in biological sciences as undergraduates were more likely to enroll full time than those with other 

majors (79 vs. 30 to 63 percent). 

Students whose highest level of enrollment was in a doctoral or first-professional degree 

program were more likely to enroll full time than students enrolled in other graduate degree 

programs (73 and 84, respectively, vs. 29 to 50 percent). Furthermore, a greater proportion of 

students in first-professional degree programs were enrolled full time than students in doctoral 

degree programs (84 vs. 73 percent). Students in MEd programs typically were more likely to 

enroll part time. 

Several demographic characteristics, such as students’ gender, race/ethnicity, age, and 

undergraduate GPA and parents’ education, were related to students’ enrollment intensity in a 

graduate or first-professional degree program. For example, men were more likely than women to 

attend graduate school full time (54 vs. 46 percent), as were Asian/Pacific Islander students than 

students of other race/ethnicities (61 vs. 43 to 49 percent). In general, younger students were 

more likely than older students to attend graduate school full time: 56 percent of students age 22 

or younger at the time they earned a bachelor’s degree were full-time students, compared with 33 

percent of students age 30 or older. Furthermore, students with higher undergraduate GPAs were 

more likely to enroll full time than their counterparts with lower GPAs, as were students whose 

parents held graduate degrees than students whose parents had less education. 

29 

—

Table 11.—

Table 11.—

Characteristics of Enrollment 

Table 11. Among 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients who had enrolled in a graduate program by 2003, 

percentage distribution of enrollment intensity while enrolled and percentage taking time off, by 

student and institution characteristics 

Percentage distribution 

Mix of 

Exclusively Exclusively full-time and 

Student and institution characteristics full-time part-time part-time 

 Total 

Highest graduate enrollment

 MBA 

MEd 

 Other master’s 

 First-professional 

 Doctoral 

All graduate enrollment

 Single enrollment 

MBA 

 MEd or post-master’s certificate in education 

 Other master’s 

 First-professional 

 Doctoral 

 Multiple enrollment


 More than one master’s
 

 Master’s and doctoral
 

 First-professional and other 


Gender

 Male 

 Female 

Race/ethnicity2

 White 

Black 

 Hispanic 

 Asian/Pacific Islander 

Age at bachelor’s degree completion

 22 or younger 

23–24 

25–29 

 30 or older 

Highest education level by either parent

 Less than high school 

 High school or equivalency 

 Some postsecondary 

 Bachelor’s degree 

 Advanced degree 

49.3 48.1 2.6 

34.9 63.8 1.3 

28.9 67.8 3.3 

49.6 48.0 2.4 

83.8 15.2 1.0 

73.1 20.8 6.0 

37.6 60.8 1.6 

29.9 66.1 4.0 

50.6 46.9 2.6 

88.8 10.9 0.3 

87.5 2.1 10.4 

28.6 70.4 1.0 

61.1 32.2 6.7 

78.3 20.2 1.5 

54.0 44.0 2.0 

45.5 51.3 3.1 

49.3 48.1 2.7 

43.5 54.0 2.5 

44.0 53.0 3.0 

61.0 36.0 2.9 

56.4 41.1 2.6 

44.8 51.6 3.6 

36.9 60.3 2.9 

32.9 65.6 1.5 

43.9 53.6 2.4 

40.3 57.1 2.6 

46.5 51.1 2.3 

51.4 45.8 2.8 

57.5 39.9 2.6 

Percent took off 

at least one 

semester or term1

52.0 

49.8

63.8

51.0

35.6

53.3 

41.9

56.5

49.6

25.0

36.4

78.6

65.2

51.7 

50.5

53.1 

51.1

53.9

53.8

61.5 

49.1

53.5

58.3

58.4 

63.3

53.0

47.6

54.0

49.0 

See notes at end of table. 

30 

—

Table 11.—

Table 11.—

Characteristics of Enrollment 

Table 11. Among 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients who had enrolled in a graduate program by 2003, 

percentage distribution of enrollment intensity while enrolled and percentage taking time off, by 

student and institution characteristics—Continued 

Percentage distribution 

Mix of 

Exclusively Exclusively full-time and 

Student and institution characteristics full-time part-time part-time 

Bachelor’s degree-granting institution

 Public 4-year

 Non-doctoral-granting 40.4 57.8 1.9 

 Doctoral-granting 49.7 47.3 3.0 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year

 Non-doctoral-granting 46.3 51.7 2.0 

 Doctoral-granting 59.7 38.0 2.3 

 Other 64.3 26.6 9.1 

Baccalaureate degree major

 Business and management 41.4 57.4 1.2 

 Education 30.4 66.5 3.1 

 Engineering 47.0 51.5 1.4 

 Health professions 51.7 46.9 1.4 

 Public affairs/social services 54.2 45.9 # 

 Biological sciences 78.8 19.7 1.5 

 Mathematics and other sciences 60.0 39.1 0.9 

 Social science 52.5 43.7 3.8 

 History 63.2 32.4 4.4 

 Humanities 53.9 42.8 3.3 

 Psychology 54.2 41.1 4.7 

 Other 46.9 48.6 4.6 

Bachelor’s degree GPA

 Under 2.5 41.0 57.2 1.8 

2.5–2.99 43.8 53.7 2.5 

3.0–3.49 50.3 47.7 2.1 

 3.5 or above 55.4 41.3 3.3 

Percent took off 

at least one 

semester or term1 

55.9

52.9

50.0

48.7

42.0 

53.6

59.9

57.7

45.2

49.6

40.4

53.8

48.2

52.7

47.8

56.5

51.3 

55.7

52.9

51.6

50.7 

# Rounds to zero.
 

1 Does not include summer sessions.
 

2 Black includes African American, Pacific Islander includes Native Hawaiian, and Hispanic includes Latino. Included in the
 

totals but not shown separately are data for American Indian/Alaska Native respondents and those who identified themselves
 

with another race not shown. Race categories exclude Hispanic origin unless specified.
 

NOTE: Estimates include students from the 50 states, DC, and Puerto Rico. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. 


Standard error tables are available at http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp.
 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993/03 Baccalaureate and Beyond 


Longitudinal Study (B&B:93/03).
 

31 

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 

 

Graduate Persistence and Attainment 


This section of the report includes a discussion on persistence and attainment among those 

students in the B&B cohort who enrolled in graduate degree programs. Demographic 

characteristics and marital and parental status are looked at in relation to degree completion. The 

percentage of bachelor’s degree recipients who are considering pursuing graduate studies is 

increasing. This section addresses whether students’ educational expectations were realized. A 

large proportion of students with graduate expectations do not earn an advanced degree; the final 

part of this section discusses reasons why graduate students leave graduate school before 

completing a degree. 

Among 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients who had enrolled in a graduate degree 

program between 1993 and 2003,9 62 percent had earned at least one graduate degree by 2003. 

Looking at the highest degree earned, 47 percent had obtained a master’s degree, 10 percent a 

first-professional degree, and 5 percent a doctoral degree (table 12). About 15 percent were still 

enrolled in a graduate degree program in 2003, and 23 percent were no longer enrolled and had 

not obtained a degree. 

The rate at which students completed a graduate degree was related to the type of graduate 

program in which they had enrolled and the modal length of the program. The completion rate 

was highest among first-professional students (71 percent), followed by master’s students (60 

percent) and doctoral students (43 percent). Because doctoral degree students typically need more 

time to finish their program (see “Time to Graduate Degree,” below), they were more likely than 

first-professional and master’s degree students to be still enrolled in 2003 (28 vs. 11 and 13 

percent, respectively). Master’s degree students were more likely than first-professional and 

doctoral degree students to have left without completing a degree (27 vs. 15 and 11 percent, 

respectively). 

More than half of the master’s degrees awarded to the B&B93 cohort were in education and 

business/management (table 13). Doctoral degree recipients tended to major in life and physical 

sciences (25 percent), engineering, mathematics, and computer science (14 percent), social and 

behavioral sciences (10 percent), and arts and humanities (8 percent). 

9 These students are frequently referred to as “graduate students” in the subsequent discussion. 

33 

—

Table 12.—

Table 12.—

Graduate Persistence and Attainment 

Table 12.	 Among 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients who had enrolled in a graduate degree program 

by 2003, percentage distribution of attainment and enrollment status in 2003, by highest 

graduate enrollment 

Attained Enrolled No 

Highest graduate 

enrollment Total Master’s1 

Firstprofessional Doctoral Total Master’s Firstprofessional Doctoral degree, 

no longer 

enrolled

 Total 61.9 47.1 10.0 4.8 14.7 10.5 1.3 2.9 23.4 

Master’s 60.1 60.1 † † 13.4 13.4 † † 26.6 

First-professional2 74.8 3.4 71.4 † 10.7 1.6 9.0 † 14.5 

Doctoral2 60.2 9.3 7.5 43.4 28.4 0.9 1.7 25.9 11.4 

† Not applicable.
 

1

 Students who have attained a master’s degree are identified as having a master’s degree if no higher degree was attained and
 

the student was not enrolled in a doctoral or first-professional degree program in 2003.
 

2

 Includes students who have earned a master’s degree.
 

NOTE: Estimates include students from the 50 states, DC, and Puerto Rico. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. 


Standard error tables are available at http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp.
 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993/03 Baccalaureate and Beyond 


Longitudinal Study (B&B:93/03).
 

Demographic Characteristics 

Rates of graduate persistence and degree attainment were related to several demographic 

characteristics, such as students’ gender, race/ethnicity, and age and their parents’ education. For 

example, women were more likely than men to have earned a master’s degree (49 vs. 44 percent) 

by 2003, but men were more likely than women to have earned a first-professional (13 vs. 8 

percent) or a doctoral degree (7 vs. 3 percent) (table 14). 

Asian/Pacific Islander students were more likely than students from other racial/ethnic 

groups to have earned a first-professional degree (26 vs. 7 to 9 percent). Although Black students 

were more likely than White students to attend graduate school after receiving a bachelor’s 

degree (see table 1), they were less likely to obtain a graduate degree (54 vs. 63 percent). 

However, Black students were more likely than White students to be still enrolled in 2003 (25 vs. 

14 percent), particularly in a master’s degree program (16 vs. 10 percent). 

Students’ age was also an important factor in their persistence in graduate programs and 

attainment of a degree. In general, the younger the students, the more likely they were to have 

earned a graduate degree, especially a first-professional or a doctoral degree. On the other hand, 

the older the students, the more likely they were to have left the program without earning a 

graduate degree. 

34 

—

 

Table 13. Percentage distribution of major field of study for the highest graduate degree earned by 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients

Engineering, 

Social and Life and mathematics,

Arts and behavioral physical computer Business and Medicine/ 

Highest graduate degree earned humanities sciences sciences science Education management health Law Other

Total 6.3 6.6 4.9 6.7 22.0 20.4 13.2 9.8 10.2

Master’s 7.1 7.6 3.9 7.4 28.2 26.2 8.3 1.1 10.1

First-professional1 † † † † † † 40.6 54.4 3.1 

Doctoral 8.4 9.8 24.5 13.7 4.2 4.3 5.5 4.1 25.6

Not applicable.
 †

1 Approximately 2 percent of students whose highest degree was a first-professional degree majored in non-first-professional fields. These students were most likely


miscategorized.
NOTE: Estimates include students from the 50 states, DC, and Puerto Rico. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Standard error tables are available at


http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp.
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993/03 Baccalaureate and Beyond Longitudinal Study (B&B:93/03).
 

35
 

Graduate Persistence and Attainment 
—

Table 14.—

Table 14.—

Graduate Persistence and Attainment 

Table 14.	 Among 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients who had enrolled in a graduate degree program 

by 2003, percentage distribution of attainment and enrollment status in 2003, by selected 

student characteristics 

Attained	 Enrolled No 

First- First- degree, 

Student profes- profes- no longer 

characteristics Total Master’s1 sional Doctoral Total Master’s sional Doctoral enrolled

 Total 61.9 47.1 10.0 4.8 14.7 10.5 1.3 2.9 23.4 

Gender

 Male 63.9 44.3 12.7 6.9 14.6 9.9 1.7 3.0 21.5

 Female 60.2 49.4 7.7 3.2 14.8 11.1 1.0 2.7 25.0 

Race/ethnicity2

 White 62.6 48.8 9.3 4.5 13.7 9.9 1.1 2.7 23.7

 Black 53.8 42.1 6.6 5.1 24.7 15.7 3.8 5.2 21.5

 Hispanic 55.9 39.2 8.3 8.4 19.3 16.3 1.0 2.0 24.8

 Asian/Pacific Islander 64.8 35.2 26.4 3.2 12.8 8.4 2.5 2.0 22.4 

Age at bachelor’s degree 

 completion

 22 or younger 67.2 47.3 13.7 6.3 12.6 8.4 0.9 3.3 20.2

 23–24 54.2 43.9 6.7 3.6 18.7 13.2 2.5 3.0 27.1

 25–29 52.2 46.9 2.6 2.7 18.7 14.9 2.7 1.1 29.1

 30 or older 55.7 50.2 3.6 1.8 15.3 12.9 0.6 1.9 29.0 

Highest education level

 by either parent

 Less than high school 52.5 42.9 4.7 5.0 19.9 15.8 1.0 3.1 27.7

 High school or 

 equivalency 55.7 46.7 6.5 2.5 16.4 13.6 1.4 1.5 27.9

 Some postsecondary 60.9 50.2 8.0 2.6 15.2 11.6 2.0 1.6 23.9

 Bachelor’s degree 61.8 45.0 10.6 6.2 16.5 11.3 1.2 4.0 21.7

 Advanced degree 67.4 47.1 13.7 6.6 11.6 6.9 1.1 3.7 21.0 

1

 Students who have attained a master’s degree are identified as having a master’s degree if no higher degree was attained and
 

the student was not enrolled in a doctoral or first-professional degree program in 2003. 


2 Black includes African American, Pacific Islander includes Native Hawaiian, and Hispanic includes Latino. Included in the
 

totals but not shown separately are data for American Indian/Alaska Native respondents and those who identified themselves
 

with another race not shown. Race categories exclude Hispanic origin unless specified.
 

NOTE: Estimates include students from the 50 states, DC, and Puerto Rico. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. 


Standard error tables are available at http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp.
 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993/03 Baccalaureate and Beyond 


Longitudinal Study (B&B:93/03).
 

The likelihood of graduate students earning a graduate degree was also related to their 

parents’ highest education level, increasing from 52 percent among those whose parents had less 

than a high school education to 67 percent among those whose parents had a graduate degree. In 

addition, students whose parents had no more than a high school education were more likely than 

36 

Graduate Persistence and Attainment 

their peers whose parents had a bachelor’s or higher degree to have left without earning a 

graduate degree. 

Marital and Parental Status 

Married students or students with dependent children typically have more family 

responsibilities, which may impinge upon the time available to study. This is reflected in their 

rates of degree persistence and completion: students who were single or had no children before 

graduate enrollment were more likely to have earned a graduate degree by 2003, particularly a 

first-professional or a doctoral degree, whereas students who were married or had one or more 

children before graduate enrollment were more likely to be still enrolled (table 15). 

Marriage was an important factor in students’ likelihood of enrolling in a graduate degree 

program regardless of gender: married men and women were less likely than their single 

counterparts to have attained a graduate degree (men: 58 vs. 66 percent, women: 51 vs. 66 

percent), especially a first-professional (men: 6 vs. 16 percent, women: 3 vs. 11 percent) or a 

doctoral degree (men: 4 vs. 8 percent, women: 2 vs. 4 percent). Thirty-two percent of men who 

were divorced, separated, or widowed before enrolling in a graduate program were still enrolled 

in that program in 2003, compared with 13 percent of single men. Among women, 23 percent of 

those who were married were still enrolled, compared with 10 percent of single women. 

Parenthood seemed to be a stronger negative factor for women than for men with regard to 

their attainment of a graduate degree. For example, among men, having a child before enrollment 

was related negatively only to their likelihood of attaining a first-professional degree. Although it 

appears that men who have no children were more likely to earn a graduate degree than men with 

children, no statistical difference was detected. Among women, having a child was related 

negatively to overall graduate degree attainment, especially for completing a first-professional or 

doctoral degree. Because women with children needed more time than women without children 

to finish a degree, as described below, they were more likely to be still enrolled in 2003 (26 vs. 

13 percent). The same pattern was observed for men, but no statistical difference was detected 

(21 vs. 14 percent). 

Educational Expectations 

Graduates’ degree attainment did not align with their educational expectations at the time 

that they had completed a bachelor’s degree. This was especially true among those with doctoral 

degree aspirations: 11 percent of graduate students who expected to earn a doctoral degree at the 

time of bachelor’s degree completion (around 1993) had done so by 2003, and just 5 percent 

37 

—

Table 15.—

Table 15.—

Graduate Persistence and Attainment 

Table 15.	 Among 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients who enrolled in a graduate degree program by 

2003, percentage distribution of attainment and enrollment status in 2003, by gender and marital 

and parental status 1 year before graduate enrollment 

Attained Enrolled No

 First- First- degree, 

Gender and marital profes­ profes­ no longer 

and parental status Total Master’s1 sional Doctoral Total Master’s sional Doctoral enrolled

 Total 61.9 47.1 10.0 4.8 14.7 10.5 1.3 2.9 23.4 

Marital status year before

 graduate enrollment

 Single 66.0 46.8 13.2 6.0 11.5 6.8 1.5 3.2 22.5

 Married/cohabit as married 53.7 46.8 4.2 2.7 20.8 17.6 0.9 2.2 25.5

 Divorced/separated/widowed 53.1 50.4 1.8 0.8 23.9 17.9 1.9 4.1 23.1 

Number of dependent children year 

 before graduate enrollment

 None 63.9 47.5 11.1 5.3 13.3 8.9 1.4 3.0 22.9

 One or more 49.2 43.7 3.9 1.6 24.1 20.3 1.2 2.6 26.7 

Male

 Total 63.9 44.3 12.7 6.9 14.6 9.9 1.7 3.0 21.5 

Marital status year before

 graduate enrollment

 Single 66.4 42.3 16.1 8.1 12.8 8.0 2.1 2.7 20.8

 Married/cohabit as married 58.3 48.0 6.0 4.3 17.6 13.9 0.6 3.1 24.1

 Divorced/separated/widowed 58.1 52.4 5.7 # 32.4 17.2 3.5 11.7 9.4 

Number of dependent children year 

 before graduate enrollment

 None 65.1 44.1 13.7 7.3 13.9 9.2 1.9 2.8 21.0

 One or more 55.8 45.3 6.9 3.6 20.9 15.5 # 5.4 23.3 

Female

 Total 60.2 49.4 7.7 3.2 14.8 11.1 1.0 2.7 25.0 

Marital status year before

 graduate enrollment

 Single 65.6 50.7 10.8 4.1 10.4 5.8 1.0 3.6 24.1

 Married/cohabit as married 50.6 46.0 3.0 1.6 22.9 20.1 1.2 1.6 26.5

 Divorced/separated/widowed 50.8 49.5 # 1.2 20.0 18.2 1.2 0.6 29.3 

Number of dependent children year 

 before graduate enrollment

 None 62.9 50.5 8.8 3.7 12.7 8.7 0.9 3.1 24.4

 One or more 45.9 42.9 2.4 0.6 25.7 22.8 1.8 1.2 28.4 

# Rounds to zero.
 

1

 Students who have attained a master’s degree are identified as having a master’s degree if no higher degree was attained and
 

the student was not enrolled in a doctoral or first-professional degree program in 2003. 


NOTE: Estimates include students from the 50 states, DC, and Puerto Rico. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. 


Standard error tables are available at http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp.
 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993/03 Baccalaureate and Beyond 


Longitudinal Study (B&B:93/03).
 

38 

—

Table 16.—

Table 16.—

Graduate Persistence and Attainment 

were still enrolled in a doctoral program in 2003 (table 16). Some with doctoral degree 

aspirations had earned another graduate degree: 41 percent had earned a master’s degree, and 

another 10 percent had earned a first-professional degree. About 25 percent had left without 

completing any graduate degree. 

Table 16.	 Among 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients who had enrolled in a graduate degree program 

by 2003, percentage distribution of attainment and enrollment status in 2003, by educational 

expectations at bachelor’s degree completion 

Attained Enrolled No 

Educational expectations 

at bachelor’s degree 

completion Total Master’s1 

Firstprofessional Doctoral Total Master’s Firstprofessional Doctoral degree, 

no longer 

enrolled

 Total	 61.9 47.1 10.0 4.8 14.7 10.5 1.3 2.9 23.4

 Bachelor’s degree or less 53.2 44.7 6.2 2.3 23.2 15.8 4.6 2.7 23.7

 Master’s degree 60.5 57.1 2.5 0.8 15.5 12.7 0.9 2.0 24.0

 First-professional degree 74.3 19.0 46.4 8.9 9.1 4.8 3.0 1.3 16.7

 Doctoral degree 61.9 41.2 9.9 10.8 13.5 7.9 0.7 5.0 24.6 

1

 Students who have attained a master’s degree are identified as having a master’s degree if no higher degree was attained and
 

the student was not enrolled in a doctoral or first-professional degree program in 2003. 


NOTE: Estimates include students from the 50 states, DC, and Puerto Rico. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. 


Standard error tables are available at http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp.
 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993/03 Baccalaureate and Beyond 


Longitudinal Study (B&B:93/03).
 

Compared with those with doctoral degree expectations, those with first-professional or 

master’s degree expectations were more successful in achieving their goals: about 46 percent of 

graduate students with first-professional degree expectations and 57 percent of those with 

master’s degree expectations had earned their expected degree by 2003. Overall, graduate 

students with first-professional degree expectations were more likely than those with master’s or 

doctoral degree expectations to have attained a graduate degree (74 vs. 60 and 62 percent, 

respectively) and less likely to leave without attaining one (17 vs. 24 and 25 percent, 

respectively). 

As noted in table 4, about 17 percent of bachelor’s degree recipients with expectations no 

greater than a baccalaureate degree enrolled in a graduate degree program. Among these students, 

about one-half (53 percent) had earned a graduate degree by 2003, including 45 percent of a 

master’s degree, 6 percent of a first-professional degree, and 2 percent of a doctoral degree (table 

16). About 23 percent were still enrolled in a graduate degree program in 2003. 

39 

 

Graduate Persistence and Attainment 

Enrollment Characteristics 

As expected, graduate persistence and attainment were related to the time taken between 

bachelor’s degree completion and first enrollment in a graduate program. The shorter this time, 

the more likely students were to have earned a graduate degree by 2003 (table 17). On the other 

hand, the longer students delayed graduate enrollment, the more likely they were to be still 

enrolled. 

Other characteristics, such as enrollment continuity and intensity, are related to graduates’ 

rates of persistence and attainment. Graduate students who enrolled continuously and full time 

were more likely than those who took time off or enrolled part time to have earned a graduate 

degree and less likely to have left without a degree. Part-time graduate students typically need 

more time than their full-time counterparts to finish their degree and therefore were more likely 

to be still enrolled in 2003 (19 vs. 9 percent). 

Looking at major fields of study for the highest level of graduate enrollment, 82 percent of 

law majors had attained a graduate degree (mostly a professional law degree) by 2003, a higher 

percentage than for those with all other majors. Following law majors were health professions 

majors (70 percent had earned a graduate degree by 2003) and life and physical science majors 

(67 percent), but this latter percentage was not measurably different from that for most other 

majors.10 

Reasons for Leaving 

Considerable attention has been paid to graduate attrition (Bowen and Rudenstine 1992; 

National Academy of Sciences 1996), but little research has actually focused on student-reported 

reasons for leaving graduate school. During the B&B:93/03 follow-up interview, students who 

indicated they had entered a graduate degree program between 1997 and 2003 and had left 

without completing a degree were asked to report the reasons they left. One of the most common 

reasons reported by students was a change in family status (30 vs. 1 to 16 percent) (figure 1) 

which supports earlier findings in this report suggesting that single students and students who 

had no children when they received a bachelor’s degree were, in fact, more likely to persist and 

complete a graduate degree (table 15). According to student reports, other common reasons for 

leaving their graduate program without completing were related to their dissatisfaction with the 

program (16 percent), conflicts with their job and the military (17 percent) and needing to work 

(14 percent). 

10 It was significantly different from arts and humanities and law majors. 

40 

—

Table 17.—

Table 17.—

 

Graduate Persistence and Attainment 

Table 17.	 Among 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients who had enrolled in a graduate degree program 

by 2003, percentage distribution of attainment and enrollment status in 2003, by graduate 

enrollment characteristics 

Attained	 Enrolled No 

First- First- degree, 

Graduate enrollment profes- profes- no longer 

characteristics Total Master’s1 sional Doctoral Total Master’s sional Doctoral enrolled

 Total	 61.9 47.1 10.0 4.8 14.7 10.5 1.3 2.9 23.4 

Time between bachelor’s completion

 and first graduate enrollment

 1 year or less 68.6 44.2 14.9 9.6 7.1 3.0 0.8 3.3 24.3

 More than 1 to 3 years 63.4 49.0 11.2 3.1 9.3 5.2 0.8 3.3 27.4

 More than 3 to 5 years 64.8 56.8 6.0 2.0 10.2 6.8 0.8 2.7 25.0

 More than 5 years 44.9 41.6 2.8 0.6 40.4 35.0 3.6 1.8 14.7 

Continuity of graduate enrollment

 Continuously enrolled 67.0 47.1 14.7 5.3 15.6 11.4 1.9 2.2 17.4

 Took off at least one 

 semester or term 57.9 47.8 5.7 4.4 13.8 9.6 0.8 3.5 28.3 

Enrollment intensity

 Exclusively full-time 74.0 47.4 18.6 8.0 9.4 4.8 1.8 2.8 16.6

 Exclusively part-time 50.7 47.7 1.5 1.5 19.0 16.0 0.8 2.2 30.3

 Mix of full-time and

 part-time 	 51.6 42.9 3.4 5.3 39.5 20.8 1.3 17.4 8.9 

Major for highest graduate enrollment

 Arts and humanities 53.4 45.5 2.0 5.9 15.2 10.2 0.3 4.7 31.4

 Social and behavioral 

 sciences 57.3 50.9 # 6.4 20.1 10.1 # 10.0 22.7

 Life and physical sciences 67.0 38.7 1.0 27.4 6.6 3.7 0.6 2.2 26.4

 Engineering, mathematics,

 computer science 56.9 47.3 0.4 9.3 11.8 6.8 0.2 4.8 31.3

 Education 59.2 58.1 0.3 0.9 15.1 12.7 # 2.4 25.7

 Business and management 60.4 59.4 # 1.0 18.0 17.0 # 1.0 21.6

 Medicine/health 69.5 34.0 33.5 2.0 11.5 4.4 6.3 0.8 18.9

 Law 82.5 8.3 72.0 2.2 5.3 2.0 3.3 # 12.3

 Other 59.4 45.2 2.3 11.9 18.9 11.5 2.7 4.7 21.7 

# Rounds to zero.
 

1

 Students who have attained a master’s degree are identified as having a master’s degree if no higher degree was attained and
 

the student was not enrolled in a doctoral or first-professional degree program in 2003. 


NOTE: Estimates include students from the 50 states, DC, and Puerto Rico. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. 


Standard error tables are available at http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp.
 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993/03 Baccalaureate and Beyond 


Longitudinal Study (B&B:93/03).
 

41 

—

Figure 1.—

Graduate Persistence and Attainment 

Figure 1. Among 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients who enrolled in a graduate degree program 

between 1997 and 2003, percentage who left for various reasons 

Reasons for leaving 

Academic problems 

Scheduling 

Dissatisfied 

Program closed 

Done taking class 

Changed program 

Taking time off 

Enrollment not suitable 

Job/military conflict 

Needed to work 

Other financial reasons 

Change in family status 

Personal problems 

Other career interests 

Pursue other interests 

Other reason 26 

3 

9 

13 

30 

12 

14 

17 

7 

9 

2 

1 

1 

16 

7 

1 

0 10 20 30 40 50 

Percent 

NOTE: Estimates include students from the 50 states, DC, and Puerto Rico. Standard error tables are available at
 

http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp.
 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993/03 Baccalaureate and Beyond 


Longitudinal Study (B&B:93/03).
 

42 

 

—

Figure 2.—

Figure 2.—

Time to Graduate Degree 


The amount of time students took to complete a graduate degree depended on the type of 

degree they earned. Students who completed a graduate degree within the 10-year study period 

took an average of 3 years to complete a master’s degree, 4 years to complete a first-professional 

degree, and 6 years to complete a doctoral degree (figure 2).11 

Figure 2.	 Among 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients who had earned a graduate degree by 2003, 

average number of years between first graduate enrollment and attainment of highest 

graduate degree, by highest graduate degree earned 

Number of years 

Master’s First-professional Doctoral 

Highest graduate degree earned 

3 

4 

6 

0 

2 

4 

6 

8 

10 

NOTE: Estimates include students from the 50 states, DC, and Puerto Rico. Standard error tables are available at
 

http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp.
 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993/03 Baccalaureate and Beyond 


Longitudinal Study (B&B:93/03).
 

11 The time to graduate degree may be underestimated because some students had not yet graduated and were still enrolled in 

2003. 

43 

Time to Graduate Degree 

Master’s Degree 

A majority of master’s degree recipients (70 percent) finished that degree within 3 years, 22 

percent took 3–5 years, and 8 percent took more than 5 years (table 18a). The time it took to 

complete a master’s degree was related to several student characteristics. For example, Hispanic 

students took longer than Asian/Pacific Islander, Black, and White students to finish a master’s 

degree. Older students (age 30 or older) took longer than younger students (age 22 or younger) to 

finish. Students whose parents had only a high school education were more likely to take 5 years 

or longer to complete a master’s degree than those whose parents had a graduate degree. 

However, no gender differences were found in terms of the time it took to complete a master’s 

degree. 

Graduate students majoring in social and behavioral sciences were more likely than those 

majoring in life and physical sciences, business and management, education, and arts and 

humanities to finish a master’s degree within 3 years (86 percent vs. 53 to 70 percent). Graduate 

students majoring in medicine and health (85 percent) were also more likely than those majoring 

in business and management, education, and arts and humanities to finish a master’s degree 

within 3 years (53 to 67 percent). Those who majored in arts and humanities were the least likely 

to complete a master’s degree within that time frame (53 percent). 

In general, divorce, separation, or widowhood prolonged time to a master’s degree: 

students who were divorced, separated, or widowed before enrolling in a master’s degree 

program took more time to finish a master’s degree than those who were either single or married 

(table 18b). However, this relationship was observed only for women. Having one or more 

children was also related to taking a longer time to obtain a master’s degree. Again, this 

relationship was observed only for women. 

Late starters in a master’s degree program seemed to finish that degree faster: those who 

had delayed graduate enrollment for more than 5 years after receiving a bachelor’s degree took 

about 2 years to complete a master’s degree, whereas those who had enrolled immediately took 

about 3 years to do so (table 18c). As expected, disrupted and part-time enrollment increased 

time to master’s degree: students who took off at least one semester or enrolled part time took 

longer to finish than those enrolled continuously or full time or a mix of full and part time. 

44 

—

Table 18a.—

Table 18a.—

Time to Graduate Degree 

Table 18a.	 Among 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients who had earned a master’s degree by 2003, 

average number of years and percentage distribution of time from first graduate enrollment 

to completion of master’s degree, by selected student characteristics 

Average Percentage distribution 

number of 3 years More than 3 More than 

Student characteristics years or less to 5 years 5 years

 Total 2.7 69.9 21.7 8.5 

Gender

 Male 2.7 72.1 19.1 8.8

 Female 2.8 68.3 23.5 8.3 

Race/ethnicity1

 White 2.7 69.8 22.4 7.8

 Black 2.8 75.4 11.1 13.5

 Hispanic 3.4 51.3 33.3 15.3

 Asian/Pacific Islander 2.3 87.4 5.4 7.2 

Age at bachelor’s degree completion

 22 or younger 2.7 72.6 20.2 7.2

 23–24 2.6 76.0 16.3 7.8

 25–29 3.4 54.0 30.3 15.7

 30 or older 3.0 59.5 29.6 11.0 

Highest education level by either parent

 Less than high school 2.4 77.2 22.8 #

 High school or equivalency 2.9 67.8 19.8 12.4

 Some postsecondary 2.7 69.7 22.0 8.3

 Bachelor’s degree 2.8 68.8 22.8 8.5

 Advanced degree 2.5 74.5 20.9 4.6 

Major for master’s degree

 Arts and humanities 3.1 52.5 39.2 8.3

 Social and behavioral sciences 2.3 85.5 11.2 3.2

 Life and physical sciences 2.7 70.0 24.4 5.6

 Engineering, mathematics,

 computer science 2.6 73.4 15.2 11.4

 Education 2.8 67.5 22.2 10.3

 Business and management 2.8 67.1 25.4 7.5

 Medicine/health 2.5 84.7 10.9 4.4

 Law ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡

 Other 2.8 69.8 19.9 10.3 

# Rounds to zero. 

‡ Reporting standards not met. (Too few cases for a reliable estimate.)
 

1 Black includes African American, Pacific Islander includes Native Hawaiian, and Hispanic includes Latino. Included in the
 

totals but not shown separately are data for American Indian/Alaska Native respondents and those who identified themselves
 

with another race not shown. Race categories exclude Hispanic origin unless specified.
 

NOTE: Estimates include students from the 50 states, DC, and Puerto Rico. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. 


Standard error tables are available at http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp.
 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993/03 Baccalaureate and Beyond 


Longitudinal Study (B&B:93/03).
 

45 

—

Table 18b.—

Table 18b.—

Table 18b.—

Time to Graduate Degree 

Table 18b.	 Among 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients who had earned a master’s degree by 2003, 

average number of years and percentage distribution of time from first graduate enrollment 

to completion of master’s degree, by gender and marital and parental status 1 year before 

graduate enrollment 

Gender and marital and parental status 

Average 

number of 

years 

3 years 

or less 

More than 3 More than 

to 5 years 5 years

Percentage distribution 

 Total 2.7 69.9 21.7 8.5 

Marital status year before graduate 

 enrollment

 Single 

 Married/cohabit as married 

 Divorced/separated/widowed 

2.7 

2.8 

3.3 

71.0 

70.3 

53.2 

21.3 

20.6 

31.7 

7.7

9.1

15.1 

Number of dependent children year 

 before graduate enrollment

 None 

 One or more 

2.7 

3.0 

71.1 

61.3 

20.6 

28.6 

8.3

10.1 

Male

 Total 2.7 72.1 19.1 8.8 

Marital status year before graduate 

 enrollment

 Single 

 Married/cohabit as married 

 Divorced/separated/widowed 

2.7 

2.7 

‡ 

73.1 

74.5 

‡ 

18.2 

16.7 

‡ 

8.7

8.8

‡ 

Number of dependent children year 

 before graduate enrollment

 None 

 One or more 

2.7 

2.8 

72.8 

65.4 

18.3 

26.6 

8.9

8.1 

Female

 Total 2.8 68.3 23.5 8.3 

Marital status year before graduate 

 enrollment

 Single 

 Married/cohabit as married 

 Divorced/separated/widowed 

2.7 

2.8 

3.4 

69.4 

67.4 

55.3 

23.5 

23.2 

26.8 

7.0

9.4

18.0 

Number of dependent children year 

 before graduate enrollment

 None 

 One or more 

2.7 

3.1 

69.9 

59.2 

22.3 

29.7 

7.8

11.1 

‡ Reporting standards not met. (Too few cases for a reliable estimate.)
 

NOTE: Estimates include students from the 50 states, DC, and Puerto Rico. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. 


Standard error tables are available at http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp.
 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993/03 Baccalaureate and Beyond 


Longitudinal Study (B&B:93/03).
 

46 

—

Table 18c.—

Table 18c.—

Time to Graduate Degree 

Table 18c.	 Among 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients who had earned a master’s degree by 2003, 

average number of years and percentage distribution of time from first graduate enrollment 

to completion of master’s degree, by graduate enrollment characteristics 

Average Percentage distribution 

number of 3 years More than 3 More than 

Graduate enrollment characteristics years or less to 5 years 5 years

 Total 2.7 69.9 21.7 8.5 

Time between bachelor’s degree and

 graduate enrollment

 1 year or less 2.9 66.0 24.1 10.0

 More than 1 to 3 years 2.9 65.2 22.2 12.6

 More than 3 to 5 years 2.7 68.1 24.7 7.2

 More than 5 years 2.1 87.3 12.7 # 

Continuity of graduate enrollment

 Continuously enrolled 2.3 82.1 15.5 2.4

 Took off at least one semester or term 3.1 58.5 27.4 14.1 

Enrollment intensity

 Exclusively full-time 2.1 88.9 9.1 2.0

 Exclusively part-time 3.5 49.3 35.5 15.3

 Mix of full-time and part-time 2.7 81.9 9.8 8.3 

# Rounds to zero.
 

NOTE: Estimates include students from the 50 states, DC, and Puerto Rico. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. 


Standard error tables are available at http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp.
 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993/03 Baccalaureate and Beyond 


Longitudinal Study (B&B:93/03).
 

First-Professional Degree 

First-professional degree programs are usually highly structured programs that take a set 

amount of time. First-professional degree recipients took about 4 years to finish that degree, and 

87 percent finished within 5 years (table 19a). No gender differences were detected in their time 

to degree completion. Those who earned a first-professional degree were most likely to choose 

medical/health professions and law as their major fields of study (see table 13). A majority of 

health professions degree recipients (79 percent) took 3 to 5 years to finish a degree, the typical 

time for completing medical school. About 17 percent of health professions degree recipients 

finished a degree after more than 5 years. Most law degree recipients (79 percent) finished a 

degree within 3 years, the typical duration of law school, and 21 percent of them took more than 

3 years to finish their law degree. 

47 

—

Table 19a.—

Table 19a.—

Time to Graduate Degree 

Table 19a.	 Among 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients who had earned a first-professional degree by 

2003, average number of years and percentage distribution of time from first graduate 

enrollment to completion of first-professional degree, by selected student characteristics 

Average Percentage distribution 

number of 3 years More than 3 More than 5 More than 6 

Student characteristics years or less to 5 years to 6 years to 10 years

 Total 3.7 46.0 40.7 9.1 4.3 

Gender

 Male 3.7 43.3 45.4 7.8 3.5

 Female 3.7 50.1 33.6 10.9 5.3 

Race/ethnicity1

 White 3.6 50.7 38.1 6.8 4.3

 Black ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡

 Hispanic ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡

 Asian/Pacific Islander 4.2 24.7 53.2 16.8 5.4 

Age at bachelor’s degree completion

 22 or younger 3.8 43.8 41.7 10.1 4.4

 23–24 3.8 38.9 51.4 6.4 3.4

 25–29 ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡

 30 or older ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ 

Highest education level by either parent

 Less than high school ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡

 High school or equivalency 3.3 60.6 31.5 3.4 4.5

 Some postsecondary 4.3 35.6 32.2 26.6 5.6

 Bachelor’s degree 3.8 38.4 49.1 8.2 4.3

 Advanced degree 3.5 51.2 41.2 5.6 2.1 

Major for first-professional degree

 Arts and humanities ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡

 Social and behavioral sciences ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡

 Life and physical sciences ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡

 Engineering, mathematics,

 computer science ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡

 Education ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡

 Business and management ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡

 Medicine/health 4.3 4.2 79.3 10.4 6.2

 Law 3.1 78.5 13.6 5.7 2.3

 Other ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ 

‡ Reporting standards not met. (Too few cases for a reliable estimate.)
 

1 Black includes African American, Pacific Islander includes Native Hawaiian, and Hispanic includes Latino. Included in the
 

totals but not shown separately are data for American Indian/Alaska Native respondents and those who identified themselves
 

with another race not shown. Race categories exclude Hispanic origin unless specified.
 

NOTE: Estimates include students from the 50 states, DC, and Puerto Rico. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. 


Standard error tables are available at http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp.
 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993/03 Baccalaureate and Beyond 


Longitudinal Study (B&B:93/03).
 

48 

Time to Graduate Degree 

Overall, single and married students did not differ in terms of the number of years it took 

them to finish a first-professional degree (table 19b). However, married students appeared to be 

more likely than their single counterparts to finish a first-professional degree within 3 years (65 

vs. 43 percent), whereas single students were more likely to finish in 3 to 5 years (44 vs. 19 

percent). Because few first-professional degree recipients had dependent children before graduate 

enrollment, statistical comparisons were not possible. 

First-professional degree recipients who interrupted their enrollment took more time to 

complete a first-professional degree than those who did not take a break (4 vs. 3 years) (table 

19c). No difference in time to degree was found between those who had enrolled in a graduate 

degree program immediately after completing a bachelor’s degree and those who had delayed 

their enrollment for 1 to 3 years. Because few first-professional degree recipients attended part 

time, comparison between full- and part-time students was not possible. 

Doctoral Degree 

Doctoral degree recipients took about 6 years to complete that degree (table 20a). About 

two-thirds (65 percent) took more than 5 years to finish, 29 percent took 3 to 5 years to finish, 

and the remaining 6 percent finished within 3 years. National data from the Survey of Earned 

Doctorates reported the median number of years it takes students to complete a doctoral degree is 

8 years (Hoffer et al. 2005). Because so few students had earned a doctoral degree by 2003 (only 

5 percent of all graduate students; see table 12), comparisons between many subgroups of 

doctoral degree recipients were not possible due to small sample sizes and large standard errors 

(tables 20a, 20b, and 20c), with the exception that doctoral degree students who were enrolled 

continuously took less time to earn a degree than those who were not continuously enrolled (5 vs. 

6 years) (table 20c). Although women appeared to be more likely than men to complete a 

doctoral degree within 3 years (11 vs. 3 percent), and men appeared to be more likely than 

women to finish in more than 6 years (29 vs. 22 percent), none of these differences were 

statistically measurable. 

49 

—

Table 19b.—

Table 19b.—

Table 19b.—

Time to Graduate Degree 

Table 19b.	 Among 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients who had earned a first-professional degree by 

2003, average number of years and percentage distribution of time from first graduate 

enrollment to completion of first-professional degree, by gender and marital and parental status 

1 year before graduate enrollment 

Gender and marital and 

parental status 

Average 

number of 

years 

3 years 

or less 

Percentage distribution 

More than 3 More than 5 

to 5 years to 6 years 

More than 6 

to 10 years

 Total 3.7 46.0 40.7 9.1 4.3 

Marital status year before graduate 

 enrollment

 Single 

 Married/cohabit as married 

 Divorced/separated/widowed 

3.7 

3.4 

‡ 

43.4 

64.9 

‡ 

43.7 

19.0 

‡ 

8.4 

13.7 

‡ 

4.6

2.5

‡ 

Number of dependent children year 

 before graduate enrollment

 None 

 One or more 

3.8 

‡ 

43.4 

‡ 

42.5 

‡ 

9.6 

‡ 

4.5

‡ 

Male

 Total 3.7 43.3 45.4 7.8 3.5 

Marital status year before graduate 

 enrollment

 Single 

 Married/cohabit as married 

 Divorced/separated/widowed 

3.8 

‡ 

‡ 

39.0 

‡ 

‡ 

49.4 

‡ 

‡ 

7.5 

‡ 

‡ 

4.1

‡

‡ 

Number of dependent children year 

 before graduate enrollment

 None 

 One or more 

3.8 

‡ 

40.7 

‡ 

47.4 

‡ 

8.3 

‡ 

3.7

‡ 

Female

 Total 3.7 50.1 33.6 10.9 5.3 

Marital status year before graduate 

 enrollment

 Single 

 Married/cohabit as married 

 Divorced/separated/widowed 

3.7 

‡ 

‡ 

48.9 

‡ 

‡ 

36.4 

‡ 

‡ 

9.5 

‡ 

‡ 

5.3

‡

‡ 

Number of dependent children year 

 before graduate enrollment

 None 

 One or more 

3.8 

‡ 

47.7 

‡ 

35.2 

‡ 

11.5 

‡ 

5.6

‡ 

‡ Reporting standards not met. (Too few cases for a reliable estimate.) 

NOTE: Estimates include students from the 50 states, DC, and Puerto Rico. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. 


Standard error tables are available at http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp.
 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993/03 Baccalaureate and Beyond 


Longitudinal Study (B&B:93/03).
 

50 

—

Table 19c.—

Table 19c.—

Time to Graduate Degree 

Table 19c.	 Among 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients who had earned a first-professional degree by 

2003, average number of years and percentage distribution of time from first graduate 

enrollment to completion of first-professional degree, by graduate enrollment characteristics 

Average 

Graduate enrollment number of 

characteristics years 

3 years 

or less 

Percentage distribution 

More than 3 More than 5 

to 5 years to 6 years 

More than 6 

to 10 years

 Total 3.7 46.0 40.7 9.1 4.3 

Time between bachelor’s degree and

 graduate enrollment

 1 year or less 3.9 

 More than 1 to 3 years 3.5 

 More than 3 to 5 years ‡ 

 More than 5 years ‡ 

40.7 

51.5 

‡ 

‡ 

45.9 7.7 

37.6 8.4 

‡ ‡ 

‡ ‡ 

5.8

2.6

‡

‡ 

Continuity of graduate enrollment

 Continuously enrolled 3.4 

 Took off at least one semester 

or term 4.4 

52.9 

29.0 

40.7 5.3 

40.9 18.4 

1.2

11.7 

Enrollment intensity

 Exclusively full-time 3.6 

 Exclusively part-time ‡ 

 Mix of full-time and part-time ‡ 

47.2 

‡ 

‡ 

41.5 8.5 

‡ ‡ 

‡ ‡ 

2.7

‡

‡ 

‡ Reporting standards not met. (Too few cases for a reliable estimate.)
 

NOTE: Estimates include students from the 50 states, DC, and Puerto Rico. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. 


Standard error tables are available at http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp.
 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993/03 Baccalaureate and Beyond 


Longitudinal Study (B&B:93/03).
 

51 

—

Table 20a.—

Table 20a.—

Time to Graduate Degree 

Table 20a.	 Among 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients who had earned a doctoral degree by 2003, 

average number of years and percentage distribution of time from first graduate enrollment to 

completion of doctoral degree, by selected student characteristics 

Average Percentage distribution 

number of 3 years More than 3 More than 5 More than 6 

Student characteristics years or less to 5 years to 6 years to 10 years

 Total 5.8 5.9 28.9 38.6 26.6 

Gender

 Male 6.0 2.9 28.3 39.3 29.5

 Female 5.6 11.0 29.9 37.3 21.8 

Race/ethnicity1

 White 5.8 6.5 29.1 36.9 27.5

 Black ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡

 Hispanic ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡

 Asian/Pacific Islander ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ 

Age at bachelor’s degree completion

 22 or younger 5.7 6.2 32.2 34.5 27.2

 23–24 ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡

 25–29 ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡

 30 or older ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ 

Highest education level by either parent

 Less than high school ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡

 High school or equivalency ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡

 Some postsecondary ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡

 Bachelor’s degree 5.6 7.9 28.2 52.1 11.9

 Advanced degree 5.9 3.4 28.3 45.4 23.0 

Major for doctoral degree

 Arts and humanities ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡

 Social and behavioral sciences ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡

 Life and physical sciences 6.0 1.5 24.3 52.7 21.6

 Engineering, mathematics,

 computer science ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡

 Education ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡

 Business and management ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡

 Medicine/health ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡

 Law ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡

 Other 5.5 6.8 43.3 18.0 31.9 

‡ Reporting standards not met. (Too few cases for a reliable estimate.)
 

1 Black includes African American, Pacific Islander includes Native Hawaiian, and Hispanic includes Latino. Included in the
 

totals but not shown separately are data for American Indian/Alaska Native respondents and those who identified themselves
 

with another race not shown. Race categories exclude Hispanic origin unless specified.
 

NOTE: Estimates include students from the 50 states, DC, and Puerto Rico. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. 


Standard error tables are available at http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp.
 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993/03 Baccalaureate and Beyond 


Longitudinal Study (B&B:93/03).
 

52 

—

Table 20b.—

Table 20b.—

Table 20b.—

Time to Graduate Degree 

Table 20b.	 Among 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients who had earned a doctoral degree by 2003, 

average number of years and percentage distribution of time from first graduate enrollment to 

completion of doctoral degree, by gender and marital and parental status 1 year before 

graduate enrollment 

Gender and marital and 

parental status 

Average 

number of 

years 

3 years 

or less 

Percentage distribution 

More than 3 More than 5 

to 5 years to 6 years 

More than 6 

to 10 years

 Total 5.8 5.9 28.9 38.6 26.6 

Marital status year before graduate 

 enrollment

 Single 

 Married/cohabit as married 

 Divorced/separated/widowed 

5.9 

‡ 

‡ 

5.0 

‡ 

‡ 

29.3 

‡ 

‡ 

38.2 

‡ 

‡ 

27.6

‡

‡ 

Number of dependent children year 

 before graduate enrollment

 None 

 One or more 

5.9 

‡ 

5.7 

‡ 

29.6 

‡ 

36.8 

‡ 

27.9

‡ 

Male

 Total 6.0 2.9 28.3 39.3 29.5 

Marital status year before graduate 

 enrollment

 Single 

 Married/cohabit as married 

 Divorced/separated/widowed 

5.9 

‡ 

‡ 

3.6 

‡ 

‡ 

29.3 

‡ 

‡ 

38.7 

‡ 

‡ 

28.4

‡

‡ 

Number of dependent children year 

 before graduate enrollment

 None 

 One or more 

6.0 

‡ 

3.1 

‡ 

30.0 

‡ 

35.8 

‡ 

31.2

‡ 

Female

 Total 5.6 11.0 29.9 37.3 21.8 

Marital status year before graduate 

 enrollment

 Single 

 Married/cohabit as married 

 Divorced/separated/widowed 

5.8 

‡ 

‡ 

7.4 

‡ 

‡ 

29.3 

‡ 

‡ 

37.2 

‡ 

‡ 

26.2

‡

‡ 

Number of dependent children year 

 before graduate enrollment

 None 

 One or more 

5.7 

‡ 

10.0 

‡ 

29.0 

‡ 

38.5 

‡ 

22.5

‡ 

‡ Reporting standards not met. (Too few cases for a reliable estimate.) 

NOTE: Estimates include students from the 50 states, DC, and Puerto Rico. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. 


Standard error tables are available at http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp.
 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993/03 Baccalaureate and Beyond 


Longitudinal Study (B&B:93/03).
 

53 

—

Table 20c.—

Table 20c.—

Time to Graduate Degree 

Table 20c.	 Among 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients who had earned a doctoral degree by 2003, 

average number of years and percentage distribution of time from first graduate enrollment to 

completion of doctoral degree, by graduate enrollment characteristics 

Average 

Graduate enrollment number of 

characteristics years 

3 years 

or less 

Percentage distribution 

More than 3 More than 5 

to 5 years to 6 years 

More than 6 

to 10 years

 Total 5.8 5.9 28.9 38.6 26.6 

Time between bachelor’s degree 

 and graduate enrollment

 1 year or less 6.1 

 More than 1 to 3 years 5.5 

 More than 3 to 5 years ‡ 

 More than 5 years ‡ 

4.1 

7.1 

‡ 

‡ 

25.6 37.2 

32.5 45.8 

‡ ‡ 

‡ ‡ 

33.1

14.6

‡

‡ 

Continuity of graduate enrollment

 Continuously enrolled 5.4 

 Took off at least one semester 

or term 6.4 

7.1 

4.6 

40.1 37.6 

16.2 39.6 

15.2

39.6 

Enrollment intensity

 Exclusively full-time 5.8 

 Exclusively part-time ‡ 

 Mix of full-time and part-time ‡ 

6.5 

‡ 

‡ 

28.8 40.5 

‡ ‡ 

‡ ‡ 

24.3

‡

‡ 

‡ Reporting standards not met. (Too few cases for a reliable estimate.)
 

NOTE: Estimates include students from the 50 states, DC, and Puerto Rico. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. 


Standard error tables are available at http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp.
 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993/03 Baccalaureate and Beyond 


Longitudinal Study (B&B:93/03).
 

54 

 

Factors Related to Graduate Enrollment, Persistence, and 

Attainment 

The tabular analyses described in this report show that many factors are related to graduate 

enrollment, persistence, and attainment. However, these relationships are bivariate and may 

reflect more complex relationships among multiple factors. For example, while the findings 

presented in table 12 indicate that younger students were more likely than older students to have 

earned a graduate degree by 2003, this may be due partially to the fact that younger students were 

more likely to enroll full time and were less likely to take time off (table 11), two factors 

significantly related to graduate degree completion (table 15). Because a bivariate relationship 

may conceal more complex relationships among several variables, the next step in this analysis is 

to examine the unique relationship between two variables while taking other variables into 

account. This approach is sometimes referred to as “commonality analysis,” in which a multiple 

linear regression is used to look at the relationship between an independent variable and an 

outcome variable while adjusting for the common variation among a group of independent 

variables.12 

For the purpose of this study, commonality analysis was performed on three outcome 

variables. The first analysis focuses on factors related to students’ likelihood of enrolling in a 

graduate degree program after receiving a bachelor’s degree. The independent variables 

examined in this analysis include demographic characteristics (gender, race/ethnicity, age, 

parents’ education, marital status, and dependent status); academic characteristics (bachelor’s 

degree major, bachelor’s degree GPA); and educational expectations at the time of bachelor’s 

degree completion. The second analysis examines factors related to the likelihood that graduate 

students had completed a graduate degree by 2003. The independent variables examined in the 

second and third analysis include student characteristics (age, gender, race/ethnicity, marital and 

parental status before graduate enrollment, and parents’ education); academic characteristics 

(educational expectations, undergraduate major and GPA, and type of bachelor’s degree-granting 

institution); and graduate enrollment characteristics (entry time, enrollment continuity and 

intensity, type of program, graduate degree major, and whether the student ever received grants, 

employer assistance, or a tuition waiver). The last analysis broadens the definition of degree 

12 See Technical Notes and Methodology in appendix B for more information about multivariate commonality analysis. 

55 

Factors Related to Graduate Enrollment, Persistence, and Attainment 

completion to include students who had completed a graduate degree or were still enrolled in a 

graduate degree program as of 2003 (often referred to as “persistence to a degree”). 

Graduate Enrollment 

The results of the analysis examining students’ likelihood of enrolling in a graduate degree 

program are shown in table 21. All 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients are included in the 

table. The first column shows the percentage of students who had enrolled in a graduate degree 

program by 2003 before controlling for all independent variables included in the model. The 

second column presents the least squares coefficients (expressed as percentages) from the 

commonality analysis. These coefficients represent the difference (either higher or lower) in 

percentage points that might be expected between the analysis group (e.g., male students) and the 

comparison group (e.g., female students) after controlling for the interrelationship of all other 

independent variables included in the analysis. Comparison groups are shown in italics. 

Significant least squares coefficients (indicated by asterisks) mean that the observed differences 

in the likelihood of attaining a graduate degree between the comparison groups and the analysis 

groups remain even after taking into account the covariation of all other independent variables. 

The relationship between two demographic variables (race/ethnicity and number of 

dependents) and graduate enrollment diminished after controlling for all other independent 

variables. After controlling for other factors, many demographic and academic characteristics 

(students’ age, undergraduate major and GPA, marital status, educational expectations, and 

parents’ education) maintained a significant relationship with enrollment in graduate school. For 

example, enrollment rates among students age 22 or younger were higher than among students 

ages 23–29. The relationship between graduate enrollment and parents’ highest education level 

only partially remained. Students whose parents held a graduate degree were more likely to enroll 

in a graduate program than students whose parents had a high school degree or equivalent. 

Academic characteristics from students’ undergraduate experience retained a significant 

relationship with enrollment in a graduate or first-professional degree program. Regardless of all 

other characteristics, students who had majored in biological sciences as undergraduates were 

more likely to enroll in graduate school than students who had majored in business and 

management, engineering, public affairs/social services, mathematics and other sciences, social 

science, and other fields. Students’ undergraduate academic achievement retained a strong 

positive relationship with graduate enrollment, with students who had GPAs of 3.5 or above 

being more likely to enroll than those with lower GPAs. 

56 

—

Table 21.—

Table 21.—

Factors Related to Graduate Enrollment, Persistence, and Attainment 

Table 21.	 Among 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients, percentage who had enrolled in a graduate or firstprofessional degree program by 2003 and least squares coefficients and standard errors, by 

selected student characteristics

Any graduate enrollment 

 Unadjusted Least squares Standard 

Student characteristics percentages1 coefficient2 error 

3

 Total	 40.0 33.8 5.37 

Gender

 Female 38.6 -1.5 2.22

 Male 41.1 † † 

Race/ethnicity4

 Black 45.4 * 7.0 4.45

 Hispanic 43.7 5.7 4.82

 Asian/Pacific Islander 41.5 -0.8 4.82

 White 39.2 † † 

Age at bachelor’s degree completion

 23–24 32.1 * -8.7 * 2.59

 25–29 27.2 * -12.1 * 3.52

 30 or older 36.2 * -6.5 3.52

 22 or younger 48.3 † † 

Highest education level by either parent

 Less than high school 33.7 * -8.2 5.56

 High school or equivalency 33.7 * -6.9 * 2.96

 Some postsecondary 39.1 * -4.2 3.15

 Bachelor’s degree 39.7 * -3.4 2.96

 Advanced degree 48.5 † † 

Baccalaureate degree major

 Business and management 25.3 * -24.6 * 5.37

 Education 50.1 * -6.5 7.22

 Engineering 39.2 * -17.8 * 5.56

 Health professions 36.3 * -5.1 5.74

 Public affairs/social services 36.0 * -12.5 * 6.30

 Mathematics and other sciences 48.6 * -15.8 * 6.30

 Social science 47.9 * -16.5 * 7.41

 History 51.9 * -8.5 6.48

 Humanities 40.7 * -10.1 5.93

 Psychology 55.0 * -7.6 9.08

 Other 34.3 * -16.8 * 5.93

 Biological sciences 66.9 † † 

Bachelor’s degree GPA

 Under 2.5 23.5 * -23.0 * 3.52

 2.5–2.99 35.6 * -14.4 * 2.96

 3.0–3.49 43.4 * -9.2 * 2.78

 3.5 or above	 52.2 † † 

See notes at end of table. 

57 
 

 

— 

Table 21.— 

Table 21.— 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Factors Related to Graduate Enrollment, Persistence, and Attainment 

Table 21.	 Among 1992–93 bachelor's degree recipients, percentage who had enrolled in a graduate or firstprofessional degree program by 2003 and least squares coefficients and standard errors, by 

selected student characteristics—Continued 

Any graduate enrollment 

Unadjusted Least squares Standard 

Student characteristics percentages1 coefficient2 error 

3 

Marital status in 1997 

Single 45.0 * 6.0 * 2.41 

Divorced/separated/widowed 44.9 9.1 5.00 

Married or cohabiting 35.1 † † 

Number of dependents in 1997 

None 42.3 * 2.0 2.96 

One or more 33.2 † † 

Educational expectations at bachelor’s completion 

Master’s degree 35.4 * 14.8 * 2.96 

First-professional degree 69.5 * 40.4 * 5.00 

Doctoral degree 63.0 * 36.1 * 3.52 

Bachelor’s degree or less 16.7 † † 

† Not applicable for the reference group.
 

* p < .05.
 1 The estimates are from 1993/03 Baccalaureate and Beyond Longitudinal Study (B&B:93/03) Data Analysis System.
 

2 Least squares coefficients, multiplied by 100 to reflect percentages (see appendix B).
 

3 Standard error of least squares coefficient, adjusted for design effect, multiplied by 100 to reflect percentages (see appendix B).
 

4 Black includes African American, Pacific Islander includes Native Hawaiian, and Hispanic includes Latino. Included in the
 

totals but not shown separately are data for American Indian/Alaska Native respondents and those who identified themselves
 

with another race not shown. Race categories exclude Hispanic origin unless specified.
 

NOTE: The italicized group in each category is the reference group being compared. Estimates include students from the
 

50 states, DC, and Puerto Rico.
 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993/03 Baccalaureate and Beyond
 

Longitudinal Study (B&B:93/03).
 

Completion of Graduate Degrees 

The results of the analysis examining students’ likelihood of earning a graduate degree are 

presented in table 22. Only bachelor’s degree recipients enrolled in a graduate degree program 

were included. The first column provides the observed percentagesthat is, the proportion of 

students who had earned a graduate degree by 2003 before controlling for all independent 

variables included in the analysis. The second column presents the least squares coefficients 

(expressed as percentages) from the commonality analysis. 

The relationship between many demographic variables (e.g., students’ race/ethnicity, 

marital and parental status, educational expectations, and parents’ education) and graduate degree 

58
 
—

Table 22.—

Table 22.—

Table 22.—

 

 

Factors Related to Graduate Enrollment, Persistence, and Attainment 

Table 22.	 Among 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients who had enrolled in a graduate degree program 

by 2003, percentage who had attained a graduate degree by 2003 and percentage who had 

attained a graduate degree or were still enrolled in a graduate program by 2003 and least 

squares coefficients and standard errors, by selected student characteristics 

Attained a graduate degree 

Attained a graduate degree or were 

still enrolled in a graduate program 

Student characteristics 

Unadjusted 

percentages1 

Least squares 

coefficient2 

Standard 

error 3 

Unadjusted 

percentages1 

Least squares 

coefficient2 

Standard 

error 3

 Total 61.9 19.2 12.84 76.5 49.8 13.05 

Gender

 Female 63.6 -3.1 3.50 75.0 -3.5 3.60

 Male 60.5 † † 78.5 † † 

Race/ethnicity4

 Black 57.9 -4.5 6.61 79.0 2.7 6.75

 Hispanic 59.1 -3.3 7.39 75.2 -1.1 7.42

 Asian/Pacific Islander 61.5 -0.9 7.78 77.9 1.6 7.87

 American Indian/Alaska Native 66.1 3.7 27.62 81.5 5.2 28.12

 White 62.4 † † 76.3 † † 

Age at bachelor’s degree completion

 23–24 55.2 * -9.4 * 4.28 72.7 -6.0 4.50

 25–29 57.9 -6.7 6.61 73.9 -4.8 6.75

 30 or older 62.4 -2.2 7.00 74.9 -3.8 7.20

 22 or younger 64.6 † † 78.7 † † 

Highest education level by either parent

 Less than high school 58.0 -6.5 9.53 74.6 -3.6 9.67

 High school or equivalency 59.6 -4.9 4.86 73.7 -4.5 4.95

 Some postsecondary 61.6 -2.9 4.86 76.3 -1.9 4.95

 Bachelor’s degree 61.3 -3.2 4.47 77.5 -0.7 4.50

 Advanced degree 64.5 † † 78.2 † † 

Educational expectations at bachelor’s 

 degree in 1993

 Master’s degree 62.8 5.2 7.20 78.3 0.8 7.20

 First-professional degree 63.6 6.0 8.75 75.6 -1.9 9.00

 Doctoral degree 60.6 3.0 7.39 74.0 -3.5 7.65

 Bachelor’s degree or less 57.6 † † 77.5 † † 

Marital status year before graduate

 enrollment

 Single 62.7 2.7 4.47 76.7 0.9 4.50

 Divorced/separated/widowed 61.5 1.5 8.75 80.3 4.5 9.00

 Married/cohabit as married 60.0 † † 75.8 † † 

Number of dependent children year

 before graduate enrollment

 One or more 58.9 -3.4 6.42 77.8 1.5 6.52

 None 62.3 † † 76.3 † † 

Time between bachelor’s degree 

 and graduate enrollment

 More than 1 to 3 years 64.6 -4.2 4.28 73.7 0.2 4.27

 More than 3 to 5 years 64.1 -4.7 5.45 75.7 2.2 5.62

 More than 5 years 43.6 * -25.2 * 5.83 87.1 * 13.6 * 5.85

 1 year or less 68.8 † † 73.5 † † 

See notes at end of table. 

59 
—

Table 22.—

Table 22.—

Table 22.—

 

 

 

Factors Related to Graduate Enrollment, Persistence, and Attainment 

Table 22.	 Among 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients who had enrolled in a graduate degree program 

by 2003, percentage who had attained a graduate degree by 2003 and percentage who had 

attained a graduate degree or were still enrolled in a graduate program by 2003 and least 

squares coefficients and standard errors, by selected student characteristics—Continued 

Student characteristics 

Unadjusted Least squares Standard 

percentages1 coefficient2 error 3 

Attained a graduate degree 

Unadjusted Least squares Standard 

percentages1 coefficient2 error 3 

Attained a graduate degree or were 

still enrolled in a graduate program 

Highest graduate enrollment

 Master 65.8 * 21.1 * 6.61 76.3 -0.4 6.75

 First-professional 

 Doctoral 

53.4 

44.7 

8.7 

† 

8.95 

† 

77.6 

76.7 

0.9 

† 

9.00

† 

Multiple graduate enrollment

 Multiple enrollment 

 Single enrollment 

68.7 * 

59.6 

9.1 * 

† 

4.47 

† 

90.8 * 

71.7 

19.1 * 

† 

4.50

† 

Continuity of graduate enrollment

 Continuously enrolled 

 Took off at least one semester or 

67.9 * 

56.4 

11.5 * 

† 

3.89 

† 

79.7 

73.6 

6.1 

† 

3.82

†

 term 

Enrollment intensity

 Exclusively full-time 

 Mix of full-time and part-time 

 Exclusively part-time 

72.2 * 

57.6 

51.5 

20.7 * 

6.1 

† 

3.89 

10.70 

† 

82.9 * 

85.5 

69.5 

13.4 * 

16.0 

† 

3.82

10.80

† 

Major for highest graduate enrollment

 Social and behavioral sciences 54.5 4.5 8.56 77.2 9.4 8.77

 Life and physical sciences 

 Engineering, mathematics, 

 computer science

 Education 

62.3 

55.5 

64.6 * 

12.3 

5.5 

14.6 * 

10.11 

8.75 

7.00 

69.9 

68.8 

79.6 

2.1 

1.0 

11.8 

10.12

9.00

7.20

 Business and management 

 Medicine/health 

 Law 

63.1 

63.2 

75.7 * 

13.1 

13.2 

25.7 * 

7.20 

8.17 

10.50 

78.6 

77.6 

80.9 

10.8 

9.8 

13.1 

7.20

8.32

10.57

 Other 60.0 10.0 7.97 75.6 7.8 8.10

 Arts and humanities 50.0 † † 67.8 † † 

Ever received grants, employer 

 assistance, tuition waiver

 Yes 

 No 

67.2 * 

57.6 

9.6 * 

† 

3.50 

† 

83.7 * 

70.9 

12.8 * 

† 

3.60

† 

† Not applicable for the reference group.
 

* p < .05.
 1 The estimates are from 1993/03 Baccalaureate and Beyond Longitudinal Study (B&B:93/03) Data Analysis System.
 2 Least squares coefficients, multiplied by 100 to reflect percentages (see appendix B).
 

3 Standard error of least squares coefficient, adjusted for design effect, multiplied by 100 to reflect percentages (see appendix B).
 4 Black includes African American, Pacific Islander includes Native Hawaiian, and Hispanic includes Latino. Included in the totals but 


not shown separately are data for those who identified themselves with another race not shown. Race categories exclude Hispanic origin
 

unless specified.
 

NOTE: The italicized group in each category is the reference group being compared. Estimates include students from the 50 states, DC, 


and Puerto Rico.
 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993/03 Baccalaureate and Beyond Longitudinal
 

Study (B&B:93/03).
 

60 

Factors Related to Graduate Enrollment, Persistence, and Attainment 

completion was no longer significant after controlling for all other independent variables. 

Students’ age was the only exception: bivariate analysis revealed that students ages 23−24 were 

less likely than students age 22 or younger to have attained a graduate degree. This relationship 

partially remained after controlling for many other variables: students ages 23–24 were still less 

likely than students age 22 or younger to have earned a graduate degree. 

After controlling for all other variables, several graduate enrollment characteristics, such as 

entry time, enrollment intensity and continuity, and graduate degree program, retained a 

significant relationship with graduate degree completion. Regardless of all other characteristics, 

full-time students were more likely than part-time students to have earned a graduate degree by 

2003. Students who entered a graduate program immediately after completing a bachelor’s 

degree had a higher rate of graduate degree completion than those who waited more than 5 years 

to enroll. Completion rates were also higher among students who enrolled continuously than 

among those who took time off, as well as among those in multiple degree programs than among 

those in a single degree program. Regardless of the demographic, academic, and enrollment 

characteristics included in this analysis, students enrolled in master’s degree programs were more 

likely than students enrolled in doctoral degree programs to earn a graduate degree. Finally, 

completion rates were higher among students who had received grants, employer assistance, or a 

tuition waiver after controlling for various factors. 

Persistence 

In addition to showing students’ rate of graduate degree completion, table 22 presents the 

results of the analysis for their rate of persistence (a concept defined as “either attaining a 

graduate degree or being still enrolled in a graduate program”). As with degree completion, after 

controlling for all other variables, many demographic and academic characteristics were no 

longer significantly related to persistence. However, enrollment characteristics continued to play 

an important role: regardless of all other characteristics, students who entered a graduate program 

immediately after completing a bachelor’s degree, attended full time, enrolled in multiple 

programs, and had received grants, employer assistance, or a tuition waiver had higher 

persistence rates than their counterparts who waited more than 5 years to enroll, attended part 

time and took time off, enrolled in a single program, and had never received any financial help in 

terms of grants, employer assistance, and a tuition waiver. 

Although doctoral degree students had a lower completion rate than master’s degree 

students, both groups had similar persistence rates after controlling for other characteristics. This 

may be due to the fact that doctoral students typically take more time to finish a degree (table 

61 

Factors Related to Graduate Enrollment, Persistence, and Attainment 

20a) and therefore have a higher rate of being still enrolled than students in master’s degree 

programs (table 12). 

62 

Summary and Conclusions 


By 2003, some 40 percent of 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients had enrolled in a 

graduate or first-professional degree program (30 percent enrolled in a single program, and 10 

percent enrolled in more than one program). Of those who continued, the highest level of 

graduate enrollment for 76 percent of graduates was a master’s degree program, for 13 percent, it 

was a first-professional degree program, and for 11 percent, it was a doctoral degree program. 

Graduate enrollment was related to a number of demographic and academic characteristics, such 

as students’ race/ethnicity, age, and undergraduate major and GPA and parents’ education. Many 

of these characteristics retained a significant relationship with graduate enrollment after 

controlling for other variables. 

Graduates waited an average of 2 to 3 years from the time they completed a bachelor’s 

degree to the time they first enrolled in a graduate or first-professional degree program. Students 

entering MBA programs typically waited the longest to enroll in graduate school (about 4 years) 

and doctoral degree students typically waited the shortest amount of time (about 1 year). 

Among 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients who had enrolled in a graduate degree 

program between 1993 and 2003, some 62 percent had earned at least one graduate degree by 

2003. Looking at the highest degree earned, 47 percent had earned a master’s degree, 10 percent 

a first-professional degree, and 5 percent a doctoral degree. These attainment rates could increase 

in the future, as about 15 percent of bachelor’s degree recipients were still enrolled in a graduate 

degree program in 2003. About one-fourth of students who enrolled in graduate school had left 

without completing a graduate degree by 2003. Attainment was higher among students who 

enrolled in first-professional programs than among master’s or doctoral students: 71 percent of 

students who enrolled in a first-professional degree program had earned a first-professional 

degree by 2003, compared with 60 percent of master’s degree students and 43 percent of doctoral 

degree students who earned degrees in their respective programs. 

The amount of time it took students to complete a graduate degree depended on the type of 

program in which they had enrolled. Among students who had completed a graduate degree by 

2003, master’s students took an average of 3 years to complete a degree, first-professional 

students took about 4 years, and doctoral students took about 6 years. 

63 

Summary and Conclusions 

Undergraduate education experiences mattered for graduate enrollment, persistence, and 

attainment of a graduate degree. After controlling for related factors, several undergraduate 

student characteristics, such as high achievement, age at bachelor’s degree completion, and 

undergraduate major field of study, were related to enrollment in graduate school. In addition to 

the importance of undergraduate experiences, graduate enrollment experiences—such as the 

intensity and continuity of enrollment that students exhibited in a graduate degree program— 

were related to students’ successful attainment of a graduate degree. 

64 

References 


Aldrich, J.H., and Nelson, F.D. (1984). Linear Probability, Logit and Probit Models 

(Quantitative Applications in Social Sciences, Vol. 45). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage 

Publications, Inc. 

Andrieu, S.C., and St. John, E.P. (1993). The Influence of Prices on Graduate Student 

Persistence. Research in Higher Education, 34(4): 399–425. 

Berry, W.D., and Feldman, S. (1987). Multiple Regression in Practice (Quantitative Applications 

in Social Sciences, Vol. 50). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications, Inc. 

Bowen, W.G., and Rudenstine, N.L. (1992). In Pursuit of the PhD. Princeton, NJ: Princeton 

University Press. 

Bradburn, E.M., Berger, R., Li, X., Peter, K., and Rooney, K. (2003). A Descriptive Summary of 

1999–2000 Bachelor’s Degree Recipients 1 Year Later (NCES 2003-165). U.S. Department 

of Education. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics. 

Choy, S.P. (2000). Debt Burden Four Years After College (NCES 2000-188). U.S. Department 

of Education. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics. 

Choy, S.P., and Geis, S. (1997). Early Labor Force Experiences and Debt Burden (NCES 97­

286). U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC: National Center for Education 

Statistics. 

Choy, S.P., and Li, X. (2006). Dealing With Debt: 1992–93 Bachelor’s Degree Recipients 10 

Years Later (NCES 2006-156). U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC: National 

Center for Education Statistics. 

Choy, S.P., and Moskovitz, R. (1998). Student Financing of Graduate and First-Professional 

Education, 1995–96 (NCES 98-083). U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC: 

National Center for Education Statistics. 

65 

References 

Clune, M.S., Nuñez, A., and Choy, S.P. (2001). Competing Choices: Men’s and Women’s Paths 

After Earning a Bachelor’s Degree (NCES 2001-154). U.S. Department of Education. 

Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics. 

The College Board. (2003). Trends in College Entrance Examination Board. Washington, DC: 

The College Entrance Examination Board. 

Ethington, C.A., and Smart, J.C. (1986). Persistence to Graduate Education. Research in Higher 

Education, 24(3): 287–303. 

Goodman, L.A. (1976). The Relationship Between Modified and Usual Multiple-Regression 

Approaches to the Analysis of Dichotomous Variables. In D. Hoise (Ed.), Sociological 

Methodology (pp. 83–110). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. 

Green, P.J., Meyers, S.L., Giese, P., Law, J., Speizer, H.M., and Tardino, V.S. (1996). 

Baccalaureate and Beyond Longitudinal Study: 1993/94 First Follow-up Methodology 

Report (NCES 96-149). U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC: National Center for 

Education Statistics. 

Green, P., Meyers, S., Veldman, C., and Pedlow, S. (1999). Baccalaureate and Beyond 

Longitudinal Study: 1993/97 Second Follow-up Methodology Report (NCES 1999-159). U.S. 

Department of Education. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics. 

Hearn, J.C. (1987). Impacts of Undergraduate Experiences on Aspirations and Plans for Graduate 

and Professional Education. Research in Higher Education, 27(2): 119–141. 

Heller, D. (2001). Debts and Decisions: Student Loans and Their Relationship to Graduate 

School and Career Choice. Retrieved July 5, 2006 from 

http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2/content_storage_01/0000000b/80/25/f7/9f. 

pdf 

Hoffer, T.B., Welch, V., Williams, K., Hess, M., Webber, K., Lisek, B., Loew, D., and GuzmanBarron, I. (2005). Doctorate Recipients From United States Universities: Summary Report 

2004. Chicago: NORC at the University of Chicago. Retrieved July 18, 2006 from 

http://www.norc.uchicago.edu/issues/sed-2004.pdf 

Knoke, D. (1975). A Comparison of Log-Linear and Regression Models for Systems of 

Dichotomous Variables. Sociological Methods and Research, 3. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage 

Publications, Inc. 

66 

References 

Lewis-Beck, M.S. (1980). Applied Regression: An Introduction (Quantitative Applications in 

Social Sciences, Vol. 22). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications, Inc. 

Loft, J.D., Riccobono, J.A., Whitmore, R.W., Fitzgerald, R.A., and Berkner, L.K. (1995). 

Methodology Report for the National Postsecondary Student Aid Study, 1992–93 (NCES 95­

211). U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC: National Center for Education 

Statistics. 

McCormick, A.C., Nuñez, A., Shah, V., and Choy, S.P. (1999). Life After College: A Descriptive 

Summary of 1992–93 Bachelor’s Degree Recipients in 1997, With an Essay on Participation 

in Graduate and First-Professional Education (NCES 1999-155). U.S. Department of 

Education. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics. 

McMahon, W. (1998). Conceptual Framework for the Analysis of the Social Benefits of Lifelong 

Learning. Education Economics, 6(3): 309–346. 

Millett, C. (2003). How Undergraduate Loan Debt Affects Application and Enrollment in 

Graduate or First Professional School. The Journal of Higher Education, 74(4): 386–427. 

National Academy of Sciences, National Research Council. (1996). The Path to the Ph.D.: 

Measuring Graduate Attrition in the Sciences and Humanities. Prepared by the Ad Hoc Panel 

on Graduate Attrition Advisory Committee. Washington, DC: Author. 

Pedhazur, E.J. (1997). Multiple Regression in Behavioral Research: Prediction and Explanation 

(3rd ed.). Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace College Publishers. 

Perna, L.W. (2004). Understanding the Decision to Enroll in Graduate School: Sex and 

Racial/Ethnic Group Differences. The Journal of Higher Education, 75(5): 487–527. 

Price, J. (2005). Marriage and Graduate Student Outcomes. Retrieved January 17, 2006, from 

http://www.ilr.cornell.edu/cheri/wp/cheri_wp75.pdf. 

Skinner, C.J., Holt, D. and Smith, T.M.F. (Eds.). (1989). Analysis of Complex Surveys. New 

York: John Wiley and Sons. 

Tsapogas, J., and Cahalan, M. (1996, May). Incidence of and Factors Related to Progression to 

Graduate School Among Recent Science and Engineering Bachelor’s Degree Recipients: 

Results From a National Study. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association of 

Institutional Research, Albuquerque, NM. 

67 

References 

U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (2002). The Condition of 

Education 2002 (NCES 2002-025). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. 

U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (2004). Digest of 

Education Statistics, 2003 (NCES 2005-025). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing 

Office. 

U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (2006). The Condition of 

Education 2006 (NCES 2006-071). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. 

Weiler, W.C. (1991). The Effect of Undergraduate Student Loans on the Decision to Pursue 

Postbaccalaureate Study. Education Evaluation and Policy and Analysis, 13(3): 212–220. 

Wine, J.S., Cominole, M.B., Wheeless, S., Dudley, K., and Franklin, J. (2006). 1993/03 

Baccalaureate and Beyond Longitudinal Study (B&B:93/03) Methodology Report (NCES 

2006-166). U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC: National Center for Education 

Statistics. 

Wright, T., and Cochrane, R. (2000). Factors Influencing Successful Submissions of PhD Theses. 

Studies in Higher Education, 25(2): 181–195. 

68 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix A—Glossary
 

This glossary describes the variables used in this report. The variables come from the NCES 1993/03 Baccalaureate 

and Beyond Longitudinal Study (B&B:93/03) Data Analysis System (DAS), a software application developed by 

NCES to generate tables from the survey data. The B&B:93/03 DAS includes data collected in the base year (1992– 

93) and the three follow-ups conducted in 1994, 1997, and 2003. Appendix B contains descriptions of both the DAS 

software and the B&B surveys. 

In the index below, the variables are organized by general topic and, within topic, listed in the order in which they 

appear in the tables. The glossary items are listed in alphabetical order by the variable name (displayed in capital 

letters to the right of the variable label). 

Glossary Index 

STUDENT/INSTITUTION CHARACTERISTICS 

Gender ...........................................................GENDER
 

Race/ethnicity ............................................ B2ETHNIC
 

Age at bachelor’s degree completion........B2AGATBA
 

Highest education level of either parent...... PAREDUC
 

Bachelor’s degree-granting institution .......SECTOR_B
 

Baccalaureate degree major ......................B2BAMAJR
 

Bachelor’s degree GPA .............................NORMGPA
 

Marital status at bachelor’s degree.............RMARITST
 

Number of dependents at bachelor’s
 

degree...................................................... RDEPENDS 

Marital status in April 1997 .......................B2MAR497 

Number of dependents in 1997 .......................B2NDEP 

Educational expectations at bachelor’s 

completion............................................... ANYHILVL 

Change in degree expectations from 

bachelor’s to 1997......................................B2CHEXP 

Educational expectations in 1997 ................. B2HIEXP 

Marital status year before graduate 

enrollment ................................................. B3MAR1Y 

Number of dependent children year before 

graduate enrollment.....................................B3DEP1Y 


GRADUATE FINANCING 

Ever received a research assistantship ....... B3RESAST
 

Ever received a teaching assistantship .......B3TEAAST
 

Ever received tuition waiver ...................... B3TUIRED 


Ever received employer assistance............B3EMBNFT
 

Ever received grants, scholarships, or 


fellowships ................................................ B3GRANT
 

Ever received loans...................................... B3GRLN2 


Ever received grants, employer assistance, or 

tuition waivers.............................................B3GRAID 

ENROLLMENT CHARACTERISTICS 

Time between bachelor’s completion and 

first graduate enrollment.........................B3GRDENR
 

Enrollment intensity....................................B3ENRINT
 

Continuity of graduate enrollment ...............B3ENCON 


ENROLLMENT AND COMPLETION OF GRADUATE 

EDUCATION 

Highest graduate enrollment......................B3HENPG2 

Comprehensive graduate enrollment with 

multiple enrollments ...............................B3GRADEN 

Graduate enrollment and attainment status 

by 2003 ......................................................B3ENRAT 

Major field for the highest graduate degree 

earned .....................................................B3HDGMAJ 

Highest degree attained by 2003...................B3HDG03 

Major for highest graduate enrollment ..... B3HENMAJ 

Time from first graduate enrollment to 

highest degree completion ......................B3TIMGRD
 

REASONS FOR LEAVING GRADUATE SCHOOL 

Left graduate program because of academic 

problems ...................................................... B3GLVA 

Left graduate program because of 

scheduling/availability ................................. B3GLVB 

Left graduate program because dissatisfied 

with school....................................................B3GLVC 

Left graduate program because program 

closed........................................................... B3GLVD 


A-1 

 

 

 

Appendix A—Glossary 

Left graduate program because done taking 

class.............................................................. B3GLVE 

Left graduate program because changed 

program.........................................................B3GLVF 

Left graduate program because taking time 

off.................................................................B3GLVG 

Left graduate program because enrollment 

not suitable...................................................B3GLVH 

Left graduate program because job/military 

conflict ...........................................................B3GLVI 

Left graduate program because needed to 

work .............................................................. B3GLVJ
 

Left graduate program because of other 

financial reasons .......................................... B3GLVK 

Left graduate program because of change in 

family status..................................................B3GLVL 

Left graduate program because of personal 

problems ......................................................B3GLVM 

Left graduate program because of other career 

interests........................................................ B3GLVN 

Left graduate program to pursue other 

interests......................................................... B3GLV0 


Left graduate program for other reason ......... B3GLVX 


A-2 

 

Appendix A—Glossary 

DAS Variable 

Educational expectations at bachelor’s completion ANYHILVL 

Indicates the highest level of education the respondent expected to complete when asked in 1993. The categories 

used in this report are the following: 

Bachelor’s degree or less	 Includes certificates and other formal awards, associate’s 

degrees, and bachelor’s degrees. 

Master’s degree Includes master’s degrees. 

First-professional Includes first-professional degrees. 

Doctoral degree Includes doctoral degrees. 

Age at bachelor’s degree completion	 B2AGATBA 

Indicates the respondent’s age at the time the bachelor’s degree was received. The age categories used in this report 

are the following: 

22 or younger 

23–24 

25–29 

30 or older 

Change in degree expectations from bachelor’s to 1997	 B2CHEXP 

Indicates whether educational expectations lowered, raised, or remained the same between two time points: the 

NPSAS:93 interview and the B&B:97 follow-up. 

Expectations lowered 

Expectations raised 

Remained the same 

Race/ethnicity	 B2ETHNIC 

Respondents’ race/ethnicity, including Hispanic/Latino. The variable gives priority to Hispanic/Latino regardless of 

race. 

Asian/Pacific Islander A person having origins in any of the peoples of the Far East, 

Southeast Asia, the Indian subcontinent, or the Pacific Islands. 

This includes people from China, Japan, Korea, the Philippine 

Islands, India, Vietnam, Hawaii, and Samoa. 

Black A person having origins in any of the black racial groups of 

Africa. Includes African Americans. 

Hispanic A person of Mexican, Puerto Rican, Cuban, Central or South 

American, or other Spanish culture or origin, regardless of 

race. Includes Latino. 

White A person having origins in any of the original peoples of 

Europe, North Africa, or the Middle East. 

A-3 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix A—Glossary 

DAS Variable 

Educational expectations in 1997 B2HIEXP 

Indicates the highest degree the respondent expected to earn when asked in the 1997 follow-up interview. 

Bachelor’s degree 


Master’s degree 


First-professional degree 


Doctoral degree (PhD, EdD, DPH) 


Marital status in April 1997 B2MAR497 

Indicates the respondent’s marital status at the time of the 1997 follow-up interview. 

Single, never been married
 

Married or cohabiting 


Divorced/separated/widowed 


Number of dependents in 1997 B2NDEP 

Indicates whether the respondent reported having any dependent at the time of the 1997 follow-up interview. 

Spouses are not included. 

None
 

One or more 


Baccalaureate degree major B2BAMAJR 

Identifies a respondent’s undergraduate major field of study. 

Business and management
 

Education
 

Engineering 


Health professions
 

Public affairs/social services
 

Biological sciences
 

Mathematics and other sciences
 

Social science 


History
 

Humanities 


Psychology
 

Other 


A-4 

Appendix A—Glossary 

DAS Variable 

Number of dependent children year before graduate enrollment B3DEP1Y 

Indicates if a respondent had dependent children 1 year before enrolling in a graduate or first-professional degree 

program. This variable was derived as follows: first the date 1 year before enrolling in graduate school was 

determined from B3GRDST which is the earliest graduate school start date. Information from each of the follow-ups 

was then used to determine whether the respondent had dependent children 1 year before their first enrollment in 

graduate school. 

No dependent children
 

One or more dependent children
 

Ever received employer assistance B3EMBNFT 

Indicates whether the student ever received assistance from an employer to pay for graduate school. 

Continuity of graduate enrollment B3ENCON 

Indicates whether or not the respondent was continuously enrolled in graduate study. Does not include time taken off 

for summer sessions. 

Continuously enrolled
 

Took off at least one semester/term
 

Graduate enrollment and attainment status by 2003 B3ENRAT 

Shows the respondent’s graduate degree attainment status and graduate enrollment status with the following priority: 

(1) Attained doctoral degree; (2) Attained first-professional degree; (3) Currently enrolled doctorate; (4) Currently 

enrolled first professional; (5) Attained master’s degree; (6) Currently enrolled master’s; (7) No attainment, 

previously enrolled; (8) No graduate enrollment. Respondents who have attained a master’s degree are identified as 

having a master’s degree if no higher degree was attained and the respondent is currently not enrolled in a doctoral 

or first-professional program. 

No attainment, previously enrolled
 

Currently enrolled master’s
 

Currently enrolled first-professional 


Currently enrolled doctorate 


Attained master’s degree 


Attained first-professional degree 


Attained doctoral degree 


No graduate enrollment 


A-5 

Appendix A—Glossary 

DAS Variable 

Enrollment intensity B3ENRINT 

Indicates the enrollment intensity of graduate study. 

Full-time Student was always enrolled full time. 

Part-time Student was enrolled part time at some point during graduate 

study. 

Mix of full-time and part-time Student had a mix of full-time and part-time enrollment 

throughout graduate study. 

Left graduate program because of academic problems B3GLVA 

Indicates whether a respondent left graduate school because of academic problems. Applies to respondents who have 

enrolled in a graduate program since 1997, but were no longer enrolled and had not completed that degree by 2003. 

Respondents were given a list of reasons to choose from and instructed to check all that apply. 

Yes 

No 

Left graduate program because of scheduling/availability B3GLVB 

Indicates whether a respondent left graduate school because of problems with the scheduling and availability of 

classes. Applies to respondents who have enrolled in a graduate program since 1997, but were no longer enrolled and 

had not completed that degree by 2003. Respondents were given a list of reasons to choose from and instructed to 

check all that apply. 

Yes 

No 

Left graduate program because dissatisfied with school B3GLVC 

Indicates whether a respondent left graduate school because they were dissatisfied with school. Applies to 

respondents who have enrolled in a graduate program since 1997, but were no longer enrolled and had not completed 

that degree by 2003. Respondents were given a list of reasons to choose from and instructed to check all that apply. 

Yes 

No 

Left graduate program because program closed B3GLVD 

Indicates whether a respondent left graduate school because the program closed. Applies to respondents who have 

enrolled in a graduate program since 1997, but were no longer enrolled and had not completed that degree by 2003. 

Respondents were given a list of reasons to choose from and instructed to check all that apply. 

Yes 

No 

A-6 

Appendix A—Glossary 

DAS Variable 

Left graduate program because done taking class B3GLVE 

Indicates whether a respondent left graduate school because they were finished taking classes. Applies to 

respondents who have enrolled in a graduate program since 1997, but were no longer enrolled and had not completed 

that degree by 2003. Respondents were given a list of reasons to choose from and instructed to check all that apply. 

Yes 


No
 

Left graduate program because changed program B3GLVF 

Indicates whether a respondent left graduate school because they changed programs. Applies to respondents who 

have enrolled in a graduate program since 1997, but were no longer enrolled and had not completed that degree by 

2003. Respondents were given a list of reasons to choose from and instructed to check all that apply. 

Yes 


No
 

Left graduate program because taking time off B3GLVG 

Indicates whether a respondent left graduate school to take time off. Applies to respondents who have enrolled in a 

graduate program since 1997, but were no longer enrolled and had not completed that degree by 2003. Respondents 

were given a list of reasons to choose from and instructed to check all that apply. 

Yes 


No
 

Left graduate program because enrollment not suitable B3GLVH 

Indicates whether a respondent left graduate school because enrollment was not suitable to their lifestyle. Applies to 

respondents who have enrolled in a graduate program since 1997, but were no longer enrolled and had not completed 

that degree by 2003. Respondents were given a list of reasons to choose from and instructed to check all that apply. 

Yes 


No
 

Left graduate program because job/military conflict B3GLVI 

Indicates whether a respondent left graduate school because of job/military conflicts. Applies to respondents who 

have enrolled in a graduate program since 1997, but were no longer enrolled and had not completed that degree by 

2003. Respondents were given a list of reasons to choose from and instructed to check all that apply. 

Yes 


No
 

A-7 

 

Appendix A—Glossary 

DAS Variable 

Left graduate program because needed to work B3GLVJ 

Indicates whether a respondent left graduate school because they needed to work. Applies to respondents who have 

enrolled in a graduate program since 1997, but were no longer enrolled and had not completed that degree by 2003. 

Respondents were given a list of reasons to choose from and instructed to check all that apply. 

Yes 


No
 

Left graduate program because of other financial reasons B3GLVK 

Indicates whether a respondent left graduate school because of financial reasons. Applies to respondents who have 

enrolled in a graduate program since 1997, but were no longer enrolled and had not completed that degree by 2003. 

Respondents were given a list of reasons to choose from and instructed to check all that apply. 

Yes 


No
 

Left graduate program because of change in family status B3GLVL 

Indicates whether a respondent left graduate school because of a change in family status. Applies to respondents who 

have enrolled in a graduate program since 1997, but were no longer enrolled and had not completed that degree by 

2003. Respondents were given a list of reasons to choose from and instructed to check all that apply. 

Yes 


No
 

Left graduate program because of personal problems B3GLVM 

Indicates whether a respondent left graduate school because of personal problems. Applies to respondents who have 

enrolled in a graduate program since 1997, but were no longer enrolled and had not completed that degree by 2003. 

Respondents were given a list of reasons to choose from and instructed to check all that apply. 

Yes 


No
 

Left graduate program because of other career interests B3GLVN 

Indicates whether a respondent left graduate school because of other career interests. Applies to respondents who 

have enrolled in a graduate program since 1997, but were no longer enrolled and had not completed that degree by 

2003. Respondents were given a list of reasons to choose from and instructed to check all that apply. 

Yes 


No
 

A-8 

Appendix A—Glossary 

DAS Variable 

Left graduate program to pursue other interests B3GLV0 

Indicates whether a respondent left graduate school to pursue other interests. Applies to respondents who have 

enrolled in a graduate program since 1997, but were no longer enrolled and had not completed that degree by 2003. 

Respondents were given a list of reasons to choose from and instructed to check all that apply. 

Yes 


No
 

Left graduate program for other reason B3GLVX 

Indicates whether a respondent left graduate school because of other reasons. Applies to respondents who have 

enrolled in a graduate program since 1997, but were no longer enrolled and had not completed that degree by 2003. 

Respondents were given a list of reasons to choose from and instructed to check all that apply. 

Yes 


No
 

Comprehensive graduate enrollment with multiple enrollments B3GRADEN 

Indicates whether a respondent enrolled in a graduate or first-professional degree program and the type of degree 

program in which the respondent enrolled. For respondents who enrolled in a single graduate degree program, this 

variable indicates the type of degree program. Those who enrolled in multiple graduate degree programs are grouped 

into one of the following categories: Master’s degree only—Student enrolled in multiple master’s degree programs. 

Master’s and doctoral degree—Student enrolled in at least one master’s degree program and at least one doctoral 

degree program. Other—Student enrolled in a first-professional degree program and some other type of graduate 

degree program. 

No graduate degree enrollment 


Master of Business Administration (MBA)
 

Master of Education (MEd) 


Other master’s degree 


First-professional degree 


Doctoral degree 


Multiple enrollment: More than one master’s degree 


Multiple enrollment: Master’s and doctoral degree 


Multiple enrollment: First-professional and other
 

Ever received grants, employer assistance, or tuition waivers B3GRAID 

Indicates whether the student ever received grants, scholarships, fellowships, employer assistance, or tuition waivers 

for graduate school. 

Ever received grants, scholarships, or fellowships B3GRANT 

Indicates whether the student ever received grants, scholarships, or fellowships for graduate school. 

A-9 

Appendix A—Glossary 

DAS Variable 

Time between bachelor’s completion and first graduate enrollment B3GRDENR 

Indicates the amount of time between conferment of bachelor’s degree and enrollment in a graduate degree program. 

Less than 1 year 


1 to 3 years
 

3 to 5 years
 

5 years or more 


Ever received loans B3GRLN2 

Indicates whether the student ever received loans for graduate school. 

Highest degree attained by 2003 B3HDG03 

Identifies the highest degree the respondent had attained as of 2003. 

Master’s degree 


First-professional degree 


Doctoral degree 


Major field for the highest graduate degree earned B3HDGMAJ 

Indicates the respondent’s major field for the highest graduate degree program the respondent completed. 

Arts and humanities 


Social and behavioral sciences
 

Life and physical sciences
 

Engineering, mathematics, computer science 


Education
 

Business and management
 

Medicine/health
 

Law
 

Other 


Major for highest graduate enrollment B3HENMAJ 

Indicates the major for the highest level of graduate degree program in which the respondent enrolled. 

Arts and humanities 


Social and behavioral sciences
 

Life and physical sciences
 

Engineering, mathematics, computer science 


Education
 

Business and management
 

Medicine/health
 

Law
 

Other 


A-10 

 

Appendix A—Glossary 

DAS Variable 

Highest graduate enrollment B3HENPG2 

Indicates the highest graduate degree program in which the respondent has enrolled by 2003. This variable differs 

from B3HENPRG by offering separate categories for MBA and MEd degrees. 

No graduate enrollment 


MBA
 

MEd 


Other master’s degree 


First-professional
 

Doctoral degree 


Marital status year before graduate enrollment B3MAR1Y 

Indicates marital status 1 year before graduate enrollment. If the time between the receipt of the bachelor’s degree at 

the NPSAS institution and the date first enrolled in a graduate program is less than 1 year, then this variable indicates 

marital status at the time of bachelor’s degree receipt (the earliest known marital status). This variable was derived as 

follows: First the date 1 year before enrolling in graduate school was determined from B3GRDST which is the 

earliest graduate school start date. Information from each of the follow-ups was then used to determine the 

respondent’s marital status 1 year before their first enrollment in graduate school. 

Single
 

Married/cohabit as married 


Divorced/separated/widowed 


Ever received a research assistantship B3RESAST 

Indicates whether the student ever received a research assistantship while enrolled in graduate school. 

Ever received a teaching assistantship B3TEAAST 

Indicates whether the student ever received a teaching assistantship while enrolled in graduate school. 

Time from first graduate enrollment to highest degree completion B3TIMGRD 

Indicates the total number of years between the earliest enrollment date in a graduate program to the date the 

respondent received their highest graduate degree. Categories used in this report are the following: 

3 year or less
 

3 to 5 years
 

5 years or more 


Ever received a tuition waiver B3TUIRED 

Indicates whether the student ever received a tuition waiver for graduate school. 

A-11 

 

 

 

Appendix A—Glossary 

DAS Variable 

Gender GENDER 

Respondent’s gender (male or female). 

Bachelor’s degree GPA	 NORMGPA 

Normalized calculated grade point average (GPA) based on recorded grades at sample school (4.0 scale). The 

categories used for this report are the following: 

Under 2.5 

2.5–2.99 

3.0–3.49 

3.5 or above 

Highest education level of either parent	 PAREDUC 

Response to the question: “What is the highest grade or level of education completed by either of your parents?” The 

variable identifies 14 mutually exclusive categories that were aggregated into five groups for this report: 

Less than high school Less than high school 

High school or less GED or high school graduation 

Some postsecondary education	 Vocational/technical training (less than 1 year, 1 year but less 

than 2 year, 2 or more years); less than 2 years of college; 

associate’s degree; 2 or more years of college 

Bachelor’s degree Bachelor’s degree 

Graduate degree Master’s degree or equivalent; first-professional degree; other 

graduate professional degree; e.g., doctorate (Ph.D., Ed.D.) 

Number of dependents at bachelor’s degree	 RDEPENDS 

Indicates whether the respondent had any dependent children at the time of the NPSAS interview in 1993. 

None 

One or more 

Marital status at bachelor’s degree	 RMARITST 

Indicates the respondent’s marital status at the time of the NPSAS interview in 1993. 

Single, never married 

Married or cohabiting 

Divorced/separated/widowed 

A-12 

Appendix A—Glossary 

DAS Variable 

Bachelor’s degree-granting institution SECTOR_B 

Type of institution (level and control) granting the bachelor’s degree. This variable differentiates between nondoctorate-granting and doctorate-granting 4-year institutions. Non-doctorate-granting institutions include colleges 

with a major emphasis on baccalaureate programs and also colleges and universities that offer both baccalaureate 

programs and graduate education through the master’s degree. Doctorate-granting institutions offer baccalaureate 

programs and graduate education through the doctoral degree. Institutions that offer first-professional degrees are 

considered doctorate-granting institutions. The categories used in this report are the following: 

Public 4-year non-doctorate-granting
 

Public 4-year doctorate-granting
 

Private not-for-profit 4-year non-doctorate-granting
 

Private not-for-profit 4-year doctorate-granting
 

Other 


A-13 

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 

Appendix B—Technical Notes and Methodology
 

The 1993/03 Baccalaureate and Beyond Longitudinal Study 

The estimates and statistics in the tables and figures of this report are based on data from 

the first, second, and third follow-ups of the 1993/03 Baccalaureate and Beyond Longitudinal 

Study (B&B:93/03). This study tracks the experiences of a cohort of college graduates who 

received a baccalaureate degree during the 1992–93 academic year and were first interviewed as 

part of the 1992–93 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:93), conducted by the 

U.S. Department of Education’s National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). NPSAS is 

based on a nationally representative sample of all students in postsecondary education 

institutions, including undergraduate, graduate, and first-professional students. For NPSAS:93, 

information was obtained from about 1,100 postsecondary institutions on approximately 53,000 

undergraduates and about 13,000 graduate and first-professional students who were enrolled at 

some time between July 1, 1992 and June 30, 1993. 

For B&B:93/03, those members of the NPSAS:93 sample who completed a bachelor’s 

degree between July 1, 1992 and June 30, 1993 were identified and contacted for a 1-year followup interview in 1994. The second follow-up of the B&B cohort occurred in 1997, approximately 

4 years after graduation. The final follow-up survey, 10 years after graduation in 2003, is the 

focus of this report. However, the estimates in this report are based on the approximately 8,100 

bachelor’s degree recipients who participated in all four surveys—the NPSAS base-year survey 

and the three follow-ups—representing about 1.2 million bachelor’s degree recipients (U.S. 

Department of Education 2002, table 247). 

The NPSAS:93 sample, while representative and statistically accurate, was not a simple 

random sample. Instead, the survey sample was selected using a more complex three-step 

procedure with stratified samples and differential probabilities of selection at each level. 

Postsecondary institutions were initially selected within geographic strata. Once institutions were 

organized by ZIP Code and state, they were further stratified by control (i.e., public; private notfor-profit; or private for-profit) and degree offering (less-than-2-year, 2- to 3-year, 4-year 

nondoctorate-granting, and 4-year doctorate-granting). The NPSAS:93 survey sample yielded an 

overall weighted institutional response rate of 88 percent. For more information about the 

B-1
 
Appendix B—Technical Notes and Methodology 

NPSAS:93 survey, refer to the Methodology Report for the National Postsecondary Student Aid 

Study, 1992–93 (Loft et al. 1995). 

For the first follow-up B&B interview in 1994, a total of about 10,100 eligible individuals 

completed the interview between June and December—using computer-assisted telephone 

interviewing (CATI), with field interviewing when necessary—which corresponds to a weighted 

response rate of 90 percent (from the NPSAS:93-identified B&B eligible sample of about 11,000 

cases). Data collection for the second follow-up interview of the B&B cohort took place between 

April and December 1997; about 10,100 individuals completed the interview, yielding a 

weighted response rate of 90 percent. For more information on procedures for the first and 

second follow-ups, consult the respective methodology reports (Green et al. [1996] for the first 

follow-up and Green et al. [1999] for the second follow-up). 

Between February and September 2003, the third and final follow-up of the 1992–93 cohort 

of bachelor’s degree recipients was conducted. For the first time, students were offered the 

opportunity to conduct the B&B interview via the Internet. A single web-based interview was 

designed and programmed for use as a self-administered interview, a telephone interview, and an 

in-person interview. All respondents to the 1997 interview were included for participation in the 

2003 follow-up; a subsample of about one-third of nonrespondents from 1997 was also included, 

resulting in a final sample of about 10,400 individuals. Almost 9,000 members of this final 

sample responded, yielding a weighted response rate of 83 percent. For more details about the 

third follow-up survey procedures, consult the 1993/03 Baccalaureate and Beyond Longitudinal 

Study (B&B:93/03) Methodology Report (Wine et al. 2006). 

Except for having all graduated in the same academic year, the 1992–93 graduate cohort 

members could be as diverse as possible in other aspects (e.g., the degree recipients could have 

been enrolled sporadically over time or enrolled continuously; some might have delayed their 

entry into postsecondary education, while others might have entered college right after 

completing high school). Therefore, the B&B:93/03 data provide the first opportunity to examine 

how a nationally representative, cross-sectional group of college graduates pursued graduate 

education over a period of 10 years after their graduation. The B&B dataset contains 

comprehensive data on post-baccalaureate graduate enrollment, attainment, student demographic 

characteristics, and labor force participation and finances (including education loans). 

Weighting 

All estimates in this report are weighted to compensate for unequal probability of selection 

into the survey sample and to adjust for nonresponse. The specific weight variable used in this 

B-2
 
Appendix B—Technical Notes and Methodology 

report is WTC00, which was constructed as the panel weight for analyzing those students who 

responded to all four surveys: NPSAS:93 and the 1994, 1997, and 2003 B&B follow-up 

interviews. For more information on weighting, consult chapter 6, “Weighting and Variance 

Estimation,” of the B&B:93/03 methodology report (Wine et al. 2006). 

Overall Response Rates 

As discussed earlier in this appendix, the weighted institution response rate for NPSAS:93 

was 88 percent. The weighted student response rate was 90 percent for both the first (in 1994) 

and second (in 1997) follow-up B&B interviews and 83 percent for the final B&B follow-up 

interview (in 2003). 

Accuracy of Estimates 

The statistics in this report are estimates derived from a sample. Two broad categories of 

error occur in such estimates: sampling and nonsampling errors. Sampling errors occur because 

observations are based only on samples of students, not entire populations. Nonsampling errors 

occur not only in sample surveys but also in complete censuses of entire populations. 

Nonsampling errors can be attributed to a number of sources: inability to obtain complete 

information about all students in all institutions in the sample (some students or institutions 

refused to participate, or students participated but answered only certain items); ambiguous 

definitions; differences in interpreting questions; inability or unwillingness to give correct 

information; mistakes in recording or coding data; and other errors of collecting, processing, 

sampling, and imputing missing data. Readers interested in efforts to minimize nonsampling 

errors for estimates used in this report should consult the methodology reports referenced earlier 

in this appendix. Below is a discussion of possible bias in statistics for variables with low item 

response rates presented in the tables/figures of this report. 

Item Response Bias 

All the variables used in this report and defined in appendix A had item response rates 

above 85 percent. Therefore, a bias analysis for individual survey items was not necessary. 

Student-Level Nonresponse Bias Analysis 

A student respondent is defined as any sample member who is determined to be eligible for 

the study and has valid data for the selected set of analytical variables. As noted earlier, the 

unweighted student response rate was 86.3 percent, and the weighted response rate was 83.4 

B-3
 
Appendix B—Technical Notes and Methodology 

percent. A nonresponse bias analysis was conducted as a part of the nonresponse adjustment for 

the analysis weight. The nonresponse bias was estimated for the variables known for both 

respondents and nonrespondents within each institution type. These variables included the 

following: 

• 	 Age in the base year (NPSAS:93), 

• 	 Race/ethnicity, 

• 	 Gender, 

• 	 U.S. citizenship status, 

• 	 Attendance status in the base year, 

• 	 Institution control, 

• 	 Bureau of Economic Analysis Code (OBE) Region, 

• 	 Type of institution/enrollment category, 

• 	 B&B institution stratum, 

• 	 B&B student stratum, 

• 	 Whether applied for aid in the base year, 

• 	 Receipt of federal aid in the base year, 

• 	 Receipt of Pell Grant in the base year, 

• 	 Receipt of Stafford Loan in the base year, 

• 	 Receipt of state aid in the base year, 

• 	 Receipt of institution aid in the base year, 

• 	 Receipt of any aid in the base year, 

• 	 Prior respondent to either 1994 or 1997 interview, 

• 	 Income in the base year (parent income for dependent students and student income 

for independent students), 

• 	 Number of telephone numbers available during B&B:93/03 data collection, 

• 	 Number of times an answering machine was encountered during B&B:93/03, and 

• 	 Whether the student was located in a field cluster for B&B:93/03. 

The steps for nonresponse bias analysis included estimating the nonresponse bias and 

testing (adjusting for multiple comparisons) to determine whether the bias is significant at the 5 

percent level. Second, nonresponse adjustment factors were computed using a subset of variables 

listed above. The nonresponse adjustments were designed to significantly reduce or eliminate 

nonresponse bias for variables included in the corresponding models. Third, after the weights 

were computed, any remaining bias was estimated for the variables listed above and statistical 

tests were performed to determine the significance of any remaining nonresponse bias. 

The weighting adjustments reduced, and in some cases eliminated, bias for students. Prior 

to the nonresponse weighting adjustment, the response bias was statistically significantly 

different from zero for 21 percent of the variables; the mean of the absolute values of the biases 

was 0.40 and the median was 0.20. After the nonresponse weighting adjustment, none of the 

B-4
 
 

 

Appendix B—Technical Notes and Methodology 

biases were significantly different from zero; the mean of the absolute values of the biases was 

0.01 and median was 0.002. 

Data Analysis System 

The estimates presented in this report were produced using the B&B:93/03 Data Analysis 

System (DAS). (The data from the 1994, 1997, and 2003 interviews were incorporated into one 

DAS.) The DAS software makes it possible for users to specify and generate their own tables. 

The DAS also contains a detailed description of how each variable was created and includes 

question wording for items coming directly from an interview. 

With the DAS, users can replicate or expand upon the tables presented in this report. In 

addition to the table estimates, the DAS calculates the proper standard errors1 and weighted 

sample sizes for these estimates. For example, table B-1 contains standard errors that correspond 

to estimates in table 1 in the report. If the number of valid cases is too small to produce a reliable 

estimate (fewer than 30 cases), the DAS prints the message “low-N” instead of the estimate. All 

standard errors for estimates presented in this report can be viewed at 

http://nces.ed.gov/das/library/reports.asp. In addition to tables, the DAS will also produce a 

correlation matrix of selected variables to be used for linear regression models. Included in the 

output with the correlation matrix are the design effects (DEFTs) for each variable in the matrix. 

Because statistical procedures generally compute regression coefficients based on simple random 

sample assumptions, the standard errors must be adjusted with the design effects to take into 

account the stratified sampling method used in the NPSAS surveys. 

The DAS can be accessed electronically at http://nces.ed.gov/das. For more information 

about the Data Analysis System, contact: 

Aurora D’Amico 

Postsecondary Studies Division 

National Center for Education Statistics 

1990 K Street NW 

Washington, DC 20006–5652 

(202) 502-7334 

aurora.d’amico@ed.gov 

1 The B&B samples are not simple random samples, and therefore, simple random sample techniques for estimating sampling 

error cannot be applied to these data. The DAS takes into account the complexity of the sampling procedures and calculates 

standard errors appropriate for such samples. The method for computing sampling errors used by the DAS involves 

approximating the estimator by balanced repeated replication of the sampled population. The procedure is typically referred to as 

the “balanced repeated replication technique” (BRR). 

B-5
 
—

Table B-1.—

Appendix B—Technical Notes and Methodology 

Table B-1. Standard errors for table 1: Percentage distribution of 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients’ 

highest graduate enrollment, by student and institution characteristics: 2003 

No

Student and institution enrollcharacteristics ment 

Total 

 any 

enrollment 

Highest graduate enrollment 

FirstOther profesMBA MEd master’s sional Doctoral

 Total 0.80 0.80 0.39 0.41 0.56 0.32 0.27 

Gender

 Male 0.99 

 Female 1.21 

0.99 

1.21 

0.56 0.42 0.81 0.57 0.50

0.57 0.63 0.65 0.35 0.39 

Race/ethnicity

 White 0.80 

Black 3.05 

 Hispanic 3.92 

 Asian/Pacific Islander 4.58 

0.80 

3.05 

3.92 

4.58 

0.37 0.44 0.58 0.32 0.31

2.14 1.56 2.45 1.19 1.66

2.51 1.82 2.41 1.36 1.36

1.83 1.53 2.60 2.35 1.03 

Age at bachelor’s degree completion

 22 or younger 1.07 

23–24 1.20 

25–29 1.98 

30 or older 2.36 

1.07 

1.20 

1.98 

2.36 

0.45 0.63 0.85 0.44 0.57

0.68 0.86 0.85 0.42 0.39

1.26 0.88 1.35 0.66 0.44

1.46 1.25 1.34 0.62 0.59 

Highest education level by either parent

 Less than high school 3.65 

 High school or equivalency 1.40 

 Some postsecondary 1.72 

 Bachelor’s degree 1.39 

 Advanced degree 1.36 

3.65 

1.40 

1.72 

1.39 

1.36 

2.25 1.81 2.11 0.82 1.07

0.81 0.79 0.96 0.52 0.39

1.00 0.84 1.24 0.83 0.59

0.70 0.79 0.82 0.73 0.62

0.94 0.77 0.99 0.64 0.74 

Bachelor’s degree-granting institution

 Public 4-year

 Non-doctoral-granting 1.43 

 Doctoral-granting 1.24 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year

 Non-doctoral-granting 2.17 

 Doctoral-granting 2.28 

 Other 5.94 

1.43 

1.24 

2.17 

2.28 

5.94 

0.78 1.00 0.95 0.44 0.39

0.55 0.51 0.66 0.35 0.51

1.03 0.73 1.09 0.74 0.61

1.36 0.87 1.52 1.25 0.99

5.50 1.21 4.21 1.37 0.94 

See notes at end of table. 

B-6
 
 

—

Table B-1.—

Appendix B—Technical Notes and Methodology 

Table B-1. Standard errors for table 1: Percentage distribution of 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients’ 

highest graduate enrollment, by student and institution characteristics: 2003—Continued 

Highest graduate enrollment 

Total 

No any FirstStudent and institution enroll- enroll- Other profescharacteristics ment ment MBA MEd master’s sional Doctoral 

Baccalaureate degree major

 Arts and humanities 2.03 2.03 0.66 0.93 1.34 0.62 0.52

 Social and behavioral sciences 1.96 1.96 1.11 0.78 1.37 0.88 0.82

 Life and physical sciences 3.16 3.16 0.90 0.64 1.47 2.25 1.68

 Engineering, mathematics,

 computer science 1.91 1.91 1.09 0.90 1.84 0.64 1.16

 Education 1.70 1.70 0.48 1.60 1.06 0.41 0.62

 Business and management 1.56 1.56 1.27 0.50 0.98 0.47 0.25

 Medicine/health 2.61 2.61 1.14 0.78 2.27 1.09 0.33

 Law 14.14 14.14 4.48 3.92 2.19 13.18 †

 Other 4.30 4.30 1.20 2.16 2.49 1.19 1.03 

Bachelor’s degree GPA

 Under 2.5 1.32 1.32 0.84 1.11 0.94 0.37 0.37

 2.5–2.99 1.21 1.21 0.76 0.72 0.82 0.60 0.38

 3.0–3.49 1.42 1.42 0.77 0.68 0.78 0.44 0.56

 3.5 or above 1.94 1.94 0.89 0.74 1.34 0.84 0.65 

Undergraduate debt

 Did not borrow 1.00 1.00 0.56 0.45 0.77 0.32 0.39

 $1–4,999 2.29 2.29 1.30 0.94 1.19 0.76 0.72

 $5,000–9,999 2.58 2.58 1.33 1.07 1.53 0.80 0.48

 $10,000–14,999 1.69 1.69 1.19 1.12 1.30 1.06 0.74

 $15,000 or more 2.32 2.32 1.12 1.13 1.94 0.87 1.13 

† Not applicable.
 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993/03 Baccalaureate and Beyond 


Longitudinal Study (B&B:93/03).
 

Statistical Procedures 

Differences Between Means 

The descriptive comparisons in this report were tested using Student’s t statistic. 

Differences between estimates are tested against the probability of a Type I error2 or significance 

level. The significance levels were determined by calculating the Student’s t values for the 

2 A Type I error occurs when one concludes that a difference observed in a sample reflects a true difference in the population 

from which the sample was drawn, when no such difference is present. 

B-7
 
 

 

 

Appendix B—Technical Notes and Methodology 

differences between each pair of means or proportions and comparing these with published tables 

of significance levels for two-tailed hypothesis testing (p < .05). 

Student’s t values may be computed to test the difference between estimates with the 

following formula: 

E1 − E2 

t = (1) 

se1

2 + se22 

where E1 and E2 are the estimates to be compared and se1 and se2 are their corresponding 

standard errors. This formula is valid only for independent estimates. When estimates are not 

independent, a covariance term must be added to the formula: 

E1 - E2 t = (2) 

se 2 + se 2 - 2(r)se se 1 2 1 2 

where r is the correlation between the two estimates.3 This formula is used when comparing two 

percentages from a distribution that adds to 100. If the comparison is between the mean of a 

subgroup and the mean of the total group, the following formula is used: 

E sub − Etot t = (3) 2 2 2 se + se − 2 p se sub tot sub 

where p is the proportion of the total group contained in the subgroup.4 The estimates, standard 

errors, and correlations can all be obtained from the DAS. 

There are some hazards in using statistical tests for each comparison. First, comparisons 

based on large t statistics may appear to merit special attention. This can be misleading since the 

magnitude of the t statistic is related not only to the observed differences in means or 

percentages, but also to the number of respondents in the specific categories used for 

comparison. Hence, a small difference compared across a large number of respondents would 

produce a large t statistic. 

A second hazard in using statistical tests is the possibility of a “false positive” or Type I 

error. In the case of a t statistic, this false positive would result when a difference measured with 

a particular sample showed a statistically significant difference when there is no difference in the 

underlying population. Statistical tests are designed to control for this type of error, denoted by 

3 U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, A Note from the Chief Statistician, no. 2, 1993. 

4 Ibid. 

B-8
 
 

Appendix B—Technical Notes and Methodology 

alpha. The alpha level of .05 selected for findings in this report indicates that a difference of a 

certain magnitude or larger would be produced no more than one time out of 20 when there was 

no actual difference in the quantities in the underlying population. When researchers test 

hypotheses that show t values below the .05 significance level, they treat this finding as rejecting 

the null hypothesis that there is no difference between the two quantities. Failing to reject the null 

hypothesis (i.e., finding no difference), however, does not necessarily imply that the values are 

the same or equivalent. 

Linear Trends 

While many descriptive comparisons in this report were tested using Student’s t statistic, 

some comparisons among categories of an ordered variable with three or more levels involved a 

test for a linear trend across all categories (in particular, for parents’ education and GPA), rather 

than a series of tests between pairs of categories. In this report, when differences among 

percentages were examined relative to a variable with ordered categories, Analysis of Variance 

(ANOVA) was used to test for a linear relationship between the two variables. To do this, 

ANOVA models included orthogonal linear contrasts corresponding to successive levels of the 

independent variable. The squares of the balanced repeated replication standard errors (i.e., 

standard errors that were calculated by the balanced repeated replication method), the variance 

between the means, and the unweighted sample sizes were used to partition total sum of squares 

into within- and between-group sums of squares. These were used to create mean squares for the 

within- and between-group variance components and their corresponding F statistics, which were 

then compared with published values of F for a significance level of .05.5 Significant values of 

both the overall F and the F associated with the linear contrast term were required as evidence of 

a linear relationship between the two variables. Means and balanced repeated replication (BRR) 

standard errors were calculated by the DAS. Unweighted sample sizes are not available from the 

DAS and were provided by NCES. 

Multivariate Commonality Analysis 

There are many ways for members of the public and other researchers to make use of 

NCES results. The most popular way is to read the written reports. Other ways include obtaining 

and analyzing public use and restricted use data files, which allow researchers to carry out and 

publish their own secondary analyses of NCES data. 

5 More information about ANOVA and significance testing using the F statistic can be found in any standard textbook on 

statistical methods in the social and behavioral sciences. 

B-9
 
Appendix B—Technical Notes and Methodology 

It is very important when reading NCES reports to remember that they are descriptive in 

nature. That is, they are limited to describing some aspect of the condition of education. These 

results are usefully viewed as suggesting various ideas to be examined further in light of other 

data, including state and local data, and in the context of the extensive research literature 

elaborating on the many factors predicting and contributing to educational achievement or to 

other outcome variables of interest. 

However, some readers are tempted to make unwarranted causal inferences from simple 

cross tabulations. It is never the case that a simple cross tabulation of any variable with a measure 

of educational achievement is conclusive proof that differences in that variable are a cause of 

differential educational achievement or that differences in that variable explain any other 

outcome variable. The old adage that “correlation is not causation” is a wise precaution to keep 

in mind when considering the results of NCES reports. Experienced researchers are aware of the 

design limitations of many NCES data collections. They routinely formulate multiple hypotheses 

that take these limitations into account, and readers of this volume are encouraged to do likewise. 

As part of the Institute of Education Sciences, NCES has a responsibility to try to discourage 

misleading inferences from the data presented and to educate the public on the genuine difficulty 

of making valid causal inferences in a field as complex as education. Our reports are carefully 

worded to achieve this end. 

This focus on description, eschewing causal analysis, extends to multivariate analyses as 

well as bivariate ones. Some NCES reports go beyond presenting simple cross tabulations and 

present results from multiple regression equations that include many different independent 

(“predictor”) variables. This can be useful to readers, especially those without the time or training 

to access the data themselves. Because many of the independent variables included in descriptive 

reports are related to each other and to the outcome they are predicting, a multivariate approach 

can help users to understand their interrelation. For example, students’ gender and undergraduate 

major are associated with each other and are both predictors of enrollment in graduate school. 

What happens to the relationship between students’ gender and enrollment in graduate school 

when undergraduate major differences are accounted for? Such a question cannot be answered 

using bivariate techniques alone. 

One way to answer the question is to create three variable tabulations, a method sometimes 

used in NCES reports. When the number of independent variables increases to four or more, 

however, the number of cases in individual cells of such a table often becomes too small to find 

significant differences simply because there are too few cases to achieve statistical significance. 

To make economical use of the many available independent variables in the same data display, 

B-10 

 

Appendix B—Technical Notes and Methodology 

other statistical methods must be used that can take multiple independent variables into account 

simultaneously. 

Multiple linear regression is often used for this purpose: to adjust for the common variation 

among a list of independent variables. This approach is sometimes referred to as “commonality 

analysis,”6 because it identifies lingering relationships after adjustment for “common” variation. 

This method is used simply to confirm statistically significant associations observed in the 

bivariate analysis, while taking into account the interrelationship of the independent variables. 

Thus, this multiple regression approach is descriptive. Significant coefficients reported in 

the regression tables indicate that when the variable is deleted from (or added to) the set of 

independent variables, it results in a non-zero change in R-squared, which is the basis of the 

commonality analysis. In other words, a significant coefficient means that the independent 

variable has a relationship with the outcome variable that is unique, or distinct from its 

relationship with other independent variables in the model. 

Multivariate description of this sort is distinct from both a modeling approach in which an 

analyst attempts to identify the smallest relevant set of causal or explanatory independent 

variables associated with the dependent variable or variables and an approach using one of the 

many varieties of structural equation modeling. In contrast, a multivariate descriptive or 

commonality approach provides a richer understanding of the data without needing to make any 

kind of causal assumptions, which is why descriptive multivariate commonality analysis is often 

used in NCES statistical reports. The commonality analyses discussed in this report use the 

Weighted Least Squares (WLS) estimation method. WLS regression weights cases differentially. 

The size of the weight indicates the precision of the information contained in the associated 

observation. The weights determine the contribution of each observation to the final parameter 

estimates and standard errors. 

When should commonality analysis be employed? It should be used in statistical analysis 

reports when independent variables are correlated with both the outcome variable and with each 

other. This will allow the analyst to determine how much of the effect of one independent 

variable is due to the influence of other independent variables, because in a multiple regression 

procedure these effects are adjusted for. For example, because the strength of the statistical 

relationship between students’ gender and enrollment in graduate school may be affected by 

undergraduate major, computing a multiple regression equation that contains both variables 

allows the analyst to determine how much, if any, difference in graduate enrollment between men 

and women is due to differences in undergraduate major. 

6 For more information about commonality analysis, see Pedhazur (1997). 

B-11 

 

Appendix B—Technical Notes and Methodology 

As discussed in the Data Analysis System section above, all analyses included in PEDAR 

reports must be based on the DAS, which is available to the public online 

(http://www.nces.ed.gov/DAS). Exclusively using the DAS in this way provides readers direct 

access to the findings and methods used in the report so that they may replicate or expand on the 

estimates presented. However, the DAS does not allow users access to the raw data, which limits 

the range of covariation procedures that can be used. Specifically, the DAS produces correlation 

matrices, which can be used as input in standard statistical packages to produce least squares 

regression models. This means that logit or probit procedures, more appropriate for dichotomous 

dependent variables, cannot be used.7 However, empirical studies have shown that when the 

mean value of a dichotomous dependent variable falls between .25 and .75 (as it does in this 

analysis), regression and log-linear models are likely to produce similar results.8 

The independent variables analyzed in this study and subsequently included in the 

multivariate model were chosen based largely on earlier empirical studies (cited in the text), 

which showed significant associations with the key analytic variable, graduate enrollment, 

persistence, and attainment. Before conducting the study, a detailed analysis plan was reviewed 

by a Technical Review Panel (TRP) of experts in the field of higher education research, and 

additional independent variables requested by the TRP were considered for inclusion. The 

analysis plan listed all independent variables to be included in the study. The TRP also reviewed 

the preliminary results, as well as the first draft of this report. The analysis plan and subsequent 

report were modified based on TRP comments. 

Missing Data and Adjusting for Complex Sample Design 

The DAS computes the correlation matrix using pairwise missing values. In regression 

analysis, there are several common approaches to the problem of missing data. The two simplest 

approaches are pairwise deletion of missing data and listwise deletion of missing data. In 

pairwise deletion, each correlation is calculated using all of the cases for the two relevant 

variables. For example, suppose you have a regression analysis that uses variables X1, X2, and 

X3. The regression is based on the correlation matrix between X1, X2, and X3. In pairwise 

deletion, the correlation between X1 and X2 is based on the nonmissing cases for X1 and X2. 

Cases missing on either X1 or X2 would be excluded from the calculation of the correlation. In 

listwise deletion, the correlation between X1 and X2 would be based on the nonmissing values 

for X1, X2, and X3. That is, all of the cases with missing data on any of the three variables 

would be excluded from the analysis. 

7 See Aldrich and Nelson (1984). Analysts who wish to estimate other types of models can apply for a restricted data license
 

from NCES. 


8 See, for example, Goodman (1976) and Knoke (1975). 


B-12 

 

Appendix B—Technical Notes and Methodology 

The correlation matrix produced by the DAS can be used by most statistical software 

packages as the input data for least squares regression.9 The DAS provides either the SPSS or 

SAS code necessary to run least squares regression models. The DAS also provides additional 

information to incorporate the complex sample design into the statistical significance tests of the 

parameter estimates. Most statistical software packages assume simple random sampling when 

computing standard errors of parameter estimates. Because of the complex sampling design used 

for the survey, this assumption is incorrect. A better approximation of the standard errors can be 

made by multiplying each standard error by the design effect associated with the dependent 

variable (DEFT),10 where the DEFT is the ratio of the true standard error to the standard error 

computed under the assumption of simple random sampling. The DEFT is calculated by the DAS 

and displayed with the correlation matrix output. 

Interpreting the Results 

The least squares regression coefficients displayed in the regression tables in this report are 

expressed as percentages. Significant coefficients represent the observed differences that remain 

between the analysis group (i.e., students whose parents had a high school education) and the 

comparison group (i.e., students whose parents held graduate degrees) after controlling for the 

relationships of all selected independent variables. For example, in table 21, the least squares 

coefficient for students who had master’s degree aspirations when they completed a bachelor’s 

degree is 15.1. This means that compared with students who expected their highest degree to be a 

bachelor’s degree, roughly 15 percent more of those who expected to earn a master’s degree were 

likely to enroll in a graduate degree program after controlling for the relationships among all 

other independent variables. 

9 For more information about least squares regression, see Lewis-Beck (1980) and Berry and Feldman (1987). 

10 The adjustment procedure and its limitations are described in Skinner, Holt, and Smith (1989). 

B-13