Beyond 9 to 5

The Diversity of Employment

Among 1992–93 College

Graduates in 1997

Postsecondary Education

Descriptive Analysis Reports

U.S. Department of Education

Office of Educational

Research and Improvement

NCES 2003–152

National Center for

Education Statistics
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
U.S. Department of Education 

Office of Educational 

Research and Improvement 

NCES 2003–152 

Beyond 9 to 5 

The Diversity of Employment 

Among 1992–93 College 

Graduates in 1997 

Postsecondary Education 

Descriptive Analysis Reports 

October 2002 

Ellen M. Bradburn 

Rachael Berger 

MPR Associates, Inc. 

C. Dennis Carroll 

Project Officer 

National Center for 

Education Statistics 
U.S. Department of Education 

Rod Paige 

Secretary 

Office of Educational Research and Improvement 

Grover J. Whitehurst 

Assistant Secretary 

National Center for Education Statistics 

Gary W. Phillips 

Deputy 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 high quality 

data to the U.S. Department of Education, the Congress, the states, other education policymakers, 

practitioners, data users, and the general public. 

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 

 Office of Educational Research and Improvement 

 U.S. Department of Education 

 1990 K Street NW 

 Washington, DC 20006-5651 

October 2002 

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

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

Suggested Citation 

U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. Beyond 9 to 5: The Diversity of 

Employment Among 1992–93 College Graduates in 1997, NCES 2003–152, by Ellen M. Bradburn and Rachael 

Berger. Project Officer: C. Dennis Carroll. Washington, DC: 2002. 

For ordering information on this report, write: 

U.S. Department of Education 

ED Pubs 

P.O. Box 1398 

Jessup, MD 20794-1398 

or call toll free 1-877-4ED-PUBS 

Contact Contact: 

Aurora D’Amico 

(202) 502-7334 

Aurora.D’Amico@ed.gov
iii 

Executive Summary

Numerous studies have examined the 

employment benefits of earning a bachelor’s 

degree, concluding that higher levels of education 

sharply increase one’s earning potential and 

employment opportunities (Cappelli et al. 1997). 

In particular, several studies have demonstrated 

the labor market advantage that students who 

concentrate in applied fields, such as business and 

engineering, experience with respect to higher 

salaries and full-time employment (e.g., Grogger 

and Eide 1995; Pascarella and Terenzini 1991; 

Rumberger and Thomas 1993). However, today’s 

labor market does not necessarily guarantee a 

college graduate a traditional 9 to 5 job, nor is this 

type of employment the only option. Bachelor’s 

degree recipients are well-represented in the 

contingent (short-term) workforce (Bureau of 

Labor Statistics 2001; Hipple 1998), but there is 

little research that examines the experiences of 

bachelor’s degree recipients who are not full-time 

professional employees, but instead have 

alternative employment. 

Although alternative employment is defined 

differently in various studies, this analysis 

examines both alternative working arrangements 

and occupation types. Alternative working 

arrangements examined here include selfemployment, part-time employment, and 

employment in multiple jobs. An aggregate 

variable indicating whether or not the respondent 

was in any of these three employment situations is 

also included. In addition, this analysis explores 

the occupation type of the respondents: clerical 

and support occupations and field professions1

 are 

both considered alternative employment for this 

study because they include jobs historically filled 

by workers without bachelor’s degrees (Decker, 

Rice, and Moore 1997). 

This study uses data from the 1993/97 

Baccalaureate and Beyond Longitudinal Study 

(B&B:93/97), representing college graduates who 

received their bachelor’s degrees in academic year 

1992–93. Survey participants were sampled from 

the 1992–93 National Postsecondary Student Aid 

Study (NPSAS:93) and were first surveyed in their 

final year of college, with follow-ups conducted in 

1994 and 1997, approximately 1 year and 4 years 

after graduation. The analysis focuses primarily on 

employment in 1997 and includes those who were 

employed and not enrolled for further study at that 

time. The data are used to address the following 

questions: How prevalent is alternative 

employment among bachelor’s degree recipients 

who are not enrolled? Which bachelor’s degree 

recipients are most likely to work in alternative 

employment, by various demographic, family, and 

academic characteristics, particularly by gender? 

What are the differences between patterns of 

alternative employment when graduates are 1 year 

out of college and when they are 4 years out of 

college? How do those in alternative employment 

differ from those in traditional employment in 

 

1

“Field professions” include jobs such as those in farming and 

forestry, protective services, and health and recreation 

services, professions that are likely to involve long or 

nontraditional hours or work outside of a conventional office 

setting. See the glossary for complete information about the 

occupation types examined in this analysis. 
Executive Summary

iv

terms of their reasons for taking their job, benefits,

salaries, and job satisfaction?

Prevalence of Alternative

Employment

In 1997, about two-thirds (68 percent) of

employed 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients

who were not enrolled for further study worked in

jobs considered traditional for college graduates—

that is, they worked full time for someone else in

one professional job. Self-employment, working

part time, and being employed in multiple jobs

were each relatively uncommon among employed,

nonenrolled 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients

(5 percent were self-employed, 5 percent were

employed part time, and 7 percent worked in

multiple jobs). In all, 15 percent reported working

in at least one of these three types of alternative

working arrangements. Also, 13 percent reported

working in clerical and support occupations, and

an additional 8 percent reported working in field

professions.

Demographic, Family, and Academic

Characteristics

Consistent with other current research

(Callaghan and Hartmann 1991; Polivka 1996a,

1996b), this analysis indicates that gender was

associated with many types of alternative

employment (figure A). Among 1992–93

Figure A.—Percentage of employed 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients not enrolled who were in alternative

Figure A.—employment, by gender: 1997

1

Includes self-employment, part-time employment, and employment in multiple jobs. These categories do not sum to the total because they are

 not mutually exclusive.

2

Detail may not sum to total due to rounding.

3

These include such fields as farming and forestry, protective services, and health and recreational services. See the glossary for further details.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993/97 Baccalaureate and Beyond Longitudinal Study 

(B&B:93/97).

5

16

20

8

7

3

16

13

9

22

5

3

8

14

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Field professions

Clerical and support occupations

Some type of alternative occupation

Working in multiple jobs

Employed part time 

Self-employed

Some type of alternative working arrangement

Percent

Male

Female

Some type of alternative

working arrangement1

Self-employed

Employed part time

Working in multiple jobs

Some type of alternative

occupation2

Clerical and support

occupations

Field professions3
Executive Summary 

v 

bachelor’s degree recipients who were employed 

but not enrolled in 1997, women were more likely 

than men to have some type of alternative working 

arrangement (16 vs. 14 percent). However, the 

gender differences varied with the specific type of 

alternative working arrangement considered. 

Women were more likely than men to have parttime employment (7 vs. 3 percent) or multiple jobs 

(8 vs. 5 percent), while men were more likely than 

women to be self-employed (8 vs. 3 percent). 

Women were also more likely than men to work in 

clerical or support occupations (16 vs. 9 percent), 

while men were more likely than women to work 

in field professions (13 vs. 5 percent). Except for 

working in multiple jobs, these differences in 

alternative employment remained even after 

controlling for other variables. 

Family characteristics were related to various 

alternative working arrangements among women, 

but few differences by family characteristics were 

detected among men. For example, among women, 

having dependents was associated with a greater 

likelihood of having some type of alternative 

working arrangement (24 vs. 13 percent), 

specifically, self-employment (5 vs. 3 percent) or 

part-time employment (15 vs. 4 percent). 

However, these differences were not detected 

among men. Among both men and women, marital 

status was related to working part time. However, 

while married women were more likely than single 

women to work part time (10 vs. 4 percent), 

married men were less likely than their single 

counterparts to work part time (2 vs. 4 percent). 

Some aspects of the academic experiences of 

1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients were 

associated with various types of alternative 

employment in 1997, 4 years after college 

completion. Undergraduate grade-point average 

(GPA) was associated with the likelihood of 

working part time, having a clerical or support 

occupation, and having a field profession. As GPA 

increased, so did the prospect of having part-time 

employment. In contrast, as GPA increased, the 

likelihood of having a clerical and support or field 

occupation decreased. 

Several studies have shown that students who 

concentrate in applied fields such as business and 

engineering are more likely to be employed full 

time (Grogger and Eide 1995; Pascarella and 

Terenzini 1991; Rumberger and Thomas 1993). 

Consistent with these studies, this analysis shows 

that business and engineering majors were less 

likely than average to report having a part-time job 

(2 percent each vs. 5 percent). Undergraduate 

major was also associated with type of occupation. 

Nineteen percent of social science majors reported 

working in clerical and support occupations. In 

contrast, education, engineering, and health majors 

were less likely than average to work in clerical 

and support occupations (7, 2, and 6 vs. 13 

percent). And health majors were less likely than 

average to work in field professions (2 vs. 8 

percent). Because education, engineering, and 

health are applied fields in which students are 

preparing for specific professional careers, 

students who major in these fields are particularly 

likely to be employed in them after completing 

college (Horn and Zahn 2001). By definition, the 

areas for which they have prepared (teaching, 

medical professions, and engineering) are included 

in the professional occupations. 

Alternative Employment 1 and 4 

Years After College Completion 

This analysis also examines how the alternative 

employment experiences of college graduates 

differed when they were 1 year and 4 years out of 

college (figure B). Employed 1992–93 bachelor’s 

degree recipients who were not enrolled were 

more likely to have some type of alternative 
Executive Summary 

vi 

 

working arrangement in 1997 than they were in 

1994 (15 vs. 11 percent). Specifically, in 1997 

compared with 1994, they were more likely to 

have multiple jobs (7 vs. 3 percent) or to be selfemployed (5 vs. 1 percent). Conversely, in 1997, 

they were less likely to work part time or to have 

clerical and support occupations or field 

professions. 

Many gender differences in alternative 

employment persisted from 1 year to 4 years out of 

college. In both 1994 and 1997, women were more 

likely than men to have some type of alternative 

working arrangement (13 vs. 10 percent in 1994; 

16 vs. 14 percent in 1997). In 1994, women were 

more likely than men to work part time (9 vs. 6 

percent) or to have clerical and support jobs (23 

vs. 14 percent), while men were more likely than 

women to work in field professions (16 vs. 7 

percent) or to be self-employed (2 vs. 1 percent). 

These patterns were consistent with the differences 

found for 1997, as described in the previous 

section. 

Working in alternative employment in 1994 

was associated with a greater likelihood of doing 

so in 1997. Specifically, 45 percent of those who 

were self-employed in 1994 were also selfemployed in 1997, compared with 5 percent of 

those who were not self-employed in 1994. About 

half (51 percent) of those who had multiple jobs in 

1994 also did in 1997, compared with 5 percent of 

those who did not have multiple jobs in 1994. In 

addition, part-time workers in 1994 were more 

Figure B.—Percentage of employed 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients not enrolled who were in alternative

Figure B.—employment: 1994 and 1997

1

Includes self-employment, part-time employment, and employment in multiple jobs. These categories do not sum to the total because they are

not mutually exclusive.

2

Detail may not sum to total due to rounding.

3

These include such fields as farming and forestry, protective services, and health and recreational services. See the glossary for further details.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993/97 Baccalaureate and Beyond Longitudinal Study 

(B&B:93/97).

8

13

21

7

5

5

15

11

19

30

3

8

1

11

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Field professions

Clerical and support occupations

Some type of alternative occupation

Working in multiple jobs

Employed part time 

Self-employed

Some type of alternative working arrangement

Percent

1994

1997

Some type of alternative

working arrangement1

Self-employed

Employed part time

Working in multiple jobs

Some type of alternative

occupation2

Clerical and support 

occupations

Field professions3
Executive Summary 

vii 

likely than their full-time counterparts to be 

working part time in 1997 as well (18 vs. 4 

percent). Finally, one-third (36 percent) of those 

who had clerical and support jobs in 1994 also had 

clerical and support jobs in 1997, compared with 

7–10 percent of those with other types of jobs in 

1994. Similarly, 43 percent of those with field 

professions in 1994 were still in positions of this 

type in 1997, compared with 4–5 percent of those 

with other occupations in 1994. 

Alternative Employment and Other 

Labor Market Experiences 

Workers have a range of reasons for voluntarily 

or involuntarily working in alternative 

employment, balancing the disadvantages and 

benefits associated with particular jobs. Studies 

suggest a number of reasons why a worker may 

not have a traditional job. For example, a worker 

may not be able to find permanent work, or he or 

she may choose alternative employment to obtain 

flexible hours, to make a transition into a new job 

or field, or to earn more money (Lester 1996; 

Rothstein 1996). 

Among 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients 

who were employed but not enrolled in 1997, 

those with some type of alternative working 

arrangement were more likely than others to report 

having the freedom to make decisions as a reason 

for taking their job (10 vs. 4 percent; figure C). 

Part-time workers were more likely than those 

working full time to cite convenience (12 vs. 8 

 

Figure C.—Percentage of employed 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients not enrolled who gave various reasons for 

Figure C.—taking their jobs, by alternative working arrangement: 1997

*Includes self-employment, part-time employment, and employment in multiple jobs. These categories are not mutually exclusive.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993/97 Baccalaureate and Beyond Longitudinal Study

(B&B:93/97).

10 9 8

4 4

18

12

6

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Freedom 

to make 

decisions

Advancement

opportunities

Good

starting

salary

Job

security

Percent

Alternative working arrangement* No alternative arrangement
Executive Summary 

viii 

percent) or having time for non-work-related 

activities (5 vs. 2 percent) as a reason for choosing 

their job. Also, those who were self-employed 

were more likely to cite income potential as a 

reason for choosing their job (17 vs. 10 percent). 

On the other hand, those with some type of 

alternative working arrangement were less likely 

to report interesting work (15 vs. 19 percent), 

advancement opportunities (9 vs. 18 percent), 

good starting salary (8 vs. 12 percent), or good job 

security (4 vs. 6 percent) as a reason for taking 

their job. 

Part-time workers were less likely than fulltime workers to receive each of the benefits 

examined—health insurance benefits (41 vs. 91 

percent), paid sick leave (39 vs. 88 percent), paid 

vacation (39 vs. 90 percent), retirement benefits 

(44 vs. 82 percent), family-related benefits (31 vs. 

70 percent), and job training (29 vs. 47 percent). 

Among full-time workers, those with some type of 

alternative working arrangement were less likely 

than others to receive each benefit examined. Fulltime workers who were self-employed or had 

multiple jobs were less likely than others to 

receive benefits. In addition, full-time workers 

employed in field professions were generally less 

likely than those employed in professional 

occupations or clerical and support occupations to 

receive benefits. Fewer differences in benefits 

were detected among part-time workers. 

Among graduates who worked full time, 

several differences in income were detected by 

alternative employment. Those who were selfemployed had a higher income than their 

counterparts who worked for someone else, while 

those with multiple jobs had a lower income than 

those with only one job. Those with professional 

occupations earned more than those with clerical 

and support occupations or field professions. In 

contrast, no income differences were found among 

part-time workers by self-employment, number of 

jobs worked, or type of occupation. 

Gender differences were also observed in the 

relationship between income and some types of 

alternative employment. Among full-time male 

workers, self-employment was associated with 

higher income and working in multiple jobs was 

associated with lower income. These results did 

not apply to their female counterparts. Also, even 

among the alternatively employed, there were 

gender differences in income. For example, fulltime self-employed men earned more than their 

female counterparts ($43,600 vs. $29,800). And 

within each occupation type, men earned more 

than their female counterparts. Clearly, a gender 

gap in earnings persists even among those with 

various types of employment. 

While the 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients 

in alternative employment generally had fewer 

benefits and often had lower incomes, the analysis 

also shows that they often gave different reasons 

for choosing their jobs. Therefore, their 

satisfaction with their work might depend on 

which job characteristics are being considered. For 

example, part-time workers were less likely than 

full-time workers to be very satisfied with their job 

security (55 vs. 65 percent), fringe benefits (36 vs. 

56 percent), and promotion opportunities (28 vs. 

40 percent). However, there were no differences 

found between full-time and part-time workers’ 

satisfaction with pay, job challenge, working 

conditions, and relationships with coworkers. 
ix 

Foreword 

This report describes the employment experiences of 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients 

in spring 1997, focusing on part-time employment, self-employment, employment in multiple 

jobs, employment in clerical and support occupations, and employment in field professions. 

Background characteristics associated with these types of alternative employment are explored, 

including an examination of differential participation in these types of arrangements by gender. 

In addition, the report examines differences in other employment characteristics, benefits, and 

satisfaction by alternative employment. 

This report uses data from the 1992/93 Baccalaureate and Beyond Longitudinal Study 

(B&B:93/97). The B&B:93/97 study is the longitudinal component of the 1993 National 

Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:93), a nationally representative sample that includes 

students enrolled in all types of postsecondary institutions, ranging from 4-year colleges and 

universities to less-than-2-year vocational institutions. The B&B:93/97 cohort consists of 

students who received bachelor’s degrees during the 1992–93 academic year. The cohort was 

followed up in spring 1994 and again in spring 1997. This and other reports using this data set 

can be accessed and downloaded from the NCES Web Site (nces.ed.gov). 

The estimates presented in the report were produced using the NCES Data Analysis System 

(DAS), a microcomputer application that allows users to specify and generate tables, for the 

B&B:93/97 study. The DAS produces the design-adjusted standard errors necessary for testing 

the statistical significance of differences among estimates. Researchers are encouraged to use the 

B&B:93/97 data for their own analysis as well. For more information on the DAS and analysis 

with B&B:93/97, readers should consult appendix B of this report. 
x 

Acknowledgments 

The authors are grateful for the contributions of staff members at MPR Associates, NCES 

and other U.S. Department of Education offices, and nongovernmental agencies. At MPR 

Associates, Kathryn Rooney assisted in the research, analysis, and technical production of the 

report. Laura Horn provided valuable guidance throughout the entire process. Expert assistance 

in the production of the report was supplied by Francesca Tussing, Eugenia Martinez, Patti 

Gildersleeve, and Wes Nations under the direction of Barbara Kridl. Andrea Livingston and 

Robin Henke provided helpful editorial and substantive reviews. We also appreciate comments 

and suggestions provided by Lutz Berkner and Susan Choy. 

At NCES, C. Dennis Carroll and Paula Knepper guided the report, and Karen O’Conor 

provided thorough oversight in the adjudication process. We also appreciate the input of the 

other reviewers, including Steve Broughman and Lisa Hudson of NCES, Dan Goldenberg of 

Planning and Evaluation Services in the U.S. Department of Education, Christine Marr of the 

American Council on Education, and Sally Dillow of the Education Statistics Services Institute. 
xi 

Table of Contents 

 Page 

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

Foreword.................................................................................................................................... ix 

Acknowledgments...................................................................................................................... x 

List of Tables.............................................................................................................................. xii 

List of Figures............................................................................................................................ xiv 

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

Data and Methods.................................................................................................................. 3 

Organization of the Report.................................................................................................... 4 

Participation in Alternative Employment............................................................................... 7 

The Prevalence of Alternative Employment ......................................................................... 7 

Demographic, Family, and Academic Characteristics.......................................................... 7 

Relationships Among Types of Alternative Employment .................................................... 18 

Alternative Employment 1 and 4 Years After College Completion ..................................... 22 

Participation in Alternative Employment After Controlling for Covariation ....................... 27 

Alternative Employment and Other Labor Market Experiences......................................... 39

Reasons for Taking a Job ...................................................................................................... 39 

Job Benefits........................................................................................................................... 41 

Income................................................................................................................................... 44 

Job Satisfaction ..................................................................................................................... 48 

Conclusion.................................................................................................................................. 53 

References.................................................................................................................................. 55 

Appendix A—Glossary ............................................................................................................. 57 

Appendix B—Technical Notes ................................................................................................. 71 
xii 

List of Tables 

Table Page 

1 Percentage of employed 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients not enrolled who were 

in alternative employment, by demographic background characteristics and gender: 

1997................................................................................................................................. 10 

2 Percentage of employed 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients not enrolled who were 

in alternative employment, by family status and gender: 1997....................................... 13 

3 Percentage of employed 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients not enrolled who were 

in alternative employment, by institutional and academic characteristics: 1997............ 15 

4 Percentage of employed 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients not enrolled who were 

in alternative employment, by job characteristics: 1997................................................. 19 

5 Percentage of employed 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients not enrolled who were 

in alternative employment, by job characteristics and gender: 1997 .............................. 20 

6 Percentage of employed 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients not enrolled who were 

in alternative employment, by gender: 1994 and 1997 ................................................... 23 

7 Percentage distribution of 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients according to 

employment and enrollment status in 1997, by employment and enrollment status and 

job characteristics in 1994............................................................................................... 24 

8 Percentage of employed 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients not enrolled who were 

in alternative employment in 1997, by employment and enrollment status and job 

characteristics in 1994..................................................................................................... 25

9 Percentage of employed 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients not enrolled who were 

self-employed in 1997, by selected characteristics, and the adjusted percentage after 

taking into account covariation of the other variables in the table.................................. 29 

10 Percentage of employed 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients not enrolled who were 

employed part time in 1997, by selected characteristics, and the adjusted percentage 

after taking into account covariation of the other variables in the table ......................... 31 

11 Percentage of employed 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients not enrolled who were 

working in multiple jobs in 1997, by selected characteristics, and the adjusted 

percentage after taking into account covariation of the other variables in the table....... 33 
List of Tables 

xiii 

Table Page 

12 Percentage of employed 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients not enrolled who were 

in clerical and support occupations in 1997, by selected characteristics, and the 

adjusted percentage after taking into account covariation of the other variables in the 

table ................................................................................................................................. 35 

13 Percentage of employed 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients not enrolled who were 

in field professions in 1997, by selected characteristics, and the adjusted percentage 

after taking into account covariation of the other variables in the table ......................... 37 

14 Percentage of employed 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients not enrolled who gave 

various reasons for taking their jobs, by job characteristics: 1997 ................................. 41 

15 Percentage of employed 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients not enrolled who 

received various job benefits, by job characteristics and employment status: 1997....... 42 

16 Income of employed 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients not enrolled, by job 

characteristics and employment status: 1997.................................................................. 45 

17 Income of employed 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients not enrolled, by job 

characteristics, employment status, and gender: 1997 .................................................... 46 

18 Percentage of employed 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients not enrolled who were 

very satisfied with various aspects of their jobs, by job characteristics and 

employment status: 1997................................................................................................. 49 

B1 Standard errors for table 2: Percentage of employed 1992–93 bachelor’s degree 

recipients not enrolled who were in alternative employment, by family status and 

gender: 1997.................................................................................................................... 74 

 
xiv 

List of Figures 

Figure Page

Executive Summary Figures 

A Percentage of employed 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients not enrolled who were 

in alternative employment, by gender: 1997................................................................... iv 

B Percentage of employed 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients not enrolled who were 

in alternative employment: 1994 and 1997..................................................................... vi 

C Percentage of employed 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients not enrolled who gave 

various reasons for taking their jobs, by alternative working arrangement: 1997 .......... vii 

Text Figures

1 Percentage of employed 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients not enrolled who were 

in alternative employment: 1997..................................................................................... 8 

2 Percentage of employed 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients not enrolled who were 

in alternative employment, by gender: 1997................................................................... 9 

3 Percentage of employed 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients not enrolled who were 

employed part time, by family status and gender: 1997 ................................................. 14 

4 Percentage of employed 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients not enrolled who were 

in clerical and support or field professions, by undergraduate major: 1997................... 17 

5 Percentage of employed 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients not enrolled who were 

in alternative employment: 1994 and 1997..................................................................... 22 

6 Percentage of employed 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients not enrolled who gave 

various reasons for taking their jobs, by alternative working arrangement: 1997 .......... 40 

7 Percentage of full-time employed 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients not enrolled 

who had various job benefits, by alternative working arrangement: 1997 ..................... 43 

8 Percentage of full-time employed 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients not enrolled 

who were very satisfied with various aspects of their employment, by selfemployment status: 1997................................................................................................. 51 

 
1 

Introduction 

Today’s bachelor’s degree recipients are entering a very different labor market than that of 

their predecessors 30 years ago. As the United States economy has evolved and companies 

increasingly compete in a global marketplace, employers are seeking a more flexible workforce. 

“Individuals are now less likely to stay with one company for the duration of their career and 

employers are investing less in maintaining a stable workforce” (Callaghan and Hartmann 1991, 

p. 1; Cappelli et al. 1997). Instead, these individuals are finding alternative employment 

arrangements, some of which have been described as the contingent or alternative workforce. 

These terms have been used to describe temporary, part-time, on-call, contract, or selfemployment, with “contingent work” referring specifically to those workers who respond to the 

expansion or contraction of the labor force (Cohany 1998; Hipple 1998; Mangan 2000). 

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (2001), contingent workers currently make up 

approximately 4 percent of total employment in the United States. Callaghan and Hartmann 

(1991) estimate that almost one in five U.S. employees are part-time workers. However, precise 

estimates of the number of alternative workers in the United States may vary according to the 

particular study, partly because different studies look at different types of alternative 

employment. 

Previous literature has compared the diverse characteristics and experiences of traditional 

workers in the general population with those of alternative workers (Cohany 1998; Kalleberg, 

Reskin, and Hudson 2000; Mangan 2000; Polivka 1996b). These two groups of workers tend to 

differ in myriad ways. For example, Cohany (1998) found differences and inequalities between 

women and men in alternative employment, where “among independent contractors (those who 

are self-employed), men’s earnings were more than 50% higher than women’s, while within 

traditional workers, the difference was 28%” (p. 7). Research also shows that the majority of 

contingent workers (specifically part-time and temporary workers) are minorities, women, and 

younger than 24 years old (Callaghan and Hartmann 1991; Polivka 1996b). In addition, part-time 

employees are more likely than full-time workers to have occupations in such areas as sales, 

service, and administrative support and to have unskilled/nonprofessional positions (Callaghan 

and Hartmann 1991). However, research has also found that many nontraditional workers are 

employed in high-skilled jobs (Hipple 1998). 
Introduction 

2 

Studies have explored the various reasons that employees choose alternative working 

arrangements. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (2001), about one-half (52 percent) of 

the contingent workforce would have preferred to be in a more traditional job. This statistic 

suggests that the other half did not prefer a more traditional job. In addition, about 90 percent of 

part-time workers are classified as working part time for noneconomic reasons (Bureau of Labor 

Statistics 2002). Thus, some individuals work in alternative employment voluntarily, while 

others do not. There are many reasons why workers might choose an alternative job, including 

having a flexible work schedule, receiving supplemental income, and having an opportunity to 

explore different jobs or fields (Rothstein 1996). However, workers may also take an alternative 

position because they were unable to find full-time traditional work. These alternative jobs often 

have fewer benefits such as health insurance, opportunities for promotion, and job stability 

(Lester 1996). 

How do college graduates fit into this picture of the alternative workforce? Numerous 

studies have examined the employment benefits of earning a bachelor’s degree, and concluded 

that higher levels of education sharply increase an individual’s earning potential and employment 

opportunities (Cappelli et al. 1997). The relationship of education to employment outcomes is 

largely mediated through the types of occupations for which a college degree qualifies a worker. 

For example, in 1992, 71 percent of workers ages 22 through 65 who had a bachelor’s degree or 

higher were employed in professional, managerial, or technical jobs, while 6 percent of college 

graduates worked in service, laborer, or farm occupations (Decker, Rice, and Moore 1997). Even 

among college graduates, who constitute about one-quarter of the adult labor force (Bureau of 

Labor Statistics 2001), several studies have demonstrated the labor market advantage that 

students who concentrate in applied fields, such as business and engineering, experience with 

respect to higher salaries and full-time employment (Grogger and Eide 1995; Pascarella and 

Terenzini 1991; Rumberger and Thomas 1993). 

Yet 40 percent of 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients in 1997 indicated that a bachelor’s 

degree was not required for their job (Horn and Zahn 2001).1 In 1997, bachelor’s degree 

recipients made up the largest percentage of the contingent workforce (Hipple 1998), and 

according to the 2001 Current Population Survey, they continue to represent a large proportion 

of these workers (25 percent; Bureau of Labor Statistics 2001). In addition, more and more 

bachelor’s degree recipients are working in occupations that historically were not held by college 

graduates (Decker, Rice, and Moore 1997). The fact that the number of bachelor’s degree 

recipients in nontraditional positions is substantial raises important questions. For example, what 

 

1

It is not clear, however, whether this means that a college education was not necessary to perform the work or that a bachelor’s 

degree was not listed as a requirement to obtain the job. 
Introduction 

3 

employment benefits are available to these employees, and how do they differ from those among 

traditional workers? 

Data and Methods 

The data set used for this study is the 1992/93 Baccalaureate and Beyond Longitudinal 

Study Second Follow-up (B&B:93/97), representing college graduates who received their 

bachelor’s degrees in academic year 1992–93.2 Survey participants were sampled from the 

National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:93) and were first surveyed in their senior 

year of college. They were subsequently followed up in 1994 and 1997, approximately 1 year 

and 4 years after graduation. 

The data from B&B:93/97 are particularly appropriate for this report because this data set 

monitors the progress of a sample of all bachelor’s degree recipients from 1992–93, not just 

those in a particular age cohort, and has follow-ups timed to describe their transitions into the 

labor force or other activities following graduation. The data include information on the 1994 

and 1997 employment status of these college graduates, including the extent to which they 

participate in various types of alternative employment. In addition, respondents reported on 

various aspects of their job satisfaction, job security, working conditions, and salary. However, 

employment situations in the first year after college may not yet be stable because recent 

graduates are deciding whether to pursue graduate study, a particular career, or other activities. 

Therefore, although one section of the analysis does compare alternative employment in 1994 

and 1997, the focus of this report is on graduates’ employment experiences 4 years after 

completing college. 

The analysis is generally restricted to those sample members who were employed in April 

1997, approximately 4 years after they completed their bachelor’s degrees, and who were not 

enrolled in graduate school in 1997 (although they could have had some post-baccalaureate 

education between college completion and 1997). Various types of alternative employment, 

especially part-time employment, are likely to be prevalent among bachelor’s degree recipients 

who are enrolled for further study. In this report, they are eliminated so as not to confound the 

differences in graduates’ employment experiences with enrollment. The analysis also pays 

particular attention to gender differences associated with alternative employment and discusses 

such differences when they are relevant. Finally, because the data set includes only bachelor’s 

degree recipients, it is not possible to compare those who worked in alternative employment 

arrangements and occupations with workers in the general population. 

 

2

While college completion rates are higher for younger cohorts, this sample still represents a small proportion of the labor force. 
Introduction 

4 

Information about several types of alternative employment are available in B&B:93/97. 

Drawing upon these data, this analysis examines both working arrangements and occupation 

types. Alternative working arrangements are distinct from alternative occupation types, but both 

are considered alternative employment. Alternative working arrangements include selfemployment, part-time employment, and employment in multiple jobs. Because these three types 

of working arrangements are not mutually exclusive, an aggregate variable indicating whether or 

not the respondent was in any of these three working arrangements is also included. In addition, 

the analysis addresses respondents’ occupation type, exploring the extent to which bachelor’s 

degree recipients work in fields other than traditional professional occupations. Occupations 

considered “alternative” compared to the experiences of the majority of bachelor’s degree 

recipients were those with characteristics that were not typical, such as those with lower levels of 

responsibility, involving long or unusual working hours, or taking place outside of a 

conventional office setting. Two categories of occupations are considered to be alternative 

employment for the purposes of this report: clerical and support occupations, and field 

professions.3

 Workers can be in only one of these two occupation groups. However, they may 

also have the other alternative working arrangements in their jobs. For example, someone 

working in a field profession may also work part time. The terms “alternative employment” or 

“nontraditional employment” are used interchangeably in this report to refer to the three types of 

working arrangements as well as the two types of occupations. 

Organization of the Report 

The first section of this report explores the prevalence of alternative employment among 

employed bachelor’s degree recipients who are not enrolled in postsecondary education. This 

section looks at which bachelor’s degree recipients were most likely to work in alternative jobs 

with respect to student demographic characteristics such as gender, race/ethnicity, age, family 

income, and dependency status. In addition, it assesses whether working in alternative 

employment is related to various types of family and academic characteristics, such as marital 

status, single parenthood, the type of institution at which the bachelor’s degree was awarded, 

undergraduate major, and cumulative grade-point average (GPA). It then investigates differences 

in the patterns of alternative employment between 4 years after college and 1 year after college. 

Finally, because some of the variables discussed here may be interrelated, multiple linear 

 

3

The specific occupational categorization available in the data as well as the aggregated groups used in this report are likely to 

contain some variation, so that all respondents in the alternative occupation groups may not have alternative characteristics in 

their jobs. For the purposes of this report, “clerical and support” occupations include such jobs as secretarial work and other

clerical or support services work. “Field professions” include jobs such as those in farming and forestry, protective services, or 

health and recreation services, professions which are likely to involve long or nontraditional hours or work outside of a 

conventional office setting. See the glossary for complete information about the occupational groups. 
Introduction 

5 

regression techniques are used to show how alternative employment is associated with the other 

variables after taking into account covariation. 

The second section provides a comparison of bachelor’s degree recipients who are in 

alternative employment with those who are not. It addresses the job characteristics of alternative 

workers and how they differ from those in traditional, professional occupations. In this section, 

several types of comparisons are made between alternative and traditional workers, focusing on 

the reasons they give for taking their jobs, their job benefits, their salaries, and finally their job 

satisfaction. For many of the comparisons, results are analyzed separately for full- and part-time 

workers because of the known differences between these two groups with respect to their 

benefits and salaries. 
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
7 

Participation in Alternative Employment 

The Prevalence of Alternative Employment 

As discussed in the introduction, today’s labor market does not necessarily guarantee a 

prospective employee a traditional 9 to 5 job, nor is this type of employment the only option. 

About two-thirds (68 percent) of employed bachelor’s degree recipients who were not enrolled 

for further study worked in jobs considered traditional for college graduates—that is, they 

worked full time for someone else in one professional job.4

 Figure 1 shows the percentage of 

1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients, employed but not enrolled in 1997, who reported working 

in alternative jobs. The findings suggest that being self-employed, working part time, and being 

employed in multiple jobs were each relatively uncommon for this cohort: 5 percent were selfemployed, 5 percent were employed part time, and 7 percent worked in multiple jobs. Overall, 

15 percent of 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients had at least one of these three types of 

working arrangements. Thirteen percent were employed in clerical/support occupations, and an 

additional 8 percent were employed in field professions. 

Demographic, Family, and Academic Characteristics 

Gender 

Gender was associated with many types of alternative employment among 1992–93 college 

graduates (figure 2). These findings are consistent with those in the current literature on this 

topic (Callaghan and Hartmann 1991; Polivka 1996a). Among 1992–93 bachelor’s degree 

recipients who were employed but not enrolled in 1997, women were more likely than men to 

have some type of alternative working arrangement (16 vs. 14 percent). But the gender 

differences depended on the type of alternative working arrangement being considered. Women 

were more likely than men to have part-time employment (7 vs. 3 percent) or multiple jobs (8 vs. 

5 percent), while men were more likely than women to be self-employed (8 vs. 3 percent). 

Women were also more likely than men to work in clerical or support occupations (16 vs. 9 

percent), while men were more likely than women to work in field professions (13 vs. 5 percent) 

 

4

U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1992/93 Baccalaureate and Beyond Longitudinal Study 

(B&B:93/97), Data Analysis System. 
Participation in Alternative Employment 

8 

These results are consistent with the gender differences in occupation types that are present in 

the labor force in general (Dennis 1996; Jacobs 1989). 

Other Demographic Characteristics 

Within gender groups, alternative working arrangements were related to several 

demographic characteristics of women, but these relationships were not detected among men 

(table 1). Older women were more likely to work part time than younger women; for example, 

12 percent of women age 30 or older worked part time, compared with 5 percent of women age 

22 or younger. Previous research has found that contingent workers tend to be younger 

(Callaghan and Hartmann 1991; Polivka 1996b). However, the population described in those 

studies includes workers who did not graduate college as well as current students, two groups 

that were excluded from this analysis. Thus, the differences between the results of the current 

Figure 1.—Percentage of employed 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients not enrolled who were in 

Figure 1.—alternative employment: 1997

1

Includes self-employment, part-time employment, and employment in multiple jobs. These categories do not sum to the total

because they are not mutually exclusive.

2

Detail may not sum to total due to rounding.

3

These include such fields as farming and forestry, protective services, and health and recreational services. See the glossary for 

further details.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993/97 Baccalaureate and Beyond 

Longitudinal Study (B&B:93/97).

8

13

21

7

5

5

15

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Field professions

Clerical and support occupations

Some type of alternative occupation

Working in multiple jobs

Employed part time 

Self-employed

Some type of alternative working arrangement

Percent

Some type of alternative

working arrangement1

Self-employed

Employed part time

Working in multiple jobs

Some type of alternative

occupation2

Clerical and support

occupations

Field professions3
Participation in Alternative Employment 

9 

study and those of previous studies may be due to differences in the samples and definitions 

used. Among bachelor’s degree recipients who are not enrolled, recent female college graduates 

who are older may have more difficulty finding full-time work or, because they are more likely 

than their younger peers to be married and have children,5

 may choose to work part time for 

family reasons (Reskin and Padavic 1994). 

In addition, White women were more likely than Black women to have some type of 

alternative working arrangement (18 vs. 10 percent) or, more specifically, to work part time (8 

vs. 2 percent). Again, these differences were not detected among men. 

 

5

U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1992/93 Baccalaureate and Beyond Longitudinal Study 

(B&B:93/97), Data Analysis System. 

Figure 2.—Percentage of employed 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients not enrolled who were in 

Figure 1.—alternative employment, by gender: 1997

1

Includes self-employment, part-time employment, and employment in multiple jobs. These categories do not sum to the total

because they are not mutually exclusive.

2

Detail may not sum to total due to rounding.

3

These include such fields as farming and forestry, protective services, and health and recreational services. See the glossary for 

further details.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993/97 Baccalaureate and Beyond 

Longitudinal Study (B&B:93/97).

5

16

20

8

7

3

16

13

9

22

5

3

8

14

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Field professions

Clerical and support occupations

Some type of alternative occupation

Working in multiple jobs

Employed part time 

Self-employed

Some type of alternative working arrangement

Percent

Male

Female

Some type of alternative

working arrangement1

Self-employed

Employed part time

Working in multiple jobs

Some type of alternative

occupation2

Clerical and support

occupations

Field professions3
Participation in Alternative Employment 

10 

Table 1.—Percentage of employed 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients not enrolled who were in alternative 

Table 1.—employment, by demographic background characteristics and gender: 1997

Clerical

and

Working in support Field

Self- Employed multiple occupa- profesAny employed part time jobs tions sions*

 Total 14.2 7.5 2.7 5.3 9.0 12.8

Race/ethnicity

 American Indian/Alaska Native (#) (#) (#) (#) (#) (#)

 Asian/Pacific Islander 7.3 1.7 0.0 5.5 11.9 4.2

 Black, non-Hispanic 14.4 6.5 3.7 5.4 16.4 11.1

 Hispanic 14.4 9.9 3.6 3.8 13.0 9.8

 White, non-Hispanic 14.6 7.8 2.8 5.4 8.3 13.6

Age 

 22 or younger 14.2 8.0 2.9 4.6 9.2 11.6

 23–24 13.5 7.2 2.6 5.3 9.8 13.5

 25–29 14.2 7.6 1.6 6.9 8.9 14.5

 30 or older 15.3 6.8 3.7 5.6 6.7 13.3

Family income and dependency status 

 Dependent students 14.1 7.8 3.0 4.9 9.6 11.9

 Lowest income quartile 13.9 8.3 2.5 5.2 9.1 12.0

 Middle income quartiles 12.6 6.3 2.8 5.6 8.8 12.9

 Highest income quartile 16.0 9.4 3.4 4.0 10.6 10.7

 Independent students 14.2 7.1 2.3 6.0 8.1 14.1

Parents’ highest education

 High school or less 14.7 7.9 2.3 6.4 9.1 11.9

 Some college 11.8 7.4 1.8 3.6 10.8 13.2

 Bachelor’s degree 13.0 7.0 2.1 4.9 9.2 14.1

 Advanced degree 15.8 7.2 4.6 5.4 8.4 12.0

See footnotes at end of table.

Male

Alternative working arrangement
Participation in Alternative Employment 

11 

Within gender groups, there were few differences in occupation types by demographic 

characteristics. Asian/Pacific Islander men were less likely than White men to work in a field 

profession (4 vs. 14 percent). However, this result was not detected among women. 

Table 1.—Percentage of employed 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients not enrolled who were in alternative 

Table 1.—employment, by demographic background characteristics and gender: 1997—Continued

Clerical

and

Working in support Field

Self- Employed multiple occupa- profesAny employed part time jobs tions sions*

 Total 16.5 3.3 7.4 8.0 15.7 4.6

Race/ethnicity

 American Indian/Alaska Native 41.1 10.6 19.6 14.7 13.5 0.0

 Asian/Pacific Islander 9.4 1.6 4.4 5.8 14.5 1.9

 Black, non-Hispanic 10.0 1.1 1.6 7.6 20.4 4.9

 Hispanic 11.0 4.1 6.6 3.6 12.4 2.9

 White, non-Hispanic 17.5 3.4 8.1 8.4 15.4 4.7

Age 

 22 or younger 13.3 2.3 4.9 7.6 16.6 4.9

 23–24 16.2 3.5 7.5 7.5 14.6 4.2

 25–29 18.3 5.0 10.5 5.9 14.3 6.2

 30 or older 23.6 4.8 11.9 10.3 15.4 3.5

Family income and dependency status 

 Dependent students 12.8 2.3 5.0 7.1 15.9 4.7

 Lowest income quartile 12.8 2.6 5.6 7.1 23.3 3.2

 Middle income quartiles 13.8 1.6 5.3 8.3 13.3 4.5

 Highest income quartile 11.6 2.9 4.3 5.8 15.9 5.5

 Independent students 21.7 4.7 10.9 9.2 15.4 4.4

Parents’ highest education

 High school or less 16.8 3.4 7.5 8.2 18.3 4.5

 Some college 18.1 4.7 7.7 8.5 15.0 5.6

 Bachelor’s degree 15.8 3.0 7.3 8.1 13.8 3.8

 Advanced degree 15.9 2.0 7.2 7.9 14.7 4.8

#Too small to report.

*These include such fields as farming and forestry, protective services, and health and recreational services. See the glossary

for further details.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993/97 Baccalaureate and Beyond 

Longitudinal Study (B&B:93/97).

Alternative working arrangement

Female
Participation in Alternative Employment 

12 

This report also examined the dependency status of bachelor’s degree recipients and, for 

dependent students, their family income in their final year of college. Women who were 

independent students as seniors were more likely than those who were dependent to be selfemployed (5 vs. 2 percent), to work part time (11 vs. 5 percent), or to work in multiple jobs (9 

vs. 7 percent) after graduation, but these patterns were not detected among men. Among 

dependent students, women from lower-income families were more likely than women from 

families with higher incomes to hold clerical positions, but this difference was not detected 

among men. On the other hand, men whose parents had more education were more likely than 

those whose parents had less education to work part time, but this relationship was not observed 

for women. 

Family Characteristics 

Family characteristics—marital status, dependents, and single parenthood—were related to 

many types of alternative working arrangements among female bachelor’s degree recipients, but 

few such associations were detected among their male counterparts (table 2). Among both men 

and women, marital status was related to working part time (figure 3). However, while married 

women were more likely than single women to work part time (10 vs. 4 percent), married men 

were less likely to work part time than their single counterparts (2 vs. 4 percent). In addition, 

single women were more likely than married women to have multiple jobs (9 vs. 7 percent), but 

this association was not detected among men. Women with dependents were more likely than 

women without dependents to have some type of alternative working arrangement (24 vs. 13 

percent), specifically part-time work (15 vs. 4 percent) or self-employment (5 vs. 3 percent). In 

contrast, among men, having dependents was not found to be associated with alternative working 

arrangements. 

When family characteristics were considered, there were relatively few differences in the 

types of occupations held by college graduates. Married men and male single parents were less 

likely than other men to have clerical positions (8 vs. 10 percent and 2 vs. 9 percent, 

respectively), but this pattern was not detected among women. Single women were more likely 

than married women to have field professions (6 vs. 3 percent), but this difference was not 

detected among men. 

Institutional and Academic Characteristics 

Many aspects of the academic experiences of 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients were 

considered, including the sector of the bachelor’s degree-granting institution, whether the 

respondent attended multiple institutions, the graduation rate of the bachelor’s degree-granting 
Participation in Alternative Employment 

13 

institution, time to degree, undergraduate major, grade-point average (GPA), and additional 

education (table 3). Several of these factors were associated with various types of alternative 

employment. The time it took to complete the bachelor’s degree, undergraduate major, GPA, and 

further enrollment were all associated with some types of alternative employment. Among 

Table 2.—Percentage of employed 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients not enrolled who were in alternative 

Table 2.—employment, by family status and gender: 1997

Clerical

and

Working support Field

Self- Employed in multiple occupa- profesAny employed part time jobs tions sions1

 Total 14.2 7.5 2.7 5.3 9.0 12.8

Marital status

 Married2 13.9 8.1 1.7 5.3 7.6 13.2

 Never married, divorced, or widowed 14.3 7.0 3.7 5.2 10.3 12.5

Any dependents

 Had dependents 14.2 7.1 1.8 6.3 8.0 15.6

 Did not have dependents 14.1 7.6 3.0 5.0 9.3 12.0

Single-parent status

 Single parent 17.1 5.1 9.4 5.1 2.3 11.1

 Not a single parent 14.1 7.6 2.6 5.3 9.1 12.9

 Total 16.5 3.3 7.4 8.0 15.7 4.6

Marital status

 Married2 18.1 3.9 10.2 6.8 15.0 3.4

 Never married, divorced, or widowed 14.7 2.6 4.3 9.3 16.4 5.9

Any dependents

 Had dependents 24.3 4.9 15.3 8.0 14.4 3.8

 Did not have dependents 13.5 2.6 4.4 8.0 16.2 4.9

Single-parent status

 Single parent 19.8 5.2 4.9 11.5 14.6 8.8

 Not a single parent 16.3 3.2 7.6 7.8 15.7 4.3

1

These include such fields as farming and forestry, protective services, and health and recreational services. See the glossary 

for further details.

2

Includes those who are living with a partner.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993/97 Baccalaureate and Beyond 

Longitudinal Study (B&B:93/97).

Alternative working arrangement

Male

Female
Participation in Alternative Employment 

14 

1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients, the longer it took to complete a bachelor’s degree, the 

more likely they were to have some type of alternative working arrangement. Specifically, those 

who took 6 years or more to complete the degree were more likely than those who took 5 years 

or less to report working part time (7 vs. 4 percent). 

Figure 3.—Percentage of employed 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients not enrolled who were 

Figure 3.—employed part time, by family status and gender: 1997

*Includes those who are living with a partner.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993/97 Baccalaureate and Beyond 

Longitudinal Study (B&B:93/97).

2

4

2 3

0

5

10

15

20

25

Married Never

married,

divorced,

or widowed

Had dependents Did not have

dependents 

Percent

Did not have

dependents 

Had

dependents

Never married,

divorced, or 

widowed

Married*

Male

10

4

15

4

0

5

10

15

20

25

Married Never

married,

divorced,

or widowed

Had

dependents

Did not have

dependents 

Percent

Female

Did not have

dependents 

Had

dependents

Never married,

divorced, or 

widowed

Married*
Participation in Alternative Employment 

15 

Table 3.—Percentage of employed 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients not enrolled who were in alternative 

Table 3.—employment, by institutional and academic characteristics: 1997 

Clerical

and

Working in support Field

Self- Employed multiple occupa- profesAny employed part time jobs tions sions1

 Total 15.4 5.3 5.2 6.7 12.6 8.4

Type of institution where received degree

 Public doctorate-granting 13.6 4.9 4.7 5.9 11.6 7.9

 Public 4-year nondoctorate-granting 16.7 4.4 5.7 8.4 12.2 9.0

 Private not-for-profit doctorate-granting 16.7 7.1 4.9 6.2 12.0 7.0

 Private not-for-profit 4-year nondoctorate-

 granting 17.8 6.5 6.0 7.1 15.1 10.2

 Other 10.5 2.4 5.8 5.8 16.7 7.2

Whether attended multiple institutions

 Attended multiple undergraduate institutions 16.7 5.5 5.7 7.3 11.5 8.2

 Attended one undergraduate institution 13.8 4.9 4.7 6.0 13.8 8.6

Institutional graduation rate2

 33 percent or below 13.6 4.1 5.8 6.0 12.6 9.1

 34–67 percent 15.9 5.6 5.1 6.9 13.5 9.2

 68 percent or above 14.0 5.5 4.2 6.1 10.1 6.3

Time to degree completion

 4 years or less 13.8 4.8 4.1 6.3 15.3 7.4

 More than 4 and up to 5 years 13.7 5.3 4.0 5.9 11.4 8.4

 More than 5 and up to 6 years 15.9 4.6 5.6 7.5 11.7 10.5

 More than 6 years 18.3 6.3 7.1 7.1 11.7 9.5

Undergraduate major

 Business and management 10.7 6.6 2.3 2.9 16.5 6.5

 Education 22.4 2.3 7.9 14.7 7.0 7.1

 Engineering 7.6 4.6 1.6 1.7 1.8 9.5

 Health professions 18.6 2.2 9.2 8.8 5.6 2.2

 Public affairs/social services 16.2 3.9 3.4 10.8 15.3 26.0

 Biological sciences 18.8 6.9 6.6 6.6 14.8 10.7

 Mathematics and physical science 12.3 3.6 3.0 6.3 11.8 7.5

 Social science 16.0 8.2 5.2 4.9 19.0 10.9

 History 20.5 9.0 4.3 8.9 14.5 10.0

 Humanities 20.0 5.5 10.1 8.6 14.8 8.0

 Psychology 12.3 3.1 4.0 6.5 10.0 6.7

 Other 17.1 6.0 6.5 7.1 13.4 10.4

See footnotes at end of table.

Alternative working arrangement
Participation in Alternative Employment 

16 

Several studies have shown that students who concentrate in applied fields such as business 

and engineering are more likely to work full time (Grogger and Eide 1995; Rumberger and 

Thomas 1993; Pascarella and Terenzini 1991). Consistent with the literature, this analysis found 

that bachelor’s degree recipients who had majored in business or engineering were less likely 

than average to report having a part-time job (2 percent each vs. 5 percent). These groups were 

also less likely than average to report working in multiple jobs (2–3 percent vs. 7 percent 

overall), while education majors (15 percent) were more likely than average to have multiple 

jobs. 

Because the fields of education, engineering, and health are applied fields in which 

students are preparing for specific professional careers, students with majors in these fields are 

particularly likely to be employed in them after completing college (Horn and Zahn 2001). By 

definition, the fields for which they have prepared (teaching, engineering, and medical 

professions) are included in the professional occupations. Consistent with this expectation, 

graduates who had majored in education, engineering, and health were less likely than average to 

work in clerical and support occupations (7, 2, and 6 percent, respectively, vs. 13 percent 

overall), while 19 percent of those with majors in social science reported working in these jobs 

(figure 4). In addition, health majors were also less likely than average to work in field 

Table 3.—Percentage of employed 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients not enrolled who were in alternative 

Table 3.—employment, by institutional and academic characteristics: 1997—Continued 

Clerical

and

Working in support Field

Self- Employed multiple occupa- profesAny employed part time jobs tions sions1

Cumulative grade-point average

 Under 2.5 12.2 6.4 3.7 3.8 14.1 15.5

 2.5–2.99 13.7 5.7 3.1 5.9 15.9 10.8

 3.0–3.49 15.5 5.2 5.1 7.2 12.0 7.8

 3.5 and above 16.9 4.6 7.2 7.2 10.1 5.5

Additional educational attainment

 No postbaccalaureate degree/enrollment 14.9 5.6 5.0 6.0 13.4 8.8

 Less than master’s 18.4 2.8 6.3 11.4 12.6 7.3

 Master’s or above 18.0 3.6 6.6 10.3 5.8 6.0

1

These include such fields as farming and forestry, protective services, and health and recreational services. See the glossary 

for further details.

2

Cohort graduation rate for 150 percent of expected time to degree completion reported by institutions in IPEDS. See appendix 

A for details.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993/97 Baccalaureate and Beyond 

Longitudinal Study (B&B:93/97).

Alternative working arrangement
Participation in Alternative Employment 

17 

Figure 4.—Percentage of employed 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients not enrolled who were in

Figure 4.—clerical and support or field professions, by undergraduate major: 1997

*These include such fields as farming and forestry, protective services, and health and recreational services. See the glossary

for further details.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993/97 Baccalaureate and Beyond 

Longitudinal Study (B&B:93/97).

10

7

8

10

11

7

11

26

2

10

7

6

8

13

10

15

14

19

12

15

15

6

2

7

16

13

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Other

Psychology

Humanities

History

Social science

Mathematics and physical science

Biological sciences

Public affairs/social services

Health professions

Engineering

Education

Business and management

Other

Psychology

Humanities

History

Social science

Mathematics and physical science

Biological sciences

Public affairs/social services

Health professions

Engineering

Education

Business and management

Percent

Total

Total

Clerical and support occupations

Field professions*
Participation in Alternative Employment 

18 

professions (2 vs. 8 percent). Furthermore, many graduates who majored in public affairs or 

social services have trained specifically for protective services (Horn and Zahn 2001), which are 

included in the field professions; those who had majored in public affairs or social services were 

indeed more likely than average to work in field professions (26 percent). 

Among 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients in 1997, as GPA increased, so did the 

prospect of having part-time employment. Because GPA is associated with attending graduate 

school (Clune, Nuñez, and Choy 2001), those students who work part time in the short term may 

be less attached to the labor force than others because they anticipate pursuing more education in 

the future. Alternatively, this relationship may result from the fact that female students, who had 

higher GPAs,6 were also more likely to work part time (figure 2). In contrast, as GPA increased, 

the likelihood of having a clerical and support or field profession decreased. 

Enrolling for more education after completing a bachelor’s degree was associated with 

certain types of alternative employment. Those who had not enrolled in postbaccalaureate study 

were more likely than those who had some postbaccalaureate enrollment (but less than a master’s 

degree) to be self-employed (6 vs. 3 percent). Those with no postbaccalaureate enrollment were 

less likely than those with any such enrollment to be working in multiple jobs (6 vs. 10–11 

percent). Finally, those who had completed a master’s degree or higher were less likely than 

others to be employed in clerical and support occupations (6 vs. 13 percent). 

When taking other institutional and academic characteristics into account, there were 

relatively few differences in the working arrangements and occupation types of college 

graduates. Those who attended public doctorate-granting institutions were less likely than those 

attending private not-for-profit nondoctorate-granting institutions to have some type of 

alternative working arrangement (14 vs. 18 percent). In addition, those who cited attending 

multiple institutions were more likely to report such arrangements (17 vs. 14 percent). No 

differences were detected in the likelihood of bachelor’s degree recipients having some type of 

alternative working arrangement by the overall graduation rate of their degree-granting 

institution. 

Relationships Among Types of Alternative Employment 

Several types of alternative employment were associated with each other (table 4). Parttime employment was positively associated with working in multiple jobs and being selfemployed among 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients. While 17 percent of those with multiple 

 

6

U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1992/93 Baccalaureate and Beyond Longitudinal Study 

(B&B:93/97), Data Analysis System. 
Participation in Alternative Employment 

19 

jobs were employed part time, 4 percent of those with only one job had part-time jobs. In 

addition, 12 percent of those who were self-employed worked part time, compared with 5 

percent of others. 

Having some type of alternative working arrangement was also associated with the types of 

occupations in which employed college graduates worked. Those in a field profession were more 

likely than professionals (or clerical and support workers) to report having some alternative 

Table 4.—Percentage of employed 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients not enrolled who were in alternative 

Table 4.—employment, by job characteristics: 1997 

Clerical

and

Working in support Field

Self- Employed multiple occupa- profesAny employed part time jobs tions sions1

 Total 15.4 5.3 5.2 6.7 12.6 8.4

Alternative working arrangement2

 Alternative arrangement 100.0 34.6 34.8 44.5 12.2 12.4

 No alternative arrangement (†) (†) (†) (†) 12.8 7.7

Self-employment status

 Self-employed 100.0 100.0 12.4 6.1 9.0 15.6

 Not self-employed 10.5 (†) 4.9 6.7 12.8 8.1

Employment status

 Full-time 10.4 4.8 (†) 5.8 12.5 8.0

 Part-time 100.0 12.3 100.0 21.3 16.4 13.5

Number of jobs worked

 Worked more than one job 100.0 4.8 16.9 100.0 10.5 9.2

 Worked one job 9.2 5.3 4.4 (†) 12.7 8.4

Occupation type

 Clerical and support occupations 14.7 3.7 6.8 5.6 100.0 (†)

 Field professions1 22.5 9.6 8.5 7.3 (†) 100.0

 Professional occupations 14.6 5.0 4.6 6.8 (†) (†)

†Not applicable.

1

These include such fields as farming and forestry, protective services, and health and recreational services. See the glossary 

for further details.

2

Includes self-employment, part-time employment, and employment in multiple jobs.

NOTE: Cells give the percentage of workers in a given row who also had the alternative employment type indicated in the 

column. For example, 12.3 percent of part-time workers were also self-employed.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993/97 Baccalaureate and Beyond 

Longitudinal Study (B&B:93/97).

Alternative working arrangement
Participation in Alternative Employment 

20 

working arrangement (23 vs. 15 percent each). In particular, workers in field professions were 

more likely than those in professional occupations to be self-employed (10 vs. 5 percent) or to 

work part time (8 vs. 5 percent).7 

When men and women were considered separately, some of the same relationships were 

present (table 5). For both men and women, working part time was associated with having 

multiple jobs and with being self-employed. Also, for both groups, being employed part time 

was associated with a higher likelihood of being in a field profession. 

 

7

Workers in field professions were also more likely than those in clerical and support occupations to be self-employed (10 vs. 4

percent).

Table 5.—Percentage of employed 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients not enrolled who were in alternative 

Table 5.—employment, by job characteristics and gender: 1997 

Clerical

and

Working in support Field

Self- Employed multiple occupa- profesAny employed part time jobs tions sions1

 Total 14.2 7.5 2.7 5.3 9.0 12.8

Alternative working arrangement2

Alternative arrangement 100.0 53.7 19.4 38.1 9.3 17.6

No alternative arrangement (†) (†) (†) (†) 9.0 12.1

Self-employment status

 Self-employed 100.0 100.0 6.8 6.0 5.8 16.7

 Not self-employed 7.1 (†) 2.4 5.2 9.3 12.6

Employment status

 Full-time 11.6 7.2 (†) 4.7 8.9 12.5

 Part-time 100.0 18.8 100.0 24.3 14.3 26.2

Number of jobs worked

 Worked more than one job 100.0 8.5 12.6 100.0 9.1 16.0

 Worked one job 9.3 7.5 2.2 (†) 9.0 12.7

Occupation type

 Clerical and support occupations 14.4 4.7 4.3 5.3 100.0 (†)

 Field professions1 19.1 9.6 5.5 6.5 (†) 100.0

 Professional occupations 13.1 7.4 2.1 5.0 (†) (†)

See footnotes at end of table.

Alternative working arrangement

Male
Participation in Alternative Employment 

21 

However, women with multiple jobs were less likely than women with one job to report 

having a clerical job (11 vs. 16 percent). In addition, self-employed women were more likely 

than women who were not self-employed to be working in field professions (13 vs. 4 percent), a 

pattern that was not detected among men. 

Table 5.—Percentage of employed 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients not enrolled who were in alternative 

Table 5.—employment, by job characteristics and gender: 1997—Continued

Clerical

and

Working in support Field

Self- Employed multiple occupa- profesAny employed part time jobs tions sions1

 Total 16.5 3.3 7.4 8.0 15.7 4.6

Alternative working arrangement2

Alternative arrangement 100.0 20.3 46.4 49.2 14.4 8.5

No alternative arrangement (†) (†) (†) (†) 16.2 3.7

Self-employment status

 Self-employed 100.0 100.0 23.7 6.3 15.5 13.5

 Not self-employed 13.5 (†) 6.9 8.0 15.8 4.3

Employment status

 Full-time 9.4 2.7 (†) 6.8 15.8 4.0

 Part-time 100.0 10.3 100.0 20.3 17.1 9.5

Number of jobs worked

 Worked more than one job 100.0 2.6 19.4 100.0 11.4 5.3

 Worked one job 9.1 3.3 6.4 (†) 16.1 4.5

Occupation type

 Clerical and support occupations 14.9 3.2 8.0 5.8 100.0 (†)

 Field professions1 31.0 9.6 16.1 9.3 (†) 100.0

 Professional occupations 15.9 2.9 6.8 8.3 (†) (†)

†Not applicable.

1

These include such fields as farming and forestry, protective services, and health and recreational services. See the glossary 

for further details.

2

Includes self-employment, part-time employment, and employment in multiple jobs.

NOTE: Cells give the percentage of workers in a given row who also had the alternative employment type indicated in the 

column. For example, 18.8 percent of part-time male workers were also self-employed.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993/97 Baccalaureate and Beyond 

Longitudinal Study (B&B:93/97).

Alternative working arrangement

Female
Participation in Alternative Employment 

22 

Alternative Employment 1 and 4 Years After College Completion 

How do college graduates’ experiences of alternative employment differ 1 year after 

completing college compared with 4 years after college? This analysis examines the alternative 

employment experiences of 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients for both points in time. Three 

kinds of analyses were conducted. The first analysis estimates the overall rates of graduates’ 

participation in alternative employment in 1994 and 1997 (figure 5 and table 6). That is, those 

who were employed and not enrolled in 1994 were used to produce the estimates for 1994; those 

who were employed and not enrolled in 1997 were used to produce the estimates for 1997. The 

second analysis examines how these two groups overlap; that is, it looks at how employment and 

enrollment status in 1994 was related to employment and enrollment status in 1997 (table 7). In 

addition, it looks at how the alternative employment of workers in 1994 was related to their 

Figure 5.—Percentage of employed 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients not enrolled who were in 

Figure 5.—alternative employment: 1994 and 1997

1

Includes self-employment, part-time employment, and employment in multiple jobs. These categories do not sum to the total

because they are not mutually exclusive.

2

Detail may not sum to total due to rounding.

3

These include such fields as farming and forestry, protective services, and health and recreational services. See the glossary for 

further details.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993/97 Baccalaureate and Beyond 

Longitudinal Study (B&B:93/97).

8

13

21

7

5

5

15

11

19

30

3

8

1

11

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Field professions

Clerical and support occupations

Some type of alternative occupation

Working in multiple jobs

Employed part time 

Self-employed

Some type of alternative working arrangement

Percent

1994

1997

Some type of alternative

working arrangement1

Self-employed

Employed part time

Working in multiple jobs

Some type of alternative

occupation2

Clerical and support

occupations

Field professions3
Participation in Alternative Employment 

23 

employment and enrollment status in 1997. Finally, the third analysis presents the relationship 

between alternative employment in 1994 and alternative employment in 1997 (table 8).8

Overall rates of participation in alternative employment differed between 1994 and 1997 

(figure 5). In 1997, employed graduates who were not enrolled were more likely to have some 

type of alternative working arrangement than they were in 1994 (15 vs. 11 percent), but the 

differences between the 2 years varied according to the type of alternative employment held. 

Workers were more likely to have multiple jobs in 1997 than in 1994 (7 vs. 3 percent). This 

increase might relate to lifestyle changes such as marriage and children that create a greater need 

for additional income (Lester 1996). Alternatively, these workers might be making or 

investigating career transitions. The rate of self-employment also increased between 1994 and 

1997 (1 vs. 5 percent). Gaining work experience, or accumulating the necessary capital, may 

account for more graduates becoming entrepreneurs. On the other hand, 1992–93 bachelor’s 

degree recipients were less likely to work part time in 1997 than in 1994 (5 vs. 8 percent) and to 

have clerical (13 vs. 19 percent) or a field profession (8 vs. 11 percent).

 

8

For this third analysis, however, it was necessary to condition upon employment and enrollment status in 1997 (table 8 is limited 

to those who were employed and not enrolled in 1997, regardless of their 1994 status). 

Table 6.—Percentage of employed 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients not enrolled who were in alternative 

Table 6.—employment, by gender: 1994 and 1997

Clerical

Working in and

Self- Employed multiple support Field

Any employed part time jobs occupations professions*

 Total 11.5 1.1 7.6 3.3 19.0 10.9

Gender

 Male 9.5 1.8 5.5 2.9 14.4 15.9

 Female 13.2 0.6 9.4 3.6 22.9 6.8

 Total 15.4 5.3 5.2 6.7 12.6 8.4

Gender

 Male 14.2 7.5 2.7 5.3 9.0 12.8

 Female 16.5 3.3 7.4 8.0 15.7 4.6

*These include such fields as farming and forestry, protective services, and health and recreational services. See the glossary

for further details.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993/97 Baccalaureate and Beyond 

Longitudinal Study (B&B:93/97).

Alternative working arrangement

1997

1994
Participation in Alternative Employment 

24 

Table 7.—Percentage distribution of 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients according to employment and 

Table 7.—enrollment status in 1997, by employment and enrollment status and job characteristics

Table 7.—in 1994

Employed, Employed, Not employed,

not enrolled enrolled enrolled Neither

 Total 76.3 13.0 4.7 6.1

 Employed, not enrolled 80.3 11.6 3.3 4.8

 Employed, enrolled 65.1 24.9 5.6 4.5

 Not employed, enrolled 59.7 11.2 19.4 9.7

 Neither employed nor enrolled 64.3 10.6 4.8 20.3

Of those employed and not enrolled in 1994:

 Alternative working arrangement1

 Alternative arrangement 75.2 13.9 3.4 7.6

 No alternative arrangement 81.1 11.2 3.2 4.5

 Self-employment status

 Self-employed 92.0 4.0 0.0 4.0

 Not self-employed 80.3 11.6 3.3 4.8

 Employment status

 Full-time 81.0 11.4 3.2 4.4

 Part-time 72.3 13.9 4.4 9.3

 Number of jobs worked

 Worked more than one job 78.3 15.5 1.9 4.3

 Worked one job 80.4 11.5 3.3 4.8

 Occupation type

 Clerical and support occupations 79.2 10.5 4.4 5.9

 Field professions2 80.7 10.5 4.1 4.7

 Professional occupations 80.7 12.0 2.8 4.5

1

Includes self-employment, part-time employment, and employment in multiple jobs.

2

These include such fields as farming and forestry, protective services, and health and recreational services. See the glossary 

for further details.

NOTE: Percentages may not add to 100.0 due to rounding.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993/97 Baccalaureate and Beyond 

Longitudinal Study (B&B:93/97).

1994 employment and enrollment status

1997 employment and enrollment status
Participation in Alternative Employment 

25 

Table 8.—Percentage of employed 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients not enrolled who were in alternative 

Table 8.—employment in 1997, by employment and enrollment status and job characteristics in 1994 

Clerical

and

Working in support Field

Self- Employed multiple occupa- profesAny employed part time jobs tions sions1

 Total 15.4 5.3 5.2 6.7 12.6 8.4

 Employed, not enrolled 14.6 5.3 4.7 6.2 12.8 8.3

 Employed, enrolled 16.9 3.9 6.4 9.0 8.2 6.9

 Not employed, enrolled 20.8 4.9 8.0 10.5 7.4 7.6

 Neither employed nor enrolled 19.6 7.7 9.1 7.1 21.7 14.0

Of those employed and not enrolled in 1994:

 Alternative working arrangement2

 Alternative arrangement 42.5 11.1 16.3 23.3 13.3 10.8

 No alternative arrangement 11.2 4.6 3.3 4.1 12.7 8.1

 Self-employment status

 Self-employed 55.1 44.8 19.7 9.5 4.9 15.4

 Not self-employed 14.0 4.8 4.4 6.1 12.9 8.3

 Employment status

 Full-time 13.3 5.3 3.6 5.7 12.5 8.4

 Part-time 30.9 5.3 18.5 12.9 17.0 8.5

 Number of jobs worked

 Worked more than one job 61.9 10.4 10.9 51.1 6.6 15.0

 Worked one job 13.0 5.1 4.5 4.7 13.0 8.1

 Occupation type

 Clerical and support occupations 10.7 4.0 3.3 4.3 35.8 4.8

 Field professions1 20.3 8.6 5.4 9.2 10.4 43.2

 Professional occupations 14.6 5.1 4.9 6.1 7.1 3.9

1

These include such fields as farming and forestry, protective services, and health and recreational services. See the glossary 

for further details.

2

Includes self-employment, part-time employment, and employment in multiple jobs.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993/97 Baccalaureate and Beyond 

Longitudinal Study (B&B:93/97).

Alternative working arrangement

1994 employment and enrollment status

Alternative employment in 1997
Participation in Alternative Employment 

26 

Many of the gender differences in alternative employment that were present 1 year out of 

college persisted to 4 years after college (table 6). In 1994, women were more likely than men to 

have some type of alternative working arrangement, and particularly to work part time (9 vs. 6 

percent) or to have clerical jobs (23 vs. 14 percent). On the other hand, men were more likely 

than women to have field professions (16 vs. 7 percent) or to be self-employed (2 vs. 0.6 

percent). These findings all parallel the results for 1997 reported above. While women were 

more likely than men to have multiple jobs in 1997, no difference was detected in 1994. 

The next part of the analysis looks at the relationship between employment and enrollment 

status of 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients in 1994 and 1997. Table 7 shows graduates’ 

employment and enrollment status in 1997 in terms of their 1994 status. The data show that 

employment and enrollment status in 1994 was related to their status in 1997; in general, 

graduates with a given combination of enrollment and employment arrangements in 1994 were 

more likely than others to be in the same category in 1997. For example, those who were 

employed and not enrolled in 1994 were more likely than other groups to also be in that category 

in 1997 (80 percent vs. 60–65 percent). However, regardless of 1994 status, 1992–93 bachelor’s 

degree recipients were more likely to be employed and not enrolled in 1997 than to have any 

other status. 

In addition, for those who were employed and not enrolled in 1994, their 1997 status is 

shown by their working arrangements and occupation types in 1994. Among respondents who 

were employed and not enrolled in 1994, those who had some type of alternative working 

arrangement in 1994 were less likely to be still employed and not enrolled in 1997 than those 

who were not employed in such arrangements (75 vs. 81 percent). However, the relationship 

varied depending on the type of alternative employment. Those who were self-employed in 1994 

were more likely than others to be employed and not enrolled in 1997 (92 vs. 80 percent), while 

those who were employed part time were less likely to be in the same situation (72 vs. 81 

percent). This may have occurred because they had plans to enter graduate school or pursue other 

interests, and therefore chose part-time employment shortly after graduation because they viewed 

their job as temporary. Alternatively, among those for whom part-time employment was 

involuntary in 1994, their lack of success in obtaining full-time work may have encouraged them 

to enroll for further education or to leave the labor market altogether. In fact, those who had 

some alternative working arrangement in 1994 were more likely than those who did not to be 

neither employed nor enrolled in 1997 (8 vs. 4 percent). In particular, those who were employed 

part time in 1994 were more likely than full-time workers to be neither employed nor enrolled in 

1997 (9 vs. 4 percent). A third explanation is that women in particular who were employed part 

time may have left the labor force to focus on childrearing and other family responsibilities 

(Reskin and Padavic 1994).
Participation in Alternative Employment 

27 

Finally, the relationship of alternative employment in 1994 to alternative employment in 

1997 was explored. Table 8 shows alternative employment status in 1997 by alternative 

employment status in 1994, for those graduates who were employed and not enrolled in 1997. 

Among those who were employed and not enrolled in 1997, having an alternative working 

arrangement in 1994 was associated with a greater likelihood of having such an arrangement in 

1997. Forty-two percent of those with some type of alternative working arrangement in 1994 

were in the same situation in 1997, compared with 11 percent of those without such 

arrangements in 1994. This pattern persisted for all types of alternative employment: 45 percent 

of those who were self-employed in 1994 also had this kind of work arrangement in 1997, 

compared with 5 percent of those who were not self-employed in 1994. About half (51 percent) 

of those who had multiple jobs in 1994 also did so in 1997, compared with 5 percent of those 

who did not have multiple jobs in 1994. In addition, part-time workers in 1994 were more likely 

than full-time workers to be working part time in 1997 (18 vs. 4 percent). About one-third (36 

percent) of those who had clerical jobs in 1994 also did so in 1997, compared with 7–10 percent 

of those with other types of jobs. Also, 43 percent of those in a field profession in 1994 were still 

in these types of positions in 1997, compared with 4–5 percent of those in other occupations. 

Participation in Alternative Employment After Controlling for Covariation 

In previous sections, this report has shown several associations between alternative 

employment and demographic, family, and academic characteristics. In addition, this report has 

illustrated how some types of alternative employment are related to each other. For example, in 

the bivariate analyses, gender was associated with each type of alternative employment, while 

working part time was related to working multiple jobs and being self-employed. Nevertheless, 

some of these variables may be interrelated. To discern the unique relationships between the 

background variables and alternative employment while controlling for the relationships among 

the variables themselves, multiple linear regression techniques were used. For more information 

about this methodology, see appendix B. 

Five analyses were conducted, one for each type of alternative employment (selfemployment, part-time employment, multiple jobs, clerical and support occupations, and field 

professions). For each analysis, only variables that were associated with that type of alternative 

employment in the bivariate tables above were included in the model.9

 Therefore, the specific 

variables differ slightly across the five regression analyses. 

 

9

In cases where the analyses above were conducted separately for women and men, variables that were associated with a given 

type of alternative employment for either women or men were included in the multiple regression model for that type. 
Participation in Alternative Employment 

28 

Tables 9–13 present the results of the regression analyses on alternative working 

arrangements and occupation types. The first column of each table contains the unadjusted 

percentages—that is, the percentages before taking into account the other variables, as shown 

above.10 Regression coefficients were used to produce the adjusted percentages shown in the 

second column (holding the other variables constant). For each row variable in each table, the 

category in italics is the reference category for comparisons and tests of statistical significance. 

Numbers with asterisks in the first and second columns indicate that the percentage of workers in 

that category is significantly different from the percentage for the reference category. Rows 

containing asterisks in only one of the columns indicate cases in which the adjustment procedure 

leads to a different conclusion than one would reach based on the unadjusted percentages. 

Table 9 shows the analysis of self-employment. After adjusting for the other variables in 

the table, women were still less likely than men to be self-employed. While education majors 

were less likely than social science majors to be self-employed both before and after taking other 

variables into consideration, the difference between majoring in health fields and majoring in 

social science was not detected once covariation was controlled. Part-time employees were still 

more likely to be self-employed than full-time workers, even after accounting for the 

relationships between part-time employment and other variables in the model. However, the 

relationships of race/ethnicity, postbaccalaureate educational attainment, and occupation type to 

self-employment were no longer detected after taking the other variables into consideration. 

Women were also more likely to be employed part time than men both before and after 

adjusting for the interrelationships among the variables (table 10). In addition, workers with 

dependents were still more likely than those without dependents to be employed part time. Other 

types of alternative employment were also related to part-time employment both before and after 

the adjustment procedure: graduates who were self-employed or who worked in multiple jobs 

were still more likely to work part time, as were those in field professions compared with those 

in professional occupations. However, race/ethnicity, age, marital status, time to degree, and 

GPA were no longer associated with part-time employment. 

The regression analysis of working multiple jobs revealed a unique result (table 11). Parttime workers remained more likely than full-time workers to have multiple jobs after taking 

other variables into account, consistent with the converse relationship described in the previous 

table. However, other variables that were associated with working multiple jobs in the cross 

tabulations discussed above had no detectable association with this type of alternative 

employment in the regression analysis. 

 

10Because some of the ways in which these variables were related to alternative employment differed according to gender, the 

unadjusted percentages reported in tables 9–13 may not reflect the relationships described in the preceding section. 
Participation in Alternative Employment 

29 

Table 9.—Percentage of employed 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients not enrolled who were selfTable 9.—employed in 1997, by selected characteristics, and the adjusted percentage after taking into

Table 9.—account covariation of the other variables in the table1

Unadjusted Adjusted Least squares Standard 

percentage2

d percentage3d coefficient4d error

5

d

 Total 5.3 5.3 13.9 3.1 

Gender

 Male 7.5 7.3 (†) (†) 

 Female 3.3* 3.5* -3.9 1.3 

Race/ethnicity

 American Indian/Alaska Native 7.7 7.3 1.8 8.2 

 Asian/Pacific Islander 1.7* 2.0 -3.4 3.1 

 Black, non-Hispanic 2.9 3.5 -1.9 2.5 

 Hispanic 6.5 6.9 1.4 2.8 

 White, non-Hispanic 5.5 5.4 (†) (†) 

Family income and dependency status 

 Dependent students

 Lower income quartile 4.9 5.5 -0.2 2.3 

 Middle income quartile 3.8 3.8 -1.9 1.6 

 Upper income quartile 6.1 6.0 0.3 1.7 

 Independent students 4.8 5.7 (†) (†) 

Any dependents

 Had dependents 5.9 5.6 (†) (†) 

 Did not have dependents 5.3 5.1 -0.5 1.5 

Undergraduate major

 Business and management 6.6 6.6 -1.6 2.3 

 Education 2.3* 2.9* -5.3 -1.6 

 Engineering 4.6 3.3 -4.9 3.1 

 Health professions 2.2* 2.7 -5.5 3.0 

 Public affairs/social services 3.9 3.8 -4.4 3.7 

 Biological sciences 6.9 7.2 -1.0 4.0 

 Mathematics and physical science 3.6 3.4 -4.8 3.2 

 Social science 8.2 8.2 (†) (†) 

 History 9.0 8.8 0.6 4.9 

 Humanities 5.5 5.4 -2.8 2.9 

 Psychology 3.1 3.9 -4.3 4.0 

 Other 6.0 5.9 -2.2 2.5 

Additional educational attainment

 No postbaccalaureate degree/enrollment 5.6 5.6 (†) (†) 

 Less than master’s 2.8* 3.3 -2.3 2.8 

 Master’s or above 3.6 3.6 -2.0 1.9 

See footnotes at end of table.
Participation in Alternative Employment 

30 

Both before and after the adjustment procedure, women were more likely than men to work 

in clerical or support occupations (table 12). In addition, graduates who had majored in 

education, engineering, health fields, and psychology were less likely than social science majors 

to work in these jobs both before and after taking other factors into consideration. Those with no 

postbaccalaureate education continued to be more likely than those who had obtained a master’s 

degree or more education to have a clerical position in this model as well. Finally, in the adjusted 

model, no relationship of family income and dependency status, institutional graduation rate, or 

time to degree with the likelihood of working in clerical and support occupations was detected. 

Women remained less likely than men to work in field professions in the regression 

analysis (table 13). Workers who had majored in public affairs or social services were more 

likely than social science majors to be employed in field professions both before and after the 

adjustment procedure, as were students with low cumulative undergraduate GPAs (below 2.5) 

compared with those with high GPAs (3.5 or above). Part-time employees were more likely than 

full-time employees to work in field professions both before and after taking other factors into 

consideration. However, race/ethnicity, institutional graduation rate, and self-employment status 

were not found to be associated with field professions in the adjusted model. 

Table 9.—Percentage of employed 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients not enrolled who were selfTable 9.—employed in 1997, by selected characteristics, and the adjusted percentage after taking into

Table 9.—account covariation of the other variables in the table1

—Continued

Unadjusted Adjusted Least squares Standard 

percentage2

d percentage3d coefficient4d error

5

d

Employment status

 Full-time 4.8 4.8 (†) (†) 

 Part-time 12.3* 13.3* 8.5 2.7 

Occupation type

 Clerical and support occupations 3.7* 3.5 -4.6 2.7 

 Field professions 6 9.6 8.1 (†) (†) 

 Professional occupations 5.0* 5.2 -2.8 2.2 

*p < .05.

†Not applicable for the reference group.

1

The italicized group in each category is the reference group being compared. 2

The estimates are from the B&B:93/97 Data Analysis System.

3

The percentages are adjusted for differences associated with other variables in the table (see appendix B).

4

Least squares coefficient, multiplied by 100 to reflect percentage (see appendix B).

5

Standard error of least squares coefficient, adjusted for design effect, multiplied by 100 to reflect percentage (see appendix B). 6

These include such fields as farming and forestry, protective services, and health and recreational services. See the glossary 

for further details.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993/97 Baccalaureate and Beyond 

Longitudinal Study (B&B:93/97).
Participation in Alternative Employment 

31 

Table 10.—Percentage of employed 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients not enrolled who were employed 

Table 14.—part time in 1997, by selected characteristics, and the adjusted percentage after taking into 

Table 14.—account covariation of the other variables in the table1

Unadjusted Adjusted Least squares Standard 

percentage2

d percentage3d coefficient4d error5d

 Total 5.2 5.2 14.5 4.0 

Gender

 Male 2.7 3.0 (†) (†) 

 Female 7.4* 7.2* 4.2 1.4 

Race/ethnicity

 American Indian/Alaska Native 14.1 11.7 6.2 9.0 

 Asian/Pacific Islander 2.2* 3.8 -1.7 3.4 

 Black, non-Hispanic 2.3* 1.6 -3.9 2.8 

 Hispanic 5.4 5.0 -0.5 3.1 

 White, non-Hispanic 5.5 5.5 (†) (†) 

Age

 22 or younger 4.1* 4.9 -1.3 3.6 

 23–24 4.7* 5.3 -1.0 3.2 

 25–29 5.3 5.0 -1.2 2.5 

 30 or older 8.7 6.2 (†) (†) 

Family income and dependency status 

 Dependent students

 Lower income quartile 4.4 5.5 0.6 3.0 

 Middle income quartile 4.2 5.5 0.6 2.4 

 Upper income quartile 3.8 5.5 0.6 2.5 

 Independent students 4.1 4.9 (†) (†) 

Marital status

 Married6 6.3* 5.3 0.1 1.4 

 Never married, divorced, or widowed 4.0 5.2 (†) (†) 

Any dependents

 Had dependents 9.5 9.0 (†) (†) 

 Did not have dependents 3.7* 3.9* -5.1 1.8 

Time to degree completion

 4 years or less 4.1* 4.7 -1.0 3.4 

 More than 4 and up to 5 years 4.0* 5.2 -0.5 3.0 

 More than 5 and up to 6 years 5.6 6.0 0.3 3.2 

 More than 6 years 7.1 5.6 (†) (†) 

See footnotes at end of table.
Participation in Alternative Employment 

32 

Table 10.—Percentage of employed 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients not enrolled who were employed 

Table 14.—part time in 1997, by selected characteristics, and the adjusted percentage after taking into 

Table 14.—account covariation of the other variables in the table1

—Continued

Unadjusted Adjusted Least squares Standard 

percentage2

d percentage3d coefficient4d error5d

Undergraduate major

 Business and management 2.3* 2.8* -6.9 2.6 

 Education 7.9 5.8 -3.9 3.0 

 Engineering 1.6* 4.4 -5.2 3.5 

 Health professions 9.2 7.8 -1.8 3.3 

 Public affairs/social services 3.4 1.9 -7.7 4.2 

 Biological sciences 6.6 6.6 -3.0 4.5 

 Mathematics and physical science 3.0 4.1 -5.6 3.6 

 Social science 5.2 5.9 -3.7 3.2 

 History 4.3 4.6 -5.1 5.4 

 Humanities 10.1 10.6 (†) (†) 

 Psychology 4.0 3.7 -6.0 4.4 

 Other 6.5 6.5 -3.1 2.9 

Cumulative grade-point average

 Under 2.5 3.7 4.4 -0.1 3.1 

 2.5–2.9 3.1 4.4 (†) (†) 

 3.0–3.49 5.1* 5.3 0.8 1.6 

 3.5 and above 7.2* 6.1 1.7 1.9 

Self-employment status

 Self-employed 12.4* 12.9* 8.1 2.9 

 Not self-employed 4.9 4.8 (†) (†) 

Number of jobs worked 

 Worked more than one job 16.9* 15.6* 11.2 2.6 

 Worked one job 4.4 4.5 (†) (†) 

Occupation type

 Clerical and support occupations 6.8 7.1 -2.1 3.0 

 Field professions 7 8.5 9.2 (†) (†) 

 Professional occupations 4.6* 4.5* -4.7 2.4 

*p < .05.

†Not applicable for the reference group.

1

The italicized group in each category is the reference group being compared. 2

The estimates are from the B&B:93/97 Data Analysis System.

3

The percentages are adjusted for differences associated with other variables in the table (see appendix B).

4

Least squares coefficient, multiplied by 100 to reflect percentage (see appendix B).

5

Standard error of least squares coefficient, adjusted for design effect, multiplied by 100 to reflect percentage (see appendix B). 6

Includes those who are living with a partner.

7

These include such fields as farming and forestry, protective services, and health and recreational services. See the glossary 

for further details.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993/97 Baccalaureate and Beyond 

Longitudinal Study (B&B:93/97).
Participation in Alternative Employment 

33 

Table 11.—Percentage of employed 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients not enrolled who were working 

Table 15.—in multiple jobs in 1997, by selected characteristics, and the adjusted percentage after taking into 

Table 15.—account covariation of the other variables in the table1

Unadjusted Adjusted Least squares Standard 

percentage2

d percentage3d coefficient4d error5d

 Total 6.7 6.8 5.2 4.3 

Gender

 Male 5.3 6.7 (†) (†) 

 Female 8.0* 6.9 0.2 1.6 

Race/ethnicity

 American Indian/Alaska Native 10.7 9.2 2.3 10.4 

 Asian/Pacific Islander 5.6 7.0 0.1 3.9 

 Black, non-Hispanic 6.9 7.4 0.5 3.2 

 Hispanic 3.7* 3.1 -3.8 3.6 

 White, non-Hispanic 7.0 6.9 (†) (†) 

Family income and dependency status 

 Dependent students

 Lower income quartile 6.4 6.3 -1.1 2.8 

 Middle income quartile 7.1 7.2 -0.2 1.9 

 Upper income quartile 4.9 5.2 -2.2 2.0 

 Independent students 6.1 7.4 (†) (†) 

Type of institution where received degree

 Public doctorate-granting 5.9 6.1 (†) (†) 

 Public 4-year nondoctorate-granting 8.4* 7.8 1.6 2.0 

 Private not-for-profit doctorate-granting 6.2 6.7 0.6 2.4 

 Private not-for-profit 4-year nondoctorate-

 granting 7.1 7.3 1.2 2.2 

 Other 5.8 5.7 -0.4 4.3 

Undergraduate major

 Business and management 2.9* 3.5 -4.7 3.0 

 Education 14.7 13.9 5.8 3.4 

 Engineering 1.7* 2.7 -5.5 4.0 

 Health professions 8.8 8.4 0.2 3.8 

 Public affairs/social services 10.8 10.7 2.6 4.8 

 Biological sciences 6.6 6.0 -2.2 5.2 

 Mathematics and physical science 6.3 6.5 -1.6 4.1 

 Social science 4.9 5.0 -3.1 3.7 

 History 8.9 8.9 0.7 6.2 

 Humanities 8.6 8.1 (†) (†) 

 Psychology 6.5 6.7 -1.5 5.1 

 Other 7.1 6.9 -1.2 3.3 

See footnotes at end of table.
Participation in Alternative Employment 

34 

In summary, gender was related to most types of alternative employment arrangements and 

occupation types after controlling for other variables, with the exception of working in multiple 

jobs. Women were more likely than men to work part time or to work in a clerical position, while 

men were more likely to have work in a field profession or to be self-employed. In addition, 

undergraduate major was related to all types of alternative employment except for working in 

multiple jobs in the regression models. Some of the associations between types of alternative 

employment, such as the relationship between working part time and working in multiple jobs, 

also remained. In fact, employment status was related to self-employment, working in multiple 

jobs, and field professions both before and after the adjustment procedure. 

Table 11.—Percentage of employed 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients not enrolled who were working 

Table 15.—in multiple jobs in 1997, by selected characteristics, and the adjusted percentage after taking into 

Table 15.—account covariation of the other variables in the table1

—Continued

Unadjusted Adjusted Least squares Standard 

percentage2

d percentage3d coefficient4d error5d

Cumulative grade-point average

 Under 2.5 3.8 5.2 (†) (†) 

 2.5–2.99 5.9 7.4 2.2 3.5 

 3.0–3.49 7.2* 7.0 1.7 3.4 

 3.5 and above 7.2* 6.2 0.9 3.6 

Additional educational attainment

 No postbaccalaureate degree/enrollment 6.0 6.1 (†) (†) 

 Less than master’s 11.4* 10.1 4.0 3.5 

 Master’s or above 10.3* 10.3 4.1 2.5 

Employment status 

 Full-time 5.8 6.0 (†) (†) 

 Part-time 21.3* 20.1* 14.1 3.4 

*p < .05.

†Not applicable for the reference group.

1

The italicized group in each category is the reference group being compared. 2

The estimates are from the B&B:93/97 Data Analysis System.

3

The percentages are adjusted for differences associated with other variables in the table (see appendix B).

4

Least squares coefficient, multiplied by 100 to reflect percentage (see appendix B).

5

Standard error of least squares coefficient, adjusted for design effect, multiplied by 100 to reflect percentage (see appendix B).

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993/97 Baccalaureate and Beyond 

Longitudinal Study (B&B:93/97).
Participation in Alternative Employment 

35 

Table 12.—Percentage of employed 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients not enrolled who were in clerical 

Table 17.—and support occupations in 1997, by selected characteristics, and the adjusted percentage after 

Table 17.—taking into account covariation of the other variables in the table1

Unadjusted Adjusted Least squares Standard 

percentage2

d percentage3d coefficient4d error

5

d

 Total 12.6 12.6 12.8 5.0 

Gender

 Male 9.0 8.2 (†) (†) 

 Female 15.7* 16.4* 8.2 1.7 

Family income and dependency status 

 Dependent students

 Lower income quartile 17.6 14.7 (†) (†) 

 Middle income quartile 11.2* 9.2 -5.5 3.1 

 Upper income quartile 13.3 11.7 -3.0 3.2 

 Independent students 12.0 9.9 -4.6 3.2 

Institutional graduation rate

 33 percent or below 12.6 12.8 -0.6 2.4 

 34–67 percent 13.5 13.4 (†) (†) 

 68 percent or above 10.1* 9.7 -3.7 2.1 

Time to degree completion

 4 years or less 15.3 14.1 (†) (†) 

 More than 4 and up to 5 years 11.4* 11.2 -2.9 2.0 

 More than 5 and up to 6 years 11.7 12.2 -1.9 2.7 

 More than 6 years 11.7 14.1 0.0 0.0 

Undergraduate major

 Business and management 16.5 16.6 -2.7 3.2 

 Education 7.0* 5.5* -13.8 3.6 

 Engineering 1.8* 5.6* -13.6 4.2 

 Health professions 5.6* 4.3* -15.0 4.0 

 Public affairs/social services 15.3 14.3 -4.9 5.1 

 Biological sciences 14.8 14.2 -5.1 5.5 

 Mathematics and physical science 11.8 12.6 -6.6 4.3 

 Social science 19.0 19.2 (†) (†) 

 History 14.5 17.4 -1.8 6.7 

 Humanities 14.8 15.2 -4.1 3.9 

 Psychology 10.0* 8.5* -10.7 5.4 

 Other 13.4 13.0 -6.2 3.5 

Cumulative grade-point average

 Under 2.5 14.1 14.4 4.2 3.8 

 2.5–2.99 15.9* 15.3* 5.2 2.3 

 3.0–3.49 12.0 12.1 2.0 2.0 

 3.5 or above 10.1 10.1 (†) (†) 

See footnotes at end of table.
Participation in Alternative Employment 

36 

Table 12.—Percentage of employed 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients not enrolled who were in clerical 

Table 17.—and support occupations in 1997, by selected characteristics, and the adjusted percentage after 

Table 17.—taking into account covariation of the other variables in the table1

—Continued

Unadjusted Adjusted Least squares Standard 

percentage2

d percentage3d coefficient4d error

5

d

Additional educational attainment

 No postbaccalaureate degree/enrollment 13.4* 13.3* 6.8 2.7 

 Less than master’s 12.6* 12.4 5.9 4.4 

 Master’s or above 5.8 6.5 (†) (†) 

*p < .05.

†Not applicable for the reference group.

1

The italicized group in each category is the reference group being compared. 2

The estimates are from the B&B:93/97 Data Analysis System.

3

The percentages are adjusted for differences associated with other variables in the table (see appendix B).

4

Least squares coefficient, multiplied by 100 to reflect percentage (see appendix B).

5

Standard error of least squares coefficient, adjusted for design effect, multiplied by 100 to reflect percentage (see appendix B).

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993/97 Baccalaureate and Beyond 

Longitudinal Study (B&B:93/97).
Participation in Alternative Employment 

37 

Table 13.—Percentage of employed 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients not enrolled who were in field

Table 16.—professions in 1997, by selected characteristics, and the adjusted percentage after taking into 

Table 16.—account covariation of the other variables in the table1

Unadjusted Adjusted Least squares Standard 

percentage2

d percentage3d coefficient4d error5d

 Total 8.4 8.4 13.5 3.0 

Gender

 Male 12.8 12.9 (†) (†) 

 Female 4.6* 4.5* -8.3 1.5 

Race/ethnicity

 American Indian/Alaska Native 3.1* 3.4 -5.5 9.9 

 Asian/Pacific Islander 3.0* 4.2 -4.7 3.7 

 Black, non-Hispanic 8.9 6.9 -2.0 3.0 

 Hispanic 5.8 5.4 -3.5 3.4 

 White, non-Hispanic 6.9 8.9 (†) (†) 

Institutional graduation rate

 33 percent or below 9.1 9.4 0.5 2.1 

 34–67 percent 9.2 8.9 (†) (†) 

 68 percent or above 6.3* 6.1 -2.8 1.8 

Undergraduate major

 Business and management 6.5 5.7 -4.9 2.8 

 Education 7.1 8.9 -1.7 3.2 

 Engineering 9.5 6.6 -4.0 3.7 

 Health professions 2.2* 4.3 -6.3 3.6 

 Public affairs/social services 26.0* 26.2* 15.6 4.5 

 Biological sciences 10.7 10.9 0.3 4.8 

 Mathematics and physical science 7.5 6.8 -3.8 3.9 

 Social science 10.9 10.6 (†) (†) 

 History 10.0 8.5 -2.1 5.9 

 Humanities 8.0 8.5 -2.1 3.5 

 Psychology 6.7 8.6 -2.0 4.8 

 Other 10.4 10.1 -0.5 3.1 

Cumulative grade-point average

 Under 2.5 15.5* 13.8* 7.3 3.4 

 2.5–2.99 10.8* 9.6 3.1 2.0 

 3.0–3.49 7.8 8.1 1.7 1.8 

 3.5 and above 5.5 6.5 (†) (†) 

Self-employment status

 Self-employed 15.6* 12.9 4.8 3.2 

 Not self-employed 8.1 8.1 (†) (†) 

See footnotes at end of table.
Participation in Alternative Employment 

38 

Table 13.—Percentage of employed 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients not enrolled who were in field

Table 16.—professions in 1997, by selected characteristics, and the adjusted percentage after taking into

Table 16.—account covariation of the other variables in the table1

—Continued

Unadjusted Adjusted Least squares Standard 

percentage2

d percentage3d coefficient4d error5d

Employment status

 Full-time 8.0 8.0 (†) (†) 

 Part-time 13.5* 15.0* 7.0 3.3 

*p < .05.

†Not applicable for the reference group.

1

The italicized group in each category is the reference group being compared. 2

The estimates are from the B&B:93/97 Data Analysis System.

3

The percentages are adjusted for differences associated with other variables in the table (see appendix B).

4

Least squares coefficient, multiplied by 100 to reflect percentage (see appendix B).

5

Standard error of least squares coefficient, adjusted for design effect, multiplied by 100 to reflect percentage (see appendix B).

NOTE: These include such fields as farming and forestry, protective services, and health and recreational services. See the 

glossary for further details.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993/97 Baccalaureate and Beyond 

Longitudinal Study (B&B:93/97).
39 

Alternative Employment and Other Labor Market Experiences 

Workers have a range of reasons for voluntarily or involuntarily working in alternative 

employment, balancing the disadvantages and benefits associated with particular jobs. As 

discussed in the introduction, about one-half of contingent workers indicate that they would 

prefer a more traditional, permanent job (Bureau of Labor Statistics 2001). But alternative 

employment is not limited to contingent work, and some workers may choose these 

arrangements or occupations because of the advantages they offer. Studies suggest a number of 

reasons why a worker may not have a traditional job. For example, a worker may not be able to 

find full-time work, or he or she may choose alternative employment because of flexible hours, 

increased income potential, or opportunity to make a transition into a new job or field (Lester 

1996; Rothstein 1996). 

In this section, several aspects of the working conditions of employed 1992–93 college 

graduates who were not enrolled are assessed, comparing workers in alternative employment to 

those with traditional jobs. First, workers’ reasons for taking their jobs are considered, followed 

by an examination of job benefits, salary, and job satisfaction. 

Reasons for Taking a Job 

Those with some type of alternative working arrangement were more likely than others to 

report having the freedom to make decisions as a reason for taking their job (10 vs. 4 percent; 

figure 6 and table 14). Specifically, self-employed workers were more likely than those who 

were not self-employed to cite this reason (21 vs. 4 percent) and were also more likely than 

others to report income potential as a reason for their choice (17 vs. 10 percent). Part-time 

workers were more likely than full-time employees to cite convenience and time for activities 

that were not related to work as reasons for choosing their job (12 vs. 8 percent). 

In contrast to the above advantages, those with some type of alternative working 

arrangement were less likely than others to report that interesting work (15 vs. 19 percent), 

advancement opportunity (9 vs. 18 percent), good starting salary (8 vs. 12 percent), or good job 

security (4 vs. 6 percent) were reasons for taking their jobs. In general, the same patterns were 

observed when comparing self-employed workers with others, those with multiple jobs with 
Alternative Employment and Other Labor Market Experiences 

40 

those with one job, and part-time workers with full-time workers. Furthermore, while selfemployed workers were more likely than others to say their jobs had good income potential, 

workers with multiple jobs and part-time workers were less likely than their counterparts in 

traditional jobs to cite this reason. 

Some of these reasons also varied according to type of occupation in which a worker was 

employed. Employees in professional jobs were more likely than those in field professions to 

report advancement opportunity (18 vs. 8 percent) and good income potential (11 vs. 7 percent) 

as reasons for taking their jobs. In addition, clerical and support workers were less likely than 

those in other occupations to say they took the job because of having the freedom to make 

decisions. However, no differences by occupation type were found in citing interesting work, 

good starting salary, or job security as reasons for taking a job. 

Figure 6.—Percentage of employed 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients not enrolled who gave various

Figure 6.—reasons for taking their jobs, by alternative working arrangement: 1997

*Includes self-employment, part-time employment, and employment in multiple jobs. These categories are not mutually 

exclusive.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993/97 Baccalaureate and Beyond 

Longitudinal Study (B&B:93/97).

10

9

8

4 4

18

12

6

0

5

10

15

20

25

Freedom 

to make 

decisions

Advancement

opportunities

Good

starting

salary

Job

security

Percent

Alternative working arrangement* No alternative arrangement
Alternative Employment and Other Labor Market Experiences 

41 

Job Benefits 

Employee benefits differed by alternative employment as well (table 15). Part-time workers 

were less likely than full-time workers to receive any of the benefits examined—health insurance 

benefits (41 vs. 91 percent), paid sick leave (39 vs. 88 percent), paid vacation (39 vs. 90 percent), 

Table 14.—Percentage of employed 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients not enrolled who gave various 

Table 14.—reasons for taking their jobs, by job characteristics: 1997

Advance- Time

Interest- Intel- ment Good Freedom for non- Needed

ing lectual oppor- starting Income Job Con- to make work job/

work work tunities salary potential security venience decisions activities money

 Total 18.5 9.2 16.4 11.5 10.6 5.5 7.8 5.3 2.6 21.1

Alternative working 

arrangement1

 Alternative 

 arrangement 15.4 7.6 9.4 7.5 8.5 3.5 9.0 10.2 2.6 21.9

 No alternative 

 arrangement 19.1 9.5 17.7 12.2 11.0 5.9 7.6 4.4 2.6 20.9

Self-employment status

 Self-employed 11.9 10.2 10.8 7.1 16.6 4.2 4.6 21.2 2.5 15.9

 Not self-employed 18.9 9.2 16.7 11.7 10.3 5.6 8.0 4.4 2.6 21.3

Employment status

 Full-time 18.5 9.5 17.0 11.8 11.0 5.7 7.6 5.3 2.5 20.9

 Part-time 19.2 5.3 7.1 5.5 3.5 1.9 11.9 6.4 5.3 23.6

Number of jobs worked

 Worked more 

 than one job 14.3 7.5 10.0 8.0 5.5 3.5 9.0 5.3 1.0 24.8

 Worked one job 18.8 9.3 16.9 11.7 10.9 5.6 7.8 5.3 2.8 20.9

Occupation type

 Clerical and support 

 occupations 16.5 6.9 14.3 9.3 8.6 5.1 10.4 3.1 3.7 31.3

 Field professions2 19.0 5.3 8.4 9.1 6.9 8.4 8.1 6.6 3.9 24.6

 Professional 

 occupations 18.8 10.0 17.6 12.0 11.3 5.2 7.4 5.5 2.3 19.1

1

Includes self-employment, part-time employment, and employment in multiple jobs.

2

These include such fields as farming and forestry, protective services, and health and recreational services. See the glossary for

further details.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993/97 Baccalaureate and Beyond 

Longitudinal Study (B&B:93/97).
Alternative Employment and Other Labor Market Experiences 

42 

Table 15.—Percentage of employed 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients not enrolled who received various 

Table 11.—job benefits, by job characteristics and employment status: 1997

Job

Health Paid Retire- Family- training

insurance sick Paid ment related in last

benefits leave vacation benefits benefits 12 months

 Total 90.6 87.9 90.4 81.8 70.2 46.9

Alternative working arrangement1

 Alternative arrangement 72.9 68.9 70.2 59.4 46.7 38.3

 No alternative arrangement 92.7 90.1 92.6 84.4 72.9 48.0

Self-employment status

 Self-employed 61.4 54.7 56.4 40.3 33.6 31.8

 Not self-employed 92.1 89.6 92.0 83.9 72.0 47.7

Number of jobs worked

 Worked more than one job 80.8 77.9 79.2 73.2 56.3 42.7

 Worked one job 91.2 88.6 91.0 82.3 71.0 47.2

Occupation type

 Clerical and support occupations 90.6 87.2 92.4 79.9 73.3 38.6

 Field professions2 79.0 70.2 81.4 71.1 53.5 36.1

 Professional occupations 91.9 89.9 91.0 83.3 71.5 49.3

 Total 40.5 38.6 39.3 43.7 30.8 28.6

Alternative working arrangement1

 Alternative arrangement 40.5 38.6 39.3 43.7 30.8 28.6

 No alternative arrangement (†) (†) (†) (†) (†) (†)

Self-employment status

 Self-employed 16.7 11.4 12.6 8.8 16.0 12.7

 Not self-employed 44.0 42.6 43.0 48.7 33.1 30.9

Number of jobs worked

 Worked more than one job 32.4 36.1 32.9 40.3 19.6 28.2

 Worked one job 42.7 39.3 41.0 44.7 33.8 28.7

Occupation type

 Clerical and support occupations 41.0 32.9 38.3 34.5 16.4 19.0

 Field professions2 35.9 23.5 32.6 26.4 25.4 25.4

 Professional occupations 41.5 43.0 41.0 49.5 35.4 31.3

†Not applicable.

1

Includes self-employment, part-time employment, and employment in multiple jobs.

2

These include such fields as farming and forestry, protective services, and health and recreational services. See the glossary 

for further details.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993/97 Baccalaureate and Beyond 

Longitudinal Study (B&B:93/97).

Full-time

Part-time
Alternative Employment and Other Labor Market Experiences 

43 

retirement benefits (44 vs. 82 percent), family-related benefits (31 vs. 70 percent), and job 

training (29 vs. 47 percent). This pattern is consistent with the findings for part-time workers in 

the labor market in general (Tilly 1991). Because these differences in the benefits of full- and 

part-time workers are so pervasive, analyses of benefits with regard to other types of alternative 

employment were conducted separately for the two groups. 

Among full-time workers, those with some type of alternative working arrangement were 

less likely than others to receive each benefit examined (figure 7). For example, 73 percent of 

full-time workers with alternative working arrangements had health insurance, compared with 93 

percent of those in traditional jobs. Those who were self-employed were less likely to have all 

types of benefits examined than those employed by others, and those with multiple jobs were 

generally less likely than workers with just one job to receive these benefits as well.11 

 

11No difference in the percentage receiving job training in the past 12 months was detected between those working in multiple 

jobs and those working in only one job.

Figure 7.—Percentage of full-time employed 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients not enrolled who had 

Figure 7.—various job benefits, by alternative working arrangement: 1997

*Includes self-employment and employment in multiple jobs. These categories are not mutually exclusive. 

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993/97 Baccalaureate and Beyond 

Longitudinal Study (B&B:93/97).

48

73

84

93

90

93

38

47

60

70

69

73

0 20 40 60 80 100

Job training in last 12

months

Family-related benefits

Retirement benefits

Paid vacation

Paid sick leave

Health insurance benefits

Percent

Alternative working arrangement*

No alternative arrangement

Job training in last

12 months
Alternative Employment and Other Labor Market Experiences 

44 

There were also differences in receipt of benefits by occupation type. Full-time employees 

in professional positions were more likely than those in field professions to report receiving the 

benefits examined. Except for job training, full-time employees in clerical jobs were also more 

likely than those in field occupations to receive these benefits. 

Among part-time workers, some similar patterns were present. For example, self-employed 

workers were less likely to receive the various types of benefits considered. However, unlike the 

pattern among full-time workers, part-time workers with multiple jobs differed significantly from 

those with one job only in the extent to which they received family-related benefits (20 vs. 34 

percent). Part-time workers in professional jobs were more likely than those in a field profession 

to receive paid sick leave (43 vs. 23 percent) or retirement benefits (50 vs. 26 percent) and were 

more likely than clerical workers to receive family-related benefits (35 vs. 16 percent). These 

findings are consistent with those cited in the literature on this topic (Lester 1996). 

Income 

In addition to the benefits described above, differences in income—both from all jobs and 

all sources—were also examined in this analysis separately for full- and part-time workers (table 

16). When comparing full-time workers to part-time workers, full-time workers earned higher 

income both overall and within each type of alternative employment. Among full-time workers, 

mean income from all sources was higher than that from job income alone ($34,200 vs. 

$32,700). While it appears that this pattern held for part-time workers as well, the standard errors 

were large and a statistically significant difference could not be detected. 

This study revealed several differences in income by alternative employment status. Fulltime self-employed workers had higher income (both from their job and from all sources) than 

other full-time workers ($39,600 vs. $32,400 for job income, and $42,500 vs. $33,900 for 

income from all sources). In contrast, full-time workers with multiple jobs had lower income 

than those with only one job ($29,000 vs. $32,900 for job income, and $30,800 vs. $34,400 for 

all income). Occupation type was also associated with differences in both job income and all 

income among full-time workers. Those in professional positions had higher income than others, 

while those in clerical jobs had lower income than those in other jobs. However, among parttime workers, no differences in income were detected by self-employment, working in multiple 

jobs, or occupation type. 

The relationships between income and some types of alternative employment also differed 

by gender (table 17). Among both male and female full-time workers, those in professional 

occupations earned more from their jobs and overall than those in clerical and support or field 
Alternative Employment and Other Labor Market Experiences 

45 

Table 16.—Income of employed 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients not enrolled, by job characteristics

Table 16.—and employment status: 1997

Income from Income from

all jobs 1996 all sources 1996

 Total $32,702 $34,235

Alternative working arrangement1

 Alternative arrangement 33,568 35,898

 No alternative arrangement 32,617 34,065

Self-employment status

 Self-employed 39,576 42,451

 Not self-employed 32,392 33,868

Number of jobs worked

 Worked more than one job 29,018 30,811

 Worked one job 32,929 34,445

Occupation type

 Clerical and support occupations 26,478 27,818

 Field professions2 30,003 31,670

 Professional occupations 33,848 35,401

 Total 18,663 21,171

Alternative working arrangement1

 Alternative arrangement 18,663 21,171

 No alternative arrangement (†) (†)

Self-employment status

 Self-employed 21,350 23,553

 Not self-employed 18,340 20,891

Number of jobs worked

 Worked more than one job 17,324 18,843

 Worked one job 19,017 21,797

Occupation type

 Clerical and support occupations 17,497 21,094

 Field professions2 17,937 19,786

 Professional occupations 19,085 21,479

†Not applicable.

1

Includes self-employment, part-time employment, and employment in multiple jobs.

2

These include such fields as farming and forestry, protective services, and health and recreational services. See the glossary 

for further details.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993/97 Baccalaureate and Beyond 

Longitudinal Study (B&B:93/97).

 Part-time

 Full-time
Alternative Employment and Other Labor Market Experiences 

46 

Table 17.—Income of employed 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients not enrolled, by job characteristics,

Table 17.—employment status, and gender: 1997

Income from Income from

all jobs 1996 all sources 1996

 Total $36,709 $38,327

Alternative working arrangement1

 Alternative arrangement 38,508 41,773

 No alternative arrangement 36,445 37,857

Self-employment status

 Self-employed 43,588 46,895

 Not self-employed 36,179 37,672

Number of jobs worked

 Worked more than one job 31,107 33,956

 Worked one job 36,978 38,534

Occupation type

 Clerical and support occupations 29,040 30,095

 Field professions2 31,996 33,758

 Professional occupations 38,151 39,807

 Total 23,789 25,170

Alternative working arrangement1

 Alternative arrangement 23,789 25,170

 No alternative arrangement (†) (†)

Self-employment status

 Self-employed (†) (†)

 Not self-employed 21,477 23,054

Number of jobs worked

 Worked more than one job (†) (†)

 Worked one job 25,215 26,921

Occupation type

 Clerical and support occupations (†) (†)

 Field professions2 (†) (†)

 Professional occupations 25,334 25,630

See footnotes at end of table.

 Full-time male

 Part-time male
Alternative Employment and Other Labor Market Experiences 

47 

Table 17.—Income of employed 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients not enrolled, by job characteristics,

Table 17.—employment status, and gender: 1997—Continued

Income from Income from

all jobs 1996 all sources 1996

 Total $29,132 $30,577

Alternative working arrangement1

 Alternative arrangement 28,197 29,501

 No alternative arrangement 29,259 30,726

Self-employment status

 Self-employed 29,764 31,347

 Not self-employed 29,147 30,598

Number of jobs worked

 Worked more than one job 27,783 28,969

 Worked one job 29,232 30,696

Occupation type

 Clerical and support occupations 25,196 26,683

 Field professions2 24,284 25,729

 Professional occupations 30,123 31,563

 Total 17,019 19,862

Alternative working arrangement1

 Alternative arrangement 17,019 19,862

 No alternative arrangement (†) (†)

Self-employment status

 Self-employed (†) (†)

 Not self-employed 17,405 20,232

Number of jobs worked

 Worked more than one job 17,058 19,012

 Worked one job 17,009 20,095

Occupation type

 Clerical and support occupations 15,372 18,258

 Field professions2 (†) (†)

 Professional occupations 17,510 20,405

†Not applicable.

1

Includes self-employment, part-time employment, and employment in multiple jobs.

2

These include such fields as farming and forestry, protective services, and health and recreational services. See the glossary 

for further details.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993/97 Baccalaureate and Beyond 

Longitudinal Study (B&B:93/97).

 Part-time female

 Full-time female
Alternative Employment and Other Labor Market Experiences 

48 

professions. However, while men with alternative working arrangements differed in their job 

income, these differences were not detected among women. That is, while being self-employed 

was associated with higher income and working in multiple jobs was associated with lower 

income among full-time male workers, this pattern was not found for their female counterparts. 

In addition, among both full- and part-time workers, men had a higher job income than 

women ($36,700 vs. $29,100 for full-time employees, and $23,800 vs. $17,000 for part-time 

workers). Likewise, among full-time workers, men received greater income from all sources than 

women ($38,300 vs. $30,600). These results are consistent with evidence from other studies 

exploring the relationship between gender and earnings from various types of work (Kemp 

1994). Among those with alternative working arrangements, there were gender differences in 

income. For example, consistent with the results for all self-employed workers (not just college 

graduates; Cohany 1998), full-time self-employed men earned more than their female 

counterparts ($43,600 vs. $29,800). Clearly, a gender gap in earnings persists even among those 

with various types of employment arrangements. 

Job Satisfaction 

While those with alternative employment generally had fewer benefits and often had lower 

incomes, the results reported above also showed that they often gave different reasons for 

choosing their jobs. Therefore, their satisfaction with their work might depend on which job 

characteristics are being considered. Because of the differences in benefits and income for fulltime and part-time workers, their satisfaction with various aspects of their work—salary, job 

security, job challenge, fringe benefits, promotion opportunity, relationship with coworkers, and 

working environment—was also analyzed separately (table 18). Consistent with the differences 

in benefits, part-time workers were less likely than full-time workers to report being very 

satisfied with their fringe benefits (36 vs. 56 percent), job security (55 vs. 65 percent), and 

promotion opportunities (28 vs. 40 percent). However, no differences were detected between 

full-time and part-time workers’ satisfaction with their pay, job challenge, working conditions, 

and relationships with co-workers. The level of satisfaction part-time workers report may reflect 

other advantages these jobs offer. For example, flexibility and time for activities other than work 

may outweigh the benefits of additional income. Alternatively, part-time workers may assess 

their satisfaction with their pay in terms of the rate of pay for their time, rather than the total 

income for the year. 

Among full-time workers, the patterns of job satisfaction among alternative employees 

compared with traditional employees depended on the type of alternative employment being 

considered. Self-employed workers were more likely than those who worked for someone else to 
Alternative Employment and Other Labor Market Experiences 

49 

Table 18.—Percentage of employed 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients not enrolled who were very

Table 18.—satisfied with various aspects of their jobs, by job characteristics and employment status: 1997

Relationship Working

Job Job Fringe Promotion with environSalary security challenge benefits opportunity coworkers ment

 Total 33.6 64.7 57.8 55.8 40.1 80.3 56.2

Alternative working 

arrangement1

 Alternative arrangement 35.6 64.9 69.2 51.8 43.2 80.6 62.3

 No alternative arrangement 33.3 64.8 56.7 56.1 39.7 80.2 55.5

Self-employment status

 Self-employed 47.6 72.0 80.1 55.6 64.3 81.9 73.8

 Not self-employed 32.9 64.5 56.8 55.7 38.9 80.2 55.3

Number of jobs worked

 Worked more than one job 25.6 58.4 61.4 48.6 26.6 79.7 53.4

 Worked one job 34.1 65.1 57.6 56.3 40.9 80.3 56.4

Occupation type

 Clerical and support 31.0 61.8 37.5 56.5 31.7 79.6 55.9

 occupations

 Field professions2 32.1 65.2 46.1 46.7 34.8 78.3 44.4

 Professional occupations 34.1 65.1 62.2 56.7 41.9 80.5 57.3

 Total 35.2 55.3 55.9 36.1 28.5 82.7 59.6

Alternative working 

arrangement1

 Alternative arrangement 35.2 55.3 55.9 36.1 28.5 82.7 59.6

 No alternative arrangement (†) (†) (†) (†) (†) (†) (†)

Self-employment status

 Self-employed 33.6 56.2 74.7 61.6 67.7 79.5 72.2

 Not self-employed 35.4 55.0 53.1 32.7 23.6 83.1 57.8

See footnotes at end of table.

Full-time

Part-time
Alternative Employment and Other Labor Market Experiences 

50 

report being very satisfied with the challenge of their jobs, their working conditions, their pay, 

their promotion opportunities, and their job security (figure 8). Because these individuals were 

self-employed, many of these characteristics were directly under their control, which is 

consistent with the finding that self-employed workers were more likely than others to cite 

having the freedom to make decisions as a reason for taking their job. In contrast, consistent with 

the differences in their employment conditions described above, workers with multiple jobs were 

less satisfied than those with only one job with their fringe benefits, pay, promotion 

opportunities, and job security. 

Satisfaction with various aspects of work was also related to occupation type. Full-time 

workers in professional jobs were more likely than others to indicate that they were very satisfied 

with the challenge of their jobs and their promotion opportunities. Consistent with the fewer 

benefits they received, workers in field professions were less likely than professionals or clerical 

workers to be very satisfied with their benefits (47 vs. 57 percent each). In addition, these 

workers were less likely than others to say they were very satisfied with their working conditions 

(44 vs. 56–57 percent). 

Table 18.—Percentage of employed 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients not enrolled who were very

Table 18.—satisfied with various aspects of their jobs, by job characteristics and employment status: 1997

Table 18.——Continued

Relationship Working

Job Job Fringe Promotion with environSalary security challenge benefits opportunity coworkers ment

Number of jobs worked

 Worked more than one job 30.6 45.5 51.2 22.4 25.7 82.0 57.4

 Worked one job 36.5 57.9 57.2 39.8 29.3 82.9 60.2

Occupation type

 Clerical and support 

 occupations 38.1 79.2 51.7 45.3 26.0 91.1 61.5

 Field professions2 21.7 46.6 31.3 42.0 20.2 79.5 56.2

 Professional occupations 37.0 51.1 61.7 32.7 30.7 81.4 59.7

†Not applicable.

1

Includes self-employment, part-time employment, and employment in multiple jobs.

2

These include such fields as farming and forestry, protective services, and health and recreational services. See the glossary 

for further details.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993/97 Baccalaureate and Beyond 

Longitudinal Study (B&B:93/97).

Part-time
Alternative Employment and Other Labor Market Experiences 

51 

Some of these relationships were also detected among part-time employees. Those who 

were self-employed were more likely to be very satisfied with the challenge of their work, their 

promotion opportunities, their working conditions, and their fringe benefits. Among part-time 

workers, those with multiple jobs were less likely to report being very satisfied with their fringe 

benefits or their level of job security. Professional workers were more likely than those with a 

field profession to be very satisfied with their pay and their job challenges. However, those in 

clerical and support occupations were more likely than both professionals and field professionals 

to report being very satisfied with their job security (79 vs. 51 and 47 percent, respectively). 

Figure 8.—Percentage of full-time employed 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients not enrolled who were 

Figure 8.—very satisfied with various aspects of their employment, by self-employment status: 1997

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993/97 Baccalaureate and Beyond 

Longitudinal Study (B&B:93/97).

55

80

39

56

57

64

33

74

82

64

56

80

72

48

0 20 40 60 80 100

Working environment

Relationship with 

co-workers

Promotion opportunity

Fringe benefits

Job challenge

Job security

Salary

Percent

Self-employed

Not self-employed

Relationship with

co-workers

Working 

environment

Promotion 

opportunity

Fringe benefits

Job challenge

Job security

Salary
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
53 

Conclusion 

Today’s labor market does not necessarily guarantee a college graduate a traditional 9 to 5 

professional job, nor is this type of employment the preference of all bachelor’s degree 

recipients. Instead, some graduates are voluntarily or involuntarily taking alternative 

employment. Overall, 68 percent of 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients who were employed 

but not enrolled in postbaccalaureate education worked in jobs considered traditional for college 

graduates—that is, they worked full time for someone else in one professional job. However, 15 

percent reported having at least one of three types of alternative working arrangements in 1997: 

5 percent were self-employed, 5 percent were employed part time, and 7 percent worked in 

multiple jobs. Also, 13 percent were employed in clerical and support occupations, and an 

additional 8 percent worked in field professions. These employment patterns differ somewhat 

from those that graduates encountered in their first year after college. For example, they were 

more likely to have multiple jobs or to be self-employed in 1997 than in 1994. On the other hand, 

they were less likely to work part time in 1997 than in 1994. 

Among the 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients, gender was associated with various types 

of alternative employment experiences. Women were more likely than men to work part time, 

have multiple jobs, and be in a clerical position, while men were more likely than women to be 

self-employed or work in a field profession. Most of these differences were detected in both 

1994 and 1997. Within gender groups, demographic and family characteristics were related to 

many types of alternative working arrangements among women, but few among men. Marital 

status was related to working part time for both men and women, but in different ways: married 

women were more likely than single women to work part time, while married men were less 

likely than their single counterparts to do so. 

The results of the multivariate analysis show that gender was related to most types of 

alternative employment after taking other variables into account, with the exception of working 

in multiple jobs. Also, in the regression models, undergraduate major was related to all types of 

alternative employment except for working in multiple jobs. There were also some associations 

among various types of alternative employment. In particular, employment status was related to 

self-employment, working in multiple jobs, and field professions both before and after the 

adjustment procedure. 
Conclusion 

54 

Workers have a range of reasons for voluntarily or involuntarily working in alternative 

employment, balancing the disadvantages and benefits associated with a particular job. For 

instance, part-time workers cited convenience and time for activities that were not related to 

work as reasons for choosing their jobs. Those who were self-employed were more likely to 

report income potential and having the freedom to make their own decisions as reasons for 

taking their jobs. However, those reporting some type of alternative working arrangement were 

less likely to report interesting work, advancement opportunity, good starting salary, or good job 

security as reasons for taking their jobs. In addition, workers with several types of alternative 

employment were less likely to report receiving benefits, for all benefits examined, and they 

often reported lower salaries. 

Among the 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients who worked full time, those who were 

self-employed earned more than their counterparts, while those with multiple jobs earned less 

than those with only one job. Those with professional occupations earned more than those in 

clerical or field professions. However, no income differences were detected among part-time 

workers according to self-employment or multiple job status. Gender differences were also 

observed in the relationship between income and various types of alternative employment. For 

example, while being self-employed was associated with higher income and working in multiple 

jobs was associated with lower income among full-time male workers, these results were not 

detected among their female counterparts. 
55 

References 

Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2001). Report on Contingent and Alternative Employment 

Arrangements, February 2001. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Labor. Available: 

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/conemp.toc.htm [September 20, 2002]. 

Bureau of Labor Statistics (2002). Employed and Unemployed Full- and Part-Time Workers by 

Age, Sex, and Race. Current Population Survey Data Annual Averages Tabulations. 

Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Labor. Available: http://stats.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat8.pdf

[September 20, 2002]. 

Callaghan, P., and Hartmann, H. (1991). Contingent Work: A Chart Book on Part-Time and 

Temporary Employment. Washington, DC: Economic Policy Institute. 

Cappelli, P., Bassi, L., Katz, H., Knoke, D., Osterman, P., and Useem, M. (1997). Change at 

Work. New York: Oxford University Press. 

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, 

National Center for Education Statistics. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. 

Cohany, S.R. (1998). Workers in Alternative Employment Arrangements: A Second Look. 

Monthly Labor Review, 121: 3–21. 

Decker, P.T., Rice, J.K., and Moore, M.T. (1997). Education and the Economy: An Indicators 

Report (NCES 97–269). U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education 

Statistics. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. 

Dennis, W.J. (1996). Self-Employment: When Nothing Else is Available? Journal of Labor 

Research, 17(4): 645–661. 

Grogger, J., and Eide, E. (1995). Changes in College Skills and the Rise of the College Wage 

Premium. Journal of Human Resources, 30: 280–310. 

Hipple, S. (1998). Contingent Work: Results From the Second Survey. Monthly Labor Review, 

121: 22–34. 
References 

56 

Horn, L., and Zahn, L. (2001). From Bachelor’s Degree to Work: Major Field of Study and 

Employment Outcomes of 1992–93 Bachelor’s Degree Recipients Who Did Not Enroll in 

Graduate School by 1997 (NCES 2001–165). U.S. Department of Education, National Center 

for Education Statistics. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. 

Jacobs, J.A. (1989). Revolving Doors: Sex Segregation and Women’s Careers. Stanford, CA: 

Stanford University Press. 

Kalleberg, A.L., Reskin, B.F., and Hudson, K. (2000). “Bad” Jobs in America: Standard and 

Nonstandard Employment Relations and Job Quality in the United States. American 

Sociological Review, 65: 256–278. 

Kemp, A.A. (1994). Women’s Work: Degraded and Devalued. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: PrenticeHall. 

Lester, B.Y. (1996). Part-Time Employment of Married Women in the U.S.A. American Journal 

of Economics and Sociology, 55(1): 61–72. 

Mangan, J. (2000). Workers Without Traditional Employment: An International Study of Nonstandard Work. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar. 

Pascarella, E.T., and Terenzini, P.T. (1991). How College Affects Students. San Francisco: 

Jossey-Bass. 

Polivka, A.E. (1996a). Into Contingent and Alternative Employment: By Choice. Monthly Labor 

Review, 119: 55–75. 

Polivka, A.E. (1996b). A Profile of Contingent Workers. Monthly Labor Review, 119: 10–21. 

Reskin, B.F., and Padavic, I. (1994). Women and Men at Work. Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge 

Press. 

Rothstein, D.S. (1996). Entry Into and Consequences of Nonstandard Work Arrangements. 

Monthly Labor Review, 119: 76–83. 

Rumberger, R., and Thomas, S. (1993). The Economics Returns to College Major, Quality, and 

Performance: A Multilevel Analysis of Recent Graduates. Economics of Education Review, 

12: 1–19. 

Tilly, C. (1991). Reasons for the Continuing Growth of Part-time Employment. Monthly Labor 

Review, 114: 10–18. 
57 

Appendix A—Glossary 

This glossary describes the variables used in this report. The items were taken directly from the NCES B&B: 

93/97 Data Analysis Systems (DAS), an NCES software application that generates tables from the B&B:93/97 data 

(see appendix B for a description of the DAS). The variables listed in the index below are organized by sections in 

the order they appear in the report; the glossary is in alphabetical order by variable name (displayed along the righthand column). Some items were reported by the student only during the Computer-Assisted Telephone Interview 

(CATI). Variables based only on CATI respondents are identified. 

Glossary Index 

ALTERNATIVE EMPLOYMENT, 1997 

Alternative working arrangement in 

 April 1997............................................. B2ALTEMP 

Self-employment status (1997)................ B2SLFEMP 

Employment status (1997)...........................B2FPJOB 

Number of jobs worked (1997).................... B2MJOB 

Occupation type (1997) ............................. B2AJOBR 

DEMOGRAPHIC AND FAMILY CHARACTERISTICS

Gender ..........................................................B2RSEX 

Race/ethnicity .......................................... B2ETHNIC 

Age when received bachelor’s degree ....B2AGATBA 

Family income and dependency 

 status ......................................... DEPEND, PCTDEP 

Parents’ highest education ..............................PEDUC 

Does respondent have a disability............ DISABLED 

Marital status ........................................... B2MAR497 

Any dependents ............................................B2NDEP 

Single-parent status................................SINGLEPAR 

INSTITUTIONAL AND ACADEMIC CHARACTERISTICS

Type of institution where received 

 degree.....................................................SECTOR_B 

Whether attended multiple 

 institutions .......................................... NUMOTHSC 

Institutional graduation rate ................... GRADRATE 

Time to degree completion ...................... B2BATIM2 

Undergraduate major ................................BAMAJOR 

Cumulative grade-point average.................GPACUM 

Additional educational attainment ..........B2HDGPRG 

ALTERNATIVE EMPLOYMENT, 1994 

Alternative working arrangement (1994) 

................................................................ B1ALTEMP 

Self-employment status (1994)................ AJOBSECT 

Employment status (1994)......................... AJOBHRS 

Number of jobs worked (1994).................... B1MJOB 

Occupation type (1994) ..........................AJOBOCCR 

1994 employment and enrollment 

 status .......................................................B2NM9404 

1997 employment and enrollment 

 status .......................................................B2NM9704 

OTHER JOB CHARACTERISTICS

Interesting work.........................................B2AJRE10 

Intellectual work ........................................B2AJRE11 

Advancement opportunity..........................B2AJRE08 

Good starting salary...................................B2AJRE05 

Income potential ........................................B2AJRE06 

Job security ................................................B2AJRE07 

Convenience ..............................................B2AJRE15 

Freedom to make decisions........................B2AJRE12 

Time for non-work activities .....................B2AJRE19 

Needed job/money .....................................B2AJRE02 

Health insurance benefits.......................... B2AJBN01 

Paid sick leave ......................................... B2AJBN04 

Paid vacation ............................................ B2AJBN03 

Retirement benefits .................................. B2AJBN02 

Family-related benefits ............................ B2AJBN06 

Job training in last 12 months .................B2EMPTRN 

Satisfaction with salary..............................B2AJST01 

Satisfaction with job security.....................B2AJST06 

Satisfaction with job challenge ..................B2AJST03 

Satisfaction with fringe benefits ................B2AJST02 

Satisfaction with promotion opportunity ...B2AJST05 

Satisfaction with relationship with 

 co-workers ...............................................B2AJST08 

Satisfaction with working environment .....B2AJST04 

Income from all jobs 1996.......................B2ANNINC 

Income from all sources 1996.................. B2TOTINC 

OTHER 

Panel weight for NPSAS and B&B ........BNBPANEL 
Appendix A—Glossary 

58 

DAS Variable 

Employment status (1994) AJOBHRS

This variable is based on the response to the question, “How many hours a week (do/did) you work at your April job 

employer?” Responses were grouped to create part-time and full-time employment categories. 

 Full-time Worked 30 or more hours per week 

 Part-time Worked fewer than 30 hours per week 

Occupation type (1994) AJOBOCCR

Revised April 1994 occupation variable. Categories were grouped to create professional, clerical and support, and 

field professions, as follows: 

 Clerical and support Secretaries, specialized secretaries, receptionists; Cashiers, tellers, sales 

clerks; Clerks–data entry; Clerical–other; Business/financial support 

services; Customer service; Legal support; Medical services. 

 Field professions Farmers, foresters, farm/forest laborers; Personal services; Cooks, 

chefs, bakers, cake decorators; Laborer (other than farm); Mechanics, 

repairers, service techs; Craftsmen; Skilled operative; Transport 

operatives (other than pilots); Protective services, criminal justice 

administrative; Military; Computer and computer equipment operators; 

Health/recreation services; Other. 

 Professional Medical practice professionals; Medical licensed professionals; 

Educators–K-12 teachers; Educators–instructors other than K-12; 

Human services professionals; Engineers, architects, software 

engineers; Scientists, statistician professionals; Financial services 

professionals; Sales/purchasing; Legal professionals; Research asst/lab 

technicians; Technical/professional workers–other; Computer 

systems/related professional/tech workers; Computer programmers; 

Editors, writers, reporters, public relations; Performers/artists; 

Managers–executive; Managers–midlevel; Managers–supervisory, 

office, other. 

Self-employment status (1994) AJOBSECT

Based on a question about employer type with the following options: A for-profit firm, private individual; A nonprofit organization; A branch of the Federal government; Part of the State government; A local government unit; 

Self-employed. For the purposes of this report, the responses were categorized as self-employed and all other 

groups. 

 Self-employed 

 Not self-employed 

 
Appendix A—Glossary 

59 

DAS Variable

Alternative working arrangement (1994) B1ALTEMP

This variable indicates whether the respondent had some type of alternative working arrangement in April 1994 

(part-time employment, employed in multiple jobs, or self-employed). It applies only to first follow-up CATI 

respondents who were employed and not enrolled in April 1994. It was constructed based on responses to 

AJOBSECT, AJOBHRS, and B1MJOB. 

 

Alternative working arrangement 

No alternative arrangement 

 

 

Number of jobs worked (1994) B1MJOB 

This variable indicates whether the respondent was employed in multiple jobs in April 1994. It was derived from the 

job histories provided in the first follow-up CATI based on the start and end dates of jobs. Those who had more than 

one job that started before April 1994 and ended after April 1994 were coded as having multiple jobs in 

April 1994. 

 Worked more than one job 

 Worked one job 

Age when received bachelor’s degree B2AGATBA

Identifies the respondent’s age when they received their bachelor’s degree at the school at which they were sampled. 

 22 or younger 

 23 to 24 

 25 to 29 

 30 and older 

 

 

Health insurance benefits B2AJBN01

 

Based on respondent’s answer to the question, “(Does/Did) your job at your April job employer provide health or 

dental insurance?” pertaining to the April 1997 job. This analysis looks at the percentage who responded “yes.” 

 

Retirement benefits B2AJBN02

 

Based on respondent’s answer to the question, “(Does/Did) your job at your April job employer provide retirement 

benefits?” pertaining to the April 1997 job. This analysis looks at the percentage who responded “yes.” 

 

 

Paid vacation B2AJBN03

 

Based on respondent’s answer to the question, “(Does/Did) your job at your April job employer provide paid 

vacation or holidays?” pertaining to the April 1997 job. This analysis looks at the percentage who responded “yes.” 

 
Appendix A—Glossary 

60 

DAS Variable

Paid sick leave B2AJBN04

Based on respondent’s answer to the question, “(Does/Did) your job at your April job employer provide paid sick 

leave?” pertaining to the April 1997 job. This analysis looks at the percentage who responded “yes.” 

 

Family-related benefits B2AJBN06

Based on respondent’s answer to the question, “(Does/Did) your job at your April job employer provide family 

related benefits such as maternity leave, child care or elder care?” pertaining to the April 1997 job. This analysis 

looks at the percentage who responded “yes.” 

Occupation type (1997) B2AJOBR

1997 occupation variable based on the following questions: “What is your occupation?”, “And what type of business 

or industry was/is that?”, and “What was the name of your main employer?” Verbatim responses to these questions 

were used to create standardized categories. For this report, the standardized categories were collapsed as follows: 

 Clerical and support Secretaries, specialized secretaries, receptionists; Cashiers, tellers, sales 

clerks; Clerks–data entry; Clerical–other; Business/financial support 

services; Customer service; Legal support; Medical services. 

 Field professions Farmers, foresters, farm/forest laborers; Personal services; Cooks, 

chefs, bakers, cake decorators; Laborer (other than farm); Mechanics, 

repairers, service techs; Craftsmen; Skilled operative; Transport 

operatives (other than pilots); Protective services, criminal justice 

administrative; Military; Computer and computer equipment operators; 

Health/recreation services; Other. 

 Professional Medical practice professionals; Medical licensed professionals; 

Educators–K-12 teachers; Educators–instructors other than K-12; 

Human services professionals; Engineers, architects, software 

engineers; Scientists, statistician professionals; Financial services 

professionals; Sales/purchasing; Legal professionals; Research asst/lab 

technicians; Technical/professional workers–other; Computer 

systems/related professional/tech workers; Computer programmers; 

Editors, writers, reporters, public relations; Performers/artists; 

Managers–executive; Managers–midlevel; Managers–supervisory, 

office, other. 

 

Needed job/money B2AJRE02

Derived from respondent’s answer to the question “Why did you accept this position with your April job employer?” 

for the April 1997 job. Respondents could indicate more than one response. This analysis looks at the percentage 

who selected the response, “Needed a job or money.” 

 
Appendix A—Glossary 

61 

DAS Variable 

Good starting salary B2AJRE05

Derived from respondent’s answer to the question “Why did you accept this position with your April job employer?” 

for the April 1997 job. Respondents could indicate more than one response. This analysis looks at the percentage 

who selected the response, “Good income to start.” 

Income potential B2AJRE06

Derived from respondent’s answer to the question “Why did you accept this position with your April job employer?” 

for the April 1997 job. Respondents could indicate more than one response. This analysis looks at the percentage 

who selected the response, “Good income potential over career.” 

 

 

Job security B2AJRE07

Derived from respondent’s answer to the question “Why did you accept this position with your April job employer?” 

for the April 1997 job. Respondents could indicate more than one response. This analysis looks at the percentage 

who selected the response, “Good job security.” 

 

Advancement opportunity B2AJRE08

Derived from respondent’s answer to the question “Why did you accept this position with your April job employer?” 

for the April 1997 job. Respondents could indicate more than one response. This analysis looks at the percentage 

who selected the response, “Better opportunity for advancement.” 

 

 

Interesting work B2AJRE10

 

Derived from respondent’s answer to the question “Why did you accept this position with your April job employer?” 

for the April 1997 job. Respondents could indicate more than one response. This analysis looks at the percentage 

who selected the response, “It was interesting work.” 

 

 

Intellectual work B2AJRE11

 

Derived from respondent’s answer to the question “Why did you accept this position with your April job employer?” 

for the April 1997 job. Respondents could indicate more than one response. This analysis looks at the percentage 

who selected the response, “It was intellectually challenging work.” 

 

 

Freedom to make decisions B2AJRE12

 

Derived from respondent’s answer to the question “Why did you accept this position with your April job employer?” 

for the April 1997 job. Respondents could indicate more than one response. This analysis looks at the percentage 

who selected the response, “Freedom to make own decisions at work.” 

 

 
Appendix A—Glossary 

62 

DAS Variable 

Convenience B2AJRE15

 

Derived from respondent’s answer to the question “Why did you accept this position with your April job employer?” 

for the April 1997 job. Respondents could indicate more than one response. This analysis looks at the percentage 

who selected the response, “Convenience.” 

 

 

Time for non-work activities B2AJRE19

 

Derived from respondent’s answer to the question “Why did you accept this position with your April job employer?” 

for the April 1997 job. Respondents could indicate more than one response. This analysis looks at the percentage 

who selected the response, “Time for non-work activity.” 

Satisfaction with salary B2AJST01

 

Respondents were asked, “(Are/Were) you very satisfied, somewhat satisfied, or dissatisfied with the pay of your 

employment at your April job employer?” and given response options of Dissatisfied, Somewhat satisfied, and Very 

satisfied. This analysis looks at the percentage who said they were “Very satisfied.” 

 

 

Satisfaction with fringe benefits B2AJST02

 

Respondents were asked, “(Are/Were) you very satisfied, somewhat satisfied, or dissatisfied with the fringe benefits 

of your employment at your April job employer?” and given response options of Dissatisfied, Somewhat satisfied, 

and Very satisfied. This analysis looks at the percentage who said they were “Very satisfied.” 

 

 

Satisfaction with job challenge B2AJST03

Respondents were asked, “(Are/Were) you very satisfied, somewhat satisfied, or dissatisfied with the job challenge 

of your employment at your April job employer?” and given response options of Dissatisfied, Somewhat satisfied, 

and Very satisfied. This analysis looks at the percentage who said they were “Very satisfied.” 

 

 

Satisfaction with working environment B2AJST04

 

Respondents were asked, “(Are/Were) you very satisfied, somewhat satisfied, or dissatisfied with the working 

conditions of your employment at your April job employer?” and given response options of Dissatisfied, Somewhat 

satisfied, and Very satisfied. This analysis looks at the percentage who said they were “Very satisfied.” 

 

 

Satisfaction with promotion opportunity B2AJST05

 

Respondents were asked, “(Are/Were) you very satisfied, somewhat satisfied, or dissatisfied with the promotion 

opportunities of your employment at your April job employer?” and given response options of Dissatisfied, 

Somewhat satisfied, and Very satisfied. This analysis looks at the percentage who said they were “Very satisfied.” 

 

 
Appendix A—Glossary 

63 

DAS Variable 

Satisfaction with job security B2AJST06

 

Respondents were asked, “(Are/Were) you very satisfied, somewhat satisfied, or dissatisfied with the job security of 

your employment at your April job employer?” and given response options of Dissatisfied, Somewhat satisfied, and 

Very satisfied. This analysis looks at the percentage who said they were “Very satisfied.” 

 

 

Satisfaction with relationship with co-workers B2AJST08

 

Respondents were asked, “(Are/Were) you very satisfied, somewhat satisfied, or dissatisfied with your relationship 

with co-workers at your April job employer?” and given response options of Dissatisfied, Somewhat satisfied, and 

Very satisfied. This analysis looks at the percentage who said they were “Very satisfied.” 

 

 

Alternative working arrangement in April 1997 B2ALTEMP

 

This variable indicates whether the respondent had some type of alternative working arrangement in April 1997 

(part-time employment, employed in multiple jobs, or self-employed). 

Applies to: Second follow-up CATI respondents who were employed and not enrolled in April 1997. 

 Alternative working arrangement 

 No alternative arrangement 

 

 

Income from all jobs 1996 B2ANNINC

 

This variable is the respondent’s answer to the question, “What was your personal income from all jobs in 1996? 

(Exclude untaxed income or income from other sources such as interest, dividends, and capital gains.)” 

 

 

Time to degree completion B2BATIM2

This composite variable calculates the number of months between the date the respondent first entered college and 

the date they received their bachelor’s degree. Responses in months were combined to the following categories: 

 4 years or less 

 More than 4 and up to 5 years 

 More than 5 and up to 6 years 

 More than 6 years 

 

 

Job training in last 12 months B2EMPTRN

 

Based on respondent’s answer to the question, “In the last twelve months, did your April job employer provide any 

training other than informal on-the-job training or tuition reimbursed courses taken through a regular college?” This 

analysis looks at the percentage who said “yes.” 

 

 
Appendix A—Glossary 

64 

DAS Variable 

Race/ethnicity B2ETHNIC

 

This variable categorizes respondent’s racial/ethnic group based on their selection of Hispanic or non-Hispanic 

ethnicity and race categories. Responses to separate questions about race and ethnicity were combined to create the 

following categories (with the OMB definition of the category provided): 

 

American Indian/Alaska Native A person having origins in any of the original peoples of 

North America and who maintains cultural identification 

through tribal affiliation or community recognition. 

 

Asian or 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, non-Hispanic A person having origins in any of the black racial groups of 

Africa. 

 

Hispanic A person of Mexican, Puerto Rican, Cuban, Central or South 

American, or other Spanish culture or origin, regardless of 

race. 

 

White, non-Hispanic A person having origins in any of the original 

 peoples of Europe, North Africa, or the Middle East. 

 

Other A person reporting having origins in a race not listed above. 

 

Employment status (1997) B2FPJOB

Full-time/part-time status of main job held in April 1997. Full-time is defined as 30 or more hours per week, except 

for those who were teaching in April 1997, in which case full-time was defined by the respondent. 

Full-time 

Part-time 

 

 

Additional educational attainment B2HDGPRG

This composite identifies degree type for the highest degree a student received after completing the bachelor’s 

degree from the school at which he or she was sampled. 

No postbaccalaureate degree/enrollment No postbaccalaureate degree/enrollment 

Less than master’s Associate degree; Bachelor’s degree; Postbaccalaureate 

certificate; Certificate or license; Non-degree program 

Master’s or above Master’s degree; MBA; Post-master’s certificate; Firstprofessional; Doctoral degree 

 

 
Appendix A—Glossary 

65 

DAS Variable 

Marital status B2MAR497

This variable was created for B&B93/97 respondents using the marital status questions to determine the 

respondent’s marital status in April 1997. 

 

Married Married; Living in a marriage-like relationship 

Never married/divorced/widowed Single, never been married; Separated; Divorced; Widowed 

 

 

Number of jobs worked (1997) B2MJOB

 

This variable indicates whether the respondent was employed in multiple jobs in April 1997. It was derived from the 

job histories provided in the second follow-up CATI based on the start and end dates of jobs. Those who had more 

than one job that started before April 1997 and ended after April 1997 were coded as having multiple jobs in April 

1997. 

 

Worked more than one job 

Worked one job 

 

 

Any dependents B2NDEP

 

This variable indicates the number of dependents the respondent had. For this analysis, positive values for this 

variable indicated respondents who had any dependents. 

 

Had dependents 

Did not have dependents 

 

 

1994 employment and enrollment status B2NM9404

 

This variable was derived based on monthly employment and enrollment information collected during the CATI 

interview. Employment and enrollment status for April 1994 was grouped as follows: 

 

Employed, not enrolled Not enrolled but employed 

Employed and enrolled Full-time enrolled and employed; Part-time enrolled and 

employed 

Not employed, enrolled Full-time enrolled and not employed; Part-time enrolled and 

not employed 

Neither employed nor enrolled Neither enrolled nor employed. 

 
Appendix A—Glossary 

66 

DAS Variable 

1997 employment and enrollment status B2NM9704

This variable was derived based on monthly employment and enrollment information collected during the CATI 

interview. Employment and enrollment status for April 1994 was grouped as follows: 

Employed, not enrolled Not enrolled but employed 

Employed and enrolled Full-time enrolled and employed; Part-time enrolled and 

employed 

Not employed, enrolled Full-time enrolled and not employed; Part-time enrolled and 

not employed 

Neither employed nor enrolled Neither enrolled nor employed. 

 

 

Gender B2RSEX

 

Respondent gender was asked only if missing from B&B93/94 and not obvious. 

 

 Male 

 Female 

 

 

Self-employment status (1997) B2SLFEMP

 

This variable indicates whether the respondent was self-employed in the April 1997 job. The survey question asked 

“Were you owner or co-owner of this business?” This question was asked only of those who indicated that their job 

type was private for-profit; “Not self-employed” was imputed for others. 

 

 Self-employed 

 Not self-employed 

 

 

Income from all sources 1996 B2TOTINC

 

This variable is the respondent’s answer to the question, “What was your personal income from all sources in 

1996?” 

 

 

Undergraduate major BAMAJOR

 

Identifies student’s undergraduate major field of study. 

 

Humanities English, liberal arts, philosophy, theology, art, music, 

speech/drama, history/fine arts, area studies, AfricanAmerican studies, ethnic studies, foreign languages, liberal 

studies, women’s studies. 

 

Social/behavioral sciences Psychology, economics, political science, American 

civilization, clinical pastoral care, social work, 

anthropology/archaeology, history, sociology. 
Appendix A—Glossary 

67 

DAS Variable 

Life sciences Natural resources, forestry, biological science (including 

zoology), biophysics, geography, interdisciplinary studies, 

including biopsychology environmental studies. 

 

 Physical sciences Physical sciences including chemistry, physics. 

Math Mathematics, statistics. 

Computer/information science Computer/information science, computer programming. 

 

Engineering Electrical, chemical, mechanical, civil, or other engineering; 

engineering technology; electronics. 

Education Early childhood, elementary, secondary, special, or physical 

education; leisure studies; library/archival sciences. 

 

Business management Accounting, finance, secretarial, data processing, 

business/management, public administration, 

marketing/distribution, business support, intern relations. 

Health Nursing, nurse assisting, community/mental health, medicine, 

physical education/recreation, audiology, clinical health, 

dentistry, veterinary medicine, health/hospital, public dietetics, 

other/general health. 

Vocational/technical Mechanic technology including transportation, protective 

services, con air/other transportation, precision production. 

Other professional or technical Agriculture, agricultural science, architecture, professional 

city planning, journalism, communications, communications 

technology, cosmetology, military science, dental/medical 

technology, home economics, vocational home economics 

including child care, law, basic/personal skills. 

 

 

Panel weight for NPSAS and B&B BNBPANEL

 

Panel weight for NPSAS, B&B93/94, and B&B93/97 response. This weight was used for all analyses in this report. 

 

 

Family income and dependency status DEPEND

 

This is one of two variables used to display information in this report for family income and dependency status. This 

variable is used to create separate estimates for dependent and independent students. Students were considered 

independent if 1) the institution reported that they were independent, or 2) they met one of the following seven 

criteria: a) Twenty-four or older as of 12/31/92; b) Student was a veteran; c) Student was an orphan or ward of the 

court; d) Student had legal dependents, other than spouse; e) Student was married, and not claimed by parents on 

1992 tax returns; f) Student was a graduate student and not claimed as a dependent by parents on 1992 tax returns; 

g) Student was a single undergraduate, not claimed as a dependent by parents on either 1990 or 1991 tax returns, and 

was self sufficient for 2 years prior to receiving any federal aid. 

 Dependent 

 Independent 

 
Appendix A—Glossary 

68 

DAS Variable 

Does respondent have a disability DISABLED

Identifies respondents who have a hearing, speech, orthopedic, vision, learning, or other disability. 

 

Had a disability 

Did not have a disability 

 

Cumulative grade-point average GPACUM

Student-reported grade-point average. If students indicated a grading scale other than a 4-point scale, grades were 

converted to a 4-point scale. The following categories were used in this report: 

 Under 2.5 

 2.5 to 2.99 

 3.0 to 3.49 

 3.5 and above 

 

Institutional graduation rate GRADRATE

Cohort graduation rate for 150 percent of expected time to degree (6 years for bachelor’s degrees) reported by 

institutions in the 2000 or 1997 IPEDS. If the 2000 graduation rate was missing, the 1997 rate was substituted. The 

following categories were used in this report: 

 33 percent or below 

 34 to 67 percent 

 68 percent or above 

 

Whether attended multiple institutions NUMOTHSC

This variable is constructed based on the respondent’s answer to the question, “How many other undergraduate 

schools did you attend?” This variable refers only to schools attended prior to completing the bachelor’s degree at 

the sample school. 

 Attended multiple undergraduate institutions 

 Attended one undergraduate institution 

 

Family income and dependency status PCTDEP

This is one of two variables used to display information in this report for family income and dependency status. This 

variable shows the percentile rank of parents’ total income (for 1991, the last year before students’ graduation) for 

dependent students only, and is used to show income quartiles for dependent students. Equal to the proportion of the 

sample of dependent students’ parents who had an income lower than sample students’ parents. 

 

Parents’ highest education PEDUC

Variable recodes highest level of education completed by either parent. 

 

High school or less Not high school graduate or equivalent; High school graduate 

or equivalent 
Appendix A—Glossary 

69 

DAS Variable 

Some college Some postsecondary education, less than 2 years; 2 years or 

more postsecondary education, Attained AA 

Bachelor’s degree Bachelor’s degree 

Advanced degree Advanced degree 

 

 

Type of institution where received degree SECTOR_B

Institution type by level and control of the institution (from which the respondent was sampled) at which the student 

received his or her bachelor’s degree. Institution level concerns the institution’s highest offering (length of program 

and type of certificate, degree or award), and control concerns the source of revenue and control of operations. The 

following categories were used in this report: 

Public doctorate granting Public, PhD granting 

Public 4-year non-doctorate granting Public, non-PhD granting 

Private not-for-profit doctorate granting Private, not-for-profit, 4-year, PhD granting 

Private not-for-profit 4-year 

 non-doctorate granting Private, not-for-profit, 4-year, non-PhD granting 

Other Public, less-than-2-year; Public, 2-year; Private, not-for-profit, 

less-than-4-year; Private, for-profit, less-than-2-year; Private, 

for-profit, 2-years-or-more. 

 

Single-parent status SINGLPAR

Identifies students who were single parents. Students were considered to be single parents if they had dependents 

and were not married. 

 Single parent 

 Not a single parent 
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
71 

Appendix B—Technical Notes 

The Baccalaureate and Beyond Longitudinal Study (B&B:93/97)12

The data analyzed in this report came from the First and Second Follow-ups of the 

Baccalaureate and Beyond Longitudinal Study (B&B:93/94 and B&B:93/97), a study that tracks 

the experiences of a cohort of college graduates who received baccalaureate degrees during the 

1992–93 academic year and were first interviewed as part of the National Postsecondary Student 

Aid Study (NPSAS:93). This group’s experiences in the areas of academic enrollments, degree 

completions, employment, public service, and other decisions have been followed through 1997. 

The data derived from this survey provide critical information about college graduates’ 

postsecondary education outcomes, including graduate and professional program access, labor 

market experience, and rates of return on investment in education. 

The B&B:93/94 survey was the first follow-up interview of NPSAS:93 participants who 

received their bachelor’s degrees between July 1992 and June 1993. Of 12,500 NPSAS:93 

respondents who were identified as potentially eligible for the first follow-up survey, about 1,500 

were determined to be ineligible. A total of about 10,000 eligible individuals completed the 1994 

interview. 

The B&B:93/97 survey is the second follow-up interview of the B&B cohort. The first 

follow-up interview (B&B:93/94) collected information from respondents 1 year after they 

received the bachelor’s degree; the second follow-up (B&B:93/97) collected data 4 years after 

they received the bachelor’s degree. Data collection for B&B:93/97 took place between April 

and December 1997. A total of over 11,000 individuals in the B&B cohort were determined 

eligible for follow-up in 1997. For the second follow-up, over 10,000 individuals completed the 

interview, yielding a response rate of 90 percent. A total of about 9,300 individuals (83 percent 

of the sample) responded to all three rounds of the B&B study. Referred to as “the B&B panel 

sample,” these respondents became the base sample of the analyses presented in this report. 

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 

 

12The text in this section is based on excerpts from the Baccalaureate and Beyond Longitudinal Study: 1993/97 Methodology 

Report, (NCES 1999–159) (Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1999). 
Appendix B—Technical Notes 

72 

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).13

For more information about the NPSAS:93 survey, refer to the Methodology Report for the 

National Postsecondary Student Aid Study, 1992–93 (NCES 95–211, Washington, DC: U.S. 

Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1995). For more information 

on procedures for the Baccalaureate and Beyond follow-ups, consult the Baccalaureate and 

Beyond Longitudinal Study Methodology Reports (NCES 96–149 for the first follow-up and 

NCES 1999–159 for the second follow-up). 

Sample weights. B&B:93/97 final weights were calculated by making a nonresponse 

adjustment to the baseline B&B weight calculated for B&B:93/94. This baseline B&B weight is 

an adjustment of the baseline NPSAS:93 weight. All analyses in this report are weighted to 

compensate for unequal probability of selection into the B&B sample and to adjust for 

nonresponse. The B&B panel weight, based on respondents who participated in all three surveys, 

is used in the report. A complete description of the weighting methodology is available in the 

methodology reports cited above. 

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 made only on samples of populations rather than 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 sample members (e.g., 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. 

 

13The NPSAS universe excludes institutions offering only correspondence courses, institutions enrolling only their own 

employees, and U.S. service academies. For this B&B cohort, institutions were further stratified by the number of degrees in 

education they had awarded in the past. 
Appendix B—Technical Notes 

73 

Data Analysis System 

The estimates presented in this report were produced using the B&B:93/97 Data Analysis 

System (DAS). The DAS software makes it possible for users to specify and generate their own 

tables from the B&B:93/97 data. With the DAS, users can replicate or expand upon the tables 

presented in this report. In addition to the table estimates, the DAS calculates proper standard 

errors14 and weighted sample sizes for these estimates. For example, table B1 contains standard 

errors that correspond to table 2 of this report, and was generated by the DAS. 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. 

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. Since 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 B&B:93/97 stratified sampling 

method. 

The DAS can be accessed electronically at http://nces.ed.gov/DAS. For more information 

about the B&B:93/97 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

 

14The B&B:93/97 sample is not a simple random sample, 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 the linear terms of a Taylor series expansion. The procedure is typically referred to as the Taylor 

series method. 
Appendix B—Technical Notes 

74 

Table B1.—Standard errors for table 2: Percentage of employed 1992–93 bachelor’s degree recipients not 

Table B1.—enrolled who were in alternative employment, by family status and gender: 1997 

Clerical

and

Working in support Field

Self- Employed multiple occupa- profesAny employed part time jobs tions sions

 Total 0.73 0.57 0.30 0.51 0.65 0.76

Marital status

 Married 1.11 0.90 0.31 0.68 0.87 1.00

 Never married, divorced, or widowed 1.01 0.76 0.54 0.65 0.96 1.03

Any dependents

 Had dependents 1.74 1.17 0.61 1.23 1.38 1.66

 Did not have dependents 0.78 0.63 0.36 0.56 0.72 0.87

Single-parent status

 Single parent 6.65 3.86 5.27 3.01 1.78 5.56

 Not a single parent 0.74 0.57 0.29 0.51 0.66 0.77

 Total 0.62 0.35 0.52 0.45 0.92 0.40

Marital status

 Married 1.13 0.50 0.90 0.58 1.07 0.49

 Never married, divorced, or widowed 0.99 0.49 0.59 0.78 1.39 0.62

Any dependents

 Had dependents 1.71 0.77 1.52 0.94 1.36 0.68

 Did not have dependents 0.65 0.38 0.44 0.53 1.07 0.50

Single-parent status

 Single parent 3.18 2.11 1.96 2.72 4.09 2.73

 Not a single parent 0.62 0.34 0.54 0.45 0.88 0.41

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1993/97 Baccalaureate and Beyond 

Longitudinal Study (B&B:93/97).

Alternative working arrangement

Male

Female
Appendix B—Technical Notes 

75 

Statistical Procedures 

Differences Between Means 

The descriptive comparisons were tested in this report using Student’s t statistic. 

Differences between estimates are tested against the probability of a Type I error,15 or 

significance level. The significance levels were determined by calculating the Student’s t values 

for the differences between each pair of means or proportions and comparing these with 

published tables of significance levels for two-tailed hypothesis testing. 

Student’s t values may be computed to test the difference between estimates with the 

following formula: 

2

2

2

1

1 2

se se

E E

t

+

− = (1) 

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: 

1 2

2

2

2

1

1 2

se se 2(r)se se

E E

t

+ −

− = (2) 

where r is the correlation between the two variables.16 The denominator in this formula will be at 

its maximum when the two estimates are perfectly negatively correlated; that is, when r = –1. 

This means that a conservative dependent test may be conducted by using –1 for the correlation 

in this formula, or 

1 2

2

2

2

1 2

(se1 ) (se ) 2se se

E E

t

+ +

− = . (3) 

The estimates and standard errors are obtained from the DAS. 

 

15A 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. 

16U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, A Note from the Chief Statistician, no. 2, 1993. 
Appendix B—Technical Notes 

76 

There are hazards in reporting 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 reporting statistical tests for each comparison occurs when making 

multiple comparisons among categories of an independent variable. For example, when making 

paired comparisons among different levels of income, the probability of a Type I error for these 

comparisons taken as a group is larger than the probability for a single comparison. When more 

than one difference between groups of related characteristics or “families” are tested for 

statistical significance, one must apply a standard that assures a level of significance for all of 

those comparisons taken together. 

Comparisons were made in this report only when p < .05/k for a particular pairwise 

comparison, where that comparison was one of k tests within a family. This guarantees both that 

the individual comparison would have p < .05 and that for k comparisons within a family of 

possible comparisons, the significance level for all the comparisons will sum to p < .05.17

For example, in a comparison of the percentages of males and females leaving 

postsecondary education without a degree, only one comparison is possible (males vs. females). 

In this family, k=1, and the comparison can be evaluated without adjusting the significance level. 

When respondents are divided into five racial/ethnic groups and all possible comparisons are 

made, then k=10, and the significance level of each test must be p < .05/10, or p < .005. The 

formula for calculating family size (k) is as follows: 

2

( −1) = j j k (4) 

where j is the number of categories for the variable being tested. In the case of race/ethnicity, 

there are five racial/ethnic groups (American Indian/Alaska Native; Asian/Pacific Islander; 

Black, non-Hispanic; Hispanic; White, non-Hispanic), so substituting 5 for j in equation 4, 

10

2

5(5 1) = − k =

 

17The standard that p ≤ .05/k for each comparison is more stringent than the criterion that the significance level of the 

comparisons should sum to p ≤ .05. For tables showing the t statistic required to ensure that p ≤ .05/k for a particular family size 

and degrees of freedom, see Olive Jean Dunn, “Multiple Comparisons Among Means,” Journal of the American Statistical 

Association 56 (1961): 52–64. 
Appendix B—Technical Notes 

77 

Adjustment of Means to Control for Background Variation 

Many of the independent variables included in the analyses in this report are related, and to 

some extent the pattern of differences found in the descriptive analyses reflect this covariation. 

For example, when examining the propensity to have an alternative working arrangement by 

gender, it is possible that some of the observed relationship is due to differences in other factors 

related to gender, such as marital status, age at degree completion, and so on. However, if nested 

tables were used to isolate the influence of these other factors, cell sizes would become too small 

to identify the significant differences in patterns. When the sample size becomes too small to 

support controls for another level of variation, other methods must be used to take such variation 

into account. The method used in this report estimates adjusted means with regression models, an 

approach sometimes referred to as communality analysis. 

For the multivariate analyses reported here, multiple linear regression was used to obtain 

means that were adjusted for covariation among a list of control variables.18 Each independent 

variable is divided into several discrete categories. To find an estimated mean value on the 

dependent variable for each category of an independent variable, while adjusting for its 

covariation with other independent variables in the equation, substitute the following in the 

equation: (1) a one in the category’s term in the equation, (2) zeroes for the other categories of 

this variable, and (3) the mean proportions for all other independent variables. This procedure 

holds the impact of all remaining independent variables constant, and differences between 

adjusted means of categories of an independent variable represent hypothetical groups that are 

balanced or proportionately equal on all other characteristics included in the model as 

independent variables. 

For example, consider a hypothetical case in which two variables, age and gender, are used 

to describe an outcome, Y (such as having an alternative working arrangement). The variables 

age and gender are recoded into a dummy variable representing age, A, and a dummy variable 

representing gender, G: 

Age A

 Less than 20 years old 0 

 20 years or older 1 

and 

 

18For more information about least squares regression, see Michael S. Lewis-Beck, Applied Regression: An Introduction, Vol. 22 

(Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications, Inc., 1980); William D. Berry and Stanley Feldman, Multiple Regression in Practice, Vol. 

50 (Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications, Inc., 1987). 
Appendix B—Technical Notes 

78 

Gender G

 Female 1 

 Male 0 

The following regression equation is then estimated from the correlation matrix output from the 

DAS as input data for standard regression procedures: 

Yˆ = a + b1A + b2G (5) 

To estimate the adjusted mean for any subgroup evaluated at the mean of all other 

variables, one substitutes the appropriate values for that subgroup’s dummy variables (1 or 0) 

and the mean for the dummy variable(s) representing all other subgroups. For example, suppose 

Y represents having an alternative working arrangement, which is being described by age (A) and 

gender (G), coded as shown above. Suppose the unadjusted mean values of these two variables 

are as follows: 

Variable Mean

A 0.355 

G 0.521 

Next, suppose the regression equation results are as follows: 

ˆ Y = 0.15 + 0.17A + 0.01G (6) 

To estimate the adjusted value for older workers, one substitutes the appropriate parameter 

estimates and variable values into equation 6. 

Variable Parameter Value

a 0.15 — 

A 0.17 1.000 

G 0.01 0.521 

This results in the following equation: 

ˆ Y = 0.15 +(0.17)(1) + (0.01)(0.521) = 0.325

In this case, the adjusted mean for older workers is 0.325 and represents the expected 

outcome for older employees who resemble the average person across the other variables (in this 

example, gender). In other words, the adjusted percentage of older workers who had alternative 

working arrangements after controlling for gender is 32.5 percent (0.325 x 100 for conversion to 

a percentage). 
Appendix B—Technical Notes 

79 

It is relatively straightforward to produce a multivariate model using the DAS, since one of 

the DAS output options is a correlation matrix, computed using pairwise missing values. In 

regression analysis, there are several common approaches to the problem of missing data. The 

two simplest 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. 

The correlation matrix can be used by most statistical software packages as the input data 

for least squares regression. That is the approach used for this report, with an additional 

adjustment to incorporate the complex sample design into the statistical significance tests of the 

parameter estimates (described below).19 

Most statistical software packages assume simple random sampling when computing 

standard errors of parameter estimates. Because of the complex sampling design used for the 

B&B surveys, this assumption is incorrect. A better approximation of their standard errors is to 

multiply each standard error by the design effect associated with the dependent variable 

(DEFT),20 where the DEFT is the ratio of the true standard error to the standard error computed 

under the assumption of simple random sampling. It is calculated by the DAS and produced with 

the correlation matrix output. 

 

19Although the DAS simplifies the process of making regression models, it also limits the range of models. Analysts who wish to 

estimate other types of models, such as logit models, can apply for a restricted data license from NCES. 

20The adjustment procedure and its limitations are described in C.J. Skinner, D. Holt, and T.M.F. Smith, eds., Analysis of 

Complex Surveys (New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1989).