Qualitative Research for the Survey of Earned Doctorates (SED)

Attachment 1: Discussion Guide for Qualitative Research on GSE Module
Discussion Guide for Qualitative Research on GSE Module
Introduction. Hello everyone, thank you for being here. I am [name], a [position] at NORC and this is
[name], who is [position] at NORC. We’ll be guiding this focus group today.
As you probably already know, we are conducting this focus group today to discuss the possibility of
adding a section on graduate school experiences to the Survey of Earned Doctorates (SED). The SED
is the nation’s primary source of information on the educational history, demographic characteristics,
and postgraduation plans of doctorate recipients. It is funded by the National Science Foundation
(NSF) and other federal agencies. NORC is conducting several focus groups on the NSF’s behalf to
gather information about what stakeholders would or would not find useful to have in a new section on
graduate student experiences. The goal for this session is to get people talking with each other and
generating ideas.
Ground Rules. I’d just like to go over some ground rules for the discussion. We’d like this to be a
free-flowing environment for the exchange of ideas. We want to encourage discussion between the
members of the group here today, and not so much between the group members and the moderator. So
as much as possible, the moderator will just be guiding the discussion. Also, we’d like the session to
remain as interruption-free as possible, so if you would please silence your cell phones now if you
haven’t already.
Informed Consent. Before starting, I would like to verify that everyone participating has read the
consent form. As stated in the form, your participation in the group is voluntary and your
confidentiality will be protected. This means that researchers will not identify you by name in any
reports or presentations. It also means that you agree not to disclose any information from this focus
group to people who are not participating in it today. If you agree to participate, please indicate that by
saying, “I agree.”
Part 1: Introductions
Before we begin, let’s introduce ourselves. Please tell us:
1. Your name
2. A little about yourself (affiliation and position)
3. How much experience you have with the SED?
4. How much experience you have had with Graduate Student Experience (GSE) surveys?

Part 2: The GSE module
Background information on the GSE module…
5. [FOR DEANS AND DEPARTMENT HEADS] Does your institution field a survey of all
current graduate students? An exit survey of graduating doctoral students that collects
information on GSE?
6. [FOR DEANS AND DEPARTMENT HEADS] If your institution fields a GSE survey, how
are the data used to inform decisions? How are the GSE data different from other data sources
that are available?
Review of potential GSE topics…
7. If a module with GSE items were added to the SED, what would be useful to include?
8. What about TOPIC (SEE LIST BELOW)? Should the GSE module cover that?
9. What topics would not be useful to include?
10. What level of detail would you want?
11. What topics would be of greatest interest to you? Of least interest? Why?
12. What kinds of experiences should be covered in the survey because they are vital to student
success?

9

13. Of the topics/items the group generally agrees should be included, which are the most
important?
14. If it were not possible to include all these topics/items, which are the lowest priority to
include?
15. [FOR DEANS, DEPARTMENT HEADS] What comparison data would be of interest to you
in interpreting GSE findings? For example, would it be useful to have data from other
institutions? What institutions (or types of institutions)?
Part 3: Issues of confidentiality
Individual students at an institution are identifiable in the SED dataset. GSE questions that could be asked
about a student’s program or advisor could be very sensitive if the student reports unfavorable experiences.

16. [FOR DEANS, DEPARTMENT HEADS] What overall issues do you see with GSE module
data being identifiable?
17. [FOR DEANS, DEPARTMENT HEADS] If data on advisors were presented in aggregate
form, what issues do you see with the identifiability of the students and the advisors?
18. [FOR DEANS, DEPARTMENT HEADS] How might student and advisor identity be
protected?
19. [FOR DEANS, DEPARTMENT HEADS] If sensitive data were to be aggregated for the
institution or across institutions, what impact would that have on its utility for your institution?
20. It is possible to protect student identity by suppressing or aggregating data. For example, data
could be combined across departments or across years to make it difficult to identify a
particular student. Further, some information, such as exact age, gender, or time to degree
could be collapsed into categories. If we used these types of techniques to protect student
identity, how would it affect the utility of the data?
21. Would aggregated data be useful to you?
22. What suggestions do you have for collapsing or aggregating the data to best preserve the utility
of the data for you or your institution?
23. [FOR DEANS, DEPARTMENT HEADS] Are there benefits to your institution of being able
to compare your data to the aggregated data from peer institutions?
24. [FOR DEANS, DEPARTMENT HEADS] If your institution currently fields its own exit
survey, would there be benefits to having NSF collect and process the data for you instead?
25. To maintain respondent confidentiality, some of the data will need to be presented in aggregate
form. How would that affect the value of the SED GSE data? Would the aggregated data still
have utility?
Part 4: Interest in and value of a GSE module
Now I would like to discuss how interested you would be in a GSE module and how valuable the
data would be to your institution/organization.
26. What would you use the data for? Can you give examples of how the data would be used?
27. Is the kind of information in a GSE module available to you from other sources? What other
sources?
28. What do you see as the advantages and disadvantages of including a GSE module in the SED?
29. [SEE EXAMPLE CHARTS in Attachment 8] Would summary data as presented in these
example charts be useful to your institution? What kind of summary report would be of
greatest value?
30. [DEANS, DEPARTMENT HEADS] If your institution already has a GSE survey, what issues
would arise if a GSE module were added to SED? How do you currently use your institution’s
GSE data?
31. [DEANS, DEPARTMENT HEADS] Would a GSE module have potential overlap with data
you already collect?

10

32. [DEANS, DEPARTMENT HEADS] What would be advantages or disadvantages of relying
on the SED GSE module instead of fielding an institution-specific survey?
33. [DEANS, DEPARTMENT HEADS] SED would field the survey and process the survey data
if a GSE module were added. Would shifting the labor to the SED make it worthwhile to your
institution?
34. [DEANS, DEPARTMENT HEADS] Standardizing administration of the survey would mean
that your institution would not be able to add customized content to the SED GSE module.
How would this affect your institution’s use of the data? What positive or negative impacts
would this have?
35. [DEANS, DEPARTMENT HEADS] If your institution is not currently participating in SED
(or completion of the SED is a low priority over institutional survey): Would adding a GSE
module increase your institution’s interest in SED? Would having common data across
institutions be interesting and valuable?
Participant Debrief and Conclusion. The moderators thank the discussants for their participation.
Potential GSE Topics

•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Communication of Important Information
Program/Campus Climate
Professional Development Experiences
Curriculum and Instruction
Skill Development
Faculty and Staff
Scholarly Products and Presentations
Financial Support/Aid
Student Support Services
Factors Hindering or Facilitating Academic Progress
Campus Life and Activities
Program and University Facilities
Overall Satisfaction

11