2019 acs graduate Student Survey Report

3.3.2 Research Groups and Advisors
In science and engineering, research is often laboratory intensive, and the historical approach to 
Figure 3. 3. 1. 1. Students’ Satisfaction With Overall Graduate Experience at Current institu-
tion by 
Degree Type (Percentages)
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
4.49 4.23
8.45 7.04
8.05 8.45
48.99 50.00
30.02 30.28
Very 
Dissatisfied
Somewhat
Dissatisfied
Somewhat
Satisfied
Very
Satisfied
Neither
Satisfied/
Dissatisfied
Doctoral degree
Master
's degree

---

22
Table 3.3.1.2. Fraction of Students Who “Definitely Will” Complete Their Graduate Degree
(Completion by Degree Type and Survey Year)
2019
2013
Doctoral degree (n=2,400) 67.7%
Doctoral degree (n=2,698) 
76.7%
Master’s degree (n=217) 
86.2%
Master’s degree (n=232) 
88.9%
Table 3.3.1.3. Likelihood Student Will Remain In the Chemical Sciences After Graduation
2019 
2013
Doctoral degree (n=2,032) 75.84%
Doctoral degree (n=2,698) 
76.1%
Master’s degree (n=174) 
83.33%
Master’s degree (n=232) 
72.3% 
higher education continues to be based on an apprenticeship model.
1,26
In this model, the
student (“apprentice”) works under the supervision of a primary research advisor, who plays a 
key role in providing the deep knowledge required for graduate students to develop into inde-
pendent researchers.
It has been reported by O’Meara and collaborators, and highlighted by the National Academies 
Press report on Graduate STEM Education for the 21st Century (2018),
1
that “a student’s re-
lationship with his or her primary advisor is the factor most directly correlated with retention, 
timely completion, sense of inclusion, career aspirations, and overall satisfaction with her or his 
graduate experience.”
27
Additional studies have reported that “the best faculty advisors improved 
academic success, research productivity, career commitment, and self-efficacy.
28,29
In light of this literature, a series of survey questions probed the relationship between graduate 
students and their advisors as well as other interpersonal relationships that influence the research- 
training environment and a student’s overall support during graduate school.
Out of the total of student survey respondents, 94.6% reported being “currently in a research 
group” (N=2,086; Table E.1., on page 51 in the appendices). The remaining 5.4% could reflect 
the percentage of survey respondents who were still in early stages of their graduate experience 
and had not officially joined a research group at the time of this survey.
To understand the main factors considered by students in the process of selecting a research 
group, students were asked to respond to the question, “Why did you decide to join your current 
research group?” A word frequency analysis of the students’ answers indicated “Research” as 
Factors
Current field of study 
9.8 
60.7
Current institution 
14.3 
47.4
Primary research advisor 
15.9 
56.3
“Yes, I would change this”
“No, I would not change this”