Dashboard Indicators Spring 2012
on the Status of Women at IU Bloomington Prepared by the Office for Women’s Affairs
Welcome
to the 2012 Dashboard Indicators on the Status of Women of the Bloomington campus of Indiana University, which we are providing as part of the celebratory events of the 40th anniversary of the Office for Women’s Affairs’ (OWA) mission. Dashboard Indicators provide a snapshot of some of the important issues that OWA and the university have always been concerned with, including women’s leadership, faculty composition, faculty recognition, composition of the staff workforce, as well as enrollment and persistence data for students. While there are many other areas that data and time constraints did not allow us to include, the available indicators provide an opportunity for readers to examine progress made as well as challenges that remain. In keeping with the sage that “one picture is worth a thousand words,” we have provided graphics that illustrate striking evidence of the successes and challenges concerning the status of women. As with any good inquiry, the data also raises new questions about mechanisms, opportunities, constraints, existing policies as well as practices and goals that, we hope, others with long-standing interests in these areas in addition to those who are newly empowered by the current data will, indeed, take up in the future. OWA is very grateful to Dr. Eric Mokube, who serves OWA as the Director of the Savant Program, Research and our Fiscal Officer. His leadership has been very important in data gathering and analysis. Furthermore, we wish to express gratitude as well to members of our Faculty and Staff Advisory Boards and current OWA staff, who offered advice about what we should include, coupled with comments on earlier drafts of the document. We are also grateful to previous OWA Deans, their team members and allies in the university as well as Bloomington communities, on whose shoulders we stand. Last, but certainly not least, we are especially grateful to the Office of the Vice-Provost for Faculty and Academic Affairs (VPFAA), Office of Affirmative Action and University Human Resource Services (UHRS), for providing the data that we have utilized to configure the Dashboard Indicators. Finally, we thank each of you in advance for taking time out of your schedules to examine, peruse and to offer your comments on the data as you work individually and collectively to improve and to move forward the standing of Indiana University by elevating the status of women faculty, staff and students.
Yvette M. Alex-Assensoh, Dean The Office for Women’s Affairs (OWA) Spring 2012
2
Statewide Demographics
I. Statewide Demographics by Gender Figure 1: State of Indiana Population Data by Gender Male
Female
51%
50.8%
2000
2010
Source: Indiana State Gov. website; US Census data spring 2012.
Women comprise a majority, which has decreased slightly over the last decade.
Figure 2: Racial and Ethnic Profiles of Women in Indiana 2000
African American
2010 4.7% 2.8%
4.4% 1.6%
Asian American Hispanic American Indian White
43%
45% 0.1% 0.5%
0.1%
0.8%
Source: Indiana State Gov. website; US Census data spring 2012.
The proportion of women of color has increased over the last decade with the exception of American Indians. The percentage of white women has decreased slightly since 2000.
3
Women’s Leadership
II. Board of Trustees at Indiana University Figure 3: Women Members of the Indiana University Board of Trustees Male
Female
21%
18%
1970/711979/80
17%
1980/811989/90
26%
1990/911999/00
2000/012009/10
Source: Board of Trustee website; http://www.indiana.edu/~trustees/trustees/academic-years/1850-1860.shtml. Spring 2012.
Since the 1970s, women have comprised less than 30% of the Board of Trustees membership, with percentages dipping below 20% in the 1980s and 1990s. From 1970 to 1980, 4 of the 18 trustees were women. From 1980 to 1990, 2 of the 11 trustees were women. From 1990 to 2000, 3 of the 19 trustees were women. From 2000 to 2010, 5 of the 19 trustees were women.
III. Academic Administrative Positions Figure 4: Gender Distribution of Appointees Holding Academic Administrative Positions (2000-2005) 2000-01
100%
2001-02
2002-03
2003-04
2004-05
80% 60% 40% 20%
Chairperson (23/67)
Dean (5/9)
Assoc. Dean (13/24)
Chancellor (3/7)
Sr. Admin. (4/5)
V. President (0/3)
Chairperson (28/75)
Dean (6/9)
Assoc. Dean (13/24)
Chancellor (2/8)
Sr. Admin. (2/5)
V. President (1/3)
Chairperson (21/69)
Dean (5/12)
Assoc. Dean (13/21)
Chancellor (2/8)
Sr. Admin. (1/4)
V. President (1/4)
Chairperson (17/80)
Dean (3/15)
Assoc. Dean (15/22)
Chancellor (2/7)
Sr. Admin. (0/4)
V. President (1/3)
Chairperson (16/71)
Dean (4/13)
Assoc. Dean (13/25)
Chancellor (3/7)
Sr. Admin. (0/3)
Male
V. President (0/4)
0%
Source: VPFAA spring 2012. Data were provided by the Office of the Vice Provost for Faculty and Academic Affairs (VPFAA) in Spring 2009 and 2012. The categories are defined as follows: Vice President includes Provost and Vice Presidents. Senior Administration includes Associate Vice Presidents, Vice Provosts and Associate Provosts. Chancellor includes Vice Chancellors and Associate Vice Chancellors. Deans include only Academic Deans and Associate Deans include only Faculty appointed to Associate Dean positions.
Figure 5: Gender Distribution of Appointees Holding Academic Administrative Positions (2005-2010)
Percentage of2005-06 women in academic 2006-07 leadership positions 2007-08 on the Bloomington campus 2008-09 has not yet reached 2009-10 50%. In100% fact, there is volatility within each year and across positions. While we see some level of stability at the lower levels of administration, including Chairpersons and Associate Deans, there are still disproportionately more 80% women at the Associate Dean than the Dean levels. Also, over the 10 year-period under review, there has been approximately only a 10 % increase in the Chairperson level. 60% 40% 20%
4
Figure 5: Gender Distribution of Appointees Holding Academic Administrative Positions (2005-2010) 2005-06
100%
2006-07
2007-08
2008-09
2009-10
80% 60% 40% 20%
Chairperson (25/75)
Assoc. Dean (17/22)
Dean (4/12)
Chancellor (N/A)
Sr. Admin. (8/10)
V. President (1/4)
Chairperson (25/76)
Assoc. Dean (17/23)
Dean (4/14)
Chancellor (N/A)
Sr. Admin. (9/12)
V. President (2/4)
Chairperson (25/71)
Dean (4/12)
Assoc. Dean (21/23)
Chancellor (N/A)
Sr. Admin. (6/10)
V. President (2/4)
Chairperson (28/72)
Assoc. Dean (15/22)
Dean (6/14)
Chancellor (1/7)
Sr. Admin. (5/11)
V. President (0/2)
Chairperson (24/65)
Assoc. Dean (15/24)
Dean (5/12)
Chancellor (1/6)
Male
Sr. Admin. (6/7)
0%
V. President (0/3)
Women’s Leadership
3/67)
3/24)
)
)
3)
8/75)
3/24)
)
)
3)
1/69)
3/21)
)
)
4)
7/80)
5/22)
)
)
3)
6/71)
3/25)
)
4)
)
Male
Source: VPFAA spring 2012. Data were provided by the Office of the Vice Provost for Faculty and Academic Affairs (VPFAA) in Spring 2009 and 2012. The categories are defined as follows: Vice President includes Provost and Vice Presidents. Senior Administration includes Associate Vice Presidents, Vice Provosts and Associate Provosts. Chancellor includes Vice Chancellors and Associate Vice Chancellors. Deans include only Academic Deans and Associate Deans include only Faculty appointed to Associate Dean positions.
Percentage of women in academic leadership positions on the Bloomington campus has not yet reached 50%. In fact, there is volatility within each year and across positions. While we see some level of stability at the lower levels of administration, including Chairpersons and Associate Deans, there are still disproportionately more women at the Associate Dean than the Dean levels. Also, over the 10 year-period under review, there has been approximately only a 10 % increase in the Chairperson level.
Racial and Ethnic Profiles of Women in Academic Administration Figure 6: 2000-2001 V. President
100%
Sr. Administrator
Chancellor
Deans
Associate Deans
Chairperson
75% 50% 25%
White (14/66)
American Indian (0/0)
Hispanic (1/1)
Asian (1/2)
African American (0/2)
White (12/23)
American Indian (0/0)
Hispanic (0/0)
Asian (1/0)
African American (0/2)
White (4/11)
American Indian (0/0)
Hispanic (0/1)
Asian (0/1)
African American (0/0)
White (2/5)
American Indian (0/0)
Hispanic (0/1)
Asian (0/0)
African American (1/1)
White (0/3)
American Indian (0/0)
Hispanic (0/0)
Asian (0/0)
African American (0/0)
White (0/2)
American Indian (0/1)
Hispanic (0/0)
Male
Asian (0/0)
Female
African American (0/1)
0%
Source: VPFAA spring 2012. V. President includes Provost and Vice Presidents; Sr. Administration includes Associate V. Presidents, V. Provost and Associate Provosts; Chancellor includes V. Chancellors and Associate V. Chancellors; Deans includes only Academic Deans; Associate Deans includes only academic appointments.
Figure 7: 2009-2010
At the highest levels of administration, women were unrepresented, although they have served as Associate Deans and Chairpersons. ThereSr.were also racial differences, Indians, Latinas, Asian and African V. President Administrator Deanswith American Associate Deans Chairperson 100% American women holding fewer positions than their white counterparts. 75% 50% 25%
5
0)
2)
0)
2)
0)
0)
0)
1)
0)
0)
1)
1)
Male
Figure 7: 2009-2010 V. President
100%
Sr. Administrator
Deans
Associate Deans
Chairperson
75% 50% 25%
Faculty Composition
White (23/65)
American Indian (0/0)
Hispanic (0/2)
Asian (0/6)
African American (2/2)
White (17/22)
American Indian (0/0)
Hispanic (0/0)
Asian (0/1)
African American (0/0)
White (3/10)
American Indian (0/0)
Hispanic (0/1)
Asian (1/0)
African American (0/1)
White (6/8)
American Indian (0/0)
Hispanic (0/0)
Asian (1/0)
African American (1/2)
White (1/4)
American Indian (0/0)
Hispanic (0/0)
Male
Asian (0/0)
Female
African American (0/0)
0%
Source: VPFAA spring 2012. V. President includes Provost and Vice Presidents; Sr. Administration includes Associate V. Presidents, V. Provost and Associate Provosts; Chancellor includes V. Chancellors and Associate V. Chancellors; Deans includes only Academic Deans; Associate Deans includes only academic appointments.
Women are now serving at higher levels of administration as Vice Presidents as well as Senior Administrators. They continue to serve, at slightly higher rates as Deans, Associate Deans and Chairpersons. There is very little racial diversity in academic administration.
Figure 8: Women Tenure/Tenure-Track Faculty (1969-2010) 100%
Full Professor Associate Professor
80% 60% 40%
Assistant Professor
20% 0% 1969
1979
1989
1991
1996
2001
2006
2009
2010
Source: IU Library Archives and IU Fact Book.
The highest percentages of female faculty are concentrated in the Assistant Professor rank, while the lowest percentages are found in the full Professor rank, where faculty have the ability to exercise the most influence and authority.
6
Faculty Composition
Figure 9: Full-Time Academic by Gender (2000-2011) 100%
80%
Male 60%
40%
Female 20% 2000 30%
2001 31%
2002 32%
2003 36.1%
2004 36.8%
2005 37%
2006 38.5%
2007 39.1%
2008 39.5%
2009 39.9%
2010 40.9%
2011 41%
Source: VPFAA data provided in spring 2012. Full-time academic faculty includes: Librarians, Researchers, Visiting Scientist, Academic Specialists, Clinical Faculty, Lecturers, Acting Professors, Adjunct Faculty, and Tenured/Tenure-track Faculty.
While men comprise the solid majority of full-time faculty on the Bloomington campus, the data also show a steady increase in the hiring of female faculty, with the sharpest increase happening between 2002 and 2003.
Figure 10: Full-Time Women Faculty of Color (2003-2011) 6%
Black 5%
Hispanic
4%
Asian
3%
American Indian
2% 1%
Multi Ethnic
0% 2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Source: Disaggregated data by gender and race are available only in 2003 and beyond.
With the exception of the Asian women of color category, almost every other category was flat. African American women saw an increase of only 0.3% from 2003 to 2010; for Hispanic women that number increased by only 0.2% and for American Indians it moved upwards by 0.03% within the same period.
7
Faculty Composition
Figure 11: Part-Time Faculty By Gender (2000-2011) 100%
80%
Male Female
60%
40%
20% 2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Source: VPFAA data provided in spring 2012. Full-time academic faculty includes: Librarians, Researchers, Visiting Scientist, Academic Specialists, Clinical Faculty, Lecturers, Acting Professors, Adjunct Faculty, and Tenured/Tenure-track Faculty.
There is virtually no gender difference in the distribution of part-time faculty.
Figure 12: Part-Time Women of Color Faculty (2003-2011) Black Hispanic
5% 4% 3%
Asian 2%
American Indian Multi Ethnic
1% 0% 2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Source: VPFAA data provided in spring 2012. Black is both native and foreign born; Hispanic is both native and foreign born; Asian is both native and foreign born. The Multi Ethnic category began in 2010 for faculty reporting more than one ethnic group.
With the exception of the Asian women and the multi ethnic categories, almost every other group’s representation was flat. It mirrored the pattern for full-time faculty (see Fig. 10).
8
Faculty Composition
Female Faculty Retention Data for Select Years Figure 13: Women Faculty Resignations (2003-2009) 100% 80%
Full Professor
60%
Associate Professor
40%
Assistant Professor
20% 0% 2003 Total 32%
2004 Total 41%
2005 Total 29%
2006 Total 34%
2007 Total 40%
2008 Total 41%
2009 Total 33%
Source: Office of Affirmative Action report to the BFC, spring 2010.
Resignations among female faculty have generally been highest at the rank of Assistant Professor, which is consistent with the national trends. What is troubling about the IUB data are the resignations by tenured faculty at the Associate and full Professor rank. There is a suggestion from anecdotal data that resignations are due to a variety of issues, including better offers from other universities, climate issues at departmental levels and lack of suitable employment for spouses.
Figure 14: Women Faculty Resignations by Ethnicity (2003) Full Professor
100%
Associate Professor
Assistant Professor
75% 50% 25%
White (1)
Indian American (0)
Hispanic (1)
Asian (1)
African American (3)
Total Women (6)
Total Men (10)
White (0)
Indian American (0)
Hispanic (0)
Asian (1)
African American (2)
Total Women (3)
Total Men (3)
White (0)
Indian American (0)
Hispanic (0)
Asian (1)
African American (0)
Total Women (1)
Total Men (8)
0%
Source: Office of Affirmative Action report to the BFC, spring 2010.
There are racial differences in faculty resignations. The majority of African-American and Latinas resigned after obtaining tenure. There is not a clear pattern of resignation among white women. Among Asian women, the data are more mixed, with a majority resigning before tenure in one year, but most resigning after obtaining tenure.
9
Full Professor
100%
Associate Professor
Assistant Professor
75% 50% 25%
White (4)
Indian American (0)
Hispanic (0)
Asian (2)
African American (0)
Total Women (6)
Total Men (11)
White (1)
Indian American (0)
Hispanic (1)
Asian (0)
African American (0)
Total Women (2)
Total Men (2)
White (2)
Indian American (0)
Hispanic (0)
Asian (0)
African American (0)
Total Women (2)
0%
Total Men (7)
Faculty Recognition
Figure 15: Women Faculty Resignations by Ethnicity (2009)
Source: Office of Affirmative Action report to the BFC, spring 2010.
There are racial differences in faculty resignations. In 2009, there was no resignation among African American women. In contrast, the majority of whites and Latinas resigned after obtaining tenure. Among Asian women, the data are more mixed, with none resigning at the full and Associate Professorial rank, but two resigning at the Assistant Professorial level.
IV. Gender Composition of Faculty Recognition at IUB William Patten Foundation Figure 16: Gender Distribution of William Patten Foundation Winners (1970-2009) Male
Female
17%
1970-1979 (5/25)
12.5%
1980-1989 (7/49)
20%
1990-1999 (7/28)
27%
2000-2009 (10/27)
Source: The William T. Patten Foundation website http://patten.indiana.edu/formerLecturers. Spring 2012
Women continue to comprise a small minority of the William Patten Foundation lecturers invited to campus, although there have been improvements over the years.
10
Faculty Recognition
Figure 17: Named Professors/Endowed Chairs By Gender (2000-2011) 100% 80%
Male
60% 40%
Female 20% 0% 2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
Source: VPFAA at IUB spring 2012. Named Professorships are a means of recognizing and honoring outstanding faculty in the colleges and schools. Such faculty are expected to exemplify standards of excellence in the performance of teaching, research and service within a specific discipline/profession.
Men comprise almost 80% of the named Professors/Endowed Chairs, while women comprise 20%. With the exception of modest improvements at the beginning and at the end of the decade, very little has changed.
Figure 18: Racial and Ethnic Profiles of Women Who Hold Named Professor/Endowed Chair Positions (2000-2010) White African American
100% 80% 60%
0%
Asian 40%
0%
Hispanic 20%
0%
Other
0% 2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
Source: VPFAA at IUB spring 2012. Named Professorships are a means of recognizing and honoring outstanding faculty in the colleges and schools. Such faculty are expected to exemplify standards of excellence in the performance of teaching, research and service within a specific discipline/profession.
No Asian, Latina or Native American female faculty member has been appointed to a named professorship or endowed chair. In 2009, one black female professor was appointed to a named professorship/endowed chair and in 2010, another black female professor was appointed to a named professorship/endowed chair. In 2000, there were 12 white female professors appointed to named professorship/endowed chairs and the number has grown to a total of 38 in 2010.
11
Faculty Recognition
Figure 19: Special Professors by Gender (2000-2010) 100% 80%
Male
60% 40%
Female 20% 0% 2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
Source: VPFAA spring 2012. Special Professors includes Distinguished, Provost, Chancellors’ and College Professors.
For the last decade, women have held about 20% of the Special Professorships on campus, while men have held the remaining 80%. Little has changed over the last decade.
Figure 20: Racial and Ethnic Profiles of Women Who Hold Special Professorships (2000-2010) White African American
100% 80% 60%
0%
Asian 40%
0%
Hispanic 20%
0%
Other
0% 2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
Source: VPFAA spring 2012. Special Professors includes Distinguished, Provost, Chancellors’ and College Professors.
There are no Asian, Latina/Hispanic or Native American female special professors on the Bloomington campus of Indiana University. From 2000 to 2007, there was a single African American female who held the status of special professor. Eight white female faculty held the status of special professor in 2000 and that number has grown to 15 in 2010.
12
Staff Data
V. Women Staff Figure 21: Full-time Non-Academic Women Workforce by EEO Category (2000-2011) 100%
Professional
80%
Clerical
60%
Technical 40%
Skilled Craft 20%
Service Maintenance
0% 2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2010
Source: Data from the Office of Affirmative Action. All data are from October 1 frozen files, spring 2012.
Women staff members are disproportionally represented among the lower-paid clerical category and underrepresented among the higher paid skilled craft and professional categories. The EEO categories are based on the Salary Grade and the job responsibility they are related to. “Full-time” is defined as someone who works 40 standard hours/week. This may be a person who has 2 jobs that each requires 20 standard hours of work/ week. “Part-time” is anything less than a total of 40 standard hours/week. For benefit status see this link: http://hr.iu.edu/enroll/video.html
Figure 22: Racial and Ethnic Breakdown of Full-time Nonacademic Women Staff (2000) Professional
Clerical
Technical
Skilled Craft
Service Maintenance
Total Men 912/ Women 923
Total Men 150/ Women 1169
Total Men 190/ Women 134
Total Men 438/ Women 30
Total Men 474/ Women 346
African American (21)
African American (23)
100% 75% 50% 25%
White (322)
Indian American (1)
Hispanic (6)
Asian (8)
African American (8)
White (30)
Indian American (0)
Hispanic (0)
Asian (0)
African American (0)
White (125)
Indian American (0)
Hispanic (2)
Asian (5)
African American (2)
White (1113)
Indian American (3)
Hispanic (10)
Asian (20)
White (862)
Indian American (4)
Hispanic (12)
Asian (24)
0%
Source: Data from the Office of Affirmative Action. All data are from October 1 frozen files, spring 2012.
In 2000, white women held a majority of all staff positions and the representation among women of color is very low, especially the technical skilled craft categories. of Full-time Figure 23:inRacial andandEthnic Breakdown
Nonacademic Women Staff (2011)
100% 75%
Professional Total Men 1262/ Women 1229
Clerical
Technical
Skilled Craft
Service Maintenance
Total Men 166/ Women 1031
Total Men 175/ Women 111
Total Men 364/ Women 27
Total Men 476/ Women 240
13
Figure 23: Racial and Ethnic Breakdown of Full-time Nonacademic Women Staff (2011) 100%
Professional
Clerical
Technical
Skilled Craft
Service Maintenance
Total Men 1262/ Women 1229
Total Men 166/ Women 1031
Total Men 175/ Women 111
Total Men 364/ Women 27
Total Men 476/ Women 240
75% 50% 25%
Multi Ethnic (0)
Native Hawaiian (0) White (214) Indian American (1)
Hispanic (8)
Asian (8)
African American (6)
Multi Ethnic (1)
Native Hawaiian (0) White (26) Indian American (0)
Hispanic (0)
Asian (0)
African American (0)
Multi Ethnic (1)
Native Hawaiian (1) White (105) Indian American (0)
Hispanic (2)
Asian (2)
African American (0)
Multi Ethnic (11)
Native Hawaiian (0) White (983) Indian American (3)
Hispanic (8)
Asian (12)
African American (17)
Multi Ethnic (22)
Native Hawaiian (1)
White (1104) Indian American (1)
Hispanic (14)
Asian (49)
African American (38)
0%
Source: Data from the Office of Affirmative Action. All data are from October 1 frozen files, spring 2012.
In 2010, only the professional category reflected a measure of improvement in the representation of women of color. The clerical, skilled craft, technical and service maintenance categories were basically the same as they were a decade ago.
Student Data
VI. Student Enrollment Figure 24: Enrollment Data for Graduate and Undergraduate Students by Gender (1970-2010) Graduate Men Undergraduate Men
100%
80%
60%
Graduate Women Undergraduate Women
40%
20% 1970
1980
1990
2000
2010
Sources: Office of the Registrar; IU Archives—Enrollment Statistics spring 2012.
Women’s enrollment surpassed the enrollment of their undergraduate male counterparts in the 1990s, but is currently at par with men. Women graduate enrollment is basically on par with men at the aggregate level.
14
Student Data
Figure 25: Percentage of Undergraduate Minority Women Enrollment to Total Undergraduate Enrollment (1980-2010) 80% 60% 40%
20% 0% 1980
Total 21873 Minority Women 2066
1990
2000
2010
Total 24911 Minority Women 2428
Total 25623 Minority Women 3099
Total 30422 Minority Women 4661
Source: Office of the Registrar; IU Archives—Enrollment Statistics spring 2012.
Figure 26: Undergraduate Enrollment Among Women of Color (1980-2010) African American
Total 2006 100%
Total 2428
Total 3099
Total 4661
1990
2000
2010
80%
Hispanic American Asian American Indian American
60% 40%
20% 0% 1980
Source: Office of the registrar; IU archives—Enrollment statistics spring 2012.
Asian women have experienced an increase in enrollment patterns. Black women, who had the highest enrollment record among minority groups in the 1980s, continue to see their numbers decline. Latina and Native American women’s enrollment patterns have decreased and flat lined, respectively. Overall, the student enrollments are certainly not proportionate to growth among women of color in the state.
15
Figure 27: Degree Conferred at IUB by gender from 2002-2011 20022003
100%
20032004
20042005
20052006
20062007
20072008
20082009
20092010
20102011
20112012
80% 60% 40% 20%
Source: University Institutional Research and Reporting website http://www.iu.edu/~uirrr/reports/standard/degree.
Earlier in the decade, women were surpassing men in the percentage of degrees conferred at the bachelor’s degree level and were at par with men at the master’s degree level. The gender gap is also closing at the doctoral level.
Design and layout by
16
Doctorate
Master’s
Bachelor’s
Doctorate
Master’s
Bachelor’s
Doctorate
Master’s
Bachelor’s
Doctorate
Master’s
Bachelor’s
Doctorate
Master’s
Bachelor’s
Doctorate
Master’s
Bachelor’s
Doctorate
Master’s
Bachelor’s
Doctorate
Master’s
Bachelor’s
Doctorate
Master’s
Bachelor’s
Doctorate
Master’s
0%
Male Female
Bachelor’s
Student Data
Degree Completion