1
AGS Internal Committee Report: Graduate Student Life Survey
2014-2015
Committee members:
Raquel Borges-Garcia
Vice President of Internal Affairs
William Devanny
Internal Committee Member
Armond Franklin-Murray
Internal Committee Member
Rebecca Grady
Data Analyst, Internal Committee Member
Michelle Ka Yu Chanu
Internal Committee Member
Nicole Winter
Internal Committee Member
Introduction
MOTIVATION FOR GRADUATE STUDENT LIFE SURVEY
The Internal Committee of the Associated Graduate Students (AGS) launched the Graduate Student Survey with the intention of identifying the key strengths and weaknesses present in the UCI graduate student experience. The motivation behind this survey was to collect and present comprehensive, empirical data, to aid not only AGS in its advocacy efforts on behalf of graduate students, but also to provide information for ou campus partners regarding current student needs. With advocacy in mind, this report focuses most heavily on areas we have identified as needing the most improvement or further attention. These areas include mental health, housing, parking, income, professional development, and awareness of AGS programming and services, therefore, this report contains sections that focus on each of those specific areas of interest.
SURVEY METHODOLOGY AND BASIC RESPONDENT DEMOGRAPHICS
We collected data for the Graduate Student Life Survey using Qualtrics Survey Software, using a sampling frame based on all currently-enrolled UCI graduate student emails as of winter quarter 2015. To bolster the response rate, we offered raffle prizes to students who completed this survey. We used a tiered prize system in which additional prizes would be “unlocked” with increasing rates of participation. This was done to increase participation rates without substantially decreasing the chances of winning a prize. 1,224 surveys were started, yielding a 87% completion rate. 1,058 graduate students completed this year’s survey out of 5,152 total graduate students at UCI in the 2014-2015 academic year, or 19.95%. 62% of respondents are doctoral students, 37% are Master’s students, and 1% are students receiving credentials in Education. 18.6% of survey respondents were from biological and physical sciences, 25.7% from engineering and computer science departments, 10.0% from health sciences and medicine (nursing, pharmaceutical sciences, public health, and medicine), 31.9% from business, education, social sciences, and social ecology departments, 8.1% from arts and humanities schools, and 5.6% from the Law school. Respondents were also given the option to respond as “other”, therefore, the percentages may not sum up to 100%.
Respondents were, on average, 27.7 years old, and 2.5 years into their graduate program (as of Winter 2015), with an even split between men and women (51% female). Most were full time students (90.1%) and California residents (69%). 34% were White non-Hispanic, 19% were Asian or Pacific Islander, 9% were Hispanic, 2% were Black non-Hispanic, and 1% were American Indian / Alaskan Native. 21% of total respondents were International students and 14% declined to state their ethnicity.
While we attempted to maximize the representativeness of our survey by capturing as many individuals across a wide array of graduate students subgroups, several questions pertained to only certain subsets of respondents. Additionally, blank or “Not applicable” responses were removed from analysis item-by-item. As a result, final analytic sample sizes may vary across sections and findings.
OVERVIEW OF KEY FINDINGS
Although students are satisfied with various aspects of life at UCI, there are several aspects causing stress and dissatisfaction with UCI graduate students. Open-ended responses showed that key complaints of survey respondents were lack of community, stressful financial experiences, unmanageable workloads, and stress from housing. Some respondents also cite identity issues and religious intolerance as sources of stress. Unsurprisingly, finances were often listed as a significant source of stress, primarily with regards to overall funding levels, availability of teaching assistantships, and summer funding for research.
Responses also showed that a large proportion of students are still dissatisfied with healthcare options on campus, with issues ranging from limited availability of physicians/specialists to poor service. Lastly, respondents also reported some inappropriate conduct from faculty members, with students reporting condescending behavior, emotional and verbal outbursts, sexual harassment, and sexism.
HOUSING
Many graduate students choose to live on campus for various reasons, such as being part of the UCI community, proximity to campus, and cheaper rent prices. However, there are also a significant portion of students who choose to live off campus for reasons, such as better night life or better accommodations for families. In this survey, 50% of the students lived off campus, and are not included in analyses of housing satisfaction except when otherwise indicated. Although the majority of students living on-campus report being moderately satisfied with their housing community, both the 2013-2014 and the 2014-2015 survey results indicate that there are several students struggling with numerous housing-related issues, such as rent, parking, and access to campus housing.
SUMMARY OF KEY FINDINGS
Approximately three-quarters of survey respondents who live on campus reported overall satisfaction with their housing communities. But consistent with last year’s findings, our results highlight a few outstanding concerns. Housing affordability remains a source of financial strain for respondents. Over one-third of students reported that they could not afford to pay rent their rent or live comfortable after paying their rent. Other concerns include availability of visitor parking and services.
Table 1: Satisfaction with Housing Communities
Housing Community / Responses / Percent SatisfiedPalo Verde / 249 / 65.9%
Verano Place / 281 / 72.9%
Campus Village / 18 / 77.8%
Vista Del Campo / 14 / 71.4%
VDC Norte / 13 / 76.9%
Puerta Del Sol / 7 / 85.7%
Camino Del Sol / 2 / 100%
Total On-Campus / 584 / 70.4%
HOUSING SATISFACTION
Graduate students appear to be satisfied with the on-campus housing opportunities with 70% of respondents reporting overall satisfaction. However, satisfaction depended in part of where residents lived. Compared to last year’s results, a lower percentage of Palo Verde residents reported satisfaction compared to residents of other communities (79% last year to 666% this year). Verano residents also expressed decreased satisfaction with their community since last year (from 77% last year to 73% this year). We suspect increased rent costs and limited availability of visitor parking contributed to this result.
Our findings did not reveal statistically significant gender differences: 73% of women and 67% of men, and 71% of those who identified as another gender were satisfied with their on-campus housing communities. There were also no statistically significant differences in housing satisfaction based on age, race/ethnicity, or family status (e.g. whether they had a partner or children).
Students who live off campus, whether by choice or otherwise, are far less satisfied housing overall – only 28% of them are satisfied, compared to 70% of on-campus students. This is how they view UCI’s housing services, not how they view the off-campus community they live in. Future surveys should follow up on why people view housing services negatively and what their reasons for moving off campus. Open-ended comments showed some recurring reasons students chose to live off-campus, including: living with family nearby, difficult application process, lack of one-bedroom apartments, noise/quality/amenities, not being able to definitely choose community/roommate/move in date, not allowing pets, rent cost, being on a waitlist, and inability for professional students to obtain available housing. Medical and law students also mentioned difficulties with their academic calendar not matching up with housing schedules.
PRIMARY SOURCE OF FINANCIAL STRESS
Housing or rent costs are the primary source of financial stress for respondents. Over one-third of respondents (36.6%) living on campus reported that they did not earn enough money to pay their rent and/or could pay their rent but did not have enough money remaining to live comfortably.
Our survey reports that most students who live on campus pay between $700-799 per month on rent while earning on average between $1,700-1,899 per month, indicating that they spend between 41.17-42.07% of their wages on rent. This percentage sits above the federal recognized rate for affordable housing, which is 30% of household annual income (U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development).
Table 2: Graduate Student Housing Prices
Housing Community / Monthly RentSingle (Cost / Bedroom) / Family (Cost / Unit)
Palo Verde
●Studio & 1 Bedroom / $805 - 1,013 / $805 - 1,013
●2 Bedroom / $632 - 796 / $1,264 - 1,592
●3 Bedroom / $647 / $1,941
Verano Place
●1 Bedroom / $945 / $945
●2 Bedroom / $509 - 746 / $1,018 - 1,492
●3 Bedroom / $368 / $1,104
Campus Village
●2 Bedroom / $731 / N/A
Puerta Del Sol
●Studio / $1,177 - 1,277 / $1,177- ,1277
●1 Bedroom / $1,450 / $1,450
●2 Bedroom (shared bedrooms) / $630 / $630
Vista Del Campo & VDV Norte
●1 Bedroom / $1,313 - 1,360 / N/A
●2 Bedroom / $955 - 1,026 / N/A
●3 Bedroom / $917 - 988 / N/A
●4 Bedroom / $820 / N/A
70.4% of on campus residents are satisfied with overall housing services. In contrast, only 28.2% of off-campus residents are satisfied with UCI housing services, indicating that maybe these people left UCI housing or were unable to find housing (for a myriad of reasons). Further surveys should inquire as to why people chose to live off-campus.
When examining the housing communities separately, there were no overall significant differences between the communities with regards to satisfaction with resident parking, overall satisfaction, quality of housing, and process of obtaining housing. We did see a few significant differences with regards to resident satisfaction, particularly in terms of visitor parking availability and affordability. Specifically, ACC residents are the least satisfied with affordability, but the most satisfied with visitor parking. Those living in Campus Village had the lowest satisfaction with visitor parking (M=1.88, scale 1-5), followed by Palo Verde residents (M= 2.62). We also found that gender did not have a significant effect on overall satisfaction with housing, although those who identified as LGBTQ* (73% satisfied, n=11) had the highest level of satisfaction, followed by cisgender women (61% satisfied, n= 388), followed by cisgender men (58% satisfied, n=375).
Lastly, we assessed graduate student satisfaction rates with the availability of parking on campus housing communities. Currently, on-campus students must register their visitors’ license plates online; students receive a finite number of visitor parking hours per year; and visitors may only park in a few designated visitor spots. Last year over half of respondents (58%) were satisfied with visitor parking in their housing communities, this year it dropped down to 45%. Notably, every community has gone down significantly since last year’s survey, with the exception of ACC. Not surprisingly, Campus Village had the lowest satisfaction rating, since it does not offer any free visitor parking opportunities to its residents. It is important to note that Campus Village’s parking policies are fundamentally different from all other student housing communities, since Campus Village is the only graduate community located on the main campus. Given the limited number of parking posts, both resident and visitor parking spots are in high demand. Lack of visitor parking was mentioned much more often than issues with resident parking, of those, respondents usually complained about having to park farther away from their homes than desired. Future surveys should also examine the effect of the “flex” parking spots implemented in Palo Verde this year, since those allow for a few more visitor spots to be available on the weekends.
Table 3: Graduate Student Satisfaction with Visitor Parking
Housing community / Responses / Percent Satisfied13-14 / 14-15 / 13-14 / 14-15
American Campus Communities / 44 / 27 / 75% / 81%
Verano Place / 248 / 275 / 71% / 52%
Campus Village / 14 / 16 / 50% / 13%
Palo Verde / 214 / 239 / 41% / 34%
Total / 520 / 557 / 58% / 45%
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Although a large portion of respondents (70.4%) were generally satisfied with their housing communities, satisfaction did go down from last year (77%). Students’ feelings regarding housing varied widely from extremely positive to severely disappointed. One of the main issues seen in the survey responses is the difficulty of paying rent given the current stipend level for graduate students. This is especially true for residents of more expensive on-campus housing options such as American Campus Communities. Notably, student housing has thus far been able to place all graduate students applicants with a housing guarantee in their first choice housing communities. It would be extremely beneficial to be able to continue this practice, since involuntary placement in a more expensive housing community could be financially devastating to students with lower stipend levels.
It is also important to note that the complaints raised in this survey are not necessarily representative of all student experiences with housing, however, they are very serious concerns for the students affected. Some of these issues, such as lack of access to housing or confusing information, can be especially problematic for certain populations such as international and master’s students. One issue that seems to impact almost all graduate students is the dire need for more affordable housing options. Graduate students are spending a large portion of their income on rent, above the federally recommended guideline for “affordable” housing, making housing one of the main sources of financial stress for our students. Although this year there has been increased programming aimed at teaching graduate students how to manage their finances, this fall short of providing graduate students either cheaper housing or higher stipends. To further address rent prices and other housing issues reported here, we continue to stress the importance of AGS representatives playing a role in decisions or policies regarding graduate student housing through committees such as the Coordinated Governance Group (CGG).
MENTAL HEALTH AND WELLNESS
The health and overall well-being of graduate students is a key concern to AGS, and our findings suggest that a significant portion of UCI graduate students are still unhappy or stressed throughout their graduate careers. A troublesome finding is that many of these students are not seeking help, unable to find help on campus, or using coping mechanisms which may be maladaptive.
SUMMARY OF KEY FINDINGS
The majority of graduate students at UCI view their experiences here as at least somewhat positive, although there are still several mental health issues that are not currently being addressed. Finances, unsurprisingly, are the biggest source of stress for the students, followed by poor work/life balance and TA responsibilities. Interestingly, culture shock was also a significant source of stress for students, potentially hinting at a need for better orientation practices.
SOURCES OF STRESS
Graduate students face many responsibilities and potential stressors, such as research, teaching, outside responsibilities, and relationships. To better understand the possible sources of stress, we asked respondents to select their major sources of stress. Table 4 lists the percentage of respondents who said the item had a negative or very negative effect on their well-being.
Table 4: Major Sources of Stress for Graduate Students
Sources of Stress / PercentageFinances / 54.5%
Work/Life Balance / 37.4%
TA responsibilities / 32.0%
Mental Health / 31.2%
Physical Health / 23.2%
Culture Shock / 22.9%
Course work / 20.5%
Employment outside UCI / 20.1%
Roommate relationship / 18.8%
Research / 15.9%
Department Culture / 13.5%
Identity-based stress / 12.3% (Gender or sexual orientation)
15.6% (Race/ethnicity)
15.3% (Other identity)
Advisor relationship / 9.5%
Family/spouse/partner relationship / 7.4% (Spouse/partner)
5.9% (Family)
Social Life/Recreation / 5.4%
Note: Because respondents could select multiple reasons, cumulative total > 100%.
Finances, work-life balance, and employment
The top three sources of stress were work-related issues, such as poor work-life balance and financial difficulties. 37.4% of students struggle to maintain a good work-life balance, which can be extremely important for overall health and well-being. Many of these complaints may come from students struggling to juggle their family lives along with their academic responsibilities. 58.6% of respondents with children report not being able to afford childcare expenses, and 41.1% of these respondents do not feel accommodated by the UCI community. These findings suggest that as the profile of the “typical” graduate student changes throughout the years to include more non-traditional and older students, the UCI community must change also to accommodate different needs, such as better childcare and other services.
TA responsibilities was also listed as one of the top sources of stress for graduate students. This finding is not surprising given the number of departments changing the number of years of guaranteed TAships. 28.7% of students feel they do not have adequate opportunities for on campus employment (such as TAships), and for those students who do are employed as TAs, 29.1% report frequently being overwhelmed by their responsibilities. One solution to this problem could be to increase the available funding for departments to hire TAs, thus reducing both financial and academic stress for graduate students. We recognize that many of these budgetary decisions are a consequence of lower allocations by the Governor of California; therefore, we stress the importance for AGS lobbyists to continue working towards increasing state funding for all the UC campuses and for departments to continue researching and providing services to aid students in receiving extramural funding.
COPING AND UTILIZATION OF SERVICES
Most graduate students are enrolled in the Graduate Student Health Insurance Program (GSHIP), which provides primary care via the Student Health Center (SHC). Perhaps the most troubling finding from this section, is that despite high levels of stress among graduate students, many do not seek help or are unable to find help. Only 54.1% of our respondents report knowing where to go if they need psychiatric services, 12.3% report they would not seek professional help for mental health issues, and 21.3% report they would not seek professional help for chronic stress.
Equally troubling are the relatively high levels of dissatisfaction with various campus services such as the student health center and the counseling center (see Table 5). The highest amount of dissatisfaction was seen in the General Medicine section of the Student Health Center (compared to psychiatric services and the counseling center). The main complaint for all healthcare providers on campus is the difficulty in acquiring a referral for off-campus services. Oftentimes, due to either low staff numbers or limited resources for specialized care, students need to seek physicians or services off-campus, but need to get a referral first. This process can takes weeks, or even months, often requiring multiple visits to the student health center on campus before the student is able to get the care he/she requires. This contributes to not only prolonged periods of pain, sickness, and discomfort for graduate students, but also decreased satisfaction with overall UCI experience. We recommend that the referral process be streamlined.