The doctoral advisor is said to be one of the most important persons-if not the single most critical person-with whom doctoral students will develop a relationship during their doctoral degree programs (Baird, 1995). However, we have limited knowledge regarding how doctoral advisors see their roles and responsibilities as advisors. Therefore, through in-depth interviews, we explored the perceptions of 25 exemplary doctoral advisors, who have graduated a large number of doctoral students, about their roles and responsibilities as advisors. We conclude this article with implications for doctoral education.

Undergraduate student involvement has been linked to retention and satisfaction (Astin, 1993; Tinto, 1993); however, no empirical research has yet been conducted on the outcomes of involvement at the graduate level. We interviewed 10 doctoral students in higher education in order to explore graduate student involvement, finding that it is not only markedly different from undergraduate involvement, but that it is an integral part of the socialization process for the future profession.

The relationship doctoral students develop with their advisor is reputed to be one of the most important of their graduate education. Research shows that advisors play a critical role in many aspects of the doctoral degree process. However, the literature is sparse regarding doctoral students' perceptions of the positive and negative attributes of their advisors. We address that gap by identifying several recurring themes that emerged from a qualitative content analysis of open-ended survey responses from doctoral students regarding their advising experiences. Students spoke most positively about advisors who were accessible and helpful as well as socializing and caring. Conversely, they identified being inaccessible, unhelpful, and uninterested as negative attributes of advisors. We offer implications for advisors and advisees.

Previous research suggests that it is the department, not the graduate school that bears the greatest responsibility for doctoral students' progress and success (Ehrenberg et al., Doctoral education and the faculty of the future (pp. 15-34). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2009) dictating the need to examine and understand how doctoral students experience their education at the department level. In the present study, we analyzed the NAGPS' 2000 National Doctoral Program Survey (NDPS) data in an effort to understand the differences in the satisfaction levels of doctoral students (current, recent graduates, and former) across various academic disciplines (e.g. social sciences, humanities, engineering) and different institutional types (e.g. research extensive and research intensive). Employing both traditional (ANOVA) and item-level (Rasch Rating Scale Model) analyses we found that although overall satisfaction with doctoral experiences appears to be equivalent/similar across multiple disciplines, student satisfaction within disciplines varied significantly and consistently with respect to specific academic experiences.Keywords Doctoral students satisfaction Á 2000 National Doctoral Program Survey Á Rasch Rating Scale Model Á ANOVA Assessing the status and quality of graduate education in the United States has become a central concern for many entities-foundations, government agencies, businesses and industry, universities, accrediting agencies, and educational associations-over the last two decades. Nowhere is this concern more evident than in the increasing number of reports and national studies (Golde and Dore 2001; Lovitts 2001; National Association of Graduate-Professional Students 2001;Nettles and Millett 2006;Nyquist and Woodford 2000) designed both to (a) understand the various student experiences and outcomes of doctoral education and/or (b) suggest best practices to improve these experiences and outcomes.