Departmental Self Review - UCLA Academic Senate

UCLAEight Year ReviewNovember 16, 2007

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, LOS ANGELESUCLABERKELEY' DAVIS' IRVINE' LOS ANGELES' MERCED' RIVERSIDE' SAN DIEGO' SAN FRANCISCOSANTA BARBARA • SANTA CRUZDEPARTMENT OF ANTHROPOLOGY341 HAINES HALLBOX 951553LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90095-1553November 16, 2007PHONE: (310) 825-2055FAX: (310) 206-7833Professor Janice Reiff, ChairGraduate Councilwww.anthro.ucla.eduProfessor Stuart Brown, ChairUndergraduate CouncilDear Colleagues:The UCLA Department of Anthropology is a top-ten research department with a prestigiousnational and international reputation. UCLA Anthropology was ranked 8 th in the last NRCranking of graduate programs. Our faculty directs a diverse range of active field projects inmany areas of the world including the Asia-Pacific region, South Asia, the Middle East, Africa,Mesoamerica, and North and South America. We also have a strong emerging focus on theAnthropology of Los Angeles, with at least 50% of our current faculty engaged in researchwithin the region.' Our faculty members are recognized as experts in their respective researchareas, and collectively we have a strong record of research, fundmg and publication. We havesought to expand the breadth of our expertise with recent hires in archaeology, linguisticanthropology, sociocultural anthropology, and we are currently engaged in a search for a newbiological anthropologist. We believe these recent hires, combined with our plans for thefuture, will help us to maintain our standing as a premier research institution.Anthropology in the United States has a long history and a complex identity, which has evolvedconsiderably over the last 120 years in terms of theories, methods, and object of study. Onecommonality has been commitment to study the full range of biological, environmental,cognitive, cultural and social phenomena that define human sociality. This commitment wasoriginally represented by the idea that anthropology departments should includearchaeologists, physical (now biological) anthropologists, linguists, and ethnologists (nowsocio-cultural anthropologists). The UCLA Department of Anthropology maintains a four-fieldcommitment to research and training while enhancing it with specializations andinterdisciplinary initiatives (i.e. research and training centers and interest groups) that build on1

and expand the most recent advancements in theories and methods for the diachronic andsynchronic study of the human condition.At UCLA, Anthropology is organized into the four subfields of: archaeology, biologicalanthropology, linguistic anthropology, and sociocultural anthropology. Each of the subfieldshas a distinct focus. Archaeologists study the origins and development of societies and culturesof the past through their material remains; biological anthropologists focus on human evolutionand adaptation; linguistic anthropologists study the role of language in the reproduction ofcultural practices and organization of social institutions; sociocultural anthropologists areconcerned with the socio-economic, ethnic, cognitive, emotional, and symbolic aspects ofcontemporary societies.All four subfields are equally strong and well represented in the department's academiccurriculum. Undergraduate and graduate students are exposed to the four fields, encouraged tospecialize in one or two subfields and, in many cases, at the graduate level, to branch out intoother disciplines and research areas represented on campus (e.g. developmental and clinicalpsychology, art history, neuroscience, conversation analysis, public health, second languageacquisition, women's studies, genetics, and philosophy). Anthropologists have beeninterdisciplinary from the beginning and our program continues to build on this tradition.1. Preparation of the self-reviewThis self-review was prepared by the Chair and the Vice Chair of the Department, with inputfrom the Anthropology staff and in consultation with the Anthropology Academic, Coordination Committee and the Anthropology Executive Committee. Graduate students'opinions were solicited and documented by former Vice Chair Jeanne Arnold in the Spring of2007. Further input was elicited in meetings with the AGSA President and Vice President andfrom a student-appointed committee in the month of October 2007. All of the faculty membersof the department were asked for their input, as well as any kind of information that might berelevant for the preparation of the report (e.g. their participation in and affiliation with otherunits). A first draft of the self-review was discussed at the November 7, 2007 faculty meeting.The final draft was discussed at the faculty meeting on November 14, 2007. Twenty facultymembers endorsed the final draft, with no votes of opposition or abstention.2. Undergraduate ProgramThe undergraduate program is designed to provide majors and minors in anthropology as wellas non-majors with broad exposure to the different intellectual currents present incontemporary anthropology. We regularly teach a series of foundational lower division classes2

in each of the four major subfields of anthropology and a range of specialized upper divisionlecture and seminar courses aimed primarily at majors and minors. The four lower divisioncore classes: Anthropology 7 (biological), 8 (archaeological), 9 (socio-cultural) and 33 (linguistic)each satisfy one or more of the General Education requirements of the College of Letters andSciences and each has been taught at least twice every year to capacity. Our upper divisionclasses are diverse and include an average of 41 courses taught per year (2003-04 to 2006-07) ofwhich 17.25 are typically in socio-cultural anthropology, 11 in archaeology, 6.5 in linguisticanthropology and 6.25 in biological anthropology.Our emphasis on a broad curriculum has had a positive impact on the undergraduate programin several ways. It has enabled us to maintain a large and steady pool of around 350 majors(Figure 1). This places it behind only political science, sociology and economics within theSocial Sciences in total numbers of majors (UCLA Fall Undergraduate Profile Fall 2005).Anthropology was also reported to be among the most popular minors in both 2005 and 2006(UCLA Fall Undergraduate Profile Fall 2005, 2006). Ninety-two percent of anthropology majorsand 95% of minors were satisfied or very satisfied with their overall academic experience(Senior Survey 2006).450400~ 3501'g 0300j..... 2500;., 200~,!:Ie::150c 100500Figure 1. The number of anthropology majors has remained high since the last review period.However, we recognize that there are several problems facing the undergraduate anthropologyprogram today. Despite the number of upper division classes taught each year, some3

undergraduate majors express frustration in trying to enroll in the courses they need tograduate. We also recognize that we need to maintain and even expand the number of upperdivision courses that have an emphasis on research and writing. We are in the process ofexploring solutions to these problems (see below).2.1. The MajorThe Department of Anthropology offers undergraduate majors the chance to obtain either aBachelor of Arts or Bachelor of Science degree. Both major programs are designed to exposestudents to the diversity of empirical work, methods and theory in contemporary anthropology.The BA and BS both emphasize training in the four subfields of anthropology. Courserequirements include:• Lower division introductory courses in all of the anthropology subfields includinghuman evolution (Anth 7 or 12), archaeology and world prehistory (Anth 8), culture andsociety (Anth 9) and culture and communication (Anth 33). This is followed by aminimum of one upper division course in each subfield: biological anthropology,archaeology, cultural, social and linguistic anthropology.• History and theory core courses that explore the intellectual foundations of thediscipline (e.g., Anth 111 Theory of Anthropological Archaeology; 120 Survey ofBiological Anthropology; 130 Study of Culture; 150 Study of Social Systems; and M140Language in Culture).• Research Methods courses that train students in contemporary anthropological practice(e.g., Anth nop Principles of Archaeology; 122P Human Osteology; 139 ResearchMethods in Cultural Anthropology).The BS degree includes all of the BA requirements and adds the pre-med cluster of courses (15­18 in total) from the life sciences, chemistry, math, physics and statistics. Students in the BSprogram have consistently made up between 21-25% of all majors over the review period. Thedepartment no longer requires majors to identify areas of concentration (e.g., archaeology), butwe do suggest subfield course clusters in the course catalog and on the departmental website tohelp students structure their program of study.The department offers its very best majors the opportunity to join the Undergraduate HonorsProgram. The Honors Program includes a set of four upper division seminar courses designedto be taken in sequence beginrling in the middle of the Junior year. In the summer betweentheir Junior and Senior years, Honors students conduct independent research that they havedesigned themselves and for which they have secured competitive research funding. Everyspring, the graduating Honors students present their projects in a one-day symposium held in4,,li'

the department. This opportunity is widely regarded as one of the most outstanding HonorsPrograms at UCLA. The Honors Program is directed by ladder faculty members (Allen Johnson1998-2003, Jeanne Arnold 2003-2007; Arnold and Linda Garro are the current co-chairs).Focused Honors student advising is handled by the program chairs and the staff undergraduateadvisor.Honors students conduct timely and compelling original research in both local andinternational settings, as revealed by recent project titles:• "Carrying the Burden: Negotiating Ethnicity, Identity, and Power among the Tamangsand Sherpas of Nepal," Jeff Dhungana, Honors Class of 2007.• "Sugar, Spice and Everything Nice: A Linguistic Study of How Adolescent GirlsFormulate Notions of Culture Through Evaluative Commentary," Lisa Newon, HonorsClass of 2006.• "Madness after Mao: Bipolar Disorders in Urban Shenzhen, China" Emily Ng, HonorsClass of 2006.• "Mummies that Speak for Millennia: Analysis of Chinchorro Settlement Patterns,"Marcin Zemsta, Honors Class of 2005.In addition to this invaluable research experience, which many have used as a springboard tograduate research projects at leading universities, the Honors Program students learn importantpractical skills in designing and writing successful research grants. The major competitivegrants our Honors students have received include the Irving and Jean Stone Research Award,the Evans Ricciardi Research Stipend, the Lotte Brueck Award, and Frederic WaingrowResearch Scholars Award. The cumulative award sizes to the Honors classes have beensubstantial: $29,284 in 2006-07, $26,721 in 2005-06 and $54,060 in 2004-05. Individual Honorsstudents have received as much as $7,050 (Nicolie Elitch, Honors Class of 2005). We believe thatthe Honors program is making a substantial contribution toward training the futureoutstanding scholars of the discipline.Undergraduates outside of the Honors Program also conduct independent research withdepartmental faculty. A considerable number of these students have been funded by individualresearch grants and College funds. Fot example, approximately 90 undergraduate studentshave participated in research in the Sloan Center on Everyday Lives of Families.Approximately 20 students have conducted individual research or participated in field or labwork in California archaeology projects in conjunction with the Channel Islands ArchaeologyLab during the review period.5

2.1.1. Maintaining Program QualityThe department has several mechanisms in place to ensure and improve the quality ofundergraduate education in anthropology:• We have continued to appoint a ladder faculty member as Vice Chair of the departmentto oversee undergraduate and graduate curricular matters, to serve as a liaison betweenstudents and faculty and to act as an advocate for student issues within the department.The Vice Chair leads the Academic Coordinating Committee (see below) and approvesall independent studies, course substitutions, and course waivers. The Vice Chair wasfilled by Professors Duranti (1996-99), Hollan (99-01), Arnold (2001-07) and Brantingham(2007-present).• The Academic Coordinating Committee engages in continuous monitoring of theundergraduate and graduate programs to ensure that both meet the most rigorousstandards. The Academic Coordinating Committee is responsible for the planning andmanagement of the anthropology undergraduate and graduate curriculum. Facultymembers representing each of the subfields sit on the Academic CoordinatingCommittee and they are responsible for annually collecting information about teachingplans from their subfield colleagues. Academic Coordinating Committee members arealso responsible for the periodic evaluation of the anthropology course catalog to ensurethat new courses make their way into the catalog and that courses that have ceased to betaught are removed from the catalog. The Academic Coordinating Committee has alsotaken on a regular role in evaluating the distribution of TAships across undergraduatecourses to ensure that these limited resources are being used where they are mostneeded.• The department has a part time undergraduate advisor who serves on the AcademicCoordinating Committee and works in consultation with the Vice Chair to advisestudents on all aspects of the undergraduate program. The undergraduate advisor helpsstudents to declare anthropology as a major or minor and helps students to structuretheir program of study to help ensure timely progress through the program. Theadvisor also works with the University to ensure the equivalence of community collegecourses, communicate timely information about changes to the program, and provideadvice about careers in anthropology. The undergraduate advisor is now a casual staffposition, this is a new policy since the previous review period when advising wasassigned to a graduate student. Our present undergraduate advisor (Dr. Selma Morley)holds a PhD in anthropology from UCLA.• The department has made an effort to make more extensive use of informationtechnology (IT) in service of undergraduate education. Our department webpage6

(www.anthro.ucla.edu) is frequently updated to include detailed information about theundergraduate program and links to important documents. Information aboutupcoming activities of relevance to undergraduate participation in the life of thedepartment is available on the departmental website. For example, all upcoming talksin different interest groups are listed on the departmental homepage. Undergraduatesalso increasingly receive pertinent and timely information about their classeselectronically from their professors via the UCLA Classweb system (e.g.,http://www.sscnet.uda.edu/07S/anthr08-1/). The percentage of classes disseminatinginformation directly to students via Classweb has risen from 59% in 1998-99 to 83%today. Some classes also have their own websites where students can obtain specializedmaterials and resources used for preparing assignments and studying for exams (e.g.,Anth 33, www.sscnet.ucla.edu/anthrolfaculty/duranti/anthr033D. Anthropology facultyalso use UCLA's full electronic gradebook at a high rate. Compared with universitywideparticipation of around 10%, more than 48% of the lower division and larger upperdivision classes in anthropology make use of this service. Finally, some facultymembers have started "podcasting" their lower division classes (e.g., Smith in Anth 8).2.2. The MinorThe department offers undergraduate students the opportunity to minor in anthropology andencourages students to choose a program of study that enhances their major. Minors must taketwo of the lower division foundation courses (from Anth 7 or 12,8,9, and 33), one of the coreupper division courses (Anth Ill, 120, 130, M140 or 150) and a total of four upper divisionelectives. It is envisioned that students gain good exposure to one or two of the subfields ofanthropology by formally declaring a minor. The number of minors has risen from a low of 49students in 1998-99 to as many as 93 in 2004-05 (Figure 2), behind only Political Science andChicana and Chicano studies in the division according to taw numbers.7

10090el 80a 70...5 60-­ 0 50!of~401 30.",c 20100Figure 2. The number of minors has risen from around 49 in 1998-99 to as many as 93 in 2004-05.2.3. Nonmajors-The Department of Anthropology aims to serve non-majors in many of its course offerings.Each of the primary lower division classes satisfies one or more GE requirements at UCLA. Thedepartment undertook a major revision of these classes in 2002-03 to meet GE standards. Anth7 (human evolution) satisfies the GE requirement in Life Sciences, which may explain why thiscourse regularly has enrollments of between 350-400 students. Anth 8 (archaeology) satisfiesthe GE requirements in both Historical Analysis and Social Analysis. Anth 9 (culture andsociety) and 33 (culture and communication) both satisfy the GE requirement in Social Analysis.During the review period, each of these lower division courses has been taught at least twiceper year with enrollments in the hundreds for each class at each sitting. It is clear that theselower division courses could be taught in all three regular academic quarters if sufficientresources were available to staff the courses with TAs; prior to 2005-06, Anthropology 7 (humanevolution) was taught three times a year and was full to capacity each time. It is important tonote that ladder faculty generally teach the lower division courses, thus exposing majors,minors and non-majors directly to some of the leading scholars in anthropology today. Some ofthelower division classes also serve as core courses in other departmental majors (e.g., Anthro33 in Communication Studies).TAs play an important role in lower division courses, and we have invested substantially in TAtraining. First-time TAs in anthropology are not only required to complete the College trainingrequirements before starting teaching but also attend a formal three-day workshop organized8

and run by the department. The departmental workshop introduces new TAs to the skillsneeded to effectively communicate with students, deal with student and potential problemsarising with instructors, and time management. The three-day workshop is followed by regularweekly meetings during which ongoing and emergent issues are addressed. The TA trainingworkshop is run by a TA Coordinator, chosen annually from the pool of experienced TAs in thedepartment. Oversight is provided by the departmental Vice Chair. Vve believe that ourapproach helps to prepare very capable and effective TAs. The UCLA Senior Survey in 2006reports that 97% of respondents were satisfied or very satisfied with the Intellectual Challengesoffered by anthropology TAs, and 94% had similar views on the Overall Quality ofanthropology TA instruction.Since their introduction in 2002, the Fiat Lux Freshman Seminars have served an important rolein introducing incoming Freshmen to a range of exciting research topics followed byanthropologists at UCLA. The format for these one unit seminars is a one hour discussion heldonce a week. Anthropology faculty have taught 33 Fiat lux Seminars since Fall 2003 with asmany as six different seminars held in 2006-07.The 2006-07 year also saw the introduction of Sophomore Seminars (88S classes) wheresophomore undergraduates team up with faculty mentors to design a seminar-style class thatthe student then goes on to teach with faculty supervision. This program offers sophomores atremendous opportunity not only to see the university educational process from the facultypoint of view, but also provides a new forum for interaction between students and faculty.Ladder faculty from the archaeology, biological and socio-cultural subfields (Brantingham,Kennedy, Tamanoi, Yang) sponsored 88S seminars in Spring 2007.Overall, we have sought to capitalize on new approaches to delivering undergraduateeducation.2.4. Issues raised in the previous review of the Undergraduate ProgramThe previous review raised several issues concerning the undergraduate program. First, thereview called for steps to increase undergraduate participation in the life of the department.We have addressed this concern in several ways. The department has continued to sponsor theAnthropology Undergraduate.Student Association (AUSA). However, as recognized duringthe previous review, the activity of the AUSA varies greatly depending upon the enthusiasm ofstudents currently in the program. Thus, while there is a webpage for the AUSA, it isapparently not maintained. The AUSA also occasionally, but irregularly, organizes "proffytalks," which bring faculty members in to speak about their research to the association.9

The department has recently initiated the practice of holding an annual Undergraduate OpenHouse. The first of these was held in November 2007. The Open House is aimed at currentmajors and minors as well as interested students and provides an opportunity for students togain access to information about the major (especially Freshmen and possible transfer students)and to interact with faculty and graduate students in a less formal setting. The AUSA teamedup with the Vice Chair and department staff to organize and promote the event. An estimated200 guests attended including 150 undergraduate students. The event was also advertised atlocal community colleges, and several delegations of possible transfer students attended.Second, the previous review stressed the need for a graduation ceremony dedicated tocelebrating the accomplishments anthropology majors. Beginning in 1997-98, the departmentestablished a formal graduation ceremony held every year at the end of the Spring Quarter.The department hosts graduating seniors and their families for a formal ceremony followed byrefreshments. The department chair and faculty speakers representing the subdisciplines ofanthropology showcase the intellectual life of the department. A valedictorian speaker chosenby the class speaks on the anthropology students' experience. Graduation culminates in aprocession where individual students are recognized and have their degrees conferred by theChair of the department.The need for a full-time undergraduate (UG) counselor was a major point raised in the previousreview. In response, the department created an UG counselor staff position who works closelywith the Vice Chair to communicate information about the program to students and to trackstudent progress. Though still only a casual position limited to l,DOO hours before the counseloris required to break from the University for three months, it is clear that having a dedicated UGcounselor has improved the management of the undergraduate program dramatically. This isparticularly apparent in dealing with the large number of transfer students who come to UCLAto major in anthropology. The previous review raised concerns about the disorientation thatmany of these transfer students experience upon their arrival in the program. In response, theUC counselor is responsible for communicating information about the anthropology programto local community colleges. The UG counselor also ensures that community college coursesmatch the degree requirements of the major and minor, thereby reducing the friction involvedin counting transfer classes toward a UCLA undergraduate degree.2.5. Challenges to meet in the Undergraduate ProgramOne of the most serious problems faced by undergraduate majors (and minors) is that theyexperience difficulty in getting some of the courses required for their degree. Part of theproblem lies in the high demand for anthropology courses by non-majors. Anthropologymajors frequently find themselves in competition with non-majors for a very limited number of10

seats in critical upper division classes. The department has made some initial steps to rectifythis situation by formally restricting first pass enrollment to only anthropology majors andminors. However, we expect that this approach will only partially solve the problem.The other serious concern is that critical courses for the major are offered too infrequently or, ifthey are offered, several may be offered during the same quarter. Scheduling conflicts (andlimits to first pass enrollment) mean that undergraduate majors are often forced to choosebetween courses that they need. The department is considering an expanded role of theAnthropology Curriculum Committee to regulate not only what courses are taught each year,but also in which Quarters essential courses fall. This shift would require a change of culturewithin the department, which presently gives substantial autonomy to individual facultymembers to decide what courses they teach and when.A third possible approach to alleviating the problem would be to expand the sizes of upperdivision classes to accommodate all majors (and non-majors). However, this approach wouldrequire that we both increase the number of graduate students in the program and thatGraduate Division direct new TA or Reader resources to the department to safeguard thewriting-intensive focus of core upper division classes.3. Graduate ProgramThe graduate program in anthropology emphasizes the recruitment and training of world-class,research-focused anthropologists. Central to this goal is our policy of funding all students withmulti-year support packages. Intellectually, our program is designed around integrativetraining in four-field anthropology. Interest groups such as Behavior, Evolution and Culture(BEC), Culture, Brain and Development (CBD), Mind, Medicine and Culture (MMAC), theDiscourse Lab, and the Center for Language, Interaction and Culture (CLIC), which are centralto the intellectual life of the department, offer graduate students exposure to current issues thatbridge the subdisciplines. While we offer both MA and PhD degrees, the departmentstrategically does not admit students intending to do terrninal-MA work.We recognize, however, that there are still several problems confronting the graduate program.Falling class sizes, resulting from our student funding policy, are beginning to have an impacton our ability to offer a diverse array of classes. We must also dedicate further attention tofinding innovative ways to integrate research and teaching across the subfields. Particularlyproblematic are the difficulties we are experiencing in further reducing tirne-to-degree, whichhas remained unchanged since the previous review. The new procedures that we haveimplemented to monitor student progress have not yet had time to take effect. We may just11

now be seeing some improvement in the time it takes for students to advance to doctoralcandidacy (see below).3.1. Recruitment and AdmissionsThe department dedicates substantial attention to the recruitment of graduate students to theprogram. Our goal is a steady supply of high-caliber and productive students. We realize,however, that we are in competition with other highly-ranked departments, and much of thecompetition over the best students boils down to the size and duration of funding packagesoffered. Clearly, public universities are at a disadvantage in this regard.Nevertheless, the department has adopted a general policy that attempts to fund all incominggraduate students with the same four-year support packages. The general model is for one totwo years to be stipend, with additional years funded by TA positions. By and large, we havesucceeded in implementing this policy; 100% of our incoming students since 2000-01 (with afew rare exceptions) have received multi-year packages. This is compared with 70% (16 of 23students) at the end of the previous review period in 1996-97. On average, 83.3% of enrolledgraduate students (at all stages in the program) receive merit-based funding and the per capitatotal support for all enrolled graduate student has climbed steadily from $17,145 in 1998-99 to$28,850 in 2005-06 (Figure 3). The level of funding we offer our graduate students issignificantly above the College mean. A considerable number of these students have benefitedfrom augmented stipends and other research support through faculty research grants (e.g., CBDand CELF).12

.- $30,000 1'g I1 $27,5001! $25,000 "'JIt:&. $22,500tl..:::'" $20,000] -joS $17,500Jj's. $15,000 ..j........ ···_·....··..-·T....·•...._··· ..··_···T..··•..•....•·• ..···-·r·..•··..··..···.. ·_···T····....··..····_..•..···,..•·•..·····..···..······T··..··..····_·.... .. ····r....·······...·..···..·......11':c:j104~tl..Figure 3. Per capita merit-based support for graduate students has risen steadily during the review period.As a consequence of our change in funding policy, we have become much more selective in ouradmissions decisions. During the current review period we offered admission to 18 students onaverage (12% of applicants; min = 9%, max = 14%), compared with between 23 and 52admissions during the previous review. Acceptances have remained steady at around 50%. Wehave sought to emphasize a variety of merit criteria, especially research experience and focus, inmaking admissions decisions. We have deemphasized quotas for the subdisciplines. Ouradmissions committee encompasses the intellectual diversity of the department with at leasttwo ladder faculty from each of the subdisciplines, a committee chair and one current graduatestudent representative. All applications are reviewed by at least two committee members andthen the short-list, approximately the top one-third of applicants, is reviewed by the entirecommittee. Finalists are ranked based on merit, and admission is offered following the rankedlist.Despite increases in both the size and duration of funding package offers, we recognize that weare still at a disadvantage with respect to many private schools. To counter this effect we havealso encouraged a greater degree of contact between potential faculty mentors and applicantsduring the application process. Every year starting in 2004-05 we hold a recruitment weekendin the Spring Quarter to which we invite all admitted students. We offer funding to support thetravel costs for those students we feel we need to most actively pursue. While our strategy hashad a modest impact on the size of our most recent incoming graduate classes (see below), it hasalso allowed us to persuade several students to corne to UCLA despite larger financial offersfrom other institutions.',.,k'13

We believe that our approach to merit-based admissions has had a positive impact in severaldifferent domains. Our approach to graduate admissions and funding has led to a markedimprovement in graduate student morale, which may be attributed to both the greater freedomthat students have to concentrate on their studies and the importance given to funding equitywithin the student body. Students are also more productive as shown by the measurablesuccess our students are having in securing extramural funding and the increased rate at whichthey are publishing both independently and with their faculty mentors. Our students are alsohaving greater success on the job market (see below).3.2. The Graduate PopulationThere is one negative consequence of our current approach to admissions and funding.Incoming class sizes have dropped from a peak of 27 in 1993-94 to an average of 9 during thereview period. Smaller incoming classes have started to have a dramatic impact on the totalsize of the graduate program. The total number of registered graduate students has fallen byabout 1/3 since the end of the last review period (96 enrolled students in 1998-99 to 62 in 2005­06). The small incoming class size also means that that the four subdisciplines in the departmentreceive on average two new students every year. This presents significant problems inmaintaining a viable graduate curriculum.Our graduate student population is drawn from a wide geographic region and is ethnicallydiverse. Domestic students coming from universities outside of California have consistentlyformed around 50% of each incoming class during the review period. Most are able to establishCalifornia residency within one year of enrolling. Foreign students on average constitute about8% of the enrolled student body. We anticipate that the proportion of foreign students in ourprogram will drop even further with the continued rise in non-resident tuition (NRT). Womenhave constituted 62.7% and minorities 18.8% of all enrolled students on average during thereview period.3.3. Graduate Academic ProgramUpon admission to the graduate program, students are assigned primary and secondaryadvisors. Increasingly, as a result of our added emphasis on recruiting on the basis of merit, thestudents entering the program have already had some direct contact with their primary advisorbefore arriving. The faculty mentors guide entering students through their first few years ofcoursework and planning of their MA and PhD research.Graduate coursework is structured around required core courses in the four subfields ofanthropology. The core courses are designed to introduce students to the key concepts,14

methods and theories in each of the subfields. The department distinguishes between focal andnon-focal subfields. Students typically take one core course in each of the non-focal subfields,and then a core sequence in their focal subfield. For example, an entering socio-cultural studentwill take one core course in archaeology (e.g., Anth M201A or 111), biological anthropology(e.g., Anth 120g, now 222), and linguistic anthropology (e.g., Anth M140 or 204) and then thesocio-cultural core sequence (Anth 203A, B and C). The exception to this pattern is biologicalanthropology, which requires its students to take a single intensive seminar (Anth 120G, now222) connected with the lower division class Anth 7.3.3.1. MA ResearchStudents typically do the research for their MA thesis during the summer following the firstyear of coursework and are expected to complete the MA by their sixth quarter in residence(end of second year). The types of research conducted for the MA are variable, reflecting thediverse interests of students and faculty within the department. In some cases, original fieldresearch is conducted for the MA, though there has been concern that this may contribute todelays in progress through the program (see below). Typically the MA is directed towardproducing a publishable-quality paper and there are several notable examples where MAresearch has led to published papers (K. Panchanathan in Journal of Theoretical Biology, S.Matthew in Science, K. Murphy in Mind, Culture and Activity, J. Bernard in World Archaeology, M.Shohet in Ethos). It is too soon to tell, however, if there are measurable differences in time toadvance to candidacy between students choosing different formats for the MA.3.3.2. Doctoral ProgramStudents who successfully complete the MA are reviewed by the full faculty for admission tothe doctoral program. Students are required to form a doctoral committee within two quarters,which is then approved by the faculty. The Vice Chair provides oversight for any committeechanges once a student has advanced to candidacy.After advancing to candidacy, students are expected to form a doctoral committee and thenprepare for and complete their qualifying exams by the end of their fourth year. Qualifyingexams typically focus on theory, method and regional topics directly relevant to the student'sdissertation research. An oral defense of a doctoral dissertation proposal follows the writtenexams. The dissertation proposal is usually written to be submitted to an extramural fundingagency such as the National Science Foundation or Fulbright.Depending upon the subfield of inquiry and the specific nature of the project, students conductbetween 1-3 years of field research. In our program, the majority of students conduct fieldresearch outside of the United States. Recognizing that students often collect an overwhelming15

quantity of data during fieldwork, the department developed an innovative internalcompetition for a year-long Post-fieldwork Data Analysis Fellowship. The funding for thiscompetition is provided by the UCLA Graduate Division Quality of Graduate EducationProgram, itself a competitive program that departments must apply to every year. 1 Studentshave to be nominated for the Data Analysis Fellowship by their faculty mentors. All nominatedstudents are then evaluated by the Awards Committee based on merit and an assessment of theprobability that the student will be able to complete and file their dissertation within two years.Students are expected to complete their data analysis within one year and then apply for theprestigious Dissertation Year Fellowship offered by Graduate Division. By all measures thisinnovative program has been a success: In the 3 years since we have been offering the Post­Fieldwork Data Analysis Fellowship we have made 9 awards (from a total of 15 applicants). All9 of these students have gone on to immediately receive Dissertation Year Fellowships. Four of5 dissertations in award years 2004-05 and 2005-06 were completed in one year plus onequarter, only two were completed within the year. While it is too early to be certain, there areindications that time to degree may be improving among the students that receive the Post­Fieldwork Data Analysis Fellowship.3.4. Time to degreeConsistent with the expectations of the previous review, however, time to degree for our entiregraduate student body has not improved during the current review period. The necessity ofconducting anthropological fieldwork may mean that there is a limit to how fast PhD researchcan be completed. The median time to degree for all students filing their PhDs during thereview period was 7.5 years (mean = 7.7 years) (Figure 4). This is compared with a median of 7.3years in 1995-96. However, we note that the median time to degree for Anthropology PhDstudents nationally is 9.6 years placing our students closer in line with the Social Sciences as awhole (median = 7.8) (NSF Science Resource Statistics 2006. Time to Degree of U.S. DoctoralRecipients). The time that it takes for students to advance to candidacy (ATC) has improved(current review period: median = 4.33 years; mean 4.75 years). For those students entering theprogram since 1998-99, 66% (35 of 53) advanced to candidacy within the expected four-yeartime frame. Nearly 75% (39 of 53) advanced within four years plus one academic quarter.1 Graduate Division restructured the Quality of Graduate Education initiative to be a non-competitiveline item in departmental allocations effective 2008-09.16

_.~12'T' ...,....1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15time to PhD (years)·' ..-_. --.--._.. .. ___..__ _ _.,.., _- __ _,..Figure 4. Time-to-degree for all PhD students graduating during the review period.3;, ·1r30 ·1~ !~ 25 1~ I2'" 20 . ț!.. ,." _ _ ~ ".. .11 2 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15time to advance to candidacy (years). Figure 5. Time to advance to candidacy (ATC) for all students advancing during the review period.3.5. Success on the Job MarketOur students are having improved success on the job market. Of the 103 individuals receivingdoctoral degrees during the review period, 38 now occupy tenure-track jobs. This represents36.9% of PhDs, up from 27.3% during the previous review period. Of the remainingindividuals, 10 are in postdoctoral positions, 18 in adjunct or research positions, 7 in temporary..17

teaching positions, and 24 individuals are working outside of academia. The majority of theselatter individuals are working in professional jobs related to their field of study (e.g., CulturalResource Management). Information was not available for 6 individuals. Overall,approximately 73% of doctoral graduates are working in some capacity within academia, andthere has been a significant shift away from temporary teaching towards more stable,permanent positions. For example, 24 of 161 PhDs (14.9%) were working in temporary teachingpositions at the end of the previous review period. Only 6.8% of the PhDs (7 of 103) from thecurrent review period are in temporary teaching positions.There may be multiple reasons for this marked improvement. First, we believe that ourattention to careful merit-based recruitment has succeeded in bringing in higher-qualitygraduate students and that the anthropology graduate program is succeeding in converting thisearly promise into professional careers ll1. anthropology. Second, full funding of all incominggraduate students has enabled them to be more productive and therefore meet many of thebenchmarks that are now becoming common in hiring new PhDs (e.g., a publication and .granting record as a grad student).3.6. Graduate Student PerspectiveThe department held a joint meeting of faculty, staff and graduate students during the SpringQuarter of 2007 to discuss the status of the graduate program. The Anthropology GraduateStudent Association subsequently held a student-only meeting in Spring 2007, and individualemail comments were collected in Spring and.Fall 2007. Graduate student comments weresummarized by the then Anthropology Graduate Student Association president and submittedto the Vice Chair for inclusion in the review.Quality of Faculty: there is consensus among the graduate students that the faculty is of highcaliber.Quality of Program: students praised the organization of the program and its integrative, yet.flexible focus on four-field training. One student comments, the "quality of the classes I havetaken has been great." Another writes, "we have the opportunity to benefit from othersubfields, as well as the freedom to reject perspectives that are inconsistent with your ownacademic leanings - which in my opinion is the best way for the four subfields to co-exist."However, concerns were expressed over specific curricular matters:• Methods & Professional Training Classes: Many students agreed that there is a need formore methods courses that discuss the details of how to do anthropological research.This need was seen to be particularly acute within the archaeology and socio-cultural18

subfields. Several students also mentioned a need for courses dedicated to grantwriting, writing publishable papers and dissertations. Specific recommendationsinclude (1) reworking the socio-cultural core sequence (203A, B and C) to include twoquarters on history and theory and one quarter on methods and (2) restructure Anth 200(Proseminar: Practice of Anthropology) to include a methods class followed by ashowcase of faculty research and then a class on how to write a dissertation.• Diversity of Graduate Classes: Some students see a lack of adequate course offerings,which is sometimes exacerbated by barriers to having undergraduatedasses, wherethere may be greater topical diversity, count for graduate credit. Some studentsspecifically ask for more theory classes in socio-cultural anthropology. One studentsuggests that there be a push to have more graduate classes from other departmentscross listed in anthropology (e.g., American Indian Studies).• Biological anthropology core course: A number of students voice concerns over thegraduate core course in biological anthropology (Anth 120G). Many students considerthis class to be too demanding of student time as it requires attendance both at a seminar(120G proper) and the lower division undergraduate biological anthropology class(Anth 7). Others accept the need for the course format, but question why it is notconsidered a graduate level course. As of the 2007-2008 year the 120G class has beenreplaced by a graduate class that assigns appropriate graduate credit.Diversity: Some students are concerned about diversity within the student body and thedepartment as a whole. One student writes that there is "~ot enough divers~ty (of ethnic,cultural, national, sexual orientation, racial backgrounds, life circumstances, social positions)among either faculty or students." Another observes that the diversity situation "is notparticular to the Department of Anthropology, but to the university as a whole...A good placeto start [to rectify this situation] may be to ask ourselves what we have to offer that would makeour department attractive to a diverse population, and if we fall short in any way, we need toactively address it."Faculty Advising: Students praise the quality of graduate advising. One student writes, the"mentorship has been wonderful-I feel very comfortable talkingwith my advisors and don'thesitate to drop in to ask other professors...for advice when I need it." Others comment thatthe strength of the program is in "accessibility of the faculty/faculty commitment to graduatestudents" and limy experience with faculty mentorship has been outstanding. I could not behappier or more impressed." However, a few students voiced concerns about differentexpectations among the faculty regarding timely progress and the protocols in place with19. :

students who are seen to be underperforming in the program. 2 Specific student suggestions toenhance the quality of advising and mentorship included:• Greater attention to the role of advising in the post-MA period and the possibility ofannual mini-conferences to keep more advanced students on track.• Greater attention to formal flow of information from faculty to students particularly inthe form of written summaries from student reviews. 3• Greater attention to preparing students for jobs, both inside and outside of academia.Student Stipends: Students agree that the current procedure of offering multi-year fundingpackages to all incoming students is working well. One student writes, "I think the funding isgreat. I really like that the department accepts few enough people to support well and I lovethat there is not a climate of competition." Another student comments, "My experience withfunding has been excellent." One student has suggested that the current approach to fundinghurts the ability of the department to attract the best students; in essence the forced equity infunding packages means that there is no room to offer "top dollar" to recruit the most soughtafter students. This student recommended that !1 small pot of money should be set aside toenhance certain individual funding packages to improve recruitment results.Teaching Assistantships: Students are concerned about variability in both the workloads andexpectations for TAs. It is suggested that classes (particularly the large lower division classes)need to be standardized in terms of the nature and quantity of assignments. There is also someconcern that the degree to which faculty oversee the activities of theirTAs varies too widely. ffione instance, a concern was raised that discussion sections should not be used to introduce newinformation, but should be exclusively a forum for review and discussion.Support for Student Research: While students generally feel financially well supported withinthe program, some have stressed a need for more research money distributed on a competitivebasis. Two students requested that the department decouple the Post-fieldwork Data AnalysisFellowship, offered competitively within the department, from the Dissertation YearFellowship, offered by Graduate Division. These students saw the current requirement thatData Analysis fellows apply for the Dissertation Year Fellowship as potentially favoring timeto-degreeissues over quality of research and preparedness for the job market.2 Concern with this issue stems from two cases in the 2005-2006 academic year where students wereadvised that they would not be accepted into the PhD program following the completion of their MAtheses.3 This would only impact students before they advance to candidacy, since students who have advancedare no longer reviewed by the faculty as a whole.20

3.7. Issues raised in the previous review of the Graduate ProgramThe previous review identified the graduate program as being in need of substantial attention.The major problems identified included: (1) funding inequities within the graduate program; (2)a lack of core courses in the four subfields, especially those that would build bridges betweensubfields; (3) a lack of fora in which students and faculty could engage in honest, nonthreateningintellectual debate; and (4) time-to-degree. Some of these issues have beenresolved, but others are much more systemic in nature and have yet to find satisfactoryresolution.Our most significant accomplishment in response to the previous review has been the change inpolicy regarding student funding. As detailed above, we now fund all of our incoming studentswith a minimum four-year package, with only a few special_exceptions. This has had a positiveimpact on the quality of students entering the program, their productivity and morale, and webelieve it to be critical in producing PhDs that are competitive in the current academic jobmarket. We have also sought to redirect funds that originate from summer session teachingtoward competitive research grants.We have made some progress in rectifying the availability of graduate core courses. Thecourses that make up the non-focal and focal subfield sequences are offered annually, meaningthat incoming students do have access to the foundational aspects of four-field training.Students also have the option of taking upper division classes in their non-focal subfields. Morecould be done, however, to add non-core courses at the graduate level, particularly in thedomain of methods.As discussed in considerable detail below, the interest groups that presently serve as a focus ofintellectual life in the department do offer fora for "honest, non:..threatening" debate (seebelow). The department has also sponsored, .in some years, talks by prominent scholars in an"influential speaker series" where there has been broad graduate student participation.However, more could be done to bridge different intellectual interests within the departmentand foster greater debate among graduate students and between students and faculty.Time to degree has not improved during the review period. However, our recorded time todegree of 7.5 years is considerably below the national norm in Anthropology of 9.2 years.Nevertheless, the department has sought innovative ways (e.g., Data Analysis Fellowship) tospeed up progress through the graduate program. It is too soon to tell if the current strategieshave had an impact.21

3.8. Challenges to Meet in the Graduate ProgramThe biggest challenge facing the graduate program today is the size of incoming classes and theconsequent dwindling size of the graduate program overall. To be clear, there is a broadconsensus within the department that our policy of only admitting students when we can fundthem has: (1) raised the overall quality of our graduate student body; (2) led to greater graduatestudent productivity; and (3) is being translated into better performance of our students on thejob market. However, our graduate class offerings are also suffering because there are too fewstudents to populate classes dedicated to special topics. Clearly, the problem here is one that issystemic and not unique to the anthropology program.The department must also seek to innovate the ways in which we bridge subdisciplines withinanthropology. As discussed below, the intellectual life of the department is increasingly beingfocused on interest groups that, by their very nature, are cross disciplinary. More could be doneto integrate graduate students and graduate training into these interest groups.Finally, we need to further explore what can be done to better monitor degree progress. At thefront-end of the graduate student career, improvements could be made by fine-tuning MArequirements. At the back-end, we are hopeful that our strategy of supporting competitivePost-Fieldwork Data Analysis Fellowships is helping to shorten time spent in the program.More may need to be done to structure the middle portion of the graduate career, or the periodbetween finishing the MA and the return from fieldwork. One possibility is to (1) implement asystem of student self-reviews that would be required for all-emolled students at all stages inthe program and (2) extend the formal faculty review to students that have already advanced tothe PhD portion of the program.4. FacultyThe vibrant intellectual climate of the Department is a reflection of the active research programspursued by ladder faculty. This research is both national and international in its scope, andthere is an emerging emphasis on the Anthropology of Los Angeles (see appendix) that wehope to develop in the coming years.Our faculty has an extremely strong record of research and publication. A sense of the breadthof research is conveyed by recent projects among our more junior faculty:• H. Samy Alim: Hip hop culture from the US to the Middle East.• H. Clark Barrett: Descent versus design in Shuar children's reasoning, Ecuador.• P. Jeffrey Brantingham: The Paleolithic colonization of Tibet.22

• Maureen Mahon: The cultural politics of race in the United States.• C. Jason Throop: The cultural expression of pain and virtue in Yap, Micronesia.Our faculty has published in widely-read and prestigious journals both within the disciplineand in the broader scientific community. For example, recent publications by departmentalfaculty have appeared in American Anthropologist, American Antiquity, American EthnologistAmerican Journal ofPhysical Anthropology, Current Anthropology, PNAS, Nature, and Science. Thisresearch has also attracted national and international media attention; faculty projects havebeen featured in US News and World Report, TIME, The Wall Street Journal, The New YorkTimes and CBS News, among other venues.During the current review period, faculty have secured more than $18 million in extramuralfunding for research (see appendix). The Sloan Center on the Everyday Lives of Familiesaccounts for $12.2 million of this total. Many of our faculty also have been recognized throughprestigious awards and honors: We have two MacArthur Fellows (Ochs, Ortner); several havereceived the John Simon Guggenheim Fellowship (Boyd, Donnan, Duranti, Ochs, Ortner); andseveral are members of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences (Donnan, Edgerton, Ochs,Ortner, Stanish). The quality of our teaching has also been recognized through distinguishedteaching awards (Duranti, Edgerton, Hale, Hammond, Hollan).The faculty as a whole has also invested in the development of interest groups that capture themajor intellectual threads of the department. Each of these interest groups regularly meet andprovide fora for the presentation of ongoing research by faculty, students and visiting scholars(see below).We also recognize that we face some serious challenges over the corning years. Of foremostconcern is the top-heavy age structure of the faculty and the impact that the anticipated wave ofretirements will have on the viability of the program. We have been proactive in developingstrategic plans for future hires that will bring more junior faculty to the program and expandthe intellectual and research strengths of the department.4.1. Faculty FTE and Department CompositionSince the last review, the department lost ladder faculty due to retirement (Johnson),recruitment by other institutions (Leventhal, Morgan, Plummer, Simons, Vigil), and death(Hill), but gained a number of new faculty at the junior and senior levels: Jeff Brantingham,Gregson Schachner and Monica Smith (archaeology), Clark Barrett and Dan Fessler (biological),H. Samy Alirn (linguistic), Akhil Gupta, Maureen Mahon, Sherry Ortner, Susan Slyomovics, andJason Throop (sociocultural). In addition, Jeanne Arnold's status changed from Professor in23

Residence to Full Professor in the regular series; Sondra Hale went from Associate AdjunctProfessor to ladder faculty (with a.5 FTE in Anthropologyand .5 in Women's Studies); JosephManson went from.5 to a 1.0 FTE; and Elinor Ochs (linguistic) transferred her FTE to ourdepartment from the UCLA Applied Linguistics Department.At the moment (Fall 2007), the Department has a total of 33 FTEs (housed in Anthropology). Ofthese FTEs, four are faculty who are 50% in Anthropology-three of them split their positionwith another department or center on campus (Hale, Park, and Slyomovics), and one is a facultymember who was appointed at 50% (Perry). In addition, we have four joint appointments: threewith zero FTE and voting rights, i.e. the faculty who are housed at the Neuro-PsychiatricInstitute (NPl, Browner, Edgerton, and Weisner); and one with zero appointment and no votingrights (History and International Institute, Apter). By the end of the academic year, weanticipate two retirements (Brodkin and Donnan), which will bring our total FTE allocationdown to 31. We are currently in the process of searching for a new biological anthropologist.Subfield FTE, Fall 1997 Fall 2007 ChangeArchaeological 5.5 7.33 +1.83Biological 5.3 6.83 +1.53Linguistic 4.0 5.0 +1Sociocultural 12.3 13.83 +1.53TOTAL 27.1 32.99 +5.89Table 1. FTEs in the four subfields-Our faculty currently reflects diversity in rank, gender and ethnicity (Table 2). Among ourladder faculty 46.1% (18 of 40) are women and 53.8% are men (21 of 40). Among the tenuredfaculty, women and men are equally represented; all 18 women in the department occupyAssociate or Full Professor ranks, while 17 of 21 men are Associate or Full Professor rank.Currently, eight of our ladder faculty are minorities. This is one minority faculty position morethan at the time of the last review but represents a percentage decline given growth of thefaculty overall.Our faculty is "top-heavy" (Table 2). As of Fall 2007, only four of our faculty members as of Fall2007 are untenured (Alim, Brantingham, Schachner, Throop). Nine ladder faculty are Associaterank. Twenty six faculty hold the rank of Full Professor and constitute 65% of the department.24

Status Gender Assistant Associate Full TotalLadder female 0 6 12 18male 4 3 14 21Joint female 0 0 0 0male 0 0 1 1Emeritus female 0 0 0 0male 0 0 15 15Minority* female 0 3 1 4male 1 0 3 4Table 2. Faculty status as of Fall 2007.*Based on self-identification.4.2. DevelopmentWe recognize the need to be proactive in dealing with pending retirements at the same time asforging ahead with the research and educational missions of the department. Each of thesubfields has therefore prepared strategic plans for future hires to meet these goals:-Archaeology: There remain a number of important theoretical and topical domains ofanthropological archaeology unrepresented in the department, as well as several world areaswhere we seek to add expertise in order to enhance subfield excellence and retain our worldclassdepartmental standing. We see a pressing need for two to three additional faculty in orderto keep pace with new areas of research, to best serve our curricular obligations, and to attracttop graduate students. These needs have now become even more pressing in light of ProfessorDonnan's recently announced plans for his retirement (eft. July 2008). Archaeology is stillworking to regain the coverage and strength it had in the department in 1990, when there wereabout ten anthropological archeology faculty teaching and attracting graduate students. Takinginto account persons available to serve the department (rather than solely where FTE reside), allother subfields have grown - some notably - in this period, and archaeology has gottensmaller. Research priorities for the archaeology subfield include but are not limited to a hire inthe domains of ancient human-climate interactions or geoarchaeology (possibly collaborativelywith the Institute of the Environment), archaeology and ancient DNA (possibly with the Centerfor Society and Genetics), and the historical archaeology of indigenous societies. Regionalneeds include state-level societies in Mesoamerica or (pending the Donnan retirement) SouthAmerica as well as coverage of Africa and Eurasia.25

In light of the new endowment in the Cotsen Institute, we see opportunity to fill a number ofslots at little cost to the department.Biological Anthropology: After considering our current strengths and the presentIIdemographic" composition of the subfield, we concur that during the next five years wewould like to hire in the following two specialties:• Formal Theory/Gene-Culture Coevolution. Under the guidance of Rob Boyd, this areahas become one of the principal strengths of our program, and one that distinguishesUCLA Biological Anthropology from almost every program that competes with us forpromising graduate students. The intellectual importance of this program lies in thecentral role that culturally transmitted information plays in determining humanbehavior. Understanding the psychological mechanisms and population-dynamicprocesses that govern cultural transmission and generate cultural variation is critical tocontinued progress in the social sciences. During the past ten years, Professor Boyd hastrained a number of PhD. students who have combined theoretical and empirical workin this area to compile impressive publication records and to compete successfully forprestigious academic positions. Several currently enrolled students show potential forsimilar accomplishments. We consider it imperative that our program maintainuninterrupted strength in this research area.• Paloeanthropology of the origin and spread of Homo sapiens. The history of the humanlineage has always been a central concern of biological anthropology. It is essential thatthe faculty always includes at least one paleoanthropologist. More specifically, researchon the origin and spread of Homo sapiens in the late Pleistocene links powerfully toseveral other critical issues in the discipline, including the selective pressuresresponsible for universal aspects of the modem human phenotype (" environment ofevolutionaryadaptiveness"). We therefore propose to hire a paleoanthropologist withthis sub-specialty.Linguistic Anthropology: To keep abreast with the most recent and promising developments inthe field, be competitive with the finest programs in the U.S., meet the intellectual interests ofcurrent and future undergraduate and graduate students, and staff the required courses in thesubfield in light of the administrative commitments of the subfield faculty, the LinguisticAnthropology subfield requests an FTE appointment in one of the following areas:• Language contact, shift, and loss, including the formation and reproduction of pidginsand creoles. Recent work in Papua New Guinea and other areas in the Pacific on theimpact of missionization on language acquisition and multilingualism is a model for thistype of work. This is an area that we see not only as directly relevant to our already..

strong program in language socialization but also as the subject of potentially greatinterest for our faculty and students who study cultural contact and change. There arepossible connections here with all other subfields:• The politics and ideology of language use with special emphasis on nation-building,transmigration, and marginalization. An example of this type of work is the expandingfield of research on the effects of the "balkanization" of European countries on languagepractices and language ideologies. This is an area that would continue to build theexisting connections between linguistic anthropology and sociocultural anthropology.• Language and communicative practices in relation to cognition, emotion, humandevelopment, illness and health. This is an area that would further expand our currentconnection with the psycho-cultural/medical faculty in the department.Sociocultural anthropology: There is consensus within the sociocultural anthropology subfieldthat acquiring a scholar with research and theoretical interests pertaining to:• The anthropology of violence would significantly complement and further develop anumber of existing strengths in the sub-field and in the department as a whole.Expertise on the topic of violence (broadly configured) could include issues of socialsuffering, trauma, and health disparities; colonialism and the politics of memory;torture, genocide, human rights, and remedies (e.g., truth and reconciliationcommissions); structural violence and the state; agency, power, and resistance. Whiletheoretical and geographical areas of specialization are open, the preferred candidate'sresearch would speak to issues of gender'and violence and/or ethnicity, race, andviolence, and would be based in Latin America.Other research areas of interest in sociocultural anthropology include:• An open-level position for a scholar pursuing science and technology issues orenvironmental anthropology. Possible topics could include bioscience; the reformulationof "nature" through genetic engineering inagriculture, materials science, and medicine;high-tech issues connected to infomatics, nanotechnology, mobile computing, and otheremerging technologies; the social uses of science and technology in everyday life;technological interventions in public health and global disease vectors; the impact onpopulations of environmental problems, such as global warming, soil erosion, risingocean levels, water shortages, and industrial pollution; and the conflicts overdisplacement and development caused by large technological projects such as dams,nuclear power stations, and highways. We are looking for scholars who are opening·new theoretical directions while doing rigorous empirical research.27

• The sociocultural group would also be interested in a scholar who works at theintersections of race, class, and politics, with a preference for Latin America and/or U.S.Latinos. Research foci might include (as a partial list) postcolonial and/or politicaleconomic approaches to race, identity, and hybridity; border-crossing and issues oftransnationalism; gender and sexuality; and relationships to the state (i.e., citizenship,alienation, and nation).• An earlier list of priorities had included an interest in a scholar working on theanthropology of religion.4.3. Research & Academic ExcellenceThe faculty's generally excellent record of merit increases, promotions, and off-scale salaryadjustments testifies to the high quality of research and teaching found within the department.Overall, the faculty is characterized by a strong sense of collegiality and an ethos of mutualsupport and tolerance toward different points of view and approaches to carrying out researchand teaching.Members of our faculty continue to play important roles in the UCLA community (Table 3).Some of them have multiple commitments and direct centers of research or, other programs. Thelist below provides a schematic summary of our faculty involvement in other units on campus.Table 3. Faculty affiliations within UCLA.Alim, H. SamyApter, Andrew- Center for Near Eastern Studies- Ralph Bunche Center for African American Studies- Department of Anthropology and History at UCLA Adjunct Professor28

Arnold, Jeanne- Cotsen Institute of Archaeology at UCLA, Executive Committee member- Interdepartmental Graduate Archaeology Program, ExecutiveCommittee member- UCLA Institute of the Environment- University of California Natural Reserve System - UCLA Stunt RanchReserve Advisory Board- UCLA Sloan Center on Everyday Lives of Families (CELF)Barrett, H. Clark- Center for Culture, Brain and Development, Director- Center for Behavior, Evolution, and Culture.- Latin American Studies Program- Center for Tropical Research- Interdisciplinary Relationship Studies ProgramBoyd, Robert- Center for Behavior Evolution and Culture- Center for Society and Genetics- Global FellowsBrantingham,Jeff- Cotsen Institute of Archaeology at UCLA- Institute of Pure and Applied Mathematics (IFAM, UCLA)- Department of MathematicsBrodkin, Karen- Center for the Study of Women- Women's Studies Program- Institute for Research on Labor & Employment- Labor and Workplace Studies Program- Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Studies- African Studies CenterBrowner, Carole- Center for the Study of Women (CSW), Faculty Advisory Committee- International Development Studies, Committee to AdministerInterdepartmental Major- Program in Women's Studies, Core Faculty Member- Mexican Studies Advisory Committee- Latin American Center, Faculty Advisory Committee- Interdisciplinary Relationship Science Program (IRSP), Faculty AdvisoryCommittee- International Institute, Faculty Advisory Committee- M. A. Program in Latin American Studies, Faculty Advisory Committee\.'Donnan,Christopher- Cotsen Institute of Archaeology at UCLA- The Latin American Center29

Duranti,AlessandroEdgerton, RobertFessler, DanielFiske, Alan PageGarro, LindaGoodwin,MarjorieGupta, Akhil- Center for Language, Interaction, and Culture (CLIC), Director- Center for Seventeenth & Eighteenth-Century Studies, CoreFaculty- Department of Psychiatry's Center for Culture and Health, Formerdirector and current member- UCLA Center for Behavior, Evolution, and Culture, Director- Center for Society and Genetics- Center for Southeast Asian Studies- The Center for Governance- Center for Culture, Brain, and Development- Center for Behavior, Evolution, and Culture- Interdisciplinary Relationship Science Program- Archeology IDP- Coleman Center for African Studies- UCLA Sloan Center on Everyday Lives of Families (CELF)- Interdisciplinary Relationship Science Program (IRSP)- American Indian Studies IDP (FAC)- UCLA Sloan Center for Everyday Lives of Families (CELF)- Center for Language, Interaction and Culture- Center for Culture, Brain and Development- Interdisciplinary Relationship Sciences Program- Center for India and South Asia (CISA)Hale, Sondra - Women's Studies Program, Joint Appointment- Women's Studies IDP (FAC)- Women's Studies Faculty AdVisory Committee (FAC)- Center for the Study of Women (FAC)- Center for Near Eastern Studies (FAC)- Near Eastern Studies Program IDP (FAC)- African Studies M.A. Program (IDP, FAC)- James S. Coleman African Studies Center (FAC)- Islamic Studies (FAC)- International Development Studies IDP(FAC)- Afro-American Studies (affiliated faculty)- Asian American Studies (affiliated faculty)Hammond, Peter . - African Studies Program- Honors Program30

(Emeriti)Hollan, DouglasKennedy, GailKroskrity, PaulLesure, RichardLevine, NancyMahon, MaureenManson, JosephOchs, ElinorOrtner, SherryPark, KyeyoungPerry, Susan- McNair Scholars Program- Center for Southeast Asian Studies- African Studies Center- Center for the Study of Evolution and the Origin of Life [CEOSOL]- Interdepartmental Program in American Indian Studies, Contributingfaculty member- Native Nations Law and Policy Center (FAC)- Center for Language, Interaction, and Culture- Cotsen Institute of Archaeology at UCLA- UCLA Graduate-Program in Archaeology- Center for Chinese Studies- Center for Buddhist Studies- International Development Studies IDP (FAC)- Center for European and Eurasian Studies- Interdepartmental Program of Afro-American Studies- Ralph J. Bunche Center for African American Studies, Core Faculty- Center for Behavior, Evolution and Culture- UCLA Sloan Center on Everyday Lives of Families (CELF), Director- Interpersonal Relationship Sciences Program- Center for Culture, Brain, and Development- Center for Society and Genetics- Institute for Social Science Research- Center for Indian and South Asian Studies (CISA)- The International Institute- Asian American Studies, Joint Appointment- Korean Studies, Joint Appointment- The Asian Institute- The Center for the Study of Women- Center for Behavior, Evolution and Culture- Center for Tropical Research- Interdisciplinary Relationship Science Program31

Read, DwightSchachner, GregSilk, JoanSlyomovics,SusanSmith, MonicaStanish, CharlesTamanoi, MarikoThornton,RussellThroop, C. JasonWeisner,Thomas- Interdisciplinary Program in Human Complex Systems, Chair- The Latin American Center- Cotsen Institute of Archeology at UCLA- Cotsen Institute of Archeology at UCLA- Interdepartmental Graduate Program in Archaeology- Center for Behavior, Evolution, and Culture- Center for Culture, Brain, and Development- Center for Society and Genetics- Interdisciplinary Relationship Science Program (Training Grant)- The Von Grunebaum Center for Near Eastern Studies, Director,beginning 5-year term July 2007- Center for the Study of Women- Interdepartmental Graduate Program, Chair- Archaeology Center for India and South Asia- Cotsen Institute of Archaeology at UCLA- Cotsen Institute of Archaeology at UCLA (ORU), Director- Interdepartmental Graduate Archaeology Program- Center for Japanese Studies, Executive member- International Institute- Asia Institute, Executive member- Center for the Study of Women- American Indian Studies Center (FAC), Postdoctoral Awards Committee- Initiative for Health, Humanity, and Culture at University of SouthernCalifornia, Founding Fellow- African Studies Center- Center for Culture and Health (Semel Institute), Director- Center for Culture, Brain, and Development- IRSP Relationship Science program (Psychology)- Developmental Psychology training program- University of California Washington Policy Center (visiting faculty)- Center for American Politics and Public Policy (visiting faculty at UCDConly)32

Yan, Yunxiang- Center for Chinese Studies (International Institute), Co-Director4.4. Response to Issues Raised in the Previous ReviewSince our last review, there have been a number of changes and initiatives that haveconsolidated the administrative structure of the department and considerably expanded theintellectual activity within and across subfields in ways that go well beyond the traditionalboundaries of the four-field curriculum. Some of the changes initiated were prompted bysuggestions made in the 1997-98 Academic Senate Review Report. Other changes were incipientat the time of the last review and have been consolidated or reshaped.At the administrative level, we continue to have a number of well-functioning committees thatmake the running of the department efficient and fair.Anthropology Committees:• Admissions (with student representative)• Academic Coordination (with student representative)• Awards (with student representative)• Executive (Elected, 2 year appointments)• Standing Review (for merit increases) (Elected yearly)• HonorsAnthropology is a broad discipline that covers human prehistory and history as well as the fullspectrum of human experience in pastand contemporary societies. Over time, we havedeveloped a series of initiatives that make possible intellectual exchanges, integration among.subfields, and interdisciplinary training. We highlight here integrative initiatives taken in: (1)interest groups; (2) research centers; (3) recent faculty hires; and (4) including students in theplanning, decision making and operation of the department:Interest groupsThe intellectual force of the department is measured by the success of interest groups that havebeen strengthened and refined over the last decade. Although the interest groups are organizedin slightly different ways, each one gathers around events that are offered as open fora for thelarger UCLA and Los Angeles area community and training grounds for our students (who cansign up and get credit for participating in them). Each group has a steady number of regularsand a fluctuating number of occasional attendees. The regulars typically coincide with the .33

faculty and students within a particular subfield, area of specialization, or program and mayalso include faculty and students from other subfields. The weekly meetings of each group arescheduled in a non-overlapping way to make it possible for students and faculty in all subfieldsto participate in more than one group either occasionally or on a regular basis. The schedule ofeach group is advertised on the Department's webpage. All interest groups have become quitewell known on campus and internationally, thereby attracting a steady flow of visiting PhDstudents and scholars from other universities across the US and abroad.Here is a brief description of the interest groups:~• Archaeology Lecture Series. The Cotsen Institute of Archaeology at UCLA has twoactive, ongoing lecture programs (Wednesdays and Fridays) that afford scholars atUCLA and from around the world opportunities to present new research. In addition,short courses and seminars offered by Institute faculty and visiting scholars alsoenhance communication and interaction among scholars in the profession. One of theInstitute's primary goals is that of outreach through both media and communityinvolvement. Outreach activities such as public lectures inform and inspire the publicabout the exciting archaeological discoveries UCLA scholars are making and to interprettheir significance for the collective study of civilization. The Institute also offers a freepublic lecture series of approximately twelve lectures and seminars each year. Inaddition, the Institute sponsors special programs which in past years have focused onthe archaeology of such areas as Australia, Polynesia, India, South East Asia,Mesoamerica, California, and Africa (http:Uwww.ioa.ucla.edurWebCalendarl).• BEe. The Center for Behavior, Evolution, and Culture (BEC) unites scholars exploringthe connections among evolution, culture, the mind, and society. BEC provides aframework to facilitate research and training on the interaction among natural selection,cultural transmission, social relations, and psychology. A weekly speaker series bringsnationally and internationally known speakers together to discuss topics of interest withfaculty and students in an informal atmosphere. Once a quarter, BEC also offers a daylongconference organized jointly with the UC Santa Barbara Evolution, Mind, andBehavior Program (Monday 12-2pm. www.bec.ucla.edul).• CPSc. A working Group in Ethnographic Research, Culture, Power and Social Change(CPSC) brings together graduate students and faculty interested in exploring issues ofcultural production, links between political economy, power and culture, culturalconstructions of ethnicity, gender, national and religious identities and the ways inwhich they impact social change in the world. CPSC meets weekly throughout the34

academic year to hear presentations by guest speakers, discuss readings, and discussconference papers. As a workshop series, CPSC is open to members of the UCLAcommunity and invited guests. Thursday 3-5pm.• DISCOURSE LAB. The Discourse Lab provides participants the opportunity to presentoriginal work-in-progress, such as conference papers and thesis or dissertation work.The range of topics, issues, methods, and theories varies, with a preference given toanalyses based on spontaneously occurring interaction across everyday settings (e.g.,homes, workplaces, classrooms, playgrounds, political campaigns, artistic performances,medical facilities, support organizations). Regular participants include faculty, students,and visiting scholars in linguistic anthropology. Other participants include interestedfaculty from other subfields, visiting scholars, and doctoral students sponsored by theCenter on Language, Interaction and Culture (CUC)-an interdisciplinary group ofstudents and faculty housed in Anthropology. The CUC Graduate Student Associationorganizes an international conference biannually. The Discourse Lab meets weekly onWednesday,4-6pm. Once a month, the Discourse Lab meeting coincides with the CUCSpeaker Series, Wednesday 5-7pm (www.sscnet.ucla.edu/clicl).• MMAC. Mind, Medicine And Culture (MMAC) is an interdisciplinary discussion groupthat provides a forum for exploring recent research and classical and contemporarytheoretical perspectives that inform psychocultural studies and medical anthropology. Ithosts regular talks and discussions with scholars from UCLA and beyond. Regular:M:MAC participants include faculty in Anthropology, Psychology and relateddepartments, post-doctoral scholars, and interested graduate and undergraduatestudents. Topics explored in recent years include critical perspectives on health; mentalhealth and illness; healing; memory; emotion; subjectivity & self-processes; religion &spirituality; psychopathology; cultural phenomenology; public health & healthdisparities; therapeutic applications; research methods & ethics; and psychoanalysis.Monday 3-5pm (http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/anthro/mmac/).Integration in recent faculty hires.Integration across subfields has been one of the criteria applied to faculty hiring over the lasttwo decades. Our most recent hires confirm and improve on our commitment to integration.Jeff Brantingham, an archaeologist with interests that range from the Paleolithic of Asia tomodem criminal behavior, participates in the Behavior, Evolution and Culture (BEC) interestgroup. H. Samy Alim, a linguistic anthropologist and expert in Hip Hop language and culturewho integrates urban sociolinguistics with ethnography, participates in the Discourse Lab, is on35

the Executive Committee of CLIC, and participates in Culture, Power and Social Change(CPSC). Jason Throop, a psycho-cultural anthropologist and an organizer and regular memberof Mind, Medicine and Culture (MMAC), also regularly attends the Discourse Lab. SusanSlyomovics, a sociocultural anthropologist focusing on human rights, participates in both CPSCandMMAC.Research Centers as opportunities for interdisciplinary collaboration and training.The most successful cases of intellectual integration and inter-disciplinary training arerepresented by two Research Centers. One is the Center for Culture, Brain, and Development(CBO), currently directed by a biological anthropologist, Clark Barrett (previously directed byPatricia Greenfield, Professor of Psychology). The other is the Center on Everyday Lives ofFamilies (CELF), directed by a linguistic anthropologist, Elinor Ochs.CBD is sponsored by the Foundation for Psychocultural Research and includes faculty fromanthropology, psychology, neuroscience, linguistics, psychiatry, and education. It offersfellowships for graduate students, a training program, and a biweekly speakers series (seewww.cbd.ucla.edu).CELF, generously supported by the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, is a research project on middleclass everyday life in Los Angeles that brings together three subfields (archaeology, linguisticanthropology, and psycho-cultural/medical anthropology) as well as faculty and students fromApplied Linguistics, Psychology, and Education. Over the last seve~ years, CELF has supported15 graduate stud-ents who have written dissertations fully or partially based on the data andresearch experience acquired by working on the CELF project (see www.celf.ucla.edu).Integrating students in department mainstreamStudents are involved in departmental committees (see above), have a representative at allfaculty meetings except for faculty personnel cases and students reviews, and participate in ad .hoc committees for new hires. The former Chair (Hollan) involved graduate students inmultiple discussions of the curriculum, the allocation of funds, and intellectual activities. Thecurrent Chair (Duranti) is carrying on this tradition and has invited the Anthropology GraduateStudent Association (AGSA) to be in charge of the Department Colloquium Series. The AGSAhas responded by forming a colloquium committee that, in consultation with a faculty advisor(Richard Lesure), has been assembling a list of potential speakers.36

4.5. Final ConsiderationsOur goal is to become a top-five Anthropology program in terms of undergraduate andgraduate training as well as faculty and student research. However, we recognize there aresome challenges ahead of us if this goal is to become a reality.1. In the undergraduate program, we need to improve our ability to deliver neededcourses to majors and minors. One solution would be to impose a standard annualschedule for the undergraduate curriculum. At the same time, we could better serve ourundergraduate upper division classes by introducing more discussion sections andwriting-intensive exercises via new TA and reader resources.2. In the graduate program, we need to deal with decreasing class sizes at the same time asmeeting our goal of providing all incoming graduate students with multi-year fundingpackages.3. Faculty research and areas of expertise will need to be expanded. Each of thesubdisciplines have strategic hiring plans that are designed to allow the Department tocompete in the national and international academic arena. Collectively, we seeinterdisciplinary research and collaborations with Centers, Interdepartmental DegreePrograms, and Departments as central to this task.-In summary, the Department of Anthropology has continued its intellectual growth. Theundergraduate program remains large and vibrant. The graduate program is diverse and hasseen measurable improvements, particularly in graduate"funding and success on the job market.Through new hires at both the junior and senior levels, our faculty has maintained its nationaland international standing. We believe that we are in a good position to build on existingstrengths, not the least of which is our interdisciplinary focus and our attention to the increasingconnections we see with other units and departments within the University.Sincerely,Alessandro Duranti.Professor and ChairDepartment of AnthropologyP. Jeffrey BrantinghamAssistant Professor and Vice ChairDepartment of Anthropology37

Appendix A. List of Faculty and Rank.NameAlim, H. SamyBrantingham, P. JeffreySchachner, Gregson T.Throop, C. JasonTitleAssistant ProfessorAssistant ProfessorAssistant ProfessorAssistant ProfessorStep3433Barrett, H. ClarkFessler, DanielKennedy, Gail E.Lesure, Richard G.Mahon, Maureen E.Park, KyeyoungPerry, Susan E.Smith, Monica L.Tamanoi, MarikoAssociate ProfessorAssociate ProfessorAssociate ProfessorAssociate ProfessorAssociate ProfessorAssociate ProfessorAssociate ProfessorAssociate ProfessorAssociate Professor113343313Apter, AndrewArnold, JeanneBoyd, RobertBrodkin, KarenBrowner, CaroleDonnan, Christopher B.Duranti, AlessandroEdgerton, RobertFiske, Alan PageGarro, Linda C.Goodwin, Marjorie HarnessGupta, AkhilHale, SondraHollan, Douglas W.Kroskrity, Paul V.Levine, NancyManson, Joseph H.Mitchell-Kernan, ClaudiaOchs, ElinorOrtner, Sherry B.Read, Dwight W.Silk, Joan B.Slyomovics, Susan.Stanish, CharlesProfessorProfessorProfessorProfessorProfessor in ResidenceProfessorProfessorProfessor in ResidenceProfessorProfessorProfessorProfessorProfessorProfessorProfessorProfessorProfessorProfessor, Dean Graduate DivisionProfessorProfessor.ProfessorProfessorProfessorProfessor2587AS82573454315FASAS977338

Thornton, RussellWeisner, Thomas S.Yan, YunxiangProfessorProfessor in ResidenceProfessorAS2Key: AS =Above Scale; FAS, Further Above Scale39·,..Ii

Appendix B. Extramural Funding.Note: Data collected by the UCLA Office of Contracts and Grants on extramural funding areincomplete for the years prior to 2002-03. As a consequence, the data reported here represent aminimum for faculty funding during the review period.PIAgencyDirectOverall totalArnold, JeanneNational Science FoundationNational Science FoundationNational Science FoundationNational Science FoundationNational Science FoundationNational Science FoundationNational Science FoundationCA Department of Parks &Recreation9,150.009,545.008,852.0011,881.00109,187.004,000.0033,412.001,000.00 187,027.00Blurton Jones,NicholasNational Science Foundation23,997.00 23,997.00Brantingham, P.J.Department of DefenseUC Pacific Rim Research ProjectNational Science Foundation194,805.0027,515.00749,747 972,067.00Boyd,RobertUniversity of MassachusettsUniversity of MassachusettsNational Science Foundation290,147.00119,868.0012,000.00 422,015.00-Donnan, ChristopherNational Science Foundation11,975.00 11,975.00Duranti, AlessandroUC Linguistic Minority ResearchInstituteNational Science Foundation15,000.0010,648.00 25,648.00Fessler, DanielUniversity of MassachusettsNational Science FoundationUniversity of MassachusettsVirginia Polytechnic Institute &State University20,160.0011,660.0029,893.005,283.00 66,996.00Fiske, AlanNIH/National Institute of MentalHealth709,685.00 709,685.0040

Garro, LindaUC/California Breast CancerResearch ProgramThe Foundation for Psycho-CulturalResearchNational Science Foundation64,087.0026,250.0012,000.00 102,337.00Goodwin, MarjorieNational Science FoundationNational Science Foundation11,995.0010,853.00 22,848.00Hale, SondraUC/ Institute for Mexico and theUnited States (MEXUS)11,999.00 11,999.00Johnson, AllenNational Science Foundation12,000.00 12,000.00Lesure, RichardNational Science FoundationUC/ Institute for Mexico and theUnited states (MEXUS)H. John Heinz II FoundationNational Science FoundationWenner-Gren FoundationNational Science Foundation11,953.0012,000.008,000.0031,342.008,809.0064,337.00 136,441.00Leventhal, RichardNational Science Foundation5,000.00-The Ahmanson Foundation218,500.00 223,500.00Ochs, ElinorNational Science FoundationNational Science FoundationUC BerkeleySpencer FoundationSpencer FoundationSloan FoundationSloan FoundationSloan FoundationSloan FoundationSloan Foundation12,000.0012,000.003,000.00394,700.00508,400.0030,000.003,609,454.00159,000.003,578,990.003,929,167.00 12,236,711.00Park, KyeyoungAcademy of Korean Studies1,200,000.00 1,200,000.0041

Perry, SusanNational Science FoundationL.S.B. Leakey FoundationNational Geographic SocietyWenner-Gren FoundationFoundationNational Science Foundation295,096.0015,00027,215.0015,690.0024,992.00 377,993.00Plummer, ThomasL.S.B. Leakey FoundationWenner-Gren FoundationFoundationL.S.B. L.S.B. Leakey Foundation18,000.0019,200.008,800.00 46,000.00Read, Dwight University of Arizona 69,569.00 69,569.00Simons, Anna National Science Foundation 12,000.00 12,000.00Smith, Monica LNational Geographic SocietyNational Science Foundation12,500.00155,292.00 167,792.00~- -Silk, JoanNational Science FoundationL.S.B. Leakey FoundationNational Geographic SocietyNational Science FoundationL.S.B. Leakey FoundationPrimate Conservation, Inc.National Science FoundationUMASS - McArthur GrantL.S.B. Leakey FoundationNational Geographic Society12,000.0011,980.0015,000.00125,629.0020,000.002,000.0012,000.0015,000.0010,250.0012,850.00 236,7-09.00Stanish, CharlesNational Science FoundationNational Science FoundationNational Science FoundationNational Science FoundationNational Science FoundationNational Science FoundationNational Science FoundationNational Science FoundationWenner-Gren FoundationNational Science Foundation11,996.0011,740.0011,482.009,550.005,200.0012,000.0011,438.0058,573.009,000.0054,961.00 195,940.0042

Tamanoi, MankoUC Pacific Rim Research Program6,600.006,600.00Thornton, RussellUCI Institute for Mexico and theUnited states (MEXUS)11,523.0011,523.00Vigil, DiegoThe Ford FoundationThe Hewlett FoundationUCI Institute for Mexico and theUnited States (MEXUS)635,000.0022,059.0014,880.00 671,939.00Vogel, MelissaCurtiss T. & Mary G. BrennanFoundation5,000.00 5,000.00Yan, YunxiangChiang Ching-Kuo FoundationWenner-Gren FoundationAmerican Council of LearnedSocieties30,000.0019,960.0040000 89,960.00Total$18,256,271.0043 .

APPENDIX C: THE ANTHROPOLOGY OF LOS ANGELESOne of the strengths of our department is that in addition to doing cross-cultural research,which is expected of anthropologists, many of our faculty and students also carry out aconsiderable amount of fieldwork in the greater Los Angeles area. Most importantly, many ofour faculty and students are engaged in doing research not only "in" Los Angeles, but"of" LosAngeles, documenting the vast cultural and socio-economic diversity of the city, which offerssocial scientists countless opportunities for emiching our understanding of social and culturalchange, conflict, marginalization, immigration, inequality, integration, learning and schooling,political activism, medical institutions, mental illness, the culture of media production andmedia consumption, family life, material culture, the interpenetration of work and leisure. Someof these projects have obvious media appeal and have been featured on local or national radio,television, or in the popular press. Others are less appealing to a wider audience. But they allshare a commitment to using research to connect to the larger community within which UCLAis located.The work done by our faculty, current students, and recent graduates have here been organizedinto four research themes:(1) Everyday Life of Families;(2) The Life and History of Communities;(3) Media, Entertainment, and Aesthetics; and(4) Medical Institutions, Medical Encounters, and Social Welfare.1) EVERYDAY LIFE OF FAMILIESSince the year 2001, the UCLA Sloan Center on the Everyday Lives of Families (CELF) - directed byProfessor Elinor Ochs in collaboration with a large research team that includes faculty, postdocs,graduate students, and undergraduates - has documented the everyday worlds of parents and childrenin Los Angeles as they attend to the needs of family, horne, school, and workplace. CELF conducted aninterdisciplinary study of the quotidian experiences of 32 working families, capturing a "week in thelife" with a richness of detail unprecedented in the social sciences. Work-family researchpredominantly has relied on self-report methods (such as surveys, interviews, and daily diary studies)to gather information about family members' feelings and behaviors. CELF expands past research witha corpus that includes ethnographic video recordings and timed tracking observations of familymembers; floor plans, photographs, and narrated video horne tours depicting families' materialenvironment; daily diaries of mood, work, and school experiences; interviews on ~amily routines, socialnetworks, health, education, and work; questionnaire measures of psychological wellbeing; andsampling of stress hormones. To address the socio-cultural underpinnings of working family life inLos Angeles, CELF has established parallel research projects in Sweden (sCELF) and Italy (iCELF).Scholars across these three sites have merged their data sets to analyze the similarities and d:i£ferences44

in family and state ideologies and their impact on time with family, in children's extra-curricularactivities, in parental involvement in homework, in couple's division of household responsibility, andin socialization to cleaning and hygiene. CELF is currently bringing together results of research projectsin (1) a volume entitled Raising a Family in the 21 st Century: The Los Angeles Experience; (2) a book-lengthphoto-essay entitled Life at Home in the 21 st Century: 32 LA Families Open Their Doors, and (3) anEducational and Professional Training Video Course on Working Family Life.Among the Anthropology faculty and students who work in the CELF project:• Professor Marjorie Goodwin has been documenting the importance of occasionedknowledge exploration in family interaction, looking at the ensemble of conversationalpractices families make use of to cultivate active and joyful engagement in imaginative inquiryabout the world, during mundane, largely unstructured activity. A second focus of interest hasbeen the negotiation of disputes between parents and children. This interest builds on previouswork by Goodwin who was the first to study conflict talk in spontaneous interaction (see her1990 book He-Said-She-Said: Talk as Social Organization among Black Children, Dniv. ofPennsylvania Press).• Professor Jeanne Arnold has designed and directed the modem materialculture/ethnoarchaeology domain of the CELF project, which has resulted in a corpus of morethan 21,000 digital photos, more than 80 self-narrated home video tours, 32 detailed floor plansof houses and grounds, and tens of thousands of timed data points onactivities of all familymembers within the home spaces. This database is providing an unprecedented examination ofthe material culture of modern middle-class America and how families actually use theirhomes. Together with other members of theCELF team and the renowned Italian photographerEnzo Ragazzini, Arnold is preparing a book of striking photos and photographic collagesaccompanied by creatively interwoven texts to visually illustrate the material side ofcontemporary family life in Southern California.• Relying on the large CELF corpus of visual material, interviews, and interactions, graduatestudent Angela Leggett is conducting comparative research regarding household aesthetics inLos Angeles with the household aesthetics she documented in Lima, Peru. The investigationreveals a (usually gendered) division of household labor, as well as patterns of consumptionbetween individual families and (usually global) corporations and the media.• Graduate student Diana Pash is completing her dissertation based on CELF data and her ownethnographic research on gay co-father families in the greater Los Angeles area. She examinestheir community and extended kinship relationships through first-person narrative accountsand through naturally-occurring conversations and social interactions. Exploration of theeveryday stories and activities of these families expands our understanding of what it means tobe a family and deconstructs past and current stereotypes on gay fathers.45

Another faculty who has been working on family life in Los Angeles for many years is ProfessorThomas Weisner Goint appointment with Psychiatry), who is currently collaborating on anexperimental study of children and parents in Head Start centers in Los Angeles; most of thefamilies are Latino. An early literacy curriculum was designed and implemented in randomlyselected centers here in LA. In some of those centers, there was in addition a homevisitor/intervention with a random sample of families. A third group of centers had business asusual. I and our research lab are analyzing parent qualitative interviews regarding horne dailyroutines and literacy experiences with families from each of these three groups. This is theEarly Literacy Study, funded by NSF in collaboration with USC and Florida State Univ.Weisner is also continuing a longitudinal study of families with children with developmentaldisabilities in the greater LA area. The families began the study in 1984 - 85 when theirchildren were ages 3-4 and we are continuing to keep in contact with the families. The focus ofthe study is on the accommodations made by families, the developmental progress of thechildren, and views of adolescents with disabilities about their lives. The CHILD Study, fundedbyNICHD.2) THE LIFE AND HISTORY OF COMMUNITIESProfessor H. Samy Alim is working with a team of graduate students who are members of theWorking Group in Hip Hop Cultural Studies in a project called The Black Los Angeles Project,which is housed in the UCLA Ralph Bunche Center. The project focuses on a number of HipHop communities in Los Angeles which are being studied from the point of view of the culturalproduction of "Blackness" and "upward mobility" in the city.Professor Kyeyoung Park has been documenting the relationship between the KoreanAmerican community and the African American and Latino Communities since the 1992 LosAngeles Uprising that followed the first trial of the police officers who arrested and beatmotorist Rodney King.Most of Adjunct Professor Tritia Toyota's research since the early 1980s has been concentratedin the widely dispersed and heterogeneous Asian American community in Southern California.More specifically, it is among post 1965 naturalized Chinese who have wrought enormouschanges not just demographically (Chinese are now the largest ethnic subgroup in AsianAmerica) but in terms of a reconfigured racial and political identity among Asian Americans.She is investigating how this is happening, how their transnational social connections are bothboon and curse, and what their U.S. citizenship looks like within a post modem and globalpolitics of belonging. Areas of research are Los Angeles County, the ethnoburbs spreadingeastward into the San Gabriel Valley into Riverside County and south into Orange County.Professor Susan Slyomovics has become fascinated by Middle East Americana! AmericanOrientalism in California and has started fieldwork in Riverside County, around Indio and the46

Coachella Valley. Since the 1920s the annual "Date Palm Festival" is organized in Februaryaround the theme of "Arabian Nights." Dates and date culture were imported from NorthAfrica, locals know the Arabic vocabulary of dates, and to promote the Riverside CountyAgricultural Fair decided to go with Arab themes (school band, The Sheiks, wear keffiyas andharem-type pants, a beauty pageant crowning Queen Scheherazade, are-constructed mini­Casbah, etc). She plans to use this research for a course that she's planning to co-teach withProfessor H. Samy Alim on Middle East Americans.For the last nine years, Dr. Worku Nida (UCLA PhD, 2006, currently a lecturer at UCLA andCalifornia State University, Los Angeles) has been closely observing the internal dynamics ofEthiopian immigrant community in Los Angeles. Nida has researched and written about howEthiopian immigrants build transnational communities and institutions aroundentrepreneurial and religious practices including Ethiopian churches and mosques, and "LittleEthiopia" in Los Angeles at the nexus of local and global forces. This ongoing project highlightsthe entrepreneurial feats of the hardworking immigrants as they made the transitions fromunderpaid wage laborers to labor-intensive, capital-scarce businesses such as driving taxi cabsand becoming workers-owners of ethnic restaurants.UCLA graduate and current postdoc at CELF, Wendy Klein (UCLA PhD, 2007) has beencarrying out extensive ethnographic research on family life and Sikh educational programs inthe Los Angeles area. Her study considers how Sikhs' everyday experiences, post-9/11, haveshifted their understandings of religion and ethnicity in American society and mobilized theirefforts for managing difference in their everyday lives. The study draws from theoreticalperspectives and methodological approaches in linguistic anthropology, psychoculturalanthropology, and sociology to exantine identification as an emergent, discursive process in adiasporic community by analyzing individual and family autobiographical narratives andreflections, along with everyday practices of child and youth socialization.Sponsored by the US Department of Education, Professors Alessandro Duranti and ElinorDchs have documented how Samoan American children in Los Angeles are socialized toproblem-solving and literacy activities in two contexts: the Sunday School (in a Samoanchurch) and the multi-generational home environment. By relying on their previous fieldworkin a (Western) Samoan village on the Island of Upolu, they were able to show that the kind ofliteracy that is practiced and acquired in multicultural environments like the one where Samoanchildren grow up in Southern California is typically syncretic. Children of Samoan descent arecontinuously exposed to culturally diverse traditions (i.e. traditional Samoan interactionalstrategies imported by the first generation and new, school-specific strategies adopted by 1.5and second generation children and adults).Building on her ground-breaking study of conflict talk among Black adolescent boys and girls ina Philadelphia neighborhood in the early 1970s, over the last ten years, Professor Marjorie H.Goodwin has been video recording and analyzing talk and interaction among preadolescentgirls on the playground, apart from adult supervision. Examining the actions of working class47

girls in downtown Los Angeles and working class-upper middle class girls in a progressiveschool on the West Side of Los Angeles, Goodwin has been able to show how rather thanavoiding conflict, girls actively seek it out. The moral universe that girls create, and in whichthey hold their peers (including boys) accountable, contradicts stereotypes that have dominatedmuch work on female moral development.Professor Karen Brodkin has been conducting research on political activism in Los Angeles fora long time. Rutgers University Press just published her book Making Democracy Matter: Identity& Activism in Los Angeles, a study of the "nineties generation" of activists in labor andimmigrant worker organizing in Los Angeles. The book asks what makes a social movement amovement and argues that activists remake political selves, create new practices and visions ofdemocracy, and that this is at the core of the signature energy by which we recognize socialmovements. She has also collaborated with UCLA graduate Cynthia Strathrnann for a projecton union organizing and the struggles that ensue when management hires anti-unionconsultants to keep unions out of negotiations. Brodkin is also working on a book dedicated toan environmental justice movement in South Gate, led by high school students, which blockedbuilding a power plant during California's energy crisis. Its analytic focus is on the role of raceand race-avoidance in progressive politics.Professor Jeanne Arnold has directed field research on the archaeology of the NativeAmericans of coastal Southern California, particularly the Channel Islands, since 1980. Shehas investigated the political evolution of complex hunter-gatherers, the emergence of largescalecraft production systems, and the role of sophisticated watercraft and intensIve exchangenetworks in the region. Dozens of UCLA graduate and undergraduate students have beeninvolved in the field and lab research, including 8-10 theses and dis~ertation projec.ts. A numberof graduate students have worked on Professor Arnold's project for their MA (John Dietler,Anthony Graesch) or for their PhD research (Ray Corbett, Terisa Green, and Anna Noah).Graduate student Julie Bernard's dissertation explores issues of native Californian resistance,persistence, and culture change in the Mission period through the study of three sites in theErnigdiano (Wand) Chumash region. The south-central California interior became a refuge formission runaways during the Historic era, and the archaeological study of extant and newlyformed villages in this area allows us to gain insight into the lives of people whoescapedhistorical documentation and forged new lives, social groups, and cultural identities in arapidly changing environment.For her MA research, graduate student Eleanor Carter did participant-observation in aCongolese church community and carried out extensive ethnographic interviews with fourCongolese families, documenting their collective memories of exile, focusing on Congoleseparents' and children's description of family, migration, and relationships among differentgenerations.48

Our undergraduate advisor Dr. Selma Morley (UCLA PhD) is leading a small group ofvolunteers - which includes former UCLA undergraduates and UCLA Extension students ­who for the past two years have been cataloguing archaeological collections from theRainbow Bridge-Monument Valley Expedition (American Southwest) and held by the FowlerMuseum. The collections made it to UCLA via Ralph Beals, Director of the Expedition duringpart of the 1930's. Beals established the UCLA Department of Anthropology and Sociology in1940. They plan to create a DVD, a museum exhibit, and archaeological analyses.3) MEDIA, ENTERTAINMENT, AND AESTHETICSSince the 1970s, Professor Sondra Hale has been carrying research on feminist art in LosAngeles, focusing in particular on the Los Angeles Woman's Building. She has just co-editedand published an e-book entitled From Site to Vision: The Woman's Building in ContemporaryCulture. The book integrates ethnographic fieldwork with archival research on feminist art inthe greater Los Angeles area and nationally.Professor Sherry Ortner is working on the "scene" of the independent film world, in both LosAngeles and NY. She has been interviewing filmmakers, producers, and screenwriters andcarried out participant-observation on the sets of several films-in-production; she has alsoattended several film festivals (including Sundance and the LA Film Festival here in LA) and alarge number of screenings of films after which the filmmaker, producer, or writer, took Q&A.She is currently writing a book based on this project.Building on a growing body of research in the social sciences that fo~ses upon thecommercialization of the self under late capitalism, Ph.D. candidate Sasha David has beenconducting fieldwork at a variety of sites (e.g. a prominent Hollywood talent managementcompany, auditions throughout Hollywood, and television and film sets in Los Angeles)examining the ways in which struggling film and television actors in Los Angeles mustbecome commodified in order to succeed in the Hollywood entertainment industry.Another of our students, Brent Luvaas, did his MA research on the ambivalent aestheticpractices of electroclash (a kind of New Wave revival electronic dance music) performance inLos Angeles. He was particularly interested in performance practices that blur celebration andcritique and complicate any clear-cut distinction between resistance and accommodation. In thearticle he published based on this research (International Journal of Cultural Studies. 9(2): 167­187), he argued that electroclash and similar aesthetic forms constitute a set of tactics for livingthrough the confusions and contradictions of life in a media-saturated, increasingly globalizedlate capitalist economy.Over the last five years, Professor Alessandro Duranti has been documenting the jazz scene inLos Angeles, through participant-observation, interviews, and extensive video recordings ofuniversity classes, public concerts, and "gigs" in small and large venues where young49

musicians often interact with professional and world-famous musicians. An analysis of thecommunicative strategies used across contexts by experts and novices reveal a strongconnection between aesthetics and morality as well as some differences in the ways in whichthe older and the younger generation conceive the relationship between jazz and other musicgenres (e.g. classical music, pop).4) MEDICAL INSTITUTIONS, MEDICAL ENCOUNTERS, AND SOCIAL WELFARESince 1989, Professor Carole H. Browner has been working in Southern California on issuessurrounding the medicalization of pregnancy and prenatal care, particularly the ways thatprenatal genetic information may alter reproductive experience. Expanding on herlongstanding interest in the social meanings and uses of genetic information, her current workconcerns the use of genetics in neurologists' clinical practices. She is analyzing factors thatshape neurologists' views about and use of genetic information in their clinical practices, andthe consequences of doing so. Other recent research has concerned how couples from Mexicanbackgrounds who are offered amniocentesis decide whether to undergo the procedure, howconflicts between a woman and man over whether to be tested are resolved, and the role geneticcounselors play in couples' amniocentesis decisions. A follow-up study enabled me todeconstruct the strategies prenatal genetic service providers use to communicate informationabout prenatal genetic testing options to Latinas with limited education and/or English liVing insouth Texas and southern California. Other projects have examined how Latino couples makedecisions about condom use; the meanings associated with cervical cancer held by women andmen living on both sides of the U.S.-Mexican border; and the use of reproductive health servicesby. homeless women in Los Angeles.In the FamilyHealth Portrait project, Professor Linda Garro and other medical anthropologistsin the CELF Project (see above) are breaking new ground through analysis of family-levelhealth. Medical anthropological research on health in the U.s. has focused more on howindividuals think about health and less on how health is entrenched in social contexts, of whichthe family is central. Combining the CELF recordings of family life in Los Angeles with indepthethnographic interviews, CELF researchers have for the first time analyzed how health isactually enacted in everyday life in relation to the nuanced, conflicting and ambiguous ideasabout health articulated by working parents.In collaboration with a team of researchers from UCLA and USC, Professor Douglas Hollan iscurrently participating in a study of the coping mechanisms of high functioningschizophrenics in the Los Angeles area.Professor Alan P. Fiske is leading a team of graduate students in Applied Linguistics,Anthropology, and Psychology studying frontotemporal dementia (FTD) in collaboration withMario Mendez, who directs the frontotemporal clinics at UCLA and the LA VA. FTD is aneurodegenerative disorder characterized by the breakdown of social relationships, while50

memory, knowledge, and understanding remain intact. We are doing participant observationin patients' homes and other natural settings, audio and video recording, conversation analysis,ethnographic analysis, controlled experimental behavioral testing, and physiological recording.For her dissertation research, Sonya Pritzker is currently carrying out fieldwork in a LosAngeles area school of Oriental Medicine looking at language socialization and ideologies oftranslation in U.S. Chinese medical education. She is therefore sitting in on first year classes inthe program and video-recording the processes by which students (and teachers) socialize andare socialized into the translated language of Chinese medicine. The broader project ties the LosAngeles findings into the divergent practices of translation that inform the creation ofeducational texts, and so she is also traveling around the U.S., China, and Taiwan interviewingrelevant translators. The overall goal of this work is to bring together theory in linguistic andmedical anthropology to reveal how translation is enacted as a set of practices and processesthat relate to social, economic, political, and deeply felt personal understandings of language,embodiment, and healing.Anthropology graduate student Mara Bunchbinder has just begun a new project with ProfessorJohn Heritage and Stefan Timmermans in the Sociology Department at UCLA on newborngenetic screening in a clinic at UCLA. They are trying to understand how parents make senseof the sometimes ambiguous positive results, and how they manage uncertainty. The study willconsist of analysis of Videotaped doctor-parent interactions, as well as periodic interviews withparents over the course of one to two years. The research will have important policyimplications since the social impact of California's mandatory at-birth genetic screening islargely unknown.As part of her dissertation research, Heather Willihnganz has been documenting a two-yearMaster of Social Work program in Los Angeles. She followed an entire cohort of 88 students asthey learned about the city of LA, its history, its social welfare laws, policies and programs, andthe needs of LA residents - particularly those seen as "vulnerable," e.g. the poor, the sick, theelderly, kids in gangs. She visited students in a wide variety of social service agencies in LosAngeles, including those specializing in mental health services, public welfare services forneglected and abused children, the Department of Veterans Affairs, a middle school whereracial conflict was a central issue, and a program for torture victims seeking asylum. She alsowent on lengthy tours with the social work students of homeless shelters on Skid Row, and theMedical Services Building of the Twin Towers Correctional Facility in downtown LA - thelargest mental institution in the United States.51

UCLAGraduate DivisionPerformanceIndicators8 Year Review Supporting DocumentsNovember 16,2007

MEMORANDUMAcademic Senate Executive OfficeLos Angeles Division3125 Murphy Hall140801June 29, 2007TO:FR:RE:Professor Alessandro Duranti, ChairDepartment of AnthropologyLinda Mohr, Assistant Chief Administrative Officer, Academic Senate OfficeGraduate Division Performance IndicatorsThe Academic Senate will distribute the enclosed information to the review teammembers for your department/program review scheduled in AY2007-08. Thisinformation was made available to you earlier in the year via the Graduate Divisionwebsite http://www.gdnet.ucla.edu/. The completed information includes the DoctoralExit Survey and the Graduate Council Student Survey that was not completed at thetime of the notification to you.If the department/program chair has questions or concerns regarding the data includedin this document, you are encouraged to contact Associate Dean Ross P. Shidelerdirectly at shideler@ucla.edu. If you have any other questions regarding the AcademicSenate Program Review Process, please do not hesitate to contact me atMohr@senate.ucla.edu. ­Thank you for your continued cooperation with this process.cc:Ross Shideler, Associate Dean, Graduate DivisionEvelyn Leon, MSO, Anthropology

UCG RAIJUA'j'E !)IVISIONAnthropologyAppendixReports, Survey Instruments, and Program RequirementsThis appendix contains the detailed reports that provided the basis for the overview containedin the executive summary for the Anthropology program.The information in the following set of reports has been assembled using data from the UCLAGraduate Division Enterprise Information System, the UCLA Registrar's Student Records Database,and two graduate student surveys. This appendix contains samples of the two survey instruments.Relevant notes, including data definitions and explanations of statistical analyses whenappropriate, preface each report. To assist the reader, the explanations and reports have beendivided into sections. The last document in the appendix is a copy of the published ProgramRequirements for Anthropology.Date Printed: 5/7/2007

UCLA C;RADLJA'fE I)IVISIONProgram ProfileThis report contains longitudinal data for 10 years (1996-1997 through 2005-2006) includingadmissions, degrees, doctoral candidates, enrollments, student financial support, and doctoral degreeprogress., Date Printed: sn12007

l1Ci .Q,'(d( \1 JL \1' ;1!\J"'H1'Profile Report: ANTHROPOLOGY.1996-97 11997-98 I 1998-99 I 1999-00 I 2000-01 I 2001-021601 1971 1591 1321 1183.561 3.55\ 3.561 3.611 3.59~ ~ ~ ~3:731 3.861 3.731 3-:84\ 3.651141 101 141 -101 I2002-0310-yearaVG.157.703.6319.603.Bl10.00.3.77or;;1996-97 I 1997-98 I 1998-99 I 1999-00 I 2000-01 I 2001-02 I 2002-03 I 2003-04 I 2004,.05 I 2005-061 l~;:.ar111 81 111 61 81 - 81 SI 81 81 61 7.90I>'Doctotal candidates 2004-05 12005-061 10-yearI11996-971 1997-9811998-9911999-00 I2000-01 I2001-02 2002-03 2003-04IaVG.IDoctorates Advanced in Academic Year I 211 111 141 91 131 18 12 8 111 61 12.3010':1.Page 1 of3' ••, ••r"1

uc~ .:~ (, I( I: H \ tIt l i .. i"': I P ..Profile Report: ANTHROPOLOGYEnrollment Summaries 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-0610-yearava.Leave of Absence 17 26 25 18 13 13 16 12 16 14 17.00l:3'imF~ ... -ell{:;:,;;:· ..•.. ./.. :¥\!l§ I' ...... :Jl~···\1:~ ~~ ;86::. J~:., L· . .7it!:l1:( :~~ "!iz !::;; ..•./ :·/1IllIO\iJITotal Registered Fall Term 111 89 96 90 88 82 73 75 67 62 83.30New 14 10 14 10 7 7 12 8 9 9 10.00Returning 9 15 9 14 9 7 3 7 6 3 8.20Continuina 88 64 73 66 72 67 58 60 52 50 65.00Master's 0 4 3 0 2 0 0 17 0 0 2.60Pet Total Enrollment 0.00% 4.49% 3.13% 0.00% 2.27% 0.00% 0.00% 22.67% 0.00% 0.00% 3.26%Doetoral Pre-Candidacy 82 53 60 55 53 48 45 27 40 36 49.90Pet Total Enrollment 73.87% 59.55% 62.50% 61.11% 60.23% 58.54% 61.64% 36.00% 59.70% 58.06% 59.12%Doetoral Candidates 29 32 33 35 33 34 28 31 27 26 30.80Pet Total Enrollment 26.13% 35.96% 34.38% 38.89% 37.50% 41.46% 38.36% 41.33% 40.30% 41.94% 37.62%Foreian 6 8 7 8 6 8 7 6 6 3 6.50Pet Total Enrollment 5.41% 8.99% 7.29% 8.89% 6.82% 9.76% 9.59% 8.00% 8.96% 4.84% 7.85%Underrepresented Minorities 17 16 14 15 13 9 4 7 6 5 10.60Pet Total Enrollment 15.32% 17.98% 14.58% 16.67% 14.77% 10.98% 5.48% 9.33% 8.96% 8.06% 12.21%Female 72 60 60 50 54 49 46 48 44 43 52.60Pet Total Enrollment 64.86% 67.42% 62.50% 55.56% 61.36% 59.76% 63.01% 64.00% 65.67% 69.35% 63.35%Non-Cal Residents (Domestic) 6 3 7 4 4 3 6 3 4 7 4.70Pet Total Enrollment 5.41% 3.37% 7.29% 4.44% 4.55% 3.66% 8.22% 4.00% 5.97% 11.29% 5.82%American Indian 1 2 2 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 1.40Pet Total Enrollment 0.90% 2.25% 2.08% 1.11% 2.27% 2.44% 1.37% 1.33% 1.49% 1.61% 1.69%African-AmIBlack 9 7 7 5 5 4 0 0 1 0 3.80Pet Total Enrollment 8.11% 7.87% 7.29% 5.56% 5.68% 4.88% 0.00% 0.00% 1.49% 0.00% 4.09%Chicano/Mexican-Am 3 4 2 4 3 2 2 2 0 0 2.20Pet Total Enrollment 2.70% 4.49% . 2.08% 4.44% 3.41% 2.44%· 2.74% 2.67% 0.00% 0.00% 2.50%Latino/Other HisDanic 3 1 1 3 2 1 0 3 4 4 2.20Pet Total Enrollment 2.70% 1.12% 1.04% 3.33% 2.27% 1.22% 0.00% 4.00% 5.97% 6.45% 2.81%Filipino 1 2 2 2 1 0 1 1 0 0 1.00Pet Total Enrollment 0.90% 2.25% 2.08% 2.22% 1.14% 0.00% 1.37% 1.33% 0.00% 0.00% 1.13%Asian 6 5 8 6 7 5 4 6 6 6 5.90Pet Total Enrollment 5.41% 5.62% 8.33% 6.67% 7.95% 6.10% 5.48% 8.00% 8.96% 9.68% 7.22%Caucasian 80 59 67 58 60 54 51 49 41 41 56.00Pet Total Enrollment 72.07% 66.29% 69.79% 64.44% 68.18% 65.85% 69.86% 65.33% 61.19% 66.13% 66.91%Other 2 1 0 3 2 3 4 3 4 4 2.60Pet Total Enrollment 1.80% 1.12% 0.00% 3.33% 2.27% 3.66% 5.48% 4.00% 5.97% 6.45% 3.41%Unknown 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 4 4 3 1.70Pet Total Enrollment 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 3.66% 4.11% 5.33% 5.97% 4.84% 2.39%Page 2 of 31::­

uel ":\ c,J< ,:n \t f \1;\ ;'=1.1'\Profile Report: ANTHROPOLOGYj:.Financial Support 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06MERIT-BASED SUPPORTPer Capita Merit Based Support - Supported $14,830 $16,069 $16723 $16,287 $17,229 $19,415 $21,125 $23,507 $26,053 $30,841 $20,208Master's --­ $10,884 $16,228 $9,890 $19,715 $563 --­ --­ --­ --­ $11,456Pre-ATe Doctoral $15,241 $18,003 $18,236 $18,526 $20,01

UCLA GRADUA'J'E I)IVISI()f\!Undergraduate Institutions ofProspective & Entering Graduate Students,2002-2006This table shows the undergraduate (or comparable) institutions of prospective and entering graduatestudents, including the location of institution.Date Printed: 5/7/2007

Anthropology*Fall 2002 through Fall 2006Undergraduate InstitutionUC Los AngelesUC BerkeleyStanford UnivCornell UniversityNew York UniversityUC Santa CruzOther U.S. InstitutionNorthwestern UnivRice UniversityPrinceton UniversityUniv WashingtonAmherst CollegeBrown UniversityUC Santa BarbaraUC IrvineUCSan DiegoUniv Pennsylvani~Undrgrd Adm*Non GradCSU FullertonUC DavisColi William And MaryEmoryUSuny BinghamtonUniv ArizonaQueens CollegeSuny Univ At BuffaloDartmouth CollegeLoyola Univ ChicagoUniv ofAmsterdamDuke UniversityGardner-Webb UnivHarvard C Enrolled UndergradBates CollegeNorthm Arizona UnivPont Cath Univ RioTexas A&M U Crps ChrUniv MontrealUniv OttawaUniv of ChicagoUnknownReed CollegeOther Foreign InstitutionUniv Michigan Ann Arbor"Univ Southern CaliforniaColumbia CollegeHarvard UnivSan Francisco State UnivLocationCaliforniaCaliforniaCaliforniaNew YorkNew YorkCaliforniaArmed Forces-AmericasIllinoisTexasNew JerseyWashingtonMassachusettsRhode IslandCaliforniaCaliforniaCaliforniaPennsylvaniaCaliforniaCaliforniaCaliforniaVirginiaGeorgiaNew YorkArizonaNew YorkNew YorkNew HampshireIllinoisNetherlandsNorth CarolinaNorth CarolinaMassachusettsMaineArizonaBrazilTexasCanadaCanadaIllinoisOregonMichiganCaliforniaNew YorkMassachusettsCaliforniaApplicants3823677191865664321171512111095555443332221111111332314107555Admits Registrants5 34 34 23 23 22 22 23 13 12 12 12 12 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 13 02 02 01 01 01 01 01 01 0

Anthropology*Fall 2002 through Fall 2006Undergraduate Institution Location Applicants Admits RegistrantsUniv Wisc Madison* Wisconsin 5 1 oAuto U of Madrid Spain 2 1 oBrandeis University Massachusetts 2 1 oCase Western Reserve Univ Ohio 2 1 oDalhousie University Canada 2 1 oGeorgetown UnivDistrict of Columbia2 1 oooooHaverford CollegePennsylvania2 1Swarthmore College Pennsylvania 2 1University ofIowa Iowa 2 1Calif Institute Tech California 1 1New York U Tisch Sch Arts New York 1 1 oTufts University Massachusetts 1 1 oTulane University Louisiana 1 1 oUniv ArkansasArkansas1 1 oNatl Taiwan UnivTaiwan9 o oUC Riverside California 6 oooo oUniv II Urbana Illinois 6oWashington Univ Missouri 6ooUniv VirginiaVirginia5CSU NorthridgeCalifornia4 o oOberlin CollegeOhio4 o oOccidental ColiCalifornia4 oo ooooPeking Univ (Beijing)China, People's Republic 4Pomona ColiCalifornia4 oSeoul Natl UnivKorea, Republic of4 oUniv FloridaFlorida4 o oUniv Maryland Col PkMaryland4 o ooUniv Nebraska Lincoln*Nebraska4 ooUniv Notre DameIndiana4oBarnard ColiNew York3 o oBoston UniversityMassachusetts3 o oBrigham Young Univ - UtahUtah3 oo oBucknell UnivPennsylvania3oCarleton CollegeMinnesota3 o oCSU Los AngelesCalifornia3 o oooooooDrew UniversityNew Jersey3 oooooGeorge Washington UDistrict of Columbia3Indiana Univ BloomngIndiana3James Madison UnivVirginia3Miami Univ OxfordOhio3Michigan State UnivMichigan3Pennsylvania St Univ Univ Park Pennsylvania3oRichard Stockton Coli ofNjNew Jersey3oSanta Clara UniversityCalifornia3Suny Center AlbanyNew York3Texas A&M Univ College Sta* Texas3Univ Colorado Soulde"Colorado3ooooooooooo

Anthropology*Fall 2002 through Fall 2006Undergraduate InstitutionUniv Illinois ChicagoUniv New Mexico AlbuquerqueUniv North Carolina Chapel HIUniv Pittsburgh Pittsburgh*Univ UtahWake Forest UnivAmer Univ of BeirutAmerican UniversityArizona State UnivBaylor UniversityBryn Mawr CollegeColorado CollegeConnecucutCollegeCSUFresnoDavidson CollegeDrake UniversityIowa State UnivKenyon CollegeKomazawa UniversityLouisiana State UnMiddlebury CollegeMount St Marys Coli ChalonNatl Cheng Chi UNatl U of SingaporeOhio State Univ ColumbusRutgers University*San Diego State UnivScripps ColiTel Aviv UnivTexas Tech UnivTrinity UniversityUC Los Angeles Honors ProgUniv ConnecucutUniv DelawareUnivKansasUniv Mass AmherstUniv North TexasUniv of PunjabUniv of San DiegoUniv South FloridaUniv Texas AustinUniversity of OregonVassar CollegeWellesley CollegeWestm St Coli CoWestm Washington UniversityWheaton Coli MaLocationIllinoisNew MexicoNorth CarolinaPennsylvaniaUtahNorth CarolinaLebanonDistrict of ColumbiaArizonaTexasPennsylvaniaColoradoConnecticutCaliforniaNorth CarolinaIowaIowaOhioJapanLouisianaVermontCaliforniaTaiwanSingaporeOhioNew JerseyCaliforniaCaliforniaIsraelTexasTexasCaliforniaConnecticutDelawareKansasMassachusettsTexasPakistanCaliforniaFloridaTexasOregonNew YorkMassachusettsColoradoWashingtonMassachusettsApplicants33333322222222222222222222222222222222222222222Admits Registrants0 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 0

Anthropology*Fall 2002 through Fall 2006Undergraduate Institution Location Applicants Admits RegistrantsWheaton College IIIllinois2 o oZhongshan UChina, People's Republic 2 o oAmer Coil ofLondonEngland1 o oAmerican Inti Coli Massachusetts 1 o oAntioch UniversityOhio1 oAoyama Gakuin UnivJapan1Arizona St Univ Arizona 1Auburn Univ Montgomery Alabama 1Azusa Pacific UniversityCalifornia1Baruch CollegeNew York1Beloit CollegeWisconsin1Bennington CollegeVermont1Biola Univ California 1Bloomsburg Univ Pa Pennsylvania 1Bogazici University Turkey 1Brooklyn CoilNew York1Bunkyo UnivJapan1Cal Poly PomonaCalifornia1Cal Poly San Luis Obispo California 1Cambridge Univ England 1Carleton Univ Canada 1Cent Inst Nationalit China, People's Republic 1Centrl Michigan Univ Michigan 1Cheyney UniversityPennsylvania1Chiang Mai UnivThailand1Chungnam National University Korea, Republic of 1City Coli New York 1Claremont Mckenna Coli California 1Coli Wooster Ohio 1Cornell ColiIowa1CSU Long BeachCalifornia1CSU SacramentoCalifornia1CSU San BernardinoCalifornia1Denison UnivOhio1Depaul University Illinois 1Dongguk UniversityKorea, Republic of1Duquesne UniversityPennsylvania1E China Normal UnivChina, People's Republic 1Eastern Washington University Washington1Edinboro University ofPa Pennsylvania 1Esc Nac Anth YHisMexico1Ewha Womans UnivKorea, Republic of1Fed U ofBahiaBrazil1Fordham University New York 1Fudan UnivChina, People's Republic 1George Mason UniversityVirginia1Georgia State UniversityGeorgia1ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

Anthropology*Fall 2002 through Fall 2006Undergraduate Institution Location App'licants Admits RegistrantsGrand Valley State University Michigan1Guilford CollegeNorth Carolina1Gustavus Adolphus C Minnesota 1Hamilton College Ny New York 1Hanyang UniversityKorea, Republic of1Harding UniversityArkansas1Hartwick College New York 1Harvey Mudd Coli California 1Hawaii Pacific Univ Hawaii 1HebrewUniv Israel 1Hebrew University Israel 1Hokkaido UnivJapan1Hosei UniversityJapan1Howard UniversityDistrict of Columbia1Hunter CollegeNew York1Idaho St UniversityIdaho1Indiana Purdue Univ Ft Wayne Indiana 1Inst Tecnl Monterrey Mexico 1Inti Christian Univ Japan 1Ithaca College New York 1Kyungpook Natl Univ Korea, Republic of 1Lawrence UniversityLiberty UniversityLife Bible CoilLoyola MarymouDt UniversityMacalester CollegeMadurai UniversityMarquette UniversityWisconsinVirginiaCaliforniaCaliforniaMinnesotaIndiaWisconsinMiddle East Tech U Turkey 1Millersville Univ Pa Pennsylvania 1Minnesota State Univ Moorhead Minnesota 1Mit Massachusetts 1Monash Univ Australia 1Mount Holyoke College Massachusetts 1Nankai Univ China, People's Republic 1Nanking Univ China, People's Republic 1New College Florida Florida 1Nihon University Japan 1North Georgia Col & State Univ Georgia 1Northm Illinois University Illinois 1Oakland University Michigan 1Ohio University Ohio 1Oklahoma State Univ Stillwater Oklahoma1Oregon St UnivOregon1Pacific University Oregon 1Peking University China, People's Republic 1Pensacola Chrstn Col Florida 11111111oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

---!Anthropology*Fall 2002 through Fall 2006Undergraduate Institution Location Applicants Admits RegistrantsPont Cath Univ Chile Chile 1 0 0Pont U CathRio Gran Brazil 1 0 0Pontifical Cath Univ Peru 1 0 0Ripon College Wisconsin 1 0 0Rollins College Florida 1 0 0Rutgers U Cook College New Jersey 1 0 0Rutgers U Douglass College New Jersey 1 0 0Rutgers U Univ College New Brn New Jersey 1 0 0San Jose State Univ California 1 0 0ShanghailnstForLg China, People's Republic 1 0 0Shimane Univ Japan 1 0 0Simon Fraser Univ Canada 1 0 0Smith Col/ege Massachusetts 1 0 0Sookmyung Womens Uni Korea, Republic of 1 0 0South Dakota St Univ South Dakota 1 0 0Southrn Adventist University Tennessee 1 0 0Southm Methodist University Texas 1 0 0Southm Oregon University Oregon 1 0 0Southwest Tx State U Texas 1 0 0St Cloud St Univ Minnesota 1 0 0St Johns Univ Mn Minnesota 1 0 0St Lawrence Univ New York 1 0 0St Marys College Md Maryland 1 0 0St Marys University Tx Texas 1 0 0St OlafCol/ege Minnesota 1 0 0Stephen F Austin State Univ Texas 1 0 0Suny Center Stony Brook New York 1 0 0Suny Coli New Paltz New York 1 0 0TempleUniv Pennsylvania 1 0 0Truman State University Missouri 1 0 0U Nacional La Plata Argentina 1 0 0UofAnkara Turkey 1 0 0U of Bordeaux 3 France 1 0 0UofSydney Australia 1 0 0U of The Philippines Philippines 1 0 0Union Col/ege Ny New York 1 0 0Univ Arkansas Little Rock Arkansas 1 0 0Univ British Columbia Canada 1 0 0Univ Louisville Kentucky 1 0 0Univ Mass Boston Massachusetts 1 0 0UnivMiami Florida 1 0 0Univ Minnesota Mpls Minnesota 1 0 0Univ Nevada Reno* Nevada 1 0 0Univ ofDelhi India 1 0 0Univ ofModena Italy 1 0 0Unlv ofMumbai India 1 0 0Univ of The South Tennessee 1 0 0; .

Anthropology*Fall 2002 through Fall 2006Undergraduate Institution Location Applicants Admits RegistrantsUniv ofTokyoJapan 1 o oUniv of VermontVermont 1 o oUniv Pittsbrgh BradPennsylvania 1 o oUniv Rhode IslandRhode Island 1oUniv RochesterNew York 1 o oUniv South Carolina AikenSouth Carolina 1 o oUniv Tennessee Chattanooga Tennessee 1 o oUniv Tennessee KnoxTennessee 1 o oUniv Texas ArlingtonTexas 1 o oUniv Tx-Pan AmericanTexas 1 o oUniv VictoriaCanada 1ooUniv Wisc Milw Wisconsin 1 o oUniversity of Haifa Israel 1 o oVrije University Belgium 1 o oWaseda University Japan 1 o oWesleyan University Connecticut 1 o oWestm Oregon University Oregon 1 o Whittier CoJlege California 1 o oWhitworth College Washington 1 o oWilliam Smith Coli New York 1 oYale University Connecticut 1 oooYamaguchi Univ Japan 1 o oYonsei Univ Korea, Republic of 1 o oo o oYork College Pa Pennsylvania 1Youngstown State University Ohio 1Five Year Total 806 ~9 47* Sorted in descending order by number of Registrants, Admits, & Applicants\.,.\(

Merit-Based Support to Graduate StudentsThis table presents data on the types of merit-based support received by graduate students duringthe past 10 years (1996-1997 through 2005-2006). The report shows total dollars and the percent ofmerit-based support represented by each type of support.Date Printed: 517/2007

veLD. ,!-;.\\.! \~l ,lj\;~n~\ MERIT-BASED SUPPORT TO GRADUATE STUDENTS IN ANTHROPOLOGYEMPLOYMENT1996-1992000-2001........................ 2001-20021........................ 2002-20031.,2003-200GSRGSR Salary I Supplemental""TA SalaryTASupplemental""TOTALMERITSUPPORT$76,353 ~~~.~5 J~77,239 $64,772 $1,334,758--_. -_._.. - . .._-.­ ~._---"!·(;I!~nl!~.fi'oil'!~~iiJi'Y~~r$83,093 . _.._~!.7.!.~.1 EP~.,?89 .... $54,.!.13 $1,349,800 1.1%~~9Q,~~4 $9,773 $361,610 $62,715 $1,438,251 6.6%. ._- --­ ... ..._-­-'-...!1~!,01Z $34,271 _1~~,570 . .._.1?0,832 $1,417,005 -1.5%....... _---_..'.$1~~?9~ . $38~~1 $3.~,747 .$11,.783 $1,326,653 -6.4%. _.. ­. $2.1i,~~~ $37,416 . J.?~4,901 $6~,372 $1,456,157 9;~%f-'--­.. !:1.93,826 ... . .!~!.~?:8 .:g!,~-,.§~4 _. $7~QZ~ $1,478,724 1.5%._E~!!680 $74,877 $307,171 $117,863 $1,598,499 .'·8.1%_. _ ..__ ... _._.­ _.. __.­,---­~.~.3..!_~48 ~??,?§6 .!.282!1,?5 . ~11§,~7.7 ~1,?§}-,;382 ,t3%_._"-'"$146,830 $36,526 $261,218 $112,580 $1,850,478 11.0%NOTES:The funding displayed here is merit based funding received by students in this major. In most cases, this is funding from the student's department, but it mayalso reflect funding received by these students from other departments.Graduate Division Grants and Fellowships includes funding from the Univ of CA, special allocations from the UCLA Chancellor, and centrallyadministered endowment funds.Federal Fellowships/Scholarships includes and fellowship money from feceral sourcesDepartmental Gifts and Endowments & Other Support includes funds controlled by departments/schools, funds from the academic dean's officeallocated to deparmtments, and endowments specific to an individual department.Private Funding Sources includes private agency fellowship funding such as foundations and indiViduals. Prior to 1999-2000 these funds were includedin the Departmental Gifts and Endowments categoryGSR funding comes from a variety of sources and is paid to students through the GSR payroll titles.""GSR and TA "Supplemental" includes fee remissions and payments for health insurance.Page 1 of 2

0(,1,1" I,~ ... \i'l \11 ;:j\: .....il·'MERIT-BASED SUPPORT'TO GRADUATE STUDENTS IN ANTHROPOLOGYPERCENT OF MERIT BASED SUPPORT BY TYPE OF SUPPORTI'~'-"" '''?' ";I EMPLOYMENT I"'~?'~~"',TOTALGSR TA MERITGSR Salary Supplemental·· TA Salary Supplemental·· SUPPORT5,7% 1,0% _._-.--. 28,3% 4,9%...._-­100,0%6.2% 1.3% 21.8% 4.0% 100.0%........................ .__ .. _._----­ ... ---'-~'_."._.. _-­7.0% 0.7% 25.1% 4.4% 100.0%........................ .--_.__.__. --._ ......_----_...... .... _­ ... _-_.. -.. -_._---­.~.~~~.7.?QQ9 ; 10.7% 2.4% 30.0% 5.0% 100.0%2000-2001 . 11.0% 2.9% 26.3% 5.4% 100.0%........................ .- -­2001-2002 < 14.7% 2.6% 19.6% 4.6% 100.0%........................ .... - -_. ----­ .._-­13.1% 3.4% 18.2% 4.9% 100.0%........................ -"- --_. _ .. ---­2003-200 13.9% 4.7% 19.2% 7.4% 100.0%;~2.4% '.. :1> f~% I ~:~J},; .... iI11.6% 3.5% 16.9% 7.0% 100.0%-----_.. _....'-'---'7.9% 2.0% 14.1% 6.1% 100.0%1,:.2005·2006 TOTAL MERIT FUNDING FOR ANTHROPOLOGY COMPARED TO TOTAL SOCIAL SCIENCEAnthropology ..i='~cE!nt of ~gis~~E!~~!!J~~n.~_s!:Pp_Clr:tec!Jn?995-200~: 85.71%P~~ capita suppo_r!f~~ thoser~ceiving support _ . $30,84!Per C:'!E!!.a_~up.p_0t! for C!11l1!n~ClI!~~.stu.dt'!.~~s.(base~ one_nrollrl1El~!):~?6,'!.~_~Social Science~_e~~.!.E! regis.!.~rt'!~s!~E~..t:J~~.~~£.Cl':!~.~_iI1...2995-.29g?: 87.48%i='t'lr _c:~pita5upp~rt for t.~()~~_~e~.':!v!rl~~~pp0rt: !?5,~?~Per capita support for all enrolled students (based on enrollment): $22,710Page 2 of 2

UCLA GRAIJUATE DIVISIONGraduate Council Survey of Enrolled Students (survev included)*Quantitative DataThe 'first report presents results of a Graduate Council survey of current students enrolled in WinterQuarter 2007. The report summarizes the results and compares all programs in an academic yearthat have been surveyed for Graduate Council reviews. A copy of the survey instrument is attached.*Open-Ended CommentsThe second report provides a transcription of the responses to the open-ended questions on thesurvey. This report provides rich qualitative evaluations of the department from matriculatinggraduate students.Names have been redacted, and only minor spelling and grammar corrections have been applied thatdo not in any way change the semantics of the students' comments. Other than this syntacticalediting, the students' comments have been transcribed as is and have not been edited for clarity.Date !'rinted: 5/7/2007

UCLA (;H,\Dl .\1 E (>lVlSIO;-";IUCLA Graduate Council Survey -Item by Item Report1Re!>~~tsf':-0!!1 s~de~~who~E!!urn~Ethe.~ra~i!!~~o_L!.~.!=!I_ Surv~y._i~ W!~!l:!r 2p07 '! . ..Please ~ee en~ ~! r~E9r:t f()r ~.l!fTlQ..er ()f respo.rldE!rll:? ,!nd resp()llser~te~-, .I~~~cXl c ~ Xl c::I III'C :s 'c .... :s'cIIIIII::IIII E ~Sl ~Slc IIIcj)) cE.... c '51 ! ::I '51 XlQ) '51 III c :::i ~ CXl c ~.0 c >- C ~:sU w III Z :s11.1 III ::IE w8''C::J ,~ ... J!! j))IIIZ ~ '0 E .... U~ ~ ~ ~ el IIIc: a. Ece o E 'i 'c ::I u C ~ ~ ·co 11.1e c i oIII~c III c ~I IIItiC ! 's .e IIIIII e E c E o .!!! 'j!! EQ) f o E a; "CI III'i- :5::J ~ 1:: 8 oC~ ::I .e u0' ~ ce ce ~ ~ as a w o .... '! ~ :E: Z A. ~ ~ .3:Percent who indicated "Very Satisfied" or"Satisfied" on the following itein~?_ % %. % % % % % % . % % % % % %. % . % % %? Advising/guidance from faculty_ ___. 54~6 '8"7.5 8303 76:4 iOci.o 55.481.0 67.9: 85:7 ioo.oi-80:0i 58:8- 59:4175.0· - 82:2T" 66:1' 9iX 6a:B6 .Advising/guidance from departmental staff _ 54:6'100.0 -- 66.7' 64_7 76-:5' S'fT 783 67:8' 85f··715'·40.0~·- - 52.9· - ·50.1:·- - 72.6· 80.6: ". -54.0.--92.1.- ._.._-- --_.. -'-'!".Formal evaluations (other than grades) on progress75.07 tOW~_rQ_ your degree . . _ __ _. _ ._ .__ 36.4 45.0 66.7 53.0 53.0 27.1 59.4 44.6 28.6 71.5 30.9: 47.1 31.2' 52.4 54.8 .'!.3...:§. 71.1 62.6The availability of faculty members in your department8 for_ c.o!1~ultil!!o.n~ 54.6 82.5 5q,Q 64.7 100.0. 64.8 81.0, 69.7 71.4 100.0 50.0 82.4 68.7 73.8 71.0 70.2 94.7 68.8j:-9TI:t~9!J~~!..!!'gl1Jctlo.':!_!l)lecture ~lass~_~Jn_Y.~~ lTIiljor 81.8 7.205 66.7 58.!J 76.5 5~1. 59.4 64.3 85.7. 8?! 7Q.0 70.6 65.7 75.0 67.8 59.7 84.2 50.0- The quality of instruction in seminar classes in your10 m~or 1!:l... 2 97.5 6.§:7 100.0 88.2. 55.4 91.9 60.7 85.7 100.0 60.0 88.3 40.7 65.5 71.0 62.1 86.9 75.111 .The.g!!..il.II!Y_2! i!)g!!!ctionJ!i. laboratory or field classes. _ 9.1 37.5 ?§.}­ 35.3 29.4' 52.7 7.8 30.4 42.9 14.3 10.0' 35.2 3.L3.~ 53.6 35.5 58.9 84.2 25.1The value of required courses for educating you in your12 field 1OJ),0_ 75,9 ~6·Ei 64.7 88.2 5.2:1 ~3.7 64.3 57.1 100.0 EiQ:O ~~,~ 65.7?1.Q §~.4 521 86.9- 62.5The·vaiue of departnientai requlrenients In facITitiltlng13_'b0ur edu~ational and rOf~ssiona: ~oals .-.r __ 63.6 70.0 66.7 76.4 88.2 43.3 75.6 67.8 57.1 100.0 40.0 58.8 62.5 77.4 64.5 63.7 39.5 56.3epaitrii"en a resources I rary, a oratorres,eqUipment, etc.) provided for student research and14 sc~ol~rship 45.5 70.0 75.0 70.6 88.2 58.1 86.4 60.7 85.7 8S,8~ 40.0 82.4 65.6 86.9 67.8 43.6 47.4 ~0.015 I!le: ~!?~c~ a~ililabl!,!.ln_y_o!!r «ie.l2ilr:!.~n.! f()r ~tude!:!.t llse 36.4' 55.0 66.7 23.5 100.0 40.5 83.7 42.9 85.7 100.0 0.0 64.7 56.3 52.3 50.0 52.5 89.5 18.8'The sense of community among graduate students in16 _YQ~ ~~r!!ne:~.L _ _.. _.. ..__ __'" .. 63.7 80.0 91.7 70.6 100.0 56.8. 81.0 67.9 57.1 85.7 10.0 64.7 37.6 71.4 62.9 78.2 89.5 50.0The extent to which faculty in your department are17 sensitivE!.!Q dJy.e:rsJ!Y...!!?_~!!es _. ._ _ .... _ .. 18.2 72.5 50.0 76.5 82.3 :g:~. .89:.?,. 42.9 71.4 85.8 70.0 47.0 46.9 76.2 37.1 ~~I._. ~7.9 62.618 The _~~~!'!. of graduate students in jlou~J)!~af!l_ 63.i5: 72:5 75.0- 47j 94.i" I?~!., z..~:§; s],S 57.T 85:8' - 30:0 58.8 59.1:;. 65.?: ,~,-2: '!?-~i 94,!L ':50:0'19 .I!J.e:!!,!vel 2!_!inanc~la~stanceyou have !.e:.~ved __ 36X 62.5 66.6 765 94.2 41.9 78.4: 48.2 71.4 100:0--80.0- 82.4 56.3' 69.1 74.2 42.7' 81.6 50.0The extent to which your department helps you obtain20 f1nilnclill sllpport 18.2 62.5 58.4 82.3 94.1 29.7 67.5 42.9 100.0 100.0 40.0 82.3 50.0 60.7 61.3. 25.0 47.4 68.821 The overall quality of faculty mentoring ill your program 27.3 85.0 91.7 58.8 88.3 45.9 64.8 51.8 57.1 100.0 ~O:O 58.8 50.0 63.1 70.9 47.6 92.1 56.3M:\Apps\lnstitutional Research\Program Review\2007-2008\Anthropology\4 Anthropology GCS Item by Item Report_xis Page 1 of 3

__ •••• 63.?.;UCLA (;J.t\IH 'SI E DIVISIO:-';...w.0E:::lZcEIng:J0'Dl VI Dl GI VI g'c .!!!.5; VI'!!! 'C'C '2 lii'" GI" GIGI -... III Dl::l GIGI ........ III oWc 11).5 Sc::I 11)._.­ C Dl'­ Dl C VI DlDl >­ III c.... C III GI CC Dl .!:! W GI III GI;; Ww.. >.... c.::II -GI.2 GI >­ ii :g eI u 0 oW rJU 0 E E .!:! III .­ ._ .. 11)._! c. ce 0 " = E C w::l U C- C GI'" III .­ C IIIVI e C 0 E c. 0 E • E III .co.c Ill" E C 0 .­ ulii 1: ~ 'iii U .2 0 8 lii ~ ~ j§ ::Ece ce GIc[ c[ c( I:A U W CJ ... ......DlC.­ l!!::IZVIU.­ VI.r4.GI:;...'ii:>;:.._ III.­!l!USEDl4.VIIIIGIl:i- c[..Ju::::>VIGI.­"::IIoWII).VICGlE~;:..The extent to which faculty in your department educateand assist graduate students In obtaining appropriate22 employmen!after they complete degrees. __ -. _.. 27.3 30.0 16.7 23.6 5].Q 13.5 32.4 32.1 57.1 71.5 10.0 41.1 25.0 35.7 22.5 33.9 26.4 31.3The inclusion of graduate students in departmental23~e.rnanC!!.. ' . . .'" _ 0.0 67.5 8.3 29.4 94.2 25.7 43.2 23.2 71.4 85.7 0.0 47.0 3.1 44.1 16.1 41.2 21.1 50.1The equity of the distribution of-financial support within24 :~our program. '===a' __=:-: r=;­ ..•; ercent who se,e...e "",.rong.y Mgree" or1.8,?­ 50.0 3~} 7~.? 70.6 21.6 43.2.~.5.-7. 71.4 85.7~ 20.0 41:t 18.8 '!U~ 40.4i 18.5 71,§.i.37.6:"Agree" on the following statements about theirprimary faculty advisor: .._'i 'Is willing to spend the time necessary to advise me onI; i25 academic matters . '. . . . . !!~ 92.5 ~,~ 94,!../g.l !!~.?, 95.~ 75.Q 100:.12; 100.0. !QQ.:9, 88.2[ 81.L 78.~_ 90,11 . 58.0 . !oo.oi ... 81.3'~~ :fnSists that wedlscuss.!!.1'yr~s~a~~bonClrE!Q.iJJ~! bClsis 27~ 60,Q; ~:.1. 53.Q.. 82.4 51dj ?h~.??~~. ~Z; 85.7! 70.0~ _ 70.&; 46.9 48.8[ g~.20.9.. 60.61. 68.8)2!.§ Y~lY..easy to approach._. c __,._ _."'" 81.9i 95.0; 83.4 88.~. 94.! 86.1: 81.!. D.·i 100.!!: 100.0~_ !OO.O[ 88.21 78.~. ~. 80.7,. 52.4'.. 97.4[ . 81.312~ '!§~nowledgeable aboutfQ.~~degreerequlremE!r1!:S 63.7.85.0, 75~ 88.~ 88,l.~:±! 75.§. 69,§, 85,1.: 100.0 70.0! 82~i 81.2 80.9;. 83.81 62.9. 89.5L . .75,Q~ i~l~erested i~.!!lY 99a1s anl!.!!,:Qjects ..._ . 0 92.5 83.l 94.1 94..!. 83.8 86.5 69.7:. 100.0 100.0 100.0' .76:.1: 59.4 _ 67.8!.. 87.1: 46.0 .. 92.1: . 75.1130canbe relied upon to ~mE! constru_C!i\l!! cri!i5=ism of IT ~,.!! 92,~ 91.1. 88~ 88.2 ?J!,l ?'i..?" 76.!!, !OO.Q; 100.0 100.0 88'~i . 71.9 70.2J 83.81 41.9. 86.91 ,75.1i3!Return~'!1Ywor~Jl!.Q.rT!P!!Y. '.~: =__...' 72.7,; . 87.5' 58·l. 82.3 88.? 79·1· ?'j",?, JL±~OO.O! 100.0~ 100.Oj 94.~ 78.1.. 69.0~ 82.3i 46.8 92.L _87.6132 Makes C1!1 effort to secure financl~ supportfQrrJ:!.e ~4.6. z.?.5 Z~,Q l~.~ .!!!!,?-. 73.[ Z?,~. 60·Z 85.:?, 100.Q. 60.0. 82.4 68&... 32.2~ 8.2.31 20~ .. 81.6 ~?}ExplaIQ~!~strategles.Qf survival I!!. graduate sc.h()ol 63.§. 60.0 Z~,Q. S8.~ 82.~. 56.8i 70.~ 60.:?. 71.±. 85.7 80,,!!. 52.9 53.2. 57.t 67.1.~ 315 86.9: 62.5:34 ~ncour~es ~nd~.QQ.~ my rese~..r:

__UCLA (,I-C'\Dl'\1 V !>1\'ISIO,'Xal lG g'! lG g'.5 :g'i:.a 1II:g 'i:i .a III E ~.a aJc 1I),5! ~ II) .5 E lG... .- C al'- al C III al al .­~ g' >- III c...I C 1lI.9! C ! a. "CIIU g' .~ IU GI III GI "CI IU III III ::::IE ~ - > ...I Co - ... oW:::3 GI ~ >- III .- III o.a ~ - lG II)z ~ leE .~ 1! .~ .~ ; (1).- ~ ~ .111C _ 0 c( 0 "CI _ E C IU U C al III :> .- Co - C GI ... 0 III .- C III C U - cuJ:i III ~ C 0 E Co E I' E I'll .c .- .- III 4: E1Il o.c III ~ E C 0 .- U ~ ~ ,- ..I~ ~ 1: ~ 'jjj ti .9 0 8 ~ ~ ~ j§ ~ ::::I .c lI! v g0', c( c:e or( q; q; CICI V IU ~ '"" '"" '"" • z a. Wi ::;) :>fif.la.ncial support ,., '. __ mn_' .u.,.,. __ .. _. , .I Percent who answered "yes" to receiving thefollowing !yp,es o.fs~pp~rt: .'__ .... .. .... ., ,.. ,. .,.. ,__ n __ _._ , __~4 ..,IA-ship . 54'2 60.0 100.0 58.BlOO,Q. ~~.. 81,]," 60.l., 100.0 71.4 ... 30.0 82.~ SO.Q. ..!!.l 91.2.:. J!1.:, ].9,87.54~ ...GSR-ship, 27.3' 42.~ 16.Z; .. 23.~ 82.4 43.,~: .,~7.8:28.6 11.2 85..?. 20.0. 29.1:. 56.3 ._...§..:2.,_, 67.7; 1O.5! .. 31.6~ . .J!Z:2c46 :..Fe!I,ows,hJp 27.3 85.0 7.5,0. . 100:0_ 70.6 47.3 94.6' 58.9 57.1 !9.Q:Q .19Q"o. 70.6 34.4 25.0' ~.~;. 25.8L,76d,_100.Q,i " .~ __._ ••• 0 _. • • __ , __ ••.as the (one) most important type of funding for47·degree..I!!',Il!tress: .. ,. _,. ..... '... .... __ ..... _ .._! 'n , l,!~:~ 9.1 Z..2 4.!:! 0.0 17.6§:.!!., 1!!:2; 3D.,'! 57.1 ?.!1:§ 0.0 41.2 15.6..!.1l .29.0 ~L. ,..Q,Q: 6.3G~R-ship , ' . .2,1 ~,2 o..,Q: 5.9 47.1 2~Q.~'!' 10.7: Q,Q 1'!,1;Q:Q;Q:Q: 4~& g! 38.7:. 1,:§,[ ?U: 0.0'Money from other empL0'iment 36.4 5.0 . 0.0' .Q,Q ...Q,Q ~:..!.: mQ.Q!.1&: .Q,Q; ,Q.Q 0.0' ..Q.,Q,l,l: ...§..:2.f ,~ 1:§l..Q..Q[ .....Q,Q~ellowsh!p__,. 1.!1.:.? 72.5 25.0.: 8.!1'?" 29.4 31:.!1, 67._~. 3~1 42.9, 5Z ..!: 20.0 52.9 1~,~, 22.6 25.8' 21:!!\ llJ,,: 9~1~oanlNeed-~~~,J!r.i!nt ~~.!Q.Q 2~.Q 5.9. Q,o..§:!!': Q.~ !!:~. Q.Q. Q:o.' 10.0 1':2: .!i,?, 48.8, .. .!:§ 45'~l O.O!.. 0.0Pe!,s.I?!1.?I/fa.mil'tfIJIl~ 18.2 7.5 8.3' 0.0 0.0 17.6 2.7 7.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.4' 9.5 0.0' 16.1' 2.6 0.0'ilsi:ciirtiiigoiiera graduate c11reer again, percent'who would select:4llThe samelJniverslty .. 54.S i2~5 75.0 7O,§. 82.4 48.6 73.0 58:9! 85.7 7i.4 60.0 64.7 40.6 69.0- 71.0, 59.7; 84.2' 43.8'4~ :J:!1~ sam~ field of study 72.7 8is 91.7 70.6 100:0' 7Oj' .,,86.r 83.9; ioo.6' 57.1 80.0' 76:5 68~7; . 75.0: . 72.61'" 75.8! :84.2 62.5-_._- _ ..

Student Degree Objective:PHD';OpoO-Eodod Commonts, Graduato COuncil Survoy, WintBr 2007Theappropriateness ofFactors which Factors which The nature of work as a course and otherhelp your hinder your TA and/or GSR at UCLA, The reasons why some The overall degree Any questions you believeprogress progress its value as part of your students have left our intellectual requirements in the review team shouldtoward your toward your education, and the quality graduate program before quality of regard to your raise and/or areas theydegree degree of the training you received completing their degrees your program career aspirations should examine,IF':.",;"There are notenough coursestaught and groupsconvened to supportmaking a paperpublishable. Thereneeds to be morehelp and emphasison helping us learnhow to pUblish.There is not a secure enoughfield of employment for PhDs inanthropology.Wednesday, May 02, 2007 Anthropology, Open·Ended Comments. Graduate Council Survey, Winter 2007 Page 1 of 14j:..I

Ie:'Student Degree Objective:Factors whichhelp yourprogresstoward yourdegree·!I\.lI1V' .Funding isthesingle most. Important factor indegree progress.TAshlps should beawarded early andfellowships shouldbe awarded later Inthe graduateprogram.Factors whichhinder yourprogresstoward yourdegree. The expectation byadvisors that thedissertation be avery large andtheoretically complexbody of work. Thisrequires that thestudent spend yearsworking on thedissertation in orderto bring it up to thehigh standards of theprofessors. Thedissertation Issupposed to be thebeginning Of thestudent's career, notthe summary of alife's work.Less emphasisshould be placed onthe dissertation, butrather on graduatestudent publications:To write acIlssertation ANDpUblish severalarticles beforegraduation is verytime consuming andgreatly hindersdegree progress.Many otherdepartments havealready cued into thischange and insteadhelp students focuson what is needed toget a job aftergraduation. TheBiologicalAnthropologists inPHDThe nature of work as aTA and/or GSR at UCLA,its value as part of youreducation, and the qualityof the training you received...;-,.....:.'....:':.. :.The nature of work as a TA isvery demanding and someprofessors'require a .very largetime commitment from theirTAs. Teaching takes up a lottime that could be devoted todegree progress. Manystudents spend'3 years as ateaching as.sistant and can onlydevote half as much time to theirdissertation research and writingduring that time period. TAshipsare valuable for learningteaching skills that will no doubthelp students in their futurecareers. However, after 2-3TAshlps, the graduate studenthas learned the majority of whathe/she needs.The reasons why somestudents have left ourgraduate program beforecompleting their degreesLack of funding, conflict withadvisors, tired of being astudent. desire for a reasonableincome.The overallintellectualquality ofyour programVery highTheappropriateness ofcourse and otherdegreerequirements inregard to yourcareer aspirations'·:';/;;:~f:·';··;'The four fieldrequirement isexcellent. Thereabsolutely needs to be areqUired course for grantwriting during thequalifying exam andproposal writing year.Any questions you believethe review team shouldraise and/or areas theyshould examine:~ ..~::/-~,.The order and allocation offunding should be reconsidered.Wednesday, May 02, 2007 Anthropology, Open·EOded Comments. Graduate Council SurJey. Winter 2007 Page 2 of 14

j:.... Student Degree Objective: PHD.Factors whichhelp yourprogress'toward yourdegree'F'c;lclors whichhinder yourprogresstoward your.degree .The nature of work as aTA and/or GSR at UCLA,its value as part of your. education, and the qualityof the training you receivedThe reasons why somestudents have left ourgraduate program' beforecompleting their degreesThe overallintellectualquality ofyour programTheappropriateness ofcourse and otherdegreerequirements in .regard to yourcareer aspiratipnsAny questions you believethe review team shouldra;s~ and/or areas theyshould examine:."..,.::~". I:RiitfI have receivedintellectual andemotional supportfrom my chair andadviserS at keyturning points in mytime at thedepartment. Thecareful advice,monitoring andencouragementfrom our GraduateStudent Adviserwho does an. amaZing job hasbeen crucial.our department havealready altered thefonnat of thedissertation to reflectthis change in .hefield ofAnthropology. Theother fields shouldfollow as well.Time and energyspent applying forfunding is oftenfrustrating. Lack 9fguidance inpreparing research. and grant proposalshas made thrprocess moredifficult. Finally,excessive influenceby advisers on thedevelopment of workat the writting upphase while wellIntended is stifling. Ithink there is a finebalance which maybe difficult to achievebut is necessary for .students to bothdevelop their ownpotentiaI andtrajectory and betrained and guided inthat processTAships are importantopportunities to learn how toorganize and present material ina lecture and discussion setting.It would be helpful however tohave TA assignments be. moreflexible and to be notified of theassignments earlier, sincecurrently students TAing areoffered their appointments onlythree weeks prior to the end of aquarter and are notified of theirTAing schedule only two weeksprior to the beginning of the nextquarter. This makes planningand making decisions for ourown work more difficult than itneeds to be; and creates a lot ofanxiety. Further, there is littleroom for Input from studentsTaing in tenns of being assignedto TA courses which· wouldbetter fit schedules that wouldsupport their degree progress.Dissillusionment with an Very good In tenns of degreeacademic career, which is therequirements there areonly career path envisioned byfew problems. I wouldthe Depatment for its graduatelike to see more diversitystudents.in the seminars offeredfor graduate studentsbeyond thosereqUirements.I think faCUlty need to mentorstudents more carefully and on amore individual basis, especiallythe more advanced students. Iwould have liked to have morefeedback during my fieldworkexperience, which I sought anddid not get.J;.Wednesday, May 02,2007 Anthropology, Open·Ended Comments. Graduate Council SurJey. Winter 2007Page 3 of 14

Student Degree Objective:Factors whichhelp yourprogresstoward yourdegree:1;,:11,generous researchfunding andfellowships duringcrucial periods ofthe program - ieduring the qualifying~;.exam quarterFactors whichhinder yourprogresstoward yourdegreelots of funding viaTAships - althoughthis is a greatexperience and theworkload of TAing forthis department isquite reasonable, itdoes slow progresstowards degreePHDThe nature of work as aTA and/or GSR at UCLA,its value as part of youreducation, and the qualityof the training you receivedexcellent TA training programand support from other TAs,staff, and faculty while teaching.The opportunity to TA for upperdivision classes is useful - youlearn the material very well andgain experience for futureteaching jobs.The reasons why somestudents have left ourgraduate program beforecompleting their degreesvery high­theoreticallyrigorousconflict with advisor and lack ofsupport for their researchinterestsThe overallintellectualquality ofyour programTheappropriateness ofcourse and otherdegreerequirements inregard to yourcareer aspirationsgood. The four-fieldrequirements are crucialto having a roundedanthropologybackground and buildinga successful careerwithin a diversedepartment. I wish thatseminars were moredirected and that someoffered a deeperunderstanding of thehistory and foundationsof the field.Any questions you believethe review team shouldraise and/or areas theyshould examinenoneWednesday, May 02,2007 Anthropology, Open-Ended Comrnents. Gmduate Council Survey Winter 2007 Page 4 of 14

k:­Student Degree Objective:PHDTheappropriateness ofFactors which Factors which The nature of work as a course and otherhelp your hinder your TA and/or GSR at UCLA, The reasons why some The overall degree Any questions you believeprogress progress its value as part of your students have left our intellectual requirements in the review team shouldtoward your toward your education, and the quality graduate program before quality of regard to your raise and/or areas theydegree degree of the training you received completing their degrees your program career aspirations should examineli,j'lI jcHMy advisors, both The only factor which Working as a TA has been From what I have heard, most of This is excellent ­ I feel the course and Not exactly a question, bULl feelmy primary advisor genuinely hinders extremely valuable in preparing these situations arose from the nearly all of the degree requirements are the department could do more toand the rest of my progress is the lack me to teach university courses research interests of the faculty, across all exceptionally provide entering graduatecommittee, are of funding as a professor. Teaching a students diverging too far afield ofthe subfields, appropriate ­ students with opportunities to dodedicated to striking opportunities. Some variety of courses, in particular, from the expertise of their are highly anthropology is a four­ genUine anthropological fieldworka balance between of this is a strikes me as a useful means of advisors, without any alternative regarded in their field discipline, and the in their first summer, by visitingtimely completion of consequence of preparing the next generation of advisors available in the specialties. This only way to maintain that faculty fieldsites to conduct theirmy degree and factors outside of the anthropology prOfessors to department who are beller is not just the in­ into the future is to master's thesis research. Theengaging in department's control, instruct across sUbfields, and suited for those interests. There house prepare all graduate lack of opportunities for early,productive such as the priorities should be encouraged more. have also been some perspective, students to speak mentored field experience isresearch, of national funding The TA training was very good, personality conflicts, I either - when across subfields by partly caused by the lack ofencouraging me to agencies, and the and did prepare me for many of understand, but these were speaking with educating them in the faculty with active fieldsites (atstay on track while department has the situations I encountered as a secondary to the overall other graduate basic precepts of each. least outside ofthe Los Angelesallowing me the taken steps to TA. However, the departmenfs mismatch between the students' students at I do know that several area). One does get thetime to work ameliorate this reliance on TAships as the only and the advisors' interests. academic other graduate students impression that faculty considercarefully on my situation by offering real source of funding for most Unfortunately, it seems the conferences, they in this program do not the field to be somewhere oneideas. They small research graduate students does force advisors In these situations have are frequently share my opinion, and I goes until tenure is received.provide genuinely grants in-house. many of us to spend more rarely dealt with this in a impressed with would like to suggestconstructive Given the nature of quarters teaching than is constructive manner, simply the overall and that their complaints becriticism, telling me anthropological desirable; after the first three or telling these students towards diverse quality of discounted as shortwhenthey think I fieldwork, which four quarters of teaching, we the end of the year that they our faculty sighted; both in terms ofmay be wrong (and requires considerably have learned most of what we have to go, which does not roster. We seem understanding thewhy) without more costs than are going to learn from this provide any opportunities for to have very, very history of anthropologydiscouraging me, other social experience, particularly when we looking into other programs to few of the as the comprehensiveand treat me with sciences, however, teach the same course quarter continue their graduate notorious kind of study of humanity, andrespect ("as a junior more opportunities after quarter. The time education (again, this is only professor who in terms of beingcolleague," as one for funding would demands of TAing are very high, what I have heard, primarily from stopped keeping prepared for theof my advisors once greatly improve the and it effectively eliminates the the student's perspective - it up with scientific vagaries of academia,put it). degree progress, as opportunities to work towards may well be that the need to progress upon where cross-disciplinarymany of us are one's own degree. Basically, 1 change programs was made receiving tenure interaction will onlyforced to spend feel TAing is a very valuable clear by the advisor but ignored (although there become more common.years TAing, or opportunity, which should be by the student). I think it would are one or two of Not wanting to studyteaching at reqUired of all graduate students be good if the faculty, when those). lingUistics or biologycommunity colleges, in the program, but it should not confronted with this kind of because it's not one'sinstead of completing be relied upon as the only kind situation, took more proactive "thing" ignores the factour research and of funding available for most steps to help their student find that an anthropologist iswriting our students, as it currently is. an appropriate place to continue expected to know aboutdissertations. One their stUdies, rather than simply more than one thing.helpful measurewash their hands of them.would be to increasethe amount of GSRsavailable toWednesday, May 02, 2007 Anthropology, Open·Ended Comments. Graduate Councii Survey. Winter 2007 Page 5 of 14

Student Degree Objective:PHDTheappropriateness ofFactors which Factors which The nature of work as a course and otherhelp yourprogresstoward yourdegreehinder yourprogresstoward yourdegreeTA and/or GSR at UCLA,its value as part of youreducation, and the qualityof the training you receivedThe reasons why somestudents have left ourgraduate program beforecompleting their degreesThe overallintellectualquality ofyour programdegreerequirements inregard to yourcareer aspirationsAny questions you believethe review team shouldraise and/or areas theyshould examine~.::IIImy own doggeddetennination, notmuch elseadvanced graduatestudents, to be usedto conduct their ownfieldwork under thesupervision of theiradvisor.lack of gUidancefrom facultylack of faculty in myspecific researcharea who couldadvise me on what todo, what to read,who to talk tono clear idea oftimetable (oftenoperated under selfimposed deadlinesthat were notrequired)TA work is vital to gettingclassroom experience,experience with students, but isan enonnous amount of workthat takes much time away fromown work- to do a thorough jobas a good TA leaves little timefor much else so this is difficultto balance- but shoudl berequired of all grad studentsamazedthat some in programfor so long with no TA experiencethe pressure is 'intenseagain felt likethere is not muchof a communityworking on myfocus so don'tknow how toevaluate this- feellike muchresources,energy,intellectual powerbehind certainsubdisciplinesand not othersthisis obviousproblem with 4field departmentand with linguistand psych anthbeing so valuednot much is leftover for othersubdiscplinesvaluablemake the intro proseminar morehelpful in orienting new studentsinto what the dept. is all aboutand how to survive- havequarterly meetings with faCUltyand students to address keeppeople connectedvery isolating experience formany- feel like you are hiking upa huge mountain alone ... with noend in sightfeel that grad. cohort is not verydiverse and not representative ofpopulation of los angeles,california, usa, or world...11:.personal reasonssurprised by lackof politicalengagement ofdepartment as awholeoutstandingvery appropriateall students should have thierown desk space. not just some.Wednesday, May 02, 2007 Anthropology. Open·Ended Comments. Graduate Goimeil Survey. Winter 2007 Page 6 of 14

Student Degree Objective:PHDTheappropriateness ofFactors which Factors which The nature of work as a course and otherhelp your hinder your TA and/or GSR at UCLA, The reasons why some The overall degreeprogresstoward yourdegree'I'."Interest groups that'provide space forreading recentstudies and/orprogresstoward yourdegreeits value as part of youreducation, and the qualityof the training you receivedAs a GSR I have hadopportunities to firsthandobservation of how faculty planclass, write letters of rec,students have left ourgraduate program beforecompleting their degreesintellectualquality ofyour programExcellentrequirements inregard to yourcareer aspirationsWould like to seeofferings in 1.ethnographic fieldmethods/data collectionpresenting our own prepare ideas for writing; the 2. ethnographic reportresearch; financial assistance of the writing 3. linguisticmentorship of GSRship is invaluable to me for analysis particular to thelinguistic financing my program of stUdy. work of lingusiticanthropology The opportunities for less antropologistsfaculty; GSRship;TAship; availabilityof help in learningto use appropriatetechnology (video)for research; help infellowshipapplication writing-­especially in, anthro200formalized interaction with afaculty member has beeninvaluable, although the work Ido is not directly related to myown research interests.Any questions you believethe review team shouldraise and/or areas theyshould examineWednesday, May 02, 2007 Anthropology, Open· Ended Comments. Graduate Council Survey Winter 2007 Page 7 of 14

(­Student Degree Objective:PHDFactors which Factors which The nature of work as ahelp your hinder your TA and/or GSR at UCLA, The reasons why some The overallprogress progress its value as part of your students have left our intellectualtoward your toward your education, and the quality graduate program before quality ofdegree degree of the training you received completing their degrees your program,"n'------is The classes that are I've been verytremendously required to meet happy with myknowledgable and core requirements coursework thushelpful. Being for the master's far and with theassigned multiple degree were all faculty I've met.advisors as an offered during the I've beenincoming student winter quarter, disappointed withhas also been making it impossible the "intellectualhelpful. to get them out of quality" of manythe way in one year.The biologyrequirement, with itscombinedundergraduatelecture and seminar,is especially onerous.of my graduatestudentcollegues, manyof whom seemeither frightfullypre-professionaland/or not verygenuinelyinterested inanthropology_They are not avery diverse lot,socioeconomicallyor otherwiseandI would urgethe admissionscommittee toaddress thisissue in the future.Theappropriateness ofcourse and otherdegreerequirements inregard to yourcareer aspirationsAny questions you believethe review team shouldraise and/or areas theyshould examineWednesday, May 02, 2007 Anthropology, Open· Ended Comments:C:;raduate Council Survey Winter 2007 Page80f14

j:;.student Degree Objective:PHDTheappropriateness ofFactors which Factors which The nature of work as a course and otherhelp yourprogresstoward yourdegree'I':'JJIIWeekly labmeetings, yearlyseminars forhinder yourprogresstoward yourdegreeTaking interestingnon-required classes.TA and/or GSR at UCLA,its value as part of youreducation, and the qualityof the training you receivedThe reasons why somestudents have left ourgraduate program beforecompleting their degreesThe overallintellectualquality ofyour programGreat. Vibrant,vital and interdisciplinary.Bothdegreerequirements inregard to yourcareer aspirationsAppropriate. There couldbe more methodscourses offered (bothdiscussion faculty and qualitative andresearch, pressure students are quantitative).to present inconferences, facultybroad minded,interested andfeedback and 1-on­abie to engage in1 meetings. a wide range ofresearchmaterial.Constant informalinteractionbetween studentsand faculty alsopromotesintellectualdevelopment andcuriosity.Any questions you believethe review team shouldraise and/or areas theyshould examineWednesday, May 02, 2007 Anthropology, Open-Ended Comments Graduate Council Survey. Winter 2007 Page 9 of 14

j;..Student Degree Objective:PHDTheappropriateness ofFactors which Factors which The nature of work as a course and otherhelp your hinder your TA and/or GSR at UCLA, The reasons why some The overall degree Any questions you believeprogress progress its value as part of your students have left our intellectual requirements in the review team shouldtoward your toward your education, and the quality graduate program before quality of regard to your raise and/or areas theydegree degree of the training you received completing their degrees your program career aspirations should examine'II'1) Knowing that I 1) Having a chair 1) TA Training -- Excellent. Our As far as I know/assume: Intellectual quality No problems. I would How do professors learn towould receive who is new to department's program is well 1) The doctoral program was not of the faculty is only suggest more advise students through thefunding one way or advising students developed and addressed many for them - did not make them excellent. practical training - "how research design, fieldwork, andanother each year. through the doctoral of my questions before I had to happy. Seminars and to" advice or then dissertation writing process?.2) -~- -------. program - unfamiliar step foot in the classroom. The 2) Chairs suggested they may talks are "professional skills How as this changed with theSupport, with req's and TAC I was trained by was an not have the skills to "make it" generally training"-- job searches, environment of universities?knowledge, regulations -- has not excellent mentor beyond simply and asked them to leave excellent. publishing, structuring a Given the tremendous pressurespractical advice, yet developed a teaching pedagogy - this made a 3) No/very slow degree progress Intellectual quality dissertation, data put on faculty members, there isfriendship. personal system to great difference in my 4) Conflict with Chair of our graduate analysis, methods, not much time left over to think3) Extremely get students through. developing a teaching style and I don't think many people leave students var,ies ­ fieldwork, etc. There are about howlwhy/where gradaccessible and 2) Poor practical finding my place as an instructor. our program because of strained but I suppose this resources within UCLA, students get stuck in program. Insupportive faculty training for field 2) Most professors seem very relations or lack of support from all sorts itself out but I would like to see today's academic environmentmembers ­ research. Our sensitive to the time constraints faculty. Most people switch through extemal more department driven we no longer have the luxury ofwillingness to meet department comes faced by TAs arid do not advisors, as I understand it. It is funding and later advice on these things. an "apprentice - master"with and advise up short on the overwhelm us with work. a bit unclear how the two job searches. There is a particular relationship where we can takestudents even when practical "how to" 3) In all the courses I have TA'd (three?) people who were asked There is a rather portfolio of activities and our time working through thesenot on their advice for both for, I would feel comfortable now to leave the program last year hostile division related skills we should issues. I don't have a solutioncommittee. research and diss designing and teaching my own were notified -- there was some and self-exclusion end the program haVing and only want to point out that4) My own writing. We go into syllabUS for a large lecture anXiety among grads thinking between Bio Anth mastered or at least the environment in the universitydetermination, the field not really course. that such a decision from the and the other practiced. Many grads has changed over the pastper.severence and knowing what our 4) The only frustration I have department/chair could just subfields which is don't realize this until it decade(s) and there isn't apushiness to find faCUlty members do encountered is the lack of come out of the blue without a frustrating to is too late. system or support resources toanswers, support, in the field nor how organization and coordinallon one on one meeting and clear those of us who help grads and faculty workand opportunities. they do it. We lack from some faculty 'members .­ objectives being firs t given to the would like to have through these new timeMaking sure faculty start to finish the resulting conft..ision falls on student along with a chance to more exchange. pressures without sacrificingmembers know who understanding of the shoulders of TAs who achieve these objectives prior to It further seems quality of education. The chair ­I am. Asking how projects evolve, ultimately do not have the dismissal. counter­ grad relationship is still the cruxstudents further modify, and reach authority to fix the problem. FOr productive to the of the system, but with facultyalong for their the stage of example: changing the syllabus agenda of facing increasing expectations tosuggestions and publication. It's all a and assignments in the middle building a pUblish, teach, etc. and there isadvice. Frequent mystery through of the quarter, telling students partiCUlar school simultaneously a pressure to getcontact with my which grads go who want to protest their grades of thought for grad students through thecommillee through a hazing to talk to their TAs while the UCLA's Bio Anth. program faster -- yet themembers. process of anxiety professor does not have (or My networks with university seems to have givenand worry without follow) a clear policy, not being Biological little thought as to how theseany benchmarks. aware of ineqUitable workloadAnthropologistschanges impact the relationshipbased3) Lack of space for distribution among the team ofare all outside ofeducation model of mostgrad students in the TAs. UCLA, where doctoral programs. Somethingdepartment to work these exchanges has to give and hopefully thatout of, partiCUlarly are not won't be quality of the PhDs weduring exams and dissmissive of my produce or sanity of facultydiss writing. This is subfieldlfieldwork members.Wednesday, May 02, 2007 Anthropology, Open-Ended Comments, Graduate Council Survey. Winter 2007 Page 10 of 14

Student Degree Objective:PHDTheappropriateness ofFactors which Factors which The nature of work as a course and otherhelp your hinder your TA and/or GSR at UCLA, The reasons why some The overall degree Any questions you believeprogress progress its value as part of your students have left our intellectual requirements in the review team shouldtoward your toward your education, and the quality graduate program before quality of regard to your raise and/or areas theydegree degree of the training you received completing their degrees your program career aspirations should examine1:-.•'Jr.,Departmentalfunding andemphasis ondegree progress.particularly true forLing Anth, Psych­Med Anth andSociocult Anthstudents. It seemsunfair to see thelovely labs/offices ofBio, Sloan, and Archstudents, while wemust fight for adesk.Lack of funding otherthan TAships, whichare very timeconsuming.I very much value the first 4-5times I TAed, and consider it tobe an essential part of myeducation/training. The next 6-7times were not useful beyondthe funding involved. Thoughmy experience In being a TA islimited to our department, I thinkthat we do a very nice jobtraining TAs and involving themin the teaching process.Conflict with committee chair isthe most common reason,though poor academicperformance and life changes(like having a baby) are otherreasons. I'm not aware ofanyone dropping the programdue to lack of funding, which issomething the departmentshould be proud of.but focused onexploring thesameanthropologicaltopics fromdifferent angles. Ifthe atmospherewere different, Ilikely would havecontinued withmore courses inBio Anth.Extremely high.Most of thegraduatestudents seem tobe convinced, atleast during thefirst years, thatthey are,surrounded bypeople that aresmarter than theyare. For many ofus, this is bothhumbling andmotivating, andit's a great feelingthat you aresurrounded bysharp minds whoare interested inhelping youimprove yourresearch.I thought that the degreerequirements were fine.The department does not go farenough in encouraging/emiblingstudents to publish their work.Finishing the PhD with severaltop-notch publications in hand isessential to getting a goodacademic job, and ourdepartment clearly favorsfinishing quickly over finishingwith an impressive CV. Thearchaeologist that we are likely tohire in the Fall had a huge list ofpublications, despite the fact thathe had not yet filed hisdissertation: This is directlyrelated to the fact that he took 11years to finish his degree.Seems like a smart trade-off tome, considering that he got thejob. Finishing in 6 years with nopUblications is not a goal that weshould embrace. This person'sdepartment (ASU) activelyencouraged (required?) the useof seminar papers as thebeginnings of publications.While this is harder in a 10-weekquarter, we should definitely dosomething similar here.Wednesday, May 02,2007 Anthropology, Open-Ended Comments. Graduate Council Survey. Winter 2007 Page 11 of 14

,IStudent Degree Objective:PHD1;.:'. Factors which Factors which The nature of work as ahelp your hinder your TA and/or GSR at UCLA,progress progress its value as part of your.toward your toward your education, and the qualitydegree degree of the training you received',1/

Stud~nt Degree Objective:Factors whichhelp yourprogresstoward yourdegree.1:":lIl'I have thrived in ourdepartmentbecause of themultitude of.opportunities for~:. dialogue between. faculty andgl1ilduate .students.The faculty workhard to foster avibrant intellectualcommunity and Iappreciate that. Ialso appreciate thedepartment's manyopportunities forfunding.k;:Factors whichhinder yourprogresstoward yourdegreeI think the corecourse requirementsare unevenly .distributed. Forexample, inbiologicalanthropology. nonbiostudents arerequired to take avery largeundergraduatelecture class. I thinkthe structure of thisclass is not fair tograduate students.For example,although we alsotake a separate gradseminar which meetsas much as regulargrad seminars. thecourse stili has anundergraduatecourse number. Thisyear. although thecurriculumcommittee decidedwe needed to have aharder midterm andfinal than the anthro7 students, we stillonly received creditfor tal

k:'Student Degree Objective:PHDTheappropriateness ofFactors which Factors which The nature of work as a course and otherhelp yourprogresstoward yourdegreeI¥··••••Money. Goodadvising (myhinder yourprogresstoward yourdegreeTA and/or GSR at UCLA,its value as part of youreducation, and the qualityof the training you receivedThe reasons why somestudents have left ourgraduate program beforecompleting their degreesThe overallintellectualquality ofyour programdegreerequirements inregard to yourcareer aspirationsAny questions you believethe review team shouldraise and/or areas theyshould examineSelf doubt.I value being a GSR both for myability to work with a professorFrom what I understand. thepeople who left the programI think this is thebest anthropologyI value the four fieldapproach because IHow living in LA can negativelyaffect one's experience at UCLA.mentors are and for the money. were people with poor faculty program. think it has broadened Finding out why some studentsawesome). relations, not serious about my perspectives. tum down UCLA--is it funding oracademia, or not interested innot enough prestige or no clearacademia anymore.matches? I'm curious.Wednesday, May 02,2007 Anthropology, Open-Ended Comments. Graduate Council Survey. Winter 2007 Page 14 of 14

Graduate Council SurveyUCLA(; R/\l ) t~/\.·I'l~:,r)IVISI{)NGraduate Council SurveyThis survey examines your expectations, experiences, and levels of satisfaction as a graduate student in a widerange of areas in your program. At the end, there is an opportunity for you to further elaborate your views throughopen-ended questions.The survey should take 20 minutes or less to complete.Please click on the "Submit" button below to save your responses.1. What is your major: f_M_a.,:.jo_r _If you are pursuing two I " .degrees, indicate which: Concurrent/Articulated ProgramsIndicate your current degree I ,. .2. objective: c;urrent Degree ()~j13Gtive3. ~nb~~c~~:our ultimate degree IUltirTlCite [)egree ()bJectiveWhich best describes your4. current degree progress IDegree Progress Standingstanding:NoPlease use the following scale to rate your satisfaction with Very Satisfied Opinion Dissatisfied Veryaspects of your program's instruction, advising, &resourcesl Satisfied . or Dissatisfiedenvironment:Neutral5. Advising/guidance from faculty6. Advising/guidance from departmental staff0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 07.8,Formal evaluations (other than grades) on progress toward your 0 0 0 0 0degreeThe availability of faculty members in your department for 0 0 0 0 0consultations9. The quality of instruction in ·Iecture classes in your major0 0 0 0 010. The quality of instruction in seminar classes in your major11. The quality of instruction in laboratory or field classes0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0(101'4)5/3/2006 11:IH:15 AM

Graduate Council Survey12. The value of required courses for educating you in your field0 0 0 0 013.14.The value of departmental requirements in facilitating your 0 0 0 0 0educational and professional goalsDepartmental resources (library, laboratories, equipment, etc.) 0 0 0 0 0provided for student research and scholarshipNoVery S f f d Opinion 0" "f VerySafISfdaIeIS IeorIssatls led 0"Issatls" fledNeutral15. The space available in your department for student use0 0 0 0 016.17.The sense of community among graduate students in your 0 0 0 0 0department or programThe extent to which faculty in your department are sensitive to 0 0 0 0 0diversity issues18. The morale of graduate students in your program19. The level of financial assistance you have received0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 020.The extent to which your department helps you obtain financial 0 0 0 0 0support21. The overall quality of faculty mentoring in your program0 0 0 0 0The extent to which faculty in your program educate graduate22. students about, and assist graduate students in, obtainingappropriate employment after earning degrees23. The inclusion of graduate students in departmental governance0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 024.The equity of the distribution of financial support within your 0 0 0 0 0programPlease use the following scale to indicate your agreement with the Strongly 0" StronglyAgreefollowing statements about your primary faculty advisor: Agree Isagree Oisagree25. Is willing to spend the time necessary to advise me on academic matters 0 0 0 026. Insists that we discuss my graduate program on a regular basis 0 0 0 027. Is very easy to approach 0 0 0 028. Is knowledgeable about formal degree requirements 0 0 0 029. Is interested in my goals and projects 0 0 0 0'·30. Can be relied upon to give me constructive criticism of my work 0 0 0 031. Returns my work promptly 0 0 0 0(2 of 4)5/3/2006 II: 18: 15 AM,~:

Graduale Council Survey32. Makes an effort to secure financial support for me o o o o33~ Explains the strategies for survival in graduate school o o o o34. Encourages and supports my research ideas o o o o35. Teaches me what it means to be a professional in my field of study o o o oThe following questions are about your scholarly activities. Yes NoDoes your department have any organized research seminars or colloquia at which36. graduate students can present their research?Don'tKnowo 0 o37. If yes, did you ever present any of your research at such a seminar or colloquium? o 038. Have you ever received funding from your department to attend national meetings? o 039. Have you been encouraged by your faculty members to publish? o 040. How many articles have you published as sole author? ~ Published ,I41. How many articles have you co-published with others (faculty, students, etc.)? ICo-Publishe

',----.51. Factors which help your degree progress toward your degree1__--,52. Factors which hinderyour degree progress toward your degree--53. The nature ofwork as a TA and/or GSR at UCLA, its value as part of your education, and the quality of thetraining you received1 154. The reasons why some students have left your graduate program before completing their degreesI55. The overall intellectual quality of your programIII56. The appropriateness of course and other degree requirements in regard to your career aspirationsII57. Any questions you believe the review team should raise and/or areas they should examineIIThank you for your assistance! Click on the "Submit" button below to save your responses.Technical ProblemsLast revised: February 2, 2006(4 uf 4)5/3/2006 11:18: 15 AM

UCLA C;RADu/\'rE DIVISIONDoctoral Recipient Exit Survey (survey included)UCLA doctoral recipients are asked to complete an exit survey when they file their dissertations. Thedata reported here have been collected from Summer 1996 through Spring 2006.*Quantitative DataThe tabular report summarizes the results and compares the subject program to similar doctoralprograms either by field of study or by professional school. Response rates appear on the surveyresults. A copy of the survey instrument is attached.Date Printed: 51712007

._­ -."---' " ..... '- .. - ••-•• -..._.. --­ •• _. .-'i}L~"/~',!i.\IJ! \:;'ill\; ....bi"\Results from students whor~ceived do~torate~ ~et\V~~!! S_limm~r 1996 ~nd Sprin~2006Ie;·~.cE~z~o~~9' _ _. ._.. ..__ ._Percent who indicated "Verr SCltisfied" or "Satisfied 1' on the following items:~,QQ....;=-

Lti. i,l~\JI: \. ,!I\

11110.1. UO!S!A!GI::;}lunpuJf)Ia:;}Juaps lupOsl~',rt'i'

UCLt\ C;JL\J)l A/'1~ J)l\'ISrOi\Shade cifcles like this:II~ Not like this:~25972Please enter UID Number:0TI II,D ". II ; u .." '•... '.I '.' ..2 .', , ;Doctoral Exit Survey• IIIn order to obtain information to evaluate and improve graduate programs and thedistribution of resources, the Graduate Division requests your assistance as a graduatingdoctoral student. Participation in the survey is voluntary and all responses will be3 am,rregated to ensure confidentiality. Your university ill number is requested so that we4 ,. . can use existing demographic data and minimize the survey length. Please submit the5 , • , completed survey to the Graduate Division when you fue your dissertation. Thank you, for your assistance. Congratulations on your accomplishments and accept our wishes6 G r r" r; • r, ,:for success in your future endeavors.7; 1 .., , . t: II ill8 Please use a #2 pencil to complete this form. Press hard & fill in circles completely.9Erase any errors.Please use this scale to rate your satisfaction with each of the following:1. Departmental advising!hruidance .2. Overall quality of instruction in hrraduate courses : ..3. Professional relationship with doctoral committee chair(s) .4. Level of financial assi.~tance .. 5. Faculty efforts assisting you in finding professional employment... .6. (werall quality of faculty mentoring .7. Resources provided for student research and scholarship ~ .YenNoSatisfied Satjsfi~d [)issati~fied ()pinionUse the following scale to indicate how often you had contact with your committee chair(s) at each of these stages:8. Selection of a disserta..tion topic .Cannot V

II ~25972UCLA Doctoral Exit Survey Page 2Using the following scale, please indicate the approximate number ofterms you received each of the types of support:22. T.-iship ..NOll(:II23. GSRship/RAship .24. Fellowship, traineeship, or grant ..25. Need based financial aid/loans .26. Personal/family or other funding only ..27. Was the financial support available within your program distributed fairly? NoUse the following scale to indicate whether you agree with each of the followingstatements as they apply to your dissertation chair(s):28. Was/were willing to spend the time necessary to advise me on academic matters .29. Insisted that we discuss my research on a regular basis ..30. Was/were very easy to approach .31. Was/were knowlegeable about forrrual degree reyuirements .32. '\X/as/were interested in my goaL~ and projects ..33. Could be relied upon to give me constructive criticism of my work.34. Returned my work promptly ..35. Made an effort to secure financial support for me.......36. Explained the strategies of survival in graduate schooL ..37. EJ>."plained the strateh>ies of survival of the dissertation process ..38. Encouraged and supported my research idea .39. Does your department have organized seminars at which graduate students can present their research?Yes No Don't know40. If yes, did you ever present any of your research at such a seminar or colloyuia?41. Did yOU ever receive funding from your department to attend national meetings?42. If you attended scholarly meetings (regardless of who paid) how many times did you go?6 or more times 3 to 5 times Twice OnceYesYesNoNo43. Did yOU ever deliver academic papers at national scholarly meetings? Yes No44. Were you encouraged by your faculty members to publish? Yes No45. How many articles have you published alone? None 1 - 2 3-4 5-6 Mote than 646. How many articles have you co-authored with your faculty members?None 1 -:2 3-4 5-6 More than 647. Please rate the time it took you to complete your dehrree:Much longer than expected .-ibout what expected Less than expected

II ~25972UCLA Doctoral Exit Survey Page 3II48. From the list below, please mark ONLY the ONE item which best describes your immediate post doctoral degree status:Postdoctoral fellowship / traineeshipTenure track faculty position in a college or universityNon-tenure track faculty position in a college or universityResearch position in a college or universityAdministrative position in a college or universityResearch position in a research instituteResearch position in private industryProfessional services offered to individualsFaculty position in education but not in a college or university.-\drninistrative position in education but not in a college or university.-\drninistrative position in private industry( )ther49. Is the position indicated above directly related to your doctoral degree trai~? Yes No50. Which of these BEST describes thisFellowship/traineeship to be held for several yearsTempora.rv job until something better can be foundJob with possible career potential.J ob with definite career potentialThank you for your assistance with this survey.Please use the available space to comment on your experiences as a doctoral student at UCL-\.Rev 8/05Office Use Only~t 0CJ. E11~.:,. m...; m.' 0 ~.18EI 013 I~ 8' 13 J!lI3I~113 .~ EJ0e1E10I3B8138' II

UCLA (;RADUA'l'l{~I)IVISIONDoctoral Degrees Awarded and Dissertation Titles: 1996-1997 Through 2005-2006This report provides information on students who received their doctorate between 1996-1997 and2005-2006, and is organized alphabetically by the faculty member who served as chair of thedissertation. The report shows the student's name, demographic status, gender, term admitted, termadvanced to candidacy, term degree was awarded, time-to-candidacy, time-to-degree, and thedissertation title.Some data elements warrant further description and are noted below.Data Definitions:Demographic Status:International (Inti): students with temporary visas.Domestic-Underrepresented (Dom-L1R); Domestic students (those who are US citizens, permanent residents,immigrants, or refugees) who are considered by the University of California to be underrepresented minorities:American Indian/Alaskan Native, Black/African American, lIIIexican American/Chicana/o, Latina/o/OtherHispanics, and Filipina/o.Domestic-Other

UCLA GRADl}.YI'E DIYIS,IONAnthropology: Doctoral Degrees Awarded and Dissertation Titles,1996-1997 through 2005-2006X~_~W:li*"", At_........Ali~wt1"W _~_~............ _ii\__i1'S;.=$;'I$~,~~,~ii\'~'$.~t!l~==~~"N~~~"IU!t~:!IX(~"'i._~'====~'*"'~=o(= (,;%,~~ ...~,=~""",,~"jj.=,_"'_""\~.o#!,_~.t, .....~ltil'

[j::.~____ .,fI"."I«ff,_.~_~~~,,,"'='W.~""" .$ "" ...... '"y=·~""'~"'"~&"J;;(w.~~=""' ....c~......."...~:~~'>t::~'Wo~'_$~.~o>lI

__~:O;

I.1~)itIr.~/Cm. on ~%lll __~~'~$(~~.:ll:lf.nto'.':::l;'~~~'~J!$V:_';';,"(;';(.'!~~-"'=';"~»O~"l''C_.'''.">''''~'= O"'·~':;;·'-='''·'.~',=!1.·'~'''','l'M~,~~~,:'..~'ff''W~'I::'[~~''''~==_>ro~~_~~,!\mtf: '''')I::;»'i;;;=~'~_ll.~.,.'l:.~DISSERTATION CHAIR I CO-CHAIR: BOYD, R. / JOHNSON, A.STUDENT DEMOGRAPHIC SEX ADMIT ATC DEGREE ATC ITONAME STATUS TERM TERM AWARDEDSMITH,NATALIE JILL International F F95 S98 SOl 3.00 6.00Dissertation Title: ETHNICITJ: RECIPROCITT, REP UTA TIO.V AND PUNISHMENT .4.1\' ETHNOEXPERfME.VTAL STUD}' OF COOPERATION AMONG THE CHALDEANS ANDHMONG OF DETROIT~__.-~>:$!t~'-'~'W.l~~!i:#!.~~-!I:~~~_~~>;(iW.@.&,DISSERTATION CHAIR I CO-CHAIR: BOYD, R. / STANISH, C.STUDENT DEMOGRAPHIC SEX ADMIT ATC DEGREE ATC ITONAME STATUS TERM TERM AWARDEDPLOURDE, AIMEE MARCELLE Domestic-Other F F95 S99 S06 4.00 11.00Dissertation Title: PRESTIGE GOODS AND THEIR ROLE IN THE EVOLUTION OF SOCIAL RANKING: A COSTL Y SIGN4LlNG MODEL WrTH DATA FROM THE FORMATTVEPERIOD OF THE NORTHERN LAKE TITICACA BASIN, PERUDISSERTATION CHAIR I CO-CHAIR: BRODKEN, K. / HALE, S.STUDENTNAMEDEMOGRAPHICSTATUSSEXADMITTERMATCTERMDEGREEAWARDEDATCITOFIKES,KESHA DANIELLE Domestic-Underrep ~inority F F92 S97 xoo 5.00 8.33Dissertation Title: SA1\TIAGUEf\'SE CAPE rERDEAN WOME,\' IN PORTUGAL LABOR RIGHTS, ClTIZElv'SHIP AND DIASPORfC TR.4NSFORMATTONAnthropology: Docloral Degrees Awarded and Dissertation Titles. 1996-1997 through 2005-2006 Date Printed: Wednesday, May 09, 2007Path:IISaturnllrislAppslProgram Review12007-200EPage 4 of 33

________________.... • •__...."""',A ..:. _Mi._""''''''' A _=---_~l'I'Il ..."l!l!t>t""'~I>f=~~."'~STUDENT DEMOGRAPHIC SEX ADMIT ATC DEGREE ATC TIDNAME STATUS TERM TERM AWARDEDZUCKER,ELEANOR ANDREA Domestic-Other F F93 597 W02 4.00 8.67Dissertation Title: PRECARIOUS PLACE: THE FOUNDING OF A TOURISM H'ORKERS' TOWN IN THE RlI'lERA iV/A fA, QUlNTANA ROO, MEXICO_'" mJ'!~'" ....._ ... "'" ---=-_~'"",''''",.I>.·~ ....._~~,~~",_llDISSERTATION CHAIR I CO-CHAIR: BRODKIN, K. / KROSKRITY, P.__STUDENT DEMOGRAPHIC SEX ADMIT ATC DEGREE ATC TIDNAME STATUS TERM TERM AWARDEDKAMPER,DAVID Domestic-Other M F96 WOl S03 2.00 4.33Dissertation Title:THE POLITICS AND POETICS OF ORGANIZING NA rAJO LABORERSDISSERTATION CHAIR I CO-CHAIR: BRODKIN, K./ PARK, K.(.STUDENT. NAMEDEMOGRAPHICSTATUSSEXADMITTERMATCTERMDEGREEAWARDEDTOYOTA, TRITIA Domestic-Other F F69 W03 F04 2.67 4.33ATCTIDDissertation Title: RECONSTRUCTfNG AN COLLECTIVE ASIA'" AMERICAN POLITICAL !DENTIn: POLITfCAL PROJECTS AMONG NEW CHINESE AMERICANACTfVISTS1c:.Anthropology: Doctoral Degrees Awarded and Dissertation Titles, 1996-1997 through 2005-2006 Date Printed: Wednesday, May 09, 2007Path:IISaturnllrislAppslProgram Review12007-200EPage 6 of 33

................ A. ""* * ~l'J~,..,~~_q""~~'-lrIi',,~~(Y'rr.

.1STUDENT DEMOGRAPHIC SEX ADMIT ATC DEGREE ATC TIDNAME STATUS TERM TERM AWARDEDWRIGHT, TIMOTHY ROBERT Domestic-Other M F89 S02 S06 3.00 7.00Dissertation Title:BOLIVIA -- MAKf.lI/G GArS IN A QUEER PLACE: AIDS, MODERNIZATlWi, AND THE POLITICS OF SEHJAL IDENTITT'ol"(:,,==-,DISSERTATION CHAIR I CO-CHAIR: BROWNER, C. / BRAY, F.i'i"'h"'-·.'~~""STUDENT DEMOGRAPHIC SEX ADMIT ATC DEGREE ATC TIDNAME STATUS TERM TERM AWARDEDROOT,ROBIN MACRAE Domestic-Other F F91 X93 F96 2.33 5.33Dissertation Title:FROAI 'WNAH KARA.'·;' TO AIDS: FA TORY WOMEN IN lvlALA rSIA BRIDGE THE RISKS TO DEVELOPAIENT_ ...." t"" "'~ ~~ ..~"~W:W,l.1!I"""",""_~":""""""",,,_~~.

• ·.~:I::'r~·'/(:'.,I:;"'l.~'X~~= 2m _ '" i~.~~~"W_m.=_~:~r.'Y.t(!. .....;F,r,t'; '.,··-:·{:.9J>...~('".~\·r.'~""',·,An>.:'_''>'! ..•':',",""""'Wt'"".'::.t'~;·_~_'!:i'.~{;r=~x.==~_,«,~"""

i~.p--..~_.~_~~~~-tt:ff'~.'~""'~_' ';"''''''-''''''"""V'''~''~;'-1,:''''''~-~'"''''."~··h~~"" ...·",~",}"w-,,''!l>:",,,.'''·';·'=""'J'''''''''.I'',~""",',·

__~'''''_'''~~O:-'''/''''''''''''''''''':Y.:"''''''''''''''''·~~~~"",~;«ffl,-~~~,_~~~ ~tlt_I'$;1·" 't' ~'WW"QS~_.f't~!(>7,",,~~~~",,_~~~"J:~'i>l_r:~~iIr.I'o;=_U.~~'>!:~:C'«W':·:"$(~.'l:X:~:'X~;{.';,"¥.·K~,,"'K.•':'l."'~~~~m.tt_."!,=DISSERTATION CHAIR I CO-CHAIR: DURANTI, A. / GOODWIN, M.STUDENT DEMOGRAPHIC SEX ADMIT ATC DEGREE ATC ITONAME STATUS TERM TERM AWARDEDSCHLEGEL, JENNIFER RACHAEL Domestic-Other F F94 S97 F04 3.00 10.33Dissertation Title:PENNSYU'ANIA GERMA:V OVERHEARERS: LIVING WITH LANGUAGE MAINTENANCE AND LANGUAGE LOSSf.:.,; t _ :loA /fl'Nf;j"",~=_~!

_________,_ .....__'1_ ••~".~.~~~~..#>·Kn.v·,,'*,:·..''

STUDENT DEMOGRAPHIC SEX ADMIT ATC DEGREE ATC TTDNAME STATUS TERM TERM AWARDEDTAKAMIYA,HIROTO International M F86 S92 X97 6.00 11.33Dissertation Title:SUBSISTENCE ADAPTATION PROCESSES IN THE PREHISTORJ" OFOKlNAWA'~m ",",~_....~nif(J!:.\~~~$!'IPW""'l"'lV~""""""",~~""'~~-=~_~""',.~_;;';!l. iIlJ mn.= 1>l'f1«~JX:t.11_~"")M:m .~ .~'-~~''i'.>i.~~t~~~"'''''"'''''~~NEGOTIATING POISE IN A MULTI-HIERARCHICAL WORLD: ,..1/1/ ARCHAEOLOGICAL EXPLORATIO.v OF IRRiGATED RICE AGRICULTURE. IDEOLOGY. ANDPOLITICAL BALANCE IN THE COEVOLlTION OF INTERESTING COMPLEX NETWORKS IN BALIDISSERTATION CHAIR I CO-CHAIR:EDGERTON,R.STUDENT DEMOGRAPHIC SEX ADMIT ATC DEGREE ATC TTDNAME STATUS TERM TERM AWARDEDASHAMALLA, ROSEMARIE ANN Domestic-Other F 889 W95 X99 6.00 10.67Dissertation Title:LOST IN THE SJ"STEM: THE GEOGRAPHIC AND INSTITUTIONAL EXCLUSION OF MINORID' rDl'TH IN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIASTUDENT DEMOGRAPHIC SEX ADMIT ATC DEGREE ATC TTDNAME STATUS TERM TERM AWARDEDCADIGAN,ROSEMARY JEAN Domestic-Other F F96 FOO 802 4.33 6.00Dissertation Title: SCRUBS. AN ETHNOGRAPHIC sn'DJ" OF PEER CULTURE .-1.\'0 HARASSMENT AMONG SIXTH GRADERS IN AN URBAN !dIDDLE SCHOOL#:;: Anthropology: Doctoral Degrees Awarded and Dissertation Titles. 1996-1997 through 2005-2006 Date Printed: Wednesday, May 09, 2007Path:IISaturnllris\AppsIProgram Reviewl2007-200EPage 13 of 33

STUDENTNAMEDEMOGRAPHICSTATUSSEXADMITTERMATCTERMDEGREEAWARDEDATCTIDCASEY,CONERLY CAROLE Domestic-Other F W91 X94 F97 2.00 5.00Dissertation Title:l'vfEDIClNES FOR MADNESS: SUFFERING, DlSABILTY AND THE fDENTlFICATION OF ENEMIES IN NORTHERN NIGERiA!c:.STUDENTNAMEDEMOGRAPHICSTATUSSEX-ADMITTERMATCTERMDEGREEAWARDEDATCTIDDICKSON-GOMEZ, JULIA Domestic-Other F F92 X96 S99 4.33 7.00Dissertation Title:LESSONS OF THE wm: THE PSYCHOSOCIAL EFFECTS OF WAR ON A10RALITY IN EL SALT:-1DORSTUDENT DEMOGRAPHIC SEX ADMIT ATC DEGREE ATC TIDNAME STATUS TERM TERM AWARDEDELLISON,MARCIA A. Domestic-Other F F84 F96 FOO 12.33 16.33Dissertation Title:DISCLOSING SELVES/EXPOSING CULTURE: THE GENDER WORK OF SINGLE WOMEN'S 'CRISIS' PREGNANCIES '. ABORTION, BlRTHMOTHERS ANDSINGLE MOTHERSSTUDENT DEMOGRAPHIC SEX ADMIT ATC DEGREE ATC TIDNAME STATUS TERM TERM AWARDEDVON MAYRHAUSER, CHRISTINA LO Domestic-Other F F93 W99 SOD 5.67 7.00Dissertation Title:LIFE II\' THE FAST LANE: METAAAfPHETAMINE ABUSE AND HI1' RISK IN CALIFORNIA'S SPEED CULTUREAnthropology: Doctoral Degrees Awarded and Dissertation Titles, 1996-1997 through 2005-2006 Date Printed: Wednesday, May 09, 2007Path:IISaturn\lrislAppslProgram ReviewI2007·200~Page 14 of 33

STUDENT DEMOGRAPHIC SEX ADMIT ATC DEGREE ATC TIDNAME STATUS TERM TERM AWARDEDWOJCICKI, JANET MAlA Domestic-Other F F92 X97 SOO 3.33 6.00Dissertation Title:SEX-WORK, STIGMA AND VIOLENCE IN THE "NEW" SOUTH AFRiCA: A.V ETHNOGRAPHIC STUDr OF SEX FOR MONEr EXCHANGE IN GA UTENGPROVINCE_________________________..""..,~~.:lO:r, ~ ~~".:~,~"""'.~:,,_;.;·1x""'rJl.. ••!f._~,":-""=,..,.j(""'_ ....\t'>""""""''''..;yf'll~.::':,=~--...~~,..~~'r."J'(~:t\'m~"'=~__ ... ..."'.!>;..h.;:::r_:J~''''''/.\ll~~"".R.'t>='''"..,t"DISSERTATION CHAIR I CO-CHAIR: FESSLER, D.STUDENT DEMOGRAPHIC SEX ADMIT ATC DEGREE ATC TIDNAME STATUS TERM TERM AWARDEPNAVARRETTE, CARLOS DAVID Domestic-Underrep Minority M F98 W03 S04 4.67 6.00k:'Dissertation Title:CHALLENGE, THREATAND PRO-NORMATIVE BIAS. COALlTIO.VAL PS}'CHOLOGr IN TWO SOCIETIESDISSERTATION CHAIR I CO-CHAIR: GARRO, L.STUDENT DEMOGRAPHIC SEX ADMIT ATC DEGREE ATC TIDNAME STATUS TERM TERM AWARDEDMITCHELL, JILL LAURIN Domestic-Other F F98 S02 S06 4.00 8.00Dissertation Title:CONSTRUCTIOll' OF MEANING IN TVOMEN'S EXPERIENCES TYITH .METASTATIC BREAST CANCERAnthropology: Doctoral Degrees Awarded and Dissertation Titles, 1996-1997 through 2005-2006 Date Printed: Wednesday, May 09, 2007Path:IISaturnlirislAppslProgram Review12007-200EPage 15 of 33

o_ ii."" .. \ '11 '__ ~"''I.",,""Io¥>.MJ;>:""""'o

=00_", l ~ '" _ oAA. O!\IIOII;III::I""T". W ••Ii\

...""",......,.,_,

",,_A..__'~'~_.~""'_>""'=._"'M_""""'_"_~'''#'-_'''''''x~",,,,,_w,,,_=,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,»>:,,",_. .,,:""","',,,STUDENT DEMOGRAPHIC SEX ADMIT ATC DEGREE ATC TIDNAME STATUS TERM TERM AWARDEDLEMELSON, ROBERT BUSH Domestic-Other M F91 F95 X99 4.33 8.33Dissertation Title: RE-CHECKING THE COLOR OF CHICKENS. INDlG£.IVOUS, ETHNOGR.APHIC AND CLINICAL PERSPECTIVES ON OBSESSn'E-COMPULSIVE DISORDERAND TOURETTE'S SrNDROME I,\' BALISTUDENT DEMOGRAPHIC SEX ADMIT ATC DEGREE ATC TIDNAME STATUS TERM TERM AWARDEDTALLEN,LOUISE ELLEN Domestic-Other F F91 S95 S97 4.00 6.00Dissertation Title: A RETURN AND A BEGINA'ING: BAALOT TESHUr:4H WITHIN LUBA f'lTCH CHASIDISM..--_-------,DISSERTATION CHAIR I CO-CHAIR:HOLLAN, D. / MATTINGLY, C. (USC ADDT'L)STUDENT DEMOGRAPHIC SEX ADMIT ATC DEGREE ATC TIDNAME STATUS TERM TERM AWARDEDTHROOP, CHRISTOPHER JASON International M F98 S02 S05 4.00 7.00Dissertation Title: SUFFERING AND SEAT/AlENT- EXPLORING THE VICISSITUDES OF PAIN AND EXPERIENCE IlV J:4P (H!AQAB), FEDERA TED STATES OF MICRONESIA(,." _"""'_'~""'"DISSERTATION CHAIR I CO-CHAIR:~:'_"">_'~"""'JOHNSON,A..."'.,__""'''',,,,, ,,,,_,,,,_,,,,.,,,,=,'''''''__'''''',.STUDENT DEMOGRAPHIC SEX ADMIT ATC DEGREE ATC TIDNAME STATUS TERM TERM AWARDEDGROARK, KEVIN PATRICK Domestic-Other M F93 S98 X05 5.00 12.33Dissertation Title:PATHOGEA'IC EMOTI01\'S: SE/\T/MENT, SOCIALlT)' AND SICKNESS AMO:VG THE lZOlZlL MA J'A OF SA,\" JUAN CHAMUL.-J, CHIAPAS, MEXICOAnthropology: Doctoral Degrees Awarded and Dissertation Titles, 1996-1997 through 2005-2006 Date Printed: Wednesday, May 09, 2007Path:IISaturnllrislAppslProgram Review12007-200EPage 19 of 33

k:'STUDENT DEMOGRAPHIC SEX ADMIT ATC DEGREE ATC TIDNAME STATUS TERM TERM AWARDEDHANAMI,MAKIKO International F F80 X84 W02 4.00 16.67Dissertation Title:GENDER IiVA RURAL MALAU COMML:Nln: BEDVEENADATAND ISLAMSTUDENT DEMOGRAPHIC SEX ADMIT ATC DEGREE ATC TIDNAME STATUS TERM TERM AWARDEDHUNTER,MONICA S Domestic-Underrep Minority F F91 S98 W03 7.00 11.67Dissertation Title: CULm:4TlNG CHANGE. AT\' ETHNOGRAPHIC CASE STUDr OF COMML'NIn'-BASED ENf7RONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP IN A COASTAL CALIFORNIAWATERSHEDSTUDENT DEMOGRAPHIC SEX ADMIT ATC DEGREE ATC TIDNAME STATUS TERM TERM AWARDEDPHILLIPS,SUSAN APRIL Domestic-Other F F91 S95 S98 4.00 7.00Dissertation Title:THE POLITICS OF LOS ANGELES G.~NG GRAFFITI~'"" A /llIl """Il ....~;:lIl ... _ .•y;;....~~/...,.,,""".. ,. mo...~_~"'="~=..""""'N-;'*"""_k_.,'>1t:rn>==",.,,~"''''''''''' __.«.«'''=''''w''''''''','''''

,,'_~iI'-___~J,~""""""'"""","''''..-m\'l'.~\J'.I)r,--,,,mrw-.~,"~~,-''.'''"''''~''''.,!,,~'?;'.""(',"">,)ffi',~!:\"""""""""-"-""~_k;'=>''''~m.J>.\-m'~;V_~w.~,.,.,~.'.,.~~~~'l:f~'~'~~.'v.~mm.=.",~~',1.~~."':·~~;-W""~"N.~'!#:~~~'1:"m_'),=~'~!I,(1.'.X:iM'·M,"i'fflXi-!'!,,*,>7.;w.,=

STUDENT DEMOGRAPHIC SEX ADMIT ATC DEGREE ATC TTDNAME STATUS TERM TERM AWARDEDRAY,SOHINI Domestic-Other F F93 S97 XOO 2.00 5.33Dissertation Title:THE SACRED ALPHABET AND THE DIVliVE BODY: THE CASE OF MEITEI MA rEK IN I\'ORTH-EASTERN INDIA"~~ ~_~ _We __~"'=f'i"",:,,,,.'~'1~,,...,,~I(''r.~1::r. ..,,

__.e~ 11* K_'~M' ~.=!:a=~·Ji_~=-"f'$'.ffl'jX(·i'»>.W~~."(,!"~·'-.~!"~;;'-~"'-'X:f(l~~=DISSERTATION CHAIR I CO-CHAIR: LEVENTHAL, R.STUDENT DEMOGRAPHIC SEX ADMIT ATC DEGREE ATC TIDNAME STATUS TERM TERM AWARDEDCONNELL,SAMUEL VIVIAN Domestic-Other M F92 W97 FOO 4.67 8.33Dissertation Title:WERE THEY WELL CONNECTED:' .11\' EXPLORATION OFANClENT ALI J:4 REGIONAL INTEGRATION FROM THE MIDDLE-LEVEL PERSPECTIVE OF CH.4ACREEK. BELIZESTUDENT DEMOGRAPHIC SEX ADMIT ATC DEGREE ATC TIDNAME STATUS TERM TERM AWARDEDDORNAN, JENNIFER LYNN Domestic-Other F F98 W02 S04 3.67 6.00Dissertation Title: "EVEN BY .h(IGHT WE ONn BECOME AWARE THEr ARE KILLl.VG U

STUDENT'NAMEDEMOGRAPHICSTATUSSEXADMITTERMATCTERMDEGREEAWARDEDATCTIDLANG,KRISTIN JOYCE Domestic-Other F F92 X96 S984.00 5.67Dissertation Title:RELIGION, POLITICS AND THE ECONOML AN EXiMI,\:4T10N OF STATE LEVEL COLLAPSE IN TEOTIHUACAN EGrPTSTUDENTNAMEDEMOGRAPHICSTATUSSEXADMITTERMATCTERMDEGREEAWARDEDATCTIDMCGOVERN, JAMES OWEN Domestic-Other M F90 X95 W04 5.3313.67Dissertation Title:MONUMENTAL CEREMONIAL ARCHITECTURE AND POLITICAL AUTONOMJ' AT THE ANCIENT MArA CITY OF ACTUNCAN, BELIZESTUDENT DEMOGRAPHIC SEX ADMIT ATC DEGREE ATC TIDNAME STATUS TERM TERM AWARDEDMORLEY,SELMA E Domestic-Other F F93 W97 S02 3.67 9.00Dissertation Title: STlLlSTIC VARIATION AND GROUP SELF-IDENTlTl': EVIDENCE FROM THE RIO GRANDE PUEBLOSSTUDENT DEMOGRAPHIC SEX ADMIT ATC DEGREE ATC TIDNAME STATUS TERM TERM AWARDEDMORRIS, JOHN MICHAEL International M F93 X99 W04 6.33 10.67Dissertation Title: ARCH4 ELOGICA L RESEARCH AT THE MOUNTAIN CO 11' SITES THE ARCH4EOLOGY OF SOCIO CUL TL'RA L DII'ERSln ETHlI'ICITY ANO IDENTITYAnthropology: Doctoral Degrees Awarded and Dissertation Titles, 1996-1997 through 2005-2006 Date Printed: Wednesday. May 09, 2007Path:IISaturnlirislAppslProgram Review12007-200EPage 24 of 33

STUDENT DEMOGRAPHIC SEX ADMIT ATC DEGREE ATC ITDNAME STATUS TERM TERM AWARDEDPREZIOSI, AIMEE MARIA Domestic-Other F F92 899 X03 7.00 11.33Dissertation Title: PA TTERNS OF SnLL THE CERAMIC RECORD AND COMMUNln DIFFERENTIATION, A STUDY FROM XUNA.YTUNICH, BELIZE;:..STUDENT DEMOGRAPHIC SEX ADMIT ATC DEGREE ATC ITDNAME STATUS TERM TERM AWARDEDSANCHEZ,JULIA LYNN Domestic-Other F F92 895 897 3.00 5.00Dissertation Title:ROYAL STRATEGIES AND AUDIENCE: AN AN4LYSIS OF CLASSIC M4 J"A MONUMElvTAL ARTSTUDENT DEMOGRAPHIC SEX ADMIT ATC DEGREE ATC ITDNAME STATUS TERM TERM AWARDEDTEETER,WENDY GIDDENS Domestic-Other F F92 W97 FOI 4.67 9.33Dissertation Title:MAYA ANIAfAL UTILIZATION IN A GROWING Cln: VERTEBRATE EXPLOIT4T10N ATCARACOL, BELIZE______________"'1__ '" __----.w~""'~,.,.."""""_~'.~~"~ ~_"_.'"""" .,.~"~"fi.,.u~"".,.,,,~'.d""'_;(:_ ......,"""',,.~.~''''~~·.,_~~m.-...'''rmr:' ......~_''''=m _ _....~HDISSERTATION CHAIR I CO-CHAIR: LEVINE, N.STUDENT DEMOGRAPHIC SEX ADMIT ATC DEGREE ATC TTDNAME STATUS TERM TERM AWARDEDCRESPIN, PAMELA G Domestic-Other F F97 W02 804 4.67 7.00Dissertation Title:ETHNOGRAPHY OF A CAN4DIA.Io·: BROADCASTER A STl../DY OF THE LINKS AMOT\'G DIGIT4L TECHNOLOGY, FLEXIBLE LABOR AND PRODUCT QUALlTrAnthropology: Doctoral Degrees Awarded and Dissertation Titles. 1996-1997 through 2005-2006 Date Printed: Wednesday, May 09. 2007Path:IISaturnllMslAppslProgram Review12007-200EPage 25 of 33

.~STUDENTNAME.DEMOGRAPHICSTATUSSEXADMITTERMATCTERMDEGREEAWARDEDATCTIDGAMBOLD,LlESL LEE Domestic-Other F F90S95 SOl 5.00 11.00Dissertation Title: POTATOES FOR PETROL THE EFFECTS OF AGRJCULTUR4L REFORM IN A RUSSIAN VJLLAGESTUDENTNAMEDEMOGRAPHICSTATUSSEXADMITTERMATCTERMDEGREEAWARDEDATCTIDMOORE, DAVID THOMAS Domestic-Other M F93 S96 F99 3.006.33Dissertation Title: ECONOMIC REFORM AND THE CHANGING INSTIn:TlOI',rS OF COASTA.L RESOURCE USE IN A SOL'THERN CHINESE FISHING rnLAGESTUDENTNAMEDEMOGRAPHICSTATUSSEXADMITTERMATcTERMDEGREEAWARDEDATCTIDl,:;.MORAN,KATHRYN MYERS Domestic-Oth~r F F81DIssertation TItle:COMMUNITl', COHESION, AND CONFLICT: ETHIOPIAN REFUGEES IN LOS ANGELESW87 F96 2.67 12.33STUDENTNAMEDEMOGRAPHICSTATUSSEXADMITTERMATCTERMDEGREEAWARDEDATCTIDMORITZ, MATTHYS Domestic-Other M F95 XOO F035.33 8.33DIssertatIon Title: COMMODITlZATlON AND THE PURSUIT OF PlETT.' THE TRANSFORMATfON OF AI\' AFRICA,""" PASTORAL SYSTEMAnthropology: Doctoral Degrees Awarded and Dissertation Titles, 1996-1997 through 2005-2006 Date Printed: Wednesday. May 09, 2007Palh:IISalurnllrislAppslPragram Review12007-200EPage 26 of 33j:..

;;,_~ ~~ \'; tf'" ii\O__~' _ '",, ~f',i(!JJ/1I(f.__ ~·iIl iM-."*, ~~~~mAA'__.=_m~>",..~_>=~~~ ........._DISSERTATION CHAIR I CO-CHAIR: LEVINE, N./BRAY, N.__A;l:l

;,.:.STUDENT DEMOGRAPHIC SEX ADMIT ATC DEGREE ATC TTDNAME STATUS TERM TERM AWARDEDJACOBS-HUEY,LANITA Domestic-Underrep Minority F F94 W98 S99 3.67 5.00Dissertation Title:BECOMING COSMETOLOGISTS: LANGUAGE SOCIALIZATIOI\' II\' AN AFRICAi\" AMERICAN BEAun COLLEGE~"""~_~~~~",-_""",,,,,,,,,,,,~~\,,,,,,·;lt!!l,,~.,...,..:( ..~,,:n-;~~~I..,..,...--~,,m1m:.J';1:;"lM'"... _~·i'>".~.\'.,,{.\V~'·:'::'.,~,>"",'''''''''''~'',~,,",'''.~:'~'~'''''>'''-'''''~Xi'''',,~,~.q;,;~,.t.~.\,;,.'·{""">i'?-'.~';!;w ... ,~"'.~.~.\~f{'~~o(Y;(=i.~~,.·.~~~,,,~=,~~''''''MMX;,"."'~""'="'M''''''_''''-''"''''''_''''''''''''''''''''''''''''-'''''~_''''''''''''''_~='''''''''::n:'#_~.~'DISSERTATION CHAIR I CO-CHAIR: PEACOCK, N.STUDENT DEMOGRAPHIC SEX ADMIT ATC DEGREE ATC TTDNAME STATUS TERM TERM AWARDEDLAWTON, PATRICIA EILEEN Domestic-Other F S89 S95 SOO 5.00 10.33Dissertation Title: HEALTH DEFICITS AS REPRODUCTIVE COST Ill' MEXICAN-AMERICAIV WOMEN IN THE HISPANIC HEALTH AND NUTRITION SURVEY, 1982-1984STUDENT DEMOGRAPHIC SEX ADMIT ATC DEGREE ATC TTDNAME STATUS TERM TERM AWARDEDPAUL,AMY RAQUEL Domestic-Other F W93 X94 X97 2.00 5.00Dissertation Title:"IT ISN'T LOVE, IT'S BL'SINESS"" PROSTlTUT/Ol\" AS ENTREPRENEURSfi/P Al\D THE IMPLlCATlOi\S FOR BARBADOSAnthropology: Doctoral Degrees Awarded and Dissertation Titles, 1996-1997 through 2005-2006 Date Printed: Wednesday, May 09, 2007Palh:I\Salurnllris\AppsIProgram Review12007-200EPage 28 of 33

1__ :__~: T... "'~~~;'"M1f(~.~~~;;;.~."'~"',~;,,,,,,,'.,(=V>l'».':l'!~~'~~'"''~~.~.''''~~~--w.·~ __;~»: m-,ii."~·,~~~~=,'1ll\=.--.:,=t~'f:q;;,'~;,-;.;.~.".=-.~:-,==r.

"~¥,",,,, F>;.__._W ':':1 ...... .._ %~""""",.c:>"""""_",,"'~f;;r.(I"/P!.~_~~,,,,,~~~;·m',l.'·~"'.',A,,":,~'J":!,,,,,,'~ A':':,,~_,'",,,,-"";"""""" """1~f':1"",,,,,,,*~~=·.l\';'f':':\':'i.""-.:&:«"""_=M""""""~"'~=«l:_""'-~l""~"'~_~~_j:" DISSERTATION CHAIR I CO-CHAIR: STANISH, C.STUDENT DEMOGRAPHIC SEX ADMIT ATC DEGREE ATC ITDNAME STATUS TERM TERM AWARDEDATTARIAN,CHRISTOPHER JAMES Domestic-Ot)1er M F94 F98 W03 4.33 8.67Dissertation Title:PRE-HISPANIC l'RBANISM AND COMMl'NITY EXPRESSION IN THE CHICAMA r:4LLEr, PERl'Anthropology: Doctoral Degrees Awarded and Dissertation Tilles, 1996-1997 through 2005-2006 Dale Printed: Wednesday, May 09, 2007Palh:IISalurnllrislAppslProgram Review\2007-200EPage 30 of 33

\"'-"ot..... _ f..--:< ~~=~~"~)4.~""''$,'r'~'''''')'''I:~~~~==Mi~~S~'!i'.'),~'~~'~'~'it'!':i:'«f t:C!"J.';.'i'!i>'~'"V!:W..\l:"·;-'':''''~'''''~'''''''''i~,,,,~_w,.,,,,.===,_~;;'~DISSERTATION CHAIR I CO-CHAIR:STANISH, C. / ALLEN, M. (CSU POMONA ADDT'L)STUDENT DEMOGRAPHIC SEX ADMIT ATC DEGREE ATC TIDNAME STATUS TERM TERM AWARDEDARKUSH, ELIZABETH NELSON Domestic-Other F F97 SOl WOS 4.00 7.67Dissertation Title: COLLA FORTIFIED SITES: WARFARE AND REGIONAL POU'ER 1.-"; THE LATE PREHISPANIC TITICAC4 BASI:\'. PERU_________~ .... U~.~_~'#"..;';t~'i mo_~;

.1_ A J~lM'Jt_ _ S " i_---.~r;;I=.;.;.·',"""~ eq .JJA ~~~'!J#t,~":''J..'!.'''''''''lI:~_«*,,'''''''w.~.",,'!';~~.DISSERTATION CHAIR I CO-CHAIR: TAMANOI, M. / MORGAN, M.STUDENT DEMOGRAPHIC SEX ADMIT ATC DEGREE ATC TIDNAME STATUS TERM TERM AWARDEDSTERLING,MARVlN DALE Domestic-Underrep Minority M F94 W99 W02 4.67 7.67Dissertation Title:IN THE SH.WOW OF THE UNIVERSAL OTHER: PERFOR/IlATIVE lDE.VTIFlCATlONS WITH JAMAICAN CULTURE 11\' JAPAN"'" o\l'O "¥ ~=~:~__.;,;.=-~~_w!;b~l'7:,~"Xt'.>~~{6'i;·~.'~rim:(ti',~v.-.4._~~~:.tW~_JI''''~i:»-'\I'''_'IM''''':'~_~''''_';;'''''m'.'''_.''';'-:.,_."w«:''''_''''' __'" ">I",._..,·· .. ·,""~,_,."·

v,_~ """'_'IC'Ml_~:'!'>:l~'#:;; _\Z(>,A ..... jj:l/ """"....J(:>Ol'-..tr,,,,==;m="'''''fII''·;''..:·~:'=Z;~_'."(,:~''''''-~;_~~.:r~~DISSERTATION CHAIR I CO-CHAIR: VIGIL, D. / KROSKRITY, P.STUDENT DEMOGRAPHIC SEX ADMIT ATC DEGREE ATC TTDNAME STATUS TERM TERM AWARDEDTANAKA,GREGORY KAZUO Domestic-Other M F91 S96 X02 6.00 8.33Dissertation Title:REMAKING THE SUBJECT FOR .~NTHROPOLOGlC AL DTSCOURSE'* "'" :mt:l _~-.:u~$'I:~".(,';;~~\~""~' '~~·,,*~=)!;:i(~:0J1:&

UCLA (;RADlJATE DIVISIONDoctoral Job Placement: 1996·1997 Through 2005·2006This report provides placement data for doctoral recipients between Summer 1996 and Spring 2006.These data are for the student's first employment in the year after the doctoral degree was awarded,and the data are based on departmental records. The report includes information on the employer,the student's name, the term the degree was- awarded, the employment rank or title, and the locationof employment. This report is organized first by placement status (e.g., employed, unemployed,postdoc, etc.), and within that by employer type (academic institution, non-academic institution, etc.),and within that by the employer name.Date Printed: 5/7/2007

:Z»!=~iliiiiVISIONAnthropology:::~L~::ctoraIJOb_EMPU)yERTYpf.EMPLOYER NAME:Academ'ic Institution - 4 Year College/UniversityBRYN MAWR COLLEGESTUDENT ______..-__.,__'~'..,I NAMEDEGREE AWARDED ACADEMIC RANK LOCATION--------------~_.~._.~- ... PASHIGIAN,MELISSA JOY W02 ASST PROF TENURE TRACK PENNSYLVANIAEMPLOYER NAME:CAMBRIDGE VNJV_____________• :1>"""...__"..... ..._... ~""&':"...=_1JI'#,l 0:1 • X ~aSTUDENT NAME DEGREE AWARDED ACADEMIC RANK LOCATION_DEMARRAIS,ELlZABETH S97 OTHER FACULTV TENURED ENGLANDEMPLOYER NAME:CASE WESTERN RESERYESTUDENT NAME . DEGREE AWARDED ACADEMIC RANK LOCATION.R."'_t'lM'_CHAPMAN,RACHEL REBEKAH X98 OTHER FACULTV NON TENURED OHIO__~~_.~_ ,... -..,-_..,.,... • "'" u: . ..PFEIFFER,JAMES T S97 ASST PROF TENURE TRACK OHIOic·EMPLOYER NAME: CSlI LONG BEACHSTUDENT NAME DEGREE AWARDED ACADEMIC RANKBISKOWSKI,MARTIN FRANCIS X97 OTHER FACULTV NON TENURED CALIFORNIAEMPLOYER NAME:EMPLOYER NAME:BOVTNER, RAN W98 OTHER FACULTV NON TENURED CALIFORNIAQUINTILlANI,KAREN S03 ASST PROF TENURE TRACK CALIFORNIACSt! NORTHRIDGESTUDENT NAME:zlI l'DEGREE AWARDEDJ ''''~,ACADEMIC RANK LOCATION""_«_.,..",>:...'_"""'''''_~.. .l1li ~. :o:._.... "''' ~_._. __ROPP; STEVEN MASAMI F03 ASST PROF TENURE TRACK CALIFORNIASAPP,WILLIAM DELANE,III 502 OTHER FACULTV NON TENURED CALIFORNIAEMORY t'NI\"STUDENT NAME ________lh_l_••_'=__• DEGREE AWARDED..,..,.....,.A.~''':-'

.M""llI~=EMPLOYER TYPE:EMPLOYER NAME:EMPLOYER NAME:Academic Institution - 4 Year College/UniversityHARVARD VNIVSTUDENT NAME DEGREE AWARDED ACADEMIC RANK LOCATION• . ..,>:_~,l1lI\'oOlIl_ 4: f11'11!Jl1'" ",-,~,~~ _-"-"'~"" M .. ~ .. • --"'''--­ELLlSON,MARCIA A. Faa MASSACHUSETTSMARLOWE,FRANK WESLEY F97 ASST PROF TENURE TRACK CALIFORNIAROOT,ROBIN MACRAEKUTZTO\VN UNIYF96 RESEARCH - NOT FACULTY MASSACHUSETTSSTUDENT NAME DEGREE AWARDED ACADEMIC RANK LOCATION_ .....-., "",~Jol:l d ~ l#t f!'.':l:CI\l~'_ ",l'J"~ .~ ..'"SCHLEGEL, JENNIFER RACHAEL F04 ASST PROF NON TENURED TRACK PENNSYLVANIAEMPLOYER NAME: LOYOLA MARYMOVNT UNIVSTUDENT NAME______________ DEGREE AWARDED __ _ ACADEMIC RANK LOCATION~ __~('_ll_· ..._~I_~'1\BENNETT, DIONNE MICHELLE X03 ASST PROF TENURE TRACK CALIFORNIA.,.! m..~~EMPLOYER NAME:MIE l..iNI\'STUDENT NAME DEGREE AWARDED'll __ACADEMIC RANKLOCATIONHANAMI,MAKIKO W02 ASSOC PROF OR HIGHER (TENURED) JAPANEMPLOYER NAME: OBERLIN COLLEGE:""'~_P"r -.._~'STUDENT NAME DEGREE AWARDED'" =- _ T ~n-.." •ACADEMIC RANK':'"LOCATIONI "'~""'>"_---"'__PAGLlAl,VALENTINA Faa OTHER FACULTY NON TENURED OHIOJ;:i;;:EMPLOYER NAME:OCCIDENTAL COLLEGE- - - ----------,,-_.. . .. . ­STUDENT NAME DEGREE AWARDED ACADEMIC RANK LOCATIONDELANEY-RIVERA, COLLEEN MARIE sao OTHER FACULTY NON TENURED CALIFORNIAEMPLOYER NAME:SUNDEEN,JOSEPH TIMOTHY S02 OTHER FACULTY NON TENURED CALIFORNIATANAKA,GREGORY KAZUO X02 OTHER FACULTY TENURED CALIFORNIAPOMONA COLLEGE.STUDENT NAME DEGREE AWARDED ACADEMIC RANK LOCATION~ " _'1.:_ ......."""""'.....,. """ ....'''''.. ~...U:......... >''''''.I"''...''_''· ._"".~... ~JENIKE,BRENDA ROBB S02 NOT APPLICABLE CALIFORNIADate Printed: Tuesday, May 08. 2007Anthropology Doctoral Job Placements 96-97 through 05-06Path: tvi:\Apps\lnstftutional Research\Program Revlew\2007-2008 Page 2 of 11j;;.I

~"EMPLOYER TYPE: Academic Institution - 4 Year College/UniversityEMPLOYER NAME: SAPPOROSTUDENT NAME DEGREE AWARDED ACADEMIC RANK LOCATION,_~"".""~_'_A:"_J'~~_ •..".,..""","._~",':"?'~n,"",~",""·~~"",,,':,,,,,~~,." NP.. iM........ _~X "'>O~l:o,l'>',.w:>:~"'>\,~~.:.-~~').:..,. ...-.•".'"'....,,,,,.. ,.,·.,,.~,,~«>'l':~ .....,..' .~-" ,. "-..,,,',0. ,.",,,,_,,,,,,,,,,,,,'?$: ........,.,;;t._.-TAKAMIYA,HIROTO X97 UNKNOWN JAPANEMPLOYER NAME:TEXAS STATE t'NI\'STUDENT NAME DEGREE AWARDED ACADEMIC RANK LOCATION"on I< .~EMPLOYER NAME:EMPLOYER NAME:.r'__~=:''''~_=_'SW:PI:~"~""r''''':',,,,,.'N

~___''''''.."x~:'h~.''''·.~,,~EMPLOYER TYPE: Academic Institution - 4 Year College/UniversityEMPLOYER NAME: lie LOS ANGELESSTUDENT NAME DEGREE AWARDED ACADEMIC RANK LOCATION&..,,",,_mr.~""'~""~~~'~~""".th)

Ie:', IEMPLOYER TYPE:EMPLOYER NAME:EMPLOYER NAME:STUDENT NAMEAcademic Institution - 4 Year College/UniversityUNlV OF HAWAll~~~N'M.",~.•w ..,~....,~_",.,... ....,...".~.~."·_~',.j,·LABRADOR,RODERICK NIROSTUDENT NAMEliNlV OF SOFfHERN CALiFORNIADEGREE AWARDED~"""t~_,,~~""'lW;~,',,,~·S03DEGREE AWARDEDACADEMIC RANK.....,.lADMINISTRATIONLOCATION,·,'"-W....•....""'~1( __~':

EMPLOYER TYPE:EMPLOYER NAME:EMPLOYER NAME:EMPLOYER NAME:Academic Institution - Not a 4 Year College/UniversityGETTY CONSERVATION INSTITUTESTUDENT NAME DEGREE AWARDED ACADEMIC RANK LOCATION______M'M'~-_....." ....;,,.. ..',~

''''~''':«-'«'''''_'''''•.''''''?'.",,,,,,,_,~"''''.:,.~,,,_""_,,.:_,,...,,,:,.,,,.,,"'''':.«::« ...,v. " .. :,.....;."x.\':';~""':'~_~:,;,~"r,~N~!"~?;.~.=·,·,O.,!:N!'i:·,

EMPLOYER TYPE:EMPLOYER NAME:EMPLOYER TYPE:EMPLOYER NAME:---EMPLOYER NAME:Non-Academic Institution - PrivateUNKNOWNSTUDENT NAME DEGREE AWARDED ACADEMIC RANK LOCATION~_.!,.::;:>!l.:_>.~_.,s::""~,~",,>,,,,,"~',.,*":'*,~::>M..,.,~,-r ~W:;'''''':;~'"-''

STATUS: • • I. ••.• ·ll~II:::t:l.EMPLOYER TYPE:EMPLOYER NAME:EMPLOYER NAME:EMPLOYER NAME:EMPLOYER NAME:EMPLOYER NAME:EMPLOYER NAME:EMPLOYER NAME:EMPLOYER NAME:ARIZONA STATE UNIVSTUDENT NAME DEGREE AWARDED ACADEMIC RANK LOCATION",,,-~.....,,-..:,,~_.M':"'_v:''''''':'_:_--=~'''''''~«'''''''"'I'>""""""",,,,,,,,_=,,,,,,w.·,, ":A-,""'''~''"'''''=',"'''''''''''',,,w,,,:-

j:..EMPLOYER TYPE:EMPLOYER NAME:EMPLOYER NAME:EMPLOYER NAME:EMPLOYER NAME:EMPLOYER NAME:EMPLOYER NAME:·liC LOS ANGELESSTUDENT NAME DEGREE AWARDED ACADEMIC RANK LOCATION~""_""'~'~r1#..M"·.~_:""l"~,,,_~,,,_,,~_~_=·,I ..:,, ..........,,;.-:-.:,."~,,,,,,a~,,,~ ..,,,,,,,.........,,,,_STUDENT NAME DEGREE AWARDED ACADEMIC RANK LOCATION_____~ ~.__._._~~._. ••e.••~••_._~'"_....."_.,••,,•.~'"' ~_,._"~_.," ,.." •.,,,,,",.,••,,,,,, _'_"'''''''"_'''''''~CARBALLO, DAVID MANUEL S05 OKLAHOMAVNIV OF SOlTHERN CALIFORNIASTUDENT NAME DEGREE AWARDED ACADEMIC RANK LOCATIONGROARK, KEVIN PATRICK X05 CALIFORNIATHROOP, CHRISTOPHER JASON S05 CALIFORNIAWASlIINGTON {'NIl"STUDENT NAME DEGREE AWARDED ACADEMIC RANK LOCATIONMONROE, JAMES CAMERON F03 MISSOURIEMPLOYER NAME: WHITTIER COllEGESTUDENT NAME DEGREE AWARDED ACADEMIC RANK LOCATION~_·~'''''''·>.·:''N,.. .. ·"·;w~~~~_",,,,\~~~~,.,,,:,,;,_y.''>'*,-,,·,-,,< ".y.;;~,« W:~""',"""",,'C""'~·~~~_''''::·

STATUS:EMpLOYER TYPE:EMPLOYER NAME:STUDENT NAMEDEGREE AWARDED• ¥ --------,.,.."":,.._~"...... ~,~:_:_ ....,.....".,... . x ...,lttl X'"''Y''~'''''''''~'''''''ERDMAN, DEBORAH ELLENF03ACADEMIC RANKLOCATION1:-:,GAMBOLD,L1ESL LEEHENRY-JUGAN, ROWANNEMEACHAM, SARAH SUTINERSCHOENFELDER, JOHN WALTERSTERLING,MARVIN DALESTRATHMANN,CYNTHIA MIKIS01F01W04X03W02F01l:::STATUS:EMPLOYER TYPE:EMPLOYER NAME:STUDENT NAME DEGREE AWARDED ACADEMIC RANK LOCATIONHUNTER,MONICA SW03KONATE,MOUSSAMCGOVERN, JAMES OWENNAVE,ARISMITH,NATALIE JILLSTAUNTON,ANNE DENISES97W04X97S01W99Path:M:\Apps\lnstitutional Research\Program Review\2007-2008Date Printed: Tuesaay, May 08, 2007Anthropology Doctoral Job Placements 96-97 through 05-06Page 11 of 11

2006-2007 Program Requirements for UCLA Graduate DegreesApplicable only to students admitted during the 2006-2007 academic year.AnthropologyCollege of Letters and ScienceGraduate DegreesThe Department of Anthropology offers the Master of Arts (M.A.) and Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.) degrees inAnthropology.AdmissionProgram NameAddressAnthropology:341 Haines HalliBox 951553Los Angeles, CA 90095-1553Phone ;(310) 825-2511EmailLeading to the degree ofAdmission Limited toDeadline to applyGRE (General and/or Subject),TSE,TWELetters of Recommendation:awalters@anthro.ucla.edu!M.A., Ph.D.Fall'December 15thiGRE: General'3, preferably from anthropologists. ._ ...._.:In addition to the University's minimum requirements and those listed above, all:applicants are required to submit awriting sample and a statement of purpose.Other RequirementsThe department requires that two faculty members sponsor an applicant before:admission is recommended. Prospective sponsors are canvassed by theDepartmental Admissions Committee, but it is also appropriate for applicants toicontact potential sponsors.oM.A.: A degree in anthropology is not required, but is highly desirable. If an:applicant with a B.A. or M.A. from another field is admitted, a program ofibackground studies in anthropology is formulated.'Ph.D.: Students who are entering the graduate program with an M.A. degree,:whether or not in anthropology, are required to demonstrate basic knowfedge of

· . ... .. ..Ithe discipline before being permitted to begin the requirements for the doctorate.;Graduate students who have been readmitted to the program are subject to anychanges in departmental policy and regulations that have been instituted since thelast time they were enrolled as an Anthropology major.Master's DegreeAdvisingAcademic advising for graduate students in the department is primarily conducted on an individual basis by a student'sfaculty adviser because, beyond basic requirements, each student's program of study is unique. The department'sgraduate adviser is primarily responsible for counseling students in regard to program requirements, policies, andUniversity regulations.Areas of StudyArchaeology; biological anthropology; linguistic anthropology; and sociocultural anthropology.Foreign Language RequirementNone.Course RequirementsThe minimum course load is 12 units per quarter. However, this may be waived for good cause by petition, with theapproval ofthe student's committee chair and the departmentchair. Students must be registered and enrolled at all timesunless on an official leave ofabsence.The M.A. degree requires 10 courses (40 units) taken for a letter grade, with a minimum 3.0 grade-point average. The10 required courses are distributed as follows:(I) One course must be the graduate proseminar, Anthropology 200.(2) One course must be the graduate core seminar (200-series) in the student's field of specialization.(3) Three courses must be graduate seminars (200-series).(4) Four courses may be upper division (100-series) designated elective courses.(5) Three courses may be outside the major with the approval ofthe three-member guidance committee.(6) Two courses may be independent studies. Eight units ofcourse 596 taken for a letter grade may be applied towardthe total M.A. course requirement, but only four ofthese eight units are applicable to the minimum graduate-courserequirement.Courses taken on a S/U basis, Anthropology 598, and 300- and 400-series courses may not be applied toward thefulfillment ofthe M.A. unit requirements. .Core Course Requirements: The purpose ofthe core course requirements is to ensure that students are versed in themajor fields in anthropology. Courses taken while in graduate status at UCLA may be applied toward the unit

equirement ofthe M.A. degree. These fields and courses have been designed to meet the minimal needs of studentsspecializing in other subfields ofstudy:(1) Archaeology: Anthropology III, CIISR, M201A, M211(2) Biological: Anthropology 120G(3) Linguistic: Anthropology M140, 204, M240, M242(4) Sociocultural: Anthropology 130, ISO, 203A, 203B, 203CStudents must demonstrate basic knowledge in all fields by exercising one or a combination ofthe following threeoptions:(1) Taking the core course with a passing grade of B or better.(2) Petitioning that coursework completed elsewhere, or at UCLA as an undergraduate, constitutes the equivalent ofsuch courses.(3) Passing the subfield's core course examination given in the Spring Quarter.A grade ofB or better is required in any core course taken at UCLA. If students received a grade ofB-, C+, or C, theymay not repeat the core course, but must take the core course examination and pass or be subject to dismissal. If a gradeofC- or below is received, students may repeat the course, but must receive a grade ofB or better the second time thecourse is taken, or be subject to dismissal.Teaching ExperienceNot required.Field ExperienceNot required but highly desirable.Comprehensive Examination PlanNone.Thesis PlanThe purpose ofthe master's thesis is for a student to demonstrate the ability to generate and assemble a body ofdata, toanalyze it, and to indicate its relevance to established anthropological thought as well as to write lucid prose. Studentsmust submit an original paper based on field, laboratory, or library research to all three committee members by the endofthe fifth quarter of residence. The thesis committee assists students in fonnulating the research paper, monitoring itsprogress, and evaluating the paper when submitted. It is essential that students maintain close contact with all threemembers while preparing the M.A. thesis. Students should consult the Graduate Division publication, Policies andProcedures for Thesis and Dissertation Preparation and Filing, for instructions on the preparation and submission ofthe thesis.

Time-to-degreeNormal progress toward the degree is as foHows:Core course requirements (if needed) - expected time of completion: end ofthird quarter.M.A. thesis committee - expected time of nomination: beginning of fourth quarter.M.A. thesis - expected time of completion: end of fifth quarter.40 units ofcoursework - expected time of completion: end of sixth quarter.Doctoral DegreeAdvisingAcademic advising for graduate students in the department is primarily conducted on an individual basis by a student'sfaculty adviser because, beyond basic requirements, each student's program of study is unique. The department'sgraduate adviser is primarily responsible for counseling students in regard to program requirements, policies, andUniversity regulations.Major Fields or SubdisciplinesArchaeology; biological anthropology; linguistic anthropology; and sociocultural anthropology.Foreign Language RequirementThe department does not require foreign language proficiency for all students in the Ph.D. program in Anthropology. Itis the responsibility ofthe student's three-member departmental doctoral committee to determine whether foreignlanguage proficiency is required for their particular program ofstudy.Ifthe foreign language proficiency is to be waived, students prepare a request for a Ph.D. language requirement waiver,which consists ofa letter justifying the request, addressed to the committee and filed with the Graduate Adviser. If thestudent's committee agrees and waives the requirement, the committee then presents a discussion oftheir endorsementof the waiver request to the faculty, typically during student review. If alternate research skills that are deemednecessary for the program of study for the student's dissertation have been identified and satisfied, these are noted bythe committee. However, no specific other courses or skills are obligatory.If foreign language proficiency is required, proficiency will be determined by the three-member departmental doctoralcommittee and may include but is not limited to:(1) Completion ofan appropriate level oflanguage instruction, or(2) Demonstration of previously acquired language skills through documentation or an examination or(3) Submission of an annotated bibliography, in English, of selected publications (in the selected language) that arerelated to the student's dissertation topic.The bibliography may be supplemented by a related analytical examination question or further translation examination.

For students required to demonstrate foreign language proficiency, all monitoring of the requirement takes place withinthe department.Course RequirementsThe minimum course load is 12 units per quarter. However, this may be waived for good cause by petition with theapproval ofthe student's committee chair and the department chair. Students must be registered and enrolled at all timesunless on an official leave of absence.Students who are entering the graduate program with an M.A. degree, whether or not in anthropology, are required todemonstrate basic knowledge ofthe discipline before being permitted to begin the requirements for the doctorate. It isexpected that students accomplish this during the first year of academic residence through (in accordance with theprocedures and regulations stated in the M.A. degree section) the following:(I) Nominating a three-member departmental advisory committee.(2) Completing the core course requirement.(3) Taking the graduate core seminar only in the student's field of specialization. This is required of all students eventhough they may already have a master's degree in anthropology.(4) Taking the graduate proseminar, Anthropology 200. This is required of all entering students.(5) Submitting to the student's departmental advisory committee, for evaluation, a prior master's paper or a researchpaper that was written while in graduate status.Only when these requisites have been met are students permitted to begin the requirements for the Ph.D. degree.Students who received their M.A. degree from this departm~ntare expected to enroll in three seminars, each with adifferent faculty member, between receipt of the master's degree and taking the doctoral qualifYing examinations. Thedepartment does not require any specific courses or number of courses for award of the Ph.D.Teaching ExperienceNot required.Written and Oral Qualifying ExaminationsAcademic Senate regulations require all doctoral students to complete and pass University written and oral qualifYingexaminations prior to doctoral advancement to candidacy. Also, under Senate regulations the University oralqualifYing examination is open only to the student and appointed members ofthe doctoral committee. In addition toUniversity requirements, some graduate programs have other pre-candidacy examination requirements. Whatfollowsin this section is how students are required tofuljill all ofthese requirementsfor this doctoral program.The qualifYing examinations for the Ph.D. degree consist of a written and an oral examination. The timing of theseexaminations is set in consultation with the members ofthe doctoral committee; they are to be taken within a 10-weekperiod of time. Students must be registered and enrolled to take the qualifYing examinations. The committee for eachexamination determines the conditions for reexamination should students not pass either portion of the qualifYingexaminations.The three-member departmental doctoral committee administers the written portion ofthe qualifYing examination. The

fields and format of the examination are to be determined by the student's departmental doctoral committee. There mustbe a minimum of two weeks between completion of the written examination and the scheduled date for the oral portionof the qualifying examination.The University Oral Qualifying Examination is the oral portion of the doctoral qualifying examinations and is primarilya defense of the dissertation proposal. This examination is administered by the four-member doctoral committee.Advancement to CandidacyStudents are advanced to candidacy upon successful completion of the written and oral qualifying examinations.Doctoral DissertationEvery doctoral degree program requires the completion of an approved dissertation that demonstrates the student'sability to perform original, independent research and constitutes a distinct contribution to knowledge in the principalfield of study.Final Oral Examination (Defense of Dissertation)Not required for students in the program. The decision as to whether a defense is required is made by the doctoralcommittee.Time-to-DegreeFull-time students admitted without deficiencies normally progress after receiving the M.A. degree as follows:Selection ofthird member of departmental doctoral committee - expected time of completion: during second quarter.Completion ofdepartmentally-monitored foreign language requirement (unless exempted) - expected time ofcompletion: end ofthird quarter.Nomination of four-person doctoral committee - expected time ofcompletion: end of third quarter.Written and oral qualifying examinations (usuaJJy taken in same quarter) - expected time of completion: end of sixthquarter.Advancement to candidacy - expected time of completion: end of sixth quarter.Final oral examinations (dissertation defense) - expected time ofcompletion: 18th quarter.Pre-M.A. to Ph.D. degree - expected time of completion: 18th quarter.Post-M.A. to Ph.D. degree - expected time of completion: a maximum of 15 quarters.Normative time-to-degree: 18 quarters (six years)

Termination of Graduate Study and Appeal of TerminationUniversity policyA student who fails to meet the above requirements may be recommended for termination of graduate study. Agraduate student may be disqualified from continuing in the graduate program for a variety of reasons. The mostcommon is failure to maintain the minimum cumulative grade point average (3.00) required by the Academic Senate toremain in good standing (some programs require a higher grade point average). Other examples include failure ofexaminations, lack of timely progress toward the degree and poor performance in core courses. Probationary students(those with cumulative grade point averages below 3.00) are subject to immediate dismissal upon the recommendationof their department. University guidelines governing termination of graduate students, including the appeal procedure,are outlined in Standards and Procedures for Graduate Study at UCLA.Special departmental or program policyA recommendation for termination is made by the chair ofthe department after a vote ofthe faculty at the studentreview each term. Before the recommendation is sent to the Graduate Division, a student is notified in writing andgiven two weeks to respond in writing to the chair. An appeal is reviewed by the department's Executive Committeewhich makes the final departmental recommendation to the Graduate Division.