ETS WG 6-7 September, 2006 Point 6: UOE quality report History Further uses Timeliness Revision of ISCED Missing data Graduates Coverage including VET / adult education Output measures ETS Working Group: immediate reactions and proposed steps to be taken

UOE quality report 1. History The UOE Task Force was given its mandate by the January ETS Working Group and had two meetings during spring 2006. The UOE quality report is the main output and it includes proposals for a list of priorities as well as the timing for their implementation. Four separate documents are also submitted to the ETS WG as results of the Task Force discussions: - UOE data format and transmission - A revision policy for the UOE data collection - Education accounts - Use of estimations in the UOE data collection Thank you to Task Force members from CZ, DK, ES, FR, NL, PT and the UK as well as to DG EAC; and to Birgitta and Pascal.

UOE quality report 1. History 5. Assumptions: - The unity of the UOE data collection should be guarded. - The persistence and transparency of collaboration between UIS/UNESCO, OECD and Eurostat. First Task Force conclusions at the outset of the meetings: - Consolidation and not expansion, focus on quality improvements; - Policy relevance high but frustration about low quality of some data which prevents proper use; - Cost-effective and output harmonised source, and should be kept that way (but balance with quality requirements?)

UOE quality report 2. Further uses The UOE quality report should be adopted by the Education and Training Statistics Working Group with the following uses in mind: A UOE quality improvement programme to guide priorities and timing over the coming years. As documentation of the UOE data quality when initiating a legislative proposal encompassing the ‘UOE’ data collection. Adoption: in relation with an implementing act covering the UOE data collection; to be submitted to Directors of Social Statistics in the ESS and the Statistical Programme Committee. First reflections on priorities by the Task Force: - timeliness, revision of ISCED, missing data, (student mobility), graduates, output measures, (education finance). Plus coverage including VET / adult education.

UOE quality report 3. Timeliness Task Force recommendation: to improve timeliness – short term goal with high priority. Proposal: to deliver data annually in the three months period September to November. Ideally, data treatment should be finished by the end of the year. Background: main Commission reports need data for the beginning of the year for the different reports published during spring. Longer term goal: further improvements regarding timeliness could be achieved; but preferable that all questionnaires should be delivered at same the same time. Related recommendation: improvement of data production cycle.

UOE quality report 4. Revision of ISCED Task Force recommendation: to revise the ISCED97 classification. Background: Task Force members confirmed difficulties in applying ISCED97 and that estimations are widely used for aligning to ISCED levels. Procedure for revising the ISCED97. Coordination. Problem areas identified: Distinctions at detailed levels 3 a, b and c; 4 a, b, c; and 5 a and b. The implementation of the BaMa structure in the Bologna process. The distinction between orientation and destination. Timing: Recommendation that revision work should be started immediately as this would be a long term process. Until revision is in place, international organisations should play a more active role in trying to get a consistent application of ISCED97 across countries. ETS WG: agreement with the recommendation? Other issues to be taken up in the revision discussions?

UOE quality report 5. Missing data Task Force conclusion: UOE data extensively used by international organisations but use hampered by insufficient quality (comparability) and many missing data (empty cells). Footnote policy should be aligned to follow normal statistical rules. Data on class size not used much. ETS WG: invited to reflect further on if any detailed breakdowns should be superfluous and hence should not be collected. Furthermore, how could data gaps be filled (further use of estimations and/or improvement of data collections)? Eurostat to provide better documentation of missing data and possibly to be taken up with countries on a bilateral basis.

UOE quality report 6. Graduates Task Force conclusion: important to provide data on first time graduates and recommendation to fill data gaps. Distinction between graduates and graduations not of much importance; number of graduates would be the important variable. Problem of different degree structures important to document and suggestions for improving comparability of data are invited from the ETS WG.

UOE quality report 7. Coverage incl. VET / adult education Task Force concluded that uneven coverage is a problem in the UOE data collection particularly regarding adult education and VET. CLA was seen by some countries and members as a useful tool. Recommendation for defining coverage in UOE manual better. – Some inconsistencies in the concepts and definitions applied in the manual (also between finance and non-finance data). Recommendation on providing better data on adult education and VET. Problem identified: ISCED mappings seem often to provide inconsistent information. VET: strong demand for data on VET but analysis needed on quality of VET data in the UOE collection.

UOE quality report 8. Output measures Task Force agreed on importance of improving methodology for calculating output measures (here exemplified with survival rates and duration of tertiary education). Policy relevance of these measures high and demand for having more frequent data. Improvements in statistical infrastructures at national level should be taken into account; for example the possibility of using student register information as it exists in a number of countries. This scenario would be relevant in a medium term perspective and agreement of methodologies to be implemented should be reached sooner.

Immediate reactions by the ETS Working Group: UOE quality report Immediate reactions by the ETS Working Group: I Your overall comments on the UOE quality report? II Timeliness: do you agree with proposals? III Revision of ISCED: do you agree? IV Avoiding missing data, how? V Graduates; how to proceed? VI Coverage of adult education and VET; how to improve? VII Output measures; improve methodology given advances in statistical systems?

Proposed steps to be taken UOE quality report Proposed steps to be taken In order to finalise the UOE quality report for endorsement by a forthcoming ETS Working Group meeting: the priorities and the proposed timetable of all countries should be taken into account; detailed comments on the conclusions and the recommendations are invited from all the countries; some editing needs to be done and the tables need to be up-dated and in some cases be more to the point. Proposed deadline for submitting detailed comments, priorities and the suggested timetable: 20th of October, 2006.