Usage of AGS Data and the Future

Graduate Careers Australia
Survey Managers Information Forum 2014
Usage of AGS data and the future
Chandrama Acharya
Strategic Planning and Information Division
Macquarie University
July 2014
AGS Code of Practice and Usage of Data
The data should be
– used with impartiality, objectivity and integrity.
– analysed using methodologically sound and
transparent methods.
– used and presented in ways that assure the
privacy of respondents and confidentiality of
their responses.
Source: Code of Practice Universities of Australia v8, GCA
Response rate and use of data
Raw GDS, CEQ or PREQ data with, or results
based on, institutional response rate below
50.0% should not be disclosed or published
external to institution.
Exceptions (with note on response rate):
• Federal and State Govt departments and any
statutory bodies
• Professional bodies
• External auditing bodies
• Academic researchers
Usage of AGS data
• Federal Government
– MyUniversity website (public)
– Institutional Performance Portfolio (IPP)
– Tertiary Education Quality and Standards
Agency (TEQSA)
• Others
Good University Guide
QS Stars Rating
Universities Australia
University groups
Professional bodies (accreditation purposes)
Institutional Use of AGS data
Institutional quality assurance and improvement
plan to the Commonwealth (Compact)
Understanding student experience
Teaching Performance Indicator
Curriculum enhancement (course performance
report, faculty or academic discipline report etc.)
Information on Employability
Career advice
Further study activities (UG/PG conversion, program
development )
Proposed changes in government surveys
CEQ and GDS will be continued till 2014-15
CEQ will cease
Graduate Outcome Survey (GOS) - from 2015-16
Employer Satisfaction Survey (ESS) – fourth quarter
of 2014
― pilot result is out. Main recommendations:
o further research on developing methodology, items
and clusters
o future ESS be conducted in conjunction with AGS or
o full census of AGS respondents
Source :
What is ahead..
Changes in Methodology
• Centralised administration
o Reliable
o Cost effective to institution
• Sample survey, rather than population
• Effective response rate
Implications for Institutional Reporting
Break in the trend due to change in methodology
Number of responses by narrow FOE
Sub-group analysis by different dimension may
not be meaningful, eg
Equity group
Course level analysis
Methodology for benchmarking (eg, weighted or
‘adjusted’ score rather simple score )
• Implication for employment outcome data
• Timely return of raw data sets to institutions
Chandrama Acharya
Manager, Surveys
[email protected]

similar documents