|
||
|
||
|
AV-CC Australian Vice-Chancellors' Committee (ACN 008 502 930) and
Graduate Careers Council of Australia (ACN 008 615 012) CODE OF PRACTICE or the public disclosure of data from the Graduate Careers Council of Australia’s Graduate Destination Survey, Course Experience Questionnaire and Postgraduate Research Experience Questionnaire January 2001 Canberra
Policy Statement
One of the primary functions of the Graduate Careers Council of Australia’s Graduate Destination Survey (GDS), Course Experience Questionnaire (CEQ) and Postgraduate Research Experience Questionnaire (PREQ) is to provide feedback to institutions, which, in conjunction with other indicators, may assist planning and the development of quality improvement initiatives. The GDS, CEQ and PREQ are also important in providing information for current and prospective students, to university careers services and to others in the education field (including the Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs). The Australian Vice-Chancellors' Committee (AVCC) supports
the public disclosure of institutional data derived from the GDS and CEQ
under the conditions and guidelines specified in this document. Support
for the public disclosure of institutional data derived from the PREQ is
contingent on further successful development of the instrument.
General Conditions
Optimal Use of Survey Data Although some institutions and users of the GCCA data may wish to compare survey data across institutions, or to compare individual institution data against national means, such comparisons should only be made after taking into consideration the following guidelines and qualifications concerning the appropriate use of the data and its interpretation.If comparison between GDS results is made, the most effective level is between like fields of study amongst institutions with similar survey response rates, with like student demographics, and in like labour markets. Even in this context it has to be appreciated that the differing missions of institutions can result in a situation where judgements about, for example, differing percentages of graduates moving into postgraduate study rather than employment, can be invalid. As such, users are advised that in many cases it is inappropriate to make inter-institutional comparisons. The greatest value of the GDS data is likely to be derived when the data are considered over a period of years. The GCCA now has a time-series of over twenty-five years of GDS data. The most effective CEQ and PREQ comparisons are within an institution,
for the same field of study, across several years. Where comparisons are
to be made across institutions, the optimal use of the CEQ and PREQ data
is in evaluating an institution’s courses against comparable courses elsewhere
to identify best practice. It is therefore critical that comparisons are
made between like courses, in like institutions with similar survey response
rates.
Release of Data
Release of data will be at the discretion of GCCA based on advice from the Survey Reference Group. In principle, GDS and CEQ datasets will be released for bona fide purposes either directly or via the Social Sciences Data Archive (SSDA) in Canberra. Requests for data will need to be accompanied by documentation describing the aims of the research, and users will be required to lodge a copy of any published results with the GCCA. In instances where institution-level data has not previously been published by GCCA, users of survey data will not be permitted to name institutions in their analyses without the prior consent of the institutions themselves. Fees (if any) for non-commercial access to data or related documentation will be limited to cost-recovery. Fees for commercial applications of data will be determined at the discretion of GCCA. Users of survey data, including institutions, are not
to pass on the raw national survey data to any third party, other than
to those within their own organisation.
The GDS is conducted within the ethical guidelines laid out in the National Statement on Ethical Guidelines in Research Involving Humans. The rights of the respondent must be respected. In terms
of use of data, information should not be used in a manner which identifies
individual subjects.
Guidelines for the Interpretation of Survey Data
Some specific points to be taken into consideration when interpreting the survey data are outlined below. · A total institutional response rate of at least 70% is desirable and achievable for the GDS and the CEQ. Any data which are disclosed publicly should be accompanied by information on the number surveyed and the response rate. Any GDS or CEQ survey data with an overall institutional response rate below 50% should not be disclosed publicly. · While individual institutions can generally calculate response rates for the majority of their individual fields of study, for reasons including the incidence of graduates with double majors and/or double degrees, it is not currently possible for GCCA to provide accurate response rate data by individual fields of study. If comparisons are made across institutions at the field of study level, caution should be exercised because of variations in response rates across institutions. · Due to the variation in cell sizes in particular fields of study, it is not possible to be prescriptive about the interpretation of data where very small numbers of graduates are involved. Caution should be exercised when drawing conclusions from small cells with low response rates, and this point should be noted clearly in any reference to such data. CEQ and PREQ data are even more sensitive to cell size than GDS data. · In interpreting survey data, it is recognised that due to the timing of the surveys, there can be different results for different fields of study, in terms of their graduates' likelihood of being in employment, further study, various modes of compulsory postgraduate training/internship, meeting requirements for professional registration, and so on. · The GDS is a 'snapshot' survey, producing information on the proportion of graduates involved in various activities, including those in full-time employment, those looking for full- or part-time employment, those going on to further full-time study (including honours year students), and those not actively seeking work, on 30 April (or 31 October for mid-year completers). It is a pertinent source of information regarding the employment experience of graduates but is subject to many influences and should be used as an indicator only. Many graduates classified as 'seeking full-time work' may be waiting for work appropriate to the level of their qualifications, rather than accepting other, less challenging employment. It does not, for instance, examine labour market experience in the period since completion of requirements for a degree, and therefore cannot indicate how long a graduate has been looking for work. · Differences in CEQ scores which can be considered worthy of note are those that exceed one-third of the relevant standard deviation. · Disparities in GDS outcomes by sex are often explained by differences in the mix of enrolments for males and females (e.g. about 10% of engineering graduates are females, compared with their being about 70% of humanities graduates). This does not, however, explain some disparities in starting salaries within fields of study and indicates the need for considered analysis of sex-based differences in GDS survey outcomes. · Requirements for professional registration that affect employment practice and starting salaries immediately following graduation mean that it is difficult to devise meaningful national GDS statistics for some fields of study. In the case of law, for example, some graduates attend a postgraduate legal institution for practical professional training, whilst others are employed as articled clerks. Architecture and pharmacy graduates have to undertake a year of supervised employment before registration, which affects starting salary levels more than employment status.
For further information: Executive Director, Graduate Careers Council of Australia Resource Analysis Contact Director, Resource Analysis Mr John Chan (02) 6285 8209
[©] [AVCC
Home Page] |
