Digest of Education Statistics, 2004 - Appendix A.2. Sources: National Center for Education Statistics

Digest of Education Statistics: 2004

NCES 2006-005
October 2005

Introduction
Foreword and Acknowledgments
List of Tables by Chapter
List of Figures
Guide to Tabular Presentation
Chapters
Appendixes
- A.1. Guide to Sources
- A.2. NCES Sources
- A.3. Other Department of Education Offices
- A.4. Other Governmental Agencies
- A.5. Other Organization Sources
- B. Definitions
Contact
Return to Digest

Appendix A.2. Sources: National Center for Education Statistics

Baccalaureate and Beyond Longitudinal Study

The Baccalaureate and Beyond Longitudinal Study (B&B) is based on the National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS) and provides information concerning education and work experience after completing the bachelor’s degree. B&B provides cross-sectional information 1 year after bachelor’s degree completion (comparable to the Recent College Graduates study), while at the same time providing longitudinal data concerning entry into and progress through graduate level education and the workforce. It also provides information on entry into, persistence and progress through, and completion of graduate level education. This information is difficult to gather through follow-ups involving high school cohorts or even college entry cohorts, both of which are restricted in the number who actually complete a bachelor’s degree and continue their education.

B&B followed NPSAS baccalaureate degree completers for a 12-year period after completion, beginning with NPSAS:93. About 11,000 students who completed their degrees in the 1992–93 academic year were included in the first B&B (B&B:93/94). In addition to the student data, B&B collected postsecondary transcripts covering the undergraduate period, which provided complete information on progress and persistence at both the undergraduate and graduate levels. The second B&B follow-up took place in spring 1997 (B&B:93/97), and gathered information on employment history, family formation, and enrollment in graduate programs. The most recent B&B cohort was associated with the NPSAS:2000 and included 11,700 students who completed their degrees in the 1999–2000 academic year. The first, and only planned follow-up survey of this cohort, was conducted in 2001 and focused on time to degree completion, participation in post-baccalaureate education and employment, and the activities of newly qualified teachers (NCES 2003-165).

Further information on B&B may be obtained from:

Paula R. Knepper
Postsecondary Studies Division
National Center for Education Statistics
1990 K Street NW
Washington, DC 20006
Paula.Knepper@ed.gov
http://nces.ed.gov/surveys/b&b/

Top

Beginning Postsecondary Students Longitudinal Study

The Beginning Postsecondary Students Longitudinal Study (BPS) provides information on persistence, progress, and attainment from initial time of entry into postsecondary education through leaving and entering the workforce. BPS includes traditional and nontraditional (e.g., older) students and is representative of all beginning students in postsecondary education. BPS follows first-time, beginning students for at least 5 years at approximately 2-year intervals, collecting student data, and financial aid reports. By starting with a cohort that has already entered postsecondary education, and following it for 5 years, BPS can determine to what extent, students who start postsecondary education at various ages differ in their progress, persistence, and attainment. The first BPS study was conducted in 1989–90, with follow-up surveys in 1992 and 1994. The second BPS cohort of students began with a survey in 1995–96, with follow-ups in 1998 and 2001.

Further information on BPS may be obtained from:

Aurora M. D'Amico
Postsecondary Coop System, Analysis, and Dissemination (PSD)
National Center for Education Statistics
1990 K Street NW
Washington, DC 20006
Aurora.D'Amico@ed.gov
http://nces.ed.gov/surveys/bps/

Top

Common Core of Data

NCES uses the Common Core of Data (CCD) survey to acquire and maintain statistical data from each of the 50 states, the District of Columbia, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, Department of Defense Dependents' Schools (overseas and domestic) and the other jurisdictions. Information about staff and students is collected annually at the school, local education agency or school district (LEA), and state levels. Information about revenues and expenditures is also collected at the state and LEA levels.

Data are collected for a particular school year via survey instruments sent to the state education agencies during the school year. Since the CCD is a universe survey, the CCD information presented in this edition of the Digest is not subject to sampling errors. However, nonsampling errors could come from two sources: non-return and inaccurate reporting. Almost all of the states submit the six CCD survey instruments each year, but submissions are sometimes incomplete or too late for publication.

Understandably, when 58 education agencies compile and submit data for approximately 96,000 public schools and over 14,000 local school districts, misreporting can occur. Typically, this results from varying interpretations of NCES definitions and differing record keeping systems. NCES attempts to minimize these errors by working closely with the state education agencies through the National Forum on Education Statistics.

The state education agencies report data to NCES from data collected and edited in their regular reporting cycles. NCES encourages the agencies to incorporate into their own survey systems the NCES items they do not already collect so that those items will also be available for the subsequent CCD survey. Over time, this has meant fewer missing data cells in each state's response, reducing the need to impute data.

NCES subjects data from the education agencies to a comprehensive edit. Where data are determined to be inconsistent, missing, or out of range, NCES contacts the education agencies for verification. NCES-prepared state summary forms are returned to the state education agencies for verification. Each year, states are also given an opportunity to revise their state-level aggregates from the previous survey cycle.

Further information on CCD may be obtained from:

John Sietsema
Elementary/Secondary Cooperative System and Institutional Studies Division (ESCSISD)
National Center for Education Statistics
1990 K Street NW
http://nces.ed.gov/ccd/

Top

Condition of America's Public School Facilities: 1999

This report provides national data about the condition of public schools in 1999 based on a survey conducted by NCES using its Fast Response Survey System (FRSS). The FRSS was established in 1985 to collect issue-oriented data quickly with minimum response burden. It was designed to meet the data needs of the U.S. Department of Education’s analysts, planners, and decision makers when information could not be collected quickly enough through traditional NCES surveys. Specifically, this report provides information about the condition of school facilities and the costs to bring them into good condition; school plans for repairs, renovations, and replacements; the age of public schools; and overcrowding and practices used to address overcrowding. The results presented in this report are based on questionnaire data for 903 public elementary and secondary schools in the United States. The responses were weighted to produce national estimates that represent all regular public schools in the United States.

Further information on FRSS may be obtained from:

Bernie Greene
Data Development Program (ECICSD)
National Center for Education Statistics
1990 K Street NW
Washington, DC 20006
http://nces.ed.gov/surveys/frss/

Top

Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, Kindergarten Class of 1998-99

The Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, Kindergarten Class of 1998-99 (ECLS-K) was designed to provide detailed information on children’s early school experiences. The study began in the fall 1998. A nationally representative sample of 22,782 children enrolled in 1,277 kindergarten programs during the 1998–99 school year was selected to participate in the ECLS-K. The children attended both public and private kindergartens, and full-day and part-day programs. The sample included children from different racial/ethnic and socioeconomic backgrounds, and oversamples of Asian and Pacific Island children, and private kindergartners. Base-year data were collected in the fall and spring of the kindergarten year. Data were collected again in the fall of first grade (30 percent subsample) and spring of first grade, and then in spring of the third grade in 2002 and spring of the fifth grade in 2004.

The ECLS-K includes a direct child cognitive assessment that was administered one-on-one with each child in the study. The assessment used a computer-assisted personal interview (CAPI) approach and a two-stage adaptive testing methodology. The direct assessment includes three cognitive domains: reading, mathematics and general knowledge at kindergarten and first grade. General knowledge was replaced by science at third and fifth grade. Children’s height and weight were measured at each data collection point and a direct measure of children’s psychomotor development was administered in the fall of the kindergarten year only. In addition to these measures, the ECLS-K collected information about children’s social skills and academic achievement through teacher reports.

A computer-assisted telephone interview with the children’s parents/guardians was conducted at each data collection point. Parents/guardians were asked to provide key information about their children on subjects, such as family demographics (e.g., family members, age, relation to child, race/ethnicity), family structure (e.g., household members and composition), parent involvement, home educational activities (e.g., reading to the child), child health, parental education and employment status, and child’s social skills and behaviors.

Data on the schools that children attend and their classrooms were collected by self-administered questionnaires completed by school administrators and classroom teachers. Administrators provided information about the school population, programs, and policies. At the classroom level, data were collected on the composition of the classroom, teaching practices, curriculum, and teacher qualifications and experience. A representative sample of teachers in the sample students’ grade in the ECLS-K sampled schools were asked to complete the teacher questionnaires, not just those who teach ECLS-K children.

Further information on the ECLS-K may be obtained from:

Elvira Germino Hausken
Early Childhood and Household Studies Program (ECICSD)
National Center for Education Statistics
1990 K Street NW
Washington, DC 20006
ecls@ed.gov
http://nces.ed.gov/ecls

Top

Federal Support for Education

NCES prepares an annual compilation of federal funds for education. Data for U.S. Department of Education programs come from the Budget of the United States Government. Budget offices of other federal agencies provide information for all other federal program support except for research funds, which are obligations reported by the National Science Foundation in Federal Funds for Research and Development. Some data are estimated, based on reports from the federal agencies contacted and the Budget of the United States Government.

Except for money spent on research, outlays were used to report program funds to the extent possible. Some tables report program funds as obligations, as noted in the title of the table. Some federal program funds not commonly recognized as education assistance are also included in the totals reported. For example, portions of federal funds paid to some states and counties as shared revenues resulting from the sale of timber and minerals from public lands have been estimated as funds used for education purposes. Parts of the funds received by states (in 1980) and localities (all years) under the General Revenue Sharing Program are also included, as are portions of federal funds received by the District of Columbia. The share of these funds allocated to education was assumed to be equal to the share of general funds expended for elementary and secondary education by states and localities in the same year as reported by the U.S. Census Bureau in its annual publication, Governmental Finances.

All state intergovernmental expenditures for education were assumed to be earmarked for elementary/secondary education. Contributions of parent governments of dependent school systems to their public schools amounted to approximately 9 percent of local government revenues and local government revenue sharing in each year. Therefore, 9 percent of local government revenue-sharing funds were assumed allocated each fiscal year to elementary and secondary education. Parent government contributions to public school systems were obtained from Finances of Public School Systems published by the U.S. Census Bureau. The amount of state revenue-sharing funds allocated for postsecondary education in 1980 was assumed to be 13 percent, the proportion of direct state expenditures for institutions of higher education reported in Governmental Finances for that year.

The share of federal funds for the District of Columbia assigned to education was assumed to be equal to the share of the city's general fund expenditures for each level of education.

For the job training programs conducted by the Department of Labor, only estimated sums spent on classroom training have been reported as educational program support.

During the 1970s, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) prepared annual reports on federal education program support. These were published in the Budget of the United States Government [Special Analyses]. The information presented in this report is not, however, a continuation of the OMB series. A number of differences in the two series should be noted. OMB required all federal agencies to report outlays for education-related programs using a standardized form, thereby assuring agency compliance in reporting. The scope of education programs reported here differs from OMB. Off-budget items such as the annual volume of guaranteed student loans were not included in OMB's reports. Finally, while some mention is made of an annual estimate of federal tax expenditures, OMB did not include them in its annual analysis of federal education support. Estimated federal tax expenditures for education are the difference between current federal tax receipts and what these receipts would be without existing education deductions to income allowed by federal tax provisions.

Recipients' data are estimated based on Estimating Federal Funds for Education: A New Approach Applied to Fiscal Year 1980, Federal Support for Education, Fiscal Years 1980 to 1984, and Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance. The recipients' data are estimated and tend to undercount institutions of higher education (IHEs), students, and local education agencies (LEAs). This is because some of the federal programs have more than one recipient receiving funds. In these cases, the recipients were put into a "mixed recipients" category, because there was no way to disaggregate the amount each recipient received.

Further information on federal support for education may be obtained from:

William Sonnenberg
Annual Reports Program (ECICSD)
National Center for Education Statistics
1990 K Street NW
Washington, DC 20006
William.Sonnenberg@ed.gov http://nces.ed.gov/surveys/AnnualReports/reports.asp?type=federal

Top

High School and Beyond

High School and Beyond (HS&B) is a national longitudinal survey of individuals who were high school sophomores and seniors in 1980. The base-year survey (1980) was a probability sample of 1,015 high schools with a target number of 36 sophomores and 36 seniors in each of the schools. A total of 58,270 students participated in the base-year survey. Substitutions were made for nonparticipating schools––but not for students––in those strata where it was possible. Overall, 1,122 schools were selected in the original sample and 811 of these schools participated in the survey. An additional 204 schools were drawn in a replacement sample. Student refusals and absences resulted in an 82 percent completion rate for the survey.

Several small groups in the population were oversampled to allow for special study of certain types of schools and students. Students completed questionnaires and took a battery of cognitive tests. In addition, a sample of parents of sophomores and seniors (about 3,600 for each cohort) was surveyed.

HS&B first follow-up activities took place in the spring of 1982. The sample design of the first follow-up survey included approximately 30,000 persons who were sophomores in 1980. The completion rate for sophomores eligible for on-campus survey administration was about 96 percent. About 89 percent of the students who left school between the base year and first follow-up surveys (e.g., dropouts, transfer students, and early graduates) completed the first follow-up sophomore questionnaire.

As part of the first follow-up survey of HS&B, transcripts were requested in fall 1982 for an 18,152 member subsample of the sophomore cohort. Of the 15,941 transcripts actually obtained, 1,969 were excluded because the students had dropped out of school before graduation, 799 were excluded because they were incomplete, and 1,057 were excluded because the student graduated before 1982 or the transcript indicated neither a dropout status nor graduation. Thus, 12,116 transcripts were utilized for the overall curriculum analysis presented in this publication. All courses in each transcript were assigned a 6-digit code based on A Classification of Secondary School Courses. Credits earned in each course were expressed in Carnegie units. (The Carnegie unit is a standard of measurement that represents one credit for the completion of a 1-year course. To receive credit for a course, the student must have received a passing grade––"pass," "D," or higher.) Students who transferred from public to private schools or from private to public schools between their sophomore and senior years were eliminated from public/private analyses.

In designing the senior cohort first follow-up survey, one of the goals was to reduce the size of the retained sample, while still keeping sufficient numbers of minorities to allow important policy analyses. A total of 11,227 (94 percent) of the 11,995 persons subsampled completed the questionnaire. Information was obtained about the respondents' school and employment experiences, family status, and attitudes and plans.

The sample for the second follow-up, which took place in the spring 1984, consisted of about 12,000 members of the senior cohort and about 15,000 members of the sophomore cohort. The completion rate for the senior cohort was 91 percent, and the completion rate for the sophomore cohort was 92 percent.

HS&B third follow-up data collection activities were performed in spring of 1986. Both the sophomore and senior cohort samples for this round of data collection were the same as those used for the second follow-up survey. The completion rates for the sophomore and senior cohort samples were 91 percent and 88 percent, respectively.

HS&B fourth follow-up data collection activities were performed in 1992 but only surveyed the 1980 sophomore class. It examined aspects of these students' early adult years such as enrollment in postsecondary education, experience in the labor market, marriage and childrearing, and voting behavior.

Appendix table A-1 contains the maximum number of HS&B cases that are available for the tabulations of the specific classification variables used throughout this publication.

The standard error (se) of an individual percentage (p) based on HS&B data can be approximated by the formula:

se_p = DEFT [p(100 – p)/n]^1/2

where n is the sample size and DEFT, the square root of the design effect, is a factor used to adjust for the particular sample design used in HS&B. Appendix table A-2 provides the DEFT factors for different HS&B samples and subsamples.

In evaluating a difference between two independent percentages, the standard error of the difference may be conservatively approximated by taking the square root of the sum of the squared standard errors of the two percentages. For example, in the 1986 follow-up of 1980 sophomores, 84.0 percent of the men and 77.2 percent of the women felt that being successful in work was "very important," a difference of 6.8 percentage points. Using the formula and the sample sizes from table A-1 and the DEFT factors from table A-2, the standard errors of the two percentages being compared are calculated to be:

1.43[(84.0)(16.0)/(5,391)]^1/2 = .714

1.43[(77.2)(22.8)/(5,857)]^1/2 = .784

The standard error of the difference is therefore:

(.714² + .784²)^1/2 = (.510 + .615)^1/2 = 1.06

The sampling error of the difference is approximately double the standard error, or approximately 2.1 percentage points, and the 95 percent confidence interval for the difference is 6.8 + 2.1, or 4.7 to 8.9 percentage points.

The standard error estimation procedure outlined above does not compensate for survey item nonresponse, which is a source of nonsampling error. (Table A-1 reflects the maximum number of responses that could be tabulated by demographic characteristics.) For example, of the 10,925 respondents in the 1984 follow-up survey of 1980 high school graduates, 372, or 3.4 percent, did not respond to the particular question on whether they had ever used a pocket calculator. Item nonresponse varied considerably. A very low nonresponse rate of 0.1 percent was obtained for a question asking whether the respondent had attended a postsecondary institution. A much higher item nonresponse rate of 12.2 percent was obtained for a question asking if the respondent had used a micro or minicomputer in high school. Typical item nonresponse rates ranged from 3 to 4 percent.

The Hispanic analyses presented in this report relied on students' self-identification as members of one of four Hispanic subgroups: Mexican, Mexican-American, Chicano; Cuban; Puerto Rican, Puertorriqueno, or Boricua; or other Latin American, Latino, Hispanic, or Spanish descent.

An NCES series of technical reports and data file users manuals, available electronically, provides additional information on the survey methodology.

Further information on the HS&B survey may be obtained from:

Top

High School Transcript Study Tabulations

The most recent high school transcript study was in 2000 and was based on a survey conducted as part of the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). The 2000 study involved analysis of transcripts of approximately 21,000 high school graduates from 277 schools. The study collected information such as course lists, graduation requirements, and the definition of units of credit and grades, on a school-level basis.

Similar studies were conducted of coursetaking patterns of 1982, 1987, 1990, 1992, 1994, and 1998. The 1982 data are based on approximately 12,000 transcripts collected by the High School and Beyond (HS&B) survey. The 1987 data are based on approximately 22,799 transcripts from 433 schools obtained as part of the 1987 NAEP High School Transcript Study, a scope comparable to data collected through the NAEP High School Transcript Study surveys conducted in 1990, 1994, and 1998. The 1992 data are based on approximately 7,600 transcripts collected by the National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988 (NELS:88/92).

Because the 1982 HS&B survey used a different method for identifying handicapped students than the 1987 and 1990 transcript studies, and in order to make the statistical summaries as comparable as possible, all the counts and percentages in this report are restricted to students whose records indicate that they had not participated in a special education program. This restriction lowers the number of 1990 graduates represented in the tables to 20,866.

Further information on high school transcript studies may be obtained from:

Jeffrey Owings
Elementary/Secondary and Library Studies Division
National Center for Education Statistics
1990 K Street NW
Washington, DC 20006
Jeffrey.Owings@ed.gov
http://nces.ed.gov/surveys/hst/

Top

Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System

The Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS) surveys approximately 6,500 postsecondary institutions, including universities and colleges, as well as institutions offering technical and vocational education beyond the high school level. This survey, which began in 1986, replaced the Higher Education General Information Survey (HEGIS).

IPEDS consists of eight integrated components that obtain information on who provides postsecondary education (institutions), who participates in it and completes it (students), what programs are offered and what programs are completed, and both the human and financial resources involved in the provision of institutionally based postsecondary education. Specifically, these components include Institutional Characteristics, Fall Enrollment, Completions, Graduation Rate Survey, Student Financial Aid, Graduation Rates, Salaries, and Fall Staff. Not all institutions are required to complete the Student Financial Aid, Graduate Rates surveys, Salaries and Fall Staff.

The degree-granting institutions portion of this survey is a census of colleges awarding associate’s or higher degrees that were eligible to participate in Title IV financial aid programs. Prior to 1993, data from the technical and vocational institutions were collected through a sample survey. Beginning in 1993, all data are gathered in a census of all postsecondary institutions. The tabulations on "Institutional Characteristics" developed for this edition of the Digest are based on lists of all institutions and are not subject to sampling errors.

The definition of institutions generally thought of as offering college and university education has been changed in recent years. The old standard for higher education institutions included those institutions that had courses that led to an associate’s degree or higher, or were accepted for credit towards those degrees. Higher education institutions were accredited by an agency or association that was recognized by the U.S. Department of Education, or recognized directly by the Secretary of Education. Tables that use only this standard are titled "higher education" in the Digest. The current category includes institutions which award associate’s or higher-level degrees that are eligible to participate in Title IV federal financial aid programs. Tables that contain any data according to this standard are titled as "degree-granting" institutions. Time-series tables may contain data from both series, and they are labeled accordingly. The impact of this change has generally not been large. For example, tables on faculty salaries and benefits were only affected to a very small extent. Also, degrees awarded at the bachelor's level or higher were not heavily affected. The largest impact has been on private 2-year college enrollment. In contrast, most of the data on public 4-year colleges has been affected only to a minimal extent. The impact on enrollment in public 2-year colleges was noticeable in certain states, but relatively small at the national level. Overall, enrollment for all institutions was about one-half a percent higher for degree-granting institutions compared to the total for higher education institutions.

Prior to the establishment of IPEDS in 1986, HEGIS acquired and maintained statistical data on the characteristics and operations of institutions of higher education. Implemented in 1966, HEGIS was an annual universe survey of institutions accredited at the college level by an agency recognized by the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Education. These institutions were listed in NCES's Education Directory, Colleges and Universities.

HEGIS surveys solicited information concerning institutional characteristics, faculty salaries, finances, enrollment, and degrees. Since these surveys, like IPEDS, were distributed to all higher education institutions, the data presented are not subject to sampling error. However, they are subject to nonsampling error, the sources of which varied with the survey instrument. Information concerning the nonsampling error of the enrollment and degrees surveys draws extensively on the HEGIS Post-Survey Validation Study conducted in 1979.

Further information on IPEDS may be obtained from:

Elise Miller
Postsecondary Institutional Studies Program (PSD)
National Center for Education Statistics
1990 K Street NW
Washington, DC 20006
Elise.Miller@ed.gov
http://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/

Top

Institutional Characteristics

This survey provides the basis for the universe of institutions presented in the Directory of Postsecondary Institutions (Vol. 1, Vol. 2). The survey collects basic information necessary to classify the institutions including control, level, and kinds of programs; and information on tuition, fees, and room and board charges. Beginning in 2000, the survey collected institutional pricing data from institutions with first-time, full-time, degree/certificate-seeking undergraduate students. Unduplicated full-year enrollment counts and instructional activity are now collected on the Fall Enrollment survey. The overall response rate was 99.2 percent for Title IV degree-granting institutions in 2002.

Further information on the IPEDS Institutional Characteristics survey may be obtained from:

Patricia Brown
Postsecondary Institutional Studies Program (PSD)
National Center for Education Statistics
1990 K Street NW
Washington, DC 20006
Patricia.Brown@ed.gov
http://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/

Top

Fall Enrollment

This survey has been part of the HEGIS and IPEDS series since 1966. The enrollment survey response rate is relatively high. The 2001 overall response rate was 97.9 percent for degree-granting institutions. Beginning in 2000, the data collection method was web-based, replacing the paper survey forms that had been used in past years. Imputation methods and response bias analysis for the 2001-02 survey are discussed in Enrollment in Postsecondary Institutions, Fall 2001 and Financial Statistics, Fiscal Year 2001 (NCES 2004-155). Major sources of nonsampling error for this survey as identified in the 1979 report were classification problems, the unavailability of needed data, interpretation of definitions, the survey due date, and operational errors. Of these, the classification of students appears to have been the main source of error. Institutions had problems in correctly classifying first-time freshmen and other first-time students for both full-time and part-time categories. These problems occurred most often at 2-year institutions (private and public) and private 4-year institutions. In the 1977–78 HEGIS validation studies, the classification problem led to an estimated overcount of 11,000 full-time students and an undercount of 19,000 part-time students. Although the ratio of error to the grand total was quite small (less than 1 percent), the percentage of errors was as high as 5 percent for detailed student levels and even higher at certain aggregation levels.

Beginning with fall 1986, the survey system was redesigned with the introduction of IPEDS (see above). The survey allows (in alternating years) for the collection of age and residence data. In 2000, the enrollment survey collected the instructional activity and unduplicated headcount data, which are needed to compute a standardized, full-time equivalent (FTE) enrollment statistic for the entire academic year. Starting in 2001, unduplicated headcounts by level of student, and by race/ethnicity and gender of student were also requested, as well as the total number of students in the entering class.

Further information on the IPEDS Fall Enrollment survey may be obtained from:

Cathy Statham
Postsecondary Institutional Studies Program (PSD)
National Center for Education Statistics
1990 K Street NW
Washington, DC 20006
Cathy.Statham@ed.gov
http://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/

Top

Salaries, Tenure, and Fringe Benefits of Full-Time Instructional Faculty

This institutional survey has been conducted for most years from 1966–67 to 1987–88, and annually since 1989–90. Although the survey form changed a number of times during those years, only comparable data are presented in this report.

Between 1966–67 and 1985–86 this survey differed from other HEGIS surveys in that imputations were not made for nonrespondents. Thus, there is some possibility that the salary averages presented in this report may differ from the results of a complete enumeration of all colleges and universities. Beginning with the surveys for 1987–88, the IPEDS data tabulation procedures included imputations for survey nonrespondents. The response rate for the 2003-04 survey was 99.9 percent for degree-granting institutions. Imputation methods and response bias analysis for the 2003-04 survey are discussed in Staff in Postsecondary Institutions, Fall 2003, and Salaries of Full-Time Instructional Faculty, 2003-04 (NCES 2005-155). . Although data from these surveys are not subject to sampling error, sources of nonsampling error may include computational errors and misclassification in reporting and processing. NCES reviews individual colleges' data for internal and longitudinal consistency and contacts the colleges to check inconsistent data.

Further information on the IPEDS Salaries, Tenure, and Fringe Benefits survey may be obtained from:

Sabrina Ratchford
Postsecondary Institutional Studies Program (PSD)
National Center for Education Statistics
1990 K Street NW
Washington, DC 20006
Sabrina.Ratchford@ed.gov
http://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/

Top

Completions

This survey was part of the HEGIS series throughout its existence. However, the degree classification taxonomy was revised in 1970–71, 1982–83, 1991–92, and 2003–03. Collection of degree data has been maintained through the IPEDS system.

Degrees-conferred trend tables arranged by the 2002–03 classification are included in the Digest to provide consistent data from 1970–71 to the most recent year. Data in this edition on associate’s and other formal awards below the baccalaureate, by field of study, cannot be made comparable with figures prior to 1982–83. The nonresponse rate did not appear to be a significant source of nonsampling error for this survey. The return rate over the years has been high, with the degree-granting institutions response rate for the 2002-03 survey at 100.0 percent (4,234 out of 4,236 institutions). The overall response rate for the nondegree granting institutions was 99.8 percent in 2002-03. Because of the high return rate for the degree-granting institutions, nonsampling error caused by imputation is also minimal. Imputation methods and response bias analysis for the 2002-03 survey are discussed in Postsecondary Institutions in the United States: Fall 2003 and Degrees and Other Awards Conferred: 2002-03 (NCES 2005-154).

The major sources of nonsampling error for this survey were differences between the NCES program taxonomy and taxonomies used by the colleges, classification of double majors, operational problems, and survey timing. In the 1979 HEGIS validation study, these sources of nonsampling error contributed to an error rate of 0.3 percent overreporting of bachelor's degrees and 1.3 percent overreporting of master's degrees. The differences, however, varied greatly among fields. Over 50 percent of the fields selected for the validation study had no errors identified. Categories of fields that had large differences were business and management, education, engineering, letters, and psychology. It was also shown that differences in proportion to the published figures were less than 1 percent for most of the selected fields that had some errors. Exceptions to these were: master's and Ph.D. programs in labor and industrial relations (20 percent and 8 percent); bachelor's and master's programs in art education (3 percent and 4 percent); bachelor's and Ph.D. programs in business and commerce, and in distributive education (5 percent and 9 percent); master's programs in philosophy (8 percent); and Ph.D. programs in psychology (11 percent).

Further information on IPEDS Completions surveys may be obtained from:

Andrew Mary
Postsecondary Institutional Studies Program (PSD)
National Center for Education Statistics
1990 K Street NW
Washington, DC 20006
Andrew.Mary@ed.gov
http://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/

Top

Financial Statistics

This survey was part of the HEGIS series and has been continued under the IPEDS system. Changes were made in the financial survey instruments in fiscal years (FY) 1976, 1982, and 1987. The FY 76 survey instrument contained numerous revisions to earlier survey forms which made direct comparisons of line items very difficult. Beginning in FY 82, Pell Grant data were collected in the categories of federal restricted grants and contracts revenues and restricted scholarships and fellowships expenditures. The introduction of IPEDS in the FY 87 survey included several important changes to the survey instrument and data processing procedures. While these changes were significant, considerable effort has been made to present only comparable information on trends in this report and to note inconsistencies. Finance tables for this publication have been adjusted by subtracting the largely duplicative Pell Grant amounts from the later data to maintain comparability with pre-FY 82 data.

Possible sources of nonsampling error in the financial statistics include nonresponse, imputation, and misclassification. The response rate has been about 85 to 90 percent for most of the historic years presented in the Digest; however, in more recent years response rates have been much higher because Title IV institutions are required to respond. The 2002 IPEDS data collection was a full-scale web-based IPEDS data collection which offered features that improved the quality and timeliness of the data. The ability of IPEDS to tailor the online data entry forms for each institution based on characteristics such as institutional control, level of institution, and calendar system, and the institutions’ ability to submit their data online were two such features. The response rate for the FY 2002 survey was 98.7 percent for degree-granting institutions. The response rates were 99.6 for public 4-year, 98.3 for public 2-year, 98.7 for not-for-profit 4-year, and 95.6 for not-for-profit 2-year. Imputation methods and response bias analysis for the 2001-02 survey are discussed in Enrollment in Postsecondary Institutions, Fall 2001 and Financial Statistics, Fiscal Year 2001 (NCES 2004-155).

Two general methods of imputation were used in HEGIS. If the prior year's data were available for a nonresponding institution, these data were inflated using the Higher Education Price Index and adjusted according to changes in enrollments. If no previous year's data were available, current data were used from peer institutions selected for location (state or region), control, level, and enrollment size of institution. In most cases estimates for nonreporting institutions in IPEDS were made using data from peer institutions.

Beginning with FY 87, the IPEDS survey system included all postsecondary institutions, but maintained comparability with earlier surveys by allowing 2- and 4-year institutions to be tabulated separately. For FY 87 through FY 91, in order to maintain comparability with the historical time series of HEGIS institutions, data were combined from two of the three different survey forms that make up the IPEDS survey system. The vast majority of the data were tabulated from form 1, which was used to collect information from public and private not-for-profit 2- and 4-year colleges. Form 2, a condensed form, was used to gather data for the 2-year for-profit institutions. Because of the differences in the data requested on the two forms, several assumptions were made about the form 2 reports so that their figures could be included in the degree-granting institutions totals.

In IPEDS, the form 2 institutions were not asked to separate appropriations from grants and contracts, nor state from local sources of funding. For the form 2 institutions, all the federal revenues were assumed to be federal grants and contracts, and all of the state and local revenues were assumed to be restricted state grants and contracts. All other form 2 sources of revenue, except for tuition and fees and sales and services of educational activities, were included under "other." Similar adjustments were made to the expenditure accounts. The form 2 institutions reported instruction and scholarship and fellowship expenditures only. All other educational and general expenditures were allocated to academic support.

To reduce reporting error, NCES uses national standards for reporting finance statistics. These standards are contained in College and University Business Administration: Administrative Services (1974 Edition), and the Financial Accounting and Reporting Manual for Higher Education (1990 Edition), published by the National Association of College and University Business Officers; Audits of Colleges and Universities (as amended August 31, 1974), by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants; and HEGIS Financial Reporting Guide (1980), by NCES. Wherever possible, definitions and formats in the survey form are consistent with those in these four accounting texts.

Further information on IPEDS Financial Statistics surveys may be obtained from:

Cathy Statham
Postsecondary Institutional Studies Program (PSD)
National Center for Education Statistics
1990 K Street NW
Washington, DC 20006
Cathy.Statham@ed.gov
http://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/

Top