Features of Campus Data Systems and Reporting to IPEDS. An AIR/NCES Data Policy Fellowship Report

Autor/in	Grove, Crissie M.
Institution	National Center for Education Statistics (ED); Association for Institutional Research (AIR)
Titel	Features of Campus Data Systems and Reporting to IPEDS. An AIR/NCES Data Policy Fellowship Report
Quelle	(2009), (28 Seiten) PDF als Volltext kostenfreie Datei Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Monographie
Schlagwörter	Postsecondary Education; Data Collection; Information Utilization; Computer Software; Management Information Systems; Accuracy; Stakeholders; National Surveys; Institutional Research; Institutional Characteristics; Access to Information; Reports + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Post-secondary education; Tertiäre Bildung; Data capture; Datensammlung; Informationsnutzung; Managementinformationssystem; Institutionelle Forschung; Abschlussbericht; Berichten
Abstract	As demand for information on postsecondary education has increased, institutions have had to adapt information systems to accurately report data. Institutions currently respond to multiple constituencies including national media outlets, higher education associations, state regulatory authorities, and federal agencies. The purpose of this study is to examine the information/data systems postsecondary institutions use to report accurate data and how these systems increase or decrease the burden of reporting data. Specifically this study examines how information systems assist institutions in reporting data to the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS), the primary source of data on colleges, universities, and technical/vocational postsecondary institutions collected by the federal government. The survey of IPEDS keyholders and interviews revealed the following findings: - Institutions rely upon a range of campus data systems. The most common systems are Banner, Datatel, Jenzabar, and Peoplesoft. - While four commercially available products were most commonly used, there was no clearly dominant system, and institutions instead seemed to use campus data systems based upon their own reasons. - The majority of respondents indicated generally positive feelings toward their campus data systems and reporting to IPEDS. They also tended to see their role as IPEDS keyholder as important, but also noted the high volume of work. None of these perceptions were related to characteristics of the respondent or institution. - There was a tendency for individuals specifically in the role of IR professional to view their systems and IPEDS responsibilities more positively. - Despite the availability of ready-made reports (such as IPEDS reports) in campus data systems, most keyholders do not use these reports to gather the data needed for IPEDS. Interviews were conducted to determine why the reports are not used. Many of the interviewees mentioned that they have developed their own reports to collect the data needed for IPEDS to be sure the correct data are being gathered. Interview results also demonstrated that despite the data systems' ready-made reports that promise reporting to IPEDS with ease, the reports are often difficult to use and require numerous steps. Reports built by the keyholder are trusted and known to gather the correct data needed for IPEDS. (As Provided).
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2020/1/01