Questions and answers from curriculum consultation events
1. For option B, what fields will be part of the Session Year entity?
a. Just the start and end dates are in the proposal. There is a question asking for suggestions of anything else that would be useful on there.
2. Where would the Location field go?
a. It’s at the student level for both options, so on Student Course Session
3. Do you have a definition of a late starter, i.e. if someone is having trouble in getting their visa and they start a bit later?
a. We have a rough idea but need to come up with a more robust definition.
4. Where has the requirement to identify late starters come from? SFC: this is not a requirement for SFC.
a. This was driven by OfS requirements, but we have asked the question of all providers.
5. In scenario 7, what if the student transferred in January, would that still be a late starter? What if this happened in the second year?
a. HESA to consider
6. We have some direct entrants into year two; would they be considered a late starter?
a. No, but HESA to consider
7. In Scotland some degrees are very flexible: students might transfer around between courses – that might mean a lot more ‘late starter’ flags returned.
a. HESA to consider
8. If they transfer, do they have to have a late starter flag?
a. It depends, when that transfer happens.
9. We have many combined subject degrees, where the student can study from a wide range of subjects, and depending on what they study, depends on what they get in their degree outcome. Would these cases need to include the late starter flag?
a. We would probably see a more generic subject course aim, and when they finish we’d see what they came out with specifically. We wouldn’t want you to be moving them around between many courses throughout their study.
10. In scenario 8 it would be helpful to have a non-September start. Can we have a case where a student studies for 6 months, 12 months, 12 months and then they go to writing up?
a. HESA to consider. Please include these kinds of examples in your consultation response
11. Why do you want data on PGRs in the Student return? Why aren’t they in the Staff return instead? They have to do so many hours of teaching as part of STIPEND.
a. HESA to consider.
12. In scenario 9i option B, would you need a flag to say they’d gone dormant (thinking about the T3 KPI, and how likely are students come back in year 2)?
a. We would get an indication of this in the RSNSCSEND field.
13. When a student becomes dormant, will HESA continue to ask us about the student in a continuity type rule?
a. Once you’ve told us, we don’t want to ask you again. Though we might follow up on this after a set period of time. We haven’t quite worked through the details yet.
14. What do you mean by dormant or interrupted?
a. We mean not actively studying or writing up.
15. Our nursing students have funding for 5 years, but in that time they could be interrupted for 2 years, and still come back and study. We don’t consider these as dormant when they interrupt.
If a nurse fails a module, and they take a year off to study again, and then resit the module a year later (and then carry on). This is an interruption for us, we don’t consider them as dormant.
a. Both of these scenarios would be considered as dormant in the Student record.
16. If a course is marked as fully flexible would all the students on it need to be fully flexible, or just some? For example, we offer one of our courses on campus, or by distance learning.
a. It would be all students, so you might need to send two courses to cover this.
17. For a standard year, full-time MSC course, would there be one session year, if it just goes over the 12-month barrier.
a. We would like to give you some flexibility, i.e. plus or minus 14 days either side like we have now, but we still need to work the details of this out.
18. In the general option B slide are you talking about a specific mode of the course here? i.e. is it for full-time or part-time students or both?
a. It could cover both or just one. That is a question for providers in the consultation.
19. When you talk about accreditation / initiatives being on course – is that for the student or for the course?
a. If it’s at course level – then all students on the course would gain that accreditation. There are some examples in the guidance where a medical student can be on an NMC accredited course, but at a student level you can record that they get the specific type of accreditation such as mental health nursing.
20. Another accreditation example is when a course is accredited based on the UCAS entrant scores, so accreditation can come and go each year depending on the scores.
a. Please put this in your consultation response. HESA to consider
21. We have direct entrants in Scotland. What would you expect for programmes that only accept direct entrants to year 3? Currently we return years 1 and 2. Other providers return years 3 and 4.
a. We will need to issue some consistent guidance on these. HESA to consider
22. Have you considered adding the expected length of study field to the course?
a. Yes, but it would bring back the duplication we were trying to avoid in the curriculum data e.g you would need a different course for a version with and without a placement year.
23. How will you identify the NSS population?
a. This has still to be worked through in detail.
24. What about programmes that have placements as part of the course, i.e. ITT and nurses?
a. They wouldn’t fall under the definition of a sandwich placement for the field. They would instead return the Off-Venue Activity entity.
1. What would happen where a foundation year is common to a number of degrees and students don’t have to choose until the end of the year which degree they are going on to?
a. There will need to be different courses set up for the generic course and one for each specific area. So that once the student completes the first year they can be moved on to the more specific course.
2. Would you class a student bringing in credit that is not necessarily ‘catching-up’ with other students as a late starter?
a. Yes, as they are moving between course they have started late to that course.
3. Scenario 7 – What would happen where in scenario 7, a student transfers between years, e.g. does the whole of year one and then moves onto a year of a different course?
a. One Student Course Session for the first year, which will be closed, and a second Student Course Session linked to the other course. As it would be the first year of two different degrees.
4. If returning a student as dormant at the end of a student course session, how would this affect funding?
a. OfS confirmed that where a student goes dormant at the end of a Student Courses Session the funding would not be affected. As long as they are recorded as completed for that Student Course Session.
The idea around allowing providers to return the student as dormant at the end of a Student Course Session is to save providers from having to send a new Student Course Session just to tell statutory customers that the student will not be returning.
5. If session year is really just a period of time, reflecting different intakes, are session years linked to courses. Or, can session years be built so all students starting in September, regardless of course be linked to the same session year?
a. Session Year is linked to a course in the proposal to show the relationship between them. Possibility of this being an option C, but it would then need some kind of Course information linked to the Session Year anyway.
6. Would Postgraduate Taught programmes that last from September to September need to be set up the same as 15-month programmes (in scenario 10), with two session years in option B?
a. If this was 12 months long, we would expect one Session Year and one Student Course Session to be returned, but we need to work with statutory customers to clearly define in the guidance when a new Session Year would be required and when the cut-off point will be, as we may allow the plus or minus 14 days that we currently have in guidance for the Student record.
7. Are we expected to return course length/expected end dates as they were at the reference point or, if we subsequently discover a change before signing off the data are, we required to provide the latest information? This applies specifically to students who might opt not to do a placement year.
a. Yes, you would need to return expected end date on the Engagement entity. Information that occurs during the sign-off period is not expected to be returned in that collection, the data will be correct at the end of the reference period. There may be some exception to the rule, e.g. award date, but we will provide guidance on specifically which fields are the exception to this.
Providers would update the date if a student wasn’t going to do a placement, but then decided they would do a placement.
A student with prior credits will be returned in the same way as those who started late but are just catching up. We are in discussions with OfS about the possibility of a new field for 2020/21, which will record where prior credits exist.
8. Module by module provision that start at different times of year – no linked course initially – dummy
a. We need to work through these fully flexible provisions and agree the best approach to map this type of provision. There are a few options to consider.
9. For providers who record separate courses for FT, PT, integrated, placement etc in their internal curriculum databases already, will there be pressure from HESA/OfS in future to ask all providers restructure to generic course structure that fits the proposed models?
a. There is no pressure from either HESA or OfS to generalise the courses, it was designed to be flexible so that providers can choose how to return the courses depending on how it is held within their systems.
10. Question 23 in the consultation refers to ‘Current Curriculum Model’, does this mean current HESA Student Return or current Data Futures model?
a. This refers to the current Data Futures model published on the website, not the current Student return.
1. In Option A, it doesn't look like the actual student dates (e.g. academic year ends in May but would return a full year) would ever be captured. Is that correct? Does HESA not need these dates?
a. That is correct, as in option A the Student course session would have to be a yearlong. Statutory customers only need the more specific end date to be earlier, when a student left or withdrew.
2. What if the end date changes mid-year because of timetable changes? Can the actual end date be adjusted in both scenario options?
a. Yes. In option A, if it’s a continuing student that’s ok as they are still a year long, and if it’s the final Student Course Session then year the dates can be adjusted. In option B the Session Year can be adjusted, so that the end date of when the student actually ended is recorded.
3. When referring to a Session Year, does this mean a level year, e.g. first year of traditional degree, or does this mean a 12-month period?
a. A 12-month period could represent a level year if that coincides with the provider’s provision. Which is the same for any type of provision.
4. In option B, does Session Year have to sit under a specific course or can Session Year sit at an organisation level (independent of course)?
a. The Session Year must be associated at Course level. The Student is then associated with the Session Year.
5. Is Year of Instance still a concept in both option A and B?
a. Yes. In option A – the student’s year would always run from March – March (if that’s when they started). In option B allows for a bit more flexibility, so if a student moves cohort, then their year moves too.
6. In Option B, what happens if there is a student on year 1 and a student on year 2 on the same Session Year with slightly different start dates?
a. Starting a day or two apart should probably be fine. HESA need to define the level of flexibility with Statutory Customers once the consultation closes.
7. In Option B, why doesn’t Session year contain other fields, e.g. ‘foundation’ information?
a. This was a result of feedback from providers around not wanting to duplicate curriculum data to represent this information. Gives flexibility for providers. I.e. Otherwise, this would force a provider to return a different Session Year for Foundation or non-Foundation courses.
8. In Option B, would providers need to set up many Session Years in advance, in case of resists etc?
a. No, with the move to a discrete collection, providers will only need to return what is relevant to the reference period. There is a separate outstanding question as to whether providers will be permitted to return data (e.g. modules) in advance, but the information is ignored in any data deliveries.
9. Is it possible for a provider to use different options for different course delivery types?
a. We are seeking preferences from providers to inform this decision in the final questions. We would consider having both options, but as exceptions to the rule rather than the norm. We would need to clearly identify what these exceptions are. We can’t have half and half scenario.
10. In either option, can the provider choose to return different courses based on location, mode and delivery type etc?
a. Yes, a provider can choose to bundle these variants in to one course or have separate courses. This was to allow providers to return the data in a method that is closer to what is in their systems.
11. Would scenario 7 option A require the same NUMHUS to be returned as the session start date would change?
a. Yes, the same NUMHUS would be required. This follows similar rules as applied in current Student return.
12. In scenario 9i, is it possible to return a dormant student once they have interrupted or do they need to be excluded from the return?
a. If at the end of Student Course Session the provider knows that the student is not coming back, then the reason for end should be returned as ‘interrupted’ and excluded from any future records until the student returns. If this was not known at the time, then the provider should return a Student Course Session in the following period to positively confirm that the Student has gone dormant.
13. In scenario 6, how is a late starter defined? Is there a working definition for when a late starter flag would be needed?
a. There is not a definition yet, but as a general rule, if the student is genuinely catching up with their cohort then they are considered to be a late starter.
14. What is the rationale behind removing the Year 0 for a programme? Whilst there is a Foundation marker, not having the value of 0 will cause large scale changes for providers.
a. This was around the fact that a Year 0 isn’t really a logical year, a student begins on year 1. However, we will be considering provider feedback on YEARPRG after the consultation.
15. How will you identify students for the NSS population (YEARPRG)?
a. We understand that there is a proposal that any year of course may be required for NSS. We are in discussion with the OfS, as there may still be a requirement to record where the student is in their final year so this is a potential use case for YEARPRG.
16. Will there be a consultation for the proposed new Course entity? E.g. issues around accreditation changing
a. No, there will not be a separate consultation on this new Course entity. There is a list of the fields we are proposing to include, so please do include any comments within the curriculum consultation.
17. In Question 15 of the consultation it refers to ‘part part time’ and ‘full full time’, do these have any meaning?
a. This is a text error which has now been amended. We have been assuming that the current definitions for mode will apply, according to current funding bodies definitions.
18. Which option would DfE prefer for their ITT return? Would both options work for them?
a. DfE, and all the Statutory Customers, have been involved in the curriculum discussions around these options and are happy with either option.
19. Would HESA prefer the 12-month period for a standard student to be the HESA academic year, I.e. 1st August - 31st July?
a. No, this should not reflect the HESA reporting year, there is no HESA reporting year anymore. This should reflect the provider’s provision.
20. Is there a diagrammatic example for fast-track (2-year) accelerated scenario?
a. No, this is because when the example was drawn-up it was the same as some of the other scenarios, i.e. the rule of having yearlong SessionYears or StudentCourseSessions still applies.
21. If placement and non-placement students were linked to the same course, would providers need to return an expected course length?
a. Expected end dates are at the student level. Providers would update the date if a student wasn’t going to do a placement, but then decided they would do a placement.
22. In scenario 9, if a provider is late in finding out that a student interrupted or went dormant, is this an historical amendment?
a. We will allow providers to include minor changes without requiring an historical amendment. HESA will be specific about which fields/scenarios will be allowed, but we are still working through this.
23. If a student is a late starter but already had prior credits to cover the bit that they missed should they be returned differently to someone who just started late but will catch-up?
a. No. A student with prior credits will be returned in the same way as those who started late but are just catching up. We are in discussions with OfS about the possibility of a new field for 2020/21, which will record where prior credits exist.
24. Would PGT students who are just writing-up in the final few months of their 14-month course still have two sessions.
a. Yes, in this example they will still have two sessions to represent the writing-up period. One 12-month session and a shorter one for the writing-up portion.
25. In flexible provision where a student resits a module (not full year), what happens?
a. Option A would return yearlong Student Course Session, with the relevant modules associated with it, but you may see two of the same modules which are resits. For option B not sure on approach for fully flexible, may look a bit different. Would like feedback from providers on this.
26. What happens when a student interrupts for two years but then turn into a withdrawal?
a. Let us know when the student becomes dormant. If you later find out that the student is not returning to the course then you will need to send a leaver record with a back-dated end date, to the last time the student was active.
27. Accreditation only cover pre-reg and course like ITT. Would the accreditation list be widened for where the registration is fundamental to the course aim, e.g. Unistats
a. Data Futures only has those that are required currently. Unistats has a different purpose so has a broader list. We are not planning on expanding the list of accreditations in Student to cover those used in Unistats at the moment.
28. A foundation course indicator is required for the SLC. Have the SLC commented on the options?
a. No, the SLC have not commented but there is flexibility in both options to be able to record foundation separately for the SLC if this is what is required. However, we have discussed differences in SLC definitions to understand why there are differences.
29. Scenario 7, a late starter from a transfer scenario may not have catching up to do, would they need the late starter flag?
a. Yes, they would be flagged as a late starter, even though they may be bringing in credit. Those analysing the data would need to know. In scenario 7 the dates shown may be slightly misleading as they all happen in the first reference period. In the discrete collection guidance document, where a transfer happens within the same reference period it says that HESA wouldn’t know about it as you only return what happens at the end of the reference period.
30. For a CPD students taking one module in an academic year, would their COMDATE reflect the module start date?
a. The Students start date should always reflect their actual start date.
31. How specific are the dates required for a 12-month Session Year? For example, for 12-month PGT course starting late September would we put 25th Sept - 24th Sept the following year?
a. There will be some flexibility in the dates, e.g. if a Monday falls on a different date each year. There is validation in the existing collection around +/-14 days to allow for term dates, so we will need to provide clear guidance on this.
32. For fully flexible study, can module study be returned against the course entity, so it ties with students which are module focused?
a. To be discussed with OU separately.
33. Can you elaborate on Question 10 of the consultation?
a. This is around returning Student Course Sessions in option B. Typo - ‘Starting a month apart’ should be ‘12 months apart’. This has now been amended. The question is asking whether Student Course Sessions in option B should be a yearlong to match the Session Years, or if they should reflect the student’s end date (where possible). In each option, the Student Course Sessions would need to start 12 months apart.
34. Is option B HESA’s preference?
a. Yes, HESA prefer option B as we believe that it gives providers the most flexibility for providers, with fewer flags and is closer to reality. HESA have assumed that this is how providers record the data in their systems, but this assumption might be incorrect, so we welcome provider feedback.
35. When will the results of the consultation published?
a. The consultation closes on 11 September and we want to make a decision as soon as possible as it will have a ripple effect on model. We will need to review all the responses and we have a review meeting set-up with Statutory Customers after the consultation closes. Aiming for a decision in October.
1. What did Statutory Customers actually want from curriculum data?
a. This was explained in the slides
2. Where are Statutory Customers not getting this from the current Data Futures model?
a. They will get the same output; this change is about exploring if we can make it easier for providers to return the data.
3. Would providers still need to send all the curriculum data upfront?
a. No, that’s a change with discrete collections. You will only need to send any curriculum that is relevant for the students you are sending in that reference period.
4. Would a 14-month Postgraduate Taught student still need to be split up into years?
a. Yes, you would return a 12-month and then a 2-month Student Course Session.
5. If Session Years won’t have MODE on, will it either be at Course or Student level?
a. Yes, that is one of the questions in the consultation.
6. For TARIFF, they would pick this up from the Student level?
a. We haven’t worked through the TARIFF calculations yet, but this would be recorded against a student.
7. Sandwich needs to be flagged in advance, why don’t you need to know that a Foundation Year in advance?
a. HESA to follow up
8. For scenario 3, could you cope with a semester only placement?
9. Could we have a course with a placement year, and a course without one?
a. Yes, you can.
10. Do we have to keep the 12-month length?
a. Yes. We won’t be able to change that.
11. Can we not snip a Student Course Session in half in the middle?
a. Not in Option A, but you can in Option B in some scenarios
12. Why do you need to identify late starters? For funding purposes?
a. Yes, that is the primary reason.
13. How are late starters known now?
a. We don’t know currently, but we need to find a solution in Data Futures.
14. If this is before the first reference period (for transfers in scenario 7), then what would we return?
a. Now with the move to discrete collections we wouldn’t see this if it happens within the first reference period. And you wouldn’t need the late starter flag.
15. If the OfS want this for funding purposes, why would you need the late starter flag returned for the second course (in scenario 6)? Especially if it was quickly.
a. The late starter flag is about identifying what is happening with the student.
16. In scenario 7, if we sent the modules for the first course, it might be linked to the second course the student has transferred on to. Would that matter?
a. HESA to follow up
17. If someone transfers in before the first reference period, what would you see then in scenario 7?
a. We would see what course they ended up on.
18. Would you need a flag for cases where it’s PGR or fully flexible (scenarios 8 and 11) if the approach is different for this provision?
a. Yes, the fully flexible identifier is on the course entity. PGR would be identified through the student’s COURSEAIM.
19. In the Research student example, scenario 8, would we need a separate course if there was a mixture? For example, a September start and a January start, but there was the odd student that we allow to start in June. Could we just have a flag on the Student who starts in June to say that we won’t do the Session Years for this student?
a. HESA to follow up
20. Would Becky be returned with two things for session year B, in scenario 9ii?
21. Sometimes we don’t find out that a student is dormant for a while. If we’ve returned them as dormant and then want to go back and correct that in the next reference period, can we do that?
a. Yes, we need to allow for this.
22. If the date we need to return was in the previous reference period, it wouldn’t technically be in scope for returning? Would you want us to return that as the first day of the second reference period?
a. No, we would want you to put in the correct date. We will work through the validation to allow that.
23. STULOAD – will you be able to calculate this?
a. HESA will consider this later on, in a discussion about FTE and STULOAD.
24. In this example: the first year is full year, the second year is a writing up phase. YEARPRG is still 1 in the current model for the second year, and we don’t want this to be YEARPRG 2 as it is considered a continuation of the first year only.
a. HESA to follow up
25. Would students need to be returned if they aren’t doing any credits? E.g. PGR students?
a. HESA will consider this later on.
26. How do we have overlapping Session Years for accelerated degrees (to cover three years being returned as two)?
a. You would have to split this and return it as only two years and only two session years. So, there wouldn’t be any need for overlapping session years.
27. What do we return for short courses, when they could start on any day of the year? Could we have some blocks of Session Years?
a. HESA to follow up – we think that will be ok, but we need to be clear on the guidelines for this.
28. For funding year, in a PGCE example, half the modules are level 6 and half level 7, how would we return this?
a. HEFCW: It is funded by the level of the qualification, so it would be that.
29. Accreditation, can we have this at student level please? Accreditation can be student specific, may not be awarded until the end of the course, and having it a student level will allow much better reporting. Course level is too high a level for us to do this.
a. Please add this into your curriculum consultation feedback.
30. YEARPRG helpful for us internally, but fully flexible isn’t relevant for them.
a. Again, please add this into your curriculum consultation feedback.
31. What about having an ‘F’ for foundation year, and an ‘R’ for a resit year in YEARPRG?
a. HESA to follow up.
32. If the sandwich could be a thick or thin placement, does that matter for the ‘sandwich’ flag.
a. HESA to follow up.
1. In cases where LOCSDY E “On industrial (or other) placement for a proportion of the year” was returned in the current Student record, what will happen in the Data Futures model? And how will you take the proportions into account for the student staff ratios?
a. We still need to consider the details on this one. All of the placements would be recorded in the off-venue activity entity.
2. Will we need to record the exact location where a nursing student was on a placement?
a. We are still working through the detail on that.
3. Off Venue Activity was on Module at some point – is that still the case?
a. It’s on Student Course Session now, with an optional link to Module where that is applicable.
4. ERASMUS, and how is that recorded against FTE?
a. We will be looking at that in future.
5. Can you forward the consultation link to colleagues, as the email suggests that you can’t?
a. Yes, you can, we will raise this with our comms team.
6. For the HECoS change, there is currently no link to what codes should be used for ATAS – please could we have the details for this?
a. No summary at the moment. @HESA to pass feedback on
7. What is the process for adding new HECoS codes?
a. Send an email to liaison. We’re about to go through a batch for review this year.
8. For the new 2020/21 Scotland only fields, will UCAS be asking the question as well?
a. We are not sure but can confirm. HESA to consider
9. Are we still committed to having three discrete collections at same level of accuracy? We should not collect partial data, if complete data can’t be provided, we should wait until data can be returned accurately for everyone?
a. Need to discuss with Statutory Customers, can’t answer now. Will take *J timing into account. Are looking at tolerances based on time from students’ start dates.
10. Will there be regional differences in tolerances?
a. Yes, we can tailor tolerances to countries. Scotland’s will be based on SFC requirements, not OfS.
11. Why do we have three returns a year? Are we still considering this? We have concerns about the time needed to quality assure and submit data.
a. Need to work through details of what SFC need and when.
12. If the sector is saying reference period one data will not be of sufficient quality, then what is the point if you can’t use it because the tolerances are so big? Lots of entrants and leavers will need to be submitted in reference period one, this will be a high volume of data with very little time to quality assure/prepare. Can you not use this data?
a. SFC: could improve data earlier on, will help you later in the year?
13. Could it be done initially at a high level (similar to the early stats return) and then get more detailed throughout the year? Was this initially how DF was sold?
a. HESA to take back to colleagues internally
14. The first reference period dates do not tie up with the current SFC census date? Are you still intending to take the SFC early stats from HESA? Between mid-November and the end of November there could be lots of entrants – could this be an issue?
a. Yes, this is still the plan to use HESA data instead. SFC indicated that they would work around the problems suggested.
15. Will UCAS be able to send the *J data earlier? Once the *J has been received, the data still needs cleansing.
a. In principle UCAS have said they will try to do this. Not had any further discussions recently with them, but will be picking this back up.
16. Are you looking at the Engagement vs Student Registration? When would you consider them to be different?
a. The OU type courses are the primary examples but also other CPD courses where students register for different elements separately. The engagement would be at the high level and then a new Student Registration would cover each individual element (where this is signed up to on an individual basis).
17. When will the Off-Venue activity decision be made?
a. Not sure on the exact date, as it will take a little while to get all parties in agreement. Likely to be at least a few months yet.
18. The religious belief coding frame doesn’t allow certain codes to be returned, e.g. NI specific codes in Scotland. Can you just get rid of the coding frame subsets and allow everyone to return all the codes? We have this internally and then need to convert this to return for HESA. Queries from other about whether this was justified under GDPR? This is also part of the problem with late *J data as students may not have responded with a valid entry applicable to Scotland.
a. Can we justify forcing all providers in Scotland to collect a level of granularity that is only required for Northern Ireland? If we do not have a justification for collecting this about students in Scotland, we don’t think we can collect this data.
19. What about the reverse of LOCSDY = S students, i.e. those who are on the AOR and come into main Student return? We always have to justify this, so could you have a flag to highlight these as well?
a. HESA to consider
20. Why don’t you make AOR part of student? General consensus from the room: don’t collect enough information now. Potentially more long-term: trying to change as same time as Data Futures would be too much change at the same time. Cost of software systems would go up as more students within the systems.
a. That level of data not required for AOR students in Scotland.
21. We always have an issue with credits in the Fee Invoice Amount, as we are told that we can’t send these within the model as it stands. How would this be returned in data futures?
a. Please drop us an email with this example. HESA to consider
22. When will Data Futures go live? Originally were going to have 4 years between the data model originally being published (2015) and go live (2019) – will we get that again?
a. We have ruled out 2020/21. The Board will be considering options at its meeting at the end of September, with a view to establishing a programme plan that meets the needs of statutory customers and other stakeholders and that we can all have confidence in.
23. What discussions are being had around FTE? FTE is good argument against having discrete collections: for full-time students we can predict it, but for part-time, resits, dormant etc. data in first reference period will be predictions which you can’t base any analysis on. Don’t you also want FTE to be submitted in year, so why not include this in reference period one? We have this in the early stats return but at a high level and this contains forecasting based on the previous years. Students changing mode will affect this, as the estimates are based on mode of study.
a. HESA and Statutory Customers will be looking at FTE after the curriculum consultation has been resolved. Providers in Scotland don’t have to return FTE until the end of the Student Course Session. SFC: funding will be based on FTE but we know it won’t be an exact figure. Data needs to be as accurate as you know it at a given point.
24. If the HESA return replaces the early stats return, will it require some predictions in the HESA return? For example, students who start after end of reference period one might have an estimated FTE included in the current early stats return but couldn’t be included in HESA return.
a. SFC indicated that this would be ok as it was, students wouldn’t need to be added unless that have actually started in that reference period, i.e. no predictions.
25. Providers would like to know what Performance Indicators will come off each reference period and understand what each reference period will be used for, e.g. league tables.
a. This is something HESA would like to work on with Statutory Customers, to be more explicit about what data is being used for and when. There will be an important message for any other users of the early data to make sure they understand where data might be subject to change, and that this is ok and to be expected in some cases.
26. Will league tables be getting the in-year data? For example, if the Staff return is still retrospective, does that mean that the Student Staff Ratios also wouldn’t be able to be calculated in-year.
a. HESA to consider.
27. Why do we need to send data in reference period one?
a. SFC: early entrants information, access targets, intakes information. Can’t continue to get this 15-months after they start, we need this earlier. We need to get a break down by different characteristics, so it can’t be at a high level, as the tables currently can only be done to a certain level of detail.
28. Can we have a document describing all the returns that might now be covered by the Data Futures return, and also which will not be covered?
a. That sounds like a very good idea! HESA to consider.
1. Subjects codes to be returned for ITT in Wales.
a. HEFCW to follow up.
2. Can the specification page list the areas that will not change?
a. We have avoided this initially but will look to create something once the first few big decisions have been reached.
3. Will the specification page be updated?
a. Yes, we plan to do this every week.
4. Can the specification page/other relevant information be easier to find? Rather than having to look through the old info?
a. HESA to follow up
5. Off Venue Activity placements that happen technically on site – need to be clear in guidance.
a. HESA will be addressing this in a wider placement discussion shortly.
6. The 20-day rule for returning placements – does this still apply to any/all types of placement?
a. Yes, to all the same ones as collected in Student currently. Where the coverage has expanded for data futures, we will be addressing these in the wider placement discussions.