“You have this effort to add these elements without a mechanism to check the new variables, as well as a system to ensure their proper execution,” Cook said. “You would almost think that whoever applied this does not know what they are doing.”
Cook has helped to advise the IPEDS Education Department for 20 years and serve technical review panels, which are usually convened first to recommend changes to data collection. These panels were dissolved earlier this year and there are none created on the new proposal for Trump’s acceptance data.
Cook and other data experts cannot understand how she could take advantage of this task. All six NCES employees who participated in the collection of IPEDS data were fired in March and there are only three employees left by 100 in NCES, which is managed by an acting commissioner, who also has several other jobs.
An employee of the education department who did not want to be baptized, denied that no one had left inside the education department had experience. The employee stated that the employees of the Data Data Data Service, which is separated from the Statistics Agency, has a “deep acquaintance with IPEDS data, its collection and use”. Former employees of the education department have told me that some of these employees have experience in analyzing data, but not in collecting it.
In the past, there were so many dozen employees who worked closely with RTI International, the Institute of Research, which processes most of the IPEDS data collection work.
Technical review eliminated
Particularly concern is that RTI $ 10 million annual contract Conducting data was reduced by approximately half by the Ministry of Government Efficiency, also known as DOG, according to two former employees who wanted to remain anonymous for fear of revenge. These severe budget cuts eliminated the technical review panels that VET has offered changes to iPeds, and has completed training for colleges and universities to provide correct data, which helped to data quality. RTI did not answer my request to confirm the cuts or answer questions about the challenges that it would face when expanding its work on reduced budget and staff.
The education department did not deny that the iPeds budget was halved. “The RTI Treaty is focused on the most critical IPEDS activities for the mission,” said the Education Division officer. “The contract continues to include at least one task where a technical inspection can be convened.”
Additional elements of data collection is also reduced, including a data verification contract.
Last week, the scope of the new task was more evident. On August 13, the administration released more Details of the new reception details He wants to describe how the educational department is trying to add a whole new survey to the IPEDS, called the Admission and Consumer Transparency (ACTS), which will divide all admission data and most data on students and financial assistance data on race and gender. The college will have to report both students and graduation. The public has 60 days to comment on and the administration wants colleges to start reporting this data this fall.
Complicated collection
Christine Keller, CEO of the Association for Institutional Research, a trade group of higher education staff who collect and analyze data called the new survey “one of the most complicated IPEDS collections ever tried”.
Traditionally, they took years to make much smaller changes to iPeds, and universities are given a year to start collecting new data before they are required to send it. (Approximately 6,000 colleges, universities and vocational schools are obliged to submit IPEDS data as a condition for their students to take federal student loans or receive federal grants for PELL. Failure to comply with fines and threat of loss of access to federal student assistance.)
Usually, the education department will reveal screenshots of data fields showing what colleges will need to enter the IPEDS computer system. But the department did not do this and several of the data descriptions are ambiguous. For example, colleges will need to take into account test results and GPA from Quintille, broken by race and ethnicity and gender. One interpretation is that the college will have to say how many black candidates for men, for example, have evaluated over 80 SAT or ACT percentiles. Another interpretation is that colleges will have to take into account the average SAT or ACT assessment of the first 20 percent of candidates for black men.
The Institutional Research Association used to train college administrators on how to collect and send data correctly and sorting through confusing details – until the dog eliminates this training. “The lack of complete, federal training will only increase the institutional burden and the risk of data quality,” Keller said. Keller’s organization now embarks on its own budget to offer a small amount of free IPEDS University TrainingS
The education department also requires colleges to account for five years of historical reception data, broken into multiple subcategories. Institutions have never been asked to store data on candidates who have not been enrolled.
“It is amazing that they want five years of previous data,” says Jordan Matsudra, an economist at the American University who has worked on educational policy at Biden and Obama administrations. “This will be square in the pandemic years when no one reports test results.”
“Misleading results”
Matsudaiira explained that ipeds was considering requesting colleges for more academic data in race and ethnicity in the past, and the education department eventually rejected the proposal. One of the concerns is that cutting and cutting the data into smaller and smaller buckets will mean that there will be too few students and the data will have to be suppressed to protect the privacy of students. For example, if there were two men from the Indians in the first 20 percent of SAT results in one college, many people may be able to know who they are. And a large amount of suppressed data would make the whole collection less useful.
Also, small numbers can lead to bizarre results. For example, a small college can have only two Spanish -eating candidates with very high SAT results. If both were accepted, this is a 100 percent intake. If only 200 white women from 400 were accepted with the same test results, this will only be a 50 percent intake. On the surface, this may seem like racial and sexual discrimination. But it could have been Fluk. Maybe both Spanish men were athletes and musicians. Next year, the school can reject two different candidates for men from Spanish with high test results, but without such impressive extracurricles. The reception percentage for Spanish men with high test results will drop to zero. “After all, you have misleading results,” Matsudara said.
Reporting the average results of the race test is another great concern. “It feels like a trap for me,” Matsudara said. “This will mechanically give the administration the claim to claim that there are more standards for admission of black students to white students when you know that this is not a correct conclusion at all.”
The statistical question is that there are more Asian and white students at the highest end of the SAT grade distribution and all these perfect 1600S will download the average for these racial groups. (Just as a very tall person will distort the average height of the group.) Even if the college has a high -test threshold that applies to all racial groups and no one under 1400 is admitted, the average SAT result for black students will still be more nicer than white students. (See the chart below.) The only way to avoid this is to be purely recognized by a test assessment and to take only students with the highest results. In some highly selective universities, there are enough candidates with 1600 Sat to fill the entire class. But no institution fills its student body with test results alone. This may mean neglecting candidates with the potential to be concert pianists, star players or great writers.
The average trap for a result
Acceptance data is a highly charged political issue. The Biden administration initially leads the collection of data for the acceptance of colleges in race and ethnicity. Democrats wanted to collect this data to show how the colleges and universities of the nation become less diverse with the end of affirmative actions. This data should begin this fall, after a complete technical and procedural examination.
The Trump administration now requires what was already in the work, and adds many new data requirements – without following normal processes. And instead of tracking a decreasing variety in higher education, Trump wants to use admission data to threaten colleges and universities. If the new directive provides bad data that is easy to interpret, it can get its desire.
