Student outcome and experience measures
Data quality notes for student outcome and experience measures
This page details any data quality issues relating to our student outcome measures, including notes for specific providers.
OfS quality observations
Our student outcome measures relating to the 2023-24 academic year are affected by fewer issues than last year.
For this year’s data, we have not included free school meals. This variable needs more complex suppression, which has not yet been developed in our new systems.
As part of changing our technology base, we have refined the implementation of some algorithms, particularly for associations between characteristics of students (ABCS) and Graduate Outcomes (GO) quintiles. This might mean changes in some of our student outcomes data, as we have improved the processing of the data.
Continuation data for higher technical qualifications (HTQs) is presented in the student outcomes dashboard for the first time in 2025. This relates to entrants in 2022-23 which was the first year of these courses. For providers that report data to the designated data body (Jisc), data on HTQs was not collected for the first time until 2023-24 so will not be available in the dashboard until 2026.
Our student outcome and experience measures relating to the 2022-23 academic year are affected by more data quality issues than other years.
In 2024 we invited providers to further check the quality of their student outcome and experience data before publication.
Through this process, several providers reported quality issues affecting the data, and we have also identified significant issues affecting some providers’ data. We have provided explanations below where users may need to exercise some caution when interpreting the data of particular dashboards for the affected providers.
Overall data quality has improved in 2023-24 but we continue to add the the notes below where users may need to exercise some caution when interpreting the data of particular dashboards for some providers.
Our data quality assessment identified some quality issues in the 2022-23 student data, as shown in the table below. The issues tend to concern elevated proportions of data categorised as either ‘missing’ or recorded by providers as ‘unknown’. The proportions of ‘unknown’ values in certain data fields has increased overall at sector level but also varies greatly by provider.
To mitigate some of these issues, particularly where the approximate scale is moderate or large, we have included student-level data from 2021-22 to fill gaps for particular variables which have elevated levels of unknowns in 2022-23.
For ethnicity, sex, socioeconomic classification (SEC) and care experienced status, wherever the data is missing or reported as not available, we will instead use known data from the same student in the previous year.
In all places where data has been reported in 2022-23, including ‘refuse to answer’, we will use the data as reported in 2022-23. This approach was taken for these four variables because there is a higher amount of missing data, across multiple providers, and these variables are unlikely to change between years. This approach reduces the need to suppress indicators due to missing data.
In general we consider the data is fit for purpose and facilitates robust measures of student outcomes and experiences. Users may however wish to exercise some caution when interpreting data about the following student or course characteristics:
|
Issue |
Aspects that could be impacted |
Relative scale of the issue |
|---|---|---|
|
Elevated proportions of ethnicity data recorded as ‘unknown’ |
Derivation of ABCS quintiles Ethnicity and ABCS split indicator values Benchmark values informed by the use of ABCS quintiles as a benchmarking factor Ethnicity and ABCS breakdowns included in the size and shape of provision data |
Large |
|
Elevated proportions of parental education data recorded as ‘unknown’ |
Derivation of ABCS quintiles ABCS split indicator values Benchmark values informed by the use of ABCS quintiles as a benchmarking factor ABCS breakdowns included in the size and shape of provision data |
Moderate |
|
Missing entry profile data leading to missing values of socioeconomic classification, parental education and highest qualification on entry |
Derivation of ABCS quintiles ABCS split indicator values Benchmark values informed by the use of ABCS quintiles or entry qualifications as benchmarking factors Socioeconomic classification and entry qualifications breakdowns included in the size and shape of provision data |
Moderate |
|
Elevated proportions of students with an unknown domicile |
Derivation of ABCS quintiles Domicile and ABCS split indicators Benchmark values informed by the use of ABCS quintiles as a benchmarking factor Domicile and ABCS breakdowns included in the size and shape of provision data Population restrictions applied to the access and participation data dashboard |
Small |
|
Elevated proportions of sex identifier data recorded as ‘refused’ or ‘not applicable’ |
Derivation of ABCS quintiles Sex and ABCS split indicator values Benchmark values informed by the use of ABCS quintiles as a benchmarking factor Sex and ABCS breakdowns included in the size and shape of provision data |
Small |
|
Erroneous recording of full-time entrants who left early as having a part-time mode of study |
Access measures included in the access and participation data dashboard for 2022-23 entrant populations Mode of study breakdowns of the 2022-23 entrant and all student populations included in the size and shape of provision data dashboards |
Small |
|
Jisc has only linked back one year in deriving Z_LEVEL, so some dormant students (with no student course session) have an unknown level of study. In the small number of cases where such students have a qualification awarded, the OfS has used level of the qualification awarded in the derivation of our level of study fields. |
Level of study breakdowns of the 2022-23 qualifiers population included in the size and shape of provision data dashboards Degree outcome measures included in the access and participation data dashboard for 2022-23 qualifier populations |
Small |
Provider-specific notes
| Provider | Notes | Dashboards affected |
|---|---|---|
| Multiverse Group Limited |
There is a data quality issue for this provider's 2022-23 and 2023-24 data that is known to have impacted how the continuation outcomes are determined. This provider’s data has been removed from our dashboard and benchmarking processes. |
|
| Provider | Notes | Dashboards affected |
|---|---|---|
| University of Bedfordshire |
The 2022-23 Student data return submitted by the University of Bedfordshire did not meet our data quality requirements in full and it is known that there remain outstanding issues with multiple areas of its data that have the potential to impact on its onward use. We are publishing indicators for this provider because impacts are expected to be marginal, but users should be aware they have the potential to extend to:
|
|
| Birmingham City University |
There is a data quality issue known to affect the populations calculated for this provider, where some students have been reported as studying for qualifications in 2022-23 data when they were actually studying for credits. The impact of this issue leads us to suppress indicators in the access and participation dashboard and the size and shape dashboard that relate to the part-time population in 2022-23. |
|
| University of Brighton | There is a data quality issue known to affect the identification of inactive students in 2022-23, where some students have been reported without any activity but not returned by the provider as dormant, as is required. There is a slight risk that any indicators of continuation and completion outcomes for this provider may consequently be overstated to marginal extent. |
|
| University of Central Lancashire |
There is a data quality issue known to affect partnership arrangements data for this provider, where some students who were registered at a different provider were erroneously recorded by that provider as under a validation arrangement with University of Central Lancashire. At this stage, the impact of this issue is limited to counts of students in the size and shape data dashboards where these are broken down by partnership arrangements, and any student outcome indicators shown in the partnerships view of the provider’s student population. |
|
| University of Chester |
There is a data quality issue known to affect partnership arrangements data for this provider, where some students who were taught at a different provider in 2022-23 were instead recorded as both registered and taught at the University of Chester. At this stage, the impact of this issue is limited to counts of students in the size and shape data dashboards where these are broken down by this characteristic. |
|
| University of Chichester |
There is a data quality issue known to affect partnership arrangements data for this provider, where some students who were registered at a different provider were erroneously recorded by that provider as under a validation arrangement with University of Chichester. At this stage, the impact of this issue is limited to counts of students in the size and shape data dashboards where these are broken down by partnership arrangements, and any student outcome indicators shown in the partnerships view of the provider’s student population. |
|
| Falmouth University |
There is a data quality issue known to affect study location data for this provider where it refers to distance learning students in 2022-23. At this stage, the impact of this issue is limited to counts of students in the size and shape data dashboards where these are broken down by this characteristic. There is a data quality issue known to affect course type data for this provider where it refers to students on courses that include an integrated foundation year in 2022-23. At this stage, the impact of this issue is limited to counts of students in the size and shape data dashboards where these are broken down by this characteristic. |
|
| University of Hertfordshire |
The 2022-23 Student data return submitted by the University of Hertfordshire did not meet our data quality requirements in full and it is known that there remain outstanding issues with multiple areas of its data that have the potential to impact on its onward use. We are publishing indicators for this provider because these impacts are expected to be marginal, but users should be aware they have the potential to extend to:
|
|
| Loughborough University |
There is a data quality issue known to affect partnership arrangements data for this provider, where some students who were registered at a different provider were erroneously recorded by that provider as under a validation arrangement with Loughborough University. At this stage, the impact of this issue is limited to counts of students in the size and shape data dashboards where these are broken down by partnership arrangements, and any student outcome indicators shown in the partnerships view of the provider’s student population. |
|
| Navitas UK Holdings Limited |
There is a data quality issue which may affect the population of taught students for this provider, where some students who were registered at a different provider but taught by Navitas UK Holdings Limited may have been erroneously reported as being taught by a different provider. At this stage, the impact of this issue may extend to any indicators based on the taught, or taught or registered views of a provider’s student population. |
|
| Solent University |
There is a data quality issue known to affect entry qualifications data for this provider where it refers to students with unknown qualifications on entry in 2022-23. At this stage, the impact of this issue is limited to counts of students in the size and shape data dashboards where these are broken down by this characteristic. |
|
| Solent University |
There is a data quality issue known to affect the identification of full-time students in 2022-23, where the mode of study reported for some entrants to short courses means that they may not be correctly classified as full-time. At this stage, the impact of this issue is limited to counts of students in the size and shape data dashboards, and access indicators in the access and participation dashboard. |
|
| Teeside University |
There is a data quality issue known to affect partnership arrangements data for this provider, where some students who were registered at a different provider were erroneously recorded by that provider as under a validation arrangement with Teesside University. At this stage, the impact of this issue is limited to counts of students in the size and shape data dashboards where these are broken down by partnership arrangements, and any student outcome indicators shown in the partnerships view of the provider’s student population. |
|
| University of Wolverhampton |
There is a data quality issue in this provider’s 2022-23 data that is known to have impacted on how the continuation outcomes are determined for full-time entrants to undergraduate courses with postgraduate components in 2021-22. The impact of this issue leads us to suppress continuation indicators in the access and participation, student outcomes and TEF indicators dashboards for these entrants. |
|
Last updated 06 August 2025 + show all updates
06 August 2025 - This page has been updated with notes on data quality for student outcomes measures relating to the 2023-24 academic year.
03 September 2024 - Added notes relating to the size and shape of provision data dashboard.
Describe your experience of using this website