Where’s the 2022-23 student data?

HESA Student data is a little like coffee, in that its existence underpins pretty much all intelligent conversation about the size and shape of our higher education sector.

But, also like coffee, it is currently subject to rising costs, significant delays in delivery, and a noticeable reduction in quality. We learned yesterday that this year’s annual open data release, covering the 2022-23 academic year – usually a first release in early January followed by the complete dataset later that same month – has been postponed until August.

Eagle-eyed readers will no doubt have spotted that this is round about the end of the following academic year – indeed, preparations for the 2023-24 data collection exercise are already underway. The late launch is down to quality concerns (and allowing providers the chance to correct their initial submissions – the deadline for such corrections was yesterday) linked to our old friend, Data Futures.

Back at the end of the 2023 calendar year student record officers struggled with a system that spat out unexpected and inapplicable error codes seemingly at random. This was the end point of a multi-year procurement and delivery process that ended with Jisc (the sector technology agency that now owns HESA) delivering the new HESA Data Platform (HDP).

HDP related woes will not end any time soon. In a letter released yesterday HESA notes that:

“The nature of the issues experienced last year means that we do not believe this year's collection will be totally issue free. The list of additional features and requests we have received from the sector is also long and we will not be able to deliver them all.

The long Data Futures process resulted in many providers upgrading or switching their student data systems, a stressful decision at the best of times which was made worse by multiple changes in the data specification (bluntly, what is to be returned and how) made often without warning and largely at the instigation of the the Office for Students (with the other UK funding bodies, one of the four main customers of HESA data).

Any changes in data collection make for a decline in data quality – if providers are not used to returning data in a particular way the first attempts are more likely to include mistakes as processes and definitions become embedded. The particularly stressful gestation of the 2022-23 collection meant that the usual bulwark against this – a robust, automated, checking system – could not be trusted to report correctly.

OfS and the others use student data for funding and regulatory purposes. Though they get far more detailed data from the collection than mere mortals like ourselves, the availability of open data allows for a measure of transparency as regards decisions. The general principle is that data used in decision making should be easily accessible (or derivable) from the HESA Open Data release – this helps the sector understand regulatory and funding activity, allows for an extra round of checking, and – frankly – keeps policy making honest.

If I publish data derived from HESA with unlikely outliers on Wonkhe, providers are quick to contact the designated data body to correct it. You can believe that the calculations of the OfS are checked by the sector with far more care. And - let us be honest here - if the broad brush outputs won't be ready for open publication until August, there will be nothing of regulatory quality available much before then. Bid farewell to this year's updates for OfS' fancy-pants dashboards.

With an election in the offing the higher education and skills sector is seemingly doomed once again to function as a political football. In most years, the availability of public data means we can speedily rebut lazy presumptions and dubious conclusions – the late delivery of 2022-23 data means, from international students to access and participation to student mental health, we are in the dark. A promised "independent review" of the series of calamities that led us to this point was promised by OfS at the start of the year - we are yet to see even a remit or cast of characters.

There’s no quick fix here – we can’t magic the data into a releasable format, or wind back the clock to recollect the data using the older methods. We are doomed, most likely, to several years of delayed and low quality student data. The national debate, and regulation, will suffer as a result.