Skip to main content
Article thumbnail
Location of Repository

Higher education outcomes, graduate employment and university performance indicators

By Massimiliano Bratti, Abigail McKnight, Robin Naylor and Jeremy Smith


Official employment-related Performance Indicators in UK Higher Education are based on the population of students responding to the First Destination Supplement (FDS). This generates potentially biased performance indicators as this population of students is not necessarily representative of the full population of leavers from each institution. University leavers not obtaining qualifications and those not responding to the FDS are not included within the official analysis. We compare an employment-related performance indicator based on those students responding to the FDS with alternative approaches which address the potential non-random nature of this sub-group of university leavers

Topics: LB2300
Publisher: University of Warwick, Department of Economics
Year: 2003
OAI identifier:

Suggested articles


  1. A (2000), “Graduate Employability: Policy and Performance doi
  2. (2001). Determinants of individual degree performance: Evidence for the 1993 UK university graduate population from the USR”,
  3. (2001). Dropping out of university: a statistical analysis of the probability of withdrawal for UK university students”, doi
  4. (1995). GCSE to GCE A/AS value added: briefing for schools and colleges. London, Department for Education and Employment. DfES
  5. (1996). League tables and their limitations: statistical issues in comparisons of institutional performance,” doi
  6. (1987). Monte Carlo evidence on the choice between sample selection and two-part models. doi
  7. (1990). Peer review and performance indicators: quality assessment in British and Dutch higher education.
  8. (2003). Performance Indicators in Higher Education 2002, downloadable at
  9. (1990). Performance indicators in higher education, SRHE/OUP,
  10. (1999). Performance indicators in higher education’, First Report of the Performance Indicators Steering Group,
  11. (1998). Reliability of league tables in vitro fertilisation clinics: retrospective analysis of live birth rates”, doi
  12. (1979). Sample selection bias as a specification error”, doi
  13. (1971). Some statistical models for limited dependent variables with application to the demand for durable goods”, doi
  14. (1981). The demand for deductibles in private health insurance: A probit model with sample selection”, doi
  15. (2002). The Heckman correction for sample selection and its critique”, doi
  16. (1993). The research performance of UK universities: a statistical analysis of the results of the 1989 research selectivity exercise,” doi
  17. (1997). The use of performance indicators in higher education: the challenge of the quality movement.

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.