HISBUS Online Panel A Virtual Village for Students as Instrument of - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

SLIDE 1

Peter Müßig-Trapp 1 20/21 June 2007

HISBUS Online Panel

Presentation in Zagreb 20/21 June 2007

A Virtual Village for Students

as Instrument of Political Consultation and Instant Information

SLIDE 2

Peter Müßig-Trapp 2 20/21 June 2007

Contents

• 1. Overview: Objectives and Philosophy
• 2. Standardization: Enquiry procedure /

Presentation of results

• 3. Representativeness
• 4. Security Concept and Data Protection
• 5. Incentives and draws

SLIDE 3

Peter Müßig-Trapp 3 20/21 June 2007

Students research in the Web

• panel of 10.000 students
• continuously available at any time
• nationwide representativeness
• quick delivery of results

– standard enquiry: 6 weeks – quick enquiry: 1 to 2 weeks max.

• 1. Objectives and Philosophy

SLIDE 4

Peter Müßig-Trapp 4 20/21 June 2007

Virtual village for students

The interviewees ...

• ... are "experts" in education and higher

education policy

• ... are not just objects of

curious interviews, but political consultants

• ... exert influence on

decision-making processes and political discussions

• 1. Objectives and Philosophy

SLIDE 5

Peter Müßig-Trapp 5 20/21 June 2007

The online panel's 4 advantages

• 1. Costs

(printing, postage, reminders, returns, data collection)

• 2. Speediness

(1 – 6 weeks between designation of the problem and delivery of the results)

• 3. Quality of data

(online plausibilization)

• 4. Expenditure for the interviewee

(reuse of master data / pre-enquiries)

• 1. Objectives and Philosophy

SLIDE 6

Peter Müßig-Trapp 6 20/21 June 2007

5.1 Standard grant foreign countries extra grant (if applicable)

Filter guidances (1)

• 1. Overview and objectives
• 5. How financed?

Parents,

• wn resources,

grant,

• ther

BAföG (federal grant) Extra granted and residence in an EU country (question 2) No extra grant 5.1.1 Studies abroad even without extra grant? 5.2 Percentage of expenses covered by BAföG?

SLIDE 7

Peter Müßig-Trapp 7 20/21 June 2007

Filter guidances (2)

• 1. Overview and objectives
• 2. weiterer

Auslandsaufenthalt geplant?

• 3. Welche Hindernisse?

(Fremdsprachenkenntnisse, Informationen, Trennung von Part. u. Familie, Finanzen, etc.)

• nein, kein Interesse
• nein, weil ...

nein, sehe keine Realisierungschance

• 4. Warum sehen Sie keine

Realisierungschance? Ende

• 4. Welche Art

Auslandsstudium geplant?

• 5. Wie lange?

Auslandsstudium

• 6. Welche Gründe für

diese Dauer?

• 7. Welches Land?
• 8. Welche

Finanzierungsquellen?

• 10. Erwägen Sie, diese

Möglichkeit zu nutzen?

Fortsetzung von Seite 1

• Praktikum
• Sonstiges
• weiß nicht
• 9. BAföG-Förderung?
• 9. Neuregelung: Möglichkeit, BAföG ins Ausland mitzunehmen

bekannt? nein, aber früher nein ja

• 10. Hätten Sie diese

Möglichkeit genutzt?

• weiß nicht
• ja, eventuell
• ja, ganz bestimmt
• ja, habe schon Vorbereitungen getroffen

Begrüßung, Erläuterungen

• 1. studienbez.

Ausl.-aufenthalt durchgeführt?

• 2. Welches Land?

ja studiert ja, Praktikum ja, Sonstiges nein

• 3. Wie lange?
• 3. Entsprach

die Dauer Ihren Vorstellungen?

4.1 Warum verkürzt? 4.2 Warum nicht länger geblieben? nein, wäre gern länger geblieben! nein, kürzer als geplant!

• 5. Wie finanziert?

ja! BAföG

5.1.1 auch Auslandsstudium wenn kein Zuschlag?

Zuschlag erhalten und Aufenthalt in EU-Land (Frage 2)

5.2 Wieviel % der Ausgaben durch BAföG gedeckt?

kein Zuschlag Eltern eigene Mittel Stipendium Sonstiges Weiter auf Seite 2 5.1. Betrag Normalförderung

• ggf. Betrag Ausl.-Zuschlag

Weiter auf Seite 2

SLIDE 8

Peter Müßig-Trapp 8 20/21 June 2007

Master data (1)

• A. University and studies
• university?
• subject?
• degree?
• second studies?

– when? – what subject was first?

• no. of university and

subject terms?

• change of subject or

degree?

• B. Educational

background

• type of university

admission

– when achieved? – which way? – in what place (Zip code)?

• vocational education?

– kind? – when (prior, after, during the studies)?

• 1. Overview and objectives

SLIDE 9

Peter Müßig-Trapp 9 20/21 June 2007

Master data (2)

• C. Personal details
• sex?
• year of birth?
• civil status?
• children?

– how many? – how old?

• nationality?
• D. Social background
• graduations of mother

and father?

• finished vocational

education of mother and father?

• job position of mother and

father? (subtly differentiated into 17 categories)

• 1. Overview and objectives

SLIDE 10

Peter Müßig-Trapp 10 20/21 June 2007

Topics / enquiries (selection)

• Teacher shortage
• Studies abroad and BAföG grant
• Utility value of university rankings
• Children planned? Students' conceptions of life
• The Bolgona process: knowledge and acceptance
• Acceptance of study fees
• E-Learning
• Knowledge of foreign languages
• Pisa – knowledge acquired at school and capability to

study

• 1. Overview and objectives

SLIDE 11

Peter Müßig-Trapp 11 20/21 June 2007

Enquiry procedure (1)

• 1. Coordination of the

enquiry concept

2. Operationalization 3. Implementation into web questionnaire 4. Expert test 5. Pretest in the field 6. Enquiry field phase 7. Plausibilization 8. Statistical evaluation 9. Result processing

• agreement on topic
• identification of relevant

content areas

• exploration of previous topic-

related research

• 2. Enquiry procedure

SLIDE 12

Peter Müßig-Trapp 12 20/21 June 2007

Enquiry procedure (2)

1. Coordination of the enquiry concept

• 2. Operationalization

3. Implementation into web questionnaire 4. Expert test 5. Pretest in the field 6. Enquiry field phase 7. Plausibilization 8. Statistical evaluation 9. Result processing

• questionnaire design with

regards to content

• sequence
• ensuring comparability with
• ther captures
• development of scales
• etc.
• 2. Enquiry procedure

SLIDE 13

Peter Müßig-Trapp 13 20/21 June 2007

Enquiry procedure (3)

1. Coordination of the enquiry concept 2. Operationalization

• 3. Implementation into

web questionnaire

4. Expert test 5. Pretest in the field 6. Enquiry field phase 7. Plausibilization 8. Statistical evaluation 9. Result processing

• adaptation to media (online

version)

• individualization (filter

creation)

• technical implementation

(use of OPST, Online Panel Site Tool of Globalpark)

• 2. Enquiry procedure

SLIDE 14

Peter Müßig-Trapp 14 20/21 June 2007

Enquiry procedure (4)

1. Coordination of the enquiry concept 2. Operationalization 3. Implementation into web questionnaire

• 4. Expert test

5. Pretest in the field 6. Enquiry field phase 7. Plausibilization 8. Statistical evaluation 9. Result processing

• first quick online test of the

questionnaire by ...

• HIS experts and ...
• client experts
• 2. Enquiry procedure

SLIDE 15

Peter Müßig-Trapp 15 20/21 June 2007

Enquiry procedure (5)

1. Coordination of the enquiry concept 2. Operationalization 3. Implementation into web questionnaire 4. Expert test

• 5. Pretest in the field

6. Enquiry field phase 7. Plausibilization 8. Statistical evaluation 9. Result processing

• test of the questionnaire by a

small group of panel participants

• 2. Enquiry procedure

SLIDE 16

Peter Müßig-Trapp 16 20/21 June 2007

Enquiry procedure (6)

1. Coordination of the enquiry concept 2. Operationalization 3. Implementation into web questionnaire 4. Expert test 5. Pretest in the field

• 6. Enquiry field phase

7. Plausibilization 8. Statistical evaluation 9. Result processing

duration: 15 – 20 days

• invitation of participants by

E-mail

• participation reminder after
• approx. 5 days
• second reminder after
• approx. 10 to 15 days
• 2. Enquiry procedure

SLIDE 17

Peter Müßig-Trapp 17 20/21 June 2007

Enquiry procedure (7)

1. Coordination of the enquiry concept 2. Operationalization 3. Implementation into web questionnaire 4. Expert test 5. Pretest in the field 6. Enquiry field phase

• 7. Plausibilization

8. Statistical evaluation 9. Result processing

• plausibilization of answers
• set up of aggregate

variables (e.g. age by age-groups)

• 2. Enquiry procedure

SLIDE 18

Peter Müßig-Trapp 18 20/21 June 2007

Enquiry procedure (8)

1. Coordination of the enquiry concept 2. Operationalization 3. Implementation into web questionnaire 4. Expert test 5. Pretest in the field 6. Enquiry field phase 7. Plausibilization

• 8. Statistical evaluation

9. Result processing

creation of evaluations corresponding to stated questions

• frequency count
• comparison of means
• cross-classified tables
• etc.
• 2. Enquiry procedure

SLIDE 19

Peter Müßig-Trapp 19 20/21 June 2007

Enquiry procedure (9)

1. Coordination of the enquiry concept 2. Operationalization 3. Implementation into web questionnaire 4. Expert test 5. Pretest in the field 6. Enquiry field phase 7. Plausibilization 8. Statistical evaluation

• 9. Result processing

creation of a summary report including ...

• a very brief commentary to

the most important results

• extensive figures
• 2. Enquiry procedure

SLIDE 20

Peter Müßig-Trapp 20 20/21 June 2007

Summary report: "Press release"

Der BAföG-Botschafter Guildo Horn ist der bekannteste Vertreter des neuen BAföG. 36% der Studierenden ken- nen ihn. Zahlen - w ann - w o - durch w en? quotus pretium quotus arro- get annus. Scriptor abhinc reddit misso annos centum qui de- cidit, inter perfectos veteresque referri debet an inter vilis at- que perfectos novos? Excludat iurgia finis. Est vetus atque pro- bus, centum qui perficit annos. Quid, qui deperiitnihis perfectos uno mense vel anno? Iste quidem veteres inter pnetur honeste, qui vel mense brevi vel toto est iunior anno. Utor per- misso, caudaeque nisi pilos ut equinae paulatim vello et virtu- tem, demo etiam unum, dum ca- dat elusus ratione ruentis acervi, qui redit in fastos et virtutem aestimat annis miraturque nihil nisi quod Libitina sacravit. Ennius et sapines et fortis et alter Homerus, ut critici dicunt, leviter curare videtur, quo promissa cadant et somnia Pytha-

• gorea. Naevius in manibus non est et sanctum mentibus hae-

ret paene recens? Adeo sanctum est vetus omne poema. A m- bigitur quotiens, uter utro sit prior, aufert Pacuvius docti fa- mam senis Accius alti, dicitur Afrani toga convenisse Men- andro, Plautus ad exemplar Siculi properare Epicharmi. Hos ediscit et hos arto stipata theatro spectat Roma potens; habet hos nisi numeratque poetas ad ambigitur tempus Livi Online BAf WWW-Auf 15 15 Kampagne BAföG-Bot keine Mate 22 36 48 Online BAföG-Rechner WWW-Auftritt zum The- ma Kampagne-Materialien BAföG-Botschafter keine Materialien be- kannt 15 15 22 36 48 Wie bekannt sind die Informationsmaterialien des BMBF zum neuen BAföG? Mehrfachant w ort, Angaben in % wie er w arte k i Fö d 63 wie er w arte Fö d entgegen d Erw artung: 10 27

wie erwartet: keine Förde- rung wie erwartet: Förderung entgegen der Erwartung: Förderung

63 10 27 Rechnen mit dem BAföG- Rechner (WWW-Auftritt BMBF) Angaben in %

2.1. Presentation of results

• press release
• diagrams (1 – 3)
• results
• method
• questionaire with

frequency tabulation

• appendix

with tables

SLIDE 21

Peter Müßig-Trapp 21 20/21 June 2007

Hochschul-Informations-System GmbH Hannover

• Nr. 1

BAföG und Studienfinanzierung

Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung

Summary report: further parts

Der BAföG-Botschafter Guildo Horn ist der bekannteste Vertreter des neuen BAföG. 36% der Studierenden ken- nen ihn. Zahlen - w ann - w o - durch w en? quotus pretium quotus arro- get annus. Scriptor abhinc reddit misso annos centum qui de- cidit, inter perfectos veteresque referri debet an inter vilis at- que perfectos novos? Excludat iurgia finis. Est vetus atque pro- bus, centum qui perficit annos. Quid, qui deperiitnihis perfectos uno mense vel anno? Iste quidem veteres inter pnetur honeste, qui vel mense brevi vel toto est iunior anno. Utor per- misso, caudaeque nisi pilos ut equinae paulatim vello et virtu- tem, demo etiam unum, dum ca- dat elusus ratione ruentis acervi, qui redit in fastos et virtutem aestimat annis miraturque nihil nisi quod Libitina sacravit. Ennius et sapines et fortis et alter Homerus, ut critici dicunt, leviter curare videtur, quo promissa cadant et somnia Pytha-

• gorea. Naevius in manibus non est et sanctum mentibus hae-

ret paene recens? Adeo sanctum est vetus omne poema. Am- bigitur quotiens, uter utro sit prior, aufert Pacuvius docti fa- mam senis Accius alti, dicitur Afrani toga convenisse Men- andro, Plautus ad exemplar Siculi properare Epicharmi. Hos ediscit et hos arto stipata theatro spectat Roma potens; habet hos nisi numeratque poetas ad ambigitur tempus Livi Online BAf WWW-Auf 15 15 Kampagne BAföG-Bot keine Mate 22 36 48 Online BAföG-Rechner WWW-Auftritt zum The- ma Kampagne-Materialien BAföG-Botschafter keine Materialien be- kannt 15 15 22 36 48 Wie bekannt sind die Informationsmaterialien des BMBF zum neuen BAföG? Mehrfachant w ort, Angaben in % wie er w arte k i Fö d 63 wie er w arte Fö d entgegen d Erw artung: 10 27 wie erwartet: keine Förde- rung wie erwartet: Förderung entgegen der Erwartung: Förderung 63 10 27 Rechnen mit dem BAföG- Rechner (WWW-Auftritt BMBF) Angaben in % I m Mittelpunkt einer v

• n

HI S Hoc hsc hul-I nf

• r

mations- Sy st e m im Rah- m en des Projektes HI S B US im Dez e mber 2001 bis Januar 2002 d urchgef ührten Befragung unter Studierenden stand das ref

• r

mier- te BAf ö G. Die breite A useinandersetz ung i m V

• rfeld

der Ref

• r

m im A pril 2001 wurde au ßerde m z u m A usgangspunkt für eine Disk ussion ü ber alternativ e M

• delle

der Studienfinanz ierung gewählt. I m Zentru m des Interesses stand also z u m einen die Inf

• r

mations- k a mpagne, die v

• m

Bundes minist eriu m für Bildung und Forsc hung ( BM B F) gest artet wurde, um mehr Studierendienanf änger und Stu- dierende für eine Förderung nac h de m BAf ö G z u gewinnen. Zu m ande- ren sollten die Ele mente des ref

• r-

m ierten BAf ö G s den Studierenden u n mittelbar v

• rgestellt

und ihre Be- k anntheit erfragt werden. Da i m V

• rfeld

der Ref

• r

m in der politi- sc hen und öffentlic hen A useinan- d ersetz ung über unt ersc hiedlichst e A nsätz e der Studienfinanz ierung ge- s proc hen wurde, sollten diese Re- for mv

• rsc

hläge im zweiten T eil i m V ergleic h mit de m aktuellen BAf ö G- M

• dell

disk utiert werden. Ausgewählte Ergebnisse D ie z entralen Studienfinanz ierungs möglic hk ei- ten sind fast allen Studierenden

• unabhängig

d av

• n,
• b

sie selbst Bez ieher sind

• der

nic ht

• ein
• Begriff. Jedoc

h sind zwei Neuerungen i m B ereich Studienfinanzierung weniger bek annt. B eide wurden mit der Ref

• mierung

des BAf ö G in v eränderter bz

• w. in

ausgeweit eter For m eingef ührt: Lediglic h 10 % der Befragten geben a n, v

• n

der M öglic hk eit eines Bildungskredites g ehört z u haben. Bildungskredit e können unab- h ängig v

• m

Eink

• m

men und sogar neben de m B Af ö G als zinsgünstiger Kredit in der letzt en St udienphase bez

• gen

werden. 18 % kennen die sogenannte Studienabschlussförderung, die nac h Übersc hreit ung der Förderungs- h öc hst dauer für max. zwölf M

• nate

bez

• gen

werden kann. K napp 16 % aller Befragten wissen, dass sie d as BAf ö G nac h 2 Se mest ern an einer deutsc hen Hoc hschule für die D auer der Regelstudienz eit mit in das europäisc he A usland neh men k önnen. Die derz eitigen BAf ö G- E mpf änger (24 %) neh men jedoc h nur d en zweit en Platz unt er den Inf

• r

mierten ein (32,8 %), an erst er Stel- le s tehen diejenigen (36, 5 %), die bisher noc h keinen A ntrag auf BAf ö G D ie T eilneh mer des HI S B US Online- P anels sind ' Ex perten' für Bildungs- u nd Hoc hsc hulpolitik und als solc he gilt es ihrer M einung so viel und s

• weit

wie möglic h in die Gest altung auc h der Online- Befragungen einz ubez iehen. Viele Sac hv erhalte

• z.B.

wenn es um die Erkundung ni-

• c

h wenig bek annter Sachv erhalte geht, lassen sich über gesc hlos- s ene Fragestellungen erheben. Was s teht also für Studierende im Z entru m des Int eresses, wenn sie sic h mit de m The ma Studienfian- z ierung und BAf ö G bef assen. Eine M öglichk eit z ur Erkundung dieses F eldes s tellt die V

• rabbefragung

per E-M ail da. D ie Mitglieder des Panels wurden daher per E-M ail nac h ihren Inte- ressen in de m Bereic h Studienfinanz ierung und BAf ö G gefragt. Auf diese m Weg war der Einbez ug der M einungen der Studierenden in d as Projekt möglic h. Diese 'V

• rrunde'
• ffenbarte

ein gro ßes Inf

• r

ma- tionsdefizit. Viele Studierende wünsc ht en sic h genauere Inf

• r

matio- n en z u m The ma BAf ö G. Die Einric htung erweit erter Inf

• r

mations mög- lic hk eit en wie die WW W- S eiten des BM B F aber auc h die des Studen- tenwerk es und andere Betreiber sind nac h diese m Ergebnis ein S c hritt auf de m ric htigen Weg. A uf grund der rec ht eindeutigen Int eressenlage der Studierenden wurde die ansc hlie ßend stattfindende Online- U mfrage nic ht nur als B efragung, sondern auc h als Inf

• r

mationsquelle konzipiert. Sie ent- hielt z.B. Inf

• r

mationen zu den einz elnen Studienfinanz ierungs möglic h- k eiten, au ßerde m wurden die Neuerungen des BAfö G s erläutert. Da- rüber hinaus wurde eine Inf

• r

mationsseite mit aktuellen Zahlen z u m B Af ö G sowie eine Web- S eite mit Link s für die eigene weiterführende R ec herc he z u m The ma eingeric htet. D ie Online- Untersuc hung basiert auf einer Mitte Dez e mber 2001 bis E nde Januar 2002 (10.12

• 24.

01. 2002) im Rah men des HI S- Projektes H I S B U S durchgef ührten Online- B efragung v

• n

1423 Studierenden. A n- g eschrieben wurden 1830 Studierende, was de m Stand an aktiv en P anel-T eilneh mern zu m da maligen Zeit punkt entsprach. Der stärk ste R ücklauf setzte un mittelbar nac h V ersand der Einladung- E-M ails ein. B ereits a m erst en T ag hatten 427 Befragt e den Online- Fragebogen a usgef üllt (23 %). Eine Woc he nac h Beginn der Befragung wurde, wie d en Panelteilneh mern angek ündigt worden war , eine V erlosung der a usgesc hriebenen Gewinne durc hgef ührt. Bis z u diese m Zeitpunkt h atten bereits 91 1 Panelisten teilgeno m men (50 %). Insgesa mt wur- d en zwei T eilnah me- Erinnerungen v ersandt (20.12.2001 und 14. 01.2002). Der Rücklauf konnte durc h jede Erinnerung deutlic h ge- steigert werden. A m Ende der Feldz eit lag der Rücklauf bei 78 %. D ie Repräsentativ ität auf Bundesebene ist gewährleistet. Mit Hilf e ei- n es Gewic htungsv erfahren wurden die z u meist geringen Diff erenz en in den Struktur merk malen: Gesc hlec ht, Alter , Hoc hsc hulart, Hoc h- sc hulort ( O st- W est) sowie Fäc hergruppe zwisc hen Grundgesa mtheit u nd Panel ausgeglic hen.

2.1. presentation of results

• press release
• diagrams (1 – 3)
• results
• method
• questionaire with

frequency tabulation

• appendix

with tables

Brevi vel toto est iunior anno. Utor permisso, caudaeque pilos ut equinae paulatim vello unum, demo etiam unum. Si meliora dies, ut vina, poemata reddit, scire velim, chartis perficit quotus pretium quotus arroget annus. Scriptor abhinc reddit misso annos centum qui decidit, inter perfectos vete- resque referri debet an inter vilis atque perfectos novos? Excludat iurgia fi-

• nis. Est vetus atque probus, centum qui perficit annos. Quid, qui deperiitni-

his perfectos uno mense vel anno? Iste quidem veteres inter pnetur honeste, qui vel mense brevi vel toto est iunior anno. Utor permisso, caudaeque nisi pilos ut equinae paulatim vello et virtutem, demo etiam unum, dum cadat elusus ratione ruentis acervi, qui redit in fastos et virtutem aestimat annis miraturque nihil nisi quod Libitina sacravit. Ennius et sapines et fortis et alter Homerus, ut critici dicunt, leviter curare vi- detur, quo promissa cadant et somnia Pythagorea. Naevius in manibus non est et sanctum mentibus haeret paene recens? Adeo sanctum est vetus

• mne poema. Ambigitur quotiens, uter utro sit prior, aufert Pacuvius docti fa-

mam senis Accius alti, dicitur Afrani toga convenisse Menandro, Plautus ad exemplar Siculi properare Epicharmi. Hos ediscit et hos arto stipata theatro spectat Roma potens; habet hos nisi numeratque poetas ad ambigitur tempus Livi scriptoris ab aevo. Ennius et sapines et fortis et alter Homerus, ut critici dicunt, leviter curare vi- detur, quo promissa cadant et somnia Pythagorea. Naevius in manibus non est et mentibus haeret paene recens? Adeo sanctum est vetus omne poe-

• ma. A mbigitur quotiens, uter utro sit prior, aufert Pacuvius docti famam senis

Hochschul-Informations-System GmbH Hannover

• Nr. 1

BAföG und Studienfinanzierung

Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung

SLIDE 22

Peter Müßig-Trapp 22 20/21 June 2007

Guideline: Quality Assurance Standards for Online Enquiries

• "The participants must be 'actively' selected or

recruited respectively ..."

• "A general invitation (e.g. by banners) does not

meet the methodical requirements ..."

• "Due to their self selectivity these 'passive'

selections result in sample biasing ..."

• "Generalized statements are only possible, if a

very advanced online penetration of the target group can be proved."

• 3. Representativeness

SLIDE 23

Peter Müßig-Trapp 23 20/21 June 2007

Online Penetration

52% total population

97% students 96% internet use phone available

Statistisches Bundesamt Spring 2003

• 3. Representativeness

SLIDE 24

Peter Müßig-Trapp 24 20/21 June 2007

Offline recruited online panel

• recruiting of panelists by representative

written enquiries

– social survey – panel of persons with university admission – first year students' enquiry – HISBUS recruiting enquiries in writing – Since 2007: study quality monitor

• ensures active selection
• allows check for sample biasing
• 3. Representativeness

SLIDE 25

Peter Müßig-Trapp 25 20/21 June 2007

Bias adjustments

Precondition: Ensuring the representativeness of the written enquiry (draw proportion adjustment and weighting, if necessary) Step 1: Bias check by ...

– comparison between persons ready to participate online and participants of the written enquiry – comparison between panelists and participants of the written enquiry

Step 2: Bias adjustment by weighting

Determination of suitable weighting characteristics by experiment,

• ptimization:

– best possible adjustment to population – at the same time smallest possible number of characteristics

• 3. Representativeness

SLIDE 26

Peter Müßig-Trapp 26 20/21 June 2007

Bias check (1)

• 3. Representativeness

Social survey Ready to participate online Panelists Female

46.1 47.3 46.3

Male

53.9 52.7 53.7

Engineering

17.0 14.3 12.5

Ling./Cult.

21.1 19.2 17.9

Math./Nat. Sc.

18.3 22.0 23.1

Medicine

6.1 7.9 7.1

Law/Econ.

22.1 22.2 22.8

• Soc. Psy. Edu.

15.4 14.4 16.7

Total (12,428) (3,255) (737)

SLIDE 27

Peter Müßig-Trapp 27 20/21 June 2007

Bias check (2)

• 3. Representativeness

Social survey Ready to participate online Computer use at univ.

4.2 h 4.7 h

External use of computer

9.8 h 10.9 h

Online (at univ. and externally)

4.8 h 6.1 h

Above-average familiar with ... (%)

• Word processor

71 78

• Spreadsheet (Excel)

33 38

• E-mail

76 86

• Internet / WWW

67 78

• Programming languages

11 14

SLIDE 28

Peter Müßig-Trapp 28 20/21 June 2007

Weighting and draw proportion adjustment

• 3. Representativeness

HISBUS panelists Population (official statistics) not weighted weighted Female

47.4 46.1 46.1

Male

52.6 53.9 53.9

Subject groups

Perfect adjustment as well

Social background

(16. Social survey)

under

11.8 12.2 12.9

middle

24.8 25.6 27.7

higher

25.5 25.5 25.9

upper

37.9 36.8 33.4

SLIDE 29

Peter Müßig-Trapp 29 20/21 June 2007

Extension of the HIS data protection concept

Conflict: Capture of private data, i.e. data to be protected, via the Internet

• 4. Security concept / Data Protection

Collection Publication Evaluation Capture

Online data protection concept HIS standard data protection concept

SLIDE 30

Peter Müßig-Trapp 30 20/21 June 2007

Guideline: Quality Assurance Standards for Online Enquiries

„... When temporarily saving the data on a server that also has access to online-media, one has to

that no third parties can access these data.

...

Address and interview data must be separated

immediately after reception in the research institute“.

http://www.adm-ev.de/quali_online.html

• 4. Security concept / Data Protection

ensure ensure

SLIDE 31

Peter Müßig-Trapp 31 20/21 June 2007

Safeguarding the webserver (1): matter of course

Protection of the HISBUS webserver by

• consistent use of open source software according to

KBSt, BSI, BMWi, DFN-CERT recommendations:

– Linux operating system – Apache webserver software – server applications (PHP middleware, security software)

• minimalistic software equipment of the webserver
• setup of an additional firewall

(rulebased package filtering)

• disabling of unsafe protocols (telnet, ftp etc.)
• 4. Security concept / Data Protection

SLIDE 32

Peter Müßig-Trapp 32 20/21 June 2007

Safeguarding the webserver (2)

Protection of the HISBUS webserver by

• use of encryption

– for administration (ssh, scp) – for access by interviewees (https, 128Bit) – certification of webserver (confidence-building measure)

• continuous system monitoring

– access control (restrict root, RSBAC) – intrusion detection / misuse detection (snort) – system logfile analysis on a regular basis (logcheck) – file system integrity check (tripwire)

• prompt integration of security updates

(patches etc.)

• 4. Security concept / Data Protection

SLIDE 33

Peter Müßig-Trapp 33 20/21 June 2007

Necessity of security updates

• 4. Security concept / Data Protection

SLIDE 34

Peter Müßig-Trapp 34 20/21 June 2007

• 4. Security concept / Data Protection

There is a vulnerability in sendmail that may allow remote attackers to gain the privileges

• f the sendmail daemon, typically root.

SLIDE 35

Peter Müßig-Trapp 35 20/21 June 2007

2-server concept

Internet

Firewall

HIS router

192.124.237.0/24:80,443

• ther

HIS webservers

Webserver Firewall Firewall Database server

10.1.0.0/16 172.16.99.0/24

encrypted connections or tunnel (SSH) moderate, filters SMTP, HTTP/S, etc. restrictive, not directly accessible

HISBUS

Switch

http/s only, accessible

• nly internally via ssh
• 4. Security concept / Data Protection

SLIDE 36

Peter Müßig-Trapp 36 20/21 June 2007

Incentives and Draws

SLIDE 37

Peter Müßig-Trapp 37 20/21 June 2007

Incentives prior to start of enquiry

53% 48% 41% 41% 2 stamps + chip 3 stamps 1 stamp chip

• 5. Incentives and Draws

82 84 77 53

... % of the participations judge the incentive as „good“ or „very good“

SLIDE 38

Peter Müßig-Trapp 38 20/21 June 2007

3 stamps vs. 2 stamps

3 stamps 2 stamps 63% 62% 31% 32% before mail reminder after mail reminder

• 5. Incentives and Draws

SLIDE 39

Peter Müßig-Trapp 39 20/21 June 2007

Feedback of panel participations

• „I was very surprised. I think I‘ve never been

that pleased to hold a stamp in my hand. Good idea, useful and completely sufficient to express appreciation“

• „I liked this thank-you

even more since I didn‘t expect it! Thank you very much!“

• 5. Incentives and Draws

SLIDE 40

Peter Müßig-Trapp 40 20/21 June 2007

Draws / Draw items

Few large winnings worth 5 * 100 € Many smalls winnings worth 20 * 25 € Combination

• f 1 MP3 and

winnings 20 * 20 € Control group without draw Equivalent cash

44% 40% 35% 35%

Equivalent in book vouchers

44% 37% 40%

Equivalent in railroad ticket vouchers

40% 36% 36%

• 5. Incentives and Draws

SLIDE 41

Peter Müßig-Trapp 41 20/21 June 2007

Draws / Draw dates

• 5. Incentives and Draws

57% 62% 68% 74% 50% 53% 61% 66% 34% 37% 44% 50%

control group 14 days 7 days 3 days without reminder after 1 reminder after 2 reminder

„Among all participations taking part until November 8th we draw a flight for two persons to Pisa ...“

SLIDE 42

Thank you!

SLIDE 43

Peter Müßig-Trapp 43 20/21 June 2007

Special Requirements

OPST Online Panel Site Tool (Globalpark)

• Open architecture (LAMP, Linux, Apache, MySQL, PHP)
• Source available

possibility to make own add-ons Examples:

• Enquiry „Foreign Languages“

DIALANG Questionaire with complex calculations

• Enquiry „E-Learning“

(Tool-Tips = Mouse over buttons)

• Semiautomatic Wightening
• HISBUS Data Cleaning Module
• HISBUS Reporting Module (planned)
• 6. Special Requirements

SLIDE 44

Peter Müßig-Trapp 44 20/21 June 2007

HISBUS Reporting

Automatic Report Generation

• Creating Tables

using OPST 4 (May 2005)

• Crating Graphs

using JpGraphs (PHP library)

• 6. Special Requirements

SLIDE 45

Peter Müßig-Trapp 45 20/21 June 2007

OPST Reporting platform

separate access to report features real-time report statistics (drop-outs, survey duration etc.) real-time analysis of open and closed questions

• 6. Special Requirements

SLIDE 46

Peter Müßig-Trapp 46 20/21 June 2007

Language support

• Specifying and Editing General Properties
• Centrally Editing Text Elements of the

Questionaire , Survey Messages and Logos or …

• Externally Editing Text Elements …
• Setting Up a Language Selection

Question

• 7. Technical Issues

SLIDE 47

Peter Müßig-Trapp 47 20/21 June 2007

Hardware

• 7. Technical Issues

2 Server, each:

• 2 Xeon Processor 3,06GHz
• 2 GB Ram
• Hardware RAID (RAID 1)
• 2 Harddisc SCSI 18GB/1.500rpm
• 2 Harddisc SCSI 73GB/1.500rpm
• 2 Gbit Lan
• 2 Redundant 400W power supply

Data Backup

• External 500 GB Harddisc
• Backup-Server

Monitoring / Notification

• Monitoring via Nagios
• Notification via SMS

High Availability

• RAID
• Redundand Power Supply
• Monitoring / Notification

SLIDE 48

Peter Müßig-Trapp 48 20/21 June 2007

Licence

• Special Agreement between

and HIS

• 10.000 Euros / year
• Support and Updates included
• Documented Source available
• 7. Technical Issues

SLIDE 49

Peter Müßig-Trapp 49 20/21 June 2007

There are four major steps to set-up and conduct an online-survey four steps to an online-survey

Create project Create questions Invite participants Field phase & data export

• 7. Technical Issues: Using OPST

SLIDE 50

Peter Müßig-Trapp 50 20/21 June 2007

first step to an online-survey – create project (I)

selection of project type (anonymous vs. personalised) create title description determine team members

Create project Create questionnaire Invite participants Field phase & data export

• 7. Technical Issues: Using OPST

SLIDE 51

Peter Müßig-Trapp 51 20/21 June 2007

first step to an online-survey – create project (II)

URL start/end of field phase pop-Up-Generator progress indicator layout type (password/code)

Create project Create questionnaire Invite participants Field phase & data export

• 7. Technical Issues: Using OPST

SLIDE 52

Peter Müßig-Trapp 52 20/21 June 2007

second step to an online-survey – create questionnaire (I)

create pages define plausibility checks define rotations create filters

Create project Create questionnaire Invite participants Field phase & data export

• 7. Technical Issues: Using OPST

SLIDE 53

Peter Müßig-Trapp 53 20/21 June 2007

second step to an online-survey – create questionnaire (II)

create questions select type of question integrate pictures

Create project Create questionnaire Invite participants Field phase & data export

• 7. Technical Issues: Using OPST

SLIDE 54

Peter Müßig-Trapp 54 20/21 June 2007

second step to an online-survey – create questionnaire (III)

preview questionnaire directly enter question text define scales import text

Create project Create questionnaire Invite participants Field phase & data export

• 7. Technical Issues: Using OPST

SLIDE 55

Peter Müßig-Trapp 55 20/21 June 2007

third step to an online-survey – invite participants

edit E-mail template send reminder use parameter

Create project Create questionnaire Invite participants Field phase & data export

• 7. Technical Issues: Using OPST

SLIDE 56

Peter Müßig-Trapp 56 20/21 June 2007

fourth step to an online-survey – field phase & data export

access statistics data export (SPSS/Excel) real time field statistics

• nline statistics
• nline report

statistics of access details and abort rate

Create project Create questionnaire Invite participants Field phase & data export

• 7. Technical Issues: Using OPST

SLIDE 57

Peter Müßig-Trapp 57 20/21 June 2007

Written versus online

Written enquiry

• printing of questionnaire
• sending of questionnaire

by mail

• reminders by mail
• return of questionnaire by

mail

• data collection:

Capturing of the answers by the corresponding

• ffice

Online enquiry

• placing the questionnaire

into the web

• invitation to enquiry by E-

mail

• reminders by E-mail
• filling in of the

questionnaire in the web

• data collection:

data is captured by the interviewees themselves

• 1. Overview and objectives

SLIDE 58

Peter Müßig-Trapp 58 20/21 June 2007

Facts and figures

4.5. Panel status

Project Quantity Ready to Panelists participate

• 16. social survey

x y z With university admission x y First year students x y z Self-registered z Total sample (number of panel members) x including

• active members (master data available)

y

• new entries (master data not yet available)

z

SLIDE 59

Peter Müßig-Trapp 59 20/21 June 2007

Prospects

• transition to regular operation, routinization
• carrying out up to 6 standard enquiries p.a.

(approx. one enquiry every 8 weeks)

• carrying out quick captures
• extension of the panel and balancing the panel mortality

rate by annual nationwide representative enquiries in writing

• pure research in the field of social empirical methods,

particularly

– panel effects – extension of cooperative relations on a national and international level – online plausibilization – convenience panel?

• 5. Prospects

SLIDE 60

Peter Müßig-Trapp 60 20/21 June 2007

HISBUS objectives

• creation of a

virtual village for students

• students as consultants for higher

education policy: inclusion of their

• pinions, attitudes, evaluations
• representative ad hoc enquiries
• quick provision of information
• 5. Summary

SLIDE 61

Peter Müßig-Trapp 61 20/21 June 2007

Organisation

• History

– Founded in 1969 – 1975: Taken over by the federal government

• Funding

– A Non-profit Organisation – Services in part free of charge – external funding

• 1. About HIS

SLIDE 62

Peter Müßig-Trapp 62 20/21 June 2007

Mission and Services

• Software Developement

Administrative computing applications for higher education

• Planning and

Management Assistance

• Pool of Information

– Higher Education Funding – Empirical Studies – Support of Decision Making

• 1. About HIS
• Empirical Studies
• Support of Decision Making