Methodology Citation analysis The bibliometric analysis was conducted by specialist information services staff using Google, Google Scholar, Publish or Perish, parliamentary databases and VOCEDplus. The time period was from each report publication date to 25 May 2015. While comprehensive, a citation analysis is a point-in-time activity; it is not a true reflection of the level of actual engagement and use of the research. Our previous work in this area suggests the peak time for academic citations is around five to six years following report publication. The complete results of the citation and media analysis are provided in the support document accompanying this report. Google analytics Included in the metrics is the collection and analysis of data from the NCVER website/portal and the VOCEDplus database, using Google analytics. It tracks how visitors interact with the websites, including how many visit, where they come from, who they are (in terms of NCVER-defined user groups), how long they spend on the website, what pages they visit and what publications they view or download. Detailed Google analytics and methodological caveats regarding the reporting period, sampling, member group scope and tracking code issues in relation to the transition from NCVER’s website to the portal (which occurred on 3 February 2014) are included in the support document. Editorial Board evaluations For this we trialled the use of NCVER’s Editorial Board as an external assessment panel, adapting the case study evaluation questions and matrices from the United Kingdom Research Excellence Framework (REF) exercise. Each editorial board member was allocated between two and four reports to review. Evaluations were conducted over the period April to June 2015. A copy of the evaluation template is provided in the support document. Stakeholder questionnaire End-user stakeholders were randomly identified from a list of current subscribers to NCVER, from within categories of people potentially interested in the topics. This list was supplemented with individuals or organisations likely to have a general interest in the VET sector. The stakeholders invited to participate for each theme are identified in table 2, along with the responses received. In addition, ten authors of the reports under consideration were invited to participate and eight completed the questionnaire. A list of those who consented to have their name identified is provided in appendix A and the questionnaire instrument is provided in the support document. Limitations in the sample In terms of the scale of this study the response rates to the surveys for both themes are satisfactory and sufficient for meaningful analysis (table 2). However, the responses are not
Methodology Citation analysis The bibliometric analysis was conducted by specialist information services staff using Google, Google Scholar, Publish or Perish, parliamentary databases and VOCEDplus. The time period was from each report publication date to 25 May 2015. While comprehensive, a citation analysis is a point-in-time activity; it is not a true reflection of the level of actual engagement and use of the research. Our previous work in this area suggests the peak time for academic citations is around five to six years following report publication. The complete results of the citation and media analysis are provided in the support document accompanying this report. Google analytics Included in the metrics is the collection and analysis of data from the NCVER website/portal and the VOCEDplus database, using Google analytics. It tracks how visitors interact with the websites, including how many visit, where they come from, who they are (in terms of NCVER-defined user groups), how long they spend on the website, what pages they visit and what publications they view or download. Detailed Google analytics and methodological caveats regarding the reporting period, sampling, member group scope and tracking code issues in relation to the transition from NCVER’s website to the portal (which occurred on 3 February 2014) are included in the support document. Editorial Board evaluations For this we trialled the use of NCVER’s Editorial Board as an external assessment panel, adapting the case study evaluation questions and matrices from the United Kingdom Research Excellence Framework (REF) exercise. Each editorial board member was allocated between two and four reports to review. Evaluations were conducted over the period April to June 2015. A copy of the evaluation template is provided in the support document. Stakeholder questionnaire End-user stakeholders were randomly identified from a list of current subscribers to NCVER, from within categories of people potentially interested in the topics. This list was supplemented with individuals or organisations likely to have a general interest in the VET sector. The stakeholders invited to participate for each theme are identified in table 2, along with the responses received. In addition, ten authors of the reports under consideration were invited to participate and eight completed the questionnaire. A list of those who consented to have their name identified is provided in appendix A and the questionnaire instrument is provided in the support document. Limitations in the sample In terms of the scale of this study the response rates to the surveys for both themes are satisfactory and sufficient for meaningful analysis (table 2). However, the responses are not
assessing-the-impact-of-research-2864.docx