Search

Head Start is a national program that helps young children from families with low incomes get ready to succeed in school. It does this by working to promote their early learning and health and their families' well-being. The Head Start Family and Child Experiences Survey (FACES) provides national information about Head Start programs and participants. Mathematica and its partners--Educational Testing Service and Juárez and Associates--conducted the study under contract to the Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation, Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Data from the study respond to current policy questions and support programs and practitioners working with Head Start families. This report includes information on the FACES 2019 study design, and presents key findings from the study's spring 2020 data collection. The purpose of this report is to (1) provide information about the FACES 2019 study, including the background, design, methodology, assessments, and analytic methods; and (2) report detailed descriptive statistics (averages, response ranges, and percentages) and related standard errors (the estimate of the standard deviation of each statistic) in a series of tables. [For "Descriptive Data on Head Start Children and Families from FACES 2019: Fall 2019 Data Tables and Study Design," see ED613786.]

Head Start is a national program that helps young children from families with low income get ready to succeed in school. It does this by working to promote their early learning and health and their families' well-being. The Head Start Family and Child Experiences Survey (FACES) provides national information about Head Start programs and participants. This report includes information on the FACES 2019 study design, and presents key findings from the study's spring 2020 data collection. The purpose of this report is to (1) provide information about the FACES 2019 study, including the background, design, methodology (including the impact of COVID-19 on data collection), assessments, and analytic methods; and (2) report detailed descriptive statistics (averages, response ranges, and percentages) and related standard errors (the estimate of the standard deviation of each statistic; see accompanying technical appendix for standard errors) in a series of tables. In total, 165 programs, 318 centers, and 590 classrooms participated in the study in spring 2020. The tables provide information from separate surveys of program directors, center directors, and teachers.

The UNESCO-UNEVOC TVET Country Profiles are an online service. They aim to provide concise, reliable and up-to-date information on TVET systems worldwide, including key statistical data which can be compared across countries, major TVET policy documents, and information on governance of TVET. Dynamic diagrams illustrate education systems at a glance, aligned with ISCED levels.

The UNESCO-UNEVOC TVET Country Profiles are an online service. They aim to provide concise, reliable and up-to-date information on TVET systems worldwide, including key statistical data which can be compared across countries, major TVET policy documents, and information on governance of TVET. Dynamic diagrams illustrate education systems at a glance, aligned with ISCED levels.

The UNESCO-UNEVOC TVET Country Profiles are an online service. They aim to provide concise, reliable and up-to-date information on TVET systems worldwide, including key statistical data which can be compared across countries, major TVET policy documents, and information on governance of TVET. Dynamic diagrams illustrate education systems at a glance, aligned with ISCED levels.

The UNESCO-UNEVOC TVET Country Profiles are an online service. They aim to provide concise, reliable and up-to-date information on TVET systems worldwide, including key statistical data which can be compared across countries, major TVET policy documents, and information on governance of TVET. Dynamic diagrams illustrate education systems at a glance, aligned with ISCED levels.

The UNESCO-UNEVOC TVET Country Profiles are an online service. They aim to provide concise, reliable and up-to-date information on TVET systems worldwide, including key statistical data which can be compared across countries, major TVET policy documents, and information on governance of TVET. Dynamic diagrams illustrate education systems at a glance, aligned with ISCED levels.

The UNESCO-UNEVOC TVET Country Profiles are an online service. They aim to provide concise, reliable and up-to-date information on TVET systems worldwide, including key statistical data which can be compared across countries, major TVET policy documents, and information on governance of TVET. Dynamic diagrams illustrate education systems at a glance, aligned with ISCED levels.

This report reflects student-level data submitted by 21 of British Columbia's (BC) public post-secondary institutions, including colleges, institutes and seven universities. The data include: student headcount totals by institution as well as student headcount by Aboriginal identity, age group, gender, and program area for the academic year (September 1 to August 31), on November 1st (a count of all students enrolled as of November 1st each year), and by fiscal year (April 1 to March 31). Lastly data on credentials awarded by credential type for the academic and calendar years (January 1 to December 31) are provided. University of British Columbia, University of Victoria, Simon Fraser University, and University of Northern British Columbia are not included in this report.

"The Forum Guide to Strategies for Education Data Collection and Reporting (SEDCAR)" was created to provide timely and useful best practices for education agencies that are interested in designing and implementing a strategy for data collection and reporting, focusing on these as key elements of the larger data process. It builds upon the "Standards for Education Data Collection and Reporting" (published by the Forum in 1991) and reflects the vast increase over the past three decades in the number of compulsory and/or continual data collections conducted by education agencies. This new resource is designed to be relevant to the state and local education agencies (SEAs and LEAs) of today, in which data are regularly collected for multiple purposes, and data collection and recording may be conducted by many different individuals within an agency. [For "SEDCAR (Standards for Education Data Collection and Reporting)" (1991), see ED343937.]

This report is part of a series of documents released in conjunction with the United Nations' International Decade for People of African Descent (2015 to 2024) and Black History Month. It aims to provide insight into some of the key socioeconomic characteristics of Canada's Black communities. The first report in this series titled "Diversity of the Black population in Canada: An Overview," was released in 2019 and highlighted both the demographic characteristics and diversity of this population. Among others, the report demonstrated that the Black population which represents close to 1.2 million people in 2016, is not only diverse, but also young and growing in size. To obtain a more comprehensive portrait of this population, this second report presents indicators related to education, employment, income, family structures and perceptions using data from the census and the General Social Survey (GSS). This report first looks at the education characteristics of the Black population, which are associated with several other aspects of their socioeconomic situation. An analysis of the highest level of educational attainment was disaggregated by sex and immigrant status, followed by data on the educational expectations and aspirations of young Black individuals. The Black population's labour market outcomes are the focus of the second part of this booklet. In addition to employment, unemployment and income indicators, there are also data presented on work experiences, including their perceived experience of discrimination and their level of satisfaction. Information on coping with life's difficulties and perceptions of the future are presented in the third part of this report. Some socioeconomic indicators are then presented for selected census metropolitan areas (CMA), which show that, far from being homogeneous, the situation of the Black population varies greatly from one part of the country to another. [Written in collaboration with René Houle and Martin Turcotte. For "Diversity of the Black population in Canada: An Overview," see ED605380.]

The 2017 edition of the "Digest of Education Statistics" is the 53rd in a series of publications initiated in 1962. The "Digest" has been issued annually except for combined editions for the years 1977-78, 1983-84, and 1985-86. Its primary purpose is to provide a compilation of statistical information covering the broad field of American education from prekindergarten through graduate school. The "Digest" includes a selection of data from many sources, both government and private, and draws especially on the results of surveys and activities carried out by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). The "Digest" contains seven chapters: All Levels of Education, Elementary and Secondary Education, Postsecondary Education, Federal Funds for Education and Related Activities, Outcomes of Education, International Comparisons of Education, and Libraries and Use of Technology. Each chapter is divided into a number of topical subsections. Preceding the seven chapters is an Introduction that provides a brief overview of current trends in American education, which supplements the tabular materials in chapters 1 through 7. The "Digest" concludes with two appendixes. The first appendix, Guide to Sources, provides a brief synopsis of the surveys used to generate the Digest tables; the second, Definitions, is included to help readers understand terms used in the "Digest." [For the 2016 report, see ED580954].

This report covers Commonwealth and state/territory government-funded training (Commonwealth or state recurrent funding, Commonwealth specific purpose funding or state specific funding). This publication provides a summary of data relating to estimated students, programs, subjects and training providers in Australia's government-funded vocational education and training (VET) system. Data are presented by the state or territory that administered the funding of the training activity.

"Ohio Education by the Numbers" offers busy policy makers, journalists, and civic and business leaders simple and easy-to-use vital statistics about Ohio's schools and the students they serve. The facts and figures contained within offer an overview of Ohio's students; where they go to school; their achievement on national and state exams; and their readiness for success in college and career. It also presents a few statistics about Ohio's educators and school funding. This edition includes the most recent data available as of December 2018, including enrollment and state exam results from the 2017-18 school year and from the 2017 round of the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP).

This third edition of the "Mobile Digest of Education Statistics" is a compact compilation of statistical information which covers prekindergarten through graduate school to describe the current American education scene. The "Mobile Digest" is designed as an easy mobile reference for materials found in detail in the "Digest of Education Statistics, 2017." The "Mobile Digest" includes selections of data from many government sources, especially those of the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). The "Mobile Digest" includes information on schools and colleges, enrollments, teachers, graduates, finances, and educational outcomes. Unless otherwise stated, all data are extracted from the "Digest of Education Statistics, 2017" (https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/). Unless indicated as a projection or estimate, all data presented in this report are the latest actual data available at the time of preparation of this document. Information on statistical procedures, definitions, and survey sources appears in the introduction, and appendixes A and B of the latest edition of "Digest of Education Statistics."

This report is based on the 2016-17 survey "Career and Technical Education Programs in Public School Districts" and provides nationally representative data on career and technical education (CTE) programs. The survey defines a CTE program as a sequence of courses at the high school level that provides students with the academic and technical knowledge and skills needed to prepare for further education and careers in current or emerging professions. For this survey, districts were instructed to include all CTE programs that the district offers to high school students, including programs provided by the district or by other entities (such as an area/regional CTE center, a consortium of districts, or a community or technical college). The report provides information about the entities that provide the CTE programs and the locations at which the CTE programs are offered to high school students. It also presents data about work-based learning activities and employer involvement in CTE programs, as well as barriers to the district offering CTE programs and barriers to student participation in CTE programs. Data are also presented about the extent to which various factors influence the district's decisions on whether to add or phase out CTE programs. The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), in the Institute of Education Sciences, conducted this survey in spring 2017 using the Fast Response Survey System (FRSS). FRSS is a survey system designed to collect small amounts of issue-oriented data from a nationally representative sample of districts, schools, or teachers with minimal burden on respondents and within a relatively short period of time. The survey was mailed to approximately 1,800 public school districts with high school grades in the United Stated (50 states and the District of Columbia). The cover letter and questionnaire indicated that the survey was designed to be completed by the person in the district most knowledgeable about career and technical education programs for high school students. Respondents were asked to provide information for the 2016-17 school year and the summer of 2016, and were offered options of completing the survey on paper or online. The unweighted survey response rate was 87 percent and the weighted response rate using the initial base weights was 86 percent. The survey weights were adjusted for questionnaire nonresponse and the data were then weighted to yield national estimates that represent all eligible public school districts with high schools in the United States (50 states and the District of Columbia). Tables of standard error estimates are provided in appendix A. See the technical notes (appendix B) for detailed information about the survey methodology. Appendix B also includes definitions of the analysis variables (i.e., district characteristics) used in the report. The questionnaire is located in appendix C. Because the purpose of this report is to introduce new NCES data from the survey through tables containing descriptive information, only selected national findings are presented. These findings have been chosen to demonstrate the range of information available from the FRSS study rather than to discuss all of the data collected; they are not meant to emphasize any particular issue. Readers are cautioned not to make causal inferences about the data presented here. The findings are based on self-reported data from public school districts. Many of the variables examined are related to one another, and complex interactions and relationships have not been explored.

The School Survey on Crime and Safety (SSOCS) is managed by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) within the Institute of Education Sciences of the U.S. Department of Education. SSOCS collects extensive crime and safety data from principals and administrators of public schools in the United States. Data from this collection can be used to study the relationship between school characteristics and violent and serious violent crimes in U.S. public schools and to examine what school programs, practices, and policies are used by schools in their efforts to reduce or prevent crime. SSOCS has been conducted six times, during the 1999-2000, 2003-04, 2005-06, 2007-08, 2009-10, and 2015-16 school years. The latest administration of SSOCS, SSOCS:2016, was conducted by NCES, and the data collection was administered by the U.S. Census Bureau. Out of a sample composed of 3,553 primary, middle, high, and combined public schools, a total of 2,092 public schools submitted completed questionnaires, for a weighted response rate of 62.9 percent. Data were collected from February 22, 2016, through July 5, 2016. This manual is designed to assist users of the public-use SSOCS:2016 data file and offers information about the SSOCS:2016 collection, including its purpose, the sample design, data collection methods, and data processing procedures.

Governments, organizations, and companies are generating copious amounts of data and analysis to support education decision-making around the world. While continued investments in data creation and management are necessary, the ultimate value of information is not in its "production," but its "use." Herein lies one of the biggest challenges of translating information into actionable insights: those that produce education data are often far removed from those that make crucial decisions about education policies, programs, and investments. With limited insight on what decision-makers use and need, the likelihood of disconnect between supply and demand is high. Yet, there has been surprisingly little systematic research on the types of information education decision-makers in developing countries value most--and why. Much of the available evidence on the use of education data in developing countries relies upon individual case studies. These qualitative snapshots offer deep insights on use patterns and challenges in a single context, but make it difficult to draw broader conclusions. In this report, we offer a unique contribution to this body of knowledge by analyzing the results of two surveys of more than 300 education policymakers in low- and middle-income countries that asked about their use of data in decision-making. Survey participants include senior- and mid-level government officials, in-country staff of development partner organizations, and domestic civil society leaders, among others. This report helps the global education community take stock of what information decision-makers use to measure results and manage change. Drawing upon our review of the literature and the two surveys of end users in developing countries, we offer practical recommendations to help those who fund and produce education data to be more responsive to what decision-makers want and need.

For more than 40 years, policymakers have committed to supporting the education of students with disabilities, who have grown as a share of all students in the United States. Beginning with landmark legislation in 1975, the U.S. Congress mandated that students with disabilities have access to a free and appropriate public education and provided funds to school districts nationwide to help serve them. Since then, the legislation has been updated six times, most recently in the 2004 Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), which emphasized helping youth prepare for postsecondary education, careers, and independent living. These and other changes in the educational, social, and economic landscapes may have affected all youth, raising interest in how the characteristics, experiences, and challenges of youth with disabilities have changed over time. The National Longitudinal Transition Study (NLTS) 2012 provides updated information on youth with disabilities in light of these changes, to inform efforts to address their needs. Sponsored by the U.S. Department of Education under a congressional mandate to study IDEA 2004 and the students it serves, the NLTS 2012 is the third in a series of such studies. It describes the backgrounds of secondary school youth and their functional abilities, activities in school and with friends, academic supports received from schools and parents, and preparation for life after high school. Through surveys in 2012 and 2013, the study collected data on a nationally representative set of nearly 13,000 students--mostly those with an individualized education program (IEP) and expected to receive special education services. The study also includes students without an IEP, who either have no identified disability or who have an impairment that does not qualify them for special education but allows them to receive accommodations through a 504 plan under the Rehabilitation Act, another federal law pertaining to the rights and needs of youth with disabilities. This third volume of findings from the NLTS 2012 uses data from all three studies in the NLTS series to examine how the characteristics and experiences of youth in special education have changed over time, overall and for each of 12 disability groups defined by IDEA 2004. The trends from 2003 to 2012 for youth with an IEP ages 15 to 18 suggests several key points: (1) Youth with an IEP are more likely than a decade ago to live in households that face economic challenges; (2) Youth with an IEP are about as healthy and able to perform some typical tasks independently as in the past, but they are also more likely to use behavioral medicines and have trouble understanding others; (3) Engagement in school and extracurricular activities among youth with an IEP increased in the past decade, whereas the prevalence of negative events such as grade retention, suspensions, and expulsions was little changed; (4) Youth with an IEP are more likely than in the past to receive supports at school but less likely to get them at home; and (5) Participation in key transition activities by youth with an IEP and their parents has declined, although they are just as likely to have gone to an IEP meeting. [For "Preparing for Life after High School: The Characteristics and Experiences of Youth in Special Education. Findings from The National Longitudinal Transition Study 2012. Volume 3: Comparisons over Time. Full Report. NCEE 2018-4007," see ED580934. For "Preparing for Life after High School: The Characteristics and Experiences of Youth in Special Education. Findings from the National Longitudinal Transition Study 2012. Volume 2: Comparisons across Disability Groups. Executive Summary. NCEE 2017-4019," see ED573353.]

For more than 40 years, policymakers have committed to supporting the education of students with disabilities, who have grown as a share of all students in the United States (Snyder, de Brey, & Dillow, 2016). Beginning with landmark legislation in 1975, the U.S. Congress mandated that students with disabilities have access to a free and appropriate public education and provided funds to school districts nationwide to help serve them. Since then, the legislation has been updated six times, most recently in the 2004 Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), which emphasized helping youth prepare for postsecondary education, careers, and independent living. These and other changes in the educational, social, and economic landscapes may have affected all youth, raising interest in how the characteristics, experiences, and challenges of youth with disabilities have changed over time. The National Longitudinal Transition Study (NLTS) 2012 provides updated information on youth with disabilities in light of these changes, to inform efforts to address their needs. Sponsored by the U.S. Department of Education under a congressional mandate to study IDEA 2004 and the students it serves, the NLTS 2012 is the third in a series of such studies. It describes the backgrounds of secondary school youth and their functional abilities, activities in school and with friends, academic supports received from schools and parents, and preparation for life after high school. Through surveys in 2012 and 2013, the study collected data on a nationally representative set of nearly 13,000 students--mostly those with an individualized education program (IEP) and expected to receive special education services. The study also includes students without an IEP, who either have no identified disability or who have an impairment that does not qualify them for special education but allows them to receive accommodations through a 504 plan under the Rehabilitation Act, another federal law pertaining to the rights and needs of youth with disabilities. This third volume of findings from the NLTS 2012 uses data from all three studies in the NLTS series to examine how the characteristics and experiences of youth in special education have changed over time, overall and for each of 12 disability groups defined by IDEA 2004. Most of the analyses examine trends for in-school youth ages 15 to 18 from 2003 to 2012, using the NLTS2 and NLTS 2012. When comparable data are available from the NLTS, the volume also examines trends starting in 1987 for youth ages 15 to 18 and youth ages 19 to 21 who were still enrolled in high school. The trends from 2003 to 2012 for youth with an individualized education program (IEP) ages 15 to 18 suggests several key points: (1) Youth with an IEP are more likely than a decade ago to live in households that face economic challenges; (2) Youth with an IEP are about as healthy and able to perform some typical tasks independently as in the past, but they are also more likely to use behavioral medicines and have trouble understanding others; (3) Engagement in school and extracurricular activities among youth with an IEP increased in the past decade, whereas the prevalence of negative events such as grade retention, suspensions, and expulsions was little changed; (4) Youth with an IEP are more likely than in the past to receive supports at school but less likely to get them at home; and (5) Participation in key transition activities by youth with an IEP and their parents has declined, although they are just as likely to have gone to an IEP meeting. [For "Preparing for Life after High School: The Characteristics and Experiences of Youth in Special Education. Findings from The National Longitudinal Transition Study 2012. Volume 3: Comparisons over Time. Executive Summary. NCEE 2018-4008," see ED580936. For "Preparing for Life after High School: The Characteristics and Experiences of Youth in Special Education. Findings from the National Longitudinal Transition Study 2012. Volume 2: Comparisons across Disability Groups. Full Report. NCEE 2017-4018," see ED573334.]

The purposes of this equity indicators project are to: (1) report the status of higher education equity in the United States and identify changes over time in measures of equity; (2) identify policies and practices that promote and hinder progress; and (3) illustrate the need for increased support of policies, programs, and practices that not only improve overall attainment in higher education but also create greater equity in higher education opportunity and outcomes. Family income remains the primary focus of the 2018 report. Recognizing the need to also address inequity based on other interrelated demographic characteristics, reports since 2016 also include selected indicators that highlight differences by race/ethnicity and socioeconomic status (SES). In these reports, SES is measured by an index comprised of family income, parents' education, and parents' occupation developed by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). For the first time, the 2018 "Indicators" report includes data describing higher education equity by U.S. state. Considering indicators of equity by state is essential given the many differences across the 50 states in historical, demographic, economic, and political characteristics, as well as the characteristics of their K-12 and higher education systems. This report presents data as far back as comparable data warrant, often beginning with 1970. In addition to providing longitudinal indicators of equity, the "Indicators" project is also intended to advance productive conversation about effective policies and practices for improving equity in higher education opportunity and outcomes. In 2018, the "Indicators" project is launching the "Improving Equity in Higher Education Search for Solutions Blog" hosted by PennAHEAD (http://www.ahead-penn.org/) intended to further advance discussion of how to create meaningful improvements in higher education equity. Methodological Appendix A provides additional notes, tables, and figures. A combined list of references and resources is included. [For "Indicators of Higher Education Equity in the United States: 2017 Historical Trend Report," see ED583542.]

The "Annual Disability Statistics Supplement" is a companion report to the "Annual Disability Statistics Compendium." The "Supplement" presents statistics on the same topics as the "Compendium," with additional categorizations by demographic characteristics including age, gender and race/ethnicity. In addition to the "Supplement," a companion "Annual Report" is available, providing graphic representations of key findings and state differences. The "Annual Report" highlights state and trend data using maps related to specific tables in the "Compendium" and "Supplement." [For the "Annual Report," see ED583258. For the "Compendium," see ED583160.]

The "2017 Disability Statistics Annual Report" presents statistics to address the following types of questions: (1) How many people with disabilities live in the United States; (2) What is the percentage of people with disabilities in different age groups; (3) What is the percentage of people with disabilities for different types of disability; (4) To what extent are people with disabilities employed; (5) What are the earnings for people with and without disabilities; (6) What is the poverty percentage for people with and without disabilities; and (7) Is disability status associated with percentages of smoking, obesity, and binge drinking? The "Annual Report" highlights state and trend data from national sources. A specific listing of source data for each figure is included in Appendix B. There is a great deal of variability in rates of people with disabilities by state and the "Annual Report" includes maps to highlight this information. A glossary of terms is included in Appendix C. The "Annual Report" charts complement the detailed tables of data which can be found in the "2017 Annual Disability Statistics Compendium" [For the "Compendium," see ED583160. For the "2017 Annual Disability Statistics" supplement, see ED583259. ]

The "Annual Disability Statistics Compendium" and its compliment, the "Annual Disability Statistics Supplement," are publications of statistics about people with disabilities and about the government programs which serve them. The "Compendium" and "Supplement" are designed to serve as a summary of government statistics. The "Compendium," available both in hard copy and online (at www.disabilitycompendium.org) presents key overall statistics on topics including the prevalence of disability, employment among persons with disabilities, rates of participation in disability income and social insurance programs, as well as other statistics. The "Annual Disability Statistics Supplement", only available online, presents tables with over 150 additional categorizations of data for each section highlighted in the "Compendium". There were several changes to the "2017 Annual Disability Statistics Compendium" and "Supplement". First, the Education section of the "Compendium" was expanded to include not only data on special education program participation and outcomes, but also statistics on educational attainment for all people with disabilities in the United States. Second, the 2017 "Compendium Health" section now identifies persons with disabilities using a methodology consistent with U.S. Census Bureau estimates. Estimates for the Health section have always used Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance Survey (BRFSS) data. Third, accessible versions in Hypertext Markup Language (HTML) of the 2017 Compendium and 2017 Supplement are now available online. In addition to providing accessible Portable Document Format (PDF) files for download there are also fully text-readable HTML file versions to remove as many barriers as possible for people with disabilities to access this material. [For the annual report, see ED583258. For the Annual Disability Statistics supplement, see ED583259.]

The Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS) collects institution-level data from postsecondary institutions in the United States (50 states and the District of Columbia) and other U.S. jurisdictions. This "First Look" is a revised version of the preliminary report released on July 18, 2017. It includes fully edited and imputed data from the IPEDS fall 2016 collection, which included three survey components: (1) "Institutional Characteristics" for the 2016-17 academic year; (2) "Completions" covering the period July 1, 2015, through June 30, 2016; and (3) data on "12-Month Enrollment" for the 2015-16 academic year. Data for all three components were collected through the IPEDS web-based data collection system. A brief summary of the fall 2016-17 survey components is included in this report, and data collection procedures are summarized in appendix A. Detailed information about the study methodology can be found at http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2017078. The purpose of this report is to introduce new data through tables containing descriptive information such as totals, averages, and percentages. The findings presented in this report demonstrate the range of information available through IPEDS; they include only a sample of the information collected and are not meant to emphasize any particular issue. [For the preliminary report, see ED574874.]

This publication provides a summary of data relating to students, programs, subjects, and training providers in Australia's government-funded vocational education and training (VET) system (defined as Commonwealth and state/territory government-funded training). Data for the Government-funded students and courses series are received by the National Centre for Vocational Education Research (NCVER) in four cumulative data submissions: (1) January to March, submitted in May; (2) January to June, submitted in August; (3) January to September, submitted in November; and (4) January to December, submitted in March. The quarterly data submissions are cumulative, which allows additional data to be reported and also corrections made to previously submitted data. The data in this publication cover the period of 1 January to 30 September 2017. For comparative purposes, it also examines this data against previously submitted data for the 1 January to 30 September 2015 and 2016 periods, and also for the 1 January to 30 June 2017 period. The Australian VET system provides training across a wide range of subject areas and is delivered through a variety of training institutions and enterprises (including to apprentices and trainees). [For the report from the previous year, "Australian Vocational Education and Training Statistics: Government-Funded Students and Courses--January to September 2016," see ED572277.]