Primary ITE key headlines 2013-14

456 views

Published on

Headline Data from the School of Education's 2012-13 Self-Evaluation Document (SED)

Published in: Education
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
456
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
2
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • First year of assessing final year students using new Teachers’ Standards – terminology has changed (High = grade 1 etc)
    Whilst comparisons with previous are in some respects more difficult in light of changing standards, attainment at the highest level has fallen this year (46% high compared to 51% last 2 years)
    However, lower % awarded the minimum grade (now 4%, down from 8/9% last 2 years)
    Important because under new Ofsted inspection framework, in order for an ITE provider to gain a good or outstanding rating, ‘all trainees exceed the minimum level of practice expected of teachers as defined by the Teachers’ Standards’ – i.e. all trainees need to be graded 'at least good' or better for us to be judged as an 'outstanding' or even 'good' provider. This informed our recruitment and selection strategies for PGCE students started in September 2012 – only recruited those with the potential to be good or outstanding teachers (less focus on meeting recruitment targets)
  • Ofsted framework has an emphasis on consistency in outcomes
    Female students tend to attain more highly
    Difference slightly less marked than last year; however, male attainment lower particularly the case on the PGCE (which tends to have more male students – BA male students = 13 [F = 126]; PGCE = 35 [F = 131]; M = 16%)
    An issue that we’ll be particularly focusing on – including the nature of the support provided to male students whilst in schools
  • BME students tend to attain less well + difference between white and students form other groups more marked than last 2 years. However, v small nos skew data (approx 4% BME)
    Relatively similar % of disabled/non disabled students get highest grades – however, disabled students more likely to get min grade – and more likely to withdraw/intermit (approx 11% disabled)
  • Relatively similar % of disabled/non disabled students get highest grades – however, disabled students more likely to get min grade – and more likely to withdraw/intermit (approx 11% disabled)
  • At the end of each placement we invite students to evaluate their experiences. We have run this survey for many years – it is a paper based survey and return rate tends to be relatively high – but this year used some new software to support analysis (and also had our highest ever response rate 90%).
    Meant that survey analysis was available much more quickly than in previous years and facilitated analysis by individual school which enabled us to, in a small number of cases, provide some targetted support where first placement analysis had identified potential issues.
    Overall, students rated their placement experiences slightly less highly than previous years – nevertheless, students continue to rate their placement experiences very highly overall – e.g. 93% Strongly agreed or Agreed with statement that the quality of their placement experience as VG – this slide shows other areas rated highly (with this year’s rating compared to last years)
  • Here are some areas for development highlighted by the survey – these should be taken in the context of very positive ratings overall – however, there may be some useful pointers in here to inform mentor support etc
  • Each year, the teaching Agency as was (now National College) undertakes a National Survey of NQTs. Completed during the spring following the year that NQTs completed their ITT. Key source of data used by Ofsted inspectors. However, very unusually, the outcomes of this survey is not yet available. We run our own end of course surveys which, to a large extent, mirror the NQT survey (to facilitate triangulation of data), so these slides show the rating of last year’s trainees of their courses at the end of the year.
    Overall, ratings were slightly less positive than in previous years – e.g. 91% rated the overall quality of their training as VG or G, compared to 95% the previous year. We are a little disappointed with these outcomes, although again should be taken in the context of a vey positive picture overall.
    Specifically, this slide those aspects of their programmes that students rate the most highly
  • This slide shows those aspects of training rated less highly – nevertheless, as you can see, some of these aspects have improved over the last 3 years
  • The NCTL also publishes annual performance profiles for all ITE providers – these include a range of data including the % of trainees from each provider who gain QTS and the % of those with QTS who are subsequently employed as a teacher. These data similarly are late; however, we do have access to the UoB data (as providers are invited to validate their data during the summer prior to publications), although we do not have access to the sector wide position.
    Those of you who were here last year may recall that we were rather disappointed with our 2012 PP data, because it showed that, for the first time, the % of our successful trainees who were subsequently employed as a teacher was below the sector average. We thought the reason for this was because we had a large % of trainees whose employment position was ‘not known’ – we have therefore developed and implemented new systems over the last year in order to try and maintain better contact with our former students. As a consequence of these new systems and better records of former students, we were able to update the data compiled by the National College with details of the employment position of a much larger proportion of our former students.
    Whilst we do not yet know the national picture, we are very pleased with our employment data – over 88% of PGCE students who graduated in summer 2012 are now employed as a teacher, as are 83% of our BA students
  • These improved contacts and records of our former students has also enabled us to undertake our own survey of our former students during their first year of employment as a teacher, and our former students’ headteachers. This was an online survey (with a response rate of approx 15-20%, which we were relatively content with bearing in mind it was the first year of the survey, although we hope to improve on this in future years), and we were able to triangulate the data by asking the two groups a similar set of questions.
    This slides shows the key headline data arising from the survey – as you can see, headteachers tend to rate the preparedness of NQTs more highly than the NQTs themselves!
    The survey confirms the aspects of our training that we know that we need to continue to improve – including behaviour management, supporting pupils with EAL and pupils with SEN. It os important for us to address these issues because, as part of the new Ofsted inspection framework, inspection teams will observe some of our NQTs in addition to our current trainees, during any inspection
  • Primary ITE key headlines 2013-14

    1. 1. Primary ITE: Key headlines from self evaluation in 2012/13
    2. 2. Achievement of the Teachers’ Standards • Overall, the proportion of Primary students graded at least ‘good’ has increased in 2012/13 PGCE and BA
    3. 3. Attainment by under-represented groups • Female students tend to attain higher grades than male students (particularly on the PGCE):
    4. 4. Attainment by under-represented groups • White students tend to attain higher grades than students from other groups (however, small numbers skew data): PGCE and BA
    5. 5. Attainment by under-represented groups • Similar proportions of disabled and non-disabled students gain the highest grades; however, disabled students are more likely to withdraw/intermit PGCE and BA
    6. 6. Retention (Year 1 students) • Overall, the retention of Primary students has improved over the last 3 years
    7. 7. Profile of cohort (Year 1 students in 2012/13) 18-24 years 25-34 years 35-44 years 45-54 years Total 67% 24% 7% 2% 347 Majority ethnic Minority ethnic Total 94% 5% Age profile is similar over the last 3 years 347 No Disability Total disability declared 92% 8% 347 Male Female Total 17% 83% 347 Ethnicity profile is similar over the last 3 years Proportion of disabled students has increased slightly over the last 3 years Proportion of male students has increased slightly over the last 3 years
    8. 8. End of placement evaluations – positive feedback • Students continue to rate their placement experiences very highly overall 2012/13 Final placement 2011/12 Final placement Overall, the quality of my placement experience was very good 93% 100% The University’s course briefings and handbook guidance supported my preparation for the placement 96% 95% I received helpful verbal and written feedback from my Placement Tutor following formal observations / visits 97% 99% My University Placement Tutor looked at, commented on and advised me about my planning and assessment files / documentation and enabled me to identify areas to improve my practice against the Standards 96% 97% The school's induction process was comprehensive and helped me become acquainted with policies and procedures 96% 100% I was given the opportunity to develop my teaching competences as appropriate to the placement and as detailed in the school experience handbook 94% 100% % who Strongly agree or Agree with statements
    9. 9. End of placement evaluations – areas for development? • New software and evaluation processes enabled quicker analysis of data, thereby facilitating more targeted support for school where needed 2012/13 Final placement 2011/12 Final placement I received helpful verbal and written feedback from my mentor following formal observations. 93% 99% My school mentor looked at, commented on and advised me about my planning and assessment files at least every 10 working days. 78% 91% The mentoring process enabled me to identify areas for further development and take appropriate action to improve my practice against the Standards [includes advice and commentary on Action Plans]. 88% 100% I was able to observe outstanding practice. 89% 94%
    10. 10. End of programme evaluations 2012/13 Overall quality of training = 91% (95% 2011/12) Aspects of programme which are rated most highly: Use new technology more effectively to support learning (88%) Use a range of teaching methods that promote pupils’ learning (89%) Work with teaching colleagues as part of a team (89%) Helping them to understand pedagogy (90%) Helping them to understand subject knowledge (89%) Preparing them to teach primary mathematics (94%) % who rate aspects of training as Very good or Good
    11. 11. End of programme evaluations 2012/13 Areas for development? (however, note improvement in most cases over the last 3 years): Preparing them to teach pupils: •From minority ethnic backgrounds (65%) [56% 2010/11] •With English as an additional language (71%) [49% 2010/11] •With special educational needs (71%) [63% 2010/11] Preparing them to teach reading, including phonics and comprehension (81%) Preparing them to work with teaching assistants to achieve objectives (79%) [77% 2010/11] [91% 2011/12]
    12. 12. NQT Survey 2013 Aspects of training which are rated most highly: Question UoB Sector Overall quality of training 95% 90% Teach specialist subject 82% 75% Using new technology to support learning 78% 75% Achieve progression for pupils 83% 78% Teach across the range of abilities 86% 81% Work with teaching colleagues as part of a team 92% 85% Communicate with parents/carers 67% 64% Assess robustness of educational research 73% 67% Apply findings from educational research 73% 69% Relates to students who graduated in summer 2012; % of NQTs who rate aspects of training as VG or G
    13. 13. NQT Survey 2013 Areas for development: Question UoB Sector Understand the national curriculum 80% 83% Teach pupils from BME backgrounds 48% 64% Establish and maintain a good standard of behaviour 78% 83% Assess pupils’ progress 60% 68% Teach pupils with SEN 63% 68% Teach pupils with EAL 47% 59% Teach language comprehension 63% 67% Teach systematic synthetic phonics 71% 76% Use data to support learning 41% 54% Record and report pupils’ progress 51% 59% Relates to students who graduated in summer 2012; % of NQTs who rate aspects of training as VG or G
    14. 14. NCTL Performance Profiles 2013 • UoB graduates are more likely to be employed as a teacher than elsewhere in sector PGCE Primary 2011 UoB 2012 UoB 2013 UoB 2013 Sector Awarded QTS 82% 91% 97% 91% Employed as a teacher 84% 76% 89% 84% 2011 UoB 2012 UoB 2013 UoB 2013 Sector Awarded QTS 88% 94% 89% 90% Employed as a teacher 74% 79% 83% 79% BA Primary NB – data relate to students who graduated in 2011/12
    15. 15. University of Brighton survey of former students (NQTs) and headteachers Head teachers How well prepared to … NQTs 95% Overall 83% 93% Teach English 74% 62% Teaching systematic synthetic phonics 62% 90% Teach mathematics 89% 93% Manage behaviour effectively 72% 79% Make accurate and productive use of assessment 61% 83% Cater for the needs of all pupils 69% 56% Specifically, pupils with EAL 43% 76% Specifically, pupils with SEN/D 61% % who rate aspects of training as Very good or Good

    ×