Evaluation of the Golden Hello Initiative - York Consulting

More documents

Recommendations

Info

• it has not been possible to extrapolate from the data whether it was thebursary or/and the Golden Hello that affected the likelihood to staybecause of the way in which the question was framed.Recipients Leaving FE4.18 Only 9 recipients (constituting 2%) who responded to the Golden Hello postalsurvey have left FE since receiving payment 30 . Most of these (8 out of 9individuals) left within twelve months of receiving payment. The main reasonsfor leaving were:• money;• hours/workload (see Figure 4.3).Figure 4.3:Reasons respondents left teaching after receiving a GoldenHello (n=8)%706050403020100MoneyHours/WorkloadDisciplineDrive to raise quality standardsWanted another jobTeach in secondary schoolJob security/permanent postLack of training4.19 When questioned about other things the Government could have done tochange recipients’ decision to leave the sector most responses related tofactors such as pay, availability of full-time employment and levels ofbureaucracy as the following quotes indicate (see Table 4.3).Table 4.3:Postal survey evidence of other things the Government could implement thatwould have affected decisions to leave30 Methodological issues mean that caution should be exercised in terms of the reliability of thisfigure e.g. factors such as attrition. It is possible that the response to the survey was low fromrecipients that have left the FE sector given that these individuals could have moved address sinceleaving their jobs and hence did not receive the survey. Qualitative evidence from case studyconsultations revealed that staff had left in 4 out of the 10 case study colleges visited, constituting atotal of 6 individuals.
The Evaluation of the Golden Hello InitiativeQuotes“Equal pay for lecturers and school teachers.”“Pay similar rates to the private sector.”“Make more fractional full time posts.”“Paperwork.”“I don't have much confidence in government initiatives.”“Better quality management would help all FE and especially in basic skills.”Influence on Commitment4.20 Qualitative evidence from the case study visits suggests that whilst recipientsappreciated the payment as a reward for their efforts within a sector that theybelieve is traditionally undervalued, it was not sufficient to influence theirlong-term commitment (see Table 4.4).Table 4.4:Case study evidence to demonstrate payment is insufficient to influence longterm commitmentQuotes“It made me feel more valued but I am not sure it will have a long-term effect.”“I felt quite valued and realise that I am doing something valuable but it doesn’taffect my long term commitment.”“Golden Hellos are not that much of an incentive – you’ve got to enjoy teaching to doit. It won’t affect long-term commitment.”4.21 This is interesting to note given that the overwhelming majority of postalsurvey respondents (98%) are still teaching in FE and over 90% indicatedthat they would stay in the sector over the longer-term (13 months plus).However, there is no data with which to compare these findings. It could bethat retention issues are more prevalent amongst those that have beenteaching in the FE sector for a longer duration (i.e. for a greater periodthan two years that were not included within the scope of this evaluation).4.22 Other factors are considered to exert greater influence over the decisionto stay or leave the FE sector according to those consulted in the survey(that are still in teaching post payment). These are shown in Table 4.5 below.Table 4.5:Factors influencing the decision to stay or leave the FE sector32 York Consulting Limited
Page 3: The Evaluation of the Golden Hello
Page 7 and 8: The Evaluation of the Golden Hello

Evaluation of the Golden Hello Initiative - York Consulting

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?