Evaluation of the Golden Hello Initiative - York Consulting

More documents

Recommendations

Info

• a clearer idea of the specific recruitment and retention issues thatthe initiative is aiming at rather than being generic;• research to establish the scale of issues and thereby set baselinesto act as a future performance measure;• links to other and new strategies and policies aimed at relatedissues;• clearer specification of the policy intentions that will lead to clearerplanning;• greater awareness raising among stakeholders regarding thepolicy aims and intended beneficiaries in order to alleviate negativeperceptions by those outside the prescribed remit;• greater clarity in the roles of the DfES and LSC.
The Evaluation of the Golden Hello InitiativeSummary of Key Points• The definition of what constitutes a shortage subject area is unclear andis leading to confusion and (mis)interpretation. The extent to which thelist of shortage subject areas is a reflection of need in the FE sector isnot known. Qualitative feedback suggests these subjects vary bylocation and contextual factors and change over time. IndependentSpecialist Colleges have their own distinct needs.• There is evidence that returnees and teachers who have undertakenprior paid teaching experience that are not eligible have slipped throughthe net. However, some stakeholders would argue that such individualsshould be eligible. It is felt that a Golden Hello could act as an incentiveto attract individuals from industry for example, who often want to ‘testout’ their suitability for teaching before leaving what are often morehighly paid jobs.• Non-eligible institutions have expressed concerns that they are notincluded within the scope of the initiative. This is based on the premisethat they are experiencing difficulties recruiting and retaining Basic Skillstutors who also have to be qualified in line with the government agendafor raising standards. Some eligible institutions have highlightedrecruitment and retention needs in relation to support staff that are notincluded in the initiative.• In aligning the eligibility criteria for Golden Hellos with the FE ITTTraining Bursaries pilot, some individuals who may be attracted to thesector are doubly excluded. This is because those with prior teachingexperience for example, are unable to claim financial assistance to trainand have no incentive of a Golden Hello.• There is evidence of a lack of cohesion and ‘joined up thinking’ acrosswider Government initiatives and programmes (e.g. for teaching) andthose that are implemented locally by the LSC (e.g. for Basic Skills). Inthe latter case this can mean that other (local) initiatives, offer greaterincentives than do Golden Hellos.• The timing of payment has been questioned in order to have an effecton both recruitment and retention. There is concern that there is norequirement to stay for longer that a term after payment. Given thatpayment is taxable, it is questioned whether this is sufficient to make adifference in light of issues concerning pay.• Several colleges highlighted that lack of flexibility in design means that58 York Consulting Limited
Page 3:
The Evaluation of the Golden Hello
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16: The Evaluation of the Golden Hello
Page 19: The Evaluation of the Golden Hello
Page 65: The Evaluation of the Golden Hello
show all

Evaluation of the Golden Hello Initiative - York Consulting

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

Delete template?

Save as template?