Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
The Diploma in Technical andVocational Education
Tracer Study
November 2008
Research Team:Margaret Nare, FCTVE
Montlenyane Selma-Robertson, FCTVETebogo Angel Moreetsi, FCTVE
George Herd, TAKlavs Dahl Christensen, TA
Jan Deurwaarder, TACandy Mbongwe, TA
Sepako Seosenyeng, TA
Table of Contents1 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS.....................................................42 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS..........................................................53 INTRODUCTION..............................................................63.1 THE DIPLOMA IN TECHNICAL AND VOCATIONAL EDUCATION (DTVE).......................6
3.1.1 Aims of the programme..................................................................................................................... 73.1.2 Outcomes of the Programme............................................................................................................. 83.1.3 The DTVE programme structure........................................................................................................93.1.4 The facilitation of the programme..................................................................................................10
4 POLICY BACKGROUND........................................................114.1 RESEARCH TEAM...........................................................11
5 METHODOLOGY..............................................................125.1 PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION PLAN (PIP)..........................................125.2 PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES OF THE SURVEY........................................12
5.2.1 The research areas............................................................................................................................ 125.2.2 Target Groups for the Data Collection............................................................................................135.2.3 The research questions..................................................................................................................... 145.2.4 Detailing the research questions.....................................................................................................15
5.3 CONTACT DETAILS OF THE FORMER DTVE STUDENTS..................................155.4 DEVELOPMENT OF DATA COLLECTION INSTRUMENTS...................................165.5 DEVELOPMENT OF TEMPLATES FOR REGISTRATION OF DATA.............................175.6 DATA COLLECTION PROCEDURES.................................................17
5.6.1 Data from DoE lecturers................................................................................................................... 175.6.2 Data from former DTVE student-teachers not employed in brigades/TCs...................................175.6.3 Data from brigades/TCs................................................................................................................... 17
5.7 QUALITY ASPECTS..........................................................185.7.1 Size of Samples.................................................................................................................................. 195.7.2 Reliability........................................................................................................................................... 215.7.3 Validity............................................................................................................................................... 21
6 DATA PRESENTATION........................................................236.1 QUESTIONNAIRE FOR DOE LECTURERS. (ANNEX D)..................................23
6.1.1 Relevance of the content of the DTVE..............................................................................................236.1.2 The structure of the DTVE programme...........................................................................................256.1.3 Portfolio Assessment......................................................................................................................... 27
6.2 QUESTIONNAIRE FOR FORMER DTVE STUDENT-TEACHERS (ANNEX C)......................296.2.1 Relevance of the content of the DTVE and its use by DTVE graduates..........................................296.2.2 The structure of the DTVE programme...........................................................................................336.2.3 Mode of facilitation used in the DTVE programme........................................................................356.2.4 Quality of facilitation by DoE lecturers...........................................................................................376.2.5 DTVE student-teacher perception on portfolio assessment...........................................................396.2.6 Effectiveness of the DoE support system for the DTVE programme.............................................40
6.3 COMPARING RESPONSES FROM DOE LECTURERS WITH RESPONSES OF THE DTVE STUDENT-TEACHERS. 446.3.1 DTVE programme content................................................................................................................ 44
DTVE Survey Page 1
TABLE 7 AVERAGE RELEVANCE RATINGS FOR CONTENT OF MODULES DN01, DP01 AND DP02 BY DOE LECTURERS AND DTVE STUDENT-TEACHERS.............................................44
6.3.2 DTVE programme structure............................................................................................................. 466.3.3 DTVE portfolio assessment system..................................................................................................476.3.4 DTVE programme support system...................................................................................................48
6.4 STRUCTURED FOCUS GROUP INTERVIEW: MANAGEMENT AND SUPERVISORS OF DTVE GRADUATES.....486.5 STRUCTURED FOCUS GROUP INTERVIEW: LEARNERS TAUGHT BY DTVE GRADUATES..............506.6 COMPLETING THE DTVE PROGRAMME..............................................516.7 CONCERNS RAISED..........................................................54
7 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS..........................................587.1 CURRICULUM..............................................................58INTEGRATED KEY SKILLS (KS)....................................................58FACILITATION/FACILITATORS......................................................59THE PROGRAMME STRUCTURE/PORTFOLIO ASSESSMENT.....................................60LEARNING SUPPORT TO STUDENTS...................................................61TEACHING PLACEMENT (TP)......................................................62
8 LITERATURE REFERENCE.....................................................648.1 EXIT SURVEY – DTVE DIPLOMA IN TECHNICAL AND VOCATIONAL EDUCATION PROGRAMME.......648.2 BOTA SURVEY.............................................................648.3 CONSULTANCY TO CONDUCT A TRACER STUDY OF GRADUATES OF THE BOTSWANA TECHNICAL EDUCATIONPROGRAMME, 2007.............................................................65
DTVE Survey Page 2
Table of tables
Table 1: DTVE Enrolment 2001 - 2008-11-24...................................7Table 2: DTVE modules and credit values.....................................9Table 3: Response rate.....................................................19Table 4: Representation of categories among respondents....................20Table 5: Representation of cohorts among respondents.......................20Table 6: Frequencies of responses on item 2.16.............................36Table 7: Average relevance ratings for content of modules DN01, DP01 and DP02 by DoE lecturers and DTVE student teachers.................................44Table 8: Average overall relevance ratings of each module and the integrated key skills (KS) by DoE lecturers and DTVE student-teachers.................45Table 9: Average overall relevance ratings of each module and the integrated key skills (KS) by DoE lecturers and DTVE student-teachers.................46Table 10: Comparing ratings of related to programme structure by DoE lecturersand DTVE graduates.........................................................47Table 11 Comparing of average ratings on items related to portfolio assessmentby DoE lecturers and DTVE graduates........................................47Table 12 Colleges and brigades visited and number of respondents in the focus group interviews with management / supervisors of the DTVE graduates.......48Table 13: Colleges and brigades visited and number of learners participating in the focus group interview...............................................50Table 14: Data on withdrawal, supplementation, pass and fail. DTVE cohorts 1-4..........................................................................52Table 15: Reasons for withdrawing from DTVE programme......................52Table 16: Pass/fail rates as percent of completers.........................53
Table of diagrams
DIAGRAM 1: BAR CHART ILLUSTRATING THE RELEVANCE RATING (SCALE 1 TO 5) BY DOE LECTURERSRS. 23DIAGRAM 2: RELEVANCE OF MODULE CONTENT AS PERCEIVED BY DOE LECTURERS.................24DIAGRAM 3: RELEVANCE OF MODULE CONTENT AS PERCEIVED BY DOE LECTURERS.................25DIAGRAM 4: STRUCTURE OF THE DTVE PROGRAMME........................................26DIAGRAM 5: PORTFOLIO ASSESSMENT MODE AND PROCESS AS PERCEIVED BY DOE LECTURERS..........28DIAGRAM 6: RELEVANCE AND USE OF MODULES COMPARED....................................30DIAGRAM 7: MODULES CONTENT RELEVANCE AND USE AS PERCEIVED BY DTVE GRADUATES............31DIAGRAM 8: MODULES CONTENT RELEVANCE AND USE AS PERCEIVED BY DTVE GRADUATES............32DIAGRAM 9: STRUCTURE OF THE DTVE PROGRAMME VIEWS OF DTVE GRADUATES...................34DIAGRAM 10: FACILITATION MODES USED IN THE DTVE PROGRAMME RATING OF...................35EFFECTIVENESS AND FREQUENCY OF USE................................................35DIAGRAM 11: PIE CHART ILLUSTRATING VIEWS ON VARIETY IN FACILITATION....................36DIAGRAM 12: PIE CHART DISPLAYING STUDENT-TEACHERS VIEWS ON CONSTRUCTIVIST,..............37LEARNER-CENTRED FACILITATION MODES USED BY DOE LECTURERS..............................37DIAGRAM 13 FORMER DTVE STUDENT-TEACHERS VIEWS ON THE QUALITY OF THEIR FACILITATORS.......38DIAGRAM 14: BAR CHART OF AVERAGE AGREEMENT RATINGS ON ITEMS ON PORTFOLIO ASSESSMENT MODE NAD
PROCESS AS PERCEIVED BY THE FORMER DTVE STUDENT-TEACHERS.........................39
DTVE Survey Page 3
DIAGRAM 15: BAR CHART OF AVERAGE AGREEMENT RATINGS ON SUPPORT RELATED ISSUES IN THE DTVE PROGRAMME AS PERCEIVED BY FORMER DTVE STUDENTS.................................41
DIAGRAM 16: AVERAGE AGREEMENT RATINGS ON ITEMS RELATED TO SUPPORT DURING SUPPLEMENTATION AND SUPPORT RO DISTANCE LEARNERS AS PERCEIVED BY FORMER DTVE STUDENTS..................43
DTVE Survey Page 4
1 List of Abbreviations
APP Annual Performance PlanATTC Automotive Trades Technical CollegeBOTA Botswana Training AuthorityBTEP Botswana Technical Education ProgrammeCTVE College of Technical and Vocational EducationDoE Department of EducationDTVE Diploma in Technical and Vocational EducationDTVET Department of Technical and Vocational Education
and TrainingFCTVE Francistown College of Technical and Vocational
EducationGTC Gaborone Technical CollegeICT Information and Communication TechnologyJTeC Jwaneng Technical CollegeMTC Maun Technical CollegeNCC National Craft CertificateNCQF National Credit and Qualification FrameworkNDP # National Development Plan #ODeL Open, Distance and eLearningOBE Outcomes Based EducationPaTeCo Palapye Technical CollegePiP Project Implementation PlanRNPE Revised National Policy on EducationSPTeCo Selebi Phikwe Technical CollegeTA Technical AssistantTC Technical CollegeTEC Tertiary Education CouncilTP Teaching placementTS Tracer StudyTVET Technical and Vocational Education and Training VBA Visual Basic Applications
DTVE Survey Page 5
2 AcknowledgementsThe tracer study group would like to express sincere gratitude to everyonewho contributed to the collection of data for this study. We are highly indebted to the Brigade Coordinators and Principals of the Technical Colleges (TCs) who assisted by facilitating and organising the visits of the data collectors to their institutions. We especially appreciate all learners and staff who contributed by either completing the lengthy questionnaire - the former students on the Diploma in Technical and Vocational Education (DTVE), or who participated in a focus group interview - institutional managers and learners. We thank them all for their time and input.
DTVE Survey Page 6
3 IntroductionThe main objective of this Tracer Study (TS) is to provide data and information to support a review of the Diploma in Technical and VocationalEducation (DTVE) which is the responsibility of the Department of Technical and Vocational Education and Training (DTVET) and the managementof the Francistown College of Technical and Vocational Education (FCTVE). The study is timely, in view of the significant changes envisaged for the Technical and Vocational Education and Training (TVET) sector of Botswana.
DTVET will become responsible for the management and funding of the 41 Brigades to support the expansion and standardisation to the Botswana Technical Education Programme (BTEP) qualification framework. A significant staff development requirement will arise since many of the brigade instructors do not have formal teacher training qualifications and are unfamiliar with the BTEP.
The Tertiary Education Council (TEC) is in the process of taking management and funding responsibility for the TVET sector with significant operational implications for the TCs
The National Credit and Qualification Framework (NCQF) is under development in an attempt to define and standardise the qualification levels of all education sectors in Botswana.
National Craft Certificates (NCC) units are under review Proposals for a certificate and an advanced certificate in Teacher
training, within the BTEP framework, have been presented to DTVET.
The study involved the tracing of former students of the DTVE programme from 2001 onwards to gather data on their experiences, both during the programme, and their subsequent involvement within the TVET sector. This report presents the data gathered, and suggests conclusions and recommendations.
3.1 The Diploma in Technical and Vocational Education (DTVE)The DTVE is an 18 month, full-time teacher training programme offered by the Department of Education (DoE) at FCTVE. The entry requirement is normally a diploma or first degree in a vocational field. The programme ismodularised, credit and outcomes-based.
Until the end of 2007 The DTVE programme was originally offered by the autonomous institution – The College of Technical and Vocational Education(CTVE) located in Gaborone. The first cohort of students was enrolled in
DTVE Survey Page 7
2001. At the end of 2007, the college relocated to Francistown to become the DoE at FCTVE.
The primary aims of the original college were defined by the RNPE Government Paper Number 2 of 1994 recommendation 62 (a), (see NDP 8 chapter 15, paragraph 15.138) as:
to provide pre-service training for teachers / instructors in the TVET sector
to provide in-service ,staff-development training for the persons working in the TVET sector
NDP 9 in section 15.122 describes the major task of the DoE at FCTVE as to provide lecturers with professional teaching skills using both
full-time course and distance/e-learning delivery
Currently, the only programme offered by the DoE is the DTVE full-time programme in affiliation with the University of Botswana (UB).
Since 2001, the enrolment numbers are as follows:
Table 1: DTVE Enrolment: 2001 - 2008
Sept 2001 -May2003Cohort 1
July2003 -Dec2004Cohort 2
Jan2005 –July2006
Jan 2005 – May2008
Cohort 3
Sept2006 -June2008Cohort 4
TOTAL
Full timeprogramme
Full timeprogramme Full
timeBlockreleas
e
Full timeprogramme
Pre-servic
e
In-servic
e
Pre-service
In-service
Pre-service
In-service
12 3 27 18 28 Pre23 In
15 33 17
15 45 66 50 176*
The cohort of 80 students enrolled in 2008 and currently studying is not included in the table and was not used to gather information for this TS.
A total of 174 students, in 4 cohorts have started the DVET programme.
*The above total is 176 - 2 students starting in cohort 2 left due to illness and continued in cohort 3.
DTVE Survey Page 8
3.1.1 Aims of the programmeThe DTVE curriculum aims to provide opportunities for student-teachers to:
a) become reflective and critical professional practitioners in the vocational education and training sector;
b) acquire knowledge of relevant educational theory related to the system in which they already work or plan to enter following the programme;
c) develop a wide range of strategies, tactics and expertise necessary for planning, preparing, implementing, assessing and evaluating teaching and learning sessions for the subjects and groupsof learners or trainees with which they will be working;
d) integrate in the facilitating of learning, studies relating to inter-personal relationships and the development of key skills associated with their intended or actual work role;
e) acquire knowledge and skills to respond to the needs of their learners;
f) identify, select and use a range of resources to support learning sessions, including ICT;
g) acquire confidence in their professional knowledge and problem-solving skills, developing their own personal philosophy of educationand commitment to and critical awareness of their professional situation;
h) commence the development of a positive and professional attitude to the philosophy of life long learning and professional development;
i) gain access to a ladder of awards, each of which matches their training and professional needs and those of their employers and learners;
j) identify barriers faced by learners in education and training suchas disability, age, race and gender and promote professional practicethat does not exclude groups of learners but recognises and values their diversity;
DTVE Survey Page 9
k) study teaching and training situations within the social, psychological and philosophical context and to relate these to changes in industry and to Government policy.
3.1.2 Outcomes of the ProgrammeOn successful completion of the DTVE Programme the student-teacher will:
a) exhibit non-discriminatory beliefs, values and behaviour, in respect to disability, race, gender, sexual orientation, culture or ethnicity in all written work, teaching practice, work based experience and their day to day involvement with the Programme tutors, peers, learners, and others with whom they work or study;
b) have developed skills and understanding in relation to the use andapplication of information and communication technologies, sufficientto carry out their intended or expected role in technical/vocational education and training;
c) have demonstrated appropriate skills in researching, analysing andusing information gathered from a variety of sources such as libraries, internet, intranet, world wide web, CD-ROMs, newspapers, journals and educational texts such as syllabuses and unit specifications;
d) be able to design, plan, implement, assess and evaluate learning programmes which take into account the diverse needs of the vocational learner or trainee and the specialist area in which they will teach;
e) demonstrate appropriate skills and competence in relation to supporting their own learners, monitor progress and provide effectiveguidance which enhances learning;
f) evaluate their own teaching effectiveness and establish their own development targets;
g) understand the role of assessment in relation to the evaluation oflearning, the vocational curriculum and the award of national qualifications related to their own teaching area;
h) understand the factors which influence the development and structure of the vocational education and training curriculum and play an effective part in the planning implementation and evaluation
DTVE Survey Page 10
of this curriculum, in relation to their own specialist teaching field;
i) understand the role of vocational education and training in relation to the Botswana Government, economic, social and cultural policy, in relation to their own professional practice;
j) be able to plan and execute work based projects aimed at enhancing the quality and effectiveness of the vocational curriculum,through appropriate levels of enterprise and collaboration with peers, mentors and managers;
k) evaluate their own learning during the programme and contextualisethis with their own values and beliefs in relation to their own professional role as a teacher or trainer;
l) develop the knowledge, understanding and skills, needed for effective and unsupervised work in a wide range of contexts in vocational education and training.
3.1.3 The DTVE programme structure.To achieve the above stated aims and outcomes an 18 month modular programme was designed and piloted with a group of 15 student teachers beginning September 2001. Teaching Placement (TP) at an vocational institution i.e. attachment to a brigade or TC offering BTEP, forms an important, integral part of the programme of which 60% is college based and 40% is TP
The programme structure consists of 10 modules. Each module has a credit value which is an indication of the time an average student-teacher will need to complete the module.1 credit corresponds approximately to 30 hoursof study time. This includes contact hours with the tutor, with peers, study in library, work in computer room, individual study, etc. The table below gives an overview of the modules in the programme.
Table 2: DTVE modules and credit values
Module Credit value
DN01 Assess learners’ needs 6DP01 Plan for effective learning 6DP02 Prepare resources to support learning
6
DTVE Survey Page 11
DF01 Facilitate learning 8DS01 Provide learners with support 4DA01 Assess learning 4DA02 Evaluate learning sessions 6DE01 Reflect upon roles of a teacher 6DE02 Improve own professional practice
6
DE03 Undertake an action research 8TOTAL 60
The complete programme carries a credit value of 60, being equivalent to approximately1800 hours of study. The following “key skills” or generic skills are fully integrated into the 10 modules:
personal and interpersonal skills; information gathering and processing skills (Information and
communication technology, ICT); communication skills; numeracy skills; quantitative data processing skills (numeracy); improving own professional performance.
These skills are developed by ensuring they are applied to activities in each and every module. The Key Skill level of each student is assessed at start of the programme and, whenever necessary, student-teachers are assisted and provided with (online) resources to practice and upgrade their skills.
3.1.4 The facilitation of the programme.The DTVE is a practical, activity-based programme founded on the general principles of adult education. Module activities and tasks are related thevocational area of specialisation of each student-teacher where possible. It is intended to be facilitated in a mode exemplary of that specified by the BTEP i.e. learner centred, based on a constructivist view of learning,supported by appropriate use of Information and Communication Technology (ICT).
The evidence for the outcomes, again similar to some BTE programmes, requires portfolio building. The portfolios are assessed in line with the Quality Assurance and Assessment Unit (QAA) following the procedure: unit assessment, internal verification and external verification. The only difference from DTVE is that the external verification is not done by QAA but by UB. In line with all BTE programmes the DTVE programme has
DTVE Survey Page 12
assessed work placement periods. DoE refers to these work placement periods as Teaching Placement (TP
The DTVE programme is flexible and individualised. Student-teachers, within limits, can determine the pace of their own progress and the pace at which evidence are gathered for each module portfolio. For this to be successful, an effective support and mentoring system is in place. A college based personal tutor is assigned to each student teacher to provide support and guidance the student-teacher throughout the programme.During TP each student-teacher is attached to a mentor from the institution concerned.
DTVE Survey Page 13
4 Policy backgroundThe Government is committed to providing quality technical and vocational education and training NDP9, section 15.112). The emphasis is on equippinglearners with the knowledge, skills and attitudes to contribute to the socio-economic and technological advancement of the country. The Government in its drive to diversify the economy seeks to create a competent, innovative and internationally competitive workforce. To provide quality education one needs quality teachers / instructors.
DTVET’s Strategic Plan (2005 – 2009), FCTVE’s Strategic Plan (2007 – 2009)and FCTVE’s Annual Performance Plan, (APP) 2008-2009incorporated the Government’s objectives mentioned above. One of the initiatives mentioned in the APP, as a quality improvement initiative, is to conduct a tracer study of DTVE graduates. The DTVE programme has been running, with few changes, since its inception in 2001. A review of the programme is required to establish whether the stated aims and objectives are being achieved, and are still relevant to the current needs of DTVET and the vocational sectoras a whole.
In a meeting with DoE in February 2008 called by the FCTVE Management attended by the Technical Assistance (TA) Team, the FCTVE Management instructed DoE to run a tracer study (TS) of former students of the DTVE programme with the purpose of informing the review of the programme, whichhas been offered unchanged since September 2001. The DoE was instructed topresent the TS report not later than 30 June 2008. At the same meeting theTA Team committed itself to support DoE in its undertaking of the TS by developing a plan for implementation of the TS including survey instruments and assistance with analysis and reporting. The TAs estimated the DoE staff input – in order to meet the deadline stated by the FCTVE Management - to the TS to be 2 lecturers ½-time for 3 months. It was also underlined by the FCTVE Management that the TA assistance should be seen as capacity building of DoE staff with the objective of enabling DoE staffto undertake future similar surveys. Carrying out surveys of tertiary education institutions, like FCTVE, is an expectation that has been expressed by Tertiary Education Council (TEC) members during their visit to FCTVE in relation to accreditation of the college and its programmes
4.1 Research TeamFollowing the meeting with the FCTVE Management, DoE nominated the following lecturers from their Department to be responsible for the planning and carrying out of the tracer study:
DTVE Survey Page 14
Margaret Nare Montlenyane Selma-Robertson Tebogo AngelaMoreetsi
To assist DoE the following TAs were nominated:
Jan Deurwaarder George Herd Klavs Dahl Christensen
The three DoE lecturers and the three TAs formed the TS task force. The task force was in September 2008 joined by the following short term TAs:
Candy Mbongwe SepakoSeosenyeng
5 MethodologyThis tracer study used quantitative as well as qualitative data. The main study is based on a survey questionnaire to two groups: 1. former DTVE student-teachers and 2.lecturers in the DoE at FCTVE. Qualitative data were collected through structure interviews with two groups 3.management and supervisors of the DTVE graduates employed in brigades and TCs and 4.Learners now being taught by the graduates. Interview guidelines were developed for groups 3 and 4.
The established TS task force had its first meeting in March 2008. Following that, several meetings were planned. However, some meetings had to be cancelled due to high workload of the DoE members.A separate folder was created on the FCTVE Moodle platform to cater for the communication among the task force members. All reference material, ideas, suggestions and decisions were uploaded to the platform.
Due to a high workload on the part of the DoE members of the TS task force, nearly all the work was carried out by the TAs. This meant that the request formulated by the FCTVE Management about capacity building among the DOE members of the TS task force did not occur.
5.1 Project Implementation Plan (PiP)The first output from the task force was a PiP (Annex A), outlining tasks to be undertaken, responsibility and timeframe. The PiP took its point of departure in the request formulated by FCTVE Management in February 2008
DTVE Survey Page 15
that the survey report should be presented by June 30, 2008. This was due to the inability of DoE members of the task force being unable to meet thevarious deadlines and contributions stated in the PiP, resulting in a delays in completion of the TS report.
5.2 Purpose and Objectives of the SurveyFollowing the development of the PiP, the task force focused on defining the purpose and objectives of the survey. The purpose of the survey was already defined by FCTVE Management as:
Provision of information for review of the DTVE programme
5.2.1 The research areasIn order to meet the stated purpose the task force identified the areas that should be the target for the survey.
The relevance of the content of the DTVE programme for the teachers / instructors in order to competently deliver their vocational subject area should obviously be addressed in the survey. But the content should not beassessed in isolation. The content only becomes meaningful if the graduates are able and willing to implement the knowledge, skills and attitudes developed during their study. Consequently, the survey would also investigate to what extent the DTVE graduates were actually applying the skills and knowledge in their daily work as lecturers or instructors.
The quality of any face-to-face programme as perceived by the learners also depends on the quality and mode of facilitation. This is especially the case,when the objective of the programme is to equip the student teachers-with planning, learning resource development, facilitation, assessment and evaluation skills, using an outcome based, and learner centred approach. The mode of facilitation of the DTVE programme should be exemplary (do what you preach). The learning resources and facilities available to the student-teachers are important in order to enhance their learning in a technological enhanced environment. Then, when in employment in colleges, they can act as examples of good teaching practice to colleagues on the use of technology in learning and facilitation.
The assessment mode of the DTVE programme is through continuous portfolio building for each of the learning modules. Portfolios contain the evidenceof having achieved the learning outcomes and document the process towards their achievement. This mode of assessment is unfamiliar to many of the DTVE student-teachers more used to end examinations. It is a mode of DTVE Survey Page 16
assessment that requires continuous support from the DoE lecturers and which serves at the same time as an example to them, as they must be able to use portfolio assessment when they join TCs teaching BTE programmes atadvanced and diploma level.
The support system in place for student-teachers was also identified as an area for evaluation, being a key aspect of any educational programme. The views of student teachers on the support system of the DTVE programme forman important aspect of the data collection. Views of those that completed the programme successfully (obtaining their DTVE), those that left before the normal end of the programme, and of those that completed the programmebut failed to achieve the DTVE are all relevant for evaluation of the support system.
The final research area identified, focused on what happened to learners on the DTVE programme after they completed or left the programme i.e. post course destinations. Did the newly qualified student-teachers find employment? What happened to those who failed or left the programme early?In conclusion it was decided by the TS task force that in order to meet the purpose of the survey that data should be gathered in the following seven areas:
1. Content, its relevance and extent to which it is used by graduates, and programme structure
2. Mode of facilitation of the programme3. Quality of facilitation4. Learning resources and environment5. Mode of assessment6. Support system7 Post course destinations
However, an issue was raised concerning item 4 above. With the exception of the groups, cohort 4 and cohort 3 (block release), none of the other graduates of the programme would have experience of FCTVE facilities, its learning resources and environment, since they completed their programme at CTVE in Gaborone. Cohort 3 (blockrelease) and cohort 4 were at FCTVE for a relatively few months only, and during a time when the campus was not fully operational. Therefore, it was decided to exclude the above item 4 from the survey as student-teachers would not be in a position to give viewson the facilities and resources a full operational FCTVE would offer.
DTVE Survey Page 17
5.2.2 Target Groups for the Data CollectionDiscussions in the TS task force indicated that there was a need tocollect data not only from those who completed the DTVE programme successfully – the graduates, but also those who did not. Consequently, the student-teacher population targeted consisted of all student-teachers enrolments to the DTVE programme since its inception. In this document this group is referred to, not quit appropriate, as DTVE graduates.
Another group targeted to provide data, were current and former lecturers in the DoE (formerly CTVE). With their experience in facilitating the programme as well as their theoretical background they would be in a position to provide useful information related to the relevance and usefulness of programme content, its mode of facilitation and assessment, and the student support system.
The purpose of the DTVE programme is to produce skilled teachers / instructors for the TVET system in Botswana. It can therefore be expected that former DTVE graduates will be working in a brigades, government TCs or other vocational training institutions as instructors/lecturers1. In order to establish whether DTVE graduates use the knowledge, skills and attitudes acquired in the DTVE programme two groups were identified to provide data.
a. learners in brigades/TCs currently taught by the DTVE graduates
b. the management of the institution in which the graduates are working, including their immediate supervisors
This data would focus on the relative performance of DTVE graduates compared with teaching staff with a non DTVE background.
In summary, the target groups for the survey were:
1.Former students enrolled on the DTVE programme since its inception (referred to as DTVE graduates)
2.Lecturers from DoE (current and/or former)3.Learners in brigades/TCs currently taught by the graduates4.Supervisors in brigades/TCs of the graduates
1 The data did confirm this - 116 (67%) of the 174 graduates identified were employed in either a brigade or TC
DTVE Survey Page 18
5.2.3 The research questionsThe TS posed the following the questions:
1.a. How relevant is the content of the DTVE programme to the work offacilitators of BTEP/ other vocational programmes within thevocational sector of Botswana?b. Do the graduates apply the skills and knowledge which they havedeveloped?c. How do graduates perceive the structure of the programme(Duration, workload, level, sequencing)and the content of modules?
2. Where the modes of facilitation used in the programme conducive to learning?
3. b. How do those taught by the graduates rate the quality of their facilitation?c. How do managers/supervisors in brigades and TCs rate the quality of the graduates?
4. a. How do graduates perceive the portfolio assessment system?b. How do DTVE facilitators perceive the portfolio assessment system?
5. What are graduates views on the support received during / after the programme?
6. a. What is the completion rate / pass rate?b. What are reasons for dropping out from the programme before completion?c. Where are graduates employed after completion?d. What is the time gap between completion and employment?
5.2.4 Detailing the research questionsFor each of the research questions a key performance indicator (KPI) with a standard was formulated. The data source / respondentsto supply data and the data collection instrument to be used to collect the data were identified. The person(s) responsible for collecting these data were identified.
DTVE Survey Page 19
To ensure that the questions included in the data collection instruments address the objective a pro forma document “justifying the questions” was designed (Annex B). The DoE members were to complete these ‘justification’ documents with the Department as a form of validation that the correct questions were asked and ‘nice to know’ questions, not related to the set objectives were not included. Time constraints did not allow this part of validation ofthe questions to take place.
5.3 Contact details of the former DTVE StudentsThe records of former students of the DoE were requested. However, the lists did not include the latest contact details for graduates or their completion status (passed with or without supplementation,failed). There was also no indication of DTVE student teachers thatwithdrew from the course before the normal end date.
As graduates tend to be mobile, contact details current when the graduates left the DoE become quickly outdated. Those not in employment within the TVET system were therefore particularly difficult to trace. Considerable energy and time was therefore needed to trace each individual. Strategies for generating a complete list of DTVE graduates were as follows:
Records of the DoE on the 4 cohorts were the starting point, though they were found subsequently to be incomplete. Each student teacher admitted to the DTVE programme receives a unique ID number. The listof former student-teachers submitted to the tracer study group had some IDs omitted.
Admission records for cohorts 1 to 3 from a former DTVE lecturer were examined to supplement, where appropriate, the records by DoE management. The Deputy Principal resources at FCTVE (former HoD in the DoE) provided a fairly comprehensive for the student teachers incohort 4.
The above strategy produced a list of 174 graduates. The list has a few ‘missing IDs’ i.e. ID numbers without a name attached. However the missingIDs could be accounted for as it was found that for some cohorts (especially 3 and 4) IDs were given to all student-teachers offered admission to the DTVE programme. Some having been offered a place on the programme did take up the offer i.e. never started the programme resultingin ‘empty’ IDs. The TS working group is confident that all DTVE graduates
DTVE Survey Page 20
were however properly identified. The next task was to trace the current location and contact details of the graduates.
a. Strategy for tracing graduates working in the TCs or brigades Staff records from the TCs and the database containing the data of
all persons working in the brigades were used to identify the graduates currently working in these institutions. This allowed 116 (66%) of the graduates to be located, 77 in brigades and 39 in TCs.
A snowball technique was used whereby graduates who had been locatedwere asked for assistance in tracing other graduates from their yearor other cohorts. A further 36 graduates were traced.
22 graduates (13% of the total) could not be traced.
In summary, a total of 152 (87%) graduates were traced and contacted.
5.4 Development of Data Collection InstrumentsThe following data collection instruments were developed|:
a. A questionnaire for former DTVE student-teachers (graduates). (Annex C)b. A questionnaire for former and/or current lecturers in the DoE facilitating the DTVE programme. (Annex D)c. Guidelines for a structured focus group interview with managers / supervisors of DTVE graduates. (Annex E)d. Guidelines for a structured focus group interview with learners currently taught by DTVE graduates. (Annex E)
The steps in developing the instruments were the following:
a. Documents detailing the research questions in each of the six areas included a section with draft / suggested questions that should be answered by the identified populations in order to collect data for answering the research question. . These 6 documents were made available to members of the TS workgroup for scrutiny and review, together with a pro forma checklist to justifyeach question (See annex B) suggested for inclusion in the data collection instruments. The workgroup members based in the DoE weretasked with presenting the documents within the Department and
DTVE Survey Page 21
include Departmental feedback and review. This is a low level form of establishing the validity of the data collection instrument. No feedback was received and hence it was assumed that the documents could be used for the next stage without any change.
b. The suggested questions in the 6 documents were collated into 4 separate documents: the first draft of the 2 questionnaires and the2 guidelines for the structured focus group interview. These draft documents were made available, through the Moodle platform to the members of the TS workgroup for review and dissemination in the DoE, together with two checklists. The first checklist was to be used to check each questions, whether it was correctly formulated, short, simple language, not a leading question, etc. The second checklist addresses the layout and structure of the whole questionnaire e.g. where similar questions grouped together, does it start with relatively straight forward questions, etc. No feedback was received from the DoE, but feedback was received from TA members in the TS workgroup.
c. The TA members of the group produced, based on the feedback, a final version of the documents. These were presented to the principal FCTVE for approval, and to the HoD of the DoE for discussion within the Department and approval. Approval was received from principal and HoD of DoE.
5.5 Development of Templates for Registration of DataOnce the questionnaires were developed, templates for entering of the quantitative data were developed. In order to construct the twodimensional XY (Scatter) charts a Microsoft Visual Basic Applications (VBA) macro was developed.
5.6 Data Collection ProceduresFour of the TS workgroup members were involved in the collection ofthe data working in pairs. To ensure that data were collected in the same way by each pair of data collectors, guidelines for the structured focus group interview with management/supervisors and learners of the DTVE student-teachers were developed (Annex E). Data collection visits to TCs and brigades were structured in the same way to increase the reliability of data collected.
DTVE Survey Page 22
5.6.1 Data from DoE lecturersThe developed and approved questionnaires (Annex D) were distributed to all 14 lecturers in the DoE at FCTVE. Five former lecturers were contacted by e-mail and requested to complete the questionnaire.Of the 14 DoE lecturers 9 (75%) returned completed questionnaires. Three completed questionnaires were received from former DTVE lecturers. Relatively, this is a fair representation of DTVE lecturers involved in facilitating the DTVE programme.
5.6.2 Data from former DTVE student-teachers not employed in brigades/TCs
58 former student teachers (33%) are not working in the TVET system(TC or brigade). Of these 58 former DTVE student teachers 22 could not be traced (13% of the total 174 former DTVE student-teachers). The 36 former DTVE student teacher traced were approached by phone and/or e-mail and questionnaires were dispatched to them through fax, e-mail or by hand. All 36 received the questionnaire. 22 (61%)were received back, some after numerous follow ups through telephone and/or e-mail. A few were collected by visiting the persons at their workplace / house. The collection of these 22 questionnaires turned out to be a tedious and time consuming exercise.
5.6.3 Data from brigades/TCs2
A data collection plan was drawn up by the TS task force, includingvisits to all TCs and brigades. There are 20 brigades with 39 DTVE graduates. 13 (85%) were visited and data collected from the formerDTVE student-teachers management / supervisors and learners. A time plan, scheduling visits to two institutions per day was produced. A standard programme3 for the visits was drawn up. All institutions were contacted by telephone, informed about the purpose of the survey and the programme for the visit. Once the details had been agreed on, the programme was faxed to the institution. Generally, all institutions contacted were very cooperative, and interested in receiving the data collection teams.The 7 brigades not visited by the data collection teams were contacted by phone and fax. Questionnaires for the former DTVE student-teachers were supplied through fax. The completed 2 List of all institutions visited is found in Annex G3 The programme is found in the Annex H
DTVE Survey Page 23
questionnaires were to be faxed back. A total 34 (87%) completed questionnaires were obtained from DTVE student-teachers in the brigades and 49 (64%) from DTVE graduates working in the colleges.
Former DTVE studentsAt the brigades/TCs the graduates of the DTVE programme were addressed as a group. A brief introduction explaining the purpose and the objectives of the data collection exercise was given. Following that, the questionnaires were handed out to the instructors/lecturers for completion. The time for completing the questionnaire was approximately 1 – 1½ hour. This is generally too long for a questionnaire, however as the DTVE former student-teachers were sitting together, discussing issues, recalling good and bad experience during their stay at the college and given the time by management to complete the questionnaire in all but one instance this worked well. In GTC the former DTVE student-teachers refused to complete the questionnaire as they had, according to them, raised issues with DTVET to which no response was received and hence they felt that there was no need for them to complete thequestionnaire as ‘nobody will attend to what we say’ and ‘we completed a questionnaire when exiting the college, so this is a duplication’.With 49 (64%) of the 77 former DTVE student-teachers currently employed in the TCs completing the questionnaire, sufficient data were collected. After, and during completion of the questionnaires the respondents were encouraged to raise issues not covered in the questionnaire. A number of concerns related to recognition of the DTVE, BTEP phase training, the BTEP, continuous staff development, and other were brought forward. These are presented in section 7 ofthis report.
Management, supervisors of the instructors/lecturers in the brigades/TCsWhile the instructors/lecturers completed their questionnaires, theresearch team interviewed the supervisors. In the brigades the supervisors comprised the brigade coordinator, the training coordinator and in some cases HoDs. In the TCs the supervisors generally were the HoDs. In several instances members of the brigade/college management participated, e.g. the centre contact, deputy principal academic. The structured interview was conducted, following the guidelines produced (Annex E). One member from the data collection team would read the questions and both researchers DTVE Survey Page 24
would write down answers for later comparison and compilation. Purpose of the interview was explained to the managers / supervisors emphasising that in answering the questions they shouldmake comparison between those of their staff who had followed the DTVE programme and those who had not. The interviews lasted approximately 45 minutes.
Learners in the brigades/TCs currently being taught by DTVE graduatesAfter interviewing the supervisors, learners taught by the DTVE graduates were gathered and interviewed. On average 3-4 learners ofeach DTVE graduate were requested to participate in the focus groupinterview. In institutions with many graduates the number of learners per. graduate could be smaller to keep the total number oflearners in around the 15 range for a manageable group and ensure participation of all the learners were briefed on the purpose of the interview and its confidence. The names of the DTVE graduates were mentioned to them and they were requested in their answers to keep these instructors / lecturers in mind and compare them with those of their instructors/lecturers who had not completed the DTVEprogramme. During the interview learners raised issues not covered in the guidelines and/or not directly related to the facilitation of the DTVE graduates. Yet some of the concerns are relevant to theTVET system in general and hence included in section 7 of this report.
5.7 Quality AspectsIn this section issues of sample sizes, reliability and validity will be discussed
5.7.1 Size of SamplesThe sample sizes measured by respondents as compared to the populations are as follows:
Table 3: Response rate
Target group Populationsize
Number ofrespondents %
DoE lecturers Lecturersin DoE: 14
Former
9 75%
DTVE Survey Page 25
lecturerstraced 5
3 60%
Former DTVE students
174 105 60%
Learners taught by DTVE graduates
Not known 195 -
Management / Supervisors of DTVE graduates
Not known 59 -
A 60% response rate from all the DTVE former students and a 69% response rate from those traced and contacted is high for tracer studies. The data collected are more than sufficient to draw conclusions as they may be considered representative for the whole population.
The tables 4 and 5 present the data on how the different categoriesin the population of 174 DTVE former students are represented in the sample of 105 respondents.
DTVE Survey Page 26
Table 4 Representation of categories among respondents
Population Number
Numberrespondents
Male 94 58 (62%)Female 80 47 (59%)
In service 75 56 (75%)Pre
service99 49 (60%)
Full time 159 93 (58%)Blockrelease
15 12 (80%)
In the total population of 174 DTVE graduates three categorisationscan be used
By gender: male or female By background: in service (employed in the TVET sector and
send for teacher training) or pre service (mainly following completion of diploma course in a vocational area but without work experience in the TVET system)
By mode of studying: in full-time face to face mode or in block release mode
Full-time face to face student-teachers train for 18 months at the DoE. The block release student-teachers (all in-service) train at DoE for one academic term (with a front load of two terms) and workat their institution the next term. It takes these student-teachers3 years to complete the programme.Table 4 gives the data on the number of respondents in each category as a percent of that category in the population. With a representation of about 60% to 70% in the respondent groups all categories are well represented.
Table 5 Representation of cohort among respondentsCohort Number in population Number
respondingC1 15 5 (33%)C2 43 24 (56%)
DTVE Survey Page 27
(actual 45, but2transferred to C3)
C3 51 32 (63%)C3
block15 12 (80%)
C4 50 32 (64%)Total 174 105 (60%)
Table 5 gives the percent of each cohort among the 105 respondents.Cohort 1 is not surprisingly least represented as they are most difficult to trace. 6 (40%) could not be traced of the 9 traced andsupplied with the questionnaire 5 (56%) responded. The other cohorts have a 60% representation, with the block release group 80%. As this group left in May 2008 and an exit structured focus group interview was carried out with this group, data on the group were available. In addition all student-teachers in this group werein service and hence could be easily contacted in their workplace in a brigade or a TC.
From the above data one might conclude that the 105 respondents area good representation of the population of 174 on the variable mentioned.
5.7.2 ReliabilityA reliable data collection instrument is one that would give the same result if repeatedly used with the same or an identical group.In order to assess whether the data collection instruments were reliable the data collection instruments were piloted at Palapye Technical College and Selebi Phikwe Technical College. The pilot did not reveal any conceptual problems with the instruments. When the data collection instruments were rolled out to other colleges and brigades, no significant difference between the responses from the two colleges and the responses from the two pilot colleges wereobserved.More systematically the internal reliability of the two questionnaires was estimated by applying Cronbach´s as an estimator4 that quantifies the reliability of a score of several questions in a questionnaire. The estimator will take values between 0 and 1. In most cases an acceptable minimum score is 0.7.
4 Detailed description is found in Annex I
DTVE Survey Page 28
The estimator was calculated for all sections in the two questionnaires with numerical data. The estimator provided values to underline that the two questionnaires can be regarded as having acceptable reliability.
For the calculated means (average rating) of the scores on a nominal 1 to 5 scale the 95% confidence intervals were computed. These intervals will with 95% certainty contain the true value in the population.
5.7.3 ValidityIt is only after establishing the reliability of the instrument that validity is to be considered.Validity of a data collection instrument refers to the question “Isthe instrument or measure used measuring what it is intended to measure?” To assess the validly of the data collection instruments the method of “consensual members checks” was used.
The data collection instruments were presented by the DoE members of the task force for feedback, comments and alterations to all DoEstaff members, together with “the question justification document”(Annex B) Each question in the instrument was to be justified: why is the question asked? To what research question is it attempting to find an answer to? As no feedback was received it was assumed that the instruments were valid. As professional educators staff in the DoE wants to collect valid data from the DTVE student teachers in order to review content, mode of facilitation, assessment and support of the programme offered. The lecturers in DoE being the experts on the DTVE programme are therefore the most knowledgeable persons to assess the content validity of the data collection instruments.The data collection instruments do allow to collect data on the relevance and use of the DTVE programme content, its mode of facilitation, its facilitators, its mode of assessment and the support provided as perceived by stakeholders.
This is one aspect of the DTVE programme. The aspect NOT addressed is how the DTVE programme compares to vocational teacher training programmes offered in the region and internationally. Is the programme in line with current developments and thinking related tothe training of teachers for the TVET sector in the 21st century? DTVE Survey Page 29
This is an important but different aspect. This however, raises thequestion whether the survey actually is providing answers to all the relevant questions. An independent researcher with relevant background in pedagogical training of vocational lecturers might need to look at the DTVE programme from these different angles. This is further elaborated under Recommendations.
DTVE Survey Page 30
6 Data presentation
In this section the data collected are presented.
6.1 Questionnaire for DoE lecturers. (Annex D)The facilitators in the DoE have on average 3.3 years of experiencewith the programme. 33% of the lecturers have facilitated 6 or moreof the 10 modules in the DTVE programme.
6.1.1 Relevance of the content of the DTVEOn a scale from 1 (very irrelevant) to 5 (very relevant) the relevance of each content aspect of the programme has an average rating from 4.3 to 5.0. As key performance indicator was set the value 4. Hence the content of the DTVE programme is considered to be relevant for student-teachers to become competent and efficient facilitators.The average relevance rating for the 10 modules is in the range 4.6to 5.0. Lecturers view the 10 modules as very relevant.The lowest overall rating is scored on the integrated key skills (average score 4.3, closer to the ‘partly relevant’ score of the relevant rating scale.
Diagram 1 illustrates lecturers´ ratings of the relevance of each of the 10 modules and of the incorporated key skills (KS)
DTVE Survey Page 31
Diagram 1: Bar chart illustrating the relevance rating (scale 1 to 5) by DoE lecturers
1.01.52.02.53.03.54.04.55.0
Relevance of the 10 Modules as percieved by DoE Lecturers
n = 12Ra
ting
on
1 to
5 s
cale
rs
The relevance rating of the elements of content of each of the modules, and of integrated key skills is presented in diagram 2 anddiagram 3
Diagram 2: RELEVANCE of module content as perceived by DoE lecturers
DTVE Survey Page 32
1.01.52.02.53.03.54.04.55.0
Content of DN01, DP01, DP02, DF01 and DS01; its RELEVANCE as percieved by DoE Lecturers n = 12
Rating on 1 to 5 scale
DTVE Survey Page 33
Diagram 3: RELEVANCE of module content as perceived by DoE lecturers
1.01.52.02.53.03.54.04.55.0
Content of DA01, DA02, DE01, DE02; DE03 and KS; RELEVANCE as percieved by DoE Lecturers
n = 12Ra
ting
on
1 to
5 S
cale
The lecturers identified in their individual comments 4 content areas that, in their opinion, need to be included and/or strengthened in the programme
Integrating of HIV/AIDS related issues Use of modern technology in facilitation and learning (e-
learning) Underpinning knowledge related to adult learning principles
and psychology of learning Aspects of school management and administration (professional
conduct, academic rules)
6.1.2 The structure of the DTVE programmeLecturers consider the DTVE programme as a very relevant teacher training programme. However, as for the structure of the programme
DTVE Survey Page 34
on several statements the key performance indicator level of 4 (on the 1 to 5 scale) was not attained. The average rating on the 1 to 5 agreement scale (from strongly disagree to strongly agree) are displayed in diagram 4
DTVE Survey Page 35
Diagram 4: Structure of the DTVE programme
1.01.52.02.53.03.54.04.55.0
DoE lecturers perception of the structure of the DTVE programme
n= 12
Rati
ng o
n 1
to 5
Sca
le
Just half of the responding lecturers feel that the programme is well planned. The weakness of the programme reported is time related or support related.
In relation to time the majority of lecturers stated that Time to complete the programme by learners is inadequate Workload for learners and lecturers is too high Time for teaching placement is insufficient
In relation to support the majority of lecturers feel that the support for student teacher
on the programme is inefficient failing the programme (and having to complete in distance
mode) is not effective
DTVE Survey Page 36
The items related to the above all score 3 or below. Time is a major issue in the programme (work overload) and there is need whenreviewing the programme to look for ways to make the programme more‘time’ friendly.
6.1.3 Portfolio AssessmentThe views of the 12 DoE lecturers related to the portfolio assessment mode and process indicate that the lecturer consider theportfolio assessment system to be (average scores 4.1 to 4.8)
the most appropriate for OBE encouraging self directed learning and reflective practice motivating valid fair in demonstrating the progress towards the achievement of
theLOs transparent to student-teachers
Diagram 5 illustrates the agreement rating on the statements in thequestionnaire on the 1 to 5 agreement scale.
DTVE Survey Page 37
Diagram 5: Portfolio assessment mode and process as perceived byDoE lecturers
3.01 Appropriate
3.02 Evidence for all LOs
3.03 Self directed Learning
3.04 Demonstrates progress towards Los
3.05 Encourages reflection
3.06 Monitoring tool
3.07 Valid
3.08 Fair
3.09 Motivating
3.10 Reliable
3.11 Ensures student Authenticity
3.12 Transparent
3.13 Encourages critical thinking
3.14 Not extra time consuming
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
Portfolio Assessment evaluated by DoE lecturers n = 12
Rati
ng o
n 1
ro 5
Sca
le
The majority consider the portfolio assessment mode more time consuming than other more traditional ways of assessment of learning. About one third of the lecturers doubt whether the assessment is facilitator independent and can ensure authentic of the work produced by learners.
The above responses are amplified in the responses to the open questions in this section of the questionnaire. The motivating aspect, quality assurance (IV/ EV) process and the learner centred nature of portfolio assessment are mentioned as the strength of this form of assessment.
DTVE Survey Page 38
As weaknesses are mentioned that portfolio assessment is time consuming, brings in issues related to authenticity of the documents placed in the portfolio (plagiarism) by the student-teachers, and for it to function w needs lecturers very familiar with OBE and its assessment.
To combat the weaknesses it is suggested that more, well trained teacher trainer, familiar with OBE should be employed and staff development workshops should be facilitated for new staff not familiar with OBE portfolio assessment.
6.2 Questionnaire for former DTVE student-teachers (Annex C)104 former DTVE student-teachers returned the questionnaire which was made available to 154 (80%) of the DTVE former student that could be traced from 174. The questionnaire was lengthy and as a result most of the questionnaires returned missed responses to someof the questions. The data as collected are summarised in annex C .
6.2.1 Relevance of the content of the DTVE and its use by DTVE graduates.
The content of the DTVE programme was rated by respondents on its relevance and its use in the work situation. As one might expect the ”USE” ratings are all lower than the ”RELEVANCE” ratings. The content of the DTVE programme is considered by DTVE graduates as (highly ) relevant all content being rated above the performance indicator (4) set. The relevance rates are in the range 4.2 – 5.0.The use frequencies were rated on a nominal scale from never used (1) to very often (5) and fall in the range from 2.5 to 4.8. Diagram 6, 7 and 8 display relevance and use ratings of content
DTVE Survey Page 39
Diagram 6: Relevance and use of modules compared.
1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.01.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
5.0
DN01
DP01
DP02
DF01DS01
DA01
DA02DE01
DE02
DE03
KS
1. Content, its RELEVANCE and FREQUENCY of USE as percieved by former DTVE students n = 105
Relevance rating
Rating frequency o
f use
Diagram 6 clearly illustrates the lower rating on use than on relevance of the content of the 10 modules and the in-cooperated keys kills.
The DTVE graduates ratings on relevance and use of content was analysed across the following three categorisations of the population
gender: male or female
DTVE Survey Page 40
background: in service (employed in the TVET sector and send for teacher training) or pre service (mainly following completion of diploma course in a vocational area but without work experience in the TVET system)
mode of studying: in full-time face to face mode or in block release mode
Average ratings for each group in each category were computed in Excel and a t-test to test for significant difference at the 95% confidence level was carried out (Annex H). No significance differences were found. The expressed views and given ratings on aspects of the DTVE programme are independent of gender, mode the programme was taken by the student-teacher or whether the student teacher was in service or pre service.
Diagram 7: Modules content relevance and use as perceived by DTVEgraduates
DTVE Survey Page 41
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
5.0Content of DN01, DP01, DP02, DF01 and DS01;
RELEVANCE and FREQUENCY of USE as percieved by former DTVE students n = 105
Relevance Frequency of Use
Rating on 1 to 5 Scale
DTVE Survey Page 42
Diagram 8: Modules content relevance and use as perceived by DTVEgraduates
1.01.52.02.53.03.54.04.55.0
Content of DA01, DA02, DE01, DE02, DE03 and KS; RELEVANCE and FREQUENCY of USE as percieved by
former DTVE students n = 105
Relevance
Rating on 1 to 5 Scale
The USE of following content was rated 3 or below use of manipulatives in learning sessions use of PowerPoint presentations keeping of personal developmental log action research
The low use of PowerPoint presentations is mainly due to lack of the appropriate technology in the TVET institutions, as reported during interviews.
DTVE Survey Page 43
Content that was mentioned as to be included or strengthened can beplace in the following categories
Underpinning theory / knowledge Curriculum development Psychology (adult educational) Learning theories Botswana’s educational laws and policies
Key skills Stress management Time management (2) Data analysis (2) Presentation skills ICT
o Software use such as PowerPoint, Excel (6)o Internet use and search (3)o Video productiono Introducing and training of vocational area
specific software (e.g. AutoCad)Management and administration in education
Principles of educational administration and management
Guidance and counselling School resource management
Use of modern technology in education E-learning Video conferencing E-assessment
BTEP phase 1 - 3 Full coverage (and recognition by DTVET) of BTEP phase training
Three of the above areas, underpinning knowledge, use of modern technology and management/administration in education, were also mentioned by the DoE lecturers
DTVE Survey Page 44
6.2.2 The structure of the DTVE programmeThe responses to the items in the questionnaire (item 1.63 – 1.78) related to the structure of the DTVE programme indicate that the respondents agree that the programme is enjoyable, interesting, motivating, well planned, of high quality. The average score on theagreement scale on these items was in the range 3.2 to 4.3. Diagram9 illustrated the strength of agreement to the items in the questionnaire.
Diagram 9: Structure of the DTVE programme views of DTVE graduates
1.02.03.04.05.0
Statements on the structure of the DTVE programme rated by Former DTVE Students n= 105
Rati
ng o
n 1
to 5
Sca
le
Two items score below the neutral point of 3. Both are time related. Workload is seen as not acceptable and time to complete LOs as insufficient. In the general comments (question 1.79) this
DTVE Survey Page 45
is amplified. None of the cohorts completed in the 18 months scheduled and a number of months were added to each course.
In the general comments, remarks related to the structure of the programme restate in many different forms the two low rated statements
The workload is too heavy and Time is insufficient
it can argue that both statements express the same. The time is insufficient to
Fully benefit from TP as TP is too much evidence collection focussed instead of developing classroom management and facilitation skills in a range of situations
To ‘learn’, the focus is on evidence collections and document production with insufficient time to ‘digest’ the underpinningtheory. This results in copying / plagiarism / ‘buying’ of evidence from other groups and/or cohorts
One suggestion forwarded was to make all the learning resources foreach module available online (e-learning) so student-teachers can work at own pace.
6.2.3 Mode of facilitation used in the DTVE programme.
The items 2.01 to 2.17 requested the former student teachers to give their opinion on the facilitation mode used. The DTVE programme is designed to do what it preaches: using learner centred, blended approaches to supporting student-teachers to acquire knowledge, skills and attitudes. Items 2.01 to 2.11 ask learners to rate effectiveness of various methods used and to rate the frequency these methods are used.Diagram 10 shows a bar chart displaying the average ratings on effectiveness and frequency of use.
Diagram 10: Facilitation modes used in the DTVE programme rating of effectiveness and frequency of use
DTVE Survey Page 46
2.01 lecture
2.02 whole class discus...
2.03 independent learning
2.04 role play
2.05 web based learning
2.06 video session
2.07 demonstration
2.08 group work & present...
2.09 PowerPoint session
2.1 cooperative learning
2.11 experiential lear...
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
5.0Effectiveness and frequency of use ratings of faciltation mode in the DTVE programme n = 105
Effectiveness rate
Rati
ng on 1
to 5 Scale
The methods mentioned are all considered to be (very) effective with ratings in 4.1 to 4.6 range. The uses of the various methods range from 2.8 to 4.2. Least used (rate 2.8) are video based sessions. As the method used will depend on the content it is not surprising that certain methods are used less frequent than others.Average ratings across gender, programme mode, and in/pre service entry were checked for significant differences using t-test. No significant differences at the 95% confidence level were found.Respondents prefer mainly co-operative learning approaches and dislike teacher centred, lecure type of facilitation mode.The variety in facilitation mode is found to be fine by 82% of the respondents. The pie chart displays the responses.
DTVE Survey Page 47
Diagram 11: Pie chart illustrating views on variety in facilitation
8%
82%
11%
2.15 The variety in the different Facilitation Modes in the DTVE programme as experienced by
former Students n = 105
Too LittleJust FineToo much
As for the mode of facilitation catering for the preferred learningstyle of the student-teacher, the majority (about 60%) feels that that is true to some extent. The results are in table
Table 6: Frequencies of responses on item 2.16
Mode of facilitation catered for preferred learning style
Frequency Percent
Not at all 2 2%To some extend 61 59%Very well 40 39%
The mode of facilitation used by DoE reflects very well (70%) a constructivist, learner centred approached according to the student-teachers. Diagram 12 illustrates in a pie chart student-teachers views.
DTVE Survey Page 48
Diagram 12: Pie chart displaying student-teachers views onconstructivist,
learner-centred facilitation modes used by DoE lecturers.
3%
27%
70%
2.17 Facilitation Modes used in the DTVE programme reflected a constructivist, learner
centred Approach n = 105
Not at allTo some extentVery well
Views of former DTVE student teachers on variety in facilitation, link between mode of facilitation and own preferred learning style and whether facilitators use a learner centred constructivist approach do not differ significantly across gender, learning mode (FT or BL) or across in/pre-service student teachers.
6.2.4 Quality of facilitation by DoE lecturers.Section 3 of the DTVE graduates questionnaire collected data on theviews of the former students as to the quality of the facilitation they received. ‘Customer’ satisfaction surveys are important for the service provider in order to find out whether or not customers are satisfied. The information obtained can guide well informed improvement plans. In the educational setting the student-teachers are the customers and the lecturers the service providers.
DTVE Survey Page 49
The rating on a scale from very poor (1) to very good (5) are displayed in the bar chart in diagram 13.
Diagram 13 Former DTVE student-teachers views on the quality oftheir facilitators
1.01.52.02.53.03.54.04.55.0 Facilitators as percieved by former DTVE
Studentsn =105
Rati
ng o
n 1
to 5
Sca
le
Student teachers´ average rate on each item is in the adequate to very good range. Student teachers generally express the opinion that their lecturers are doing a professional job. Student teachersare least satisfied with the turn over time of assignments (rated 3.6). Across the categories used in this survey the average ratingsare not significantly different (Annex H).In the open question space student-teachers were positive about thefacilitation of their lecturers. Positive critical observations were clearly (i) referring to isolated cases (ii) aimed to improve
DTVE Survey Page 50
the learning environment and interaction between student-teachers and lecturers. Issues mentioned by more than one student-teacher Give prompt feedback *6 Ensure timely feedback – well before submission deadline *2 Give constructive feedback, not destructive *3 Treat student teachers with respect / as adults *5 Employ qualified lecturers familiar with the DTVE programme / OBE *7
Employ DTVE graduates as SDFs *6 Lecturers need to come to sessions well prepared *4 Lecturers should be familiar with / inducted into the DTVE programme *7
Lecturers should be open to criticism *2 Inconsistency in assessment among lecturers need to be addressed*3
Lecturers should also be specialist in a particular vocational area *4
Address authenticity / plagiarism *2 Act professional, avoid bias, favouritism
6.2.5 DTVE student-teacher perception on portfolio assessmentDTVE is assessed continuously through portfolio building. Particularly for teacher trainin programmes, portfolio assessment is very appropriate, provided it is used effectively and efficiently. The DTVE portfolios should contain the evidence for the learning outcomes and document the process that lead to the final evidence. Student-teachers, were to rate their agreement withstatements related to portfolio assessment. Diagram 14 illustrates the average rating on the portfolio assessment related items
Diagram 14: Bar chart of average agreement ratings on items onportfolio assessment mode nad process as perceived by the former
DTVE student-teachers
DTVE Survey Page 51
1.02.03.04.05.0
Portfolio Assessment mode and process as percieved by
former DTVE udents n =105Ra
ting
on
1 to
5 S
cale
Student teachers were in agreement (score 4 of above) with the statements that portfolio building as used in the DTVE programme ismost appropriate, ensures all learning outcomes are covered, gives responsibility to learners for own learning, enhances reflective practice and critical thinking, is motivating, transparent and effective to monitor own progress. These aspects are mentioned in the open items 4.17 and 4.19 where as strength of the portfolio assessment system were mentioned:
Continuous nature of portfolio assessment, the cycle: submit evidence – receive feedback – implement feedback – resubmit
Portfolio assessment (PA) allows to monitor growth and progress
PA encourages reflective and critical thinking PA places responsibility for learning and evidence collection
with the student teacher PA ensures all LOs are covered
DTVE Survey Page 52
PA process is transparent as the portfolio verification document describes in detail the evidence to be submitted
The below 4 agreement ratings scores are on exactly the same aspects as identified by the DoE lecturers:
Reliability Authenticity Time consuming mode
The three aspects being problematic are described in a variety of ways in item 4.18
Reliability of assessmento Marking is ‘subjective’o Different lecturers use different criteria (You ‘pass’
with lecturer A, but will have to resubmit with lecturer B)
Authenticity of submitted evidenceo Copying from other students (as work will be submitted to
different lecturers, hence copying / plagiarism goes unnoticed in nearly all instances)
o Plagiarism from webo ‘buying’ portfolios from previous cohortso Focus on evidence production / assessment – at the cost
of learning – encourages copying due to time pressure anddeadlines to be met
Time consuming nature of PAo Too much work within a short timeo ‘not achieved’ for minor short comings [could be resolved
using oral evidence as in BTEP]
The expressed views of the DTVE student teachers on portfolio building are independent (at 95% significance level) of gender, whether they are in- or pre-service student teachers and whether they studied in the full time face to face mode or block release mode (See annex H).
DTVE Survey Page 53
6.2.6 Effectiveness of the DoE support system for the DTVE programmeIn all modes of programme delivery the support available and given to learners to achieve the learning outcomes is crucial. One might produce the most engaging, motivating learning materials but without effective and efficient support to learners the materials by itself will not produce the desired outcome i.e. that learner will learn and achieve the set learning outcomes. Within the DTVE programme the student teacher may aspect support and guidance from (i) the module facilitator on academic aspect and evidence production for the module (ii) his/her personal tutor to receive guidance and support in a holistic way. The (weekly) meetings with the personal tutor will discuss not just a single module but look at the overall picture of the programme and set attainable targets on weekly basis. Action planning is a key feature, as is the addressing of (personal) issues that might negatively impact on achieving set goals. (iii) The TP mentor, the experienced lecturer / instructor in the institution where the student teacher is placed for TP. The mentor inducts supports and assists the student teacher throughout the TP period by observing the student-teacher, giving feedback and supporting in evidence collection.
The questionnaire items 5.01 – 5.12 addressed the above issues. Diagram 14 displays in a bar chart the average agreement ratings onthe items related to the availability and receiving of support.
Diagram 15: Bar chart of average agreement ratings on supportrelated issues in the DTVE programme as perceived by former DTVE
students
DTVE Survey Page 54
1.01.52.02.53.03.54.04.55.0
Support systems in place as percieved by former DTVE Students
n = 105
Rati
ng o
n 1
to 5
Sca
le
Average agreement ratings on the item seeking view on the support available and given to the DTVE student teachers falls within the 3.4 – 4.2 range. The lowest average agreement rating (3.4) is on the item relating to a personal guidance/counseling, a system to address personal problems negatively affecting the performance of the student teacher. This is not surprising as the DoE has for longbeen depending on guidance and counselling officers NOT located within the Department. With DoE at FCTVE the current student-teachers can make use of the Guidance and Leaner support system in place within FCTVE.
Overall student teachers perceive the support system available and the support given by their lecturers as adequate for their needs. Among strengths are mentioned (item 5.19):
Facilitators are very supportive throughout the programme *18 Facilitators are committed and readily available for support
*3 Strong support given before and during TP
DTVE Survey Page 55
Close cooperation between student-teachers and facilitators, and constructive feedback ensures effective evidence collection *2
Counselling available when needed (‘if the going was tough’) *2
Personal tutor system effective to overcome academic problems Learning resources accessible and available *6
As weaknesses in the support system student-teachers mentioned:
Facilitators are unskilled/less experienced in OBE *6 Feedback provided
o Not timely *8o Inconsistent across facilitators (biased /reflecting
favouritism of lecturers) *6o Plagiarism / copying goes undetected *2
Insufficient briefing and support for student-teacher placed in ‘distance learning mode’
Supplementation rates of DTVE students are high. Few pass after final submissions of their portfolios. The supplementation rate forthe first cohort was 33%, for the second cohort 10%, while for cohort 3 and 4 the supplementation rate was 100% - no student teacher passed ‘on first attempt’. Those who supplement are provided with extensive feedback on what is to be done in order to meet the evidence requirements; this is part of the support system.Those failing the programme are referred to ‘distance mode’ – they can complete the programme in distance mode. For those having failed and continuing in distance learning mode a support system iscrucial, without it they will not be in a position to successfully complete the programme. Diagram 16 is a bar chart displaying the average agreement rate of DTVE former students that were supplementing and/or referred to the distance learning mode.
DTVE Survey Page 56
Diagram 16: Average agreement ratings on items related to supportduring supplementation and support ro distance learners as
perceived byformer DTVE students
1.01.52.02.53.03.54.04.55.0
Support to students who had to supplement and to those who did not obtain diploma
If supplementedIf no diploma obtained
Rati
ng o
n 1 to
5 S
cale
The average agreement ratings by supplementing DTVE students on thequestionnaire items 5.13 – 5.15 are between 3.5 and 4. This is in the partly agree region. It suggests that the support system duringsupplementation needs to be critically reviewed to make it more effective and efficient.This corresponds to the rating of the DTVE facilitators on the statement “2.17. The programme has efficient support systems in place” with an average agreement rating of 3.0 – half of the responding facilitators (strongly) disagreed with the statement.
DTVE student-teacher that failed the programme and were placed in ‘distance mode’ rated the items related to support in the range 1.8to 2.0. In other words they perceive that there is no effective
DTVE Survey Page 57
operational system in place to support them. 50% of the facilitators concur with that perception (item 2.18 in the lecturers’ questionnaire score average rating of 2.7)
The expressed views of the DTVE student teachers on the DTVE programme support system are independent (at 95% significance level) of gender, whether they are in- or pre-service student teachers and whether they studied in the full time face to face mode or block release mode (Annex H).
6.3 Comparing responses from DoE lecturers with responses of the DTVE student-teachers.
The questionnaire for lecturers and for DTVE graduates had many identical items. This allows the perceptions of the two groups to be compared and tested for significant differences. (Annex H)
6.3.1 DTVE programme contentThe average relevance ratings of content and modules in general by DoE lecturers and DTVE graduates were compared. A t-test was applied at 95% confidence level – no significant difference were found. The ratings of DoE lecturers and of DTVE student-teacher arenot in any way different. Table 7 compares the average relevance rating by DoE lecturers and DTV graduates.
Table 7 Average relevance ratings for content of modules DN01, DP01and DP02 by DoE lecturers and DTVE student-teachers.
DTVEgraduat
es
DoElecturers
1.01 Diagnose Learners´ Needs 4.6 51.02 Determine Learning Style 4.5 4.81.03 Methods for different needs and learning styles 4.7 51.05 Interpret LU specifications 4.6 51.06 Prepare scheme of work 4.8 51.07 Prepare session plans 4.7 51.09 Different activities to meet 4.7 4.6
DTVE Survey Page 58
LOs1.10 Written LM to support learning 4.9 4.91.11 Audio/visual LM to support LOs 4.7 51.12 Visual learning aids to support LOs 4.8 4.81.13 Manipulatives to support Los 4.5 4.31.14 OHT to support Los 4.6 4.51.15 PowerPoint to to support LOs 4.6 4.51.16 Internet/Web based resources to support LOs 4.7 4.6
The differences in ratings are very small and not significant at 95% confidence level (Annex H) The content of the modules is rated as (very) relevant by both student-teachers and DoE lecturers. Diagram 16 in a double bar chart illustrates that ratings of the two groups are extremely close to each other or identical in some instances.
DTVE Survey Page 59
Table 8: Average overall relevance ratings of each module and theintegrated key skills (KS) by DoE lecturers and DTVE student-
teachers.
DTVE graduates
DoE lecturers
1.18 Group discussions in facilitation 4.8 4.81.19 Cooperative learning spproaches 4.6 51.20 Experimental learning approach 4.7 51.21 Individualised learning approach 4.6 4.81.22 Range of motivational techniquesto support LOs 4.7 51.23 Manage conflict situations 4.7 4.71.24 Effective questioning techniques 4.8 4.91.25 Promotion of equal opportunities 4.8 4.51.27 Induction programme 4.8 4.91.28 Support to meet LOs 4.7 4.61.29 Personal support and guidance 4.6 4.51.31 Different formative assessment activities 4.8 51.32 Feedback to support learning 4.9 51.33 Keeping record of learners achievements 4.9 4.91.34 Fair and unbiased assessment 4.8 51.36 Evaluate own facilitation 4.6 4.91.37 Evaluate teaching methods 4.6 4.91.38 Evaluate learning resources 4.6 4.91.40 Being a reflective practitioner 4.2 4.61.41 Keeping personal develoment log 4.0 4.41.43 Evaluate own practice using action plans 4.4 4.51.44 Effective working relationships 4.7 4.51.45 Adhering to high professional standards 4.8 4.51.46 Championing teaching and learning methods 4.7 4.91.47 Enterprise activities with institutions 4.2 4.71.48 Proactivity on own further development 4.7 4.81.50 Undertake action research 4.4 4.9
DTVE Survey Page 60
1.52 Using Word 4.8 4.71.53 Use speadsheet, e.g. graphing 4.8 4.61.54 Use power point 4.8 4.51.55 Use data analysis techniques 4.8 4.61.56 Use Web search 4.7 4.51.57 Use APA referencing 4.5 4.51.58 Use discussing skills (participating) 4.8 4.51.59 Use discussion skills (leading) 4.8 4.41.60 Use presentation skills to audience 4.9 4.7
Note that on the key skills content the average ratings by DoE are ALL less than the average ratings of the student teachers.
The overall relevance rating of each module by DoE lecturers and TVE student-teachers are displayed in table 9.
Table 9: Average overall relevance ratings of each module and theintegrated key skills (KS) by DoE lecturers and DTVE student-
teachers.
DTVE graduates
DoE lecturers
DN01 Assess Learners´ Needs 4.6 4.7DP01 Plan for effective Learning 4.8 5DP02 Prepare Resources to support Learning 4.8 4.9DF01 Facilitate Learning 4.8 4.9DS01 Provide Learners with Support 4.7 4.6DA01 Assess learning 4.7 5DA02 Evaluate learning Sessions 4.6 4.8DE01 Reflect upon Roles of a Teacher 4.4 4.7DE02 Improve own professional Practice 4.7 4.7DE03 Undertake Action Research 4.3 4.9Key Skills 4.8 4.3
DTVE Survey Page 61
The two differences, although not significant, to note are on DE03 and KS. Student-teacher are not strongly convinced about the relevance (and use) of module DE03, the action research module, while lecturers consider it highly relevant. For the integrated keyskills it is the other way around. Student teachers find key skill very relevant and mentioned (see section 5.2.1) that more attentionand support should be given to key skills.
6.3.2 DTVE programme structureIdentical questions in the DoE lecturers and the DTVE graduates questionnaires allow to compare ratings on programme structures. The ratings and the items are tabulated in table 10.
DTVE Survey Page 62
Table 10: Comparing ratings of related to programme structure byDoE lecturers and DTVE graduates
Item
DTVE graduates
DoE lecturers
Enjoy programme 3.9 4.0Programme well planned 3.2 3.5Good sequencing of Units 3.3 4.0Appropriate Content 3.4 4.4Time for Completion adequate 2.6 2.0Workload acceptable 2.2 2.3High Quality programme 4.2 4.3Well prepared for TP 4.1 4.1Integration of TP and college work 4.1 4.4Programme is flexible 3.5 3.1
On most items DoE lecturers give a slightly higher rating. The problem of too heavy workload and the insufficient time given to complete the programme is shared between lecturers and student-teachers.
6.3.3 DTVE portfolio assessment systemBoth DoE lecturers and DTVE student-teachers rated items related tothe portfolio assessment. They are tabulated in table 10 with the average agreement rates. Diagram 20 illustrates the data in the table in a double bar chart. The difference in rating are not significant at 95% confidence level as checked by using a t-test (Annex H).
Table 11 Comparing of average ratings on items related to portfolioassessment by DoE lecturers and DTVE graduates
Portfolio assessment related items
DTVE graduates
DoE lecturers
Most appropriate for OBE 4.3 4.6Ensures evidence for all LOs 4.4 4.5Encourages self directed learning 4.5 4.8Demonstrates progress towards identified LOs 4.3 4.3Encourages reflective practice 4.3 4.1
DTVE Survey Page 63
Provides opportunities to demonstratecompetence 4.3 4.1High validity 4.3 4.4Fair way to document progress 4.5 4.4Motivating 4.4 4.3Reliable method. Lecture independent 3.8 3.5Ensures authenticity of evidence 3.7 3.9Transparent method of assessment 4.1 4.1Encourages critical thinking 4.4 3.3NOT more time consuming than other modes of assessment 3.2 2.5
DoE lecturers and DTVE student-teachers share the perception that using portfolio assessment is more time consuming than other forms of assessment. They share the view that portfolio assessment is most appropriate for the outcome based DTVE programme, ensures all learning outcomes are covered, gives responsibility to learner for own learning, enhances reflective practice and critical thinking, is motivating, transparent and effective to monitor progress.
6.3.4 DTVE programme support systemIn the student-teacher questionnaire a section was focusing on the support system of the DTVE programme. In the DoE lecturer questionnaire only two items (2.17 & 2.18) referred to the support system. The average agreement score on these items is low, 3.0 and 2.7 respectively. Both the support system during the running of theDTVE programme and the support system to support student-teachers that failed (and are moved to the distance learning mode) the programme are perceived as inefficient. The student-teachers share this opinion as outlined in section 6.2.6.
The DTVE programme structure, its content, portfolio assessment system and support system are perceived in the same way by DoE lecturers and student teachers. Any differences in average rating of corresponding items in the two questionnaires are not significant. Strengths and weaknesses are shared ground and hence form a solid basis for implementation of any change in the programme that might be needed. There is no disagreement between DoE lecturers and their former students as to the strong and weak aspect of the DTVE programme.
DTVE Survey Page 64
6.4 Structured focus group interview: management and supervisors ofDTVE graduates
Structured focus group interviews were conducted with management/supervisors of the DTVE graduates with in 6 TCs and 13 groups in the Brigades. A total of 59 respondents were involved 27 in the TCs and 32 in the brigades. The details are in table 12.
Table 12 Colleges and brigades visited and number of respondents inthe focus group interviews with management / supervisors of the
DTVE graduates
Institution: College /Brigade
Management /
supervisorsATTC 4GTC 5JTeC 4MTC 7
PaTeCo 2SPTeCo 5
Total TCs 27Barolong
VTC2
KRDA 4Marapong 3Marobela 2Naledi 6Ngethu 3Okavango 2Ramatea 1Shashe 1Tlokweng 1
Tswelelopele
2
Tutume 5Total
Brigades32
DTVE Survey Page 65
The purpose of these structured focus group interviews (Annex E) with management / supervisors of the DTVE graduates was to find out: How do managers / supervisors of DTVE graduates rate the quality of their facilitation as compared to facilitators without this teacher training background? The summary of the responses of the 19 structured focus group interviews with management/supervisors of former DTVE students is found in Annex H.The most frequent mentioned strengths of the DTVE graduates were:
Competent and confident in learner centred methods Effective use of teaching/learning aids Effective use of a variety of teaching/learning methods Effective planning and preparation of lessons Preparing effective schemes of work Supporting management/Co operative Supporting learners in achieving the learning outcomes Demonstrating professional behaviour/ Good work relationship
with learners Contribute ideas and take initiative in the institution Professional interaction with learners
The responses are based on classroom / workshop observations by management / supervisor taking place at least once every term and the level of participation in staff meetings observed. Management /supervisors in brigades reported a stronger impact of the DTVE graduates on the institution than management / supervisors in the TCs. DTVE graduates in the brigades on completion of the DTVE programme were given more responsibilities, promoted and/or given positions in the management. In 10 of the 13 interviews with brigade management / supervisors it was mentioned that the DTVE graduates had been running workshops for the instructors in the institution varying in length from 1 day to 2 weeks (during term break). This dissemination of knowledge and skills within the institution was NOT mentioned in any of the 6 TCs visited.
In discussion weaknesses and suggestions for improvement of the DTVE programme management and supervisors mentioned issues not directly related to the quality of facilitation of the DTVE
DTVE Survey Page 66
graduates. These will be covered in the next section under concernsand issues raised
6.5 Structured focus group interview: learners taught by DTVE graduates
A structured focus group interview (Annex E) was carried out with learners currently taught by the DTVE graduates working in the TCs or Brigades. The procedure followed is described in section 5.6. Data were collected through interview sessions with 91 learners in 6 TCs and 104 learners in 13 Brigades. The details are in table 13.
Table 13 Colleges and brigades visited and number of learnersparticipating in the focus group interview
Institution: College /
Brigade
Learners
ATTC 10GTC 14JTeC 14MTC 17
PaTeCo 15SPTeCo 21
Total TC’s 91Barolong
VTC15
Ghanzi 6KRDA 8
Marapong 8Marobela 4Naledi 5Ngethu 6Okavango 8Ramatea 5Shashe 8Tlokweng 6
Tswelelopele
17
Tutume 8
DTVE Survey Page 67
TotalBrigades
104
The purpose of the interviews was to answer the research question: How do learners of graduates rate the quality of the facilitation by DTVE graduates? Learners took the opportunity provided to raise various issues related to their education and their educational environment. Some of these issues, reported in the section “Concerns raised”, did not immediately relate to the focus question: What is the quality of the facilitation of the DTVE graduates? A report was produced for each of the 19 focus interviews and these were summarised (Annex J). The data relating to the perceived quality of facilitation by the DTVE graduates by the learners is summarised here.
At the surface level the facilitation of DTVE graduates does not differ much from the facilitation of lecturers / instructors without DTVE. All lecturers in TCs and brigades facilitate, assess and support their learners. However by looking more carefully the learners mentioned differences. Learners in the brigades pointed out two areas in which the DTVE graduates differ from the non DTVE trained lecturers / instructors
Differences in practice. DTVE graduateso Use more variety in teaching methods. They ensure the
teaching method used is aligned to the learning outcome to be covered
o Predominantly use learner centred approaches. Cooperativelearning methods, especially small group work, are frequently used. Non teacher trained lectures / instructors tend to use teacher centred lecture methods.
o Plan each session carefullyo Scheme the whole course. In contrast non teacher trained
lecturers / instructors are poor in scheming or do not scheme. This leads to situations that work is unequally divided over the term, with extreme pressure towards the end or even having to extend the official set length of the course.
o Demonstrate a professional approach to their work Provide prompt and constructive feedback
DTVE Survey Page 68
Set very regular formative tests Treat all learner equal
Differences in attitude. DTVE graduateso Demonstrate confidence. “They seem to know what they are
doing”o Are less authoritative / more flexible in taking
learners’ suggestion on boardo Are very supportive in assisting learners to achieveo Are approachable in and outside sessions
DTVE graduates in the brigades were singled out as good role modelsfor other lecturers / instructors in the great majority of cases. The differences mentioned by learners are too a large extend similar to those reported in the previous section as the strengths observed by management / supervisors.
Learners in the TCs saw little or no difference in the practice of the DTVE graduates and their other lecturers. This is understandable as most staff in the TCs are experienced and a number of them have some teacher training background. In the brigades qualifications of instructors is lower and majority has not gone through any form of teacher training. The learners in the TCs did mention noticeable difference in attitude, similar to the once mentioned by learners from the brigades.
Learners in both brigades and TCs, although emphasising the positive aspects of their DTVE trained facilitators, did express that in their view ALL lecturers / instructors in their institution, including the DTVE graduates, did not approach them asadult learners. Learners mentioned numerous situations in which they felt that they were treated without sufficient respect, felt belittled, insulted. “They all treat us like kids”
6.6 Completing the DTVE programmeThis section presents data to answer the research questions
a. What is the completion rate / pass rate?b. What are reasons for dropping out from the programme beforecompletion?c. Where are graduates employed after completion?
DTVE Survey Page 69
d. What is the time gap between completion and employment?
Data to calculate withdrawal, completion, pass and fail rates of student-teacher in the DTVE programme were collected from the DoE. Different documents give slightly different data for the 174 student teacher that went through (part of) the programme. Table 14summarises the data as available to the TA tracer group and mainly based on the compiled student list (Annex K).
Table 14 Data on withdrawal, supplementation, pass and fail DTVEcohorts 1 to 4.
Cohort
Preservice
Inservice
Withdrawn fromcourse
Supplement ing
Passed Failed
C1 12 3 0 5 (33%) 9 (60%) 6(40%)C2 27 18 9 (20%) 4 (11%) 32
(71%)4 (9%)
C3 FT 28 23 3 (6%) 48 (100%) 43(84%)
5 (10%)
C3Block
- 15 1 (7%) 14 (100%) 5 (33%) 9 (60%)
C4 33 17 10 (20%) 40 (100%) 33(66%)
7 (14%)
Withdrawal rates for cohort 2 and 4 are 20% i.e. 1 out of each 5 student teacher that started the programme withdrew from the programme before completing. Reasons for withdrawing from the course or not completing were given by 15 respondents and can be categorized as in the table 15.
Table 15: Reasons for withdrawing from DTVE programme
Category Reason as stated in responseMedical (13%) Due to illness
Medical reasonsTaking up employment opportunity (20%)
I was appointed at Department of Supplies
I found an employment opportunity and so I went for it
Offered employment
DTVE Survey Page 70
Course related reasons (33%)
The programme was taking longer than the expected 12 months and was caught up in a financial crisis
Had not finished all the modules when the time elapsed(f=3)
There were many reasons, e.g. Files not being marked in time, Teaching Placement wrongly placed and facilitators personalizing things.
Personal reasons(33%)
I had personal / family / business issues to take care of(f=5)
Supplementation rate All student-teachers in cohort 3 and 4 had to supplement i.e. nobody passed the programme on 1st submission of theportfolios. No data are available to explain the 100% supplementation rate. It is clearly related to the way the programme is structured i.e. the workload and time pressure mentioned by both DTVE student-teachers and DoE lecturers.
Pass rates are calculated as a percent of those starting the course. Pass rate for the block release group is very low, only 1 out of every three student teachers passed in this mode. If one calculates the pass rate as a percent of those completing the course (leaving out the withdrawals) the percent pass / fail are as in table 16.
Table 16. Pass / fail rates as percent of completers
Cohort
Passed Failed
C1 9 (60%) 6(40%)C2 32 (89%) 4 (11%)
C3 FT 43 (90%) 5 (10%)C3
Block5 (36%) 9 (64%)
C4 33(82.5%)
7(17.5%)
Employment data for DTVE former student teachers are incomplete – data on the 22 non traceable previous students are missing.
DTVE Survey Page 71
Assuming that the 22 not traced students are employed (if in the TVET system they would have been traced) then 8% of the former DTVEstudents are unemployed (all except 1, from the last cohort finishing in July 2008). Employed in the TVET sector (TCs or brigades) are 67% of the 174 DTVE student-teachers. Hence about 25%is employed outside the TVET system (some will be self employed or studying).
17 (16%) of the respondents did not find employment immediately after completion. Reported waiting times vary from a few months to a year.
Reasons stated for not being immediately employed are: Still waiting for DTVET to post me “They said I am a foreigner so I can only be employed when
DTVET advertises, then I can apply just like any other foreigner”
Have not completed all modules (f=2) I completed my studies in 2006 and had to wait for DTVET to
employ me. I got employment in February 2007 with the Department. I don’t know why I had to wait so long to get employment looking at the fact that I was a qualified lecturer
As a pre-service trainee I was not automatically placed by DTVET
I applied at various Institutions and did not get an offer(f=2)
It took time for the Ministry/Department to allocate me to a college(f=5)
I had to wait for 6 months reason being that DVET was still looking for posts
No idea why DTVET did not employ me Took 3 months to find Temporary Full Time employment in a TC
It is made clear to student-teachers entering the programme as pre service candidates that employment on completion is not guaranteed.Yet with the shortage of trained vocational teachers, one would expect that all successful graduates from the DTVE programme could be immediately absorbed into the TCs. It needs further investigation to find out why successful graduates from the DTVE programme are not immediately employed.
DTVE Survey Page 72
6.7 Concerns raised. Inevitably, there were issues raised during the data collection that were outside the scope of the study. Listed here are those thought to be important for a future review of the programme, or a wider review of vocational teacher training.
DTVE graduatesRecognition of DTVE1. Graduates working in the TCs expressed disappointment that DTVETdoes not recognise the DTVE as worthy of a salary increment. They are at same scale point as those having a vocational diploma but with no teacher training qualification. This could act as a deterrent to some, since there is no financial incentive to attend or achieve.2. Comments were made regarding some college managers, not fully appreciating the value of DTVE and therefore reluctant to permit staff to enrol for the course. 3. Articulation routes are apparently not well defined. The lack ofan internationally recognised qualification caused difficulty for some students attempting to enrol on Bed programmes abroad. This could be addressed by seeking formal arrangements through memorandums of Understanding between FCTVE and other institutionsBTEP training1. DTVE graduates are required to go through BTEP phase 1 / 2 /3 training when placed in colleges. The content of these training workshops is covered by the DTVE programme and was an unnecessary duplication. The DTVE graduates complained that they often knew more about BTEP, than those delivering the phase training!
DTVE facilitators at DoE1. It was mentioned that there has been ‘an inflow of secondary school teachers’ as facilitators of the outcome based DTVE programme. Graduates felt that the background of these lecturers made them unsuitable to deliver the outcome based DTVE programme without themselves first being thoroughly trained on OBE in generaland the DTVE programme in particular and familiarising themselves with vocational training (work attachment in industry was suggestedand/or attachment for at least one term as lecturer in a vocationalarea in a TC i.e. facilitating BTEP.
DTVE Survey Page 73
Staff development1. The graduates expressed concern that there was no programme for continuous professional development upon completion of the DTVE. There would be a demand for: training in project supervision portfolio building (several BTEP units require learners to
build portfolios) the use of technology (e-learning and eAssessment).
Gap between competencies achieved and what can be implemented1. The lack of resources in some of the TCs, and in most of the Brigades was mentioned by graduates as a major problem. The lack ofdata projectors, and network connectivity in the classroom prevented the use of PowerPoint presentations and internet resources in the classroom.
Follow up of ‘non-completers’1. There are a number of former DTVE students that did not completeall the modules. They reported that they did not receive clear information as to how they could continue beyond the normal end of programme, to complete them. Some reported that attempting to clarify this with DoE had not been successful.
Feedback on outcomesMany respondents made the comment that after having giving their time and input to the tracer study they will never receive any feedback or information on the outcomes.
The Teaching Placement component of the DTVE1. It appears that students on TP are reluctant or unwilling to take responsibility for a group of learners on a timetabled basis. They want access to a class group only while being observed for external assessment.2. The consequence of the above: TCs are reluctant to employ DTVE graduates as they have not really seen the graduates ‘performing’ within the college.2. TP supervisors suggested student-teachers to (i) follow experienced teacher for about 1 week (ii) take full responsibility for a group of learners for the next weeks. This allows feedback from supervisors.
DTVE Survey Page 74
3. The TCs and brigades are not sufficiently informed beforehand byDoE about the upcoming TP. When DoE lecturers are at the TCs and Brigades they don’t consult or interact with the lecturers/instructors of that institution. 4. External supervision (DoE at FCTVE) could be greatly reduced by training the workplace based mentors and, after training, allowing these to assess student on TP. Currently TP supervisors / mentors feel sidelined: their views are not considered nor asked for.
Communication DoE with TCs and brigades1. Management at both TCs and brigades expressed that “we do not know much about the content of the DTVE programme”. A need was expressed for workshops/ briefing meetings by DoE for management / HoDs on the programme.
Staff development (SD)1. Management at both TCs and at brigades identified the need for continuous staff development to upgrade staff and management. The question was raised in some of the brigades “What happened to the BRIDEC short training courses?” These were felt to have been very useful for instructors to improve their teaching skills. As these courses were offered (phase 1 -3) during term breaks they fitted well in the programmes of the Brigades. Similar short courses were suggested for staff development.2. SD activities related to using of modern technology in teaching,understanding blended/flexible learning approaches, setting formative assessments, classroom management skills – were mentionedas some areas a staff development unit in the DoE should provide.3. Teachers should also be upgraded in vocational areas. Currently some of the graduates cannot teach all units in their vocational area as they lack the content knowledge for certain units. During the teacher training attention should be paid to the vocational content knowledge to ensure the graduate feels confident with all units at the foundation and certificate BTE programme level.
Learners taught by DTVE graduatesLearners are concerned about
a. the BTEP
DTVE Survey Page 75
1. The assessment mode is not challenging, same assessment instrument(s) used repeatedly.2. The long time it takes to receive the BTEP certificate after completion. Learners in TCs stated that learners– since the start of the programme – had not received a Certificate (going back to 2004 / 2005).3. Employers do not value the BTEP as it shows A only (achieved, misinterpreted as a grade A).4. Learners prefer a system of assessment/reporting that does distinguish between learner levels of achievement, as they feel this could enhance employment opportunities.5. Lack of understanding of the BTEP by senior college management.6. Lack of understanding of BTEP by employers – who prefer the graded NCC.7. Poor planning of some of the programmes – a programme can be extended by some months because some LOs are not covered or they ‘forgot’ to offer an elective – leading to extension of the programme.8. Key skill departments in TCs received much criticism from learners. They felt the departments are poorly organised, lecturersauthoritative and lacking knowledge. It was suggested by some learners that the lecturers in their vocational department ‘could do a better job’ and cover the key skills as integral part of otherunits.
b. Access to resources1. Opening hours, access to computers and library was felt to be insufficient.2. More computers and fast internet access was felt to be needed inconnecting with project report research and writing3. Access to computers frequently only for learners in ICT programmes, access for other vocational areas was considered to be insufficient in relation to work they had to do on the computers (e.g. project work and reports)
c. Resources1. Brigade learners mentioned lack of resources: library books, computer (if present – outdated hard and software), data projector2. In some vocational areas it was said that the number of teachingstaff was insufficient resulting in the few staff available being
DTVE Survey Page 76
overloaded and having insufficient time to support learners individually.
d. Support1. Non ICT related vocational areas felt that they were not supported enough in ICT during the very limited time (at times 1 or2 hours a week) they had access to computers. Nobody was around togive them support and they felt belittled by ICT lecturers who hardly tolerated them in “their” lab.
e. The learners´ views1. Learners in TCs and brigades are concerned about the weak vocational knowledge of many lecturers / instructors. It was statedthat it is not uncommon that instructors / lecturers with an NCC are teaching NCC. Learners expressed that there is a need for vocational upgrading of lecturers / instructors.2. Due to lack of vocational knowledge instructors/lecturers tend to copy from books but fail to explain what they copied.3. Learners in TCs observed that the content presented frequently lacked relationship to the real work situations. In their opinion this was due to the lack of industrial experience of the great majority of lecturers. They, the lecturers, have a theory background but lack experience in industry.4. Learners in TCs observed that in their opinion there was no difference in approach used by lecturers when delivery foundation, certificate or advanced certificate BTEP. In their view the different levels need different approaches and ways of interaction with the learners.
DTVE Survey Page 77
7 Conclusions and RecommendationsThe recommendations are based upon the combination of the data collected from the all the target groups:
7.1 Curriculum Both DoE lecturers and graduates are satisfied with the curriculum contentof the modules. The DoE lecturers are marginally more satisfied with the module content. Conversely, the graduates´ satisfaction rating of the integrated Key Skills was higher than the lecturers.
Some comments from the graduates, the DoE lecturers and management supervisors suggest that they would have liked additional input on the following topics:
psychology adult learning theories the context of vocation education in Botswana educational policy and management integrating of HIV/AIDS related issues use of modern technology in facilitation and learning (e-learning)
The content of the DTVE has not changed significantly since 2001 during which time there have been major changes in the vocational sector, with more to come over the next few years. While there is a general satisfaction with the content of the DTVE, from the surveyed stakeholders,a wider stakeholder review e.g. including TEC, BOTA and private colleges, could provide useful input to a review of the design and content of the programme. Equally, comparison with similar programmes from other countries, both regionally and further afield, could be considered.
Integrated Key Skills (KS)The DTVE programme was designed to include key skills at BTEP level4. There are no stand alone modules; all of the desired competencies are included in the other individual modules. This is
DTVE Survey Page 78
Recommendation 1That DTVET initiate a review of the DTVE curriculum by external consultants and with the involvement of a wider set of stakeholders. This should include comparisons with similar
in line with current international trends ensuring that students develop and improve key skills throughout all levels study. The concern is however, that while the criteria for achievement of the key skill is embedded, how is the skill to be evidenced, how is it to be taught and by whom? The average rating of the relevance of key skills by DoE lecturers (4.3) - lower than the average rating (4.8) of the graduates. This is not statistically significant in itself. However when combined with comments from the graduates concerning the strengthening of key skills in the programme (see section 6.2), this may indicate that the teaching practices of DoE lecturers should be reviewed for effectiveness as far as the key skills component is concerned. Very few of the current DoE staff were involved in the original design of the programme, and some of the original aims and objectives may need to be re-emphasised, especially in view of the later recommendation concerning new staffinduction. Further, very few of the current DoE lecturers have previous experience with an outcomes based programme and the integration of Key Skills.
Facilitation/FacilitatorsGenerally speaking the DTVE graduates are satisfied with the mode of facilitation used to deliver the DTVE. They are also positive about the general facilitation of the programme by the DoE lecturers who are considered professional in their approach and demonstrate good quality in their work. However, an observation made by some graduates indicated that when being taught by staff new to DoE, it was obvious that they had not been sufficiently wellinducted to the programme facilitation and assessment procedures.
DTVE Survey Page 79
Recommendation 2It is recommended that FCTVE management initiate an internal review of the practices being adopted by staff to teach the embedded key skills components in the taught modules. The review should consider the effectiveness of the practices and consider ways to enhance and improve student opportunities thatenable them to practice their key skill competencies to the required level. The review should further take into consideration the diverse background of students by
This was confirmed by informal comments by DoE staff, who recently joined the department. It is good practice to ensure that new staffare properly inducted to both the institution and the specific department in which they will work. It is usually carried out by a group of experienced practitioners, each contributing a particular area of expertise to the induction programme. It should involve appropriate verifiable activities.
Some comments indicated that the real-world business and industry knowledge of some lecturers could be improved. As is the case for vocational lecturers, short industrial placement is an important and appropriate way to keep up-to-date with modern practices and trends and could be considered by DoE management and staff alike.
The Programme Structure/Portfolio AssessmentThere is general agreement that the structure and sequencing of theprogramme is effective. The portfolio assessment is considered appropriate, fair and valid. However, concerns were raised by bothDoE teachers and the graduates.
The overall workload is too heavy for the time available Insufficient time available to develop and practice new
skills Issues concerning plagiarism Assessment reliability Gathering evidence is time-consuming
DTVE Survey Page 80
Recommendation 3That the FCTVE management initiate an internal review of the continuous professional development of DoE staff. This should include vocational placements and the induction processes for new teaching staff. The following should be considered:
Include an initial training needs analysis for new teaching staff in relation to the content, facilitation and assessment of the DTVE programme
Ensure that appropriate induction and continuous professional development activities are created to meet individual staff needs. The use of ICT could usefully be
A heavy workload can have the effect of reducing the quality of facilitation e.g. delays in providing feedback, the quality of feedback. To save time, students may be tempted to copy evidence generated by other students (plagiarism). One frequently suggestedway to address this issue was to increase the number of staff in the DoE. This might address the workload of the DoE staff, but is not guaranteed to resolve the issue for the students. It might be expected that the curriculum review recommended earlier would consider this issue in some depth; however, there may be some useful efficiencies that could be considered by the department.
integrating related content from different modules so that it is taught once and the same evidence used across different module portfolios
investigate other possibilities for cross referencing of evidence across module portfolios to reduce the amount of evidence which needs to be gathered
review timetabled staff allocations e.g. a single lecturer teaching the same module to all student groups in a single cohort. This would reduce preparation time and reduce the timerequired for internal verification (since the overall number of portfolios to be internally verified would be reduced). It could also be expected to improve the reliability of assessment.
use more flexible / blended learning approaches to reduce face-to-face contact time
Consider stricter use of deadlines and the use of student progress files
introduce Accreditation of Prior Learning (APL) to recognise the prior experience and knowledge of students, many of whom already have extensive teaching experience. This could lead to exemption from certain modules and/or learning outcomes.
investigate how modern technology can be used to make more effective and efficient use of the time available for the programme e.g. electronic submission and tracking of evidence
The issue of plagiarism is a growing concern internationally. Student use of ICT makes the copying and sourcing of others work, much easier than before. It is obviously a concern that individual
DTVE Survey Page 81
students obtain the diploma by their own efforts and study and not through some form of academic deceit. However, the issue is arguably more serious from an institutional point of view. Educational institutions have a duty of due diligence to ensure that the status or perceived value of its qualifications remains high. A qualification which may be obtained simply by purchasing a portfolio from a previous student, is of little value. Any institution which ignores the trends is failing in its duty.
This is an urgent issue which needs to be given a high priority by the DoE. Effective approaches could be:
Consider the use of computer software, or subscription to online plagiarism detection services
Regularly change the nature or form of evidence to be gatheredacross student cohorts and groups
Student induction activities to emphasise the nature of plagiarism as academic fraud and clearly outline the measures taken by the department to combat it, and the penalties attached
FCTVE Plagarism Policy made available to students during induction
Learning support to studentsAn important component of an educational training programme is the learning support system available to the learners. This becomes
DTVE Survey Page 82
Recommendation 4While awaiting the outcome of Recommendation 1, the DoE should internally review its assessment practices, timetabling and theuse of modern technology to seek efficiencies which reduce the work load of staff and students.
Recommendation 5That FCTVE management initiate an investigation to determine the extent of plagiarism on the DTVE programme and to propose effective methods and procedures which may be applied to combatit.
even more important, for the new flexible and blended learning approaches expected to be developed at FCTVE using e-learning and distance learning. The support available and given to student teachers during the DTVE programme is rated by student-teachers as adequate in meeting their needs. However, both DoE lecturers and DTVE graduates feel that it is inefficient. As might be expected, amongst those who needed support beyond the normal end of the programme, the satisfaction rating of the support system is very low (see section 6.2).
A good departmental learner support system will generally include:
An extensive programme of induction Assigning a named support/programme tutor First line pastoral care Appeals and other support for student advocacy Regular measure of student satisfaction across a range of
indicators Regular in-course progress guidance using progress files Exit guidance at normal end of programme Post-course guidance when required Published post-course reviews and performance indicators
The following table is copied from section 6.6
Cohort
Preservice
Inservice
Withdrawn fromcourse
Supplement ing
Passed Failed
C1 12 3 0 5 (33%) 9 (60%) 6(40%)C2 27 18 9 (20%) 4 (11%) 32
(71%)4 (9%)
C3 FT 28 23 3 (6%) 48 (100%) 43(84%)
5 (10%)
C3Block
- 15 1 (7%) 14 (100%) 5 (33%) 9 (60%)
C4 33 17 10 (20%) 40 (100%) 33(66%)
7 (14%)
Learning support is now internationally recognised to be a holisticstrategy aimed at ensuring a quality experience for learners in support of their optimal achievement. The cost to government of
DTVE Survey Page 83
providing financial support to learners, maintaining and staffing institutions is high. Retention and pass rates are an important keyperformance indicator which helps to assess the cost effectiveness of educational policy and government spending. Institutions need some means by which they can be assessed for cost-effectiveness andperformance against national benchmarks. Quality frameworks and measures of performance are readily available for comparison from other countries and equivalent teacher-training programmes.
Teaching Placement (TP)TP is an integrated part of the DTVE programme. The students go for3 months on TP during their study. In-service student teachers return to their institutions for TP while for the pre service student teachers a place is found in a TC or a brigade that offers programmes in the vocational area of specialization of the DTVE student. During TP the student-teachers collect evidence for various portfolios. Some of the evidence is obtained through observation – DoE lecturers use observation checklists during classroom sessions.
Some concerns about TP were raised during interviews with the management/supervisors group and relate mainly to the communication, coordination and effectiveness of TP. Mentioned were:
No regular consultation or meetings with institutions to coordinate TP, leading sometimes to inconvenience and inappropriate timing.
Student teachers concentrate on evidence collection and consider the placement period too short to effectively practice their facilitation skills
DTVE Survey Page 84
Recommendation 6It is recommended that DoE initiate a review of the DTVE learnersupport system currently in place. Best practice from similar regional and international institutions should be consulted. It would also be appropriate to maintain records of student
Student teachers should fully participate in the institution during TP, taking over the full responsibilities of a lecturer/ instructor under close supervision of the mentor
Limited or no resources for student teachers to use, but needed for evidence collection e.g. use of data projector, OHTetc.
With training, institution based mentors could be used for some observational assessment activities thus reducing the workload of the DoE lecturers and reducing costs overall.
With the relocation of the DoE to FCTVE new opportunities for student-teachers to collect evidence at the college itself e.g. establishing learners´ needs, giving academic support to learning, running a PowerPoint session with a group of on-campus learners could all be done on campus. Each student teacher could be assignedto a lecturer in the vocational Departments. Opportunities for the collection of portfolio evidence could be identified e.g. teaching single topics to groups of learners. This would create time for ‘full-time facilitation’ during TP at other institutions.
DTVE Survey Page 85
Recommendation 7It is recommended that the planning, coordination and arrangements for TP are reviewed, taking into consideration that the DTVE is now delivered within a technical college with a wide range of vocational departments. This could permit regular interaction with the vocational departments, its lecturers and learners. The review should consider the feasibility of:
Involving experienced instructors and lecturers, after training in the assessment of the student-teachers
8 Literature Reference
8.1 Exit Survey – DTVE Diploma in Technical and Vocational Education Programme
The survey was carried out in January 2008 by the TA Team with a group of 8 DTVE block release students shortly before their completion of the programme. Block release DTVE programme mode implied that the student-teachers would be full time on campus for the first two trimesters (July – December 2005) and after that alternate between working as instructors in their Brigade for one trimester (started first trimester 2006) and being full time student-teachers on campus for the following semester. As the DTVE programme is a 18 month programme for full time student-teacher, this made the programme for the block release group to last 3 years. The purpose of the survey was to gain understanding of the learning experiences of the participants in the block-release DTVE programme
The main findings were The content of the programme was seen as relevant and useful
(applicable) to the work as an instructor in a brigade. The portfolio assessment mode was seen as an appropriate way
to assess the learning outcomes Great dissatisfaction with the quality of the facilitators of
the programme Support perceived to be of good standard during the initial
block deteriorated later in the course (progress grids, personal tutor system cancelled; great delays – up to two years – in feedback)
Lack of communication between DoE and brigade management on the nature, content and mode assessment of the DTVE programme
For the full report see Annex L
The findings of the exit survey are in line with and support the following findings in this report
The content of the DTVE programme is relevant and applicable in the work situation
DTVE Survey Page 86
Portfolio assessment is an appropriate assessment mode for theDTVE programme
Weaknesses in the portfolio assessment system (time consuming,authenticity, reliability of assessment, turn over time and nature of feedback) need to be addressed
The need for strengthening the underpinning theories and philosophies
. The support available and received from DoE lecturers is of
good quality. Some weaknesses in the support system need to be addressed
e.g. support to student-teachers placed in the distance learning mode
8.2 BOTA surveyBota carried out a tracer study for vocational training graduates (phase 1) in 2005. The main aim of the survey out this was to track down vocational training graduates in order to identify and address mismatches between former learner’s jobs and the training received.The main conclusion from the tracer study is that the vocational training system does not produce readily employable people mainly because of the absence of practical experience in the training programme.
This conclusion is identical to concerns expressed by learners, DTVEgraduates and management. This relates to confusion over the purpose ofthe Foundation and Certificate programmes: are these programme an exit orbridging qualification. With the Government Grant Loan Scheme nowapplicable to learners in the TVET system for certificate – advancedcertificate and diploma level, the three perceived as an entity ,it can bededuced that exit into industry / self employment should be at diplomalevel. However with no BTEP advanced certificate and/or diploma holdersproduced as yet it is still to be established whether BTEP effectivelyprepares learners for the world of work i.e. whether or not they are(self) employable. The delays in offering the BTEP Advanced Certificateand Diploma levels contributed to negative perceptions of BTEP amonglearners, management and DTVET graduates. The stronger work experiencecomponent, which is a feature of both the Advanced Certificate andDiplomaBTEPs, will also help to combat the negative image of the BTEPs.
DTVE Survey Page 87
8.3 Consultancy to Conduct a Tracer Study of Graduates of the Botswana Technical Education Programme, 2007
The overall objective of this tracer study on BTEP graduates (2002 to2006) was to find out about the graduates1. employability in terms of course relevance and quality for the world-of-work; 2. employment or self employment.
Some of the findings were lack of BTEP awareness by employers who may be prefer to employ an
NCC or other better known qualification. There is need to re-consider the programme structure of BTEP,
especially with regard to the balance between theory and practicalassignments as both employers and graduates identified this as anarea of weakness
Respondents also identified problems with the quality and educationlevels of instructors.
A serious concern for BTEP is that half of the total graduaterespondents are still unemployed or economically inactive.
These findings are identical to the concerns mentioned in section 6.7
DTVE Survey Page 88
