1 / 20

implementing the hefce guidance: achieving targeting targets chris carpenter mike kerrigan

Workshop structure. Brief presentationYour questionsDiscussion groupsSummary and close. HEFCE Targeting Guidance (2007). Stage 1: Area level targetinge.g. particular schools/colleges, communitiesStage 2: Learner level targetingStage 3: Monitoring the effectiveness of targetingIMD: 67% of participantsNS-SEC 4-8: 67% of participants.

paul
Download Presentation

implementing the hefce guidance: achieving targeting targets chris carpenter mike kerrigan

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

    1. Implementing the HEFCE guidance: Achieving Targeting Targets? Chris Carpenter & Mike Kerrigan Aimhigher National Conference 7th October 2009

    3. HEFCE Targeting Guidance (2007)

    4. Stage one: Area Level HEFCE Targeting Guidance Identify schools, colleges and communities where disadvantage is concentrated, and where resources should be directed Our approach IMD Maps to indicate deprived communities and for context School/college profiles

    5. Example IMD Maps: Bassetlaw District and Nottingham City

    6. Example School profile (simplified version)

    7. Stage 2: Learner Level HEFCE Targeting Guidance Most intensive interventions (equivalent to Cat2?)– e.g. mentoring, master classes, summer schools Make judgements as to which learners (from disadvantaged backgrounds) will benefit most from provision Our approach Postcodes database LA support to identify cohorts

    8. Identifying cohorts

    9. Stage three: Monitoring the effectiveness of targeting procedures HEFCE Targeting Guidance Collection of key data: NS-SEC, IMD, parental HE experience Improved targeting depends on improved monitoring 67% participants from 40% most deprived areas 67% participants from NS-SEC 4-8 Our approach Collection of participant data Monitoring & Evaluation Database

    10. Collecting and using data

    11. Coding occupations for NS-SEC Single open question method: What is the occupation of the highest earning parent/carer currently living in the household? Input by areas into M&E database and extracted by AhEM for coding centrally (giving consistency) New occupations coded manually using ONS listing as a guide Occupations added to a lookup once coded to automatically code future occurrences Around 60-70% of occupations now automatically coded by lookup - this figure is continually increasing

    12. Results summary

    13. Taking populations into account…

    14. AhEM Collective: IMD

    15. AhEM Collective: NS-SEC

    16. AhEM Collective: POLAR2 qYPR

    17. Monitoring school/college targeting

    18. Your questions…

    19. Discussion groups… Problems in implementing targeting procedures. Any solutions? Issues with using FFT (potential to succeed) data in identifying cohorts Monitoring of targeting: Cohort data vs. Participant data Are Category 1 and Category 2 classifications of any use?

    20. Thanks for your time! Chris Carpenter c.j.carpenter@lboro.ac.uk / 01509 223462 Mike Kerrigan m.d.kerrigan@lboro.ac.uk / 01509 223460

More Related