Longitudinal Teacher Workforce Pilot Study

A report on the

Longitudinal Teacher Workforce Pilot Study

Prepared

Abstract

This report is a summary of the key findings from the Longitudinal Teacher Workforce Pilot Study, undertaken as a component of the 2011 Beyond Graduation Survey. This pilot study follows up with teacher education graduates who completed their studies at an Australian higher education institution in 2007 and went on to respond to the 2008 Australian Graduate Survey. Findings are presented in relation to graduates’ career progression in the early years after course completion, and their views on the relevance and quality of their teacher education program. Recommendations on how to improve future similar studies based on lessons learned from this pilot study are also presented.

ISBN 978-1-74361-921-6 [PDF]

ISBN 978-1-74361-922-3 [DOCX]

With the exception of the Commonwealth Coat of Arms, the Department of Education logo, any material protected by a trade mark and where otherwise noted all material presented in this document is provided under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Australia ( licence.

The details of the relevant licence conditions are available on the Creative Commons website (accessible using the links provided) as is the full legal code for the CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 AU licence (

The material must be attributed as The Report of the Longitudinal Teacher Workforce Pilot Study authored by David Carroll, Graduate Careers Australia with funding from the Commonwealth of Australia as represented by the Department of Education.

As far as practicable, material for which the copyright is owned by a third party will be clearly labelled. All reasonable efforts have been made to ensure that this material has been reproduced in this document with the full consent of the copyright owners.

The Copyright Officer, Department of Education, Location code C10MT1 GPO Box 9880 Canberra ACT 2601 or emailed to.

The terms of use for the Commonwealth Coat of Arms are available from the It's an Honour website.

Where a copyright owner, other than the Commonwealth, is identified with respect to this material, please contact that third party copyright owner directly to seek permission.

Graduate Careers Australia

PO Box 12103, A’Beckett Street, VIC 8006

Telephone: 03 9605 3700

Facsimile: 03 9670 5752

Email:

Web:

Disclaimer

Although Graduate Careers Australia (GCA) has made all reasonable efforts to ensure the accuracy of these data, GCA accepts no responsibility for any inaccuracies. Persons relying on these data do so at their own risk. GCA accepts no responsibility for decisions or actions taken as a result of these data.

1. Introduction

Authorisation

This research report has been prepared by Graduate Careers Australia (GCA) for the Teacher Quality National Partnership Section (TQNPS) of the Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations (DEEWR), in partial fulfilment of Deliverable 2 of the Longitudinal Teacher Workforce Pilot Study (LTWPS). Deliverable 1 of this study, collection of career progression and teacher education data, was completed with the conclusion of data collection fieldwork on Friday, 30 September 2011. (See Section 2 for details of this fieldwork.) An accompanying survey data file has been supplied to TQNPS, which represents the total fulfilment of Deliverable 2.

Purpose and scope

The LTWPS addresses two important aspects of the post-study experiences of teacher education graduates from Australian institutions of higher education:

Career progression: the utilisation of teacher education graduates in the teaching profession, their retention or attrition in the teaching profession in the early years of their career, and their mobility within the profession.
Teacher education relevance and quality: the relationship between graduates’ view of their teacher education and their early teaching career.

This current report presents a summary of findings concerning both of these aspects, based on data collected from graduates who completed a teacher education qualification from an Australian higher education institution in 2007, many of whom would have entered the professional workforce in 2008. By surveying graduates approximately three years after the completion of their tertiary studies and entry into the professional workforce, these data provide us with the unique opportunity to investigate the impact that these interceding years have on recent teacher education graduates in Australia. To the best of our knowledge, these data represent the most thorough, and certainly the most recent effort to understand the early-career experiences of such graduates. It is important to acknowledge, however, that this research project was intended from the outset to be a pilot study, and therefore represents a beginning rather than an end to this valuable research. To aid in the ongoing development of thisresearch, lessons learned from the conduct of this pilot study are presented for the consideration of TQNPS. These points appear in indented boldface. In addition, key points from the discussion of results are summarised at the beginning of each section for the convenience of readers.

As a final point for this introduction, it should be noted that this current report should not be seen asa complete analysis of every facet of the LTWPS data. Rather, this report presents an analysis of the main trendsemerging from these data, as well as providing an overview of the scope of these data and an assessment of their representativeness. A copy of the data file has been supplied in conjunction with this report so that custom analysis can be undertaken by TQNPS as required.

The remainder of this report is organised as follows. Section 2 provides a detailed overview of the methodology used for this study, including the presentation of descriptive statistics for the sample. Section 3 analyses the career progression of teacher education graduates, while Section 4 presents an investigation into the views of graduates concerning how their course of study has influenced their teaching career thus far. Conclusions and recommendations are presented in Section 5.

The next section presents a detailed overview of key aspects of the research methodology used for this study, including the development of the LTWPS questionnaire, data collection procedures, the nature of response to the survey, as well as other important analytical considerations. It is important that readers consider all findings presented herewith in the context of this research methodology.

2. Research Methodology

Key points

The Longitudinal Teacher Workforce Pilot Study was administered to graduates who completed their teacher education program in 2007 and responded to the 2008 Australian Graduate Survey.
This pilot study was administered as a component of the 2011 Beyond Graduation Survey, which achieved a response rate of approximately 20 per cent.
Some graduates were required to respond to nearly 400 data items, which may be excessive.
Valid responses were received from 1,115 teacher education graduates from 32 institutions.
The sample of secured responses was representative of the target and generalisable populations.

Data collection

The LTWPS was administered by GCA as a component of the 2011 Beyond Graduation Survey (BGS), a longitudinal survey of recent graduates from Australian institutions of higher education conducted approximately three years after course completion.

Every year since 1972, graduates have been invited to participate in a national census-style survey of their outcomes and activities around four months after course completion. The current incarnation of this national graduate survey is known as the Australian Graduate Survey (AGS). The 2011 BGS was developed as a cohort-style follow-up to the 2008 AGS, whereby graduates who completed the earlier survey were invited to complete a survey on their work and study activities in the three years after course completion. Surveyed graduates were asked a wide range of questions concerning their activities on April 30 in 2009, 2010 and 2011, which were subsequently merged with data on their activities in 2008 based on a unique identifier assigned to each graduate. In all, 34 Australian higher education institutions participated in the 2011 BGS, ensuring a nationally-representative sample of graduates from a diverse range of institutions. These are listed in Table 1.[1]

Table 1.Institutions participating in the 2011 BGS

Australian Catholic University / James Cook University / University of Newcastle
Australian College of Theology† / La Trobe University / University of Notre Dame, Australia
Australian National University*‡ / Macquarie University* / University of Queensland
Avondale College / Melbourne College of Divinity† / University of South Australia*
Bond University*‡ / Monash University* / University of Southern Queensland
Central Queensland University* / Murdoch University* / University of Sydney
Charles Darwin University / RMIT / University of Tasmania
Charles Sturt University / Southern Cross University / University of Technology, Sydney
Deakin University* / Swinburne University of Technology‡ / University of the Sunshine Coast*
Edith Cowan University* / University of Ballarat / Victoria University
Flinders University of South Australia* / University of Melbourne
Griffith University / University of New South Wales*

Notes. * Institution conducted its own email campaign. † Institution does not offer a teacher education degree; no responses received. ‡ Institution does not offer a teacher education degree; responses received.

Graduates were invited to complete the survey by email. Graduates who completed the 2008 AGS were asked at the time to supply a long-term email address to facilitate follow-up research, which was used as the primary means of inviting graduates to participate in the BGS. Twelve institutions chose to email their own graduates, while the remaining 22 institutions supplied a list of email addresses to GCA,which undertook the email campaign on their behalf. Regardless of whether the invitation was sent by GCA or the institution, all respondents completed a standardised online survey developed by GCA. Graduates were given the incentive of going into a draw to win one of two retail vouchers to the value of $250 in exchange for a complete survey response. Data collection fieldwork commenced on Wednesday, 3 August 2011 and concluded on Friday, 30 September 2011. Reminder emails were sent to non-responders in the weeks commencing 11 August and 23 August. The overall response ratewas approximately20 per cent, which is a typical response rate for the BGS.The response rate for graduates of teacher education programs,[2]calculated on the basis of the graduates who completed the teacher education component of the BGS in its entirety, was approximately 11 per cent. In all, 7 per cent of graduates who completed a teacher education qualification in 2007 provided a valid response to the survey.[3]While the long-term email approach employed by GCA likely reduced the potential for bias due to graduate mobility (i.e., moving house after graduation and failing to leave a forwarding address), it is important to note that those graduates who achieved labour market success may have been more likely to respond to this follow-up survey,[4] which could impact the generalisability of the results presented herewith.

In addition to the standard BGS questions relating to graduates’ activities and outcomes following the completion of their studies, the LTWPS included a set of questions specific to teacher education graduates (see Appendix A). These questions were supplied to GCA by TQNPS,[5] and were embedded into the BGS as a standalone survey module that was only presented to graduates who identified that they completed a teacher education qualification in 2007. Following an approach agreed upon by both GCA and TQNPS, graduates were directed to the LTWPS on the basis of this yes/no question:

Was the course you completed in 2007 a teacher education qualification? For example: Bachelor of Education, Graduate Diploma in Education, Master of Teaching?

Graduates who answered ‘yes’ to this question were directed to complete the questions contained within the LTWPS module, while graduates who answered ‘no’ were directed to the next section of the BGS without seeing any further questions related specifically to teacher education. One issue that emerged concerning this approach was the load placed on survey respondents: graduates completingthe LTWPS module in addition to the standard BGS questions were (potentially) required to respond to nearly 400 dataitems,[6] which, based on email messagesreceived by GCA, wasfeltby respondents to be excessive. It is likely that a more concise question set would have yielded a greater response rate andmore complete data.

Consideration 1

For future surveys, it is recommended that a more concise set of questions is developed for the teacher education module if these questions are to be administered as a component of an existing research project (such as the BGS). If developing a more concise set of questions is not feasible, it is recommended that the teacher quality study be undertaken as a standalone research project to minimise the load placed on survey respondents.

Response and representativeness

A total of 1,115 graduates from 32 higher education institutions (see Table 1) indicated that they completed a teacher education qualification by means of the trigger question previously noted,[7] whichequates to roughly 9.4 per cent of all valid responses to the 2011 BGS. All secured responses were de-identified to remove any information that would allow the identification of individual respondents in the survey data file. Descriptive statistics for the teacher education sample are presented in Table 2.

Table 2.Descriptive statistics

Variable / Category / % / n
Sex / Male / 24.3 / 271
Female / 75.7 / 844
Total / 100.0 / 1,115
Age group / 25 and under / 39.0 / 435
Over 25 / 61.0 / 680
Total / 100.0 / 1,115
Degree level / Undergraduate / 51.6 / 575
Postgraduate / 48.3 / 538
Other / 0.1 / 1
Total / 100.0 / 1,114
Residency / Domestic / 90.1 / 1,004
Overseas / 9.9 / 110
Total / 100.0 / 1,114
Basis of admission / Satisfactory completion of secondary education / 20.9 / 230
Graduate entry from a completed higher education program / 47.3 / 519
Transferred from an incomplete higher education program / 5.4 / 59
Mature age or other special provision / 13.8 / 151
Completed or incomplete TAFE course / 2.9 / 32
Examination or assessment by institution / 1.9 / 21
Work experience, professional qualification, etc. / 4.6 / 50
Other / 1.5 / 16
Don't know / 1.8 / 20
Total / 100.0 / 1,098
Working as a school teacher at the time of the BGS / No / 35.4 / 387
Yes, mainly primary / 33.4 / 365
Yes, mainly secondary / 31.3 / 342
Total / 100.0 / 1,094

Males comprised around a quarter of the sample. Around 40 per cent of respondents were aged 25 and under at the time of the 2008 AGS. Slightly more than half of all respondents indicated that their teacher qualification was undertaken at a bachelor degree level, while slightly less than half undertook the same at a postgraduate level. Ninety per cent of graduates in the sample identified themselves as being Australian citizens or permanent residents at the time of the 2008 AGS. When asked about the basis on which they were admitted to their program, 47 per cent indicated that they were admitted following the completion of a higher education program (graduate entry), 21 per cent were admitted after completing their secondary education, while 14 per cent were admitted on the basis of a mature-age or other special entry provision. These three bases of admission accounted for more than four in five respondents. Around 65 per cent of respondents were employed as school teachers as at 30 April 2011, with a nearly equal split between those employed in primary teaching (52 per cent) and those employed in secondary teaching (48 per cent).

Consideration 2

It would be of value to add a question concerning school sector for those graduates employed in teaching. Gleaning this data from the open-text employer name question on the BGS is not always possible because some graduates provide a vague response, while others choose not to furnish the name of their employer, possibly due to privacy concerns. This issue is discussed further in Appendix B.

The representativeness of the sample of secured responses to the LTWPS can be established by comparing it against the sample of teacher education graduates who provided a valid response to the 2008 AGS.[8]Non-responder studies have demonstrated in the past that the AGS is not subject to non-response bias.[9]Specifically, we compare the composition of the two samples with regard to gender, age group and degree level. This comparison is presented in Table 3. It can be seen that the LTWPS sample collected by means of the 2011 BGS is generally reflective of the composition of the AGSsample. As such, the LTWPS data may be analysed without the need for analytic weighting. The male/female split in the sample is reflective of that in the generalisable population of graduates who completed an initial teacher training course in 2007 (25.1 per cent and 74.9 per cent respectively).[10]

Table 3.Comparison of 2011 BGS and 2008 AGS samples, teacher education graduates

2011 BGS / 2008 AGS
% / n / % / n
Sex / Male / 24.3 / 271 / 22.6 / 2,257
Female / 75.7 / 844 / 77.4 / 7,733
Total / 100.0 / 1,115 / 100.0 / 9,990
Age group / 25 and under / 39.0 / 435 / 40.8 / 4,077
Over 25 / 61.0 / 680 / 59.2 / 5,912
Total / 100.0 / 1,115 / 100.0 / 9,989
Degree level / Undergraduate / 51.6 / 575 / 55.9 / 5,587
Postgraduate / 48.3 / 538 / 43.9 / 4,383
Other / 0.1 / 1 / 0.2 / 23
Total / 100.0 / 1,114 / 100.0 / 9,993

Because survey responses were not able to be collected for every member of the target population, all results presented within this report should be treated as point estimates rather than as population parameters.[11] While point estimates have been reported in the interest of simplicity and parsimony, it should be noted that they are subject to sampling error and should be interpreted with due caution.

The next section of this report presents an overview of the career progression of recent teaching graduates, including the utilisation of graduates in the teaching profession, graduates’ mobility within the profession, and their attrition and progression behaviour.

3. Career Progression

Key points

The subjects most commonly studied by teacher education graduates at a tertiary level include English, Literacy, and Mathematics. Graphic Communication, Textiles, Librarianship, Wood or Metal Technology, Food Technology, and Career Education were the least common.
A number of scientific fields suffered the double problem of being studied by a small proportion of graduates, and being studied by those graduates for a limited number of semesters.
Regardless of teaching area, the majority of primary teachers intend to remain in teaching for the next five years. More variation was observedbetween teaching areas for secondary teachers.
Females were more likely to be engaged in teaching, as were graduates aged 25 and under.
Most of the graduates not employed as school teachers were not seeking alternate work. Many were employed as tertiary education teachers, or in other professional and managerial roles.
Interstate mobility was not common for graduates employed as school teachers. Mobility between postcodes was much more common, especially for males and graduates aged 25 and under.
Most graduates employed as school teachers after course completion were still employed as such three years later. The same was true of those not employed as school teachers. Very little mobility was observed between different careers within the teaching profession.
Graduates who completed an undergraduate teacher education program were less likely to leave the teaching profession within the early years after course completion.

Utilisation of teacher education graduates

The LTWPS collected detailed data concerning the subject areas that teacher education graduates studied during their tertiary education, including the duration of study for each subject area. This is summarised in Table 4. The first results column shows the proportion of graduates who indicated that they studied a given subject area at a tertiary level. Graduates were permitted to select as many or as few subject areas as applicable. The results columns under the heading semesters of tertiary study show the relative proportions of graduates who studied a given subject area for one to two semesters, three to four semesters, and more than four semesters.