The secrets of improving student performance

Citation

(2001), "The secrets of improving student performance", Education + Training, Vol. 43 No. 8/9. https://doi.org/10.1108/et.2001.00443hab.002

The secrets of improving student performance

The secrets of improving student performanceKeywords: Students, Performance, Leadership, Demographics

Although there is a link between poor student performance and deprivation, individual student achievement is substantially affected by the ethos, systems, procedures and practices of the college, says a report from the Learning and Skills Development Agency (LSDA). Closing the Achievement Gap: Colleges Making a Difference shows that demographic factors such as gender, age and the ethnicity of students account for no more than half the differences in student achievement from college to college.

The findings demonstrate that the key factors affecting student achievement are well within the control of the college, even in the most deprived areas.

"Year-on-year improvements have generally been most pronounced among the colleges with the lower achievement rates, showing that college-level interventions can turn around a college's image and students' aspirations", said Anna Reisenberger, manager of the LSDA raising quality and achievement programme. "This pattern is consistent with the view that a significant element of student achievement is a direct result of college-level interventions". She continued: "We have seen that colleges with below-average achievement have been helping to close the achievement gap by improving their position at a relatively faster rate than others with fewer difficulties. A number of the most interesting innovations are now in place within colleges which, previously, had the greatest cause for concern about their achievement rates. Ultimately, we believe that it ought to be possible to reduce the achievement gap between colleges to half its present size, or less."

Some of the key characteristics of colleges which have been successful in raising student achievement are:

• •

  a commitment from senior managers to raising achievement – communicated to all staff with clear accountabilities;

• •

  college-wide approaches to reviewing strengths and weaknesses, with bottom-up and top-down initiatives to improve retention and achievement;

• •

  well developed systems, with opportunities for students to take time in choosing their options;

• •

  a full curriculum ladder, with progression that can be adapted to meet the changing student profile and labour market;

• •

  high expectations of students, with individual targets and regular reviews;

• •

  active involvement of teaching staff in course-review procedures, lesson observation and disseminating effective practice;

• •

  management-information systems which provide accurate information on retention and achievement, in a user-friendly format.

Improvements still need to be made in management-information systems, course delivery (to address retention and achievement problem areas) and sharing the learning from good practice, rather than simply identifying and acting upon weaknesses.

Meanwhile, the LSDA's Leadership Issues: Raising Achievement reveals that little work has been done about the nature of leadership at team-leader or middle-management level in post-16 education and training, and that leadership needs to be developed with all staff throughout the organization, not just with senior management. The publication, which contains commissioned articles by leading academics and researchers, discusses:

• •

  the nature of leadership in post-16 secondary education, and whether leadership in colleges differs from leadership in schools or other organizations;

• •

  the difference between leadership and management, and whether leadership is a set of skills or competencies which can be learned through training;

• •

  how leadership skills can be developed, and whether leadership can be developed among all staff working in colleges; and

• •

  the links between leadership and student achievement.

The report seeks to clarify what is meant by leadership in post-16 education, summarizes existing research and presents strategies for translating theory into practice using examples from a training course developed by the LSDA. The emphasis throughout is on developing leadership within course teams where the impact on teaching and learning is both more direct and greater, rather than simply at senior-management level.

"Leadership at that level has a more immediate focus on people, on teambuilding and on team development", said LSDA development advisor Chris Horsfall. "Curriculum knowledge and teaching expertise are crucial elements of the team leader's task. This focus is not necessarily the same as that of senior staff engaged in defining vision and values for the college and in establishing and directing the colleges as organizations."

A research project, led by Chris Horsfall, is looking at the role of the team leader within further-education colleges. The main points are:

• •

  leadership programmes exist for senior managers within colleges, but there is a dearth of leadership training at lower levels that are close to classroom delivery;

• •

  a focus on the status, management-development and leadership roles of middle managers is needed;

• •

  more emphasis needs to be placed on the personal attributes that characterize good leaders;

• •

  more research is needed to find out what it is about leadership that makes the difference to student outcomes, so improvement and development efforts can be better focused.