You are here

Indicators examples for reengaging measures

Tackling early leaving from education and training requires having specific programmes and measures for those who have already left the system. Reengaging measures aim to help early leavers rediscover an interest in learning, reengage in education and training, and potentially acquire a qualification.

An evaluation of a reengaging measure should start by explaining why and how the activities put in place are expected to help bring young people back into education and training.

Example:

Some of the reasons that make it difficult for early leavers to come back to education or training are:

  • the traditional, classroom-based approach to learning is not appropriate for some young people who dropped out of education and training in the past 
  • these young people have internalised a vision of themselves as ‘poor students’ and do not trust their capacities in education and training
  • these young people are facing other challenges (e.g. health and well-being issues, housing, etc.) that impede engagement in education and training

Reengaging measures can have different components:

  • they aim at increasing learners’ self-esteem and interest in learning
  • they help young people develop the skills and behaviours they need to access formal learning or employment
  • they provide individualised support to tackle the different challenges in young people’s lives

Reengaging measures aim to achieve these changes by, for instance:

  • building a trusting relationship with the young person
  • creating a friendly, open environment based on mutual respect
  • using appropriate teaching and learning methods (e.g. make use of a hands-on approach, which enables young people to see how their learning can be applied in practice)
  • offering a holistic support to address the full range of barriers to learning faced by the young person

Based on such theory a set of indicators for evaluating a reengaging programme can be developed.

Intervention logic

This is an example of an intervention logic for a reengaging measure for young people who left education and training prematurely:

Collapsible section
Input indicators

Indicative list:

  • human resources put at the disposal of the intervention (teachers, trainers, counsellors, and other professionals)
  • budget allocated, broken down by infrastructure and other expenses
Collapsible section
Process indicators

Indicative list:

  • availability of methodologies, training or tools for staff
  • cooperation with local services (e.g. health services, social services, public employment services) and stakeholders (e.g. employers)
  • activities to inform the target group of the existence of the measure
  • relationships between VET teachers, trainers and other professionals involved in programme delivery
Collapsible section
Output indicators

Indicative list:

  • number of young persons who contacted those responsible for the programme
  • number of young people who took part in activities
  • number of young people who followed the whole programme
  • features of the learning environment or the teaching approach
  • number of contact hours delivered per type of activity
  • share of learners with individualised learning plans

Example:

The evaluation of the Irish initiative Youthreach included several output indicators, for instance:

  • number of training centres that use the national methodology and how is it put in place
  • share of learners with individualised learning plans
  • level of parents’ involvement

Read 2010 evaluation report (in English)

Collapsible section
Result indicators

Indicative list:

Quantitative indicators:

  • share of programme participants who state that they feel happy in the school, training centre, or other entity delivering the measure
  • share of programme participants who state the programme contributed to:
    • increasing their self-confidence
    • improving their motivation to study
    • choosing their education/training programme
  • share of participants who defined their objectives during their participation in the programme
  • share of participants who reached at least one of the objectives during their participation in the programme
  • share of participants who:
    • have lower absenteeism
    • improved their education performance

Qualitative indicators:

  • narratives from beneficiaries on what differences the measure made to them. Stories about how the measure helped them regain interest in education and training, and decide on their next steps
  • narratives from teachers, trainers or other staff on what differences the activities made to the beneficiaries

Example:

The annual report of the Austrian Production Schools informs on several result indicators, for instance:

  • career plans
  • capacity to fulfil working duties
  • motivation to fulfil working duties;
  • programme completion rate
  • self-esteem and self-efficacy
  • literacy levels

Read 2015 annual report (in German)

Collapsible section
Impact indicators

Indicative list:

Quantitative indicators:

  • share of learners who dropped out that return to education or training
  • share of learners who complete an education and training programme
  • share of participants who move on to further education/training
  • share of participants who are in employment X years after taking part in the programme

Qualitative indicators:

  • narratives from beneficiaries about how the measure helped them return to education and training and complete their programme
  • narratives from teachers, trainers or other staff about how the measure helped beneficiaries return to education and training and complete their programme

Example:

The evaluation of the Irish initiative Youthreach included the following impact indicators:

  • the share of students who achieve a qualification
  • the share of students who progress to further education and training
  • the share of students in employment

Read 2010 evaluation report (in English)

Collapsible section