individual study paths statistics and conclusions from finland

Erityisesti Sinulle

Individual study paths

Statistics and conclusions from Finland

National authorities have invested lots of money to the programs concerning reducing dropping out• Main goals were:

- produce information of those factors which help students forward and factors that cause students´ droping out- evaluate all penetration programmes- develope control

• 11 different programmes took part to this

• Main themes were- Pedagogical solutions and teaching arrangements- Flexibility in studies and in examinations.- Develope student councelling- Develope student welfare services- Develope surveillance and information systems- Healthy learning environment

Challenges when talking about dropping out

- Are we talking about droping out or resigning?

- How do we do our statistics?

- Our foundation is based on the amount of students – we have two days in a year when we compile our statistics – when do we mark certain drop outs?

Dropping out statistics in Upper secondary education, in Vocational education, in polytechnics and in universities during 2002/2003-2011/2012 %

Results

• During school year 2011-2012 97 097 students studied in those vocational colleges which were involved to national droppign out programs

• Differences between organizations were alarmingly big- Drop out percent varied from 2,4% to 18,8%- KPAO:s percent was 7,5% in 2011-2012 and 5,9% in 2012-2013.- Now it is 8,5 % and we still have one month left….

• Over 50% of organizations that percent was between 6-10%

• Tourism, Catering and Domestic Services had the biggest percent 11,8%- Why? That sector of vocational education have not been the first choice for many applicants. In that sector there are also more special students.

Results

•Social Services, Health and Sport had the lowest percent 8,00%.- Why? That sector of vocational education have less special students than others.

•Special students` in dropping out percent in vocational schools was 9,3% and in special vocational schools 7,6%

•Adults (over 20 years old) drop out more often than younger students.

•Reasons fro dropping out - wrong career choice - school related reasons

- Alarming!! What are we going to do?

Keskuspuisto• Drop out percent 2011-2012 7,5%, in Keskuspuisto 8,8% 2012-2013 5,9%, In Keskuspuisto 8,1% • Control period autumn 2009 – spring 2012

- Drop out percent 19,43

examination N Drop out percent

Vehicle mechanic 12 25,53

Artisan (Product Design and Manufacture) 2 6

Datanomi (User support,Software Production) 10 17,86

ICT Technician 18 19,35

Property Maintenance Operative 8 18,18

Machinist 12 16,44

Practical Nurse 13 27,08

Painter 8 16,67

MediaAssistant 10 21,74

Merkonomi (Customer Service and Sales) 5 7,81

Keskuspuisto

• Control period autumn 2009 – spring 2012- Drop out percent 19,43

examination N Drop out percent

Musician 3 5,77

Design Assistant 22 25,88

Cook 24 28,92

Dancer 3 15

Site Facilities Operative 7 11,66

Piano tuner 0 0

Upholsterer and interior Decorator 22 34,36

Warehouse Operative 3 30

Keskuspuisto

• Age affects to drop outs. Those who are just majors are in a bigger risk(Age 18-21 – 45 %)

• Health issues and wrong career choice are the most common reasons to dropping out.

• 38% of drop outs happened in August/September• 62% happened in fall semester• -> Drop outs are concentrated to Autumn

KeskuspuistoReason for special need education Number % of the dropouts % of students

Difficulties to perceive, in vigilance and concentration 13 7,22 6,37

Difficulties in language 17 9,44 12,74

Difficulties in interaction and behavior problems 19 10,55 4,42

Mild developmental disability 15 8,33 9,71

Severe developmental disability 0 0 0,1

Long-term mental problems 52 28,88 23,21

Physical long-term condition 6 3,33 5,5

Learning difficulties based on Autism and Asperger syndrome 7 3,88 5,07

Difficulties in movement and motoric functions 12 6,66 8,74

Hearing impaired 3 1,66 2,8

Visually impaired 12 6,66 12,31

Other reason which requires special needs education 15 8,33 4,31

No requirement for special needs education 9 5 4,64

Keskuspuisto

APersonal factors

(no influence school): health issues, financial problems, change of address, dismissed

BPersonal factors

(possible influence school): personal circumstances, learning difficulties, level too high, insufficient level of language or mathematics, personal behaviour/functioning, too many things outside school

CSchool related

factors (high level of influence school): school organisation, organisation of education/didactics, social and physical environment, insufficient counselling/support, /equipment, attitude staff

D Study and career

choice related (possible influence school): wrong perception of course, wrong perception of future job, more interested in different course/job

ELabour market

and other outside influences (possible influence school): work preferred, no more training company

F other

Autumn 2009 –spring 2012

89

48,5%

54

30%

1 23

12,5

3

1,5%

6

3%

Drop out reasons (20.9.2012-20.6.2013)13 students aged 23-)

19+13

8

42,1%

4

21,05%

4

21,05%

1 2

10,5%

(1.8.2013-17.4.2014)13 students aged 23-)

30+13

1157,89%

526,3%

1 1052,63%

315,78%

Keskuspuisto

•Conclusions:- Early intervention is needed.- We have offered “grouping”- training to all our teachers (group

leaders).- other updating training- Student election is developed.- Support and counselling is increased(4 counselors, 4 special teachers, job coaches) - We have a pilot in which we offer neuropsychiatric rehabilitation for 10

students-Teaching methods are developed.- Statistics don`t tell what we need to know. For instance School related reasons are not visible.

Erityisesti Sinulle

Erityisesti sinulle!

Keskuspuiston ammattiopisto