1. Factors affecting students’ throughput rates in an ACE(Language Education) programme Eugéne Marais UKZN

2. THE CONTEXT  Pressure to increase student throughput rates  Shortage of teachers impacts on matriculation pass rates  Low ranking on International benchmark tests of South African learners  Poor ANA scores  Research on drop out rate and throughput rate funded by UTLO  The programme is designed for in-service educators who need to obtain a formal qualification (upgrade)  Some students use the programme for re-skilling 2

3. RESEARCH QUESTION  DP Certificate grants permission to sit for the exam  DP requires submission of assignments and portfolio tasks on due date  Require weighted average no less than 40% together with at least 75% attendance 3

4. The research hypothesis  H 0 = There is no significant difference between the final results of students who have a DP mark below 50% and those who have a DP mark above 50% 4

5. METHOD & RESULTS  DP granted if weighted average exceeds 40%  Portfolio tasks test understanding of theory  Assignments require an application of theory to classroom context  Feedback to students is verbal and written  Analysis of 2 sets of data viz. results from semester 1 of 2011 and selected modules from previous cohorts 5

6. Method & results continued  Table 1: Class average marks for the 2011 cohort of ACE (Language Education) students ModuleAverage achievement in semester tasks Average achievement in written exam Language Pedagogy58%52% Policy and Professionalism 54%57% 6

7. Method & results continued  Table 2: Correlations between DP marks and Written exam marks ModuleAverage Mark Correlation: DP : Exam 2007 Self-paying Cohort: Pedagogy68,45%0,295 Low correlation 2011 DoE Funded Cohort: Pedagogy54,35%,0,348 Moderate correlation 2011 DoE Funded Cohort: Core Module (Language students only) 54,19%0,471 Moderate Correlation 7

8. Method & results continued  Table 3: Summary of results for Language Pedagogy (2011 cohort)  Χ 2 (1, N=95) = 2,87 > Χ 2 o.1 = 2,72 Group A: DP < 50% Group B: DP > 50% TOTAL Written Exam: mark < 50% 162036 Written Exam: mark > 50% 154459 TOTAL316495 8

9. Method & results continued  Table 4: Summary of results for Policy & Professionalism (2011 cohort)  Χ 2 (1, N=95) = 8,10 > Χ 2 0,05 = 3,84 Group A: DP < 50% Group B: DP > 50% TOTAL Written Exam: mark < 50% 151833 Written Exam: mark > 50% 105262 TOTAL257095 9

10. FURTHER RESEARCH in the next phase  The impact on these results of students who did not write the examination  The cause for absenteeism from exams when a DP certificate is granted  Absenteeism from contact sessions  Students perceptions of the programme and reasons for enrolling  Students perceptions of what is required for success at university  The correlation of student perceptions about the programme and the programme outcomes 10

11. Thank you for listening  Now for the developmental feedback …….. 11