Literacy and numeracy (LN) progress at Waikato Institute of Technology (Wintec) for 2012 and 2013

Orientation This report outlines literacy and numeracy progress for learners enrolled in targeted level-1 to level-3 modules, irrespective of level of programme, for 2012 and 2013. We intend to provide a pro-active account of LN progress as we anticipate the Tertiary Education Commission’s (TEC’s) progress measures to be published early in 2014. This report should therefore be seen as a point of orientation for interpreting these anticipated progress measures. LN Progress Using a data extraction from the TEC assessment tool website (2012-2013), we prepared the following matched repeated measures data sets, followed by analyses in IBM SPSS (Version 21): • Composite data sets (Step 1 to step 6) - Sets 1 and 2 (2012) and sets 3 and 4 (2013) as matched samples. • Sub-samples: Our analyses showed that these means mask progress in reading and numeracy at different step-levels. For this reason, we split the data sets into the following sub-samples: o Sets 5 and 6 (2012) and sets 7 and 8 (2013) of Step 1 and step 2 learners o Sets 9 and 10 (2012) and sets 11 and 12 (2013): Step 3 and step 4 learners o Sets 13 and 14 (2012) and sets 15 and 16 (2013): Step 5 and step 6 learners Findings and Discussion Applying repeated measures t-tests for matched pairs in the 2012 and 2013 cohorts, we found mean differences to be ambiguous for both reading and numeracy. However, our analyses showed that the results for the full cohorts masked significant growth for at-risk learners at step 1 and step 2, hence our analysing sub-groups of learners. We report descriptive statistics such as means, standard deviations and the proportions of learners at various step levels. For the latter, we used step levels at start and finish for the three sub-samples to perform cross-tabulations. These cross-tabulations show the proportions of the sub-samples that either improved or regressed. Conclusions and Recommendations In this section, we present our conclusions, followed by recommendations for further action. Conclusion 1: The low-stakes status of the TEC assessment tool for learners and its high-stakes status for the institution remain an ostensibly negative anomaly undermining measures of participation and progress. Recommendation 1: Declare the TEC assessment tool high stakes, integrating tool results into module assessments and grading. If the TEC assessment tool retains its low-stakes status for learners, the LN-embedding team and vocational tutors have to intensify their advocacy plan to keep learners on board with these assessments. Conclusion 2: The low-stakes status of the TEC assessment tool has negative consequences for its reliability. Recommendation 2: Declare the TEC assessment tool high stakes (see directly above). Conclusion 3: Learner performance in 2012 and 2013, outlined in this report, should serve as metrics in setting targets for improving progress in 2014. Recommendation 3: Define objectives for 2014 on the basis of means and standard deviations obtained in 2013