Writing paper help

LEAs E, I and H had a higher proportion of primary teachers responding to the survey.

However, the case-study part of the EPD evaluation identified issues relating to the management writing paper help of EPD within secondary schools at these LEAs (for example some coordinators reported that it was not possible to release all their 18 In an exaggerated example, LEA X has 100 second year teachers (and no third year teachers). Meanwhile LEA Y has 100 third year teachers (and no second years).

Secondary writing paper help teachers therefore reported lower effectiveness scores and even with the higher proportion of primary teachers responding to the survey, these had a negative impact on cost-effectiveness. Given the quality of the data provided, it would not be possible to separate costs between primary and secondary teachers and conduct separate cost-effectiveness analyses. First, replacement means that EPD was not additional to CPD for the EPD teachers. Second, non-EPD teachers in the school may have benefited from having a greater CPD allocation per head as a result. Most coordinators acknowledged that EPD funding freed-up CPD monies for other teachers. This was partly due to the cuts in the school funding in financial year 2003-4 reported by many coordinators. Summary The objectives of Appendix 1 were to produce a cost-effectiveness analysis of the 12 LEAs involved in the EPD pilot and to consider the determinants of cost- effectiveness. For reasons associated with data quality and quantity, the results presented here should be interpreted with caution, particularly with respect to making comparisons between the 12 LEAs. For the first outcome measure, the LEAs achieved between 42 per cent and 90 per cent of the theoretical maximum cost-effectiveness ratio. This increased to a range of 53 per cent to 97 per cent for the second outcome measure. Four LEAs achieved relatively high cost-effectiveness ratios for both outcome measures, and three had relatively low cost-effectiveness ratios for both. An analysis of the potential determinants of the variations in cost-effectiveness did not reveal an overall determinant of cost-effectiveness. This implies that it was the net effect of a combination of determinants that influenced the cost-effectiveness ratio achieved by each LEA.

In addition, the results may have been affected writing paper help by intangible determinants of cost-effectiveness, such as the way in which the scheme was marketed to teachers or the usefulness of topics covered in training events. There was some evidence that the most cost-effective LEAs achieved both high effectiveness scores and relatively low costs. This suggests that the amount of money spent on EPD was not the key determinant of effectiveness - what is important is how the money was managed and distributed. Thus, Appendix 1 needs to be read in conjunction with the detailed analysis set out in Parts three and four of the help book essay this report, which highlight the determinants of the effectiveness of EPD. For all three years, the response rate was calculated after a number of withdrawals were made. These withdrawals included recipients of the questionnaire whom it later emerged had left the survey-sample schools, were not currently in school help writing a descriptive essay (e.

Do my term paper for me karate definition essay subtitles in research paper apa format legal research paper writing service book review my brilliant friend.


Also removed from the sample were non-respondent mentors in two LEAs where mentoring was optional (for where to buy a research paper all teachers in one case and for third year teachers in the other). In despatching the questionnaires, it was assumed that all EPD teachers in these authorities might have a mentor.

Consequently, a mentor questionnaire was sent out with every teacher questionnaire for the EPD teacher to pass on. However, the case-study fieldwork confirmed that, because mentors were not compulsory, minimal numbers were involved. Hence, this was accounted for in the response rate. As with the EPD sample, this response rate was calculated after a number of withdrawals were made, including incidences where the recipient had left or had never worked at the school, was absent from school (maternity leave, sickness) or was not a second or third year teacher.

The characteristics of those second and third year teachers outside the EPD pilot LEAs who responded to the comparative survey are also presented. Year 1 (2002) - EPD teacher survey respondents Presented below are the characteristics of the 620-strong EPD teacher survey sample in the first year of the evaluation. Phase of school Gender Ethnicity Age ITT Subject specialism 341 (55 per cent) taught the primary age range, 276 (45 per cent) were secondary teachers and three (1 per cent) worked in special educational needs (SEN) schools or pupil referral units (PRUs).

Overall, 78 per cent were female (90 per cent of teacher respondents from primary schools and 66 per cent of respondents from secondary schools were women). Predominately white (93 per cent) with small numbers of Black African, Black Caribbean, Indian, Bangladeshi, Pakistani and Chinese. PCGEs were held by 65 per cent of the overall teacher sample (including 85 per cent of secondary teacher respondents and 49 per cent of the primary teacher sample). Three per cent of the sample had undertaken other qualifications, such as the Graduate Teaching Programme (GTP) qualification or overseas accreditation. The top five at primary level were literacy (24 per cent), sciences, art, numeracy and history.

At secondary level, the top five were sciences (17 per cent), English, languages, RE and PE. Year group The primary sample included teachers of all year groups, with the highest proportions taking Year 1 (25 per cent) or Year 4 (22 per cent). Around 10 per cent each were teaching Year 2 or Year 6. Roles in school There was a significant difference between primary and secondary teacher respondents in terms of the additional duties they performed in their second year of teaching. Eighty-eight per cent of the primary teachers compared with 51 per cent of the secondary teacher sample held an area of responsibility in school other than their classroom teaching. For 90 per cent of these primary teachers, this involved the coordination of a subject area. However, the most commonly undertaken (by 26 per cent of those stating they held additional duties) involved a particular responsibility within a subject area e. Phase of school Year of teaching Gender Ethnicity Age ITT Subject specialism Year group Roles in school 589 taught the primary age range (50 per cent), 590 were secondary teachers (50 per cent) and ten (1 per cent) worked in SEN schools or PRUs.

Discount essay writing service expository essay how to make a cake paraphrasing sentences exercises online dissertation proposal example history argumentative essay sugar tax.