Indicator 4. Completion rate in VET programmes

Number of successfully completed/abandoned VET programmes, according to the type of programme and the individual criteria

Definition

Completion rate in VET programmes:
a) Percentage of those completing (i.e. attaining a formal qualification) IVET programme(s) (which lead to a formal qualification), compared to those entering IVET programme(s);
b) Percentage of those completing (i.e. attaining a formal qualification) CVET programme(s) (which lead to recognition), compared to those entering CVET programme(s).

Key Information

Recommended Use

What is the policy rationale for Indicator 4 and what is it useful for?

The purpose of the policy is to obtain basic information on educational achievements and the quality of training processes, to calculate drop-out rates compared to participation rate, to support successful completion and adapted training provision, including for disadvantaged groups.

Usefulness of Indicator 4

Indicator 4 is an output/outcome indicator which

  • Assists in achieving basic information on educational achievements, calculating dropout rates compared to participation rates, supporting successful completion and adapted training provision, particularly for disadvantaged groups;
  • May be used in the planning, implementation, evaluation and review phases of the quality cycle;
  • May be also used for budgetary target setting and benchmark results by comparing VET providers’ results at national level.

Related Indicators

Which other EQAVET indicators may be used to improve understanding or provide additional information?

EQAVET supplementary Indicator: VET Qualification compared to population - Percentage of those having completed VET programmes (i.e. attained a formal qualification or recognition) compared to active population (15 to 74 years old).

Indicator 3: Participation rate in VET programmes

Indicator 6 : Utilisation of acquired skills at the workplace

Indicator 8; Prevalence of vulnerable groups

Indicator 9: Mechanisms to identify training needs in the labour market

Indicator 10: Schemes used to promote better access to VET

Contextual and technical caveats

Which specific issues should be considered in order to implement this indicator?

  • The calculation of drop out rates varies according to how the concept is defined and the type of drop out statistic used, i.e.  a) the proportion of learners who drop out in a single year without completing the programme (the event rate), b) the proportion of learners who have not completed the programme and are not enrolled at one point in time, regardless of when they dropped (the status rate) or c) what happens to a single group or cohort of learners over a period of time (the cohort rate);
  • Multiple methods and definitions can result in conflicting information, e.g. it is possible to have a low rate of completion, and to have a low rate of drop out based on event or status calculations as well. Since it is about successful completers, we might limit to those finalising the programme in due time and passing the final examinations at the end of the VET programmes;
  • Dropout rates provide no information on why students have not completed their courses, i.e. further assessment is needed to interpret them;
  • Also, it might be recommended that, depending on the specific situation and if relevant, an additional statistical dimension of the indicator to be measured might be included, e.g. in one year time after the ‘regular’ end of the programme;
  • Time lag between indicator 3 (Participation rate in VET programmes)  and indicator 4 (Completion rate in VET programmes);
  • Possibly useful to identify specific groups of drop outs in order to design adequate programmes and methodologies;

Data sources from different databases would need a common identifier to link data.

Additional information

Which other issues may influence the use of this indicator?

  • Areas contributing to definitional confusion include: variation in age of learners who can be classified as dropouts, variation in the length of time for programme completion before a learner is considered a drop out;
  • According to the definition above the indicator measuring the completion rate is not specific for measuring the abandon rate (although it might give an idea about it), that is, someone may not abandon because he/she follows the training until the end but simply does not pass the final examination. If your purpose is to calculate “programme completion”, then you may find unnecessary to calculate when that completion took place, i.e. after the regular end of programme;
  • Consideration of the learning activities within the National Framework of Qualifications;
  • A good completion rate does not automatically prove the quality of education, i.e. it is difficult to be taken into consideration as a reliable indicator  without ensuring the quality and relevance of examinations based on sound training and assessment standards and procedures;

It may be very complex to try to construct statistics that can cope with all different kind of drop outs.

Technical Notes

Components: Which data elements are needed to generate this indicator?

For:  IVET programme completers attaining a formal qualification

Numerator: Number of successful IVET programme completers (by age and gender).
Denominator: Total number of participants entering IVET courses.

For: CVET programme completers attaining a formal qualification

Numerator: Number of successful CVET programme completers (by age and gender).
Denominator: Total number of participants entering CVET programmes.

Formula: Which mathematical formula may be used for computing the indicator value?

For IVET: The number of successful program completers (by age and gender) divided by the number of those who entered theIVET programme x 100.
For CVET
: The number of successful CVET completers (by age and gender) divided by the number of those who entered the CVET programme x 100.

 

Reported Subgroups: Which subgroups are commonly reported for this indicator?

Since it is about successful completers, you might limit to those finalising the programme in due time and passing the final examinations at the end of the VET programmes. Depending on the specific situation, and if relevant, it might be useful to introduce an additional statistical dimension e.g. in one year time after the ‘regular’ end of the programme.

 

Data requirements: What type of data may be useful to gather on this indicator?

Completion rate in VET programmes:

a. Type of VET programmes: VET programmes which lead to a qualification or recognition

b. Programme completion: those who receive either a qualification (IVET) or recognition (CVET).

Need to consider

  • different interpretations used by and different VET systems across Member States, to provide a context;
  • supplementary indicator, due to data collection difficulties with the proposed indicator;
  • vulnerable groups.

The following Questions & Answers, therefore, may be useful in interpreting this indicator and in supporting its implementation.

NOTE: for further information on completion rate in VET programmes in Denmark, Estonia, Hungary and Romania, please click here

© European Quality Assurance in Vocational Education and Training

This project has been funded with support from the European Commission. This Website reflects only the views of EQAVET and the Commission cannot be help responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein

Designed and developed by Arekibo