Training Opportunities: Exploring what happens two months later

Placement order

This variable simply shows the order of the placement for each learner. Overall, the odds of an employment outcome over an other outcome increase with the order of the placements until the learner reaches their fourth or more placement, when the odds of employment occurring over an other outcome begins to decline.

The odds of attaining a further training outcome over an other outcome increase as the number of placements increase, and the odds of a return to the programme also consistently increase with each successive placement.

Learners leaving their first placement were most likely to attain an other outcome, then a return to Training Opportunities outcome. They were less likely to attain an employment outcome. Employment becomes the most likely outcome after the second placement ends.

There could be a number of explanations for these effects. Two possible (polar opposite) explanations have been suggested: that this is showing a training effect, or the alternative, an opposite explanation is that the trends in figure 9 suggest a needs effect. It is difficult to distinguish between a needs effect and a training effect hypothesis in this case, but on balance it seems that the training effect can be more highly supported.

That employment is only more likely than an other outcomeafter the second placement ends suggests that just one placement in Training Opportunities is rarely enough for a learner to succeed. This implies a training effect rather than a needs effect.

The decline in the likelihood of employment between the third and fourth placement could be for any of several reasons. It might suggest that those who undertake four or more placements have higher needs than those who have fewer placements, and are therefore less likely to be successful than other learners who need fewer placements.

That employment becomes the most likely outcome only after the second placement ends suggests that this is showing a training effect rather than a needs effect. We could hypothesize that if this was a needs effect, learners with only one placement would be more likely to gain employment and further training than an other outcome,  but this is not what we see.

The alternative explanation for the trend we see in figure 9 (the training hypothesis), is that repeated placements may be ‘marking’ learners as people with problem or high needs. These people may become less attractive to employers as their CV shows more and more spells in Training Opportunities. Further training outcomes become more likely as the number of placements per learner increases, again suggesting a training hypothesis.

That learners with multiple placements are most likely to return to Training Opportunities over any other outcome is interesting and could be explored further. It supports both a needs hypothesis and a training hypothesis.

Figure 9 – Odds ratio of  labour market outcome to other outcome category by placement order

Note: points above 1 indicate more likely to occur than an other outcome, while points below 1 indicate the outcome is less likely to occur than an other outcome.