Trainee-Trainer Ratio

Outcome indicator, Output indicator

Indicator Phrasing

average number of VET trainees per trainer [if required, specify: given trade, VET institution, school year]
nombre moyen d’étudiants en EFP par formateur [si nécessaire, précisez: métier, établissement d'EFP, année scolaire]
průměrný počet studentů na učitele odborného vzdělávání [pokud potřeba, určete: obor studia, poskytovatele vzdělávání, školní rok]

Indicator Phrasing

English: average number of VET trainees per trainer [if required, specify: given trade, VET institution, school year]

French: nombre moyen d’étudiants en EFP par formateur [si nécessaire, précisez: métier, établissement d'EFP, année scolaire]

Czech: průměrný počet studentů na učitele odborného vzdělávání [pokud potřeba, určete: obor studia, poskytovatele vzdělávání, školní rok]

What is its purpose?

Trainee to Trainer ratio belongs among the key factors influencing the quality of the students' learning. A high trainee-trainer ratio suggests that each trainer is responsible for a large number of pupils. The lower the number of trainees in the group, the higher the relative access of trainees to the trainer and the available equipment. Trainers can also pay attention to the individual trainees, which may positively impact on their performance.

How to Collect and Analyse the Required Data

Calculate the indicator's value by dividing the total number of trainees enrolled in the given VET program by the number of trainers in the same VET program.

  

If the trainers teach in more than one VET program, then only the relative share directly related to the given VET program should be counted. For example, if a trainer spends 50% of his time training veterinarian students and 50% of his time training animal husbandry students than he should only be counted as 0,5 trainer in trainee-trainer ratio for each of the VET programs.

  

The data can be obtained from registers of VET providers, teacher records and education authorities.

Important Comments

1) If a VET institution suffers from low attendance rates, then the indicator should be calculated based on the number of attending trainees (instead of enrolled ones).

  

2) The results can be compared with established national norms on the number of students/ trainees per teacher/ trainer for each level or type of education.

  

3) This indicator does not take into account factors which could affect the quality of teaching/ learning, such as differences in trainers’ qualifications, pedagogical training, experiences and status, teaching methods, teaching materials and variations in classroom conditions.

Access Additional Guidance

Propose Improvements