« Previous | Contents | Next »
Listen
Background and Method
15. This report sets out the key findings of the 2007 national activity survey for community learning and development (and associated evaluation). The survey was carried out by Learning Connections (part of the Lifelong Learning Directorate in the Scottish Government) with the objective of quantifying the scale of the activity delivered by community learning and development ( CLD) providers across Scotland.
16. This quantitative data collection is part of a wider range of work that aims to improve the quality and availability of performance information related to CLD at both national and local level. The CLD Performance Information Project ( PIP) was launched at a seminar in October 2004 and ran through to June 2006. It took forward strands of work focusing on improving information on the outcomes, outputs and inputs of CLD. The project recognised the importance of a robust but limited core of information at national level, and of supporting CLD partners to improve local information for their own management purposes.
17. Learning Connections is now working with partners to take forward a programme of work building on the Performance Information Project:
- To maintain and develop the national evidence base on CLD activity and outcomes which can feed in to the National Performance Framework and inform policy;
- To support development of local performance information systems and of work to evidence the outcomes of CLD at local level.
18. The robust collection of quantitative information on the CLD activity delivered in Scotland is central to achieving these objectives. Learning Connections is considering information on CLD in terms of: the inputs required to deliver the activity; the outputs actually delivered; and the outcomes that these achieve. This survey is our main source of information on the outputs of CLD.
19. Until the pilot data collection undertaken in 2005, there had been no systematic national collection of information on community learning and development since 1997. Increasingly, the need for robust collection of data reflecting the activity of the sector has become a priority.
Survey aims
20. At a local level information is required to plan, monitor and evaluate the delivery of CLD activity within communities, as well as to inform local strategies and policy.
21. Similarly at the national level there is a need for information which quantifies the scope and scale of CLD in Scotland to support the development and evaluation of national policies and priorities by the Scottish Government. This information is used along with other information being gathered by Learning Connections, from a range of sources, to provide an increasingly accurate picture of all aspects of the CLD sector.
Survey design
22. The survey was substantively based on the previous CLD Activity Survey which took place in November 2006.
23. The survey itself remained relatively straightforward. It focussed on the three national priorities for CLD:
- achievement through learning for adults;
- achievement through learning for young people; and
- achievement through building community capacity.
24. For the first two priorities, providers were asked to report all the opportunities provided directly by them that were accessed in the reporting week. It should be noted that the number of opportunities accessed may be greater than the number of individuals participating as any individual may undertake more than one activity within the week. This should not be considered as double counting as we are deliberately counting the uptake of opportunities, not individuals.
25. For the third national priority, community capacity building, we asked for the number of community groups that had received support during the reporting week.
26. There is an important distinction between opportunities accessed and individual uptake of those opportunities. It is not feasible in this type of multi-agency survey to collect the levels of participation of individuals with reasonable confidence that double counting has been avoided.
27. The counts of opportunities accessed were carried out over the course of the reporting week, 5 - 11 November 2007. This was expected to give a snapshot of a typical week.
28. It was not expected that it would be possible to multiply this figure by 52 to give a year's activity. It should also be noted that across the organisations involved, we would expect to see variation in the numbers for the chosen week. Put simply, in some areas this will be a quiet week, in others a busy week. Across the country (assuming this variation is random in nature) we would expect the fluctuations to balance out to give a reasonable national figure. As part of the evaluation, respondents were asked how typical the week selected was for them.
29. The questionnaire was set in context with a description of the background to the survey explaining why we were requesting this information. General guidance was provided explaining the concepts behind the data collection in terms of what and how data should be reported. The guidance recognised the cross-cutting nature of much of the work of CLD and asked respondents to count activity where it best fitted within the three national priorities.
30. Detailed guidance and definitions relating to each question were provided along with the survey form. Due to the complex nature of the CLD sector the definitions are extremely important. Definitions were produced by Learning Connections for the pilot data collection, with guidance from the CLD field and drawing upon widely used definitions already in existence. These were positively evaluated in previous surveys and were used substantively unchanged in this year's survey. In addition, as a response to feedback in the 2006 evaluation, examples were included in the guidance. A word version of the survey form was also included to allow participants to prepare the appropriate data prior to completion of the on-line survey form.
Evaluation process and quality assurance
31. In order to allow for local quality assurance of the data, following the close of the survey, each CLD partnership was given the opportunity to review and confirm the returns from their partnership area. Some figures were revised and updated as a result of this.
32. The continuity between the survey questions in the previous surveys gave the opportunity to compare figures for local authority delivery between the two years. The checking process involved identifying the biggest changes year on year. This was done in two stages:
- Firstly, by stratifying the data for local authorities into quartiles (8 local authorities in each quartile) based on the number of opportunities accessed per head of population for the first two questions; and in relation to number of community groups supported per head of population for the third.
- Then, the upper quartile was checked for significant variation between the 2006 figures and the 2007 figures. Where significant changes were detected, lead officers were re-contacted and asked to either confirm or amend their figures. Two lead officers responded with changes to their local authority returns and the others confirmed, giving reasons for the differences.
33. An evaluation questionnaire was included in the on-line survey form. The person coordinating the data collection was asked to complete it with regards to the survey form and the guidance attached.
34. The evaluation questions can be found in Appendix 2.
« Previous | Contents | Next »