 |  |
| www.dg.dial.pipex.com | 765 readers since 19 Aug 2007 |
| |
| www.dg.dial.pipex.com | 765 readers since 19 Aug 2007 |
Plowden (1967) Notes on the text Volume 2 Preliminary pages Foreword and Contents
The 1964 National Survey: Appendix 3 1964 National Survey
Appendix 8 Social services and primary education
Report (full text) about Plowden |
The Plowden Report (1967)
A Report of the Central Advisory Council for Education (England) London: Her Majesty's Stationery Office 1967
Volume 2 Appendix 3
1964 National survey of parental attitudes and circumstances related to school and pupil characteristics The Survey consists of: Foreword Appendix 3: Survey among parents of primary school children by Roma Morton-Williams, The Government Social Survey. Appendix 4: The regression analyses of the National Survey by GF Peaker. Appendix 5 : The National Survey: data from the schools. Appendix 6 : The National Survey: infant starters. Appendix 7 : Standards of reading of eleven year olds 1948-1964 by GF Peaker. Annexes to the National Survey.
Foreword 1. The surveys carried out for the last three reports of the Central Advisory Council, and other research, have provided powerful evidence linking home circumstances with the pupils' educational progress. Parental occupation was used as the measure of home circumstances because it was easily ascertainable. But it was clear that the association between the occupation of the parent and the achievement in school of the child must arise, at any rate in part, from the association between occupations and attitudes, and that the variation in attitudes might account for a good deal more of the variation in achievement. It therefore seemed desirable to attempt to estimate the influence of occupation, irrespective of attitudes, and of attitudes, irrespective of occupation. 2. With this end in view, the Council requested the Department of Education and Science to commission the Social Survey Division of the Central Office of Information to interview the parents of a representative national sample of primary school children. The children were at three stages of the primary school, 'top' infant, first year junior and fourth year junior. The evidence obtained by the Social Survey from the parents covered aspects both of parental circumstances and parental attitudes. The opportunity was also taken to find out the attitude of parents on aspects of school organisation on which the Council might wish to recommend changes and to obtain information about facilities for children in the neighbourhood of the schools. The report of the Social Survey follows this foreword and is Appendix 3. 3. The regression analyses, reported in Appendix 4, formed the core of the enquiry. The evidence from the Social Survey interviews with parents has been linked with evidence from the schools that the children attended. The evidence from the schools included the children's performance in tests of reading comprehension (and also a picture test for the youngest) their rank order and many facts about their teachers and the school organisation. Estimates are made of the part played by parental attitudes, independently of their circumstances, and by circumstances, independently of attitudes, in influencing the children's achievement in school. There are also estimates of the effect of variation in schools and teaching, independently of parental attitudes and circumstances. 4. Just as parental attitudes were tested on matters not immediately relevant to the main enquiry, so information was obtained from the schools, which was too detailed - or otherwise unsuitable - for use in the regression analyses but was of general interest for the Council's Report. Evidence about the staffing and organisation of schools and the attendance of teachers at short courses is reported and tabulated in Appendix 5 (Data from the Schools). 5. Information was needed by the Council about the way in which beginners at school settled down. In infant schools and junior mixed and infant schools included in the main sample, a sample was drawn of those children who began school in the summer term of 1964. Their parents were interviewed by the Social Survey interviewers and information was obtained from the schools. The results of this enquiry are reported in Appendix 6. 6. One of the criterion variables used for the analyses relating to fourth year juniors was the Watts-Vernon Reading Test. This is the test that was used for the Department's chain of surveys of reading ability from 1948-1956. It was therefore possible to compare the reading standards of children of 11 in 1964 with those of earlier years since 1948. The results are reported in Appendix 7. 7. To supplement the work on the representative sample a special group of schools was selected by HM Inspectorate. This group consisted of a dozen schools where the relation with parents was thought to be particularly good. The Social Survey interviewed the parents of a sample of children from these schools. The evidence from the interviews vindicated the judgements that led to the selection of the schools, but there was no perceptible difference between the average of the children's achievements and the general average. 8. The Social Survey also interviewed the parents of a sample of children drawn from the Manchester schools on which Professor Wiseman reports in Appendix 9. 9. Finally, they interviewed the parents of selected children from four schools, two streamed and two unstreamed, in the sample of schools from which the evidence was drawn for the interim report on streaming contained in Appendix 11 by the NFER. 10. We believe that the data collected from the Survey may be of use to research workers and are glad to hear that the Department of Education and Science have made arrangements for the material to be preserved in a form accessible to research workers and institutions. 11. It remains only to thank all those who collaborated in the National Survey: the parents who were ready to give their time to the interviews; the teachers who returned much information about school organisation and about individual pupils and, at short notice, tested the pupils in the sample; and, finally, the research workers and those who helped them. We are much indebted to the Social Survey, to their interviewers and their staff and, in particular, to Miss R Morton-Williams who describes the results of the interviews with parents. We also wish to thank Mrs E Fisher who gave much help with the Survey. The main plan of the enquiry was designed by Mr GF Peaker, CBE, and Miss SMC Duncan, HMI. To Mr Peaker, also, we owe the design and analysis of the standards of reading survey.
Appendix 3 Survey among parents of primary school children by Roma Morton-Williams, Government Social Survey Contents I: The method of enquiry (a) The sampling procedure (b) The interviewing II: The home backgrounds of primary school children (a) Social class and economic position of the families
(b) The educational level of the homes (c) The educational support given to children in their homes
(d) Parental aspirations for their children
(e) Physical conditions of the home and neighbourhood amenities
III: Parental attitudes to primary education (a) School starting age. Changes of and parental choice of primary school
(b) Parental contacts with the primary schools
(c) Parents' views on school organisation and teaching methods
(d) Behaviour training and discipline of children (e) Other general comments about primary schooling IV: A summary of some of the interrelations between partental attitudes to education, home crcumstances and social class Annex I The sample design Annex II Technical note on the factor analysis of information from the parental interviews Annex III The interview questionnaire List of tables 1. Member of child's family interviewed, analysed by form
I: The method of enquiry 1.1. This survey among parents of primary school children investigated their attitudes towards the education their children were receiving and their relationships with the teaching staff of their children's schools. It also obtained information about the interest displayed by parents in their children's education and the hopes they had for their future. In addition, facts were collected about the socio-economic status of the families, the physical conditions of the homes, and neighbourhood amenities of these primary school children. (a) The sampling procedure 1.2. The sampling procedure had two stages. First a random sample was taken from all types of maintained primary schools in England. Then a random selection was made of children within these schools. The parents of these children formed the interview sample. Full details of the method of sampling are given in Annex I. 1.3. A total of 173 schools were selected in the first stage of the sampling. In the second stage within these schools four, eight or 12 children, depending on the size of the school, were selected from each of the three forms. In the junior with infants schools all three forms would of course be present. In the juniors only two forms, top and bottom juniors and in the infants only the top infants form. This procedure gave an interview sample of 3,237 parents. The interview achievement was as follows:
1.4. It should be borne in mind that the sample for this survey is of children in primary schools whose parents were interviewed. Parents' chances of coming into the sample were related to the number of children they had in primary schools. This inquiry is, however, about the backgrounds of children at school and it seemed right, therefore, that the sampling design should give each child an equal probability of being selected, regardless of the size of family to which he or she belonged. 1.5. At the time of the survey the majority of the top juniors were 11, the bottom juniors eight and the top infants seven years old. (b) The interviewing 1.6. The structured questionnaire shown in Annex III was used for the interviewing. There were two stages in its development, the first was to establish what were the most important topics to cover in the interview, the second was to test the actual wording of questions and the structure of the questionnaire. In the first stage advice was sought from heads and other teachers in primary schools, care committee workers and child welfare officers. Discussions were held with four groups of parents and freely-ranging individual interviews with approximately fifty parents. In the second stage the questionnaire was tried out in interviews with approximately 200 parents. Thanks are very much due here to HMI Miss SMC Duncan of the Central Advisory Council for Education who contributed greatly to the planning of the survey and the design of the questionnaire. 1.7. The parents were interviewed in their homes by Social Survey interviewers. The interviews took place over the period 22 June to 31 July 1964. Within the time available for the inquiry it would not have been feasible to interview both parents separately and as it is extremely difficult to carry out an interview with two people together it was decided as far as possible to see the mother of the selected child alone. The mother was chosen rather than the father because it was thought that in the majority of families she would be the parent having most direct contact with the school, at least when the child was at the primary stage. The interviews were in fact carried out with the following members of the children's families: Table 1 Member of child's family interviewed, analysed by form 1.8. The interviewers were instructed to make every effort to interview the mother on her own. In 43 per cent of the interviews however at least one other person was present for part or the whole of the interview. Table 2 shows the relationship to the selected child of other people present. Table 2 Other people present during interview, analysed by form 1.9. The parents showed great interest in the inquiry and were very ready to give their views. Over half of the interviews lasted for an hour or longer. (See Table 3). Table 3 Length of time interviews lasted, analysed by form
II: The home backgrounds of primary school children 2.1. Parents' attitudes towards the education their children are receiving, the sort of relationship they have with the schools and the role they expect or wish the schools to take in the upbringing of their children are of course likely to be related to characteristics of the parents themselves, such as their own level of education, and also to home circumstances such as the financial position of the family. In presenting the results of this survey, therefore, we look first at the home backgrounds of these children in primary schools and then at parental attitudes towards their schooling. 2.2. In this section we examine the socio-economic status of these families; the incidence of working mothers and broken homes and how these are related to economic circumstances; parents' education and reading habits; the amount of educational support which appeared to be given to the children in their homes, parents' aspirations for their children and, finally, the physical conditions and amenities of the homes and the neighbourhoods. (a) Social class and economic position of the families (i) Social class 2.3. The social class grouping used in this inquiry was the Registrar General's classification based on occupations, 1960 edition. The social class of the family was determined by the occupation of the father or father substitute. If there was no father or father substitute in the household at the time of the interview then the classification was based on the occupation of the father or father substitute when last in the household. If the father was unemployed, then his last occupation was used. Only one per cent of the families could not be classified by paternal occupation. The proportions of the sample falling into each social class group are given below. For comparison is given the social class distribution of married males aged 20 to 64 in the general population at the time of the 1961 census.
2.4. The social class distributions of these families in the 10 Department of Education Divisions in England are given in Table 4. It must be remembered that the distribution within a Division is based on a relatively small sample of schools. The Divisions with the lowest proportion of these families in social classes I and II were the North West, North Midlands, Midlands and Northern. The highest proportion were in the South Western. The Metropolitan division had the highest proportion of fathers who were in unskilled and labouring occupations. The highest proportion of skilled manual workers were in the North Midland and the lowest in the South Eastern. Table 4 Social class distribution of family by Department of Education Division 2.5. In Table 5 is shown the social class distribution in this sample of the children in the three different primary school forms included in the inquiry. In examining social class and form differences in later tables it should be borne in mind that, in this sample, social class I parents had a slightly lower proportion of children in the top juniors and social class V a slightly higher proportion than did the other social class groups. Table 5 Child's form by social class (ii) Income level 2.6. Two measures of the economic levels of the families were obtained. Firstly the net income of the father, or if there was no father, of the head of the household. This was his income for the week before the interview, including any overtime or bonuses and excluding income tax, national insurance deductions and family allowances. The second measure was the total of the net incomes of the father plus the mother, if she had any, plus family allowances and any other income apart from money received from other working members of the family living in the household. The latter contributions were not included because it was not possible to determine what proportion went to raising the standard of living of the family in general and what was spent directly on the person who had made the contribution. 2.7. Table 6 shows the relationship between social class and income of father. For each social class group the salary band in which the median salary falls is shown in bold type. Although there was a wide spread of incomes within each social class group, there was nevertheless a marked difference between the general income levels of the different groups with the median salaries of those in social classes IV and V being in the £12 10s. 0d. [£12.50] to £15 per week range, and of the class Is being £25 to £30. Table 6 Net income of father, analysed by social class 2.8. The way in which the father's or head of the household's income is augmented by the addition of income from the mother, family allowances, and income from other sources is shown below and in more detail in Table 7. It must be remembered that any contributions made by members of the family other than father and mother are not included. In subsection (c) of this section it is shown that in almost half the families with incomes of £10 or less per week there was either no father or no mother in the household.
Table 7 Income of father only, by income of father plus mother plus family allowances 2.9. The numbers of dependent children in families of different income level are given in Table 8. Dependent children were taken as those who had not started school or were still in full-time education. Apart from the lowest incomes, that is £10 per week or less, there was very little difference between family income level and the numbers of dependent children in the family. At the £10 a week or lower income level there were slightly lower proportions of families with more than three dependent children but even so 18 per cent of these families had four or more children not yet at school or still in full-time education. (This latter finding is based on only 103 cases however.) Table 8 Total net income of father and mother and number of dependent children (iii) Working mothers 2.10. At the time of the survey over one third of the mothers were in paid employment. For 17 per cent their work took them away from home for five hours or more a day. The lowest proportion of working mothers was in social class I, 18 per cent. In the other social class groups the proportions of working mothers varied only from 34 per cent in class II to 44 per cent in class IV. (See Table 9.) Thirty-four per cent of mothers of children in the top infants forms worked, the proportion rose to 46 per cent with children in the top juniors. Table 9 Mothers' hours of work, analysed by social class 2.11. There was a marked association between the income of the father (or head of the household) and the likelihood both of the mother being in paid employment and of working away from home for five hours or more a day. Approximately half of the mothers in the £10 a week or lower income category were working and the proportion of working mothers fell steadily through the income groups to a quarter in the £25 a week or higher category. (See Table 10.) Table 10 Mothers' hours of work analysed by income of father or head of household (iv) Broken homes 2.12. One or both of the natural parents was missing from at least eight per cent of the homes in which interviews were conducted. The true figure might well be higher than this because informants may not always have told interviewers whether either or both parents were not the child's natural parents. The interviewers were instructed not to press the checking of this point if to do so was likely to cause resentment or distress. In the sample of children selected for this survey 0.3 per cent were found to be living in institutions or group homes. No interviews were attempted for these children. The parental situation where both natural parents were not in the household was as follows:
2.13. There was no significant association between the proportion of broken families and social class. However in 47 of the 103 families with incomes of £10 a week or less there was either no father or no mother in the household. The fatherless families were the only group large enough to examine further. Tables 11 and 12 compare family incomes and the employment position of the mother in fatherless and normal families. Fifty-six per cent of the fatherless families had an income of £12 10s. 0d. per week or less compared with seven per cent of the normal families. A larger proportion of these mothers were working and 41 per cent of them were away from home for over five hours a day compared with 16 per cent of mothers in the normal families. Table 11 Comparison of family incomes of fatherless and normal families Table 12 Comparison of employment position of mothers in fatherless and normal families Note: Broken families other than fatherless ones are omitted from Tables 11 and 12. (b) The educational level of the homes 2.14. There is no doubt that the type of education which parents have themselves had is likely to colour their attitudes in one way or another towards the value of education in general and to affect their aspirations for their children. Parents' own educational experience may well also affect their understanding of what the schools are trying to achieve now and may limit the extent to which they are able to follow what their children are doing, irrespective of how interested they are or how anxious to encourage their children in their school work. 2.15. It is important then to note that over half of these children's parents had completed their continuous full-time formal education by the age of 14. Sixty-three per cent of the fathers and 81 per cent of the mothers had had no further education after leaving school. Further education is defined here as professional, academic, trade or vocational courses taken full or part-time or by correspondence but lasting for at least a session; completion of full apprenticeship or qualification as state registered nurse is included. (See Tables 13 and 14 at the end of Section II.) 2.16. As would be expected there was a very close association between level of parents' education, particularly father's, and the occupation of the father. Only a very small proportion of the fathers in social classes IV and V, that is those who were doing semi- or unskilled work, had stayed at school beyond the age of 14 or taken any further education. In the large skilled-manual occupational category further education of fathers had mainly taken the form of apprenticeships. The majority of mothers in this group had had no further education after leaving school. Further information about the family's educational experience is obtained by considering whether at least one member, that is father, mother, brother or sister of the selected child had been to a selective secondary school. A selective secondary school is taken as one in which there is some selection of entrants by ability. Included here are state grammar and technical schools, private grammar schools, and pre-1947 secondary, central, intermediate and higher grade schools. Comprehensive schools have also been included as they provide a wide range of courses. The proportion of families who, in this sense, had had some experience of selective secondary education ranged from only 15 per cent in social class V to 88 per cent in social class I. (See Table 15.) 2.17. Apart from further educational courses as already defined only a small proportion of the parents had taken any recreational or leisure time courses for interest. Sixteen per cent of the fathers and 26 per cent of the mothers had taken such courses. Again there was a marked difference between the social class groups but in each class a higher proportion of mothers than fathers had taken some type of leisure course. 2.18. The probability is that if parents have firm habits of reading their children also will be more likely to develop similar interests. The majority of these parents said that they liked to do some reading when they had time for relaxing. The wives of manual workers, however, tended to read as a form of relaxation rather less than their husbands. The main form of reading was of newspapers and magazines. 2.19. Less than half of the parents belonged to a lending library of any sort at the time of the interview and in approximately a third of the families neither parent had ever belonged to a library. Twenty-nine per cent of the parents possessed less than six books apart from children's books. There was a marked increase with social class both in the incidence of library membership among parents and in the number of books they possessed. (See Tables 16 and 17.) (c) The educational support given to children in their homes 2.20. In this section are considered some aspects of child upbringing and parental attitudes which seem likely to support or to hinder the primary schools in what they are trying to achieve. We examine the extent to which parents spend time with their children and the interest taken by fathers in their children's upbringing. We also consider the amount of reading children do at home, parental attitudes towards children of these ages doing any school work at home and whether any help with school work is given outside school. (i) Time spent by parents with their children 2.21 We look first at the extent to which parents said that they had any time free to join in activities with their children, should their children wish it, such as playing or reading with them, taking them out or showing them how to do things. Approximately half of the mothers were able to spend time with their children on most evenings during the week. The others were free only occasionally or not at all on weekday evenings. Whether mothers were available in the evenings was related to the form the child was in. Fifty-eight per cent of the mothers of children in the top infants were free most evenings compared with 42 per cent with children in the top juniors. (See Table 18.) Whether mothers were working or not and the hours worked made little difference to their being able to give time to their children in the evenings. 2.22. A quarter of the fathers were not able to join in activities with their children on weekday evenings and almost a third were only available occasionally if at all at weekends. In families in which the father was a manual worker there was a slight tendency for the parents to be less often available to spend time with their children than in other families. Over a quarter of the fathers in skilled and semi-skilled manual occupations were on shift work or permanent night work or were regularly working away from home for at least two nights each week. (See Tables 19 and 20.) 2.23. There was a marked social class difference in the proportions of families which went for outings together, that is other than visits to relatives or to church or out shopping. The families with fathers in the non-manual occupations were more inclined than the manual worker families to go on outings together and also to have had their last outing more recently. (ii) Interest taken by fathers in their children's education and upbringing 2.24. The social class groups showed very different patterns in the responsibility taken by fathers over the educational progress of their children at the primary stage. The proportion of mothers who said that their husbands had taken an interest in the schools their children went to increased markedly with social class. Over 40 per cent of the fathers in manual occupations had left the starting of their children at the sampled school entirely to their wives. Almost half of these fathers had not been to the child's present school at all and less than a quarter of them had talked to the heads; on the other hand not a very high proportion of fathers in any social class had talked with the heads. (See Table 21.) 2.25. The majority of mothers in all social classes said that their husbands were taking an interest in how their children were getting on at school but again rather more of the manual occupation fathers left this responsibility to their wives. (iii) Reading habits of children 2.26. The very great majority of children did some reading at home apart from homework. The frequency of reading increased with social class as also did the tendency for the children to read books and not just magazines or comics. 2.27. Approximately half of the children took books home from school to read and over half borrowed books from libraries, other than the school's. In all 80 per cent borrowed books from one or other sources. The proportion borrowing books increased both for school and library books as the children moved up the school. (See Table 22.) 2.28. In the social class V families there was a slight dropping off compared with other families in the proportion of children taking books home from school. The children from manual working families were less likely than those from non-manual to borrow books from libraries (see Table 23). Taking both sources of book borrowing together there was a marked relationship between the proportion of children borrowing books and social class, the percentages ranging from 73 per cent in social class V to 95 per cent in class I. (See Table 24.) 2.29. Parents whose children did not borrow books were asked if they would be quite happy if their children were to bring books home to read or whether they would be worried that these books might get spoilt. In all five per cent of the mothers from the manual worker families said that in fact they would be worried about this. (iv) Parents' attitudes towards school work being done at home and towards helping their children with school work 2.30. We now consider parents' views on whether their children should be given any school work to do at home at the primary stage of their education. Over the school years covered in this sample there were marked increases both in the proportions of children already doing some school work at home and of parents approving of their doing so. In the top juniors 61 per cent of children were already given work to do at home and 75 per cent of parents wanted some homework for their children. Of the top juniors' parents whose children already had homework, 11 per cent thought that they should not be given any at all and 26 per cent thought that they should have more. Among the top infants children 26 per cent already had homework and 46 per cent of parents approved of the idea. Of the top infants' parents whose children had homework 16 per cent did not want them to have any and 19 per cent wanted them to have more. (See Table 25.) 2.31. It is of interest that the children of manual workers were slightly less likely than other children to be given any school work to do at home but that there was little social class difference in the proportions of parents wanting their children to be given some homework. (See Table 26.) 2.32. Almost a third of the parents had asked for their children to be given some school work to do at home or had asked the teachers to show them how they could help their children at home. The proportions asking increased slightly with social class. Just over a third had bought copies, to have at home, of some of the textbooks their children were using in school. Considerably higher proportions of parents from the non-manual than manual worker families had done this. 2.33. Parents' attitudes towards helping their children at home with school work were related to social class and to the stages the children had reached in their primary schools. The proportions who considered that parents should leave all teaching and helping with school subjects to the teachers ranged from 30 per cent in social class I to 49 per cent in class V. Seventy-six per cent of those in class I said that their children were given help with school work outside school compared with 57 per cent in class V. Thirteen per cent of the mothers said that they had too much to do to spend time on helping their children with school work (three per cent in class I, 23 per cent in class V). There was however no difference here between working and non-working mothers. 2.34. The lower children were in the school the more likely they were to be helped with school work at home. Seventy-three per cent of those in the top infants were helped compared with 42 per cent in the top juniors. This may well be related to the difficulties that some parents said that they had in helping their children because methods of teaching had changed so much since they themselves were at school. In all social classes help was given mainly by the child's mother and/or father. (d) Parental aspirations for their children (i) School leaving age 2.35. At the time this inquiry was carried out approximately half of the young people in maintained secondary schools stayed at school beyond the statutory leaving age and the trend was for this proportion to increase. The government had already announced their decision to raise the school leaving age to 16 in 1970. In general this would affect all the children in the top infants classes of our sample, most of those in the bottom juniors but none of the top juniors. 2.36. In view of the government's decision it is an important finding that three quarters of the parents in this sample had positive hopes at this stage in their children's lives that they would stay at school longer than the minimum leaving age which would apply to them. Only seven per cent definitely wanted their children to leave as soon as possible (see Table 27). Parents may become less keen, for financial or other reasons, for their children to stay on at school as they approach the permitted age of leaving. On the other hand there have been steady increases in the proportions of pupils staying on at school voluntarily and staying on right into the sixth forms and it seems likely therefore that parents' attitudes towards the value of a longer school life are changing. If this is so, these younger parents might be expected to be in the forefront of any general change in this area of attitudes. 2.37. There were some social class differences in parents' attitudes towards their children staying on at school. Virtually none of the non-manual occupation parents wanted their children to leave as soon as possible and over half hoped that they would stay until 18 or over. Among the manual workers the proportions of parents definitely wanting their children to leave at the minimum age possible ranged from eight per cent of the skilled manual to 15 per cent of the unskilled. From 17 to 21 per cent of these parents would not say at that stage whether they wanted their children to leave early or to stay on. It is noteworthy however that over a third of the social class V parents hoped that their children would stay at school till 17 or over; the proportions hoping this increased through the other social class groups. 2.38. There was little difference between the attitudes towards age of leaving school of parents with children in the different forms included in the sample, or towards the leaving age thought appropriate for boys compared with girls. (ii) Secondary school preferences 2.39. The children in the top junior classes had already mostly been allocated to their secondary schools by the time the interviewing was carried out. Twenty-three per cent were going to grammar schools, 61 per cent to secondary modern and seven per cent to comprehensive. The other nine per cent were going to technical or independent schools or the type of secondary school was not known. We now compare this actuality with the hopes parents had had for their children's secondary education. Approximately half of all parents hoped, or had hoped, that their children would go to grammar schools. Twenty-four per cent of parents of top junior children said that they had wanted their children to go to secondary modern schools compared with 12 per cent of the parents with children in the earlier stages of the primary school. As would be expected a larger proportion of the parents of the younger children had not thought about the type of secondary school preferred. A comparison is made below between the hopes of parents at different stages and the actual allocation of the top juniors to secondary school.
2.40. There were marked social class differences in the proportions both of parents hoping that their children would go to grammar schools and of those achieving their ambitions. Of the top juniors whose parents had wanted them to go to grammar schools 52 per cent of the children of non-manual occupation fathers had gained grammar school places and 36 per cent of the manual workers. (See Tables 28, 29 and 30.) 2.41. The reasons for wanting their children to go to grammar schools which were given most frequently by parents were, firstly, that they considered that the standard of teaching and of education was better and that their children would learn more than at other schools (65 per cent), and secondly that a grammar school education led to better career prospects (60 per cent). Other reasons mentioned less frequently were that the grammar school curriculum was better and offered subjects in which their children were interested (22 per cent), or that their children had intellectual or academic abilities and that they hoped that a grammar school course would enable them to go to university (19 per cent). Seventeen per cent referred to what they felt to be the social advantages of going to grammar schools arising from their traditions and reputations. They cited the character training and general preparation for life given at grammar schools and the type of pupils with whom their children would be associating. (See Table 31.) 2.42. The parents who said that they would like their children to go to secondary modern schools mentioned most frequently the varied, interesting and wide curricula and the type of subjects offered as being attractive (41 per cent). Thirty-seven per cent knew of other children who were happy there or said that their children would be helped by having friends or relatives already there. Twenty-seven per cent thought that their children would learn more in a secondary modern school and that the education and teaching given was better. 2.43. Comprehensive schools were the preferred secondary schools of less than one in ten of the parents. This cannot be taken as a judgement on comprehensive schools however as it was found at the pilot stage of the survey that many parents did not know what they were. The attractions of these schools were the wide curricula offered (69 per cent), the standard of education and teaching (30 per cent), the social advantages in mixing with different types of pupils and the general preparation for life which they felt their children would have (17 per cent). 2.44. Technical schools were liked for the better career opportunities they offered (63 per cent), the subjects covered (50 per cent) and the standard of education and teaching (23 per cent). 2.45. Only three per cent of the total sample hoped to send their children to independent schools at the secondary stage. These parents thought particularly that their children would have a better standard of education and would also have social and career advantages from going to this type of school. 2.46. Parents in the non-manual occupational groups were considerably more likely than those in manual work to be positively opposed to their children going to some schools. (See Table 32.) The most disliked type of schools were secondary moderns and the criticisms most frequently made of them were of the behaviour of the pupils; that they were rough, bad mannered, poorly disciplined or lax in morals. Next in number came comments about the teaching, that the pupils did not seem to learn anything and that their progress was slow. (See Table 33.) (e) Physical conditions of the home and neighbourhood amenities (i) Physical conditions and amenities of the home 2.47. Some physical conditions of the home which seem likely to have an adverse influence on children's development are overcrowdedness, which may result in ill health and fatigue both of parents and children, lack of play space and of variety of stimulation, impermanent tenancy of accommodation and lack of, or sharing of, basic facilities such as running hot water and a fixed bath or shower. 2.48. We consider now the type of accommodation in which these families were living. The great majority (91 per cent) were in whole houses. More of those with fathers in non-manual than manual occupations were in detached or semi-detached houses. Eight per cent of the families overall were in self-contained flats and one per cent in rooms or caravans. Of the families in social class V however 15 per cent were accommodated in flats and five per cent in rooms or caravans. There was a close association between ownership of dwelling and social class with 84 per cent of social class I owning or buying their dwellings compared with 15 per cent of class V. 2.49. The measure of crowdedness of the home which we have used is the bedroom deficiency index devised by PG Gray of the Government Social Survey. This index is calculated by comparing the number of bedrooms possessed by a household with the standard given below. This standard has no statutory standing but seemed to us to be the most useful measure of crowdedness for this inquiry. A standard number of bedrooms has been allocated to each household, the number of bedrooms being allocated in the following order: (i) Each married couple was given one bedroom.2.50. On the bedroom deficiency index the children of manual workers were very much worse off than those of non-manual. There was a steady deterioration in standards from the social class I families, only three per cent of which had one or more bedrooms less than the standard considered satisfactory, to the social class Vs with 43 per cent of families having too few bedrooms. Among the non-manual occupational groups the proportions of families which had two or more bedrooms less than the standard were negligible. In the manual workers groups the proportions ranged from six per cent of the skilled workers to 11 per cent of the unskilled. (See Table 34.) 2.51. The bedroom accommodation situation of this sample of families with children in primary schools was in general lower than that of the general population in 1960, recorded in Social Survey Report SS 319 The Housing Situation in 1960 by PG Gray and R Russell. In that survey, it was found that 15 per cent of households in Greater London had fewer bedrooms than the standard. For the rest of England and Wales the proportion was 11 per cent. Our figure for households with children in primary schools in England is 25 per cent. This difference between the general population and our figures is not unexpected as under-occupied property tends to be lived in mainly by older people whose families have grown up and moved away. 2.52. Other amenities of the home which give an indication of the standard of living of families are whether their accommodation has hot water from a tap, a fixed bath or shower and whether the family owns or has the use of a car. Seven per cent of the families had no running hot water in their homes and 10 per cent no fixed bath or shower. The proportion sharing a hot water tap or a fixed bath or shower with other households was one per cent for each. In respect of these facilities the families of manual workers were again worse off than the non-manual, the proportions with no running hot water rising to 17 per cent in social class V, and with no fixed bath or shower to 19 per cent. 2.53. Just over half of the families owned or had the use of a car but again there was a marked difference between the social classes with the proportions with a car ranging from 93 per cent in class I to 17 per cent in class V. (ii) Neighbourhood amenities for children 2.54. We look now at the information on the playing areas and facilities available for and used by these children. Only five per cent of the homes had no garden, yard, or play space, either for their sole use or shared, which the child could use. Again however the manual workers' families were worse off and 11 per cent of social class V had no play area for their children. The family's own garden or open space round or between dwellings were the main areas used by just over half the children when playing out of doors. 2.55. The next most common type of play areas were parks, heaths, commons, or fields. Thirteen per cent of the children played mainly in streets which were not specifically designated 'play' streets. Expectedly, larger proportions of those in the higher social classes tended to play mainly in their own gardens or areas round their homes, and smaller proportions of them than in the lower social classes went to parks, commons or fields, played in the street or used outdoor playgrounds or recreation grounds. 2.56. Parents were asked what recreational facilities there were in the neighbourhood within easy distance of their homes, that is easy distance for a child to get to by himself or, if too young, for the parent or other adult to take the child. It was left to the parents to decide whether in their particular circumstances they felt that the various facilities were readily accessible to their children. It is possible that some amenities might have been available but not known about by parents. 2.57. The great majority of these families had public libraries with children's books within easy reach of their homes. The next most commonly found facility in the neighbourhood were outdoor open spaces such as parks, heaths, fields, or public gardens where children were allowed to play (81 per cent of families). Seventy-seven per cent had, locally, children's clubs or societies such as cubs, brownies, youth clubs or church clubs for young people. Proper playgrounds or outdoor play centres, children's cinema shows, and indoor or outdoor swimming pools were each available to approximately half of the families. Only four per cent said they had any indoor recreational or play centres available for children of primary school age. (See Tables 35 and 36.) 2.58. The facilities which had been used during the previous year by the largest numbers of children were the outdoor open spaces such as parks (69 per cent of all children in the sample), the libraries (57 per cent), and outdoor playgrounds (41 per cent). The swimming pools had been attended by 33 per cent, the children's clubs by 32 per cent and the children's cinema shows by 23 per cent. 2.59. The amenities for children which were lacking from the neighbourhoods and were wanted by the largest numbers of parents were swimming pools (32 per cent of all parents in the sample), proper outdoor playgrounds (27 per cent), and indoor recreational centres for children (27 per cent). 2.60. From social class I to class V there were slightly increasing proportions of parents saying that there were proper playgrounds available in the neighbourhood and also that their children used them. With children's clubs and societies the trend was in the opposite direction. Slightly higher proportions of the children of manual than non-manual workers had been to children's film shows during the year. Rather less of them had used the children's libraries. 2.61. Understandably there was a tendency for a higher proportion of the parents of the older children to feel that there were open spaces like parks, swimming pools, children's clubs, cinema shows and libraries which could readily and safely be used by their children. The proportions of children actually using these facilities also increased with age. Children's playgrounds and the very few indoor play centres were the only amenities used equally by all age groups. Table 13 Age parents completed formal education, by social class Table 14 Whether parents had any further education after leaving school, by social class Table 15 Whether any members of family had been to a selective secondary school, by social class Table 16 Whether parents belonged to a lending library or either had belonged to one within the last 10 years, by social class Table 17 Number of books in home apart from children's books, by social class Table 18 Whether parents had any time free to do things with child, by form Table 19 Whether parents had any free time to do things with child, by social class Table 20 Whether father was on shift work etc, by social class Table 21 Interest taken by father in child's education and upbringing, by social class Table 22 Whether child borrowed books from school or public libraries to read at home, by form Table 23 Whether child borrowed books from school or public libraries to read at home, by social class Table 24 Whether borrowed books from school or other libraries or, if not, whether parent would have been worried if child had done so, by social class Table 25 Whether children were given school work to do at home and what parents felt about it, by form Table 26 Whether children were given school work to do at home and what parents felt about it, by social class Table 27 Parents' attitudes towards their children staying on at school, by social class Table 28 Children in last year of juniors. Type of secondary school child was actually going to and type of secondary school parents hoped child would go to, by social class Table 29 Children in last year of juniors. Type of secondary school child was going to by type of school parents had hoped for Table 30 Children in bottom junior or top infants classes. Type of secondary school parents hoped they would go to, by social class Table 31 Type of secondary school parents wanted child to go to and the advantages of that type Table 32 Whether any type of secondary school was particularly disliked for child, by social class Table 33 The type of secondary school parents would have disliked their child to attend and the things disliked most about that kind of school Table 34 Bedroom deficiency, by social class Table 35 Comparison of facilities for children present, used and wanted in the neighbourhood Table 36 Facilities present, used and wanted, by social class
III: Parental attitudes to primary education (a) School starting age. Changes of and parental choice of primary school 3.1. We now examine parents' experience of and attitudes towards various aspects of primary education. In this section are considered parental preferences, firstly, concerning the age of starting school and, secondly, for their children to attend school for a full or half day on first starting. We look also at the extent of parental choice of primary school, reasons for choices made and the amount of and reasons for changing schools at the primary stage. (i) Starting age, actual and preferred 3.2. Just over half of these children had started attending school, either nursery or primary, for a full day before the age of five. Eleven per cent had started before four and a half. Only two per cent had not started until they were five and a half or older. Sixteen per cent had attended a nursery school or nursery class. Children in the Metropolitan Division of Education were more likely than those in other Divisions to have attended a nursery school or class or to have started school at a younger age. Slightly higher proportions of the children of professional and of unskilled parents had been to nursery schools. Rather smaller proportions of children of professional and managerial than of other parents had started school before four and a half. (See Tables 37 to 40 and 43 at the end of Section III.) 3.3. A comparison is now made of the actual ages at which children started full time schooling with the ages preferred by parents. A prevalent tendency found in surveys is for people to express contentment with their actual circumstances rather than to want something different. An overall figure of a third of parents preferring their children to have started school at an earlier age than they did is therefore quite striking. The proportions preferring their children to have started earlier were closely related to the actual ages of starting and ranged from five per cent among parents whose children started at three and a half to almost a half of those whose children started at five or older. On the other hand, over 10 per cent of those whose children started under four would have preferred them to have had a later start. (See Table 41.) There was little difference between the social classes in the proportions who would have liked their children to have started school earlier or later than they did. 3.4. The great majority of parents who would have preferred an earlier start for their children were not in fact thinking of a very markedly earlier starting age as is shown in Table 42. The overall differences between the actual starting ages and those parents would have preferred are shown below. In considering these figures we must of course remember that our sample consists only of parents with experience of having children actually at primary schools and does not include any whose children have not yet reached that stage. In all over two thirds of the parents would have liked their children to have started full-time school before the age of five.
(ii) Full and half day starting 3.5. Only one per cent of the children had started school by going for only half a day in the first instance. Approximately a quarter of the parents thought that it would have been better for their children to have attended school only in the mornings or the afternoons at first. The proportions preferring a half rather than a full day start for their children were very markedly associated with social class and ranged from 15 per cent of class V to 42 per cent of class I. (See Tables 43 and 44.) (iii) Changes of school and parental choice of school 3.6. The proportions of children who had changed primary school at some stage rose from 18 per cent of those in the top form of the infants to 68 per cent of the top juniors. Fifteen per cent of children in the juniors had attended three or more primary schools including the one they were at when their parents were interviewed; only three per cent had been to four or more schools (See Table 45.) The lengths of time children had been at the schools in the sample are shown in Table 46. 3.7. The main reason for change of school was transfer from a separate infants to a junior school. The only other reason which was given with any frequency was that the family had moved to a different district; this accounted for over a third of the changes of school. 3.8. Just over half the parents felt that they had had a choice of primary school for their children and said that there was another school near their homes to which their children could have gone if they had wished. Private schools were not included. It needs to be borne in mind however that this was the position as the parents saw it but that they may not have known whether in fact the local education authority would have permitted their children to attend other schools in the neighbourhood. There was little difference either by social class or child's form in the proportions of parents saying that they had a choice of school. 3.9. The reasons given most frequently for selecting the school chosen were, firstly, that it was the most convenient for the child to get to, it was the nearest or safest to reach or there were no main roads to cross (49 per cent of parents who had a choice of school). Secondly came religious reasons, either that the school was chosen because it was a church school or an alternative was rejected for the same reason (30 per cent). Thirdly, parents chose primary schools because they had heard good reports about them (24 per cent) and, fourthly, because their other children or other relatives or friends of the sampled children were there or had been previously (23 per cent). Seven per cent of the parents specifically mentioned that there were better educational standards in the chosen schools and six per cent that the atmosphere seemed happier and more homely and friendly. 3.10. It is interesting that almost three quarters of the children had had other relatives attending the sampled schools either at the time of the survey or previously. Sixty-two per cent had, or had had, brothers or sisters there and as many as 20 per cent of the selected children's fathers or mothers had been at the same schools. In manual worker families children were rather more likely to have had parents, siblings or other relatives at the same school than in non-manual worker homes. (See Table 47.) 3.11. Six per cent of the parents had at some stage asked the Education Office or someone in authority for permission for the selected child to go to a different school from the one to which he or she had been allocated. Of these half had obtained and a third failed to obtain permission for the child to go to the desired school; the other cases were still undecided at the time of the interview. (b) Parental contacts with the primary schools 3.12. This section discusses the amount and type of parental contact with the primary schools. We examine the extent to which parents showed interest in their children's education by visiting the schools and discussing their children's progress with the teachers, the variety of opportunities provided by the schools for parents to see what the schools were doing and the proportions of parents who took advantage of them and, finally, parental satisfaction with the school's arrangements for seeing the staff. (i) Enquiries made and interest taken by parents when children started in school 3.13. Just over half of the parents said that they had made enquiries about the sampled school or visited it before sending the first of their children there. If parents had themselves been at the school, they were asked whether they had taken steps to find out what it was like when their children were ready to start there. The proportions who had made enquiries or visited the schools increased with social class from 50 per cent of parents in class V to 80 per cent of those in class I. It must be remembered here that there was a greater likelihood among the manual than non-manual worker classes for other relatives to have attended the same school and there might therefore have been less need for these parents to make specific inquiries when they first sent any of their own children to the school. 3.14. Enquiries about the school were made most frequently of the head or other teachers at the school and next most often of friends, relatives or neighbours whose children were already at the school or had been recently. 3.15. Over a third of the parents had not had an actual talk with the head when the selected child first started in the school which he or she was attending at the time of the survey. By a talk we mean something more than the minimum communication necessary for the child's enrolment, the head would have told the parents something about the school or discussed the child. The proportions of parents who had talked to the heads when their child started at the school was higher among those with children in the infants than in the junior forms. Again there were differences between the social class groups with the proportions varying from 78 per cent of the parents in class I having had an initial talk with the head to 60 per cent of those in class V. (See Table 48.) 3.16. Among the parents who had talked to the heads when their children started at school the majority had been seen on their own by the heads. Fourteen per cent had seen the heads together with other parents. There was no social class difference in the proportions of parents who had talked on their own with the heads. (ii) Talks with teachers; frequency and subjects discussed 3.17. We look now at the frequency with which parents had discussed their children with the heads or class teachers in their children's schools. As would be expected this was related to the length of time the child had been at the school. (See Table 50.) In all eight per cent of the parents had had no talks at all about their children with the heads or class teachers. Forty-five per cent had had four talks or more. The frequency with which parents discussed their children with the school staff was not related to whether mothers were working or not but it was markedly associated with social class. (See Tables 49 and 50.) As Table 46 shows there was little difference between the lengths of time that children in the various social classes had been at these schools. 3.18. This tendency for the amount of contact with the school staff to increase with social class is found again when we compare the proportions of parents in the different groups who had had a talk about the selected child with any of the child's own class teachers. Only six per cent of the parents in class I had not talked with the child's class teacher compared with 27 per cent of those in class V. (See Table 51.) 3.19. In their talks with heads or class teachers parents had most frequently discussed their children's progress educationally or the teaching methods used at the school (83 per cent). Over a quarter of the parents had talked about some behavioural problems of their children such as nervousness, anxiety or bad behaviour. The other main purpose of parents' talks with the head or class teachers was to notify them of children's illness or absence from school for other reasons. (iii) Opportunities provided for parents to visit the schools and advantage taken of them by parents 3.20. It may be assumed that the provision of opportunities for parents to visit the schools has three main purposes, firstly to facilitate meetings between parents and teachers so that both come to know each other better, secondly to enable parents to see for themselves what the schools are doing and how their children are progressing and, thirdly, so that children feel that their parents are interested in and know what happens at school and that home and school are not separate worlds. It seems likely that in these respects some types of school activities to which parents are invited will be more valuable than others. We now compare the extent to which various opportunities for parents to visit the schools are provided and are taken advantage of by parents. Table 52 following shows the proportions of parents who said that they had been invited to various school functions and the proportions who attended. Table 52 Comparison between opportunities provided for parents to visit the schools and parents' attendance 3.21. Open days or evenings in general provide opportunities both for parents to see children's work and to talk to class teachers. Eighty-one per cent of the parents said that they had been invited to them. There was no social class difference in the provision made but the parents in the manual worker classes were rather less likely to attend them than those in the non-manual groups. (See Table 53.) Working mothers were just as likely to go to their children's open days as those not working. 3.22. During the course of the survey very different opinions were expressed to us about the value of parent/teacher associations. A quarter of these parents said that there was a PTA attached to their children's schools. There was again a marked relationship between attendance and social class. Twenty per cent of social class I had attended PTA meetings or activities but only five per cent of class V. During the preliminary stages of the enquiry working class mothers who had been to PTA meetings had several times said that they did not care for them as the more fluent and confident parents dominated the meetings and they themselves were not able to express their views. 3.23. The great majority of parents had been invited to attend school medical or dental examinations of their children. Sixteen per cent in all had not done so. There was no social class difference either in the proportions who had been invited to or who had attended these examinations. 3.24. Three quarters of the parents had had the opportunity of going to school plays, shows or concerts or to school carol or other services. Sixty-four per cent had been to at least one of these functions. Fifty-five per cent had been invited to sports days or swimming galas and 14 per cent to prize days. Thirty-nine per cent had been to the former and 10 per cent to the latter. The only social class difference evident here was a tendency for parents in class I to be the most likely to attend and those in class V the least likely. Fourteen per cent of parents could have gone on school outings with the children but only four per cent did so. Two thirds of the parents, a slightly higher proportion in the non-manual than manual worker classes, said that the schools had organised jumble sales, bazaars or social evenings to raise money for the schools. (iv) Parental satisfaction with arrangements for seeing the school staff and opinion of their contacts with teachers 3.25. In general these parents were satisfied with the arrangements at their children's schools for seeing the head or the class teachers and with the reception they had when they visited the schools. The proportions making any criticisms of contacts between themselves and the staff were small. Only 11 per cent were not completely satisfied about the arrangements for seeing the head or class teacher. Nine per cent felt that it was not easy to see the teachers whenever they wanted to, seven per cent did not think that the teachers seemed very pleased when they went to the schools and 11 per cent considered that the teachers would prefer to keep parents out of the school. 3.26. Social class differences found here were that parents in the professional and managerial classes tended to be slightly more critical of the school's arrangements for seeing the head or class teacher. As we have already seen they were more likely to want to visit the schools. On the other hand parents in the manual occupational categories were more inclined than the non-manual to consider that the teachers had favourites among the parents. In all 19 per cent of the parents felt this. 3.27. Suggestions made for improving the arrangements for seeing the staff were that it should be easier to see the class teachers (four per cent of the total sample) and that there should be a parent/teacher association (three per cent). The latter was raised more often by the professional and managerial class parents than the others. Other suggestions, each made by one or two per cent of the parents, were that it should be easier for them to see the head or class teacher in private, that the head should be more readily available for parents to see, that more open days should be arranged at convenient times, that parents should be given more information when they went to the schools and that they should be able to make appointments or have definite times for seeing the heads or other teachers. 3.28. It was clear in the preliminary stages of this inquiry that some parents were reluctant to go to the schools unless they were invited to some school function or were specifically asked by the heads in order to discuss their children. The impression gained from talking to these parents was not that they were uninterested in their children's schooling but that they were confident that the heads would let them know when they needed to visit the school for any reason. Approximately a quarter of the parents said that they felt that they were interfering if they went to the school uninvited. This attitude was not related to social class. Twenty-nine per cent considered that teachers had enough to do already without having to talk to parents. 3.29. Half of the parents had in fact been to have a talk with the head or another teacher on their own initiative. The highest proportions of parents , who had been to see the staff without an invitation were in the professional and in the unskilled occupational classes. There was some association between parents going to school on their own initiative and their making a complaint to the head or class teacher on some issue. Twenty per cent of those who had been to the school uninvited had made a complaint compared with seven per cent of those who had been to the school only on invitation. 3.30. The findings discussed in this section point strongly to the importance of the initiative being taken by the school staff in inviting parents to the schools if close contacts are to be maintained between parents and teachers. (iv) Communication between parents and teachers 3.31. The first step in establishing relations between parents and teachers is for parents to visit their children's schools. After that the important issue is that the contact established should be helpful to both groups. We now consider whether the results of this survey give any indications of the value of contacts between parents and teachers. 3.32. Approximately half of the parents said that they would have liked to be told more about how their children were getting on at school. Almost a third thought that the teachers should have asked them more about their children. A fifth considered that if they went up to the school the teachers only told them what they knew already. Each of these points tended to be made more frequently by parents in the manual than non-manual occupations, suggesting that satisfactory communication between parent and teacher is considerably easier for the latter category of parents. 3.33. An important finding of this enquiry is that, within the social class groups, parents were less likely to say that they wanted to be told more about how their children were getting on or that they thought that the teachers should ask them, the parents, more about their children if open days were arranged by the school or if parents had had several talks with the heads or class teachers. 3.34. These findings indicate the value of talks between parents and teachers and of open days in making parents feel better informed about their children's school life and also that their contribution towards their children's progress is of importance and is considered to be so by the schools. (c) Parents' views on school organisation and teaching methods 3.35. In this section are discussed parents' preferences for combined and separate schools for infants and juniors, their views on the advantages and disadvantages of streamed and mixed ability classes in the primary schools and their satisfaction generally with the methods of teaching and the progress of their children at school. (i) Parental preferences for combined or separate schools for infants and juniors 3.36. In the preferences expressed by parents for separate or combined schools for juniors and infants we find again the tendency for people to like the arrangement with which they are familiar. Taken overall however separate schools for juniors and infants were rather more frequently preferred. Separate schools were thought to be better by over 60 per cent of parents with children in separate schools and by 26 per cent of those with children in combined schools. Forty per cent of those with children in combined schools liked the arrangement they had but only 14 per cent with children in separate junior schools and 17 per cent with children in separate infants would have preferred a combined primary school. (See Table 54.) 3.37. The main advantages seen in having the juniors and infants in separate schools were that the older children tended to be rough and to bully the younger if they were together (given by 58 per cent of the parents who preferred separate schools). Separate schools were thought to provide a greater incentive for children to grow up and to help them to develop (29 per cent). There was considered to be more likelihood of having specialised teachers for different age groups if the juniors and infants were separate and it was thought that teachers in such schools were more able to concentrate on and so understand the special needs of different age groups (25 per cent). Some parents felt that older children tended to be a bad influence on the younger ones and taught them bad language and habits (14 per cent). 3.38. Three reasons for preferring combined juniors and infants schools were given frequently. One was that the change between the infants and junior stages was more gradual if the children were in one school; it was less upsetting because infants knew more what to expect in the higher classes from mixing with juniors (45 per cent of parents who preferred combined schools). The second most frequently mentioned reason was that it was useful if brothers, sisters or friends were in the same school because they could go to school together and see each other in break and generally look after each other (42 per cent). Thirdly these parents considered that it was better for older and younger children to mix together and that the older ones helped the younger (41 per cent). (ii) Parental preferences for streamed or mixed ability classes 3.39. The ways in which these children were allocated to their classes, that is whether they were in streamed or mixed ability groups, were related to the stage they were at in the primary school. Fifty-three per cent of the parents of children in the top juniors said that their children were in streamed classes compared with 16 per cent of those with children in the top infants. Thirteen per cent of parents were not sure how their children were assigned to classes. Taken overall just over half the children were thought to be in classes according to their ages, these would have been of mixed ability. (See Table 55.) 3.40. There was a clear preference among the majority of parents for their children, at whatever age they were at the time of the survey, to be taught with other children of the same capacity, that is for the quicker and slower children to be allocated to separate classes rather than mixed together. Separate ability groups were preferred by as many as 59 per cent of the parents with children in the top infants class and by 70 per cent of those whose children were in the top juniors form. (See Table 56.) 3.41. What is striking is the large proportion of parents, 61 per cent, whose children were in mixed forms who would have preferred them to be in separate ability groups. Seventy-six per cent of parents with children in streamed classes considered that it was better for the quicker and slower children to be separated. (See Tables 57 and 58.) 3.42. There were no clear social class differences either in the ways in which these children were allocated to their classes or in parental preferences for streamed or mixed ability classes. (See Tables 59 and 60.) 3.43. The two most frequently mentioned advantages of streaming by ability were, firstly, that the slow children would then have more attention and tuition and greater opportunities for being brought on in their work (68 per cent of those who preferred streaming) and, secondly, that the bright children would not be held back academically by the slower children and could be given more attention by teachers (57 per cent). It is of interest that a greater proportion of the manual occupation parents were concerned about the advantages of streaming for the teaching of slower children whereas more of the non-manual groups mentioned the help to the brighter child. (See Table 61.) 3.44. Thirty per cent of the parents said that in separate ability classes the slow child was less likely to feel inadequate and ashamed of his slowness. Thirteen per cent said that streaming helped and made life easier for the teachers. 3.45. The majority of parents who thought that it was better for pupils of their children's ages to be in mixed ability classes were in favour of the sense of competition that this gave and considered that the slower and more backward pupils would be spurred on by being with brighter children (68 per cent of those preferring mixed ability classes). Thirty-seven per cent thought that mixed classes prevented feelings of difference developing among the children and the brighter or quicker looking down on the slower or duller. Seventeen per cent considered that the brighter, quicker ones would help the slower to learn and to develop. (See Table 62.) (iii) Parents' satisfaction with the teaching methods and with their children's progress at school 3.46. Parents were asked whether they were quite happy with the methods of teaching used at their children's schools and with the way the children were progressing in their work. No attempt was made to separate parents' views on methods of teaching from concern about school progress because it was found in the preliminary trial interviews that in general parents saw these as aspects of one issue and could not assess them separately. 3.47. A third of the parents did have some worries about their children's progress or the teaching methods. The proportion was the same for each of the forms included in the survey. The non-manual occupation parents were somewhat more inclined to be anxious about these matters than the manual. 3.48. The anxieties most frequently expressed by parents were that they thought that their children were not being brought on fast enough or were not up to standard for their ages. This was mentioned by 15 per cent of the total sample of parents. Next came mention of too little individual attention being given to pupils, that classes were too large or that teachers were not interested in the children's progress. Points falling in this category were made more frequently by parents with children in the higher classes (13 per cent overall). Criticisms or anxiety specifically about new methods of teaching were expressed by seven per cent of all parents, rather more frequently by parents of younger children. In addition seven per cent of parents with children in the top infants class considered that too much time was spent on play and other activities which did not help the child with his work progress (see Table 63). There was no clear association between the type of worries expressed by parents and social class. 3.49. Heads or other teachers had talked to just over a quarter of the parents about the teaching methods which were used in the sampled schools. Rather more of the non-manual than manual occupation parents had had such a talk. The proportion of parents who were anxious about their children's progress or the methods of teaching was no lower among those who had than those who had not had a talk about the methods of teaching used in the school. The proportion who were worried was also no lower among parents who had attended open days and was not related to the number of talks parents had had with heads or class teachers. 3.50. These findings do not appear surprising in view of the fact that this assessment of satisfaction or anxiety covers a very wide range of issues many of which would not be affected by attendance at open days or talks between parents and teachers. For the same reason they are not thought to conflict with the conclusion reached in paragraph 3.34 on the value of contacts between parents and teachers. 3.51. Anxiety about the methods of teaching and their children's progress was to a certain extent related to parents' educational aspirations for their children. Among parents whose children had not at the time of the enquiry been allocated to their secondary schools, those who hoped that their children would go to a type of school other than secondary modern were slightly more inclined to worry about their children's progress than those who considered that secondary modern schools would suit their children. This relationship was not found, however, among parents of top junior children who had already been allocated to their secondary schools. Higher proportions of parents who were worried about their children's progress or the teaching methods had bought copies of the school text books to have at home. (d) Behaviour training and discipline of children 3.52. The great majority of these parents considered that teaching children to behave was a joint responsibility of parents and the schools and did not think that it should be left mainly to the teachers. 3.53. On the whole parents thought that the control exercised by the schools over the children was about right but practically all of those who would have preferred it to be different in any way would have liked the teachers to be firmer and not less firm with the pupils. As children progressed up the schools parents were rather more inclined to want firmer discipline than the school provided. Parents who themselves found their children difficult to control were more likely to want the schools to be firmer with the children. There were no clear social class differences in parents' attitudes towards the teachers' control of the children. 3.54. Parents were asked for their views on corporal punishment. A quarter thought that children needed to be smacked quite often. Almost three quarters said that they would agree to the school using the cane occasionally. Fifcy-two per cent however considered that having the cane was very bad for most children and it follows that they would consider that it would need to be used with careful discrimination if at all. Thirty-eight per cent disagreed that the cane was very bad for most children (see Table 64). Parents in the manual and clerical occupational categories were slightly more inclined than those in the professional or managerial to think that children need to be smacked fairly frequently. Apart from this there were no marked social class differences in parental attitudes to these issues. (e) Other general comments about primary schooling 3.55. Besides the specific questions put to parents about different aspects of primary education the answers to which we have already discussed, opportunities were also given to parents to raise any other issues they wished. After answering specific questions about the school they were asked whether there was anything which they were not happy about or which worried them about their children's schools which they had not already mentioned. The proportions of parents who wished to make additional comments varied markedly with social class and ranged from two thirds of class I parents to less than one third of class V. 3.56. The most frequently made complaints, and particularly by the professional and managerial class parents, were firstly of bad, old-fashioned school buildings, lack of facilities or poor equipment in their children's schools. Secondly about the size of classes, shortage of teachers and general overcrowding. (See Table 65.) 3.57. Next came comments about the discipline, control and general behaviour of the children and about teachers' relations with the pupils. Equally frequently mentioned were worries about the standard of teaching, the progress made by their child, and about various aspects of the curriculum. Criticism of the liaison between home and school were made more frequently by the professional and managerial than other parents. The school meals and the uniforms and other clothing required for school were each criticised by only one per cent of the parents. 3.58. At the end of their interviews parents were again asked whether they had anything else they wished to say about their children's schools or about primary schooling in general. This question produced a very similar distribution of comments about the schools. In addition however some points were made about primary schooling in general but only by small proportions of parents. For example four per cent considered that 11 was not a good age for transfer to secondary education. Three per cent commented on the unfaimess resulting in some instances from children having to start or change schools according to the month of their birth. Other comments were made by even smaller proportions of parents. (See Table 66.) Table 37 Whether child went to a nursery school or nursery class, by social class Table 38 Whether child went to a nursery school or nursery class, by Department of Education Division Table 39 Age at which child started at school, by social class Table 40 Age at which child started at school, by Department of Education Division Table 41 Whether earlier or later start preferred, by actual starting age Table 42 Starting age preferred, by actual starting age Table 43 Whether child attended school for a full or half day when he or she started in the infants, by social class Table 44 Whether parents preferred child to start school by attending for a full or half day, by social class Table 45 Number of primary schools attended, by form Table 46 Length of time child had been at sampled school, by social class Table 47 Whether other members of the family had attended child's present school, by social class Table 48 Whether parents had a talk with the head when child first went to present school by social class Table 49 Number of talks parents had had with school staff, by social class Table 50 Number of talks parents had had with school staff, by length of time child had been at the school and by social class Table 51 Whether parents had had a talk with any of the class teachers since child had been at sampled school, by social class Table 53 Opportunities provided for parents to visit the schools and advantage taken of them by parents, by social class Table 54 Whether parents preferred juniors and infants to be in same or separate schools, by type of school child was at Table 55 Method of allocation to classes, by form Table 56 Whether parents preferred streaming by ability or not, by form Table 57 Whether parents preferred streaming by ability or not, by method of allocation to classes Table 58 Whether parents preferred streaming or not, by method of allocation to classes and by form Table 59 Method of allocation to classes, by social class Table 60 Whether parents prefer streaming by ability or not, by social class Table 61 Advantages of streaming by ability, by social class Table 62 Advantages of quicker and slower children in one class, by social class Table 63 Whether parents were satisfied with methods of teaching, and child's progress at school, by form Table 64 Parental attitudes to corporal punishment, by social class Table 65 Whether there was anything else parents were not happy about or which worried them about child's school, by social class Table 66 Whether there was anything else parent wanted to say about child's school or infants or junior schooling in general, by social class
IV: A summary of some of the interrelations between parental attitudes to education, home circumstances and social class 4.1. As was mentioned in the foreword to these appendices this survey had two broad purposes. The first was to collect information about the home backgrounds of children in primary schools and parental attitudes towards primary education and the upbringing of children; this has been presented in sections II and III of this report. The second purpose was to relate this information to children's achievement in schools. This latter analysis is reported in Appendix 4. For this second part of the enquiry it was desirable to group together questions which tended to be answered in the same way, or in statistical terms were correlated. (For example, parents who said that it was very easy to see the teachers whenever they wanted also tended to say that the teachers seemed very pleased when parents went along to see them. Other parents tended to disagree with both statements.) To find which questions in the interview tended to be answered similarly a statistical analysis (factor analysis) was carried out on 80 items of the interview data. The items included in this analysis are given in Annex II. 4.2. Some of the main groupings of items are worth discussing here because they serve to summarise some of the information presented in this report. The first group of items which tended to be answered in the same way appears to indicate the extent to which parents took responsibility and initiative over their children's education. At one extreme were parents who had talked to the head when their child first started in school, had talked with their child's class teacher, in all had had a large number of talks with the head or class teacher and had discussed educational matters and teaching methods with them. These parents were also likely to have asked for work for their child to do at home or for advice on how they could help their child at home. They had attended a large proportion of the different types of school functions to which parents were invited and in many cases the father as well as the mother had been to the school and had a talk with the head. At the other extreme were mothers who had never or rarely been to the child's school or, if they had been, were unlikely to have talked to the child's class teacher or to have discussed educational matters. They had attended few or none of the different types of school functions offered and the husbands were unlikely to have been to the school. 4.3. Another set of items which clustered together bear upon the relations between parents and teachers. Answers expressing a favourable attitude were that parents felt it was easy to see the teachers whenever they wanted to and that the staff seemed very pleased when parents went along to see them. They considered that the teachers seemed really interested in all the children and that they definitely seemed interested in what parents thought about their children's education. These parents tended to be happy with the school's arrangements for seeing the head or class teachers. They did not feel that they were interfering if they went to the school uninvited nor did they have the impression that teachers would have liked to have kept parents out of the school. 4.4. The interest and part taken by fathers in educational decisions and in the upbringing of their children is indicated by the following items. Whether the father took much part in the control of the children, how much spare time he had and whether he spent any of it with the child in the evenings or at weekends, whether he had taken an interest in which school the child went to and had visited it and talked with the head and whether he was concerned to know how the child was progressing there. 4.5. Other items associated together appear to relate to the extent to which mothers devoted time and attention to their children's development. The least favourable extreme was expressed by those who felt that they should leave all teaching and helping with school subjects to teachers and that teaching children to behave should also be mainly the school's job. These mothers rarely spent time with their children in the evenings. The children were unlikely to get any help with school work at home and the mothers tended to say that they were too busy to give such help. 4.6. Another group of items which clustered together were somewhat similar to those just discussed but seemed related rather more to parents' interest in and knowledge of the work the child was doing at school. The favourable extremes of these items were that the children often talked to their parents about school work, they brought books home from school to read, they read frequently and their mothers spent time with them on most evenings. These parents were satisfied with their children's progress at school and the teaching methods used. They felt that they were told enough about how their children were getting on at school and that the teachers consulted them sufficiently as parents. 4.7. The final cluster of items to be discussed in this section gives an assessment of the level of literate interest in the home. Included here are whether the husband or wife belonged to a library or liked reading, the number of books possessed by the parents, how much reading the child did at home and whether he or she used a library. 4.8. In order to see whether parental behaviour and attitudes in these six areas varied with social class, scores were calculated for all parents on each of the six item clusters. In Table 67 are given the average scores on each of these indices for the different social class groups. The items are scored so that a low average indicates a favourable position. The association between social class and, for example, the responsibility and initiative taken by parents over their children's education can be seen by comparing the average scores of the various social class groups on item cluster (1). (There is no significance in the variations in scores between the indices, i.e. the fact that the average total score of cluster (1) is 16.6 and for cluster (4) is 7.5 is an artefact of the number of items making up the cluster and the scoring system used.) 4.9. On these indices associations were found between social class and the responsibility and initiative taken by parents over their children's education, in the interest shown and support given by fathers over their education and upbringing, in the time and attention parents devoted to their children's development and in their interest in and knowledge of the work their children were doing at school. In respect of each of these factors the home situation was likely to be more favourable the higher the social class of the home. What might be termed the literacy of the homes, that is the extent to which the families had firm habits of reading, increased very markedly with social class. 4.10. The index of satisfaction with parent-teacher relations showed little variation between the social class groups. As discussed in paragraph 3.25 the proportions who had criticisms of their relationships with the school were not large. The parents from the professional and managerial occupational categories had had more contacts with their children's schools and they tended to be more aware of and critical of any difficulties in meeting the teachers they wished to see but they were also more able than less educated parents to have discussions with members of the staff which they found satisfactory and informative. Table 67 Average scores on item clusters, analysed by social class
Annex I: The sample design The enquiry was conducted amongst the parents of a sample of children of certain age groups in maintained primary schools in England. The sample design was a stratified random one in two stages with maintained primary schools in England as the primary sampling units. At the second stage, a sample of children in the specified age groups was selected such that the overall probability of selection of each child was uniform. In designing the sampling frame the maintained primary schools were divided into four main size strata: (i) schools with 25 or less pupils (ii) schools with 26 to 50 pupils (iii) schools with 51 to 200 pupils and (iv) schools with 201 and more pupils.As the population of the first stratum, i.e. schools with 25 or less pupils being under 0.5 per cent of the total primary schools population it was decided to exclude this stratum from the frame. Within the remaining three size strata, schools were broken down into the four types: (a) infants only (b) junior with infants (c) junior without infants (d) all-age.An estimate of the population of each of the 12 cells was obtained by taking the mid-point of each of the size bands as given in Table II of Statistics of Education, 1963, multiplying these by the number of schools in each of the size groups and adding together to form the strata given by type and size of school. A sample of approximately 3,500 was distributed between the cells in proportion to the estimated populations. From the junior with infants and all-age schools, the sample was to consist of children in three age bands defined as 'top infants', 'bottom juniors' and 'top juniors'. From the 'junior only' schools only two age bands could be selected and the third - 'top infants' - was to be selected from the 'infants only' schools feeding the selected 'junior only' schools. From selected schools in the largest size stratum it was decided that 12 children per age group would be selected; from schools in the 51-200 size group eight children per age group would be selected and in the smallest size stratum four children would be selected from each size stratum. The theoretical distribution of the sample of children and the number of schools selected in each cell is shown in the following table.
Then within each of the cells, other than 'infants only', from which the primary units, schools, were to be selected, the schools were arranged by local education authority and in size order and the requisite number selected with probability proportionate to their size. One hundred and seven schools were selected in this manner. The total number of schools in the sample were increased to 173 by taking the 'infants only' schools from which the selected 'juniors only' schools recruited their intake. The actual distribution of the sample is shown in the following table.
Notes
It can be seen from the figures in the above table that the distribution of 'infants only' schools obtained by taking those feeding the 'juniors only' schools does not conform with the theoretical distribution, that is the distribution which would have been obtained if the 'infants only' schools had been selected in the same way as the other schools. This is accounted for by the fact that for such selected 'juniors only' school a sample of infants was drawn from only one feeding infants school. This resulted in a reduction of 10 in the number of schools selected and a reduction of 72 in the number of infants. At the second stage a systematic sample of children was selected for each of the three age groups, 4, 8 or 12 children being selected from each dependent upon the size-stratum into which the school fell. Before selecting the sample of children's names all those comprising the survey population were arranged within each age group: (i) by classThe age groups taken were those defined as: 1. Top juniors - in general those born between 1/9/1952 and 31/8/1953 (both dates inclusive).The design produced a set sample of 3,349 children in 173 schools distributed by age group as follows: 1. Top juniors 1,104From this selected sample children living in institutions or who had parents teaching in the sampled school were withdrawn. When more than one child in a family had been selected one child was picked at random as the subject of the interview. For one or other of these reasons 112 names (i.e. three per cent of the total) were deleted from the original sample, leaving an interview sample of 3,237. The extent to which the sample was representative of the population of primary school children in respect of type of school attended and Department of Education Division is shown below. The sex distribution was the same in the sample as in the total population of children. The population figures are taken from Statistics of Education Part I 1964, and refer to the position in January, 1964. The sample was drawn in April-May 1964.
*Note In the sample two of the all-age schools had no infants classes - these are classified with the junior only schools. The other five all-age schools are classified with the juniors with infants schools.
Annex II: Technical note on the factor analysis of information from the parental interviews This annex gives some technical details of the factor analysis which is discussed in section IV. The factor analysis was carried out with a computer programme devised by HH Harman and modified by CEIR (UK) Ltd. The results given are an orthogonal rotated solution using HF Kaiser's varimax criterion. Varimax is specifically designed to break up any large general factors in the data and to produce factors which are more equal in size. The purpose of the factor analysis in this inquiry was to produce measures of parents' attitudes and home circumstances and generally to structure information about the homes so that this data could be related to children's school achievement in a multiple regression analysis. It was considered that if large general factors were included in the regression analysis the results might be very difficult to interpret because of the problem of deciding what broadly described factors are assessing. It was decided that the narrower and more precisely defined factors resulting from the varimax criterion would be more suitable for this study. Eighty variables were included in the factor analysis. These variables are listed in the table at the end of this annex together with their loadings on the 14 factors which appeared meaningful and the percentage of the variance accounted for by each factor. The inclusion of this many variables, which covered many different aspects of parents' attitudes and home circumstances, and the use of the varimax criterion produced a large number of factors, each of which accounts for a very small proportion of the variance. A number of the factors also have very few items with reasonable loadings. For the multiple regression analysis it was decided nevertheless that combining the items with the highest loadings on each of these 14 factors would be likely to give results which were easier to interpret than including a large number of items separately which were known to be correlated. For inclusion in the multiple regression each factor was scored by summing each individual's score on the items with the highest loading on that factor. The items used to form each factor score are given following. FACTOR 1 Responsibility and initiative taken by parents over child's education -.81 Whether parent has talked to class teacher.
FACTOR 2 Relations between parents and teachers .70 It's very easy to see the teachers whenever you want to.
FACTOR 3 Paternal interest and support .75 Whether husband helps with control of children.
FACTOR 4 Attitude to corporal punishment .70 Having the cane is very bad for most children.
FACTOR 5 Physical amenities of home -.86 Whether fixed bath or shower.
FACTOR 6 Whether parents devote time and attention to child's development .59 Parents should leave all teaching and helping with school subjects to the teachers.
FACTOR 7 Educational aspirations for child .80 Whether particular type of secondary school wanted for child.
FACTOR 8 Whether parents have taken any recreational or leisure courses .80 Whether father has taken any recreational/leisure courses.
FACTOR 9 Whether parents took steps to find out about school when child was starting there -.66 Whether made inquiries about school.
FACTOR 10 Whether active antagonism shown to the school or not .60 Whether parent has complained to head or class teacher.
FACTOR 11 Literacy of home .67 Whether husband or wife belong to library.
FACTOR 12 Parental interest in and knowledge of work child is doing at school -.55 Whether child talks to parent about school work.
FACTOR 13 Attitude to starting age .65 Starting age preferred.
FACTOR 14 Whether school should be stricter or freer .74 The schools should be stricter with the children.
Variables included in the factor analysis and their factor loadings [Note This is a very large table - it occupied 4 pages in the printed version. If you wish to make use of it your best bet might be to print a copy of it.]
Annex III: SS 365 Survey of parents of primary school children [Note The next 21 pages (158-178) consisted of the form used by interviewers. To see how it was set out in the printed version click here for an image of the first two pages (158-9).] (i) Serial Number: School: Child: (ii) Interviewer's Name: (iii) Auth: Number (write in column): (iv) Date of interview: (v) Time of starting interview:
(vi) Time interview took:
(vii) Whether anyone other than informant present during interview. RING ALL THAT APPLY. DO NOT COUNT ADULTS OR CHILDREN WHO WERE PRESENT FOR LESS THAN FIVE MINUTES:
(viii) Relationship of person interviewed to selected child:
INTERVIEWER: THE HOUSEHOLD BOX, PAGE 175, CAN BE COMPLETED AT WHICHEVER POINT IN THE INTERVIEW IS MOST SUITABLE. 1. I would like to ask you first about the schools ... has been to so far. Did he/she go to a nursery school or nursery class? PROBE IF NEC.
CODE AS NO - 3 IF ATTENDED NURSERY FOR LESS THAN ONE MONTH IN TOTAL (a) If Yes, in this country and child is now in infants: Was this a nursery class in his/her present school?
2. How old was he/she when he/she first started to go to school in the mornings and afternoons?
INCLUDE NURSERY SCHOOL OR CLASS IF ATTENDED IN THE MORNINGS AND AFTERNOONS 3. Was that a good age for him/her to start or would you have liked him/her to have started earlier or later?
THIS REFERS TO STARTING IN THE MORNINGS AND AFTERNOONS (a) If earlier/later start preferred: At what age would you have liked ... to have started?
THIS REFERS TO MORNINGS AND AFTERNOONS AT SCHOOL 4. When ... first went to infants school did he/she attend school in the mornings and afternoons, or only in the mornings or the afternoons?
5. Which do you think would have been better for ... when he/she first started in the infants: (RUNNING PROMPT)
THROUGHOUT THE REST OF THE SCHEDULE THE PRESENT SCHOOL IS THE SCHOOL WHICH THE SELECTED CHILD IS NOW ATTENDING. CHECK FROM YOUR ADDRESS LIST WHETHER THIS IS AN INFANTS, A JUNIOR, OR A COMBINED INFANTS AND JUNIOR SCHOOL. THROUGHOUT MAKE CLEAR TO THE INFORMANT TO WHICH SCHOOL YOU ARE REFERRING. 6. When ... first went to infants school, which school did he/she go to? COUNT INFANTS AND JUNIOR SCHOOL AS SEPARATE IF SEPARATE HEADS:
If other school COMPLETE A SEPARATE COLUMN BELOW FOR EACH INFANT OR JUNIOR SCHOOL ATTENDED. PRESENT SCHOOL AND NURSERY SCHOOLS ARE EXCLUDED (a) What type of school was that? (i) Was it
(ii) Was it:
(b) How old was he/she when he/she left there? (GIVE IN WHOLE YEARS OMIT MONTHS): (c) Why did he/she leave that school?
(d) Which school did he/she go to next?
IF 'OTHER' COMPLETE NEXT COLUMN TO ALL 7. How long has ... been at (PRESENT SCHOOL)?
8. Have any other members of your family been to (PRESENT SCHOOL)?
9. 'X' IN THIS QUESTION AND Q.10 REFERS TO SELECTED CHILD OR TO HIS/HER ELDER BROTHER OR SISTER, WHICHEVER STARTED FIRST IN PRESENT SCHOOL. Before X started at (PRESENT SCHOOL) did you know anything about what the school was like (now)? CODE AS 2 IF KNOWLEDGE OF SCHOOL IS ONLY OF WHAT IT WAS LIKE IN PARENTS' TIME:
10. Were you (or your husband) able to make any inquiries about the school, or to visit it, before deciding to send X there? IF PARENTS' GENERATION THERE, WERE ANY INQUIRIES OR VISITS MADE TO FIND OUT WHAT SCHOOL IS LIKE NOW?
(a) If Yes; Who did you talk to about the school?
11. Was there any other school near here that ... could have gone to if you had wanted him/her to? CODE YES IF THERE IS A POSSIBLE SCHOOL ALTHOUGH RELIGION OF PARENT OR SCHOOL WOULD DETER PARENT FROM SENDING CHILD TO IT:
(a) If Yes (i): What were your reasons for choosing this particular school?
12. IF HUSBAND AND WIFE IN HOUSEHOLD Was your husband able to take much interest in which school ... went to or did he leave that to you?
13. We have been talking about when ... started at (PRESENT SCHOOL). Could you tell me now whether you have at any time asked the Education Office or anyone else in authority for permission for ... to go to a different school from the one he/she was to have gone to? (IF NO, CHECK PROBE) Have you ever asked the Education Office, or anyone else in authority, to allow you to send ... to a particular school, or to allow ... to change schools?
(a) If Yes: (i) At what stage in ...'s schooling was this? RECORD EACH OCCASION IN SEPARATE COL., EARLIEST IN COL. (1) PROMPT PRECODES AS NEC.
ASK FOR EACH OCCASION & RECORD IN APPROP. COL. (ii) Did you get permission to send ... to the school you wanted?
14. Can we talk now about the contacts parents have with the teachers at ...'s present school? Did you have a talk with the head when ... first went to (PRESENT SCHOOL)? CODE 1 IF TALKED TO HEAD JUST BEFORE CHILD STARTED, IF TALKED TO DEPUTY OR ASSISTANT HEAD, OR IF PARENT KNEW HEAD PERSONALLY AT THAT TIME:
(a) If Yes: (i) Apart perhaps from ... being there, did the head talk to you on your own or with other parents?
15. Have you had a talk with any of ...'s class teachers since he/she has been at (PRESENT SCHOOL)?
16. About how often have you had a talk about ... with the head, or with ...'s class teacher since he/she started there? INCLUDE ANY TALK WHEN CHILD STARTED. IF TALKED TO HEAD AND CLASS TEACHER ON SAME VISIT, COUNT AS ONE TALK:
(a) If had a talk with head or class teacher: Have you ever been to see the head without him/her asking you to go?
(b) We would like to know what sort of things parents want to be able to see the teachers about. Would you mind telling me what sort of things you have been to see the head or ...'s teacher about? RING ALL THAT APPLY. INCLUDE ALL VISITS, WHETHER INITIATED BY THE HEAD OR PARENT:
17. INTERVIEWER CODE:
18. I am going to read out a list of things which some schools provide for parents. (a) I would like you to tell me whether (PRESENT SCHOOL) has had any of these since ... started there: PROMPT LIST BELOW AND RECORD IN COL. (a):
(b) FOR EACH ITEM CODED YES IN COL. (a) ASK: Have you (or your husband) been able to go to any of these? RECORD IN COL. (b):
(i) Open days (include open evenings)
19. Are there any (other) things which you have been to at (PRESENT SCHOOL) which I haven't mentioned? INTERVIEWER SEE INSTRUCTIONS AND BACK CODE INTO Q.18 IF APPROPRIATE, DELETING FROM THIS QUESTION 20. IF HUSBAND AND WIFE IN HOUSEHOLD Has your husband been able to go to ...'s school at all?
(a) If Yes: Has he talked with the head at all?
21. What do you think of the arrangements at (PRESENT SCHOOL) for seeing the head or class teacher? Are you quite happy with the present arrangements or not?
(a) If not completely happy: Could you tell me what sort of arrangements you would prefer?
22. INTERVIEWER CODE: (SEE Q.7 PAGE 160)
(a) This is/was ...'s first term in the infants school then. Have you been quite happy with the way the teachers have helped him/her to settle in or not?
(i) If has any worries, criticisms: What is it that has worried you? (b) Has ... been quite happy in infants school this term or has he/she been disturbed by it at all?
(i) If child worried or disturbed (2): In what way has he/she been worried or disturbed? 23. TO ALL: I am going to read out some things that parents have said about going to their children's schools. I would like you to tell me whether you feel the same way or not about (PRESENT SCHOOL):
(i) It's very easy to see the teachers whenever you want to
24. Can we talk now about the methods of teaching which they use at (PRESENT SCHOOL)? Has the head, or have any of the other teachers talked to you about the methods they use at (PRESENT SCHOOL)? (e.g. about the way they teach different subjects, or what they are trying to do in the school)
25. Does ... talk to you much about the work he/she does in school, or show you the sort of things he/she does? IF NOT GIVEN SPONTANEOUSLY, PROMPT WHETHER THIS HAPPENS OFTEN OR OCCASIONALLY:
26. Do you feel quite happy about the methods of teaching used at (PRESENT SCHOOL) and the way ... is getting on in his/her work, or is there anything which worries you at all?
(a) If worried: What is it that worries you? RING ALL THAT APPLY:
27. Do you know how the children of ...'s age are put into classes at (PRESENT SCHOOL)? Are they put into classes by age or do they put the quicker ones into one class and the slower into another? IF GROUPED BY ABILITY WITHIN A CLASS, CODE AS 1. IF CLASSED BY AGE EXCEPT FOR OCCASIONAL BRIGHT OR SLOW CHILD, CODE AS 1:
28. For children of ...'s age could you tell me which of these you think is better? RUNNING PROMPT:
(IF THINKS THEY SHOULD BE DIVIDED INTO GROUPS BY ABILITY WITHIN CLASS, CODE 1 TO MAIN). (a) If better for quicker and slower to be mixed (1): What do you think are the advantages of having the quicker and slower children mixed together in one class? CODE ALL THAT APPLY:
(b) If better for quicker and slower to be separated (3): What do you think are the advantages of having the quicker in one class and the slower in another? CODE ALL THAT APPLY:
29. Have the teachers at (PRESENT SCHOOL) given ... any work to do at home? READING AND PROJECTS SHOULD BE CODED 1:
(a) If Yes (1): (i) Do you think that it is a good thing for ... to be given some school work to do at home, or do you think that he/she should be free from it at home?
(ii) If ... should have work to do at home: Do you think that ... is given about the right amount of school work to do at home at present, or does he/she get too much or too little?
(b) If No (2) to main: Would you like the school to give ... any work to do at home or do you think he/she should be free from school work at home?
30. Have you ever asked the teachers to give ... some work to do at home, or have you asked them to show you how you could help him/her at home with his/her school work? IF PARENT ASKED BUT SCHOOL REFUSED, CODE 1:
31. Have you bought copies at any time of any of the text books ... uses in school, for example readers or arithmetic books? CODE 1 ONLY IF BOUGHT COPIES, NOT IF BORROWED THEM. CODE 1 EVEN IF THE COPIES WERE ACTUALLY BOUGHT FOR AN ELDER CHILD:
32. Outside school does ... get any help with school work from anyone, including yourself or your husband? CODE AS NO (1) IF ONLY HELP IS VERY OCCASIONAL ANSWERING OF CHILD'S QUESTIONS ABOUT SCHOOL WORK:
33. IF HUSBAND/WIFE Is your husband able to take much interest in how ... is getting on at school now or is that your job?
34. I want to read out some things that parents have said about the schools their children are attending. I would like you to tell me whether you feel the same way or not about ...'s school.
(i) The teachers seem really interested in all the children
35. Do you think that it is better for juniors and infants to be in the same or separate schools; (PAUSE) or haven't you really thought about this?
(a) If better in same school: What do you think are the advantages of this?
(b) If better in separate schools: What do you think are the advantages of this?
36. What do you feel about the way the teachers control the children at (PRESENT SCHOOL)? Are you quite happy about this or do you feel that they should be firmer or less firm with the children?
37. On the whole do the teachers seem to treat all the children pretty fairly or not? CODE AS UNFAIR IF THINKS SOME CHILDREN PICKED UPON, OR IF SOME NEGLECTED:
38. Do you find that ... is an easy or difficult child to control on the whole?
39. I am going to read out some things that parents have said about teaching children to behave. I would like you to say whether you feel the same or not.
Some parents say that:
40. Is there anything which you are not happy about or which worries you about (PRESENT SCHOOL) which you haven't already mentioned?
41. INTERVIEWER CODE: Child is in last year of juniors (i.e. 10/11 years old) ask Q.42 and 43; Child is in bottom class of juniors (i.e. about 8 years old) or in infants go to Q.44 42. ASK ONLY IF CHILD IS IN LAST YEAR OF JUNIORS I would like to talk now about the type of school ... will be going to, when he/she leaves (PRESENT SCHOOL). Some Education Offices send round a letter to mothers asking them which school they would like their child to go to at 11. Have you received one of these?
(a) IF YES: Was there anything that wasn't clear to you in it?
(i) If Yes (1): What was that? 43. ASK ONLY IF CHILD IS IN LAST YEAR OF JUNIORS. I expect you know that the main types of secondary schools are grammar schools and secondary modern schools. In some districts there are comprehensive and technical schools as well. (a) Can you tell me what type of secondary school ... is going to when he/she leaves (PRESENT SCHOOL)? RECORD IN COL. (a)
(b) What type of secondary school did you hope he/she would go to? RECORD IN COL. (b)
(i) If particular type of school hoped for: What did you think would be the advantages of this type of school?
44. ASK ONLY IF CHILD NOT IN LAST YEAR OF JUNIORS (I.E. ASK IF IN FIRST YEAR OF JUNIORS, OR IN INFANTS). Can we talk now about the different types of secondary schools children go to when they are 11. I expect you know that the main types of secondary schools are grammar schools and secondary modern schools. In some districts there are comprehensive and technical schools as well. If you had the choice, what type of secondary school would you like ... to go to when he/she is 11?
(a) If particular kind of school wanted: What do you think would be the advantages for ... of that type of school?
45. TO ALL. Is there any type of secondary school which you would particularly dislike ... to go to?
(a) If Yes: What kind of school is that?
(b) What would you dislike most about this kind of school?
46. Is (was) there one particular secondary school which you would like (would have liked) to go at 11? IF YES: PROMPT 'Would you prefer that school very much or just slightly?'
47. Do you think that the type of secondary school your child goes to at 11 should be decided mainly by his/her teachers or mainly by an examination like the 11+?
48. I know it's early yet but have you thought about what you would like ... to do later on? Would you like to see ... leave school as soon as possible or stay on longer? (SCHOOL LEAVING AGE WILL BE 15 FOR 9-11's, 16 for 7-8-YEAR-OLDS IN GENERAL) Would like child to:
(a) If would like child to leave as soon as possible: Would you prefer it if ... could leave at: (FOR 9-11s) 14 instead of having to stay till 15? (FOR 7-8s OR YOUNGER) 15 instead of having to stay till 16?
(b) If would like child to stay on longer (3): Up to what age would you like to see him/her staying? IF RANGE GIVEN, TAKE HIGHEST AGE, AVOID USING CODE 4 IF POSSIBLE:
49. We are interested to know what children like to do out of school, and the sort of places there are in the area where children can play or go to out of school. Apart from indoors, where does play most of the time? ONLY ONE TO BE CODED. IF PARENT CANNOT GIVE ONE ONLY, PRIORITY CODE 1 DOWNWARDS:
50. A. I am going to read out a list of things and I would like you to tell me whether you have any of these within easy distance of your home (i.e. easy distance for a child to get to by himself/herself or, if too young, easy for a parent or other adult to take child to). RECORD PRESENCE BY RINGING CODE IN COL. A: Present B. Has ... used this at all this year (i.e. SINCE THIS TIME LAST YEAR). RECORD ITEMS USED BY RINGING CODE IN COL. B: Used C. Is there anything else that you wish there were round here for? RECORD BY RINGING APPROPRIATE CODE IN COL. C OR WRITING IN 'OTHERS' BELOW BOX: Wanted CODE ALL THAT APPLY:
51. (I realise from what you have told me that you are very busy). In the evenings when ... comes home from school do you have any time free to do things with him/her if he/she wants you to? (Such as playing or reading with him/her, taking him/her out, showing him/her how to do things). THIS REFERS TO WEEKDAY EVENINGS, NOT WEEKENDS. IF YES, PROMPT 'Is this most evenings or just occasionally?'
52. IF HUSBAND AND WIFE What about your husband? IF YES, PROMPT 'Does he spend time with ... just on occasional evenings/weekends or on most?' (a) Does he have any time to do things with ... on weekday evenings?
(b) What about at weekends?
53. IF HUSBAND AND WIFE Does your husband take a big part in controlling the children or does he leave that to you mainly? CODE 2 IF HUSBAND TAKES SMALL PART BECAUSE AWAY A LOT:
54. IF HUSBAND AND WIFE Would you say that your husband was on the strict or lenient side with the children? IF LENIENT, PROMPT: 'Would you say that he is fairly lenient or very lenient?'
55. Do you ever manage to go for outings together as a family? I mean any sort of outings apart from visits to relatives or going to church or going shopping. (For example picnicking, going to the theatre or cinema):
(a) If Yes: When was the last time you had an outing together as a family?
56. Does the family have a car, or the use of a car?
57. (Apart from homework) does ... do any reading at home or does anyone read to him/her? IF YES, PROBE WHETHER READS BOOKS OR ONLY COMICS OR MAGAZINES. CODE ONE ONLY: Yes, reads, or is read to:
(a) If reads Books (1): Not counting comics, about how often does he/she read books, or have them read to him/her?
58. ASK (a) AND (b) (a) Does ... bring any books home from school to read? CODE AS YES (1) BOOKS FROM SCHOOL LIBRARY AND CLASS READERS:
(b) Does ... ever have any books to read at home from the public library or any other library? CODE AS YES IF CHILD BORROWS BOOKS OR IF SOMEONE ELSE BRINGS THEM FOR CHILD:
(c) If No (2) to (a) and (b): Would you be quite happy if ... borrowed books to read at home or would you be worried that they might get spoilt?
59. Do you (or your husband) belong to a lending library, or have either of you belonged to one within the last 10 years?
60. If you (or your husband) have any time for relaxing, do you do any reading? (a) Husband
(b) Wife
(a) If Yes to either or both: What sort of things do you/does he like to read? PROMPT, CODE ALL THAT APPLY: (a) Husband
61. IF MORE THAN FIVE BOOKS IN ROOM, CODE FROM OBSERVATION, OTHERWISE ASK AS SEEMS MOST TACTFUL Do you (or your husband) have any books? OR About how many books do you and (your husband) have? EXCLUDE MAGAZINES AND CHILDREN'S BOOKS. COUNT A SET OF ENCYCLOPAEDIAS AS ONE BOOK: Wife and/or husband has:
CLASSIFICATION SECTION I Household Composition N.B.
 II Date of birth of selected child III Total number of children in household not yet attending school or still in full-time education IV Type of dwelling
V Ownership of dwelling
VI Garden/yard
VII Number of bedrooms household has (include bedsitter) WRITE NO. IN BOX VIII Do you have a:
(b) hot water from a tap? INCLUDE HOT WATER STRAIGHT FROM GEYSER. IF YES ask 'Is this used only by your family or is it shared? COUNT AS OWN IF SHARED ONLY BY LODGERS
N.B. UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED, IN SUBSEQUENT SECTIONS INFORMATION SHOULD BE GIVEN ABOUT PARENT WHO IS IN HOUSEHOLD, IRRESPECTIVE OF WHETHER THE CHILD'S OWN PARENT OR A SUBSTITUTE, IF NO SUCH PERSON CURRENTLY IN HOUSEHOLD, ABOUT THE LAST PARENT OR PARENT SUBSTITUTE. IX Occupation of father ALWAYS REQUIRED, IF UNEMPLOYED OR DECEASED, GIVE LAST JOB: Occup: Indust: Self-employed:
X Whether father is on shift work:
XI Occupation of mother‹REQUIRED ONLY IF GAINFULLY EMPLOYED NOW:
Occup: Indust: XII Hours away from home TOTAL LENGTH OF ABSENCE FROM HOME ON WEEKDAYS. (INCLUDE TRAVELLING TIME, AND LUNCH HOURS, WHETHER TAKEN AT HOME OR AT WORK): (a) Father
(b) Mother
XIII Income of Father (or H.O.H.) and total income of family. In (A) give father's net income, less deductions, plus overtime, bonuses, etc. (Exclude Family Allowances, incomes from rent, etc. from (A))
COL. (A): Father or father substitute (otherwise H.O.H.) COL. (B): Total income of family, i.e. father's plus mother's net incomes plus any family allowances, income from rent, etc. ALWAYS COMPLETE BOTH COLUMNS EVEN IF (A) & (B) ARE THE SAME XIV Country of birth of parents (a) Father
(b) Mother:
XV Age at which child's parents completed full time continuous formal education. GAPS OF ANY LENGTH DUE TO ILLNESS AND OF THREE MONTHS OR LESS FOR ANY OTHER REASON SHOULD BE IGNORED. (a) Father (b) Mother XVI Type of school attended for full time formal education A. Number of brothers plus sisters of the selected child who are now at, or last attended each type of school. EXCLUDE SELECTED CHILD. (IF NONE, WRITE IN '0'). B. Type of school parents last attended  [For clarity, the items in the above table are: Not yet started school
XVII Further Education of Parents, i.e. since leaving school (Professional, academic, commercial, trade vocational). Count only if course pursued for at least one session (i.e. one academic year, or three terms) or longer. CODE ONE ONLY, PRIORITY, CODE ONE DOWNWARDS (a) Father
(b) Mother
XVIII Recreational/Leisure Courses Any recreational/leisure/interest courses taken COUNT ONLY IF TAKEN FOR ONE SESSION (i.e. ONE YEAR OR THREE TERMS) OR LONGER. (a) Father
(b) Mother
XIX Qualifications obtained by parents Give highest qualification only, exclude apprenticeships and SRN. CODE ONE ONLY, PRIORITY, CODE ONE DOWNWARDS: (a) Father
(b) Mother
62. Is there anything else that you would like to say about ...'s school, or about infants or junior schooling in general?
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
){kind=link}