Parents' Experiences of the Process of Choosing a Secondary School

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Parents’ Experiences of the Process of Choosing a Secondary School A nationally representative survey of parents of children in school years 5,6,and 7 Office for National Statistics: Social Survey Division John Flatley, Helen Connolly and Vanessa Higgins An analysis of policies and practices of LEA admission authorities in England Sheffield Hallam University: School of Education John Williams, John Coldron, Kathy Stephenson, Angela Logie and Nicola Smith Department for Education and Skills The views expressed in this report are the authors' and do not necessarily reflect those of the Department. © Queen’s Printer 2001. Published with the permission of the Controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office. Applications for reproduction should be made in writing to The Crown Copyright Unit, Her Majesty's Stationery Office, St Clements House, 2-16 Colegate, Norwich NR3 1BQ. ISBN 1 84185 527 8 June 2001
Contents
Page 1: Parents' Experiences of the Process
Page 5: Executive Summary 5
Page 8 and 9: 4. LEA management of the process In
Page 10 and 11: Nearly 1 in 4 parents said that the
Page 12 and 13: parents perceive erroneously that t
Page 14 and 15: less likely to be offered the schoo
Page 16 and 17: Parents may be more concerned about
Page 19 and 20: 1.1 Aims of the research The Depart
Page 21 and 22: In March 1999 the Government introd
Page 23: Part 1 Policies and practices of LE
Page 27 and 28: 2. The statutory context 2.1 As far
Page 29: 2.8 There are differences in opinio
Page 32 and 33: 3.2 Capturing complexity Finding a
Page 34 and 35: 3.3 The main features of admission
Page 36 and 37: Type 4 Single Preference System Par
Page 38 and 39: LEA1 The LEA uses a common form tha
Page 41 and 42: 5. The use of application forms and
Page 43: Table 8: The extent to which common
Page 46 and 47: Mode 3: Rank Order of Preferences I
Page 48 and 49: 3 Technology 4 Languages Table 10:T
Page 50 and 51: 6. 12 Selection on the basis of gen
Page 52 and 53:
Table 12: Availability of informati
Page 54 and 55:
7.8 To know that an admission autho
Page 56 and 57:
7.12 Does the LEA offer guidance ab
Page 58 and 59:
7.14 Providing Information about ap
Page 60 and 61:
8.5 An LEA is categorised as Very G
Page 62 and 63:
The Needle-in-a-Haystack Site The i
Page 64 and 65:
if they are having difficulty in fi
Page 66 and 67:
the guidance in this Code in drawin
Page 68 and 69:
9.5.4 Supply of and demand for scho
Page 70 and 71:
In one LEA admissions to secondary
Page 73 and 74:
1. Introduction 1.1 Background and
Page 75 and 76:
2. Finding out about schools Summar
Page 77 and 78:
2.3 Perceived usefulness of informa
Page 79 and 80:
2.5 Use of performance tables The s
Page 81 and 82:
social class (1.0 : 0.6) and those
Page 83 and 84:
The logistic regression analysis ha
Page 85:
Table 2.7 Parents use of formal pub
Page 88 and 89:
To gain a place in such a school, p
Page 90 and 91:
Table 3.1 Over-subscription criteri
Page 92 and 93:
• Whether or not LEA part of EiC
Page 94 and 95:
Table 3.3 Likelihood of parents rep
Page 96 and 97:
Table 3.4 shows, for each of the va
Page 98 and 99:
3.6 Applications to schools in othe
Page 100 and 101:
3.7 Applications to more than one a
Page 102 and 103:
Table 3.7 Parents applying to schoo
Page 104 and 105:
Table 3.9 Number of applications to
Page 106 and 107:
Parents were also asked the total n
Page 108 and 109:
Table 3.13 Admission by interview %
Page 110 and 111:
110
Page 112 and 113:
attending secondary school for at l
Page 114 and 115:
In order to explore the hypothesis
Page 116 and 117:
116
Page 118 and 119:
However, the proportion receiving m
Page 120 and 121:
4.6 Appeals Parents who are not sat
Page 122 and 123:
4.7 Parents' satisfaction with the
Page 124 and 125:
was lower (60%). As shown below, th
Page 126 and 127:
Table 4.9 Likelihood of parental di
Page 128 and 129:
5. Factors that parents take into a
Page 130 and 131:
A preliminary exploration of the da
Page 132 and 133:
Controlling for other factors in th
Page 134 and 135:
Table 5.3 Parents citing reasons wh
Page 136 and 137:
likely than parents who were owner
Page 138 and 139:
5.3 The characteristics of favourit
Page 140 and 141:
chosen a favourite school with a hi
Page 142 and 143:
Table 5.9 Likelihood of choosing a
Page 144 and 145:
5.5 Reasons why parents did not app
Page 146 and 147:
Table 5.14 Gender intake of unpopul
Page 148 and 149:
6. Parents of children due to enter
Page 150 and 151:
Table 6.1 Use of information source
Page 153 and 154:
Table 6.4 Over-subscription criteri
Page 155 and 156:
similar (see section 3.4). Analysis
Page 157 and 158:
The proportions responding positive
Page 159 and 160:
estimates than would otherwise have
Page 161 and 162:
7.3 Key results Tables 7.2 to 7.7 p
Page 163 and 164:
Table 7.3 Completion of LEA applica
Page 165 and 166:
Table 7.4 Application routes 1999 a
Page 167 and 168:
Table 7.6 Reasons for wanting a pla
Page 169 and 170:
References 169
Page 171 and 172:
Audit Commission. (1996) Trading Pl
Page 173 and 174:
Appendices 173
Page 175 and 176:
Appendix 1 Frequency of over-subscr
Page 177 and 178:
Appendix 1: Frequency of over-subsc
Page 179 and 180:
1 st priority 2 nd priority 3 rd pr
Page 181 and 182:
1 st priority 1 0.7 2 nd priority 1
Page 183 and 184:
Not included as criterion 125 88.7
Page 185 and 186:
Table 16: Waiting lists: Breakdown
Page 187 and 188:
Appendix 2 Applying for school plac
Page 189 and 190:
Appendix 2: Applying for school pla
Page 191 and 192:
other boroughs. The OFSTED LEA Insp
Page 193 and 194:
some areas there is a shortage of p
Page 195 and 196:
Assessment The information assumes
Page 197 and 198:
197
Page 199 and 200:
199
Page 201 and 202:
A3.2 The interview in the nationall
Page 203 and 204:
Table A3.1 Response to the survey 1
Page 205 and 206:
The final sample was constructed as
Page 207 and 208:
Correcting for non-response bias be
Page 209 and 210:
Table A3.2 Weighting classes for no
Page 211 and 212:
In addition to the estimates themse
Page 213 and 214:
213
Page 215 and 216:
215
Page 217 and 218:
Appendix 4 The questionnaire ASK AL
Page 219 and 220:
ASK ALWAYS: Respdnt INTERVIEWER: EN
Page 221 and 222:
ASK IF: SchStrt6 = No YNtStrt6 Can
Page 223 and 224:
IntCrit Some schools receive more a
Page 225 and 226:
ASK IF: SchBro = Yes SchUse [*] How
Page 227 and 228:
ASK IF: State7 = Yes OR Apply7 = Ye
Page 229 and 230:
ASK IF: NOT (LEAform = No) FormSat
Page 231 and 232:
ASK IF: State7 = Yes OR Apply7 = Ye
Page 233 and 234:
ASK IF: NrSchK = Yes NrSName Which
Page 235 and 236:
ASK IF: SCodeO = 9999999 SchDetO IN
Page 237 and 238:
ASK IF: DirTest = Yes WhyTest How w
Page 239 and 240:
ASK IF: PrefStat >= 1 AND PrefStat
Page 241 and 242:
ASK IF: RefReas = Yes WhyRef What r
Page 243 and 244:
ASK IF: SCodeA = 9999999 SchDetA IN
Page 245 and 246:
ASK IF: (State6 = Yes) OR (Apply6 =
Page 247 and 248:
ASK IF: AnyInfo = Yes InfUse [*] Wh
Page 249 and 250:
ASK IF: AnyInfo = No AND PerfT IN W
Page 251 and 252:
ASK IF: WhchSch = Yes Nr5SchK Can I
Page 253 and 254:
Page 255 and 256:
ASKIF:((School/college/university q
Page 257 and 258:
ASK IF: SCE Higher IN Quals NumSCE
Page 259 and 260:
Page 261 and 262:
ASK IF: IN WORK OR EVER WORKED OccT
Page 263 and 264:
ASK IF: Respprt < 97 AND: GrossP R
Page 265 and 266:
ASK IF: PrefOth1 = RESPONSE YPrf1C
Page 267:
267
show all

Parents' Experiences of the Process of Choosing a Secondary School

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?