Get documents about "Survey Aware Understand Sci Engin Tech Report
Document Sample
Survey on changes in awareness and
understanding of Science, Engineering
and Technology
Report on Findings
DEEWR June 2008
Contents Page
Executive Summary 2
1. Introduction 6
2. Methodology 8
3. Survey Analysis 14
4. Some Demographic Differences: A 63
Summary
5. Conclusion and Summary 69
1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Survey on Changes in Awareness of Science, Engineering and Technology (SET) was
initiated as part of follow-up research to the Science, Engineering and Technology Skills Audit,
which was completed in mid 2006. The audit investigated a range of aspects of the demand for
and supply of SET skills.
The survey was designed in part to build on previous studies on attitudes to science and
technology in Australia, which also involved survey components (although with much lower
sample sizes). These previous studies were conducted in 1991, 1994, and 1997, and included
questions on Australians’ perceptions of the rewards of a SET career, the importance of science
and technology (S&T) to Australia, the suitability of SET careers for women, and media
coverage of SET, among other things.
The aims of the 2007 survey were to assess changes in community awareness and attitudes to
SET within Australia since 1997 (when the last similar survey was conducted), the effectiveness
of current Australian SET-awareness raising initiatives (such as science centres, awards, etc),
and the effect of these initiatives on influencing decisions on entering SET careers.
The target groups of the survey were parents of children under 18, children in secondary
education, and other adults. In total, 3337 people were interviewed, including 1113 secondary
school students, 1108 parents, and 1116 general community members.
How do parents and the community perceive science and technology?
The survey asked parents and community members what they associated with the words
‘science’ and ‘technology’. The majority of people tended to associate science with specific
scientific disciplines (chemistry, biology, physics, maths), experiments and research. This has
not changed since the previous surveys, but the actual fields mentioned have changed – no
doubt because some areas of science are now more in the public eye than they were ten years
ago. Many people don’t really distinguish between science and technology, such that
comments about science were often about what it produces – eg “anything to do with modern
day high tech appliances and the things that we use”.
Technology, far more than science, is seen to be about ‘computers’, but also includes progress
and inventions, machinery, and telecommunications. Since 1994, computers have always been
at the top of people’s definitions of technology, but there has been a steep rise in the proportion
of people drawing that association. Women were much more likely to think of computers (and a
bit more likely to cite telecommunications) than men, and men more likely to cite broader
associations (machinery, improvements, use of science knowledge in applications, technology
centres).
How about careers in SET?
The survey asked whether parents and community members thought careers in SET were
rewarding for young people and suitable for women. Some further questions were also asked
indicating awareness of what people in SET might do and where they might work.
Most respondents (about 85%) thought that ‘careers in SET’ were very or quite rewarding for
young people. People seemed to feel more strongly positive about this than they did in 1994,
when the question was first asked. Lower proportions of males, younger age groups,
metropolitan residents and people with higher non-school qualifications are positive about SET
careers. Interestingly, people with qualifications in the natural and physical sciences are among
the least positive.
2
When asked to think of SET professions, the top three professions people thought of were
medical researcher, doctor and computer programmer. Only 9% could not think of any SET
professions.
An overwhelming majority of people thought that SET careers were suitable for women.
However, both the proportion of people agreeing that SET careers are suitable, and strength of
opinion on the subject, has increased markedly over the decade since 1997. The main reasons
people gave for their positive view were that ‘women are equal to men’, ‘SET jobs should be
open to anyone’, and ‘women are intelligent.’. Most negative comments were focussed on
perceived practical rather than ideological barriers, and had to do with SET jobs being family-
unfriendly or male-dominated and therefore hard to get into or get promoted in. However many
people, either in support of women in SET or against, referred to the intrinsic traits of females –
diligent, logical, detail-oriented, physically strong – or not, etc.
Most respondents knew people who worked in a SET job. Only 15% of people said they didn’t
know anyone in a SET job, while a further 6% only knew one person. The majority of people
knew quite a lot of people working in SET – with a fifth knowing between 6 and 10, 13%
between 11 and 20, 10% between 21-50, and 10% over fifty. Predictably, those who knew a lot
of people working in ST were more likely to be SET graduates or in management or
professional occupations.
The survey asked people about their awareness of organisations involved in SET, and over a
quarter said they didn’t know of any. However, of the remainder, respondents were most
commonly aware of CSIRO (almost half), universities (just over a fith), hospitals (just over a
tenth) and government (a tenth). Significantly more women than men couldn’t name a SET
organisation, although women were more aware of hospitals, medical and health research
institutions, and other research organisations.
Young people from 16-25 were particularly uninformed compared to older age groups, with over
half not being able to name any SET organisation.
SET in the media
The survey asked a number of questions about the media, including respondents’ SET-related
TV-watching habits, and their views on how SET is portrayed in the media.
SET-related TV programmes were quite popular, both among parents and community members
and among secondary students. The most watched SET-related TV programmes were ‘The
New Inventors’, ‘Beyond 2000’, and ‘Mythbusters’ – each with about 50% of the sample
claiming to watch regularly. Young people (16-25) preferred Mythbusters, CSI and NCIS, while
women were less keen on Mythbusters and more on SVU. Half of the secondary students
watched Mythbusters on a regular basis, a third watched NCIS, and roughly a third watched
CSI. From about age 13 onwards, there is a drift away from science-information programmes
(eg Walking with Dinosaurs) to crime shows.
Most people (around 60%) said that the media covers SET-related issues too little or much too
little. Somewhat less than a third think that it covers SET about the right amount, particularly
16-25 year olds (41% of whom thought it was just right). More than half the respondents
thought that media coverage was very or quite positive, however – and again, younger people
were more likely to think so.
How important is SET for Australia’s future?
As in the last three surveys, this survey asked respondents how important SET was for
Australia’s future. A large majority of people thought that SET was extremely important. The
3
proportion of people who said this has increased significantly in the last decade, from just under
70% from 1991 to 1997, to just under 90% in 2007. However, people with no non-school
qualifications and in lower income groups tended to rate its importance lower.
Participation, experience and outcomes of SET awareness raising activities
A surprisingly large number of parents and community members (36%) said that they weren’t
aware of any SET activities. Those who were aware, were more likely to have a non-school
qualification, a university-level qualification, a higher income, speak English at home, live in a
metropolitan, regional or rural location, and be managers, professionals or students.
Despite this, nearly three quarters of parents interviewed, more than half the community
members, and two thirds of secondary students, had visited a SET activity in the last year. The
top activities visited were zoos, aquarium, science centres, museums of natural science, and
science shows – and, for students – science talks or debates.
Parents were asked the age and sex of the eldest child who went with them to the activity: the
most commonly cited age groups were primary-school age (5-12) and then 13-18, and the child
was more often a boy than a girl.
The main reason for the visit was either educational value, or (for some activities, eg zoo,
aquarium) for fun or a ‘day out’. The most common reason for secondary students was as part
of a school excursion.
Parents hoped their child would have fun, primarily, and then learn something. Stimulating
their child’s interest in a SET career was the lowest rated objective, and a relatively low
proportion of parents (about a third) thought the visit had actually achieved this. Parents of
boys rated most outcomes (eg increased interest in science, increased learning about science)
higher than parents of girls.
Encouragingly, most parents said their child had found the visit very inspiring, although a fifth
said that the child showed no interest in SET either before or after the trip. Most didn’t think the
child had enjoyed the activity only from an entertainment perspective, and most said they’d like
to go again.
Engaging young people in SET
The survey indicated that many SET activities were effective in engaging and interesting
secondary students in SET. Asked which aspect they enjoyed most of the visit, many (about a
fifth) said that it was ‘learning about different things’, and 15% that it was ‘seeing fish..animals
etc up close’. Students also said they liked the interactivity and hands-on nature of their
experience. Most found it fun, especially 13 year olds. Two thirds said they’d like to find out
more about SET as a result and that they’d visit again: more than half said they’d do physics
(strangely enough, considering not all activities would have involved physics), and 55% said
they’d go to other SET activities. Over half the students said it had changed their understanding
of science. Many students said that they’d become more aware of what jobs were available in
science, and what they involved.
On the other hand, participation in science week was not particularly high. Well over a third
(37%) of students were aware of science week, though that leaves around two thirds who
weren’t. Of those, about a fifth had been to science week activities, and four fifths of those said
that the activities had presented interesting careers in science. However, participation in
voluntary environmental activities was higher - nearly half (46%) had participated in Clean Up
Australia Day and a fifth in tree planting.
4
Considering the popularity of the net, interaction with science websites was low. Slightly less
than a third of secondary students were aware of science websites – more males than females.
Most visited them rarely or never, and used them – when they visited – to get information for
school work.
The impact of demographics
There is a clear trend in the survey results suggesting that (as might be expected) awareness of
and participation in SET-related activities is lower among people who live in rural or remote
areas and who have low-SES backgrounds. For instance, almost twice as many remote
resident parents hadn’t participated in any SET activities in the last year, as metropolitan
parents. Low SES background parents tended to hope for more from the visited activity (eg
help with child’s education, stimulation of child’s interest in SET) than high SES, and rate what
the child actually got (eg value other than entertainment, understanding of science as part of
everyday life), lower. There was one important exception to this: a very much higher proportion
of low SES parents thought the visit had raised their child’s interest in a science career.
On the other hand, parents who spoke a LOTE at home were likely to report more positive
outcomes for their children from visits to SET activities, than their English-only speaking
equivalents, and participation of LOTE-speaking secondary students in activities such as
science week, science websites and science subjects at school was noticeably higher.
In conclusion, the findings suggest that:
People associate science with concrete scientific disciplines rather than with a general
approach to the world, and technology with applications of science, particularly
computers. There is broad acknowledgement that science and technology are intrinsic
to life in today’s world.
People have a high opinion of the rewards of a science and technology career for young
people, and the importance of S&T generally to Australia, and that view has
strengthened over the last decade;
Australians are highly supportive of women’s ability to undertake SET careers, but, if
there are caveats, they are often practical (eg to do with family-unfriendly practices etc)
rather than ideological.
There is a fairly broad view of what people trained in science might do – ie not just
‘scientist’ or ‘researcher’. Most people know a number of others who work in SET fields.
Awareness of organisations involved in SET is very low among young people 16-25, an
age-group when it would be important to know where people with S&T skills might be
employed.
Activities which bring science and technology to the public (zoos, aquariums, science
centres, etc) seem to be highly effective in raising interest in SET, but not so much
interest in a SET career as such. Science talks, conferences and maths/science week
are the most effective in raising secondary students’ awareness of jobs – but not many
attend.
There may be scope to increase the awareness of science week activities, which is quite
low, and awareness and use of science websites.
5
1. Introduction
The Survey on Changes in Awareness of Science, Engineering and Technology was initiated as
part of follow-up research to the Science, Engineering and Technology (SET) Skills Audit, which
was completed in mid 2006. The audit investigated a range of aspects of the demand for and
supply of SET skills.
The aims of this survey were to assess:
changes in community awareness and attitudes to SET within Australia since the last
investigation in 1997;
whether current Australian awareness raising initiatives have had a positive effect on
enhancing awareness of SET;
whether current Australian awareness raising initiatives positively influence decisions on
entering SET careers; and
which types of awareness raising programs have been the most effective.
Prior to the survey, DEEWR commissioned a literature review, to assess what research had
been already been done on SET community awareness initiatives, and their aims and
effectiveness.
The literature review ‘Literature Review of Science, Engineering and Technology (SET)
Awareness Raising Activities’, DEST, 2006, found that:
Australia has a plethora of science awareness raising initiatives, mainly for students;
Programmes are often not well co-ordinated, leading to potential gaps and overlaps in
their impact;
There is limited evaluation of awareness raising initiatives, limiting understanding of how
effective these initiatives are at meeting their goal.
The focus of initiatives is on science, not science careers;
There is a limited focus on parents; and
Australia lacks baseline data on community attitudes to science against which to
measure success of SET awareness raising activities.
The survey was designed in part to build on previous studies on attitudes to science and
technology in Australia, undertaken by Woolcott Research. These studies were the:
‘Strategy Development Study: An Evaluation of Changes in the Understanding of, and
Attitudes to, Science and Technology’, conducted for the S&T Awareness Program,
DIST, 1998;
‘Strategy Development Study: An Evaluation of Changes in the Understanding of and
Attitudes to Science and Technology’, prepared for the S&T Awareness Program, DIST,
1995; and
‘An Evaluation of the Attitudes of Australians to Science and Technology’, 1991,
conducted for the Science and Technology (S&T) Awareness Programme, Department
of Industry, Technology and Commerce (DIST);
Henceforward, these studies are referred to as the 1991, 1994, and 1997 surveys (the
differences in year from the reports listed above are because the survey was run, in some
cases, the year before the report was completed. Similarly, the current survey was conducted in
2007).
In summary, these previous studies found that there were two main strands in Australians’
perceptions of science and technology: risk, and relevance. Over time (ie between 1991 and
6
1998), the research found that Australians’ perceptions of the risks of S&T (eg job loss, difficulty
in adapting to job and lifestyle change, unpleasant side effects of ‘progress’, business risk in
investing in science/r&d) have lessened, and perceptions of the relevance (centrality to
Australia’s future, value to society) have increased.
The previous studies were dissimilar to the current one in that the sample size for this survey is
much larger (3337 people, in all, compared to 755 in 1998, 674 in 1995, and 1000 in 1991) and
because previous studies included a qualitative component (focus group discussions and/or
interviews with groups of women, businesspeople, SET undergraduates, and secondary school
students).
However, the 2007 survey asked a number of questions which were similar to questions in the
previous studies, for comparison purposes. These questions were in relation to perceptions of
‘science’ and ‘technology’, the importance of science for Australia’s future, the rewards of SET
careers for young people, the suitability of SET careers for women, and media coverage of
SET. Previous surveys asked some questions about awareness and recognition of SET
activities and media, but as these were framed differently, it was not possible to compare.
7
2. Methodology
The target groups of the survey were:
Parents of children attending primary and secondary schools ;
Children in secondary education (parents were asked for permission to survey their
children); and
Adults who were not parents of school-aged children.
Respondents were identified at random from the White Pages telephone directories for
Australia, and the survey was conducted using a computer assisted telephone interview (CATI)
process.
DEEWR consulted the ABS to determine a valid sample size for the survey. Using the National
Statistical Service Sample Size Calculator and assuming a relative standard error of 3%, a
required sample size of 1,111 was identified for each group.
In terms of actual respondent numbers, 3337 people were interviewed for this survey. These
included roughly equal numbers of parents of children 0-17 years, members of the general
community, and secondary school students (see below). The number of parents was slightly
(by 3 people) short of that recommended by the ABS.
Number Percent
Secondary school students 1113 33.4
Parents of child 0-17 years 1108 33.2
General community members 1116 33.4
Following is a break-down of the demographic characteristics of survey respondents.
Parents and General Community Members
Gender
Of the 2224 parents and members of the general community surveyed, 62.72% (1395) were
women and 37.28% (829) were men.
Age
The following table shows the distribution of parents and community members by age. In
any following analysis of this group by age, those under 16 have been excluded because
there were only five, and this is not a statistically valid sample (people under 16 are well-
represented in the part of the survey relating to secondary students).
Frequency Percent
Under 16 5 0.22
16-25 127 5.71
26-35 411 18.48
36-45 635 28.55
46-55 406 18.26
Over 55 640 28.78
8
Location
63.71% (1417 people) lived in a metropolitan area, 19.51% (426) lived in a regional area,
15.6% (347) lived in a rural area and 1.53% (28 and 6 respectively) lived in a remote or very
remote area. (Q99) Because of the low numbers of people from remote and very remote
areas, it is not feasible to make any real extrapolations from this survey about the remote
population more generally.
Income
The following table provides the income-level distribution of parents and community
members.
INCOME LEVEL Frequency Percent
Under $30,000 385 17.31
$30,000-50,000 356 16.01
$51,000-70,000 344 15.47
$71,000-100,000 344 15.47
Over $100,000 389 17.49
Refused/not sure 406 18.26
TOTAL 2224 100.01
Employment
The following table provides the employment status/occupation of parents and community
members.
Respondent occupation Frequency Percent
Managers 160 7.19
Professional 597 26.84
Technicians and Trades workers 133 5.98
Community & personal service workers 115 5.17
Clerical & administrative workers 162 7.28
Sales workers 106 4.77
Machinery operators & drivers 32 1.44
Labourers 79 3.55
Home duties 294 13.22
Student 82 3.69
Unemployed-not retirement age 32 1.44
Pensioner-not retired 8 0.36
Pensioner-on pension 328 14.75
Retired-not on pension 96 4.32
9
Life-cycle stage
In terms of life-cycle stage, 6% (138 people) classified themselves as young singles, 4%
(89) as young couples without kids, 24% (535) as (members of) young families with the
youngest child under 6, 22% (500) as ‘middle families’ with the youngest child 6-15, 11%
(237) as ‘mature families – youngest child 15 plus’, 20% (448) as ‘older couple – no children
at home’, 12% (275) as ‘mature single’, and 0.09% (2) refused.
Educational attainment
71% (1571 people) had completed a non-school qualification including TAFE and higher
education qualifications. 43% (689) of those who had completed a non-school
qualification held more than one non-school qualification.
Of the 1571 parents and members of the general community who had completed a non-
school qualification, 31.89% had a Bachelor degree, 25.91% had a certificate-level
qualification and 12.92% had a diploma-level qualification. 9.29% held a Masters-level
or higher level qualification.
The following table shows the distribution of qualifications by field of study.
Field of Study Frequency Percent
Natural & physical science 125 7.96
Information technology 69 4.39
Engineering & related technologies 191 12.16
Architecture & building 57 3.63
Agriculture, environmental & related 46 2.93
Health 204 12.99
Education 193 12.29
Management & commerce 298 18.97
Society & culture 146 9.29
Creative arts 91 5.79
Food hospitality & personal services 127 8.08
Other 24 1.53
Culturally and linguistically diverse respondents
1.03% (23 people) identified as Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander, 98.7% were non-
Indigenous and 6 people declined to provide this information.
12.77% (284) spoke another language in addition to English at home. Of these,
approximately 14% spoke Italian, 10% Arabic, 9% an ‘other Asian language’, 7%
German, 6% Greek, 5% Mandarin, 5% Spanish, and the rest various other European
and Asian languages.
Secondary Students
Gender
Of the 1113 secondary students interviewed, 48.9% (533) were male and 52.1% (580)
female.
10
Location
The following table shows the number and percent of secondary students living in
metropolitan, rural, regional and remote areas. Not many students lived in remote or
very remote areas, so it is very difficult to extrapolate anything from their views:
however, there were major (and not necessarily easy to explain) differences between
remote and very remote students and other students in a number of areas of the survey.
Area of residence Number Percent
Metropolitan 673 60.47
Regional 270 24.26
Rural 156 14.02
Remote 12 1.08
Very remote 2 0.18
School grade level
The following table shows the school year in which respondents were studying, by
number and percentage.
School year (secondary) Frequency Percent
Year 7 134 12.04
Year 8 193 17.34
Year 9 183 16.44
Year 10 207 18.6
Year 11 189 16.98
Year 12 207 18.6
School subject being studied
The following charts shows the science and technology subjects being studied by the
respondents, in total, and by gender. The first chart shows that maths (being studied by
92% of students), science-general (63% of students) and geography (32% of students)
were the most frequently studied subjects. The second chart shows that much the same
proportions of females and males were studying most S&T subjects, although there were
more females in biology and chemistry than males and more males in most of the
engineering/technology subjects (except for food technology).
11
Number of students
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
0
1 "Mathematics"
6 "Science (General)"
11 "Geography"
3 "Biology"
2 "Chemistry"
4 "Physics"
5 "Earth & environmental science"
8 "Electronics technology"
13 "Industrial technology"
Subject
7 "Construction"
10 "Metal and engineering"
SET subjects studied by secondary students
12 "Agriculture"
9 "Engineering studies"
15 "None"
16 "Food Technology"/
14 "Other (Specify)"
12
Proportion of respondents studying (percent) Students studying S&T subjects, by gender
100.00
90.00
80.00
70.00
60.00
Male
50.00
Female
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
16 "Food Technology"/
1 "Mathematics"
2 "Chemistry"
5 "Earth & environmental science"
15 "None"
11 "Geography"
4 "Physics"
10 "Metal and engineering"
9 "Engineering studies"
6 "Science (General)"
13 "Industrial technology"
8 "Electronics technology"
3 "Biology"
14 "Other (Specify)"
12 "Agriculture"
7 "Construction"
Subjects
Cultural and linguistic diversity
19% (209) of the students spoke a language other than English at home, and 81% (904)
didn’t. A third of the students spoke a language which was not on the coded list, and
these languages covered a very broad range (including various African languages,
Asian languages and European languages). After these languages, Arabic, Vietnamese
and ‘other Asian language’ were most frequently cited (9, 8 and 7 percent respectively).
It should be noted that, throughout this report, where percentages of respondents are quoted for
questions with multiple responses permitted, the percentages don’t add up to 100%.
13
3. Survey Analysis
As previously explained, the survey respondents fell into three groups: general community
members, parents of children 0-17 years, and secondary students. The survey was structured
so that each group was asked a set of specific questions, although parents and general
community members answered the same questions for the first part of the interview. This report
follows this structure, with a section for each group of respondents.
3.1 Parents and General Community Members
The first part of the survey asked parents and community members a set of questions seeking
their general views about science, engineering and technology (SET).
What is science?
The survey asked people what came to mind when they thought about ‘science’. People could
nominate as many ideas as they wished, and these were coded into 27 ‘response categories’.
The most frequently mentioned categories were ‘chemistry/chemical’ and
‘biology/physics/maths/microbiology’ (both about 24% of respondents). About 19% of people
mentioned ‘experiments’ and 18% ‘research (general)’ ,16% mentioned ‘study/research into
environment/nature’ and 15% said ‘’medicine/medical health research’. The graph below shows
the proportion of people whose response fell into each category.
Parents & Community Members - ideas of science
Proportion of respondents citing category
30
25
20
(percent)
15
10
5
0
15 "*Technology (NFI)"
10 "Computers/ computerisation/
3 "Chemistry/ chemical"
26 "*Scientists (NFI)"
1 "Medicine/ medical health
6 "Experiments"
12 "Development - general"
centre/science museums"
24 "*Weather/climate/global
4 "Discover/ invention/
11 "Biology/ physics/ maths/
21 "*Engineering"
2 "Research - general"
8 "Laboratories/ lab equipment"
17 "*Teaching/education"
production/gas/electricity/mining"
5 "Study/ research into
20 "*Everything around us of a
25 "*The future/everything to do
27 "*It's exciting/interesting/fun
7 "Study/ research into space/
14 "(Don't know - can't think of
13 "Other (Specify)"
technology/agriculture"
18 "*Study/learning/school"
22 "*Backing up hypothesis with
9 "Knowledge/ understanding"
19 "*Science/technology
environment/ nature"
scientific nature/in every day
warming/greenhouse"
23 "*Food/food
16 "*Energy sources &
innovation"
with our future(NFI)"
microbiology"
research"
computer age"
astronomy"
proof/facts"
(NFI)"/
any)"
Response category
Male and female responses were fairly similar. A higher proportion of women mentioned
‘experiments’ and ‘science/technology centre/science museums’, and a higher proportion
of men said ‘development’ or ‘knowledge/understanding’.
14
There were a very large number of ‘other’ responses (694 in total) which ranged over the
whole gamut of concepts connected with science and technology. At least 82 of these
comments related directly to technology, 19 to schooling, and many others were
associated with museums or science centres, various science subjects (eg mathematics),
nature, or value statements (eg “improves your life”). A few comments were along the
lines of “a lot of men in white coats” and “horrible school experiments dissecting frogs”.
As can be seen from the graph below, the profile of medicine/medical health research (as
‘science’) has dropped considerably since 1997, and that of study/research into
environment/nature has also fallen off. Biology/physics/maths/microbiology is more at the
forefront of peoples’ minds than it was in 1997. Some areas which were prominent in
1994 but didn’t make the charts in 1997, made a come-back in 2007 –
discovery/inventions/innovation, chemistry/chemicals, and experiments. It is hard to say
why this might be.
Ideas of science-comparison of responses 1994, 1997, 2007
50
45
40
35
30 1994
25 1997
20 2007
15
10
5
0
medicine/medical health
biology/physics/maths/micro-
Study/research into
discovery/inventions/innovation
Experiments
chemistry/chemicals
environment/nature
research general
research
biology
What is technology?
The survey asked a similar question in relation to technology (ie, when I use the term
‘technology’ what comes to mind’). The main things that came to respondents’ minds
were ‘computers/computerisation/computer age/IT’ (64% of respondents mentioned this),
‘improvements/advancement/inventions’ (19%), and ‘machinery/machines’ or
‘telecommunications’ (both 15%).
15
Proportion of respondents citing
category (percent)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
1 "Computers/ computerisation/
computer age/ IT"
3 "Improvements/ advancement/
inventions"
9 "Telecommunications"
most other categories.
2 "Machinery/ machines"
8 "Development in electronics"
6 "Communications"
4 "Affects/ improved standards of
living/ way of life"
5 "Use of science knowledge in
application"
7 "Improvements/ developments in
transportation"
11 "Science/ technology centre"
13 "(Don't know - can't think of
anything)"
12 "Other (Specify)"
10 "Building/ construction/
architecture"
14 "*Health/Medicine/Medical
Inovations & equipment"
Response category
19 "*The future/related to
everything around us and how it
16 "*Study/learning/School"
15 "*Engineering"
17 "*Space travel/Aviation"
18 "*Industrial
Parents & community members - Ideas of technology
manufacturing/Production"
23 "*Power/Energy sources(eg.
The chart below shows the differences between the sexes in how they think about
Hot
21 "*Appliances/Consumer
whitegoods"
technology. Women were much more likely to think of computers, whereas men led on
20 "*Gadgets (NFI)"
16
22 "*Environment/Climate
change/Pollution"
Proportion of respondents by gender (percent)
Ideas of technology, by gender
80.00
70.00
60.00
50.00
Male
40.00
Female
30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
22 "*Environment/Climate
7 "Improvements/ developments in
3 "Improvements/ advancement/
20 "*Gadgets (NFI)"
14 "*Health/Medicine/Medical
1 "Computers/ computerisation/
6 "Communications"
9 "Telecommunications"
2 "Machinery/ machines"
8 "Development in electronics"
18 "*Industrial
15 "*Engineering"
21 "*Appliances/Consumer
19 "*The future/related to
10 "Building/ construction/
13 "(Don't know - can't think of
23 "*Power/Energy sources(eg.
12 "Other (Specify)"
16 "*Study/learning/School"
11 "Science/ technology centre"
5 "Use of science knowledge in
17 "*Space travel/Aviation"
4 "Affects/ improved standards of
Response category
524 people provided additional comments. A large number of these were to do with
computers, electronics, mobile phones, IPods, etc. Some referred to the future and
‘progress, ‘the way things work’: (also ‘headaches’ and ‘complicated things, that I have
trouble using’).
Perceptions of technology don’t appear to have changed very much over the last fifteen
years, although there is a much higher level of awareness of computers now as a major
aspect of ‘technology’ – 64% compared to 48% in 1997 and 42% in 1994. The
‘machinery’ aspect has dropped back, as also the ‘improvements/advancements
/inventions’ idea. ‘Telecommunications’ is much more prominent. It is interesting that
‘affects/improves standard of living’ and ‘use of science knowledge in application’,
respectively 11% and 12% in 1997, are now both mentioned by only 8% of respondents.
17
Ideas of technology-comparison of responses 1994, 1997, 2007
70
60
50
1994
40
1997
30
2007
20
10
0 improvements/advancemen
Affects/improved standard
improvements/development
developments in
use of scientific knowledge
Telecommunications
computers/computerisation
communications
machinery/machines
electronics
s in transportation
in applications
/computer age
ts/inventions
of living
Perceptions of Rewards and Career Paths in Science
Parents and general community members were asked how rewarding they consider
science, engineering and technology careers to be for young people. Over half (56%) said
they were very rewarding, and a further 29% said they were quite rewarding. About 4%
said they were very or quite unrewarding, with the rest sitting on the fence (‘don’t know’ or
‘neither’).
18
Parent and community member perceptions - how rewarding is
a SET career?
60
50
40
Percent
30 Percent
20
10
0
Very Quite Neither Quite Very Don't know
rewarding rewarding rewarding unrewarding unrewarding
nor
unrewarding
Rating
A slightly higher proportion of females (58%) than males (55%) said that SET careers
were rewarding or very rewarding. The proportion of people who said they were very
rewarding also increased quite markedly with age (see chart below).
How rewarding are SET careers, by age-group
70
Response rating (percent of age group)
Very rewarding
60
Quite rewarding
50
Neither rewarding nor
40
unrewarding
Quite unrewarding
30
Very unrewarding
20
Don't know
10
0
16-25 26-35 36-45 46-55 Over 55
Age group
Fewer people with non-school qualifications in natural and physical sciences, creative arts
and society and culture than in other fields thought careers in science were ‘very
19
rewarding’ for young people, while the share of those who ticked ‘don’t know’ was higher
among architecture, agriculture and creative arts graduates. Graduates of the physical
and natural sciences had the lowest opinion of the rewards of science for young people
(with 11.2% saying science was quite or very unrewarding).
Again, the higher the qualification level, the lower the proportion of people expressing
enthusiasm about the potential of science careers, with about 74% of people with
doctorates and masters qualifications, as against 82% of graduate diploma holders, 89%of
graduate.certificate holders, 85% of bachelor holders, 84% of diploma holders, 87% of
advanced diplomas, 89% of certificate holders, and 86% of trade certificate holders. The
overall number of people with doctorates was low, however, at 27.
Also striking was the increased proportion of people in regional and particularly remote
areas who said that S&T careers were very rewarding/quite rewarding for young people.
96% of remote area residents and 89% of regional, as against 84% of metropolitan and
rural dwellers, were enthusiastic about S&T careers. The overall number of respondents
from remote areas was low, however, at 28.
It could be suggested that these patterns relate to the respondents’ own vantage point: a
science graduate might see science as less rewarding because they may see graduates
of other disciplines earning more, whereas a remote or regional resident might see it as
rewarding because of science’s contribution to agriculture or because of limited rural
options.
Perceptions of the rewards of a science career have improved strikingly. In 2007 56% of
respondents viewed a science career as ‘very rewarding’, compared to 38% in 1997 and
46% in 1994. The proportion who see it as only ‘quite rewarding’ has decreased, from
47% in 1997 and 39% in 1994 to 29% in 2007.
What professions are involved with science and technology?
The survey asked parents and general community members, what professions they would
think of as being in the science and technology area. This gives an indication of
awareness both of what people do in the S&T field generally, and what professional
careers are available.
The chart below shows the top ten professions nominated, with ‘medical researcher’,
‘doctor’ and ‘computer programmer’ at the forefront. The least nominated professions
were to do with building, inventing and surveying. 9% of people couldn’t think of any
scientific professions.
There were 43 separate professions or groups of professions mentioned, many of which
use science and technology but would not perhaps usually be classified as primarily
scientific/technical. For instance 90 people mentioned ‘dentist’, 316 mentioned ‘nurse’,
and 52 ‘architect. Health professions generally were mentioned frequently.
20
Top ten professions in science
40
35
Proportion of respondents (percent)
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
7 "Computer programmer"
5 "Pharmacist"
12 "Computer graphics"
13 "Environmental protection"
3 "Doctor"
4 "Engineer"
15 "Nurse"
17 "Medical researcher"
1 "Scientist"
2 "Science teachers"
Response category (professional area)
Over the last ten years, people’s awareness of the involvement of doctors in S&T has
decreased, while their awareness of medical and health researchers, nurses and science
teachers has increased.
21
S&T Professions - Comparison 1994, 1997, 2007
40
35
30
25 1994
20 1997
15 2007
10
5
0
er
er
s
e
or
ls
r
t
ist
he
is
rs
er
na
m
ne
ct
ac
nt
ch
Nu
ac
am
Do
io
gi
ie
m
ar
te
ss
En
Sc
ar
gr
se
e
fe
Ph
ro
nc
re
ro
rP
ie
lp
lt h
Sc
te
ica
ea
pu
ed
/h
m
al
m
Co
ic
er
ed
th
M
O
Are S&T careers suitable for women?
Parents and general community members were asked, “Thinking …about careers and
study in science and technology, how suitable do you think careers and study in science
and technology are for women?”.
A large majority thought they were very suitable (66.4% of respondents) or quite suitable
(25.9%). A small proportion (2.1%) thought they were ‘quite’ or ‘very’ unsuitable, 3.2%
said neither and 2.2% ‘don’t know’. A lower proportion (60%) of people who spoke a
language other than English (LOTE) at home than primarily English-speakers (67%)
agreed that SET careers were very suitable, and a slightly higher proportion of LOTE
speakers said ‘neither suitable or unsuitable’ (4% as against 3%) or ‘quite unsuitable’ (3%
as against 2%).
In the current survey, people have a very much more positive view of the suitability of
careers in SET for women, as the graph below shows. Previous surveys did not show
much significant movement in perceptions, either up or down, but 2007 shows a large
jump in the strength of opinion.
22
Are S&T careers suitable for women: comparison 1991, 1994,
1997 and 2007
70
60
50
40
Very suitable
Quite suitable
30
20
10
0
1991 1994 1997 2007
Why are SET careers suitable/not suitable for women?
A follow up question asked respondents the reason for their choice. Around 56% of
respondents said ‘women are equal to men’, 30% said ‘(SET jobs) should be open to
anyone’, 18% that ‘women are intelligent’, and 15% that ‘women are good at
science/reasoning/logic’. A very small proportion of respondents (4%, or 90 people) didn’t
think that SET careers were suitable for women, and many of their reasons focussed on
the nature of SET jobs/career paths which made them unsuitable for women, rather than
the nature of women which made them unsuitable for SET. There were no particular
gender differences on this subject.
23
Reasons why SET careers are suitable/unsuitable for women
60
50
40
Percent
30
20
10
0
18 "@ Women more
11 "@ It's mental not
1 "Women are equal
2 "Women are
7 "Jobs are too
15 "@ Women have
16 "@ Women are
8 "Women are not
10 "(Not sure)"
19 "# Industry is
17 "@ Women very
5 "Should be open
opportunity in these
3 "Because science
at science/ reasoning/
accepted in areas
4 "Women are good
12 "@ You can do
demanding - not
interested in this field
13 "@ Women
anything you want
good at science/
jobs can be family
dominated by
14 "@ A lot of
meticulous/High
intelligent"
to anyone"
a different
physical
to men"
Reasons more
Some respondents who said SET careers were not suitable for women, made comments
such as “women are built and geared to do more feminine roles” or “difference in marks
between girls and boys – boys are more into science than girls and (have) better marks”,
but most comments had to do with the perception of S&T as being male-dominated or
non-family-friendly, so that it would be hard for women to make a career in these areas
(however, a number of these respondents still expressed support for women doing so
against the odds). For example:
“I personally don’t perceive any disadvantage in pursuit of (a SET) career, but (it) has
the image of a male dominated area.”;
‘It’s changing now, it’s more open to females but realistically its still male dominated –
but I do encourage females to go into the field.”;
“Hours are long, they’re not family friendly, you can’t be there for your children.”;
“(I) don’t think it is a fair playing ground. It is more encouraged and geared to men in the
field of science and technology”;
“(there is) insufficient support to get into these professions”.
Many verbatim responses mentioned male and female characteristics, mostly as helping
women to do SET jobs: for example, women’s perceived patience, attention to detail,
ability to think outside the square, and the fact that SET jobs don’t require physical
strength. Many people also knew women working in SET jobs, often relatives.
24
Jobs in SET – who does them and where do they work?
The survey asked parents and general community members how many people they knew
in a science, engineering or technology related job. About 15% of people didn’t know
anyone, while a further 6% knew one person, and 26% knew between two and five
people. A fifth knew between 6 and 10 SET workers (most either 6 (7%) , or 10 (10%)),
13% knew between 11 and 20 people, 10% knew twenty-one to fifty people, and 10%
knew from fifty to 99.
It would seem likely that the roughly 20% who knew over 21 S&T workers would be in an
S&T-related field themselves (either as an occupation, or having studied in that area), and
this is the case, with around 15% of graduates of the natural and physical sciences
knowing from fifty to ninety-nine people in SET, 8% of IT graduates, 12% of ‘engineering
and related technologies’ graduates, 10% of agriculture, environmental & related sciences,
compared to only 5% of management and commerce graduates and 2% of ‘architecture
and building’. In a related pattern, 13% and 20% of managers and professionals
respectively knew over 50 people in SET, as against 10% of students, 6% of technicians
and trades workers, and 3% of machinery operators and drivers.
Surprisingly, 14% of remote respondents said they knew over fifty people in SET (though
the overall number of remote respondents was only 28). Another 14% of remote
respondents said they knew from twenty to fifty. Otherwise, predictably, people living in
metropolitan areas had the highest share of SET contacts, with about 11% saying they
had over fifty and 11%, between twenty and fifty, compared to 7% and 8% and 9% and
8% respectively for regional and rural residents.
The survey also asked respondents to nominate organisations they know of as being
involved in science, engineering and technology. The chart below shows that respondents
were most commonly aware of CSIRO (with 44% of people nominating it), followed by
universities (28%), hospitals (13%) and government (10%). Over a quarter (28%) of
people said they didn’t know of any organisations involved in SET.
25
Q20: Organisations involved in SET
Proportion of respondents (percent) 50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
20 "*Computer/IT Companies"
3 "CRC (Co - operative Research
1 "CSIRO"
13 "Business - NFI"
Telecommunications"
Companies/Providers"
10 "Pharmaceuticals companies"
24 "*Banking/Financial Institutions"
19 "*Non-medical & health
5 "Government"
2 "ANSTO"
12 "Mining companies"
11 "Engineering companies"
17 "*Educational Institutions"
7 "Military - Army/ Navy"
21 "*Livestock/Agricultural/Primary
15 "(Don't know - can't name
18 "*Medical & health research
6 "Police"
8 "Hospitals"
4 "Universities"
27 "Weather/Meteorology Sector"/
26 "*Building & Construction"
9 "Bayer"
"*Aeronautical/Shipping/Transport
14 "Other (Specify)"
25 "*Manufacturing Sector"
research organisations"
16 "*Electronics &
22 "*Fuel & Energy
Industries/Produce"
Institutions"
any)"
Centre)"
23
Organisations/categories of organisation
About 11% more women (32%) than men (21%) couldn’t name any SET organisations.
Recognition of most organisations/organisational categories (such as CSIRO,
government, pharmaceutical companies, mining companies etc) was lower among
women, but higher in some cases (hospitals, medical and health research institutions, and
non-medical/health research (ie other research) organisations.
There is also a fairly strong age-related pattern, with over half (51%) of 16-25 year olds
not being aware of any SET organisations (compared with just 19% of 46-55 year olds,
25% of 36-44 year olds, 28% of over-55s, and 33% of 26-35 year olds). Given that 16-25
year olds are in the age group most likely to be considering their future careers, their lack
of awareness of organisations which employ people with SET skills is worrying.
Recognition of science organisations was generally lower among regional, rural and
remote respondents (averaged at 32% who were not aware of any organisations) than
among metropolitan respondents (27%), and much lower among people in lower income
brackets (eg 24% for the under-$30,000 bracket against 6% for the over-$100,000
bracket), and for people with no non-school qualifications (28% compared to 11% with
non-school qualifications). It was also lower among people who spoke a LOTE at home
(21% against 14%).
There have been changes in awareness of various organisations over the last sixteen
years. Awareness of CSIRO has dropped, from a high of 50% in 1994 to 45% in 1997 to
44% in 2007. BHP and Telstra have slipped off the radar, as far as recognition as ‘S&T’
organisations goes, while recognition of the role of universities, government, and
pharmaceutical companies has increased.
26
Awareness of SET organisations: comparison 1994. 1997, 2007
60
50
40
1994
30 1997
2007
20
10
0
t
RO
ra
s
ps
P
ls
es
en
s
itie
es
BH
it a
st
ou
ni
nm
I
el
sin
CS
rs
sp
pa
gr
/T
ve
er
Bu
Ho
m
m
h
ov
i
co
rc
Un
co
G
ea
le
al
es
Te
tic
r
eu
al
ac
ic
ed
m
ar
M
Ph
Science and technology in the media
Parents and community members were asked if they watched any of a number of S&T-
related television programmes (read out from a list by the interviewer) regularly. As the
chart below shows, overall the most watched programmes were ‘The New Inventors’ (51%
of respondents), ‘Beyond 2000’, ‘Mythbusters’ (both 48%), ‘CSI’ (44%) and ‘National
Geographic’ (40%). Not surprisingly, TV-watching preferences are affected by age-group
(the top three S&T shows for 16-25 year olds were Mythbusters (61%), CSI (50%) and
NCIS (39%) and by gender (see below).
Almost twice as many LOTE speakers (15%) as people who spoke English at home (9%)
said they didn’t watch any of the programs, and slightly more people without non-school
qualifications (11%) as with (9%).
27
Percent of respondents (male and People who said they watched regularly
female) (percent)
8
"T
he
8 N
"T e
14 w I
he "B nv e
0.00
10.00
20.00
30.00
40.00
50.00
60.00
N e n
15 yo tor
ew "M nd s "
16 y t 20
In "N hb 00
at us "
ve io te
0.00
10.00
20.00
30.00
40.00
50.00
60.00
70.00
12 na rs
nt "W lG 1" "
or al eo CS
s" ki g r I"
ng 7 ap
w "C hic
15 1 i th at "
"C D al y
"M 20 in
"D os s t"
SI is au
yt
hb " co 4 rs "
"N
14 ve 2
us r y " C CI
16 "B te C SI S"
ha M
"N ey rs nn iam
at on " 6 el - i "
"Q N
io d 11
ua FI"
nt
u
na 20
lG "W 18 3 m"
00 al "P l "S
ki an V
eo " n U
5 g w et E "
gr "C i t a
ap 13 1 ros h B rth"
hi "W 7 " s in ea s
al The g J ts "
c" ki
ng B l ord
12 4 23 u a
22 wi e P n"
"*
S
"W "N "( th C lan
N
2 BS on av et "
/A e em
al CI
"C S" BC of e
th n"
kin
D
g SI
M
oc 19 es
w ia
um
en 9 "T 10 co
"S e)"
ith 30 2 ta he " pe
m ri S "
TV programme
D "* 1 "
i" H O 27 " es/ Sk y pa
in ea r * S c
TV program
lth a s Do cie at e"
S&T-related TV programs
os /G i m cu nc Nig
ar il a me e S ht
"
au de r p n
7 rs
" 26 ni ro tar how
ng gr i e s
"C "* /L am s ( "
Top ten S&T TV shows, by gender
C i
at I C 33 fe s (S NFI
al ri m "*W ty le pe )"
ys e il P ci f
In dli f rog y)"
t" ve e
st Pro ram
3 ig
at gra s"
io
"S n ms
32 ch "/
"* 24 a n
VU
31 Q "*
" "*
C
ui Ho nel"
z
ri m 29 Pr use
28 e "*T ogr "
Sh o am
"*
C
ow ta ll s
ur s yW "
re 25 (Va i ld
nt
were only asked about television viewing. However in previous surveys, Beyond 2000
A
In previous surveys, people were asked about a range of SET-related media (including
"* riou "
and Quantum figured prominently. 59% of respondents watched Beyond 2000 in 1994,
ffa To s
irs p )"
Pr Gea
newspapers, current affairs programs, radio and magazines), whereas in this survey, they
og r"
28
ra
Male
m
s"
Female
with a dip to 23% in 1997 (compared to just under 50% in 2007). Quantum is no longer
running.
The survey asked if respondents thought the media covers science and technology too
much or not enough. The majority of respondents (59.5%) said it covered S&T too little or
far too little, with 29.7% saying ‘the right amount’ and 4.7% ‘too much’ or ‘far too much’.
Women (5.7 said ‘too much’ or ‘far too much’) were more likely than men (3.3%) to say
that there was too much coverage of science and technology, and men (64.1%) more
likely than women (56.9%) to say there was too little or much too little. More 16-25 year
olds (41%) than other age-groups (an average of 29%) thought the coverage was about
right, and correspondingly fewer thought the coverage was too much or too little.
It seems that more people now believe that media coverage of S&T is about right. In
1997, 25% of respondents said that the media covered it ‘the right amount’ (and 27% in
1994). An even greater majority (69%) than in 2008 said that the media coverage of S&T
was ‘less than should be’ or ‘far less than should be’. The corresponding figure in 1994
was 64%.
Media coverage of S&T: comparison of 1994, 1997, 2007
45
40
35
30
25 1994
1997
20 2007
15
10
5
0
Far too much Bit too much The right amount Less than Far less than
should be should be
Respondents were also asked whether they thought the media coverage of science and
technology is positive or negative. Most people (58.4%) thought it was very or quite
positive, with 15% saying it was quite negative or very negative. The older the age group,
the higher the proportion of people who felt that media coverage was negative (for
instance 50.3 and 19.8% of over 55s thought coverage was positive and negative
respectively, compared with 61.4% and 10.2% of 16-24 year olds).
29
How important is S&T for Australia’s future?
As in previous studies, the survey asks respondents how important they consider science
and technology for Australia’s future. 89.3% of respondents said they thought it was
extremely important, a further 9.6% said ‘very important’, 0.6% said ‘somewhat important’,
0.09% (2 people) said ‘not very important’, and 0.27% (6 people) said ‘not at all important’.
There were no obvious age or gender-related differences. However, people who had no
non-school qualifications tended to rate its importance lower than people with non-school
qualifications (rated ‘extremely important’ by 84% and 92% respectively), and people in
lower income-groups lower than people in higher income groups (86% said ‘very
important’ in the under-$30,000 group, against 93% in the over-$100,000 group).
As the graph below shows, perceptions of the importance of science to Australia’s future
have jumped significantly in the last decade, after being fairly steady since 1991.
Importance of science to Australia's future
100
90
80
70
60
Very important
50
Quite important
40
30
20
10
0
1991 1994 1997 2007
30
3.2 Parents of children under 18
The second part of the questionnaire surveyed only parents of children under 18, mainly in
relation to their experience of science, engineering and technology events or activities
they had visited with their children.
Awareness of SET activities
The survey asked parents if they were aware of any science and technology centres,
shows or events (respondents were prompted with examples if necessary). More than two
thirds (64%) said they were, and a rather surprising 36% said they were not. Following a
pattern which appears throughout the survey, more people who were aware of SET
centres had:
A non-school qualification (67% as against 57% who didn’t have one);
A university-level qualification (76% of people with graduate diplomas, 50% of
people with trade certificates);
A higher income (67% of the $100,000-plus group, 64% of the under-$30,000
group);
English as their home language (67% compared with 50% of people who spoke a
language other than English at home);
A metropolitan, regional or rural location (64%, 67% and 63% respectively, against
56% remote);
Jobs as managers (68%), professionals (73%), and students (83%) compared
particularly with technicians and trades workers (48%) and sales workers (46%).
Visits to SET activities – where did they go?
Parents were asked whether, in the last year, they or their children had visited any of the
attractions on a list read out by the interviewer. Out of 1108 parents of children under 18,
814 had visited one or more S&T activity during the last year, while 294 (27%) hadn’t.
Follow-up questions were addressed to these 814 parents.
The top five activities parents and/or their children had visited were a zoo (52% of
parents), an aquarium (39%), ‘science centre (eg Questacon/Scienceworks)’ (28%), a
museum of natural science (20%) and a science show (11%). None of the respondents
had visited a Planetarium or Wildlife Park. The chart below shows the proportion of
parents who said they had visited each attraction.
31
Number of respondents
0.00
10.00
20.00
30.00
40.00
50.00
60.00
10 "Zoo"
11 "Aquarium"
1 "Science centre (eg. Questacon/ Scienceworks)"
14 "(None of these)"
9 "Museum of natural science"
2 "Science show"
12 "Observatory/ space exploration centre"
5 "Science/ maths week"
3 "Science talks or debates"
6 "Science/ maths awards"
Activities
4 "Science conference"
13 "Other similar activity or event (Specify)"
7 "Engineering/ technology week"
19 "*Museums/Exhibitions"/
8 "Engineering/ technology awards"
Activities visited by parents and/or their children
15 "*Power House Museum"
16 "*Guided/Self guided Outdoor Activities/Walks"
17 "*Planetarium"
32
18 "*Wildlife Parks"
There were some differences between responses based on the age of the eldest child
who went with them to the last attraction they visited. The most frequently cited age of the
eldest accompanying child for all attractions, except for ‘science/maths awards’, was
primary school age (ie 5-12), and after that, 13-18 (see graph below):
Parents' visits to science activities in last year, by age-group
Percent of parents visiting by child age group
80.00
70.00
60.00
50.00 0-5 years
6-12 years
40.00
13-18 years
30.00 Over 18 years
20.00
10.00
0.00
"*Museums/Exhibitions"/
13 "Other similar
9 "Museum of natural
12 "Observatory/
3 "Science talks or
5 "Science/ maths
6 "Science/ maths
4 "Science
15 "*Power House
1 "Science centre (eg.
10 "Zoo"
11 "Aquarium"
conference"
technology week"
space exploration
7 "Engineering/
2 "Science show"
technology awards"
activity or event
8 "Engineering/
Museum"
debates"
awards"
Questacon/
week"
science"
19
Activity
All activities were visited by a higher proportion of parents whose eldest accompanying
child was a boy, as the graph below shows (note: self-guided walks are excluded as a category
because only one parent went on one):
33
Parents who attended S&T activities, by gender of eldest
accompanying child
70.00
60.00
Parents (percent)
50.00
40.00 Male
30.00 Female
20.00
10.00
0.00
"*Museums/Exhibitions"/
13 "Other similar
9 "Museum of natural
12 "Observatory/
3 "Science talks or
5 "Science/ maths
6 "Science/ maths
4 "Science
15 "*Power House
1 "Science centre (eg.
10 "Zoo"
11 "Aquarium"
conference"
technology week"
space exploration
7 "Engineering/
2 "Science show"
technology awards"
activity or event
8 "Engineering/
Museum"
debates"
awards"
Questacon/
week"
science"
19
Activity
How often did they go?
The survey asked parents who had visited one or more of the listed activities, with or
without their children, how many times they had gone. For most activities, the majority of
people (between 60 and 70%) had gone only once, with between 15 and 20% of people
going twice, and very small proportions going more than twice.
The zoo had a relatively high proportion (23%) of people going twice, and 17% of people
also went twice to science centres, science shows, and a museum of natural science.
13% of people went twice to an aquarium.
Of people who went to science talks or debates, a lower proportion (41%) than for other
activities went just once, and higher proportions went twice (23.5%), three (8.8%) or four
(8.8%) times. Activities such as Maths Week, Maths Awards and Engineering Technology
Week and Awards (probably because they tend to be held annually) had relatively high (in
the 80-90% range) of people going just once.
Who did they go with?
Parents were asked whether any of these activities had been undertaken with their
children. Most (717) parents said ‘yes’ (96 parents said ‘no’). The survey went on to ask
questions of these parents about their children’s experience of a randomly selected
activity they had taken them to.
They were also asked who else was involved in the visit to the activity in question.
Predictably, spouses and partners were the most common category, followed by other
children and other family members.
34
Who else involved Percent
1 "Spouse/ partner" 12.97
3 "Other children" 10.04
4 "Other family members" 9.34
2 "Other siblings" 6.42
5 "Friends" 5.86
6 "No one just me and my child" 2.79
8 "*Other students/Teachers/School Activity" 2.09
7 "Other (Specify)" 0.56
9 "*Work Colleagues/Professional people"/ 0.00
In terms of the gender of the eldest child who attended with the respondent, 51.7% (294)
were male and 48.2% (274) were female. Their ages ranged from one to thirty-one
years, but the highest proportions of children were in the 4-11 year age-group. After the
age of eleven there is a fairly steep drop-off.
Age of eldest child who attended activity with parent
8
7
6
Percent of total
5
4 Percent
3
2
1
0
One
Nine
Ten
Five
Three
Eleven
Thirteen
Eight
Eighteen
Fourteen
Nineteen
Thirty-one
Four
Seven
Fifteen
Sixteen
Seventeen
Six
Two
Twelve
Twenty-one
Twenty-three
Twenty-nine
Twenty
Twenty-five
Twenty-two
Age
Why did they go?
The most commonly cited reason overall was educational value, although, of parents who
took their children to the zoo or aquarium, more said it was for a day out or for fun (see the
chart below).
35
Parents' top ten reasons for taking their children to S&T
activities, by activity
80
70
Reason (percent)
60 s)" ce wo rk
50
Educational value
atio n cent re"
40
stacon/ S ci en
30 Day out
20 For fun
awards "
week"
ent"
10 Children w anted to go
e"
or
0
ev
natural scienc
ry/ spac e expl
School excursion
s"
"
ntre (eg. Q ue
g/ technolo gy
g/ technolo gy
10 "Zoo"
aths wee k"
ilar activity or
aths awards "
ow"
11 "A quarium
lks or debate
Curiosity/Interest/Discovery
2 "Scien ce sh
Something to do on a rainy day
Other (Specify)
5 "Scien ce/ m
12 "O bservato
9 "Mus eum of
1 "Scien ce ce
6 "Scien ce/ m
13 "O ther si m
7 "Engineerin
8 "Engineerin
3 "Scien ce ta
Took visitors
Birthday party
Activity
What were parents hoping the child would get out of it?
Parents were asked, in relation to the nominated activity they attended with their children,
what they were hoping the child would get from the experience, and how important this
was to their visit.
Parents who took their children to science activities tended to rate them highly on all
counts, viewing all the outcomes as either very important or extremely important, except
for ‘stimulating your child’s interest in a SET career’, where the share of very positive
responses was under 50%. However, there were some differences by activity.
A higher proportion of parents who had been to Science and Maths Week said that they
viewed it as educational, and important for developing their child’s interest in S&T,
generally and as a career, than for other activities, while Engineering and Technology
Awards were viewed as very important for ‘understanding the world’. Science and Maths
Awards, Engineering Technology Week, and Engineering Technology Awards were seen
as important for ‘learning about how things work’. Similarly, in regard to ‘learning about
science’, science/maths week, science/maths awards, and engineering/technology
week/awards, were very important or extremely important. ‘Having fun’ was very
important for parents who took their child to science and maths awards, the zoo, science
shows and aquariums
As the chart below shows, overall, having fun was the main outcome parents hoped for,
followed by learning about the environment, helping with their education and
understanding the world. This is a bit surprising given that the top reason for taking
children to most activities was educational, but the two are probably perceived as closely
linked.
36
What parents were hoping child would get from
visiting science/technology attraction
120
Importance to parent
100
Don't know
80 Not at all important
Not very important
60
Somewhat important
40 Very important
20 Extremely important
0
H
Le
Le
U
St
St
H
Le
av
nd
el
im
im
ar
ar
ar
p
in
e
ni
ni
ul
ul
ni
in
rs
g
ng
ng
at
at
ng
g
ta
fu
in
in
w
ab
nd
n
ab
ab
g
g
ith
i
ou
ch
ch
ou
ou
ng
th
ild
ild
t
t
t
e
th
sc
ho
th
ir
's
's
e
e
ie
ed
w
in
in
wo
n
en
te
te
u
th
ce
ca
r
vi
r
r
i
ld
ng
es
es
ro
t io
s
ti
ti
nm
n
w
n
n
or
en
S&
SE
k
t
T
T
ca
r
ee
r
Hoped-for Outcome
What did children actually get out of it?
Overall, not many parents said that the visit had raised the child’s interest in a science career
(only about a third of parents strongly or slightly agreed that it had), but over half agreed that the
visit had raised the child’s interest in studying science. Three quarters said that it had raised
their child’s interest in S&T generally, and 78% agreed that their child had learned a lot about
science.
Those who did think the activity had interested their child in a SET career were more likely to
have participated in science/maths week, science talks, or science/maths awards (however, it
could be guessed that those who participated in awards probably already performed relatively
well in science and maths, so were probably already more interested in science as a career).
A large majority (85%) of parents agreed that the child had found the visit very inspiring, and
only 20% that the child had no interest in science either before or after the visit. Four fifths
(81%) said that it had raised their child’s understanding of how science is part of everyday life,
and 69% that their child had always been interested in S&T. Less than half (46%) agreed with
the statement that the child had enjoyed the visit from an entertainment perspective only.
There was a significant difference between parents whose eldest accompanying child was a
boy, and those whose child was a girl, on almost all perceived outcome measures.
Significantly more parents whose child was a boy agreed more strongly that the child had learnt
37
Rating (percent)
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
interested in S&T.
Your child learnt a lot about science
The visit raised child's interest in science
Visit raised child's interest in studying science
Visit raised child's interest in following a career in
science
Your child was interested in learning more about
science
Your child found the visit very inspiring
activity
Your child enjoyed the visit only from an entertainment
perspective
Raised child's understanding of how science is a part of
everyday life
Child has always been interested in S&T
Child showed little interest, experience did little to
change this
Parents' perception of what children gained from visit to SET
Neither
a lot, become more interested, wanted to study science more, was interested in a science
Slightly agree
Strongly agree
Slightly disagree
Strongly disagree
career, and wanted to learn more about science. More agreed that their child had always been
38
Did the activity stimulate your child's interest in a science
career (by activity)?
80
70 Strongly agree
60 Slightly agree
Percent
50
Neither
40
30 Slightly disagree
20 Strongly disagree
10 Don't know
0
Observatory/ space
Museum of natural science
Engineering/ technology
Science talks or debates
Zoo
Aquarium
Science centre
Science/ maths week
Engineering/ technology week
Science/ maths awards
Science shows
exploration centre
awards
Almost all (97.6%) of parents said that they would like to engage in this type of activity again,
while only 2.3% said that they would not. Overall, these results are an encouraging indication
that children’s participation in science activities had a positive effect.
3.3 General community members’ experience of SET activities
The third section of the survey asked members of the general community the same types of
questions as were asked of parents of children under 18 about their experiences of visiting
science and technology activities.
Where they went
General community members were asked if they had experienced any of the activities on a list
read out by the interviewer (the same list is used throughout the survey) in the last twelve
months. More than half (53%, or 587 people) said they had experienced one or more, and 47%
(529 people) had not.
39
S&T activities attended by general community members in last
year
(None of these)
Zoo
Aquarium
Museum of natural science
Number of respondents
Science centre (eg. Questacon/ Sciencew orks)
Science show
Science talks or debates
Observatory/ space exploration centre
Science conference
Engineering/ technology w eek
Museums/Exhibitions
Science/ maths w eek
Engineering/ technology aw ards
Science/ maths aw ards
Other similar activity or event (Specify)
Pow er House Museum
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
40
How often?
Similarly to parents visiting with their children, some activities attracted people once or twice in
the last year (the science centre, science maths week/awards, engineering-technology
week/awards, the museum, zoo, aquarium and observatory), whereas others (science shows,
talks and debates) attracted more repeat visits (presumably either by enthusiasts or people
involved in the activity in some way).
Number of times general community members visited S&T
activity in last year
Number of times (as percent of people visiting)
100.0
90.0
80.0
Once
70.0
One to four times
60.0
Six to ten times
50.0
Eleven to twenty times
40.0
More than twenty times
30.0
Don't know
20.0
10.0
0.0
12 "Observatory/ space exploration
1 "Science centre (eg. Questacon/
3 "Science talks or debates"
9 "Museum of natural science"
10 "Zoo"
11 "Aquarium"
5 "Science/ maths week"
7 "Engineering/ technology week"
4 "Science conference"
6 "Science/ maths awards"
8 "Engineering/ technology awards"
2 "Science show"
Scienceworks)"
centre"
S&T activity
As with parents, the interviewer randomly selected an activity the respondent said they had
visited, and following questions relate to that activity. Respondents were distributed by selected
activity as follows:
ACTIVITY Frequency Percent
1 "Science centre (eg. Questacon/ Scienceworks)" 48 8.18
2 "Science show" 33 5.62
3 "Science talks or debates" 31 5.28
4 "Science conference" 24 4.09
5 "Science/ maths week" 7 1.19
6 "Science/ maths awards" 5 0.85
7 "Engineering/ technology week" 14 2.39
41
8 "Engineering/ technology awards" 4 0.68
9 "Museum of natural science" 73 12.44
10 "Zoo" 177 30.15
11 "Aquarium" 115 19.59
12 "Observatory/ space exploration centre" 32 5.45
13 "Other similar activity or event" 24 4.09
587
Why did they go?
Overall, the main reason given for going to the S&T activity was ‘a day out’, followed by
‘educational value’ and ‘for fun’.
Main reasons for attending S&T activity (general community
members)
Day out
Educational value
For fun
Children w anted to go
Took visitors
percent of total respondents
Curiosty/Interest/Discovery
Work/Professionally related
Other (Specify)
I like it/Wanted to go for entertainment/Fun
School excursion
Partner/ spouse w anted to go
Something to do w ith Children/Family
Something to do on a rainy day
Birthday party
On holidays at the time
Wanted to expose my children to it
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
‘Educational value’ was the most important reason for visiting most activities, includiing science
centres, science shows, science talks, science conferences, science/maths week,
engineering/technology week and awards, and the observatory/space centre. Education was
eclipsed by ‘a day out’ for museums, zoos, and aquariums. Professional or work-related
reasons were important for conferences and engineering/technology week, and ‘school
42
excursion’ for science/maths week and awards. ‘Curiosity/interest/discovery’ was relatively
important for museums.
43
Observatory/
space exploration
centre
Aquarium
Zoo
On holidays at the time
I like it/Wanted to go for
Museum of natural entertainment/Fun
science
School excursion
Something to do on a rainy day
Engineering/
technology Birthday party
aw ards
Work/Professionally related
Wanted to expose my children to it
Engineering/
technology w eek
Other (Specify)
Something to do w ith Children/Family
Science/ maths
aw ards Partner/ spouse w anted to go
Curiosty/Interest/Discovery
Science/ maths Took visitors
w eek
For fun
Children w anted to go
Science
conference Day out
Educational value
Science talks or
debates
Science show
Science centre
(eg. Questacon/
Sciencew orks)
0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0
44
Who did they go with?
More than a third (37%) of respondents (bearing in mind that this group did not have children
under 18) had visited with their spouse or partner, 28% with other family members (often,
judging from the comments, grandchildren), 23% with friends, 21% with other children, and 10%
by themselves.
What did they get out of it?
Respondents viewed ‘learning about the environment’ and ‘learning about how things work’ as
very important, and ‘stimulating interest in SET career’ as of much less importance. Very low
proportions rated anything as ‘not at all important’.
What were you hoping to get from S&T experience?
350
Number of responses
300 Extremely important
250 Very important
200 Somewhat important
150 Not very important
100 Not at all important
50 Don't know
0
&T
er
t
n
ld
e
en
k
re
fu
nc
or
or
S
nm
ca
g
ie
w
w
in
in
sc
ro
ET
gs
e
st
av
th
vi
re
in
t
S
H
ou
en
ng
te
th
in
ab
in
nd
e
w
st
th
ho
g
ng
ta
re
in
t
s
ou
te
ni
at
t
er
ou
in
ar
ul
ab
nd
ab
im
Le
g
U
ng
in
St
ng
at
ni
ni
ul
ar
im
ar
Le
Le
St
Response category
For some activities, the ‘fun’ aspect was particularly important – eg for Science Centres,
science/maths awards, engineering/technology week, zoos, aquariums, and observatories. For
other activities, learning was more of a priority – these included science shows, science
conferences, and science/maths week. For a few activities – science talks and
engineering/technology awards – stimulating interest in S&T was the most frequent hoped-for
outcome. Science Centres (19% of respondents), science talks (16%), science conferences
(12%), science/maths and engineering/technology weeks (both 14%), were the only activities
where stimulating interest in an S&T career was a significant desired outcome.
45
Observatory/
space exploration
centre
Aquarium
Zoo
Museum of natural
science
Engineering/
technology Having fun
aw ards
Learning about the environment
Understanding the world
Engineering/
technology w eek
Learning about how things work
Stimulating interest in a science
career
Science/ maths
aw ards Stimulating interest in science
and technology
Learning about science
Something else
Science/ maths
w eek
Science
conference
Science talks or
debates
Science show
Science centre
(eg. Questacon/
Sciencew orks)
0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0
46
99 people (or 16%) said that they were hoping to get something else from the experience other
than the listed outcomes. Many comments were around people wanting to gain a better
understanding and knowledge of the world, or of the particular aspect of it covered by the
activity (eg animals, for the zoo, aquatic life, for the aquarium, space, for the observatory).
Some were about encouraging children or grandchildren to be interested in science and
technology, eg “invigorate my son and daughter into maths and science” (science show), “Just
to expose them (presumably the children) to something new which I thought would be important
to their learning” (aquarium) and “keeping children away from Paris Hilton crap” (science show).
Some were oriented towards updating professional knowledge and contacts, particularly for
maths/science/engineering/technology weeks and awards, science conferences, and science
talks, eg “the chance to make a change and to do things better” (science conference).
47
3.4 SECONDARY STUDENTS
The fourth and final section of the survey related only to secondary students in the household.
What (science-related programs) do secondary students watch on TV?
Secondary school students were asked what science-related tv programmes they watched on a
regular basis. Mythbusters was most popular (with 619 students watching on a regular basis, or
56% of students), followed by NCIS (418, or 38%) and CSI (379, or 34%).
SET TV Programs watched regularly by secondary students
Criminal Investigation Channel
Grey's Anatomy
House
Brainiac
Animal Planet
Or a similar program
The Sky at Night
Space
Quantum
The Blue Planet
Walking w ith Cavemen
Planet Earth
Catalyst
Scope
Crossing Jordan
Walking w ith Beasts
Beyond 2000
National Geographic
None of these
Walking w ith Dinosaurs
The New Inventors
Discovery Channel - NFI
SVU
CSI Miami
CSI
NCIS
Mythbusters
0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0
Percent
There were significant differences between girls and boys. Nearly a quarter (23%) of girls said
they didn’t watch any of the listed programs, compared with only 11% of the boys. Boys were
much more likely to watch Mythbusters (68% to 44% of girls), Catalyst (10% to 5%), The New
Inventors (27% to 15%), Walking with Dinosaurs (24% to 14%), and Beyond 2000 (17% to 8%),
while girls were a bit more likely to watch CSI (36% to 32% of boys), CSI Miami (28% to 26%),
SVU (30% to 19%) and Crossing Jordan (12% to 5%).
There were also age-related patterns. The Discovery Channel was fairly high on the watching
agenda of 12 year olds (second most popular) but not so much for 13-18 year olds, whereas
CSI shows the opposite trend. This may be related to what 12 (as opposed to 13) year old
teenagers are allowed to watch as well as what they choose to watch – watching of crime-
related shows tend to jump upwards at 13, and purely science-information related shows
(Walking with Dinosaurs) to drop, though not so steeply.
48
What SET activities do secondary students go to?
Over a third (35%, or 389 respondents) had visited a zoo, 320 (29%) had visited an aquarium,
and 277 (25%) had visited a science centre, in the last year. A third (373) hadn’t visited any.
There were no significant gender differences, but the older the student, the less likely they were
to have visited a science activity in the last year (28% of 12 year olds had not, 43% of 18 year
olds). The turning point for decline in visits to most activities was at about age 15.
Visits to S&T related activities, secondary students
Zoo
(None of these)
Aquarium
Science centre (eg. Questacon/ Sciencew orks)
Science talks or debates
Science show
Museum of natural science
Science/ maths aw ards
Observatory/ space exploration centre
Science/ maths w eek
Engineering/ technology w eek
Science conference
Engineering/ technology aw ards
Other similar activity or event (Specify)
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Percent (of students)
How often do they go?
During the last year, the majority of students had visited a SET activity only once.
49
Times visited an S&T activity in last year - secondary students
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
10
15
Don't know
However, some activities attracted repeat visits more than others. For instance, as the tables
below show, over 40% of students had visited science talks or debates more than once, more
than a quarter of students had visited science centres more than once, compared to 15% who
had visited the museum of natural science more than once, and about 17% for the observatory.
Science and maths weeks and awards were predominantly once-only occasions, for obvious
reasons (ie they are usually held only once a year).
Times Science Centres
visited
1 74.5
2 17.5
3 6.6
4 1.1
5 0.4
Times visited Science shows
1 70.7
2 18.7
3 4.9
4 3.3
5 1.6
Dont know 0.8
50
Times Science talks/debates
visited
1 59.7
2 25.4
3 6.7
4 3.7
5 4.5
Times Science conferences
visited
1 75
2 25
Times Science/maths week
visited
1 81.8
2 16.7
4 1.5
Times Science/maths awards
visited
1 71.8
2 14.1
3 10.3
4 2.6
6 1.3
Times Engineering/technology week
visited
1 84
2 16
Times Engineering/technology awards
visited
1 83.3
2 16.7
51
Times Museum of natural science
visited
1 85.6
2 12.2
4 1.1
6 1.1
Times Zoo
visited
1 72.2
2 19
3 4.9
4 1.8
5 0.5
6 0.5
10 0.8
15 0.3
Times Aquarium
visited
1 76.6
2 17.5
3 3.75
4 0.9
5 0.6
6 0.6
Times Observatory/space exploration centre
visited
1 83.3
2 9.1
3 7.6
As with parents and general community members, the survey randomly selected an activity
which the respondent said they had attended in the last year, and the student was asked follow-
up questions about this experience. The distribution of selected activities was as follows.
52
Activity No of Percent
respondents
10 "Zoo" 200 27.03
11 "Aquarium" 149 20.14
1 "Science centre (eg. Questacon/ Scienceworks)" 148 20
3 "Science talks or debates" 57 7.7
2 "Science show" 43 5.81
9 "Museum of natural science" 38 5.14
12 "Observatory/ space exploration centre" 24 3.24
6 "Science/ maths awards" 22 2.97
5 "Science/ maths week" 21 2.84
13 "Other similar activity or event" 15 2.03
7 "Engineering/ technology week" 13 1.76
4 "Science conference" 8 1.08
8 "Engineering/ technology awards" 2 0.27
TOTAL 740 100.01
Why did they go?
Almost half the secondary students (44%) said that they visited the SET activity as part of a
school excursion. The second most commonly cited reason was as a day out.
Secondary students' reasons for visiting SET activity
50.00
45.00
40.00
35.00
30.00
Percent
25.00
20.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
0.00
6 "For fun"
3 "Took
10 "Other
"Something
8 "School
"Educational
2 "Day out"
1 "Birthday
excursion"
visitors"
(Specify)"
to do on a
rainy day"
value"
party"
4
5
Reason
53
Secondary students were most likely to visit science centres, science shows, science debates,
science and maths week, engineering and technology week and a museum on a school
excursion, whereas they were most likely to visit science conferences, science/maths awards
for education value, and zoos, aquariums and observatories for a day out. ‘For fun’ was a more
frequently cited reason for visiting science centres, aquariums and zoos, and educational value
less frequently cited for zoos, aquariums and observatories. However for all activities, ‘school
excursion’, ‘day out’, ‘for fun’ and ‘educational value’ were significant reasons, with other
reasons coming far behind.
Secondary students' reasons for visiting SET activities, by
activity
8 "School excursion"
80
70 2 "Day out"
60
50 6 "For fun"
Percent
40
5 "Educational value"
30
20
3 "Took visitors"
10
0 10 "Other (Specify)"
7 "Engineering/
8 "Engineering/
"Observatory/
3 "Science talks
1 "Science
2 "Science
centre (eg.
10 "Zoo"
maths week"
11 "Aquarium"
natural science"
conference"
maths awards"
4 "Science
5 "Science/
9 "Museum of
6 "Science/
technology
technology
or debates"
show"
12
4 "Something to do on a
rainy day"
1 "Birthday party"
Activity
Did they enjoy it?
The survey asked students which aspect they enjoyed most about the science and technology
activity they went to. ‘Learning about different things’ was top on the list, with 20.8% of
respondents nominating this reason, and ‘seeing fish..animals etc up close’ was the second
most popular reason (14.8%). Respondents also liked the interactivity of their experience and
said they found the experience interesting and stimulating.
Many students said that they liked the hands-on, practical aspect of the science activity they
visited, eg ‘doing things instead of just watching’ (science centre), and enjoyed the learning
experience, eg ‘learning new things about biology and chemistry and science in general’
(science show). Some activities drew greater numbers of negative comments, such as
museums (what did you enjoy most? ‘the exit’), ‘can’t remember’, ‘didn’t really enjoy it’ and
science/maths awards, ‘I got an award, but to be honest, it wasn’t that enjoyable’.
54
Proportion of students (percent)
0
5
10
15
20
4 "Learning about different things/I like to learn" 25
6 "Seeing fish/marine life/creatures/animals up
close"
2 "It was hands on/practical/interactive"
have had fun at them.
3 "It was interesting/fun/stimulated my interest"
1 "See/touch/discover/experiment/experience
new things"
16 "Experiencing the diversity of species/colours"
7 "Seeing different animals/creatures live and
interact in their natural habitat"
10 "The
shows/demonstrations/tours/exhibits/entertaining
8 "I liked the big creatures/fish/sting
rays/octopus/elephants/lions"
97 "Other"
15 "I just liked it/enjoyed the experience &
surroundings (NFI)"
98 "Don't know/can't recall"
5 "Seeing the sharks (NFI)"
Response category
13 "Being with/seeing family members/others
enjoy it"
year olds, all about 95%, and 14, 15 and 18 year olds (93/94%).
96 "Nothing"
11 "Seeing primates/monkeys"
14 "The rides"
17 "Looking back at/learning about
history/historical artefacts"
Aspects students enjoyed most about S&Texperience
18 "It got me out of school/work"
Higher proportions of students said they had fun at aquariums, observatories, and
12 "Seeing reptiles/snakes"
99 "No answer"/
engineering/technology week (all with 100% approval ratings), followed by science centres,
9 "Learning about different
said no. Slightly more girls (96%) than boys (94%) said the experience was fun, and 13 year
animals/creatures/how they breathe & eat"
olds (97% positive) enjoyed it more than students of any other age (followed by 12, 16 and 17
A further question asked whether the experience was fun. 95.3% (705) said yes and 4.7% (35)
zoos and museums. Science talks were the least popular, with only 71% of students claiming to
55
Did you have fun? (at the science activity, by activity)
Aquarium Observatory/ Engineering/ Engineering/ Science Zoo Museum Science Science/ Science/ Science Science
space technology technology centre of shows maths maths conference talks or
exploration week awards natural week awards debates
centre science
YES 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 99.3 98.0 94.7 93.0 85.7 81.8 75.0 71.9
NO 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.7 2.0 5.3 7.0 14.3 18.2 25.0 28.1
N= 149 24 13 2 148 200 38 43 21 22 8 57
Note: ‘other similar activity or event’ has not been included in this list. 15 students attended these activities.
56
57
And the effect?
Students were asked what they thought the impact of the experience would be as far as their
future involvement in S&T-related activities (“Based on this experience, would you like to (visit
again, find out more about S&T, etc – from a list read out by the interviewer)”. Student
experiences seem to have quite a significant positive impact: 67.6% of students said they’d like
to find out more about science and technology, as a result of the experience, 66.8% said they’d
visit particular centres again, 56.7% said they’d do physics, and 55% said they’d visit other
educational centres.
Impact of S&T experience on future S&T involvement of student
Proportion of students (percent)
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1 "Like to 8 "Visit 5 "Do 7 "Visit 2 "Like to 3 4 "Do 6 "Join a 9 "(None
find out particular physics other find out "Consider work science of these)"/
more about centres educational more about doing experience club"
science and again" centres" a particular science or in a science
technology" science engineering related job"
area" at
university"
Aspects of experience
Twelve and thirteen year olds appeared to be the most enthusiastic about following up their
experience in each response category. There were no particular gender differences.
58
Impact of SET experience, by age
90
80
70
60
Percent
50
40
30 12
20 13
10
0 14
15
"/
"
s"
n"
s
..
ub
...
.
..
ic
rt.
e)
n.
ai
tre
n.
ys
ie
es
cl
e
pa
ag
gi
nc
en
16
sc
ph
e
th
en
ta
nc
ie
s
lc
t
tre
o
of
ou
sc
or
ie
ou
na
"D
en
e
sc
ab
a 17
ab
e
ti o
on
5
nc
rc
in
a
e
ca
N
e
ie
or
n
la
e
or
"(
du
oi
nc
sc
18
tm
cu
tm
9
"J
re
ri e
rti
ng
ou
ou
6
pa
he
pe
oi
d
d
rd
ot
ex
it
fin
fin
is
it
de
k
"V
is
to
to
or
si
"V
e
8
w
e
on
ik
ik
7
o
"L
"C
"L
"D
1
2
3
4
Response
In answer to the question ‘did this experience change your understanding of science’, over half
the students (56%) said that it did, while 44% said that it didn’t.
The survey also asked if it changed the respondents’ understanding of jobs in science. In this
case, less than half (41%) said that it did, and the majority (59%) said that it did not.
Has experience of SET activity increased understanding of
jobs in SET?
90
80
70
60
Percent
50 YES
40 NO
30
20
10
0
Engineering/ technology
Engineering/ technology
Aquarium
Zoo
Science centre
Observatory/ space
Science conference
Museum of natural
Science shows
Science/ maths week
Science talks or debates
Science/ maths awards
exploration centre
science
awards
week
59
As the chart above shows, science conferences, science/maths week and science talks/debates
seemed the most effective in increasing understanding of jobs in science, but these were
among the least frequently attended activities.
Those who said the activity had changed their understanding, made comments such as:
“I just learned that there were heaps more jobs in (the) science area – (I) wasn’t aware there
were so many.” (visited science/maths awards)
“It gave me a better understanding of the industry and what you need to do to get into this
industry” (science talk)
“I would like to be a science teacher when I get older because I never knew that science was so
interesting..” (Science centre)
“Because I thought that jobs in this area would be boring..I found out that it’s fun” (zoo)
“A lot more technical, a lot harder than I imagined” (museum)
“Yeah..it’s not all working in labs” (science centre)
Many said that the activity had broadened their idea of what science jobs entailed, and that they
hadn’t realised how many jobs there were, and in what disparate fields.
What about science week?
Overall students’ awareness of Science Week was low. Asked if they were aware of it, overall,
37% said ‘yes’, and 63% ‘no’. Interestingly, more females (40%) were aware of it than males
(33%).
Of those who were aware, 22.6% had been to one or more science week activities, while 77.4%
hadn’t. In this case, slightly more males (23.5%) had been to an activity than females (21.9%).
Of students who had been to a science week activity (93 in all) most (82%) agreed that these
activities presented interesting careers in science, while 18% disagreed. Again most students
(80.7%) said that they learned more about science and technology (generally) during science
week, although 19.3% said they didn’t.
The survey asked if respondents learned more about jobs in S&T during science week: The
response to this question was more equivocal, with 59.1% saying ‘yes’, 40.9% ‘no’.
Students were also asked if they would go to science week activities again in the future. 83.9%
said they would, while 16.1% said they wouldn’t.
It appears from this that science week activities had a largely positive impact on students who
participated, but that most unfortunately didn’t know about it and, if they did, didn’t participate.
General interest in science and technology
The survey asked students if they’d like to learn more about science and technology. Almost
two thirds (62.2%) said yes, and 37.8% said no. More males (64%) than females (60%), and
more students who spoke a language other than English (67% as against 61% of students who
spoke only English at home) said they would like to learn more. The younger the student,
generally the higher proportion of positive answers (12 and 13 year olds (77%), 14 year olds
(66%), 15 year olds (60%), 16 year olds (51%), 17 year olds (50%)). This may simply be the
result of students focusing their interests more narrowly as they get older (eg on particular
subjects they are interested in or good at) rather than losing interest in science per se.
60
Science on the net
Students were asked if they were aware of any science websites. Science websites appear to
have a low profile amongst this group, with only 31.5% were aware, while 68.5% were not
aware of any. A higher proportion of males (33% compared to 29% of females), metropolitan
and remote (34% and 41% as against 26% and 28% of regional and rural respectively) and
students speaking a language other than English (39% as against 29% of their only-English
speaking counterparts) said they were aware of science websites.
Students who were aware of science websites, were asked how many times they had visited
them in the last year. Over three quarters (75.8%) of respondents said they visited either ‘only
every now and again’, ‘just the once’, or ‘never’.
Times visited science website in last year (number and percent)
140
120
Number and percent
100
80
Number
60 Percent
40
20
0
Very often Often Not very Only every Just the Never
often now and once
then
As to what they did on the websites, as the chart below shows, most used them to get
information for school work or to browse and read information.
61
Students' activities on science websites
24.19 1 "Play games"
41.89
2 "Get information for school
work"
18.58 3 "Browse and read
information"
82.89 4 "Do quizzes"
21.24
5 "Solve puzzles"
25.66 6 "Learn about science
careers"
7 "Learn how things work"
61.36
Finally, the survey asked students if they’d participated in any conservation activities. 508 (or
45.6%) said they hadn’t participated in any. However 46.3% had participated in Cleanup
Australia Day.
Students' participation in Landcare activities
Proportion of students participating (percent)
50.00 46.36 45.64
45.00
40.00
35.00
30.00
25.00 22.64
20.00
15.00
10.00 6.02 5.30 4.04
5.00 1.44 1.26
0.00
)"/
"
y"
g"
)"
"
"
"
ity
ch
ch
e
fy
Da
se
tin
ar
tiv
at
ci
t
wa
dc
e
an
pe
ac
w
ia
th
an
th
g
pl
l
(S
ra
of
k
ro
ar
"L
e
Ar
st
"F
er
e
re
"E
Au
on
1
et
th
"T
3
4
n
"O
"(N
p
la
2
U
"P
7
8
na
5
le
"C
6
Activity
62
4. Some Demographic Differences: A Summary
The following section summarises some demographic differences found by the survey, relating
to socio-economic status (SES), location, and language background. It does not discuss
gender, as this is adequately covered in other parts of the report.
4.1 Socio-economic status
There were significant differences between parents of high and low socio-economic status.
Looking at SES-related factors of income, post-school qualifications and occupation separately,
in terms of whether they had visited a SET attraction in the last year:
nearly half (46%) of parents with incomes under $30,000 had not (compared with 34% of
those in the $30-50,000 group, 24% of the 51-70,000 group, and about 18% of those
earning more than $70,000).
More than a third (38%) of parents without post-school qualifications had not, but only
23% of those with them;
24% of managers and 18% of professionals (respondents’ occupation) compared with
54% of unemployed people, 50% of labourers, and 75% of ‘pensioners-not retired’ (a
similar pattern is evident in relation to the respondents’ partners’ occupation).
Parents and community members with the SES-related attributes mentioned above were
considerably less likely to be able to name any SET organisations, less likely to think that S&T
is very important for Australia’s future - but more likely to think science rewarding as a career.
Relatively high SES parents (those with non-school qualifications, incomes over $70,000, and
professional or managerial occupations) put a lower priority on their children ‘having fun’ at SET
activities than relatively low-SES parents (those without non-school qualifications, with incomes
under $50,000, and in occupations other than professional and managerial, excluding retired).
More than half (55%) of low SES parents said that having fun was a ‘very important’ hoped for
outcome, compared with 36% of high SES parents. However, low SES parents were also
keener on their children ‘learning about science’, ‘learning about how things work’, ‘becoming
interested in a SET career, becoming interested in S&T, ‘learning about the environment’ and
helping with their education.
In terms of outcomes, high SES parents were more likely to strongly agree that their child ‘learnt
a lot about science’, was interested in learning more about S&T, understood more about how
science is part of everyday life, that their child was always interested in S&T, and that the visit
raised the child’s interest in S&T. Low SES parents, on the other hand, was more likely to
strongly agree that the child found the visit very inspiring, enjoyed the visit only from an
entertainment perspective, or ‘showed little interest in science and the experience did little to
change this’, and that the visit raised the child’s interest in studying science and in following a
scientific career.
63
Hoped for outcome from science activity, by SES
Learning about the environment
Helping with their education
Stimulating child's interest in SET career
Stimulating child's interest in S&T
High SES
Understanding the world Low SES
Learning about how things work
Learning about science
Having fun
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Percent
Outcome from science visit, by SES
Child showed little interest & experience
did little to change this
Child has always been interested in S&T
Raised your child's understanding of how
science is part of everyday life
Your child enjoyed the visit only from an
entertainment perspective
Your child found the visit very inspiring
High SES
Your child was interested in learning more Low SES
about science
Visit raised child's interest in following a
career in science
Visit raised child's interest in studying
science
The visit raised child's interest in science
Your child learnt a lot about science
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
percent
64
The chart below summarises other significant differences between high and low SES
respondents, in their attitudes to S&T and participation in science-related activities. It clearly
shows that higher SES respondents are much more aware of the activities on offer, and that
more believe that science is critical to Australia’s future, while lower SES respondents have a
stronger belief that science careers are rewarding (perhaps because their definition of
‘rewarding’ is coloured by their own income status, as are higher SES respondents’ views).
Other attitudinal measures to science, by SES
Not aware of science shows and centres
Aware of science shows and centres
Science is quite important for Australia's
future High SES
Science is very important for Australia's Low SES
future
Science careers are quite rewarding for
young people
Science careers are very rewarding for
young people
0 20 40 60 80 100
Percent
65
4.2 Location
Interestingly, in some cases, rural and remote residents seemed to be more positive about
science and more involved in SET activities than regional or metropolitan residents. For
instance, more rural/remote parents hoped for positive outcomes from the SET activity they had
visited with their child, and more thought their child had got something out of it (see below).
What parents hoped for from SET experience, by location
Learning about the environment
Helping with their education
Stimulating child's interest in SET career
Stimulating child's interest in S&T Rural/remote
Regional
Understanding the world Metro
Learning about how things work
Learning about science
Having fun
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
Percent
66
What parents thought their child got from SET experience, by
location
Child has alw ays been interested in S&T
Raised your child's understanding of how
science is part of everyday life
Your child enjoyed the visit only from an
entertainment perspective
Your child found the visit very inspiring
Rural/remote
Your child w as interested in learning more about
science Regional
Visit raised child's interest in follow ing science Metro
career
Visit raised child's interest in studying science
The visit raised the child's interest in science
Your child learnt a lot about science
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%
Percent
Rural/remote adults also had a relatively high opinion of the rewards of science for young
people (67% said SET was ‘very rewarding’ compared to 63% of regional dwellers and 54% of
metro dwellers). Perhaps this reflected perceived opportunities available in rural areas.
In addition, more rural and remote resident secondary students were aware of science week
(46% rural/remote, 35% metro), had been to science week activities (28% to 22% metro), and
were aware of science websites (36% to 34% metro). Rural/remote resident students watched
less SET TV (14% to metro 9%), and gave more positive answers to a question about the
outcome of participation in a science activity, as the chart below shows.
67
Impact of SET experience on secondary students (based on
this experience, would you like to..?)
(None of these)
Visit particular centres again
Visit other educational centres
Join a science club
Rural/remote
Do physics, chemistry, biology or other science Regional
Metro
Do w ork experience in a science related job
Consider doing science or engineering at
university
Like to find out more about a particular science
area
Like to find out more about science and
technology
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Percent
4.3 Language background
Language background made a significant difference to science participation and awareness.
For instance, half the parents who spoke a LOTE at home were aware of one or more SET
activities (centres, etc) compared to over two thirds of the parents who spoke mainly English at
home. LOTE-speaking parents were a lot more likely to say they wanted their child, as an
outcome of a SET activity, to learn about science (29% to 18% English-speaking), learn about
how things work (31% to 25% English-speaking), understand the world (35% to 25% English-
speaking). In most cases, LOTE-speaking parents perceived significantly more positive
outcomes from the SET experience than English-speaking, as the chart below shows.
68
LOTE and non-LOTE speaking parents: perceived outcomes
from visiting SET activity
Child has alw ays been interested in
S&T
Raised your child's understanding of
how science is part of everyday life
Your child enjoyed the visit only from
an entertainment perspective
Your child found the visit very inspiring
Parents speaking only English
Your child w as interested in learning at home
more about science Parents speaking LOTE at
home
Visit raised child's interest in follow ing
science career
Visit raised child's interest in studying
science
The visit raised the child's interest in
science
Your child learnt a lot about science
0% 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
% %
% % Percent % % %
LOTE-speaking secondary students watched less SET-related TV than English-speaking (15%
of LOTE compared with 7% of English-speaking students didn’t watch any of the listed
programs), and LOTE-speaking adults were less aware of SET-related organisations (37% to
27% English-speaking) and were slightly less likely to know anyone working in SET (11% to 9%
said they didn’t know anyone). LOTE-speaking secondary students were less aware of science
week, but more had been to science week activities, and more were aware of science websites.
69
5. Conclusion and Summary
The survey found some significant changes in community attitudes since the last similar study in
1997, and previous studies in 1994 and 1991, insofar as they were comparable. People had a
much more positive perception of the rewards of science, and there has been a significant jump
in the proportion of people who think that science is important, and indeed very important, to
Australia’s future. Support for women undertaking careers in SET has strengthened. The
profile of computers as defining ‘technology’ has lifted considerably compared to other aspects.
The 2007 survey found that:
people define science in terms of scientific disciplines, and technology in terms of
appliances, but that there is considerable overlap between the two, not to say confusion.
Most people have a positive attitude towards careers in science for young people, especially
the over-55s. Young people themselves (16-25) were the least enthusiastic, and,
surprisingly, people with post-school qualifications in the natural and physical sciences.
Again perhaps surprisingly, respondents most frequently nominated two medical professions
(medical researcher and doctor) as involved in science and technology, followed by
computer programming. Awareness of medical researchers has increased, perhaps
because of media coverage in the last ten years. The nomination of ‘computer programmer’
correlates with the high profile of computers/computerisation in people’s responses on what
constitutes ‘technology’.
In 2007 an overwhelming majority (93%) of respondents thought that SET careers were
suitable or very suitable for women, mostly because they felt that women and men have
equal abilities and that women should be able to do ‘anything’. Many of those who
disagreed, did so on the basis that there were systemic barriers to women in SET, although
there were a number of people making comments along the lines that women aren’t good at
maths or that “women are made to do women things”.
Most respondents were familiar with a number of people in SET jobs, with well over half
knowing six or more people working in SET. Recognition of some organisations which are
involved in SET (and therefore employ people with SET skills) is fairly high, with the CSIRO
leading. However over a quarter of adult respondents (and nearly a third of secondary
school students) couldn’t name any SET-related organisation.
Science has a reasonably high media profile. Quite high proportions (around 40-50%) of
people watch SET-related TV shows such as Mythbusters, The New Inventors, Beyond
2000, CSI, NCIS and National Geographic. Beyond 2000 has increased its popularity over
the ten years since the last survey. Despite this, most respondents thought that there
should be more coverage of SET (although half of all secondary students thought the
balance was about right). Most people, especially young people (16-24) also thought that
coverage of SET was generally positive.
Respondents saw science and technology as ‘extremely important’ to Australia’s future,
although less well-educated people (with no non-school qualifications) rated its importance
lower than others.
Almost two thirds of respondents knew about science and technology centres, shows and
events – particularly the more financially well-off, better-educated, primarily English-
speaking, professional or managerial, and metropolitan respondents. Nearly three-quarters
of parents (especially those whose eldest accompanying child was a boy) had gone to a
70
SET activity in the last year, with zoos, aquariums, science centres, museums attracting the
most people. They tended to take primary school aged children along with them.
Respondents who didn’t have kids under 18 most often went to the same types of
attractions, but took their partners and family members with them (often, judging by the
comments, grandchildren).
Educational value and fun were perhaps the two most important reasons for going to SET
activities, and again, fun and learning were the main outcomes hoped for, for both parents
and other adults. Many (about a third) of the parents taking their kids to SET attractions
hoped that it would stimulate interest in a SET career, but this was a low rating compared to
other outcomes mentioned. Overall, the visits seemed to engage children and parents very
effectively, in that 85% of parents said their child had found the activity ‘very inspiring’, more
than half thought they’d learnt something, and all but 2% wanted to go to a similar sort of
activity again
Secondary students hadn’t visited SET activities quite so often as their parents (about two
thirds had gone to one in the last year) and tended to have gone as part of a school
excursion. They enjoyed the learning aspect the most, and many commented that they
appreciated being able to touch as well as look, to get involved in the practical aspects, and
to see how things worked. Their experiences seemed to have a significant positive impact,
with over two thirds claiming that (as a result of the experience) they’d like to find out more
about science and technology, and over half saying that it had changed their understanding
of science. It did not, however, affect their understanding of jobs in science, which implies
that enjoying SET activities won’t necessarily lead to being interested in a SET career.
Science conferences, science/maths week and science talks/debates seemed the most
effective in increasing understanding of jobs in science, but these were among the least
frequently attended activities.
Student awareness of science week was low (at slightly above a third) and participation
even lower, although of those who did participate, most found it interesting. Awareness of
science websites was also low (less than a third) and students who went to them, didn’t go
often, and mostly for school work. In general, around two thirds of students said they’d like
to learn more about science and technology, leaving a third who said they wouldn’t.
There were significant differences between people of relatively high and low socio-economic
status, people living in metropolitan and rural locations, and people of English and non-English
speaking language background. For instance:
relatively low-SES parents hoped for much the same outcomes from SET activities (and
in some cases were even more keen on them) than high-SES parents, but were less
aware of, and participated less in, the activities on offer;
if anything, rural and remote residents were often more interested in SET activities and
positive about SET in general than metropolitan and regional residents;
similarly, more LOTE-speaking parents hoped for (and said they got) positive outcomes
from SET activities, but fewer were aware of them.
In conclusion, it appears that SET awareness activities have had a positive impact in terms of
fun and learning, though perhaps not so much in terms of stimulating interest in SET careers.
There may be room to improve awareness of SET activities, particularly among secondary
students. This may be especially true of Science Week and science on the web, though there
may also be a natural limit in this regard (ie, teenagers who no matter what the effort put into
promotion, will never be very interested in science and technology).
71
It also seems, not surprisingly, that some sections of the community – mainly low SES and
those speaking a LOTE at home - are less engaged with science and technology than others,
and thus less likely to benefit from SET awareness-raising activities and to be able to participate
in a world where SET plays an increasing role.
72
Appendix A
Survey Questionnaire
DEST- Community Aware and Understanding of SET Survey – Questionnaire Programme
Q.1 ENTER / ALL
Enter 1 to continue
[REQUIRE ANSWER]
(300)
CONTINUE 1
[S - IF THE ANSWER IS 1, THEN SKIP TO QUESTION 4]
Q.2 SAMPLE / ALL
Phone number, State, Postcode
[REQUIRE ANSWER]
________________________________________________________________
_______ (301-450)
Q.3 STATE / ALL
STATE
[REQUIRE ANSWER]
(25)
VIC .... 1 SA ..... 5
NSW .. 2 WA .... 6
QLD .. 3 NT ..... 7
ACT ... 4 TAS ... 8
73
Q.4 INTRO / ALL
INTRODUCTION
Good (…), my name is (…) from Market Solutions, a research company calling on behalf of
the Australian government Department of Education, Science and Training. We’re
conducting a national study regarding science, engineering and technology to give the
department a better understanding of community attitudes and awareness towards these
areas.
IF NECESSARY: The survey covers general topics such as the potential role of science
and technology in Australia’s future and the importance of science events, museums and
zoos in raising the community’s awareness of science, engineering and technology.
The interview will take around 10 minutes and any information that you provide will be
totally confidential and used for research purposes only.
IF AGREE: Before we begin I’m required by law to read the follow privacy statement
which will only take a few seconds.
We have drawn your name at random from the White Pages phone directory. Information
you provide will be used only for the purpose for which you provided it, and we will not
disclose it without your consent, unless where authorised or required by law.
The information will be entered into a database. However, I stress that no data from
individual responses will be kept beyond the duration of the project. They will be destroyed
at the conclusion of the project. We are only interested in the overall picture. This survey is
being conducted in accordance with the requirements of the Commonwealth Privacy Act. If
there are any questions you don’t want to answer just tell me so I can skip over them.
My supervisor may listen to parts of this interview to assist in quality control monitoring.
[REQUIRE ANSWER]
(451-452)
CONTINUE ..................... 1 Terminated Early .............. 6
Schedule Callback ........... 2 Non working number ........ 7
Refused ........................... 3 Communication difficulties 8
Non qualifying ................. 4 No contact on 5 attempts . 9
Government/ Business .... 5 Duplicate ......................... 10
[S - IF THE ANSWER IS NOT 1, THEN SKIP TO QUESTION 1005]
74
Q.5 SCRE1/ PARENTS/ GENERAL COMMUNITY
SCREENER - SECONDARY SCHOOL STUDENT
For this survey we need to speak to a range of people including secondary school students.
Do you have any secodnary school students living in this household that we have your
permission to talk to?
[IF STUDENT UNAVAILABLE BUT HAVE PARENTAL PERMISSION - SKIP TO Q.999
AND SCHEDULE CALLBACK]
[REQUIRE ANSWER]
(453)
Yes - Secondary school student - PERMISSSION & CONTINUE 1
No secondary school student available for interview ........... 2
[S - IF THE ANSWER IS 1, THEN SKIP TO QUESTION 91]
Q.6 SCRE2 / PARENTS AND GENERAL COMMUNITY
SCREENER - PARENTS & GENERAL COMMUNITY
Are you a parent of [other] children aged less than 18 years?
[REQUIRE ANSWER]
(454)
Yes - PARENT 0-17 YEARS 1 No - GENERAL COMMUNITY 2
Q.7 INTINS / ALL
INTERVIEWER ONLY
Who are you interviewing?
[REQUIRE ANSWER]
(455)
Secondary school student 1 General community ........ 3
Parent of child 0-17 years 2
[S - IF THE ANSWER IS 1, THEN SKIP TO QUESTION 91]
75
Q.8 SCI1-13 /PARENTS AND GENERAL COMMUNITY
Section 2: Questions Regarding Science and Technology
Q.2 When I use the term science could you tell me what comes to mind?
(DO NOT READ OUT) (PROBE FULLY) (ACCEPT MULTIPLES)
[REQUIRE ANSWER]
(456-481)
Medicine / medical health research .......... 1
Research - general ................................... 2
Chemistry/ chemicals ............................... 3
Discover/ invention/ innovation ................. 4
Study/ research into environment/ nature . 5
Experiments ............................................. 6
Study/ research into space/ astronomy ..... 7
laboratories/ lab equipment ...................... 8
Knowledge/ understanding ....................... 9
Computers/ computerisation/ computer age 10
Biology/ physics/ maths/ microbiology ..... 11
Development - general ............................ 12
Other (Specify) ........................................ 13
(Don't know - can't think of anything) ....... 14
[S - IF THE ANSWER IS NOT 13, THEN SKIP TO QUESTION 10]
76
Q.9 OSCI / OTHER WHEN USE TERM SCIENCE
SPECIFY OTHER THING THAT COMES TO MIND FOR TERM SCIENCE
[REQUIRE ANSWER]
________________________________________________________________
_______ (482-981)
Q.10 TECH1-9 / PARENTS AND GENERAL COMMUNITY
Q.3 When I use the term technology could you tell me what comes to mind?
(DO NOT READ OUT) (PROBE FULLY) (ACCEPT MULTIPLES)
[REQUIRE ANSWER]
(982-999)
Computers/ computerisation/ computer age . 1
Machinery/ machines ................................... 2
Improvements/ advancement/ inventions ..... 3
Affects/ improved standards of living/ way of life 4
Use of science knowledge in application ...... 5
Communication ............................................ 6
Improvements/ developments in transportation 7
Development in electronics .......................... 8
Other (Specify) ............................................. 9
(Don't know - can't think of anything) ........... 10
[S - IF THE ANSWER IS NOT 9, THEN SKIP TO QUESTION 12]
77
Q.11 OTECH / PARENT AND GENERAL COMMUNITY OTHER WHEN USE TERM
TECHNOLOGY
SPECIFY OTHER THING THAT OCMES TO MIND FOR TECHNOLOGY
[REQUIRE ANSWER]
________________________________________________________________
_____ (1000-1499)
Q.12 REWARD / PARENTS AND GENERAL COMMUNITY
Q.4 Thinking now about careers, how rewarding do you personally believe careers are
for young people who study science and technology? Are they..?
(READ OUT)
[REQUIRE ANSWER]
(1500)
Very rewarding ............................1 Quite unrewarding ....................... 4
Quite rewarding ...........................2 Very unrewarding ........................ 5
Neither rewarding nor unrewarding 3 ................................ (Don't know)
6
Q.13 PROF1-15 / PARENTS AND GENERAL COMMUNITY
Q.5 Thinking about careers in general, what professions can you think of, that you
would consider being involved in the areas of science and technology?
(DO NOT READ OUT) (ACCEPT MULTIPLES)
[REQUIRE ANSWER]
(1501-1530)
Scientist ................................ 1 Industrial designer .................. 9
Science teachers ................... 2 Food technologist .................. 10
Doctor ................................... 3 Accountant ............................ 11
Engineer ................................ 4 Computer graphics ................ 12
Pharmacist ............................ 5 Environmental protection ...... 13
Architect ................................ 6 Forensic scientist .................. 14
Computer programmer .......... 7 Other (Specify) ...................... 15
Dentist ................................... 8 (Don't know - can't name any) 16
[S - IF THE ANSWER IS NOT 15, THEN SKIP TO QUESTION 15]
78
Q.14 OPROF / PARENTS AND GENRAL COMMUNITY OTHER PROFESSIONS
SPECIFY OTHER PROFESSIONS CONSIDER AS INVOLVED IN SCIENCE &
TECHNOLOGY
[REQUIRE ANSWER]
________________________________________________________________
_____ (1531-2030)
Q.15 WOMAN/ PARENTS AND GENERAL COMMUNITY
Q.6 Thinking again about careers and study in science and technology, how suitable do
you think careers and study in science and technology are for women? Are they..?
(READ OUT)
[REQUIRE ANSWER]
(2031)
Very suitable .........................1 Quite unsuitable .................... 4
Quite suitable ........................2 Very unsuitable ..................... 5
Neither suitable nor unsuitable 3 (Don't know) .......................... 6
[S - IF THE ANSWER IS 3 OR 6, THEN SKIP TO QUESTION 17]
79
Q.16 OWOMAN / PARENTS AND GENERAL COMMUNITY
Q.7 Why do you say that careers and study in science and technology are [ANSWER TO
Q. 15] for women?
[REQUIRE ANSWER]
________________________________________________________________
_____ (2032-2531)
Q.17 PEOP /PARENTS AND GENERAL COMMUNITY
Q.8 How many people do you know in a science or engineering related job?
[REQUIRE ANSWER]
Number of People ____ (2532-2533)
Q.18 ORG1-6 / PARENTS AND GENERAL COMMUNITY
Q.9 Could you please tell me what organisations there are in Australia that you know of,
that focus on science and technology development?
(DO NOT READ OUT) (PROBE FULLY) (ACCEPT MULTIPLES)
[REQUIRE ANSWER]
(2534-2539)
CSIRO ...............................................1 CRC (Co - operative Reserach Centre)
5
ANSTO ..............................................2 Other (Specify) .................................. 6
Universities ........................................3 (Don't know - can't name any) ........... 7
Business ...........................................4
[S - IF THE ANSWER IS NOT 6, THEN SKIP TO QUESTION 20]
80
Q.19 OORG / PARENTS AND GENERAL COMMUNITY OTHER ORGANISATION
SPECIFY OTHER AUSTRALIAN ORGANISATIONS THAT FOCUS ON SCIENCE AND
TECHNOLOGY
[REQUIRE ANSWER]
________________________________________________________________
_____ (2540-3039)
Q.20 TV1-20 / PARENTS AND GENERAL COMMUNITY
Q.10 Do you watch any of the following television programmes regularly?
(READ OUT AND CODE ONE AT A TIME)
[REQUIRE ANSWER]
(3040-3079)
CSI ......................................... 1 Walking with dinosaurs ......... 12
CSI Miami .............................. 2 Walking with cavemen .......... 13
SVU ....................................... 3 Beyond 2000 ......................... 14
NCIS ...................................... 4 Mythbusters .......................... 15
Crossing Jordan ..................... 5 National Geographic ............. 16
Quantum ................................ 6 The Blue Planet .................... 17
Catalyst .................................. 7 Planet Earth .......................... 18
The New Inventors ................. 8 Scope ................................... 19
The Sky at Night .................... 9 Or a similar program (Specify) 20
Space .................................... 10 (None of these) ..................... 21
Walking with beasts ............... 11
[S - IF THE ANSWER IS NOT 20, THEN SKIP TO QUESTION 22]
81
Q.21 OTV / PARENTS AND GENERAL COMMUNITY OTHER TV PROGRAMMES
SPECIFY OTHER SIMILAR (SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY) TV PROGRAMMES
WATCHED
[REQUIRE ANSWER]
________________________________________________________________
_____ (3080-3579)
Q.22 AUSFU / PARENTS AND GENERAL COMMUNITY
Q.11 How important do you believe science and technology is for Australia’s future? Is
it…?
(READ OUT)
[REQUIRE ANSWER]
(3580)
Extremely important 1 Not very important ... 4
Very important ......... 2 Not at all important .. 5
Somewhat important 3 (Don't know) ............ 6
Q.23 AMMED / PARENTS AND GENERAL COMMUNITY
Q.12 Thinking about the amount of media coverage for science and technology in
Australia, do you think that the amount of cover is…?
(READ OUT)
[REQUIRE ANSWER]
(3581)
Far too much ...... 1 A bit too little ...... 4
A bit too much .... 2 Far too little ........ 5
The right amount 3 (Don't know) ....... 6
82
Q.24 MEDCOV / PARENTS AND GENERAL COMMUNITY
Q.13 Do you think the media coverage is more positive or negative to science and
technology. Is the media …?
(WAIT FOR RESPONSE: Is that very or quite positive/negative?)
[REQUIRE ANSWER]
(3582)
Very positive ......................... 1 Quite negative ...................... 4
Quite positive ....................... 2 Very negative ....................... 5
(Neither positive nor negative) 3 (Don't know) ......................... 6
[A - IF THE ANSWER TO QUESTION 7 IS 3, THEN SKIP TO QUESTION 57]
Q.25 SHCEN / PARENTS
Section 3: Science and Technology Activities/Venues
Q.14 There are a number of science or engineering shows and science centres that
have been developed to make people more aware and develop a better understanding of
science and technology in Australia. Could you tell me if you are aware of any of these
types of shows or science centres?
(ASSIST USING CARD IF NECESSARY)
[REQUIRE ANSWER]
(3583)
Yes - aware .. 1 No not aware 2
83
Q.26 ATTEND1-13 / PARENTS
Q.14 Which of the following have you or your children experienced in the last 12 months?
(READ OUT AND CODE ONE AT A TIME)
[REQUIRE ANSWER]
(3584-3609)
Science centre (eg. Questacon/ Scienceworks) 1
Science show ................................................ 2
Science talks or debates ............................... 3
Science conferences ..................................... 4
Science/ maths week .................................... 5
Science/ maths awards ................................. 6
Engineering/ technology week ....................... 7
Engineering/ technology awards .................... 8
Museum of natural science ............................ 9
Zoo ............................................................... 10
Aquarium ...................................................... 11
Observatory/ space exploration centre ......... 12
Other similar activity or event (Specify) ........ 13
(None of these) ............................................ 14
[S - IF THE ANSWER IS 14, THEN SKIP TO QUESTION 72]
[S - IF THE ANSWER IS NOT 13, THEN SKIP TO QUESTION 28]
84
Q.27 OATTEND / PARENTS
SPECIFY OTHER ACTIVITY/EVENT ATTENDED IN LAST 12 MONTHS
[REQUIRE ANSWER]
________________________________________________________________
_____ (3610-4109)
Q.28 TIMES1-13 / PARENTS WHO HAVE ATTENDED OR CHILDREN HAVE ATTEND
ACTIVITIES
Q.16 How many times in the last 12 months have you experienced...?
(READ OUT AND RECORD NUMBER OF TIMES)
[REQUIRE ANSWER][READ ONLY ANSWERS PICKED IN QUESTION 26]
Science Centre (eg. Questacon/ Scienceworks) __ (4110)
Science show .......................................... __ (4111)
Science talks or debate ........................... __ (4112)
Science conference ................................. __ (4113)
Science/ maths week .............................. __ (4114)
Science/ maths award ............................. __ (4115)
Engineering/ technology week ................. __ (4116)
Engineering/ technology awards .............. __ (4117)
Museum of natural science ...................... __ (4118)
Zoo .......................................................... __ (4119)
Aquarium ................................................. __ (4120)
Observatory/ space exploration centre .... __ (4121)
Other similar activity or event .................. __ (4122)
Q.29 CHILD / PARENTS
Q.16a And were any of these experiences or activities undertaken with your children?
[REQUIRE ANSWER]
(4123)
Yes .. 1 No ... 2
[S - IF THE ANSWER IS 2, THEN SKIP TO QUESTION 72]
85
Q.30 LAST / PARENTS WHO HAVE ATTEND OR HAVE CHILDREN WHO HAVE
ATTENDED
Q.17 And which of these was the last one you experienced with your children?
(READ OUT)
[REQUIRE ANSWER][READ ONLY ANSWERS PICKED IN QUESTION 26]
(4124-4125)
Science centre .................................. 1 Engineering/ technology awards ....... 8
Science shows .................................. 2 Museum of natural science ............... 9
Science talks or debates ................... 3 Zoo .................................................. 10
Science conference ........................... 4 Aquarium ......................................... 11
Science/ maths week ........................ 5 Observatory/ space exploration centre 12
Science/ maths awards ..................... 6 Other similar activity or event ........... 13
Engineering/ technology week ........... 7
Q.31 REAS1-8 / PARENTS WHO ATTENDED EVENT WITH CHILDREN
Q.18 Thinking of this last experience with your children, what were your main reasons for
this experience?
(DO NOT READ OUT) (ACCEPT MULTIPLES)
[REQUIRE ANSWER]
(4126-4133)
Birthday party ........................ 1 For fun ................................... 6
Day out .................................. 2 Children wanted to go ............ 7
Took visitors .......................... 3 School excursion .................... 8
Something to do on a rainy day 4 Other (Specify) ....................... 9
Educational value .................. 5
[S - IF THE ANSWER IS NOT 9, THEN SKIP TO QUESTION 33]
86
Q.32 OREAS / PARENTS WHO ATTENDED EVENT WITH CHILDREN
SPECIFY OTHER REASON FOR LAST EXPERIENCE
[REQUIRE ANSWER]
________________________________________________________________
_____ (4134-4633)
Q.33 OLD / PARENTS WHO ATTENDED EVENT WITH CHILDREN
Q.19 How old is the eldest child who you experiened this activity with?
(REFUSED = 99)
[REQUIRE ANSWER]
Record Age of Eldest Child ____ (4634-4635)
Q.34 CHGEN / PARENT WHO ATTENDED EVENT WITH CHILDREN
Q.20 Is this child male or female?
[REQUIRE ANSWER]
(4636)
Male ......... 1 (Refused) . 3
Female ..... 2
[A - IF THE ANSWER TO QUESTION 33 IS 0-4, THEN SKIP TO QUESTION 56]
Q.35 INSTR
Q.21 Thinking of the last experience you and your eldest child had with the [[ANSWER
TO Q. 30]], what were you hoping this child would get from this experience. How
important was…?
[ASK QUESTIONS 36 TO 42 IN RANDOM ORDER]
87
Q.36 RATE1 / PARENT WHO ATTENDED EVENT WITH CHILDREN
Q.21a Having fun?
(How important was this in the experience?)
(READ OUT)
(4637)
Extremely important 1 Not very important ... 4
Very important ......... 2 Not at all important .. 5
Somewhat important 3 (Don't know) ............ 6
Q.37 RATE2 / PARENT WHO ATTENDED EVENT WITH CHILDREN
Q.21b Learning about science
(How important was this in the experience?)
(READ OUT)
(4638)
Extremely important 1 Not very important ... 4
Very important ......... 2 Not at all important .. 5
Somewhat important 3 (Don't know) ............ 6
Q.38 RATE3 / PARENT WHO ATTENDED EVENT WITH CHILDREN
Q.21c Learning about how things work
(How important was this in the experience?)
(READ OUT)
(4639)
Extremely important 1 Not very important ... 4
Very important ......... 2 Not at all important .. 5
Somewhat important 3 (Don't know) ............ 6
Q.39 RATE4 / PARENT WHO ATTENDED EVENT WITH CHILDREN
Q.21d Understanding the world
(How important was this in the experience?)
(READ OUT)
(4640)
88
Extremely important 1 Not very important ... 4
Very important ......... 2 Not at all important .. 5
Somewhat important 3 (Don't know) ............ 6
89
Q.40 RATE5 / PARENT WHO ATTENDED EVENT WITH CHILDREN
Q.21e Stimulating your children’s interest in science and technology
(How important was this in the experience?)
(READ OUT)
(4641)
Extremely important 1 Not very important ... 4
Very important ......... 2 Not at all important .. 5
Somewhat important 3 (Don't know) ............ 6
Q.41 RATE6 / PARENT WHO ATTENDED EVENT WITH CHILDREN
Q.21f Stimulating your children’s interest in a science or engineering career
(How important was this in the experience?)
(READ OUT)
(4642)
Extremely important 1 Not very important ... 4
Very important ......... 2 Not at all important .. 5
Somewhat important 3 (Don't know) ............ 6
Q.42 RATE7 / PARENT WHO ATTENDED EVENT WITH CHILDREN
Q.21g Helping with their education
(How important was this in the experience?)
(READ OUT)
(4643)
Extremely important 1 Not very important ... 4
Very important ......... 2 Not at all important .. 5
Somewhat important 3 (Don't know) ............ 6
Q.43 RATE8 / PARENT WHO ATTENDED EVENT WITH CHILDREN
Q.21h Or is there something else you were hoping to get from this expeirence?
(4644)
Yes .. 1 No ... 2
90
[S - IF THE ANSWER IS 2, THEN SKIP TO QUESTION 45]
91
Q.44 ORATE8/ PARENT WHO ATTENDED EVENT WITH CHILDREN
SPECIFY OTHER THING HOPING TO GET FROM LAST EXPERIENCE
________________________________________________________________
_____ (4645-5144)
Q.45 INSTRU
Q.22 And thinking about this child’s experience during the [[ANSWER TO Q. 30]] activity,
do you agree or disagree that…?
[ASK QUESTIONS 46 TO 55 IN RANDOM ORDER]
Q.46 EXP1 / PARENT WHO ATTENDED EVENT WITH CHILDREN
Q.22a Your child learnt a lot about science
(Do you agree or disagree that (...) during the experience?)
(WAIT FOR RESPONSE: Is that agree or disagree? Is that strongly or slightly?)
(5145)
Strongly agree .... 1 Slightly disagree ..4
Slightly agree ..... 2 Strongly disagree 5
(Neither) ............. 3
Q.47 EXP2 / PARENT WHO ATTENDED EVENT WITH CHILDREN
Q.22b The visit raised your child’s interest in science
(Do you agree or disagree that (...) during the experience?)
(WAIT FOR RESPONSE: Is that agree or disagree? Is that strongly or slightly?)
(5146)
Strongly agree .... 1 Slightly disagree ..4
Slightly agree ..... 2 Strongly disagree 5
(Neither) ............. 3
92
Q.48 EXP3 / PARENT WHO ATTENDED EVENT WITH CHILDREN
Q.22c The visit raised your child’s interest in studying science
(Do you agree or disagree that (...) during the experience?)
(WAIT FOR RESPONSE: Is that agree or disagree? Is that strongly or slightly?)
(5147)
Strongly agree .... 1 Slightly disagree ..4
Slightly agree ..... 2 Strongly disagree 5
(Neither) ............. 3
Q.49 EXP4 / PARENT WHO ATTENDED EVENT WITH CHILDREN
Q.22d The visit raised your child’s interest in following a career in science
(Do you agree or disagree that (...) during the experience?)
(WAIT FOR RESPONSE: Is that agree or disagree? Is that strongly or slightly?)
(5148)
Strongly agree .... 1 Slightly disagree ..4
Slightly agree ..... 2 Strongly disagree 5
(Neither) ............. 3
Q.50 EXP5 / PARENT WHO ATTENDED EVENT WITH CHILDREN
Q.22e Your child was interested in learning more about science
(Do you agree or disagree that (...) during the experience?)
(WAIT FOR RESPONSE: Is that agree or disagree? Is that strongly or slightly
(5149)
Strongly agree .... 1 Slightly disagree ..4
Slightly agree ..... 2 Strongly disagree 5
(Neither) ............. 3
Q.51 EXP6 / PARENT WHO ATTENDED EVENT WITH CHILDREN
Q.22f Your child found the visit very inspiring
(Do you agree or disagree that (...) during the experience?)
(WAIT FOR RESPONSE: Is that agree or disagree? Is that strongly or slightly?)
(5150)
Strongly agree .... 1 Slightly disagree ..4
Slightly agree ..... 2 Strongly disagree 5
93
(Neither) ............. 3
94
Q.52 EXP7 / PARENT WHO ATTENDED EVENT WITH CHILDREN
Q.22g Your child enjoyed the visit only from an entertainment perspective
(Do you agree or disagree that (...) during the experience?)
(WAIT FOR RESPONSE: Is that agree or disagree? Is that strongly or slightly?)
(5151)
Strongly agree .... 1 Slightly disagree ..4
Slightly agree ..... 2 Strongly disagree 5
(Neither) ............. 3
Q.53 EXP8 / PARENT WHO ATTENDED EVENT WITH CHILDREN
Q.22h The visit raised your child’s understanding of how science is a part of everyday
life
(Do you agree or disagree that (...) during the experience?)
(WAIT FOR RESPONSE: Is that agree or disagree? Is that strongly or slightly?)
(5152)
Strongly agree .... 1 Slightly disagree ..4
Slightly agree ..... 2 Strongly disagree 5
(Neither) ............. 3
Q.54 EXP9 / PARENT WHO ATTENDED EVENT WITH CHILDREN
Q.22i Your child has always been interested in science and technology
(Do you agree or disagree that (...) during the experience?)
(WAIT FOR RESPONSE: Is that agree or disagree? Is that strongly or slightly?)
(5153)
Strongly agree .... 1 Slightly disagree ..4
Slightly agree ..... 2 Strongly disagree 5
(Neither) ............. 3
Q.55 EXP10 / PARENT WHO ATTENDED EVENT WITH CHILDREN
Q.22j Your child shows little interest in science and technology and the experience did
little to change this
(Do you agree or disagree that (...) during the experience?)
(WAIT FOR RESPONSE: Is that agree or disagree? Is that strongly or slightly?)
(5154)
Strongly agree .... 1 Slightly disagree ..4
Slightly agree ..... 2 Strongly disagree 5
95
(Neither) ............. 3
96
Q.56 VISAG/ PARENT WHO ATTENDED EVENT WITH CHILDREN
Q.23 Would you or your children like to visit these centres or engage in this type of
activity again?
(5155)
Yes .. 1 No ... 2
[S - IF THE ANSWER IS 1-2, THEN SKIP TO QUESTION 72]
Q.57 ATTEN1-13 / GENERAL COMMUNITY
Q.24 In the past 12 months have you attended or engaged in any of the following?
(READ OUT AND CODE ONE AT A TIME)
[REQUIRE ANSWER]
(5156-5181)
Science centre (eg. Questacon/ Scienceworks) 1
Science show ................................................ 2
Science talks or debates ............................... 3
Science conferences ..................................... 4
Science/ maths week .................................... 5
Science/ maths awards ................................. 6
Engineering/ technology week ....................... 7
Engineering/ technology awards .................... 8
Museum of natural science ............................ 9
Zoo ............................................................... 10
Aquarium ...................................................... 11
Observatory/ space exploration centre ......... 12
Other similar activity or event (Specify) ........ 13
(None of these) ............................................ 14
[S - IF THE ANSWER IS 14, THEN SKIP TO QUESTION 72]
[S - IF THE ANSWER IS NOT 13, THEN SKIP TO QUESTION 59]
97
Q.58 OATTEND2 / PARENTS AND GENERAL COMMUNITY ATTENDED OTHER ACTIVITY
SPECIFY OTHER SIMILAR ACTIVITY OR EVENT
[REQUIRE ANSWER]
________________________________________________________________
_____ (5182-5681)
Q.59 TIMAT1-13 / GENERAL COMMUNITY ATTENDED ACTIVITIES
Q.25 How many times in the last 12 months have you experienced...?
(READ OUT)
[REQUIRE ANSWER][READ ONLY ANSWERS PICKED IN QUESTION 57]
Science centre (eg. Questocon/ Scienceworks) ____ (5682-5683)
Science shows ..................................... ____ (5684-5685)
Science talks or debates ...................... ____ (5686-5687)
Science conferences ............................ ____ (5688-5689)
Science/ maths week ........................... ____ (5690-5691)
Science/ maths awards ........................ ____ (5692-5693)
Engineering/ technology week .............. ____ (5694-5695)
Engineering/ technology awards ........... ____ (5696-5697)
Museum of natural science ................... ____ (5698-5699)
Zoo ....................................................... ____ (5700-5701)
Aquarium .............................................. ____ (5702-5703)
Observatory/ space exploration centre . ____ (5704-5705)
Other similar activity or event ............... ____ (5706-5707)
Q.60 LAST / GENERAL COMMUNITY ATTENDED ACTIVITIES
Q.26 And which of these was the last one you experienced?
[REQUIRE ANSWER][READ ONLY ANSWERS PICKED IN QUESTION 57]
(5708-5709)
Science centre (eg. Questocon/ Scienceworks) 1
Science shows .............................................. 2
Science talks or debates ............................... 3
Science conferences ..................................... 4
Science/ maths week .................................... 5
Science/ maths awards ................................. 6
Engineering/ technology week ....................... 7
Engineering/ technology awards .................... 8
Museum of natural science ............................ 9
98
Zoo ............................................................... 10
Aquarium ...................................................... 11
Observatory/ space exploration centre ......... 12
Other similar activity or event ....................... 13
99
Q.61 MAINRE1-7/ GENERAL COMMUNITY ATTENDED EVENT
Q.27 Thinking of this last experience, what were your main reasons for engaging in this
activity?
(DO NOT READ OUT) (ACCEPT MULTIPLES)
[REQUIRE ANSWER]
(5710-5716)
Birthday party ........................ 1 For fun ................................... 6
Day out .................................. 2 Children wanted to go ............ 7
Took visitors .......................... 3 School excursion .................... 8
Something to do on a rainy day 4 Other (Specify) ....................... 9
Educational value .................. 5
[S - IF THE ANSWER IS NOT 9, THEN SKIP TO QUESTION 63]
Q.62 OMAINREC / GENERAL COMMUNITY WHO ATTENDED EVENT FOR SOME OTHER
REASON
SPECIFY OTHER MAIN REASON FOR EXPERIENCE
[REQUIRE ANSWER]
________________________________________________________________
_____ (5717-6216)
Q.63 INSTRU
Q.28 We want to know what you were hoping you would get from this visit. How
important was…?
[ASK QUESTIONS 64 TO 69 IN RANDOM ORDER]
100
Q.64 IMP1 / GENERAL COMMUNITY WHO ATTENDED AN EVENT
Q.28a Having fun
(How important was this in the experience?)
(READ OUT)
(6217)
Extremely important 1 Not very important ... 4
Very important ......... 2 Not at all important .. 5
Somewhat important 3 (Don't know) ............ 6
Q.65 IMP2 / GENERAL COMMUNITY WHO ATTENDED AN EVENT
Q.28b Learning about science
(How important was this in the experience?)
(READ OUT)
(6218)
Extremely important 1 Not very important ... 4
Very important ......... 2 Not at all important .. 5
Somewhat important 3 (Don't know) ............ 6
Q.66 IMP3 / GENERAL COMMUNITY WHO ATTENDED AN EVENT
Q.28c Learning about how things work
(How important was this in the experience?)
(READ OUT)
(6219)
Extremely important 1 Not very important ... 4
Very important ......... 2 Not at all important .. 5
Somewhat important 3 (Don't know) ............ 6
Q.67 IMP4 / GENERAL COMMUNITY WHO ATTENDED AN EVENT
Q.28d Understanding the world
(How important was this in the experience?)
(READ OUT)
(6220)
101
Extremely important 1 Not very important ... 4
Very important ......... 2 Not at all important .. 5
Somewhat important 3 (Don't know) ............ 6
102
Q.68 IMP5 / GENERAL COMMUNITY WHO ATTENDED AN EVENT
Q.28e Stimulating interest in science and technology
(How important was this in the experience?)
(READ OUT)
(6221)
Extremely important 1 Not very important ... 4
Very important ......... 2 Not at all important .. 5
Somewhat important 3 (Don't know) ............ 6
Q.69 IMP6 / GENERAL COMMUNITY WHO ATTENDED AN EVENT
Q.28f Stimulating interest in a science or engineering career
(How important was this in the experience?)
(READ OUT)
(6222)
Extremely important 1 Not very important ... 4
Very important ......... 2 Not at all important .. 5
Somewhat important 3 (Don't know) ............ 6
Q.70 IMP7 / GENERAL COMMUNITY WHO ATTENDED AN EVENT
Q.28g Or is there something else you were hoping to get from this experience?
(6223)
Yes .. 1 No ... 2
[S - IF THE ANSWER IS 2, THEN SKIP TO QUESTION 72]
103
Q.71 OIMP7/GENERAL COMMUNITY WHO ATTENDED AN EVENT
SPECIFY OTHER THINK HOPING TO GET FROM EXPERIENCE
________________________________________________________________
_____ (6224-6723)
Q.72 GEN1 / PARENT AND GENERAL COMMUNITY
Section 5: Demographics
Now we need to complete the survey by asking some questions about you. Your
responses will help us to analyse the data we have collected.
Q.29 GENDER (RECORD AUTOMATICALLY)
(6724)
Male ..... 1 Female ..2
Q.73 AGE1 / PARENT AND GENERAL COMMUNITY
Q.30 Which of the following age groups are you in?
(READ OUT)
(6725)
Under 16 years 1 46 to 55 years ..5
16 to 25 years . 2 Over 55 years ..6
26 to 35 years . 3 (Refused) .........7
36 to 45 years . 4
Q.74 LCYC1 / PARENTS AND GENERAL COMMUNITY
Q.31 Which of the following best describes you?
(READ OUT)
(6726)
Young single .......................................... 1
Young couple - no children ..................... 2
Young family - youngest child under 6 years 3
Middle family - youngest child 6-15 years 4
Mature family - youngest child 15 years + 5
Older couple - no children at home ......... 6
Mature single .......................................... 7
(Refused) ............................................... 8
104
Q.75 LANG1 / PARENT AND GENERAL COMMUNITY
Q.32 Do you normally speak another language other than English in your household?
(6727)
Yes ......................... 1 Prefer not to answer 3
No .......................... 2
[S - IF THE ANSWER IS 2-3, THEN SKIP TO QUESTION 78]
Q.76 OLANG1 / PARENTS AND GENERAL COMMUNITY WHO SPEAK ANOTHER
LANGUAGE
Q.33 What language is that?
(6728-6729)
Italian ................ 1 Greek ................ 7
Croatian ............ 2 Arabic ............... 8
Serbian .............. 3 German ............. 9
Macedonian ....... 4 Vietnamese ...... 10
Mandarin ........... 5 Spanish ............ 11
Cantonese ......... 6 Other (Specify) . 12
[S - IF THE ANSWER IS NOT 12, THEN SKIP TO QUESTION 78]
Q.77 OOLANG1 / PARENTS AND GENERAL COMMUNITY WHO SPEAK ANOTHER
LANGUAGE
SPECIFY OTHER LANGUAGE SPOKEN AT HOME
________________________________________________________________
_____ (6730-7229)
Q.78 ABTOR1 / PARENTS AND GENERAL COMMUNITY
Q.34 Are you of Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander descent?
(7230)
Yes ......................... 1 Prefer not to answer 3
No .......................... 2
105
Q.79 OCC1 / PARENTS AND GENERAL COMMUNITY
Q.35 What is your occupation?
(RECORD VERBATIM)
________________________________________________________________
_____ (7231-7280)
Q.80 PART / PARENTS AND GENERAL COMMUNITY
Q.36 Do you have a partner living with you?
(7281)
Yes .. 1 No ... 2
[S - IF THE ANSWER IS 2, THEN SKIP TO QUESTION 82]
Q.81 POCCU / PARENTS AND GENERAL COMMUNITY
Q.37 And what is your partner’s occupation?
(RECORD VERBATIM)
________________________________________________________________
_____ (7282-7331)
Q.82 HEDU / PARENTS AND GENERAL COMMUNITY
Q.38 What is the highest level of education you have completed?
(7332)
Degree or higher .................... 1 Other post school qualifications 4
TAFE qualification .................. 2 Other (Specify) ....................... 5
Trade certificate ..................... 3
[S - IF THE ANSWER IS 1-4, THEN SKIP TO QUESTION 84]
106
Q.83 OHEDU / PARENTS AND GENERAL POPUALTION COMPLETED OTHER HIGHEST
LEVEL OF ED
SPECIRY OTHER HIGHEST LEVEL OF EDUCATION
________________________________________________________________
_____ (7333-7832)
Q.84 FIELD / PARENTS AND GENERAL COMMUNITY
Q.39 What was your main field of study?
(READ OUT IF NECESSARY)
(7833-7834)
Natural and phsyical science ............. 1 Education .......................................... 7
Information technology ...................... 2 Management and commerce ............. 8
Engineering and related technologies 3 Society and culture ........................... 9
Architecture and building ................... 4 Creative arts .................................... 10
Agriculture, environmental and related 5 Food, hospitality and person services 11
Health ................................................ 6 Other (Specify) ................................. 12
[S - IF THE ANSWER IS 1-11, THEN SKIP TO QUESTION 86]
107
Q.85 OFIELD / PARENTS AND GENERAL COMMUNITY OTHER MAIN FIELD OF STUDY
SPECIFY OTHER MAIN FIELD OF STUDY
________________________________________________________________
_____ (7835-8334)
Q.86 ONEQUL / PARENTS AND GENERAL COMMUNITY
Q.40 Have you completed more than one qualification?
(8335)
Yes - more than one 1 No - one only .......... 2
[S - IF THE ANSWER IS 2, THEN SKIP TO QUESTION 89]
Q.87 LOWQUL / PARENTS AND GEN COMMNITY COMPLETD MORE THAN ONE FIELD
Q.41 What field was the lowest qualification you completed in?
(8336-8337)
Natural and phsyical sciences ............ 1 Education ........................................... 7
Information technology ....................... 2 Management and commerce .............. 8
Engineering and related technologies . 3 Society and culture ............................ 9
Architecture and building .................... 4 Creative arts ..................................... 10
Agriculture, environmental and related 5 Food, hospitality and personal services 11
Health ................................................. 6 Other (Specify) .................................. 12
[S - IF THE ANSWER IS 1-11, THEN SKIP TO QUESTION 89]
108
Q.88 OLOWQUL / PARENTS AND GENERAL COMMUNITY COMPLETED OTHER LOW
QUAL
SPECIFY OTHER LOWEST QUALIFCATION COMPLETED
________________________________________________________________
_____ (8338-8837)
Q.89 LOC/ PARENTS AND GENERAL COMMUNITY
Q.38a In which of the following areas do you live?
(READ OUT)
(8838)
Metropolitan 1 Remote ....... 4
Regional ...... 2 Very remote 5
Rural ........... 3
Q.90 INCOM / PARENTS AND GENERAL COMMUNITY
Q.42 The next question is about income. It is not compulsory but we would appreciate
your best guess - could I get a rough idea of your gross annual household income? Is
it...?
(READ OUT)
(8839)
Under $30,000 ........ 1 $71,000 to $100,000 4
$30,000 to $50,000 . 2 Over $100,000 ........ 5
$51,000 to $70,000 . 3 (Refused/ not sure) . 6
[S - IF THE ANSWER IS 1-6, THEN SKIP TO QUESTION 129]
Q.91 SYEAR / SEC SCHOOL CHILDREN
Section 6: Secondary School Children
Q.43 What year are you in at school?
(8840)
Year 7 ... 1 Year 10 . 4
Year 8 ... 2 Year 11 . 5
Year 9 ... 3 Year 12 . 6
109
Q.92 MASCI1-6 / SEC SCHOOL CHILDREN
Q.44 Which maths or science subjects do you do at school?
(8841-8846)
Mathematics ...... 1 General science 5
Chemistry .......... 2 Other (Specify) .. 6
Biology .............. 3 None ................. 7
Physics .............. 4
[S - IF THE ANSWER IS NOT 6, THEN SKIP TO QUESTION 94]
Q.93 OMASCI / SEC SCHOOL CHOLDREN WHO DO OTHER MATHS SCIENCE SUBJECT
SPECIFY OTHER MATHS OR SCIENCE SUBJECTS
________________________________________________________________
_____ (8847-9346)
Q.94 NAMSCI / SEC SCHOOL CHILDREN
Q.45 Now I'm going to ask you a series of questions relating to science awareness
initiatives, such as science centres, zoos etc. Can you name any science centres,
museums or zoos?
(9347)
Yes (Specify) 1 No ................. 2
[S - IF THE ANSWER IS 2, THEN SKIP TO QUESTION 96]
110
Q.95 ONAMSCI / SEC SCHOOL SCHILDREN CAN NAME CENTRES
SPECIFY OTHER SCIENCE CENTRES, MUSEUMS, ZOOS
________________________________________________________________
_____ (9348-9847)
Q.96 ATTE1-13 / SEC SCHOOL CHILDREN
Q.46 Which of the following have you attended or been involved in over the last 12
months?
(READ OUT AND CODE ONE AT A TIME)
(9848-9873)
Science centre (eg. Questacon/ Scienceworks) 1
Science shows .............................................. 2
Science talks or debates ............................... 3
Science conference ....................................... 4
Science/ maths week .................................... 5
Science/ maths awards ................................. 6
Engineering/ technology week ....................... 7
Engineering technology awards ..................... 8
Museum of natural science ............................ 9
Zoo ............................................................... 10
Aquarium ...................................................... 11
Observatory/ space exploration centre ......... 12
Other similar activity or event (Specify) ........ 13
(None of these) ............................................ 14
[S - IF THE ANSWER IS 14, THEN SKIP TO QUESTION 109]
[S - IF THE ANSWER IS NOT 13, THEN SKIP TO QUESTION 98]
111
Q.97 OATTEND3 / SEC SCHOOL CHILDREN ATTENDED OTHER ACTIVITY
SPECIFY OTHER SIMILAR ACTIVITY/EVENT
[REQUIRE ANSWER]
________________________________________________________________
____ (9874-10373)
Q.98 TIM21-13 / SEC SCHOOL CHILDREN ATTENDED ACTIVITY
Q.47 How many times in the last 12 months have you attended or been involved in…?
[REQUIRE ANSWER][READ ONLY ANSWERS PICKED IN QUESTION 96]
Science centre (eg. Questacon/ Scienceworks) ____ (10374-10375)
Science shows ................................... ____ (10376-10377)
Science talks or debates .................... ____ (10378-10379)
Science conferences .......................... ____ (10380-10381)
Science/ maths week ......................... ____ (10382-10383)
Science/ maths awards ...................... ____ (10384-10385)
Engineering/ technology week ............ ____ (10386-10387)
Engineering/ technology awards ......... ____ (10388-10389)
Museum of natural science ................. ____ (10390-10391)
Zoo ..................................................... ____ (10392-10393)
Aquarium ............................................ ____ (10394-10395)
Observatory/ space exploration centre ____ (10396-10397)
Other similar activity or event ............. ____ (10398-10399)
Q.99 LAST3 / SEC SCHOOL CHILDREN ATTENDED ACTIVITY
Q.48 And which of these was the last one you experienced?
[REQUIRE ANSWER][READ ONLY ANSWERS PICKED IN QUESTION 96]
(10400-10401)
Science centre (eg. Questocon/ Scienceworks) 1
Science shows .............................................. 2
Science talks or debates ............................... 3
Science conferences ..................................... 4
Science/ maths week .................................... 5
Science/ maths awards ................................. 6
Engineering/ technology week ....................... 7
Engineering/ technology awards .................... 8
Museum of natural science ............................ 9
Zoo ............................................................... 10
Aquarium ...................................................... 11
112
Observatory/ space exploration centre ......... 12
Other similar activity or event ....................... 13
113
Q.100 MAR1-8/ SEC SCHOOL CHILDREN
Q.49 Thinking of this last experience with [[ANSWER TO Q. 99]], what were your main
reasons for this expeirence?
(DO NOT READ OUT) (ACCEPT MULTIPLES)
[REQUIRE ANSWER]
(10402-10409)
Birthday party ........................ 1 For fun ................................... 6
Day out .................................. 2 Children wanted to go ............ 7
Took visitors .......................... 3 School excursion .................... 8
Something to do on a rainy day 4 Other (Specify) ....................... 9
Educational value .................. 5
[S - IF THE ANSWER IS NOT 9, THEN SKIP TO QUESTION 102]
Q.101 OMAR / SEC SCHOOL CHILDREN ATTENDED ACTIVITY
SPECIFY OTHER MAIN REASONS FOR EXPERIENCE
[REQUIRE ANSWER]
________________________________________________________________
____ (10410-10909)
114
Q.102 ENJOY / SEC SCHOOL CHILDREN ATTENDED ACTIVITY
Q.50 What did you enjoy the most about your last visit?
(RECORD VERBATIM) (PROBE FULLY)
[REQUIRE ANSWER]
________________________________________________________________
____ (10910-11409)
Q.103 FUN / SEC SCHOOL CHILDREN ATTENDED ACTIVITY
Q.51 Was this experience fun?
[REQUIRE ANSWER]
(11410)
Yes .. 1 No ... 2
Q.104 BAVIS1-8 / SEC SCHOOL CHILDREN ATTENDED ACTIVITY
Q.52 Based on this experience, would you…?
(READ OUT AND CODE ONE AT A TIME)
[REQUIRE ANSWER]
(11411-11418)
Like to find out more about science and technology 1
Like to find out more about particular science area 2
Consider doing science or engineering in university 3
Do work experience in a science related job ...... 4
Do physics, chemistry, biology or other science 5
Join a science club ............................................ 6
Visit other educational centres ........................... 7
Visit particular centres again ............................. 8
(None of these) ................................................. 9
115
Q.105 UNDER / SEC SCHOOL CHILDREN ATTENDED ACTIVITY
Q.53 Did this experience change your understanding of science?
[REQUIRE ANSWER]
(11419)
Yes (Specify) 1 No ................. 2
[S - IF THE ANSWER IS 2, THEN SKIP TO QUESTION 107]
Q.106 OUNDER / SEC SCHOOL CHILDREN ATTENDED ACTIVITY
SPECIFY CHANGE IN UNDERSTANDING OF SCIENCE
[REQUIRE ANSWER]
________________________________________________________________
____ (11420-11919)
Q.107 JOBS / SEC SCHOOL CHILDREN ATTENDED ACTIVITY
Q.54 Did this experience change your understanding of jobs in science?
[REQUIRE ANSWER]
(11920)
Yes (Specify) 1 No ................. 2
[S - IF THE ANSWER IS 2, THEN SKIP TO QUESTION 109]
116
Q.108 OJOBS / SEC SCHOOL CHILDREN CHANGED UNDERTANDING OF JOBS IN
SCIENCE
SPECIFY CHANGE IN UNDERSTANDING OF JOBS IN SCIENCE
[REQUIRE ANSWER]
________________________________________________________________
____ (11921-12420)
Q.109 SWEEK / SEC SCHOOL CHILDREN
Q.55 Are you aware of science week?
[REQUIRE ANSWER]
(12421)
Yes .. 1 No ... 2
[S - IF THE ANSWER IS 2, THEN SKIP TO QUESTION 116]
Q.110 WEAC/ SEC SCHOOL CHILDREN AWARE OF SCIENCE WEEK
Q.56 Have you ever been to any science week activities?
[REQUIRE ANSWER]
(12422)
Yes (Specify) 1 No ................. 2
[S - IF THE ANSWER IS 2, THEN SKIP TO QUESTION 116]
117
Q.111 OWEAC / SEC SCHOOL CHILDREN AWARE AND BEEN TO SCIENCE WEEK
ACTIVITIES
SPECIFY OTHER SCIENCE WEEK ACTIVITIES BEEN TO
[REQUIRE ANSWER]
________________________________________________________________
____ (12423-12922)
Q.112 INTCAR / SEC SCHOOL CHILDREN AWARE AND PARTCIPATED IN SCIENCE
WEEK
Q.57 Do you think these science week programmes present interesting careers in
science?
[REQUIRE ANSWER]
(12923)
Yes .. 1 No ... 2
Q.113 SCITEC / SEC SCHOOL CHILDREN AWARE AND PARTICIPATED IN SCIENCE
WEEK
Q.58 During science week did you learn about science and technology?
[REQUIRE ANSWER]
(12924)
Yes .. 1 No ... 2
Q.114 JSCITE / SEC SCHOOL CHILDREN AWARE AND PARTICIPATED IN SCIENCE
WEEK
Q.59 During science week did you learn more about jobs in science and technology?
[REQUIRE ANSWER]
(12925)
Yes .. 1 No ... 2
118
Q.115 SWFUT / SEC SCHOOL CHILDREN AWARE AND PARTICIPATED IN SCIENCE
WEEK
Q.60 Would you go to science week activities again in the future?
[REQUIRE ANSWER]
(12926)
Yes .. 1 No ... 2
Q.116 LMORE / SEC SCHOOL CHILDREN
Q.61 Would you like to learn more about science and technology?
[REQUIRE ANSWER]
(12927)
Yes .. 1 No ... 2
Q.117 SCIWEB / SEC SCHOOL CHILDREN
Q.62 Are you aware of any science websites?
[REQUIRE ANSWER]
(12928)
Yes .. 1 No ... 2
[S - IF THE ANSWER IS 2, THEN SKIP TO QUESTION 121]
Q.118 VISWEB / SEC SCHOOL CHILDREN AWARE WEBSITE
Q.63 How many times have you visited these websites in the last 12 months? Would
you say you visit them…?
(READ OUT)
[REQUIRE ANSWER]
(12929)
Very often ..................... 1 only every now and then 4
Often ............................ 2 Just the once ............... 5
Not very often ............... 3 Never ........................... 6
[S - IF THE ANSWER IS 6, THEN SKIP TO QUESTION 121]
119
Q.119 DOWEB1-7/ SEC SCHOOL CHILDREN AWARE AND VISITED WEBSITE
Q.64 What did you do on the websites?
(READ OUT AND CODE ONE AT A TIME)
[REQUIRE ANSWER]
(12930-12936)
Play games ........................ 1 Learn about science careers 5
Read information ................ 2 Learn how things work ....... 6
Do quizzes ......................... 3 Other (Specify) ................... 7
Solve puzzles ..................... 4
[S - IF THE ANSWER IS NOT 7, THEN SKIP TO QUESTION 121]
Q.120 ODOWEB / SEC SCHOOL CHILDREN WHO USE THE WEBSITE FOR OTHER
PURPOSE
SPECIFY OTHER ACTIVITY ON WEBSITE
[REQUIRE ANSWER]
________________________________________________________________
____ (12937-13436)
Q.121 CONACT 1-5/ SEC SCHOOL CHILDREN
Q.65 In the past 12 months have you participated in any of the following conservation
activities?
(READ OUT AND CODE ONE AT A TIME)
[REQUIRE ANSWER]
(13437-13441)
Landcare .......... 1 Earthwatch ....... 4
Tree planting .... 2 Other (specify) . 5
Frogwatch ........ 3 (None of these) 6
[S - IF THE ANSWER IS NOT 5, THEN SKIP TO QUESTION 123]
120
Q.122 OCONACT / SEC SCHOOL CHILDREN PARTICIPATED IN OTHER AONSERVATION
ACTIVITIES
SPECIFY OTHER CONSERVTION ACTIVITIES PARTICIPATED IN
[REQUIRE ANSWER]
________________________________________________________________
____ (13442-13941)
Q.123 GEN2 / SEC SCHOOL CHILDREN
Q.66 GENDER (RECORD AUTOMATICALLY)
[REQUIRE ANSWER]
(13942)
Male ..... 1 Female ..2
Q.124 AGE2 / SEC SCHOOL CHILDREN
Q.67 How old are you?
[REQUIRE ANSWER]
RECORD AGE ____ (13943-13944)
Q.125 LOC2/ SEC SCHOOLD CHILDREN
Q.67a In which of the following areas do you live?
(READ OUT)
(13945)
Metropolitan 1 Remote ....... 4
Regional ...... 2 Very remote 5
Rural ........... 3
121
Q.126 LANG2 / SEC SCHOOL CHILDREN
Q.67b Do you normally speak another language other than English in your household?
(13946)
Yes ......................... 1 Prefer not to answer 3
No .......................... 2
[S - IF THE ANSWER IS 2-3, THEN SKIP TO QUESTION 129]
Q.127 OLANG2 / SEC SCHOOL CHILDREN
Q.67c What other language is that?
(14514-14515)
Italian ................ 1 Greek ................ 7
Croatian ............ 2 Arabic ............... 8
Serbian .............. 3 German ............. 9
Macedonian ....... 4 Vietnamese ...... 10
Mandarin ........... 5 Spanish ............ 11
Cantonese ......... 6 Other (Specify) . 12
[S - IF THE ANSWER IS NOT 12, THEN SKIP TO QUESTION 129]
Q.128 OOLANG2 /SEC SCHOOL CHILDREN
SPECIFY OTHER LANGUAGE SPOKEN AT HOME
________________________________________________________________
____ (13947-14446)
Q.129 NAME2 / ALL
CLOSE
Q.68 That’s the end of the interview. As part of quality control procedures, someone
from our project team may wish to re-contact you to verify a couple of responses you
provided today. For this reason, may I please have your first name?
[REQUIRE ANSWER]
________________________________________________________________
____ (14447-14496)
122
Q.130 FUT2 / ALL
Q.69 As this is market research, it is carried out in compliance with the Privacy Act and
the information you provided will be used only for research purposes. Your answers will
be combined with those of other participants, no individual responses will be identified.
We do re-contact people from time to time for related research projects. Would it be okay
if we contacted you again in the future to invite you to participate in any similar research?
We will only use this information to contact you to invite you to participate in research,
your details will not be passed onto any third party.
IF AGREE, SAY: We will only keep your contact details on record for 12 months. You
may ask to have your details removed at any time over the next 12 months.
[REQUIRE ANSWER]
(14497)
Agree to future research ......... 1 Do not agree to future research 2
Q.131 CLOSE2 / ALL
CLOSE: Thank you for your time and responses. My name is (…) from Market
Solutions, if you would like to verify this survey, you can call or email the Australian
Government Department of Education, Science and Training or you can call this office
during business hours. Would you like any of these details? (Provide preferred details:
DEST - 1300 363 079 or ScienceAwarenessProject@DEST.gov.au, MS – Danielle
Jenner (03) 8330 6002).
If you have any general queries, you can call the Market Research Society’s Survey Line
on 1300 364 830.
[REQUIRE ANSWER]
(14498)
COMPLETE 1
[A - IF THE ANSWER TO QUESTION 7 IS 1, THEN SKIP TO QUESTION 134]
123
Q.132 OCODE1 / RESPONDENTS
RESPONDENTS OCCUPATION (&&)
[REQUIRE ANSWER]
(14499-14500)
Managers .............................................. 1
Professional .......................................... 2
Technicians and trades workers ............ 3
Community and personal service workers 4
Clerical and administrative workers ....... 5
Sales workers ........................................ 6
Machinery operators and drivers ........... 7
Labourers .............................................. 8
Home duties .......................................... 9
Student ................................................. 10
Unemployed- not retirement age .......... 11
Pensioner - not retired .......................... 12
Retired - on pension ............................. 13
Retired - not on pension ....................... 14
[A - IF THE ANSWER TO QUESTION 80 IS NOT 1, THEN SKIP TO QUESTION 134]
Q.133 OCODE2 / PARTNER
PARTNER OCCUPATION ([ANSWER TO Q. 81])
[REQUIRE ANSWER]
(14501-14502)
Managers .............................................. 1
Professional .......................................... 2
Technicians and trades workers ............ 3
Community and personal service workers 4
Clerical and administrative workers ....... 5
Sales workers ........................................ 6
Machinery operators and drivers ........... 7
Labourers .............................................. 8
Home duties .......................................... 9
Student ................................................. 10
Unemployed- not retirement age .......... 11
Pensioner - not retired .......................... 12
Retired - on pension ............................. 13
Retired - not on pension ....................... 14
124
Q.134 INTID / ALL
Interviewer's ID
[REQUIRE ANSWER]
Interviewer's ID ________ (14503-14506)
[A - IF THE ANSWER TO QUESTION 87 IS 1, THEN SKIP TO QUESTION 1005]
[A - IF THE ANSWER TO QUESTION 131 IS 1, THEN SKIP TO QUESTION 1005]
Q.135 AUD1 / ALL
AUDITING (OFFICE ONLY)
Q.70 Was the date and time of interview correct?
[REQUIRE ANSWER]
(14507)
Yes .. 1 No ... 2
Q.136 AUD2 / ALL
Q.71 Was the interview recorded correctly?
[REQUIRE ANSWER]
(14508)
Yes .. 1 No ... 2
Q.137 AUD3 / ALL
Q.72 Was the interviewer courteous?
[REQUIRE ANSWER]
(14509)
Yes .. 1 No ... 2
Q.138 AUDID / ALL
Q.73 AUDITOR'S ID
[REQUIRE ANSWER]
Auditors ID ________ (14510-14513)
125
126
