School Sports Participation Survey

Document Sample
School Sports Participation Survey Powered By Docstoc
					school sport
participation and
the Olympic
legacy



a survey of teachers, school games
organisers and school sport
partnerships staff
Abbreviations

School Sport Partnerships (SSPs)
School Games Organisers (SGOs)
School Sports Coordinator (SSCO)
Primary Link Teacher (PLT)
Partnership Development Manager (PDM)




Online survey

1,019 people were surveyed:

•   673 Primary school teachers
•   225 Secondary school teachers
•   121 SGO/SSP staff that work with a total of 3,617 schools

Responses were given between 14th March and 19th April 2013

Not all respondents answered all questions. Figures for each question can be found in the
relevant sections.
T H E    S M I T H      I N S T I T U T E




school sports
participation and
the Olympic
legacy



a survey of teachers, school games
organisers and school sport
partnerships staff




Published by The Smith Institute

This report represents the views of those surveyed and not those of the Smith Institute.

© The Smith Institute May 2013
T H E   S M I T H   I N S T I T U T E




Contents

Key findings                             4

Introduction                             8

Survey results:

1. School Games take-up                 12

2. Retention of SSPs                    14

3. Levels of participation              17

4. PE Teacher Release                   24

5. The impact of changes                27

6. Opinions on school sport             29




2
               T H E   S M I T H   I N S T I T U T E




Key findings




                                                  3
T H E    S M I T H   I N S T I T U T E




Key findings

Falling participation since the loss of ring-fenced funding for School Sports
Partnerships

•       Over two thirds (68%) of School Games Organisers and School Sport Partnership
        staff surveyed reported a decrease in sports participation since ring-fenced
        funding ended in 2011.
•       A third of primary and secondary school teachers (34% and 35% respectively)
        reported that there had been a decrease in participation.
•       The main reasons mentioned for those who indicated decreased levels of
        participation were a lack of funding and as a consequence pressure on time. This
        was impacting the ability of schools to run sports clubs, competitions and events
        and therefore resulted in fewer opportunities for participation.
•       Those who were able to maintain or increase levels of participation cited longer
        working days, their school’s commitment to sport and continued collaboration.
        There were concerns from some, however, about how sustainable this will be.

Old versus new funding system

SGO and SSP staff were asked whether they preferred the former system (ring-fenced
funding of School Sport Partnerships) to the new one (PE Teacher Release, non-ring-
fenced funding for School Sport Partnerships and School Games):

•       88% stated the old system was better.

Teachers were asked about the impact of the change in the funding system on provision
of PE and sport:

•       36% of primary school teachers surveyed reported a worsening of sport in their
        school under the new system, 48% said it had stayed the same and 16% it had
        improved;
•       37% of secondary school teachers surveyed reported a worsening of sport in
        their school under the new system, 55% said it had stayed the same, and 8%
        said it had improved.
•       A large number of respondents from schools thought that money earmarked for
        PE teacher release was actually being spent to that end. However, a significant
        number reported that only some or none of the money was being used to release
        teachers (68% and 58% of respective responses from primary and secondary


4
                                                           T H E   S M I T H   I N S T I T U T E




    school teachers).
•   The results therefore suggest that there has been a significant loss of funding
    channelled into school sport.

School Games and School Sport Partnerships

•   Whilst a majority of teachers who responded to the survey are signed up for School
    Games a significant minority, especially those who were primary school teachers
    (42%), stated they were not.
•   The majority of respondents reported that their School Sports Partnerships had
    remained in place after ring-fenced funding had ended:
    o However, a significant minority of primary school teachers (28%) and secondary
          school teachers (34%) surveyed reported that they were no longer a part of a
          School Sport Partnership; and
    o Two thirds (64%) of School Games Organiser and School Sport Partnership staff
          who’s SSP had continued reported that at least one school which previously
          was a member of the retained School Sport Partnership had left.
•   Those schools who reported that they were registered for School Games were more
    likely to be part of a School Sport Partnership than the average.

Views on sport in schools

•   Over 90% believe that non-competitive physical activities must be encouraged
    alongside competitive activities.
•   97% agreed that schools should have a minimum target of two hours PE and Sport
    a week.
•   69% agreed that schools should be required to monitor participation and make the
    information available to parents.
•   95% agreed that physical activity improves educational attainment.
•   Under half of respondents (47%) agreed that a strategy focused on competitive
    sport will inspire inactive children to engage in sport and PE.




                                                                                              5
T H E   S M I T H   I N S T I T U T E




6
               T H E   S M I T H   I N S T I T U T E




Introduction




                                                  7
T H E   S M I T H   I N S T I T U T E




Introduction
Following Britain’s successful hosting of the Olympic Games and record breaking
medal tally the Smith Institute decided to undertake an online survey of people
currently involved in school sports. The survey forms part of an ongoing programme
of work on sport in schools, including a report of policy perspectives to be published
later in the year.

The survey was initially prompted by the abolition of the School Sport Survey and
is intended to provide an assessment of the impact of the lifting of ring-fenced
funding for School Sport Partnerships.

The survey aims to: understand how those teaching sport feel about recent changes
to school sports; and what impact they think the changes are, and will have, on sport
participation levels and School Sport Partnerships.

The online survey took place between March and April 2013 and covered over
1,000 respondents, including primary and secondary school teachers, School Games
Organisers, and School Sport Partnerships staff.

The Institute would like to thank all those who took part in the survey.

Recent changes to school sports
School Sports Partnerships (SSPs) were developed under the previous government
and involved families of Secondary, Primary and Special schools working together to
increase the quality and quantity of PE and Sports opportunities for young people. All
schools in England were part of an SSP. SSPs received £162 million ring-fenced funding
per year.

Each SSP was managed by a Partnership Development Manager (PDM), who was
funded centrally and employed directly by schools. Under SSPs each secondary school
had a School Sports Coordinator (SSCO) to coordinate sport and each Primary School
had a Primary Link Teacher (PLT).

Ring-fenced funding for SSPs was removed in 2011. After widespread complaints about
this the government agreed to spend £32.5 million for PE teacher release for two years
- a scheme to allow a PE teacher to provide PE support to local schools and within
their own school. It also aimed to help provide more competitive sport for pupils,
including the School Games. This funding is not ring-fenced and only runs until the


8
                                                          T H E   S M I T H   I N S T I T U T E




end of the next academic year.

In February 20111 the government announced its funding for a new version of School
Games. These are based around four tiers of sport: intra-school; inter-school; county;
and national. School Games are designed to improve engagement in competitive sport
and would be supported by School Games Organisers.




                                                                                             9
T H E   S M I T H   I N S T I T U T E




10
                 T H E   S M I T H   I N S T I T U T E




Survey results




                                                   11
T H E    S M I T H   I N S T I T U T E




1. School Games take-up

Respondents were asked whether their school or schools in their area were signed up
for the new system of School Games.

The majority of teachers stated that their school was registered for School Games:

•       However, a significant minority of primary school teachers reported that they
        were not (42%).
•       This was significantly different to secondary school teachers who reported a
        much higher rate of registration.

Figure 1: Is your school registered for the School Games?




                                         41.51%
 No
                       15.93%


                                                                                Primary
                                                                                Secondary
                                                  58.49%
Yes
                                                                    84.07%



     0.00%           20.00%         40.00%   60.00%        80.00%     100.00%

Base: Primary: 542; Secondary: 182


SGO/SSP staff also reported that most schools they worked with were signed up for
School Games with a similar split (albeit it not as wide) between secondary and primary
schools:

•       Those surveyed reported that 54% of primary schools were signed up.
•       Those surveyed reported 75% of secondary schools were signed up.



12
                                                                            T H E   S M I T H   I N S T I T U T E




Figure 2: School Games Organisers/SSP Staff - How many of the schools you
work with are signed up for the School Games?2

               0%       20%       40%      60%       80%      100%



    Primary              54.47%                   45.53%


                                                                             Registered for the School
                                                                             Games
Secondary                     74.52%                   25.48%                Not Registered for the
                                                                             School Games



      Other           42.01%                   57.99%



Base: 76 reporting on 3617 schools (2875 Primary, 573 Secondary and 169 other)




2 Compared to – How many schools in your area are you responsible for?



                                                                                                             13
T H E    S M I T H   I N S T I T U T E




2. Retention of SSPs

Following the removal of ring-fenced funding for School Sports Partnerships,
respondents to the survey were asked whether their SSP had remained in place. The
government has stated that it is up to schools to decide whether to continue with
SSPs. The survey found:

•       The majority of respondents reported that their SSP had remained in place.
•       However, a significant minority of primary school teachers (28%) and secondary
        school teachers (34%) reported that they were no longer a member of an SSP.

Figure 3: Following the removal of the ring-fence of funding in 2011 has your
School Sport Partnership remained in place?

                             0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00% 60.00% 70.00% 80.00%



                                                                               67.66%
                          Yes
                                                                          60.44%




                                                                                             Primary
                                                    28.44%
                           No                                                                Secondary
                                                       33.52%




                                    3.90%
Yes, but we are not part of it
                                     6.04%



Base: Primary: 538; Secondary: 182


SGO and SSP staff were asked whether any schools had left the local SSPs that had
been retained:

•       Almost two thirds of those surveyed whose partnership continued reported that
        at least one school had left their partnership (64%).




14
                                                           T H E   S M I T H   I N S T I T U T E




Figure 4: If yes [SSP is still running], since 2011 have any schools left your
partnership?




                    36.36%
                                                                                      Yes
                                                                                      No
                                               63.64%




Base: 66


The responses from teachers on whether their school was part of the SSP and
registered for School Games were then combined to analyse engagement with these
schemes.

Those who reported that they were registered for School Games were more likely to
be part of a SSP than the average reported above:

•     73% of primary school teachers reported that they were part of a SSP and
      registered for School Games; and 66% for secondary school teachers.

There was a split between primary and secondary school teachers for those not
registered for School Games or part of a SSP:

•     39% of primary school teachers who reported that their school was not
      registered for School Games also said that they were not part of an SSP.
•     69% of secondary school teachers who reported that their school was not
      registered for School Games were also not part of an SSP (although given the
      smaller sample size these figures should be treated with some caution).




                                                                                            15
T H E   S M I T H   I N S T I T U T E




Figure 5: Schools who stated that they are registered with the School Games
broken down by engagement with SSP3
                       Primary                                                             Secondary
                    Primary                                                           Secondary




        27.22%                                                              33.55%
                                                     Part of SSP                                                         Part of S
                                                     Not in SSP                                                          Not in S
                            72.78%                                                                  66.45%




Base: Primary: 316; Secondary: 152



Figure 6: Schools who stated that they are not registered with the School Games
broken down by engagement with SSP
                       Primary                                                                Secondary
                 Primary                                                                 Secondary




                                                                                                       31.03%
     39.37%                                           Part of SSP                                                           Part o
                                                      Not in SSP                                                            Not i
                             60.63%
                                                                             68.97%




Base: Primary: 221; Secondary: 29




3 Figures for those who stated their partnership had not continued and those who stated it had continued but they were
not part of it have been combined



16
                                                                                T H E   S M I T H   I N S T I T U T E




3. Levels of participation

Respondents were asked to give their thoughts on the level of participation since ring-
fenced funding had been abolished. They were asked whether they felt participation
had increased, decreased or stayed the same and why.

A significant proportion of the teachers who responded, around a third, thought the
levels of participation had decreased since the ending of ring-fenced funding. Higher
levels of School Games Organisers (SGOs) and School Sports Partnership (SSP) staff
(around two thirds) thought that levels had fallen.

•     A majority (68%) of SGOs and SSP Staff that responded reported that there had
      been a decrease in participation.
•     A significant minority of primary school teachers (34%) reported that there had
      been a decrease, with 11% stating that there had been an increase and 55%
      saying that it had stayed the same.
•     There were similar results for secondary school teachers – over a third (35%)
      reported a decrease, 57% stayed the same; and 8% increased.


                                             Primary
Figure 7: Since the removal of ring-fenced funding for School Sport Partnerships
has participation in sport for your pupils: Increased, Decreased or Stayed the
Same?4

                                                     Primary

                                            11.61%

                                                                                 Increased


                                                                                 Decreased
                       54.68%                     33.71%
                                                                                 Stayed the
                                                                                 Same


4 SSP staff/SGOs were asked: Since the removal of ring-fenced funding for school sport partnerships has participation
in sport by school children in the area you are responsible for...



                                                                                                                 17
                                         Secondary
T H E    S M I T H   I N S T I T U T E




                                                  Secondary


                                          8.24%

                                                                Increased


                                                                Decreased
                                              34.62%
                     57.14%
                         School Games Stayed the
                       Organisers and SSP
                                       Same

                             Staff
                               School Games Organisers and SSP Staff


                                             10.13%
                                                                Increased
                       21.52%
                                                                Decreased

                                          68.35%                Stayed the
                                                                Same

Base: Primary: 534; Secondary: 182: SGO/SSP: 79


Participation by regions
The participation results were broken down by region. In most areas the results showed
similar levels to the national average:

•       Yorkshire and the Humber saw the smallest proportion (5%) reporting an


18
                                                         T H E   S M I T H   I N S T I T U T E




    increase in levels of participation and the Midlands the highest (14%).
•   Fewer respondents proportionately in the West Midlands, South West and
    London reported a lower decrease than the average – all at or just above 30%.
    Yorkshire and the Humber, East Midland and North East showed the highest
    proportion of respondents reporting a decrease (all above 40%).
             North West                                          North East
Figure 8: Reported change in participation since end to ring-fenced funding of
SSPs by region

                 North West
          North West                                       North East

                   10.89%                                               10.00%
                       10.89%
                                         Increased                                               Increa
                                      Increased

    49.50%49.50%
                                         Decreased
                                      Decreased 47.50%                                           Decre
                   39.60%
                      39.60%
                                                                      42.50%
                                      Stayed the
             Yorkshire &Same             Stayed
                                      Same         the                                           Stayed

             Humberside                                  West Midlands                           Same


     Yorkshire and the Humber                            West Midlands

               5.08%                                                   13.75%
                                         Increased                                               Increa

                                         Decreased                                               Decre
     52.54%         42.37%                                            30.00%
                                                 56.25%
                                         Stayed the                                              Stayed
                                         Same                                                    Same




                                                                                          19
T H E         East Midlands
        S M I T H   I N S T I T U T E                                 Eastern

             East Midlands                                       Eastern

                           14.12%                                      11.43%
                                                   Increased                        Increa


        41.18%                                     Decreased                        Decre
                                                            51.43%     37.14%
                         44.71%
                        London                     Stayed the        South East Stayed
                                                   Same                             Same

                    London                                      South East
                          13.04%                                      9.66%
                                                   Increased                        Increa


                                                   Decreased                        Decre
        53.62%            33.33%
                                                                Combined (Exc.
                                                            52.27% 38.07%
                    South WestStayed the                                    Stayed
                                                   Same             DNR) Same
              South West                                        Combined*
                       8.11%                                               10.62%
                                                   Increased                        Increa


                                                   Decreased                        Decre
                          31.53%
        60.36%                                              52.09%     37.29%
                                                   Stayed the                       Stayed
                                                   Same                             Same
Base: 791
* Excludes those who did not report their region



20
                                                             T H E   S M I T H   I N S T I T U T E




Participation in other schools
The teachers surveyed were also asked whether they thought other schools in their
area were able to maintain the levels of sports participation that existed under the
former SSP system:

•     Half of respondents thought that schools were not able to (51%); 18% thought
      they were; and 31% did not know.

    Figure 9: Do you believe that other schools in your area have been able to
    maintain the level of sports participation that existed under School Sport
                                   Partnerships?



                                              18.03%

                    31.07%
                                                                       Yes
                                                                       No
                                                                       Don't Know


                                             50.90%



Base: 721


Reasons for a decrease in participation

A decrease in participation
Those who reported a decrease in levels of participation were asked to give reasons
why:

•     The main issue mentioned was a lack of resources. Funding was consistently
      raised, as was a lack of staff/time.
•     A reduced level of staff, support and coordination provided by the SSP was
      reported to be impacting the ability of schools to run sports clubs, competitions,
      events and a wide range of sports and therefore resulted in fewer opportunities
      for participation.

5 Combined responses from Primary & Secondary School Staff



                                                                                              21
T H E    S M I T H   I N S T I T U T E




“The Sports Partnership is much reduced and is offering far fewer competitions, and
no staff training or opportunities to meet other Primary School PE coordinators”
                               Primary school teacher from Yorkshire and the Humber

“As a secondary school we have not been working as closely with our primary
schools. School sports leadership in our school has decreased since the funding has
been lost.”
                                     Secondary school teacher from the East Midlands

Similar levels of participation
Those who reported participation levels as staying the same were asked to explain how:

•       The emphasis was on the school’s commitment to sport as a subject, including
        meeting the costs of running competitions and events and working much harder.
•       There was a sense that whilst participation had not decreased things had
        become much more difficult. Some were worried about how long the
        commitment to sport would remain and others acknowledged that neighbouring
        schools were suffering as a result of the changes.

“It has stayed the same for us, but I know other schools have been affected as not all
the secondary schools have stayed involved.”
                                           Primary school teacher from the South East

“We have increased our individual commitment to PE as a school. Not through any
help from the DfE”
                                        Primary school teacher from the South East

“We have had a member of staff cut from 2 days to 1. We have had to pull harder to
still offer the same.”
                                 Secondary school teacher from the Eastern region

Increased levels of participation
For those respondents who had an increase in levels of participation, the reasons given
were:

•       A commitment to PE as a subject (including paying for extra coaching) and
        driven by the hard work of staff.
•       A number of responses from primary school teachers also mentioned employing
        a full time PE coach.


22
                                                          T H E   S M I T H   I N S T I T U T E




•   Mention was also made to continued partnerships, local clusters and the
    introduction of School Games.

“Year on year our commitment to further enrichment to the school life means we
offer more. This is purely down to the continuing commitment of all staff within the
school to offer their time for the benefit of the students.”
                                                 Secondary school teacher from London

“We aimed to be proactive in response to the removal of the ringed fence funding
and already had plans in place to increase participation.”
                                    Secondary school teacher from the East Midlands




                                                                                           23
T H E    S M I T H   I N S T I T U T E




4. PE Teacher Release

In the survey we asked whether the money earmarked (but not ring-fenced) to
release a PE teacher for one day a week to coordinate School Games with local
primary schools was being used to that end.

Answers among the three groups varied, with large numbers reporting that part or
none of the money was being spent to release a teacher:

•       Just over half of respondents from primary schools thought that local
        secondary schools were using part of the money for PE teacher release (53%);
        a third all (32%) and 15% reported that none was being used. However a large
        number of respondents were not sure.
•       42% of respondents from secondary schools said they were using all of the
        money available for PE teacher release; 30% thought that part of it was being
        used and almost an equal number (28%) thought that none was being used.

SGOs and SSP staff were asked a slightly different question regarding how many
schools in their area spent part, none or all of funds on PE teacher release:

•       According to the combined figures 59% of schools spent all on PE teacher
        release; 27% part; and 14% none.6




6 This figure was reached by combining all reported numbers for all SGO/SSP staff – they were asked how many
schools they looked after and how many of them used all, part, or none of the funding for to release teachers




24
                                                             T H E   S M I T H   I N S T I T U T E




Figure 10: Primary Schools – To the best of your knowledge are the secondary
schools in your area using the money for PE teacher release to organise School
Games in your area?7




                       15.27%

                                                    32.06%
                                                                          Using All
                                                                          Using Part
                                                                          Using None


                     52.67%



Base: 262


Figure 11: Secondary Schools - Is your school using all, part or none of the
money for PE teacher release to organise School Games in your area?




               28.09%
                                                    42.13%               Using All
                                                                         Using Part
                                                                         Using None


                     29.78%



Base: 178

7 Excluding those that replied not sure - 50.84% of total



                                                                                              25
T H E   S M I T H   I N S T I T U T E




Figure 12: School Games Organisers - Of the secondary schools that you
work with how many use all, part or none of the PE teacher release money
for its intended purpose?



                        14.41%



                                                            Using All
                                                            Using Part
            26.61%
                                                   58.98%   Using None




Base: 76 respondents who referred to 590 schools




26
                                                         T H E   S M I T H   I N S T I T U T E




5. The impact of changes

Respondents were asked to consider the overall impact of the switch from ring-fenced
funding for SSPs to teacher release and School Games.

•     An overwhelming majority (88%) of SSP staff and SGOs stated that the old
      system was better than the current one.
•     A very small number (4%) thought the old system was worse.

Figure 13: School Games Organisers/SSP Staff - From your experience was the
School Sport Partnership system better, the same or worse than the current
system for delivering school sport?

                       3.95%


                  7.89%



                                                                       Better
                                                                       The Same
                                                                       Worse


                                 88.16%




Base: 76




Primary and secondary school teachers were asked a slightly different question about
whether the change had brought about improvements.

Only a small minority reported an improvement, although the responses from the
teachers were more varied:

•     48% of primary school teachers who responded thought that sport and PE in


                                                                                          27
   T H E    S M I T H    I N S T I T U T E




           their school had stayed about the same since the changes; 36% reported a
           worsening; and 16% an improvement.
   •       55% of secondary school teachers who responded thought the sport and PE
           in their school had stayed about the same since the changes; 37% reported a
           worsening; and a far smaller number (8%) an improvement.

   Figure 14: Considering your experience of School Sport Partnerships what has
   been the change, if any, to sport and PE in your school compared to teacher
   release and the School Games

                    Primary      Primary                                     Secondary
                                                                      Secondary
                   Primary

                                                                            7.87%
                   16.10%        16.10%

35.80% 35.80%                                Improved        37.08%
                                                         Improved
                                             About the SameAbout the Same
                                             Worse       Worse
                        48.11%                                                      55.06%
                                  48.11%




   Base: Primary: 528; Secondary: 178




   28
                                                                 T H E   S M I T H    I N S T I T U T E




6. Opinions on school sport

As part of the survey respondents were asked a range of questions regarding priorities
for sport in schools.

Responses from Teachers, SGO and SSP Staff
An overwhelming majority of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that non-
competitive physical activities should be encouraged alongside competitive ones (94%)

Figure 15: Non-competitive physical activities must be encouraged alongside
competitive activities
                                       [Figure 15]
 Strongly Disagree     0.50%

            Disagree       2.01%

        No Opinion         3.01%

              Agree                                     35.84%

    Strongly Agree                                                                   58.65%

                   0.00%     10.00%   20.00%   30.00%   40.00%    50.00%      60.00%        70.00%
Base: 798


Less than half of those surveyed (47%) thought a strategy focused on competitive sport
would inspire inactive children to engage in sport and PE, and 44% disagreed.




                                                                                                   29
T H E   S M I T H   I N S T I T U T E




Figure 16: A strategy focused on competitive sport will inspire inactive children to
engage in sport and PE                   [Figure 16]
Strongly Disagree                            10.88%

            Disagree                                                          32.88%

        No Opinion                         8.88%

               Agree                                                 27.50%

     Strongly Agree                                        19.88%

                      0.00%       5.00% 10.00% 15.00% 20.00% 25.00% 30.00% 35.00%

Base: 800


The vast majority agreed with the statement that physical activity improves educational
attainment (95%).

                                         [Figure 17]
Figure 17: Physical activity improves educational attainment


Strongly Disagree            0.13%

            Disagree          1.26%

         No Opinion              3.27%

               Agree                                  32.16%

     Strongly Agree                                                         63.19%

                       0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00% 60.00% 70.00%

Base: 796




30
                                                                T H E   S M I T H    I N S T I T U T E




A similar number also thought that schools should have a minimum of two hours PE and
sport a week (97%).

                                 [Figure 18]
Figure 18: Schools should have a minimum target of 2 hours PE and sport a week


   Strongly Disagree      0.12%

              Disagree     1.62%

            No Opinion     1.62%

                Agree                 19.35%

     Strongly Agree                                                                 77.28%

                     0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00% 60.00% 70.00% 80.00% 90.00%
Base: 801


On whether schools should be required to monitor participation and make this
information available to parents, the majority (69%) either agreed or strongly agreed
and only 19% disagreed.

Figure 19: Schools should be required to monitor participation and make this
information available to parents       [Figure 19]
  Strongly Disagree                4.89%

               Disagree                          14.05%

            No Opinion                         12.05%

                  Agree                                                                 36.01%

      Strongly Agree                                                            33.00%

                         0.00% 5.00% 10.00%15.00%20.00%25.00%30.00%35.00%40.00%
Base: 797



                                                                                                  31
T H E    S M I T H   I N S T I T U T E




Views of School Teachers
The majority of both primary and secondary school teachers surveyed believed that
children should be taught a broad range of sports by specialist coaches:

•       86% of respondents from primary schools thought so.
•       However, a lower (although relatively high) proportion of secondary school
        teachers agreed (68%).

Figure 20: Do you believe that children should be taught a broad range of sports
                     Primary
by specialist coaches?                                           Secondary
                     Primary                                      Secondary



            13.83%

                                                        31.29%
                                             Yes                                       Yes
                                             No                                        No
                                                                              68.71%
                            86.17%



Base: Primary: 506; Secondary 163


There was general agreement that if resources were available respondents would buy
in expert sports coaching.




32
                                                     T H E   S M I T H    I N S T I T U T E




Figure 21: If resources were available would you buy in expert sports coaching
                  Primary
for children in your school?                                 Secondary
                  Primary                                    Secondary


              8.73%                                   13.66%


                                      Yes                                                     Yes

                                      No                                                      No


                         91.27%                                          86.34%



Base: Primary: 461; Secondary: 161




                                                                                       33
The Smith Institute
The Smith Institute is an independent think tank which provides a high-level
forum for thought leadership and debate on public policy and politics. It seeks
to engage politicians, senior decision makers, practitioners, academia, opinion
formers and commentators on promoting policies for a fairer society.

If you would like to know more about the Smith Institute please write to:

The Smith Institute
Somerset House
South Wing
Strand
London
WC2R 1LA

Telephone +44 (0)20 7845 5845
Fax +44 (0)20 7845 5846
Email info@smith-institute.org.uk
Website www.smith-institute.org.uk




The Smith Institute is a not-for-profit company (registered as SI Research Limited, 07098225)

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:1
posted:9/10/2013
language:
pages:36