Industrial prejudices and occupational aspirations of sixth form pupils.
Series: D39642/82
Publisher: University of Salford
Published: 1982
Place of publication: Salford
Language: eng
Description: Industrial Prejudices and Occupational Aspirations of Sixth Form Pupils


Walter Louis James

Thesis for the degree of 
Philosophiae Doctor

The University of Salford

Department of Visual and Applied Arts

June 1982



************
DEDICATION 
************
To Jennifer, Emma and Alexandra who have shown great patience and forbearance during the preparation of this work and without whose unfailing support and encouragement it would not have been completed.



CONTENTS


1.1
Introduction
2

1.2
Social class, educational achievement and career choice
4

1.3
The effect of linguistic ability
11

1.4
Child rearing practices
14
2
Occupational choice
17

2.1
Developmental theories of occupational choice
17

2.2
Sociological aspects
19

2.3
Roberts' Opportunity Structure Model
21

2.4
Attitudes of parents and their children
23

2.5
Idealised Child Types  
26

2.6
Family background and job opportunity 
30

2.7
The association of effeminacy with non-manual work
31
3
Occupational perception
34

3.1
Introduction
34

3.2
Classification and evaluation of occupations
36

3.3
Application of MDS to occupational perception
39

3.4
Summary of the work of Reeb
41
4
Survey I - The Spectrum of career choices and childrens' opinions on careers in industry 
46

4.1
General objectives                             
46

4.2
Assignment of social class categories          
47

4.3
Scaling of abilities by examination grades  
49

4.4
Survey I                                   
50

4.5
Results of Survey I               
52

4.6
Discussion                               
54
5
Survey II - Parental occupation, ability and career choice  
58

5.1
Initial investigation                           
58

5.2
Composition of the survey sample          
60

5.3
Proposed model of occupational aspiration      
61

5.4
Career choice distribution       
63

5.5
Link between social class and ability  
66

5.6
Link between nature of school and ability      
67

5.7
Link between social class and career choice  
70

5.8
Link between school and career choice  
74

5.9
Link between academic ability and career choice  
76

5.1
Social class, curriculum subjects and careers  
78
6
Career choices of younger children in a single school 
85

6.1
Introduction                               
85

6.2
Objectives of Survey III                   
87

6.3
Parental occupation and career choice
88

6.4
Social class as an indicator of ability  
90

6.5
Ability as an indicator of career choice  
93

6.6
Conclusions                             
96
7
Childrearing practices and career choice     
98

7.1
Objectives                             
98

7.2
'Muscles-Brains' analogue of social class  
99

7.3
Concordance of analogue with social class  
101

7.4
The questionnaire           
102

7.5
Interview administration          
105

7.8
Teachers' assessments of the children       
107

7.7
Analysis and conclusions        
108
8
Occupational perceptions of schoolchildren
114

8.1
Introduction                               
114

8.2
An occupational model           
115

8.3
Development of the work of Reeb  
116

8.4
A pilot study                                 
118

8.5
Discussion                               
122

8.6
The main investigation      
124

8.7
Questionnaire administration        
126
9
Investigation of the application of MDS



to occupations.               
130

9.1
Hypothesis on questionnaire quality     
130

9.2
Three test criteria             
131

9.3
Splitting according to criteria A and B     
132

9.4
Splitting according to criteria A, B and C  
135

9.5
Investigation of the questionnaire subsets     
136

9.6
Discussion           
143
10
The study of subjective occupational perceptions using Osgood's semantic differential technique 
146

10.1
Introduction                               
146

10.2
Choice of occupations and adjective pairs  
147

10.3
Results                                 
149

10.4
Discussion                               
151
11
Difficulties inherent in obtaining and interpreting the data     
157
12

Conclusions  
166

Appendices
Survey I   - Childrens' Questionnaire
179
- Childrens' comments on Industry
181
- Teachers' comments on works visits
191
- Teachers' comments on careers guidance
196
Appendix 1- Individual subject comparisons
202
Appendix 2 - Survey II - Childrens' Questionnaire
201
Appendix 3 Survey III - Interview schedule 
216
Appendix 4 Survey IV  - Interview schedule
219
Appendix 5 Multidimensional scaling questionnaire
222
Appendix 6 Semantic differential questionnaire 
226


******************
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 

I have, at every stage in the preparation of this thesis, been helped and
encouraged by many people and the following is by no means an exhaustive
list of those whose assistance I have valued.
My first thanks go to the Manchester Professional Panel of the Royal
Society of Chemistry without whose financial support this work could not
have been undertaken.  To Dr Michael Harris, my supervisor, there is no
way that I can adequately acknowledge the debt I owe.  I count myself
very fortunate indeed to have worked under his guidance.  Dr Richard Baker,
Professor John Copas, Dr Steve Stradling and Mr Douglas Webster have given
generously of their time and I have greatly valued their encouragement and
advice.
The staff of Salford University Library have been extremely helpful in
providing me with study materials and the staff of the Computing Centre
have unfailingly supported my extensive computing and data preparation
activities.  My thanks are due to them all, particularly to Mrs Margaret
Foulkes for data preparation and Mrs June Thomas for typing.
The many children and teachers who completed my questionnaires and responded
positively to my many requests for information and help must remain
anonymous but to them too, I tender my thanks.



**********
ABSTRACT 
**********
Questionnaire and interview surveys were carried out on samples of up to
1200 children studying 'A' level sciences in schools and sixth form colleges
in the Greater Manchester area.  Data was collected on their career aspirations,
social class backgrounds, childhood educational experiences and their current
academic ability.  Additional data was collected and analysed from a survey
of chemistry and careers teachers to reveal the factors influencing career
choice.  Attempts were made to identify why children in sixth forms were predisposed
towards careers in the traditional professions rather than careers in
industry.
A section of the study is devoted to multidimensional scaling (MDS).  This has
developed in recent years as a powerful and easily applied technique capable
of producing simple models of a group of occupations.  It has been claimed to
produce diagrams highlighting the subjective occupational perceptions of
various child and adult groups and is here applied to demonstrate the
inter-relationships between careers in industry and careers in the professions.  Suitable data was collected and an investigation carried out.  Particular
attention was paid to how the technique was affected by the quality of the questionnaires returned by the children and the size of the sample used.  An
existing method was developed by extending a previous use of a directional
question to collect pairs of opposed similarity comparisons for each pair
of occupations.  The strengths and limitations of this alternative procedure are discussed.
Observations are centred on the career choices of the most able sector of
schoolchildren although most of the works reviewed and on which the study has
been based, have considered children from a broader academic spectrum.
Various models of career choice and occupational perception are developed.  Findings are then presented and discussed in terms of academic children looking
favourably on careers in manufacturing industry.


***********
CHAPTER ONE
***********

Areas covered by the Study
There is an apparent reluctance on the part of academically gifted young people to aspire to
training for posts as technicians or for eventual entry to management in manufacturing industry or engineering.  On this priority of national importance, the Department of Industry (16) comments:

''  Attitudes towards industry, and particularly manufacturing industry, are less favourable in Britain than in any major industrialised countries and are reflected in our educational system.  ...  A consequence of these unfavourable attitudes is that British industrial managers and engineers
tend to be accorded less prestige in our society than their continental counterparts attract in theirs. ...  These circumstances reduce the attractiveness of a career in industrial management and hence the attractiveness of courses of study in preparation for it.  ''
The drive to improve attitudes generally towards British manufacturing industry began in 1976
with the launch of the 'Great Debate' by the then Prime Minister, Mr James Callaghan.  On this point, the Department of Industry (16) commented:
''  The education system has an important role to play in our industrial performance in the long term, by helping to produce the kind of people industry will need in the future.... and more generally by securing improved understanding, particularly among young people, of the role of industry and manufacturing in creating wealth in society.  ''
It was in this light that this study commenced in 1978. 

The comments above serve to indicate the background for believing that 'industrial prejudice' in schoolchildren existed and the concern of this study was, and has been, to attempt to understand this behaviour.  The children involved were academically gifted schoolchildren brought up
with the background of a major centre of industry, the Greater Manchester (GMC) area.
Apart from the major influences of parental values and advice, it was assumed that the career choices of children would be based on their individual perceptions of the occupational world which, in turn, they would have gained from everyday experiences, observations and hearsay.
Throughout the study, the term 'perceptions' is taken to refer to the habitual ways children have of looking at themselves and the world arond them so that certain features are emphasised and others are overlooked.
A basis for the occupational aspirations of children is taken to be :
(a)  Their beliefs at the time,
(b)  The values they associate with the expected outcomes of these beliefs, and
(c)  Their behavioural norms and the social pressures which they feel are exerted on them
to conform with or reject these norms.
In recent times career choices of children has been a topic of increasing interest in social and educational research, and undoubtedly the pressure of recent political and economic changes has accelerated this still further.  Most of the data for this study was collected in the period 1978 - 1980 at a time before the job market for school leavers, especially in connection with careers in manufacturing industry, had changed sharply for the worse.
Comments in the press and in the media indicate that many of even the more able schoolchildren may now be developing a greater scepticism about the purpose of study and
a greater sensitivity to the pragmatic aspects of securing any kind of employment.

The schemes of class division used in social science and in common language derive from a variety of different initial conceptions.  Frequently the terms 'working', 'middle' and 'upper' class are taken to imply a scale of prestige or socio-economic status along with an underlying concept of a 'layer cake' monolith of social strata.  The present usage of these terms takes the major
determinants of class position to be the fact that incumbents of a class share broadly similar market and work situations.  In this way, importance is placed on whether a person is paid as a wage-earner with an accompanying labour contract or as an employee with a set annual salary and an employment contract bestowing a far greater security of tenure.
The terminology used in this work, 'service', 'intermediate' and 'working' class is that of Halsey (30) and Goldthorpe (26).  
On the use of social class, Kohn (39,p471) comments:
''  ...social class has proved so useful a concept because it refers to more than simply
educational level, or occupation, or any of the large number of correlated variables.  It is so useful because it captures the reality that the intricate interplay of all these variables creates different basic conditions of life at different levels of the social order.  Members of different social classes by virtue of enjoying (or suffering) different conditions of life, come to see the world differently - to develop different conceptions of social reality, different aspirations and hopes and fears, different conceptions of the desirable.  ''
Common experience indicates that the children of manual workers usually perform less well at school and leave school earlier than the children of professional or managerial parents.  Trying to look beyond this, however, at the enormously complex concept of family background and home environment, it becomes difficult to pin down precisely how the various factors combine to account for this underachievement.
Social class is assigned in practice by referring to the father's occupation and clearly the multiplicity of individuals constituting any occupational group will cover a wide spectrum of characteristics and personalities. 
In consequence, analysis of the factors involved will always be complicated by the variability of factors such as the degree of parental involvement, type of school attended and the type and quality of the teaching that goes on there.  Thus whilst it is true that in general working class children underachieve at school, there is always a proportion of them who are successful and any explanation must equally account for this fact as well.
Britain has changed even in the present century from a system where it was believed that the working classes did not need (because they would be incapable of using it) more than a minimal education to one where institutional barriers to educational inequality have been completly removed.  Halsey et al (30) have suggested that remaining educational inequality is now caused by the much more subtle factors of family background and social class differences.
Ever since the Education Act of 1944, the serious handicaps to working class children of extreme poverty, malnutrition, poor living conditions, lack of health care, etc. have been steadily removed by a continuing general improvement in the economic standard and it is now thought that factors associated with poverty are only a minor determinant of the underachievement of working class children.  A survey of children in the GMC area carried out for the Plowden Committee (49) gave the conclusion :

''   When we think of the problem of material and cultural deprivation, we see it as a problem affecting the 'submerged tenth', the slum dwellers, the poverty stricken.  We tend to assume that it affects only the tail-end of the ability range as well as the tail-end of the income range.  Both of these views are wrong, and the second is even more radically wrong than the first.
Educational deprivation is not mainly the effect of poverty, parental attitude and maternal care are more important than the level of material needs.   ''

It is not to say that there is no close link between material deprivation and the whole way of life of a family.  Poverty is bound to make parents less willing to support the educational needs of their children, and attendant poor housing conditions must make for strained family relationships and render impossible many beneficial child-parent activities.  More important, as the quotation above suggests, are the more subtle factors which touch on the child's values and motivations.  
The work of Katz (36) suggests that goals of success may vary according to social class background.  It argues that middle class parents place greater value on status achievement, personal effort and personal worthiness whilst working class parents, particularly the
unskilled, define success more in terms of possessions which are procured by working long hours of manual labour.  This leads to a conception of ambition as a complex set of values which aid the achievement of educational and occupational success.  The term 'value-orientations' was defined by Kluckholm and Strodbeck (38,p4) as being :

''...Complex but definitely patterned ... principles .. which give order and direction to the ever flowing stream of human acts and thoughts, as these relate to the solution of common human problems.  ''

Kahl (34) suggested that parental value-orientations are an important factor in a child's attitude towards 'getting ahead' at school, and in a later study Kahl (35) found again that the atitudes of children correlated consistently with their socioeconomic status.  From the above evidence it would seem that, in general, working class parents hold different values and behave in different ways towards their children than do middle class parents.  These differences are relevant to the differing achievements and aspirations of their respective children.  The main differences between them would appear to be in:
(a)  their chances of gaining material wealth,
(b)  the congeniality of their working environments, and
(c)  their opportunities to gain social status.

Traditionally, those in middle class, non-manual occupations earn more and have greater job security than those in working class, manual ones.  While the general rise in working class standards of living has caused considerable overlap in earnings, the trend still persists.
Table 1 illustrates these differences,the figures relating to a sample of over 100,000 people who were in full time employment in various areas of England, Wales and Scotland during April 1979.
Age (years)
21-24
25-29
30-39
40-49
50-59
60-64
65
Manual Jobs(Males)

83.8
93
98.7
90.9
82.5
65.7
Manual Jobs(Females)
55.3
58.1
57.2
56.2
55.4
50.8
45.7
Non-Manual Jobs(Male)
77.9
97.9
118
126.3
120.7
103.6
98.1
Non-Manual Jobs(Females)
59.7
69.7
72.7
72.4
71
65.9
57

	(Figures from New Earnings Survey(1979) Table 124)

Added to this, manual workers are usually paid on a weekly basis and have a somewhat minimal security of tenure compared to the typical monthly, quarterly or even permanant tenure of most non-manual occupations.  Within the work situation itself, there are also differences, as suggested by Goldthorpe (26,p41-2):

''...the basic feature of their market situation that they sell their labour power in more or less discrete amounts (whether measured by output or time) in return for wages and secondly, the basic feature of their work situation - that they are, via the labour contract, placed in an entirely subordinate role, subject to the authority of their employer or his agents.  ''

It is perhaps reasonable to expect that these facts will be reflected in working class parental attitudes.  It has been suggested by Gouldner (28 p117-136) that the working class parent sees his occupational security as being dominated by luck or chance rather than as being under his own control.  Unlike the individualistic approach of the non-manual worker, the manual worker can progress in his work only by being paid more for doing the same job.  This fact is clearly
emphasised in the activities of the trade unions.  In the work of Jackson and Marsden (32,p88) it is suggested that parents with a low opinion of their own abilities not only fail to encourage their children to achieve but may even fail to recognise the achievement of their children unless
it is pointed out to them.  
Kohn (39) set out specifically to relate social class to parent-child relationships.  His findings suggested that the greater occupational autonomy of middle class jobs lead such parents to value self-direction in thir children and to encourage in them qualities such as curiousity and
self control.  He found on the other hand that working class parents stressed qualities such as honesty, obedience and neatness because to them, these were the qualities mainly required of them in their own working lives.
Since this time, it seems likely that these virtues have diminished, especially amongst working class children.  An even more forceful statement of this view is given by McKinley (43,p54) who argues that :

''...the greater punitivness and the more common rejection of the child by parents in the urban lower classes is a consequence of the parent's greater frustration and stronger feelings of threat.  The parent's agression is displaced from the frustrating system (the power and reward structure of industrial society) to the relatively powerless child.  ''

Children of middle class parents are encouraged to take their own decisions and to arrive at an internalised system of self discipline in contrast to the greater emphasis placed by working class parents on neatness and obediance to their spoken words.  The implication here is that working
class children are being led to believe that external factors and chance rather than they themselves are the main arbiters of their eventual success in life.

Bernstein (5), in his theory of linguistic development, proposes that the extremes of the upper middle class and the lower working class are characterised by two different extremes of language referred to respectively as elaborated and restricted code.  In the latter, Bernstein's language of the working classes, sentences are short, grammatically simple and often incorrect with a limited use of adjectives, adverbs and conjunctions and a tendency to overutilise a small
number of traditional phrases.
Middle class children, by contrast, are raised in an environment where great stress is placed on verbalisation and conceptualisation.  This speech is subtle and makes wide use of all parts of speech.  Merely for accurate appreciation of the changes in feeling in verbal messages from their parents, the middle class children are rapidly sensitised to recognise quite small changes
in word position and sentence structure.  These children are thereby given a much more efficient vehicle for logical argument and the discussion of relationships.  Furthermore,
the middle class children learn both linguistic codes and are able to use and to respond to each one appropriately as the social context demands.  In this respect the working class children suffer even further.
Bernstein (5) illustrates this with the following example.  A middle class child will respond to the statement 'I'd rather you made less noise' by placing a certain significance on the words 'rather' and 'less' and will realise that the sentence is asking for the response of being quiet immediately!  To gain the same response from a working class child, a statement such as
'shut up!' would be required.  Whereas middle class children would respond appropriately to either version, the working class child may not gain from the first sentence its subtly implied
sense of urgency.  If they did, they would translate it to 'Shut up!'   but failure to make this translation  would leave them puzzled.
Bernstein argues that a different function is fulfilled by language for each social class.  It gives middle class children an insight of the 'formal ordering of their environment' and 'notions of its ordering in time and space'.  The restricted code of lower working class children lends emphasis
to the 'here and now', to the description of objects rather than the relation between them, and gives them a greater sensitivity to the demands of their peer group rather than the environment.
Middle class parents are more likely to control their children by appeals to logic and reasoning, whilst working class parents make more recourse to personal authority, e.g. 'You'll do as you're told because I tell you' or 'because I'm your father'.  This latter approach is not related to any
stable system of rewards and punishments and will inevitably be more inconsistent and arbitrary.
In this way, entry to school can be likened to a barrier to some children because of the sudden exposure to a new linguistic system, particularly since teachers themselves are usually from the middle class.
Lawton (41) comments :  
''... the simple socioeconomic fact ...(is)... that traditional working class socialisation processes
are preparing its young members for a world which is disappearing : in the near future routine manual jobs are going to disappear and jobs will become available in industry or in bureaucratic, welfare or distribution spheres which will require a much higher level of
symbolic control.  ''
In this, ''symbolic control'' is taken to mean the spoken and written use of words and numbers.
These words, written more than a decade ago seem prophetic.  In the light of current events and the ever increasing pace of technological change, they are even more applicable today than they were then. 
Sears et al (61), carrying out a careful and detailed investigation of about 400 working class and non-working class mothers, suggested that a mother's attitude, affection and manner of control are most important and physical treatments, other than outright neglect, are much less important.
An important concept seems to be that of a child's independence and the way in which certain child rearing practices can generate this.  Sears et al (61) gave the simple picture that parents who on the one hand were overprotective but threatened withdrawal of this as a punishment
for bad behaviour, or punished severely for displays of the child's aggression, produced dependent children.
Subsequent studies by Sears (60) and particularly Sears (62) pointed to a much greater complexity of this phenomenon such that it was impossible to trace it clearly.  The major difficulty they found inherent in such studies was the problem of giving precise categorisations to both methods of upbringing and a child's characteristics.  It was pointed out that data on upbringing are most frequently obtained by questioning mothers as to the procedures they employed and such rememberences are likely to be inaccurate, since often the mother was unaware of them at the time.
Rosen (58) in an American study has found that children from poor homes in which independence was enforced on the child from an early age, for example by making children look after themselves, produced children with low achievement motivation.  Rosen and d'Andrade (59) found that children from non-working class homes whose parents had been successful in life showed higher achievement motivation when their parents consistently set
them higher standards of achievement and remained closely involved with their successes.
In addition, a survey of childrearing techniques by Banks (2) adds the following points:
(a)  High achievement motivation appears to flourish in a family atmosphere of 'cold democracy' in which initial high levels of material involvement are followed by pressures for independence and accomplishment.
(b)  Over-achieving children were more likely to describe their families as approving and trusting, affectionate, encouraging (but not pressuring) with regard to achievement, relatively non-restrictive and non-severe.
(c)  When parents were rated as being protective, nurturant, approving and non-rejecting, children were more likely to believe that they themselves, rather than something or someone else, were responsible for their intellectual development. 
(d)  Though more tolerant of expressed impulses and desires, the middle class parent has higher expectations of the child.  
Parental behaviour as distinct from parental attitudes is obviously not easy to investigate.  Also parental behaviour in one aspect of childrearing is not necessarily an indication of overall parental behaviour.  The age, sex, temperament and even physical characteristics of the child
may affect the success or otherwise of any particular childrearing practice.





***********
CHAPTER TWO
***********
Occupational Choice

Before 1960 investigations of occupational choice were largely confined to the USA, and the classical studies of the developmental psychologists Eli Ginzberg (24) and Donald Super (68),
were perhaps the first attempts to blend the diverse aspects of this subject into a unified
framework.  Their work considered topics such as sexual behaviour and intellect in terms of stages of an individual's maturity and the development of innate capabilities.
From studies of samples drawn from educationally privileged sections of North American society, Ginzberg (24) found that the occupational choice of individuals was different at different stages of their development. The occupational aims of young adolescents were described as being fantasies and it was only as they progressed through adolescence and gained an increasing appreciation of their own interests and capacities that their occupational
aspirations became serious ones.  It was proposed that only after entering employment and
gaining a realistic knowledge of what various occcupations involved that a completely firm career choice could be made. The argument was that whilst occupational choice began before formal education was completed, it developed over a number of years ending with the realisation of ambitions and the gaining of a feeling of self realisation.
The work of Super (68) was similar in that it too constructed a theory of occupational choice based on a developmental process. This proposed the hypothesis that a career followed a path whereby it implemented a series of previously conceived ambitions, these both directing and themselves being modified by a series of career changes until eventually the individual settled into an occupation in which there was a feeling of achievement and self-fulfilment and ambitions and experience were in harmony with each other.
Up to the commencement of employment, the development of occupational choice envisaged by Super proceeded through stages similar to those suggested by Ginzberg except that where Ginzberg stressed  the individual's growing awareness of his strengths and interests, Super placed more importance on  social environment in structuring their interests and capabilities. Both Ginzberg and Super stress the need to see the whole of entry to employment as a single process only explicable as a total framework and whose parts such as career choices, occupational attitudes and ambitions could not be properly understood in isolation.
Musgrave (45) restated the theories of Ginzberg and Super in sociological terms by suggesting that the notion of development could be considered in conjunction with that of socialisation and role theory.  The individual was seen moving between a sequence of roles in the home, the school and the occupational system with ongoing socialisation, structuring and continually modifying the available range of future roles.
Blau (6) added a further dimension to the model of Ginzberg and Super by emphasising that the actual occupation a person enters depends on the decision of the people making personnel selections.  Their choice will also depend on the general state of the job market for that
occupation.  Blau's model of occupational choice was based on the individual's evaluation of the rewards offered by alternative occupations and their appraisal of their chances of realising each of them.  This then determined the person's approach and their success or failure then depended
upon the personnel selection procedure.  This in its turn depended upon the individual's personal attributes and the supply and demand factors of the labour market.


Roberts (56) set out to test the application of Ginzberg and Super's theories of vocational
development on a random sample of young men in a Greater London Borough.  Interview data was collected from about 200 of them to test the hypotheses that :
(a)  Ambitions become more consistent as careers develop. 
(b)  Job satisfaction generally increases as careers develop.
(c)  Occupational mobility declines in frequency as careers develop.
The data analysis did not validate any of the above and the study suggested that in Britain at any rate, factors other than occupational choice play a key role.  Three pieces of evidence were given in support of this :
(a)  Most occupational mobility amongst the adolescent labour force is not anticipated in their ambitions,
(b)  Despite the fact that many school leavers fail to enter their chosen jobs, few of them are dissatisfied with the employment they do obtain, and
(c)  The ambitions of British schoolchildren are modest, realistically based on their abilities and are consequences of the job situations and careers they are entering rather than determinants of the patterns of career they will take.
Roberts (56) proposed that the main determinant of a school leavers occupational choice is to some extent the secondary school attended and more particularly the child's achievements
therein, educational attainments being amongst the main criteria used in job selection procedures.  As he (56,p176) puts it :

'' ... Upon making their exits from the educational system, school leavers stand in varying degrees of social proximity to different types of occupations, these having .... nothing to do with the ambitions of the individuals concerned. ''
To each school leaver there is open a different career opportunity structure based upon
school achievement and home background.  The study stresses the importance of the
informal network of parents and uncles and aunts arranging apprenticeships and other opportunities on behalf of their young relatives, a point which becomes the subject of a study in itself by Granovetter (29) who comments (p22) :

''.... personal contacts are of paramount importance in connecting people with jobs.  Better jobs are found through contacts, and the best jobs, the ones with the highest pay and prestige and affording the greatest satisfaction to those in them, are most apt to be filled this way. ''

Finally an Opportunity Structure model was given by Roberts, the conditions for which were that :
(a)  Job opportunities are structured in a manner corresponding to the way in which the output of the educational system is graded,
(b)  The work orientations of school leavers should be sufficiently elastic to adapt to those occupations to which the opportunity structure places them in closest proximity.  This last condition is explained through the existence of three factors :
(1)Because of the widespread belief in free occupational choice (if not the reality of it), children feel responsible for the job they enter because they believe that it was personally chosen.  They are satisfied with it because to be dissatisfied would be to be critical of their own judgement,
(2)  It is widely believed that the modern adolescent is leisure oriented and sees employment as having a largely instrumental significance.  This is taken to explain why young people seek so little from work beyond a secure income and why they are so rarely dissatisfied and frustrated by boring and undemanding work, and
(3)  Limited knowledge of, occupations limited access to ocupational information, an inability on the part of parents and teachers to offer comprehensive advice and of the careers services
unable to operate on a scale where they make a wide enough impact, all combine to limit children's career choices.
These difficulties are then compounded by the multiplicity of occupations in the complex division of labour in our present diverse industrial society where work is normally
performed outside the gaze of the general public.
These factors lead to schoolchildren often having only a hazy outline knowledge of the occupations open to them, even in the case of jobs they aspire to enter.  To develop a genuine commitment to a particular career a child would need a knowledge of the work involved, how the occupation is entered and the qualifications and training required for entry.  All of this, Roberts argues, explains why children, once they have entered a job, will often stick to it because at least in this they have some concrete knowledge upon which to build their
future ambitions.

Thomas and Weatherall (71) conducted a major study on behalf of the Central Youth
Employment Executive in ten areas in England and Wales surveying the transition and adjustment of male school leavers to employment.  By means of a questonnaire survey of over 1700 boys and interviews with about 200 of their parents, factors including the boys'
academic ability, home background and school environment were thought to influence their attitudes towards work and were investigated.  The sample consisted mainly of less
academic boys of whom two thirds were leaving school without sitting any GCE or CSE examinations.
The main findings of Thomas and Weatherall (71) may be summarised as follows :
(a)  The nature of the school attended was important in determining the level of a boy's academic aspirations and a small proportion of middle class children in a school had a catalytic
effect.  This caused a relatively high proportion of the pupils to be entered for public examinations compared to schools where the  catchment was exclusively from working class
families,
(b)  Factors associated with social class such as socioeconomic status, income, educational level and rate of home ownership in boys' families were all found to be correlated with academic performance.
The study incorporated a series of questions whose answers compounded to give what they
described as a scale of 'cynical-apathetic materialism'.  This enabled a comparison of favourable and unfavourable parental attitudes with orientations to white collar work or 'instrumental
orientation'.  By 'instrumental', they meant the extent to which work was seen simply as a means of earning money rather than as a worthwhile goal in itself.  Their results presented in Table 2 clearly show the connection, and
(c)  Within schools it was found that boys who conformed to the school system and showed approved traits such as academic success, co-operativness and maturity as perceived by their teachers had conventional attitudes to their future employment and aspired towards 'better' jobs.

	Parental	Sons' orientation to	Sons' inclination
	Attitudes	White collar work	to instrumental
						satisfactions
			Percent		Percent

			Low	Mid	High	Low	Mid	High	Number
High positive 		15	32	53	57	25	18	379
Low positive  		21	35	45	51	26	23	372
Low negative  	30	33	37	44	25	32	457
High negative 	38	33	29	32	22	46	439

Conversely the boys who failed to conform to the ways of the school and generally failed to gain the approval of their teachers were found to show a leaning towards 'dead-end' and low status jobs.  Perhaps Thomas and Weatherall's most important conclusion was :

'' particularly striking relationships were found between the boys' scores on the occupational aspiration and commitment scales and fathers' and elder brothers' occupational status, the number of children in the family and the position of the boy in the birth order.  A marked association, which persisted even when the father's occupational level held constant, was found between boys' scores on the scales measuring orientation to employment and fathers' scores on the measure of 'cynical-apathetic materialism' already referred to.  This suggests that direct transmission of cultural values from father to son, as well as more generalised and diffuse home background influences, may be important in forming boys' basic attitudes to employment. ''

The study of Ashton and Field (1) set out to consider the adjustment problems of the small but significant proportion of working class children who found their early years in work a frustrating and bitter experience.  Evidence taken from taped interviews was collected over an extended period was collected from a wide spectrum of young workers.  This lead to the conclusion that for the majority of young people :

''...there is a basic continuity in their experience at home, at school, and at work, such that the kinds of beliefs they acquire about themselves and the perspectives they develop about the world at home and in the school are continually verified in their experience of work.  This we think, explains why it is that most young people do not experience severe problems of adjustment to work and why some of them may be happy to enter 'dead-end' jobs.  It also explains why a small minority do experience severe problems of adjustment due to the discontinuity between the expectations and experiences transmitted and acquired at home and
school and those encountered at work.  ''
A useful model is presented in Fig.1 of the inter-relationships between social class background, educational experience and occupational choice.  In addition a clear and logical sociological analysis based on three idealised types of child.

Family perspectives leading to three basic levels of occupational aspiration in children were presented as follows :

Children from lower and middle working class families find the greatest clash between their home background and the values propounded by their school.  Many of them are allocated to the lower streams in their school where little is expected of them and they are given little opportunity to develop their cognitive skills.  School for them is likely to reinforce attitudes they have already gained from their parents that academic achievement and examination passes are beyond them.  This combined with a family emphasis on a 'here and now' need for immediate rewards, directs such children to leave school early and enter semi-skilled or
unskilled work requiring a minimum of training and with little challenge. Here it may be commented that perhaps a distinction exists between the 'old style' working class, of say the 1930s, who emphasised hard work and the working class of today where these qualities may be fading as the availability of apprenticeships is receding.

Children from 'respectable' working class families are encouraged to look ahead and think of consequences in the forseeable future.  They are more in accord with the values presented to them by the school and typically find themselves in its middle streams gaining moderate academic success and minimal examination passes.  On leaving school they wish to 'make something of themselves' and are keen to continue to further training or night school to
become qualified for a skilled manual trade, a technical occupation, or a clerical or secretarial job.
This is held by children typically from  middle-class or upwardly mobile working class families.  Their home background fits them well for school and their resulting progress places them in the upper examination streams of the school.  They see themselves as being educationally competant and capable of further self development being well motivated by their families with their attention focussed on the long term benefits which self-discipline and hard work can bring.  Their aim is at occupations which offer long term rewards and they appreciate the benefits of deferred gratification.  
The remainder of Ashton and Field's study consolidates this model and develops its consequences, highlighting particularly the implications of blocked upward mobility and other problems associated with the careerless youth.


2.6  Family Background and Job Opportunity  
Weir and Nolan (76) carried out in 1975 a questionnaire survey of a stratified random
sample of 1000 male school leavers in schools in West Central Scotland and about 200 parental interviews.  Their study established the importance of family background and attitudes and linked family disadvantage and job opportunities.  Their literature review emphasised the importance of family background and community factors in setting the aspirations of school
leavers.  Ford (23) comments:

''  Many young people are simply conforming to the social position provisionally
assigned to them on account of their father's occupation.  ''

Emphasis was placed on the findings of Venables (73,74) and Entwistle (21) that the personality characteristics of teachers operate to preferentially affect the behaviour of certain pupils.  On this they comment (76) :

''  Extraverts, the outward going sociable people, tend to leave school at an earlier age than intraverts, the more quiet solitary people .... It has been suggested that the introverted teachers
contribute in part to the decision of extraverted pupils to leave school.  ''

In a later presentation, Weir (75) the point is further emphasised.

''  Many teachers have a clear view of the type of young person they consider suitable to continue his education (usually because of some resemblance between the teacher and pupil), a view which they transmit and which the pupils are very adept at picking up.  ''
On the effect of school type on the child's achievement and career choice, the study accords completly with the findings of Thomas and Weatherall (71).

Willis (78) carried out in 1977 a participant observation study of a small group of non-academic working class boys from an inner city secondary modern school.  His material has considerable outward similarity to that of Ashton and Field (1).  Where the latter work rests soundly on the development of a conventional sociological framework his study accepts this as a starting point, and proceeds with careful step by step reasoning and firm references to data to carry the analysis further.  He gives a plausible explanation of the division between middle class children aspiring to careers with a future and prospects and, at the other extreme, the willing choice of
'dead-end' jobs by working class boys.  He proposes that working class children have effectively seen through the customary facade of 'sensible' job choices advocated by their school to what
for them are the worldly realities of the matter :
(a)  Modern day capitalism and technology have largely destroyed the older traditionally
skilled jobs which children could look up to and have effectively lowered the value of their labour and reinforced the barriers to their upward mobility.
(b)  Such children rationalise and justify their rejection of the individualistic striving for academic success by successfully associating mental labour with effeminacy.  Manual labour, on the other hand, is equated with masculinity and an eventual social position as patriach.
In Willis' own words (78),

“The counter school culture reasserts as one of the bases of its visible forms a version of the appropriate class logic and gives an identity to -'explains'- the position of its members, not by an
illusory accomodation in the dominant academic and occupational gradient, but by a transformtion and an inversion. “

Reinforcement of this attitude in working class children may well be being transmitted to them unconciously by their parents and relatives.  However it is actually occuring, its prescence is fortuitous since with the increasing destruction by our modern society of the need for manual labour, it must exert a powerful stabilising influence.  
This effectively stems any efforts on the parts of their teachers and others to divert them from the class cultural solidarities of collective academic failure. In his analysis, working class children see as remote their chances of eventual occupational success by following the academic pathway, approved of by the school.  Willis proposes that such children see their persuit of study not only as eventually failing to give them examination successes but
as losing them their manly standing and credibility in the eyes of their contemporaries.



*************
CHAPTER THREE
*************
Occupational Perception

The idea that any list of occupational titles can be placed into a 'pecking order' from the most to the least 'prestigous' has been inherent in most all earlier studies of occupational choice and is no less so in this one.  Such orderings come in many guises, and the criteria upon which occupations have been ordered has variously been the personal desirability of the occupations, their social standing, their degree of deference entitlement or even the vague, all embracing criterion, their 'general level'.  The most thorough going treatment of this area has been that of Coxon and Jones (12,13,14) and the impact of their work was emphasised in a review by Jones (33):

''  Coxon and Jones set out boldly to investigate the subjective/cognitive aspects of the occupational structure, .....  They begin by arguing that there is both a priori and empirical support for the supposition that occupations are configured (for actors) in social or cognitive space which is inherently multidimensional.  Through these spectacles, the efforts of those who have constructed unidimensional scales of occupational prestige, and used them in comparative settings, can only be described as Procrustean. ''

In the light of this it would seem appropriate to look at the use of multidimensional scaling (MDS) in the context of the perceptions held by the children of the prestige or personal desirability of an appropriate group of occupations.  As early as 1959, this method had been applied in an analagous situation by Reeb (51) and the same method has been developed
and reapplied by him on several occasions since.  Coxon and Jones (13,p2) define 'occupational perception' as :

''...the complex of (occupational) beliefs and assumptions that exist in the individuals memory.  The term incorporates the processes by which the term came to be organised as it is, and
how it is likely to incorporate new information.  Thus studies of the 'perception' of occupations might be more accurately be described as studies of how people come to form concepts and how they come to manipulate and evaluate them when making vocationally relevant
decisions.  ''

The idea of compounding together the occupational perceptions of many individuals to make an 'averaged perception' or 'occupational stereotype' is one which has been developed by occupational psychologists over many years.  In the literature, such stereotypes lead to sets of assignment rules of the form -  'If he is a scientist then he will be untidy, studious and absent-minded '.  Tajfel (70,p327) gives the following definition of such a stereotype :

''...a set of characteristics attributed to a human group.  Individuals who belong to such a group are assumed to be similar to one another with respect to those characteristics and to differ
with respect to the same attributes from other contrasting groups.  ''

The assessment of occupational stereotypes has been an area of considerable research interest
and a wide variety of methods have been employed.  Among these are :
	the analysis of open ended essays,
	sentence completion tasks,
	Osgood's semantic differential technique.
A typical study was that of Dipboye and  Anderson (18).  This gave to children a list of 70 phrases for describing the behaviour of people and for each of 8 occupational titles, the children
had to pick the five phrases which they felt best described the behaviour of a typical person engaged in that occupation.
Subsequent analysis of the frequency of assignment of each of the phrases to each of the occupations was then used as a basis for evaluating the resulting stereotypes in terms of a
list of 14 manifest needs.  The 'strength' of their stereotypes was emphasised in that in all cases at least 50% and up to 80% of the chosen phrases fell into only 4 out of the possible 14 need groups.  This marked partitioning and high degree of consistence between the children was taken as evidence of powerful stereotyping of the occupations.  In the application of Osgood's semantic differential (46), a series of Bi-polar descriptors (e.g. secure......insecure) are given
each being referred to by a 5 or 7 point scale (e.g. very secure = 5, secure = 4, neutral = 3, insecure = 2, very insecure = 1) and using 20 or so of these, the respondant is asked to assess each of a list of occupational titles in terms of each of the descriptors.  By taking the average value of the numeric assignments for each descriptor for each of the occupations,
averaged descriptions are formed.  The stereotype for each occupation can then be arrived at by choosing for each occupation its strongest descriptors, strength of any descriptor being defined statistically as a function of the degree to which the numeric assignments given to it have been systematic and have departed from randomness.  Results produced by this technique have been extremely impressive.  Beardslee and  O'Dowd (3,4) produced occupational profiles which were 'stable' and had high consistence in that profiles obtained from such diverse groups as students
and college professors were similar. Coxon and Jones (12,p7-11), however, emphasise what they see as the fallacies inherent in such studies :

''...the standard instructions for a semantic differential are, 'Trust your first impressions and work quickly.  Try not to spend more than a moment or two thinking about any one rating.'  With such an instruction it takes an act of faith to believe that the responses will be true reflections of the cognitive structure.  ''

In their opinion stereotyping exaggerates differences between groups whilst minimising differences within them and as in the communication of data, processes of levelling, sharpening and assimilation take place to reduce it to a simplified 'shape' of the 'typical instance'.  In their
own words (12) :

''...In the day to day world of discussion, individuals may exaggerate differences between and minimise those within; they may polarise issues, and discuss them in crude typologies
they may 'level', 'sharpen' and 'assimilate to the typical instance' and yet they may only do such things to gain the effects of metaphor, imagery and contrast in communication.  ''

Goldthorpe  and Hope (27,p38) point out the need that any evaluations people make of occupations must be viewed in terms of their individual bases of occupational understanding and their own individual positions in the status structure and on this point Coxon  and Jones (12) conclude that :

''...to the extent that conventional occupational prestige studies claim to represent in any significant way a subject's conceptions of the status structure, they fail.  However useful scales of generalised 'goodness' of occupations may be for some purposes, they cannot represent in any direct way people's perceptions, interpretations or the meanings which they ascribe to the
occupational world.  ''

They go on to point out that perception of reality is an indirect process in that it involves mentally 'interpreting and encoding' information received.  The individual's responses are
then made to these internal images which include representations of the social structure and the individual himself.  Coxon and Jones (12) quote extracts from Bott (7) to illustrate that because
the ideas a person has of social class are based on their individual experiences, some people see class as a source of power and adopt a two valued - 'them and us' model - of the working
classes set against authority.  Others, who see class position in terms of prestige, see it as a 'three valued' prestige model of working class, middle class and upper class, so representing
one's inferiors, one's equals and one's superiors.  Still others see it in terms of an 'income and prestige' model with multiple class divisions on a single continuum.  The conclusion here is again that any attempt to use people's (or children's) evaluations of occupations is fraught with
complications arising from the different initial ideas they have of the social structure.

Multidimensional Scaling (MDS) is a technique widely used in many fields of science and social science research.  In applying it to occupations, it is assumed that these lie at positions in a multidimensional space in which the dimensions are the attributes of the occupations.  The proximity of the occupations to each other within the space model their overall similarities.  In
accordance with this, closely similar occupations would be clustered together and the further apart in the model occupations were the greater the difference between them in terms of their attributes.
This technique is solely a mathematical one which, given the distances between all the pairs of points in a space, will calculate precisely the co-ordinates of their positions. A simple example would be:  Given all the straight line distances between a number of towns and cities, the method will yield their positions as grid references on a map.  Irrespective of the values of the distances, the technique will always produce a map but it may well be that it requires a lot of dimensions, up to a maximum of one less dimension than the number of points supplied.  In such cases, the method is  able, if required, to compress the points in to a structure having only three or two dimensions, thereby allowing a solid model or a diagram to be made of what in reality had many more dimensions.  Its power lies in its capability to carry out this simplification with minimum distortion of the original configuration.  This gives maximum retention of the original information in a display of great simplicity.  At the same time the method calculates and supplies as a stress factor the extent to which the original configuration has been distorted in order to present it in the simplified form.
Since the development of MDS by Messick (44) a number of studies (8,11,61,62) have applied the technique to 'Subjective Occupational Structures'.  Since his initial work in 1959, Reeb has carried out a number of studies (51,52,53,54) directed towards establishing a useful classification of occupations which placed jobs together in groups so that the jobs within
each group are similar and there are apparently meaningful relationships between the groups.  Such categorisations already existed at the time, e.g. those of Roe (57) and Super (69) which were based either on empirical findings, similarities in aptitude requirements or other external dimensions.  The work of Reeb followed from his suggestion that differentiation between the occupations may be done on the basis of their overall similarity or difference from each other.

In his 1959 study of a group of 25 Youth Employment Officers (YEOs), Reeb (51) collected their estimates of the similarities between all the possible pairs in a list of 15 jobs, as listed in Table 3, on the following 7 point scale :

	1 = The jobs are almost identical.
	2 = The jobs are very similar.
	3 = The jobs are mostly similar.
	4 = The jobs are about as similar as they are different.
	5 = The jobs are mostly different.
	6 = The jobs are very different.
	7 = The jobs are completly different.

The YEOs used this scale to allocate numbers to each of the 105 pairs of jobs constructed from his list of 15 occupational titles.  In each case they answered the question, 'How similar are the
two jobs.'.  He allowed each of the YEOs to put their own interpretation to each of the occupational titles and to judge similarities by their own personal criteria.
In this way he received about 2500 estimates, one from each of the YEOs, of each of the possible job pairs.  By taking averages in each case, he arrived at what he described as group values.  These averaged estimates were interpreted as measures of the separation of the occupations in a multidimensional 'subjective occupational structure'.  The dimensions
of the structure were envisaged as being, for example, qualifications required for the job and the
various aptitudes, level of intelligence and other personal qualities perspective entrants to it required.  Reeb was apparently assuming that the YEOs would somehow be balancing and taking into account all such factors in reaching their various decisions on the job similarities.  He further implied that his averaging technique would suitably compound together all the different judgements made, which perhaps involved different bases for comparison, in such
a way that the final averaged result would be a balanced compilation of all the various dimensions involved.
At this point, proceding with assumptions as outlined above, Reeb applied MDS to his matrix of what he then took to be inter-job distances in a multidimensional space.  He utilised the dimension reducing facility of MDS to simplify the structure of occupations to a three, and for the purposes of display, a two dimensional structure.
The result, shown in Fig.2, appeared to have the following satisfactory outcomes :
(a)  It had achieved a condensation of about 2500 original responses on to an extremely compact final representation, and
(b)  The model made apparent two logical and clearly applicable dimensions relating to occupations :
(1)  A manual skills dimension which can be equated with dexterity, and
(2)  An intellectual skills dimension which can be equated to qualifications or intellegence.

FIGURE   TWO
In his work, Reeb has hypothesised the existence of a perceived subjective occupational structure in the mind of any individual which guides them in their vocational behaviour and he sees the MDS technique as a means of eliciting the details of such subjective structures.
His successive studies are all firmly based on the application of this research instrument which he later and with similar results applied (53) to a group of 125 Israeli 14 year olds, and most recently (54) to 101 Israeli 17 year olds.

************
CHAPTER FOUR
************

Survey I - The spectrum of career choices and childrens' opinions on careers in industry

The earlier studies reviewed make it clear that social class and other parental factors such as the level of interest and the extent to which parents retained overall responsibility for the academic
progress of their child, are relevant to both achievement motivation and level of aspiraton.  Accordingly surveys were envisaged to collect data in these areas.
The work of Roberts (56) had made clear propositions which would be of interest in the study.  These were :
(a)  the type of school attended was important in raising or lowering the level of aspiration of the child to an expected level for the school and
(b)  children became more realistic about their career objectives as the time of leaving school became imminent.  
It was anticipated that data would be collected to support or disaffirm these theses.  In the area of subjective occupational perceptions, it was felt that certain methods, the semantic differential technique of Osgood et al (46) and the MDS technique as had been used in the various studies of Reeb (51,52,53,54) would be of considerable value in revealing the existence of industrial prejudice in the children and surveys were proposed accordingly.
In this work it was necessary to categorise occupations according to social classes and to categorise the abilities of the children.  The details of these are as follows.

The occupations arrived at by compounding together the career choices of the children and the occupations of their parents were conveniently categorised, without information loss, into about 70 categories.  In keeping with the replies received from the children some of these categories are reasonably well defined, e.g. 'doctor', whilst others, e.g. 'technologists and production managers', in accordance with the comments made above, are more vague.  A considerable amount of analysis was completed using the categories themselves, but the large number of occupations involved caused difficulties in visualising some of the results.  Social class groups proved useful in this respect and their use led to clear and concise presentations of what would otherwise have been an overpowering mass of statistical information.  For this purpose the social class scale (I to VII) of Goldthorpe (26) is used and the social class group descriptors,
'service', 'intermediate' and 'working' of Halsey et al (30,p18) are used where appropriate to further compress the seven categories of Goldthorpe (26,p39-42) to three.  These provided a convenient and unambiguous categorisation, details being given in Table 3.

	CLASS	GROUP

		  I	Higher grade professionals
			administrators, managers,
SERVICE		and proprietors
CLASS
		 II	Lower grade professionals,
			administrators and managers,
			supervisors and higher grade
			technicians.


		III	Clerical, sales and rank and file
			service workers.
INTERMEDIATE
CLASS	 IV	Small proprietors and self
			employed artisans. The 'petty (sic)
			bourgeoisie'.


		  V	Lower grade technicians and
			foreman. The 'aristocracy of
			labour'.

		 VI	Skilled manual workers in
WORKING		industry.
CLASS
		VII	Semi and unskilled manual
			workers in industry and
			agricultural workers.

Where individual subject grades were considered, these were converted to numbers for comparing overall subject totals, in the manner shown in Table 4.

		    Examination Grade	Score

		GCE grade A	5
		GCE grade B	4
		GCE grade C or CSE grade 1	3
		GCE grade D or CSE grade 2	2
		GCE grade E or CSE grade 3	1
		Lesser grades in either exam	0

To specify a measure of the overall examination performance of the children, their subject scores, allocated as above, were added together for up to a total of seven curriculum subjects.  In cases where the child had more than seven such subject passes, the best seven were considered.
This spread the children out on a points scale from 0 to 35.  A score of 35 would imply that the child had seven 'O' level passes all at grade A.  The scores towards the centre of the scale, however, become increasingly ambiguous, e.g. a child with seven 'O' level passes at grade C  would be rated equally with another child who, perhaps less likely, had passed only four 'O'
level subjects at grade A and one CSE subject at grade 3, etc.  Most of the children concerned had customarily been entered for seven or more subjects in the 'O' level examinations, and a random check on a number of individual cases showed that the scale, apart from the fact that it counts all subjects equally, represented most of the children reasonably well.

It was first necessary to collect from a large sample of children details of their occupational choices and their subjective comments on the attractiveness or otherwise of careers in industry.  This would establish the existence of prejudice and the assumed disposition of the career choices of the children away from industrial occupations.  In order to narrow the spectrum of children covered, the survey was restricted to children in the first or second year sixth forms who were studying 'A' level chemistry.  It was felt that these children would be both academically gifted, and by the nature of the subject, might have a favourable disposition towards industry.
At the same time their chemistry teachers and where possible their careers teachers were asked the extent to which they gave positive encouragement towards industrial careers.  To implement this survey, contact was made with several local LEAs and subsequently individual headmasters, attempts being made to establish liaison with over 50 schools in the GMC
Area.  Visits to as many as possible of these were arranged and interviews conducted with one of their chemistry teachers and where possible one of the careers teachers.  Through this chemistry teacher, questionnaires were administered to the children in both the upper and lower
sixth forms who studied 'A' level chemistry.
Along with limited personal details, this questionnaire collected specific comments from the children on the attractions and deterrants of working in industry and any additional general comments.
Another questionnaire given at the same time to their chemistry teacher asked for information on :
(a)  Industrial works visits which children at any stage in the school engaged in as part of their chemistry course.
(b)  The extent to which the children in the survey, i.e. those in the sixth form studying chemistry, received careers guidance from the schools careers staff or the LEA careers service.
The most important results were the comments received from the children and their teachers.  These were particularly illuminating and are reproduced fully in Appendix 1.  The comments of teachers have been altered only to the extent of removing references to schools and individuals, otherwise they are reproduced in full.  
Table 5 below complements these by giving the spectrum of the careers chosen by the children.

Career Choice	Number	Grade in 'O' level Chemistry



 A
 B
 C
 Lower
Accountant
14
3
8
3
0
Aero Engineering and Design
6
1
4
1
0
Agricultural Research
13
3
3
7
0
Air Traffic Controllers
3
0
1
2
0
Aircrew Officer
1
0
0
1
0
Animal Husbandry
1
0
0
1
0
Applied Biologist
1
0
1
0
0
Archeologist
1
1
0
0
0
Armed Forces
5
0
4
1
0
Astro Physicist
2
1
1
0
0
Automotive Engineer
1
0
0
1
0
Banking
3
0
0
3
0
Biochemist
34
6
10
15
3
Biologist
15
5
5
4
1
Botanist
1
0
1
0
0
Broadcaster / Radio Producer
1
0
0
0
1
Business Management
11
3
3
5
0
Catering
1
0
0
1
0
Chemical Engineering
52
26
17
7
2
Chemical Industry or Research
29
9
12
8
0
Chiropodist
3
0
2
1
0
Civil Engineering
16
9
3
3
1
Communications Engineer
1
0
0
1
0
Computing
26
5
13
6
2
Dentistry
42
7
18
17
0
Dietitian
3
1
1
1
0
Ecological Scientist
3
1
1
1
0
Equestrian Management
2
0
1
1
0
Fisheries Scientist
1
0
0
1
0
Food Scientist
3
1
0
2
0
Forensic Scientist
9
3
1
5
0

Career Choice	Number	Grade in 'O' level Chemistry



 A
 B
 C
 Lower
Forestry
2
0
1
1
0
Genetics Research
2
0
2
0
0
Geologist
10
2
4
4
0
Horticulturalist
1
0
0
1
0
Laboratory Assistant
6
0
1
5
0
Lawyer
1
1
0
0
0
Lecturer in Higher Education
4
0
1
3
0
Marine Biologist
4
0
3
1
0
Materials Scientist
2
2
0
0
0
Mathematician
5
0
4
1
0
Mechanical Engineering
41
13
15
10
3
Medical Laboratory Assistant
2
0
1
1
0
Medicine
150
63
51
30
6
Merchant Navy
2
0
1
1
0
Metallurgist
2
1
1
0
0
Meteorologist
6
0
3
3
0
Mining
3
1
1
1
0
Musical Instrument Research
1
0
0
1
0
Nuclear Physicist
5
1
4
0
0
Nursing
10
1
3
6
0
Opthalmic Optician
9
3
4
2
0
Pathologist
1
0
1
0
0
Pharmacist
65
12
20
27
6
Photographer
2
0
0
1
1
Physicist
7
3
3
1
0
Physiotherapist
8
0
4
4
0
Police
1
0
1
0
0
Polymer Chemist
4
0
2
1
1
Printer
2
1
0
1
0
Psychiatrist
2
1
0
1
0
Psychologist
3
0
2
0
1
Quantity Surveyor
3
0
2
1
0
Radiographer
1
0
1
0
0
Scientific Civil Service
2
1
0
1
0
Sports Scientist
2
0
2
0
0
Teacher(Subject Unspecified)
18
4
11
4
1
Textiles Chemist
1
0
1
0
0
Town Planner
1
1
0
0
0
Undecided on Career
326
88
130
91
17
Veterinary Surgeon
11
5
2
4
0
Zoologist
5
1
2
2
0

Totals   1039     290  394  309   46



Comments of the children reflected an expected naivety and also a general lack of well founded information about industrial careers.  Where such information did exist, there was evidence that it had come from advertisments, newspapers and TV documentaries rather than from their school, as might be expected in view of the lack of industrial experience of the average teacher.
The section of favourable comments in Appendix 1 include all those received, whilst the unfavourable ones are a selection taken from a list about twice as long.
Far more informative were the comments of the teachers.  These, as with any such responses, probably reflect the differing degrees of enthusiasm and involvement in their effect on their pupils.  This  of the various teachers was emphasised further when the were looked at in conjunction with the responses from the children they taught.
Points emerging from this latter were that :
(a)  The main priority of any of the schools was expectedly an academic one and the importance
of presenting a balanced view of industry as a career prospect rated relatively low.
(b)  Limited interviews with the teachers confirmed the view presented by their comments that 'syllabus pressures' and 'shortage of teaching time' were a far greater concern to them than
was the less imminent need to present the children with a balanced view of industry.
(c)  The replies on careers guidance also given in Appendix 1 emphasise how in the view of these teachers, a successful child is one who achieves University entry.  Comments from  Appendix 1 such as 'The careers teacher is mainly involved with less academic pupils in the fifth form.' and 'The majority of them seem to go into higher education' seem to reflect this.
In a sense, going into higher education merely puts off the day of decision about going into work, and transfers the advice on careers to the University or Polytechnic careers service.
Historically in this country's education, the last two decades have seen a transition from a system where children required academic qualifications in the form of adequate 'O' level passes for sixth form entry to one where the term 'sixth form' covers all post sixteen education including children with few or no public examination passes who are staying on at school to take or retake 'O' level or CSE examinations. Looking at the relatively low examination grades in Table 5, it would seem as though the old ethos of the academic sixth form has in one sense lived on and is affecting these non-academic children equally with the others.  Children who would have aspired to jobs as apprentices or office juniors seem, in the evidence of this survey, to have seen their entry to the sixth form as a 'passport' to high status occupations and for the most part have adjusted their aspirations accordingly. The main information obtained from Table 5 is that whilst 12% of these children studying 'A' level chemistry aspire to careers in the
chemical industry and a further 11% to all other forms of manufacturing industry, over 45% of them aspire to careers associated with medicine.  Taking in to account the fact that so many
of the children sampled did have low overall academic standards, two factors would seem to be operating :
(a)  In being asked for their career choice, the children were confronted by a questionnaire originating from a University.  This, combined with the fact that as they were now in the sixth form and by implication on the road to higher academic ideals, makes it likely that none of
them, perhaps because of possible embarassment or imagined repercussions, would specify a choice which was less than a high status occupation, and
(b)  In accordance with the point made earlier, the majority of the choices listed in the table, especially occupations such as teaching, medicine and dentistry, are ones which would be 'obvious', professions which would be known to the children without recourse to a great deal
of thought or searching.
Selected children who seemed to have made individualistic career choices were contacted afterwards.  Their discussion of what they had written usually revealed that there was involved a special family background or a family with close contacts or connections with the occupation concerned.
Other children contacted were more non-commital and usually commented to the effect that the choice was merely ''what appealed to them the most'', without much thought as to the reality of attaining those careers.




************
CHAPTER FIVE
************
Survey II - Parental Occupation, Ability and Career Choice

Prior to producing a questionnaire for collecting information on the ability of children in various curriculum subjects, their career choices and the occupations of their parents, interviews were carried out in some of the schools.  Individual children were asked about their career choices and how they had arrived at them and from this the following points emerged:
(a)  Children often did not have precise or detailed knowledge of the occupations of their parents.  When children were asked to supply occupational information they frequently had difficulty in specifying their career choice or the occupation of their parents in a precise
and unambiguous way.
A noticeable proportion of the children had only vague information on the occupation of their father.  They often knew where he worked but not really what he did there, or what his status in the organisation was.  'Father is a manager' or 'Father is an engineer' were common replies which the child found difficult to follow with more precise information.  Only certain easily understood categories such as teacher, solicitor or bank clerk were clearly described.
(b)  Where a child had a well defined career choice, it seemed frequently to be a well known occupation perhaps with a glamorous image, e.g. a doctor or a nurse, rather than one where the nature of the work was more obscure, e.g. a chemical engineer.
From the clarity or otherwise of these descriptions, it was possible to gain an impression of which occupations were well understood by the children and which were not. Manual occupations and the professions which the children had direct contact with, such as teachers, doctors and dentists, were well understood but others, and this included most of the industrial and technological professions were shrouded in mystery.
(c)  Children without a clear career choice preferred to discuss careers in terms of curriculum subjects, e.g. ''I expect to enter a career in Physics or Mathematics.''  General knowledge of occupations by children was found to be extremely limited and they seemed to look upon their
future life in employment simply as an extension of their life in school.  Their feelings of success in school seemed to be determined  by a combination of the marks they received in
examinations, school reports and the security and rapport they felt with the work and the school staff in the various subject areas.  This perhaps accounted for their discussion of career preferences in terms of school subjects rather than in terms of specific occupational fields or titles.

The schools involved in the survey were a subset of those in Survey I.  Four of them were mixed Sixth Form Colleges of between 500 and 800 pupils, two were mixed Grammar Schools, two were (in effect) Girls' Grammar Schools and one was an Independent Boys' Grammar School.  In the following, the schools are referred to by index numbers and these are
listed in the Table 6 below :


School		School					Number of
Number	Type					Children

	1	Girls' Grammar School		 29
	2	Girls' Grammar School		 26
	3	Independent Boys' Grammar School	 45
	4	Mixed Grammar School		 28
	5	Mixed Sixth Form College		 43
	6	Mixed Grammar School		 97
	7	Mixed Sixth Form College		149
	8	Mixed Sixth Form College		141
	9	Mixed Sixth Form College		175

It has been a conclusion of numerous studies e.g. Ashton and Field (1) and Thomas and Weatherall (71) that the best single indicator of the career choice of children is the occupational level of their parents.  In the Opportunity Structure Model of Roberts (56) this factor is specified along with the nature of the school the children have attended and the level of their achievements therein.  Perhaps the single most important determinant of the latter is the 'quality' of their home background and their ability to gain from the experiences that school and the education system generally have to offer them.
In terms of the work of Bernstein (5), the ability of children to conceptualise depends firmly on the breadth and quality of their linguistic base and a child can only gain this through having serious, regular conversations and general interactions with dedicated adults.  Studies of Crandall (15), Winterbottom (79) and Rosen et al (59) have produced some evidence that children with high achievement motivation come from parents with high aspirations who have encouraged independence and self reliance at an early age. The studies of Douglas (19) and Douglas et al (20) indicate that parental aspirations for their children and the interest they take in their education is associated both with their social class and the level of their own education.   These studies and many others, e.g. Deutsch et al (17) and Plowden (49), have demonstrated substantial correlations between parental social class and the IQ and scholastic achievement of their children.  Based on these implications Survey II was directed towards investigating the model shown in Figure 3.
Measures of each of the four parameters, social class, school, ability and career choice were to be made by questionnaire analysis, and then the connections between them investigated.

SOCIAL CLASS BACKGROUND 	1	  3

		ACADEMIC	  4	CAREER
		ABILITY		CHOICE

			2		   5

NATURE OF THE SCHOOL

This model does not consider genetic factors or the innate intellegence of the child.  It assumes that social class background and the nature of the school attended contribute to determining academic ability and all three factors contribute in determining career aspiration.

Table 7 gives an analysis of the number of parents (P) whose occupations are in each of the categories used in the survey and also the number of girls (G) and boys (B) who chose the occupation as a career.




Occupational Category
P
 G
 B

Agricultural Workers
0
5
0

Archeologists
 
0
0
4
Architects and Town Planners
1
0
4

Armed Forces
0
4
14

Banking

2
16
20
Building Contractors and Bricklayers
18
0
0

Building Society and Insurance work
7
5
2

Businss Managers
0
10
6

Car Mechanics and Garage Proprietors
12
0
0

Chartered Accountants
12
6
17

Chartered and Insurance Surveyors
3
3
3

Chartered Mechanical Engineers
47
1
22

Civil Engineers
6
0
7

Clerks and Secretaries
36
27
1

Company Directors
30
0
4

Computer Programmers
2
6
17

Computer Operators
1
0
6

Dentists

2
4
14
Doctors

11
25
32
Draughtsmen, Designers and Artists
17
21
15

Drivers

31
0
0
Educational Administrators
1
0
0

Electronics Engineers
8
0
18

Electricians
11
0
0

Environment and Agriculture
0
2
7

Factory Workers, Machine Operators
30
0
0






Further Education Teachers
2
0
0

Gas Fitters and Welders
3
0
0

Head and Deputy Head Teachers
10
0
0

Higher Education Lecturers
10
2
6

Industrial Chemists and Physicists
28
6
37

Joiners, Upholsters and Glaziers
21
0
0

Journalists and Novelists
2
3
9

Lawyers and Solicitors
2
5
12

Linguists and Translators
0
9
0

Local Authority and Civil Service
25
18
10

Merchant Navy
1
1
2

Midwives

1
4
0
Miners and Power Industry Workers
2
0
0

Nurses and Physiotherapists
13
52
4

Opticians

1
7
6
Painters and Decorators
3
0
0

Personnel Officers
4
5
2

Pharmacists and Pharmacologists
6
8
5

Pilots and Air Traffic Controllers
0
3
7

Plumbing and Heating Contractors
6
0
0

Police and Security Officers
11
6
9

Psychologists, Child Phychologists
0
4
5

Railway Guards and Signalmen
3
0
0

Restaurateurs and Catering Managers
3
5
3

Retail Traders and Publicans
40
2
1

Sales Representatives
10
0
0

Sales and Advertising Managers
36
2
1

Schoolteachers
30
57
20

Skilled Textile Workers
13
0
0

Social Workers and Youth Work
2
5
3

Speech Therapists
0
6
0

Stewardesses and Couriers
1
9
1

Storekeepers, Warehousemen, Porters
11
0
0

Systems Analysts
1
0
5

Technologists and Production Managers
13
3
6

Telecommunications Enginers
4
0
0

Transport Managers
13
0
1

Unskilled labour, Cleaners and Dockers
19
0
0

Vets and Zoologists
0
7
1


Totals           644      336      349

Table]7	Distribution of occupational categories of parents
		and the career choices of their children N=733


P    Parents with this occupation
G    Girls who chose this career
B    Boys who chose this career

It is clear that the aspirations of the children in the group are in general towards more desirable careers than those of their parents.  Nearly 30% of all the parents had working class occupations such as bricklayers, factory workers, machine operators, storekeepers, labourers, etc. which were chosen by none of the children themselves. Over 10% of the parents were involved in selling or the retail trade whilst less than 1% of the children had a similar interest.  Some 7% of parents worked as civil or mechanical engineers and about half as many children, nearly all of
whom were following parental example, aspired in this way.  Doctors, dentists and opticians constituted less than 2% of the parental sample.  Relatively few of their own children had chosen the same career but over 12%, the largest subset of the children, had made these occupations their career choice.
Information from Survey II based on the separate sexes is only shown in Table 7.
In the remaining analysis, the results of the data from the sexes taken separately did not contribute further to the picture produced by the composite results.  Consequently these are not presented.
The number of parents counted in all of the analyses is 89 less than the number of children because this many of them did not declare their parent's occupation.  The relative proportions of people in the three social class groups of Table 3 are compared with the distribution for parents of the children in the survey in Table 8.

Social class of	   	Service	Intermediate	  Working

General population	    14	   	31		   55

Parents in Sample	    37	  	 33	  	 30

In the Oxford Survey (30,p204) the results pointed to a probability ratio of 4 : 2 : 1 for the relative likelihoods that children born in to the three different social classes would eventually achieve service class jobs.  Using corresponding figures from the survey sample for Table 8 above gives, assuming the population distribution shown, a ratio for the chance of children from
different social class families achieving a place in a sixth form as being 5 : 2 : 1.  These ratios would be expected to have this similarity since children who will eventually achieve service class occupations would be expected to have been through a sixth form. The academic abilities of the children surveyed was measured by their overall grade in seven 'O' level subjects as described earlier and for the present purpose this is reduced to a three point scale, low, medium or high, the limits of the divisions being set so as to include as near as possible one third of the children in each of the categories. terms, the distribution for the sample of 733 children was as in Table 9.


	      'O' level rating
Social class	  Low	  Medium	  High	  Number
Service	  		7	  46	  47	  249
Intermediate		  5	  55	  40	  189
Working		 13	  59	  28	  206



On this evidence it would appear that children of working class parents who have gained entry to a sixth form are still less likely to have achieved as high a level of academic success as their counterparts from service class home backgrounds.

In comparing the output in terms of academic results of each of the nine schools in this survey, it is of interest to compare them at the same time in terms of the average social class of the children attending.  These distributions of social class are given in Table 10 (the schools are
as specified in Table 6).


	  		SERVICE	  INTERMEDIATE	  WORKING	   	              

   I
  II
 III
  IV
   V
  VI
 VII
N 
  'Average' Social Class
School 1
3
26
22
15
14
15
3
29
3.5
School 2
14
44
17
0
4
13
8
26
3
School 3
14
79
2
3
2
0
0
45
1.9
School 4
7
34
15
7
11
7
19
28
3.7
School 5
16
37
14
0
7
24
2
43
3.2
School 6
3
39
17
11
3
19
8
97
3.5
School 7
2
40
17
6
6
23
6
149
3.5
School 8
6
21
14
8
8
27
16
141
4.2
School 9
1
24
20
6
5
28
16
175
4.1


The figures in the rows of the table are percentages and the number (N) of children surveyed from that school.  The right hand column gives an 'averaged' value of the social class of the
children at the school expressed in terms of the I (1) to VII (7) social class scale used.
Table 11 below gives the corresponding figures for the distributions of academic abilities, as judged by 'O' level abilities, for each of the nine schools.


  		       LOW GRADES                         HIGH GRADES
range of 'O' level passes
 0-5
10/06/03
15/11/03
16-20
21-25
26-30
31-35
School 1
0
0
0
0
40
49
11
School 2
0
4
4
0
31
35
26
School 3
0
0
0
0
7
37
56
School 4
0
0
0
3
30
49
18
School 5
0
0
0
7
18
32
43
School 6
2
8
13
15
25
31
6
School 7
2
5
14
21
31
21
6
School 8
7
9
17
25
26
13
3
School 9
0
5
11
15
36
24
9


The rows of this table are rounded percentages of the children surveyed at that school and the grade scales are calculated from with those described in Table 4.  In both cases, the I to VII social class scale and the 1 to 7 examination assessment scale can only be considered as ordinal
scales and the averages calculated using them can only be used as rough guides.  These figures are however sufficient to indicate that the measures in the two tables are not related closely to each other. 
This suggests, as would perhaps be expected, that the academic performance of the children is related more to the school they attend than to the social class distribution of their parents.  The figures clearly reflect certain pragmatic features of the schools, such as the fact that school 3
contained only highly selected children all of whom has passed a difficult entrance examination whilst most of the other schools, particularly school 8, practiced various policies which allowed, and in some cases encouraged, children of relatively low ability into their sixth forms.

The overall distributions of the social classes of the career choices of the children for the different categories of parental social class are given in Table 12 below.

	Parental		          Career Choice %
	Social		 Service	Intermediate	 Working	N

	Class %		 I	II	III	IV	 V	VI	VII

	         I	40	27	18	1	 9	 3	0	 33
	Service
	         II	14   53	15	2	16	 0	0	220

	         III	 9	55	10	3	16	 5	2	 94

	Inter    IV	11	58	16	0	11	 2	2	 45

	         V	12	58	 7	0	23	 0	0	 43

	         VI	18	43	18	3	15	 3	0	139
	Working
	         VII	 4	54	12	5	23	 0	0	 70

	N            	91  323	91  18   106	12	3	644




A summarised version of this, Table 13 below, indicates that the career aspirations of these children, contrary to the findings of Ford (23) and Ashton and Field (1) already mentioned, are relatively independent of the occupational position of the their parents.

	Parental		     Career Aspiration
	Social
	Class		Number	Service	Intermed	Working

	Service	 253	  66	   33	   1

	Inter		 182	  63	   33	   4

	Working	 209	  60	   38	   2


The largest parental category was schoolteachers.  Their children along with the children of head and deputy head teachers may be taken as representing the best available subsample from the children with service class parents.  It is possible to choose from the children of intermediate and working class backgrounds corresponding subsamples where the best available
degree of homogeneity of home background exists for the children from each. For the intermediate class subsample, tradespeople such as plumbers, glaziers, electricians, painters and decorators, etc. and for the working class subsample, parents whose children had declared their occupations as being factory work or labouring were chosen.  A direct assessment can
then be made by comparing the career choices of these children.  This checks the extent to which they are or are not choosing careers at the same occupational level as their parents.  The results of this are given overleaf in Table 14.  It is important to note that in this list the occupations chosen by the working class children are not likely to be representative since the table includes a smaller proportion of working class children than from other classes. When the children aspiring to jobs in each social class category are counted the results of Table 14 are summarised as in Table 15.  These show that the working class children in the sample perhaps
because of their academic success or the prestige attached to the school they attend, do not aspire to careers at the same occupational level as that of their parents.  Alternatively, see Table 8, it may be that these children, for entirely different reasons, are  a subset of working class
children who have high achievement motivations independent of their social class background and their academic achievement is merely another consequence of this.
It must be noted that the parents of all the children were categorised on the basis of their present occupation and it is on this sole evidence that all the attendant implications of the social
class groups are being drawn.  It may be that the parents classified as working class in this survey are not really representative of the working class generally and may well, at least as far as their treatment of their children is concerned, be more like parents of a higher social class.


	Service	Intermediate	Working

	Teachers   	 Tradespeople  	  Labourers, etc.
	N  as parents	N  as parents	N  as parents


	1 Ch.Accountant	2 Business Managers	5 Armed Forces
	3 Civil Engineers	3 Ch.Accountants	2 Bank workers
	6 Computer workers	2 Ch.Mech.Engineers	3 Business Managers
	3 Dentists	1 Clerk	2 Clerks
	5 Doctors	1 Company Director	3 Ch.Accountants
	3 Draughtsmen	2 Dentists	1 Ch.Mech.Engineer
	1 Electronics Eng.	5 Doctors	3 Computer workers
	2 Lecturers	3 Draughtsmen	2 Draughtsmen
	5 Indust Chemists	2 Electronics Eng.	1 Dentist
	2 Lawyers	1 Environmentalist	1 Doctor
	1 Local Auth. work	1 Lecturer	4 Industrial Chemists
	2 Nurses	1 Lawyer	2 Journalists
	1 Pharmacist	1 Linguist	1 Lawyer
	1 Personnel Officer	1 Local Auth.work	2 Local Auth work
	1 Police work	4 Indust Chemist	2 Midwives
	1 Psychologist	4 Nurses	6 Nurses
	1 Social worker	2 Pilots	2 Opticians
	1 Teacher	2 Police work	1 Personnel Officer
	1 Technologist	2 Stewardesses	1 Pharmacist
		2 Teachers	2 Pilots
		1 Vet	1 Police work
			1 Restaurateur
			1 Retail trader
			1 Social Worker
			12 Teachers




Table 14 shows most clearly how the level of occupation is largely set by the social class of their parents.  It seems likely that the choices such as doctor and dentist made by the working class children may be based on fantasy rather than realism.

	Service	Intermediate	Working

Teachers as parents	   71	    29	   0

Tradespeople as parents	   75	    25	   0

Labourers, etc. as parents	   60	    24	   0

It must be emphasised that the sample of children surveyed in each of the schools does not reflect the whole school in miniature.  Only in the case of school 6 does the sample of children constitute almost half of the sixth form.  In all of the other schools, only a much smaller proportion of the  sixth forms were sampled each time.  Table 16 gives the distribution of the career choices of the children for each of the nine schools.

Career	  SERVICE	 INTERMEDIATE	 WORKING	   No	 'Average'
				                              Social
Choices 	   I	  II	 III	  IV	  V	 VI	 VII		  Class

School 1	 3	49	14	0	23	7	3	 29	3.1
School 2	21	40	18	4	17	0	0	 26	2.5
School 3	26	58	11	0	 5	0	0	 45	1.9
School 4	15	63	 7	0	15	0	0	 28	2.3
School 5	56	34	 5	0	 5	0	0	 43	1.5
School 6	11	46	21	4	15	1	2	 97	2.7
School 7	 8	52	11	5	23	1	0	149	2.8
School 8	 8	46	20	3	19	4	0	141	2.8
School 9	11	55	19	1	13	1	0	175	2.5


The figures in each row, percentages of the children sampled in the school in question, reflect largely the different natures of the schools. The more prestige confered on the child by attendance at the school, the more likely it is that the child will aspire to a prestigeous occupation.  This fact was apparent, both from conversations with the children, who in such schools gave the impression of being very confident about their eventual career success, and with members of the school staff, who in their dealings with the children always implied a high degree of expectation simply because in that school, such success was the norm.
Table 17 below gives the overall distributions of the career choices for the various levels of examination attainment described earlier.

			          Career Choice
			 Service	 Intermediate	 Working	 No

			 I	II	III	IV	 V	VI	VII

	   Low	4	 1	34	48	 7	 7	 0	 0	 15
Overall		2	 3	33	28	 8	25	 3	 0	 36
Ability		3	 3	29	17	 7	 9	21	10	 66
Grade	   Med	4	 5	27	18	 5	 3	28	14	 95
of the		3	 5	33	16	 8	 7	22	11	182
Children		6	 5	36	17	 7	 9	16	10	166
	   High	7	13	48	12	 6	 5	11	 5	 84

No. in Survey	  32	 220	 115	  46	  51	 120	  60	  644

The table shows how the ability of the children, measured in terms of their 'O' level examination results, provides what may be the best indicator of the occupational levels to which they will aspire in their career choices.  A summarised version, Table 18 below, further illustrates this.  The finding accords with the work of Roberts (56) in which he concluded that the opportunity structure of occupations was directly related to the output of the educational system.  For these children, at least, the result of their school career is customarily measured by their overall success in public examinations and as seen, their occupational choice is then commensurate with this.  The percentages for each ability category in the successive rows of Table 18 reflects this in that children with higher overall examination grades aspire to more prestigous
occupations.

			          Career Choice
Child's ability	  Service  Intermediate  Working	No. in
							Survey

High	  78	   20	  2	 250
Med 	  60	   37	  3	 277
Low 	  40	   58	  2	 117

In this section, consideration is given to the way in which the career choices of the children in the sample vary according to their 'O' level performances and the occupations of their parents
and these results are given in detail in Appendix 2. It is common for examination grades to be thought of as being 'normally distributed'.  This implies that the distribution of scores is     
symmetrical with as many children with scores above the mean as there are below it, and that the more a score diverges from the mean, the fewer children it will have associated with it
i.e. the graph of the distribution is 'bell shaped'.   The distribution of 'O' level grades,
which are presented fully in Appendix 2, frequently depart from this expected pattern indicating that the sample is biased, perhaps containing a disproportionate number of able children, or because the number in that sample is so small that chance factors have made it atypical of the population it seeks to represent.  Skewness (deviation from being symmetric) and kurtosis (deviation from being bell shaped) are statistical measures which take values of zero and unity
respectively for a normal distribution of scores, and values of these are quoted for each distribution in the tables.  Their purpose is to indicate how closely the subgroup from the sample is in each case likely to be representative of the population of children at large.
Where mean values are quoted these are to 0.01 marks merely to facilitate a unique ordering of the entries and not to imply significance otherwise.  So that the tables can be used to differentiate between the various occupational groups, difference of means t tests have been carried out for all the possible pairs of occupational categories in each table.  In this situation, the t tests are taking into account the size of each sample in the table and the way in which the scores about each of the mean values are clustered or dispersed.  Their use enables a measure (see Table 19) to be given of how trustworthy the, often small, differences between the means actually are. Some of the tables, as will be apparent, discriminate better between the adjacent groups than others.  By averaging the t test values corresponding to each table, a measure of this
discriminatory ability is given in terms of the proportion of the total of the lines in the table which need to be traversed in order to give two groups whose mean values can be said to differ at the 5%  level of significance.  That is the means of entries this far apart in the table could have been chosen randomly from populations whose mean values have only a 5% likelihood of
being the same.
The results shown have been restricted to contain only occupations where ten or more children were involved in order to avoid groups so small as to be almost certainly unrepresentative.  The relative efficiency of the tables from the point of view of differentiating between the groups of children is also indicated by F values (see Table 20).   These measure the extent to which the various entries in the table are from different populations and in a sense their use parallels the earlier described use of t test values.
	Length of	Parental Occupation	     Career Choice
	the Table

Science and Maths		0.66		0.25
Science		0.86		0.45
Physics and Chemistry		0.65		0.44
Physics and Maths		0.50		0.23
Biology		0.50		0.15
Craft Subjects		0.70		0.26

Total 'O' levels		0.48		0.33

	F Value	Parental Occupation	     Career Choice

Science and Maths		1.73		14.92
Science		1.34		13.15
Physics and Chemistry		1.30		 6.43
Physics and Maths		2.19		10.58
Biology		1.58		 6.63
Craft Subjects		1.21		 2.30

Total 'O' levels		2.24		 7.19

The figures show in all cases that the 'O' level results of the children give much closer predictions of the career choices than they do of the parental occupations.  This is perhaps to be expected.  The tables showing the career choices of the children are all fairly consistent in that professional or other careers requiring a high degree of training are appropriatly associated with higher scores in the relevant academic subjects. The purpose of the tables in Appendix 2 was to throw light on how the children of different parental categories were ordered in terms of their
'O' level examination performances and also to show which careers were chosen by children at various levels of examination performance.
In interpreting the tables for this purpose, the low levels of significance of the results indicated by Tables 19 and 20 must be considered.  This difficulty may be overcome as follows:
The group of tables A2.1 to A2.10 allow five separate estimates to be made and averaged results taken.  By considering the five highest, and equally the five lowest, mean values as being equal in terms of significance, the following information emerges: In the lists of parental occupations graded by examination results in science subjects and mathematics, the combination of the five tables showed that the parents of children with the highest examination resuls were:

School teachers 	5 times
Doctors	4 times
Chartered mechanical engineers	3 times
Technologists and production managers	3 times
Chartered accountants 	twice
Nurses and physiotherapists	twice
Various others	once

and in contrast, the parental occupations of those children with the lowest examination results were:

Builders				5 times
Drivers					4 times
Industrial chemists and physicists	3 times
Unskilled labourers			3 times
Electricians				twice
Various others			once

When the same procedure was applied to the corresponding tables relating to the career choices of the children, the choices of the children with the highest examination successes occured as follows: Those for children with the highest examination grades were:

Industrial chemists and physicists	5 times
Doctors				4 times
Dentists				4 times
Opticians				4 times
Computer programmers		3 times
Pharmacists				twice
Electronics engineers			twice
Mechanical engineers			once


The careers appearing as choices of the children with the lowest examination grades in science subjects and mathematics were:

Draughtsmen			4 times
Nurses				4 times
Business management	3 times
Banking			3 times
Local authority work		3 times
Teaching			3 times
Police and security work	twice
various others			once

The single tables A2.13 and A2.14 containing similar information relating to the total examination scores served to emphasise the results described above.  Tables A2.11 and A2.12 relate to examination results in Art and in Craft subjects.  In their isolation, the comparative procedure used above cannot be applied.  Their apparent lack of any clear pattern may perhaps be attributed to the fact that the schools concerned regard them as minority subjects and as being less academic.  The picture which emerges from this part of the study is in accordance
with childrren from privilidged social class backgrounds performing better in academic examinations.  The children of schoolteachers stand out sharply in this respect, perhaps as a result of having a special sympathy with educational aims, as being high achievers in examinations.
It is not possible in this section of the study to deduce any quantitative measures comparing children aspiring to industrial and non-industrial occupations since the results do not associate clearly with fixed groups of children.  At various points, there are, however, indications of
qualitative accuracy.  Children, for example, who chose the highly practically orientated career of chartered mechanical engineer scored both the highest examination results in physics and mathematics and in art and craft as might be expected.  It is perhaps unfortunate that this trend is not reflected in the other professional careers.

***********
CHAPTER SIX
***********
Survey III - Career Choices of Younger Children in a Single School 

The results of Survey II had indicated that apart from level of academic achievement, the major determinant of occupational choice was the nature of the school the children attended.  It may be that as suggested earlier, children who are all widely different when they enter secondary school, gradually become processed into accepting the ideals and values of the school and, within any particular school, this effectively coalesces their expectations and levels of
career aspiration.
The effect of differences in social class background, for the children in the previous survey at least, seemed to be of relatively minor significance compared to the effects of their overall ability and the nature of the school they attended.  It was as though their occupational aspirations, like workers salaries, are 'sticky upwards' in that once they are raised, they do not
readily fall back down again.  It appeared that for some less able children, limited examination success could encourage them to see in the sixth form an exagerated possibility for upward
social mobility.
Liversedge (42) comments on the situation of lower ability working class children but his words taken in this opposite context are still appropriate.

''   The general picture that emerges ..... is one of startlingly accurate appraisal of life chances by the children and a shrewd appreciation of the social and economic implications of their placing
within the educational system.   ''

Again, however, it is possible that the true effect of the social class backgrounds of the children was not apparent in the previous survey because they had been inaccurately determined by the simple questionnaire instrument used. The use of social class in this context concurs with that of
Sugarman (67,p278-301):

''   'Social class' is just a shorthand way of referring to the complex of factors which correlate with occupation.   ''

It is this 'complex of sociological factors' to which reference is really being made and the parental occupations of the children are merely the best available indicator of it.  The expedient of using in the previous survey a remotely administered questionnaire to ascertain the occupations of their parents may have created measurement errors due to misinterpretations
on both sides.

By carrying out an intensive investigation of children from a single Grammar school, school 6 from Survey II, any 'processing' by the school of their career aspirations would be common to
all of them but might vary with the length of time the children had been there.  By considering children from the second year through to the fifth year of the school, it might be possible to detect evidence of the effects:
(a)  That the influence of parental social class diminishes as the child moves upwards through the school, and
(b)  That the correlation of high ability with high occupational aspiration is present in all the
age groups.
The use of a single school also facilitated the use of interviewing rather than the questionnaire approach used already.  This allowed much more accurate assignment of parental social class since the replies of the children when asked the occupations of their parents be questioned
further as necessary to remove ambiguities and evasive answers.  The technique also made possible the collection of additional data on associated factors such as family size and the aspirations of the children towards entering higher education or taking direct entry into work.
Details of the questions are included in Appendix 3.
Details of the analysis of parental backgrounds and career choices are given in Tables 21 and 22 below for the various yeargroups in the school.

	   Parental Social Class	Distribution
				of Sample by
Yeargroup	Service	Intermed	 Working	Yeargroup
Second Year	  29	  25	  46	  27
Third  Year	  31	  36	  33	  22
Fourth Year	  46	  25	  29	  21
Fifth  Year	  38	  32	  30	  30
Overall
Distribution	  36	  29	  35	 N = 222

	       Career Choice       	Distribution
				of Sample by
Yeargroup	Service	Intermed	 Working	Yeargroup
Second Year	  67	  31	   7	  27
Third  Year	  44	  50	   6	  22
Fourth Year	  50	  44	   6	  21
Fifth  Year	  42	  53	   5	  30
Overall
Distribution	  49	  45	   6	 N = 222

Table 21 indicates the variability of the school's annual intake in terms of parental social class.  Over the period when these children were admitted to the school, the catchment area, largely one of the better non-working class suburban areas, remained unchanged and the criteria by which the children were selected for entry had also remained the same.
On the evidence of Table 22, it would appear that the children, as far as their occupational aspiration is concerned, rapidly, perhaps almost immediately, adjust to the implications of
their Grammar school placement and aspire towards more prestigous occupations than those of their parents.  Table 22 shows that there is a steady moderation of the level of career choices
as the children progress through the school but hardly any of the children aspire to the working class occupations held by about a third of their parents.  
The apparent trend towards more moderate choices as the children progress through the school may be because they are becoming, as Roberts (56) suggests, more realistic about their chances and their capabilities the nearer they get to the school leaving age. The measures of ability of the children collected in the interviews and used in the tables which follow, are based on subjective judgements made by the children.  Having the children make their own estimates of
their abilities seems at first sight to be fraught with difficulties apart from the obvious lack of objectivity.  However, when the possible alternatives were considered, it was seen for the present purpose to be the best one.  The main points in favour of this procedure were that the child's liking  for any particular subject might not correlate with the opinion of their teacher of their performance in it.  Also, the children themselves are most likely to have all the information on their performance in the various subjects than are even their subject teachers.
In any particular class in a secondary school, it is likely that the subject teacher knows well
only the children in the class who are outstanding or troublesome. The rest, perhaps the 'silent majority' of the class, may be known to the teacher only through the marks in a
record book and their faces when they are handed back their homeworks.  For these children, the teacher's judgement about their ability may be even more subjective than that of the children themselves. It was therefore accepted that on the whole, the children themselves would have the best knowledge of their capability in each school subject and their judgements are used in the tables below.
On a 1 to 5 scale the children judged the extent to which they 'liked' each of their school subjects and with a similar scale assessed their ability in it.  In this latter the children made the
assignment according to how near they thought they were to the top, the middle or the bottom of the class they were for the subject either in terms of the last exam they had taken or their general ability to cope with it.
All of the judgements for each child were added and then averaged over whatever number of subjects the child had given replies on.  On the rank order of these averages, the group of
children was split as near as possible into thirds.  The results are given in Tables 23 and 24.

		  Ability in Years 2 to 4	Distribution
						of Sample by
	 Lower	Middle	Upper	Yeargroup
	 Tertile	Tertile		Tertile

	Service	  20	  39	  41	  35
Parental
Social	Intermed	  32	  32	  36	  28
Class
	Working	  38	  41	  21	  37

Division of
Sample 		  30	  38	  32	 N = 156


		  Ability in Year Five	Distribution
					of Sample by
	 Lower	Middle	Upper	Yeargroup
	 Tertile	Tertile		Tertile

	Service	  24	  48	  28	  38
Parental
Social	Intermed	  38	  24	  28	  32
Class
	Working	  35	  30	  35	  30

Division of
Sample 		  32	  36	  32	 N = 66

These figures show that there is a good degree of correspondance between the  ability of the child and their parental social class in school years 2 to 4 but for the children in the fifth form any such relationship is far from apparent.  This may be taken as evidence for believing that having a working class background has a diminishing effect on their conceptions of their ability and any advantage which having a non working class background may have conferred on the children on their entry to the school seems to become insignificant compared to the effect of the overall processing they receive from the mechanisms of attending the school itself.
Tables 25 and 26 both reinforce the trends which have already emerged and are consistent in showing that within a particular school, the abilities of children seem to be the best indicator of the level of their occupational choice.  In either of the tables, the proportion of the children aspiring to working class careers amounts to only about 5% and this is concentrated largely, and in the case of the fifth form children entirely, in the lower tertile of the ability range.
The likelihood of a child choosing a prestigeous service class career seems to be a feature associated with the school attended.  From the schools in Survey II, it is clear that certain of the schools, school 3 in particular, had strong traditions of achieving university placements and elite careers for its pupils.  Any child entering such a school comes perhaps to expect such results simply as a consequence of their attendance as they gradually assimilate the school's values and expectations as their own.
The results of Survey III reflect a tendency for more able children to choose occupations with more prestige.  In as far as interschool comparisons can be made, however, it would seem that for a child of a given ability, the level of occupational choice still depends strongly on the nature of the school attended.  It is as if the ethos and expectations of the school sets the level of aspiration of the child generally and the ability of the child serves only to moderate this overall tendency.


		      Career Choice		Division of
					Sample by
	 Service	Intermed	 Working	Ability

	  Upper	  57	  39	   4	  32
Ability of
Group in	  Middle	  58	  37	   5	  38
Tertiles
	  Lower	  40	  49	  11	  30

Distribution
of Sample 	  53	  41	   6	 N = 156

		        Career Choice		Division of
					Sample by
	 Service	Intermed	 Working	Ability

	  Upper	  43	  57	   0	  32
Ability of
Group in	  Middle	  50	  50	   0	  36
Tertiles
	  Lower	  33	  53	  14	  32

Distribution
of Sample 	  42	  53	   5	 N = 66

In common with Table 22, these tables reflect the tendency of the children in the fifth form to have been more realistic in their career choices compared with their counterparts lower down the school who are further away from the statutory minimum school leaving age and the need to find a job or go on to further or higher education.  If the trend shown here accurately reflects the reality of the situation then it indicates that with increased maturity children become more realistic about their occupational choice, in terms of their own assessment of their capabilities,
when its imminence is upon them.

		        Career Choice		Division of
					Sample by
	 Service	Intermed	 Working	Ability

	  Service  66	  30	   4	  35
Parental
Social	  Inter	  41	  52	   7	  28
Class
	  Working  48	  43	   9	  37

Distribution
of Sample 	  53	  41	   6	 N = 156

	        Career Choice		Division of
					Sample by
	 Service	Intermed	 Working	Ability

	Service	  60	  40	   0	  38
Parental
Social	Intermed	  24	  67	   9	  32
Class
	Working	  40	  55	   5	  30


Distribution
of Sample 	  42	  53	   5	 N = 66

Tables 27 and 28 point ot the fact that, within the same school, there are only marginal differences in the career choices of children from different parental backgrounds.  A feature which does persist is that children with a service class family background have a higher likelihood of aspiring to a service class occupation and this trend carries on through the school
including into the 'period of realism' the children seem to experience in the fifth form.

The above comparisons between social classes, subjective abilities and career choices
between children in the lower forms and the fifth form classes in a Grammar School have emphasised the following points:
(a)  The fact that children attend a prestige school elevates their aspirations to the extent that practically none of them aspire to a working class occupation when they leave, irrespective of the social class of their family background.  In this context, prestige is taken to mean a school producing high academic results and children who frequently go to university.  In the case of the grammar school in the survey, the children were about equally divided between the choice
of intermediate class and service class career choices.
(b)  The children in the fifth form have moderated the level of their career choices compared to the children lower down the school for whom the need to choose a career realistically is still relatively far away.
(c)  Again in accordance with the findings of Roberts (56), and notwithstanding the overall effect of the nature of the school, the childrens' abilities provide the next best guide to the level of their occupational choices.  Children with high abilities are more likely to aspire towards service class occupations than those of lower ability.
(d)  Parental background is only important, in the context of this particular school, in that children from service class backgrounds are in all cases more likely, even in the case of children in the fifth form, to aspire to service class occupations.




**************
CHAPTER SEVEN
**************
Survey IV - Childrearing Practices, Motivation,
Ability and Career Choice

This survey was conceived with the objective of collecting detailed and embedded information on the 'quality' of the childhood interactions of a necessarily small group of sixth form children with their parents and at the same time finding measures and descriptors by means of which children with different categories of home background experiences could be compared in
terms of their chosen careers and academic abilities. The quality of the relationship between the author and the children had been built up painstakingly over a two year period.  This had involved being regularly present in certain of their lessons sometimes as a supervisor in practical lessons and occasionally as a visiting teacher.
This, along with a strong participation in various out of school activities, built up a relationship in which the overall purpose of the research was known to them and they; their names, faces,
school backgrounds, even some of their successes and problems within the school and at home were known.  Through a continuing programme of cooperation with the school on a number of fronts, a strong bond of confidence and credibility had been developed with their teachers and
in particular with the head of the school.

In the work described so far, parental background has been categorised in terms of the social class of their parents and this in turn has been established solely by reference to the
occupations of fathers or guardians as reported by the children themselves. As has already been mentioned, this allows a considerable variability of home background within the same social class categorisation and consequently, it was felt worthwhile to develop a parallel measure.
To facilitate this development, the contemporary view of Willis (78,p104-141) on the effect of social class on school and occupational achievement was presented to the children to be surveyed in one of their general studies lessons as a basis for discussion.
The essence of this was that children from middle class backgrounds were more likely to conform with and accept the academic ideals of the school and their concommitance that these lead eventually, through examinations and paper qualifications to the best jobs.
On the other hand, children from working class backgrounds are more likely to reject the meritocratic ethos of the school, believing instead in the more immediate rewards derivable from the solidarity of their working class membership.
The discussion which followed was largely on whether the children felt Willis' analysis to be a fair and an accurate one.  In this context some of the children raised the point that the distinction between being a conformer to the academic and occupational ideals of the school or a person who rejected them (and Willis implies this anyway) is not a clear cut one.  The point was made by some that whilst they believed fundamentally that academic ideals would eventually lead them to occupational success, they did have occasional periods of romanticism when they felt drawn towards what they called the 'simplicity and honesty' of a working class occupational future.
Finally, and ostensibly through the suggestions of the children, a 'muscles-brains' scale was drawn up which, if one accepted the analysis of Willis, could be used to categorise the occupational leanings of any individual.  In constructing this, the children had argued that even the most menial work required some intellegence but they could imagine that some occupations at the 'executive' end of the scale required a negligible amount of muscle.  The details are shown below in Table 29.

	    Description of Occupational Category	Muscles	Brains

Unskilled Labouring with no training required	  6	  1
Semi-skilled Labour with some training required	  5 	  2
Skilled Labour with apprenticeship or other 	  4	  3
long training

Clerical or Sales work			  3	  4
Professional work at the level of a teacher	  2	  5
Professional work at the level of a doctor	  1	  6
Administration work at the level of a Chief	  0	  7
Education Officer




In accordance with the scale in Table 29, each of the children thought carefully about their
father's work activities, and weighing this along with their knowledge of the rest of his social and family life, they assigned to him a position on the scale.  In this way two quantitative descriptors were available, the muscles-brains rating counted using the right hand 1 to 7 scale of Table 29, along with the previously known measure of social class, again on a parallel I to VII scale, as assigned by category of occupation.  The concordance of these was high and was as shown in Table 30 below.  Note that in this the I to VII Roman scale has had to be represented using Arabic numerals.

		    Correponding measures for the    Nineteen children

	Parental Social Class		2 2 4 6 5 3 4 5 3 3 5 2 3 3 3 6 5 6 3

	'Muscles-Brains' Rating 	1 2 6 6 5 5 5 5 2 4 5 4 4 3 5 5 4 5 4

	      Rank Order Correlation Coefficient = 0.72

In order to obtain details from the children which all fitted in the same categories rather than a series of compilations of anecdotal and other general evidence, it was decided to draw up a questionnaire for administration by interview which would elicit in a consistent
manner the following items. Details of this are given in Appendix 4.

This concentrated upon assessing the capability of the parent to help helping the child in the fields of arithmetic, English language, mathematics and science.  The children were thus asked for each of these categories to assess how old they were when their knowledge of, or capability in that subject exceeded the capability of their parents to give them real assistance in their understanding of it.  In this way the children gave four ages, their present age being taken if they felt that their parents were still ahead of them in the subject.  The sum of the four ages then led to a measure which was an indication of the educational  standard of their parents and their capacity to give their children academic help.

It was felt that an indication of treatment the children had had at the hands of their parents, at least in terms of their attitude towards school matters, would be gained by considering how conscientious the parents had been in taking an overall responsibility for their competence in basic academic skills rather than their abdicating this responsibility to the attentions of primary school teachers.  A question was asked  in connection with:
Reading  Ability
Handwriting Ability
General Arithmetic Skills
Fluency with Multiplication Tables
Elocution
For each of these separately the children were asked to assess their parents on a five point scale, giving a score of five if they thought that for example the skill had been gained either entirely from their parent's teaching before they had started primary school or at least their parents
had been the main driving force in teaching it to them, down to a score of one in the case where their capability in the subject had been entirely the result of the efforts of their primary school teachers with negligable concrete assistance from their parents.  For each of the five skills listed above, the measures were added to give an overall measure of the degree of responsibility
the parents had taken to ensure the eventual academic success of their children.

A criticism commonly cited of parents is their tendency to, in a sense, abandon their children for long periods, by leaving them entirely to their own devices or simply just to pass away time by 'playing out' with other children of their own age.  In connection with this, it was felt that a further measure of parental conscientiousness might be gained by compounding together the answers the children gave to the following questions:
(a)  Did your parents regularly spend time reading to you when you were young, and
(b)  Did your parents noticably give of their time to play games such as chess, snakes and ladders, football, etc. with you when you were young. In each case the response of the children to each of the questions was discussed at some length, but for the purpose of the assessment, their answer was reduced to 'yes' or 'no' in each case and an overall score of 2, 1 or 0 was assigned on the basis of the number of affirmations the children had given.

As already described, the nature of this interview exercise had been fully explained to the children, and generally built up to by the events of the weeks beforehand.  In this way the children were aware of the kind of questioning to expect and the 'motives' behind it.  In general
sufficient prior group discussion had been carried out to be confident of a sympathetic reception from each child.  
The schedule of questions was carried through in the same order for each child and responses were recorded.  Where a scale had to be used to quantify a judgement, the details of the scale were displayed on the wall by means of an overhead projection transparency and in the same way, questions which involved a detailed list of alternative answers had these displayed whilst the children made their choice.  The children were seen in this way in rotation by appointment over a series of visits to the school.

In addition to the above, two teachers who had known the children and taught them over most or all of the seven years they had been in the school were asked independently to make assessments on the children.  These included an estimate, judging on a 1 to 20 scale and basing
their judgement relative to the standards of best and worst other children who had passed through their hands in previous years in the school,of the the quickwittedness and general 'level of genius' of the child and also the extent to which the child seemed to be 'motivated' towards the ideal of eventual academic success by dint of hard work and effort.  For this purpose, ''level of genius'' was described to the teachers as ''the extent to which the child succeeded in academic
work without apparent effort'', notwithstanding the fact that the child's effort might be well hidden!   These estimates are given in Table 31.

	       'Genius' Rating      'Motivation' Rating
	  Child	Teacher1	Teacher2	Teacher1	Teacher2

	  1	 10	  8	 10	 16
	  2	 12	 14	 10	 16
	  3	 10	 10	 12	 13
	  4	 16	 11	 14	 16
	  5	 14	 12	 14	 16
	  6	  8	  6	 10	  8
	  7	 10	  8	 12	 11
	  8	 14	 12	 14	 11
	  9	 12	 10	 14	 14
	 10	 16	 13	 16	 13
	 11	 12	 12	 14	 12
	 12	 12	 12	  8	  5
	 13	 10	  8	 10	  7
	 14	 16	 15	 16	 17
	 15	  8	  6	 10	  9
	 16	 10	  9	 12	 13
	 17	  8	  6	 10	 10
	 18	 14	 14	 14	 16
	 19	 10	  4	 10	  5

From discussions with the teachers on the ways in which they had arrived at these assessments, it was apparent that they placed strong interpretations on the way in which the task was to be carried out and they seemed in effect to have modified it to fit with a task with which they were familiar, that of assessing the children for the purpose of impending public examinations.  In the case of motivation, the teachers seemed to think in terms of the apparent effort the children had made to drive themselves through work and exam revision.  By these means, the teachers made the assignments of the children promptly and with little hesitation or difficulty.

The measures used for the most part in the questionnaires can only be thought of at best as having ordinal significance and for this reason the analysis done on them was the calculation of rank order correlation coefficients.  These are displayed in Table 32 below.
In this items 1 and 2 in the upper half matrix were generated by Teacher 1 and those in the lower half matrix by Teacher 2.


Item No	                Description

1.	Teacher's estimate of the child's inherent Genius as
	determined by how easily the child copes with work
2.	Teacher's estimate of the child's apparent Motivation
	to strive for academic ideals
3.	Child's ability as previously assessed by total of 'O'
	level grades
4.	Social class category of the child's career choice
5.	Social class category of parent's occupation
6.	Child's rating of father on 'muscles-brains' scale
7.	Parents daily paper
8.	Child's being read to and played with by parents
9.	Parents taking responsibility for the child's early
	educational progress
10.	Parents educational standard


	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10

1	1.0	 .64	 .55	 .42	 .08	-.08	-.13	-.13	-.09	-.09
2	 .76	1.0	 .43	 .25	 .14	-.17	-.16	-.36	-.29	-.17
3	 .46	 .55	1.0	-.13	 .26	 .21	 .12	 .03	-.21	 .31
4	 .60	 .31	-.12	1.0	 .07	 .13	 .20	-.09	 .39	-.09
5	 .19	 .49	 .26	 .07	1.0	 .72	 .34	 .40	 .32	 .62
6	-.01	 .21	 .21	-.13	 .72	1.0	 .42	 .73	 .58	 .65
7	-.02	 .27	 .12	 .20	 .34	 .42	1.0	 .34	 .44	 .30
8	-.11	-.07	 .03	-.09	 .40	 .73	 .34	1.0	 .58	 .69
9	 .08	 .03	-.21	 .39	 .32	 .58	 .44	 .58	1.0	 .31
10	-.06	 .19	 .30	-.09	 .63	 .65	 .30	 .69	 .31	1.0

Figure 4

CORRELATION DIAGRAM
These results when considered in the light of earlier research, particularly that of Bernstein (5), indicate that parents may be in a powerful position to influence the outcomes of their childrens' school careers.  Support is also provided for one of the major conclusions of Halsey et al (30) that the freedom we enjoy in this country from any institutional barriers to educational equality
fall far short of providing real educational equality.  The diagram in Figure 4 above shows the interconnections between the survey items in Table 32 according to those which are most significantly correlated and with child attributes and parental attributes separated on opposite sides.  Within the obvious limitations of the sample size, this model indicated that for these children : 
(a)  The extent to which parents have the academic ability to help their children and the extent to which they take responsibility for their children's education are, at least out of the factors considered, instrumental in determining the child's performance in examinations and the social class level of their career choice.
(b)  Those with he highest estimate of 'genius' are also the most motivated towards academic success and both of these factors, as would be expected, connect strongly with the examination performance of the child.
This latter observation, (b) above, is perhaps connected with the conclusions of Willis (78)
in that all of the children in this exclusively sixth form sample are likely to be strongly in accord with the philosophy and values of their school and consequently 'approved of' by the teachers who made these estimates.

*************
CHAPTER EIGHT
*************
Occupational Perceptions of Schoolchildren

As mentioned earlier, perceptions are taken to be feelings which cause individuals to select certain decisions rather than others and which generally govern their behaviour.  In particular, these feelings determine the extent to which individuals will generalise in certain things and make discriminations in others.  Discrimination between two possible careers, can be carried
out by an individual who has a fair understanding, a minimal understanding or perhaps even no understanding whatsoever of what the careers involve.  If two people have exactly the same understanding of a pair of occupations this does not imply that they would both discriminate them in the same way and equally, the fact that they did discriminate them similarly should not be taken as evidence that they both had the same understanding of what each of the occupations involved.  Any investigation of occupational perceptions must take into account the different levels of understanding of the occupations and a necessary precursor must be an assessment of the familiarity and level of appreciation of each of the occupations by each child involved.  Goldmeier (25,p14) suggests that the most basic operation involved in understanding is the
recognition of overall similarity between objects.  The more complex operations like classification or producing analogies all depend on recognising the extent to which the objects in question are similar.
Thus any judgement received from a child to the question : ''How similar are the occupations A and B'' will depend on both the understanding the child has of the attributes of the two occupations and the personal evaluation placed on them.

Occupations may be taken as entities characterised by an appropriate set of occupational attributes.  Thus one may imagine that an occupation such as bricklaying has associated with it a list of all the occupational attributes of a bricklayer and that similar lists exist for all other
occupations.  All such lists may then be drawn together in to a long overall list from which a complete definition of any occupation could be reconstructed by picking out and compounding back together appropriate amounts of each of its characteristics.  For two occupations a generalised Venn diagram representation might be as in 
Figure 5.

Set of the 	Set of the
Attributes   	Attributes
of Job A   	of Job B

Set of the
Attributes the	Universal Set
the jobs have	of all
in common   	Occupational
		Attributes






The absence of primary survey data makes an objective appraisal of Reeb's findings (51,52,53,54) impossible.  However, the distinctive results he obtained from as wide an experimental background as the various adult and child groups he used should be easily replicated in any similar experiment.  An apparent change in his 1979 study (54) was the use
of a fundamentally different question to collect the job similarity estimates from the children.  Whereas in all his previous studies, the question used was :  ''  How similar are the two jobs  ''
His question was changed to :  
''  If someone is very suitable indeed for the first job, how suitable is he for the second one.  ''
His justification for this change  was given (54,p117) as :
''  It was shown previously .... that the question 'How similar are the two jobs.' elicited very substantially the same responses as the question used in the present study.  ''
The first question asks the children to think about the general similarity of the pair of jobs and provides no basis to guide their lines of thought.  The second question, however, orders the jobs, asking the child to think of the qualities of the second job in terms of the qualities of the first one.  Also it directs the child to think of factors, such as competence, which determine
the suitability of a person to carry the job out. For the limited purpose of children making occupational judgements, this usage requires an acceptance that the qualities of a job and the qualities of people who carry it out can be treated as the same thing.  From the sucess of the method it is apparent that the results produced are outwardly similar to those of his earlier works (51,52,53) but it is doubtful that this similarity is more than superficial because any
answer given to the second question would seem to depend on the order in which the jobs
have been presented.
In terms of the occupational model, Figure 5, the answer to the original question  ''How similar are the two jobs''  is strongly determined by the extent to which the jobs have attributes in common, i.e. the area of overlap in the diagram.  The later question however, requires consideration of the occupational attributes which are not common to both jobs and the ways in which the child may consider these introduces a degree of ambiguity into the answers received.
A preliminary study was carried out in order to investigate the properties of this latter type of question using a list of occupations similar to that in Reeb's 1974 study (53) along with the question  '' How competent would a person, skilled in the first named job, be at carrying out the second named job''.
A questionnaire was constructed which presented the jobs listed below in pairs.

	 1.	Postman
	 2.	Carpenter
	 3.	Car Mechanic
	 4.	Office Clerk
	 5.	Tool Maker and Fitter
	 6.	Primary School Teacher
	 7.	Television Repairman
	 8.	Secondary School Teacher
	 9.	Dispensing Chemist
	10.	Accountant
	11.	Doctor
	12.	Engineer


The pairs were ordered so that a job higher in the above list was always placed first.  Subsequently a similar questionnaire was administered this time with all the pairs of jobs
in the opposite order.
The sets of opposite results were seperated and mean values for all the job distances from both of the them were calculated and subjected to MDS as described earlier. The resulting MDS models, 1 and 2, are shown in Figures 6 and 7.

FIGURE     SIX

FIGURE     SEVEN

In the manner of Reeb's work, the children were given a total of about 25 minutes to complete the 132 comparisons required by the questionnaire.  They were asked to 'write down the first judgement that comes to mind and not spend much time on any particular question'.  Under these circumstances, they were taking between 5 and 20 seconds to answer each question.
Following this, in a more relaxed atmosphere a test was also carried out to see if it made any difference to the results if the children deliberated over each judgement rather than answering them rapidly.
This time the children were asked to think carefully about each decision and to write down in each case the things they had thought about in coming to it.
Comparison of these results with the same judgements made rapidly in the questionnaire
showed that the assignments made by the child were closely similar in both cases.

The returns from this exercise and the discussion with the children which followed, showed
that with a pair of job titles which mixed an occupation requiring considerable training such as a doctor with a manual occupation requiring little formal training such as a postman, a difficulty was incurred.  The early question, 'How similar are the jobs' produced the obvious answer
that they were dissimilar but the later question now produced different answers according to the order in which the jobs were presented. 
The order postman-doctor gave the response 'the jobs are very dissimilar' because the postman would hardly know where to begin the complex tasks involved in the doctor's work.  
The order doctor-postman, however, made a large proportion of the children think along the lines, 'anyone knows how to push mail through mailboxes' and the doctor would certainly be able to do this competently.  Some argued further that the doctor may well be attracted to the task, 'with its apparently undemanding lifestyle and the fresh air and exercise involved'.  These children, who were saying only that the doctor was competent to carry out the work of a postman would in Reeb's usage, have been taken as implying that the jobs were similar.
The results in Figure 6 show a strong similarity to the results of Reeb.  
The jobs lie in a 'general order', from doctor down to postman and are appropriately positioned in groups. In Figure 7, however, the diagram is centered around the job of the postman, since the children seem to have assumed that people in all the other occupations in the list would be equally capable of carrying out a postman's relatively uncomplicated work.  Apart from this, the the other features of the diagram have remained the same. In particular the groups of similar occupations, groups A, B, C and D  still remain together but their relative positions have changed.  In this respect at least, the method is inconsistent and this points to the fact that Reeb's 1979 study (54) may not be entirely compatable with his earlier work.

With the difficulty above in mind, job titles for the proposed survey were chosen so
all of the jobs were highly skilled ones.  As the overall objective of the study was to try to reveal the attitudes of able children towards careers in manufacturing industry, examples of
such occupations were included along with professions traditionally preferred by such children.
These are listed below and again the questionnaire contained both orderings of each of the job pairs.

	 1.	Lawyer
	 2.	High School Teacher
	 3.	Overseas Sales Representative
	 4.	Industrial Designer
	 5.	Mechanical Engineer
	 6.	Novelist or Journalist
	 7.	Doctor or Dentist
	 8.	Senior Civil Servant
	 9.	Nuclear Physicist
	10.	Industrial Chemist
	11.	Veterinary Surgeon
	12.	Computer Scientist

The question used was as in the pilot study

''  If a person is completly competent in the first job, how competent will he be in the second one.  ''
and was in conjunction with the same nine point scale where it had been found easier for the children to assign a high number to indicate a high competence.  Thus 9 was used to indicate that the person with job A would have total competence if he were to carry out job B, 5 would indicate moderate competence and 1 was to indicate no competence whatsoever.  This meant that the questionnaire results had to be transformed :

Job Dissimilarity   =  10  -  Estimate of Competence

before they could be used as data for the MDS diagram.   Details of the questionnaire used can be seen in Appendix 5.  The questionnaire carried a list of all the 66 ordered pairs of the occupations in a suitably randomised order, followed by the same 66 pairs with the order reversed.  92 children whose personal details had been collected beforehand, took part in the
work which was usually completed under supervised 'examination conditions'.
Both sections of the questionnaire were completed at the same sitting, taking a total of about 20 minutes and afterwards the children commented that it had been tedious but not difficult.
Retesting was also carried out.  Some of the children repeated the questionnaire only minutes after completing it for the first time and others, including some of the same ones, repeated it after a week, a month and after a six month period.  Analysis of these showed that with repetition at up to or a week afterwards, the numeric assignments changed only marginally but after longer periods there were usually systematic changes. In these the general pattern of the judgements remained the same but all the assignments were uniformly higher or lower than they
had been earlier.  Overall, however, the assignments were sufficiently stable not to affect the MDS model produced from one occasion to the next.
The whole of the numeric information from the questionnaires was typed into a computer file
and careful checks were carried out to ensure transcription accuracy. The subsequent retest questionnaires were treated in a similar way.
The MDS models produced by the two halves of the questionnaire were in this case much more similar to each other than those shown in Figures 6 and 7, neither of them having a central occupation encircled by the others in the manner of Figure 7.

Mean  S.Dev  Frequency of each distance         Job Pairs        
Dist         1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9    First Job    Second Job

3.304 1.852  10 30 19 13  7  6  3  3  1   Vet          Doctor
3.870 1.872   8 18 15 19 15  8  5  3  1   Civ Servant  Lawyer
3.902 1.923   5 22 16 18 15  5  4  6  1   Novelist     Lawyer
3.957 1.811   6 15 19 21 13 10  3  4  1   Teacher      Lawyer
3.967 1.557   3 13 25 17 18 10  5  1  0   Novelist     Teacher
4.130 2.060   7 16 16 17 16  6  6  5  3   Sales Rep    Lawyer
4.467 1.618   0  8 22 16 28  9  4  2  3   Engineer     Designer
4.478 1.638   4  8 10 24 25  9  9  3  0   Sales Rep    Teacher
4.522 1.652   1  9 19 17 20 14  8  4  0   Computing    Physicist
4.598 1.836   2 10 17 18 16 12 11  5  1   Ind Chemist  Physicist
4.663 1.801   3  9 14 13 25 15  7  4  2   Civ Servant  Novelist
4.772 1.701   3  5 16 13 24 16 10  5  0   Novelist     Sales Rep
4.880 1.805   2  5 17 18 15 12 19  2  2   Computing    Engineer
4.967 1.820   3  7  9 17 21 12 17  5  1   Ind Chemist  Designer
4.978 1.794   1  7 13 14 24 14 11  5  3   Civ Servant  Doctor
5.033 1.645   1  4 12 17 25 14 12  6  1   Computing    Ind Chemist
5.065 1.811   1  5 17 10 22 16 14  3  4   Civ Servant  Teacher
5.098 1.745   2  4  9 21 18 19 11  5  3   Civ Servant  Sales Rep
5.261 1.769   3  3 12 10 17 22 20  3  2   Ind Chemist  Doctor
5.272 1.688   1  3 12 15 15 25 13  6  2   Civ Servant  Designer
5.337 1.930   2  5 11 14 15 16 16 10  3   Novelist     Designer
5.522 1.716   0  5  9 10 18 23 15 10  2   Computing    Doctor
5.543 1.697   1  3  9 11 16 24 19  6  3   Ind Chemist  Engineer
5.609 1.615   0  2 12  6 18 30 13  8  3   Computing    Designer
5.620 1.864   0  6 10  8 16 21 15 12  4   Physicist    Ind Chemist
5.652 1.826   1  3  7 14 19 18 11 15  4   Physicist    Doctor
5.783 1.876   2  4  6 10 11 25 19  9  6   Physicist    Engineer
5.848 1.615   0  3  6  8 20 19 22 12  2   Computing    Vet
5.859 1.592   2  2  5  7 11 31 24  9  1   Designer     Teacher
5.870 1.650   1  1  7 13 10 21 25 13  1   Novelist     Engineer
5.880 1.768   3  1  5 12  8 26 22 12  3   Computing    Teacher
5.880 1.793   1  7  2  6 16 23 22 11  4   Ind Chemist  Teacher
6.054 1.638   1  1  4 11 15 17 27 12  4   Vet          Ind Chemist
6.185 1.608   1  2  2  7 16 23 19 19  3   Engineer     Teacher
6.217 1.718   1  1  5  6 16 21 21 12  9   Vet          Physicist
6.304 1.666   1  1  5  3 17 21 19 19  6   Civ Servant  Engineer
6.467 1.796   1  2  3  9  8 16 26 16 11   Doctor       Engineer
6.467 1.838   1  2  6  5 10 14 22 24  8   Doctor       Lawyer
6.478 1.625   0  2  3  7 10 20 21 23  6   Doctor       Designer
6.533 1.521   1  0  3  5 12 16 30 20  5   Computing    Civ Servant
6.533 1.735   1  1  6  3  9 21 19 24  8   Computing    Lawyer
6.543 1.741   0  2  3 12  5 15 22 25  8   Engineer     Sales Rep
6.609 1.601   0  2  5  4  6 17 27 27  4   Ind Chemist  Civ Servant
6.630 1.977   3  3  2  4  8 15 19 26 12   Doctor       Teacher
6.641 1.515   0  2  5  2  5 19 29 28  2   Computing    Sales Rep
6.674 1.540   0  0  3  5 17 11 21 28  7   Vet          Engineer

Mean  S.Dev  Frequency of each distance         Job Pairs        
Mean         1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9    First Job    Second Job

6.674 1.636   0  1  7  2 10 11 26 30  5   Designer     Sales Rep
6.674 1.656   0  4  1  4 13  7 30 27  6   Ind Chemist  Lawyer
6.696 1.627   1  2  1  5  9 14 29 23  8   Designer     Lawyer
6.772 1.636   1  2  2  3  7 17 26 25  9   Engineer     Lawyer
6.793 1.827   3  1  2  3  7 14 27 21 14   Vet          Teacher
6.804 1.807   1  2  2  7  8 12 17 31 12   Vet          Lawyer
6.815 1.674   1  0  1  8 11 12 23 21 15   Physicist    Teacher
6.870 1.708   0  2  2  5 11 13 18 26 15   Vet          Designer
6.880 1.545   0  2  4  2  4 16 25 33  6   Ind Chemist  Sales Rep
6.913 1.640   0  0  6  6  3 12 24 30 11   Computing    Novelist
6.924 1.663   1  2  0  6  8  9 25 30 11   Vet          Civ Servant
6.924 1.861   1  2  3  7  6  6 23 28 16   Physicist    Lawyer
7.033 2.019   3  2  2  5  5  7 18 29 21   Doctor       Novelist
7.087 1.679   0  4  1  5  1 10 25 33 13   Ind Chemist  Novelist
7.087 1.976   2  1  4  5  6  9 10 33 22   Doctor       Sales Rep
7.163 1.759   2  1  2  1  8  8 24 25 21   Physicist    Civ Servant
7.185 1.835   0  1  5  8  3  3 20 29 23   Vet          Novelist
7.489 1.716   2  0  1  4  3 10 12 31 29   Physicist    Novelist
7.522 1.448   0  1  2  2  4  5 19 38 21   Vet          Sales Rep
7.565 1.913   3  1  0  4  4  5 13 24 38   Physicist    Sales Rep

In consequence, one of which Figure 8, was arbitrarily chosen and the data which led to it investigated.  This data is analysed in Table 33 which shows in ascending order the mean values calculated for its job distances, so listing the jobs from the pair thought most similar, vet-doctor, through to that thought least similar, physicist-sales representative.
Listed also are the standard deviations associated with each of the means and the frequency distributions which led to them.

FIGURE      EIGHT






***********
CHAPTER NINE
************
Investigation of the Application of MDS to Occupations

The judgement of the similarities for a long series of pairs of occupational titles is invariably tedious and repetitious.  It was therefore thought likely that some of the recorded judgements had been made by children who were disinterested or whose concentrations had lapsed and it was felt worthwhile to check the effect of this on the method.
A hypothesis was proposed that the questionnaires received ranged from ones in which the child concerned has completed all of the required judgements by giving them appropriate thought and consideration through to ones where the child was paying little real attention.  Accordingly a sifting process was carried out whereby the questionnaire returns were scrutinised from various points of view so as to step by step isolate the least consistent ones in order to check the effect they were having.

It was assumed that questionnaires containing a lot of 'guessed' responses could be
differentiated from the others by the following criteria :
A.   Some of the judgements in them could stand out as being unreasonable and in conflict with common sense.
B.   Correlation coefficients between the judgements of each child and the mean values for the group would expose those who, on the whole, deviated most from the rest of the group.
C.   On the statistical basis that the relative independence of the adjacent job pairs in the questionnaire list and the generous length (9 points) of the assessment scale would make the inclusion of sequences of the same judgement increasingly unlikely, children should be unlikely to have, by chance, included long runs of the same judgement.
Using these as guidelines, the questionnaire returns were twice subdivided as indicated in Figure 9.
Of the three, it was felt that violation of commonsense, criterion A, provided the strongest, and criterion C the weakest reason for believing that children may have completed the questionnaires in a less than conscientious manner.  The headings and first line of Table 50 are reproduced below :

Mean  S.Dev  Frequency of each distance         Job Pairs        
Dist          1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9   First Job    Second Job

3.304 1.852  10 30 19 13  7 {6  3  3  1}  Vet          Doctor
This line is chosen as containing the pair of occupations judged by most of the children as being the most similar out of all of those in the rest of the list.  The 13 children whose judgements are shown in parentheses, however, show a disagreement with this and are thus singled out in accordance with criterion A.  Their disagreement with commonsense was taken as evidence that they had completed their questionnaires with at least some unconsidered assignments.  
To check the questionnaires according to criterion B, correlation coefficients were then calculated between the assignments of job distances made by each child and the job distance averages produced from the group.  These correlation coefficients were distributed as in Table 34.  A total of 27 questionnaires were found for children who had violated criterion A or criterion B or both.  These were separated into a data subset S1 and the remainder passed on to data subset S2 as indicated in Figure 9.

	Number of	High				Low
	Children	Correlation		Correlation

		>0.8	>0.6	>0.4	>0.2	<0.2

	Total Sample(92)	16	46	12	5	13
	Girls Only  (48)	 8	24	 8	 4	 4
	Boys Only   (44)	 8	22	 4	 1	 9

In using the above system, it was noted that Criterion B, as well as picking out children who were making judgements in a thoughtless manner, was likely to penalise unfairly those children who were genuinely deviant in their views.  In the event, however, nearly all the children were
rejected by Criterion A and those for whom B had operated had their returns closely checked to see that a mistake was not obviously being made.

Since the ordering of the job pairs was random and a 9 point scale was available for placing
each of the judgements, it is statistically unlikely that a child making independent judgements would make long runs of the same numeric assignment.  While having 2 successive assignments the same is likely, runs of 3 or more become increasingly unlikely, especially
if the judgement involved lies near an extreme of the scale.  Where several such runs were occuring this was taken as an evidence that the concentration of that child had lapsed.  Table 35 below indicates their frequency.

	Number of	Runs of 3	Runs of 4	Runs of 5
	Children	the same	the same	the same
	Total sample  (92)	33	15	12
	Subset S2     (65)	27	11	 9

On this statistical basis and as a result of detailed inspections, a further 26 children were rejected.  They formed a new data subfile S3 with the remainder in a data subfile S4.  The children in this latter file were the ones who all showed the highest degree of agreement with each other and whose judgements accorded best with commonsense.  In this way it was expected that subset S4 might contain the most 'refined' and consistent questionnaires and subset S1 the least consistent ones.

According to the intentions of the sorting procedures it was imagined that the qualities of the
averaged judgements obtained from processing the files S2 and S4 would be superior to those from  the files S1 and S3.  In particular, the file S1, which had perhaps the questionnaires most likely to contain a lot of quessed assignments, might stand out by producing an ordering of the job distances very different from that in Table 33 and an MDS diagram bearing no resemblance
to that in Figure 8.
The rank order of the job distance means is important in determining the final form of the MDS diagrams, and it might be anticipated that if this changes significantly, it will produce a substantially different MDS diagram.  
A visual indication of the extent to which the rank order of the mean job distances altered
from the original data in forming the four data subfiles, is given by the bar charts in Figure 10.  This shows that, as would be expected, the children who failed in either of the first two test criteria, had made judgements which deviated the most from those of the rest of the children.
The rank orders of the mean job distances for the various files were then further compared by calculating rank order correlation coefficients and at the same time the values of the means themselves were compared using correlation coefficients.  The values of these are displayed
in the left lower half and right upper half respectively of Table 36.

	Original	S1	S2	S3	S4
Orig	  -	0.822	0.994	0.990	0.993
S1	0.815	  -	0.757	0.871	0.767
S2	0.988	0.739	  -	0.974	0.966
S3	0.985	0.865	0.960	  -	0.966
S4	0.981	0.747	0.990	0.944	  -

data subsets as compared by their correlations

Upper Half Matrix = Correlation Coefficients for
the values of the means themselves.

Lower Half Matrix = Correlation Coefficients
for the rank orders of the means.

figure 10

BAR CHARTS

FIGURE   11        DIAGRAM FOR S1

FIGURE   12        DIAGRAM FOR S2

FIGURE   13        DIAGRAM FOR S3

FIGURE   14        DIAGRAM FOR S4

The final evidence on this point must, however, be the MDS diagrams derived form the four data subsets.  These are shown in Figures 11, 12, 13 and 14.
Their comparison with Figure 8 shows that quite a good correspondence still exists with the original and between each other.  It should be noted that certain of these diagrams had to be rotated or inverted in order to make them all have the same orientation as Figure 8 but beyond this, the scales are the same and the positions of the occupations accurately represented.  The considerable similarity of all of the diagrams indicates that the information which determines the relative positions of the occupations is so firmly embedded in the data that it is still contained in any of the data subsets.

This investigation supports Reeb's claim that the MDS method is both extremely robust and shows a strong immunity to spurious entries in its data.  A possible explanation would seem to be as follows.
Assuming that for any given pair of jobs, a 'correct' and reasonable similarity judgement exists and children who take the question seriously will judge close to it;it follows that the calculated job distance means will have utilised a mixture of 'correct' and guessed judgements.  Since a 1 to 9 scale is being used, the random judgements, provided there are enough of them, can be expected to always have a mean value of 5.  This would be unaffected by children who systematically aimed their guesses low or high all the time, since, provided there were sufficient children in the sample, these would average themselves out.   Thus the mean job distance calculated from the data would be a compromise between the 'correct' value and the value 5.

Measured Mean  =  NC x CJ  +  NG x 5
Value                 NC + NG

Where CJ is the value of the correct judgement NC is the number of children who judged it correctly and NG is the number of children who judged by guessing.

Mean values and standard deviations calculated from tables similar to Table 33 for each of the subfiles are shown in Table 54 below.

	  Job Distance Means  	     Standard Deviations     
	Min	Max	Range	Min	Max	Average

Original	3.30	7.57	4.27	1.45	2.06	1.84
File S1	4.11	6.70	2.59	1.60	2.90	2.35
File S2	2.65	8.17	5.52	0.89	1.78	1.43
File S3	3.85	7.26	3.41	1.54	2.32	1.95
File S4	2.56	8.10	5.54	0.94	1.75	1.41


The analysis would indicate that judgements whose 'correct' values lie in the middle of the scale will, apart from having their standard deviation increased, be unaffected whilst the guessed judgements will increasingly affect the other judgements the further their values lie away from the centre of the scale.  In spite of this, the distributions of the judgements of the
children, listed in Table 33, have standard deviations of between 1.5 and 2.0 with no apparent
difference between the job pairs at the ends of the table and those in the middle.  Table 37 shows how subsetting the children can reduce or increase these variances but in all cases as Figures 9 to 12 show, this makes little difference to the MDS model produced.  The analysis has shown that all of the data subsets, including the smallest one, S1, of only the 17 children who made the most disparate and least sensible judgements still contained substantially the same information, at least as far as producing a MDS diagram is concerned, as the original data and this concurs closely with the finding of Reeb that data drawn from even disparate groups produces the same MDS model of a given set of occupations.




*************
CHAPTER TEN
*************
The Study of Subjective Occupational Perceptions
using Osgood's Semantic Differential Technique

The semantic differential technique of Osgood (46) utilises a series of antonymous adjective pairs such as honest - dishonest or secure - insecure as scales for describing a set of
objects being investigated.  A sufficient number of these bipolar adjective pairs are chosen and each one is intuitively connected with an interval scale from, say, 1 to 7 as follows, e.g.
	1  =  completly honest
	2  =  largely honest
	3  =  more honest than dishonest
	4  =  about as honest as dishonest
	5  =  more dishonest than honest
	6  =  largely dishonest
	7  =  completly dishonest

For a list of occupational titles, the respondents are asked to associate with each occupation a number corresponding to its position on each of the adjective scales used.  The averaged judgements which show the smallest variance, i.e. the greatest agreement among the respondents can then be taken as the most consistent descriptors for that occupation.
This technique is extensively described by Osgood et al (46) and Snider and Osgood (65).  The latter cites considerable evidence for its reliabliity and validity and includes a comprehensive bibliography.  Previous studies applying the technique to occupational titles and descriptions have included Triandis  (72), Osipow (47) and Remenyi et al (55).

The set of occupations used were those in Table 33.
Osgood et al (46) stressed how in studies of this kind the adjective pairs used fall consistently into one of three categories.  They imply either an evaluation by the respondant, e.g. the scale good .... bad;a judgement of strength or potency, e.g. the scale strong .... weak, or a judgement of degree of activity e.g. the scale active .... passive.  Remenyi et al (55) in investigating various properties of this technique in connection with occupational titles, concluded that the method provides a very economical instrument for the measure of occupational perception.
They emphasised, however, that the adjective scales had to be carefully chosen with due regard
to their relevance to all of the occupational titles being used.  
With this in mind, the adjective pairs chosen were as in Table 38. A strong criticism of this method is given by Coxon and Jones (12,p7). They point out how the method determines the affective rather than the objective component of the respondent's understanding of the occupation and they say that in this way, the results obtained are superficial.  Coxon and Jones
mention the considerable body of research, e.g. the work of Beardslee and O'Dowd  (3, 4) and Coxon (11) and indicate that in their opinion, the well defined and detailed viginettes of people such as lawyers and teachers, so produced, make an illegitimate shift from the statistical properties of groups to the characteristics of individuals.
Adjective pairs used
1.  High .... Low Social Usefulness
2.  Professional .... Non-professional
3.  High .... Low Initiative Required
4.  Much .... Little Training Required
5.  Influential .... Non-influential
6.  High .... Low Job Satisfaction
7.  Forming Policy .... Carrying it out
8.  High .... Low Creativity
9.  Exciting .... Boring Work
10.  High .... Low Promotion Prospects
11.  High .... Low Remuneration
12.  High .... Low Job Security
13.  Held in High .... Low Esteem
14.  Honest .... Dishonest

The questionnaire used is given in Appendix 6.  From its assigned position on an adjective scale, each occupation was given a score from 1 to 7 according to its position with respect to the ends of the scale.  Treating the scales as having equal intervals, the scores 'given' by each child to each occupation were added and in terms of their overall scores, the occupations were placed
in the rank orders shown in Table 39 below.

			Occupation No.

Adjective	 1	 2	 3	 4	 5	 6	 7	 8	 9	10	11
Pair No.

1.	 3	 1	11	 6	 1	10	 1	 7	 9	 5	 7
2.	 1	 3	11	 6	 8	10	 2	 9	 4	 5	 7
3.	 1	 7	 8	 2	 9	 5	 3	11	 4	 5	 9
4.	 1	 8	10	 7	 6	11	 1	 9	 1	 4	 5
5.	 1	 4	11	 6	 8	 5	 2	 3	 7	10	 8
6.	 2	 3	10	 5	 5	 4	 1	11	 7	 7	 9
7.	 8	 6	10	 1	 6	 3	 8	10	 2	 4	 5
8.	10	 6	 9	 2	 6	 1	 8	11	 4	 3	 4
9.	 5	 6	10	 4	 4	 2	 1	11	 8	 7	 9
10.	 4	10	 7	 2	 3	11	 4	 8	 9	 4	 1
11.	 1	11	10	 7	 8	 9	 2	 3	 3	 6	 3
12.	 2	 8	10	 9	 6	11	 1	 3	 7	 3	 3
13.	 1	 9	11	 7	 7	10	 1	 6	 3	 5	 4
14.	 8	 4	11	 5	 5	10	 1	 9	 5	 3	 2
Overall
Position	 2	 8	11	 3	 7	 9	 1	10	 5	 4	 6

Some groups of the children who completed the questionnaire were returned
to and shown the ordered list as in Table 40 below.

1.  Doctor
2.  Lawyer
3.  Industrial Designer
4.  Industrial Chemist
5.  Nuclear Physicist
6.  Computer Scientist
7.  Mechanical Engineer
8.  High School Teacher
9.  Novelist
10.  Senior Civil Servant
11.  Sales Representative

The children constructed preference lists which in the main confirmed the list above.  When asked why the professions were rated the highest, the only pertinent comment made was to the effect that these were occupations which combined all the desirable attributes such as high esteem, security, high rewards and high standing in the community, etc.  The comments about the industrial jobs amounted to the childrens' always placing 'thinkers' above 'doers'.
Some of the children felt the teacher's job to be a special case.  Teachers were seen as 'loco parentis' figures and in a way, it was not like a normal occupation at all and did not seem to compare directly with the other occupations in the list.  This may have skewed the results.  The term 'civil servant' was one that they felt difficulty in really appreciating.  It was felt to be a vague term, and whilst a 'senior civil servant' was obviously a desirable occupation, it was also
one which none of the children could readily identify with.
There was complete agreement about the positioning of 'sales representative' at the bottom of the list.  It was freely admitted that such work was necessary and was of paramount importance to the success of industry and in turn the wealth of the nation.  At the same time, however, the business of selling was seen as a 'cut-throat' activity and likely to require a high measure of dishonesty and 'double-dealing' if anyone was to be successful in it.  A sales representatives
job was very important, but was better left for someone else to do.

The orderings for the occupations in each of the adjective pair categories may be looked at in the light of Kahl's (34) summary of the principles inherent in ordering occupations.  In these Kahl states that:
(a)  People perceive a rank order,
(b)  People agree more about the extremes of the scale than about the middle of the occupations range,
(c)  People are more in agreement about the top of the range than about the
bottom of it, and
(d)  The more is known about any particular occupation, the greater is likely to be the agreement about it.
Taken at their face value, these results emphasise strongly that the children concerned have a higher regard for the professions, doctor and lawyer than they do about the industrial occupations in the list, sales representative being appreciated the least.  Retest questionnaires showed that in common with the MDS study, the results were highly reproduceable and children on subsequent occasions filled in the questionnaires in substantially the same way.
Various factors are important in considering these results.  One of these is the wording used to describe the titles themselves.  As a further check, one retest group was given an identical questionnaire except that the title Sales Representative was substituted by Sales Executive with all the rest of the job description left the same.  The result was a marked improvement of
the salesman's ratings on all of the scales.
This indicated how the descriptors for the job categories affects the nature of the results.  One may think of the comparison between 'dustman' and 'waste disposal operative' as an example of how the same job can be given a different image by assigning it a different title.
The fact that it is unlikely that a person's response to a job title will be the same as their response to being confronted with a person who actually has that job is pointed out by Coxon and Jones (12,p31) :

''  People may react in one way to an occupational title which is encountered in the middle of a long and abstract task, but in quite another way when they meet someone whose job is covered by the same occupational title. ''
Another possibility is that data from individual children in being compressed to form a hypothetical statistical average is loosing its connection with reality.  The higher proportion of
agreements might be covering up various small but important minorities of children who are strongly at variance with the main trend of the results.  
Coxon and Jones (12,p52) cite what they see as an example of the way this situation is often rationalised:

''  Young and Willmot ... reported that workers from London's East End ranked garbage collectors (dustmen) as more important than many middle class occupations.  One way to deal with evidence which disconfirms a theory is to give it a label which defines it as being in some sense a lawful exception.   The Young-Willmott phenomenon has been dealt with in this way by calling it 'status dissent'.  ''
This kind of group discussion carried out with children in a classroom situation may be seen as a poor way of eliciting the children's opinions. The 'fait accompli' presentation of a list of occupations based on a previously administered questonnaire may well have given the list a high status and integrity from the begining and it may be reasonable to assume that at least
some of the children who spoke up were following a strategy of polite agreement as this involved less chance of controversy and their drawing embarassment to themselves.  Certainly, at the time of the discussion, there was no real evidence that the children were very concerned about the risk of impending unemployment, although since that time there have been letters in the press, e.g. Dickens G, TES 17.4.81.,p13, to the effect that this may now be occuring.

''  While interviewing fifth-formers in a local authority school recently,... I found a number of boys and girls who have clearly both the ability and interest to take 'A' level .... are planning to leave ....(to) take low level jobs in commerce and industry.  They have given very clearly as their reason the fear that unemployment may be worse in two year's time, and the belief that the security of a job now, if they can get one, outweighs any possible advantage of further study.. ''
The overall impression left after the long period of exposure to individual discussions with of these children was that their over-riding concern was to be eventually successful in the forthcoming 'A' level examinations and hence to gain entry to higher education.  A concern with choosing and preparing for a particular occupation seemed to be one which did not yet apply to them.  They seemed to feel that they were on a ladder which if they could remain on it would lead them to a secure occupational future.  What mattered most to them was the 'here and now' of getting good examination passes since these would ensure their ability to further progress.  Failing examinations at any point would mean their 'stepping off' the career ladder and that, when it happened, would be the time for taking occupational decisions.  They felt that the longer they remained on the ladder of academic progress the more secure their future would be, irrespective of how the outside employment situation was changing.  It was as though the outside employment situation was something outside their control whilst the strategy of increasing their academic worth with qualifications was one which they well understood and could implement for themselves.
***********

REFERENCES 

************

1  
ASHTON D.N. and FIELD D., ''Young Workers'', (1976), London, Hutchinson.
2  
BANKS O., ''The Sociology of Education'', 3rd Ed,(1971), London, Batsford Press.
3  
BEARDSLEE D.C. and O'DOWD D.D., ''The college student image of the
scientist'', Science, (1961), 133, 997-1001.
4  
BEARDSLEE D.C. and O'DOWD D.D, ''Students and the occupational world'',
in SANDFORD N.(Ed) 'The American College', (1962), New York, Wiley.
5  
BERNSTEIN B., ''Social class and linguistic development: a theory of
social learning'', in HALSEY A.H., et al,(Eds), 'Education, Economy and
Society', (1961), Collier-Macmillan, London.
6  
BLAU P.M., et al., ''Occupational Choice: a conceptual framework'',
Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 8, 531-46, Cornell University
Press.
7  
BOTT E., ''Family and Social Network'', 2nd Edition, (1971), London,
Tavistock Publications.
8  
BURTON M., ''Semantic Dimensions of Occupational Names'', in ROMNEY A.K.,
et al (Eds), 'Multidimensional Scaling: Theory and Applications in the
Behavioural Sciences, Volume 2', (1972), New York, Seminar Press.
9  
CICOUREL A.V., ''Theory and Method in a study of Argentine Fertility'',
(1974), New York, Wiley.
10  
CLARE P. and VICKERS S., ''Industrial literacy - a fresh approach to
inter-disciplinary study at Advanced level GCE'', School Technology,
(1981), 3, 14.
11  
COXON A.P.M. and JONES C.L., ''Occupational Similarities: Subjective
aspects of social stratification'', Quality and Quantity, (1974), 8, 139-54.
12  
COXON A.P.M. and JONES C.L., ''The images of occupational prestige: A study
in social cognition'', (1978), London, The Macmillan Press.
13  
COXON A.P.M. and JONES C.L., ''Class and Heirarchy: The social meanings of
occupations'', (1979), London, The Macmillan Press.
14  
COXON A.P.M. and JONES C.L., ''Measurement and Meanings: Techniques and
methods of studying occupational cognition'', (1979), London, The Macmillan
Press.
15  
CRANDALL V.J., ''Achievement'', in STEVENSON H.W. (Ed), 'Child Psychology:
The sixtysecond yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education
Part I',(1963), University of Chicago Press.
16  
DEPARTMENT of INDUSTRY, ''Industry, Education and Management - A discussion
paper'', (1977), London, HMSO.
17  
DEUTSCH M., et al(Eds), ''Social clas, race and psychological development'',
(1968), New York, Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
18  
DIPBOYE W.J. and ANDERSON W.F., ''Occupational stereotypes and manifest
needs of high school students'', Journal of Counselling Psychology, (1961),
8, 296-304.
19  
DOUGLAS J.W.B., ''The Home and the School'', (1964), London, MacGibbon and
Kee.
20  
DOUGLAS J.W.B., et al, ''All our future: A longitudinal study of secondary
education'', (1968), London, Peter Davies.
21  
ENTWISTLE N.J., ''Academic motivation and school attainment'', British
Journal of Educational Psychology, (1968), 38, 2.
22  
FRASER E., ''Home environment and the School'', (1959), University of
London Press.
23  
FORD J., ''Social class and the Comprehensive School'', (1969), London,
Routledge and Kegan Paul.
24  
GINZBERG E., et al, ''Occupational Choice: An approach to a general
theory'', (1951), New York, Columbia University Press.
25  
GOLDMEIER E., ''Similarity in visually perceived forms'' , Psychological
Issues (1972), 8, Monograph 29.
26  
GOLDTHORPE J.H., ''Social mobility and the class structure in modern
Britain'', (1980), Oxford, Clarendon Press.


27  
GOLDTHORPE J.H. and HOPE K., ''Occupational Grading and Occupational
Prestige'', in HOPE K.(Ed), 'The Analysis of Social Mobility', (1972),
Oxford, The Clarendon Press.
28  
GOULDNER A.W., ''Patterns of Industrial Bureaucracy'', (1955), London,
Routledge and Kegan Paul.
29  
GRANOVETTER M.S., ''Getting a Job - A study of contacts and careers'',
(1974), Harvard University Press.
30  
HALSEY A.H., HEATH A.F. and RIDGE J.M., ''Origins and Destinations - Family,
Class and Education in Modern Britain'', (1980), Oxford, The Clarendon Press.
31  
HOLLAND J.L., ''A psychological classification of occupations - Report No
90'', (1970), Centre for the study of social organisation in schools, John
Hopkins University.
32  
JACKSON B. and MARSDEN B., ''Education and the working class'', (1962),
London, Routledge and Kegan Paul.
33  
JONES T.W., A review of the works of COXON and JONES (1978 - 79), (see
above), British Journal of Sociology, (1980), 31, 4.
34  
KAHL J.A., ''Common Man Boys'', in HALSEY A.H., et al, (Eds), 'Education,
Economy and Society', (1961), London, Collier-Macmillan.
35  
KAHL J.A., ''Some measures of Achievement Orientation'', American Journal
of Sociology, (1965), 70.
36  
KATZ F.M., ''The meaning of success: Some differences in the value systems
of social classes'', Journal of Social Psychology, (1964), 62.
37  
KLOPFER L.E., ''Evaluation of science achievement and science test
development in an international context: The IEA study of science'', Science
Education, (1973), 57.
38  
KLUCKHOLM F.R. and STRODBECK F.L., ''Variations in Value Orientations'',
(1961), Chicago, Row, Paterson.
39  
KOHN M.L., ''Social class and parent child relationships: An
interpretation'', The American Journal of Sociology, (1963), 68, 471-480.
40  
KUDER G.F., ''Manual for the Kuder Vocational Preference Record'',
(1960), Chicago, Science Research Associates.
41  
LAWTON D., ''Social class, Language and Education'', (1968), London,
Routledge and Kegan Paul.

42  
LIVERSEDGE W., ''Life Chances'', The Sociological Review, (1962), 10,
17-34.
43  
McKINLEY D.G., ''Social class and family life'', (1964), Glencoe, Illinois,
The Free Press.
44  
MESSICK S.J. and ABELSON R.P., ''The additive constant problem in
multidimensional scaling'', Psychometrika, (1956), 21, 1-16.
45  
MUSGRAVE P.W., ''Towards a sociological theory of occupational choice'',
The Sociological Review, (1967), 15, 33-46.
46  
OSGOOD C.E., et al, ''The measurement of meaning'', (1957), Urbana, The
University of Illinois Press.
47  
OSIPOW S.H., ''Perceptions of occupations as functions of titles and
descriptions'', (1962) in Journal of Counselling Psychology 9,106-119.
48  
OXFORD DELEGACY of LOCAL EXAMINATIONS, broadsheet on the 'Industrial
Studies' Advanced level GCE examination, (March 1981), Oxford.
49  
PLOWDEN REPORT, ''Children and their Primary Schools'', Volume 2, (1967),
London, Central Advisory Council for Education, HMSO.
50  
POPE A.J., ''Engineering a turnaround to technology'', in The 'Guardian',
Education Section, 20 February 1979.
51  
REEB M., ''How people see Jobs: A multidimensional analysis'',
Occupational Psychology, (1959), 33, 1, 1-17.
52  
REEB M., ''Similarity, Prestige and Desirability of Jobs as seen by
Counsellors and 14 year old boys'', Occupational Psychology, (1971), 45,
233-242.
53  
REEB M., ''The perception of occupational structure: An intervening
variable in vocational behaviour'', Journal of Vocational Behaviour,
(1974), 4, 125-137.
54  
REEB M., ''Occupational perception and school stream in relation to job
classifications, preferences and prestige for 17 year old girls and boys'',
Journal of Occupational Psychology, (1979), 52, 113-127.
55  
REMENYI A.G., et al, ''Measuring attitudes to occupational concepts'',
(1979) in The Vocational Aspect of Education, 31, 37-41.


56  
ROBERTS K., ''The entry into employment: An approach towards a general
theory'', The Sociological Review, (1968), 16, 2, 165-184.
57  
ROE A., ''The psychology of Occupations'', (1956), New York, Wiley.
58  
ROSEN B.C., ''Race, ethnicity and the achievement syndrome'', American
Sociological Review, (1959), 24, 47.
59  
ROSEN B.C. and D'ANDRADE B.C., ''The psychological origins of achievement
motivation'', Sociometry, (1959), 22, 185.
60  
SEARS R.R., ''Dependency Motivation'', in JONES M.R., (Ed), 'Nebraska
Symposium on Motivation', (1963), University of Nebraska Press.
61  
SEARS R.R., MACOBY E.E., LEVIN H., ''Patterns of Childrearing'', (1957),
Evanston, Illinois, Row, Patterson.
62  
SEARS R.R., RAU L., ALPERT R., ''Identification and Childrearing'', (1966),
London, Tavistock Publications.
63  
SEISS T.F. and ROGERS T.B., ''Roe's classification and the
multidimensional nature of occupational perception'', Journal of Vocational
Behaviour, (1974), 4, 403-415.
64  
SHUBSACHS A.P.W. and DIVISON M.L., ''Individual Differences in perceptions
of occupational reinforcers'', Journal of Occupational Psychology, (1979),
52, 299-310.
65  
SNIDER J.D. and OSGOOD C.E., (Eds), ''Semantic differential technique:
A source book'', (1959), Aldine Publishing Co., Chicago.
66  
STRONG E.K. Jr., ''Vocational Interests of men and women'', (1943),
Palo Alto, California, Stanford University Press.
67  
SUGARMAN B.N., ''Social class and values as related to achievement and
conduct in school'', The Sociological Review, (1962), 10, 287-301.
68  
SUPER D.E., 'A theory of vocational development'', American Psychologist,
(1953), 8, 185-190.
69  
SUPER D.E., ''The Psychology of careers'', (1957), New York, Harper.
70  
TAJFEL H., ''Social and cultural factors in perception'', in LINZEY and
ARONSON, (Eds), 'The handbook of social psychology', (1969), Reading, Mass.,
Addison Wesley.
71  
THOMAS R. and WEATHERALL D., ''Looking Forward to Work'', (1974), London,
HMSO.
72  
TRIANDIS H.C., ''Differential perception of certain jobs and people by
managers, clerks and workers in industry'', (1959) in Journal of Applied
Psychology 43, 221-225.
73  
VENABLES E., ''The young worker at college'', (1967), London, Faber and
Faber.
74  
VENABLES E., ''Apprentices out of their time'', (1974), London, Faber and
Faber.
75  
WEIR A.D., ''Research into education and the economic system'', in DOCKRELL
B., (Ed), 'School and After', Windsor, NFER Publications.
76  
WIER A.D. and NOLAN F.J., ''Glad to be out - A study of school leavers'',
(1977), Edinburgh, Scottish Council for Research in Education.
77  
WILLIAMS R.M., ''American society: A sociological interpretation'', (1951),
New York, Alfred A Knopf Inc.
78  
WILLIS P., ''Learning to Labour: How working class kids get working class
jobs'', (1977), London, Saxon House.
79  
WINTERBOTTOM M.R., ''The relation of need for achievement in learning
experiences in independence and mastery'', in ATKINSON J.W., (Ed), 'Motives
in Fantasy, Action and Society', (1958), Princeton N.J., Van Norstrand.




************
APPENDICES 
************




Appendix 1
Survey I   - Childrens' Questionnaire	179
- Childrens' comments on Industry	181
- Teachers' comments on works visits	191
- Teachers' comments on careers guidance	196
Appendix 2
Survey II - Childrens' Questionnaire	201
- Individual subject comparisons	202
Appendix 3
Survey III - Interview schedule 	216
Appendix 4
Survey IV  - Interview schedule	219
Appendix 5
Multidimensional scaling questionnaire	222
Appendix 6
Semantic differential questionnaire 	226


Attractions and deterrents of a career in industry


Given below are a series of quotations taken from the more articulate replies
received in the returns from Survey I.


Openings for quick promotion
Working with intellegent dedicated people.  Job satisfaction
Good working conditions and a fair days pay for a fair days work.  A chance to meet people and go places, I would feel the job was doing some good.
You would be earning money immediately and would be seeing something for your labours.
More opportunities for promotion in industry
Female equality, independence and good promotion prospects.
Lab work rather than site work.
Very short hours, long holidays and a lot of money.
It would be interesting and varied work on the research side.  I would take great delight in inventing something that would be of use to the community as a whole.
Industry provides a variety of jobs and the promotion rate would be high.
Industry gives a good job, well paid with good promotion prospects and sponsorship to go to university.
The possibility of working on something new in development or design.
Research or analytical work would interest me as would working with other people.
The incentive of high wages.  The challenge of tackling and solving problems which involve a combination of processes.
I come from a family of engineers and it has always been my ambition to work in the British engineering industry.
The challenge of working in new fields rather than in routine work, the opportunity to do something no one else has done and to benefit the community at large.
An interesting job working with specialised equipment.
The ability to travel around (before marriage) and security and relative immobility (after marriage).
The attraction of a high salary.
Financial inducement and the fact that one is assisting the countries economy.
Good incentive schemes, good working hours and conditions, a lot of room for promotion.
Well equipped sports facilities, modern machinery, good pay, good research facilities.
If industries were fairly new, there would be small groups of researchers
doing interesting projects.
Most activity goes on in industry.  One is more deeply involved and therefore
the work is more interesting.
No attractions except possibly good wages.
Industry is interesting because it is relevant to the outside world.
A large firm offers a wide variety of research projects and would probably be a secure job.
The chance to be part of a large organisation and to feel that you were contributing something towards society.
Nothing would attract me towards a career in industry.  I think the job satisfaction is not sufficient.  I have always been attracted towards medicine and jobs involving people.
I would rather work in contact with people, helping people than in producing a manufactured article.
Research projects would be frustrated by the company requiring what it wants from the back room boys.
Industry is stagnated by lack of reearch investment.
Danger of handling dangerous chemicals / having to work in ugly surroundings of factories.
Working in industry could force you to live in a city.  Could be working in a nasty environment.  Possibility of redundancy.
Bad working condiions, the need to work longer hours than other jobs, the hazard of working with dangerous and unproven materials.
Lack of involovement with people, lack of social status, the need for any research done to lead quickly to profit for the company.
A fear of the hardship attached to being a manual worker in unpleasant working conditions.
The possibility of being replaced by a silicon chip.
Trade union power is too great.
The work may be too overpowering for a female.
A nine to five job with little or no variation, full of people trying to scramble up the social ladder as quickly as possible.
I know too little about industry to give an intellegent answer to this question.
I would hate to be involved in assembly or packaging in industry.
It would be hard to get a job that I really wanted in industry.  I would hate a job packing household goods into fancy wrappers.  I need a lot more of a challenge than that.
I do not know much about careers in industry at the moment.
It gets monotonous in the same job.  The pay is low compared to teaching.  Working on a plant could lack job satisfaction.
Nationalisation and the adverse publicity given to British Steel, British Leyland etc.
Not being able to work independently.  Little information on industrial careers available in schools.
I dont really know anything about industry.
A repetitive job.
Unions.
Working with reactive chemicals could be dangerous.
Industrial troubles, the monotony of jobs at shop floor level, the possibility of sudden sacking.
Trade Unions
The health risks from new potentially dangerous products.
Government ownership, not enough national development.
A smaller range of industrial jobs for women than there are for men.
The same boring routine.  Machines will take away from qualified people and losses of jobs.
Being a small cog in a large machine and not knowing what happens to the results of your work.  The possibility of unemployment.
The work would be more or less the same each day.
Monotony - looking forward to the next teabreak all the time and not concentrating.  The job is secure only as long as the firm is making a profit.
Bad (dirty) working conditions.
Industry is only interested in profitability.
The instability of British industry, political and social prejudices.
Lack of responsibility and interest.
Repetitiveness of the job, damage to health by high noise levels, etc.
Research on weaponry and on living animals.
Risks involved in working with dangerous materials.  Dangers of leaking causing pollution to the atmosphere and rivers etc.
Noisy environment, boredom, unhealthy conditions, impersonal job.
Clocking in and out, working in a large building or factory.
My impression is that wages are comparatively low, and when a company no longer has a need for your services you will be made redundant without a doubt.
To attract people to industry, more facts are needed about it and its technical side must be made available.
I am deterred by the possible lack of privacy or self esteem and noisy working conditions.
I think present TV documentaries and the media generally give a dark impression
of industry as being harsh, noisy and grimy with a high risk of fire, expolsion
or death. (e.g. Flixborough).
Too much responsibility, the danger of an accident is high, changing the scene of ones work is a remote possibility.
Industry seems a mundane existance, not very fulfilling.
At the moment the news about British industry is pretty bad, with firms going out of business and present government policy.
I am deterred by the unfavourable woking conditions, e.g. needing to wear overalls because the job is dirty.
Too many people to deal with and consequently impersonal.  Too many responsibilities and possibly dangerous working conditions.
Boring repetitive job working for someone else instead of myself.  Trade unions affect the running of the country.
One could be confined to a routine job, there is a risk of being unemployed.
The present image of industry is that it is dirty, monotonous and unsuitable for women.
Industry is traditionally male dominated and has unpleasant working surroundings.
A better way of teaching chemistry would be to try and integrate it more with other subjects, physics teachers should be used in conjunction with maths teachers to remove the isolation of chemistry as a subject.
I confess to having been favourably influenced towards industry by TV programmes like Horizon and Survival.
Chemistry seems harder to relate to ordinary living than biology, physics
or medicine.
Not enough practical demonstrations are given in 'A' level chemistry.
In choosing a job it is ones own ideas that count because one gets little
real information from anyone else.
I know little about jobs except teaching.  I am hoping that university will broaden my horizons.
I want to help people not to use them.
Liking or disliking of the sciences depends on the teachers attitudes towards the subject and you.  My teacher makes it easier for me to learn.
No amount of disuasion by my careers officer will change my mind about my career.  (Career choice here was medicine).
There should be more information about careers in schools.
The lack of knowledge of the above (industry) is directly linked to the help of careers officers.  They usually try to get you into an apprenticeship of some kind.
Very little detailed information on industry is available through the school.
We are directed by the school towards university degrees in pure rather than applied science and this hinders our thoughts on working in industry.
I think more should be done to educate students about industry, using trips, lectures,etc.
Careers advice and literature on chemical engineering are hard to come by.
Industry does not make enough effort to sell itself to schools, especially for careers other than pure engineering.
I do not think that industry makes enough effort to capture the attention of students in schools.  A lot of people think industry is a never ending succession of assembly lines and have no idea of the research that goes on behind.
Large firms like ICI and BP should offer a type of work experience for people 15 to 17 years old so they can see exactly what are the tasks, responsibilities and duties involved.
We have hardly any chances to visit industial complexes to see what conditions are like.
More provision should be made for the training of minerologists as the prospecting for minerals will become increasingly important in the search for future resources.
Until more money, respect for the public and opportunities are available to the industrial engineer, trained people will not be attracted.
Virtually no careers advice is given by those whose job it is to give it.
We have very little knowledge of what industry is really like, what it involves and what its prospects are for graduates.
I think the reason why not many science based students are making a career in industry is because of the lack of information on such careers.
No career choice - the careers teacher is trying to persuade me into a career I am not interested in.
If I change my mind from medicine, it will probably be towards biochemistry.
I would like to work in industry, but the impression I have got about industry is that it is a pretty grotty place to work in.  If I knew more about it maybe I would like to work there.
We are not given any information about careers in industry.
Students need more chance to see industry at work.  More tours round factories, more advertising of the different divisions of industry and the job prospects.


Questionnaire replies from teachers

Please list brief details of any works visits, works experience schemes or
schools industry link schemes that the lower or upper sixth chemistry pupils
participate in.  Mention the duration of such visits, a day, a week, etc., at
what point in the sixth form course they occur and whether they are integrated
with course work.  Please finish with a general comment on whether you think
such visits make a real contribution to the students academic work, career aspirations or any other aspect.

No works experience schemes, no schools industry link schemes.  Works visits
are largely discontinued because of: disproportionate time taken by such visits, little relationship with JMB syllabus B.  Very little to actually see because
of modernisation and computer control.  Visits to smaller firms where true
inorganic bucket chemistry still goes on are preferred and even then such
visits can be of value only when the pupils have been adequately prepared
beforehand and the firm is aware of the needs of these pupils in terms of the
syllabus they are following and knows what their academic level is.
No works visits have been run in the last year or two, although their usefulness, in moderation, is to be admitted.  Pressures of completing the syllabus, Nuffield 'A' level, prevent this.
The school has a works experience involvement for the whole of the lower sixth
for one or two weeks during the period of the easter holidays, and this is not
integrated in any way with the course work.  Chemistry/physics establishments
used include Geigy, Lankro, Chloride Lorival, the Electricity Board and the
visits are primarily concerned with careers.  The lower sixth pupils
choose establishments from those available.  No teaching time is lost by anyone
and it is impressive how effectively the firms involve the pupils in what they
are doing.
Pupils make occasional half day visits to industrial concerns.  These are not integrated in any way with course work and to some extent have a doubtful usefulness except to pupils aspiring to go into industry.
Previously visits were to Procter and Gamble in Trafford Park, and currently
there is a half day visit to Lever Brothers, Port Sunlight.  Not much chemistry
is seen but the pupils get an opportunity to see the chemical industry at
first hand.  Pupils visit UMIST during the summer holidays to attend one day courses on textiles, colour chemistry and colloids but these are not integrated
with school work.  Industrial visits serve little academic purpose, but do arouse interest, help to build up confidence and encourage careers in industry.
A Christmas visit to Shell's oil refinery at Stanlow and visits to Leeds and
York Universities are run during term time.  Manchester Polytechnic's sixth
form instrumentation course and Salford University's paper science course were
visited during the two weeks of the local holidays.  Such visits would, however,
be a total waste of time if there were not adequate preparation beforehand and
discussion afterwards.
There is no school involvement in works visits.  They are rated as making
no contribution to academic work and making little contribution to career aspirations.
The upper sixth go on day visits to British Aerospace, etc. and to firms who offer sponsorships.  Most pupils do not find the visits helpful in that they come
away still not knowing what working at the place would entail.  Firms generally
do not respond to detailed requests for specific types of visit.  Students can come away more put off than stimulated.
Whilst it is felt that they would be valuable, the school does not find time
to do works visits due to the pressures of the syllabus.
The school follows the JMB industrial 'A' level syllabus.  Visits pertaining
to this are: a one day visit to ICI dyestuffs at Trafford Park as part of the
colour chemistry option, this being a specially tailored visit.  One day is at
the Polymer Technology Department at Manchester Polytechnic with morning and
afternoon sessions as part of the polymers option.  A similar day at the same
time is spent in connection with the metallurgy option.  Additionally for this
there is a day spent in the Aeronautical and Mechanical Engineering Department
at Salford University.  Ciba Geigy are currently being negotiated for a visit as part of the colour chemistry course and also for a supply of materials.
The Polymer and Fibre Science at UMIST also contributes material to the school.
There is also a visit to a filtration plant of the North West Water Authority.
The visits and contacts with industry are regarded as being of great benefit to
the students in many ways and this programme will be expanded if this becomes
possible.
No works are carried out, they are noisy and time consuming and few of the
children in the party can hear the guide.  They do a lot to deter young people
from entering the chemicals industry.  Films can do a much better job in a much better and more controlled environment.
Visits are carried out to Lankro chemicals and to various universities.
Their number is limited by shortage of time, but such visits are thought to be
useful.
Properly arranged industrial visits make a valuable contribution both
academically and careerwise to the 'A' level chemistry course.
Syllabus pressures prevent our operation any works visits.  Given proper
groundwork before and after, such visits would be of value, and even more so if
syllabus A were being followed.
There are works experience schemes running in the fifth form.  The school has
run visits to university and polytechnic open days but not a lot of works visits.  Most of the sixth form pupils already have fixed career aspirations.
The sixth form do not participate in any works visits.  Such visits do give
pupils an insight into the work of an industrial chemist, but the maze of
metal pipes and steel vessels prevent the pupils from seeing the reactions.
The general shortage of teaching time is also prohibitive.
In recent years groups have been taken to Pilkington's glassworks, Ciba Geigy
Pharmacceuticals in Macclesfield, Clayton Aniline and the Paterson Laboratories
at Christie's Hospital.  Such visits form an invaluable part of the school life
and lack of more time is the only factor which prohibits the use of more such
visits.  The firms and laboratories concerned deserve our grateful thanks.
Firms approached in the past have given an unsympathetic response and no
programme of works visits has materialised.
The non-works oriented nature of the syllabus produces little demand for
industrial visits.  Special courses at Manchester Polytechnic on spectroscopy,
etc., are attended.
Whilst works visits and works experience schemes would improve the attitudes
towards industry and broaden the syllabus as taught, the difficulties of their
disrupting the teaching of other departments prevents then from being used.
Works visits are run to Shell at Stanlow and various of the divisions of ICI.
Visiting lecturers are invited from UMIST, about six a year and the UMIST sixth
form lectures are attended.  Some of the pupils go on the one week chemistry
course at Manchester Polytechnic.
The school has been involved in the past with industrial visits but at present,
lack of teaching time and the extensive outside commitments of the pupils conspire to prevent our doing any now.
Attempts have been made in the past to arrange visits to various firms
but with no success.  A visit to UMIST and an involvement in their summer school
is planned.  The visits do not help academically, but they do emphasise the
involvement of chemistry in industry.
The school has no links with industry and works experience visits are confined to those leaving at the end of the fifth form.  Industrial visits in the past
seem to have had little effect, mostly they reinforce the students preconcieved
ideas.
The school has an industrial link which is aimed at a 14 to 16 year old group
who did experimental work on dyes and colloids.  Works visits done in the past
with the sixth form have disillusioned as many people as they have inspired.
To be successful, a visit would need to look at a particular process or technique.
The lower sixth go to the summer school course in chemistry at Manchester
Polytechnic.  From previous experience, the open day and departmental tour at
Sheffield Polytechnic is to be highly recommended.
Due to the large number of pupils involved, outside science is promoted by
posters and films rather than works visits.  Works experience occurs in the
fifth form and chemistry pupils have been connected with the Water Board, the
CEGB and various local industries.  No industrial links exist with the sixth form and there are fewer films used with them.  Present sixth form members have
attended the holiday chemistry courses at UMIST and Liverpool University.
A visit to the oil refinery at Stanlow is carried out in the first term of the
lower sixth and this is integrated with course work.  Running this causes considerable timetable disruption and its overall value is doubtful as it does not
give a good idea of what professional chemists do.
Visits are run each year to Shell at Stanlow, the sewage works, Tupperware,
H.J. Heinz and the hospital laboratories.  These happen mostly at the end
of the lower sixth year and they give the students an insight into industrial life and work in factories.  Apart from Stanlow, they make little contribution to the academic side.
What careers guidance do children who go through the school on an 'O' level
- 'A' level path actually receive.  To what extent do you or your fellow
chemistry staff point out or emphasise chemistry based careers.  To what
extent do these children engage the attentions of the school's careers
teacher.  Estimate what proportion of the children passing through 'A' level
chemistry classes are given specific encouragement or advice which might
direct them towards specific careeers.


The chemistry department gives subject choice advice at the end of the
second year in preparation for making option choices for the third year.
A list compiled from careers journals of some 35 careers for which the study
of chemistry is necessary is given to each of the children for this purpose.
The fourth and fifth forms are given careers lectures by outside agencies
and do go on careers visits organised by the school and the LEA.  Chemistry
staff do encourage certain children of obvious ability towards certain areas
of the curriculum.
The careers staff are available to lower sixth pupils one evening a week
and the lower sixth are given one period of formal careers education each week.
The fourth formers during the summer term are given 15 to 20 minute
interviews by both a careers teacher and a careers officer from the LEA.
Chemistry biased fifth formers interested in either employment or further
studies in the sixth form are actively encouraged.  Most of such stay on at
school.
Four careers teachers on the staff and a careers officer from the LEA give
advice to the children.  The chemistry staff give advice on industry and the
choice of university courses.
Each pupil is interviewed in both the fifth and in the sixth form by the
school's careers teacher and also by an LEA careers officer.  The most
helpful careers advice comes from a school science careers conference which
the school runs every two or three years at which past pupils, usually still
at university, speak about their careers, pharmacy, engineering, biochemistry.
The fourth, fifth and sixth form pupils attending can ask questions of
them etc.  Before the conference each pupil is given a list of careers in
science and the subject combinations required for each of them.
In the lower school pupils are made aware of the spectrum of careers having
science requirements.  The value of science qualifications and the inherent
difficulty of science subjects is also pointed out.
The careers staff in the third year give careers lessons in preparation
for making option choices in the fourth year.  No direct encouragement is given by
members of the chemistry staff to take chemistry.
Careers guidance interviews are given within the school by the careers staff
and by the LEA careers officer.  Discussions on proposed 'A' level courses
also go on in the fifth form.  Pupils tend to make choices of the subjects
they get highest marks in rather than in the light of any career aspiration.
The opinion was mooted that the children get more inspiration from television
than they get from any official careers education.
The usual pattern of advice in the lower school is given by the careers teacher
and the LEA careers officer.  The chemistry staff avoid unduly influencing
the lower school pupils, but considerable advice of various kinds is given
to the sixth form pupils.
Children are interviewed as many as three times in the third year to discuss
subject choices and career aspirations and there is a careers / option choices
meeting for parents.  Interviews are also carried on in the fifth form by
careers teachers and LEA careers officers.  Similar interviews go on in the
sixth form and also advice is given to UCCA applicants and for mock interviews.
Annually a careers convention is held at which higher education and industrial
establishments are represented.
All the pupils are attached to a particular careers tutor who liaises with
the LEA careers officer.  The majority of them seem to go into higher education.
Chemistry based careers are mentioned from time to time in lessons, e.g.
chemical engineering, pharmacy, water board, polymer chemistry.
Pupils are given fairly specific advice by the schools careers service.  The
chemistry staff do not overtly emphasise chemistry based careers during lessons.
Generalised careers advice is given in the third year prior to making option
choices.  In the fourth and fifth forms careeers lessons are timetabled and
there is a careers centre in the school.  The chemistry department gives
advice and information about chemistry based careers and encouragement where
this is appropriate.
Careers talks begin for the third year pupils in January or February and
careers staff are also available during the lunch hours.  In the fourth and
fifth years, there is an interview with the LEA careers officer and they are
encouraged to use the careers library.  In the sixth form the same process
is escalated.  For the chemistry department to directly encourage careers in
chemistry could be construed as touting for customers.
Advice is given to help fourth year setting and staff emphasise the utility
of science in an industrial city and how it can enhance job prospects.  The
careers teacher is mainly involved with the less academic pupils in the fifth
form.
The careers teacher gives specific advice to sixth form pupils and the long
industrial experience of the head of department enables occasional discussions
of chemistry based careers with sixth form classes.  Most of the pupils go on to higher education on leaving.
Careers guidance is given through interviews with the head teacher and the
LEA careers officer.  There is also a careers information section in the school library.
The chemistry staff advise against early specialisation and from time to time
chemistry careers are pointed out and explained.  Until recently, it had not
been thought prudent to direct pupils towards higher qualifications in pure
chemistry.
In both the lower school and the sixth form careers advice is furnished by
the careers teacher and the LEA careers officer.  Subject teachers are not
formally involved in this.
Advice on options choices is given in the third year and formal careers lessons
are given once a fortnight to the fourth and fifth formers and once a week to
the sixth form.  The chemistry staff do discuss chemistry based careers at
various times.  All the 'A' level pupils see the careers teacher, but it is
difficult to estimate the extent to which they truely engage his services.
The importance of chemistry is stressed and general guidance is given by the
chemistry staff on chemistry based careers.  The careers teacher gives
considerable help.
There is an effective careers guidance system in the school with interviews given by the school careers teacher and the LEA careers officer.  The fourth
form have a talk with the careers teacher every few weeks.
Careers lessons are given to the fourth and fifth formers and a file of
their career interests is kept.  More attention, necessarily, is paid to those
who are leaving rather tha to those staying on in the sixth form.  An
interview / appointment system is used but, at the time of writing, none of
the sixth form have consulted the careers teacher so far this term.
Careers advice is given throughout the school but not particularly with
the chemical industry in mind.  The careers teacher does supply literature
on careers in chemistry and in the third and fourth years emphasis is placed
upon the importance of having science qualifications.
Both the school career teachers and the LEA careers officer are available for
consultation through from the third to the sixth forms.  The chemistry
department does give some guidance on chemistry based careers.
Students are well informed on the relevance of subject choice to careers in various
professions but have not had formal careers lessons.  The vast majority have entered
the sixth form without any discussion of the relevance of their choice of
subject to any career objective.  The careers department in the school is
understaffed and there is little enough time for basic interviews with
those who request them so careers in industry are in no way specially
promoted.  Most of the students in the sixth form have only the generalised
aim of university followed by empolyment and nothing more specific than this.
The school's careers guidance service is directed more towards school
leavers rather than towards academic pupils.  Encouragement is given to stay
on at school but little discussion goes on into what employment prospects may
exist afterwards.  Chemistry staff discuss career matters as they arise, but this
is largely advice about avoiding wrong decisions, as we are not qualified to
provide the required detailed information.
Some of the pupils in the fourth and the fifth form get as many as two double
periods of careers lessons a week, but timetable pressures often prevent the
top band of pupils receiving any such lessons at all.  There are six members of
staff involved in giving these careers lessons.  During chemistry lessons, the discussion of
chemistry based careers is carried out as and when the occasion arises.
The career choice implications of option choices made in the lower school are
clearly emphasised and two personal interviews are given with pastoral staff
before and after 'O' levels.  Careers talks on a variety of topics are
regularly given during tutor group periods.
Interviews are given in the fifth form with the careers teacher and the LEA
careers officer.  The chemistry staff help only indirectly, giving information
about colleges, etc.  Direct encouragement towards chemistry based careers
is not given.



Occupational Category	Mean	No.	Std.Err	Skew	Kurtosis	Value		
Car Mechanics etc.
6.2
10
1.17
1.76
0.77

Skilled Textile Workers
7.04
11
1.66
1.87
0.77

Electricians
7.73
11
0.94
0.56
-0.12

Builders and Bricklayers
7.94
18
1.23
0.83
-0.57

Drivers
8.43
22
0.98
1.09
-1

Police and Security Workers
8.5
10
0.73
0.25
-0.83

Unskilled Labourers & Dockers
8.65
19
0.87
0.24
-0.65

Skilled Engineering Operatives
8.72
18
1.24
0.27
-1.19

Industrial Chemists 
8.87
24
1.03
0.97
-0.92

Factory Workers
8.93
28
0.87
0.97
-0.66

Draughtsmen & Designers
9.06
17
0.94
1.2
0.1

Company Directors
9.07
28
1.06
1.11
-1

Sales & Advertising Managers
9.11
35
0.97
0.94
-1.41

Local Auth. & Civil Service
9.33
24
1.05
0.23
-0.93

Joiners & Glaziers, etc.
9.48
21
1.13
0.48
-1.79

Clerks & Secretaries
9.58
31
0.89
0.82
-1

Transport Managers
10.09
11
1.45
0.67
-0.4

Retail Traders & Publicans
10.51
37
0.85
0.72
-1.49

Ch. Mech. Engineers, etc.
10.59
44
0.89
0.39
-1.52

Chartered Accountants
11.08
12
1.74
-0.41
-0.59

Lecturers & Academics
11.6
10
1.56
0.08
-0.31

Nurses & Physiotherapists
11.8
10
1.85
-0.89
-0.8

Head & Deputy Head Teachers
11.9
10
2.27
-0.04
-1.21

Technologists & Prod. Managers
12.36
11
0.9
-0.57
-0.36

Doctors
12.91
11
1.93
-0.47
-0.94

School teachers
13.03
30
1
-0.47
-1.5



	Total 513












Occupational Category	Mean	No.	Std.	Skew-	Kurt-
	
Clerks & Secretaries
5.4
10
0.67
-0.43
-0.76
Business Managers
5.93
15
0.9
0.98
-0.92
Banking
5.96
23
0.74
2.38
1.26
Draughtsmen & Designers
5.96
24
0.67
1.67
-0.51
Nurses & Physiotherapists
6.94
52
0.59
2.82
0.98
School teachers
6.97
58
0.58
2.58
-0.3
Local Auth. & Civil Service
7.69
16
1.03
2.5
2.59
Police & Security workers
7.77
13
1.31
1.71
1.1
Lawyers & Solicitors
9.25
16
1.12
0.76
-0.81
Pilots & Air Traff Controllers
9.4
10
1.27
0.32
-0.73
Chartered Accountants
9.48
23
0.93
1.35
-0.37
Armed Forces
9.56
16
1.11
-0.55
-0.79
Lecturers & Academic Research
11.6
10
1.56
0.98
-0.31
Electronics Engineers
12.17
18
1.22
-0.05
-1.18
Ch. Mechanical Engineers,etc.
12.52
23
0.78
0.66
-0.73
Computer Programmers
12.61
23
0.91
0.43
-0.84
Pharmacists & Pharmacologists
13
12
1.41
-1.03
0.16
Opticians
13.31
13
1.18
-1.02
-0.39
Industrial Chem & Physicists
14.21
42
0.65
-1.83
0.45
Dentists
14.41
17
1.01
-2.39
1.47
Doctors
15.07
56
0.53
-1.23
-1.53
	Total 489

Occupational Category	Mean	No.	Std.	Skew-	Kurt-

Police & Security workers
5.3
10
0.73
0.02
-0.97
Electricians
5.5
10
1.07
2.27
1.37
Unskilled Labourers etc.
5.5
22
0.7
0.76
-0.76
Bricklayers & Building workers
5.65
17
1.08
1.33
-0.61
Industrial Chem & Physicists
6
22
0.89
0.69
-0.89
Draughtsmen & Designers
6.56
16
0.81
0.95
-0.74
Drivers
6.67
21
0.87
0.77
-1.02
Factory workers etc.
6.88
25
0.74
1.04
-0.69
Clerks & Secretaries
6.89
27
0.73
1.28
-0.96
Local Auth & Civil Service
7
20
0.75
0.93
-0.27
Retail Traders & Publicans
7
36
0.71
0.99
-1.3
Company Directors
7.08
26
0.83
0.81
-1.07
Transport Managers
7.1
10
1.23
0.68
-0.22
Sales & Advertising Managers
7.25
28
0.79
0.59
-1.17
Joiners & Glaziers, etc.
7.35
17
0.87
0.99
-0.4
Ch. Mechanical Engineers
7.67
40
0.74
0.67
-1.69
Lecturers & Academic Research
8
10
1.26
1.24
-0.16
Skilled Engineering Operatives
8.15
13
1.05
-0.11
-1.21
Technologists & Prod. Managers
8.81
11
0.89
-0.42
-0.41
Nurses & Physiotherapists
8.6
10
1.34
-0.55
-0.96
Chartered Accountants
8.8
10
1.12
0.53
-0.23
Doctors
9.18
11
1.57
-0.33
-0.98
School teachers
9.33
30
0.78
-0.05
-1.62
	Total 439









Occupational Category	Mean	No.	Std.	Skew-	Kurt-

Business Managers
4.08
12
0.73
0.65
-0.84
Banking Work
4.13
15
0.71
2.21
0.77
Draughtsmen & Designers
4.2
20
0.48
0.78
-0.8
Local Auth & Civil service
4.62
16
0.84
3.13
3.17
Police & Security Workers
5.08
13
1.02
2.23
1.6
Nurses & Physiotherapists
5.17
46
0.46
3.15
1.48
School teachers
5.65
40
0.46
1.67
-0.83
Armed Forces
6.19
16
0.82
0.18
-0.96
Chartered Accountants
6.3
20
0.86
1.22
-0.49
Lawyers & Solicitors
6.68
14
0.86
1.2
-0.24
Ch. Mechanical Engineers
7.96
23
0.73
0.69
-0.73
Technologists & Prod. Managers
8.18
11
0.89
-0.42
-0.41
Computer Programmers
 8,39
23
0.82
0.59
-0.97
Electronics Engineers
8.61
18
1.03
-0.19
-1.11
Opticians
9.38
13
0.94
-0.75
-0.57
Pharmacists & Pharmacologists
9.64
11
0.99
-0.16
-0.7
Industrial Chem & Physicists
10.1
42
0.53
-1.27
0.19
Doctors
11.3
57
0.43
-1.69
-1.4
Dentists
11.4
16
0.53
-0.97
-0.43
	Total 426


Occupational Category	Mean	No.	Std.	Skew-	Kurt-

Unskilled Labourers, etc.
4.53
19
0.56
1.13
-0.37
Drivers
4.89
18
0.54
0.78
-0.32
Bricklayers & Building workers
5
11
0.89
0.1
-0.92
Industrial Chem & Physicists
5
17
0.77
0.41
-1.16
Joiners, Glaziers, etc.
5.14
14
0.72
0.52
-0.76
Local Auth & Civil Service
5.39
18
0.71
-0.05
-1.03
Lecturers & Academic Research
5.6
10
0.83
1.04
-0.5
Factory Workers, etc.
5.68
19
0.63
-0.47
-1.01
Clerks & Secretaries
5.73
22
0.49
0.52
-1.1
Retail Traders & Publicans
5.74
31
0.54
-0.04
-1.55
Skilled Engineering Operatives
5.75
12
0.58
-0.39
-1.01
Sales & Advertising Managers
6.18
22
0.66
0.01
-1.57
Company Directors
6.32
19
0.58
-0.62
-0.59
Doctors
6.45
11
0.97
-0.3
-1
Chartered Accountants
6.6
10
0.83
-0.35
-0.95
Ch. Mechanical Engineers
6.65
31
0.56
-1.26
-1.29
School teachers
7.28
25
0.28
-1.08
-1.33
	Total 309


Occupational Category	Mean	No.	Std.	Skew-	Kurt-

Banking work
3.62
13
0.64
2.25
0.85
Nurses & Physiotherapists
4.59
22
0.53
1.28
-0.51
School teachers
4.68
26
0.47
1.53
-0.62
Armed Forces
5.05
16
0.66
0.58
-0.86
Chartered Accountants
5.33
18
0.62
0.23
-0.96
Lawyers & Solicitors
6.08
13
0.66
-0.97
-0.29
Ch. Mechanical Engineers
6.57
23
0.54
-0.66
-1.16
Chartered Accountants
6.6
10
0.83
-0.35
-0.95
Pharmacists & Pharmacologists
6.64
11
0.78
-0.62
-1.06
Opticians
6.82
11
0.7
-1.06
-0.23
Computer Programmers
6.9
21
0.49
-0.37
-1.15
Electronics Engineers
6.94
18
0.69
-0.4
-0.79
Doctors
7.58
57
0.27
-2.18
0.21
Industrial Chem & Physicists
7.71
42
0.36
-3.02
1.09
	Total 301


Occupational Category	Mean	No.	Std.	Skew-	Kurt-

Police & Security Workers
4.2
10
0.53
1.66
0.33
Bricklayers & Building Workers
4.53
15
0.58
0.53
-0.28
Factory Workers, etc.
4.74
27
0.44
0.78
-0.96
Draughtsmen & Designers
5.14
14
0.66
1.67
-0.15
Drivers
5.15
26
0.44
0.77
-1.06
Skilled Engineering Operatives
5.24
17
0.58
0.4
-0.9
Electricians
5.3
10
0.68
0.55
-0.71
Unskilled Labourers, etc.
5.45
22
0.53
0.28
-0.85
Industrial Chem & Physicists
5.52
23
0.54
0.59
-1.29
Joiners, Glaziers, etc.
5.58
19
0.57
0.49
-1.34
Company Directors
5.64
22
0.55
0.76
-1.19
Local Auth & Civil Service
5.7
23
0.61
0.12
-1.34
Transport Managers
5.91
11
0.72
0.09
-1.1
Clerks & Secretaries
6.03
29
0.43
0.02
-1.34
Sales & Advertising Managers
6.13
30
0.51
0.46
-1.64
Chartered Accountants
6.25
12
1.03
-0.51
-1
Lecturers & Academic Research
6.3
10
0.8
0.1
-0.49
Ch. Mechanical Engineers
6.79
39
0.48
-1.1
-1.65
Retail Traders & Publicans
6.86
35
0.42
-1.25
-0.74
Doctors
7.27
11
0.82
-0.36
-1.04
School teachers
7.37
27
0.56
-1.58
-0.93
Technologists & Prod Managers
7.55
11
0.85
-1.38
-0.4
	Total 436

Occupational Category	Mean	No.	Std.	Skew-	Kurt-

Nurses & Physiotherapists
4.08
38
0.33
3.76
2.27
Business Managers
4.17
12
0.53
1.42
-0.19
Local Auth & Civil Service
4.29
14
0.6
2.39
1.04
School teachers
4.39
54
0.28
3.31
0.42
Draughtsmen & Designers
4.42
19
0.49
1.16
-0.47
Banking work
4.61
23
0.51
0.96
-0.75
Police & Security Work
4.73
11
0.74
0.91
0.08
Lawyers & Solicitors
5.44
16
0.65
0.41
-1.22
Armed Forces
5.94
16
0.67
-0.06
-0.74
Chartered Accountants
6.35
23
0.51
-0.59
-0.74
Pharmacists & Pharmacologists
6.92
12
0.78
-0.96
-0.73
Optcians
7
12
0.6
-0.88
-0.44
Doctors
7.42
57
0.32
-2.71
0.02
Electronics Engineers
7.74
18
0.55
-1.07
-0.67
Computer Programmers
7.57
23
0.41
-0.6
-1.27
Dentists
7.62
16
0.47
-1.47
0.25
Industrial Chem & Physicists
7.83
42
0.36
-2.72
0.53
Ch. Mechanical Engineers
8.27
22
0.37
-1.76
0.01
	Total 428


Occupational Category	Mean	No.	Std.	Skew-	Kurt-

Unskilled Labourers, etc.
2.92
12
0.29
0.24
0.38
Industrial Chem & Physicists
2.94
16
0.28
-0.75
-0.11
Local Auth & Civil Service
3.31
13
0.21
1.02
0.27
Bricklayers & Building Workers
3.42
12
0.34
-0.72
-0.17
Drivers
3.47
15
0.31
-0.29
-0.42
Retail Traders & Publicans
3.52
21
0.2
-0.85
0.89
Clerks & Secretaries
3.53
17
0.23
0.24
-0.71
Sales & Advertising Managers
3.53
19
0.23
-0.62
-0.08
Company Directors
3.56
18
0.32
-0.87
-0.61
Factory Workers, etc.
3.76
17
0.26
0.31
-0.43
Joiners & Glaziers, etc.
3.79
14
0.19
0.44
-0.63
Draughtsmen & Designers
3.86
14
0.21
0.36
-0.89
Ch. Mechanical Engineers
3.88
26
0.26
-1.84
-0.37
School teachers
4.08
24
0.17
-0.31
-1.47
	Total 238

Occupational Category	Mean	No.	Std.	Skew-	Kurt-

Draughtsmen & Designers
3.06
16
0.27
-0.77
0.04
Nurses & Physiotherapists
3.11
44
0.14
-1.07
1.04
Police & Security Workers
3.2
10
0.44
0.19
-0.71
School teachers
3.39
28
0.23
-1.15
-0.4
Local Auth & Civil Service
3.46
13
0.31
-0.39
0.02
Computer Programmers
3.69
13
0.29
0.25
-0.96
Dentists
3.87
15
0.19
0.32
-0.83
Opticians
3.92
12
0.23
0.2
-0.89
Industrial Chem & Physicists
4.53
23
0.16
-1.32
-0.94
Doctors
4.51
47
0.12
-3.89
1.72
	Total 221


Occupational Category	Mean	No.	Std.	Skew-	Kurt-

Company Directors
3.2
10
0.51
0.21
-0.53
Industrial Chem & Physicists
3.55
11
0.28
2.85
2.47
Factory Workers, etc.
3.8
15
0.28
2.85
2.47
Retail Traders & Publicans
3.95
19
0.39
3.09
2.31
Local Auth & Civil Service
4
15
0.46
2.39
1.79
Ch. Mechanical Engineers
4.06
16
0.57
1.67
0.61
School teachers
4.08
24
0.17
-0.31
-1.47
Skilled Engineering Operatives
4.4
10
0.6
2
0.95
Joiners, Glaziers, etc.
4.5
10
0.58
1.75
1.22
Drivers
4.53
15
0.5
0.71
0.26
Clerks & Secretaries
4.67
12
0.4
1.52
0.72
School teachers
4.71
14
0.55
1.71
0.39
Unskilled Labourers, etc.
4.73
15
0.66
0.49
-0.85
Sales  Advertising Managers
5.2
15
0.54
1.34
-0.36
	Total 201


Occupational Category	Mean	No.	Std.	Skew-	Kurt-

S
chool teachers
3.85
13
0.28
3.73
3.31
Nurses & Physiotherapists
3.94
36
0.26
5.1
4.94
Clerks & Secretaries
4.27
11
0.6
0.84
-0.56
Industrial Chem & Physicists
4.38
13
0.66
1.55
-0.09
Draughtsmen & Designers
4.92
24
0.43
0.56
0.15
Ch. Mechanical Engineers
5.92
12
0.72
0.19
-0.9
	Total 109


Occupational Category	Mean	No.	Std.	Skew-	Kurt-

Car Mechanics, etc.
14.08
12
1.96
0.27
-1.14
Skilled Textile Workers
18.23
13
2.21
0.72
-0.98
Sales Representatives
18.8
10
2.73
-1.08
-0.25
Bricklayers & Building Workers
19.61
18
2.11
-0.29
-1.29
Unskilled Labourers, etc.
20.14
29
1.25
-0.08
-0.78
Nurses & Physiotherapists
20.85
13
2.27
0.12
-1.11
Drivers
21.03
31
1
0.05
-0.3
Factory Workers, etc.
21.07
30
1.38
-1.25
-0.41
Industrial Chem & Physicists
21.46
28
1.36
-1.55
0.64
Skilled Engineering Operatives
21.57
21
1.29
-1.1
-0.44
Electricians
21.94
11
1.72
-1.06
0.23
Storekeepers & Warehousemen
22.45
11
1.75
-1.44
0.41
Company Directors
22.47
30
1.37
-0.94
-0.39
Retail Traders & Publicans
22.5
40
1.13
-0.58
-0.78
Local Auth & Civil Service
22.92
25
1.36
-1.19
-0.66
Transport Managers
23
13
2.33
-2.28
1.26
Clerks & Secretaries
23.03
36
0.04
-0.64
-0.26
Doctors
23.09
11
3.3
-0.87
-0.64
Sales & Advertising Managers
23.75
36
1.25
-1.77
0.29
Joiners, Glaziers, etc.
23.95
21
1.4
-1.82
0.46
Draughtsmen & Designers
24.06
17
1.49
-1.07
0.35
Ch. Mechanical Engineers
24.17
47
1.22
-1.34
-1.24
Police & Security Workers
24.55
11
1.24
-0.5
-0.35
Technologists & Prod Managers
24.77
13
1.76
-2.11
0.84
Lecturers & Academic Research
24.9
10
2.18
-0.07
-0.84
Chartered Accountants
25
12
2.4
-1.02
-0.47
School teachers
27.5
30
1.02
-1.39
0.06
Head & Deputy Head Teachers
27.5
10
1.47
-0.87
-0.58
	Total 570

Occupational Category	Mean	No.	Std.	Skew-	Kurt-

Clerks & Secretaries
14.25
28
1.73
-0.06
-0.85
Banking work
16.77
36
1.43
-0.71
-0.85
Police & Security Workers
17.07
15
2.08
0.09
-0.46
Nurses & Physiotherapists
19.64
56
0.8
-0.04
-1.23
Stewardesses & Couriers
19.6
10
1.93
-0.8
-0.39
Armed Forces
19.89
18
1.62
-1.32
-0.3
Draughtsmen & Designers
20.46
36
1.33
-1
-0.73
Electronics Engineers
21
18
2.51
-0.43
-1.1
Pilots & Air Traff Controllers
21.9
10
1.37
-0.88
-0.52
School teachers
21.9
77
0.79
-2.01
-0.52
Business Managers
21.94
16
1.13
-3.15
3.11
Chartered Accountants
23.26
23
1.25
0.12
-0.77
Local Auth & Civil Service
23.89
28
1.36
-1.95
0.94
Journalists & Novelists
23.92
12
1.92
-1.05
-0.24
Dentists
24.39
18
1.44
-1.52
-0.08
Computer Programmers, etc.
24.43
23
1.35
-0.63
-0.71
Pharmacists & Pharmacologists
25.42
13
1.46
-1.45
0.89
Lawyers & Solicitors
25.53
17
1.16
-1.46
0.11
Industrial Chem & Physicists
25.86
43
1.25
-3.19
1.69
Opticians
26.92
13
1.24
-0.03
-0.56
Ch. Mechanical Engineers
27.3
23
1.06
-0.76
-0.69
Doctors
28.21
57
0.8
-3.11
0.92
	Total 590
Notes: PhD thesis, Visual and Applied Arts.
Table of contents: class: section