Home Elements for a Diagnosis of the Spanish Educational System
4 - School functioning (end)


anterior índice siguiente



Life at schools


RELATIONS WITHIN THE EDUCATIONAL COMMUNITY

The usual relations between the teaching staff and students have a prevailing 69% of good atmosphere of companionship and mutual support. Only 1% of the responses by the whole group affirm that there are continual conflict at their schools between the teaching staff and a tendency toward individualism.

The relations with students may be classified as positive. From almost four thousand valid answers, only 2% (n = 62) affirm than during academic year 1996-1997 the level of collaboration between students was bad. On the contrary, the remaining 98% is comprised of regular, good or excellent atmosphere.

The students consider the relations among themselves in a worse light than the rest of the sectors of the educational community.

Graph 6 shows the data obtained as to relations, among the teaching staff as well as among the students.



Graph 6. Relations among the teaching staff and students at the schools

The question "Is the school setting a reason for concern among parents due to the levels of violence?" has four categories of answers, ranging from severe concern to denying that there is violence at the school. The latter category and no concern as to the increase in violence amount to 68%. The fact that 8% of the respondents state that it is a matter for severe concern and 25% say they are somewhat concerned, should be a cause for social concern and further investigation to obtain a more detailed description of the situation. In other words, the situation described by the data is not one of manifest severity, but one must not underestimate that stated, above all the aforementioned 8% who express severe concern.




RULES FOR SCHOOL LIFE

As to the levels of information the members of each sector themselves state they have, one may note on Graph 7 that the percentages are high and the general situation may be classified, at least, as good. The data broken down shows significant differences between the opinion of the different sectors forming the group.



Graph 7. Information on the rights and duties of the students
según esos mismos colectivos

The percentage (84%) of favourable opinions stating Yes as to the information given to the students according to all the members, is much greater than that stated by the students themselves (70%). The students, according to what they state themselves, do have information on their rights and duties. although it is noticeable that a quarter (26%) of the students place the information in the category of "some". This fact may be interpreted as a demand for more information.

One must note first of all that out of the total number of responses (4.661) 206 cases (absolute values) state that the school has no School Rules. there is the possibility that some sectors of the group asked had no knowledge of its existence. The sector that contributes most to forming this figure is that of the parents representatives. Secondly, data on the efficiency of the School Rules is clear: The School Rules improve life at schools. If the answers are taken on a dichotomy basis, that is answers that stated whether it is efficient or not, we note than the School Rules are efficient according to 97% of the answers and inefficient in the remaining 3%. Thirdly, on the basis of answers that affirm the efficiency of the School Rules, one should now aspect whether the efficiency is limited, or really unlimited, being effective to improve school life.

The answers to the question "To what extent do the school rules decrease problems of discipline and order?" clearly show that the school rules are a way to decrease problems of discipline and order. Excluding the answers "I do not know" and "there are no rules", and taking the four categories "a lot", "fairly", "little" and "none", we note that there is only one per cent of the answers that affirm that the school rules are not a means to decrease problems of discipline. 19% of the answers state that they contribute little and the remaining 80% considers that the school rules are a means to decrease problems of order and discipline "a lot" (21%) or "fairly".




DETERIORATION IN SCHOOL LIFE


SITUATIONS OF LACK OF DISCIPLINE

Respondents amounting to 80% affirm that, in the last three years, there have been situations of lack of discipline at their schools (see graph 8). Among the remaining 20%, those who affirm in higher percentages that there are no situations of lack of discipline are the representatives of private school holders. They are followed in this sense by representatives of the parents, representatives of the Local Government and the administration and services staff. On the other hand, the lowest percentages on the non existence of situations of lack of discipline are reported by the principals (13%), head of studies (13%), students (15%), non School Council member teachers (17%) and School Council member teachers (20%).



Graph 8. Existence and frequency of situations of lack of discipline at the school

The answers show that the situation of lack of discipline "uproar outside the classroom" is by far the most frequent, the second situation in frequency is that of "lack of respect for companions", followed by "uproar in the classroom", "moral aggression: jeering, insults, threats ...", "lack of respect for the teachers" and "truancy". As may be seen, the first three situations of lack of discipline: uproar in and out of the classroom and lack of respect for companions arise with a frequency that may be considered high; moral aggression (jeering, insults ...) with an average frequency and the last two, lack of respect for the teachers and truancy have very low average frequency levels.

Considering the last three years, the answers as to how the discipline related situations are evolving are fairly heterogeneous and divided opinions are noted. There is 32% which affirms that the situation is gradually improving, 41% states that the situation is more or less the same and 27% considers lack of discipline is increasing. Considering that 27%, the main cause lies in the students' lack of interest, followed by family problems and the presence of repeating students. The presence of closed or intolerant groups, or there being teachers who do not perform their duties properly or are disinterested in practice of their profession is less important in the order of possible causes of lack of discipline. The greatest significant differences between the sectors of the group are to be found in the answers by the teaching staff (including the principal and head of studies) and parents. Also between the teaching staff, principal, head of studies and the students' opinion.

Over the last three years (1994-97), at the schools included in the sample that answered the Questionnaire (534), there were 207 schools that have imposed a penalties without a disciplinary record, and 161 schools have imposed penalties after inchoating a disciplinary record. The courts have had to intervene at 19 schools. There was an average of four penalties per school over the three year period, amounting to 1.3 penalties per annum. Those with a disciplinary record amount to 0.6 penalties per school per annum and a much lower number in the case of penalties with intervention by the courts.

The actions by unipersonal bodies at schools in disciplinary matters do not seem to have been very numerous. The average per school per annum is almost 13 written warnings, 19 appearances before the head of studies, 9 before the principal and 8.5 summons for the parents of indisciplined students.

As may be seen on table 7, 79% of the schools have had not suffered any considerable vandalism during school hours.

Over the three years, on 113 there has been considerable vandalism during school hours, vandalism that has been referred to the School Council or Teachers' Assembly. Vandalism has taken place on 151 occasions outside of school hours. Not enough information is available to be able to compare these figures to be able to note whether the situations are deteriorating and increase year after year, or if on the contrary they are decreasing.



Table 7: Schools where vandalism to the facilities has been recorded. Time reference: Academic years 1994/95, 1995/96 and 1996/97
  None 1 - 2 3 - 5 > 5 Average
In school hours 79% (n=419) 9% (n=45) 7% (n=38) 6% (n=30) 1,96
Outside school hours 72% (n=381) 13% (n=69) 9% (n=49) 6% (n=33) 1,30


Finally, as to whether it has been necessary to adopt corrective measures due to severe offenses during this academic year, almost half the principals said they did not have to take such measures. The other half (53%) said it had to take them.


AGGRESSIVE SITUATIONS

As to the information bearing answers in one sense or another, and without taking abstention into account, 41% says, as to the last three years, that there have not been any aggressions among the students and 59% (n that 2167 members) affirm that there have been aggressions at their schools (see table 8 and graph 9). As to the last percentage, those who contributed most to forming the 59% opinion were the principals and heads of studies, and the least, the representatives of the holder of the school. Faced with such a yes or no dichotomy, significant differences are noted according to the group, the school ownership, the surroundings and sex. There is more aggression at state schools, in suburban settings and among boys.



Table 8. Existence, frequency and evolution of aggressiveness among the students. Time reference: Academic years 1994/95, 1995/96 and 1996/97
AGGRESSIONS AMONG THE STUDENTS NO
41%
(n=1522)
 
     
YES
59%
(n=2167)
Frequency of the aggressions Low: some isolated incidents 73%
(n=1475)
Medium: above five, under ten 20%
(n= 407)
High: more than ten aggressions 7%
(n=140)
 
Evolution of the levels of aggressiveness Clearly increasing 29%
(n=566)
Remains as always 48%
(n=934)
Tends to decrease 23%
(n= 455)





Graph 9. Existence and frequency of aggressions among the students

The table and graph cited show that the frequency of aggressions is low. It is mainly thought that the frequency of aggressions is a matter of an isolated episode (73%, n=1475) and high according to 7% of the respondents (n=140), ("high" means more than 10 aggressions in the last three years).

7% of the answers to the questionnaire state that there have been more than 10 aggressions at the school or nearby in the last three years. Probably, these aggressions are sufficient to give rise to the levels of social alarm aforementioned.

As to the evolution of the number of aggressions, the data shows the following figures. An increase in the number of aggressions is stated by 29% of the respondents, 23% say it is decreasing and the remaining 48% say the level of aggressiveness remains more or less the same. The students' sector is most inclined to affirm that the levels of aggressiveness are decreasing, the sector of teachers (including the principal, head of studies and representative of the holder of private schools) contributes most to stating that such levels are increasing, and the sector of the representatives of Local Governments at the school who mostly state that the levels of aggressiveness remain more or less as usual. The data broken down as to the school holdership, educational level and setting of the school show no significant differences.

The existence of aggressions at schools over the last three years, recorded in the Minutes of the School Councils, or in the Minutes of the Disciplinary Committees, stating the aggressors and victims, is shown on table 9. There are practically no aggressions by parents against students or parents against teachers. The same may be said of teachers to students or other teachers. The weak point lies in aggressions among the students (34%, n=180) and students against teachers 812%, n=61); although the period of time to be taken into account is three years, the number of aggressions is worth consideration.

The differences are significant in aggressions among students according to the school holdership. There are less aggressions among students at private schools than at state schools. Aggressions by students against teachers show no significant differences in any of the variables broken down.



Table 9. Number and type of aggressions at schools. Time reference: Academic years 1994/95, 1995/96 and 1996/97
  Victims
Aggressors Students Teachers
None Some None Some
Parents 98%
(n=523)
2%
(n=9)
98%
(n=98)
2%
(n=2)
Students 66%
(n=352)
34%
(n=180)
89%
(n=471)
12%
(n=61)
Teachers 98%
(n=520)
2%
(n=12)
99%
(n=529)
1%
(n=3)



MAIN MEASURE TO BE TAKEN BY THE SCHOOL TO PREVENT POSSIBLE OUTBREAKS OF AGGRESSION AMONG STUDENTS

The respondents were requested to choose one of the four measures proposed as the main one to prevent possible outbreaks of aggression among the students. The main measure stated was that of students receiving orientation and support. The following was pointed out as the main measure by 56% of the respondents: "It is not a matter of adopting control measures. It is a matter of orientation and support for the students". This measure is called for by the majority of the representatives of the holder of private schools, students and principals. Those who most request this measure are the representatives on the School Council of the administration and services sector. The following measure called for is that of requesting greater collaboration between the students families and the school. The measures least considered to prevent possible breakouts of aggression among the students, in this order, are control of student entrance and exit, intervention by the Local Government social services and measures related to greater surveillance during recreation. As to the latter, it is least called for by the teaching staff (including the principal, head of studies and representative of the holder of the school at private schools) and most requested by students, administration and services staff and the parents.


Previous Table of Contents Next


© Instituto Nacional de Calidad y Evaluación (INCE)
calle San Fernando del Jarama, 14
E28002 MADRID
Tel: +34 91.745.9200
Fax: +34 91.745.9249
email: info@ince.mec.es