USING A VISUAL ANALOGUE SCALE TO ESTIMATE ASPECTS OF
ETHOS IN FOUR SECONDARY SCHOOLS
Edwin Smith, University of Warwick Institute of Education
Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the British Educational Research
Association, University of Exeter, England, 12-14 September 2002
Abstract
This paper reports the use of two instruments designed to estimate three main
dimensions of ethos: achieving atmosphere / climate for learning; perceptions of
the impact of other pupils; and pupils’ perceptions of the social background of the
pupil population as a whole.
Visual analogue or linear analogue scales have been fairly widely used in
medical psychology for several decades, mainly but not exclusively in estimating
patients’ perceptions of pain. Figures for reliability and validity are encouraging. In
contrast, no studies in educational research have been identified which make use
of this technique although some semantic differential scales provide scales which
are verbally anchored only at their poles. These scales, however, provide a number
of discrete points or dashes.
All Year 8 pupils in four schools of different pupil social background composition
(n = 676) took part in the piloting of the instruments. Each item used in this study
presents to respondents a 10-centimetre horizontal line extending between two
polar anchors, for example ‘no lessons’ and ‘all my lessons’, or ‘all the pupils’ and
‘no pupils’. They were asked to make a vertical mark on the line to indicate their
perception or estimate. The marks were digitally scanned to provide an interval
(and arguably ratio) level of measurement which permits a range of statistical
treatments to compare the four schools. These treatments are discussed.
Acknowledgements
I was introduced to visual analogue scales by Tirjinder Singh Gidda, one of the
many students at Churchfields High School, who over many years generously
allowed me to learn from them as well as being one of their teachers. He and
others continued to supply me with opportunities to learn after they left the school,
and it was during a discussion of a project in his BDS course that he explained the
scales to me. Without his unfailing willingness to share, I would not have known
about them.
I am grateful, too, to Dr Sean Neill and Dr Daniel Mujis in the Warwick University
Institute of Education for their comments on preliminary drafts. Any errors remain
my responsibility.
The staff and students of five schools in a Midlands LEA have been exceptionally
forbearing and generous in giving time to help with the research.
2
1. Context
The instruments discussed here form part of a study of the school composition
effect in four secondary schools in a Midlands LEA. In that study, school- level SES
is an important variable, and measures have been derived using 1991 census data
for pupils’ postcodes to calculate Jarman indexes Jarman 1983). One pupil
questionnaire attempts to triangulate these data, particularly in view of the date of
the most recent available census data (1991). It asked pupils to provide their
impressions of the proportions of pupils in their schools who matched descriptors
related to Jarman elements, for example ‘have someone living in their family who
has a car’. A complete questionnaire is in Appendix 1. The second questionnaire
attempts to estimate pupils’ perceptions of the ‘ethos’ of their schools. A complete
questionnaire is in Appendix 2. This paper focuses mainly upon this, second
questionnaire. The concept of ethos is complex, and it is not possible here to
explore it. The author has discussed the relationship between ethos, habitus,
situated learning and culture elsewhere (Smith 2002, submitted).
2. Visual analogue scales.
Both questionnaires used horizontal 10 centimetre visual analogue scales in
preference to more conventional Likert scales and rating scales. Although visual
analogue scores appear not to be reported in the social science journals, they are
commonly used in medicine, particularly to measure patients’ experience of pain
(for example Pomeroy et al 2001; Schwenk et al 2002). However, still in medical
contexts, Kluger et al (2002), Hall et al 2000, MacDonald et al (2002), O’Neill et al
(2000), Jepegnanam et al (2001) and Ashley et al (2001) used them to assess
attitudes. In nearly every case, the line was 10 centimetres in length and some
were horizontal and some vertical.
These scales are derived from instruments originally devised to measure well
being (Clarke and Spear 1964, cited in Reville et al 1976), and so their use in this
study represents something of an innovation. The visual (or linear) analogue scale
has a key advantage over the Likert-style inventories and rating scales which are
commonly used in attitude surveys. Intermediate verbal anchors are not needed
and consequently there is no need to assume equality of interval for example
between agree / strongly agree and disagree / strongly disagree. The provision of a
ten-centimetre line with end-point verbal anchors enables respondents to mark any
point on the continuum. It can more safely be assumed that the result is an intervallevel measurement, and if the lower anchor point represents a zero, then the
measure can even be considered as a ratio-level one.
The reliability of the linear analogue depends on visual and motor co-ordination, the
ability of a respondent to put a mark where they intend to (Reville et al 1976).
While that may be more of an issue in clinical medicine, even among healthy
adolescents there may be cultural and visual factors which impact on this ability, for
example dyslexia or dysgraphia and pupils’ experiences of perceiving and visually
analysing straight lines. The latter might affect significant numbers of pupils in a
school, but the latter is no more of a factor in visual analogue scales than in Likert
ones. Measures of reliability for visual analogue scales in medicine yield promising
results for lines of 10, 15, and 20 cm length (but not 5 cm) (Reville et al 1976).
3
Jaesch et al (1990) conducted a carefully controlled study into to relative merits of
visual analogue scales and seven-point ones, again in a medical setting. They
found no significant differences between the two scales in validity or
responsiveness. They did, however, conclude that visual analogue scales require
considerably more training of the respondents (5 - 10 minutes compared with less
than five), but as Butler (1997) argues, this is a function of deteriorating abstract
reasoning with age (and possibly with pain). This factor is less likely to be an issue
with school pupils than with chronically ill patients, but to test whether school-age
pupils’ responses, a third pupil questionnaire was devised (see below)
Arslan et al (2001) found that visual analogue scales compared favourably with
ordinal variables for the measurement of pain, and Jepegnanam et al (2001) found
a visual analogue anxiety scale to be more reliable than conventional anxiety and
depression scores in assessing preoperative anxiety
Butler (1997) developed a critique of the use of visual analogue scales in assessing
pain, but his main sources of concern were the complexities involved in
conceptualising pain, and the questions whether it can be estimated by a
unidimensional measure. Ethos, too is (arguably) multi-dimensional, but here the
questions did not directly ask pupils to estimate ethos: they addressed some of the
putative dimensions within the concept. Butler points out that in pain
measurement, it is difficult to select ‘end phrases’ the wording of the anchor points
at the ends of the lines. In the questionnaires discussed here, this was less
problematic as the end-points were unequivocally ‘no pupils / all pupils’ ; all lessons
/ no lessons’; and ‘ completely agree / completely disagree.
More pertinent to the present study is Butler’s challenge to the treatment of
measures on the scales as interval level, and he argues that even if scores are
statistically standardised. the grounds for applying parametric statistical procedures
are far from secure However, this concern is centred mainly on the question
whether patients can discriminate among 100 levels of pain intensity.
3. Validity, sensitivity and intervality
It may be that at the age of twelve to thirteen years not all school pupils have
achieved a level of abstract reasoning commensurate with translating a number /
proportion into a mark on a ten-centimetre line. This would be susceptible to
empirical testing, but there appears to be no published research. The cognitive
processes involved may include perception-formation, use of analogy to convert a
numerical proportion into a proportion of a line, and psychomotor skills to mark
accurately the intended proportion of the line. The first of these perceptionformation) is neutral to these concerns since it is perception that is being estimated
in the present study. The third (psychomotor skills) is less of an issue with schoolage pupils than with chronically ill patients. It is the operation of the analogy
between perceived proportion on a population and the proportion of a line that
provides the strongest threat to validity.
To test this, a questionnaire was completed by a Year 8 tutor group in a secondary
school. the school has the lowest mean SES of the four in the study. This
questionnaire is presented in Appendix 3. There are essentially three types of
question:
4
 translating a number between into a mark on a ten-centimetre line
 translating a simple fraction into a mark on a ten-centimetre line
 translating a perception of a proportion (e.g. how much of a circle is shaded)
innate a mark on a ten-centimetre line
The validity can be estimated by comparing the true value of the proportions I the
question and the mean score returned. Since in this study, the mean sores on pupil
and teacher questionnaires are the basis for analysis, it is the validity of the mean
that is important. Fig 1 shows that with three exceptions (arrows , mice and lines,
with true values of 0.4, 0.9 and .036 respectively ), all the mean errors were less
than 0.1, i.e. one centimetre on the 10-centimetre scales
ERROR IN ESTIMATE
ERROR AGAINST TRUE VALUE
0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
TRUE VALUE
Fig 1 Mean size of error in Year 8 pupils’ estimates of proportion using a visual
analogue scale
The size of the errors is related to the fineness of discrimination involved
(sensitivity). The greatest error was for an item requiring an estimate of 43 out of
109 lines, an item which might tax visual acuity and perceptual judgement as much
as the skills of translating those into marks on 10-centimetre lines.
The sensitivity of the mean scores can be judged from the 95 percent confidence
intervals (Table 2) which suggest that nearly all the items are estimated by the
pupils as a group within a range plus or minus 7 percent
5
cakes
TRUE
CI
drinks mice chocolat half
quarter eighth arrows shapes lines
0.5
0.2
0.9
0.5
0.5
0.75
0.88
0.4
0.4 0.36
0.041 0.073 0.064
0.054 0.032 0.064 0.074 0.051 0.073 0.065
Table 2. Confidence intervals of Year 8 pupil’s estimates of proportion using a
visual analogue scale
Whether, and to what extent the estimates on the visual analogue scales can be
treated as interval-level data is indicated in a scatterplot comparing true and
estimated values. Figs 3 and 4 support a claim that the estimated values are
proportional to the true values - a straight line passing through the origin.
Proportionality refers to a relationship in which increasing one of the variables by
any ratio results in the second variable changing by the same ratio. This is the sole
criterion for a ratio level of measurement, which itself entails intervality. The outlier
in Fig 3 is the ‘lines’ question (43 out of 109 lines)
TRUE AND ESTIMATED PROPORTIONS
0.8
0.7
ESTIMATED
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
TRUE VALUE
Fig. Scatterplot of Year 8 pupils’ mean scores against true values
By omitting one outlier (the 43 out of 109 lines item) it can be shown that the
calculated linear trend-line passes almost exactly through the origin. If two sets of
numbers are proportional, and one of them is interval it is extremely unlikely that
the second is not.
6
OMITTING ONE OUTLIER
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
Fig 4. Scatterplot from Fog 3, omitting one outlier, and adding a linear trend-line.
The concepts of intervality and sensitivity are distinct: the evidence points to a
sensitivity for the mean scores of plus or minus 7 millimetres, and convincing
support for a claim of intervality and validity - but only for the mean scores for the
group of pupils.
That is not the same as a claim for validity, sensitivity and intervality for each
individual pupil’s score. In the field of medical treatment of individuals (to which all
the critiques of and support for visual analogue scales refer) it is the individual’s
estimate of pain, etc., that are of interest, not means of groups. In the present
study, like most of those published in the areas of attitude in medical matters, the
salient variables are not individual estimates but the group means of those
estimates . Thus the evidence for validity, sensitivity and intervality provided by the
data from 25 Year 8 pupils in this study justify treating the group means as
interval-level data.
However, taking an unweighted mean assumes that the individual data are ratio
level. It can be argued that if those individual data were not at all interval-level, their
means would not show the pattern they do. Stronger support comes from
scatterplots of individual pupils’ estimates against true values. Taking the first six
pupils (a random selection since the pupil order in which the data were entered was
entirely random, the questionnaires having been ‘shuffled’ repeatedly) a similar, but
unsurprisingly slightly weaker pattern of proportionality is discernible (Figs 5). Given
that pupils 3 and 4 have poor enough English to warrant language support in their
lessons, the overall pattern presented by the six scatterplots supports a claim that
individual responses in these visual analogue scales can indeed be treated as
interval-level, even in the school which of the four in this study has the lowest SES,
and when the sample includes pupils with weak English language skills. Weak
language skills do not, of course of necessity impede the kind of cognitive
processing implicit in the visual analogue calculus. Pupil 3 is an example of this..
7
PUPIL1
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
0.8
1
0.8
1
0.8
1
PUPIL 2
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
PUPIL 3
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
PUPIL 4
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
continued on next page
8
PUPIL 5
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
0.8
1
PUPIL 6
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
Fig 5. Scatterplots of six individual year 8 pupils’ estimates on a visual analogue
scale against true values.
It must be remembered that in this ‘sub-study’ to assess the validity, sensitivity and
intervality of the visual analogue scale, only 25 Year 8 pupils were involved, and
they were a full-range ability group in the lowest SES school in the substantive
study. A further study with a larger sample, and particularly with a set of questions
more finely graduated in terms of the level of discrimination involved would test the
issue more rigorously.
However, the evidence reviewed so far provides strong support for using visual
analogue scales in preference to Likert and rating scales. It is therefore surprising
that the Social Sciences Citation Index (accessed 14.3.02, including abstract
search) listed 3,454 references since 1988 for the key words ‘visual analogue’, but
provided none when those key words were linked with ‘school’, ‘pupil’, or ‘teachers’.
This suggests that the use of such scales is not common in educational research.
In the questionnaires developed for the substantive study, 10-centimetre lines were
used and they were arranged horizontally rather than vertically, in both cases
mainly because that format fitted most easily onto A4 size paper - an important
consideration in view of the numbers of questions employing them (Appendix 1 and
2). Ten centimetres is the minimum length for acceptable levels of reliability (Reville
et al 1976). In each questionnaire, two ‘worked example’ were given with a view to
clarifying to the pupils what they were being asked to do.T he questionnaires were
completed by all Year 8 pupils in the four schools in a PSE lesson selected for
convenience by the schools, but all were during the Spring term of 2002. Written
instructions to the teachers included a ‘script’ to be read to the pupils (Appendix 4)
9
and a request that the two questionnaires, one white and one blue, should be
distributed in such a way that of each pair of pupils siting next to each other, each
had a different questionnaire, i.e. a white questionnaire and a blue one given to
adjacent pupils. This was the best available device to minimise sampling error
between the two questionnaires.
4. Reliability
There is scope here only to discuss in detail the results of one of the two pupil
questionnaires the one concerning ‘ethos’. 326 completed questionnaires were
returned, representing a 50% sample of Year 8 pupils from each of the four
schools. They were electronically analysed using a digital scanner to measure the
distance along the 10 cm scale each pupils had marked their response to each
question.. Before any analysis was conducted, all the visual analogue scores were
statistically standardised to provide z-scores. The standardised data were reduced
by factor analysis with varimax rotation. This yielded four main factors, the first of
which (‘ethpos’) included nearly all the questions which represented positive
perceptions. The alpha reliability among these items is 0.82, and the split-sample
reliability is 0.99 (from correlation of two 50% random samples from the full data
set ). The other three main factors included varying combinations of items with
negative connotations. Each had much lower alpha coefficients for inter-item
reliability ( 0.32, 0.05, and 0.06. They were combined into a single factor
(‘ethnegall’), the alpha coefficient for reliability among the three sub-factors being
0.66. The split sample reliability is 0.99 (from correlation of two random 50%
samples of the data set). From the same splitting of the sample, the p value for an
F test is 0.70 and for a two-tailed t-test the p value is 0.57. Equivalent figures for
the other questionnaire are 0.99; 0.96, and 0.65 respectively.
A difficulty in interpreting the data lies in the nature of the pupil mix itself. For
example, a school with a lower proportion of ethnic minority pupils contains fewer
pupils who are likely to have experienced racism, and more who may themselves
have racist tendencies. Both of these factors might depress the average scores on
a question asking about racism. Similarly, if a school has a higher proportion of
disruptive pupils that may depress average scores on questions about the
behaviour of other pupils since their involvement in disruption may make the effect
of other pupils’ behaviour on their work somewhat irrelevant. Thus there is scope
for paradoxical result - schools with higher proportions of some kinds of pupils
appearing to be less affected by such pupils - and also for amplification of factors
which are more likely to affect some kinds of pupils than others.
The questionnaires were piloted in a secondary school in the same LEA but which
was not one of the four study schools. A slightly modified wording was used in the
substantive survey.. Each pupil completed only one of the two questionnaires,
either the ‘ethos’ one or the ‘SES’ one, so that the experience of thinking about
one set of issues did not affect their thinking about the other, and more practically
to reduce the time taken by the pupils in the task. In effect, this device reduced the
sample to fifty percent of the total Year 8 population in the four schools for each of
the questionnaires.
5. Results
10
In view of the balance of evidence reviewed above, it was decided to use
parametric statistical tests, notably ANOVA (analysis of variance) and for this
purpose, use was made of SPSS - (SPSS 2001). As appropriate, use was also
made of Microsoft Excel (Microsoft 1995). The following discussion will consider
only the items for which one way analysis of variance provided 5% levels of
significance (i.e. p < 0.05). Multivariate analysis of variance including gender as
well as school made very little difference to the power of the ‘explanatory’ model1
The sample size is approximately fifty percent in each of the four schools The
smallest school (Ardell) has only about 90 Year 8 pupils, so according to Krejcie
and Morgan (1970), cited in Cohen, Manion and Morrison ( 2000: 94), a sample of
73 pupils would be required for each questionnaire. Ideally that ratio (73 / 90)
would also be applied to the other three schools, but since there were two distinct
pupil questionnaires (only one of which is being discussed here) and there was a
limit to the pupil time the schools were willing to allocate to the filling in
questionnaires. the maximum ratio available was 50%. For this reason, it is not
argued here that the overall sample of 676 (326 and 350 for the white and blue
questionnaire respectively) from a population of approximately 780 in the four
schools together conforms with Krejcie and Morgan’s scale (requiring a sample of
between 254 and 260) because it is advisable to ‘work up’ from the smallest subgroup (i.e. Ardell School) and it is the figures for individual schools which are the
focus of the discussion.. However, that overall sample size, substantially greater
than Krejcie and Morgan’s recommended size may mitigate the problem, as might
also restricting the use of the data to comparative treatment rather than claiming
absolute values for individual schools. In this case, the interval or ratio level of the
data, and each school sample is not subdivided may provide some further
indication that a smaller sample may be acceptable (Borg and Gall 1979, and
Oppenheim 1992, cited in Cohen et al 2000: 94).
Multivariate analysis of variance indicates that there are significant between-school
differences for ‘ethpos’ even when the effects of gender are included, but for
‘ethnegall’, gender differences are significant while between-school differences are
not (Table 3, with boys scoring higher than girls (Fig 6).
Tests of Between-Subjects Effects
Source Dependent Variable
Model
ETHPOS
ETHNEGAL
SCHOOL
ETHPOS
ETHNEGAL
GENDER
ETHPOS
ETHNEGAL
SCHOOL * GENDER
ETHPOS
ETHNEGAL
Error
ETHPOS
ETHNEGAL
Total
ETHPOS
ETHNEGAL
a R Squared = .060 (Adjusted R Squared = .032)
b R Squared = .494 (Adjusted R Squared = .479)
Type III Sum of
Squares
797.584
5356.088
532.213
41.195
108.414
94.741
67.161
115.457
12503.088
5484.192
13300.672
10840.281
df Mean Square
8
8
3
3
1
1
3
3
270
270
278
278
F Sig.
99.698 2.153 .031
669.511 32.962 .000
177.404 3.831 .010
13.732
.676 .567
108.414 2.341 .127
94.741 4.664 .032
22.387
.483 .694
38.486 1.895 .131
46.308
20.312
Table 3. Multivariate analysis of variance: ‘ethpos against school and gender
1
No claim is made here for a cause and effect relationship among the variables - ANOVA merely indicates a
degree of association, since the research design is not a controlled experiment.
11
6.0
5.5
5.0
4.5
95% CI ETHNEGAL
4.0
3.5
3.0
2.5
N=
146
141
MALE
FEMA LE
GENDER
Fig 6. Gender differences in ‘ethnegall’
Thus while pupils’ positive perceptions of their schools appear to be a function of
the school they attend, their negative perceptions are a function of gender.. If this
indication is robust, it may be significant in boys’ underachievement. Certainly it
suggests that positive and negative perceptions (or at least the questionnaire
elements that were brought together by factor analysis) are separate dimensions,
rather than opposites. This notion gains some support from the higher mean value
for ‘ethpos’ among boys than girls (Fig 7), that is, on average, boys in the sample
had stronger positive and negative perceptions than did the girls.
3
2
1
95% CI ETHPOS
0
-1
-2
-3
N=
154
143
MALE
FEMA LE
GENDER
Fig 7. Gender differences in ‘ethpos’
The items combined in ‘ethpos’ are qualitatively different from those in ‘ethnegall’.
The former are mainly connected with attitudes to school work and the actions of
12
teachers, whereas the latter relate to the behaviour of other pupils, the relationship
between the school and external influences in causing good and bad things, and
feeling at ease in the company of teachers. Interestingly, both question 6 and 13
appear twice (i.e. in two of the sub-factors): they appear to be contradictory (‘if I
tried harder I could do much better work, and my work is the best I can do’), but
combining them into a two-factor variable (‘complacency’) does not yield significant
between-gender or between- school differences.
Bearing in mind the relatively small threat to an assumption that the level of
measurement is interval, the data were also analysed using the Kruskal-Wallis H, a
non-parametric equivalent to one-way ANOVA. The ‘ethos’ factors based on
standardised scores for individual elements were used in the Kruskal-Wallis test
because of the need to avoid differences in range between different elements
producing a differential weighting effect in the totals. The p value for ‘ethpos’ is
0.010, and the between-school differences in the negative ‘ethos’ factors are not
significant. (Table 4).
Test Statistics
positive ethos negative ethos1 negative ethos2 negative ethos3
Chi-Square
11.390
df
3
Asymp. Sig.
.010
a Kruskal Wallis Test
b Grouping Variable: SCHOOL
1.795
3
.616
6.618
3
.085
.237
3
.971
negative ethos
combined
2.022
3
.568
Table 4. Between-school differences in ‘ethos’ factors’
Gender differences for ‘ethpos’ ‘ethneg1’, ‘ethneg2’, and ‘ethnegall’ are significant
at the 0.05 level (Table 5)
Test Statistics
positive ethos negative ethos1 negative ethos2 negative ethos3
Chi-Square
4.588
df
1
Asymp. Sig.
.032
a Kruskal Wallis Test
b Grouping Variable: GENDER
4.000
1
.046
4.906
1
.027
2.812
1
.094
negative ethos
combined
5.843
1
.016
Table 5. Gender differences for ‘ethos’ factors
Some individual items were shown (ANOVA and Kruskal-Wallis H) to vary
significantly between the four schools. For example, Denham (a lower SES school)
pupils are most likely to revise before a test (they say), and Carlton (a higher SES
school) the least likely. More Denham pupils agreed that their school work is
important than in any of the other schools, to agree that lessons usually start on
time, and they rank second in acknowledging a link between doing well at school
and getting a good job.
Carlton pupils were least likely to agree that the way their teachers mark their work
helps them do better next time2, and second least likely to agree that their teachers
2
Not significant in the non-parametric test
13
help them make the most of their ability. They were least likely to agree that their
school work is important, and second most likely to agree that doing well at school
wouldn’t help them get a good job. Denham pupils are second least likely to agree
that the way their teachers teach helps them to do well2
Ardell (the lowest SES school) pupils ranked themselves second in terms of
revising for tests and valuing their school work, but they were most likely to agree
that even if they did well at school it wouldn’t help them get a good job. The reason
here may be linked to a perception that they will be discriminated against in the job
market, whereas many Carlton pupils may believe that they will succeed after
school because of their parents’ connections. That is borne out by comments from
several teachers at Carlton. The pupils are the most negative of all the schools in
relation to lessons starting on time, the behaviour of other pupils, the way teachers
teach, and teachers helping them make the most of their ability2 . They were
slightly more positive about the way their work is marked.
Bulton’s (a higher SES school)mean score for pupils reporting getting enough
homework to keep their work up to standard is the highest, and Ardell’s is the
lowest. Bulton pupils are also the most satisfied about the way the teachers mark
their work. Bearing in mind the (albeit small) doubt about the justification for
treating the pupil data as interval-level, a non-parametric equivalent to one-way
analysis of variance was used to assess the significance of between school
differences in mean scores on the individual ‘ethos’ questions. (Table 6)
Test Statistics
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q5
Q6
Q7
Q8
Q9
Q10
Q11
Chi-Square 5.277 9.364 23.442 6.815 15.444 20.896 9.412 13.365 2.802 19.679 11.970
df
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
Asymp. Sig. .153 .025
.000 .078
.001
.000 .024
.004 .423
.000
.007
ANOVA .101 .168
.000 .059
.033
.000 .005
.051 .206
.000
.002
Q12 Q13 Q14
Q15 Q16
Q17 Q18 Q19 Q20 Q21
Q22
Chi-Square 5.334 1.762 8.604 23.162 7.485 12.149 7.961 7.815 6.971 4.092 11.086
df
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
Asymp. Sig. .149 .623 .035
.000 .058
.007 .047 .050 .073 .252
.011
ANOVA .072 .798. .042
.000 .052
.006 .062 .034 .056 .171
.058
a Kruskal Wallis Test
b Grouping Variable: SCHOOL
Table 6. Kruskal-Wallis H for between-school differences in individual elements of
‘ethos’ factors (unstandardised scores); and ANOVA (one way) for the
standardised scores
Two of the four questions about internal and external causes of good things in
school (Q15 and 17) showed significant (p is less than 0.05) between-school
14
differences, but the overall pattern of responses to the four questions is interesting
(Fig 8).
INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL INFLUENCES
0.7
MEAN SCORE
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
Q17
0.2
Q20
0.1
Q15
0
ARDELL
BULTON
CARLTON
DENHAM
Q21
SCHOOL
Fig 8. Internal and external causes of good and bad events in school. Q17* and 20
indicate external causes of good and bad things; Q15* and 21 indicate internal
causes of good and bad things (* significant at a 0.01 level)
Ardell pupils are different from those in the other three schools in seeing both
internal and external influences for bad as stronger than their influences for good.
They are the only group not to see their school’s influence on good things (Q15) as
the strongest influence overall: for them, the strongest overall influence is the
external influence on bad things in school. They see the school as a stronger
influence than external factors on bad things, whereas the reverse is true in the
other three schools. Pupils in all four schools (on average) see their schools as
stronger influences than external factors on good things, and the opposite for bad
things. This relatively negative view of their school among Ardell pupils is
compatible with their perceptions of lessons starting on time, the behaviour of other
pupils, the way teachers teach, and teachers helping them make the most of their
ability It is consonant also with their views of other pupils in the school. From the
blue questionnaire, Year 8 pupils at Ardell School have a mainly negative view of
other pupils in their school. Compared with the other three schools, they are more
likely to see their fellow pupils as making it difficult for them to do their school work
and causing problems for the teachers. They see ‘hustling’ (intimidation) for money
or goods, bullying, and racist attitudes as more prevalent in their school, and less
religious tolerance. Fewer pupils, they say, usually work hard in lessons, get on
well with the teachers, and do their homework conscientiously.
6. Conclusions
Visual analogue scales, although widely used in medical research, are virtually
unknown in educational research. Some researchers have doubts about the validity
of such instruments, but many of these are centred medical issues. This study
provides some evidence that, used to estimate pupils’ perceptions of aspects of
their schools and their pupil populations, threats to the validity of visual analogue
scales are small, and that their reliability is high. The evidence suggests that it is
fair to treat the data obtained by using the scales as interval (or ratio) level
15
measurements. This provides a significant advantage over Likert and other verbal
scales in that the data can be treated as parametric. The validity, sensitivity and
intervality of such scales might be enhanced by increasing the element of training
in their use, e.g. more ‘worked examples’ or even some teaching by those
supervising the pupils. However, this would have implications for the demands
made upon the schools.
Analysis of a visual analogue questionnaire completed by year 8 pupils in four
schools indicates that it is possible to detect some distinctive patterns of ‘ethos’ in
the schools. Combined with data from teacher questionnaires, participant
observation and interviews with teachers and pupils, this information may provide
some insight into some factors associated with pupil mix.
16
REFERENCES
Ashley M, Lamb D J, and Ellis B (2001) ‘Defects of Dental Appearance Assessed
by Patient and Dental Student Groups’ Journal of Oral Rehabilitation 28(12) 1116 1121
Butler P V (1997) ‘Linear Analogue Self Assessment and Procrustean
Measurement: A Critical Review of Visual Analogue Scaling in Pain Measurement’
Journal of Clinical Psychology in Medical Settings 4(1) 111 - 129
Clarke P R F and Spear F G (1964) ‘Reliability and Sensitivity in the SelfAssessment of Well-Being’ Bulletin of the British Psychological Society 17 (55)
Cohen L, Manion L, and Morrison K (2000) Research Methods in Education (5th
edition) (Routledge)
Hall D, Taylor R W, Jacobson A, Sadowsky P L, and Bartolucci A ( 2000) ‘The
Perception of Optimal Profile in African American Versus White Americans as
Assessed by Orthodontists and the Lay Public’ American Journal of Orthodontics
and Dentofacial Orthopedics 118(5): 514 - 525
Jaesch R, Singer J, and Guyatt G H (1990) ‘A Comparison of Seven-Point and
Visual Analogue Scales’ Controlled Clinical Trials 11: 43-51
Jarman B (1983) ‘Identification of Underprivileged Areas’ British Medical Journal
286 (May 28th): 1705 - 1709
Jepegnanam C and Lawrence A S (2001) ‘Linear Analogue Anxiety Scale or
Hospital Anxiety and Depression Score to Assess Preoperative Anxiety in Day
Case Surgery’ British Journal of Anaesthesia 87(4): 675 - 686
Kluger M T, Watson D W, Laidlaw T M, and Fletcher T (2002) ‘Personality Testing
and Profiling for Anaesthetic Job Recruitment: Attitudes of Anaesthetic Specialists
and Consultants in New Zealand and Scotland’ Anaesthesia 57: 116 - 122
MacDonald J W D, Mahon J, Zarnke K, Feagan B, Simms L, and Tucker W (2002)
‘A Randomised Survey of the Preference of Gastroenterologists for Systematic
Review Versus a Traditional Narrative View’ Canadian Journal of Gastroenterology
16(1) Jan
Microsoft (1995) Excel for Windows 95, Version 7.0. Microsoft Corporation
O’Neill K, Harkness M, and Knight R (2000) ‘Ratings for Profile Attractiveness After
Functional Appliance Treatment’ American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial
Orthoptics 118(94): 371 - 376
Pomeroy V (2000) ‘Reliability of a Measure of Post-Stroke Shoulder Pain in
Patients with and without Aphasia and / or Unilateral Spatial Neglect’ Clinical
Rehabilitation 14: 584 - 591
17
Reville S I, Robinson J O, Rosen M, and Hogg I J (1976) ‘The Reliability of a Linear
Analogue for Evaluating Pain’ Anaesthesia 31 1191-1198
Schwenk W, Mall J, Neudecker J, and Muller J (2002) ‘One Visual Analogue Pain
Score is Sufficient after Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy’ British Journal of Surgery
89(1) July: 114-115
Smith E F (2002) ‘Ethos, Habitus and Situation for Learning: An Ecology’ submitted
to British Journal of Sociology of Education 24.7
SPSS for Windows (2001) Release. 11.0.1.. Chicago: SPSS Inc.
18
APPENDIX ONE
UNIVERSITY OF WARWICK INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION

We are interested in what you think about your school. Please help us by answering the questions on
this sheet. You will need a blue or black pen or a pencil
WE DO NOT NEED TO KNOW YOUR NAME
If you are in a set for English, please write down which set it is [ _____________________ ]
Please tick one of the boxes to show whether you are a boy or a girl BOY [
] GIRL [
]
Here are some comments about other pupils in your school. We would like to know how
many of the pupils (not just your friends) you think are like this. Please make a mark
somewhere along the line to show how many pupils in the school fit the description. For
example, If you think that about three quarters of the pupils in the school are like it, mark
the line like this:
no pupils in
the school
all the pupils in
the school
like wearing school uniform
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
If you think that none of the pupils are like it, mark the line like this:
no pupils in
the school
all the pupils in
the school
live a hundred miles away
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
How many pupils in your school do you think:
no pupils in
the school
all the pupils in
the school
1. usually work hard in lessons
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
2. need a lot of extra help from
teachers with their school work
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
3. make it difficult for you to do
your work
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
4. want to do well at school
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
5. cause problems for the
teachers
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

Please turn over
19

no pupils in
the school
all the pupils in
the school
6. respect each others people’s
religions
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
7. have a parent or carer who
works in a permanent job
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
8. have racist attitudes
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
9. live with both of their ‘real’
parents
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
10. ‘hustle’ or threaten other
pupils for money or other things |-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
in school
11. come from homes where
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
people think education is
important
12. have well educated parents
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
or carers
13. live in ‘dodgy’ areas
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
14. have parents or carers who
do all they can to give the
school back up
15. bully other pupils
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
16. have parents or carers who
make sure they do their
homework
17. have parents or carers who
come into school and hassle the
headteacher or other staff
18. usually do their homework
as well as they can
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
19. get too much stress at home
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
20. get on well with teachers
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
21. have been victims of crime,
e.g. robbed on the street, had
their house burgled
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

Please turn over
20

no pupils in
the school
22. have parents or carers who
have plenty of useful contacts,
e.g. they know people who can
help them if they need help
23. have committed a crime
all the pupils in
the school
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
24. have parents or carers who
know how to get things done
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
25. live in overcrowded houses
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
26. have parents or carers who
belong to clubs, temples, .
churches, mosques, or social
groups
27. have someone living in their
family who has a car
28. live in houses which are
rented from private landlords
29 don’t live with their proper
families
30. live in council (or housing
association) accommodation
31. live with parents or carers
who often have rows with each
other
32. are quiet and obedient in
lessons
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
Thankyou for answering our questions.

21
APPENDIX TWO
UNIVERSITY OF WARWICK INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION

We are interested in what you think about your school. Please help us by answering the questions on
this sheet. You will need a blue or black pen or a pencil
WE DO NOT NEED TO KNOW YOUR NAME
If you are in a set for English, please write down which set it is [
]
Please tick one of the boxes to show whether you are a boy or a girl BOY [
] GIRL [
]
Here are some things for you to agree or disagree with. Please make a mark somewhere along the
line to show how much you agree or disagree. For example, if you completely agree, mark the line
like this
Completely
disagree
Completely
agree
Our school is OK
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
If your opinion is abut half way between completely agreeing and completely disagreeing,
mark the line like this
Completely
disagree
Completely
agree
Teachers have a tough job
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
Now please do the following ones on your own. Please use a blue or black pen or a pencil
Completely
disagree
Completely
agree
1. I’m usually proud of my
work
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
2. My teachers want me to do
well
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
3. I nearly always revise
before a test
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
4. A lot of time is wasted in
lessons
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
5. The work we do is
important
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
6. Lessons usually start on
time
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
Please turn over
22
Here are some comments about your lessons. We would like to know how many of the
lessons you think are like this. Please make a mark somewhere along the line to show how
many of your lessons fit the description. For example, if you think that none of the lessons
are like it, mark the line like this
none of
my lessons
all of
my lessons
Lessons are on Sundays
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
If you think that about three quarters of your lessons are like it, mark the line like this
none of
my lessons
all of
my lessons
Lessons are fun
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
Please remember that we are interested in your opinion about all the pupils in the school, not
just the ones you know. That means you will need to give us your impression, not actual
facts.
none of
my lessons
7. The way teachers mark my
work helps me do better next
time
8. If I tried, I could do much
better work
9. The marks and grades I get
give a fair idea of my ability
10. The behaviour of other
pupils stops me doing my
best
11. I get enough homework
to keep my work up to
standard
12. The way the teacher
teaches helps me do well
all of
my lessons
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
13. My work is the best I can
do
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
14. My teachers help me
make the most of my ability
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

Please turn over
23

In the following questions, please mark the lines to show how much you agree or disagree
with the statements
Completely
disagree
15. When good things happen
in school they are because of
the way the school is
16. Both of my parents or
carers usually come to parents
evenings
17. When good things happen
in school they are because of
good things outside the school
18. If my one of favourite
teachers came to visit our
family I would feel
embarrassed
19. Even if I do well at school
it won’t help me get a good job
20. When bad things happen in
school they are because of
problems outside the school
21. When bad things happen in
school they are because of the
way the school is
22. One of my parents or carers
usually comes to parents
evenings
Completely
agree
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
What kind of job do you think you will have when you are about 25? _________________
_________________________________________________________________________
Thankyou for answering our questions.

24
APPENDIX 4
UNIVERSITY OF WARWICK INSTITUTE IF EDUCATION
SCHOOL COMPOSITION RESEARCH PROJECT
YEAR EIGHT QUESTIONNAIRES
Dear Colleague,
Thankyou for your help in administering the questionnaires. There are TWO versions, one
white and one blue. When your group is seated in their usual places, please explain to them
that by filling in the questionnaire carefully they will be helping a research project which has
a chance of making things better in schools. Thank them on my behalf and assure them that
they will not have to do any writing - just marking
lines. The scanning process is fairly tolerant, so it is not necessary to be too precise about the
kind of pen they use.
4 Explain
that we do not need them to put their names on the papers, so their answers are
private. No-one can identify them. Ask them not to write anything on the papers until you
have explained what to do. Then please give out the questionnaires. Please give each pupil
ONE version, either a white one or a blue one. Assuming that they are
,- seated in pairs, please give a blue one to one of the two and a white one to their neighbour.
If they are not seated in pairs, please alternate them at your discretion so that as far as
possible adjacent pupils have different colours and that roughly equal numbers of blue and
white versions are in use.
Explanation to pupils - blue questionnaire
If they are in sets for English, they should write top / middle / bottom, or the set
number. Please guide them in this. If they are not in sets, please leave the item blank.
Ticking boy / girl should not present too many problems.
Then there are two examples showing how to mark their answers. Please go over
them, drawing their attention to the 'no pupils -- all the pupils dimension at the top of the
boxes. The first example should be obvious, and please make sure that they see that in the
second one the mark is at the very left hand end of the line.
The questions are not about them, but how many pupils in the whole school they think
(guess) are like the descriptions..
Explanation to pupils - white questionnaire
If they are in sets for English, they should write top / middle / bottom, or the set number.
Please guide them in this. If they are not in sets, please leave the item blank.
Ticking boy / girl should not present too many problems.
The white questionnaire has TWO sections, with fresh examples at the top of the second
page, so please explain both types of answer. On the front page are two examples showing
25
how to mark their answers. Please go over them, drawing their attention to the ‘no pupils - all the pupils’ dimension at the top of the boxes. Please make sure that they see that for ‘our
school is OK’ , we have indicated ‘all pupils’ with a mark at the right-hand end of the line .
The marking of the second example is more obvious. Please remind them that the questions
are about how they themselves feel.
Then at the top of the second page there are two more examples. Again please make sure
they notice the 'none of my lessons -- all of my lessons' dimension at the top of the boxes,
and go over with them the answers to the two examples. ('All my lessons' means all my
lessons in all subjects, not all my lessons in a single subject)
Take them back to the beginning of page one and be ready to start
Once you have dealt with any questions, please ask all of them to start - blue and white
questionnaires - without conferring with other pupils.
Afterwards please collect in all the questionnaires and return them straight away to [. . . . . . ]
Thankyou for your help
Edwin Smith