Editorial Comment:

Focus

Against a background of major changes in schools and in pupils’ post-school opportunities, a recent SOEID funded project, Guidance in Secondary Schools, explored pupils’ guidance needs and the effectiveness of provision. This briefing summarises one aspect of the research –pupils’ opinion and experience of the guidance system.

The central aim of the study was to examine the guidance needs of pupils and their parents, the organisation of guidance provision and the effectiveness of this provision in meeting their needs. In relation to the specific focus of this aspect, the research was expected to address the question - how effective are current guidance arrangements in the schools studied in the view of pupils?

Variables or concepts being measured

• Importance of individual guidance teachers;
• Qualities of a good guidance teacher;
• Support for the guidance system;
• Problems of access;
• The guidance structure;
• Extent and quality of contact;
• Awareness and use of guidance;
• Who is guidance for?;
• Guidance and discipline;
• Personal and Social Education;
• Primary/secondary transfer;
• Subject choice;
• Careers education and guidance;
• Contact with the Careers Service.

Study design

A Qualitative case study approach was taken on the recommendation of SOIED that thought it was necessary because of the complex and multi-faceted nature of guidance work and its interaction with other aspects of school organisation.

In relation to this aspect of the study discussions were carried out with S2, S4 and S5 pupils respectively, a total of 18 groups. The pupils in the groups completed a questionnaire on an individual basis and worked in pairs to produce a list of issues as well as taking part in a group discussion. In the second year of the research, small group discussions were conducted with S5 pupils in three of the project schools to investigate senior pupils' views further.

Findings

Importance of individual guidance teachers

Young people's experience and opinion of guidance provision was heavily dependent on the attitude and approach of their own guidance teacher. No clear connection between guidance staff's training and pupils' opinion of their effectiveness.

Qualities of a good guidance teacher:

Pupils had a very clear and consistent view of the qualities of a good guidance teacher as someone who: listened and was understanding; liked children; took time; and showed an interest in them. A good guidance teacher should be fair, should listen to pupils' side of issues and should not label pupils as ‘good’ or ‘bad’. Other aspects of a good guidance teacher were the ability to preserve confidentiality, be trustworthy and should treat pupils with respect.

Support for the guidance system

All pupils believed in the value of the guidance system.

Problems of access to guidance teachers

A very common theme of pupils' comments was that guidance teachers were overloaded and did not have enough time. Access to guidance staff because of lack of time and large caseloads was identified as a problem by pupils in five of the six project schools.

The guidance structure

The guidance structure in the school (horizontal, vertical, or combination) seemed to make little difference to pupils' experience and opinions.

Extent and quality of contact

There was some difference in the perception of pupils compared to staff about the effectiveness of provision. Staff had concerns about the quality of the relationship between guidance staff and pupils.

The majority of pupils did not think their guidance teacher knew them well (and seemed dependent upon the qualities of the guidance teacher). This view varied across schools. Greater contact did not necessarily mean pupils felt more known by their guidance teacher Whether or not a pupil felt their guidance teacher knew them was important in several respects, in particular, whether they were likely to approach them with problems. This mattered to pupils in respect of the role of the teacher to guide them – how could they guide without knowledge of the person?

Awareness and use of guidance

The majority of pupils knew their guidance teacher were aware that s/he could be consulted about any difficulties. Pupils’ level of consciousness about guidance did vary, partly related to the extent of contact.

About half of the pupils were prepared to consult their guidance teacher about problems and depended on how approachable and accessible their guidance teacher was, also the nature of the problem and the age of the pupil.

The perceived focus of guidance in the school

• Pupils knew that guidance teachers were not directly responsible for discipline but the general view was that their role centred on discipline to a major extent.
• The majority of pupils believed that guidance should be there for all pupils, not just those with obvious needs or problems.
• There was some feeling among S5 pupils, especially in two schools, that contact with guidance was greater in the lower school but that now, more was required.
• Regular one-to-one interviews were generally viewed as a good idea to ensure a basic level of contact and knowledge.
• Regular interviews were also supported to circumvent what pupils acknowledged as their reluctance to approach guidance and thus be seen to have a problem.
• Pupils thought that their school could organise small groups rather than offer more individual attention.

Guidance and discipline

Pupils had contrasting experiences of guidance teacher's role and conduct about disciplinary matters.

A common theme was that guidance teachers usually ‘took the teachers' side’. Pupils wanted their guidance teacher to be prepared to listen to both sides. Most did not expect or want guidance teachers to ‘be soft – being able to maintain discipline was seen as important.’

PSE

• Pupils' opinion about PSE ranged from the very positive to the very negative with the majority somewhere in the middle. Although opinion in the same pupil groups tended to be in the same direction, pupil’s reactions to PSE within schools were partly related to the PSE teacher.
• Sex education; drugs; AIDS/HIV; and alcohol were perceived as topics not currently dealt with adequately in PSE. 4th and 5th year groups noted study skills and careers-related issues.
• Around two-thirds of the pupil groups were critical about the methodology of PSE - the size of PSE classes; lack of, or poorly focused, discussion; an over-reliance on worksheets and videos; out-of- date or English focused materials; and inappropriate classroom layout. Some thought that teachers were uncomfortable about certain topics.

Primary/secondary transfer

The large majority of S2 pupils felt their school had made considerable effort to ease their transition from primary to secondary school. Most had had visits from guidance and other staff while at primary school.

Subject choice

All pupils had had considerable input at the second year option choice stage via PSE and interviews with guidance staff, but the majority were critical of at least some aspects of the process. Criticisms centred on lack of real choice; the desire for a greater careers input; and more time. Commonly felt that the interview had been rushed and some thought that the choices had to be made quickly to suit the school rather than the pupil.

CEG

Post-school options were a major concern to all S4, and especially, S5 groups. Pupils at S2 stage were also concerned about career ideas when making their choice of Standard Grade subjects.