Research, regeneration and education - analysing survey data with SPSS - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 23
About This Presentation
Title:

Research, regeneration and education - analysing survey data with SPSS

Description:

Employment: Civil Service/Universities/Local Authority. Have ... Pelham ward (Gravesham district) 4 lower super output areas. E01024289 top 30% most deprived ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:41
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 24
Provided by: spss6
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Research, regeneration and education - analysing survey data with SPSS


1
Research, regeneration and education - analysing
survey data with SPSS
  • Tony Alderton
  • Researcher for Early Years and Childcare
  • Kent County Council
  • 9th October 2009

2
Biography
  • 1st Degree Social Policy
  • PhD Sociology
  • Started using SPSS 1994 (previously used
    Minitab)
  • Employment Civil Service/Universities/Local
    Authority
  • Have taught use of SPSS to MBA students
  • Trained as researcher Not statistician!

3
Outline
  • Context
  • Problems
  • Solutions
  • Methods
  • Results
  • Analysis
  • Future plans

4
Context
  • KCC CFE Strategic Planning and Review
  • Early Years and Childcare Operations Unit
  • High level targets
  • child poverty
  • unemployment
  • Local Targets
  • childcare
  • early education
  • Childcare Act 2006
  • Childcare Sufficiency Assessments (published
    document)

5
Problems
  • Size/diversity of Kent
  • Free market v command economy
  • Access
  • Quality
  • Price (sustainability)
  • Parental choice

6
Solution
  • Parents consultation Project (PCP)
  • (later - CSA demand survey)

7
Methods
  • Door-to-door interviews
  • Two phases (Oct 2005 to March 2006 and November
    2008 to March 2009)
  • Selected wards/LSOAs (mixed reasons for
    inclusion)
  • Structured survey form (hard copy/PDA)
  • Mix of 23 closed and 1 open ended question
  • Questions multi-layered (i.e. sample question
    potentially 60 data entries)

8
PCP wards/LSOAs
9
Results
  • 60,000 households visited (in two phases)
  • c 6,500 questionnaires completed (c 30 response
    rate)
  • c 11,000 children covered

10
Survey questionnaire sample question
11
Analysis
  • Survey data linked to MOSAIC data.
  • Data mapped using GIS tools

12
Example
  • Pelham ward (Gravesham district)
  • 4 lower super output areas
  • E01024289 top 30 most deprived
  • 670 households
  • MOSAIC range 1 - 59 (ward and lsoa)
  • MOSAIC average 27 (ward)
  • MOSAIC average 30 (lsoa)

13
(No Transcript)
14
MOSAIC type 27
15
Households needing childcare
16
Analysis childcare need
17
Analysis age of children
18
Analysis type of childcare wanted
19
Analysis issues with using childcare
Issue N of responses of cases
Cost 397 10.65 11.70
No job 99 2.66 2.92
None available 40 1.07 1.18
Need multiple places 17 0.46 0.50
Accessibility 15 0.40 0.44
Quality 27 0.72 0.80
Hours of care 48 1.29 1.41
Child's needs 38 1.02 1.12
Want to keep children at home 189 5.07 5.57
Children old enough to look after themselves 220 5.90 6.48
Do not trust care 99 2.66 2.92
Other 218 5.85 6.42
No issues 2321 62.26 68.41
Totals 3728 100.00 109.87
20
Analysis BME groups use of childcare
First child is in childcare First child is in childcare Total  
No Yes Total  
Ethnicity of respondent White British 80.9 19.1 100.0  
Ethnicity of respondent BME group 81.4 18.6 100.0  
Total Total 80.9 19.1 100.0  
Chi-Square Tests Chi-Square Tests Chi-Square Tests Chi-Square Tests Chi-Square Tests Chi-Square Tests
Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Exact Sig. (2-sided) Exact Sig. (1-sided)
Pearson Chi-Square .037(b) 1 0.847    
Continuity Correction(a) 0.012 1 0.914    
Likelihood Ratio 0.037 1 0.847    
Fisher's Exact Test       0.932 0.463
Linear-by-Linear Association 0.037 1 0.847    
N of Valid Cases 3,399        
21
Analysis regression model
Model summary Model summary Model summary Model summary Model summary Model summary Model summary Model summary
Model R R square Adj R Std err of the est
1 .591(b) 0.349 0.348 0.42241
Coefficients (a,b) Coefficients (a,b) Coefficients (a,b) Coefficients (a,b) Coefficients (a,b) Coefficients (a,b) Coefficients (a,b) Coefficients (a,b)
Model Unstandardised Unstandardised Standardised Standardised t Sig
Model B Std err Beta Beta t Sig
1 How well informed 0.128 0.021 0.202 0.202 6.07 .000
1 Emp status 0.343 0.016 0.902 0.902 21.2 .000
1 Tot no children -0.094 0.016 -0.23 -0.23 -5.91 .000
22
Analysis - flowchart
23
Future plans
  • Further surveys
  • Plan services
  • Monitor
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com