UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONGebook.lib.hku.hk/HKG/B35836465.pdf · UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG ... required...

UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG

LIBRARY

This book was a giftfrom

Hong Kong Sports Development Board

Principals' Attitudes TowardsPhysical Education And Sport In Schools

Commissioned byHong Kong Sports Development Board (11/92)

Conducted byPatrick P.O. Chan/Lo Cho-yim

Department of Physical EducationHong Kong Baptist College

9208

ABSTRACT

Physical Education is ̂ an academic subject in Hong Kong'sprimary and secondary schools, with the objective of educationthrough physical* Sport activities, are also media through whicheducational goals of physical education are achieved. Theprincipal, as a leader of a school, plays an important role informulating goals of the school which in turn affect the qualityof physical education program and extra-curricular sportsactivities of that school. The principal also has considerableinfluence on the attitude of both teachers and students towardsphysical education and sport.

The aim of this study, hence, is to investigate attitudes ofschool principals towards physical education and sport in HongKong's primary and secondary schools.

A pilot study through face-to-face or telephone interviewwas done in order to clarify and modify any unclear wordingsidentified in the questionnaire. The questionnaire was employedas the research instrument was sent to all the local primary(n=1113) and secondary (n-573) schools by mail. The Likert five-point scale was used to indicate the principals' attitudesscores. A total of 815 responses were returned by mail, whichconstituted a response rate of 48%.

The results showed that the principals* attitudes towardsphysical education and sport in schools were positive (n=815,mean=1.98+0.312) with no significance differences in age, sex andtypes of schools. In addition, primary school principals had ahigher attitude scores (mean=l.96+0.321) than secondary schoolprincipals (mean=2.02+0.286). Thus, it would likely hint thatwith the support from principals, a better physical education andsports program in Hong Kong schools could be implemented.

Table of Content

Page

List of Tables iv

I. Introduction 1

II. Literature Review 5

III. Methodology 11

IV. Results 12

V. Conclusion 15

VI. Recommendations . 18

Tables 19

References 47

Appendices (I & II)

List of Tables

Table Page

I. Background Information 19

IA. Location, Size, Type and Day by School Level 24

II. The findings which linked with sport facilities,number of physical education teaching section,total expenditure on physical education andsport, and difficulties encountered inorganizing sports programs in schools 25

III. Principals1 attitudes towards physicaleducation and sport in schools 30

IIIA. Comparison between the primary and secondaryschool principals1 attitudes towards physicaleducation and sport in schools (% of SomewhatAgree + % of Strongly Agree) 44

IV. T-test for different attitudes towards physicaleducation and sport in schools between maleand female principals 45

V. T-test for different attitudes between theprimary and secondary school principals towardsphysical education and sport in schools 45

VI. One way Anova for different attitudes amongschool principals towards physical educationand sport in different types of schools 45

VII. Principals1 attitudes towards physical educationand sport among the eight different age groups 45

VIII. Regression for the relation between theattitudes of the principals towards physicaleducation and sport and the expenditure onphysical education and sport related activities 46

VIIIA. Expenditure on physical education and sportrelated activities by school level, type andday. 46

PRINCIPALS1 ATTITUDES TOWARDS PHYSICAL EDUCATIONAND SPORT IN SCHOOLS

I. Introduction

In the past, Western scholars like Socrates, Plato,

Aristotle, J.A. Comemius, J. Milton, J. Locke and Jean Jacgues

Rousseau all shown positive attitudes towards physical education

and sport. They also acknowledged the positive value of physical

education in education. Similarly, Chinese principals or

scholars _like Confucius, Gu Ting-Lim ( H -? $£ ), Huang Li-Zhou

( 3f 31 $i ) and Yan Hsi-Tsai ( H ff ff ) all supported that

physical education should play an important ro3,e in education and

students should participate in sports activities ( Van Dalen and

Bennett, 1971; Ng, 1981).

In Hong Kong, regardless of the differences between Western

and Eastern cultural orientation with respect to curricula

design, physical education is an academic subject in primary and

secondary schools, with the objective of education through

physical. Sports activities, such as ball games, track and

field, swimming, dance, gymnastics, etc., are also media through

which educational goals of physical education are achieved.

Many of Hong Kongfs professional educators and school

principals were brought up in Hong Kong, a place where the

Western and Chinese cultures meet. Nevertheless, their

educational - 'backgrounds were influenced by a distorted

British educational system which puts much emphasis on academic

achievement and only limited attention has been placed on

availability of time for sports (Fu and Poon, 1992). During

their Form Five or Form Seven of school days, as a result of the

local competitive examination system , students were, in most

cases, forced to give up sport so that they could have time to

prepare for the Certificate of Education and/or Advanced Level

Examinations *

The singular emphasis on scholastic achievement might affect

students value system. It is not until the last few years, there

were noticeable changes in attitudes concerning physical

education and sports development in the Territory. The

establishment of the Hong Kong Sports Development Board, the

introduction of physical education as an examination subject to

be included as a part of Hong Kong Certificate of Education

Examination, and the launching of the first full time degree

course in physical education and recreation studies in the

government funded Hong Kong Baptist College are all landmark

changes.

The principal, as a leader of a school, plays an important

role in formulating education goals of the school which in turn

affect the quality of physical education program and extra-

curricular sports activities of that school. The principal also

has considerable influence on the attitude of both teachers and

students towards sports (Lai, 1991). He/she may act according

to his/her past experiences, ideas, likes, dislikes or changes

towards physical education and sport (Johnson and Nelson, 1986).

However, research or survey associated with the attitude of

principal is scarcely done in Hong Kong. Whether in general

principals have positive or negative attitudes towards physical

education are little known.

Therefore, in this study, we wish to find out who are less

willing to commit themselves to physical education and sport in

primary and secondary schools? Is it age of the principal that

makes the difference? Is it the level of the schooling that

makes the difference? Obviously, students in secondary schools

are at developmental and maturation stage that physical exercises

are considered more important, along with the proper diet and

guidance. School children on the primary level are less visible

in terms of their need for exercise and sports since their play

activities are physical in any case* Again, we ask questions

about the gender differences of responding principals. We are

curious if female principals are less, or more, committed to

physical education philosophy, and are more willing or less

willing to commit resources to physical education. Finally, we

are naturally curious to find out if private schools have a

different philosophy with respect to physical education and sport

as compared to government owned or aided schools. For these

reasons, the aim of this study is to investigate attitudes of

school principals towards physical education and sport in Hong

Kongfs primary and secondary schools. Specifically, we wish to

find out if differences exist with respect to the following

situations:

1. The attitudes between primary and secondary school principalstowards physical education and sport.

2. The attitudes of school principals towards physical educationand sport in different types of schools.

3. The attitudes towards physical education and sport in schoolsbetween male and female principals.

4. The attitudes of principals of different age cohorts towardsphysical education and sport.

Furthermore, we wish to find out if there is a relationship

between the attitudes of principals towards physical education

and sport, and the actual -expenditure on physical education and

sport related activities.

II. Literature Review

In order to have positive development of physical education

and sport in schools, the support of the principal is extremely

important. The principal is the person to set the tone in the

school. He/she also has considerable influence on the attitude

of both teachers and students towards physical education and

sport. The following review of literature consists of four

sections: (1) the role of principal, (2) early advocacy for

physical education and sport for students, (3) principals1

attitudes towards physical education and sport, and (4) the use

of measurement scales in attitude elicitation.t

The Role of Principal

School is a social system with belief patterns, authority

structures, organization goals and communication networks. In

this social system, principals may take many different roles,

which are appropriate to the operation of the institution (Me

Clearly and Thompson, 1977).

Roe and Drake (1980), Sergioranni (1991) , Ubben and Hughes

(1987) reported that principals played a critical role in

schoolfs effectiveness. According to Hughes, there are five

functions which shape the role behavior of the principals. "The

functions are the school and community relations, staff

development, student development, educational program development

and business and building management. The principal is at the

centre of these functions trying to meet the needs all of the

forces within the school.ff (Hughes, 1980)

Sergiovanni (1991) gives seven-folded classifications of

administrative processes of the principals. These are: planning,

decision making, organizing, coordinating, communicating,

influencing and evaluation* The most important one is to

identify specific objectives and devise means, select objectives

and means, and decide content of programs.

Early Advocacy for Physical Education and Sport for Students

Long before Christ was born, in Xia Dynasty ( JC II , 2100-

1600 B.C.), formal learning was already well established in

China.. During that time, dance, archery ( It ) , and Charioterring

( fP ) were popular sport in school.

Van Dalen and Bennett (1971), and Ng (1987) translated parts

of description from the Book of Rites ( it 15 ) as the following:

"At thirteen years of age, the boys and girls do the "Cho ( ̂ )"

Dance , when they are fifteen, they do the "Siang ( ̂ )" Dance

and learn archery, char ioterr ing11. These sports activities were

required subjects in schools of Zhou Dynasty ( JH || , 1066-221

B.C.) with educational goals to promote better moral virtue,

character, discipline and physical improvement (Ng, 1986).

Today, surprisingly, these old Chinese educational goals

which attained through the physical activities are still the

goals or objectives of physical education and sport in the West.

Physical educators, Williams and Brownele (1948) , and Bloomfield

(1991), stressed in their writings that the objectives of

physical education and sport should contain physical development,

character and personality development and sport skill

acquirement.

Famous Chinese educators like Confucius, Yan Hsi-Tsai

and Huang Li-Zhou, strongly advocated the inclusion of sports in

the daily curriculum. Confucius thought a whole' person's

education should include sports like archery and Charioterring;

whereas, Yan and Huang urged students to participate sports

activities to improve their spirit and body (Ng, 1981). The

strong positive attitudes towards physical education and sport

paralleled those Western schoolmasters or educators; men like

John Locke, Richard Mulcaster, John Comenius, and Jean Jacques

Rousseau.

John Locke, the famous educator of the seventeenth century,*

wrote the book Some Thoughts Concerning Education. Locke gave

his view on the aim of education : first, vigor of body; second,

virtue in soul; third, knowledge or mental acquisitions. His

first concern, is for the body and the opening paragraph of his

book is, "A sound mind is a sound body, is a short but full

description of a happy state in this world11.

Both schoolmasters Mulcaster and Comenius were advocators

and writers on physical education. In Mulcasterfs English

writing, there were forty-five "positions" and more than half of

them dealt with physical and moral training through games and

exercises. As for physical education, Comenius was quoted to

have said: gymnastics and games, running, jumping, wrestling and

ball playing were to be encouraged in school (Rice and Hutchison,

1952).

French educator, Rousseau in his famous book "Emile",

suggested that "natural" learns in education was very important

to children. Furthermore, he said, lfln order to learn to think,

we must then exercise our limbs, our senses, and our organs which

are the instruments of our intelligence".

Principals1 Attitudes Towards Physical Education and Sport

The principal is involved in the curriculum and is

recognized as a decision maker in school programs. Physical

education is a component of the school curriculum, the attitudes

of the principals towards physical education and sport are deemed

important. It has been reported that secondary school

principals, in general, seemed to be unconcerned about physical

education programs (Siedentop, 1987). Barros (1982) and Sum

(1992) indicated that principals who had participated in physical

education also had a more positive attitude towards physical

education in school and it in turn had influenced the success or

failure of the school's physical education program.

erase (1978) and Sum (1992) believed that attitudes of

principals may determine whether a physical education program

would be implemented and remained in the curriculum, or would be

neglected, reduced in status, and subsequently eliminated from

the curriculum. Thus, principals1 attitudes would have

considerable influence on the physical education program. A

survey of literature revealed, however, that there has been only

limited research on principals1 attitudes towards physical

education and sport in Hong Kong's schools.

Among available studies elsewhere, Sum (1992) reported that

principals believed physical education is important to the

secondary school education. Sum's study was consistent with

previous studies (Ziatz, 1973; Barros, 1982) which described

8

various populations, including principal, teacher and student,

supported physical education in the schools. These populations

also believed physical education should be included in the school

curriculum. Moreover, principals also believed that the time of

the students spent in physical education class was worthwhile.

Sum (1992) reported that the majority of secondary school

principals believed that improved primary school physical

education programs would also contribute to secondary school

physical education programs. Sum believed that specific funding

for primary school physical education specialist was needed.

However, more than half of the secondary school principals in

Hong Kong doubted primary school physical education specialists

are necessary or essential. Although principals' attitudes were

limited to secondary schools and the sample size was only 10,

principals1 attitudes towards physical education is an important

issue to be clearly understood.

Attitudes Measurement Scale

According to Zimbardo and Esbesen (1970), "The first major

technique of attitude measurement was developed by Thurstone, in

1929, in his study of attitudes towards religion11. The

Thurstone scale was made up of approximately twenty independent

statements of beliefs about a particular problem. Each statement

has a value that was numerically based on it's position on a

continuum. The individual's attitude on the problem was

evaluated by having him/her check on those statements with which

the individual agreed. The score was the mean value of those

statements he/she has checked. The distinguishing feature of a

Thurstone scale was that the intervals between the statements

were approximately equal.

The Likert method of the measuring attitudes has been more

widely used than any other method (Thornburg, 1986). The Likert

scale was made up of a set of belief statements concerning some

issues. However, in contrast to the Thurstone scale, an

individual's attitude was measured by asking him/her to indicate

the extent of his/her agreement or disagreement with each item.

This was accomplished by having the individual rated each item on

a five point scale of responses (strongly agree, agree,

undecided, disagree and strongly disagree). An individuals>

attitude score was the sum of his/her individual ratings. The

items in the scale are considered to be highly related with a

common attitude. Zimbardo and Esbesen (1970) explained that it

is assumed that each statement used in the Likert scale is a

linear function of the same attitude dimension. Individuals with

different points of view should respond to those items presented

differently which should lead to different ratings and different

scores (Thornburg, 1986).

10

- Methodology

The subjects for this research include 1113 primary and 573

secondary school principals, which would cover the whole

population (all existing primary and secondary schools in Hong

Kong). Before sending out the formal questionnaire to

principals, a pilot study through face-to-face or telephone

interview was done in order to clarify and modify any unclear

wordings identified in the questionnaire. Five principals,

including two from primary and three from secondary schools

participated in the pilot study. As a result, four unclear

questions were revised. With the assistance of the Education

Department and the Hong Kong Sports Development Board, a total of

1686 questionnaires, including 1113 copies of Chinese version

(see Appendix I) for primary and 573 copies of English version

(see Appendix II) for secondary schools were mailed to principals

in September, 1992.

A total of 815 responses were returned by mail, which

constituted a response rate of 48%. T-tests, analyses of

variance and Chi Square Tests were used to analyse the data via

the Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS).

11

IV. Results

Background information of respondents are shown in Table I*

The findings which linked with sport facilities, number of

physical education teaching section, total expenditure on

physical education and sport, and difficulties encountered in

organizing sports programs in schools are shown in Table II.

Attitude responses are shown in Table III. The Likert five-point

scale indicated, "agree stronglytf, "agree somewhat",

"undecided/no opinion", "disagree somewhat", and "disagree

strongly" with 1 to 5, respectively. The results showed that the

degree intensity of principals1 attitudes towards physical

education and sport in schools were 1.98+0.312, which means that

the responses of principals attitudes scores were between "agree

somewhat" and "agree strongly".

By using the t-test, it was found that there exists no

significant difference (Table IV) in principals1 attitudes

towards physical education and sport in schools between male and

female principals (t=l.91f df=786, P>0.057). No significant

differences (Table VI) of attitudes scores were found among

government, government subsidized/aided and private schools

principals (F=0.63, df=2,805, p>0.54). There were also no

significant attitudinal differences (Table VII) among principals

of eight different age groups (F=1.33, df=7,803, p>0.23).

Furthermore, there was no association (Table VIII) between

principals1 ,attitudes and school expenditure on physical

education and sports programs (r=O.Q41, p>0.26).

However, there was significant difference (Table V) between

primary and secondary school principals1 attitude scores (t=2.98,

12

df=813, P<0.003). The primary school principals attained scores

mean 1.96+0.321 and ^ the secondary school principals attained

scores mean 2.02+0.286, which indicated that primary principals

showed better support towards physical education and sport. In

the Likert five-point scale, to sum the scores of "somewhat

agree11 and "agree strongly", the primary principals had higher

percentage in question No.l (97.1% vs 82.1%), No.2 (99.5% vs

98%), No.3 (79.5% vs 59%), No.6 (99.8% vs 99.7%), No.9 (76% vs

64.2%), No.11 (70.9% vs 61.8%), No.12 (67.3% vs 60.4%), No.13

(95.3% vs 95%), No.14 (89.3% vs 80.8%), No.17 (66% vs 65.4%),

No.18 (67.7% VS 48.1%), No.20 (>59.5% vs 48.4%), No.26 (95.5% vs

62.6%), No.29 (63.7% vs 50.6%); but lower percentage in question

No.4 (65.5% VS 70.6%), No.5 (88.2% vs 92.7%), No.7 (85.1% vs

87.7%), No.15 (61.5% vs 75.6%), No.19 (83.4% vs 95%), No.24 (67%

vs 79.1%), No.25 (49.2% vs 70.4%), No.27 (63.5% vs 83.7%), No.28

(88.8% vs 91.5%) (see Table IIIA).

Sports facilities in schools were felt to be inadequate by

over 50% of the total respondents, 49.2% and 68.5% from primary

and secondary schools, respectively, depend on public sports

facilities to support their schools1 sports activities. On the

other hand, 71.9% responded that school sports facilities should*

not be made available for public use outside school hours (see

Table II).

Last year, over 70% of the responding primary school

principals spent a total expenditure (excluded all staff

salaries, but included equipment hiring charge for venue, school

sports team allowance, etc.) of $7,999 or less on physical

13

education and sport related activities in school. In secondary

schools, the expenditure situation was more diverse, with 38% in

the range of $8,000 to $16,999, while about one quarter were

spending over $25,000, but only 18.6% of the responding secondary

school principals spent $7,999 or less (see Table VIIIA).

Nearly 18% of the respondents spent 2% or less of their

total budget (excluding staff salaries) on physical education and

sports programs, and about 40% spent 5% or less. Moreover, over

55% spent 8% or less, but less than 10% spent 15% or more (see

Table II).

Nearly 80% of the respondents felt that insufficient space

was one of the major difficulties encountered in organizing

sports programs, whereas 58.6% of the respondents felt that

insufficient facilities was one of the major difficulties

encountered in organizing sports programs. 93.3% of the

responding secondary school principals felt that insufficient

P.E. staff was one of the major difficulties, while less than 60%

of the responding primary school principals felt that

insufficient P.E. staff was one of the major difficulties.

Furthermore, insufficient funding (40.7%), insufficient support

from government (28.2%), low student participation (22.3%), and

parents pressure (21.5%) were also perceived by the school*

principals as difficulties encountered in organizing sports

programs (see Table II) .

14

V. Conclusion

In a Chinese society of Hong Kong, it is not surprising to

find that the attitude scores of school principals are favorable

towards physical education and sport. It is clear that in Western

and Chinese history, sports and physical education have always

been an academic subject in schools. Physical education has its

own educational goals. Many earlier noted educators were

pioneers and promoters to implement physical education and sport

programs in schools.

Hong Kong's primary and secondary schools principals are

professional educators, they might share the same views and

philosophy of pioneers in education, men like Confucius, Yan Hsi-

Tsai, John Locke, Mulcaster, Comenius and Rousseau. In this

study, a positive attitude towards physical education and sport

expressed by local professional educators was not at all

surprising, especially, they agreed strongly in such statements

like: " Physical Education should be a required academic subject

(71.8%)"; "Physical education has its own educational goals

(79.8%)"; "Physical education and sport are good and beneficial

to the development of human body (85%)"; "When it become

necessary to cut programs, physical education should not be one

of the subjects to go (57.9%)"; and "Like to see outside agencies

organizing more sport-related activities for students

(40.5%)" (see Table III).

Hong Kong is a densely-populated modern city with limited

space, therefore limited school sports facilities has long been a

common phenomena. However, the higher dependency on public

sports facilities from secondary schools is properly due to the

15

launching of swimming class and school soccer team training at

public sports facilities.

Although most school principals are positive towards

physical education and sport in schools, about 40% of the

respondents spent 5% or less of their total school budget on

physical education and sport related activities last year, 18%

spent even 2% or less. This may probably due to the budget

constraint and the money allocated to physical education and

sports program was placed at a lower priority.

Moreover, it was not surprised that most secondary schools,

in terms of the net amount, spent more than the primary schools

did. This is mainly due to the funding from Education Department

is based upon the number of students enrolled.

However, attitudes of primary school principals had higher

scores (n=555, mean=1.96±0.321) than those of secondary school

principals (n=260, mean=2.02±0.286). This is probably due to the

significant difference of percentage between primary school

principals (PP) and secondary school principals (SP) in the

following aspects:

1. 97.1% of PP support that PE (physical education) should be arequired academic subject, for SP is 82.1%, with a 15%difference.

2. 79.5% of PP stress PE teacher should have a degree in PE,for SP is 59%, with a difference; over 20%.

3. 76% PP think that it is counter-productive when sport hasbecome too competitive, for SP is 64.2%, with a differenceover 10%.

4. 70.9% PP' like to have more elite athletes, for SP is 61.8%,with a 9.1% difference.

5. 89.3% of PP support that PE should not be one of subjects tocut, for SP is 80.8%, with a 8.5% difference.

16

6. 67.7% of PP is normally a spectator in sports, for SP is48.1%, with a difference nearly 20%.

7. 83.4% of PP think physically strong and fit is veryimportant, for SP is 95%, with a 11.6% difference.

8. 67% of PP support non-PE trained teachers to supplement PEstaff, for SP is 79.1%, with a 12.1% difference.

9. 49.2% of PP agree panel chairperson of PE subjects should bea senior post person, for SP is 70.4%, with a 21.2%difference.

10. 95.5% of PP support that sports activities should always behandled by PE trained staff, for SP is 62.6%, with a 32.9%difference.

11. 63.5% of PP like to employ outside agencies/coaches inorganizing sport-related activities, for SP is 83.7%,with a difference over 20%.

To conclude, it was encouraging to note that due to the

common recognition of educational goals and values in physical

education, attitudes of school principals were not affected by

age, sex, or the types of schools (government, government

subsidized/aided and private). The result (n=815,

mean=l.98±0.312) of the study showed that the .principals1

attitudes were positive towards physical education and sport.

There are likely to hint that with the support from principals, a

better physical education and sports program in Hong Kong

schools could be implemented.

17

VI. Recommendations

1. There^should be special seminars and/or workshops for schoolprincipals to share ideas on physical education and sport inschools. ^ Moreover, guidance from professionals would helpthem in implementing the physical education programs andsports activities more effectively and efficiently.

2. School^principals are encouraged to participate in sports, asparticipants and/or spectators. They are the best role modelsfor students.

3. The Urban/Regional Councils and the Education Departmentshould coordinate the dual usage of schools andcommunity sports facilities. Schools should also have a highpriority, even after school hours, in booking facilities. Onthe other hand, schools with good sports facilities areencouraged to volunteer their facilities as the venues forinter-school sports competitions.

4. The Hong Kong Sports Development Board and local physicaleducation professionals should coordinate with the twoSchools Sports Associations and various national sportsassociations to conduct systematic training programs (withdifferent skill levels and/or age groups) on various sports,so as to provide a broad base for training as well as forphysical recreational purpose.

5. A proper channel for recruiting elite athletes from localschool teams are encouraged.

6. At least two senior posts in each school should be allocatedto the Panel Chairperson of Physical Education subjects andCoordinator of extra-curricular activities.

7. It is advisable that Physical Education teachers should havea degree in Physical Education or related fields.

8. Extra resources should be available to employ outside coachesin organizing sport-related activities and/or to provideallowances for Physical Education staff working on Sundaysand Public Holidays.

r9. It is recommended that an in-depth research on the

difficulties encountered in implementing physical educationand sports programs in local schools should be conducted.

10. Comparative' studies of the principals1 attitudes towardsphysical education and sport in schools with the other threesmall dragons, i.e. Taiwan, Singapore and South Korea areencouraged.

18

PRINCIPALS1 ATTITUDES TOWARDS PHYSICAL EDUCATIONAND SPORT IN SCHOOL

Total Number of Questionnaires Sent « 1686 (1113 Primary + 573 Secondary)Total Number of Completed Questionnaires Collected = 815Response Rate = 48%

Table I: Background Information

1. School Level

Primary Secondary

55568.1%

26031.9%

Location

Hong Kong Island

15118.5%

A. Primary

Hong Kong Island

9316.8%

Kowloon New Territories

26031.9%

40349.4%

Kowloon

(Not ascertained : lf 0.1%)

New Territories

16930.5%

29252.7%

B. Secondary

Hong Kong Island Kowloon New Territories

5822.3%

9135.0%

11142.7%

2. Size

>2000 Students 1000-1999 500-999 300-499 <300 Students

70.9%

27033.1%

29336%

9111.2%

14818.2%

(Not ascertained : 6, 0.7%)

A. Primary


50.9%

10318.8%

23743.2

8214.9%

12222.2%

19

B. Secondary


20.8%

16764.2%

5621.5%

93.5%

2610.0%

3. Type

Government Gov't Subsidized/Aided Private

658%

69885.6%

455.5%


A. Primary


376.7%

48488.2%

295.3%

B. Secondary


2810.9%

21482.9%

166.2%

4. Religious Background

Yes No

44354.4%

36845.2%

A. Primary

Yes No


29253.0%

25947.0%

B. Secondary

Yes No

15158.1%

10941.9%

20

5 . System

Whole Day A.M.

332 19840.7% 24.3%

Number of Class

< 11 11 to 20

144 19117.7% 23.4%

\. Primary

Whole Day A.M.

103 19821.2% 40.7%

Number of crass

< 11 11 to 20

126 16024.4% 30.9%

8 . Secondary

Whole Day A.M,

229 099.6% 0.0%

P.M.

18622.8%


21 to 30 31 to 40 > 40

347 63 1942.6% 7.7% 2.3%


P.M.

18538.1%

21 to 30 31 to 40 > 40

212 8 841.0% 1.5% 2.1%

P.M.

10.4%


Number of Class

< 11 11 to 20 21 to 30 31 to 40 > 40

187.3 %

3112.6%

13554.7%

5522.3%

113.2%

21

6. Number of P.E. Staff

1 2 3

647.9%

7

415%

\. Primary

1

468.7%

7

417.8%

17821.8%

8

131.6%

2

8415.9%

8

132.3%

16019.6%

9

70.9%

3

7915.0%

9

71.3%

11614.2%

10

81%

4

7313.9%

10

81.5%

108 6813.3% 8.3%

>10

172%


5 6

96 6718.2% 12.7%

>10

142.8%

Total: 100%

3. Secondary

1

187.1%

7

00.0%

7. Age of

< 30

60.7%

46 to 50

18923.2%

2

9437.2%

8

10.4%

Principal

31 to

344.2%

51 to

- 21326.1%

3

8132.0%

9

00.0%

35

55

4

4317.0%

10

00,0%

36 to 40

708.6%

56 to 60

8210.1%

5 6

12 14.7% 0.4%

>10

31.2%

Total: 100%

41 to 45

199!?4.4%

> 60

182.2%

22

A. Primary

< 30 31 to 35 36 to 40 41 to 45

40.7%

203.6%

417 .4%

12723.0%

46 to 50 51 to 55 56 to 60 > 60

13624.6%

15528.1%

6111.1%

S1.4%

B. Secondary

< 30 31 to 35 36 to 40 41 to 45

8. Gender of Principal

Male Female

Total:100%

20.8%

46 to 50

5320.5%

145.4%

51 to 55

5822.4%

2911.2%

56 to 60

218.1%

7227.8%

> 60

103.9%

Total:100%

53665.8%

25230.9%

A. Primary

Male Female


36468.0%

17132.0%

B. Secondary

Male Female

Total:100%

17268.0%

8132.0%

Total:100%

23

Table IA: LOCATION, SIZE, TYPE and DAY by SCHOOL LEVEL

Primary

Location

H.K Island

KLN

N.T

Size

> 2000

1000 to 1999

500 to 999

300 to 499

< 300

Type

Government

Gov't subsidized/ aid

Private

Day

Whole day

A.M

P.M

93

169

292

5

103

237

82

122

37

484

29

103

198

185

(16.

(30.

(52.

(0.

(18.

(43.

(14.

(22.

(6.

(88.

(5.

(21.

(40.

(38.

8%)

5%)

7%)

9%)

8%)

2%)

9%)

2%)

7%)

0%)

3%)

2%)

7%)

1%)

Secondary

58

91

111

2

167

56

9

26

28

214

16

229

0

1

(22.

(35.

(42.

3%)

0%)

7%)

(0.8%)

(64.

(21.

(3.

(10.

(10

(82

(6

(99

2%)

5%)

5%)

0%)

.9%)

.9%)

.2%)

.6%)

(0.0%)

(0.4%)

Note: all the percentage are the valid percentage.

24

Table II:The findings which linked with sport facilities, number of

physical education teaching section, total expenditure on physicaleducation and sport, and difficulties encountered in organizing sportsprograms in schools.

1. Sports facilities are adequate

AgreeStrongly

303*7%

Mean 3*241

\. Primary

AgreeStrongly

203.6%

3. Secondary

AgreeStrongly

103.9%

2. Depend on

AgreeStrongly

13716.8%

Mean 2.658

\. Primary

AgreeStrongly

8014.5%

3. Secondary

AgreeStrongly

5722.2%

AgreeSomewhat

28134.5%

AgreeSomewhat

20136.2%

AgreeSomewhat

8031.1%

Undecided/No Opinion

809.8%


6111.0%


197.4%

DisagreeSomewhat

30537.4%

(Not ascertained

DisagreeSomewhat

21238.2%

DisagreeSomewhat

9336.2%

DisagreeStrongly

11614.2%

: 3, 0.4%)

DisagreeStrongly

6111.0%

Total: 100%

DisagreeStrongly

5521.4%

Total: 100%

public facilities

AgreeSomewhat

31138.2%

AgreeSomewhat

19234.7%

- AgreeSomewhat

11946.3%


9311.4%


7313.2%


207.8%

DisagreeSomewhat

23028.2%

(Not ascertained

DisagreeSomewhat

• 17932.4%

DisagreeSomewhat

5119.8%

DisagreeStrongly

394.8%

: 5, 0.6%)

DisagreeStrongly

295.2%

Total: 100%

DisagreeStrongly

103.9%

Total:100%

25

3. School sports facilities should be made available for publicuse outside school hours"

AgreeStrongly

354.3%

Mean 3.920

\. Primary

AgreeStrongly

132.3%

3 . Secondary

AgreeStrongly

228.5%

i. Cycle

Per Week

20024.5%

AgreeSomewhat

9711.9%


9411.5%

DisagreeSomewhat

25831.7%

(Not ascertained

AgreeSomewhat

6712.1%

AgreeSomewhat

3011.6%

Per 6 days

9211.3%


6611.9%


2810.9% /

Per 7 days

70.9%

DisagreeSomewhat

18333.0%

^

DisagreeSomewhat

7529.1%

DisagreeStrongly

32840.2%

: 3, 0.4%)

DisagreeStrongly

22540.6%

DisagreeStrongly

10339.9%


Average Number of Teaching Sessions

< 19 20 to 25 26 to 30 31 to 35 > 36

172 2821.1% 3.4%

16520.2%

41751.2%

151.8%


A. Primary

Per Week Per 6 days Per 7 days

12394.6%

43.1%

32.3%


< 19 20 to 25 26 to 30 31 to 35 > 36

14326.5%

S1.5%

7213.3%

31257.8%

50.9%

26

B. Secondary

Per Week Per 6 days Per 7 days

7745.6%

8852.1%

42.4%


< 19 20 to 25 26 to 30 31 to 35 > 36

29 2011.3% 7.8%

9336.2%

10540.9%

103.9%

5. Expenditure

<$2000 $2000-$4999 $5000-$7999 $8QOO-$1Q999 $11000-$13999

123 18015.1% 22.1%

12315.1%

9311.4%

658%

$1400Q-$16999 $17000~$19999 $20000-$24999 >$25000

445.4%

J384.7%

394.8%

809.8%

6. % of Expenditure

0 to 2% 3 to 5%


6 to 8% 9 to 11%

14617.9%

12 to 14 %

739%

\. Primary

0 to 2%

11824.1%

12 to 14 %

4910.0%

17521.5%

15 to 17%

334%

3 to 5%

12124.7%

15 to 17%

224.5%

13016%

18 to 20 %

263.2%

(Not

6 to 8%

7214.7%

18 to 20 %

153.1%

12415.2%

> 20%

202.5%

ascertained : 88, 10.8%)

9 to 11%

8116.5%

> 20%

122.4%

27

B. Secondary

0 to 2% 3 to 5% 6 to 8% 9 to 11%

2811.8%

12 to 14 %

2410.1%

5422.8%

15 to 17%

114.6%

5824.5%

18 to 20 %

114.6%

4318.1%

> 20%

83.4%

7. The Major Difficulties Encountered in Organizing Sports Program

Difficulties

Insufficient support from Gov'tInsufficient PE staffInsufficient spaceInsufficient facilitiesParents pressureObjections from non-PE staffLow student participationInsufficient fundingOthers

Frequency

2255626464681726117832544

Percentage

28.2%70.3%80.9%58.6%21.5%7.6%22.3%40.7%5.5%

A. Primary

Difficulties

Insufficient support from Gov'tInsufficient PE staffInsufficient spaceInsufficient facilitiesParents pressureObjections from non-PE staffLow student participationInsufficient fundingOthers

Frequency

135326434301152349819125

Percentage

24.8%59.8%79.6%55.2%27.9%6.3%18.0%35.0%4.6%

B. Secondary

Difficulties

Insufficient support from Gov'tInsufficient PE staffInsufficient spaceInsufficient facilitiesParents pressureObjections from non-PE staffLow student participationInsufficient' fundingOthers

Frequency

90236'21216720278013419

Percentage

35.6%93.3%83.8%66.0%'77.9 %10.7%31.6%53.0%7.5%

28

8. Investment .

Too high About right Too low

60.7%

63577.9%

16019.6%

A* Primary

Too high


About right Too low

40.7%

43579.7%

10719.6%

B. Secondary

Too high About right Too low

20.8%

20078.4%

5320.8%

29

lable III:Principals' Attitudes Towards Physical Education and Sport in

Schools

1. Physical Education (KB) should be a required academic subject

AgreeStrongly

58271.8%

Mean 1.408

\. Primary

AgreeStrongly

43177.8%

3. Secondary

AgreeStrongly

15158.5%

2. PE has its

AgreeStrongly

65079.8%

Mean 1.214

k. Primary

AgreeStrongly

45882.7%

B. Secondary

AgreeStrongly

19273.8%

AgreeSomewhat

16820.6%

AgreeSomewhat

16819.3%

AgreeSomewhat

6123.6%


313.8%


81.4%


238.9%

DisagreeSomewhat

232.8%

(Not ascertained

DisagreeSomewhat

71.3%

DisagreeSomewhat

166.2%

DisagreeStrongly

81%

: 3, 0,4%)

DisagreeStrongly

10.2%

DisagreeStrongly

72.7%

own educational goal

AgreeSomewhat

15619.1%

AgreeSomewhat

9316.8%

AgreeSomewhat

- '6324.2%


60.7%


30.5%


31.2%

DisagreeSomewhat

20.2%

(Not ascertained

DisagreeSomewhat

00.0%

•

DisagreeSomewhat

20.8%

DisagreeStrongly

00.0%

: lf 0.1%)

DisagreeStrongly

00.0%

DisagreeStrongly

0 '0.0%

30

3. PE teacher should have a degree in PE

AgreeStrongly

22127.1%

Mean 2*105

\. primary

AgreeStrongly

18132.7%

B. Secondary

AgreeStrongly

4015.4%

AgreeSomewhat

37245.6%

AgreeSomewhat

25946.8%

AgreeSomewhat

11343.6%

4. PE and Sport has its

AgreeStrongly

13816.9%

Mean 2.190

A. Primary

AgreeStrongly

10519.1%

B. Secondary

AgreeStrongly

3312.8%

AgreeSomewhat

40449.6%


14417.7%


7313.2%


7127.4%

own definition


24129.6%

DisagreeSomewhat

637.7%

(Not ascertained

DisagreeSomewhat

336.0%

DisagreeSomewhat

3011.6%

DisagreeSomewhat

222.7%

DisagreeStrongly

121.5%

: 3, 0.4%)

DisagreeStrongly

71.3%

DisagreeStrongly

51.9%

DisagreeStrongly

20.2%

(Not ascertained : 8, 1%)

AgreeSomewhat

255' 46.4%

AgreeSomewhat

14957.8%


17131.1%


7027.1%

DisagreeSomewhat

162.9%

DisagreeSomewhat

62.3%

DisagreeStrongly

20.4%

DisagreeStrongly

00.0%

31

5. PE program is necessary fto attain the educational goal

AgreeStrongly

29135.7%

Mean 1.759

V. Primary

AgreeStrongly

17231*3%

3. Secondary

AgreeStrongly

11945.8%

AgreeSomewhat

43553.4% '

AgreeSomewhat

31356.9%

AgreeSomewhat

12246.9%

5. PE and Sport are good

AgreeStrongly

69385%

Mean 1.151

\. Primary

AgreeStrongly

46984.8%

3. Secondary

AgreeStrongly

22486.2%

AgreeSomewhat

11814.5%

AgreeSomewhat

8315.0%

AgreeSomewhat

3513.5%


728.8%


5810.5%


145.4 %^

and beneficial


10*1%


10.2 %


00.0 %

DisagreeSomewhat

121.5%

(Not ascertained

DisagreeSomewhat

71.3%

DisagreeSomewhat

51.9%

to human body

DisagreeSomewhat

10.1%

(Not ascertained

DisagreeSomewhat

00.0%

DisagreeSomewhat

10.4%

DisagreeStrongly

00%

: 5, 0.6%)

DisagreeStrongly

00.0%

DisagreeStrongly

00.0%

DisagreeStrongly

00%

: 2, 0.2%)

DisagreeStrongly

00.0%

DisagreeStrongly

00.0%

32

7. Students who participate regularly in sport are generally moresatisfied with school life

AgreeStrongly

32940.4%

Mean 1.778

A. Primary

AgreeStrongly

22340.3%

B. Secondary

AgreeStrongly

10640.8%

8. There are

AgreeStrongly

8810,8%

Mean 2.691

A. Primary

AgreeStrongly

7713.9%

3. Secondary

AgreeStrongly

114.2 %

AgreeSomewhat

37045.4%

AgreeSomewhat

24844.8%

AgreeSomewhat

12246. £%

declining

AgreeSomewhat

34442.2%

AgreeSomewhat

26047.0%

AgreeSomewhat

8432.4%


8510.4%


5910.6%


2610.0%

DisagreeSomewhat

273.3%

(Not ascertained

DisagreeSomewhat

213.8%

DisagreeSomewhat

62.3%

DisagreeStrongly

30.4%

: 1, 0.1%)

DisagreeStrongly

30.5%

DisagreeStrongly

00.0%

opportunities for competitive sport


14718%


7413.4%


7328,2%

DisagreeSomewhat

19724.2%

(Not ascertained

DisagreeSomewhat

12322.2%

' DisagreeSomewhat

7428.6%

DisagreeStrongly

364.4%

: 3, 0.4%)

DisagreeStrongly

193.4%

DisagreeStrongly

176.6%

33

9. It is counter-productive when a sport has become too competitive

AgreeStrongly

21226%

Mean 2.161

A. Primary

AgreeStrongly

16930.5%

B. Secondary

AgreeStrongly

4316.5%

*10, The term

AgreeStrongly

9711.9%

Mean 2.393

A. Primary

AgreeStrongly

7413.5%

B* Secondary

AgreeStrongly

238.9 %

AgreeSomewhat

37646.1%

AgreeSomewhat

25245.5%

AgreeSomewhat

12447.7%

M sport culture

AgreeSomewhat

33941,6%

AgreeSomewhat

20938.0%

AgreeSomewhat

13050.2%


12114.8%


7513.5%


4617.7%

" is vague


33541.1%


24845.1%


8733.6%

DisagreeSomewhat

9311.4%

(Not ascertained

DisagreeSomewhat

519.2%

DisagreeSomewhat

4216.2%

DisagreeSomewhat

344.2%

(Not ascertained

DisagreeSomewhat

162.9%

Disagree* Somewhat

186.9%

DisagreeStrongly

121.5%

: 1, 0.1%)

DisagreeStrongly

71.3%

DisagreeStrongly

51.9%

DisagreeStrongly

40.5%

: 6, 0.7%)

DisagreeStrongly

30.5%

DisagreeStrongly

10.4%

34

11. Like to have more elite athletes

AgreeStrongly

14918.3%

Mean 2.267

A. Primary

AgreeStrongly

10619.2%

B. SecondaryAgreeStrongly

4316.6%

(~)12. Not much

AgreeStrongly

182.2%

Mean 3.629

A. Primary

AgreeStrongly

30.5%

B. Secondary

AgreeStrongly

155.8 %

AgreeSomewhat

40349.4%

AgreeSomewhat

28651.7%

AgreeSomewhat

11745.2%


16620.4%


10018.1%


6625.5%

DisagreeSomewhat

8210.1%

(Not ascertained

DisagreeSomewhat

559.9%

DisagreeSomewhat

2710.4%

of a participant in any sport

Agree Undecided/ DisagreeSomewhat No Opinion Somewhat

16420.1%

AgreeSomewhat

10619.1%

AgreeSomewhat

5822.3%

10212.5%


7213.0%


3011.5%

34842.7%

(Not ascertained

DisagreeSomewhat

24444.0%

DisagreeSomewhat

10440.0%

DisagreeStrongly

121.5%

: 3, 0.4%)

DisagreeStrongly

61.1%

DisagreeStrongly

62.3%

DisagreeStrongly

18222.3%

: 1, 0.1%)

DisagreeStrongly

12923.3%

DisagreeStrongly

5320.4%

35

(-)13. Sport may do more harm than good to the human body

AgreeStrongly

91.1%

Mean 4.542

\. Primary

AgreeStrongly

40.7%

3. Secondary

AgreeStrongly

51.9%

14. PE may be

AgreeStrongly

232.8%

Mean 4.357

\. Primary

AgreeStrongly

132.4 %

3. Secondary

AgreeStrongly

103.8 %

AgreeSomewhat

101.2%

AgreeSomewhat

61.1%

AgreeSomewhat

41.6%


202.5%


162.9%


41.6%

DisagreeSomewhat

26632.6%

(Not ascertained

DisagreeSomewhat

17531.6%

DisagreeSomewhat

9135.3%

DisagreeStrongly

50762.2%

: 2, 0.4%)

DisagreeStrongly

35363.7%

DisagreeStrongly

15459.7%

one of subjects to cut

AgreeSomewhat

273.3%

AgreeSomewhat

132.4 %

AgreeSomewhat

145.4 %


597.2%


336.0 %


2610.0%

DisagreeSomewhat

23228.5%

(Not ascertained

DisagreeSomewhat

13524.4%

DisagreeSomewhat

9737.3%

DisagreeStrongly

47257.9%

: 2, 0.2%)

DisagreeStrongly

35964.9%

DisagreeStrongly

11343.5 %

36

15. Like to have a few very strong sports teams

AgreeStrongly

15218.7%

Mean 2.305

!U Primary

AgreeStrongly

8815.9%

3. Secondary

AgreeStrongly

6424.8%

AgreeSomewhat

38347%

AgreeSomewhat

25245.6%

AgreeSomewhat

13150.8%


17221.1%


12823.1%


4417.1%

16. Clear separation between community

AgreeStrongly

799.7%

Mean 2.527

\. Primary

AgreeStrongly

5910.7%

3, Secondary

AgreeStrongly

207.8 %

AgreeSomewhat

37746.3%

AgreeSomewhat

27950.5%

AgreeSomewhat

9838.3%


21926.9%


14125.5%


7830.5%

Disagree DisagreeSomewhat Strongly

85 1910.4% 2.3%



68 1712.3% 3.1%


17 26.6% 0.8%

sports and school sports


113 2013.9% 2.5%



67 612.1% 1.1%

, Disagree DisagreeSomewhat Strongly

46 1418.0% 5.5%

37

17 Like to engage in sports as a participant

AgreeStrongly

11814.5%

Mean 2.310

A. Primary

AgreeStrongly

7713.9%

B. Secondary

AgreeStrongly

4116.0%

18. Normally

AgreeStrongly

9411.5%

Mean 2.541

\. Primary

AgreeStrongly

7513.6%

3. Secondary

AgreeStrongly

197.4 %

AgreeSomewhat

41550.9%

AgreeSomewhat

28852.1%.

AgreeSomewhat

12749.4%

a spectator

AgreeSomewhat

40349.4%

AgreeSomewhat

29854,1%

AgreeSomewhat

10540.7%


19223.6%


12823.1%


6424.9%

in sports


12615.5%


9417.1%


3212.4%

DisagreeSomewhat

789.6%

(Not ascertained

DisagreeSomewhat

539.6%

DisagreeSomewhat

259,7%

DisagreeSomewhat

15218.7%

(Not ascertained

DisagreeSomewhat

6812.3%

Disagree' Somewhat

8432.6%

DisagreeStrongly

70.9%

: 5, 0.6%)

DisagreeStrongly

71.3%

DisagreeStrongly

00.0%

DisagreeStrongly

344.2%

: 6, 0.7%)

DisagreeStrongly

162.9%

DisagreeStrongly

187.0%

38

19. Physically strong and fit is very important

AgreeStrongly

33040.5%

Mean 1.770

\. Primary

AgreeStrongly

18032.4%

3. Secondary

AgreeStrongly

15058.4%

AgreeSomewhat

33746.3%

AgreeSomewhat

28351.0%

AgreeSomewhat

9436.6%

20. Human movement in sport

AgreeStrongly

202.5%

Mean 3.588

\. Primary

AgreeStrongly

81.5 %

3. Secondary

AgreeStrongly

124.7 %

AgreeSomewhat

11013.5%

AgreeSomewhat

6612.0%

AgreeSomewhat

4417.1%


749.1%


6411.5%


103.9 %

DisagreeSomewhat

242.9%

(Not ascertained

DisagreeSomewhat

224.0%

DisagreeSomewhat

20.8%

DisagreeStrongly

70/9%

: 3, 0.4%)

DisagreeStrongly

61.1%

DisagreeStrongly

10.4%

is "beautiful" is absurd


22627.7%


14927.1%


7729.8%

DisagreeSomewhat

27934.2%

(Not ascertained

DisagreeSomewhat

19335.1%

DisagreeSomewhat

8633.3%

DisagreeStrongly

17321.2%

: lt 0.9%)

DisagreeStrongly

13424.4%

DisagreeStrongly

3915.1%

39

24. Non-PE trained teachers to supplement PE staff

AgreeStrongly

15919.5%

Mean 2.381

I. Primary

AgreeStrongly

S315.9%

3. Secondary

AgreeStrongly

7127.5%

AgreeSomewhat

41651%

AgreeSomewhat

28351.1%

AgreeSomewhat

13351.6%

25. Panel chairperson of

AgreeStrongly

16119.8%

Mean 2*499

\. Primary

AgreeStrongly

9116.4%

3. Secondary

AgreeStrongly

7027.2%

AgreeSomewhat

29336%

AgreeSomewhat

18232.8%

AgreeSomewhat

11143.2%


637.7%


488.7 %


155.8 %

DisagreeSomewhat

,117'l4.4%

(Not ascertained

DisagreeSomewhat

9617.3%

DisagreeSomewhat

218.1% ,

PE subjects should be a senior


18522.7%


13324.0%


5220.2%

DisagreeSomewhat

13816.9%

(Not ascertained

DisagreeSomewhat

11721.1%

t DisagreeSomewhat

218.2%

DisagreeStrongly

577%

: 3, 0.4%)

DisagreeStrongly

397.0%

DisagreeStrongly

187.0%

post person

DisagreeStrongly

354.3%

: 3, 0.4%)

DisagreeStrongly

325.8%

DisagreeStrongly

31.2%

40

26. Sports activities handled by PE trained staff

AgreeStrongly

36244*4%

Mean 1.813

\. Primary

AgreeStrongly

30755.3%

3. Secondary

AgreeStrongly

5521.4%

AgreeSomewhat

32940.4%

AgreeSomewhat

22340.2%

AgreeSomewhat

10641.2%


425.2%


122.2 %


3011.7%

27. Employ outside agencies/coachesactivities

AgreeStrongly

16920.7%

Mean 2.243

\. Primary

AgreeStrongly

9917.9%

3. Secondary

AgreeStrongly

7027.1%

AgreeSomewhat

39848.8%

AgreeSomewhat

25245.6%

AgreeSomewhat

14656.6%


14217.4%


11520.8%


2710.5%

DisagreeSomewhat

698.5%

(Not ascertained

DisagreeSomewhat

81.4%

DisagreeSomewhat

6123.7%

DisagreeStrongly

101.2%

: 3, 0.4%)

DisagreeStrongly

50.9%

DisagreeStrongly

51.9%

in organizing sport-related

DisagreeSomewhat

8210.1%

(Not ascertained

DisagreeSomewhat

6912.5%

* DisagreeSomewhat

135.0%

DisagreeStrongly

202,5%

: 4, 0.5%)

DisagreeStrongly

183.3%

DisagreeStrongly

20.8%

41

28. Like to see outside agencies organizing more sport-relatedactivities for students

AgreeStrongly

33040.5%

AgreeSomewhat

39748.7%


647.9%

DisagreeSomewhat

172.1%

DisagreeStrongly

30.4%

Mean 1.725

A. Primary


AgreeStrongly

22640.9%

AgreeSomewhat

26547*9%


468.3 %

DisagreeSomewhat

142.5%

DisagreeStrongly

20.4%

B. Secondary

AgreeStrongly

10440.3%

AgreeSomewhat

13251.2%


187.0 %

DisagreeSomewhat

31.2%

DisagreeStrongly

10,4%

42

*29. PE subject will be more important in secondary school, if PE isincluded as HKCEE subjects(For Secondary Schools Only)

AgreeStrongly

4316.3%

Mean 2.580

\. Primary

AgreeStrongly

218.2%

3. Secondary

AgreeStrongly

4116.3%

AgreeSomewhat

9134.5%

AgreeSomewhat

545.5%

AgreeSomewhat

8634.3%


7026.5%


436.4%


6626.3%

DisagreeSomewhat

4918.6%

(Not ascertained

DisagreeSomewhat

00.0%

DisagreeSomewhat

4919.5%

DisagreeStrongly

93.4%

: 2, 0.8%)

DisagreeStrongly

00.0%

DisagreeStrongly

93.6%

Note: (-) Negative Statement: No. 12,13,14,20

* Statement not counted on Average Attitude Score:No.8,10,16,29

Agree Strongly 4- Agree Somewhat (over 60%) : No.1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,11,12,13,14,15,17,18,19,24,26,27,28

Agree Strongly (over 50%) : No. 1,2,6

Undecided/No opinion (over 25%) : No. 4,10,16,20,29

Disagree Strongly <f Disagree Somewhat (over 25%): No.8

43

IIIA:Comparison between the primary and secondary school principals'

attitudes towards physical education and sport in schools {% ofSomewhat Agree + % of Strongly Agree)

The Primary School PrincipalsHad Higher Percentage

Primary Secondary

No 1.

No 2.

No 3.

No 6.

No 9.

No 11.

No 12.

No 13.

No 14.

No 17.

No 18.

No 20.

No 26.

No 29.

97.1%

99.5%

79.5%

99.8%

76.0%

70.9%

67.3%

95.3%

89.3%

66.0%

67.7%

59.5%

95.5%

63*7%

82.1%

98.0%

59.0%

99.7%

64.2%

61.8%

60.4%

95.0%

80.8%

65.4%

48.1%

48.4%

62.6%

50.6%

The Primary School PrincipalsHad Lower Percentage

Primary

No 4.

No 5.

No 7.

No 15.

No 19.

No 24.

No 25.

No 27.

No 28.

Secondary

65.5%

88.2%

85.1%

61.5%

83.4%

67.0%

49.2%

63.5%

88.8%

70.6%

92.7%

87.7%

75.6%

95.0%

79.1%

70.4%

83.7%

91.5%

Note: For details of the questions, please refer to Table III.

44

Table IV:T-test for different attitudes towards physical education and

sport in schools between male and female principals

Groups

Male

Female

Number

536

252

Mean

1.96

2.01

t-Value

-1.91

s.d.

.308

.323

df

786

2-tail test

y

.057

P

Significance level (two-tailed test)**** p<.001 *** P<-005 ** P<.01 * P<,05

Table V:T-test for different attitudes between the primary and

secondary school principals towards physical education and sportin schools

Groups

Primary

Secondary

Number

555

260

Mean

1.96

2.02

t-Value

-2.98

s.d*

.321

.286

df

813

2-tail test

.003***

P

Table VI: /One way Anova for different attitudes among school

principals towards physical education and sport in differenttypes of schools

Groups

GovernmentGovt1 sub /aidPrivateTotal

Number

6569845808

Mean

1.971.972.031.98

s.d. df

.312

.310

.331

.311 807

F ratio F prob

.6244 .5359

Table VII:Principals' attitudes towards physical education and sport

among the eight different age groups

Group Age Count Mean S.D.

12345678

Total

Below 3031-3536-4041-4546-5051-5556-60

Over 60

634701991892138218811

2.112.021.952.011.981.961.981.831.98

0.090.380.310.310.280.330.320.300.31

45

table VIII:Regression for the relation between the attitudes of the

principals towards physical education and sport and theexpenditure on physical education and sport related activities

Variables Multiple R R square B df signif F

Avescale

Expend,041 .002 -.005 783 1.30 .254

jable VIIIA:Expenditure on physical education and sport related

activities by SCHOOL LEVEL, TYPE and DAY

Expenditure P

< $2000 11722.0%

$2000-4999 16130.3%

$5000-7999 10119.0%

$8000-10999 529.8%

$11000-13999 377.0%

$14000-16999 173.2%

$17000-19999 152.8%

$20000-24999 163.0%

>$25000 163.0%

S

62.4%

197.5%

228.7%

4116.2%

2811.1%

2710.7%

239.1%

239.1%

6425.3%

G

1625.4%

1422.2%

1015.9%

812.7%

46.3%

11.6%

23.2%

23.2%

69.5%

GS/A.

10115.0%

15523.0%

10615.8%

7811.6%

598.8%

40S.9%

345.1%

334.9%

6710.0%

PR

49.5%

1023.8%

61̂ 4.3%

49.5%

24.8%

37.1%

24.8%

49.5%

716.7%

W.D.

3811.9%

4313.4%

3912.2%

4313.4%

3310.3%

257.8%

206.3%

278.4%

5216.3%

H.D.

7219.5%

11130.0%

7119.1%

3710.0%

287.6%

164.3%

113.0%

123,2%

123.2%

Note: P=primary s=secondaryG=government GS/A=government subsidized/aid PR=privateW.D.=whole day H.D.=half dayall the percentage are the valid percentage

46

References

Hg^J i , 1981^

Barros, J.M. (1982). "Attitudes of school principals towarda.??ysi5al *ducation: A study of their relationshipwith the implementation of physical education inelementary school. " Unpublished doctoral dissertationGeorge Peabody College for Teachers of VenderbiltUniversity.

Bloomfield, J. (1991). "Physical Education And Sports: AnInternational Perspective." Sports Excellence, pp. 12-16.

erase, D. (1978) ̂ "New fitness alarm sounded, how will secondaryschool physical education respond?" National Associationof Secondary School Principals Bulletin, pp. 90-93.

Fu, F.H., & Poon, W.Y. (1990). "A Comparison of the Developmentof Sport Culture in the People fs Republic of China and HongKong * " Journal of International Council for Health,Physical Education & Recreation r pp. 9-16.

Hughes, L. (1980) . The Secondary Principals1 Handbook. Boston,MA: Allyn and Bacon.

Johnson, B.L., & Nelson, K.J. (1986). Practical Measurementsfor Evaluation in Physical Education. 4th ed. New York,Macmillan Publishing Company.

Lai, M. (1991) . "Physical Education and Sport in School:Reflection of A Headmistress." Proceedings of Sport inEducation The Future Challenge: A Seminar For ThePhysical Education Profession of Hong Kong, pp. 30-34.

Me Clearly, L. , & Thompson, S. (1977). The Senior High SchoolPrincipalship. Reston, Va: National Association of SecondarySchool Principals.

Rice, E., & Hutchinson, J. (1952). A Brief History ofPhysical Education. 3rd ed., New York, A.S. Barnes and Co.

»

Rice, E . , & Hutchinson, J. & Lee, M. (1967). A _ BriefHistory of Physical Education. New York, The Ronald PressCo.

Roe, W . H . , & Drake, T.L. (1980). The Principalship. New York:Macmillan.

Sergiovanni, T.J. (1991). The Principalship: a ReflectivePratice Perspective. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

47

Siedentop, D. (1987). "High school physical education: Still anendangered species.1 Journal of Physical Education,Recreation and Dancer 58(2), pp. 24-25.

Sum, K.W.R. (1992). "A Study of Hong Kong Secondary SchoolPrincipals' Attitudes toward Physical Education.»Unpublished Master's Independent Study, Springfield College,Springfield, MA.

Thornburg, R.A. (1986). "A Study of Selected Secondary SchoolPrincipals1 Attitudes toward Physical Education."Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of SouthernMississippi.

Ubben, G.C., & Hughes, L. (1987). The Principal: CreativeLeadership for Effective Schools, Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Van Dalen, D.B., & Bennett, B.L. (1971). A World History ofPhysical Education, 2nd ed. , N.J. Prentice Hall,Inc.

Williams J.F., & Brownele C.L. (1948). The Adminstration ofHealth and Physical Education. 3rd ed. , London, W.B.Saunders Co.

Ziatz, D.H. (1973). "The Effect of a Public Relations Program onParental Attitudes toward Physical Education."Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Utah,Salt Lake City, UT.

Zimbardo, P., & Esbesen, E.B. (1970). Influencing Attitudes ofChanging Behavior. Reading, Ma: Addision-Wesley.

48

Appendix I

(fl!H±/«Ji«mKl«F5g)

2.&10QOM 19992. HiS500MS300ig& £$300

4.5.

6.

SOJSJBtT31-35^36-40^41-45^

234

46-50^51-55^56-60^6018

23

2345

23

4

5678

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

(Sport Culture)

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

15.

is.

17.

is.

19.

20.

21.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

29.

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 ' 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5

30.

20-2526-3031-35

2345

31.) :

, 000552,00055- 4,999555,00055- 7,999558,00055-10,99955

11,00055-13,9995514,00055-16,9995517,00055-19,9995520,00055-24,99955^^25,00055

i23456789

32.

0-2X3-5%6-8%9-11%

1234

12-14%15-17%18-20%^£$20%

5678

33.

123

-45

6789

34.

123

Appendix II

Principals1 Attitudes Towards Physical Education and Sport in Schools

(Hong Kongf 1992}

The Hong Kong Sports Development Board is interested in seekingprincipals' opinion and views about physical education and sportsactivities in primary and secondary schools in the Territory. Though it isentirely voluntary on your part to answer the following questions, it isour wish that you give us your answers to these questions. Results of thestudy will be made public only in statistical forms, and will not revealthe identity of any individuals or schools. Please do not put down yourname, or the name of your school on the form. When you return thequestionnaire to the sender's address, we will destroy the envelopeimmediately the contents are pulled out. Thank you for your cooperation.

NOTE: 1. THE TERM OF PE SUBJECT OR PE PROGRAM INDICATES HERE AS A FORMALSUBJECT TAUGHT IN SCHOOL.

2. SPORT INDICATES ANY PHYSICAL ACTIVITY (eg.field, soccer, school team training, etc.).

games, track and

* Delete as appropriate

PART I. GENERAL INFORMATION. /(Please circle / fill in the answers)

1. The location of your school is:

2. The size of your school is:

Hong Kong IslandKowloonNew Territories

More than 2,000 studentsBetween 1,000 to 1,999Between 500 to 999Between 300 to 499Less than 300 students

3. Type of your school: Government* Gov't subsidized/aided* Private (bought place/non bought place)Others (Please specify)

123

12345

1234

4. Your school has a religious background: Yes No

5. The total number of classes in your school *(whole day/A.M/P.M) is_

6. The total number of PE staff in your school is

1. Your age is: Below 3031-3536-4041-45

1234

46-50 551-55 656-60 7Over 60 8

8. Your gender is: Male 1 Female

II^A. THE FOLLOWING ARE STATEMENTS WHICH WILL REQUIRE YOU TO INDICATErrfO VrVTT "Af^OW /Mi TMr«"»ii J-«««W->«M .-_

A EWHETHER YOU AGREE OR DISAGREE WITH THE STATEMENT (FOR NO.1-28). PLEASE

'

' 1Agreestrongly

2Agreesomewhat

Undecided/no opinion

Disagreesomewhat

1. Physical Education (PE) should be arequired academic subject in allschools.

Agreestrongly

Disagreestrongly

Disagreestrongly

2. Physical Education has its own educationalgoal.

3. PE teacher should have a degree in PE orallied fields.

4. Given the history and culture in Hong Kong,it is acceptable that PE and Sport havetheir own definition.

5. PE program is necessary to attain theeducational goals of your school.

6. PE and Sport are good and beneficial tothe development of human body.

7. Students who participate regularly insport are generally more satisfied withschool life.

8. There are declining opportunities forcompetitive sport in schools. 1

9. From the view of education, it is counter-productive when a sport has become toocompetitive. 1

10. In Hong Kong, the term "sport culture1* isvague and can be interpreted in any way ,by anybody. 1

11. I would like to have more elite athletesin my school. 1

12. I am not much of a participant in anysport. 1

13. Sport may do more harm than good to thehuman body. 1

14. When it becomes necessary to cut programs,PE should be one of the subjects to go, 1

15. I would like to have a few very strongsports teams in our school. 1

16. There should be a clear separation betweencommunity sports activities and schoolsports in management and in programming. 1

17. I would like to engage in sports as aparticipant* 1

18. I am normally a spectator as far as sportsis concerned. ^

19. As far as I am concerned, being physicallystrong and fit is very important. 1

20. The idea that every human movement insport is "beautiful" is absurd. 1

21. Sports facilities are adequate in ourschool. 1

/22. We depend on public sports facilities

to support our sports activities. 1

23. School sports facilities should be madeavailable for public use outside schoolhours. 1

24. I support to have non-PE trained teachersto supplement PE staff in organizingsport-related extra-curricular activitiesand/or training of school sports team* 1

25. The panel chairperson of PE subjectsshould be a senior post person(eg./ SAM, SGM). 1

26. Sports activities should always behandled by PE trained staff. 1

27. I support to employ outside agencies/coaches in organizing sport-relatedactivities and /or training of schoolsports team. 1

28. I would like to see outside agencies(eg. Municipal Council, National SportAssociations) organizing more sport-related activities for students. 1

29. (Applied to secondary schools only)PE subject will be more important ifyour school included PE as one of theHK Certificate of Education Examination

subjects. 1

PART II B. Please circle the appropriate answer.

30. The average number of teaching sessions *(per week /per 6 days cycle/per 7 days cycle) for each PE teacher (including PE and other subjects)in your school is: 19 or iess x

20-25 226-30 331-35 4over 36 5

31. Last year the total expenditure (excluding all staff salaries) on PEand sports related activities in our school is about (includingequipment, hiring charge for venue, school sports team allowance,etc.):

Less than $2,000 1$2,000 - $4,999 2$5,000 - $7,999 3$8,000 - $10,999 4$11,000 - $13,999 5$14,000 - $16,999 6$17,000 - $19,999 7$20,000 - $24,999 8Over $25,000 9

32. The percentage of the above mentioned sports and PE programs in thetotal budget (excluding all staff salaries) is about:

0-2% 1 12-14% 53-5% 2 15-17% 66-8% 3 18-20% 79-11% 4 over 20% 8

33. Some of the major difficulties encountered in organizing sportsprograms in our schools are (circle as many as applied):

Insufficient support from government 1Insufficient PE staff 2Insufficient space (venue) 3Insufficient facilities (equipment) 4Parents pressure 5Objections from non-PE staff 6Low student participation 7Insufficient funding 8Others (please specify) 9

34. As far as I am concerned, investment and contribution to the PE andsports programs in our school is:

too high 1about right 2too low 3

END

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We should like to express our gratitude to the Hong Kongf

Sports Development Board and Education Department, especially the

initial ideas and funding from the Hong Kong Sports Development

Board, and the extensive information from the Education

Department. We would also like to thank all of those people

directly involved in our study, especially Professor William Liu,

Dr. Frank Fu, Mr. Chan Wan-Kar, Miss Malina Ngai, Mr. Ku Hok-Bun

and Miss Lee Kai-Tsz. Numerous other people deserve a mention,

but such an attempt would leave us in fear of omitting any one

person.

November 1992

P.C.C.C.Y.L.

XQ24Q323fl

[P] 796.071 C45

XOSitD323fi

P 796.071 C45

Chan, Ping-cheung ,Patrick.

i 4 ---- 3 __

Date Due

edto :colleagues

;sionin refereed journalsthe views of the author(s) only.

Date post:	08-Jun-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	doandung
View:	213 times
Download:	0 times

UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONGebook.lib.hku.hk/HKG/B35836465.pdf · UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG ... required...

Documents