- Email: [email protected]
Public School Development and Planning: Parents’ Criteria of Selecting Public School in Gombak District
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
ScienceDirect Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 153 (2014) 274 – 285
AicQoL2014Kota Kinabalu AMER International Conference on Quality of Life The Pacific Sutera Hotel, Sutera Harbour, Kota Kinabalu, Sabah, Malaysia 4-5 January 2014 “Quality of Life in the Built & Natural Environment”
Public School Development and Planning: Parents’ criteria of selecting public school in Gombak District Nuraihan Mohd Ibrahim*, Mariana Mohamed Osman, Syahriah Bachok Department of Urban and Regional Planning, Kulliyah of Architecture and Environmental Design, International Islamic University Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur, 50728, Malaysia
Abstract School is a nucleus of the society. School development should be planned based on the sustainable concept. The purpose of this paper is to determining parents’ criteria in selecting the suitable public school to enrol their children. There are various factors underlying in determining the school selection which are location, distance, school facilities, school academic performance, extra-curricular and school environment which will be ranked based on the Relative Importance Index (RII) method. The findings showed that school academic performance is the most important criteria of parents in selecting school for enrolling children. Hopefully, the paper will benefit the local authority, parents as well as children in term of public school development in the community. © 2014 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license © 2014 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the Association of (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/). Malaysian Researchers, AMER (ABRA Malaysia). Peer-review Environment-Behaviour under responsibility of the Association of Malaysian Environment-Behavior Researchers, AMER (ABRA malaysia). Keywords: Public school; school development; parents; criteria
1. Introduction The provision of school should be a fundamental part of the communities towards the sustainable development. Nowadays, there is no doubt that school becomes a focal point of the community as neighbourhood playground for the children as well as a meeting area for parents (Kaiser et al, 1995, The Oregon School Siting Handbook, 2005). School must be planned with organizing sectors such as * Corresponding author. Tel.: E-mail address: [email protected]
1877-0428 © 2014 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/). Peer-review under responsibility of the Association of Malaysian Environment-Behavior Researchers, AMER (ABRA malaysia). doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.10.061
Nuraihan Mohd Ibrahim et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 153 (2014) 274 – 285
residential, transportation and business so that the surrounded communities will help in supporting the schools (McKoy et al, 2008). As one of the essential elements in the inclusive development planning process, components such as safety, convenience and adequacy must be included in school planning (Rahimah, 1998). This brief summarizes research on public school development and planning as well as determines parents’ criteria in selecting public school. Over the past few years, traffic safety of the students when going to school has been a concern in the metropolitan area. Therefore, this paper also explores factors that influence transportation modes of the students during a trip to school. This study is a vital aspect for school planning, and as such the paper focuses for the future development of public schools. The study conducted on the selected primary and secondary level schools in Gombak District. 1.1. Research problems School location affects how students going to school by given them various transportation modes (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2003; The Oregon School Siting Handbook, 2005; McKoy et al, 2008). According to Roya Shokoohi et al (2012), students are more likely to use automobiles as transportation modes during a trip to school. Larger school may have a wider catchment area which makes walking to school is impossible for students who live far from the school (Ewing et al., 2004; The Oregon School Siting Handbook, 2005). Beaumont and Pianca (2002) and Bukhari et al (2010) supported the argument by mentioning that school location can cause traffic problems when it located far from the residential area resulting in the increasing of walking distance. Ewing et al. (2004) and McDonald (2007) both mentioned that the primary obstacle for students to walk to school is because of the increased distances between school and home. The shorter distance between school and neighbourhood area encourages students to walk to school (Ewing et al., 2004; The Oregon School Siting Handbook, 2005). In addition, school location that is closer to home not only improves student’s health by encouraging them to be physically active but also helps to decrease the traffic congestion by reducing the number of vehicles on the road (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2003; The Oregon School Siting Handbook, 2005). Factors such as traffic, utilities and cost must be taken into consideration when planning the school in terms of its location, design and building as school is one of the essential public facilities that serve the needs of the community (The Oregon School Siting Handbook, 2005; McKoy, 2008; Bukhari et al, 2010). Travel mode to school may vary because it influenced by parents’ perception towards various factors such as distance, neighbourhood population density, school size and traffic safety (Carlin, 1997; Ewing et al., 2004; McMillan, 2005). Parents’ concern with the children’s safety affected the transportation modes of their children to school (DeBoer, 2005; Vigne, 2007). In addition, DeBoer (2005) and Vigne (2007) stated that traffic congestion and accident are some of the significant problems associated with traffic safety in school involving children during a school trip. Vigne (2007) cited that the main factors contribute to traffic congestion is the increasing number of students taken car during a school trip. Commonly, the source of school surrounding congested with traffic because of parents who are dropping off and picking up their children from school (Vigne, 2007; McKoy et al, 2008). 1.2. Research background The research aims at determining parents’ criteria in selecting the suitable public school for their children. The duration of study is twelve months. It began from August 2012 until August 2013. The limited duration of time given to complete this study caused constraints in the process of collecting data and resources, reliability in the method of sampling, transferability of the findings and validity of the recommendations. The scope of the study is only focusing on the transportation modes of the students during a school trip and factors influencing criteria in school selection. This study only covers on the
275
276
Nuraihan Mohd Ibrahim et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 153 (2014) 274 – 285
selected primary and secondary public schools in Gombak District. Hence, the outcomes may not be relevant to all public schools in Malaysia. Table 1 shows the number and types of public schools for primary and secondary schools as well as the number of teachers, staffs, enrolments and classes in Gombak District. In Malaysia, education is the responsibility of the Federal Government. The existing types of schools in this country are government or government-aided schools and private schools. The school starts in January and ends in November. At the end of every school levels, students will sit for general public examinations (Malaysian Education Act, 1996). Malaysian education programmes have continued to emphasize increasingly on accessibility, equity and quality, strengthening the delivery system, as well as improving the achievement of rural students to reduce the academic performance gap between rural and urban areas (Osman and Rajah, 2011). Table 1. Basic education information of Gombak District in 2013 Primary School
Teachers
Non-teachers
Enrolment
Class
Types of School
No.
Male
Female
Male
Female
Male
Female
No.
SK
53
949
2720
47
373
30174
27475
1762
SJK (C)
8
90
491
10
39
6130
5502
334
SJK (T)
7
44
244
13
29
2244
2246
145
SK (Khas)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
SK (Asli)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
SR (Agama)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
SR Model Khas Komprehensif K9
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
School without students
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Sub Total
68
1,083
3,455
70
441
38,548
35,223
2,242
Secondary School
Teachers
Non-teachers
Enrolment
Class
Types of School
No.
Male
Female
Male
Female
Male
Female
No.
SMK
30
490
2803
81
300
27553
26660
1575
SM Vokasional
2
56
152
16
30
830
388
44
SM Teknik
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
SMK Agama
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
SM Khas
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
SM Berasrama Penuh
2
23
92
16
23
656
627
46
SM + SR (Model Khas)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Sekolah Sukan
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
SM Agama (SABK)
2
26
68
16
13
510
668
32
Sekolah Seni
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
School without students
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Sub Total
36
595
3,115
119
366
29,549
28,343
1,697
TOTAL
104
1,678
6,570
189
807
68,097
63,566
3,939
8,248 Source: http://www.pelajarangombak.net/v1/index.php (2013)
996
131,663
Nuraihan Mohd Ibrahim et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 153 (2014) 274 – 285
2. Literature review 2.1. Definition of school There are many types of schools which have different development impacts towards the surrounding area. Table below shows several types of schools and the definitions. Table 2. Definition of schools Components
Definitions
School
“School” means a place where ten or more persons gain knowledge whether in one or more classes, but does not include any area where there is a restriction in teaching exclusively to the teaching of any religion (Malaysian Education Act, 1996).
Public School
Public school associated with the neighbourhood community which has access to various local resources such as funding, land, and political interest (Chung, 2005).
Government School
“Government school” or “government educational institution” means a school or an educational institution established and fully maintained by the Minister “government-aided school” or “government-aided educational institution” means a school or an educational institution in receipt of capital grant and full grant-in-aid (Malaysian Education Act, 1996).
Source: Malaysian Education Act (1996) and Chung (2005)
2.2. School choice School choice is parents’ rights of selecting the most preferred school for their child to attend (Burgess, 2009). Students who are getting access to their favourable school will have better academic achievement than students who are not receiving access to school (Cullen et al, 2003; Cullen et al, 2005). The essential of school choice is from numerous policies which allowing students to be transferred out from the current school to a new school within the neighbourhood area (Rabovsky, 2011). These policies certified that neighbourhood area establishes their very own school which grounded by the provision of public educational facilities (Epple and Romano, 2003). There are various factors in influencing the selection of a private or public school. According to Figlio and Stone (1997) and Beavis (2004), family backgrounds such as includes household income and parents’ level of education influences the school choice. . School choice is one of the factors that can increase the academic achievement of the students because it indicates the competition among schools (Cullen et al, 2003; Lauen, 2009; Rabovsky, 2011). However, there is also an argument where school choice would create racial segregations in terms of ability, income, ethnicity and religion (Cullen et al. 2005; Böhlmark and Lindahl, 2007; Rabovsky, 2011). The proponents also claimed that drop out students are those who do not have an option to choose their school. 2.3. Planning guidelines for school development Location and distance of a school determines the school allocation. In Malaysia, the development of school is using the planning standards and guidelines are as reference in planning a school. Based on the Table 3, it showed that the location of both primary and secondary schools are within the walking distance. There are two fundamental aspects of built environment influencing the transportation mode namely distance and connectivity (Saelens et al, 2003). This statement supported by Hodgson et al (2004)
277
278
Nuraihan Mohd Ibrahim et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 153 (2014) 274 – 285
which mentioned there is two factors concerned route choice, which are good connections and the implementation of pedestrian facilities. Table 3. Planning standards and guidelines for schools Types of school
Primary School
Secondary School
Population
3,000 – 7,000 residents
> 9,000 residents
Allocation
0.4 – 0.8 km
0.4 – 0.8 km
5 – 10 minutes walking distance from the furthest house
5 – 10 minutes walking distance from the furthest house
Far from the intersection
Far from the intersection
Direct access to the road 20.1m /66’ (within a residential area)
Direct access to the road 20.1m /66’ (within a residential area)
Has public transportation routes
Has public transportation routes
Flat Surface
Hilly area
Flat Surface
Hilly area
2.4 hectare
3.2 hectare
2.4 hectare
3.2 hectare
(6 acre)
(8 acre)
(6 acre)
acre)
Acreage (minimum)
Source: Town and Country Planning Department of Selangor (2010)
2.4. Factors influencing parents’ criteria in choosing public school Parents’ perception on school criteria is necessary because these criteria will help them to select the most suitable school for their children. These factors determine whether parents want to choose public or private school based on the school criteria (Beavis, 2004). There is several factors influence the parents’ criteria in choosing proper public school for their children. Based on Kowalski (2002), the physical of the school building have developed over time which affected by urbanization, policy makers and technology. The availability of the facilities that the school served influencing parents’ criteria in school choice (Glick and Sahn, 2001; Wilkinson et al, 2004, ISCA Research Report, 2008; Burgess et al 2009; Roy and Chakrabarti, 2010; Zainurin and Mohd Sabri, 2011). Providing adequate school facilities influences the learning environment of the students and teaching environment of the teachers (Berry, 2002; Planning Guide for Maintaining School Facilities, 2003; Schneider, 2003). Location becomes one of the most influential criteria in school choice (Wilkinson et al, 2004; Beavis, 2004; O’Mahony, 2008; Roy and Chakrabarti, 2010; Zainurin and Mohd Sabri, 2011). According to Bukhari (2010), the improvement of students’ performance in academic can be achieved by locating the school in the strategic area. Kaiser et al (1995) and Ewing et al (2004) both mentioned that school location influenced by the built environment factors because location will determine the accessibility and transportation mode of students going to school. According to the Home to School Transport Policy (2011), a measurement of a walking distance of the students is by calculating the shortest distance between home and school entrance. School distance is one of the attributes in choosing school (Beavis, 2004; O’Mahony, 2008; Burgess et al, 2009). According to Gibbons et al (2006), parents consider distance as fundamental criteria because by living in neighbourhood area that is closer to the school their children will have easier access to the academic achievement. Students’ academic performance has always been a primary concern to parents in choosing a school for their children (Beavis’ 2004, Wilkinson et al, 2004, ISCA Research Report, 2008; Burgess et al 2009; Roy and Chakrabarti, 2010; Yusuf and Adigun, 2010). As school is an essential institution, it needs a conducive physical and social environment in order to provide a positive impact on students’ academic performance (Tremblay, 2001; Asikhia, 2010; Nurul Syakima, 2011). Other than that, Alvaera
Nuraihan Mohd Ibrahim et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 153 (2014) 274 – 285
et al, (2009) cited that students’ academic performance also can be influenced by parents’ and teachers’ approach. Although education focuses on academic, most students enjoy the participation in co-curricular activities (Lawhorn, 2008). Wilkinson et al (2004) and Zainurin and Mohd Sabri (2011) both agree that relevant criteria for parents in choosing a school for their children is because of the extra co-curricular activities offered by the school. In Malaysia, participation in co-curricular activities is compulsory for students, and teachers are responsible in conducting these activities (Marjohan and Mohd Sofian, 2007). Lawhorn (2008) cited that co-curricular activities give benefits in the development of personal, social and intellectual of the students. School environment is important criteria in choosing school (Wilkinson et al, 2004; ISCA Research Report, 2008; Roy and Chakrabarti, 2010; Zainurin and Mohd Sabri 2011). According to Berry (2002) and Planning Guide for Maintaining School Facilities (2003), a healthy school environment must be comfortable and safe to ease the learning process regardless of the school location to ensure the academic excellence. A safe and healthy school environment covers the physical surroundings regulated by various policies. These policies specifically implemented to maintain the condition of the school environment (Jones et al 2007). 3. Methodology The first method was problems identification. This stage has analysed the content of the literature and the gaps. Data collections obtained by using questionnaires surveys. Data analyses have conducted using SPSS. The last stage provides recommendations and conclusions based on the analysis findings in the last stages. The primary data collected through a questionnaire survey in order to obtain information regarding the research. The questionnaire survey consists of three main sections: x Section 1: Respondents’ profile x Section 2: Transportation modes to school x Section 3: Parents’ perception in criteria of choosing school The duration of data collection for this is 3 months starting from February 2013 till April 2013. There are a total of 400 questionnaire forms distributed to the selected primary and secondary schools within Gombak District. The 400 sample in the survey is adequate to perform the statistical analysis during the analysis stage. The surveying of a widely dispersed population is impractical due to limitation of time, workforce and availability of respondents in the case study areas. Hence, the sampling method implemented in this study is non-probability which is convenience sampling method. The targeted group for this research was the parents of students from the nine selected primary and secondary schools in Gombak District. Table 4 shows the distribution of the questionnaire surveys among the selected schools. The collected data analysed after the data entry. The analyses will be both descriptive and inferential in nature. This stage includes the documentation of the analysis process, explanation of the study output and organization of the information accordingly. The data from the survey analysed using Statistical package for Social Science (SPSS) programme in order to present the data in tables and to test the relationship between variables. For conducting assessment or evaluation when comparing outcomes with baseline data, the use of quantitative method is necessary. Chi-square Analysis is one of the statistical methods that relevant to test the hypotheses regarding the research. Table 4. Questionnaire survey distributions Schools Primary Schools SK Gombak Utara SK Gombak 1 SK Gombak 2
Frequency
Percentage (%)
65 38 16
16.25 9.5 4.0
279
280
Nuraihan Mohd Ibrahim et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 153 (2014) 274 – 285 SK Gombak Setia SK Taman Setia SK Taman Seri Gombak Secondary Schools SMK Sg Pusu SMK Gombak Setia SMK Seri Gombak Total
75 16 20
18.75 4.0 5.0
49 91 30 400
12.25 22.75 7.5 100.0
Source: Questionnaire Survey (2013)
4. Findings 4.1. Transportation modes of students to the school There are several mode choices are identified for students to go to the school such as walking, cycling, school bus, private vehicles and public transport. The usage of particular transportation modes vary due to many reasons. Table 5 shows the transportation modes of students to school. The reasons of using transportation modes are acknowledged in this study. From the survey, the most transportation mode that been used was private vehicles with the percentage of 54.75% (219) from the total number of respondents. On the other hand, the least transportation modes that been used by the students is bicycle. There were 4.75% (19) of the respondents chose cycling as the transportation modes of their children to go to the school. Private vehicles that been used includes cars, motorcycles, MPVs and etc. The main reasons why respondents used private vehicles as the transportation mode is because they are concerned for their children’s safety (40%), the distance between school and workplace is close (5.75), and they could save the time (7.75). In contrast, the reasons students are cycling to school because of the distance between school and home is close to each other (2.75). They also wants to be physically active (1.25) and to save the travel cost (0.75%). Table 5. Cross – tabulation between transportation modes and reasons of using the particular transportation modes Reasons
Transportation Modes Walking Cycling No
(%)
Physically active 29 7.25 Safety of the 1 0.25 children Save cost 14 3.5 No other 7 1.75 transportation system Close to home 39 9.75 Close to workplace 0 0 Save time 0 0 Total 90 22.5 Source: Questionnaire Survey (2013)
Total School Bus
Private Vehicles
No
(%)
No
(%)
No
(%)
5 0
1.25 0
0 26
0 6.5
0 160
0 40
Public Transport No (% ) 0 0 0 0
3 0
0.75 0
7 13
1.75 3.25
0 3
0 0.75
0 26
0 6.5
24 49
11 0 0 19
2.75 0 0 4.75
0 0 0 46
0 0 0 11.5
2 23 31 219
0.5 5.75 7.75 54.75
0 0 0 26
0 0 0 6.5
52 23 31 400
No
(%)
34 187
8.5 46.7 5 6 12.2 5 13 5.75 7.75 100
Nuraihan Mohd Ibrahim et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 153 (2014) 274 – 285
A Chi-square test was made in order to test whether there is a relationship between transportation modes and school distance. Hypothesis #1: “There is a relationship between transportation modes and distance”. The results of this test are shown in Table 6 below. Table 6. Summary on hypotheses tested Variables Transportation modes VS Distance between School and Home Transportation modes VS Distance between School and Workplace
Hypotheses Tested Chi-Square Value 57.534
df 4
Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) .000
Significant Significant
48.245
4
.000
Significant
Source: Questionnaire Survey (2013)
From the result in Table 6, the significant value of 0.000 is less than the critical values of 0.05 which means the research hypothesis can be accepted. It concludes that there is a relationship between transportation modes and distance. Thus, it shows that distance influences the mode choice of the students during trip to school. 4.2. Parents’ perception in criteria of selecting school R.I.I. analyses parents’ perception in criteria of selecting a school for their children. R.I.I. method transforms the answer's choice of in Likert scale to assess the ranking of each factor by using the following equation:
RII =
¦w AN
To determine the relative ranking of the factors, the scores were then transformed to importance indices based on the formula (Zeng et al, 2001) where w is the weighting given to each factor by the respondents, ranging from 1 to 5, A is the highest weight (i.e. 6 in the study) and N is the total number of samples. The parents’ perception towards the criteria in selecting school has been scaled by; 1=1st choice, 2=2nd choice, 3=3rd choice, 4=4th choice, 5=5th choice and 6=6th choice. The six-point scores ranging from 1 to 6 are transformed to the relative importance indices for each of criteria on academic performance, location, distance, school facilities, school environment and co-curricular activities. The indices were then used to determine the rank of each item. These rankings made it possible to cross compare the relative importance of parents’ perception and the criteria of selecting school. The RII determines the most influential criteria of parents in selecting school for their children.
281
282
Nuraihan Mohd Ibrahim et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 153 (2014) 274 – 285 Table 7. Parents’ perception in criteria of selecting school (n=400) Criteria
Academic Performance Location Distance School Facilities School Environment
1st Choice (Score of 6) 175 (1050) 94 (564) 93 (558) 24 (144) 14 (84)
2nd Choice (Score of 5) 59 (295) 84 (420) 112 (570) 60 (300) 37 (185)
Extra co0 curricular (0) activity Source: Questionnaire Survey (2013)
48 (240)
Frequency of Respondents 3rd Choice 4th Choice (Score of 4) (Score of 3) 98 29 (392) (87) 72 53 (288) (159) 41 32 (164) (96) 95 127 (380) (381) 68 93 (272) (279) 27 (108)
67 (201)
5th Choice (Score of 2) 32 (64) 67 (134 49 (98) 54 (108) 67 (134) 130 (260)
RII
Rank
6th Choice (Score of 1) 7 (7) 30 (30) 73 (73) 40 (40) 121 (121)
0.7 90 0.6 52 0.6 50 0.5 47 0.4 48
1
128 (128)
0.3 90
6
2 3 4 5
Based on the findings, academic performance of the school was chosen as the most preferred criteria for parents in choosing a school to enrol their children, with the R.I.I scores of 0.79 which has been stated in the Table 7. This is followed by the school location with R.I.I scores of 0.652, school distance with R.I.I scores of 0.65, school facilities with R.I.I scores of 0.547 and school environment with R.I.I scores of 0.448. The extra co-curricular activity ranked as the least importance criteria in school selection with the lowest R.I.I scores of 0.39. 5. Discussions and conclusions The research was aimed at determining parents’ criteria in selecting the suitable public school for their children. There are two main objectives for this research. Firstly, to identify the transportation modes of students when going to school and secondly to examine parents’ criteria in selecting school for their children. From the findings, the transportation modes that had been used by students going to school are walking, cycling, school bus, private vehicle and public transportation. Several reasons of using mode choices are health, safety, cost, distance and time. Most of the parents send their children to the school by using private vehicles with the percentage of 54.75% (219). From the 219 respondents that chose private vehicles as the transportation mode, there are160 respondents chose safety as their reason. Based on the analysis, it can be said that the main reason of parents choosing private vehicles because they are concerned about their children’s safety. The other reason is because the school distance is closer to their workplace. Roya Shokoohi et al (2012) mentioned that neighbourhood safety becomes a concern of parents which leads them to use private vehicles to send their children to school. There were 22.5% (90) of the respondents choose walking and there were 4.75% (19) of the respondents chose cycling because the location of the school is closer to home. According to Ewing et al., 2004; the shorter distance between school and home encourages children to walk or cycle during a school trip. In addition, Sri Maryati, et al (2002) stated travel distance to primary school normally within walking distance. The relationship between distance and transportation modes was tested using chi-square test. The result shows that the critical value (0.000) is less than 0.05 which concluded that there is a relationship between transportation modes and distance. Mode choice to school may differ from one place to another because it influenced by parents’ perception towards factor such as distance and traffic safety (Carlin, 1997; Ewing et al., 2004;
Nuraihan Mohd Ibrahim et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 153 (2014) 274 – 285
McMillan, 2005). Based on the respondents, there are six primary criteria of parents in selecting school for the children which are academic performance, location, distance, school facilities, school environment and co-curricular activities. From the opinion of the parents, school academic performance ranked as the most influential criteria in choosing a suitable school for their children. This is followed by location (rank 2), distance (rank 3), school facilities (rank 4), school environment (rank 5) and lastly extra co-curricular activity (rank 6). Based on Schneider (2003), the improvement of educational achievement at national level influences the decision of school choice by the parents. As been mentioned by Burgess (2009), parental demand for academic performance is a crucial element in strengthening school choice that will enhance the school performance. Extra co-curricular activity is ranked as the least important criteria because students only participating in the co-curricular activity because it is compulsory for them. As conclusion, a good school has always been an important factor for parents in deciding where to enrol their children. The study is significant for various parties such as local planning authority, parents and students. The outcomes of the study will contribute to the decision making by local authorities. The decision making includes the preparation in preparing the site of public school location. From the results, the guidelines and policies for school development should include academic performance as one of the determinants in school planning. Parents will get benefits from this research in term of criteria that they need to know in selecting the suitable school for their children. As from the findings, the criteria are academic performance, location, distance, school facilities, school environment and co-curricular activities. As students, they will get the benefits by having a safe and healthy learning environment of the school. As location is necessary in planning a school, school must be located in the strategic area so that it will promote walking and cycling to school. Apart from the school physical planning, the school system also should be improved in term of the academic performance because it is a key factor for parents to choose the school for their children. References Alvaera A. B. et al., (2009), Teaching Approach, Perceived Parental Involvement and Autonomy as Predictors of Achievement, The International Journal of Research and Review, Vol. 1, September 2009, pg. 57-80, ISSN 2094-1420 Asikhia O. A., (2010), Students and Teachers’ Perception of the Causes of Poor Academic Performance in Ogun State Secondary Schools (Nigeria): Implications for Couselling for National Development, European Journal of Social Sciences, Vol 13, No. 2, pg. 1-14 Beaumont, C. E., and Pianca, E. G., (2002), Why Johnny Can't Walk To School: Historic Neighbourhood Schools In the Age of Sprawl Washington, DC: National Trust for Historic Preservation. Beavis A., (2004), Why Parents Choose Public or Private Schools, Research Developments, Vol. 12, Issue 12, Article 3 Berry M. A., (2002), Healthy School Environment and Enhanced Educational Performance: The Case of Charles Young Elementary School, Washington, DC, January 2002, Carpet and Rug Institute Bukhari Z. et al., (2010), Spatial Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis for Safe School Site Selection, International Geo-informatics Research and Development Journal, Vol. 1, Issue 2, June 2010, pg. 1-14 Böhlmark A. and Lindahl M., (2007), The Impact of School Choice on Pupil Achievement, Segregation and Costs: Swedish Evidence, IZA Discussion Paper No. 2786, May 2007 Burgess S. et. al., (2009), What Parents Want: School Preferences and School Choice, Centre for Market and Public Organisation, CMPO Working Paper No. 09/222, October 2009, ISSN 1473-625X Carlin, J. B. et al., (1997), Walking to School and Traffic Exposure in Australian Children, Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health Chung C., (2005), Connecting Public Schools to Community Development, Communities & Banking, Winter 2005, pg. 12-16 Cullen J. B. et al, (2003), The Effect of School Choice on Student Outcomes: Evidence from Randomized Lotteries, National Bureau of Economic Research, NBER Working Paper No. 10113, November 2003 Cullen J. B. et al, (2005), The Impact of School Choice on Student Outcomes: An Analysis of the Chicago Public Schools, Journal of Public Economics Vol. 89, pg. 729– 760 DeBoer E., (2005), The Dynamics of School Location and School Transportation, TR News 237 March–April
283
284
Nuraihan Mohd Ibrahim et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 153 (2014) 274 – 285 Epple D. and Romano R., (2003), Neighbourhood Schools, Choice, and the Distribution of Educational Benefits, National Bureau of Economic Research, January 2003, pg. 227- 286, ISBN: 0-226-35533-0 Ewing R., (2004), School Location and Student Travel: Analysis of Factors Affecting Mode Choice, Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1895, pg. 55-63 Figlio D. N. and Stone J. A., (1997), School Choice and Student Performance: Are Private Schools Really Better?, Institute for Research on Poverty, September 1997, Discussion Paper No. 1141-97 Gibbons S. et al, (2006), The Educational Impact of Parental Choice and School Competition, Centrepiece, Vol. 11, No. 3, Winter 2006, pg. 6-9 Glick P. and Sahn D., (2001), The Demand for Primary Schooling in Madagascar: Price, Quality, and the Choice Between Public and Private Providers, December 2001, Cornell University Hodgson, F. C., Page, M and Tight M. R., 2004, A Review of Factors which Influence Pedestrian Use of the Streets: Task 1 Report for an ERSRC Funded Project on Measuring Pedestrian Accessibility ISCA Research Report, (2008), Factors Affecting School Choice, Independent Schools Council of Australia Jones S. E. et al, (2007), Healthy and Safe School Environment, Part I: Results from the School Health Policies and Programs Study 2006, The Journal of School Health, Vol. 77, No.8, pg. 522-543 Kaiser E. J. et al, (2006), Urban Land Use Planning, Fifth Edition, University of Illinois Lauen D. L., (2009), To Choose or Not To Choose: High School Choice and Graduation in Chicago, Pro Quest Education Journals, September 2009, pg. 179-199 Lawhorn B., (2008), Extracurricular Activities: The Afterschool Connection, Occupational Outlook Quarterly, Winter 2008–09, pg. 16-21 Laws of Malaysia, (2006), Act 550 Education Act 1996 Marjohan Jamalis and Mohd Sofian Omar Fauzee, (2007), Developing Human Value through Extra-Curricular Activities, The Journal of Human Resource and Adult Learning, Vol. 3, No. 1, July 2007, pg. 53-60 McKoy D. et. al., (2008), Integrating Infrastructure Planning: The Role of Schools, No. 33, Fall 2008, pg. 18-26 O’Mahony E, (2008), Factors Determining School Choice, Report on a survey of the Attitudes of Parents of Children Attending Catholic Primary Schools in Ireland, Council for Research & Development, April 2008 Osman Rani Hassan and Rajah Rasiah, (2011), Poverty and Student Performance in Malaysia, International Journal of Institutions and Economies, Vol. 3, No. 1, April 2011, pp. 61-76 Rahimah Ahmad, (1998), Educational Development and Reformation in Malaysia: Past, Present and Future, Journal of Educational Administration, Vol. 36, No. 5, January/February 2011, pg. 462-475 Rabovsky T., (2011), Deconstructing School Choice: Problem Schools or Problem Students? Pro Quest Education Journals, Vol. 71, No. 1, pg. 87-95 Roya Shokoohi et al, (2012), Children Walking to and from School in Tehran: Associations with Neighbourhood Safety, Parental Concerns and Children’s Perceptions, Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences Vol.38, pg. 315 – 323 Roy J. and Chakrabarti R., (2010), The Economics of Parental Choice, International Encyclopaedia of Education, Amsterdam: Elsevier Saelens, B. E. et al, (2003), Environmental Correlates of Walking and Cycling: Findings from the Transportation, Urban Design, and Planning Literatures, Vol. 25, No.2, pg. 80-91 Schneider M., (2003), Linking School Facility Conditions to Teacher Satisfaction and Success, National Clearinghouse for Educational Facilities, August 2003 Sri Maryati et al, (2012), Effect of School Clustering Policy on Travel Distance of Urban School Children, Journal of Asian Behavioural Studies, Vol. 2, No. 7. The Oregon School Siting Handbook, (2005), Planning for Schools & Liveable Communities, The School Siting Handbook, The Oregon Transportation and Growth Management Program, June 2005 Planning Standards and Guidelines for Public Facilities 2nd Edition, (2010), Town and Country Planning of Selangor, Selangor. Tremblay S. et al., (2001), Factors Affecting Grade 3 Student Performance in Ontario: A Multilevel Analysis, Education Quarterly Review, Vol. 7, No. 4, pg. 25-36 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, (2003), Travel and Environmental Implications of School Siting, EPA231-R-03-004, October 2003 Vigne N. C. L., (2007), Traffic Congestion around Schools, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services U.S. Department of Justice, Problem-Oriented Guides for Police Problem-Specific Guides Series Guide No. 5, ISBN: 1-932582-82-7, August 2007 Wilkinson et al., (2004), The Accountability of Private Schools to Public Values, The Australia Institute, Discussion Paper Number 71, ISSN 1322-5421 Yusuf M. A. and Adigun J. T., (2010), The Influence of School Sex, Location and Type on Students’ Academic Performance, International Journal of Education Science, Vol. 2, No. 2, pg. 81-85
Nuraihan Mohd Ibrahim et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 153 (2014) 274 – 285 Zainurin Dahari and Mohd Sabri Ya, (2011), Factors that Influence Parents’ Choice of Pre-Schools Education in Malaysia: An Exploratory Study, International Journal of Business and Social Science, Vol. 2, No. 15, August 2011, pg. 115-128 Zeng, S.X. et al, (2001), A Survey of Construction Site Safety in China
285
ScienceDirect Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 153 (2014) 274 – 285
AicQoL2014Kota Kinabalu AMER International Conference on Quality of Life The Pacific Sutera Hotel, Sutera Harbour, Kota Kinabalu, Sabah, Malaysia 4-5 January 2014 “Quality of Life in the Built & Natural Environment”
Public School Development and Planning: Parents’ criteria of selecting public school in Gombak District Nuraihan Mohd Ibrahim*, Mariana Mohamed Osman, Syahriah Bachok Department of Urban and Regional Planning, Kulliyah of Architecture and Environmental Design, International Islamic University Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur, 50728, Malaysia
Abstract School is a nucleus of the society. School development should be planned based on the sustainable concept. The purpose of this paper is to determining parents’ criteria in selecting the suitable public school to enrol their children. There are various factors underlying in determining the school selection which are location, distance, school facilities, school academic performance, extra-curricular and school environment which will be ranked based on the Relative Importance Index (RII) method. The findings showed that school academic performance is the most important criteria of parents in selecting school for enrolling children. Hopefully, the paper will benefit the local authority, parents as well as children in term of public school development in the community. © 2014 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license © 2014 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the Association of (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/). Malaysian Researchers, AMER (ABRA Malaysia). Peer-review Environment-Behaviour under responsibility of the Association of Malaysian Environment-Behavior Researchers, AMER (ABRA malaysia). Keywords: Public school; school development; parents; criteria
1. Introduction The provision of school should be a fundamental part of the communities towards the sustainable development. Nowadays, there is no doubt that school becomes a focal point of the community as neighbourhood playground for the children as well as a meeting area for parents (Kaiser et al, 1995, The Oregon School Siting Handbook, 2005). School must be planned with organizing sectors such as * Corresponding author. Tel.: E-mail address: [email protected]
1877-0428 © 2014 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/). Peer-review under responsibility of the Association of Malaysian Environment-Behavior Researchers, AMER (ABRA malaysia). doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.10.061
Nuraihan Mohd Ibrahim et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 153 (2014) 274 – 285
residential, transportation and business so that the surrounded communities will help in supporting the schools (McKoy et al, 2008). As one of the essential elements in the inclusive development planning process, components such as safety, convenience and adequacy must be included in school planning (Rahimah, 1998). This brief summarizes research on public school development and planning as well as determines parents’ criteria in selecting public school. Over the past few years, traffic safety of the students when going to school has been a concern in the metropolitan area. Therefore, this paper also explores factors that influence transportation modes of the students during a trip to school. This study is a vital aspect for school planning, and as such the paper focuses for the future development of public schools. The study conducted on the selected primary and secondary level schools in Gombak District. 1.1. Research problems School location affects how students going to school by given them various transportation modes (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2003; The Oregon School Siting Handbook, 2005; McKoy et al, 2008). According to Roya Shokoohi et al (2012), students are more likely to use automobiles as transportation modes during a trip to school. Larger school may have a wider catchment area which makes walking to school is impossible for students who live far from the school (Ewing et al., 2004; The Oregon School Siting Handbook, 2005). Beaumont and Pianca (2002) and Bukhari et al (2010) supported the argument by mentioning that school location can cause traffic problems when it located far from the residential area resulting in the increasing of walking distance. Ewing et al. (2004) and McDonald (2007) both mentioned that the primary obstacle for students to walk to school is because of the increased distances between school and home. The shorter distance between school and neighbourhood area encourages students to walk to school (Ewing et al., 2004; The Oregon School Siting Handbook, 2005). In addition, school location that is closer to home not only improves student’s health by encouraging them to be physically active but also helps to decrease the traffic congestion by reducing the number of vehicles on the road (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2003; The Oregon School Siting Handbook, 2005). Factors such as traffic, utilities and cost must be taken into consideration when planning the school in terms of its location, design and building as school is one of the essential public facilities that serve the needs of the community (The Oregon School Siting Handbook, 2005; McKoy, 2008; Bukhari et al, 2010). Travel mode to school may vary because it influenced by parents’ perception towards various factors such as distance, neighbourhood population density, school size and traffic safety (Carlin, 1997; Ewing et al., 2004; McMillan, 2005). Parents’ concern with the children’s safety affected the transportation modes of their children to school (DeBoer, 2005; Vigne, 2007). In addition, DeBoer (2005) and Vigne (2007) stated that traffic congestion and accident are some of the significant problems associated with traffic safety in school involving children during a school trip. Vigne (2007) cited that the main factors contribute to traffic congestion is the increasing number of students taken car during a school trip. Commonly, the source of school surrounding congested with traffic because of parents who are dropping off and picking up their children from school (Vigne, 2007; McKoy et al, 2008). 1.2. Research background The research aims at determining parents’ criteria in selecting the suitable public school for their children. The duration of study is twelve months. It began from August 2012 until August 2013. The limited duration of time given to complete this study caused constraints in the process of collecting data and resources, reliability in the method of sampling, transferability of the findings and validity of the recommendations. The scope of the study is only focusing on the transportation modes of the students during a school trip and factors influencing criteria in school selection. This study only covers on the
275
276
Nuraihan Mohd Ibrahim et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 153 (2014) 274 – 285
selected primary and secondary public schools in Gombak District. Hence, the outcomes may not be relevant to all public schools in Malaysia. Table 1 shows the number and types of public schools for primary and secondary schools as well as the number of teachers, staffs, enrolments and classes in Gombak District. In Malaysia, education is the responsibility of the Federal Government. The existing types of schools in this country are government or government-aided schools and private schools. The school starts in January and ends in November. At the end of every school levels, students will sit for general public examinations (Malaysian Education Act, 1996). Malaysian education programmes have continued to emphasize increasingly on accessibility, equity and quality, strengthening the delivery system, as well as improving the achievement of rural students to reduce the academic performance gap between rural and urban areas (Osman and Rajah, 2011). Table 1. Basic education information of Gombak District in 2013 Primary School
Teachers
Non-teachers
Enrolment
Class
Types of School
No.
Male
Female
Male
Female
Male
Female
No.
SK
53
949
2720
47
373
30174
27475
1762
SJK (C)
8
90
491
10
39
6130
5502
334
SJK (T)
7
44
244
13
29
2244
2246
145
SK (Khas)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
SK (Asli)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
SR (Agama)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
SR Model Khas Komprehensif K9
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
School without students
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Sub Total
68
1,083
3,455
70
441
38,548
35,223
2,242
Secondary School
Teachers
Non-teachers
Enrolment
Class
Types of School
No.
Male
Female
Male
Female
Male
Female
No.
SMK
30
490
2803
81
300
27553
26660
1575
SM Vokasional
2
56
152
16
30
830
388
44
SM Teknik
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
SMK Agama
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
SM Khas
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
SM Berasrama Penuh
2
23
92
16
23
656
627
46
SM + SR (Model Khas)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Sekolah Sukan
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
SM Agama (SABK)
2
26
68
16
13
510
668
32
Sekolah Seni
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
School without students
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Sub Total
36
595
3,115
119
366
29,549
28,343
1,697
TOTAL
104
1,678
6,570
189
807
68,097
63,566
3,939
8,248 Source: http://www.pelajarangombak.net/v1/index.php (2013)
996
131,663
Nuraihan Mohd Ibrahim et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 153 (2014) 274 – 285
2. Literature review 2.1. Definition of school There are many types of schools which have different development impacts towards the surrounding area. Table below shows several types of schools and the definitions. Table 2. Definition of schools Components
Definitions
School
“School” means a place where ten or more persons gain knowledge whether in one or more classes, but does not include any area where there is a restriction in teaching exclusively to the teaching of any religion (Malaysian Education Act, 1996).
Public School
Public school associated with the neighbourhood community which has access to various local resources such as funding, land, and political interest (Chung, 2005).
Government School
“Government school” or “government educational institution” means a school or an educational institution established and fully maintained by the Minister “government-aided school” or “government-aided educational institution” means a school or an educational institution in receipt of capital grant and full grant-in-aid (Malaysian Education Act, 1996).
Source: Malaysian Education Act (1996) and Chung (2005)
2.2. School choice School choice is parents’ rights of selecting the most preferred school for their child to attend (Burgess, 2009). Students who are getting access to their favourable school will have better academic achievement than students who are not receiving access to school (Cullen et al, 2003; Cullen et al, 2005). The essential of school choice is from numerous policies which allowing students to be transferred out from the current school to a new school within the neighbourhood area (Rabovsky, 2011). These policies certified that neighbourhood area establishes their very own school which grounded by the provision of public educational facilities (Epple and Romano, 2003). There are various factors in influencing the selection of a private or public school. According to Figlio and Stone (1997) and Beavis (2004), family backgrounds such as includes household income and parents’ level of education influences the school choice. . School choice is one of the factors that can increase the academic achievement of the students because it indicates the competition among schools (Cullen et al, 2003; Lauen, 2009; Rabovsky, 2011). However, there is also an argument where school choice would create racial segregations in terms of ability, income, ethnicity and religion (Cullen et al. 2005; Böhlmark and Lindahl, 2007; Rabovsky, 2011). The proponents also claimed that drop out students are those who do not have an option to choose their school. 2.3. Planning guidelines for school development Location and distance of a school determines the school allocation. In Malaysia, the development of school is using the planning standards and guidelines are as reference in planning a school. Based on the Table 3, it showed that the location of both primary and secondary schools are within the walking distance. There are two fundamental aspects of built environment influencing the transportation mode namely distance and connectivity (Saelens et al, 2003). This statement supported by Hodgson et al (2004)
277
278
Nuraihan Mohd Ibrahim et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 153 (2014) 274 – 285
which mentioned there is two factors concerned route choice, which are good connections and the implementation of pedestrian facilities. Table 3. Planning standards and guidelines for schools Types of school
Primary School
Secondary School
Population
3,000 – 7,000 residents
> 9,000 residents
Allocation
0.4 – 0.8 km
0.4 – 0.8 km
5 – 10 minutes walking distance from the furthest house
5 – 10 minutes walking distance from the furthest house
Far from the intersection
Far from the intersection
Direct access to the road 20.1m /66’ (within a residential area)
Direct access to the road 20.1m /66’ (within a residential area)
Has public transportation routes
Has public transportation routes
Flat Surface
Hilly area
Flat Surface
Hilly area
2.4 hectare
3.2 hectare
2.4 hectare
3.2 hectare
(6 acre)
(8 acre)
(6 acre)
acre)
Acreage (minimum)
Source: Town and Country Planning Department of Selangor (2010)
2.4. Factors influencing parents’ criteria in choosing public school Parents’ perception on school criteria is necessary because these criteria will help them to select the most suitable school for their children. These factors determine whether parents want to choose public or private school based on the school criteria (Beavis, 2004). There is several factors influence the parents’ criteria in choosing proper public school for their children. Based on Kowalski (2002), the physical of the school building have developed over time which affected by urbanization, policy makers and technology. The availability of the facilities that the school served influencing parents’ criteria in school choice (Glick and Sahn, 2001; Wilkinson et al, 2004, ISCA Research Report, 2008; Burgess et al 2009; Roy and Chakrabarti, 2010; Zainurin and Mohd Sabri, 2011). Providing adequate school facilities influences the learning environment of the students and teaching environment of the teachers (Berry, 2002; Planning Guide for Maintaining School Facilities, 2003; Schneider, 2003). Location becomes one of the most influential criteria in school choice (Wilkinson et al, 2004; Beavis, 2004; O’Mahony, 2008; Roy and Chakrabarti, 2010; Zainurin and Mohd Sabri, 2011). According to Bukhari (2010), the improvement of students’ performance in academic can be achieved by locating the school in the strategic area. Kaiser et al (1995) and Ewing et al (2004) both mentioned that school location influenced by the built environment factors because location will determine the accessibility and transportation mode of students going to school. According to the Home to School Transport Policy (2011), a measurement of a walking distance of the students is by calculating the shortest distance between home and school entrance. School distance is one of the attributes in choosing school (Beavis, 2004; O’Mahony, 2008; Burgess et al, 2009). According to Gibbons et al (2006), parents consider distance as fundamental criteria because by living in neighbourhood area that is closer to the school their children will have easier access to the academic achievement. Students’ academic performance has always been a primary concern to parents in choosing a school for their children (Beavis’ 2004, Wilkinson et al, 2004, ISCA Research Report, 2008; Burgess et al 2009; Roy and Chakrabarti, 2010; Yusuf and Adigun, 2010). As school is an essential institution, it needs a conducive physical and social environment in order to provide a positive impact on students’ academic performance (Tremblay, 2001; Asikhia, 2010; Nurul Syakima, 2011). Other than that, Alvaera
Nuraihan Mohd Ibrahim et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 153 (2014) 274 – 285
et al, (2009) cited that students’ academic performance also can be influenced by parents’ and teachers’ approach. Although education focuses on academic, most students enjoy the participation in co-curricular activities (Lawhorn, 2008). Wilkinson et al (2004) and Zainurin and Mohd Sabri (2011) both agree that relevant criteria for parents in choosing a school for their children is because of the extra co-curricular activities offered by the school. In Malaysia, participation in co-curricular activities is compulsory for students, and teachers are responsible in conducting these activities (Marjohan and Mohd Sofian, 2007). Lawhorn (2008) cited that co-curricular activities give benefits in the development of personal, social and intellectual of the students. School environment is important criteria in choosing school (Wilkinson et al, 2004; ISCA Research Report, 2008; Roy and Chakrabarti, 2010; Zainurin and Mohd Sabri 2011). According to Berry (2002) and Planning Guide for Maintaining School Facilities (2003), a healthy school environment must be comfortable and safe to ease the learning process regardless of the school location to ensure the academic excellence. A safe and healthy school environment covers the physical surroundings regulated by various policies. These policies specifically implemented to maintain the condition of the school environment (Jones et al 2007). 3. Methodology The first method was problems identification. This stage has analysed the content of the literature and the gaps. Data collections obtained by using questionnaires surveys. Data analyses have conducted using SPSS. The last stage provides recommendations and conclusions based on the analysis findings in the last stages. The primary data collected through a questionnaire survey in order to obtain information regarding the research. The questionnaire survey consists of three main sections: x Section 1: Respondents’ profile x Section 2: Transportation modes to school x Section 3: Parents’ perception in criteria of choosing school The duration of data collection for this is 3 months starting from February 2013 till April 2013. There are a total of 400 questionnaire forms distributed to the selected primary and secondary schools within Gombak District. The 400 sample in the survey is adequate to perform the statistical analysis during the analysis stage. The surveying of a widely dispersed population is impractical due to limitation of time, workforce and availability of respondents in the case study areas. Hence, the sampling method implemented in this study is non-probability which is convenience sampling method. The targeted group for this research was the parents of students from the nine selected primary and secondary schools in Gombak District. Table 4 shows the distribution of the questionnaire surveys among the selected schools. The collected data analysed after the data entry. The analyses will be both descriptive and inferential in nature. This stage includes the documentation of the analysis process, explanation of the study output and organization of the information accordingly. The data from the survey analysed using Statistical package for Social Science (SPSS) programme in order to present the data in tables and to test the relationship between variables. For conducting assessment or evaluation when comparing outcomes with baseline data, the use of quantitative method is necessary. Chi-square Analysis is one of the statistical methods that relevant to test the hypotheses regarding the research. Table 4. Questionnaire survey distributions Schools Primary Schools SK Gombak Utara SK Gombak 1 SK Gombak 2
Frequency
Percentage (%)
65 38 16
16.25 9.5 4.0
279
280
Nuraihan Mohd Ibrahim et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 153 (2014) 274 – 285 SK Gombak Setia SK Taman Setia SK Taman Seri Gombak Secondary Schools SMK Sg Pusu SMK Gombak Setia SMK Seri Gombak Total
75 16 20
18.75 4.0 5.0
49 91 30 400
12.25 22.75 7.5 100.0
Source: Questionnaire Survey (2013)
4. Findings 4.1. Transportation modes of students to the school There are several mode choices are identified for students to go to the school such as walking, cycling, school bus, private vehicles and public transport. The usage of particular transportation modes vary due to many reasons. Table 5 shows the transportation modes of students to school. The reasons of using transportation modes are acknowledged in this study. From the survey, the most transportation mode that been used was private vehicles with the percentage of 54.75% (219) from the total number of respondents. On the other hand, the least transportation modes that been used by the students is bicycle. There were 4.75% (19) of the respondents chose cycling as the transportation modes of their children to go to the school. Private vehicles that been used includes cars, motorcycles, MPVs and etc. The main reasons why respondents used private vehicles as the transportation mode is because they are concerned for their children’s safety (40%), the distance between school and workplace is close (5.75), and they could save the time (7.75). In contrast, the reasons students are cycling to school because of the distance between school and home is close to each other (2.75). They also wants to be physically active (1.25) and to save the travel cost (0.75%). Table 5. Cross – tabulation between transportation modes and reasons of using the particular transportation modes Reasons
Transportation Modes Walking Cycling No
(%)
Physically active 29 7.25 Safety of the 1 0.25 children Save cost 14 3.5 No other 7 1.75 transportation system Close to home 39 9.75 Close to workplace 0 0 Save time 0 0 Total 90 22.5 Source: Questionnaire Survey (2013)
Total School Bus
Private Vehicles
No
(%)
No
(%)
No
(%)
5 0
1.25 0
0 26
0 6.5
0 160
0 40
Public Transport No (% ) 0 0 0 0
3 0
0.75 0
7 13
1.75 3.25
0 3
0 0.75
0 26
0 6.5
24 49
11 0 0 19
2.75 0 0 4.75
0 0 0 46
0 0 0 11.5
2 23 31 219
0.5 5.75 7.75 54.75
0 0 0 26
0 0 0 6.5
52 23 31 400
No
(%)
34 187
8.5 46.7 5 6 12.2 5 13 5.75 7.75 100
Nuraihan Mohd Ibrahim et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 153 (2014) 274 – 285
A Chi-square test was made in order to test whether there is a relationship between transportation modes and school distance. Hypothesis #1: “There is a relationship between transportation modes and distance”. The results of this test are shown in Table 6 below. Table 6. Summary on hypotheses tested Variables Transportation modes VS Distance between School and Home Transportation modes VS Distance between School and Workplace
Hypotheses Tested Chi-Square Value 57.534
df 4
Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) .000
Significant Significant
48.245
4
.000
Significant
Source: Questionnaire Survey (2013)
From the result in Table 6, the significant value of 0.000 is less than the critical values of 0.05 which means the research hypothesis can be accepted. It concludes that there is a relationship between transportation modes and distance. Thus, it shows that distance influences the mode choice of the students during trip to school. 4.2. Parents’ perception in criteria of selecting school R.I.I. analyses parents’ perception in criteria of selecting a school for their children. R.I.I. method transforms the answer's choice of in Likert scale to assess the ranking of each factor by using the following equation:
RII =
¦w AN
To determine the relative ranking of the factors, the scores were then transformed to importance indices based on the formula (Zeng et al, 2001) where w is the weighting given to each factor by the respondents, ranging from 1 to 5, A is the highest weight (i.e. 6 in the study) and N is the total number of samples. The parents’ perception towards the criteria in selecting school has been scaled by; 1=1st choice, 2=2nd choice, 3=3rd choice, 4=4th choice, 5=5th choice and 6=6th choice. The six-point scores ranging from 1 to 6 are transformed to the relative importance indices for each of criteria on academic performance, location, distance, school facilities, school environment and co-curricular activities. The indices were then used to determine the rank of each item. These rankings made it possible to cross compare the relative importance of parents’ perception and the criteria of selecting school. The RII determines the most influential criteria of parents in selecting school for their children.
281
282
Nuraihan Mohd Ibrahim et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 153 (2014) 274 – 285 Table 7. Parents’ perception in criteria of selecting school (n=400) Criteria
Academic Performance Location Distance School Facilities School Environment
1st Choice (Score of 6) 175 (1050) 94 (564) 93 (558) 24 (144) 14 (84)
2nd Choice (Score of 5) 59 (295) 84 (420) 112 (570) 60 (300) 37 (185)
Extra co0 curricular (0) activity Source: Questionnaire Survey (2013)
48 (240)
Frequency of Respondents 3rd Choice 4th Choice (Score of 4) (Score of 3) 98 29 (392) (87) 72 53 (288) (159) 41 32 (164) (96) 95 127 (380) (381) 68 93 (272) (279) 27 (108)
67 (201)
5th Choice (Score of 2) 32 (64) 67 (134 49 (98) 54 (108) 67 (134) 130 (260)
RII
Rank
6th Choice (Score of 1) 7 (7) 30 (30) 73 (73) 40 (40) 121 (121)
0.7 90 0.6 52 0.6 50 0.5 47 0.4 48
1
128 (128)
0.3 90
6
2 3 4 5
Based on the findings, academic performance of the school was chosen as the most preferred criteria for parents in choosing a school to enrol their children, with the R.I.I scores of 0.79 which has been stated in the Table 7. This is followed by the school location with R.I.I scores of 0.652, school distance with R.I.I scores of 0.65, school facilities with R.I.I scores of 0.547 and school environment with R.I.I scores of 0.448. The extra co-curricular activity ranked as the least importance criteria in school selection with the lowest R.I.I scores of 0.39. 5. Discussions and conclusions The research was aimed at determining parents’ criteria in selecting the suitable public school for their children. There are two main objectives for this research. Firstly, to identify the transportation modes of students when going to school and secondly to examine parents’ criteria in selecting school for their children. From the findings, the transportation modes that had been used by students going to school are walking, cycling, school bus, private vehicle and public transportation. Several reasons of using mode choices are health, safety, cost, distance and time. Most of the parents send their children to the school by using private vehicles with the percentage of 54.75% (219). From the 219 respondents that chose private vehicles as the transportation mode, there are160 respondents chose safety as their reason. Based on the analysis, it can be said that the main reason of parents choosing private vehicles because they are concerned about their children’s safety. The other reason is because the school distance is closer to their workplace. Roya Shokoohi et al (2012) mentioned that neighbourhood safety becomes a concern of parents which leads them to use private vehicles to send their children to school. There were 22.5% (90) of the respondents choose walking and there were 4.75% (19) of the respondents chose cycling because the location of the school is closer to home. According to Ewing et al., 2004; the shorter distance between school and home encourages children to walk or cycle during a school trip. In addition, Sri Maryati, et al (2002) stated travel distance to primary school normally within walking distance. The relationship between distance and transportation modes was tested using chi-square test. The result shows that the critical value (0.000) is less than 0.05 which concluded that there is a relationship between transportation modes and distance. Mode choice to school may differ from one place to another because it influenced by parents’ perception towards factor such as distance and traffic safety (Carlin, 1997; Ewing et al., 2004;
Nuraihan Mohd Ibrahim et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 153 (2014) 274 – 285
McMillan, 2005). Based on the respondents, there are six primary criteria of parents in selecting school for the children which are academic performance, location, distance, school facilities, school environment and co-curricular activities. From the opinion of the parents, school academic performance ranked as the most influential criteria in choosing a suitable school for their children. This is followed by location (rank 2), distance (rank 3), school facilities (rank 4), school environment (rank 5) and lastly extra co-curricular activity (rank 6). Based on Schneider (2003), the improvement of educational achievement at national level influences the decision of school choice by the parents. As been mentioned by Burgess (2009), parental demand for academic performance is a crucial element in strengthening school choice that will enhance the school performance. Extra co-curricular activity is ranked as the least important criteria because students only participating in the co-curricular activity because it is compulsory for them. As conclusion, a good school has always been an important factor for parents in deciding where to enrol their children. The study is significant for various parties such as local planning authority, parents and students. The outcomes of the study will contribute to the decision making by local authorities. The decision making includes the preparation in preparing the site of public school location. From the results, the guidelines and policies for school development should include academic performance as one of the determinants in school planning. Parents will get benefits from this research in term of criteria that they need to know in selecting the suitable school for their children. As from the findings, the criteria are academic performance, location, distance, school facilities, school environment and co-curricular activities. As students, they will get the benefits by having a safe and healthy learning environment of the school. As location is necessary in planning a school, school must be located in the strategic area so that it will promote walking and cycling to school. Apart from the school physical planning, the school system also should be improved in term of the academic performance because it is a key factor for parents to choose the school for their children. References Alvaera A. B. et al., (2009), Teaching Approach, Perceived Parental Involvement and Autonomy as Predictors of Achievement, The International Journal of Research and Review, Vol. 1, September 2009, pg. 57-80, ISSN 2094-1420 Asikhia O. A., (2010), Students and Teachers’ Perception of the Causes of Poor Academic Performance in Ogun State Secondary Schools (Nigeria): Implications for Couselling for National Development, European Journal of Social Sciences, Vol 13, No. 2, pg. 1-14 Beaumont, C. E., and Pianca, E. G., (2002), Why Johnny Can't Walk To School: Historic Neighbourhood Schools In the Age of Sprawl Washington, DC: National Trust for Historic Preservation. Beavis A., (2004), Why Parents Choose Public or Private Schools, Research Developments, Vol. 12, Issue 12, Article 3 Berry M. A., (2002), Healthy School Environment and Enhanced Educational Performance: The Case of Charles Young Elementary School, Washington, DC, January 2002, Carpet and Rug Institute Bukhari Z. et al., (2010), Spatial Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis for Safe School Site Selection, International Geo-informatics Research and Development Journal, Vol. 1, Issue 2, June 2010, pg. 1-14 Böhlmark A. and Lindahl M., (2007), The Impact of School Choice on Pupil Achievement, Segregation and Costs: Swedish Evidence, IZA Discussion Paper No. 2786, May 2007 Burgess S. et. al., (2009), What Parents Want: School Preferences and School Choice, Centre for Market and Public Organisation, CMPO Working Paper No. 09/222, October 2009, ISSN 1473-625X Carlin, J. B. et al., (1997), Walking to School and Traffic Exposure in Australian Children, Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health Chung C., (2005), Connecting Public Schools to Community Development, Communities & Banking, Winter 2005, pg. 12-16 Cullen J. B. et al, (2003), The Effect of School Choice on Student Outcomes: Evidence from Randomized Lotteries, National Bureau of Economic Research, NBER Working Paper No. 10113, November 2003 Cullen J. B. et al, (2005), The Impact of School Choice on Student Outcomes: An Analysis of the Chicago Public Schools, Journal of Public Economics Vol. 89, pg. 729– 760 DeBoer E., (2005), The Dynamics of School Location and School Transportation, TR News 237 March–April
283
284
Nuraihan Mohd Ibrahim et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 153 (2014) 274 – 285 Epple D. and Romano R., (2003), Neighbourhood Schools, Choice, and the Distribution of Educational Benefits, National Bureau of Economic Research, January 2003, pg. 227- 286, ISBN: 0-226-35533-0 Ewing R., (2004), School Location and Student Travel: Analysis of Factors Affecting Mode Choice, Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1895, pg. 55-63 Figlio D. N. and Stone J. A., (1997), School Choice and Student Performance: Are Private Schools Really Better?, Institute for Research on Poverty, September 1997, Discussion Paper No. 1141-97 Gibbons S. et al, (2006), The Educational Impact of Parental Choice and School Competition, Centrepiece, Vol. 11, No. 3, Winter 2006, pg. 6-9 Glick P. and Sahn D., (2001), The Demand for Primary Schooling in Madagascar: Price, Quality, and the Choice Between Public and Private Providers, December 2001, Cornell University Hodgson, F. C., Page, M and Tight M. R., 2004, A Review of Factors which Influence Pedestrian Use of the Streets: Task 1 Report for an ERSRC Funded Project on Measuring Pedestrian Accessibility ISCA Research Report, (2008), Factors Affecting School Choice, Independent Schools Council of Australia Jones S. E. et al, (2007), Healthy and Safe School Environment, Part I: Results from the School Health Policies and Programs Study 2006, The Journal of School Health, Vol. 77, No.8, pg. 522-543 Kaiser E. J. et al, (2006), Urban Land Use Planning, Fifth Edition, University of Illinois Lauen D. L., (2009), To Choose or Not To Choose: High School Choice and Graduation in Chicago, Pro Quest Education Journals, September 2009, pg. 179-199 Lawhorn B., (2008), Extracurricular Activities: The Afterschool Connection, Occupational Outlook Quarterly, Winter 2008–09, pg. 16-21 Laws of Malaysia, (2006), Act 550 Education Act 1996 Marjohan Jamalis and Mohd Sofian Omar Fauzee, (2007), Developing Human Value through Extra-Curricular Activities, The Journal of Human Resource and Adult Learning, Vol. 3, No. 1, July 2007, pg. 53-60 McKoy D. et. al., (2008), Integrating Infrastructure Planning: The Role of Schools, No. 33, Fall 2008, pg. 18-26 O’Mahony E, (2008), Factors Determining School Choice, Report on a survey of the Attitudes of Parents of Children Attending Catholic Primary Schools in Ireland, Council for Research & Development, April 2008 Osman Rani Hassan and Rajah Rasiah, (2011), Poverty and Student Performance in Malaysia, International Journal of Institutions and Economies, Vol. 3, No. 1, April 2011, pp. 61-76 Rahimah Ahmad, (1998), Educational Development and Reformation in Malaysia: Past, Present and Future, Journal of Educational Administration, Vol. 36, No. 5, January/February 2011, pg. 462-475 Rabovsky T., (2011), Deconstructing School Choice: Problem Schools or Problem Students? Pro Quest Education Journals, Vol. 71, No. 1, pg. 87-95 Roya Shokoohi et al, (2012), Children Walking to and from School in Tehran: Associations with Neighbourhood Safety, Parental Concerns and Children’s Perceptions, Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences Vol.38, pg. 315 – 323 Roy J. and Chakrabarti R., (2010), The Economics of Parental Choice, International Encyclopaedia of Education, Amsterdam: Elsevier Saelens, B. E. et al, (2003), Environmental Correlates of Walking and Cycling: Findings from the Transportation, Urban Design, and Planning Literatures, Vol. 25, No.2, pg. 80-91 Schneider M., (2003), Linking School Facility Conditions to Teacher Satisfaction and Success, National Clearinghouse for Educational Facilities, August 2003 Sri Maryati et al, (2012), Effect of School Clustering Policy on Travel Distance of Urban School Children, Journal of Asian Behavioural Studies, Vol. 2, No. 7. The Oregon School Siting Handbook, (2005), Planning for Schools & Liveable Communities, The School Siting Handbook, The Oregon Transportation and Growth Management Program, June 2005 Planning Standards and Guidelines for Public Facilities 2nd Edition, (2010), Town and Country Planning of Selangor, Selangor. Tremblay S. et al., (2001), Factors Affecting Grade 3 Student Performance in Ontario: A Multilevel Analysis, Education Quarterly Review, Vol. 7, No. 4, pg. 25-36 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, (2003), Travel and Environmental Implications of School Siting, EPA231-R-03-004, October 2003 Vigne N. C. L., (2007), Traffic Congestion around Schools, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services U.S. Department of Justice, Problem-Oriented Guides for Police Problem-Specific Guides Series Guide No. 5, ISBN: 1-932582-82-7, August 2007 Wilkinson et al., (2004), The Accountability of Private Schools to Public Values, The Australia Institute, Discussion Paper Number 71, ISSN 1322-5421 Yusuf M. A. and Adigun J. T., (2010), The Influence of School Sex, Location and Type on Students’ Academic Performance, International Journal of Education Science, Vol. 2, No. 2, pg. 81-85
Nuraihan Mohd Ibrahim et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 153 (2014) 274 – 285 Zainurin Dahari and Mohd Sabri Ya, (2011), Factors that Influence Parents’ Choice of Pre-Schools Education in Malaysia: An Exploratory Study, International Journal of Business and Social Science, Vol. 2, No. 15, August 2011, pg. 115-128 Zeng, S.X. et al, (2001), A Survey of Construction Site Safety in China
285