CHAPTER 4 DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
4.2 Student perceptions
4.2.1 High School Sample Profile
There were two high school samples, namely Sample A (students who participated in the Master Builders Association career fair), and Sample B (students who attended the representative school). Table 1 shows the size of the two samples.
Table 1 Sample size
Sample N Percent
Sample A 27 15.88%
Sample B 143 84.12%
Total 170 100.00%
The sample consisted of students in grades 10 to 12, which by inference suggests an age grouping of 15 to 18 years. It was expected that it was during this time that high school students were exposed to and considering the various career possibilities available to them. In South Africa, it was ideal to start applying to institutes of further education when the student was in grade 11. It was expected that:
Students in grade 10 had been introduced to various possible careers;
46
Students in grade 11 should have spent some time discussing possible career paths with career advisors, family and friends; and
Students in grade 12 should have had a clearer idea of what each career path entails and which career they intend to follow. If they intended to study after school, they ought to have applied to institutes of further education.
Table 2 shows the distribution of the sample over the three grades and its distribution across the two samples. The majority of the respondents were in grades 10 and 11. It was expected that the majority of the respondents would have been introduced to the careers available to them and had been discussing possible career paths with friends, relatives and teachers or career advisers.
However, 29% of the respondents were in grade 12, their final school year. They should have applied for further education and decided on a possible career path. They would have weighed the pros against the cons about careers in different industries.
Table 2 Grade and Sample Cross Tabulation
Grade Sample Total
Sample A Sample B Gr 10 9 (33.3%)
(15.3%)
50 (35%) (84.7%)
59 (34.7%) (100%) Gr 11 14 (51.9%)
(23%)
47 (32.9%) (77%)
61 (35.9%) (100%) Gr 12 4 (14.8%)
(8%)
46 (32.1%) (92%)
50 (29.4%) (100%)
Total 27 (100%)
(15.9%)
143 (100%) (84.1%)
170 (100%) (100%)
*Note: The italicised percentages represent the proportions within each grade whereas the non- italicised percentages represent the proportions within each sample.
The sample had a relatively equal gender distribution, as indicated in Table 3, but there were more female respondents (54%). With the recent attempts to eradicate the male dominancy in the industry, it was important to establish the views of female students. It was important to determine whether young women were prejudiced against careers in construction. Sample A had more male respondents (63%). Table 3 shows the gender distribution across the two samples.
47 Table 3 Gender and Sample Cross Tabulation
Gender Sample Total
Sample A Sample B
Male 17 (63%) (21.5%)
62 (43.4%) (78.5%)
79 (46.5%) (100%) Female
10 (37%) (11%)
81 (56.6%) (89%)
91 (53.5%) (100%)
Total 27 (100%)
(15.9%)
143 (100%) (84.1%)
170 (100%) (100%)
*Note: The italicised percentages represent the proportions within the gender whereas the non- italicised percentages represent the proportions within each sample.
Table 4 shows the gender distribution across the three grades. There were more female than male students in grades 10 (64.4%) and 12 (58.0%).
Table 4 Gender and Grade Cross Tabulation
Gender Grade Total
Gr 10 Gr 11 Gr 12
Male 21 (35.6%) (26.6%)
37 (60.7%) (46.8%)
21 (42.0%) (26.6%)
79 (46.5%) (100%) Female 38 (64.4%)
(41.8%)
24 (39.3%) (26.3%)
29 (58.0%) (31.9%)
91 (53.5%) (100%)
Total 59 (100%)
(34.7%)
61 (100%) (35.9%)
50 (100%) (29.4%)
170 (100.0%) (100%)
*Note: The italicised percentages represent the proportions within each gender whereas the non- italicised percentages represent the proportions within each grade.
The respondents were asked to indicate whether they knew someone working in the construction industry. Their responses are shown in Table 5. It can be expected that respondents who knew someone in the industry would have a perception of the industry based on the actual experiences of that person. One might also expect that these respondents would have a greater knowledge of the inner workings of the industry. The majority of the students knew someone who worked in the construction industry. The majority of the students knew someone who worked in the construction industry (65%). Two-thirds (67%) of the students in Sample A reported that they knew someone who worked in the construction industry. In Sample B, 65%
of the students indicated that they knew someone working in construction.
48 Table 5 Source and Sample Cross Tabulation
Source Sample Total
Sample A Sample B
Yes 18 (66.7%) (16.2%)
93 (65%) (83.8%)
111 (65.3%) (100%) No 9 (33.3%)
(15.3%)
50 (35%) (84.7%)
59 (34.7%) (100%)
Total 27 (100%)
(15.9%)
143 (100%) (84.1%)
170 (100%) (100%)
*Note: The italicised percentages represent the proportions within each response category whereas the non-italicised percentages represent the proportions within each sample.
Table 6 shows the percentage of how many students knew someone working in the industry, distributed across gender. In general, more female students knew someone working in construction than their male counterparts (53%).
Table 6 Gender and Source of information Cross Tabulation
Gender Source of information Total
Yes No
Male 52 (46.8%)
(65.8%)
27 (45.8%) (34.2%)
79 (46.5%) (100%) Female 59 (53.2%)
(64.8%)
32 (54.2%) (35.2%)
91 (53.5%) (100%)
Total 111 (100%)
(65.3%)
59 (100%) (34.7%)
170 (100%) (100%)
*Note: The italicised percentages represent the proportions within the gender whereas the non- italicised percentages represent the proportions within each response category.
When asked who this person was, the respondents responded as shown in Table 7. It could be expected that the respondents with family members such as a parent, sibling or uncle in the industry would have had a higher degree of knowledge about the industry than those with merely a friend in the industry or those who answered with “other” or “none”.
49 Table 7 Source of influence/information
Source N Percent
Parent 27 15.88%
Sibling 8 4.71%
Uncle 18 10.59%
Friend 27 15.88%
Other 31 18.24%
None 59 34.70%
Total 170 100.00%
It is worth noting that 31% of the respondents had a family member currently employed in the construction industry. These respondents were expected to know more about the industry than the other groupings. About a third of the respondents (34%) knew someone who was employed in construction but these were friends or acquaintances of the respondents. These respondents were expected to have some knowledge of the industry. In contrast, 35% of the respondents did not know anyone working in construction and they were expected to know the least about the inner workings of the industry.