Parent, pupil and learner voice: December 2025
Updated 30 April 2026
Applies to England
© Crown copyright 2026
This publication is licensed under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0 except where otherwise stated. To view this licence, visit nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3 or write to the Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU, or email: psi@nationalarchives.gov.uk.
Where we have identified any third party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned.
This publication is available at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/parent-pupil-and-learner-voice-omnibus-surveys-for-2025-to-2026/parent-pupil-and-learner-voice-december-2025
Introduction
The Department for Education (DfE) commissioned Verian to recruit and maintain a panel of parents, pupils and learners in England, known as the Parent, Pupil and Learner Voice (PPLV). The PPLV is designed to collect robust evidence to help DfE understand the perspectives of parents, carers, pupils and learners. This allows DfE to make more effective policy.
The PPLV works as a series of short surveys across the academic year, covering a range of new and longstanding policy issues. This report is about the findings from the December 2025 survey wave of the PPLV.
Methodology
The December 2025 PPLV survey included secondary school pupils in years 7 to 11 and parents of primary, secondary and special school pupils (years 1 to 11) who have agreed to participate in short, regular research surveys on topical education issues.
We select parents and pupils randomly using records from the National Pupil Database (NPD) and invite them to take part in an online survey. For the first survey of the academic year, we send invitation letters to households. For other surveys in that same academic year, we send the invitation by email and text message to the parents and pupils who agreed to join the panel in the first survey.
Midway through the academic year, we randomly select pupils and learners in years 12 and 13 and invite them to join the panel in the same way. We select learners (those studying in a college setting) from the individualised learner record (ILR) and we select pupils (those studying in a school setting) from the NPD.
We ran the survey which is the main focus of this report between 2 and 9 December 2025. The respondents were:
| Audience | Responses |
|---|---|
| Primary school parents | 828 |
| Secondary school parents | 881 |
| Special school parents | 501 |
| Secondary school pupils | 1505 |
Questions with fewer than 30 responses (before weighting) are not included in this report, and base sizes of below 100 should be treated with caution. Complete findings can be found in the published data tables, which include more detail on how different groups answered each question.
The report makes some comparisons to previous surveys conducted in previous academic years – for example, the Parent, pupil and learner panel omnibus surveys for 2024 to 2025. These comparisons are helpful to understand how trends may be changing. However, the survey methodology changes over time and so comparisons to previous years are not as reliable as survey findings within each academic year. We introduced parents of pupils attending special schools in the 2023 to 2024 academic year, so any comparisons from earlier academic years do not include these audiences.
In this report, we round figures to the nearest whole number.
We use consistent terminology to describe percentages that fall within specific bands, as follows:
- very few – 0% to 10%
- a small minority – 11% to 32%
- a minority – 33% to 47%
- about half – 48% to 52%
- the majority – 53% to 66%
- a large majority – 67% to 89%
- almost all – 90% to 100%
We do not describe 0% and 100% as ‘none’ and ‘all’ because figure rounding may mean this is not accurate. For instance, 100% may be 99.6% of respondents, rounded to the nearest whole number. Unless otherwise stated, when we refer to the ‘average’, we are reporting the arithmetic mean.
Further information on the survey methodology is available in the accompanying technical report.
Topics covered in this survey
This survey included questions about:
- flexible working in schools
- affordability of wraparound care
- cost impacts of school lunches
- parental support for children
- school belonging
- behaviour
- experiences of stereotypes
- attitudes towards women and girls
- relationships with peers
- bullying
- school attendance
Flexible working in schools
We asked parents if their child had ever been taught by 2 teachers working in a job share arrangement during the current school year (since September 2025).
A job share arrangement was defined as when 2 or more teachers are doing one role and splitting the hours between them, with the hours potentially overlapping on some days. The definition excluded teaching assistants, where different teachers teach different subjects, or where another teacher is covering a class whilst the usual teacher is not teaching (for example, due to illness or training).
Overall, 33% of primary parents, 39% of secondary parents and 28% of special school parents said that their child had been taught by 2 teachers working in a job share arrangement. The proportion who said they did not know whether their child had been taught by 2 teachers in a job share arrangement was 17% for primary parents, 33% for secondary parents and 32% for special school parents.
We also asked pupils whether they had ever been taught by 2 teachers working in a job share arrangement during the current school year (since September 2025).
Overall, 54% of key stage 3 pupils and 47% of key stage 4 pupils said they had been taught by 2 teachers working in a job share arrangement.
A small minority of key stage 3 pupils (20%) and key stage 4 pupils (17%) said they did not know if they had been taught by 2 teachers working in a job share arrangement.
We asked parents about the impact they would expect if their child were taught by 2 teachers working in a job share arrangement, compared with being taught by a single teacher.
Figure 1: Expected impact on pupils if teachers work in a job share arrangement, as reported by parents
| Audience | A positive impact | A negative impact | Both a positive and a negative impact | No impact | Don’t know | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Parents | 20% | 17% | 39% | 12% | 11% | 100% |
Base: All parents (n = 2210). Data table reference = “flexibleworking_impact”.
Overall, 61% of primary parents, 58% of secondary parents and 55% of special school parents said they would expect some degree of positive impact (either solely positive or both positive and negative) if their child was taught by 2 teachers working in a job share arrangement. The proportion of parents that expected some degree of negative impact (either solely negative or both positive and negative) was 54% for primary parents, 59% for secondary parents and 51% for special school parents.
If parents expected that being taught by 2 teachers working in a job share arrangement would have a positive impact on their child, we asked them in what ways they thought it would have a positive impact. The question was asked of both parents who expected a solely positive impact and of those who expected both positive and negative impacts.
Figure 2: Ways in which teachers working in a job share arrangement could have a positive impact on pupils, as reported by parents
| Response | Parents |
|---|---|
| Experiencing a range of teaching styles | 78% |
| Building relationships with different personalities | 71% |
| Being able to go to more than one teacher for help and support with learning | 69% |
| Being able to go to more than one teacher for support with wellbeing | 56% |
| Other | 4% |
| None | 0% |
| Don’t know | 2% |
Base: Parents who said their child being taught by 2 teachers working in a job share arrangement would have some positive impact (n = 1255). Data table reference = “flexibleworking_positive”.
If parents expected that being taught by 2 teachers working in a job share arrangement would have a negative impact on their child, we asked them in what ways they thought it would have a negative impact. The question was asked of both parents who expected a solely negative impact and those who expected both positive and negative impacts.
Figure 3: Ways in which teachers working in a job share arrangement could have a negative impact on pupils, as reported by parents
| Response | Primary | Secondary | Special |
|---|---|---|---|
| Inconsistency of teaching (for example, teachers using different approaches to teach the same subject) | 79% | 83% | 77% |
| Teachers not sharing information (for example, about my child’s progress at school or any additional needs) | 67% | 65% | 56% |
| Class disruption due to inconsistent approaches to behaviour management | 65% | 54% | 65% |
| Unsure who to speak to about concerns | 36% | 29% | 37% |
| Lack of support for my child | 22% | 17% | 14% |
| Concern that my child was building relationships with more than one teacher | 13% | 9% | 22% |
| Other | 5% | 2% | 7% |
| None | 1% | 0% | 2% |
| Don’t know | 1% | 1% | 0% |
Base: All primary parents (n = 456), secondary parents (n = 509) and special school parents (n = 264) who said their child being taught by 2 teachers working in a job share arrangement would have some negative impact. Data table reference = “flexibleworking_negative”.
We asked pupils who had been taught by 2 teachers working in a job share arrangement what, if anything, they liked about it.
Figure 4: What, if anything, pupils liked about being taught by 2 teachers working in a job share arrangement, as reported by pupils
| Response | Key stage 3 | Key stage 4 |
|---|---|---|
| Experiencing different teaching styles | 50% | 55% |
| Interacting with different personalities | 31% | 40% |
| Being able to go to more than one teacher for help and support with learning | 23% | 34% |
| Being able to go to more than one teacher for help and support with wellbeing | 11% | 8% |
| Other | 7% | 2% |
| None | 21% | 16% |
| Don’t know | 7% | 4% |
Base: All key stage 3 pupils (n = 431) and key stage 4 pupils (n = 293) who had been taught by 2 teachers working in a job share arrangement. Data table reference = “flexibleworking_like”.
We also asked pupils who had been taught by 2 teachers working in a job share arrangement what, if anything, they disliked about it.
Figure 5: What, if anything, pupils disliked about being taught by 2 teachers working in a job share arrangement, as reported by pupils
| Response | Key stage 3 | Key stage 4 |
|---|---|---|
| Didn’t like one of the teachers as much as the other | 48% | 47% |
| Teachers had different behaviour rules | 44% | 33% |
| Teachers not sharing information with each other | 25% | 32% |
| Unsure who to go to if I was worried about something in class | 13% | 11% |
| Lack of support | 9% | 8% |
| Other | 6% | 5% |
| None | 11% | 16% |
| Don’t know | 5% | 4% |
Base: All key stage 3 pupils (n = 431) and key stage 4 pupils (n = 293) who had been taught by 2 teachers working in a job share arrangement. Data table reference = “flexibleworking_dislike”.
Affordability of wraparound care
We asked primary parents and special school parents whether, since the start of the September 2025 school year, their child had normally attended any school-run childcare at least once a week. School-run childcare was defined as excluding any childcare provision not run by the school, such as childminders or out-of-school sports clubs.
Figure 6: Pupils’ use of school-run childcare, as reported by parents
| Response | Primary | Special |
|---|---|---|
| My child does not normally attend before- or after-school childcare | 65% | 91% |
| Both before and after-school childcare | 14% | 2% |
| After-school childcare only | 12% | 3% |
| Before-school childcare only | 7% | 2% |
| Don’t know | 2% | 3% |
Base: All primary parents (n = 828) and special school parents (n = 501). Data table reference = “childcare_use”.
If parents said their child did not attend both before and after-school childcare, we asked them to what extent cost was a barrier to using the type (or types) of childcare that their child did not attend.
Figure 7: The extent to which the cost of before- or after-school childcare is a barrier to its use, as reported by parents
| Phase | To a great extent | To some extent | To a small extent | Not at all | Don’t know | Prefer not to say | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Primary | 19% | 19% | 12% | 35% | 14% | 0% | 100% |
| Special | 13% | 10% | 6% | 43% | 24% | 4% | 100% |
Base: All primary parents (n = 705) and special school parents (n = 482) who said that their child did not attend both before and after-school childcare. Data table reference = “childcare_cost”.
Among those whose child did not attend both before and after-school childcare, 51% of primary parents and 29% of special school parents said that cost was a barrier to attendance (to either a great extent, some extent or a small extent).
We asked primary and special school parents whose child attended school-run, before- or after-school childcare how worried they were, if at all, about being able to afford this childcare.
Figure 8: Parents’ level of worry about being able to afford before- or after-school childcare
| Audience | Very worried | Quite worried | Not very worried | Not at all worried | Don’t know | Prefer not to say | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Parents | 14% | 24% | 41% | 20% | 0% | 2% | 100% |
Base: Primary and special school parents whose child attends school-run, before- or after-school childcare (n = 281). Data table reference = “childcare_costworry”.
Among those parents whose children attended school-run childcare, 38% said they were very worried or quite worried about being able to afford this childcare.
We asked all primary parents and special school parents if the cost of before- or after-school childcare stopped them from using it as much as they would have liked this academic year.
Overall, 34% of primary parents and 16% of special school parents said the cost of before- or after-school childcare stopped them from using it as much as they would have liked.
We also asked primary and special school parents if the cost of before- or after-school childcare meant they had changed their working hours this year.
Figure 9: Impact of the cost of before- or after-school childcare on parents’ working hours
| Phase | I have reduced my working hours | I have increased my working hours | My working hours have not changed | Not applicable | Don’t know | Prefer not to say | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Primary | 19% | 3% | 40% | 33% | 3% | 3% | 100% |
| Special | 9% | 1% | 19% | 64% | 6% | 2% | 100% |
Base: All primary parents (n = 828) and special school parents (n = 501). Data table reference = “childcare_workingchange”.
Cost impacts of school lunches
We asked parents what their child’s usual school lunch arrangements were in a typical week.
Figure 10: Pupils’ usual school lunch arrangements, as reported by parents
| Response | Primary | Secondary | Special |
|---|---|---|---|
| School lunch | 63% | 61% | 63% |
| Packed lunch | 49% | 48% | 44% |
| My child goes outside of school to get lunch | 0% | 1% | 2% |
| My child attends school part-time so does not eat at school | 0% | 1% | 1% |
| Other | 1% | 3% | 4% |
Base: All primary parents (n = 828), secondary parents (n = 881) and special school parents (n = 501). Data table reference = “nutrition_lunchtype”.
We also asked parents the extent to which they agreed with the statement ‘I trust my child’s school to provide a healthy, balanced school lunch’.
Figure 11: Extent to which parents agreed that they trust their child’s school to provide a healthy, balanced school lunch
| Phase | Strongly agree | Agree | Neither agree nor disagree | Disagree | Strongly disagree | Don’t know | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Primary | 32% | 40% | 14% | 9% | 3% | 2% | 100% |
| Secondary | 15% | 42% | 24% | 12% | 3% | 5% | 100% |
| Special | 39% | 37% | 15% | 4% | 1% | 4% | 100% |
Base: All primary parents (n = 828), secondary parents (n = 881) and special school parents (n = 501). Data table reference = “nutrition_meals”.
A large majority of primary parents (72%), a majority of secondary parents (57%) and a large majority of special school parents (76%) agreed or strongly agreed that they trusted their child’s school to provide a healthy, balanced school lunch.
Parents whose child’s usual school lunch arrangements included school lunch, but who were not eligible for benefit-related free school meals or the free meal entitlement, were asked the extent to which the cost of school-provided lunches put pressure on their household finances.
Some children who are not eligible for benefit-related free school meals, or the free meal entitlement, nevertheless receive meals without charge. These include children in reception, year 1 and year 2, and those who live in certain areas (including London) where eligibility for free meal provision has been extended.
Figure 12: Extent to which the cost of school-provided lunches had put pressure on parents’ household finances
| Phase | To a great extent | To some extent | To a small extent | Not at all | Don’t know | Prefer not to say | Not applicable – school provides free lunch | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Primary | 7% | 12% | 17% | 30% | 3% | 0% | 31% | 100% |
| Secondary | 11% | 28% | 41% | 17% | 1% | 1% | 1% | 100% |
| Special | 4% | 27% | 18% | 31% | 3% | 1% | 15% | 100% |
Base: All primary parents (n = 287), secondary parents (n = 230) and special school parents (n = 152) whose child has school lunches but does not receive benefit-related free school meals. Data table reference = “nutrition_cost”.
Among those whose child had school lunches but did not receive benefit-related free school meals, 35% of primary parents, 80% of secondary parents and 49% of special school parents said that the cost of school lunches put pressure on their household finances to at least a small extent.
Parents whose child did not receive benefit-related free school meals were asked whether the price of school lunches had risen this term compared to the summer 2025 term. Overall, 35% said that prices had risen, 11% said that prices had not risen and 39% said they didn’t know whether prices had risen. A further 14% said that this was not applicable as their child’s school provided lunch free of charge and 1% said that they preferred not to say.
If parents indicated that the price of school lunches had increased compared to the summer 2025 term, they were also asked whether the rising price had influenced their decision about whether to use school-provided lunches. This question was only asked of those whose child’s usual school lunch arrangements included options other than school-provided lunches. It was not asked of those whose child received benefits-related free school meals.
Figure 13: Whether rising school meal prices influenced parents’ decisions about using school-provided lunches
| Audience | Completely switched to packed lunch due to cost | Reduced how often child has school lunch | No impact | Don’t know | Prefer not to say | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Parents | 23% | 35% | 40% | 1% | 1% | 100% |
Base: Parents whose child didn’t exclusively have school lunches, did not receive benefits-related free school meals, and said that the price of school-provided lunches had risen in the autumn 2025 term compared with the summer 2025 term (n = 248). Data has been rebased to exclude the 2 parents who said that the school provides free lunch but also said that the cost of school meals had increased. Data table reference = “nutrition_priceinfluence”.
Parental support for children
We asked parents whether they had made any specific adjustments to support their child in the last 3 years. Parents were asked to select those that applied from a list of specific adjustments.
Figure 14: Adjustments made by parents to support their child in the past 3 years
| Response | Primary | Secondary | Special |
|---|---|---|---|
| Asked for compressed or flexible working hours, without reducing total number of hours | 27% | 20% | 21% |
| Reduced contracted working hours to care for my child | 20% | 17% | 26% |
| Turned down a job opportunity to care for my child | 21% | 13% | 30% |
| Found wraparound childcare for my child (for example, breakfast and after school clubs, childminder) | 22% | 7% | 4% |
| Taken a job opportunity that was not my preference to care for my child | 9% | 7% | 10% |
| Given up my job to care for my child | 9% | 6% | 29% |
| Considered home schooling my child | 8% | 8% | 10% |
| Undertaken home schooling my child | 2% | 3% | 4% |
| Other | 4% | 7% | 5% |
| None of the above | 30% | 43% | 26% |
| Prefer not to say | 3% | 4% | 3% |
Base: All primary parents (n = 828), secondary parents (n = 881) and special school parents (n = 501). Data table reference = “parentsupport_adjustments”.
We also asked parents whether they had cut back on household essentials (such as food or energy) to be able to afford school-related costs (such as uniforms or textbooks).
Overall, 32% of primary parents, 34% of secondary parents and 32% of special school parents said that they had cut back on household essentials to afford school-related costs.
We also asked parents how often they had found it hard to manage the time needed to support their child’s learning since they started school. Learning support was defined as including things such as helping with homework and supporting learning at home through reading.
Figure 15: How often parents found it hard to manage the time needed to support their child’s learning
| Phase | All of the time | Most of the time | Some of the time | Never | Don’t know | Prefer not to say | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Primary | 10% | 18% | 47% | 21% | 2% | 1% | 100% |
| Secondary | 7% | 17% | 49% | 25% | 1% | 1% | 100% |
| Special | 14% | 18% | 32% | 31% | 3% | 2% | 100% |
Base: All primary parents (n = 828), secondary parents (n = 881) and special school parents (n = 501). Data table reference = “parentsupport_time”.
Overall, 76% of primary parents, 73% of secondary parents and 64% of special school parents said that they found it hard to manage the time needed to support their child’s learning at least some of the time.
We also asked parents how often they had found it hard to pay for resources or equipment needed to support their child’s learning – for example, by buying extra books and equipment or paying for tutoring.
Figure 16: How often parents found it hard to pay for resources or equipment needed to support their child’s learning
| Phase | All of the time | Most of the time | Some of the time | Never | Don’t know | Prefer not to say | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Primary | 5% | 8% | 30% | 50% | 4% | 3% | 100% |
| Secondary | 7% | 11% | 42% | 37% | 2% | 2% | 100% |
| Special | 8% | 9% | 30% | 45% | 4% | 3% | 100% |
Base: All primary parents (n = 828), secondary parents (n = 881) and special school parents (n = 501). Data table reference = “parentsupport_resources”.
Overall, 43% of primary parents, 60% of secondary parents and 47% of special school parents said that, at least some of the time, they found it hard to pay for resources or equipment needed to support their child’s learning.
School belonging
We asked parents and pupils a series of questions about how they, or their child, had felt about school over the previous week of term.
Firstly, we asked pupils and parents how often they, or their child, had felt safe at school over the previous week of term.
Figure 17: How often pupils and parents felt they, or their child, had felt safe at school over the previous week of term
| Phase | Every day | Most days | Some days | Never | Don’t know | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Key stage 3 pupils | 54% | 32% | 11% | 2% | 1% | 100% |
| Key stage 4 pupils | 54% | 32% | 10% | 3% | 2% | 100% |
| Primary parents | 63% | 26% | 7% | 2% | 2% | 100% |
| Secondary parents | 48% | 34% | 12% | 3% | 3% | 100% |
| Special school parents | 53% | 30% | 9% | 4% | 5% | 100% |
Base: All key stage 3 pupils (n = 867), key stage 4 pupils (n = 638), primary parents (n = 828), secondary parents (n = 881) and special school parents (n = 501). Data table reference = “belongingtracker_safe”, “belonging_safe”.
A large majority of key stage 3 pupils (86%) and key stage 4 pupils (86%) said that they had felt safe at school every day or on most days in the past week.
When previously asked at an equivalent point in the school year, in December 2024, the proportion of key stage 3 pupils (82%) and key stage 4 pupils (81%) who felt safe at school every day or on most days was lower than in December 2025.
A large majority of primary parents (89%), secondary parents (81%) and special school parents (83%) said their child had felt safe at school every day or on most days in the past week.
When previously asked at an equivalent point in the school year, in December 2024, the proportion of primary parents (95%) and secondary parents (86%) who said their child had felt safe at school was higher than December 2025. The proportion among special school parents (81%) was similar to December 2025.
We asked pupils how often they had felt they belonged at their school over the past week of term.
Figure 18: How often pupils felt they belonged at their school over the past week of term
| Phase | Every day | Most days | Some days | Never | Don’t know | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Key stage 3 | 47% | 32% | 14% | 4% | 3% | 100% |
| Key stage 4 | 37% | 34% | 20% | 6% | 3% | 100% |
Base: All key stage 3 pupils (n = 867), key stage 4 pupils (n = 638). Data table reference = “belongingtracker_belong”.
Overall, 79% of key stage 3 pupils and 71% of key stage 4 pupils said that they felt they belonged at their school every day or on most days in the past week of term.
When last asked at an equivalent point in the school year, in December 2024, the proportion of key stage 3 pupils who felt they belonged at their school (76%) was similar to December 2025. However, the proportion among key stage 4 pupils (65%) was lower than December 2025.
We also asked pupils and parents how often they, or their child, had enjoyed going to school over the past week of term.
Figure 19: How often pupils and parents felt they, or their child, had enjoyed school over the past week of term
| Phase | Every day | Most days | Some days | Never | Don’t know | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Key stage 3 pupils | 22% | 38% | 28% | 11% | 1% | 100% |
| Key stage 4 pupils | 10% | 39% | 37% | 13% | 1% | 100% |
| Primary parents | 41% | 40% | 16% | 4% | 0% | 100% |
| Secondary parents | 22% | 48% | 23% | 7% | 1% | 100% |
| Special school parents | 41% | 36% | 16% | 6% | 2% | 100% |
Base: All key stage 3 pupils (n = 867), key stage 4 pupils (n = 638), primary parents (n = 828), secondary parents (n = 881) and special school parents (n = 501). Data table reference = “belongingtracker_enjoy”, “belonging_enjoy”.
Overall, 60% of key stage 3 pupils and 49% of key stage 4 pupils said that they had enjoyed coming to school every day or most days in the past week of term.
When last asked at an equivalent point in the school year, in December 2024, the proportion of key stage 3 pupils (58%) who enjoyed coming to school was similar to December 2025. However, the proportion of key stage 4 pupils (39%) who enjoyed coming to school was lower than in December 2025.
A large majority of primary parents (80%), secondary parents (70%) and special school parents (77%) said their child had enjoyed going to school every day or most days in the past week of term.
In December 2024, the proportion of primary parents (84%), secondary parents (72%) and special school parents (78%) who said their child had enjoyed going to school was similar to December 2025.
Behaviour
We asked pupils how they would rate the behaviour of pupils at their school over the past week of term.
Figure 20: How pupils rated behaviour over the past week of term
| Key stage | Very good | Good | Neither good nor poor | Poor | Very poor | Don’t know | Prefer not to say | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Key stage 3 | 10% | 37% | 35% | 12% | 3% | 2% | 1% | 100% |
| Key stage 4 | 7% | 41% | 34% | 8% | 7% | 3% | 0% | 100% |
Base: All key stage 3 pupils (n = 867) and key stage 4 pupils (n = 638). Data table reference = “behaviour_rating”.
Overall, 47% of key stage 3 pupils and 48% of key stage 4 pupils said that the behaviour of pupils at their school had been good or very good in the past week of term.
When last asked at an equivalent point in the school year, in December 2024, a similar proportion of key stage 3 pupils (44%) rated behaviour as good or very good in the past week of term. However, the proportion among key stage 4 pupils (39%) was lower than December 2025.
We also asked pupils how often they thought their school had been calm and orderly over the past week of term.
Figure 21: How often pupils thought their school was calm and orderly over the past week of term
| Phase | Every day | Most days | Some days | Never | Don’t know | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Key stage 3 | 17% | 43% | 30% | 8% | 2% | 100% |
| Key stage 4 | 9% | 48% | 32% | 7% | 3% | 100% |
Base: All key stage 3 pupils (n = 867) and key stage 4 pupils (n = 638). Data table reference = “behaviour_calm”.
The majority of key stage 3 (61%) and key stage 4 (57%) pupils said that their school had been calm and orderly every day or most days in the past week of term.
When last asked at an equivalent point in the school year, in December 2024, a lower proportion of key stage 3 pupils (49%) and key stage 4 pupils (48%) said that their school had been calm and orderly every day or most days in the past week of term.
We asked pupils how often, if at all, misbehaviour of other pupils had interrupted the lesson or stopped them doing their work in the past week of term.
Figure 22: How often misbehaviour of other pupils stopped or interrupted lessons or prevented pupils from doing their work over the past week of term
| Phase | All lessons | Most lessons | Some lessons | Rarely | Never | Don’t know | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Key stage 3 | 4% | 23% | 39% | 27% | 5% | 2% | 100% |
| Key stage 4 | 3% | 15% | 39% | 36% | 4% | 3% | 100% |
Base: All key stage 3 pupils (n = 867) and key stage 4 pupils (n = 638). Data table reference = “behaviour_misbehaviour”.
The majority of key stage 3 (66%) and key stage 4 (58%) pupils said that misbehaviour had interrupted all, most or some lessons in the past week of term.
When last asked in May 2025, a similar proportion of key stage 3 pupils (68%) said that misbehaviour had interrupted all, most or some lessons in the past week of term. The proportion among key stage 4 pupils in May 2025 (64%) who said that misbehaviour had interrupted all, most or some lessons in the past week of term was higher than in December 2025.
Experiences of stereotypes
Pupils were asked about their experiences of stereotypes and assumptions about how other people believe boys should behave.
Firstly, pupils were given examples of types of comments that some people make about how boys should behave or feel. These included phrases such as ‘boys don’t cry’, ‘man up,’ and ‘boys will be boys’. They were then asked how often they had heard pupils at their school make comments like this over the past month.
Figure 23: How often pupils had heard comments about how boys should behave or feel over the past month
| Phase | Every day | Most days | Some days | Never | Prefer not to say | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Key stage 3 | 4% | 11% | 28% | 54% | 3% | 100% |
| Key stage 4 | 3% | 11% | 32% | 50% | 4% | 100% |
Base: All key stage 3 pupils (n = 867) and key stage 4 pupils (n = 638). Data table reference = “stereotypes_heard”.
Overall, 43% of key stage 3 pupils and 46% of key stage 4 pupils had heard comments about how boys should behave or feel every day, most days or some days over the past month.
Male pupils who said they had heard comments about how boys should behave or feel over the past month were asked how often, if at all, they were bothered by it.
Figure 24: How often male pupils were bothered by comments about how boys should behave or feel, if they had heard any such comments
| Phase | Always | Most of the time | Some of the time | Never | Don’t know | Prefer not to say | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Key stage 3 | 6% | 17% | 35% | 32% | 7% | 3% | 100% |
| Key stage 4 | 8% | 10% | 29% | 47% | 6% | 0% | 100% |
Base: Male key stage 3 pupils (n = 215) and male key stage 4 pupils (n = 146) who had heard pupils at their school making comments about how boys should behave or feel. Data table reference = “stereotypes_bothered”.
Among those male pupils who had heard comments about how boys should behave or feel, 57% of key stage 3 pupils and 47% of key stage 4 pupils said that, at least some of the time, they had been bothered by the comments.
Male pupils were also asked the extent to which they agreed or disagreed with the statement ‘boys often feel pressure to not cry, to man up, or misbehave’.
Figure 25: Extent to which male pupils agreed or disagreed that boys often feel pressure to not cry, to man up, or misbehave
| Phase | Strongly agree | Agree | Neither agree nor disagree | Disagree | Strongly disagree | Don’t know | Prefer not to say | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Key stage 3 | 13% | 30% | 29% | 11% | 6% | 10% | 1% | 100% |
| Key stage 4 | 18% | 33% | 29% | 9% | 3% | 5% | 3% | 100% |
Base: Male pupils in key stage 3 (n = 418) and key stage 4 (n = 257). Data table reference = “stereotypes_pressure”.
Overall, 42% of male pupils in key stage 3 and 51% of male pupils in key stage 4 said that they agreed or strongly agreed that boys often feel pressure to not cry, to man up, or misbehave.
Male pupils were also asked the extent to which they agreed or disagreed with the statement ‘I sometimes make choices or act differently to match what friends and other pupils expect from boys, like having to act tough or not express my feelings’.
Figure 26: Extent to which male pupils agreed or disagreed that sometimes they make choices or act differently to match what friends and other pupils expect from boys
| Phase | Strongly agree | Agree | Neither agree nor disagree | Disagree | Strongly disagree | Don’t know | Prefer not to say | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Key stage 3 | 7% | 25% | 30% | 18% | 7% | 11% | 1% | 100% |
| Key stage 4 | 7% | 27% | 25% | 24% | 7% | 5% | 4% | 100% |
Base: Male pupils in key stage 3 (n = 418) and key stage 4 (n = 257). Data table reference = “stereotypes_expect”.
Overall, 33% of male pupils in key stage 3 and 34% of male pupils in key stage 4 said that they agreed or strongly agreed that sometimes they make choices or act differently to match what friends and other pupils expect from boys.
Pupils in mixed schools were asked the extent to which they agreed or disagreed with the statement ‘teachers in my school treat boys and girls differently, even when their behaviour and grades are similar’.
Figure 27: Extent to which pupils in mixed schools agreed or disagreed that teachers in their school treat boys and girls differently
| Phase | Strongly agree | Agree | Neither agree nor disagree | Disagree | Strongly disagree | Don’t know | Prefer not to say | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Key stage 3 | 10% | 19% | 23% | 24% | 13% | 11% | 0% | 100% |
| Key stage 4 | 17% | 26% | 23% | 18% | 8% | 6% | 3% | 100% |
Base: Pupils in key stage 3 (n = 781) and key stage 4 (n = 576) who attend mixed schools. Data have been rebased to exclude pupils in single sex schools. Data table reference = “stereotypes_teachers”.
Pupils were asked the extent to which they agreed or disagreed with the statement ‘I worry about being judged by my friends if I show I care about doing well at school’.
Figure 28: Extent to which pupils agreed or disagreed that they worry about being judged by their friends if they show they care about doing well at school
| Phase | Strongly agree | Agree | Neither agree nor disagree | Disagree | Strongly disagree | Don’t know | Prefer not to say | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Key stage 3 | 8% | 17% | 22% | 28% | 20% | 4% | 1% | 100% |
| Key stage 4 | 5% | 17% | 18% | 32% | 24% | 3% | 1% | 100% |
Base: All key stage 3 pupils (n = 867) and key stage 4 pupils (n = 638). Data table reference = “stereotypes_judged”.
Overall, 25% of key stage 3 pupils and 22% of key stage 4 pupils agreed or strongly agreed that they worried about being judged by their friends if they showed they care about doing well at school.
Pupils in years 9 to 11 were asked if they think boys and girls get the same chances to find a job, start training, or continue their education after finishing secondary school at 16.
Figure 29: Whether pupils thought boys and girls get the same chances to find a job, start training or continue their education after finishing secondary school at 16
| Audience | I think they get the same chances | I think boys get better chances than girls | I think girls get better chances than boys | Don’t know | Prefer not to say | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Male pupils | 51% | 17% | 8% | 21% | 2% | 100% |
| Female pupils | 39% | 32% | 2% | 26% | 0% | 100% |
Base: Male pupils (n = 388) and female pupils (n = 546) in years 9 to 11. Data table reference = “stereotypes_chances”.
Attitudes towards women and girls
Pupils were asked whether they consented to answer questions about behaviour and attitudes towards women and girls. Almost all female pupils (98%) and male pupils (92%) said that they were happy to answer questions on this topic.
Pupils who agreed to answer questions about this topic were asked how often, in the past week, they had witnessed other pupils at their school make comments about girls and women that they would describe as misogynistic. ‘Misogynistic comments’ were defined as comments that show feelings of hating girls and women, or a belief that boys and men are better than girls and women.
Figure 30: How often pupils had heard comments at school that they would describe as misogynistic in the past week
| Audience | Every day | Most days | Some days | Never | Don’t know | Prefer not to say | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| All key stage 3 pupils | 2% | 4% | 26% | 51% | 16% | 1% | 100% |
| All key stage 4 pupils | 4% | 9% | 31% | 46% | 11% | 0% | 100% |
| Male pupils only | 1% | 4% | 24% | 57% | 14% | 0% | 100% |
| Female pupils only | 5% | 8% | 31% | 41% | 14% | 1% | 100% |
Base: All key stage 3 pupils (n = 827), key stage 4 pupils (n = 608), male pupils (n = 616) and female pupils (n = 819) who consented to answer questions about behaviour and attitudes towards women and girls. Data table reference = “attitudegirls_misogynistic”.
Overall, 32% of key stage 3 pupils and 44% of key stage 4 pupils said they had heard comments by other pupils at school, on at least some days in the past week, that they would describe as misogynistic. This represents a reduction compared with the proportion of key stage 3 pupils (49%) and key stage 4 pupils (63%) in March 2025 who said that they had heard misogynistic comments from other pupils on at least some days in the past week.
Among female pupils, 44% said that, on at least some days in the past week, they had heard comments from other pupils at school that they would describe as misogynistic. Among male pupils, 29% said that they had heard misogynistic comments from other pupils on at least some days in the past week. This is lower than the proportion of female pupils (68%) and male pupils (40%) in March 2025 who said that they had heard misogynistic comments from other pupils on at least some days in the past week.
Pupils were also asked how often, in the past week, they had witnessed other pupils at their school make comments that made them worry about the safety of girls and women.
Figure 31: How often pupils had heard comments at school that made them worry about the safety of girls and women
| Audience | Every day | Most days | Some days | Never | Don’t know | Prefer not to say | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Key stage 3 | 1% | 4% | 15% | 69% | 11% | 1% | 100% |
| Key stage 4 | 2% | 4% | 23% | 60% | 11% | 1% | 100% |
| Male pupils | 1% | 2% | 13% | 74% | 10% | 0% | 100% |
| Female pupils | 2% | 5% | 23% | 57% | 12% | 2% | 100% |
Base: All key stage 3 pupils (n = 827), key stage 4 pupils (n = 608), male pupils (n = 616) and female pupils (n = 819) who consented to answer questions about behaviour and attitudes towards women and girls. Data table reference = “attitudegirls_safety”.
Overall, 20% of key stage 3 pupils and 29% of key stage 4 pupils said they had heard comments from other pupils at school, on at least some days in the past week, that made them worry about the safety of girls and women.
This is lower than the proportion of key stage 3 pupils (32%) and key stage 4 pupils (47%) in March 2025 who said that they had heard comments from other pupils at school, on at least some days in the past week, that made them worry about the safety of girls and women.
Among female pupils, 30% said that, on at least some days in the past week, they had heard comments at school that made them worry about the safety of girls and women. Among male pupils, 16% said that they had heard comments that made them worry about the safety of girls and women, on at least some days in the past week.
This is lower than the proportion of female pupils (47%) and male pupils (27%) in March 2025 who said that they had heard comments from other pupils at school, on at least some days in the past week, that made them worry about the safety of girls and women.
Relationships with peers
Pupils were asked a series of questions about their relationships with other pupils in school. Throughout, they were asked to think about the last class they attended when answering.
Firstly, they were asked the extent to which they agreed that the pupils in their class enjoy being together.
Figure 32: Extent to which pupils agreed or disagreed that the pupils in their class enjoy being together
| Phase | Strongly agree | Agree | Neither agree nor disagree | Disagree | Strongly disagree | Don’t know | Prefer not to say | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Key stage 3 | 13% | 47% | 28% | 6% | 1% | 5% | 1% | 100% |
| Key stage 4 | 8% | 50% | 30% | 6% | 1% | 4% | 1% | 100% |
Base: All key stage 3 pupils (n = 867) and key stage 4 pupils (n = 638). Data table reference = “relationships_enjoy”.
The majority of key stage 3 pupils (60%) and key stage 4 pupils (58%) said that they agreed or strongly agreed that the pupils in their class enjoy being together.
Conversely, 7% of key stage 3 pupils and 7% of key stage 4 pupils said that they disagreed or strongly disagreed that the pupils in their class enjoy being together.
Pupils were also asked the extent to which they agreed that most of the pupils in their class were kind and helpful.
Figure 33: Extent to which pupils agreed or disagreed that the pupils in their class are kind and helpful
| Phase | Strongly agree | Agree | Neither agree nor disagree | Disagree | Strongly disagree | Don’t know | Prefer not to say | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Key stage 3 | 9% | 46% | 28% | 11% | 2% | 4% | 0% | 100% |
| Key stage 4 | 11% | 43% | 29% | 11% | 2% | 3% | 1% | 100% |
Base: All key stage 3 pupils (n = 867) and key stage 4 pupils (n = 638). Data table reference = “relationships_kind”.
The majority of key stage 3 pupils (54%) and key stage 4 pupils (53%) said that they agreed or strongly agreed that most of the pupils in their class are kind and helpful.
Conversely, 13% of key stage 3 pupils and 13% of key stage 4 pupils said that they disagreed or strongly disagreed that most of the pupils in their class are kind and helpful.
Finally, pupils were asked the extent to which they agreed that other students in their class accept them as they are.
Figure 34: Extent to which pupils agreed or disagreed that other students in their class accept them as they are
| Phase | Strongly agree | Agree | Neither agree nor disagree | Disagree | Strongly disagree | Don’t know | Prefer not to say | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Key stage 3 | 21% | 46% | 19% | 7% | 2% | 6% | 1% | 100% |
| Key stage 4 | 13% | 46% | 24% | 9% | 3% | 5% | 1% | 100% |
Base: All key stage 3 pupils (n = 867) and key stage 4 pupils (n = 638). Data table reference = “relationships_accept”.
A large majority of key stage 3 pupils (67%) and a majority of key stage 4 pupils (59%) said that they agreed or strongly agreed that other students in their class accept them as they are.
Conversely, 9% of key stage 3 pupils and 11% of key stage 4 pupils said that they disagreed or strongly disagreed that other students in their class accept them as they are.
Bullying
Parents were asked whether their child had been bullied for any reason in the past 12 months. Bullying was defined as including both online bullying (cyber bullying) and bullying in person.
Overall, 25% of primary parents, 30% of secondary parents and 22% of special school parents said that their child had been bullied by somebody in the past year.
More specifically, 25% of primary parents, 28% of secondary parents and 18% of special school parents said that their child had been bullied by pupils at their school, either on school grounds, on the way to and from school, or online. And 1% of primary parents, 3% of secondary parents and 4% of special school parents said that their child had been bullied by someone who was not a pupil at their school.
School attendance
Pupils and parents were asked how often they, or their child, had physically attended school in the past 2 weeks of term time.
Figure 35: How often pupils have attended school in the past 2 weeks of term, as reported by pupils and parents
| Phase | Every weekday | Most weekdays | Some weekdays | Not at all | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Key stage 3 pupils | 77% | 18% | 3% | 1% | 100% |
| Key stage 4 pupils | 72% | 22% | 4% | 3% | 100% |
| Primary parents | 85% | 11% | 2% | 2% | 100% |
| Secondary parents | 80% | 13% | 5% | 3% | 100% |
| Special parents | 76% | 15% | 5% | 5% | 100% |
Base: All key stage 3 pupils (n = 867), key stage 4 pupils (n = 638), primary parents (n = 828), secondary parents (n = 881) and special school parents (n = 501). Data table reference = “attendance_pupils”.
Overall, 95% of key stage 3 pupils and 94% of key stage 4 pupils said that they had attended school on every weekday or most weekdays over the past 2 weeks.
Among parents, 97% of primary parents, 93% of secondary parents and 91% of special school parents said their child had attended school on every weekday or most weekdays over the past 2 weeks.
The following table shows the proportions of parents who said that their child had been to school every day or most days, in surveys conducted across this academic year and the previous 2 academic years.
Figure 36: Proportion of pupils attending school every day or on most days over the past 2 weeks, as reported by pupils and parents
| Wave | Key stage 3 pupils | Key stage 4 pupils | Primary parents | Secondary parents | Special school parents |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| December 2025 | 95% | 94% | 97% | 93% | 91% |
| May 2025 | 96% | 95% | 99% | 95% | 93% |
| March 2025 | 95% | 93% | |||
| September 2024 | 97% | 96% | 98% | 96% | 91% |
| March 2024 | 95% | 95% | 98% | 95% | 93% |
| December 2023 | 96% | 94% | 99% | 95% | 91% |
Base: All key stage 3 pupils, key stage 4 pupils, primary parents, secondary parents and special school parents. The number of responses for each group varied in each survey wave and can be found in the accompanying data tabulations. Parents were not asked about attendance in March 2025. Data table reference = “attendance_pupils”.
We asked pupils who had not physically attended school every weekday in the past 2 weeks of term why this was.
Figure 37: Reasons reported by pupils for not attending school every day in the past 2 weeks of term
| Response | Key stage 3 | Key stage 4 |
|---|---|---|
| I have been ill | 71% | 72% |
| Anxiety or mental health problems | 20% | 29% |
| A neurodevelopmental condition, such as ADHD or autism | 8% | 9% |
| I am being bullied at school | 6% | 6% |
| I have been suspended or permanently excluded from school | 6% | 4% |
| I have been on holiday | 3% | 0% |
| I am now being permanently home schooled | 2% | 1% |
| Cost of travel to school | 1% | 2% |
| Other | 17% | 18% |
| Don’t know | 1% | 2% |
| Prefer not to say | 4% | 1% |
Base: Key stage 3 pupils (n = 255) and key stage 4 pupils (n = 239) who had not physically attended school every weekday over the past 2 weeks. Data table reference = “attendance_whynot”.
We also asked parents whose child had not physically attended school every weekday in the past 2 weeks of term why this was.
Figure 38: Reasons reported by parents for their child not attending school every day in the past 2 weeks of term
| Response | Primary parents | Secondary parents | Special school parents |
|---|---|---|---|
| My child has been ill | 69% | 65% | 50% |
| Anxiety or mental health problems | 13% | 26% | 35% |
| A neurodevelopmental condition, such as ADHD or autism | 20% | 16% | 34% |
| My child is being bullied at school | 3% | 7% | 6% |
| My child is now being permanently home schooled | 3% | 4% | 1% |
| My child has been on holiday | 6% | 1% | 7% |
| My child has been suspended or permanently excluded from school | 2% | 3% | 4% |
| Cost of travel to school | 2% | 1% | 4% |
| Other | 16% | 13% | 16% |
| Don’t know | 0% | 1% | 4% |
| Prefer not to say | 8% | 3% | 3% |
Base: Primary parents (n = 139), secondary parents (n = 240) and special school parents (n = 111) whose child had not physically attended school every weekday over the past 2 weeks. Data table reference = “attendance_whynot”.
If pupils had not attended school every day in the past 2 weeks, and anxiety or mental health problems played a part in this absence, they were asked whether a range of specific factors had contributed to this.
Figure 39: Factors that contributed to pupils’ anxiety or mental health problems, as reported by pupils
| Response | Pupils |
|---|---|
| Worries about other pupils’ behaviour | 57% |
| General worries not about anything in particular | 46% |
| Worries about my lessons or exams | 43% |
| Worries about getting on with teachers | 34% |
| Worries about lessons and learning | 32% |
| I’ve been diagnosed with a mental illness, such as depression or anxiety | 25% |
| None of these | 6% |
| Don’t know | 2% |
| Prefer not to say | 3% |
Base: Pupils (n = 177) who had not attended school every day in the past 2 weeks and said that anxiety or mental health problems had played a part in this. Data table reference = “attendance_mentalhealth”.
Only pupils in years 9 to 11 were asked whether worries about lessons or exams had been a contributing factor.
If parents said that their child had not attended school every day in the past 2 weeks, and anxiety or mental health problems played a part in this absence, they were asked whether a range of specific factors had contributed to this.
Figure 40: Factors that contributed to pupils’ anxiety or mental health problems, as reported by parents
| Response | Parents |
|---|---|
| Worries about lessons and learning | 47% |
| General worries not about anything in particular | 46% |
| Worries about getting on with teachers | 37% |
| Worries about other pupils’ behaviour | 37% |
| My child has been diagnosed with a mental illness, such as depression or anxiety | 28% |
| Worries about exams or coursework | 9% |
| None of these | 8% |
| Don’t know | 4% |
Base: Parents (n = 153) whose child had not attended school every day in the past 2 weeks and who said that anxiety or mental health problems had played a part in this. Data table reference = “attendance_mentalhealth”.
Only parents of children in years 9 to 11 were asked whether worries about exams or coursework had been a contributing factor.
Glossary of terms
Individualised learner record (ILR)
The primary data collection about further education and work-based learning in England. It is requested from learning providers in England’s further education system.
National Pupil Database (NPD)
A register data set of all pupils in state schools in England, compiled by DfE. It contains attainment data as children progress through school, as well as information on pupil background, absences and exclusions from school.
Special schools
Schools that provide an education for children with a special educational need or disability. Almost all pupils in special schools have an education, health and care plan (EHCP), which are plans for children and young people aged up to 25 who need more support than is available through special educational needs support. EHCPs identify educational, health and social needs and set out the additional support to meet those needs.