Phil Hogan
Question:56 Mr. Hogan asked the Minister for Education and Science if she will establish an implementation group for the task force on the physical sciences; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [12940/05]
Other Questions.
Task Force on the Physical Sciences.
The Department of Education and Science continues to progress the recommendations of the task force on the physical sciences as resources permit in collaboration and consultation with the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment, Forfás and industry. One of the recommendations in that report was the appointment of a chief scientist who would have responsibility for overseeing developments under the task force and other science focused initiatives and providing advice on all aspects of science and technology policy. A chief science adviser and a deputy chief science adviser have been appointed and maintain continuing contact with my Department on implementation issues. The office of the chief science adviser works in conjunction with the interdepartmental committee for science, technology and innovation and the Cabinet Sub-Committee on Science and Technology. It is not intended, therefore, to establish an implementation committee for the task force report.
Significant progress has been made in a range of areas pertaining to my Department. For example, a new science curriculum has been introduced at primary level supported by a resource grant in December 2004 of €1,000 per school plus €10 per pupil and revised syllabi in junior certificate science and in leaving certificate physics, chemistry and biology have been introduced. Work on the revision of the two remaining leaving certificate subjects, agricultural science and physics and chemistry combined, is well advanced. The introduction of the revised syllabi has been supported by comprehensive in-service programmes for teachers; additional equipment grants have been provided to schools and laboratories continue to be refurbished as part of the ongoing schools building programme. In that context, €16 million was issued to schools in 2004 to support the implementation of the revised junior certificate science syllabus; a review of grading of subjects in the leaving certificate and initial reports on teacher training have been undertaken; a review of mathematics at post-primary level is being undertaken by the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment; and investment in the programme of research in third level institutes is continuing apace to enhance and promote world class standards in research, innovation and development. Between this programme and the various grants to the research councils, and other sources, an estimated €101.5 million will be invested in third level institutions in 2005.
The discover science and engineering programme, operated under the aegis of Forfás with the collaboration of the education sector, was launched in October 2003 to bring together existing science awareness activities in a unified strategy. I have recently announced a provision of €750,000 towards the cost of the BA Festival of Science which is being hosted by Trinity College this year. This is one of the world's leading science events and will be attended by 3,000 delegates, with an estimated 7,000 to 10,000 people enjoying some part of the programme.
In the last question, we discussed the overlap and the number of groups dealing with the third level grants. However, the situation is the same with the implementation of the science report. There seem to be a large number of groups trying to drive it forward, which they are failing to do. Does the Minister accept that it is the high quality of human skills, and their availability, which will determine whether companies invest here? Is the Minister aware that fewer students are choosing science as an option at third level even though the points have fallen quite dramatically? Why is the task force not being resourced sufficiently?
I accept a number of initiatives have been brought forward but the most hard-hitting and most important ones have not been driven forward with the pace required. I am disappointed the Minister will not set up an implementation group which was one of the foremost recommendations of the task force and was highlighted again by it earlier this month. Will she reconsider that decision? Will the Irish Council for Science, Technology and Innovation review the state of science education on an annual basis, which was proposed in the task force report and which would be a good co-ordinating body to consider it?
The Deputy began by saying a number of different bodies were dealing with this issue and then went on to suggest there should be another body.
I suggested a co-ordinating body. The other bodies have different roles.
I do not believe we need another implementation group when we already have the Cabinet sub-committee, a chief science adviser, a deputy chief science adviser and an interdepartmental committee for science, technology and innovation. I will certainly not add another layer to look at this issue.
It is important to look at the teaching of science in schools. The numbers taking science subjects at leaving certificate level have improved. Some years ago, there were fewer students studying chemistry than physics but that has reversed. New science laboratories and investment in science is making a difference for schools and students.
I accept those skills will be needed by the economy. I met some of the major investors and major multinationals in this country which are concerned about the falling number of graduates not only in the strict science area, but also in the technology area. That is why the Government is taking such a serious approach to this issue and to research and investment in the programme for research in third level institutions, PRTLI, etc. By looking at syllabi and making them more attractive, which is happening, by investing in schools and by providing ongoing training for teachers, significant change is being brought about.
It will not be possible to implement some of the recommendations in the task force report as some involve considerable cost — for example, having a technician in every school. If we do that, every other practical subject will require an assistant and other European countries do not do that. Of the 35 recommendations of the task force referred to the Department of Education and Science, we are making progress on 25 of them.
I remind the Minister and Deputies that questions, supplementary questions and answers are subject to a maximum time limit of one minute.
Does the Minister have plans under the building programme to ensure good quality science laboratories in schools? I know a small amount of money was given to schools to implement the junior certificate science syllabus. Given the condition of some laboratories, it is a drop in the ocean. Will the Minister consider that under the building programme as a side issue rather than wait for a school to apply for large-scale development? Can the provision of science laboratories be prioritised?
What about Midleton CBS?
New schools and major extensions get such funding. In addition, curricular change is included under the summer works scheme and schools can get laboratories under that. We spent €60 million on summer works this year but I hope next year we will be able to do more under curricular work as well.
Is the Minister satisfied there is enough investment in science at primary level? Is training for teachers and those directly involved up to international standards? There is a lack of resources to teach science at primary level. Some schools do not have the necessary space or facilities to teach science subjects effectively. Gaelscoil Colmcille in Whitehall in my constituency uses a football club as its premises. It creates a major difficulty in teaching science subjects and there is a lack of space in corridors and in the rooms. Will the Minister agree that science must be taught to pupils at a young age and that ensuring it is made a curriculum subject is an important part of the economic strategy for the further development of the country?
In regard to the Young Scientist of the Year competition, from her experience as a new Minister does she consider that standards, particularly in science subjects, among students have risen dramatically in the past three or four years? I welcome the fact that the falling number of young people becoming involved in the sciences has been reversed. We need to have a more focused emphasis on these students because science subjects are a major important strategy for the economic development of the State.
I accept what the Deputy said about the skills of our young people, particularly those who have participated in the Young Scientist of the Year exhibition, having been an exhibitor fadó, fadó.
How did the Minister get on?
Their success in international competitions is certainly to their credit. Gaelscoil Colmcille decided to set up in a football club. If a school wants to establish itself in a football club, it must realise the restrictions under which it will have to operate. The building needs of that school are currently being considered.
We are spending €500 million on the schools building programme this year to ensure that people can respond to the curriculum. There has been a huge welcome for the primary school science curriculum. All primary teachers are able to get support for its introduction. Extra funding was given to them. The teachers involved and the children find the subject very exciting. It is a good basis from which to move forward to respond to our skills needs.
School Completion Programme.
David Stanton
Question:57 Mr. Stanton asked the Minister for Education and Science the number of schools participating in each of the school completion programmes and the Giving Children an Even Break initiative; the number of schools participating in each of these programmes which offer school meals projects; the number of pupils who receive school meals as part of these projects; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [13126/05]
The school completion programme, which was launched in 2002, incorporates the learning, experience and best practice derived from previous early school leaving initiatives, namely, the eight to 15 early school leaver initiative and the stay in school retention initiative. The programme is a key component of the Department's strategy to discriminate positively in favour of children and young people who are at risk of early school leaving and it is based on an integrated cross-community approach to tackling educational disadvantage, involving 82 projects in 21 counties. There are currently 300 primary schools and 112 second level schools participating in the school completion programme. Approximately 15,000 pupils were targeted by the school completion programme in the 2003-04 school year.
The Giving Children an Even Break programme was launched in 2001 to tackle educational disadvantage at primary level. Primary schools participating are in receipt of a range of additional supports, including teacher posts and other non-teaching supports to be targeted at disadvantaged pupils. A total of 2,345 primary schools are participating in this programme, covering a spectrum ranging from highly concentrated to very dispersed levels of disadvantage. Financial support is allocated to schools on a sliding scale, and schools with greater proportions of pupils from disadvantaged backgrounds are allocated proportionately more funding than those with fewer numbers of such pupils.
The majority of the 412 schools in the school completion programme, and more than 100 of the most disadvantaged primary schools participating in the Giving Children an Even Break programme, operate some level of breakfast or other meal provision, in accordance with the nutritional guidelines issued by the Department of Social and Family Affairs. In addition to being able to use funding, the provision of school meals is primarily funded by the school meals programme, administered by the Department of Social and Family Affairs, and involving both an urban scheme operated by 36 participating local authorities and a local projects scheme.
The school meals programme aims to supplement the nutritional intake of pupils from disadvantaged backgrounds in order to allow them to fulfil their potential within the educational system and to reduce the risk of early school leaving. Some 41,000 children benefited in 450 schools under the local projects scheme and the urban scheme provided support for more than 380 primary schools and 51,000 pupils. The Department of Social and Family Affairs has provided funding of €6.38 million for the programme.
We will continue to ensure that the resources available are used to best effect to further expand school meal provisions in schools serving disadvantaged communities.
Have these programmes being evaluated recently and, if so, what information has the Minister received in respect of them? What is her view of their effectiveness? Has she measured that? Does she plan to expand these programmes to other schools across the State? If so, will she give us information on that?
Is all the money being made available by the Department of Social and Family Affairs under the school meals programme being used? Is the Minister satisfied with the quality of the breakfasts and other food made available to pupils?
The Deputy's last question would be more appropriately directed to the Department administering that programme. The money available under the programme is used to great advantage, as any of us who have been in schools would have seen. We have devised models of best practice for breakfast clubs, which provide that food is offered to all pupils in a class or in a school rather than targeting individual children, that the food is nutritious and hot, a specific room is allocated to serve the food which is a familiar place to the children and parents are encouraged to become involved in the programme. It works very well. Unfortunately, as I have said before, it is a terrible indictable of our society that children will get out bed to go for breakfast and then they stay in school, having been fed. It is a hugely successful programme.
The Deputy asked about the school completion programme. We have examined various elements of it and decided to adopt a co-ordinated approach to the whole area of disadvantage, taking the best elements and progressing them further and, more particularly, targeting resources at areas that need them most. Disbursing money in many different areas throughout the country is not having the best effect because we need to specifically target resources. There are very good elements in some of these programmes which we will continue to operate under the new co-ordinated programme with extra investment to tackle disadvantage.
I asked the Minister about evaluation of these programmes. Has an evaluation been carried out? Does she plan to expand these programmes to all schools? Will she agree it is an indictment of our society that there is such a need and such poverty that children come to school hungry? What other plans has she, in conjunction with other Ministers, to deal with poverty, in particular food poverty, in schools and elsewhere in society?
Much can be done to promote healthy eating. It is promoted in the schools through the SPHE programme through encouraging students to learn about nutrition and food at primary and post-primary level. Family support services do great work in this area. We have seen this in our communities with the implementation of initiatives such as the Springboard Project where families in very disadvantaged areas are encouraged and brought in and receive training on the nutritional aspect. I visited very disadvantaged schools that run a parallel programme for mothers who receive adult education on healthy eating and food. Full credit is due to one school in Tallaght that not only brought in the mothers and taught them about healthy eating but gave them the cooking implements to bring home. If the class made a Chinese stir-fry, the mothers were given a wok to keep, which was a lovely idea. It was like teaching a man to fish and giving him the equipment to do so. This programme is working and it must be promoted by way of a cross-departmental approach.
Under the new disadvantaged action plan, having evaluated in-house the programmes that have worked, we will extend the schemes that work.
I recently visited a Barnardos project and it was interesting to hear that the children are willing to get up early in the morning where there is a breakfast club whereas prior to its introduction they might not have wanted to go to school. We must urge the Minister to expand that programme as quickly as possible.
Regarding the general proposals to tackle educational disadvantage — I presume this scheme is part of the overall discussions — when does the Minister expect to publish her proposals?
The document has gone to the printer and for translation as a policy document. Caithfidh sé bheith ar fáil i nGaelige freisin. As soon as it is available I will launch it.
The Minister's primary concerns at the beginning of her ministry were the areas of disadvantage and special needs. Has there been a drift away from that focus, particularly when there is much talk about private schools lately and about the third level debate? Has the Minister changed her focus on the areas of disadvantage and special needs?
Does she have any long-term plan for pre-school education, particularly in targeting educational disadvantage because children are turning up in primary schools who are three or four years, and sometimes even five years, behind in literacy and language skills? Does she have a strategy to deal with this issue?
Regarding the healthy eating project we all support, it is sad that children have to come to school in the morning to get a breakfast in a breakfast club in a primary school, although it is a service that is urgently needed. Will the Minister agree that if children constantly eat junk food, it leads to indiscipline in the classroom and, at times, particularly in some schools, more violence in the yard during breaks?
At the outset of my ministry I made it clear that each sector within the education system was important and it would be highly dangerous to ignore the third level sector in favour of any one of the other two sectors, because we need each of them for the future of society and the economy. My concentration continues to be on disadvantage and special needs. The amount of extra Exchequer spending on special needs has been evident in the last couple of months, including the huge increases on addressing disadvantage. The new co-ordinated approach and the attention on disadvantage will be evident when the new plan is launched in the next few weeks. I accept that pre-school early intervention is essential for disadvantaged areas. It is also important to examine other provisions in disadvantaged areas because there is no point in duplicating provisions. The role of parents, the community and pre-school services must be examined together, but it is my intention to extend it.
Schools Building Projects.
Olwyn Enright
Question:58 Ms Enright asked the Minister for Education and Science the amount being spent on prefabricated buildings in the education sector each year; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [12968/05]
In the five years to the end of 2004, my Department has spent €73.5 million on the purchase of prefabricated buildings in the primary and post-primary sectors. This expenditure was for the supply and installation of the prefabricated buildings, including associated site works and other costs such as for compliance with planning permission conditions, professional fees, connections for water, electricity and sewage. The breakdown of this expenditure by year is €4,407,981 in 2000, just over €9 million in 2001, approximately €21.5 million in 2002, €25.75 million in 2003 and €12,711,802 in 2004.
This expenditure represents less than 5% of the total expenditure on school buildings between 2000 and 2004. The total spent in these years on primary and post-primary school buildings, including PPP projects at second level, amounted to €1.6 billion. The demand for additional accommodation in schools has risen significantly over the last number of years, mainly due to the rapid expansion in teacher numbers, particularly in the area of special needs, the growth in the school-going population in rapidly developing areas and the demands to cater for diversity through the recognition of new Gaelscoileanna and Educate Together schools.
The current focus within my Department is to empower schools to resolve their accommodation needs, wherever possible, in a permanent manner rather than relying on temporary accommodation. In order to reduce the amount of temporary accommodation at primary level, a new initiative was launched in 2003. The purpose of this initiative is to allow primary schools to undertake a permanent solution to their classroom accommodation needs and to achieve the best value for money. The feedback from the 20 schools in this pilot was very positive. The initiative was expanded to include 44 additional primary schools in 2004 and more than 70 schools have been invited to participate in 2005.
My Department has also used other innovative solutions to deliver urgently required permanent accommodation for schools in rapidly developing areas. An example of this is the new 16 classroom primary school for Griffeen Valley Educate Together national school, Lucan, which was delivered through the use of a design and build contract within 13 months.
Some €73.5 million over five years, which is a relatively short period, is a significant amount of money to spend on a temporary facility. I accept there is a need for stop-gap measures. The amount of money decreased in 2004 but it climbed steadily in the four years preceding that. What is the average lifespan of a prefabricated building? Given that €12.7 million was spent in 2004, how many schools were provided with prefabricated accommodation? When will these schools get permanent accommodation? How long is it intended to use these stop-gap measures in schools?
Expenditure on prefabricated buildings amounts to just 5% of the €1.6 billion spent in recent years. The measure is used to ensure a speedy response in growing areas in particular. Many of these buildings are used throughout the country for children with special needs. A number of them have a very long lifespan and are of very good quality. In many instances, one would not recognise that the new ones are not a permanent solution. However, they are not designed to be a permanent solution, which is why the new initiative of allowing people funding is to allow them to decide whether they are able to build an extra classroom. Many schools are taking that option, which is encouraging. Unfortunately, there will always be a need for these buildings in order to provide extra space until new buildings are built.
Written answers follow Adjournment Debate.