asked the Minister for Education if he will state why recognition of the Respondency of Trinity College, Dublin, as the equivalent of an honours degree for the purposes of the award of the special honours degree increment of salary under the secondary teachers' salary scheme was withdrawn without any notice by the Department of Education, said recognition having been granted for the preceding ten years; and if he will state why he refused to receive a deputation from the Schoolmasters' Association and the Association of Secondary Teachers to discuss the matter, in view of the objection of the teachers to the absence of notice that the Department intended taking the action referred to; and if he will state why notice was not given.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Teachers' Salary Increments—Trinity College Respondency.
The recognition of the Respondency of Trinity College, Dublin, as the equivalent of an honours degree for the purposes of the award of the special honours degree increments of salary under the rules for the payment of incremental salary to secondary teachers was withdrawn because my Department, on consideration of the question, came to the conclusion that this qualification, which is a grading of the pass B.A. degree of the University of Dublin, is not the equivalent of a first or second class honours degree as contemplated under the rules, and the Department could not continue a position which conferred a privilege upon pass graduates of the University of Dublin, which is denied to graduates of other Universities. It is understood that students who hope to be classified as Respondents do not require to undertake any special course of study for the purpose, apart from the ordinary pass courses of the University, and since only one application for the recognition of the Respondency was received by the Department during the period of nine years preceding the date on which recognition was withdrawn, there seemed to be no serious necessity for giving notice of the alteration or delaying the rectification of the position.
The Department's decision has been explained in correspondence with the associations mentioned in the Deputy's question, and in the circumstances I did not consider that any useful purpose would be served by discussing the matter further with the suggested deputation.
Inasmuch as this degree has been recognised since 1926 with a full knowledge of the position, and since the status of the degree has undergone no change since then, does not the Minister appreciate that the withdrawal of the recognition constitutes a serious hardship on teachers who obtained that degree in preceding years? I wonder would the Minister see his way to mitigate that hardship by at least restoring the recognition for the current year? Will the Minister see myself or Deputy Professor Thrift on the matter?
Yes.