Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 2 Jun 1942

Vol. 87 No. 7

Committee on Finance. - Vote 46—Primary Education.

Tairgim:—

Go ndeontar suim ná raghaidh thar £2,358,837 chun slánuithe na suime is gá chun íoctha an Mhuirir a thiocfaidh chun bheith iníoctha i rith na bliana dar críoch an 31adh lá de Mhárta, 1943, chun Bun-Oideachais, maraon le hAois-liúntas Múinteoirí Scoile Náisiúnta agus Deontas-i-gCabhair, etc.

That a sum not exceeding £2,358,837 be granted to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1943, for Primary Education, including National School Teachers' Superannuation, and a Grant-in-Aid, etc.

I should like to ask the Minister a question. On the 20th May, I addressed a question to the Minister, in respect of a certain number of schools in the City of Dublin, as to the attendance at each class and the number on the roll at the last normal date on which the information was available.

I asked yesterday about certain information which I got this morning. I mentioned the intention for which I wanted it. I desire to draw the Minister's attention to the following facts: In the Central Model infants' national school we find that the junior infants are divided into two classes, with 80 pupils on roll in the first class and 61 in the next. In that school you have nine classes. In every one of them there are more than 50 children on the roll. In the Model School (girls) you have 13 classes, and in four of these there are more than 50 on the roll. In Gardiner Street convent school there are 27 classes. In 14 of the classes there are more than 50 children on the roll. In seven of these classes there are more than 60 on the roll, and in three more than 80. In one class there are 86 on the roll, in another 82, and in another 88. In St. Vincent's (senior) girls' school, North William Street, there are more than 50 children on the roll in eight out of the 15 classes. In the junior infants there are 111 children on the roll. 89 children were in attendance on the date on which the information was given to me. A note on the return states that the number on roll in April was from 65 to 67 on the average, and that since May the number had increased to 111. In the North William Street convent boys' school, there are more than 50 children on the roll in ten out of the 14 classes. Two of these are junior infant classes. In the first junior infant class there are 94 on the roll, and 75 were in attendance on the date on which the information was given. In the second class, 76 are on the roll. 57 were in attendance on the date on which the information was given. In the Girls' Lower Rutland Street school there are more than 50 on the roll in four out of nine classes. In the infant girls' school, Lower Rutland Street, there are more than 50 on roll in six out of the seven classes. In the senior infant classes you have 67, 62 and 63 in classes. In the Pro-Cathedral boys' national school, you have more than 50 on the roll in five out of ten classes. In the Pro-Cathedral infant boys' school you have more than 50 on the roll in five out of eight classes. In three of these classes you have more than 60 on roll. There are two classes in which there are more than 80. In St. Patrick's No. 1 boys' school, there are more than 50 on roll in six out of 14 classes, and in three of these you have more than 60 on roll. In one class there are 75 on roll. The attendance on the date for which the information was given was 66.

Quite apart altogether from anything which has been said by the Minister with regard to his policy for the use of Irish in infant schools, and quite apart from the ideal that he held up before us this evening, if the children in these classes were being looked after by their mothers, will the Minister seriously tell us, when we consider what primary education means for such a large number of the people in the City of Dublin, that we can afford to have the basis of our primary education laid on classes of over 50, of 60 and of 82 in the case of infants? Will he tell us what is happening in this city when we find in a school in this city that you can have 111 infants on the roll in one class?

I dealt with most of the points raised by Deputy O'Sullivan yesterday. I do not think he was present when I was replying. Even so, I do not think it is necessary that I should repeat what I said regarding the school-leaving age and the inspection system in secondary schools. We have not enough inspectors to test the work as thoroughly as we would wish. His ideal appeared to be to have specialists in particular subjects. I am afraid that is a long way off, because we have not the numbers, I fear, in our small schools to make such a thing possible, unless very great financial inducements are given.

I never asked for specialists. I asked for people with some qualifications in the subject which is a very different thing.

Take history for example. I do not know what qualifications the Deputy has in mind. We are going into the whole question on the basis of having a university degree as a requisite before a teacher can be recognised as a secondary teacher.

The point I raised was that a person can teach history, for instance, without producing any proof that he has ever studied history. I never asked that he should be a specialist.

What the Deputy expects is that a teacher should have pursued a course in the university?

History can be taken as one of the subjects for the B.A. degree, and as a minor subject for an Honours degree.

The Deputy, I take it, means some proof of knowledge by examination?

That would be the obvious proof.

The position is that we have intimated to the schools and to the association that we propose to take action on this matter, but no official decision has been reached. At the same time we have asked the schools to give us certain information, particularly as regards the qualifications of new teachers coming in. When we get that information, during the next school year, we will be in a better position to judge what progress will be necessary. As the Deputy knows, it will take some time, even with the best will in the world, to get this matter settled, and no matter what proposals we put up the schools will have to be given reasonable time to make arrangements. I hope the Chair will grant me indulgence to deal with a matter that really does not arise on this Vote. It is the matter of county histories. Four have been published, and four more are in course of preparation. It was never intended that they should be used as school texts. The object is to give information of a fairly specialised character to readers interested in local history. I feel also that these books might be used as handbooks by teachers and that they will have a certain appeal to teachers. Such books have been published in Great Britain, for example, and have been used there and elsewhere by teachers.

I asked the Minister also whether these books had been used. How far have they been used by teachers to brush up their knowledge of local history which is more or less brought to their notice by the instructions the Department issues? Have they actually been used to a large extent by teachers for that purpose?

I could not say.

Surely the inspectors would know.

I have not asked the inspectors.

We will give the Minister an opportunity of asking the inspectors.

I should like the Minister to be given a chance of saying something about the size of the classes in primary schools.

If the position is as is represented to me by the inspectors who have been making inquiries very recently into the matter—that there is an influx at this period of the year, that infant classes have doubled in size in many cases, and that on the 1st July when the new school year commences that situation has ended as the infants pass up to the first standard, or from junior infants to senior infants —then I do not see how we can make new arrangements for staffing classes on the basis of an entirely temporary matter which only occurs for a few months in the year.

How many months?

The inspectors, who at least ought to know as much about this matter as the Deputy, stated in the most categorical terms, as I stated in the House yesterday, that no educational disadvantage accrues from this temporary influx and temporary swelling of numbers in the infant schools.

The Minister says for a few months. I ask for how many months.

Possibly from some time in April to the 1st July. The pupils may be coming in at all stages during that period.

Does the Minister suggest that it is possible from April to 1st July to have classes in the City of Dublin for 60, 70, 80 and, at least in one case, 111 pupils?

Is the Minister suggesting that this problem of overcrowded classes in the City of Dublin only occurs occasionally? It is an old-standing problem. Apparently the Minister is not aware of it, or his inspectors either.

This is not the first occasion on which the matter has been raised.

That is why I take it so seriously.

It seems new to the Minister.

It is not new to the Minister. The Minister has discussed it with the inspectors.

And they are satisfied?

They are satisfied that for the past three years—not this year —there is no serious problem of large classes in Dublin, unless the situation has changed since Deputy Mulcahy put down his question. I have not had an opportunity of going into the figures closely. I only got them to-day.

Is the Minister aware that on the date on which the last information was provided, in a small section of the city, probably one-fifth of the city, there were eight classes with over 80, and of those one was 91, another 94, and another 111? Will he say what kind of work can be done in that class?

Will the Minister say if there is any policy in his Department with regard to assisting in the editing or writing of textbooks by inspectors of his Department?

I understand that some inspectors have written textbooks, but it is not a practice that I favour. I do not know that recently inspectors have been doing that. There have been a few cases in the past where inspectors have edited textbooks for private publishers. We discouraged the publication of textbooks by primary school inspectors. I think a definite instruction has been given in that matter.

There are approved lists of textbooks sent out to the schools. Are the textbooks edited or written by inspectors definitely removed from these lists of approved books?

I do not think so.

The reason is not due to any interest we may have in the inspectors. It may be due to the fact that there is a scarcity of alternatives to the particular book, for example, or it may be due to the fact that publishers have entered into commitments and we enabled them to try to work off the stocks which they held. But, if there are books by inspectors on the list, I am sure the officers of my Department who deal with that matter are only too anxious to get them off, if we can do so without creating harm or hurt elsewhere. Certainly we will not keep them on to advantage the inspectors. That is not the idea.

The Minister realises that it is to the advantage of the inspectors at the moment. With regard to the question of commitments of publishers, the Minister is surely aware that most of these books, certainly the most important ones, have been published and republished. They have been issued and reissued from time to time. There is no question of doing any hurt to any inspector who has indulged in this extra form of emolument. They have benefited to a great extent in years past. I take it that there is a policy of removing such texts from the list of approved books and I am glad to be assured that this is to be done.

If there are suitable textbooks available. If there are not, the Deputy will recognise that we are in a difficulty.

I take it that the Minister will even hold out an inducement to other people to edit such textbooks on the basis that they will be preferred to the ones written by the inspectors?

Yes. The only question would be the standard—that they would be of a standard which would be passed by the inspector dealing with textbooks.

Will the inspector who happens to test the standard be the competing inspector?

We will look after that.

It is not the inspector?

That is the fear which people have who wish to deal with these textbooks—that the inspector has a certain preference. That is why I want a statement that the people who set themselves to edit or write textbooks ordinarily in use will, in fact, be preferred to the inspector, everything else being equal.

Yes, certainly.

Vote put and agreed to.
Top
Share