Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 21 Jul 1965

Vol. 217 No. 11

Committee on Finance. - Vote 28—Office of the Minister for Education (Resumed).

Debate resumed on the following motion:
That a sum not exceeding £732,500 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, 1966, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Office of the Minister for Education (including Institutions of Science and Art), for certain Miscellaneous Educational and Cultural Services, and sundry Grants-in-Aid.—(Minister for Education.)

I do not intend to speak in any general way about education. Deputy Jones has dealt with this in a very comprehensive way, much more so than I could attempt to do. I should like, however, to make a few comments about educational facilities in my constituency in County Dublin. Development is taking place there at a very rapid rate. This continues, but the educational facilities being provided are not keeping pace with it. We had experience in certain areas less than a year ago where large numbers of children could not gain entry to primary schools because there were no schools available locally and the schools that were in existence were completely overcrowded.

Were it not for the advent of prefabricated schools and the co-operation of site owners in coming to the rescue at the eleventh hour—very much so in some cases—hundreds of children who needed admission to primary schools for the first time would not have been able to gain entry into any school unless their parents were prepared to send them long distances at considerable expense and at considerable anxiety for their safety.

I am afraid that there is a great lack of anticipation and of planning in relation to schools generally in an expanding area like County Dublin. There should be better liaison between the local authorities, the school managers and the vocational education authorities so that there would be a continuous survey in relation to population trends and the general need for educational facilities. I know that in many parts of rural Ireland the shoe is on the other foot—schools are emptying. Here we have not sufficient schools and the need for them is becoming a greater problem every day. It is extremely important that that problem be dealt with urgently. Even the schools we have are suffering from quite a degree of overcrowding.

No matter what the Minister may say about the supply of teachers, I submit it is totally inadequate. It has been said repeatedly that we have reached the stage where we have no class of more than 50 pupils. I ask the Minister to check that up because I personally do not believe it. As well as that, I still hold it is an impossibility for a teacher adequately to educate young children when there are 50 in the class. I do not believe—I do not say this lightly—that we have anything like classes of 50 with a fully trained teacher in charge all the time. There are many instances of teachers being absent for unavoidable reasons of one sort or another. There is no replacement and the children are just being minded, but not taught in the schools. That is no reflection at all on the teachers. They are an excellent body of people. I believe the whole trouble is that they are not coming up in sufficient numbers and are not available in sufficient numbers.

I know an effort is being made all the time to provide additional teachers. The demand for them is increasing all the time. I am not quite clear what exactly is the problem, whether it is that we have insufficient accommodation in the training schools, or whether it is we have not sufficient trainees coming up. If the problem is a question of accommodation, there should be a far greater effort made to provide suitable accommodation for the training of teachers because it is a definite and obvious loss to children, and something which they never catch up on, if they are in classes with too great a number of children, especially if they are not particularly bright children.

I always feel that, if anything, there is too much concern for the brilliant child and not enough concern for the backward child. The parents who are unfortunate enough to have a child who is inclined to be backward have a very big burden. The unfortunate child himself finds it difficult to make his way in the world. I have heard this sort of reference from time to time "for all children who can benefit". Will anybody show me the child who cannot benefit? It is a quite wrong reference to make or to use. When you say "for all children who can benefit" that includes every child. It includes even mentally handicapped children. They, too, can benefit. Therefore, it is a completely wrong phrase to use.

I spoke about the necessity for anticipating educational needs, the need for making a survey and for keeping that survey continuously under review. We, in County Dublin, who are members of the Vocational Education Committee, got a survey made about six months ago because we were anxious to build a number of extra vocational schools in County Dublin. The need is there and we wanted to supply the need.

It is deplorable, in a county where we hope to expand industrially and where the whole standard of living of the people in the county depends on industrial expansion and increased exports, and where they in turn depend on the technical skill and ability of the people who are going to operate these industries, that we are not as concerned as we should be to ensure that every area is fully supplied with vocational educational facilities. We have been unable to get any reply from the Department so far as to what is their reaction to that survey. The survey is sufficiently long with the Department for them to be able to say: "If we are to provide the facilities that should be provided you must have a school there, there and there and in the long term, schools so-and-so elsewhere."

We have one obvious area that is in existence for very many years. There is a teeming population there. This area, which is on the fringe of a highly industrialised area, is in Crumlin-Walkinstown. There is no school there. We went to a lot of trouble, of course, late in the day, to look for a site. That is always the difficulty in an area which is built. A community is formed and then we find that there is no central situation and no possible site for a school. Eventually, through, let me say, the generosity of a developer there, we got a suitable site but there is some difficulty with the landlord in relation to building a school on that site. We need to use compulsory powers in order to get that site.

I took this matter up with the Minister's predecessor and for some reason, at that time, he was not satisfied that it was necessary to proceed along those lines in order to secure the site. I would like to tell the Minister, and impress upon him, if we are to get sites in most of the areas, where the need is greatest in County Dublin, we will only be able to get those sites by compulsory purchase order. If we are denied those powers we will have no schools in those areas. I would like the Minister to appreciate that fact. We have the power and we should be allowed to use it as soon as possible. Otherwise we will be falling far behind, as we are at the moment, in providing vocational needs for the people whom we are expected to look after in those areas.

Whenever we place a proposal before the Department, the officers of the Department are very attentive to it. I know we had a case where it took us approximately three years from the time we submitted plans to the time we could say we could go ahead and build a school. That happened in Clondalkin and by the time we were ready to start building we found the school was only half big enough. This has been the practice all over the area. The question of economising in the size of schools is really deplorable.

We built a primary school in Clondalkin and, in spite of the fact that I had been with the Minister on a number of occasions to increase the size of the school—I know the school manager comes into this as well—and impress upon him the rapid rate of development taking place there and that the school was ridiculously small —there was deplorable overcrowding in that school—a year later we had to come to the aid of the school with a rush-up prefab in order to accommodate the children. This practice is repeated in almost every area in County Dublin.

There is no foresight in regard to the building of schools. The cost of building has enormously increased. Every year building costs are rocketing. Prices are increasing all the time. There is a lack of planning, foresight and liaison among the people who have the responsibility for providing educational facilities for the people. An effort should be made, in planning a community, to ensure that public buildings, such as schools, health centres, recreation centres, libraries and all other facilities should be the centre of the community. In many cases it would assist mothers who were taking children of tender years, perhaps, one to school and another to the health centre on the same morning, if they were close by. It would also be a great help from the point of view of school medical examinations if we had the health centres close to the primary schools. The examinations could go on without disrupting the work of the school.

I rose mainly to make those few comments in relation to the difficulties we are experiencing in County Dublin, and that are pretty general also, and to ask the Minister to pay some attention to them. I do not intend to speak in a general way because I know that if we are to leave this House tonight, we will have to curtail ourselves in the contributions we make.

I merely want to repeat what I have said on many occasions in the past. I want to ask the Minister to use his good offices to see that an extension of the night lectures at University College, Galway, is provided. The facilities are required; the demand is there. In an up and coming town like Galway, it should be provided. I should like the Minister to use his good offices if at all possible for that purpose.

I shall be equally brief because I know the situation in regard to time. I want to ask the Minister something which I asked his predecessor, and something which I think is of public importance. Will he produce the statue of George Bernard Shaw which is in the National Gallery for public display outside the National Gallery? This was a great Dublin man who contributed much in actual cash to the enhancement of the arts in this city. This splendid representation of him, which is now to be seen in a secluded alcove in the National Gallery, should be on public display. I cannot understand why this has not been done, because I understand from those who appreciate sculpture that this statue is of outstanding merit and design, and should be on public view.

Quite apart from that, for a long time I have campaigned to try to have the Shaw statue removed from seclusion and displayed in some place like St. Stephen's Green. Shaw had historic associations with the Green. He passed through it on his way to work when he worked in Molesworth Street, not far from this House. He may have been a controversial figure in other times. Some people may not have thought well of him, but he was a great humanitarian and a great Irishman. He spoke out for this country when there were few people to speak out for it. As we all know, he bequeathed very considerable sums of money—a substantial part of the income from My Fair Lady, for example—for the benefit of Dublin. The Minister is a Dublin man, and I am glad to see a Dublin man in that Department at long last. I ask him as a Dublin man to give sympathetic consideration to my suggestion.

I do not want to detain the House unnecessarily, but there are several points I want to raise which I have been trying to force home to the Minister and the Department by Parliamentary Question. It is not always as easy to express oneself by way of Parliamentary Question as it is in an Estimate debate.

First, I want to deal with the question of school transport. I do not think the Minister and the Department are realistic with regard to school transport. There are some archaic laws in existence which lay down that a person must have ten children, to start with, for a transport scheme and that the family must live within a certain distance of the school. I understand the position is that they must live within two miles of the school unless the children are between the ages of ten and 14 years. What happens if they live four or five miles from the school? Very often there is no school nearer. That is the type of scheme the Department have been operating for years, and are continuing to operate.

I want to point out that at the moment a certain amount of town and country planning is going on. Previously cottages were built in outlying districts but now they are being built around centres of population. There are still people living in outlying districts and they should get the consideration to which they are entitled. The reason they do not is that the bureaucratic grip that controls the country as a whole is pretty strong but is nowhere stronger than in the Department of Education, and refuses to allow any fresh thinking. I ask the Minister, as a new Minister, to break that bureaucratic grip and to introduce a proper up-to-date transport scheme so that people who live in districts remote from schools will have the opportunity of sharing in the benefits to which their more fortunate brethren are entitled. That is my first point, and I could enlarge on it, but as time is supposed to be limited, I shall pass on to the next question.

The next question is the question of retarded children. I do not believe the Department have any policy in regard to retarded children. I do not believe they have ever had a policy, nor do I believe that they have ever done any rational thinking on the subject outside the city of Dublin. I belong to a philanthropic organisation in my constituency. Many people who were interested got together and endeavoured to start a school. We were frustrated from start to finish by the Department and the then Minister refusing to have any consideration for us. We were told we had to have over 20 retarded children to start a school—21, I think it was. I pointed out in return to the Minister and his officials that it was quite impossible on the law of averages to get 20 retarded children within a rural district. Of course I got no satisfaction. I was told that if we had 40 children, they would give us assistance to start a school.

I should like the Minister to tell us is there any place in rural Ireland in which he would get 40 retarded children unless he went to a town with a population of, perhaps, over 10,000. Even in a town with a population of 10,000, on the ordinary law of averages which obtains all over the world you would not get that number of retarded children. I want to know what the Minister's policy is in this regard? Are retarded children still to be taught in ordinary schools as they have been throughout the years. The reply is an easy one: a commission has enquired into the subject and the Minister has not yet had time to study the report. I should like the Minister to remember that these children are growing. This procrastination and frustration have been going on and the children have been getting older. It is a source of anxiety to parents that the children are getting beyond the age for education.

The House is entitled to hear from the Minister what his policy is, and whether he proposes to permit schools to operate outside the city of Dublin and the bigger centres for this type of child who is less fortunate than his brothers. If he does not intend to do so, it would be better and fairer for him to tell the House and the country that he has no policy and intends to do nothing. I do not wish to blame the Minister directly. He has only taken over the Department but I do wish to point out that so far as any up-to-date thinking on the matter is concerned, it is entirely negative in so far as the Minister for Education and those who advise him are concerned.

The third point I want to raise is the question of the vocational school in the town of Wexford. Vocational education, as I am sure the Minister will accept in the age in which we are living, is becoming daily and hourly more important. Deputy Clinton also dealt before me with this matter in relation to County Dublin where he lives. We have in Wexford town, a town with a population of about 10,000. The vocational school in existence there at the moment is over 100 years old and cannot accommodate the pupils. It has no facilities such as central heating. Even if it were extensively renovated in every way possible, it would not meet the problem of today. In spite of repeated applications on behalf of the vocational education committee, of which I am not a member, this body has been told the school will be renovated and that a sum of £50,000 will be spent on it.

I want to point out to the Minister that expenditure of this £50,000 is total waste of money because, even if the money is expended and the building is renovated, it is not big enough to cater for the demand for vocational education in the area. Furthermore, there is a site immediately adjacent to the school which would take a new vocational school, big enough to provide for all the existing pupils and those who may come in the foreseeable future.

The last thing I want to refer to is fire-fighting. When we had newspapers in this country, and I hope we shall have them soon again, one hardly took up a newspaper without reading of some tragedy in relation to small children being burned, often at the expense of their lives, or being mutilated. Usually in these cases one reads that parents were called out and that small children were left in the house and very often there were children of schoolgoing age in the house. If they had been taught in school to deal with fire and fire-fighting, they would perhaps save themselves.

This is a matter I have been repeatedly raising in this House by way of Parliamentary Question. Indeed, it is nearly as old a theory as the helicopters and the Naval Service. Had the different Ministers for Education considered allowing fire-fighting training in the schools, valuable lives would have been saved. It is a very necessary training. Ten minutes a week would be sufficient to deal with the question and lives would not be lost. I should like to ask the Minister to give that consideration as well.

Ba mhaith liom i dtosach mo bhuíochas a chur in iúl do na Teachtaí i ngeall ar an tslí réasúnta inar chuireadar chuig díospóireacht na bliana so ar chúrsaí oideachais. Tá sé an-fhuirist bheith ag fáil locht ach rud eile is ea é gníomh cinnte chun feabhais a mholadh. Ba bhreá liom a thabhairt faoi ndeara nár chualamar oiread sin den lochtú agus gur léir go raibh fonn ar na Teachtaí a labhair nithe a chabhródh, dar leo, leis an oideachas a chur os ár gcomhair. Ní féidir liom tagairt a dhéanamh do gach aon phointe ach ní h-ionann san is a rá nach bhfuil nóta déanta agam díobh. Ós i mBéarla a pléadh furmhór na bpointí, tá mé, ó thaobh cuirtéise dhe, chun freagra do thabhairt orthu i mBéarla.

As I have just said, I want to express my appreciation to the Deputies who spoke on this Estimate for the constructive way generally they have approached the problem of education in this country. Very many points were raised. I cannot hope to deal with all of them but I do want to make it clear that the fact that I do not deal with certain points does not mean I am paying no attention to them. Perhaps I might be forgiven if I start by taking up with Deputy Esmonde the rather strong strictures he made on the Department of Education and which he developed into a stricture on bureaucracy which he said was exemplified and typified in the Department of Education. He was speaking of the school transport services.

It appears to me that Deputy Esmonde has got the wrong end of the stick in this regard. He said the regulations forbid the provision of transport for people living beyond a certain distance from a school. In fact, the opposite is the case. The restrictions do not allow for transport for children living within three miles of a school where they are between the ages of five and ten years, and four miles where they are over ten years of age. Therefore, it is the exact opposite of what Deputy Esmonde was saying. I feel that strictures based on these misconceptions were perhaps unwarranted.

Deputy Jones made a very comprehensive and constructive speech. I should like to refer to a few points he made. He referred to the subject of civics. We all agree that civics are desirable in the schools. As I mentioned in my Estimate speech we are a little further than saying they are desirable. We are doing something about them. Civics will be on the course very shortly in secondary and vocational schools and will be on the course also in the national schools, if certain negotiations which have to take place between my Department and the national teachers are successfully concluded, as I have no doubt they will be.

Deputy Jones said that civics are admirable but he asked where teachers would find time for these things in the curriculum. I should like to point out that as far as I know we have in our primary schools the shortest school-day in Europe. I think recognition of this fact by all concerned should enable us to evolve a satisfactory solution to the problem of finding time for such subjects as civics, physical education and environmental studies.

The question of the supply of teachers was raised by Deputy Jones and by, I think, Deputy Clinton. I should like to point out that dealing with a problem like this is somewhat of a long-term nature. My predecessor took the necessary steps to deal with it, as a result of which a building scheme is taking place in St. Patrick's Training College. As a result of this additional accommodation, we will be turning out annually 150 teachers more than our normal requirements. We shall start on this next year and all these additional teachers will be used to improve the pupil/teacher ratio.

Deputy Jones mentioned one point which I mentioned when speaking on this Estimate in another capacity, that is, the necessity to develop the critical faculty amongst our children. This, I think, is of very great importance. I feel that there are many things we can do to develop these. It is important that we should realise that when schools encourage their children in such things as debates, drama, wide reading outside the course, and so on, they are contributing very much to developing the critical faculty and should be encouraged to do so.

The provision of an assembly hall in a school is a great aid to widening the scope of the education available. This is one of the reasons we insist, when we give grants for secondary schools, on the provision of an assembly hall in the school.

Deputy O'Leary made a number of points but one of them I want to take up with him, concerning something I said in introducing my Estimate. I said we are frequently criticised in regard to our educational system and that we do not give credit where we are perhaps slightly ahead of others. He seemed to cast doubt on the possibility that we could be ahead of others on any aspect. There are some aspects in which we are ahead. I will mention one of them. Since 1958, we do not recruit any untrained teachers. As far as I know, we are the only country in Europe and perhaps the only country in the world which can claim this.

Deputy O'Leary referred to our educational system as being too compartmentalised. I agree with him thoroughly and referred to it in introducing my Estimate. My efforts have been and will be directed to getting rid of that compartmentalisation, in so far as it appears to retard our educational process.

Deputy O'Leary also referred to the fact that education, other than primary education, is not available to all children. I feel that it is of prime necessity —I also mentioned this in introducing my Estimate—that we direct our efforts to ensure that post-primary education is available to all our children. I want to tell the Dáil a little more about the methods I propose to use in dealing with this problem.

I should say that the Department of Education under my predecessor was carrying out a survey which is being continued at present and which, when completed, will enable us to say, in regard to any particular area in the country, what the approximate post-primary school-going population is and is likely to be at different years ahead; what post-primary facilities exist there at present—and this includes vocational and secondary schools and in some cases it may include space available in primary school buildings; what language laboratories we have and the science teachers, art teachers, music teachers, people who are in short supply, we have, so that we shall be able to say, in relation to any area, what it needs for post-primary education for all the children; what it has at the moment and what is needed to add to that in order to provide for that area.

It seems clear to me, if one is to be practical in approaching this problem, that we must build on the basis of our existing facilities. Therefore, what we have to do is to say, in a case, for instance, where a secondary school has a science laboratory and an adjoining vocational school has not, that the students of the vocational school doing science should be enabled to use that science laboratory and vice versa. Further, where there is a science teacher available he should be made available to all the children and not merely to those in the particular school in which he is employed at present. Where necessary, we should add to an existing vocational school or an existing secondary school in order to provide the necessary facilities for that area as shown by the survey.

I want to stress that this scheme envisages the provision of what we know as the academic secondary education in the vocational schools as well as in the secondary schools. It also visualises the provision of much of the kind of training given in vocational schools in the secondary schools—in other words, both the vocational and the secondary schools will, I hope, tend to lean towards the comprehensive system and, by full utilisation of all our existing resources, we can, with some confidence, tackle the problem of providing post-primary education for all our children.

At the moment, the national average is that one-third of our children do not receive post-primary education; two-thirds do. But, of course, in certain areas the proportion who do not receive post-primary education would be much higher than that. This is something which I think is of great urgency and which I am tackling on the basis I have mentioned.

I also want to mention that in my opinion the existing courses available in either a secondary school or a vocational school do not suit the needs of all our children. There is a third stream, a stream of children whose aptitudes and intelligence are such that many of them in secondary schools will pass the Intermediate and Leaving Certificates but the courses provided for them are not adequate to their requirements or to the kind of life they will lead when they go out into the world. There are also the same type of children in vocational schools. I want to see that we will provide courses to suit these children.

It should be clear to the House, I think, that my approach to this is based on utilising what we have as best we can, as efficiently as we can, without regard to the divisions between our various sections of education which have existed, for historical reasons, in the past. By this, I do not mean that we want to abolish the existing systems but we want them to adjust to the requirements of the nation and where distinctions exist for no reason other than the fact that they are there we want to get rid of those distinctions.

Reference was made by a number of Deputies to the necessity for vocational guidance. In introducing my Estimate, I indicated that the employment of four psychologists in the Department of Education is, I hope, a first step in dealing with the problem of vocational guidance which consists basically of two difficulties: (1) the ascertaining of the children's aptitudes and capabilities and (2) the provision of knowledge for the children and their parents of what positions, jobs, openings are available for the children who have the particular aptitudes. The engagement of the psychologists is the beginning of what I hope will eventually be a service which will be available to all our children and to their parents to indicate as accurately as this can be done the aptitudes and intelligence which the children have and the general kind of occupation they ought to follow. The next step, then, is the provision of information for the parents and the children, and, having been given that information, what opportunities are available. A good deal of work will have to take place on this but I regard it as a matter of some importance and intend to see that we will make progress in that regard.

A number of Deputies, including Deputy O'Leary, but he was not the only one, referred to my statement in introducing the Estimate about the proposal to double the amount of scholarships. I want to point out it was my predecessor in office who, by way of the Scholarships Act, 1961, was the first to provide Exchequer assistance to local authorities in providing scholarships. As a result of that Act, the number of scholarships then available was trebled. As I have already said, I now propose to double the existing number.

Having said that in my Estimate speech, I said something else which all the Deputies who have referred to this seem to have ignored. I said: "The number of scholarships expected as a result of the foregoing grants are based on the proposed amendment of the 1961 Act only and do not include the possibility of other measures to increase the number of scholarships." This last sentence was utterly ignored. I want to point out to the House that this is not the last word on scholarships at all. Our ability to increase the number of scholarships available will be dependent on the degree of economic progress this country makes. This is a matter we might all do well to consider when we are talking of economics, industrial relations and other matters. Our ability to increase our educational provision is vital for the future of our people.

Deputy Briscoe, in a maiden speech on which I should like to congratulate him—it was a very thoughtful one— referred to the necessity for the production of books suitable for this country. I am glad to be able to tell him and the House that the school library scheme is already giving the necessary encouragement to some of our publishers to embark on the production of such books.

Deputy James Tully referred to the school libraries and said he hoped they would not be just reference libraries. In fact, they will be, as he said, just reference libraries. But I think he may be under a misapprehension about them. Already in the areas in which these school reference libraries exist the results obtained have been most impressive and encouraging. I have already referred to Limerick, and I hope I will be forgiven if I refer to it again. I have seen the results there and have been most impressed by what has happened. As a result of close co-operation between the city of Limerick and the county of Limerick librarians and the schools, there has been developed a phenomenal interest in books among young children, who have been encouraged to take on projects based on the reading they do and produce work based on these projects. I personally have found the results most encouraging. We have had similar good results in other areas. The object of providing the reference libraries is of course to enable teachers to train children how to use books and, in co-operation with the local libraries, to encourage the children to go further and use the books available in the local libraries.

Is the Minister aware that for the exhibition to be given to teachers in the counties just starting the local libraries have been asked to buy £200 worth of books? Would the Department be able to make any subvention to that? Otherwise, the scheme will be a failure.

No, I am not aware of what the Deputy mentions.

That is the position.

As far as the Department are concerned, we have had, with the willing co-operation of the British Ministry of Education, a school inspector over there studying what is being done in Britain in regard to school libraries. In the training colleges, I have authorised the appointment of lecturers in school librarianship. Courses are also being made available to trainee teachers in the use of library books. It is a matter of very considerable importance that all children should be educated in the use of books. This is real education and, as far as I can encourage this, I intend to do so.

The Minister will appreciate that out of a total sum of £800 for books for the whole year, a library committee could not buy £200 worth of books for the purpose of starting this reference library?

I wonder are we talking about the same thing? The reference library to which I am referring is one provided in the schools by the Department of Education and at the expense of the Department of Education.

The original exhibition for the teachers is at local library level and the books must be supplied by the local committee and not the Department.

Perhaps the Minister would be allowed to conclude?

I have an idea the Deputy and I are speaking of different things. I shall look into it. If I find what the Deputy says is correct, I will communicate with him.

I will give the Minister particulars afterwards by letter.

Deputy P. Hogan requested information as to the number of secondary school science laboratories in respect of which equipment grants had been given and the total amount of these grants. The relevant figures to date are 57 and the sum involved £68,515. There are many other allocations at various stages of being dealt with in the Department.

Another point to which Deputy P. Hogan and others referred was the amount of the State contribution in regard to the Scholarships Act vis-à-vis that of local authorities. I want to make it clear that, if the equivalent of the produce of a rate of 2d in the £ has been reached, the State contribution is not one for one but one and a half for one.

Another point I should perhaps mention, because judging by some of the statements made, there is some confusion about it, is that the 1961 Act also provides that the total sum for post-primary scholarships shall be double that for university scholarships. This is an equitable distribution, having regard, on the one hand, to the numbers pursuing post-primary education and, on the other, to the numbers pursuing university education and the relative cost of the two forms of education.

I should like to thank Deputy James Tully, particularly since he is now present, for his very gracious remarks and the compliments he paid me. I appreciate them. He asked me how many secondary schools were availing themselves of school television and the answer is 350. There was also a reference by the Deputy, which was then topical, to the examinations and the bus strike. I am glad to be able to tell him and the House that we have not had even one instance reported of a pupil having missed the Intermediate or Leaving Certificate examinations as a result of the bus strike.

They certainly earned their certificates this year!

Another question the Deputy raised was whether the sum of £3 7s 6d in respect of industrial school pupils was the total amount payable. The answer is no. The teaching costs are paid for separately.

Deputy Tully also referred to what he thought was a practice of school managers who were in the process of getting new schools and who allowed the school to deteriorate while waiting for the new one in the belief that, if they did it up, they would lose their place in the queue. There is no basis at all for that. The Department never used the fact that a school has been temporarily repaired as a reason for changing its place in the queue. It does of course sometimes happen from the manager's point of view that, once he has applied for a grant and got sanction, he says it is not worth spending money on this and does not do it, but if he does so in the belief that it will hold him back in getting a new school, he is mistaken.

Deputy Moore made an appeal to our industrialists to be more generous in providing money for scholarships. I should like to endorse that plea heartily. While some of our industrial firms have given a fair measure of support to educational activities, there is very much more scope for this and, indeed, as some Deputy pointed out, some of the activities in which industrial firms indulge for the purpose of publicity, presumably, could with justice be described as being of lesser importance than the work they could do for the country by endowing educational activities, particularly scholarships. I should like to add my voice to that of Deputy Moore in appealing to industrial firms to consider this idea as a very useful way in which they could help the country from which they are making their profits, with no disadvantage to themselves from the point of view of income tax.

Reference was made to the question of Irish in the schools. I do not want to develop this topic but there is one aspect of it I want to mention. It has come to my notice that in the case of Irish people who emigrated and then were able to return here and whose children were educated for some time abroad, these children, on attending Irish schools, were very much behind children of their own age group in the matter of Irish and found it very difficult to catch up and, therefore, were unable to sit for the Intermediate Certificate examination and were obliged to pass in Irish in the Leaving Certificate examination. This in some cases proved impossible, through no fault of their own.

I have given a great deal of thought to this matter and have come to the conclusion that to ask the children I have in mind to make up Irish from scratch in a short time is unfair to them in relation to their fellow pupils. In addition, there is the consideration that to do so is liable to create in the minds of these children and of their parents a resentment which in the long run might do harm to the cause of the language which would perhaps outweigh any advantage that might otherwise accrue. In these circumstances, I have decided that from now on such children may, if their parents so wish, select another language instead of Irish for the purpose of recognition generally and for the award of the Intermediate and Leaving Certificates.

Does that apply only to children who have received their earlier education abroad?

Yes, and who have received it while their parents or guardians were abroad. It does not apply to Irish people who send their children abroad for education. If they wish to do that, they are entitled to do so.

And the Six Counties would be considered "abroad"?

No. I made a reference when introducing the Estimate to the necessity to have another look at the problem of small national schools and since then I have been having another look at the problem. It seems to me quite clear that we have to take a very firm decision on this matter of the small schools. For quite some time the Department have not been building one-teacher schools except in the case of schools for minority religions who are in a special case but we in the Department of Education have good reason to believe that in the case of small one-teacher and two-teacher schools, in general the educational attainment of the children is, on average, two years behind that of children in larger schools.

This is a very serious matter. Consequently, I have made up my mind that it is a matter I will do something about. I know we are going to run into considerable opposition, most of which will be based on misguided sentiment, and I would appeal to Deputies to consider the interests of the children and not to lend support to the kind of agitation which will arise and which has arisen in cases such as this. I would remind Deputies on the Fine Gael Benches that Deputy Dillon, when he was Leader of their Party, on numerous occasions expounded the view that it was necessary to have larger schools.

The problem is, of course, that a teacher, no matter how good he is, if he is trying to cover all classes, just cannot do this. It is not physically possible. Therefore, I intend, in so far as it is feasible to do it, where, say, the question of building a new school arises or where a teacher is retiring, to examine the position in each case to see if it would not be possible, instead of building a new school or replacing the teacher, to have the children attending that school attend a central school, to enable us to have a bigger school with more teachers, if possible, one teacher to each class. This, of course, implies the provision by the State of transport for the children concerned. This is an absolutely necessary element and will be carried out. I do not think I need dwell further on that matter, except again to appeal to Deputies, when the objections come, as they will, to remember that the educational interests of the children concerned are involved and not to allow sentiment to stand in the way.

May I put a question to the Minister at this stage on that point? Does the Minister imply at this stage in regard to a two-teacher school whether a boys' school or a girls' school, that the standard of the pupils is, on average, two years behind the standard in the ordinary school? Is the Minister making that assertion now?

No. Perhaps I may have been—not intentionally—slightly misleading in what I said. The two years refers actually to one-teacher schools but the two-teacher schools present, not quite in as acute a form, the same problem.

And they are losing pupils to the bigger schools.

Yes, because the parents are realising that what I have said is true and are sending their children to the bigger schools. I should also mention that so far as the teachers involved in the closing of these schools are concerned, they will not lose. For instance, a principal teacher in one of these schools who as a result of this arrangement goes into a central school will be what is known as a privileged assistant, that is, he will retain all his allowances. He will not lose money as a result of this arrangement.

Would the Minister agree that perhaps some of that comes from the fact, not necessarily in any sense a fault of the teacher, from the small numbers, that pupils are losing competitiveness? If there is only one teacher, there must be a small number of pupils. It is as much a problem of the children not having the competitive spirit amongst themselves to the same degree as would exist in bigger schools?

This could well be a factor, although there is the obvious difficulty for a teacher of teaching all the classes at one time.

That is exactly the trouble.

I will not deny that what Deputy Dockrell has said is undoubtedly a factor.

This is what Fine Gael have advocated on many occasions, as the Minister has pointed out.

Deputy Dillon pointed it out, as Leader of the Party.

I did, too. We will always find the individual school and have no option but to make representations when requested but the policy adumbrated by the Minister is one that Fine Gael have been advocating.

I feel that I will have the full support of Deputy O'Donnell in any such case.

You certainly will.

I do not wish to delay the House unduly but there are one or two other matters I want to mention. First, the training of teachers of all kinds is something we intend to have another look at. There are many things about it that we might consider improving. It is a very technical matter and not something on which the Department of Education as such is going to make up its mind. We hope to get outside expert advice on this matter.

Examination techniques are also matters that will have to be looked at, that is, whether we are putting the right questions in the examinations, whether the examinations are doing what they are supposed to do, whether they are tending to cramp the education being provided for children. There are very big questions involved here but I do intend to examine this whole matter of examination techniques and see if we can devise a system which would be, perhaps, more efficient, better suited to what we are trying to do and not have the effect of cramping courses in certain schools.

Deputy Clinton raised a question as to what is happening in County Dublin. I am sure what I said at the beginning about the survey we are carrying out in the Department will reassure him that we are alive to the problem and are working on it. I should mention that the development section in my Department, the setting up of which I announced in introducing the Estimate, will have as one of its functions the completion of this survey, the assessment of the results and the application of those results then all over the country.

The question he mentioned of compulsory purchase powers is one I intend to look into. I do not want to say "yes" or "no" at the moment. He also complained that primary schools in built-up areas are being built too small and that prefabricated buildings have had to be added. I do not suggest that what I am about to say is true in all cases but experience has shown that in a newly-built area the school-going population in the early years rises to a crescendo and then starts levelling off. Eventually it levels off at a fairly steady pace for the remainder of the life of the school. It seems from a long-term point of view the best way to deal with the problem is to build the school to the size at which it will level off and deal with the situation at the beginning by means of prefabricated buildings which can be moved to the next school that is being built. What Deputy Clinton described as lack of planning and foresight may, in fact, be an example of planning and foresight.

I will not agree in all cases.

I think I have had the indulgence of the House for long enough, having regard to the circumstances existing.

Would the Minister like to say anything about the Commission on Higher Education?

I have not got the report. I hope to get it about autumn but until I do, I cannot comment.

Vote put and agreed to.
Top
Share