asked the Minister for Education the plans he now has for the introduction of special trainee teachers into primary schools.
4.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Trainee Teachers.
3.
asked the Minister for Education if, in order to improve the teacher-pupil ratio, he will consider making arrangements for a special teacher training course for the hundreds of graduates who appear willing to take part in such a scheme.
5.
asked the Minister for Education if, in view of the disappointing consequences to many graduates following the failure of his graduate-teacher programme, he will make other plans for their employment within the scope of the education scheme.
With the permission of the Ceann Comhairle, I propose to take Questions Nos. 3, 4 and 5 together. I am in consultation at present with the organisations concerned, namely, the teachers, the colleges of education and the school managers, and I expect to be in a position to make a statement before the end of this week.
Is there any difference in the attitude of the INTO and of the teacher training colleges in regard to the 398 people who did the courses in September?
I do not understand the question: any difference as to what?
Is it a fact that only 144 of the 398 people who did the courses would have been entitled to go to a teacher training college as graduate students in any event, and does the Minister propose to make any differentiation between those 144 and the remainder when it comes to employment or to training courses?
The question the Deputy asked was if I had plans for the introduction of special trainee teachers. I have such plans and I will be making a statement on this matter before the end of this week.
Can I take it that in the consideration of this plan he will involve, or seek to involve, the 600 people who showed interest in his original scheme seeking to reduce the teacher/pupil ratio.
I am very pleased to be able to tell the Deputy that all the 398 people will be involved.
Will the Minister ask them to go to colleges of education for a full year of study prior to taking up teacher appointments?
The negotiations will be along those lines.
I am pleased the Minister has taken my advice.
Is it not extraordinary that having promised 600 extra teachers in primary schools we now find that less than a quarter of those involved are people who would be entitled to enter training colleges?
Can the Minister say how many of the people now teaching are being paid? Is he aware that quite a number of the people who have taken up positions have not received payment from the Department.
I am calling the next question.
I am raising a point of order. Question No. 5 refers to "disappointing consequences" and I submit that this is a most disappointing consequence.
I can assure the Deputy that there is no question of those people not being employed. We are carrying on negotiations to make sure that all the interests concerned will be fully behind their employment.
Will the Minister assure the House that these graduates will receive payment for the year they are in colleges?
That is my intention.
6.
asked the Minister for Education if he has had any consultations with the INTO prior to the announcement of his intention to introduce university graduates in primary schools.
7.
asked the Minister for Education the present position with regard to the employment of university graduates on a permanent basis in primary schools; and if he intends to pursue this policy.
With the permission of the Ceann Comhairle, I propose to take Questions Nos. 6 and 7 together.
It should be noted that there has for many years been an advertised competition annually for the admission of university graduates to a one-year course in a college of education to enable them to qualify for recognition as teachers in national schools on a permanent basis. It is the intention that such competitions should continue.
In the case of the special scheme for the employment of graduates as trainee teachers in national schools there were consultations with the INTO executive prior to the announcement of this scheme. In fact, the executive agreed to the scheme when I modified it to omit them in certain areas.
Can the Minister say why there was such an about-turn by the INTO and why the scheme was completely rejected later?
In the month of July the only effective people available for consultation were the democratically elected executive of the INTO. By a democratic process in accordance with their rules, the members of the INTO held a special congress which rejected the scheme as originally proposed. The distinction is quite clear. Anybody conversant with normal trade union procedure will understand what happened.
Does that imply that the executive were out of touch with the wishes of the ordinary members?
It is not part of my duty to reflect on the democratically elected executive of any trade union.
Does the Minister intend to have a similar scheme next year?
Deputy John Horgan is next.
I do not want to disobey a rule but I should like to comment on the supplementary question, if it pleases the Chair. The basic principle in our manifesto was that we were to improve the pupil-teacher ratio. Every possible avenue for the recruitment of trained teachers will be explored to ensure that the pupil-teacher ratio is improved.