asked the Minister for Education if she will state the average student-teacher ratio in primary schools in (a) national and (b) Dublin schools.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Pupil-Teacher Ratio.
9.
The pupil-teacher ratio in national schools for the school year 1981-82 was as follows: (a) National average 27.9; (b) Average in Dublin schools 27.0.
Is the national average inclusive or exclusive of Dublin?
My information is that the national average is inclusive of Dublin.
Supposing we were to exclude Dublin, could the Minister say from figures she has whether it would be less attractive in Dublin schools than elsewhere?
That is a different question.
I do not have that information.
Would the Minister agree that national averages do not give a true picture of the situation in national schools?
I agree with the Deputy that averages are always open to various kinds of interpretation.
Would the Minister agree, in case the media assumes that we have an exceptionally good situation in relation to primary schools, that when we say the average is 27.9 students per teacher, that is far from being the case? I accept that the Minister has replied to the question asked but her answer might be misinterpreted.
I fully accept what the Deputy has said and if he would like to put down detailed questions on various schools I will get the information he requires.
Is the Minister satisfied with the national average and, if not, what would she consider to be a satisfactory average?
I would not like to go into detail but I agree that the question of pupil-teacher ratio in primary schools has been a matter for concern to successive Governments and we are anxious to continue the process of decreasing the pupil-teacher ratio. I have that matter constantly under review in the Department. I would like to see the pupil-teacher ratio coming down as soon as possible.
Is it the Minister's policy to reduce the pupil-teacher ratio in primary schools?
Yes.
Could I ask the Minister why, if that is her policy in primary schools, it is not equally her policy to increase the pupil-teacher ratio in post-primary schools?
Surely the Minister has a point of view on the question I asked? She did not indicate what she considers to be the proper teacher-pupil ratio. Has she a private view which she could now make public?
I am sure the Deputy realises that there are many views on the ideal pupil-teacher ratio. There are views being expressed in some areas that the pupil-teacher ratio may not be such a definite guideline towards excellence of learning as it was always considered to be in the past. However, I make that remark purely because I read something to that effect recently. I would like to assure the Deputy that I am taking into consideration all the views on pupil-teacher ratio and when I reach a conclusion in that regard I will act on it as soon as possible.
I am not attributing the faults of the past to the Minister, I am simply looking for her views. The Minister has already indicated that third level students receive benefits five times in excess of those given to other students. We all know the majority of children in working-class areas never reach that level, even though their parents are the main contributors to the fund. Does the Minister not accept that she should be looking to a situation where there should be discrimination now at primary school level in favour of those children who are described as working class but who are, in fact, the children of tax-paying parents?
The question of access to third level education is one of great concern to us, as I know it is to the Deputy. The whole question of the funding of education at all levels is under review.
A final supplementary, please.
Would the Minister accept that there are other circumstances which militate against certain students ever reaching third level education and that the facts and figures which she gave here are certainly not going to remedy that situation?
That question is going into a whole, different psychological area.