Vol. 443 No. 4
10 Mr. R. Bruton asked the Minister for Education the incentives if any, she intends to provide to ensure the maximum take-up of in-service courses by teachers in view of the increase in the budget allocation for in-service education; and the provision, if any, she intends to make for the absence of teachers from school to attend such courses.
33 Mr. Currie asked the Minister for Education the incentives if any, she intends to provide to ensure the maximum take-up of in-service courses by teachers in view of the increase in the budget allocation for in-service education; and the provision, if any, she intends to make for the absence of teachers from school to attend such courses.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 10 and 33 together.
The Programme for a Partnership Government states that the Government will provide an extended and strengthened in-career development programme for teachers. As Minister for Education, I have announced a programme of in-career development which will meet the needs of the education system and the needs of schools and individual teachers. The programme is being put in place in consultation with the two representative advisory committees — one for primary and one for second-level — which I have established to advise and recommend on all aspects of teacher in-career development. I am confident that teachers will be prepared to fully participate in the programme.
Among the incentives being offered to teachers at present are extra personal vacations for primary teachers arising from attendance at summer in-career development courses; travel and subistence for attending certain courses; no course fees in respect of attendance at certain categories of courses; accreditation arising from attendance at particular courses.
Important curriculum changes are taking place at first and second levels which necessitate extensive teacher in-career development. The manner in which the in-career development activities are delivered will have a significant bearing on the question of absences of teachers from schools. This is an area which is being examined by my Department in consultation with the advisory committees whose terms of reference include advising and recommending on modes of delivery.
In the context of this examination, the extent of the provision of substitution to cover for the absence of teachers from school on in-career development courses will also be addressed.
My main concern, as Minister for Education, is to ensure that as much as possible of the money available for in-career development is spent on the actual delivery of a high quality in-career developments programme.
(Carlow-Kilkenny): I am amazed the Minister is talking about summer courses because they have been in operation for many years. If this is an effort to recharge teachers' batteries, it comprises the usual bad value in that teachers forego five days of their summer holidays and are given three days later in the year, good value from the Department's point of view. The Minister should treat this matter very seriously by running such courses, within school time, nationwide.
Over £30 million will be made available for teacher in-career development over the next six years under the terms of the National Development Plan which constitutes an extraordinary investment in in-career development. Therefore, we must be very careful to ensure that as much as possible of that investment is expended on delivery of high quality in-career development programmes. I have established representative committees within my Department to advise on how best we can deliver on those programmes, under which all primary schools are to be invited to submit proposals for their in-career development programmes which will be based on their local, individual identified needs. My Department will be prepared to facilitate and fund these programmes, otherwise schools would have to pay for them or do without. The incentive is their own professional development. I have set in train a two-pronged process, to ensure that the expenditure of the money will be done in close collaboration with those who deliver the courses and we have invited schools within the different sectors to seek departmental funding for new programmes which they consider meet their local needs. I take the point made by Deputy Browne about the delivery of such programmes locally. Teachers centres and colleges of education nationwide have been asked to submit proposals for courses for primary teachers in the autumn term, which we envisage would take place outside school time and would respond to the Department's published list of priorities, in respect of which fees will not be charged to participants. I hope, by being flexible and close to the teaching profession in the matter of planning, that all teachers will benefit from this first time investment in in-career development.
I wish to ask two brief supplementaries. Are the teacher unions represented on those two advisory bodies and, if so, to what extent? Will the Minister say whether the £5 million allocated this year is divided evenly between the primary and second level sectors? In other words will there be £2.5 million for both sectors?
The teacher unions are represented on the committees. If the Deputy wants a breakdown I can give it to him. I should say they are satisfied with their representation on the committees. Without giving an exact breakdown of the moneys available for this year a higher proportion will go to in-career development at the senior cycle——
Why?
We have put in place extraordinary changes at the senior cycle. Because of the demands that will be made on the teaching profession for those delivering on the senior cycle of second level education the Department must respond. We made money available for teachers who had accepted the invitation to be involved in the transition year. The bulk of the activity for delivery this year is at the second level. The unions involved, represented on the two committees, have accepted the invitation extended to them. They are advising the Department on how best we can serve the teaching profession and, ultimately, the students involved with this massive investment the Government is making in in-career development.
I want to specifically ask about the curriculum changes and the arrangements being made for the in-service training of teachers. Is it the intention that the in-service training for teachers will be provided within normal school time and that training will be carried out by members of the teaching profession? If so, what arrangements, if any, have been made for the release of those teachers from their normal teaching duties to prepare for and carry out the training exercises?
The responses from the teaching profession to avail of this training have been flexible. As I said in my reply, there are different ways of doing it. I would welcome a specific question on the content of in-career programmes. I will avail of any opportunity offered to spell out the many ways in which we are responding to the different needs. The first tranche of the moneys available for in-career development went towards training principls. We were involved in the preparation of trainers for the transition year. Different groups are responding to each of the changes being introduced and the development programmes available. Others are making programmes available to be able to respond to suggestions and programmes. We now have six months work under our belt and we are putting a formula in place. We have not completed the formula because we have invited teachers to express their needs. A formula is being put in place as to how best we can invest the money on which the teacher unions and the committees are advising the Department but specific responses are awaited. A sum of £6 million is to be spent over a six year period on different programmes. I know I will be satisfied that we will have not only the goodwill of the teacher unions but that we will be working with them to ensure that their members benefit from this investment in in-career development. Until now, except for teachers who volunteered to do summer courses and the small number involved in retraining, many more left the training college and went into the classroom and the curriculum did not change. Now the curriculum has changed and the Department and the Minister have a responsibility to ensure that teachers can avail of training, respond positively to the curriculum changes at second level and make the school curriculum relevant to the growing numbers of children remaining on in our schools. At present 73 per cent of the school cohort remains on until leaving certificate but I hope it will reach 90 per cent. To put the matter in perspective when I did my leaving certificate, 40 per cent stayed on.
We are changing the curriculum and giving people different options. We are telling the teaching profession that we appreciate they will deliver that change and as a Department ensure that we invest wisely, on their advice, on their in-career development needs.
(Carlow-Kilkenny): I accept readily that even a bicycle gets rusty after ten years and teachers are in the same position. I am worried that, as usual, the goodwill of teachers is being cashed in on by the Department. The Minister referred to summer and evening courses and the vast sums of money being spent on training. Surely serious thought must be given by the Minister's advisory group to full time training and, if necessary, close schools to allow teachers to attend courses on so called in-service training. Is it not time teachers were treated seriously and that their goodwill was not always used as an excuse for not looking after them properly?
That was the reason I asked for an advisory committee who would advise the Department on how the in-career development would be carried out. As far as possible it would be locally based. We asked the schools to submit proposals and I am sure the concerns of Deputies will be expressed by the teachers who are now responding to the invitation issued by the Department.
The Minister certainly learned about Shakespearean soliloquy in school. When does she expect the advisory committee on in-career development to report? Will she abide by its recommendations or will we have the spectacle of only half its recommendations being implemented? Will the reports of all the advisory committees be published? It is important that they are.
I expect this committee to be ongoing and that we will work hand-in-hand with the teachers' unions and managerial bodies. The moneys will be spread over a six year programme. I will leave it to other people to decide whether at the end of this programme I should have to account for this money.
Six years of this would be too much for anybody — spare us.
This committee will continue to operate as money is invested in in-career development each year.
