Micheál Martin
Question:4 Mr. Martin asked the Minister for Education if inservice courses have been provided for parents and teachers to facilitate the introduction of the relationships and sexuality programme in our schools this year. [13620/95]
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Inservice Training.
Robert Molloy
Question:7 Mr. Molloy asked the Minister for Education when the programme on relationships and sexuality education will be fully introduced in schools; the consultations, if any, that have taken place in relation to the programme; and the funding already utilised for the programme. [13484/95]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 4 and 7 together.
Planning for a programme of inservice training in connection with the relationships and sexuality education programme is well advanced. The programme will be finalised following receipt of the report of the implementation group which is working on the details of implementing the programme and the curricular guidelines being prepared by the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment. The preparation of an overall training strategy for the implementation of the relationships and sexuality programme has been a central element of the work of the implementation group.
The circular which I issued to all schools in January proposed that schools would now begin to develop their policies with a view to starting to introduce programmes of relationships and sexuality education into schools in the 1995-96 school year. This proposal received a very large measure of support from the partners in education.
In order to assist schools in preparing for the introduction of the programme, three groups have been working with my Department for some months. First, the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment is developing curriculum guidelines, teaching and learning strategies and assessment/evaluation procedures. Draft guidelines prepared by the council were issued to all schools in June. Final guidelines will be prepared taking into account comments received on the draft guidelines.
Second, an implementation group, representative of my Department, the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment and the partners in education, is considering how best to implement the details of the programme. I expect to have a report from this group within a few weeks.
Third, my Department has been working with the Department of Health on reviewing existing activities and teaching materials which have been developed by the health boards and a range of other organisations. The proposals from this group are now being examined in both Departments and will be finalised before the end of October.
Why is the Minister so slow to introduce this programme? The circular was issued in January and guidelines have been issued. When I asked a question about this before the summer recess I was accused of wanting to delay the implementation of the programme. The Minister said that we should be careful to avoid giving encouragement to people who want to delay it. I do not want to delay it, but it is incredible that, although we are well into the new school year, the final guidelines are not yet ready and no inservice training has been given to teachers or parents. It is clear that the programme will not be ready for introduction until 1996. It is typical of the Minister's approach that she makes announcements which are greeted with fanfare and establishes committees but nothing happens on the ground.
There is apprehension among the teaching profession about the introduction of this programme. It has received tremendous support from all the partners including owners, managers, parents and teaching bodies, but there is apprehension among teachers who teach the programme about the importance and success of the initiative. They have strong views about essential training and support for teachers and the school community, the need to take things slowly, the training of teachers to include enabling them acquire the knowledge, understanding and necessary skills to teach the programme and the need to collaborate with parents and others in the area. If it means that we hasten slowly but gain our objective, I am more than willing to play my part in that.
I believe it was in May 1993 I indicated that I, as Minister, would set up a process begun by many other Ministers of including a module of sex education in schools. I underestimated how long it would take to achieve that in partnership. It is a measure of my modus operandi that if one of the partners believes that it needs more time, investment and consultation to achieve something people expect of the education system, I am prepared to move slowly and indicate, as I did during the Easter conference speeches, that rather than expect this programme to be operating in schools in September we will hasten slowly and look forward to its gradual introduction during this school year. We should not underestimate the number of schools which operate such programmes.
The Minister announced it would be introduced by September. I accept that she underestimated the length of time it would take to introduce the programme having regard to consultation with the partners. However, I put it to her that it would be better, more effective and would avoid the creation of apprehension and confusion if, prior to major public announcements of initiatives such as this, she would enter into detailed consultations to arrive at some measure of agreement with the teachers and parents prior to making politically nice sounding statements prematurely?
It was not a nice sounding statement, it was a reply to a question put to me on "Morning Ireland".
It was not.
It was. I can tell the Deputy where it began.
I can also tell where it began.
It began when I was questioned on "Morning Ireland" following the finding of a newly born dead baby. I was asked about my responsibility as Minister for Education for the introduction of sex education in our schools. I gave an undertaking at that stage that I would set about doing that. I have set about something other Ministers have set about, but none has quite succeeded.
A former Minister, Deputy O'Rourke, was quite effective.
The Deputy asked why such a programme is not in our schools. If previous Ministers had been successful in introducing such a programme, I would not be saying, "let us hasten slowly". We have not reached the position many previous Ministers sought to reach and we are about to reach it during this school year. It has taken a little longer because of genuine apprehension among the teaching profession who will be responsible for introducing it in the classroom. I have reacted positively to calls from the teacher unions which have been supportive of the concept of this programme and hastening slowly to enable their teachers to feel fully empowered before they take on the task of operating the programme. Many schools are operating such a programme and those which are not are those that consider they have particular problems. I am concentrating on those schools and it was useful to have had a public discussion on the matter. People are aware that I have had as much support from church and managerial bodies as I have had from teacher unions.
People want to get on with it.
They want it introduced carefully. I am prepared to slow down matters and accept that my expectation that it would be introduced by now has not been met. When introduced during this school year it will be the culmination of many a Minister's aspiration.
The time available to us for dealing with priority questions is quite exhausted. I can deal with Priority Question No. 5 in ordinary time.