Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 27 Feb 1996

Vol. 462 No. 2

Adjournment Debate. - Marking of 1995 Art Examination.

Ms Keogh

I raise the matter of the oversights and misplacements which took place in the marking of the 1995 leaving certification examination in art and design. We are all aware of the sorry tale of blunders made by the Department of Education in regard to that examination. As a result of revelations of those blunders public confidence in the examinations system has been seriously undermined.

The Minister for Education did not give a full and accurate account of the extent of the inaccuracies, oversights and misplacements which have taken place. Why was there such a delay in investigating the blunders that were made known to the Minister by officials in her Department on 12 December last?

It is now known that mistakes made in the case of students at the Ursuline Convent in Sligo only came to light because of the persistence of parents, students and teachers in pursuing their rights. I am reliably informed that in the past mistakes in the marking procedures in the art and design examination were detected at the recheck stage. A fail safe mechanism was put in place and it appeared to work until last year. It seems extraordinary that, notwithstanding that the missing sections of the examination accounted for 25 per cent of the examination marks, their absence was not noticed during a subsequent recheck. The suspicions of teachers who would have a reliable idea of the standard of their pupils were ignored for months. Why did it take so long for errors to be discovered and for an investigation to be carried out?

Last week the Minister for Education said that an investigation of the 11,000 art and design candidates' work was carried out between 15 and 20 December last. As late as last Friday the Minister confirmed that more cases of missing examination work have been identified. Why was the Minister kept in the dark by her Department or, if that was not the case, did she know the extent of the blunders made? If she was kept unaware of such serious mismanagement within her Department, serious questions must be answered about the internal operations of the Department and the Minister's ability to maintain stewardship of that most important Department. The Minister has shielded herself behind the Price Waterhouse inquiry, but the answers to many questions should not require an independent investigation. Why was the Department so slow to react to the concerns of the Ursuline Convent in Sligo? When was the investigation into the errors launched? More importantly, is the Minister satisfied that all errors have been accounted for or will more new cases, such as those which came to light last Friday, be reported?

It is now intended that a complete recheck of all 11,000 entries will be made. Can we have a guarantee that such a recheck will be more thorough than that made last December? Is the Minister confident that those with responsibility to recheck examination entries have the necessary experience and competence to do so? What way will the Department compensate those students who have had to repeat their leaving certificate at great personal cost? Will there be any recompense for those students who have had to change their future plans because of unsatisfactory results in their art and design examination? What does the need to resort to outside agents to determine the truth about what happened in her Department say about the competence of the Minister?

Minister for Health, (Mr. Noonan,

Limerick East): I will not be able to answer specifically all the interesting questions raised by Deputy Keogh. I reply on behalf of the Minister for Education to the matter raised.

The Minister for Education replied fully to the questions which were put to her on 20 February. As the Minister informed the House during the Adjournment Debate some weeks ago, the marking and the processing of the results of the 1995 art examination is the subject of a fully independent inquiry by Price Waterhouse. The Minister has already confirmed that it is her intention to publish the full report of the Price Waterhouse inquiry and to make it available to Members of the House.

With regard to the revelations mentioned by the Deputy, I assume she is referring to the Minister's reply to a parliamentary question on 22 February that the number of upgrades notified to schools was 47, rather than 46, and that a further case has come to light of a candidate being entitled to an upgrade.

The position is that, in the first case, even though an upgrade was awarded and notified to the school involved in early January, it was not added to the list because of administrative failure, error or oversight. The Minister became aware of this error on Wednesday, 21 February. This aspect will be pursued.

The second case came to light as a direct result of the work initiated in connection with the Price Waterhouse inquiry. It involved an error in the processing of an appeal. All aspects of this further upgrade will be encompassed within the scope of the Price Waterhouse inquiry.

With regard to the candidate who received an upgrade because of failure to credit marks for design, the position is that the Minister has referred in previous statements to marks not being credited for parts or components of the art examination. From an early stage in these inquiries, it was known that one of the candidates had not been credited with marks for design. The candidate's school was notified of the upgrade and informed that the upgrade had arisen because of a failure to credit the candidate with marks for design, on 8 January 1996. As it happens, the failure in the case of all of the other candidates who were found to be missing components in the marking was in respect of craftwork.

The Minister is greatly concerned at the failure to correctly credit marks in the case of some of this year's art students. Not only does it cause distress and worry for students, their families and teachers, but any failure in this area has an impact on the overall integrity of the certificate examinations. Given the Minister's responsibility for ensuring that the examinations retain the full confidence of parents, students and the many institutions that rely on them, the Minister considered it essential that this problem be the subject of a full independent inquiry. The fact that this inquiry is external and independent will enhance both its public standing and the acceptability of its recommendations.

In addition to the inquiry which will deal with all aspects of the running of this year's art examination, the Minister has also asked Price Waterhouse to review the entire appeals procedure in the case of all subjects. The Minister thinks that such a review is essential to fully secure public confidence in this process. It is the Minister's firm intention that any recommendations for improvements in the operation of the art examination or in the appeals process will be implemented for the 1996 examinations.

The Minister understands and shares the anxiety and need of Deputies, students, teachers and parents for full information on the circumstances and events which gave rise to the incorrect results which were issued for the art examination. It is for this reason that the Minister decided on an independent, external inquiry. She has also undertaken to publish the report and to make it available to Members of the House. She also intends to implement the changes that will be necessary.

To refer back to the words of this motion the Minister intends that the House will have a "full and accurate account" of what happened. We must all avoid prejudicing the results of this inquiry, the Minister's response to it and, indeed, the response of the House and the wider public, by reacting on the basis of incomplete information and drawing premature conclusions.

The issue is a serious one. The Minister is giving the House very important reassurances. This worrying episode is being seriously investigated. The report of the investigation will be made public. Effective action will be taken.

The Dáil adjourned at 9.10 p.m. until 10.30 a.m. on Wednesday, 28 February 1996.