Richard Bruton
Question:21 Mr. R. Bruton asked the Minister for Education and Science if he has full details of the survey of literacy in primary schools; when he will publish these details; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11856/00]
Priority Questions. - Literacy Levels.
I do not have full details of the results of the surveys of the English reading achievement of fifth class pupils. A national assessment of English reading was carried out in 1993 by the Educational Research Centre, Drumcondra. A further such survey was conducted in May 1998.
It is my understanding that the report of the findings of these two surveys is due for delivery in a matter of weeks. I intend to publish the findings. However, I am pleased to provide the Deputy with the following summary of the findings of the 1998 survey.
Standards of English reading in 1998 were the same as in 1993. Furthermore, although different measuring instruments were used prior to 1993, following a linking exercise with those instruments, it is concluded that standards have not changed since 1980. There has been no change in the performance of low achieving pupils.
There is great variation in the performance of pupils in fifth class. Teachers rated the reading proficiency of about one in ten pupils as weak-inadequate and an equal number as reading at third class level or lower. More than one in five pupils was regarded as being advanced in reading, while a third were judged to be reading at a class level higher than fifth class.
In general, boys achieve at a lower level than girls. This was reflected in their performance on the reading assessment instrument as well as in teachers' ratings of their competencies. Pupils' reading achievements are related to a number of personal factors, including time spent in voluntary reading and liking for reading, as well as teachers' assessments of learning related behaviours. Pupils' reading achievements are related to a variety of home-background factors, including the number of books and of study aids, and measures of the educational climate of the home.
Additional Information.
Surveys of the English reading achievement of pupils have been conducted since 1972. The main finding of this series of surveys is that since 1980 there has been no significant improvement or disimprovement in pupils' achievements. It is also estimated that about 10% of pupils in fifth class have serious reading difficulties.
Does the Minister agree it is alarming that we have failed to improve the reading standard of low achievers in primary school in 20 years? Does he further agree that what is needed is a national literacy initiative which goes well beyond the timid initiative announced by his predecessor? As recommended by the INTO, this new initiative should have a national co-ordinating committee and provide significant investment of up to 500 newly trained remedial staff. Does the Minister accept that this is the scale of investment needed to tackle the seriously low literacy levels in primary education?
Had I been able to conclude I would have said that it is also estimated that about 10% of pupils in fifth class—
A Cheann Comhairle, I know you have no control but this—
The Deputy should let me finish. He should not be so ignorant for a change. It is estimated that about 10% of pupils in fifth class have serious reading difficulties.
Instead of hurling abuse across the floor I would prefer if the Minister answered the questions he is asked rather than continuing to read from a script.
The Deputy should allow the Minister to conclude.
The Minister should be courteous.
If the Deputy would listen he would realise that I am supporting the argument he is trying to make. If he contained himself he would realise that if 10% of children in fifth class have serious reading difficulties this justifies what I said the first day I became Minister that I regard the difficulties at this level as a major national priority. That is how I am pursuing this issue. Such a high percentage requires a serious approach which is in accordance with what the Deputy is saying.
Surveys over the years have led to the same conclusion and the position has not changed much since 1980. It is a very deep rooted problem. There is a revised English curriculum, which will place an increased emphasis on raising literacy standards through the development of reading skills. We have allocated 1,465 remedial teachers to primary schools to support pupils with learning difficulties, including reading difficulties. Revised remedial teaching guidelines have been prepared by an expert representative committee involving parents, teachers and the research centre. Particular attention has been focused on the revised guidelines for designated areas.
Many things have been done in the past one and a half to two years. A good deal of extra money has been provided. I feel very strongly that—
Is there not a time limit on the Minister's reply?
Not for priority questions. There is an overall time limit. The one minute time limit for supplementary answers applies to ordinary questions but not priority ones.
It is an abuse by the Minister.
The Deputy can be assured that, in addition to those steps which are under way at the moment, I will be giving a great deal of attention to this. I want to see a strong programme.
Does the Minister agree this is a hollow commitment from him? Not one remedial teacher has been provided to a disadvantaged school since his party entered Government. The issue of literacy is not about curriculum revision and guidelines – it is about resources. Does the Minister agree that 85% of children needing remediation in maths get none and that 25% of children needing remediation in reading get none? Does he agree that the INTO, which is at the coalface, has indicated we need a national literacy committee, 35 regional co-ordinators and 500 specialist literacy remedial teachers if this is to be addressed?
We must move onto the next question.
The Minister's hollow recitation of issues that are deep in the bureaucracy of the Department will make no difference to the reading standards of children.
In my experience, it is clearly making a difference. However, I accept there is a need for a major concentration on this area. As a matter of interest—
We must move on to Question No. 22.
—1,465 remedial teachers were appointed, which is more than were provided by the Deputy's party when it was in office. I would be very careful about what I said if I were him.
Not one remedial teacher was appointed to a disadvantaged school in constituencies such as the Minister's and my own.
I have called Question No. 22.
That is where the problem is.
The Chair has called Question No. 22.