Vol. 634 No. 2
1 Ms Enright asked the Minister for Education and Science the number of applications submitted to her Department for extensions, additional classrooms, and new school buildings; when all of these will be fully delivered; the number of building projects given the go-ahead to proceed during the past 12 months; the number of these projects which have actually started construction work; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [10994/07]
The Government is determined to ensure that every child is educated in a suitable and comfortable environment. Since 1997, great advances have been made in transforming school accommodation throughout the country through an investment of €3 billion. This has funded more than 7,800 individual school projects in the past seven years alone. The National Development Plan 2007-13 will involve an investment of more than €4.5 billion in school accommodation. The first roll-out of the new NDP will be in the current year with a budget for 2007 of €542 million-€306 million at primary and €236 million at post-primary level.
While the challenge before us in reversing decades of under-investment in school buildings and in responding to emerging needs in new population areas is great, we are making huge progress. Currently, my Department has in the region of 1,300 applications for building works on the main building programme. Applications range from small-scale projects in existing schools to new schools. A number of schools would have applications for more than one project.
The level of work being done under the school building programme is at an all-time high. The number of projects approved under all the different schemes last year was over 1,300. A further 1,500 projects are expected to be delivered in 2007. The 1,300 projects approved last year include 109 large-scale projects, 778 schools benefiting from the summer works scheme and 210 schools approved under the small schools and permanent accommodation schemes.
Of the 109 large-scale projects announced last year, 55 were approved in February and April 2006 and 54 in November 2006 to proceed to tender and construction over the subsequent 12 to 15 month periods. The Department's main focus is on setting the initial parameters for these projects. Thereafter, responsibility for progression to detailed design, planning permission, tendering and construction is devolved to local school management authorities and their design teams. This approach facilitates a steady stream of these projects proceeding to construction during the course of 2007 and into early 2008.
To date, school authorities have already commenced construction on 17 of these projects and it is intended most of the remainder will commence construction during 2007. Given the timeframe for moving to construction was 12 to 15 months, and the earliest of these projects were announced 13 months ago, I am satisfied they are on schedule. As I said, 778 schools were given approval to proceed with refurbishment projects as part of the 2006 summer works scheme. More than 95% of these projects have been undertaken, with the remainder due to be delivered later in 2007.
During 2006, approval was also given to 210 schools under the small schools and permanent accommodation schemes. These schemes enable schools to address their accommodation needs on a devolved basis without the need for major interaction with my Department. Projects announced in 2006 typically commence construction in 2007.
Additional information not given on the floor of the House.
To date, 68 of these projects are under construction and it is expected the remainder will have commenced construction during 2007.
To conclude, there has been an unprecedented level of activity under the school building programme in recent years. While increased investment has been a central reason for this, the introduction of new schemes and changes in how projects are managed have also made a major difference.
I accept the figures that have been announced for approval but, in terms of the number actually progressing, the pace of delivery once a project has been announced is quite slow. Is the Minister satisfied that when projects are announced the technicians arrive on site in time, which is another issue on which I have received several complaints?
Will the Minister outline how much prefabricated accommodation has cost in the past year and the expected lifetime of a prefab? I had occasion to visit a school recently where the prefabs arrived the same year I was born and are still being used — that is a significant period. In the same school, a bicycle shed was converted to a classroom decades ago and is still in use. That school is still awaiting word of approval from the Department.
On 25 October the Minister claimed on "Morning Ireland" that the problem in Laytown had been sorted out in two weeks. Five months on, will she clarify the position in regard to the school in Laytown, where I understand planning permission had been sought on a site the Department did not own or had not signed contracts for ownership of? Is this the responsibility of the Department or the Office of Public Works?
What number of new classrooms will be provided specifically to deal with the reduction in class size which is promised from September? Why the lack of transparency with regard to the building programme? Will the Minister allow the position to return to one where schools could see in what position they were on the Department's website?
We are committed to delivering the two new schools for Laytown on schedule. Two portions of land were needed for this. I announced in October that a deal had been done for the purchase of the larger portion of land. The owner of that portion of land, which is needed for the development of the new school, has indicated he is very happy with the deal.
A second, smaller portion of land was desirable for the temporary accommodation which would be needed pending the building of the new school and for access. Difficulties have arisen with this site, which is why, with the written permission of the owner, we applied last week for planning permission for the temporary school on the larger portion of land. Meath County Council has indicated to us it will allow this to progress as quickly as possible through its planning procedures, so I am hopeful, providing there are no major delays in the planning process, we will be on site in May to ensure the temporary building will be provided in September for the students who need it.
The indication given in October referred to the larger portion of land. There seems to be confusion among people who thought we were referring to a different portion of land.
It was not sorted either way.
There were two portions of land in question.
With regard to the number of classrooms needed due to class size, every new teacher will obviously need a new class. Some 5,000 extra teachers have been provided in the past five years, which adds pressure, given there is a direct link between the reduction in class size and the provision of classrooms.
Of those classrooms provided last year and being provided this year, a number are resource rooms for the special needs teachers who have been appointed. We are very conscious of the fact not every school had the space for the special needs teachers but we appointed the teachers anyway because it is better to have the teacher who could support the child rather than waiting for the classroom.
Through the permanent initiative scheme and the small schools scheme, where schools have been extended, in most cases the classrooms and in particular the resource rooms are required for extra teachers, be that due to reductions in class size or the development of schools.
2 Ms O’Sullivan asked the Minister for Education and Science the number of schools that include an oral exam for junior certificate; if in the context of her announcement on the increases in marks for oral Irish in the leaving certificate she will also address the lack of emphasis on spoken Irish at junior certificate level; if she will introduce an oral exam in all schools at junior certificate level; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [10858/07]
Only a minority of schools avail of the optional oral examination in the junior certificate at present. For example, the following oral examinations were undertaken in 2006: French — 506 oral examinations in 22 schools; Spanish — 80 oral examinations in six schools; German — 267 oral examinations in 14 schools; and Gaeilge — 335 oral examinations in 12 schools.
With regard to the oral Irish examination I recently announced significant changes to the proportion of marks awarded for oral Irish in both the junior certificate and leaving certificate exams. These changes will apply to students enrolling in first year in 2007 and will mean that, in 2010, there will be 40% of marks available for the optional oral Irish examination in the junior certificate, and with effect from 2012, 40% of marks will be available for oral Irish in the leaving certificate.
The syllabus for junior certificate Irish focuses strongly on developing communicative skills. Oral work is critically important in improving students' competence and confidence in this regard and should be a key component of day-to-day teaching of the language from the beginning of junior cycle.
I am determined to increase the emphasis on the spoken language at junior certificate level. However, I am conscious that the model of oral examination in place for the leaving certificate examination is not replicable at junior cycle. Issues of examiner supply and school disruption mean that implementing junior and leaving certificate oral examinations through a totally externally based approach would be unsustainable. I recognise the need to explore the scope for a different approach at junior cycle, where the stakes are not so high. I believe that the increase in the marks for the optional oral component in the junior certificate from 20% to 40% from 2010 will be an incentive for more schools to provide this option.
In addition, I have asked the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment, NCCA, to undertake a study of the possible use of information technologies such as mobile phones or the Internet in oral assessment. A report on this issue is expected later this year. I have also provided for the establishment of a new support service for post-primary teachers of Irish, An tSeirbhís Tacaíochta Gaeilge Dara Leibhéal, which will provide professional development for teachers from autumn 2007.
The announcement I have made clearly gives advance notice to schools of a significant shift in emphasis towards Irish as a spoken language where students can communicate and interact in a spontaneous way and where Irish is spoken every day in schools. This is a new challenge for teachers and will be supported by comprehensive investment in professional development programmes and the provision of updated and age-appropriate materials using new technology to optimum effect.
The way to bring new life to a language is to be able to converse in it every day. These changes are intended to strengthen the emphasis on oral competence in Irish in our schools and ensure that Irish is taught in our schools in a way that is interesting and relevant and promotes a positive attitude to the language among our young people.
Additional information not given on the floor of the House.
Other developments in respect of promoting the Irish language in our schools that I announced recently include the provision of an additional €1 million for An Chomhairle um Oideachas Gaeltachta agus Gaelscolaiochta over the next three years for the development of resources and materials to support the teaching of subjects through Irish; an additional €150,000 to enable second level pupils in disadvantaged areas to attend Gaeltacht summer courses; and the introduction of week-long summer camps in Irish to enable up to 600 primary school students in designated disadvantaged schools to participate in fun activities through the medium of Irish. I am confident that, taken together, these measures will improve students' ability to speak our native language.
I thank the Minister for her answer and welcome the steps she is taking with regard to the leaving certificate. My concern is that there is a gap in the middle. The curriculum at primary level is initially focused on the spoken language, but when children move up to post-primary level, many of them become turned off the language because of the difficulty in dealing with a largely written curriculum.
Is the Minister concerned that, as her answer stated, only 12 schools with 335 students take the oral option? That is a tiny fraction of children and schools. Does the Minister intend to take action to ensure this is mainstream within the junior certificate cycle? Will she consider making it obligatory for an oral examination to be held at junior certificate level? In light of the difficulty involved in the logistics of having people to carry out the examination, has the Minister explored how that can be done, possibly by carrying it out within the school itself. I know there is an issue with the teachers in that regard, but to what extent has the Minister examined that option? I am sure she must be concerned that such a small number is involved at junior certificate level.
Has the Minister considered the proposal by Conradh na Gaeilge, the Union of Students in Ireland and the Union of Secondary Students that she consider introducing two subjects at leaving certificate level, one of which would focus on the language while the other would focus on the more cultural and literary elements of Irish? They have also made a proposal in respect of much more immersion for student teachers in the area of language. Has the Minister carried out any evaluation of the standard of the teaching of Irish at primary and post-primary level?
Gabhaim mo bhuíochas leis an Teachta as ucht na tacaíochta a thug sí do na moltaí seo because they are very significant proposals. It is the first time in 35 years that a change has been made in oral Irish. Naturally, I would love to see more schools offering the oral Irish examination at junior certificate level. I believe that many teachers are not aware it is an option in the first instance. Probably the greatest barrier is that the two teaching unions have established positions against teacher-based assessment.
This morning, I visited Newpark comprehensive school, where students take the oral examination at junior certificate level, certainly in the modern languages, I am not too sure about the Gaeilge. In this school, a class teacher examines another class, so one does not examine one's own students. That is certainly a very feasible way of doing it. It is done in a very objective manner without interfering in the running of the school. Local arrangements could be made between two schools if one wished to take it outside one's realm altogether. There is great potential to do that.
In the first instance, I hope to remind all schools that this exists and to set out how it can be done. I also want to encourage people, on the basis of the extra percentage that is being given, that it is valuable for the students to do it. Third, I want to point out that not only is it of value in itself, but it is a direct preparation for the leaving certificate, given that emphasis will be placed on the spoken language within the schools. I am awaiting the NCCA's work, which it has begun to undertake, on the various ways of doing an oral examination using mobile technology, such as mobile phones and the Internet. That could be quite exciting and would be a new challenge within schools. Obviously, as I stated in my answer, there would be considerable professional development for teachers because I recognise that is needed. Normally, when we introduce changes for the curriculum, we do it with a two-year run-in, as we are doing with the technology subjects, which I announced two years ago and which will be introduced in September of this year. It is the love and use of the language I want to change, rather than just the examination, which is why I gave a five-year lead-in to this one.
I met Conradh na Gaeilge to discuss its proposal, about which I have two concerns. First, it would be very elitist to have two separate leaving certificate honours courses. If that is the case, ordinary mainstream schools would not be able to offer the two choices because they would not have the capacity to offer an alternative leaving certificate level. The NCCA proposals in that regard were somewhat similar.
The question of giving extra points for honours Irish also arose. That argument has been made in respect of honours mathematics, the sciences——
That is not contained in this proposal.
There are proposals out there relating to that. I would like to think that a student attending school in Limerick, Thurles, or Offaly will get the same opportunity as one attending a gaeilcoláiste such as Coláiste Eoin Íosagáin or one in Galway or elsewhere, and that it would not just become the preserve of one group. That is what would happen if one ended up with a curriculum split in two.
Given that only 50% of the leaving certificate examination goes for the written paper, that in itself must be revamped and I will always ensure that literature is a part of that examination. That is also very important because we have such a wealth of literary culture.
3 Mr. Gogarty asked the Minister for Education and Science the plans in place to create regional structures in education as envisaged in the action plan of the national forum on education, published in 2001; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [10856/07]
I understand that the Deputy is referring to the action plan of the national forum on primary education, Ending Disadvantage. The forum was held in St. Patrick's College in Drumcondra in July 2002 and was planned by a national planning group representing all national agencies working in the area of educational disadvantage and parents living in designated areas of disadvantage.
One of the recommendations of the forum was the devolution of the organisation and delivery of pre-primary, primary and post-primary education, third level access and further and second chance education from the Department of Education and Science to local structures. The report also envisaged the devolution of budgetary control, responsibility for the identification of local and regional educational needs and strategic planning to meet the needs to those local structures.
The Deputy will be aware that my Department has established a regional offices service as a result of the recommendations made in the Cromien report, which, in October 2000, reviewed my Department's operations, systems and staffing needs. The implementation of the recommendations contained in the Cromien report were approved by the Government.
This regional office service, which is an integral part of my Department, consists of ten regional offices and a central directorate of regional services. The role of the offices is to support a socially inclusive society by representing the Department on appropriate regional and local bodies, such as the city and county development boards and the regional and local drugs task forces, communicating information on education issues to and from the Department and providing any other educational services that can best be undertaken regionally.
The regional office service also co-ordinates the response of the Department to the education needs of newcomers, manages the visiting teachers services for Travellers and the hearing and visually impaired and manages the distribution of dormant accounts funding in the education sector.
While the Department will continue to review the operation of the regional offices with a view to transferring other functions to them as appropriate, it is not proposed to transfer to them the range of functions envisaged in the action plan of the national forum on primary education.
Page 147 of the action plan of the national forum on primary education states that the plan recommends the creation of regional education structures and devolved responsibility for the areas of primary, pre-school, second level and third level education. The Minister referred to looking for administrative duties but also real decision-making powers in terms of the analysis of regional needs, the development of strategies for the integration of services at a local level and the allocation of funding and resources. Does she not agree it is time we took a radical approach to education? VECs are located in virtually every city and county authority and local authorities are engaged in planning. The Department of Education and Science is supposed to plan school places in advance of any new housing developments or change in the population. In some cases it is not very effective in this role. Would it not make sense to have a regional education structure on a county-by-county basis with links to or amalgamated with the existing VEC structure, and links to county councils and the Department of Education and Science? Would that not serve the needs of education at all levels more effectively than having ten regional bodies? Would it not be preferable to have a regional body working along existing lines where the facilities already exist, between the VEC meeting structures and those of local authorities? There would not be a significant increase in costs but decision making would be sharper and more focused and people would be able to target money exactly where it is needed.
No. I fundamentally disagree with the proposal. The last thing we need is another 26 structures for education with administrative boards which would link into other administrative boards and to try to link agencies together. This would tie people up in knots going from one meeting to another. It would not serve any purpose whatsoever. It was part of a proposal made in 1995 or 1996 in a White Paper on education. Fianna Fáil fundamentally opposed it at that stage. It is crucially important that we are able to maintain quality at all levels, in addition to budgetary control, and to ensure there is equity in the service. I have no proposals to set up more administrative structures.
What I suggest is a series of one-stop-shops on a countywide basis where all of the various strands would be integrated into one location. In that way, people would know where to go to find whatever information they require on education. Given that the Government's current policy appears to be to move Departments to various parts of the country and to call that decentralisation, is it not about time we had real decentralisation and local decision making? I agree it is time we had proper systems, instead of disparate decisions being made. We need a one-stop-shop. Would the Minister consider this option if it could be done properly? I accept more research is required.
The type of system we have is probably unique in the world. We have 4,000 schools, half a dozen management bodies — all of which have responsibilities — major agencies like the National Educational Welfare Board and the National Educational Psychological Service. The Department is also involved in the school completion programmes in all of the drugs task force areas, and in local development and partnership bodies. People are already involved in a significant number of initiatives.
But they do not work together.
The best place for parents to get information is in their local school. That is as it should be. That is why the relationship between schools and parents is so important. The regional offices serve to make contact with people. The proposals outlined in that forum are wide ranging. They include regional structures with relative autonomy, authority, budgetary control, responsibility for the identification of local and regional educational needs and strategic planning for all of that. The suggestion is that these powers would all be moved from the Department of Education and Science. I fundamentally disagree with this proposal.
4 Ms Enright asked the Minister for Education and Science the steps she will take to ensure all second level students receive relationships and sexuality education; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [10995/07]
As the Deputy is aware, many positive developments in regard to the teaching of relationships and sexuality education, RSE, have taken place in recent years, and these have been further strengthened through making social, personal and health education, SPHE, a mandatory programme for junior cycle since September 2003. In addition, all schools are required to have an RSE programme at senior cycle.
Schools are currently supported in the implementation of RSE by the SPHE and RSE support services which are provided in collaboration with the health sector. The supports available to schools include guidelines on policy development, curricula and teacher guidelines, information for parents, teaching resource materials and teacher training. Schools are also encouraged to utilise the resources produced by the health promotion unit.
Earlier this month I launched a report, RSE in the context of SPHE: An Assessment of the Challenges to the Full Implementation of the Programme in Post-primary Schools, published jointly by the Crisis Pregnancy Agency and the Department of Education and Science. The report highlighted widespread support for both the broad principles and the content of the SPHE and RSE programmes from teachers, parents and health professionals and strong levels of interest and support from parents and students about the importance of RSE in schools.
The report also demonstrated increasing levels of implementation compared with earlier studies, with 76% of schools showing high or moderate levels of implementation, and with 90% of schools teaching RSE at some level. However, a clear need is highlighted to strengthen both implementation levels and consistency in regard to the content of RSE. In that context, my Department is taking a number of important steps which will remind all post-primary schools of their obligations in this area. It will update and re-issue the RSE policy guidelines and finalise a template on RSE policy in order to facilitate schools in developing and implementing RSE programmes; review and update RSE materials; develop lesson plans linked to a DVD resource on contraception, sexually transmitted infections and sexual orientation, in collaboration with the Health Service Executive and the Crisis Pregnancy Agency; and increase the level of information and training available to parents, building on a successful primary model and introduce a programme of subject inspections in this area with effect from 2007-08.
The availability of a national curriculum in SPHE at junior cycle has played a vital role in supporting increased implementation of RSE. I am aware of the development work undertaken to date by the NCCA in regard to a social personal and health education programme at senior cycle. This is now at an advanced stage, and I look forward to receiving the NCCA's recommendations in this regard at an early date. I am confident these initiatives will help to ensure full implementation of this vital aspect of social education in our schools.
I thank the Minister for her reply. I was a little alarmed at first as she concentrated on reminding and updating. I welcome the fact it is intended to have subject inspections. However, if a subject is not being taught in a school, how can an inspection be carried out?
I am sure the Minister shares my main concern, which is the recent survey carried out by the Crisis Pregnancy Agency. This survey showed 11% of secondary schools are not teaching RSE to first and second year students. The percentage rises to 20% in third year, with a third of all schools not teaching the subject in the senior cycle. When interviewed on this matter, the Minister referred to the pressure on the curriculum etc. I share her concerns in this regard but does she agree this is an extremely important subject and we must ensure it is provided to all children?
The Government appears to be a little confused on this issue. Both Government parties publicly stated they want the age of consent lowered to 16 yet we are not ensuring necessary sex education is provided to young people in schools to furnish them with proper knowledge on this subject.
Is the Minister aware that in 2005 a total of 42 teenagers aged under 15 gave birth to children? I do not suggest this problem can be solved just by the provision of better sex education in schools but it will go some way towards addressing it.
How many subject inspections will be carried out in 2007? What type of information and training will be provided to parents? Will this be carried out within schools and if so, who will provide the service?
The report which I launched is a useful resource, not just for the Department but also for schools by showing not alone their findings but also what works in different schools. Schools employ different models of delivering RSE as part of their programme. In some schools, it is done by the classroom teacher while others bring in professionals from the HSE. It will be interesting for schools to read the report to see for themselves what might work.
I accept this is a crucially important part of the overall social, personal and health education. It is important for schools to realise there is nothing in the programme that would conflict with their ethos. Schools all over the country have found it is possible to teach all of the programme. I am especially worried that the schools that are least likely to implement the full programme are single sex boys schools. This is just as important an issue for boys as it is for girls. We need to get this message across strongly. The measures and supports will be available for all schools.
One of the recommendations in the report was that inspections take place. I was amused that people wished inspectors to go into schools. However, the schools themselves felt that it accorded a subject status if inspectors came to assess it. The inspectors have now been assigned to regional teams and will start in September. I cannot yet say how many inspections will take place, but they will be regional, cross-sectoral and cross-gender, taking in the various elements of the school system. That will give us a different status.
Another conclusion that came across in the report was that, where the entire school supports SPHE, it works very successfully. There should not be a single teacher isolated in his or her classroom. It is very important that the teachers themselves wish to teach the subject, which should not simply be assigned to someone who happens to have a spare period. If schools take all that on board, the principal is seen to support it, and other staff members support the teacher. It can be very successful.
One heartening finding of the report was that students, teachers and parents are all extremely positive. However, there has not been a public information campaign for parents since the subject was first introduced, when many fears had to be allayed. I hope that, as part of their information meetings for parents at the beginning of each year, schools will include advice regarding the programme's content. That could then become part and parcel of what they wish to discuss at home.
When does the Minister anticipate 100% participation from schools to ensure that all children in secondary education are able to avail of this subject? Regarding inspections, she mentioned the HSE element and stated that some schools were bringing people in. We need a degree of flexibility on inspections, since if schools are teaching the subject in different ways, an inspector could say that one is wrong in comparison with another. However, it may be working for both. How does the Minister propose to deal with that?
It is important to stress that the Department of Education and Science inspectors are obviously not there to inspect the HSE professionals. Rather they will consider the overall context of how the programme is delivered. The positive side of the report is that 90% of schools are teaching the subject at junior cycle. We will see 100% compliance when the SPHE curriculum arrives for senior level, since that gives schools something with which to work. I know that the NCCA is due to provide that soon. When it does, it will be of great assistance to schools. Once they have more up-to-date information, that will encourage them. We will actively encourage schools to view this as a very important part of wider education and not something that should be dropped when one approaches an examination, as currently happens.
That was junior cycle, but what about senior cycle?
SPHE is currently a compulsory part of the junior cycle programme, and we will obviously inform all schools of guidelines in that regard.
5 Mr. Crowe asked the Minister for Education and Science if, in view of the recent landmark decision for leaving certificate students with dyslexia, who were successful in their claim of discrimination under the Equal Status Acts 2000 to 2004 against her Department in relation to the annotation of their leaving certificate examination results, she will reform this anomaly to ensure equality for all students; and the discussions she has had with the State Examinations Commission in relation to their policy and practice in this area. [11043/07]
As the Deputy will be aware, the Government has shown an unrivalled commitment to ensuring that children and young people with special needs get the extra support they need to reach their full potential at school. We have dramatically expanded investment in special education in recent years, and we have improved access to the state examinations for young people with special needs.
A range of accommodations is provided to enable students with disabilities to take advantage of the certificate examinations. For example enlarged print, Braille translation, modified questions, use of a scribe, a reader, a personal assistant, a tape recorder or word-processor may be allowed, depending on needs.
The scheme was expanded in 2000, following the report of an expert advisory group, to provide opportunities for exemptions where a candidate was not in a position to demonstrate achievement in a core area of assessment. In keeping with the advice of the expert advisory group, a system of annotation was applied to any case where a student was exempt from a core area of assessment, or where the mode of assessment used had the same effect.
That change, for example, enabled a hearing-impaired student to be exempt for the first time from the aural component of language subjects. His or her marks on the balance of the examination would be extrapolated proportionately, and the certificate would include a note to the effect that all elements of the subject were assessed except the aural component. Spelling and grammar waivers in language subjects were provided to cater for students with dyslexia on a similar basis, with annotation of the certificates.
The aim of those changes was to facilitate the operation of a responsive and flexible system that enabled all candidates to demonstrate their achievements, while preserving the integrity and fairness of the examinations by ensuring that special arrangements were operated in a transparent manner.
The introduction of the expanded scheme was seen as important in widening access and promoting optimum participation among students with disabilities. Since then, the number of students availing themselves of accommodations in the certificate examinations has grown dramatically. Some 4,438 accommodations were granted in 2002, including 39 component exemptions and 1,945 spelling and grammar waivers. By 2006, that number had increased to 12,136 accommodations, including 987 component exemptions, and 5,450 spelling and grammar waivers.
Annotations on certificates apply only in situations where a core area of a subject is not assessed, or where the mode of assessment used has the same effect. That is used to ensure fairness and integrity vis-à-vis other students who have been assessed on those components, and in order not to mislead the end user of the certificate.
Regarding the Equality Tribunal's findings, the legal position is that they must either be implemented in full or appealed against within the specified timeframe under the Equal Status Act 2002. My Department has examined the findings and is concerned both that the widening of access through the use of exemptions coupled with annotations has not been fully understood in this case and that the fundamental nature of the accommodations being provided has been questioned. It has therefore been decided to appeal the findings to the Circuit Court.
I have also asked the State Examinations Commission to re-examine policy and practice in the area. It is important that our system continue to evolve in line with best practice, promoting high standards of quality and integrity while guaranteeing access, participation and benefit for all our students. I do not anticipate that changes will be made to practice in the area before the outcome of the review and the findings regarding the appeal.
I welcome the fact that the Minister has said she will re-examine the area. I do not know why or when the system was introduced. The Minister gave plenty of statistics regarding numbers taking examinations and so on.
We are talking about fairness and integrity, but this system is unfair. That seems also to be the view of the Equality Tribunal, which examined the issue. Two students won a court case in this regard. The asterisks or annotations label the student, undermining the entire concept of mainstreaming students. The Central Applications Office, CAO, accepts the grades without taking account of marking adjustments. For whom is the information intended? We are told that it was introduced to support the integrity of the examinations process.
The Minister mentioned marks for Irish, which allow some students an extra 5% in leaving certificate examinations, but there is no indication on their certificates that any adjustments have been made. Why is it so regarding these students? We are labelling them and signalling something to employers. If the CAO is not interested, I do not know who is. The asterisks suggest that the leaving certificate is not worth as much. How could any Minister defend that process? That the Department of Education and Science has taken a court case in this regard is a scandal and a waste of public money.
We are seriously talking about mainstreaming children with impairments, yet this sends them the wrong message. That more such children are sitting the leaving certificate is irrelevant. Similar annotations are not allowed in other jurisdictions, including the North and Britain. I ask that the Minister act on this issue. It will cost neither her nor her Department anything, but it will certainly make a substantial difference to the families of the children affected.
The leaving certificate details what was examined and the marks awarded. In most cases, it would simply list the grades in certain subjects, the assumption being that all elements were examined. The annotation merely states that an element of one or more examinations was not taken into account. It is a statement of fact. It is there because so many people have been accommodated to ensure that they get every opportunity to participate fully within the examination system. Annotations have been, and are, used in other countries. They are being used in the United States, which is the only country where a ruling has been made to say that it is not illegal to do so. England, Wales and Northern Ireland have also provided for exemptions and certificate annotations, but those authorities were told that they could not go ahead under the terms of the disability discrimination legislation. Those areas then decided to drop the exemptions completely, although there now seems to be some confusion and rowing back on the issue. It is therefore a matter for other countries as well. I am anxious to ensure that young people with learning disabilities will be able to participate. To this end, we must give them as much accommodation as possible. I have read out the type of work that is made available for them.
Who is it for?
The certificate is simply a statement of what was examined.
What is this certificate for?
It can be used by employers.
Is that not what it is for?
Yes.
Will it still indicate that they got an accommodation?
It can be used by colleges but they do not seek to use it. The State Examinations Commission has already examined the matter to ascertain what is best practice and how to ensure that people are not disadvantaged in any way. The appeal was taken because we felt strongly that the tribunal had gone outside its remit. It challenged the type of accommodation offered and spoke of the leaving certificate as a standardised test, which it is not. It dictated that individually suited accommodation based on individual assessment should be offered in cases, and that the range of accommodation currently available should be continued into the future. The tribunal strayed into the area of educational, curriculum and assessment policy over which it has absolutely no remit. That would have had far wider consequences than the issues that were at stake in this particular case. That is why we appealed it.
