JOINT COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND SCIENCE debate -
Thursday, 23 Jan 2003

Vol. 1 No. 2

Institution of Engineers of Ireland: Presentation.

Chairman

We have in attendance a delegation from the Institution of Engineers of Ireland to discuss the science, technology and engineering programme for schools, STEPS. The delegation comprises Mr. Peter Langford, incoming president, Mr. Liam Connellan, past president, Dr. Jane Grimson, past president, Mr. Paddy Purcell, director general of the IEI, and Ms ItaMcGuigan, project manager of STEPS. They are welcome.

As the witnesses will be aware, this matter was to have been considered by the previous committee but the general election intervened. Members were anxious that the new committee consider the matter.

I draw the attention of witnesses to the fact that members have absolute privilege but this does not apply to witnesses appearing before the committee. Members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the House or an official by name in such a way as to make him or her identifiable.

I understand the presentation is to be made by Mr. Langford.

Mr. Peter Langford

I thank the Chairman and members for the kind invitation to address them. We intended to have another person with us, Paddy Caffrey, who is the vice president and managing director of Pfizer, but he ran into difficulties when coming from Cork and could not make it.

We have given the committee a reference book to which we will refer as we go through. It is not our intention to go all the way through it, merely to take the first 15 pages. Additional information and reference material backing up our presentation is included. I will make a short presentation giving the context of the institution and where we sit within the engineering profession and the economy. Paddy Purcell, the director general, will deal with the third and second level education challenges. I will then wrap up with some quick comments in conclusion. We will then be delighted to answer any questions or enter into any discussion.

The Institute of Engineers of Ireland has 21,000 members and is the largest professional body in Ireland. It is an all-Ireland learned body that was founded in 1835 and is strongly represented in all the regions. Our charter was amended by a 1969 Act of the Oireachtas and, as a result, we are charged with responsibility to keep a register of chartered or professional engineers. We represent all the engineering disciplines, both in the private and public sectors. The main divisions are: civil and structural, electrical and electronic, mechanical and manufacturing, chemical, software, biomedical, agriculture and food. There are other divisions as well. A run down of these is on page 17 of the book we have given members. We are an all-Ireland body and cover all disciplines.

We realise the committee has a wide remit and, although the main purpose of today is to talk about the decline in the study of the physical sciences, we would like to mention a few areas where we have the potential to make a further contribution and on which we would be delighted to be consulted.

One is the accreditation of third level engineering qualifications. Under European Union regulations, we have formal responsibility under the Washington, Sydney and Dublin Accords and a range of international agreements to carry out quality assurance of third level qualifications at degree, diploma and certificate levels. This gives confidence to the international business community that, when they locate or work in Ireland, the quality of engineering they come across is on a par or better than what they are used to in their home countries or best world standards.

The second item highlighted on page 4 is the Bologna Declaration. Ireland is a signatory to this declaration, which commits all EU countries to a common approach to third level qualifications by 2010 for all third level qualifications. It has particular relevance and implications for the engineering profession, with which we want to deal. The institution prepared an early position paper on the Bologna Declaration in 2001 and we are currently completing a further paper on it. Much work will have to be done in Ireland to ensure we are best placed to meet our commitments here by 2010. We work closely with the Department of Education and Science, the HEA, HETAC and the third level colleges on the Bologna Declaration and we would be delighted to discuss this with the committee if it becomes an issue.

We are aware that all parties have significant commitments to research and development in Ireland to keep up the economic surge of recent years. We also believe that the seeds are set in the third level education sector and we are keen to ensure there is sustained investment in third level education, research and development. We will happily discuss this with the committee at an appropriate time.

Regarding continuing professional development and lifelong learning, we strongly believe that an engineer's education is not complete on graduation. In some ways it is only starting and we are in sync with Government and EU policy on this. We have a major initiative under way with companies which employ engineers and engineering personnel and though it is relatively recent there has been a good take-up and it is very successful. We have 130 companies which have signed a protocol and which are willing to commit themselves to providing continuing professional development or lifelong learning for their engineering personnel. We are working closely with industry on this.

We have a very important role to play in the manufacturing-export sector, which is a cornerstone of our economic success and our strong balance of payments. If members look at pages 21 to 28 they will see the logos of many major companies in which engineers are employed and we have many members in those companies. Our contribution to the manufacturing sector is emphasised by a remark made recently by Sean Dorgan in his annual review of the IDA's performance. He referred to recent job losses, saying by far the greater part of the jobs lost were in basic assembly but that there will be an unstoppable growth in demand for highly qualified engineers.

We feel it is very important that that supply of highly qualified engineers is provided. Our members, and engineers in general, play a huge role in the development of infrastructure also; pages 29 and 30 show a number of private and public sector organisations in which engineers play a vital role, working hard to produce the infrastructure required for economic success. The same goes for engineers' contribution to quality of life. Apart from the organisations already mentioned, engineers are actively involved in many State organisations - local authorities and so on - which enhance the environment and contribute to sustainable development. They will also be critically employed in the national spatial strategy.

All in all, our economy is dependent on approximately 70,000 engineers, so a continuing supply of engineers is vital. Page six gives an indication of the challenges we face. A graph shows the NCEA awards through the 1990s in broad disciplines. The red line in the graph shows quite a decline in engineering and technology output right through the decade and there is no change since. Meanwhile, there is a significant rise in business studies, so a rise in this sector seems to follow a decline in interest in engineering. The same goes for science and computing, if one follows the green line through the graph, while the humanities have increased. We see this as encapsulating the challenge we face in ensuring an appropriate supply of engineers to meet the needs of the economy and the country.

Mr. Paddy Purcell

Mr. Langford has outlined the critical role engineers play in the economy and society as well as the declining interest among school leavers in engineering as a career. We see reversing this decline as a key national priority. There is a particular challenge in attracting more females into engineering. Approximately 7% of qualified engineers in the country at present are female while going through college at present, depending on the individual class one looks at, between 15% and 20% of undergraduate classes are female. Opportunities must be provided to females to enter a career which can bring them to the top of industry and the public service. The profession itself needs a balance between males and females and there is a challenge here in ensuring the places currently available in college are filled by a balance of males and females.

I will not repeat the statistics the committee will have available to it, such as those from the Task Force on the Physical Sciences and the Expert Group on Future Skills Needs. I will concentrate on the earlier part of the third level challenge in explaining the practical work being done under the STEPS programme - the science, technology and engineering programme for schools - to address the decline in engineering. Page 9 of the handout shows that the STEPS programme commenced in 2000 as a result of discussions between the Institution of Engineers of Ireland, the IDA, Forfás, various industry groups and the then Minister for Education and Science, Dr. Woods, to discuss the decline in interest in engineering the committee has heard about. The project is jointly sponsored and financed by industry and the Department and is managed by the Institution of Engineers because of the extensive voluntary input and support we, as an institution, can obtain from our members in both industry and the public service.

The objectives of the project are to promote an interest in engineering as a career among second level students and to promote the uptake of maths and the physical sciences at second level. The STEPS project consists of a range of integrated activities: we have roadshows which tour the country and visit secondary schools, explaining the nature of engineering across the various disciplines. These roadshows have been attended by over 20,000 students per annum. We have schools-to-industry visits, over 250 of which have been scheduled for this year. The STEPS project and roadshow visit all the major career exhibitions in the country and we have a wide variety of workshops for both guidance counsellors and other teacher groups. We have young engineer summer camps and a very extensive website which is used as a resource by second level schools and there is also a wide range of promotional material, some of which has been given to members this morning. There is a range of continuing initiatives, including a recent guide to engineering as a career year book by Professor Gerry Byrne of UCD, which committee members have received. That was launched last Friday by the Minister for Education and Science, Deputy Dempsey.

The STEPS programme is now well established. It has wide credibility with students, teachers, parents and industry partners. It has been endorsed as being required by Forfás, the Expert Group on Future Skills Needs, the IDA, FÁS, the American Chamber of Commerce in Ireland and so on. Its approach and effectiveness is supported both by our and independent survey material and a steering committee, comprised of both public sector and industry representatives, monitors the ongoing operation and direction of the project and its finances.

In relation to our recommendations in this area, now that the project has been firmly established and is seen to have credibility, the institution believes its activity level should be at least doubled to enable it to interface with more schools and pupils each year. The project focuses on transition, fifth and sixth years. This needs to be extended to include more comprehensive coverage at junior cycle level and primary level where many students first formulate their views on both subject and career choice. In order to enable this to be done, we have been seeking from the Minister for Education and Science an increase in Department funding up to €300,000 per annum. This will be more than matched by at least €400,000 from industry, which we can guarantee will be delivered.

I will now move on to second level challenges and what the institution considers critical issues in this area. As an engineering profession we obviously have an interest in both the quality and numbers of students taking higher level maths and the physical sciences at second level. Members will be aware from the findings of the Task Force on the Physical Sciences of the low numbers taking higher level leaving certificate maths, dropping from a low of 36% of students at junior level to an abysmally low 18% at leaving certificate level, which is just a quarter of the percentage of students who take higher level in other subjects. Significantly more attention must be given to mathematics and science at primary level, because this is where the foundation for and interest in engineering and scientific careers are first formulated and the foundation is laid to continue through second level with the physical sciences.

We have pointed out to the Minister for Education and Science and others the problems associated with part-time working at second level, particularly the negative impact this has on the study of maths and the physical sciences at second level. On page 14, we stress our belief in the fundamental importance of mathematics for engineering and other numerate careers. We agree with a statement from the Task Force on the Physical Sciences that the study of mathematics and the physical sciences are inextricably linked.

In regard to our recommendations on second level education, we believe the review of mathematics by the Minister should be implemented urgently and improvements introduced to both the curriculum and teaching methods. The recommendations of the Task Force on the Physical Sciences should be implemented in totality and as a matter of urgency. We ask for a review of the problems associated with part-time working by students and how the current transition year format may contribute to these problems. I thank members for their attention and I will now ask Peter Langford to summarise.

Mr. Langford

I will summarise briefly three points. First, the STEPS programme, which Paddy outlined, needs to be expanded. We are confident we can maintain the industry contribution. In order to do so, however, we would first need increased Government commitment as outlined. Second, the maths review being conducted by the Minister for Education and Science should be completed urgently and implemented. Third, we fully support the recommendations of the Task Force on the Physical Sciences and believe these recommendations should be implemented as soon as possible.

Chairman

We will now have the question and answer session. As there is the largest attendance ever, I will call first on the representatives of the parties.

Deputy Stanton

I welcome the delegation and thank them for their very interesting presentation. I have a number of brief questions. It seems that young people make up their minds very early as to what career track they will take, which can happen as early as primary school level. Am I correct in saying that the attention to science at primary level leaves a lot to be desired, including the numbers in classes and that laboratory work, even at an elementary level, is almost non-existent in most schools? As a result, the kind of excitement and interest at that level which could be developed in science is not happening. At that age children are very often hooked into an excitement about science, which is very exciting and interesting, but instead they drift into other areas.

Following the junior certificate, if students do not avail of the transition year, very often they must make a career choice of subjects for the leaving certificate. They do so at a very young age and are often encouraged to group subjects together. For instance, if a student wishes to do science, they must also do Irish, English and maths. If they want to go on to NUI colleges in particular they must also do a modern continental language. If they want to do science, they are often encouraged to pick three science subjects or a combination of subjects, which was not the case in the past. The choice of subjects at that stage is crucial because students' career paths are determined at that age. Am I correct in saying that at that stage many students believe honours maths, and physics and chemistry in particular, and perceived to be very difficult subjects, and they may not succeed unless they are very able students, particularly at honours level? What can be done to address that perception? I am very impressed with what the representatives have been doing in this regard.

It appears also that many secondary schools do not have a science laboratory and back-up staff to do the preparatory work required for many of the experiments which are an integral part of these subjects. There is a science city in Tunisia, which recognises the importance of science and maths. Will someone comment on the quality of teaching of maths and science because we need to look at this aspect to see if can we assist teachers in different ways of teaching?

Chairman

The Deputy probably raised the principal points in which most people are interested.

Deputy O’Sullivan

I join colleagues in welcoming the delegation. Looking through the booklet, particularly the appendices, shows the importance of the sciences to the economy right across the major sectors of employment. I hope that by coming to the committee we will highlight the issue. I was thinking back to the 1970s when Peggy Seeger had a song entitled "I Was Gonna Be An Engineer". It was during the time of the women's liberation movement and perhaps the song should be revived again because it was a statement of the low perception of women in engineering at the time, which is one of the issues the delegation is seeking to address.

Deputy Stanton raised the most pertinent issue. I read a column in one of the national newspapers advising people how to fill in their CAO forms. The point was made that there is a perception it is difficult to get good points in maths and the physical sciences. This is crucial and I would be interested to hear what the members of the delegation think about this. There was a suggestion that even people who want to go on to study physical sciences at third level may not necessarily take all those subjects at leaving certificate level because of the difficulty in getting good points. I presume there is a rigorous system of ensuring subjects are treated equally in terms of how people are marked at leaving certificate level. There is a perception among students, however, that it is easier to get points in certain subjects. This is a crucial factor because there is such a competitive element in terms the points system in the whole education system. This is reflected throughout the system. I would like a response to that issue.

I welcome the committee highlighting this very important issue. We should support the request for the development of the STEPS programme.

Deputy Gogarty

Perhaps my first question can be answered later. I am not fully aware of the current funding for the STEPS programme. A figure of up to €300,000 was mentioned. What is the current figure being given by the Department? Obviously the companies who promise €400,000 want to be able to match what the Government will offer because they will not subsidise the whole project.

In other aspects of education, the primary schools building project is the most recent example, time and again funding causes a crucial logjam. I must criticise this short-term saving because a longer term investment, either through borrowing or other means, would reap benefits. I had the opportunity to visit many of the companies mentioned because in my former incarnation I was a business journalist. Five years ago, I found a good spread of both male and female engineers. This balance is growing but it needs to be encouraged, as was mentioned in the report. At least there is now a better balance than was the case previously. There also seems to be a broader range of skills.

I have two other questions. In regard to third level education, what is the view of having broader courses so that people will be able to diversify into different disciplines, depending on market conditions? Is it the opinion of the delegation that people should specialise in a subject or should they do general science for the leaving certificate? If one has studied a broad range of subjects up to that point, at least when one takes up a third level course one will be able to pick up a lot.

In regard to maths and the teaching of science - this is just anecdotal evidence - when I was doing my leaving certificate a few years ago, many teachers seemed to teach science as a second or third subject. It was not a subject in which they specialised. What is the current number of second level teachers who graduate with a primary qualification in a science subject as opposed to something they might have taken in first year and then dropped? As that would infringe on the quality of teaching, perhaps there should be some incentives introduced for teachers taking these subjects. Has the number of people taking maths and science subjects declined because students were encouraged to take business subjects as a result of the Celtic tiger economy? Until recently the IT sector was growing at a rapid rate but much of the IT jobs appeared to be in narrow specialist areas where one could be upskilled in a certain aspect of work such as call centres or telecommunications. There was no skill base to broaden out. Is it now the case that people in second level are being encouraged to take subjects based on earning potential? Is the STEPS programme highlighting that fifth, sixth and transition year students, given the Celtic tiger back drop, are encouraged by the bottom line as much as by their own specific interest, that people are not taking medicine, for example, because it is considered to be a great career? However, if people have a certain aptitude for engineering, is there a case for highlighting the earnings potential for working within Ireland, given the industry demand? Would the STEPS programme be suitable for primary education? How can it be modified to the extent that one would be able to explain to fifth or sixth year students the various disciplines and get them interested at that level? Would it be better to get them interested in engineering and science in general so that they could pick up on it in the early stages of second level?

Senator Minihan

I join previous speakers in thanking the delegation for their presentation. A number of points have been covered by previous speakers. However, I would like to comment on a few issues. On the modernisation of the mathematical programme, it appears the success of technology and engineers has replaced the form of mathematical understanding we had with the logic and discipline of problem solving. My children are using computers and DVDs but when I ask how they did something, they cannot explain it to me. They just know what button to press. In one way we have become victims of our own success from an engineering point of view. How we bridge that change to modern technology from the old discipline of logic and understanding of how things work is one of the big challenges facing us. I would be interested in the views of the delegation in this regard because it has to do with the modernisation of how science subjects are taught. While there appears to be a decline in science subjects, and we see how successful the young scientist programme has and continues to be, it is amazing such interest and enthusiasm can suddenly disappear afterwards. That success must be looked at to see how we can broaden and build on it.

The other area about which I am concerned is research and development. It appears the whole future and success of business depends on research and development. A businessman wants to make money and have a good turnover but he will want to know what might happen ten, 15 or 20 years down the road. He is dependent on research and development to produce that technology. We appear not to give due recognition to those who work in R&D, which is reflected in salaries and so on. If we could concentrate some efforts in improving R&D as a very necessary part of the future of the whole science and engineering programme, we would be taking a step in the right direction.

I am also interested in the views of the delegation on the points system. It strikes me that this area needs a total review. We have become very dependent on the points system in the education of our children from grind schools and so on. One might be given advice to drop an honours paper because the student will struggle to get a C, but will get an A in the pass paper. The points system is geared in that way. While in its day it may have been the fairest and most equitable system, I am now seriously concerned that the points system is clouding the career progression of children in that it is a game as to how to achieve maximum points. I would be interested to hear the views of members of the delegation on people's adaptability and suitability for subjects and how this could be made compatible with a system that needs to be reviewed.

I concur with the view expressed by previous speakers on the STEPS programme. I believe in the modern technology life we are now living. We must concentrate our efforts in primary school but I do not know how we will do this. I am certainly not concerned about capturing the imagination of young people who are far more in tune with the era in which we live than we give them credit for. It is up to us to adapt a programme suitable to them. I thank the delegation for attending.

Senator Fitzgerald

I welcome the delegation. Senator Minihan has done a pre-emptive strike on one of the points I wanted to make. I suggest to the delegation that two of the aspects most influencing participation in optional subjects are interest and the fact that it is points friendly. The points system has been dealt with at some length and I will not go into that matter.

It is difficult to prioritise which comes first and which comes second because they are inextricably linked. If one looks at the history of participation in science subjects one will find that up to the 1970s they were perceived as subjects for the most intelligent. They were not popular subjects. There was, at that time, limited choice. The prevailing wisdom was that intelligent students studied science. Today, there is unlimited choice in terms of subject development. Students will pick the subjects most useful to them. If what they wish to do following their leaving certificate does not require them to have science, they do not do it.

Up until recently, music was perceived as a subject studied by girls. It was not until after the 1980s that boys began to study it. Rarely did anyone achieve an A in music in the leaving certificate. That has changed somewhat now. I know some people will be tempted to say that has been changed by all the young groups around now. I do not believe that. Fundamental changes occurred at establishment level among the schools of excellence in music during the 1980s which motivated, directed and influenced change in the participation rates in those studying music.

There was an acknowledgement that music was as much about performance as theory and that equally, if it was about performance, practical elements should be an integral part of it and so changes took place. I do not wish to develop that at length although I could as I am reasonably familiar with it. There was a fundamental change due to a recognition, awareness and acknowledgement of music. The change came by way of the practical examination becoming an integral part of the overall allocation of marks. There are a variety of choices such as 50:50, 25:25:75 as between practical, composition and theory in music.

I suggest there is a huge case for a practical element in second level junior and leaving certificate examinations, as was raised by Deputy Staunton and others. I know it is regarded as an integral part of the course but it is only paid lip service because it does not count when it comes to marks. There is a very strong case for changing that system.

That argument is linked with interest because defined subjects such as music are as much about participation as theorising. I suggest, with respect and a very limited knowledge of scientists, that science evolved as a subject through practise and experimentation. The point has been made that we do not have adequate facilities in our schools. It is my recollection that laboratories were available in second level schools even in the most rural areas. I have no reason to believe - I may be told otherwise - that has changed. Perhaps it has changed because of the dying interest in science. A fundamental change in the practical element of examinations is required at national level. I would like to hear the delegation's comments on that.

The point was made that primary schools have a role to play. I suggest that it is playing a role but it is not taken up at second and subsequent levels. Every primary school teaches an element of environmental science be it picking primroses, daisies or leaves that have fallen off trees. There is a fundamental understanding at primary level of the importance of science. It is not followed up at second level because environmental science is not part of the curriculum. Environmental science, as I understand it, involves all the sciences. It was well thought out in the 1950s and the 1960s that environmental science should be an integral part of the primary school curriculum. It never evolved from there. It is, perhaps, something to which your organisation might give some attention. Surely engineering is as fundamental a part of science as is maths, biology, botany, physics or chemistry.

People have commented on the science exhibition. It has been an phenomenal success and credit is due to all those involved. I understand that STEPS participates in the European Science Olympia. That is a very welcome initiative and it has taken off over the last three or four years. DCU and all others involved are to be complimented in that regard. I believe DCU are the originators here in Ireland. We are having our first European Science Olympia in April and May this year. We should give due recognition to that. It is part of the popularising of the science subjects.

We have stopped the globe - I do not wish to be considered party political in this regard. We were the first country outside the USA to embrace the globe. I understand President Clinton was anxious that Ireland should take this on board. We did so for a number of years. Did you make any submission in that regard to the relevant Minister at the time? I will not be accused of being party political when I question the justification for stopping it.

I believe environmental science should be an integral part of where we go in the future. It is essential, as a first step, irrespective of financial resources, that a practical element be introduced. I would like to hear the delegation's comments on the globe.

Deputy Hoctor

I, too, welcome the engineering group and Mr. Liam Connellan, whom I met on a previous occasion.

I am delighted to have heard the presentation given to us today. It is not one of the main issues with which I am familiar. However, I identify with much of what has been said. The very obvious slump in engineering depicted in the graph is alarming. Having listened to my colleagues and agreeing with everything said so far I believe it comes down to marketing.

I would like to refer to the greatest marketing of engineering we have witnessed in the past few weeks with the erection of the Spire in the city. It is wonderful to see what engineering can actually do. The book referred to earlier states that engineering creates what never was. What a wonderful feat it was for the discipline of engineering. I believe it comes down to marketing more so now than ever.

I welcome the STEPS initiative and hope we can work towards expanding it. I agree with Senator Fitzgerald's comments regarding learning by doing. The practical nature is proving inefficient within secondary schools in particular. There are many reasons that is so. Ireland is the only country in Europe which does not provide laboratory technicians for science teachers whereby the room is prepared beforehand with experiments set up and cleared away later for the teacher. That takes a great deal of time. I was not involved in teaching science but I know that is a practical difficulty which science teachers experience. It is a discouragement for the teacher who teaches other subjects also. This will have to be addressed. We must examine the possibility of providing laboratory technicians in schools as is done in all other EU countries.

Courses are less interesting when they become theory rather than practice based. The very nature of science is that one experiments by doing. The Department has spent a great deal of money on the changing of syllabi, training teachers and providing computers. We have not gone far enough. Computers have been provided to the science department of every school but unfortunately some computers have been put into cupboards and students' practical experience of data logging is decreasing because the subject is not examined. The experiments continue but not to the extent they should to keep science alive and interesting, or to encourage pupils to delve more into the mystery of why things change or why they are as they are. That must be addressed. Hopefully this committee will have a positive influence. After all the training and courses we have fallen short of putting the experiments in place.

We have an exciting new maths syllabus to junior certificate level but junior certificate students this year will return to the old maths programme for fifth year and leaving certificate unless they do transition year. This will be the case unless the new maths programme is revised and updated as our guests have requested. Security coding, number theories and so on are not included in the modernisation programme of maths at secondary school level. If we are seen to be outdated and not up to speed with regard to school subjects we will lose the consumers, our students, who are the potential engineers of the future.

We need the people in the science area of the Department to address this situation because the practical work on the ground is not effective, as we see from the figures presented to us today. How do we compare with the UK and Europe in regard to our students when they leave school or how do we compare with the practice of the sciences and the response of students to the sciences in the UK and Europe?

Senator Tuffy

I thank the delegation for its presentation and welcome the work being done by STEPS. When I was at school I had a vague idea of engineering. This type of programme would have been helpful to me.

I worked in student registrations in Dublin Institute of Technology, Bolton Street. Until I worked there I did not appreciate the flexibility of an engineering career. The same is true of science. One can start off with a certificate, then move on to a diploma, a degree or postgraduate qualification, and from part-time to full-time study or the reverse. That flexibility should be made clear to second level students. They should learn that there is flexibility in the career and that a person can progress as far as he or she is capable and further. Students may not be high fliers at second level but that does not necessarily mean they do not have the capability to progress. I am aware of students who did not have the qualifications to get into full-time education, who studied in Bolton street by night, did well and then went on to full-time degree courses. Some of them proved to be the best performers at degree level. We need to recognise that and get it across to students in our promotion of engineering as a career.

At one stage there was an ESF-funded programme called NOW. In Bolton Street it provided a one year course for women with the idea that they could consider progressing to a third level engineering course. These women did not necessarily have the qualifications for third level. There should be more of those programmes or transition year courses in our education system. If people do not have the qualifications required in maths or whatever, they should be able to do a one year course which would allow them, if successful, to proceed to third level.

Deputy McEllistrim

I welcome the members of the delegation and thank them for their presentation. As engineering is one of the most important professions for the country, it is regrettable that more students do not study it. We support the STEPS programme which is a welcome initiative. It is surprising that only 15% of students going on to study engineering are female. That should be addressed. What can be done? What does the delegation feel is important to do to address that?

There should be more emphasis on maths and science as the primary subjects needed for engineering. What can be done to encourage students to take honours level maths? What changes would be needed in teaching methods or what new ideas are required? Science laboratories are important for experiments. There was no science laboratory in the secondary school I attended. Most second level schools have science laboratories now but we should consider providing them in national schools to foster an interest in science and engineering.

We should also consider the employment of science laboratory technicians to facilitate teachers. This would make the teacher's job much easier. As a secondary teacher I know that the day is stressful and the employment of technicians would be worthwhile and welcome.

Chairman

Two questions come to my mind. Limerick Institute of Technology and UL gave points to students of computer science in some of the Limerick schools and for a while to some of the other schools in the region. It was a pilot project the ends of which do not seem to have been tied up properly. Some other schools took up the subject but found that their students did not qualify for points for either of the colleges. This scheme does not seem to have developed further although the subject was popular and students did quite well at it.

I am also under the impression that students must pass mathematics to get a place in all third level colleges. I have a son in leaving certificate year and cannot but help hearing him and his friends discussing mathematics in less than glowing terms, and that is at pass level. Does that have any impact?

Deputy Stanton

If students take higher level maths at leaving certificate level and fail they do not get access to any higher level institution. However, if they opt for ordinary level they may get a B and succeed in getting a place. There is a significant difference between both levels. That issue needs to be addressed.

Chairman

It certainly needs attention judging from the discussions I have heard.

Mr. Langford

I thank everybody for their questions and contributions. Each of us will respond and try to cover the main points.

We are pleased that STEPS was warmly welcomed. I will deal with the STEPS programme and Paddy, Jane and Liam will pick up on the curriculum and syllabus items in particular and on industry and the research and development issue.

I was delighted to hear the Spire mentioned because one of our chartered members was its structural designer and another was the supervisor of construction. Another of our chartered members is the project manager for the renewal of O'Connell Street. As an institution we are proud of that and an image of it can be seen on the cover of our presentation if one looks carefully. We are thrilled with the response we are getting to STEPS from this committee. It mirrors the response we are getting as we go around the country. Our next road show is in Monaghan. The maximum number we can have at a show is 1,200 but we have 1,500 coming to Monaghan and there are more people who cannot be accommodated. They are coming from Donegal and other places to Monaghan for the show.

We regard it as very important to expand STEPS to the junior cycle at second level and also to the primary cycle. We take on board the committee's points. We did a small straw poll before we came in and of the five engineers who are here, two of us made up our minds in primary school that we wanted to become engineers. The influencing age is very young and it is very important. We have been encouraging people in this regard and we ask the committee for its support in seeking additional Government funding.

Page 38 of the report shows the funding make up for the past three years. Approximately one-sixth is provided by Government and the remainder by industry. Clearly we need increased Government support if we want to sustain the funding from industry. We believe we can achieve that provided we can get Government backup.

There was mention of the broadening of the syllabus at third level. Examination of the syllabi for the engineering courses will be a key item as will the broadening of the syllabi to allow people to move into different disciplines rather than confining them on day one. I will pass over to Paddy Purcell.

Mr. Purcell

In relation to primary level, we support the need to have the excitement of the sciences brought to the attention of people under the ages of 11 or 12. We have gone on record to the Minister in that regard. We concur with the members who spoke about the need for hands-on experimentation at that level. Young people like to be involved and to participate. It was noticeable that a number of Deputies and Senators mentioned the word "participation". It is important to generate that excitement in the sciences at primary level which can carry on into second level.

The importance of participation continues at second level. It was interesting to hear a comment from a number of members about the need to potentially change the approach to examination. We concur with the view that there would be benefits in introducing changes in the way in which examinations, particularly in the physical sciences, are carried out. There can certainly be greater attention paid to project work, to the issue of oral examination and one-to-one examination. The sciences are interactive and we believe the examination should not necessarily be just a single paper examination at the end of a long career in school.

Questions were raised about the perceived difficulty of maths and the physical sciences and how that can be addressed. The institution is strongly of the view that second level subjects need to be treated equally in assisting students to achieve the same level of points. Not all the subjects are as easy to assimilate by students and not all are easy to teach and this was referred to by committee members. There is a need to examine teaching methods for both maths and the physical sciences. There will be need for smaller class sizes for these subjects because there is a particular issue of sequential understanding. Each student could have a different problem with an individual mathematical task or with an individual physics or chemistry task. More one-to-one interaction between the teacher and student is necessary. More time allocation to both maths and the physical sciences is important.

The issue of hands-on experimentation is important as is ensuring that the curricula are rooted in and supported by examples from practical life. Young people are very practical in their approach; they want to know the reasons why and we have to be able to show them the reasons why science - be it physics, chemistry or biology - and maths are important and useful in society. It is important to build that element into the curriculum.

There were two questions about why numbers have declined. There are a range of reasons. The more recent reason we believe relates to part-time working. A significant number of students work part time. This was referred to in the 1991 report by the Department's chief mathematics examiner. Much of this part-time work may commence during transition year. Students then acquire a lifestyle and an income and may find it difficult to give up work in fifth and sixth year. The perception that a private income is needed to fund their social lives can carry on into third level and can colour their views on the type of third level study that can be accommodated with the amount of time available. The issue of part-time working in second and third level must be addressed and we need to consider the impact of transition year on this trend.

We believe there has been encouragement from a wide range of areas for students to study business subjects. When the Celtic tiger was growing the automatic reaction of students was to want to be part of that economy and to get into business in some way or other. They did not appreciate what business is actually about or that the majority of the chief executives in charge of multinationals are engineers. This is one area where we as a profession fell down. The IDA, Fórfas, the Department of Education and Science also fell down in that regard. This is why the STEPS programme is important.

Deputy Enright said that it all comes down to marketing and we concur with that view. The STEPS programme is a marketing programme; it is meant to market and sell careers in engineering to students. The issue of flexibility of career was mentioned. This applies not just to enable students to move from a certificate to a diploma and a degree, and from part time to full time, it also applies to the issue of being able to enter a common entry course which will offer one year of common entry or, as in the case of one college, two years of common entry before making up one's mind to choose civil, mechanical, electrical or electronic engineering, etc.

The STEPS programme is trying to get across the fact that when people qualify as engineers they have a wide range of career options open to them. They often move out of their original discipline either into other engineering areas or into general, financial or personnel management.

Dr. Jane Grimson

I will not repeat what Peter and Paddy have said but I will pick up one or two points. Given where I am coming from and who I am, the first point is a fairly obvious one and that is the issue of women in engineering, which has been raised by a number of members. I was the first woman to graduate in engineering in 1970 in Trinity College and it is terrible. UCC and NUI, Galway, had women graduates before Trinity. It has taken a long time to reach the present figure of 20%; progress is very slow. It is useful to review the reasons for its importance. Obviously, the main argument is on the grounds of equality - that all careers should be open to men and women, whether in nursing, engineering or whatever. That means that pupils must have access to the appropriate subjects in schools. In the past, in girls' schools, honours mathematics, physics and chemistry were not available but that issue has been addressed in more recent years. It is true that the subjects are generally available, in principle, to all pupils in all schools. However, with the drop in numbers taking honours mathematics, physics and chemistry, the reality is that it becomes increasingly a timetable problem for schools when they only have a handful of pupils wishing to take those subjects. It becomes particularly difficult in girls' schools. Accordingly, there is still an issue to be addressed in terms of equality of access to subjects. Demographics militate against that, making the situation even worse.

The second argument is the economic one, in relation to the importance of engineering in sustaining and developing the economy. If we only fish in half the pool for qualified young people for careers in engineering, then we are doing a disservice to the economy of the country as well as to the individuals concerned. The third argument, which we in the engineering profession have to work very hard to get across, is the nature of the profession and what engineers actually do. The Americans refer to it as "the stealth profession" because it is somewhat hidden, in the sense that when something is well engineered, the way it works is not apparent to the users. That is right and proper but it makes it very difficult for young people to understand what engineering is all about.

Modern electronics, as the Chairman mentioned, makes it even more obscure - buttons are pushed without any awareness of how things work. In reality, engineering is a multidisciplinary profession. As well as working with each other, engineers also interact with other people as users, economists or members of society. Engineering positions itself between science and mathematics. It is trying to apply scientific and mathematical techniques for the benefit of society and to improve the quality of life. Like Janus, engineers have to look in both directions; they must have a good understanding of science and mathematics but they also need a good understanding of society and where engineering solutions fit within society. That aspect, the application of the benefit of technology, tends to be of particular interest to women. We need to get the message across that engineering is not simply concerned with the nuts and bolts but also with the softer side in relation to society, economics and so on.

On the curriculum aspect, other colleagues have spoken at length about the importance of practical assessment and the reintroduction of a stronger practical element to science and mathematics teaching in secondary schools so that pupils gain a good understanding of the relevance of scientific and mathematical principles and how to use them. In this regard also, women and girls tend to be more interested in whether something is of use, relevance or benefit to society. The curriculum should reflect that and should contain a more practical element.

In relation to the perceived difficulty with honours mathematics, physics and chemistry relative to other subjects and the question of pressure, the task force on physical sciences commissioned a study which indicates that the perception of greater difficulty in obtaining high points in these subjects is borne out by the reality. I believe that work is still ongoing but if those findings are confirmed, it is quite disturbing. Perception is one thing but if it represents the reality, then, clearly, it must be addressed in terms of the effort which pupils must apply to particular subjects to gain particular grades.

An issue was also raised in relation to teachers. With regard to primary schools, the task force on physical sciences looked at the backgrounds of those going into primary school teaching, very few of whom have a science background. Indeed, many of them may never have studied science at all. That is somewhat disturbing. It means that, with the reintroduction of science to the primary school curriculum, we need to ensure that there is really good inservice training and support for teachers.

At secondary school level, those going into science teaching include more biology graduates and relatively few physics, chemistry and mathematics graduates. That is probably not surprising, having regard to the structure of the teaching profession in this country. It can take a long time for a newly qualified graduate teacher to obtain a permanent post, having to work on an APT or part-time basis for quite a number of years. Graduates in science, mathematics and engineering have the option of going to work in industry, where they can secure very well paid jobs. That is an issue which we have to address. Some countries have considered differential salaries. Those are some issues we need to consider. I thank the committee.

Mr. Liam Connellan

I wish to comment on the development of industry and the economy over the next decade, with particular reference to the research and development aspects to which Senator Minihan referred. I will also pick up on the marketing element. In the current development of industry, there is an increasing focus on moving up the value added chain. That involves more technology, research and development. We, in Ireland, need to differentiate ourselves from the relatively lower cost, but highly educated, countries in central and eastern Europe. That is a continuing struggle. The main factor which will differentiate us will be our ability to innovate, to conduct research and development and to move on from there. The feedstock for that comes from the throughput of people taking science and engineering in our second level schools.

Other countries have a similar problem, including the United Kingdom, Germany and others. It seems to be an international phenomenon that, as people become somewhat wealthier, they aspire to an easier lifestyle and decide not to take the hard option. That is all very well, but in looking at the development of our economy over the next five to ten years or more, we must have the necessary engineering personnel to achieve that development, otherwise we will be unable to sustain the rate of growth. Firms such as Intel and Wyeth only come to Ireland because we have such personnel. In the context of longer term development, we need to place strong emphasis on engineering, technology, research and development.

There is a strong relationship between industrial development and engineering. That was our selling point and provided the basis for the Celtic tiger phenomenon. What happens when the supply dries up, as is now evident? We can either accept that situation or proceed to do something about it, changing our mindset. That brings us back to marketing and promotion. We have a very big problem in the short-term in that the institutes of technology and some of our universities have many empty places for engineering courses. The experience is that effective promotion and marketing of those courses can make prospective students much more interested in the engineering profession.

We must put an enormous effort into the marketing aspect in order to increase the intake of women to engineering - and boys also. At present, we are reaching approximately 20% of young people. We need to increase that to 40% as quickly as possible and we believe that is achievable. The mechanisms and process are in place. We have approached industry and secured substantial funding to support something of the order of 70% of the programme. A matching contribution from the State is needed. The Government has allocated some funding but not enough. It is not easy to get it privately and we think this needs a national effort as it is very important for industrial development.

Deputy Gogarty

How much is the Government providing?

Mr. Connellan

On page 38 of the document, the Deputy will see the exact amount. It is about €60,000 or €70,000 per year while industry is putting in a multiple of that. We want that money to help sustain development. It is not that we do not know how to do that; we do, but we need this money for industrial development. There are many things to sort out but a key area in the short-term is to market and develop the programmes so that we fill the places we have and keep moving forward. We are concerned with the development of the economy over the next decade and now is the time to take action.

Mr. Langford

On the point that Mr. Connellan has just made about the numbers of places still needed at third level, it is not an option for us to dumb down in the results at second level either. The quality must come through or there will be widespread failures in the first and second years at third level. That brings us back to mathematics and the physical sciences in the schools. I would be glad if Mr. Purcell could make some further points.

Mr. Purcell

We support the view that the mathematics curriculum at leaving certificate level needs to be modernised to more appropriately link in with the new junior curriculum. It is crazy to have a new lead-in from junior certificate and then a change back to the old system for leaving certificate.

On the nature of the support for the programme, the original intention, when this programme was initiated in 2000, was that it would be a joint partnership between the Government and industry, and there was to be joint financial support. It has not worked out like that and, as Mr. Connellan said, the vast majority of the funding has come from industry. It is not just the tangible financial support; there is a huge amount of logistical support, effort and commitment provided by industry. Plants are being taken off their normal work on Friday and Monday afternoons so that students can visit. A huge voluntary effort is being made by engineers across the country to attend roadshows and to participate in careers events.

The Department should return to the original intention of joint funding, and move from the €70,000 per annum approximate contribution from the State at the moment to a figure of the order of €300,000. Industry will still be giving significantly more both in financial and logistical support terms.

Deputy Stanton

I note the amount of money from the Department dropped last year. It went from €88,000 to €63,000. Is that correct?

Mr. Langford

That is correct, when the timing of payments and all the rest are taken into account.

Deputy Stanton

Part time work has been mentioned on a number of occasions and something should be done about that. Are there suggestions as to what that might be?

Mr. Langford

We do not have a clear view on that and it is not an area that we have formally addressed from the point of view of what could be done. Modern society is part of the issue and parents may falsely believe that they should encourage their children to work at an early age as it could give them an appreciation for money etc. However, we do not have clear views on how the issue can be addressed. This is why we asked for it to be addressed by a task force.

Deputy B. Andrews

On Mr. Langford's point regarding honours mathematics, I remember it as a very difficult subject and I spent an inordinate time studying it. The phrase "dumbing down" was used and I consider that a pejorative term. Is there a real problem with the failure rate in engineering at third level? Has research been done on whether those students who have come from second level with a lesser mark in honours mathematics have a greater tendency to fail? My memory of this area is that far too much time was spent studying honours mathematics compared to other subjects. It is a subject that needs a high level of instruction and is not something that one can do on one's own. With the same facilities, it might be possible to study humanities subjects or languages. Has research been done? I am not sure that "dumbing down" is the correct phrase. Is there any way of making this more accessible?

Mr. Langford

I apologise if I have offended anybody with the use of the term "dumbing down" but it is a term in standard use. The point I was trying to make was that if people believe it is harder to get points in a particular subject, there is a suggestion that the standard should be lowered and better grades given to those who do not do quite as well. That will not solve the problem as that relates to the area of tuition, support and approach to the subject. Dr. Grimson might address this.

Dr. Grimson

Thank you. It is a complex issue and I am aware of studies that look at mathematics attainment at entry and performance at third level in the university sector. One of the strongest determinants of performance at university in terms of those achieving a first class honours degree is mathematics. There is a strong link between those who enter with an A grade in mathematics and high achievement; the mathematics link is stronger than any other and that goes for all subjects, not just engineering.

Specifically on engineering, Trinity and other universities have undertaken studies looking at mathematics performance. There is a close relationship between attainment at mathematics at leaving certificate and in first year at third level. As students move on, the link lessens and the performance of the previous year increasingly determines the next year. However, there is a strong link and other studies have been done in this area.

With regard to the difficulty of the subject, the Deputy's experience would be borne out by that of most pupils at secondary school. Honours mathematics requires a lot more effort for the same result; it is more difficult in that sense. This is the kind of issue that needs to be looked at carefully. If it is more difficult to get an honour in mathematics than in a humanities area then, unless students are desperately committed to doing engineering or a subject that requires honours mathematics, it is inevitable that they will choose the easier route. The study begun by the Task Force on Physical Sciences to look at this issue needs to be finalised, and there needs to be a careful look at the mathematics curriculum.

Mathematics is a subject that has to be built on incrementally. It is not just a series of disconnected topics. In some subjects, for example physics and chemistry, it would be possible to study some topics in isolation and have a good understanding of them. Mathematics, however, is very much a subject that builds year on year, and it is necessary to continue developing skills in an incremental way. That means the curriculum has to be looked at from primary level through secondary level and up to third level to address the issue.

Senator Fitzgerald

If I gave the impression that I was suggesting dumbing down as a way of making the sciences more points friendly, that is not what I meant. I was making the point that one should not have to be a Beethoven to get an A grade in music or an Einstein to get an A grade in the sciences. There are many factors involved in that.

Under the recommendations, the review of part-time work was mentioned. Is it suggested that part-time work hits the sciences more heavily in terms of participation rates than other subjects? If so, why is that area affected more than other optional subjects at second level?

Mr. Purcell

Part-time work definitely impacts on the study of mathematics and the physical sciences for the reasons that Dr. Grimson has outlined, including the need for continuous sequential learning in those subjects. If a student comes in tired on a Monday morning, either because of work or socialising over the weekend, it is more difficult for them to concentrate on mathematics or physics than on some of the other subjects. Equally, if they are rushing off on a Friday, they are not concentrating. These are subjects which students find more difficult to learn by themselves. They are not as easy to study on one's own; a teacher's assistance is required. We believe that part-time working impacts negatively. More time is required for mathematics homework and students' progress in that subject will suffer if time is not available due to the pressure of getting to the filling station to work.

Deputy Gogarty

Mr. Purcell made a critical point that is especially relevant to engineering and science subjects. I have three teenage sisters and I understand the pressures of part-time work. In the case of one of my sisters and her friends, it seems that the money earned from this employment is spent on socialising and alcohol. There seems to be an increasing incidence of teenage drinking, even among those who may be termed academic achievers. A clear message in relation to these matters should be sent out to the Ministers for Education and Science and Health and Children. Concentration levels also suffer, as those whose time is consumed by employment and drinking on Saturdays and Sundays will have poorer concentration levels.

I thank the representatives of STEPS for attending this meeting. I do not expect them to comment on the social aspects of the problems I have been discussing, but I feel that the take-up of science subjects, and achievement levels in those subjects, are being affected by the problems. I hope this matter will be taken up by those in positions of authority.

Chairman

That is probably a good note on which to finish. I thank the delegation from STEPS for its presentation and for its responses to the committee's questions. I thank members of the committee for their participation in the meeting and I hope that the attendance of members of the STEPS programme will help them. It is also to be hoped that more attention will be drawn to the programme in the short-term as a result of this meeting. This committee is determined not to leave presentations or reports hanging in mid air, but to take action. Deputy Hoctor seemed to make a proposal about how this matter can be pursued and I am sure other members will agree that we should write to the Minister in relation to the financial input into the programme.

Senator Minihan

Perhaps we should look at the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment's research and development budget, as there seems to be an overlap. Perhaps financial assistance can be received from that quarter to complement that coming from elsewhere.

Chairman

We can write to the Chairman of the relevant committee to point out that there is a problem in this area. This committee's work programme includes a reference to curriculum development and a member of the committee is acting as a rapporteur in relation to physical education. We will gradually build up a picture of where the curriculum should be and we will pursue the delegation's concerns with the curriculum unit and the Minister.

The joint committee adjourned at 1.05 p.m. until 11.30 a.m. on Thursday, 30 January 2003.