JOINT COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND SCIENCE debate -
Thursday, 17 Jun 2004

Early Childhood Education: Presentations.

Chairman

The committee is meeting with representatives of the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment, the Centre for Early Childhood Development and Education, the IPPA — the Early Childhood Organisation, and the Department of Education and Science to discuss early childhood education.

On behalf of the members of the joint committee, I welcome from the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment Dr. Anne Looney, chief executive officer, and Mr. Cathal DePaor, education officer; from the Centre for Early Childhood Development and Education, Mr. Heino Schonfeld, director, and Dr. Noirin Hayes, chairperson of the board; from the IPPA — the Early Childhood Organisation, Ms Irene Gunning, chief executive officer, and Ms Carmel Brennan, assistant director of quality; and from the Department of Education and Science, Ms Breda Naughton, principal officer, central planning unit, and her colleague Mr. Alan Wall, assistant principal.

I draw your attention to the fact that while members of the committee have absolute privilege, this privilege does not extend to witnesses appearing before the committee. I also remind members of the long-standing parliamentary practice whereby members should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the House, or an official by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable. As there are four groups present, in order to facilitate the opportunity for questions and answers, I also request that speakers limit their submissions to ten minutes. I invite Dr. Anne Looney to make a presentation on behalf of the NCCA.

Dr. Anne Looney

On behalf of the NCCA, I thank the members of the joint committee for inviting us to present a brief summary of our current work. The focus of our presentation will be a consultative document, Towards a Framework for Early Learning, launched by the Minister for Education and Science, Deputy Noel Dempsey, on 29 March 2004. The NCCA developed this consultative document as a basis for working in partnership with the early childhood sector to develop a framework to support children's learning throughout the early childhood period from zero to six years.

This is a new departure for the NCCA. The consultative document is the first publication dealing with the whole early childhood period. However, the NCCA has been significantly involved in developing the infant curriculum for four, five and six year olds. The most recent work in this area was the development of the infant curriculum, launched as part of the primary school curriculum in 1999.

Currently in Ireland, over half of all four year olds and almost all five year olds are enrolled in infant classes in primary schools. There are six areas of learning in the infant curriculum: language, mathematics, social environmental and scientific education, arts education, physical education and social personal and health education. This curriculum is based on a number of principles of learning including "integrated learning" — we all know that subjects will mean very little to four, five and six year olds and so the curriculum recommends that learning for infant classes happens through themes and topics which can also be accessed through play. The infant curriculum is also based on the belief that children learn best when they are active. Learning with and from their peers is important for children of four to six years. Another important principle is guided discovery in which the teacher plays a critical role in supporting each child by extending and enriching their learning.

Since the publication of the infant curriculum the NCCA has broadened its work to include the full early childhood period from zero to six years. Following the forum on early childhood education, the publication of the White Paper was significant. The paper recommended the development of specimen curricula for the pre-school years along with general guidelines for the zero to three years age group. When the NCCA began its work in this area it was clear that benchmarking against international practice and current research indicated that a single framework that embraced the zero to six years age group would better support the integration of the two dimensions of care and education so significant in this phase in the life of a child. In the review of early childhood care and education conducted by the OECD, the value of this single framework covering the period from zero to six years was noted. That was the basis for our work in this area.

Another important part of the background to this document is the expansion and acceleration of work in the early childhood sector. The establishment of the Equal Opportunities Childcare Programme and the County Childhood Committees have had a significant effect on the level and quality of provision of children's learning. The setting up of the Centre for Early Development and Education, which is represented on the NCCA, has also been important.

The NCCA developed this document by reviewing national and international policies on early childhood care and education. We examined a range of studies on how children learn in their early years, the types of learning which are important and the types of frameworks other countries use to support children's learning in their early years. This was supported by a working group comprised of experts in the early childhood sector, under the chairmanship of Liz Dunphy of St. Patrick's College, Drumcondra. As with all NCCA work, the document was agreed by the council.

My colleague, Mr. Cathal DePaor, will point to the key features of the document and talk a bit about the consultation that is now underway. Before he does, it is important to clarify the children, adults and settings we are discussing in Towards a Framework for Early Learning. We are dealing with all children from zero to six years and the full range of settings in which they spend time. These include the child's home, a relative or childminder's home, a crèche, a nursery, a parent and toddler group, playschool, playgroup, a naíonra, an infant class in a mainstream or special school, a hospital, an after-school setting. These are all settings in which children in this age group spend time. That means that this framework must be relevant to parents and guardians, childminders and early childhood practitioners. My colleague, Mr. DePaor, will now talk you through the highlights of the consultative document.

Mr. Cathal DePaor

I will explain some of the key ideas in the document. Section 1 extensively discusses the benefits of early learning which is the foundation for all subsequent learning, including lifelong learning. It also outlines the tremendous opportunity that early childhood offers for enriching and extending children's learning. Ongoing neuroscientific research shows how a child's ability to learn rapidly develops at a young age.

The document proposes an overlapping framework in three phases: babies from birth to 18 months, toddlers from 12 months to three years, and young children from two and a half to six years. The document recognises that learning does not fall neatly and discreetly into these categories. There will be overlapping and much depends on the uniqueness of each child as well as other ways in which children differ from each other.

Another challenge for the framework is to reflect the diversity of experiences that children have in their early childhood years. We must consider the uniqueness of each child and their social diversity in terms of language, culture and ethnicity, as well as their ability. The richness and traditions of various service providers are also a consideration. Hopefully the framework can reflect this richness and diversity, and develop from the ground up.

The framework can provide a coherence among the various service providers in order that existing curriculum materials can fit within the overarching framework. We envisage links upwards into primary schooling. Far from pressure downwards from primary schooling, we hope the effect will be in the opposite direction. There are various principles which emerge from the document, two of which I shall focus on — the importance of caring and support of attachments and relationships, providing a secure base for the child with which he or she can explore the human and physical environment, and the cultivation of learning dispositions — curiosity, risk taking, resilience, concentration, creativity and so on. These are useful lifelong dispositions. The key contexts for learning are relationships and play, while permeating these contexts is the importance of language as a vehicle for learning. Relationships highlight the social and interactive nature of learning. There is much discussion on the rich potential of play. Play is exploratory, socio-dramatic, fantasy play going on to play with rules.

While relationships and play are key contexts for learning they are also key contexts for assessment. Assessment can best take place in the everyday routines and activities of the child. Assessment involves observing children as learners, talking and listening to them, striving to understand their learning and using that understanding to further develop their learning. Various people contribute to the assessment process — the child, practitioners, parents-guardians and specialists such as paediatricians and nurses Identification of children with special educational needs is important in the context of assessment.

We propose to present the learning framework under four themes. This arises from the holistic development of the child which was a central part of the National Children's Strategy to which the chief executive has referred. The themes include well-being, identity and belonging, communication and exploring and thinking. Rather than one to one correspondence between learning domains, such as physical development, cognitive development, spiritual development and so on, these four themes capture the extent and range of learning in the various developmental domains. It highlights the interconnectedness of learning andforegrounds the child as an active learner who has much to contribute.

The consultative process is under way and we have organised four seminars. We are collaborating with various agencies and organisations. For example, the county child care committee structure, under the auspices of the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, has been useful and has organised various seminars. We have an on-line questionnaire and a response form in hard copy. We have the survey and the seminars and will invite written submissions from those who have a specific interest in early childhood education. We have also established an early childhood committee to steer the ongoing work. This committee is representative of the various partners in early childhood education such as the centre for early childhood development in education and the national voluntary childhood organisation and the various Departments which have responsibility for early childhood education.

I will leave the committee with the vision for the Framework for Early Learning — page 13 of the document — which, I hope, will guide this work into the future. We invite feedback on this vision. Nothing in the document has been decided. The vision reads:

The Framework for Early Learning promotes an early childhood for all children in Ireland where they can develop as learners within the context of trusting and loving relationships with others, and through meaningful engagement with their environment. They will be supported in their holistic development, and in realising their potential as learners in ways which reflect their individuality as well as their diverse experiences of childhood in Ireland in terms of their abilities, cultures, languages and socio-economic backgrounds.

Chairman

Before moving on to the next speaker I ask people to turn off their mobile phones completely, rather than having them, on silent, because, apparently, they interfere with the technology here. I invite Mr. Heino Schonfeld on behalf of the Centre for Early Childhood Development and Education to address the committee.

Mr. Heino Schonfeld

I am grateful for the opportunity to meet with the committee and discuss some issues on early childhood, care and education. We agreed I would give a brief presentation on behalf of the centre but Dr. Hayes will be available to take questions and to participate in the discussion. I shall give an overview of what the centre is about, our objectives, what we have done so far and the next steps of our programme. I will highlight some of the issues that are important from a policy point of view in regard to early childhood, care and education.

The Centre for Early Childhood Development and Education is an initiative of the Department of Education and Science arising from the Government White Paper, Ready to Learn, published in 1999. The centre was established jointly by the Dublin Institute of Technology and St. Patrick's College, Drumcondra. Following the establishment of a joint board of management, the centre employed its first administrative staff in March 2002. The centre became fully operational in October 2002 and began to deliver on its considerable programme of work. We are a young organisation and have been in operation just under two years.

The aim of the CECDE is to develop and co-ordinate early childhood care and education in pursuance of the objectives of the White Paper, Ready to Learn, and to advise the Department of Education and Science on policy issues in this area. The White Paper states that, "we must recognise that young children have needs for both education and care and that the focus can never be exclusively on either. For very young children, their education and care needs are closely intertwined, and must be met in a unified way."

Based on this view, the centre's brief covers children from birth to six years of age in a wide variety of settings, including families, nurseries, crèches, playgroups, childminders, pre-schools and the infant classes of primary schools. This gives an idea of the policy issues involved here and the difference in practice and in delivery.

The main objectives of the centre are to develop a quality framework for early childhood education for all children from birth to six, to develop targeted interventions on a pilot basis for children who are educationally disadvantaged and children with special needs and to prepare the groundwork for the establishment of an early childhood education agency as envisaged by the White Paper, Ready to Learn. The centre has made considerable progress in delivering on its objectives. Two important baseline reports were published to assist the work of the centre. The first is Audit of Research on Early Childhood Care and Education in Ireland 1990-2003, published in 2003, and the second is a publication that I think was disseminated to the committee, On Target?, an audit of provision of services targeting disadvantage and special needs among children from birth to six years in Ireland, published in 2004.

With regard to its first objective, the development of a quality framework, the CECDE conducted a national consultation on quality in early childhood care and education and published a comprehensive report this year. The centre also completed national and international reviews of research, policy and practice relating to "quality" in early childhood care and education and summary reports will be published later this year. The work on these reports has been completed. A third contributory element to the drafting of the quality framework, a critical analysis of how young children develop and learn, is at drafting stage and will also be published later this year. Much of our work in this area will come to fruition this year.

Addressing its second objective, the development of targeted projects, the CECDE designed and agreed with the Department of Education and Science four major projects with immediate impact on practice. The first project is an examination of diverse perspectives on quality in early childhood care and education. There is astonishingly little research and examination of quality in the Irish context, although there is a considerable degree of it in the international context. We have very little knowledge about what quality means and how the issue of quality is dealt with in early childhood care and education in Ireland.

The second project examines the impact of high quality early intervention for young children with special needs across a variety of settings, particularly settings which, to a varying degree, may or may not be integrated. There is an ongoing debate about the benefits or otherwise of increasing the integration of children with special needs.

The third project envisages the design and delivery of an accredited inservice training programme for staff and management committees of Traveller pre-schools. There are a number of pre-schools funded by the Department of Education and Science addressing the early learning needs of Traveller children. A recent evaluation report by the Department highlighted serious concerns about these pre-schools and we tried to address some of them in this project.

The fourth project is a pilot one evaluating the operation and impact of an enhanced Early Start project. It works with the existing Early Start project, as it has been in operation for the past eight years as a pilot project. These projects were offered for tender and are being commissioned for completion by September 2005, which, incidentally, is the end point of the current work programme of the Centre for Early Childhood Development in Education. All our objectives have to be developed by that time, which gives members an idea of the ambitious programme of work that lies before us.

The final objective, laying the groundwork for the establishment of the Early Childhood Education Agency, has been addressed in a variety of ways. The centre in its short term of operation has developed solid organisational structures, a research and dissemination strategy, including a website and a regular newsletter, lasting relationships with relevant stakeholders and a consultative network, including an effective consultative committee. The CECDE has built a strong identity and presence within the wider early childhood care and education sector in Ireland and internationally and is recognised as the only State funded agency with a brief beyond the boundaries of any one Department. The centre has worked closely with the Department of Education and Science but also with the Departments of Justice, Equality and Law Reform and Health and Children. The CECDE has contributed to numerous important policy making bodies through representation or submissions. The centre has also proposed practical steps towards the establishment of the Early Childhood Education Agency to the Department of Education and Science and participates in the recently established high level working group on co-ordination of early childhood care and education. This group is convened by the National Children's Office and reports to Cabinet. The centre is well on its way to deliver on its objectives and I am confident that we will deliver by September 2005.

If the Chairman will allow me the time, I would like to highlight some of the issues we consider are currently important in terms of early childhood care and education in Ireland.

Chairman

In terms of the time available, it would be helpful if you could do that in one or two minutes.

Mr. Schonfeld

My timing is a bit off. I would like to concentrate on three particular issues, quality, access and co-ordination, which we consider to be areas that need attention and that can greatly contribute to the further development of early childhood care and education. In terms of quality, the crucial importance of quality in the provision of early years' services has been stressed above and cannot be over-emphasised. There are no national standards of quality in early childhood care and education. This makes it difficult to benchmark the quality of our current provision. However, applying global indicators, research evidence and comparative studies suggest that the quality of provision in Ireland is at best patchy and frequently poor. The single most important contributor to quality in early childhood care and education is training, professional development and support of practitioners. Other important indicators include the presence and content of curriculum or programme — the NCCA described how it is currently addressing that lack of curriculum — parental involvement, methodology, pedagogy environments and equipment and so on. Many of our services fall far short in these areas of practice. The welcome examples of high quality, even excellence, are random and often due to local initiative and voluntary effort.

Given the important role that high quality plays in terms of compensating for disadvantage and special needs, one would expect higher levels of quality to be found in areas of concentrated disadvantage but, sadly, this is not the case. The CECDE will develop, for the first time, a national quality framework for early childhood care and education in Ireland, and this will be an important step forward but requires the establishment of organisational structures such as the Early Childhood Education Agency to implement and support the framework. The succession from the CECDE to the newly established agency should be seamless and immediate.

In the area of access we have major problems. The supply of early childhood care and education still falls far short of meeting demand. The demand has been rising over the past few years due to changed family patterns, labour market demographic changes and so on, with which we are all familiar. The provisions through State funded provision and community, voluntary and private provision have not been able to meet that rising demand. As a result in some areas we have great difficulties in accessing early childhood care and education, particularly in disadvantaged areas but also increasingly in the private sector, where particularly the cost and price of child care makes it extremely difficult for some parents, especially mothers, to participate in the labour market or in further training. This has now become a major issue of access. Lack of access persists also for children who attend infant classes in primary schools and require provision in the afternoon or through the summer holidays because if parents are working in most cases the school hours do not necessarily match their working hours.

The third area of co-ordination is one with which the members are most likely familiar. We have a number of Departments, notably the Departments of Health and Children, Justice, Equality and Law Reform and Education and Science involved in the provision and policy-making for early childhood care and education. The ongoing difficulty in co-ordinating the efforts and activities of these and other Departments has now become an obstacle to developing and bringing forward early childhood care and education in this country. I appreciate the difficulties that have to be overcome to achieve higher co-ordination, but we have to address them in a serious way. This lack of co-ordination is filtering through to local and regional levels and to individual services which find it difficult to make sense of the different, and sometimes, contradictory initiatives that emanate from Government. Further co-ordination of early childhood care and education also requires structural changes. For example, the possibility of allocating the responsibility for early childhood care and education to one Department or to devolve it to an executive agency taking responsibility for this area. I thank the Chairman for this opportunity and apologise for having run over the time allocated.

Chairman

I invite Ms Irene Gunning to address the committee on behalf of the IPPA.

Ms Irene Gunning

I am pleased to be here and delighted to have this opportunity to speak on early childhood care and education. The IPPA, the Irish Pre-School Playgroups Association, is now known as the Early Childhood Organisation. It is in existence for approximately 35 years, has approximately 200 members and more than 40,000 children participate in the services provided. The services started with playgroups when parents needed to have services for their young children and it is very much a voluntary parent-led organisation with playgroups established in the interest of the child. The organisation grew itself without funding and in the latter years with very little funding. It grew a network of branches giving support and training until recent times when the organisation has been fortunate to receive more funding through the equal opportunities child care programme.

I reiterate the importance of care and education. In many ways the sector is sometimes seen as child care and then separately early childhood education. Child care is led by the market, the economy and the need for women to participate in the workforce. Often early childhood education is seen as a kind of intervention for children that are at risk or disadvantaged. Either way a child in any of those services has the same needs and rights. We believe children deserve to have good quality services. It is their right as citizens as we now know. Most of the children in Ireland are citizens of Ireland who have a right to quality services.

When we consulted children recently as part of developing the national children strategy, they told us that they wanted to play and as a result we established a national play policy. We are developing more and better ways to consult with young children. Very soon we will be able to feed back what it is like to be a young child in these services. It is, therefore, very important that we address this topic now. I will now hand over to my colleague Ms Brennan.

Ms Carmel Brennan

The basis of what we have to say is our experience on the ground. We would like to give some insight as to what it is like for children and practitioners in the sector. I start by again reminding Members of the importance of the sector. We are talking about early childhood. The Barnardo's slogan tells us that every childhood lasts a lifetime. We are talking about the most critical time in the life of any human being, these early years. This is corroborated by all the brain research, which indicates that children make very important connections in early childhood. When they live in very stressful circumstances they make connections that do not lead to healthy development.

It is a critical time for learning lessons that they are loved, can love, their contribution is valued and they can take responsibility. These are the critical lessons in early childhood the learning of which we must support. We know that children are innately motivated to learn. We do not have to force them into it. They want to do it. We just need to give them opportunities to learn in the healthiest possible environment. I am delighted that the NCCA document emphasises the importance of play. This is what our organisation is about. We believe it is the best mechanism. It is a naturally given mechanism for children to learn. We ignore it at our peril.

The very good news about early childhood care and education from an economic point of view is that investment pays. From the high scope research carried out in America there is a repayment of seven to one on investment on early childhood. This repayment comes in employment, stable relationships, good health and crime prevention. As Ms Gunning has said, we have been in the sector for a long time, more than 35 years. We have seen the organic growth of this sector. It has grown more or less unresourced through the input of women who came together to look after the care and education needs of their children and set up in their homes, garages etc.

On entering the 21st century we saw an explosion of demand and a very low base from which to meet that demand. Interestingly Jan Peterson, when asked why more men are not involved in child care, replied that it was because child care in Ireland is so boring. Why would a man seek employment in this sector? This is because the base is so low.

To show what is happening in the sector at present, I have distributed the community playgroup's position paper on it, which outlines the role of child care services. We believe that is a multiple role. The emphasis is on supporting people returning to work training and education, which is an important role for services. We know the best anti-poverty device is employment and we want child care services, which support that. However, it is also about many other things such as families, community development and inclusion. Child care is often the interface where all those different elements of the community come together — ethnic minorities, those with disabilities, etc.

It is also about early childhood care and education. These roles cannot be divorced and represent the best argument as to why child care must continue to be based in the community. It must be user friendly. They must be services that relate to, contribute to and have a sense of ownership in the community. They must be integrated and innovative. This is the advantage of how they have grown. We cannot throw it away. They have grown organically which has led to a wonderful sense of belonging to and within the community. That is where they are situated and where they should stay, and we must build on this.

At present they are largely dependent on parents' fees. After that FÁS is the biggest contributor to child care by providing the CE staff that run our services. I do not need to remind Members that, at present, to get on a CE programme people must be long-term unemployed and most of them come from very difficult life circumstances. They are the people who staff our community services. They mainly start on contracts for one or sometimes two years after which they must leave. A child with a group of staff on Friday could face a totally different cohort of people on a Monday. We know that is not good for children. All the research indicates that continuity of care is critical. That is one of our main problems.

After FÁS comes the EOCP, which has been a catalyst in the sector. This funding has been well used to develop services, to upgrade and just to broaden our horizons somewhat. The problem with it is that as soon as the equal opportunities child care fund came into being all the other statutory agencies either withdrew or reduced their funding. The EOCP, which had a very specific brief, is now a catchphrase for everything. The health boards have traditionally been the lead agencies. Their grants are in the region of €500 to €1,500 a year to a service, which is very small. Since the introduction of the regulations in 1997, there has been no money to support their implementation. The implementation was done on the backs of European money, charity money and voluntary work.

It is clear that the sector has grown in a very poorly resourced way. It works from a very low base, in community service is dependent on CE, and because it is a very labour intensive industry, in private services it has to balance the cost of staffing with fees to make a profit.

The second important point about this sector is that we are talking about the 20% of children who go to centre-based care because that is where any investment happens. From our OECD report, Babies and Bosses, we know that 80% of children are minded in the child-minding or home-based sector, of which we know very little. The OECD report raises great concern about the quality of that care. Furthermore, the reports tell us that it is a short-lived possibility because as young women stay in the sector, the facility will not remain there.

The Barcelona agreement, to which we are a party, has set a standard of 90% participation in playgroups and pre-schools by the year 2010. The only reason we have not been totally disgraced in terms of that agreement is because most of our four years olds are in school, which camouflages much of the paucity involved. The four year olds are in classes of 25 or more, and class numbers can rise to 35. We cannot possibly call that quality.

There are also policy and infrastructure problems. In practice, 20% of people working in services are trained and the remainder are not. We maintain that services need support in training, pedagogy, professionalism and development if they are to begin to respond to the needs of the community. They are managed by voluntary committees which often do not exist per se because such committees are being asked to take on employment and funding responsibilities. Those are enormous responsibilities for any voluntary committees to undertake.

Chairman

I will have to ask you to conclude.

Ms Brennan

We need to change. We have initiated research entitled, Reconceptualising community playgroups in contemporary Ireland, which is to feed policy by the end of this year. We need a co-ordinated policy, as has been said. We also need an infrastructure. I will phrase this from the practitioner's viewpoint. Can we have a clear outline of what each Department has to offer? Can we bring it together in one pool so that services can apply to one source of funding? Could it be based on entitlement so that when we are developing a service we know what we are entitled to? Could we have one target to meet the Barcelona agreement? We suggest that the starting point should be that every child is entitled to a pre-school place.

In terms of practice, could we have funding for decent support and mentoring? We already have the models, including the IPPA's. Other organisations also have models for doing it, but we need support in order to implement it.

Chairman

Finally, I call Ms Breda Naughton from the Department of Education and Science.

Ms Breda Naughton

I thank you, Chairperson, and the committee, for having invited us to make this presentation. I will make the presentation and Mr. Alan Wall will assist me in providing responses to any questions that members of the committee may wish to pose.

In Ireland children can commence their primary school education provided they have reached the age of four years on 1 September of the academic year in question. Currently, 49% of all four year olds and virtually all five year olds — 99% — are enrolled in infant classes in primary schools. Compulsory education starts at six years. In some European countries, however, children do not begin their formal education until they are six or seven years of age.

The Department of Education and Science has traditionally been engaged in the formal education of children aged four years and above. The Department is now committed to the education of children from birth to six years. This represents a new departure for the Department. To inform its deliberations on early childhood education the Department carried out an intensive process of consultation in 1998, centred around the national forum for early childhood education, to which a number of speakers have already referred.

Out of this consultation process came the White Paper on Early Childhood Education, entitled Ready to Learn, which was published in 1999. High quality early education provision was the key theme of the White Paper. It also had a particular focus on children experiencing disadvantage and children with special needs.

Mr. Heino Schonfeld has outlined the work of the Centre for Early Childhood Development and Education, CECDE, which became operational late in 2002. The Department approved a budget of some €3 million for the operation of the CECDE over a three year period. Additional funding is being provided for programmes developed by the centre to meet the needs of disadvantaged children and children with special needs. Mr. Schonfeld outlined four studies with which it is about to commence.

Dr. Anne Looney, who is the chief executive, and Mr. Cathal de Paor, have outlined the work of the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment, NCCA, in this area, with particular reference to their recent consultation document, entitled Towards a Framework for Early Childhood Education. In view of this, I believe enough has been said about the NCCA from their perspective.

As regards disadvantage and early childhood initiatives, this year alone the Department is providing almost €8 million for pre-school programmes such as the Early Start Pilot Project, the Rutland Street Project, pre-schools for Travellers and the Centre for Early Childhood Development and Education.

The Early Start pre-school pilot project was launched in 1994-95 based on the Rutland Street project. It is in place in 40 selected schools located in designated areas of disadvantage and consists of a separate dedicated unit from which pupils transfer into junior infants class in the primary school. Early Start is a one-year pre-formal schooling intervention for pupils aged three to four years who are most at risk in areas of social disadvantage. It aims to expose young children to an educational programme that will enhance their overall development, prevent school failure and offset the effects of social disadvantage.

There are currently 56 teachers and 56 child care workers employed in 24 full units and 32 half units. A full Early Start unit caters for a total of 60 children and a half-unit caters for 30. Classes are limited to 15 pupils.

The Department of Education and Science funds 98% of the tuition — that is, teachers' salaries — and transport costs for 49 pre-schools catering for Traveller children. It also allocates an annual equipment grant of €500 to each pre-school and pays an additional grant of €50 per child aged between three and five years. Total allocations amount to approximately €1.25 million in 2004.

The Department's inspectorate carried out an evaluation of the Traveller pre-schools, to which Mr. Schonfeld referred earlier, and approximately half the pre-schools were included in this evaluation. In April 2003, the National Composite Evaluation Report was published, which aims to facilitate the dissemination and development of good practice throughout the Traveller pre-schools. In addition, the report identifies a number of actions that are required of all involved in the provision of this service to Traveller children.

The Department of Education and Science is providing over €73 million for disadvantaged programmes at primary level such as the disadvantaged areas scheme, the home school community liaison scheme, and the Giving Children an Even Break programme. The provision for each of these programmes in 2004 is as follows: disadvantaged areas scheme, €14.32 million; Breaking the Cycle, €3.59 million; Giving Children an Even Break, €18 million; HSCL, €7 million; support teachers, €1.68 million; book grants, €5.3 million; and Traveller education, €23 million.

New measures are being introduced to address the special needs of children with autism. To date, 137 special classes have been established to provide dedicated educational support for children with autism. These classes include eight pre-school classes, 68 classes in mainstream national schools, including four classes for children with Asperger's syndrome, and 61 classes in special schools.

The management boards of all such facilities receive enhanced capitation grants and each of these classes operates at a maximum pupil teacher ratio of 6:1. The Department also provides two special needs assistants to each group of six pupils. Additional special needs assistant support may be allocated on an assessed needs basis. A set-up grant of €6,500 towards the cost of furniture and equipment in each autistic class is also provided.

The Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform has responsibility for child care provision. Its functions include the provision of grant aid to private and not-for-profit child care providers to establish and improve child care facilities; support for quality improvement in the child care sector; developing new funding initiatives in response to emerging training needs; consolidation of the county and city child care committees; and co-ordinating child care funding policies and programmes at national level. Much of the work of the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform's child care directorate, and particularly its function of providing grant aid and the improvement of quality, is achieved under the Equal Opportunities Childcare Programme 2000-2006.

Almost €5 million was provided in 2003 for child care to support access by early school leavers and the unemployed to VTOS, Youthreach and Senior Traveller Centre programmes operated through the vocational education committees. This form of support has been in place since 1998. The scheme operates in a flexible way through direct provision of places, purchase of crèche places and the payment of childminders.

For the academic year 2002-03, there were almost 1,800 students on VTOS, Youthreach and Traveller programmes benefiting from this measure, which caters for some 2,000 children, of whom over 1,600 are in full-time child care and almost 400 in part-time child care

The Department of Education and Science provides for nationally certified child care training, through post leaving certificate courses and programmes in the institutes of technology. The Department is also currently funding a range of part-time child care courses, leading to qualifications at FETAL levels 2 and 3, under the Back to Education initiative. The BTI is designed to assist young people and adults who left education with low levels of skills and qualifications to return to learning. The existence of recognised courses in child care is an important factor in ensuring that qualified personnel are available to provide the quality of service desired.

The Department invited the OECD directorate for education to conduct a short review of early childhood education and care policies and services in Ireland. The OECD was asked to focus on quality, access and co-ordination in early childhood provision. To assist the work of the OECD, a detailed background report on developments in policy and practice in early childhood provision in Ireland was prepared for the Department in consultation with other relevant Departments, agencies and stakeholders. It was presented to the OECD review team in October 2002. The OECD team visited Ireland in November 2002 and met all relevant Departments, State sponsored bodies, community and voluntary groups as well asprovider representatives. The OECD's review, which will be published in the near future, will help inform national policy and programme development in the sector.

The Department, in its deliberations on early childhood education, takes into consideration the recommendations in the reports to which I have referred and the work of agencies and practitioners, such as the IPPA, which is also here today, as it works towards a quality early childhood education. The CECDE representative has already elaborated for the committee on the position regarding quality in early childhood education.

Responsibilities for early childhood education and care are divided among a number of Government Departments and agencies, the chief players being the Department of Education and Science, in the education sphere, and the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, in the care sphere. In addition, the Departments of Health and Children and Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs and agencies such as the NCCA, CECDE and NCO also have major roles in this area.

Recognising that responsibility for early childhood education and care is dispersed across many Departments and agencies, the Government established the Cabinet committee on children. In order to consider co-ordination issues in the child care and early education arena, the Cabinet committee established an interdepartmental high level working group on child care and early childhood education in June 2003. This group is being chaired by the National Children's Office.

The high level working group is currently evaluating the OECD report on early childhood education and care to which I referred earlier. The Departments are represented on the group include the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform; the Department of Education and Science; the Department of Health and Children; the Department of Social and Family Affairs; and the Department of Finance. The CECDE is also represented on the group. The Department awaits the recommendations of the group.

Early childhood education, particularly provision for those under four years of age, is a new area for the Department but it is one to which it is committed. Particular emphasis will be placed on provision for children who are disadvantaged and for children with special needs.

The White Paper states: "Early childhood education will, where possible, be provided as part of a seamless provision of care and education ...". The Department of Education and Science, as already noted by the IPPA and the CECDE, recognises that co-ordination is the key. We are not starting from a clean slate but we will build on best practice to provide a high quality early childhood education in Ireland.

Chairman

I thank all of our participants for their presentations. I invite members to ask questions.

Deputy Enright

I welcome our guests. I have a number of questions to ask and comments to make in respect of the various presentations. Dr. Looney referred to the broader curriculum, the themes and topics involved and the idea of play. In light of the existing primary school system, are the obvious difficulties in some schools with a lack of space hampering the development of the new primary curriculum? Members will be aware that teachers are encountering problems because of a lack of space. Has that been the experience of our guests?

A framework has been established but where do we go from here? The presentation from the Department referred to a new departure and stated that it is committed to the education of children from zero to six years of age. Has a decision been taken at Government level that the Department of Education and Science will be the lead Department in respect of this matter or will the lead be taken by either the Department of Health and Children or the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform? I am aware that there is a Minister of State who holds briefs in the three Departments. Has that helped matters and has it made co-ordination between the three Departments more cohesive or could more be done? Would it still be the opinion of the various groups that it would be better if one Department were to give a strong lead?

One of the reports states that there are 1,426 different programmes targeting disadvantage and special needs. I presume that this creates problems in some ways. I accept that everyone who obtains the benefits of those services will want them to remain in place but could matters be done in a better or more co-ordinated way? I am aware that the Minister has instituted a review, which is ongoing, into the area of disadvantage.

Will the representatives of the Department indicate when the disadvantaged areas were last reviewed or when decisions were most recently taken with regard to which schools would be granted disadvantaged status? Do they believe it is time for a further review? As far as I am aware, the last review took place a few years ago and population trends, etc., would have changed in the interim.

Mr. Schonfeld referred to pilot projects. I presume the experience is that these lessen the ability for something to develop properly. For example, Youthreach has been a pilot project for the past 18 years. If something is working, surely we should change its status from being a pilot project to being something more definite. One of the presentations indicated that there is to be a new special Early Start pilot project. What changes will this involve and to what areas will it apply?

As regards access, I asked the Minister two months ago about the Early Start pre-school project which was established in 1994 or 1995 but which only applies to 40 out of 350 disadvantaged schools. I do not just want to deal with the area of disadvantage because, as some people stated, the project should be available to everybody. However, if it only applies to 40 out of 350 disadvantaged primary schools, that does not bode well in terms of its extension to the thousands of other primary schools.

On page 57 of the document, On Target, a map of services targeting disadvantage in the context of disposable household income is provided. I looked at the map before I read the observation that accompanies it. I represent the counties with the lowest and second lowest levels of disposable income in the country. If one turns the page, one will discover that the Breaking the Cycle rural project is not available in either of those counties. County Laois has only one home-school liaison service, while County Offaly has three or four. Various reasons are given as to why the two counties have the lowest levels of disposable income but it is difficult to know if these are valid or if some other factors are involved. Perhaps our guests will comment on that.

I am interested in the concept of quality and the lack of a benchmark. Perhaps someone will address that issue and indicate what we should do in order to put in place a benchmark is put in order to ensure that there is proper quality provision.

Deputy Andrews

I apologise for being late. I have a few questions to pose which arise on foot of what I have heard and from what I have read about this area.

One of the themes that appears to arise from this, and an entire range of other topics in the education sphere, is that of joined-up government. That point came across strongly in Ms Naughton's presentation. Perhaps she could inform us the stage which the high level working group has reached.

Like Deputy Enright, I am interested in discovering which is the lead Department in this area. Why does child care fall within the remit of Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform? I accept that provision for staffing and capital grants comes out of the equal opportunities programme but, in reality, we are dealing with an area in respect of which the staff of the Department of Education and Science would have much better expertise, would be more aware of reports issued by the OECD and would engage more with those involved in curriculum assessment.

I am interested, in the context of early childhood education, in identifying risk factors that lead to problems such as crime and children drifting into drug abuse. This is happening to children aged between ten and 12 in a number of areas. The factors that put children at risk are identifiable from an early age. Will the delegations comment on this in the context of their work?

Are the delegations addressing the OECD report to make sure various Departments that could have an impact on these issues are focused on it? We have debated Garda strength over the past few days in the Dáil. Potential crime can be identified through the issues we are discussing.

With regard to the starting age, a committee delegation visited Finland where children enter school when they are seven. Has there been a debate about whether such an age would be more appropriate?

Deputy Crowe

I welcome the delegation. There has been too much emphasis on third level education and I welcome this debate. Nobody has touched on the issue of class size. How important is it?

The breakfast club has been mentioned and the Minister has talked about expanding the scheme, which is welcome. What happens when a parent refuses to allow his or her child to attend a breakfast club?

I recently attended a meeting in Killinarden where I was given profiles of children who caused problems in the local school from the day they entered it. The profile outlined the difficulties not only for teachers but also the other pupils in the class. It was a cry for help from the teachers. The system is failing. One child, referred to as Jimmy, is going into third class next year but there are six or seven like him in the class. The delegation referred to the domestic and social environment in which they live. The children may have only one parent at home, who might have difficulties in his or her life. One child needed speech therapy but there is a long waiting list. He is getting more aggressive and frustrated and is having difficulties in the playground with other pupils. Some parents do not turn up with their children when they have such appointments. A number of children are involved in crime in the area. Others come to school tired or miss classes. Some children have no runners for PE class.

It is grand to produce aspirational documents, that contain great ideas but they do not filter through to areas of need. Many schools in disadvantaged areas employ teachers who are not fully qualified and that has an effect on classes. I refer to special needs assistants. This policy is being restructured but I would like to know where they are currently. Are many appointed in disadvantaged areas? Many teachers believe they are only to be found in more affluent areas. If extra teachers are needed in schools in affluent areas, the parents chip in and pay for the extra resource hours but that is not possible in disadvantaged areas.

Society is skewed against children in these areas from the outset. The document refers to the importance of encouraging parents to participate in the education system. If the parents received proper education, that would have a positive effect on their children.

Last Monday I received a telephone call from parents of children attending a playschool in my constituency. They were seeking an immediate meeting with local public representatives because the school's windows had been smashed. In the context of the environment children grow up in, schools are not even safe. One wonders about the effect this has on them. They must have pride in their school and the school must be seen to be part of the community. Schools must be at the hub of lifelong learning and at the centre of communities. How would the delegation deal with troublesome pupils? The system is failing them.

Deputy Hoctor

I welcome the delegation. I thank the representatives, some of whom have appeared before us previously and I also thank the departmental officials. I refer to the cross-departmental input into this important area of child care. Are the NCCA's recommendations being implemented satisfactorily, given that three Departments are involved? Would an interdepartmental committee be better, given the potential gap in service delivery?

I refer to the Department of the Environment and Local Government. Regional planning guidelines are in place nationwide. They relate to planning the landscape of Ireland for the next 20 years. The Department has made recommendations regarding the provision of child care facilities in all developments involving more than 60 houses. I am not sure how well that is working, as the recommendation is being implemented at the discretion of the local authority planners. Did the groups and the Department of Education and Science have an input into the regional planning guidelines in terms of the provision of recreational facilities and safety of children? As soon as many estates are built, residents are seeking signage and ramps to slow traffic. Has there been input regarding long-term provision for children?

I welcome Ms Brennan's comment. I admire her passion for her work. Many good supports have been put in place for young parents, particularly those in one-parent families. While the financial supports are good, one-parent families are often isolated in rural areas or in apartments in urban centres and they are not aware of the services available to them. The first six years of life are crucial and the environment in which we are raised is important. It is easy to become a parent and one does not even need to be able to read or write to do so. It is afterwards that we should have the supports available to help young parents learn that their behaviour must be separated from the child. A child could grow up with an inferiority complex or other psychological difficulties because if the parent is not equipped with the necessary skills from day one. I am not talking about financial support but help with how to deal with children and pass on the qualities and learning environment required in the child's early years.

Are we doing enough to communicate the message on parenting to young people? They want to do what is right but often because of insufficient information they mould a child in a way that will later manifest in crime on the streets etc. We need to work in the direction of educating young parents and need a partnership approach among the various Departments involved.

Has the disadvantaged status for schools policy come to a halt and is the Department examining the various representations it receives with regard to the composition of the school population? For example, St. Kevin's national school in Littleton, Thurles, has sought disadvantaged status on a number of occasions because of the variety of social backgrounds of its pupils. Some are socially disadvantaged and one in four of the children is from a Traveller family. The school needs assistance, yet the Department has denied disadvantaged status to the school. What is the policy with regard to giving disadvantaged status to schools not already in that category?

Deputy Stanton

I agree with the delegations that early childhood is a special time. When I was a counsellor in a second level school, one of the techniques used with teenagers, especially those with disruptive behaviour, was to look back at their early memories. It was amazing to find that some of their memories of two or three years of age were of how awful matters were at the time. We could make a link between that and their behaviour at thirteen years of age and wonder whether if those children or their parents had been helped and supported then, their lives might have been different.

What is the policy on home-school-community liaison at this level? Deputy Crowe pointed out that some parents are not aware of the benefit of or do not want pre-school education for their children. Is home-school-community liaison provided at this critical stage to help parents know what is going on or to help them link up with what is available in the locality? Deputy Hoctor also asked whether they know what is available.

Deputy Andrews raised the issue of the age at which children begin primary school. Does the delegation agree that some parents send their children too early to primary school because they must do so for economic reasons? We have already been told about the cost of pre-school education. The costs involved in crèches and child care are an issue. I and colleagues have come across cases where what working mothers bring home goes to the childminder and so little remains that they wonder whether it is worthwhile working at all. Some have stopped work because of this and stay at home, returning to being a single income family. Tax implications follow from that also.

I would like to hear some comment on costs and how they can be addressed. I come across the issue more frequently now, especially in areas that lack provisions. Is there an industry building up in this area where some people set up child-minding facilities and charge exorbitant fees? Are the costs involved reflective and why are they so exorbitant?

We visited Finland to see its advanced, successful educational system and learnt much from our visit. It has a progressive, advanced and readily available pre-school system and children do not start formal education until they are seven years of age. However, prior to their formal education they receive excellent education in their pre-schools. Does the NCCA feel we are developing the infant stage in primary schools as a pre-school stage similar to that in other countries? Is that how the NCCA sees it and is this the course we are taking? In the past the infant stage was more formal and children sat at a desk, but now the infant class has become more play oriented. Does the NCCA see our system developing more along these lines?

There is a time when a child is "ready to learn" or more ready for a formal education. Is it not wrong to place children in a formal setting when they are not ready for it and when they are too young? I asked a parliamentary question on this matter but have not got the reference for it with me. I was told that some children attend school at three years of age. I did not think that was allowable, but according to the reply to my question of approximately two years ago, that was the case. It is amazing that some parents were sending their children to school before they were four. Can the Department give me further information on this matter?

On the issue of language formation, we know that young children learn a language easily, quickly and naturally. Has the NCCA any thoughts on whether they learn a second or other language as easily? Different types of pre-schools exist such as Montessori schools and others. How do these different types of schools fit in with the plan or framework?

I agree with Deputy Hoctor about the planning required when building new housing estates, etc. Plans for crèches should be in place before estates are built. We build hundreds of houses but no facilities are provided. When children arrive, there is no place for them to go or to play in safety. No community centres exist and these areas are just urban wastelands. In the past ten years we have built wastelands where each house is the same as the next. When the children are older they have nothing to do but hang around on the streets. We all know where that leads. We need to prevent this now and I agree with what was said on that.

Another big issue concerns the vetting of those who work with children in pre-school education. How sure can we be that people who set up crèches and pre-schools are suitable to work with small children? We know of examples from other jurisdictions where people who worked with small children should not have been permitted to do so. What are the NCCA views on that? I am concerned that some Belgian research said we were bottom of the league in all categories. That is amazing.

Mr. Schonfeld

It is really not amazing to those who are quite familiar with early childhood education.

Deputy Stanton

More and more children are born to single parents. I am not making any moral judgments here but how does this impact on the provision of child care? What stresses are on single parents with regard to the provision of child care? Are there issues of which this committee should be aware?

Class size is another crucial point. What is happening and what are the guidelines on class numbers? I was taken by the claim that if we invest in child care at this early stage we get a pay-off of seven to one. That is fantastic. We might get some support if this is seen from an economic point of view as an investment.

Deputy Hoctor mentioned four Departments involved, but there are five: the Departments of Education and Science; Justice, Equality and Law Reform; Health and Children; Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs; and Environment, Heritage and Local Government.

The Department of Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs is also involved. It is responsible for ADM, which is cutting back on the provision of staffing. This is linked to the community employment schemes. The NCCA, CECDE and so on are involved. Perhaps we should bring in the National Children's Office to see what it is doing because so far it does not appear to be very effective. Perhaps we can help it to work better. I agree that there is a need to establish the early education agency as soon as possible. When will the OECD report be published?

Chairman

One could add the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment to that list of Departments because that is where the community employment workers come from. On the point raised by most speakers regarding the children who most need to be brought in, do the social services co-operate with dysfunctional families where children need to be supported in their early years? Ms Brennan spoke about how it affects children if things go wrong at an early stage in their lives. Is there a system to bring these children into early childhood education or is it haphazard? There is pressure for places in community crèches where parents are knocking on the door. If parents are not knocking on the door, is there a system to bring in these children?

If we are to achieve the Barcelona aspirations for 90% participation by 2010, it appears there will need to be a quantum leap in terms of development, support and co-ordination in the different aspects referred to. We are all agreed on how we should progress the agenda.

Dr. Looney

I will deal with the issues that relate to the NCCA. My colleague will speak about the infant curriculum in primary schools, particularly formal reading. Most questions relate to co-ordination of provision and issues that are more provider based. Deputy Enright asked about resourcing for the primary school curriculum. It is fair to say that at this stage the NCCA has begun to collect data from a number of case study schools to try to move beyond the anecdote, so to speak, into getting details from teachers about the challenges they face in three subjects, English, visual arts and mathematics, which were the first three subjects introduced. Their enthusiasm for the curriculum and the way they are beginning to see it impact on children is interesting.

However, resourcing is a constant thread through it. This ranges from things like class size, the number of students in the room, classroom size, the space they have to work in and the indoor and outdoor environment. It is important to remind people that in this country the indoor environment is crucial because we cannot be outdoors very often. The indoor environment for infants is absolutely critical. If one is to do the kind of work the visual arts or the English curriculum require, one needs space to get out of the regimental roles. Teachers bring up the issue of space, not just the equipment.

In Finland, children are already in pre-school settings and are not in school until the age of seven. Mr. De Paor will say something about what happens in Ireland in terms of literacy. It is worth noting that there is a strong tradition in Ireland of sending children to school early, and it is regarded as being a badge of intelligence that a child started school at three and a half. Being brought out in front of relatives to read from books before a child goes to school is equally seen as a major achievement, whereas it might be detrimental to a child's long-term development. We have a strong cultural investment in sending children early to formal education. It goes back a long way and it is a very difficult tradition to challenge.

On Deputy Crowe's question about early identification and class size in disadvantaged communities, as a former teacher of Jimmy's sister, what we must recognise is that by the time Jimmy or Sarah is sitting in front of us with their parents, and everyone is wringing their hands, they represent a school career of let down by various agencies. Many infant teachers can look at a group of four or five year old children and map out their school careers. They can do this within two or three days of encountering these children for the first time. What our colleagues are saying is that there should be intervention before children enter through the school door. It is tricky because one is intervening with children who could be in family settings. It is a challenge to provide support to the whole community, which is why so many Government Departments are involved. It is why joined-up Government in this area is so difficult.

We make no apologies for the aspirations in the framework for learning because there are aspirations for every child in the country. There is a wonderful quote in the document which says experiences may alter the behaviour of an adult but experience forms the mind of a child. The Jimmys and Sarahs have a set of experiences in their families and communities that make them who they are, but their families share these experiences. The great asset of early learning in its diverse settings is that it is not just the child, it is his or her family who get involved in the process from what they might do in primary or post-primary education.

We do not make recommendations in the framework document as to the lead Department. However, in terms of the development of the framework, we are making a particular effort to work with the agencies' providers and the many groups of people already involved, so that this does not become something else we must connect, but is actually informed by what is going on and, in particular, working with the centre which is represented in council. It is a good way to ensure there is ongoing co-operation but we do not recommend how it should happen.

Mr. De Paor

On Deputy Stanton's question on literacy and how the framework will link with the primary school curriculum, in all areas of the NCCA's work there is a concern that there should be continuity and progression between all sectors, not just between early childhood and primary but between primary and post-primary education. We believe the framework for early learning can have an influence upwards. In the period zero to six, children have a unique set of needs and capacities. It is recognised as a coherent phase in a child's life. The principles which underpin the primary school curriculum correspond to principles which underpin early learning in its entirety such as the child as an active learner, guided discovery methodologies, the importance of play and the interconnectedness between all our learning.

On literacy, the primary school curriculum is based on the work of Vygotsky and on the idea of the child constructing his or her meaning. Formal reading has now been delayed until the middle of senior infants. The emphasis is on emergent literacy where the child's natural language ability is the basis for success in reading and writing. Gone is the notion of pre-reading and then reading. The child is literate from the start and the print rich environment and high quality exchanges between parents and children is also very well developed in the curriculum.

Chairman

We will now move on to the CECDE.

Ms Noirin Hayes

I do not think I sat in on a discussion on early childhood care and education and remained quiet for so long. I was thinking as I was listening that back in 1983 I carried out some research on day nurseries supported by health boards and I indicated that the co-ordination of care and education was an issue of real difficulty. That is a long time ago. This point has been made very strongly and I hope it is being picked up.

Child care is early education. That is the bottom line. To see the two as separated in policy documents, departmental structures and even intra-departmentally is a major issue. While co-ordination is a subject for providers and provision it is a conceptual, policy-making and structural problem and one which we have been unable to resolve for the past 20 years.

Although I do not wish to pick on anyone in particular, the Department of Education and Science has afforded me an opportunity to point out an example of what I am speaking about. What I say is not a criticism because the Department has been very responsive. Point 5 of the presentation deals with supporting existing initiatives in early education. Point 6.1 deals with the wider issue of child care. It refers to crèche places, payment for child minders and the provision of child care places for people taking part in VTOS schemes. The fact that the child care service for children of people coming to VTOS schemes is conceptualised as a separate service from the early educational services in how it is presented, funded and supported is indicative of the kind of difficulty we are up against. While we can appreciate, talk about and agree the difficulty it seems to be a remarkably resistant barrier to overcome.

In response to Deputy Enright's question and others, where do we go from here? We must embrace this issue somehow and then look to what we know about early learning and what that means in education. We know that quality early child care needs to be seen as educative. It is educational for children's nappies to be changed by people who will talk to them while they are doing so. It is educational, for instance, to have the experience of being held, sung to and engaged with in that way. It is educational for three year olds to play with sand. That is education. It is more than simply schooling. This joined-up thinking is critical.

Deputy Andrews mentioned risk factors and early identification. This ties in with the comment made in respect of the Perry pre-school project and "one dollar in and seven dollars out". A very recent follow-on study has looked at that group of children at the age of 40. It looks at the impact on their children and shows very solid investment. Factors such as combating the prospect of setting out on a path of crime and increased likelihood of continuing education are all affected by quality early education. In 1992 a presentation was made to Ministers in two Departments by Mr. David Weikart, who was the director of that research project. It has been known about but we need to see if we can act on it.

The comment about the resistance of some parents to breakfast clubs was interesting. It brought to mind a piece of work done in England. The study approached the issue from a more social than educational perspective and brings us to a point Carmel Brennan made about the multiple roles early education can have. It pointed out that crèches and child minders are non-threatening and often afford a bridge for families who are concerned about engaging with the system. There is a certain facility afforded by well qualified staff in such settings to bridge that gap for many parents who might have a resistance to engaging with something which might be perceived as charity or in any number of ways, perhaps with a stigma. They strengthen neighbours and provide a kind of glue between families and systems. International research supports that.

It is academic what age children go to school. It is what we provide for them that matters. There is a notion abroad that we send children to school early because we value education so highly in this country. There are all sorts of historical reasons for that. It is also because, perhaps, there has not been an alternative for families, and school offers a part-time opportunity for relief. We do not have any empirical evidence to support that. The evidence is anecdotal rather than empirical.

If we were to think about early education from the perspective of children and recognise that children grow, develop and learn in the midst of society, we might begin to place children in the midst of our policy thinking as well. One of the difficulties, and it has been largely budgetary, has been that our policies have developed down two separate lines. Child care has been a labour market and equal opportunities issue while early education has been an educational disadvantage issue. They have stayed separate whereas the richness we could achieve if we conceptualised in an integrated way would be efficient in terms of money and in terms of all sorts of value added for children and families.

I was pleased with the questions because they show a sensitivity to the issue. Back in 1983 I was seeing this as a problem. It is enormously resistant to change. We defer to Members of the Oireachtas to make those changes.

Ms Irene Gunning

Like Ms Hayes, I emphasise the importance of crèches and day care facilities in the community because they are so much more approachable and families can engage with them. We need to engage with families and support very young families and young single parents. These are the vulnerable in the community who need support very early on. By the time a child is three years old we need to be there interfacing with him or her.

Likewise, the Perry pre-school project was very well resourced. Parental involvement is crucially important in projects of that sort. These kinds of services exist for children and there must be real parental involvement. The more the service is embedded in the community and the community knows about the service the better. These are the kinds of services which are best for young children and to support families.

Ms Brennan

The question of the cost of provision has been raised. Child care is very labour intensive. It is costly. There is probably very little rip-off in the market. The ratios are often one to three for babies. To have three babies minded for a week takes one and a half staff and overheads must be added to that. Child care is an expensive business. The ratio is one to six for two year olds. Staff costs and overheads are very high.

How do children from deprived backgrounds get into services? They are referred through the social welfare service and the health boards. However, the health boards now tell us they do not have the money to pay for child care. When such parents access services they do so at the subsidised rate because they cannot afford to pay the commercial rate.

The Department of Education and Science spoke about the VTOS payments and the VEC subsidies. About this time last summer that fund ran dry and was withdrawn for three or four months. The sector went into chaos. The community welfare officers' payments have been withdrawn. Families have no other access. What that has exposed is not only that it was needed but that there is nothing else available. Unless one is on a scheme such as VTOS or community employment one does not have access to a subsidy which allows one to access a service. One has to be either considered at risk or involved in a scheme to be placed on the health board list. That is amazing. We do not know how many low incomes families fall into the category.

The Society of St. Vincent de Paul research illustrates that low income families do not prioritise education in their budgets. They do not have the money to factor in such costs. It is a scary situation.

We are speaking in this regard of families living in disadvantaged areas. I worry about comment which suggests their parenting is dysfunctional because they live in disadvantaged areas. All families need support with child rearing. As society changes and people move into the workforce, they need more support. That support must be about enhancing children and not about keeping children busy while parents are at work. If it is not about enhancing childhood then we are making bad decisions.

I was glad to hear Deputy O'Sullivan's speak of the quantum leap. We cannot just tweak the system; we need to make such a quantum leap. To do so, we need leadership. I put it to the committee that members, as politicians, have the power to bite the bullet on this matter. I put that challenge to the committee.

Ms Naughton

I will try to answer the remainder of the questions. One of the main issues raised by members was that of co-ordination. In that regard, there is co-ordination between seven Departments though I think reference was made earlier to 11 Departments.

Mr. Schonfeld

Nine.

Ms Naughton

The Cabinet committee on children established the higher level working group which consists of five Departments examining the co-ordination issue. The group which is trying to rationalise the most appropriate way to do things is expected to report in December 2004. I cannot answer that question further. Regarding the OECD, it made reference to co-ordination and provided advice and guidance in that regard. The report is also being evaluated by the higher level working group. The issue of co-ordination is actively being reviewed.

Deputy Enright asked when the issue of disadvantage was examined. It is actively being evaluated in the Department from pre-school upwards. Not only are many Departments involved; there are a great deal of schemes. The Department is considering the best way to rationalise the schemes to provide the most efficient services with the least amount of duplication. The Early Start programme will be considered in that context also.

Deputy Crowe referred to children who do not have runners when participating in physical education. That issue is relevant to the Department of Social and Family Affairs by way of its supplementary welfare schemes.

I am sure members are aware of the establishment of the National Council for Special Education. That body will examine the special needs assistants issue. Many new procedures are commencing. The National Children's Office recently published its pay policy, an issue dealt with in co-operation with the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government.

A question was also asked regarding disadvantage status for schools and Littleton near Thurles was mentioned. The Department will consider any representation it receives in that regard. Much of the work may be delayed in the context of the Department's consideration of the issue in its totality. I will check the position on the matter for the Deputy.

Children from disadvantaged families referred to a particular school are dealt with by the community welfare officer and the school-community liaison system. The school works with the children and the families.

I am not sure how many three year old children attend school. The figure for four year olds is 49%. Children are meant to be four years old on 1 September of the particular school year. I can get the information for the committee. The inclusion of three year olds in the number attending particular schools may include those involved in the Early Start programme. It is difficult to answer the question relating to the number of children in a class because that can be determined by one's status and so on. The Department is trying to reduce the ratio in that regard. The ratio for those with autism is 6:1 and for Early Start it is 15:1. The ratio in some primary school classes would be 20:1. There is anecdotal evidence that primary school classes are often over 30:1.

Reference was also made to the role of the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform in education. The equality section of that Department deals with child care. Officials of the Department of Education and Science, in an effort to provide co-ordination and not duplication of service, would consult with the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform on matters relating to disadvantage.

The question of child care and the VTOS issue is interesting. It is a two-way process. We are trying to encourage people with poor education back into the system. We also try to ensure their children are involved in the education system. It is only by this two-way process that we can improve the quality of life for children and parents.

The National Education Welfare Board will be involved in matters relating to disadvantaged children who are unable to access education. The National Educational Psychological Services would also be involved if a child had particular behavioural issues.

Mr. Wall

Members raised the issue of co-ordination. That matter has also been highlighted by the groups with which we work in the sector. The high level working group is actively considering that issue and will report on it in December.

A number of issues arose regarding the conceptual difficulties surrounding early education. The Department of Education and Science and the CECDE have a close working relationship. The Department relies on CECDE for its advice on equality in terms of how it affects early childhood and on how the conceptual framework for early childhood education should be viewed. The Department does not have all the answers and as such requires bodies such as CECDE, NCCA and others to advise it on issues relating to this sector.

Deputy Stanton

I understand approximately 7,000 applications for special needs and resource teacher provision have not yet been processed. Would the delegation agree that they should receive urgent consideration and that it is wrong that some of them have been awaiting processing for more than a year? How many of those applications relate to young children with special needs such as dyslexia, dyspraxia, ADD, ADHD or autism? Why is it that so many of these applications are not being processed? Why can parents not obtain an adequate response from the Department of Education and Science on the matter?

Ms Naughton

The National Council for Special Education has only recently been established. Processing from now on should be quicker.

Deputy Stanton

It is not its function to deal with processing issues. It is wrong that that should be the case. Surely the processing of applications relating to Early Start and special education needs should be a priority. Why is it that approximately 7,000 applications have been on the Minister's desk for more than a year?

Ms Naughton

I will raise that matter at departmental level.

Chairman

I thank everybody who participated in this meeting. The discussion has been positive. The committee needs to take up Ms Brennan's challenge to show leadership and move this process forward. Deputy Stanton suggested we should meet the National Children's Office. Perhaps the Minister with responsibility for children should also come here. The committee should, perhaps, discuss this issue at the next meeting and decide how we will move it forward. We have all engaged in the issue and been taken by what has been said and by the need for us to move the process forward. With agreement, we will put the issue on the agenda for the next meeting for discussion as to how to progress.

I thank the committee and our visitors for their attendance.

The joint committee adjourned at 1.32 p.m. sine die.