JOINT COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND SCIENCE debate -
Thursday, 29 Jul 2004

Primary Teaching Courses: Presentation.

The joint committee met in private session until 11.39 a.m.

Chairman

I welcome the representatives from the Department of Education and Science, all of whom have appeared before the committee previously. We have the deputy chief inspector, Mr. Gearóid Ó Conlúin, Ms Ruth Carmody, principal officer, Mr. Barry Conroy, assistant principal officer, Mr. Johnny Bracken, principal officer and Mr. Gabriel Harrison, assistant chief inspector.

We invited HETAC and a representative of the Department arising from our discussions with various groups on on-line teacher training, and we also sent a number of queries to the Department. For the information of the witnesses, the Minister's response was faxed to me this morning. It has not been circulated yet but will be circulated to members as soon as the photocopies are available. We realise the representatives do not have responsibility for a number of areas that fall under the remit of HETAC, and I am sure they will remind us of that if we ask questions about that area. We invite you to make a brief presentation on the Department's involvement in this regard, following which we will have questions and answers and a general discussion. Am I correct in thinking that the volunteer to make the presentation is Mr. Bracken?

Mr. John Bracken

No.

Chairman

That is a departure. There is disappointment all round.

Ms Ruth Carmody

Unfortunately, I have that pleasure. The Chairman has introduced the members of the delegation to the committee.

I will go through the issues in our presentation. The first issue is that of primary teacher supply and demand. A number of factors affect the demand for primary teachers. These include application of the agreed staffing schedule, demographic trends, the number of teachers opting to take career breaks, the number of secondments approved and the age at which teachers opt to retire on a voluntary basis. The creation of additional posts in a particular school year and the retention of posts arising from the allocation of the demographic dividend also affect the demand for teachers.

The Department reviews the enrolment projections for schools and the factors affecting the demand for teaching posts on a regular basis with a view to ensuring as far as possible, within resource constraints, that the supply of teachers available meets the demand.

Members of the committee are probably aware that during the 1980s there was a perceived over-supply of trained primary teachers and this led to a reduction in the number of places available for persons wishing to train as primary teachers. From 1989 to 1992, inclusive, the total approved annual intake to the colleges of education was 275. Since 1993, the approved intake has increased each year due to the need for additional trained teachers and the number of undergraduate intake places stands today at 1,000 per year, which is double the number of places available in 1996-97. There are also currently 280 students on the postgraduate course in the colleges of education.

A number of initiatives to improve teacher supply have been taken by the Department in recent years to boost substantially the supply of trained primary teachers and alleviate the current supply difficulties. One of these was the introduction of the graduate diploma, a full-time course run in the colleges of education to enable third level graduates to train as primary teachers. This 18 month full-time course was first provided in the 1995-96 academic year and it has been repeated on a number of occasions since then. The most recent course commenced in February of this year.

In addition, the intake to the Bachelor of Education course has been increased dramatically in recent years. Since 1999, some 1,000 students have been admitted annually to the programme — this represents a doubling of the number admitted in 1996. Members of the committee will note the table in the document sets out intakes to the various courses from the 1995-96 academic year to date.

Other initiatives to increase the number of trained personnel have also been introduced. Bachelor of Education graduates of St. Mary's College, Belfast who have studied Irish to honours levels as an academic subject as part of their teaching qualifications are recognised as fully qualified teachers. Since September 1998, all primary degree holders who hold the Higher Diploma in Education are paid as fully trained substitute teachers. Since September 2000, teachers employed in a temporary capacity holding a degree and the Higher Diploma in Education are paid on the trained basic scale for teachers.

Teachers trained in EU member states employed in primary schools are now remunerated at the trained rate pending their obtaining the necessary competence in the Irish language. EU trained teachers previously had to acquire the necessary competence in the Irish language within three years of their first appointment to a primary school. These teachers now have up to five years to obtain the necessary competence in the language. In addition, for the period of two years from 1 September 2000, teachers trained outside the EU whose qualifications are accepted by the Department will be granted provisional recognition for five years on the same basis as EU trained teachers.

Montessori trained teachers who have successfully completed the full-time course of three years' duration at St. Nicholas, Dún Laoghaire, which is recognised by HETAC, or the Montessori qualification, which is awarded on completion of the three year course in the AMI College, are also recognised as being fully qualified substitute teachers. These Montessori trained teachers are also granted restricted recognition to teach in a temporary or permanent capacity in certain special schools and special classes. The decision to grant fully qualified teachers who trained outside the State restricted recognition to teach in certain categories of schools and classes without the necessity to hold an Irish language qualification is also contributing to an improvement in the supply of trained primary teachers.

Despite all the above initiatives, the INTO has recently said that there is a shortfall of 1,600 qualified primary teachers to fill vacant positions. The INTO has also indicated that, if there are still unqualified personnel in charge of classes at primary level by September 2005, its members will refuse to work in those schools. The Minister shares the concern in regard to the employment of unqualified teachers in our primary schools. As mentioned earlier, the number of teachers on career break is a contributory factor and a review of this scheme may be necessary.

I will deal with the modular course in primary teaching. The INTO wrote to the Department in June 2001 indicating that a resolution had been passed at its annual congress seeking the introduction of a modular course to enable post-primary qualified teachers who are currently employed in primary schools to become qualified primary teachers while continuing to serve in the primary schools. It was estimated at the time that there were 280 such people in the system.

In January 2003 the Department was approached by Dr. Seán Rowland, executive chairman of Hibernia College, who was interested in providing a modular course on-line for primary teacher training. All costs associated with such a course would be borne by Hibernia and funded by fees paid by students on the course. The Department decided that, before it would engage further with Hibernia College, it would explore with the colleges of education how such a course might be provided, as they are the primary routes for the supply of primary teachers.

The Department subsequently wrote to the colleges of education seeking proposals for the provision of a modular course to enable the specified cohort of people to become qualified primary teachers. CHOICE, the umbrella organisation for the colleges of education, responded to the Department's letter indicating that each of the colleges of education was carefully examining the Department's suggestion and also indicating that there was a range of issues on which they wished to receive further clarification. These included entry requirements, course design and content, programme delivery etc. One college, Froebel College of Education, submitted a proposal for a part-time course of three years' duration. However, the costs associated with the proposed course represented double the cost of providing the current 18 month full-time postgraduate course.

In April 2003, the Department again metHibernia College. At that meeting, the Department indicated that, as far as it was concerned, the central issue in regard to the proposal from Hibernia College was whether, if such a course was independently approved by the Higher Education and Training Awards Council, HETAC, the Department would recognise graduates of the course as primary teachers. In other words, the Department made it clear to Hibernia College that its function, as the designated authority for the recognition of qualifications for purposes of employment for the regulated profession of primary teaching, was confined to recognition of a qualification, provided that all conditions set by HETAC were met, including those relating to quality assurance.

On 3 June 2003 HETAC issued a certificate of approval in respect of the course at Hibernia College. The course would be titled Graduate Diploma in Primary Education. On 1 August 2003, the Department wrote to Hibernia College indicating that the Graduate Diploma in Primary Education would be recognised by the Department for the purposes of primary teaching, subject to adherence by Hibernia College to the conditions set out in the HETAC certificate of approval and to any further conditions set by HETAC, and in particular to agreement with HETAC on appropriate quality assurance procedures.

This process would involve satisfying HETAC that the institution had the appropriate quality assurance procedures in place, compliance with HETAC requirements for the conduct of assessment and the arrangements for international and external examiners, in addition to having the content of the particular course approved by a programme accreditation panel. In addition, the quality assurance requirements of HETAC, which are published at www.hetac.ie require that, over time, each provider engages in an institutional self-evaluation process in line with international standards at higher education level, and an external review.

The Qualifications (Education and Training) Act 1999, under section 26(1), provides that HETAC may review a programme it has validated at any time, and under section 30 it must do so at least once every five years. The provisions in the Act provide adequate arrangements for independent assessment of awards.

With regard to the Higher Education and Training Awards Council, HETAC, the Qualifications (Education and Training) Act 1999 provided for the establishment of the national Qualifications Authority of Ireland and the Further and Higher Education and Training Awards Councils for the accreditation of non-university education and training awards at further and higher levels. The role of HETAC, which is a statutory body, is to establish policies and criteria for the making of higher education and training awards, and the validation of programmes; to determine the standards of knowledge, skills and competencies to be acquired by learners for an award; to make or recognise awards; and to monitor the quality of programmes, ensuring that providers have procedures for assessment of learners, which are fair and consistent.

As the national awarding body, the primary concern that HETAC must have in relation to validating a programme leading to one of its awards is whether the programme meets the appropriate outcomes for an award and the associated quality assurance arrangements for that programme. The awarding service of HETAC is open to all public and private providers, as is required under the Qualifications, (Education and Training) Act 1999. There is no legal limit on the fields of learning in which HETAC may make awards.

I now turn to the Hibernia College graduate diploma in primary education. The Department understands that there are currently some 400 students undertaking the Hibernia College programme. The first cohort of about 200 students is due to graduate in February 2005. We understand that Hibernia College has recently advertised for a third intake to the course.

The Department of Education and Science will monitor 10% of the final teaching practice students from the Hibernia College course, as is the case for students of the colleges of education. If, following the committee's meetings with HETAC and Hibernia College — which, I understand, will take place in the autumn — the committee has any information or documentation that leads it to have serious misgivings about the quality of the course offered by Hibernia, or indeed HETAC's validation, I would invite the committee to submit them both to HETAC and the Department for consideration.

I hope the committee has found the presentation informative. I hope to be able to answer any questions.

Chairman

Thank you. At the start of the meeting, I should have reminded people that members of the committee have absolute privilege but that this does not apply to witnesses appearing before the committee. I would also remind members of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that 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.

We have heard the Department's presentation and we will now come to members for their questions and comments.

Deputy Enright

I welcome the delegation from the Department. The witnesses should understand that Hibernia College's representatives have not yet appeared before the committee. Therefore, I am basing my questions on the information I have obtained from the other groups and organisations that have appeared before the committee, although Hibernia College has not yet been in a position to contradict them.

As regards HETAC's evaluation process, Ms Carmody is probably aware there was no teaching expert or educationalist on the panel that approved the course. I wonder whether that would affect Ms Carmody's judgment in any way, whether she felt it did not make any difference, or whether she felt it was something that should have been included.

In her presentation, Ms Carmody mentioned that Froebel College of Education put a proposal to her for on-line learning. Perhaps she can tell us how that was evaluated. She mentioned the issue of costs. Was it cost alone that led her to reach the decision she did? Does she have any idea about the reasons their costs were so much more expensive than the conversion course? Were those costs supposed to be met by the Department of Education and Science?

Ms Carmody alluded to the modular course in her presentation, but she did not actually tell us what happened with the negotiations on the modular course. It is something about which I have questioned the Minister, Deputy Dempsey, quite a few times. They were in consultation or discussions, but nothing seems to have happened concerning the modular course since Hibernia College was set up. Are those discussions completely at an end? If not, at what stage are they currently? Are there prospects in future for the modular course?

As regards what the Department took into account, it is the accrediting body that decides whether or not somebody is a teacher. In making that decision, what did Ms Carmody consider? Is it the case that if HETAC approves it, the Department of Education and Science is happy? Is the course content examined or is it just a cost analysis that is carried out? If different angles are examined, can Ms Carmody tell us the ratio in terms of the consideration given to each angle, and what takes precedence in her thinking?

Two weeks ago, concerns were raised by some of the groups that appeared here about the content of the Hibernia College course. In particular, it was pointed out that Hibernia had recently advertised for writers for some aspects of the course. Music, Irish and drama were mentioned in connection with delivering the course in November 2004. If that is so, we will have people training to be teachers who will graduate in February 2005, yet some of their course content may not yet have been written. Has that been brought to Ms Carmody's attention? Perhaps it is an issue for HETAC, but I do not know.

Will Ms Carmody explain who is responsible for running and financing the three teacher training centres around the country? If it is the Department, what arrangements have been made for their use by Hibernia College?

The group that produced the Kellehan report was established by the then Minister for Education and Science, Deputy Martin, and was launched by his successor, Deputy Woods. What is the current status of that report? Have aspects of it been introduced? I do not think it mentioned the issue of on-line teacher training. What consideration was given by the Department to the broader philosophy of how we are going to do this?

At the end of her presentation, Ms Carmody said that if we have questions we should submit them to HETAC and the Department. I am not necessarily saying that HETAC got it wrong in this case, but if HETAC approves something about which serious questions arise, who or what has the power to do anything about it? Does the Minister for Education and Science have the power to step in and say "We're not happy with this. We think it should be looked at again"?

I understand that HETAC re-examines a course only after five years. Does Ms Carmody have any concerns about the fact that this course will be running for five years before it is evaluated? We might, therefore, have a few thousand teachers out there in that length of time. If queries arise, the teachers will be within the system.

Ms Margaret Kelly from Ms Carmody's Department was before the committee on 23 October 2003. In fairness to her, she did not know we were going to ask her questions about Hibernia College. It was not the easiest situation for her to be in but she stated, "We are not funding the Hibernia course and we have no role in limiting its intake, as we are not paying for it." Obviously, the Department of Education and Science has a role in limiting intakes to the traditional teacher training colleges. HETAC is only responsible for the quality of a course, not the quantity that will emerge — that is the Department's responsibility. Is it the case that the Department has absolutely no power to limit the numbers on the Hibernia course? If so, is Ms Carmody not concerned that in a few years' time the majority of teachers will be coming from the on-line course? Obviously, it depends on the decisions an individual Minister may take in terms of capping numbers, but the reality is that if we had tighter financial times, this decision could easily be made because there is an alternative route. Is it the case that if Hibernia College wants to put 3,000 students through its course next year, nobody is in a position to stop it?

Deputy Crowe

We have learnt this morning that there is no legal impediment to Hibernia College in the sense that it can apparently take as many people as it wants on this course. In its programme of validation to HETAC, Hibernia proposed that it should be allowed 100 students in the first year and a further 100 in the second year. We are now being told that the numbers have risen significantly. Does the Department have no real input regarding the amount of students that can go through this course?

The other teacher training colleges were concerned and felt they could get an on-line course up and running themselves. They seem to have been cut out of the loop, however, given the cap on student intake numbers imposed by the Department itself. I note from the document we received this morning that there was some engagement with the colleges. Perhaps MsCarmody could expand on the Department's engagement with the colleges on this issue. How often did this occur? Did it just involve correspondence or were many meetings held about the matter?

The various groups that attended the committee were all concerned about the quality and standard of teaching on the Hibernia College course. Lo and behold, the people who are providing that course are involved in self-assessment. HETAC can assess the course over a five year period. I do not know the international standards for this, and as it seems to be a new area of work I would have thought for the first five years anyway there would be constant assessment of the course.

We have heard a number of things that concern us. Hibernia's original application mentioned that teachers would be on its staff. Later it transpired that many of the teachers were not staff. To what extent did the Department engage with the colleges? What is the duration of the pilot course? All of the groups understood there would be a certain level of intake but now we have been told there is no legal cap on it. What is the Department's view on capped intake levels? Did it examine the international best practice for such courses? Again, there was a concern that HETAC did not have someone with a background in international best practice taking part in the assessment process.

Deputy Hoctor

I welcome the Department's representatives and thank them for their prompt response. As Deputy Enright said, Hibernia College did not attend our last meeting but we look forward to meeting its representatives. At our meeting there was serious concern about the on-line training of primary teachers.

I understand from Ms Carmody's presentation that the Department handed over the assessment and monitoring of the scheme to HETAC. What is the relationship between the Department and HETAC? Has the Department handed over all responsibility to HETAC even in light of the concern expressed by the INTO? Did it discuss on-line teaching training with HETAC? Is it good enough for the Department to accept the course if HETAC agrees to it?

We talk about monitoring teachers. I wonder how all of the bodies operating on behalf of the Department, and on the public's behalf, are monitored to ensure there are high calibre teachers in the classroom? We paid great tribute to the education colleges who turn out excellent people. They apply an extensive and discerning screening process for the duration of the regular three year B.Ed training programmes. We are concerned that online courses have the potential to diminish the calibre of people coming through. After all, on-line training is done from home and one of the concerns I aired at the last meeting related to the whole screening process. The colleges here emphasised that the people who apply to undertake the postgraduate diploma course have already been screened during their third level courses. I understand that the organisation is not in a position to screen new students applying for the B.Ed courses in the various colleges and that is understandable to a degree. However, when I speak about screening I am talking about the screening of adults who will work in close proximity to children. How is this being addressed with on-line training? Did the Department express concern about screening or is it left to HETAC to handle? I regret that HETAC was not able to meet us today but I know it wants to meet us in September. We need to meet everyone and get the full picture.

Ms Carmody mentioned competency in the Irish language for teachers trained inside and outside of the EU. Teachers may take up to five years to attain an acceptable standard in Irish. Are the teacher unions seeking to increase it to seven years? Will the Department consider the measure? The unions believe people should be allowed seven years to reach the high standard required in Irish. Perhaps the standard required is too high for these people who are competent teachers already.

Deputy Stanton

I welcome the delegation from the Department. I am disappointed HETAC and Hibernia could not be present today.

A fortnight ago we met various groups to discuss on-line training. I agree with Deputy Hoctor that we expressed great concern about it during the meeting. Our job is to monitor and inquire about the work done by the Department and statutory agencies involved in education. We have many questions on the issue. In the interest of fairness we must ensure that all sides contribute to the debate on teacher training and are listened to. We have endeavoured to do that.

The heads of the colleges of education raised many concerns about the programme. Will the Department supply us with the correspondence it received from them on the modular courses and its reply to same? We could then analyse the correspondence.

I note from material sent by the Minister to the Chairman yesterday that the Department indicated at a meeting on 3 November with CHOICE that the demand for modular courses had changed somewhat since its original request for proposals for a modular course and that it had taken the view that such a course was not necessary at that time. On what figures, facts and information did the Department base that view? This is an important issue. On the one hand, Hibernia is increasing the number of places on the modular course it is offering and, on the other, the colleges of education are indicating that they are being told they must reduce the number of places, while the Department is indicating that such a course is not necessary. There seems to be an inconsistency somewhere there.

The INTO expressed concern about the possible over supply of teachers in the not too distant future and that people may not enter into teaching if that was the case, as there would be a fear that teachers would be unemployed and so on. We would prefer to see balance.

The Minister said that market forces will determine the number of teachers. Has that always been the Department's policy? How are market forces determined?

CHOICE also mentioned the threat, as it sees it, to the quality of teacher education, the professional status of teaching and the well-being of Irish primary schoolchildren. It has called for a pause in further intakes to this course pending a full review. Does the Department plan to undertake a full review of this relatively new departure?

Deputy Hoctor referred to the view that teaching is not just about information but also about formation. Do the departmental experts present agree with that view? I have concerns regarding the issue that the formation of teachers would suffer in the case of on-line teacher training. The heads of the colleges of education stated that the interpersonal dimension is vital because teaching is a caring profession. I am aware that the departmental inspectors are conscious of the need for screening of persons both from the point of view of safety but also from the point of view of suitability to work in classrooms. Is there ongoing monitoring by the Department of the Hibernia course?

The heads of the Irish colleges of education also stated that Hibernia's enrolment has led to a curtailment in the intake to the postgraduate conversion programmes in the colleges of education. The colleges are satisfied they can meet the demand for additional teachers and have repeatedly offered to enter into discussions with the Department on alternative models of teacher education where such were requested. What is the status of these discussions? I may be mistaken but it seems the Department is biased in favour of Hibernia in that it is directing the colleges of education to cut back whereas Hibernia can do what it likes. I know there is nothing to stop them having as many places as they can. This question has been asked by others. Is it a cost cutting measure?

Hibernia was granted approval under section 21(4) of theQualifications (Education and Training) Act 1999. On the issue of HETAC accreditation, I am informed Hibernia has asked the Department to review the manner in which the Act is being applied in this instance with a view to ascertaining whether this is an appropriate section under which the programme should be validated. Has that review taken place or has the Department any plans for a review?

Hibernia College states it has raised concerns with HETAC to do with its responsibilities but received no satisfactory response. A delegation from HETAC is not present so we cannot pursue that further. On the question of the absence of expertise in the area of third-level teacher education and the HETAC assessment panel, we are informed the four-person panel comprised a programme validation expert, an expert in e-learning, a serving teacher and a retired teacher. It has been stated that Hibernia can take on as many students as it wishes. Has the Department any concerns in this regard? The market is being flooded with teachers.

The validation programme has been submitted to HETAC. Twelve staff are listed but the submission contained CVs for only seven individuals. How could the programme be approved with such incomplete information? That is a question for HETAC to answer. Who oversees HETAC? Has the Department a role or is it our job? Is HETAC an independent body? Of the nine persons listed as members of the academic council, at least one third later denied involvement. The Higher Education Authority has issued a public statement drawing attention to factually incorrect claims by Hibernia College in the mission statement submitted to HETAC by the college.

The Department will understand why all members of this committee are concerned about the situation. There are also concerns about the entry requirements and selection procedures. Rule 1563 of the rules for national schools under the Department of Education and Science specifies that a student is not eligible for employment in any capacity in a national school between the date of entrance to a college for a first year course of training and the date of conclusion of the final year unless with the special sanction of the Minister previously obtained. We are unaware whether this rule is currently being observed in respect of the students of Hibernia College. Will the Department inform the committee on this matter?

Regarding those working in the primary curriculum support programme, the panel of assessors appointed on behalf of HETAC concluded that the involvement by PCSP staff in the delivery of the programme is considered essential to its success. The Minister has stated that the primary curriculum support programme has no role in the compilation of the Hibernia course syllabus or material. The Department's policy in respect of persons employed in this programme is clear in that those employed on the primary curriculum support programme or any Department programme are informed that any involvement with any private entity must not in any manner impinge on their employment in the programme.

It is stated that the Department cannot regulate what individuals do in their own time. I am unclear as to the meaning of this statement. Does it mean persons working on the primary curriculum support programme are working in supporting Hibernia? It is also stated that their involvement in the programme is considered essential to its success yet they can do what they like in their own time. Will the Department explain the situation? There seems to be a potential conflict of interest. It appears that those involved in their own time may be being paid for that work. I presume they would not be working for nothing. This is a serious matter, in my view. I ask the Department to explain exactly what is happening. Perhaps there is nothing happening but it is the job of this committee to raise these questions.

Has the Department examined the programme content of the Hibernia course? The heads of the colleges of education stated that in their view the programme content submitted for validation was weak and deficient in numerous respects. They stated:

It seemed extraordinary that the programme was given accreditation without any information on the course content in the areas including religious studies, psychology of education, philosophy of education, arts education, Gaeilge, English, maths, history, geography, science, visual arts, drama, music, law and insurance education, parent-teacher relations, first aid.

It would appear that the courses in some of these areas have not yet been written and that the course writers are now being recruited. Will the Department comment? Is this a serious situation or not?

The heads of colleges of education also spoke about the lack of library support and the fact that large parts of the relevant literature on teacher education are not available on-line. Mr. Eamon Murtagh, assistant chief inspector in the Department of Education and Science said that it was stated that the Hibernia supporting documentation stated without any supporting evidence that the Internet was an exciting educational medium which provides a learning experience that far exceeds traditional modes of pedagogy. He suggests it is very important to have ongoing monitoring of students, assimilation of the course contents by seminars, tutorial assignments, projects and written and practical examinations. What is the Department's view? Will the students work with disadvantaged or special needs children? Hibernia College charges a fee of more than €5,000. It may be argued that a person from a disadvantaged background would find it difficult to become a primary teacher by this method because this is a private enterprise and fees must be paid up front. Has the Department any plans to help people from disadvantaged backgrounds to become primary teachers by this method? I believe assistance is provided to them for the traditional training courses.

The Irish Federation of University Teachers, IFUT, is not satisfied that Hibernia College is subject to the same level of external examination scrutiny which is the norm in third-level structures. IFUT has stated that students may perform on the day of inspection in the classroom but their broader educational attainment and standard remains untested until suitably qualified external examiners are appointed to monitor the new course. What is the situation regarding external examiners? I have reservations about the manner in which the course was accredited. There was a lack of transparency in that regard. Are there any plans for HETAC to be designated as a public body under the Freedom of Information Acts? I do not know why it is not designated at present.

According to IFUT, HETAC does not seem to have taken cognisance of changes in teacher education. It spoke about a universal trend towards increased professionalisation of teaching, with an emphasis on research in teacher education. It argues that the Hibernia model is typical of the old style of teacher training and is similar to the "monitorial" model of the 19th century. Does the Department agree with this assertion?

The Kellehan report said that the graduate diploma should be extended from 18 months to two years, full-time. Has the Department changed its view in that regard? Does it agree with the report's assertion? IFUT has said that the work of HETAC's panel of assessors was superficial, shoddy and seriously flawed. It has expressed its alarm at the willingness of the Department to sanction an untried course, which is offered by a company that lacks experience in teacher education, without first testing it in a strictly monitored pilot scheme. Almost all other measures are introduced on a pilot basis initially. A school in Cork where autistic children are taught has been operating on a pilot basis for years. There is no pilot in this case, as far as I can see.

I am sure the departmental officials are aware that IFUT has said it is clear that the Department's decision to sanction the course was made without regard to educational policy. IFUT considers that the decision flies in the face of policy and practice and appears to be based on immediate expediency and financial considerations. It believes that the Department has granted a lucrative franchise to train primary teachers to a private for-profit company. The effect of this, according to IFUT, is to reduce the number of graduate teachers emerging from State-funded colleges.

Other submissions were received from the INTO and other organisations. I have made the main points I wish to emphasise at this stage and I have asked some questions.

Deputy Andrews

I would have preferred if HETAC had appeared before the committee, which has been given the run-around by the various interested bodies in this debate. Deputy Stanton asked if the new course has been sanctioned as a cost-cutting measure. It is obvious that it is a cost-cutting measure because it is cheaper, but I would like to know whether finance, as opposed to general educational policy, was the overriding consideration when the Department was deciding whether to recognise the qualification. The Department has stated that it is controlling the intake into the colleges, but it has made clear that it cannot control Hibernia. As Hibernia produces graduates, fewer graduates will be required from other colleges and costs will decrease as a result.

That it is simply a cheaper way of training teachers must have been a consideration when the Department was deciding whether to recognise the award. It is possible that it will be free, ultimately, because Hibernia has the potential to produce 1,200 or 1,500 teachers each year. There is nothing the Department can do about that. In such circumstances, the colleges would not be required to produce any graduates and would be closed down. The State's funding of the education of teachers would disappear. How great was the financial consideration when the decision was being made by the Department? It is a simple analysis — it is cheaper to produce teachers if they are trained by colleges such as Hibernia. It is possible that other players might enter the market to compete with Hibernia, which could be a good thing. To what degree was the Department thinking about that?

I would like to speak about paragraph 8.7 of the Minister's letter, which has been circulated to the committee. I do not understand why the Department cannot regulate what individuals do in their own time. It would be unacceptable for such people to engage in anti-competitive practices which conflict with the interests of the Department. It seems that the Department has the right to regulate what is done by persons in its employment, in other professional capacities, in their spare time. Perhaps the officials will give us some clarification in that regard.

Senator Browne

I wish to make clear at the outset that I have a BEd degree. The table on the second or third page of the Department's document, which outlines the number of people who have qualified in recent years, is very informative. Can the committee be given details of the number of teachers who retired in recent years and the projected figures of the number of teachers who are due to retire in the next five years? How many teachers are on secondment or career break, or are job sharing? Such figures would tell the real story, in my view. If one examines the table to which I have referred, one will have the impression that everything is satisfactory in terms of teacher supply. If all the information were made available to the committee, we would be able to see how we are facing in the future.

I have criticised in the past the Department's failure to plan. There were no jobs when my sister qualified in the 1980s, but there were plentiful jobs when I qualified in the mid-1990s. We now seem to have returned to a stage at which there are very few jobs. A school that recently advertised a position received 190 applicants, which is extraordinary. I am not sure if it is related to panel positions or whatever, but it may not be telling the real story. From what I hear throughout the country, there seems to be an over-supply of teachers this year.

Will the Department indicate the current cost of producing a teacher in St. Patrick's College or Mary Immaculate College? What are the comparative costs to the State of the three-year degree course and the 18-month postgraduate course? Some of the points raised by Deputy Stanton are valid. Is there a hidden agenda in the Department, particularly on the part of the Minister? Does it suit him to off-load his responsibilities by sanctioning on-line courses?

Decentralisation has been a buzz word in recent times. I cannot understand why all teacher training must take place in Dublin or Limerick. Why can we not franchise it out to institutes of technology, for example? At present, people who want to train as teachers have to move to Dublin or Limerick. Surely it is possible to give people the option of staying in their own areas, so they do not have to do as much travel. They should have the opportunity to live at home and commute, for example. It is particularly important when one is training to be a teacher that one should be offered the training facility in more centres than those where it is currently offered.

Is the Department aware of the exploitation of new teachers, particularly in private schools? One's starting salary in such schools is approximately €8,000 less than one would receive in a State school. It may be that this matter is totally outside the Department's remit. Is it aware of the problem? Does it have a role in rectifying it? Most teachers starting in private schools receive approximately €20,000, or €21,000 if they are lucky. It is not fair on them.

Deputy B. O’Keeffe

It is important to bear in mind that a significant number of people are being trained as national school teachers. A number of things struck me as I considered this morning's presentation. According to page 4 of the Department's document, the INTO has said that 1,600 additional qualified primary school teachers are needed to fill vacant positions. I find it extraordinary that the Department has not denied that the figure is accurate. What is the real position? Is there such a lack of teachers within the system at present?

I would like to raise the number of unqualified personnel in charge of primary school classes, especially as we approach the September 2005 deadline. What is the likelihood in that regard? Can the delegation give us an accurate number? What is being done to ensure that the existing problem will be eradicated? Page 4 of the Department's document accepts that there is a shortfall, but it claims that it can be attributed to the number of teachers on a career break. This raises questions about management, supervision and the controls that should be in place within the Department. How were so many people allowed to take career breaks that it affected the whole teaching system? How many people are on career breaks at the moment? What is the duration of these breaks? Who is managing the system so that that the type of thing that seems to have happened here has been allowed to happen? There has been no management mechanism in place to control it.

As a general rule, when talking about recognition of courses, particularly in the context of courses being offered by private colleges, the normal procedure would be to investigate what modules other private colleges could provide. Even though this college made an offer of a module and even though it has been recognised by HETAC, is it not the Department's responsibility to inquire of other colleges what modules they would be prepared to offer from the private sector and what costs are involved? Has this happened? If it has not, why was the process not seen to be open, above-board and fair? If I was the principal of another private college and found that the Department and HETAC had done a deal with another college without inquiring about what my college could offer by way of a module, I would certainly be dissatisfied with the Department and particularly with HETAC.

What about the summer courses that keep teachers up to date? Does that have anything to do with what we are discussing at this meeting?

Chairman

It has been the practice here that we accept questions and if the Department or whoever is appearing before the committee does not have the answers it will enter into correspondence subsequently. The matter is related to the subject matter of today's meeting so I will accept a question on it.

Deputy B. O’Keeffe

I want to ask the representatives of the Department of Education and Science a number of questions about the summer courses and the fact that teachers are given five extra days' holidays as a result of their attendance. Who is running these courses? Does the Department have responsibility for introducing them or is it a different organisation? How are they evaluated? Are they pertinent? Do they contribute to improved teaching mechanisms within the school? I am told that a course such as flower arranging could qualify or has done so in the past. There could be courses in mountaineering or walking tours. I understand that improvements have been made in the past.

I am a member of the Joint Committee on Health and Children and I am conscious that there are three serious concerns in teaching at the moment. These are lifestyle education, special needs education and general sex education. How does the Department attract teachers to courses in these areas? There are obvious difficulties within the school system in that many teachers may be less adept or may not be trained in these areas. What is being done to ensure these courses are tailored to the immediate demands of society and the requirements of young people?

What is the level of inspection of these courses? How many inspectors attend? Is there evaluation or feedback from the people who attend? How is the expertise and knowledge passed on? How many of these courses are found to be wanting in terms of the knowledge and capabilities they give to those who attend?

Deputy Enright

I already asked about the role of HETAC and the Department and the question of what can be done if something is found to be flawed. Has it ever been the case that something has been approved by HETAC and the Department must recognise it? As an example, if HETAC approves a law course tomorrow it does not mean the students of the course can go to the Law Society or King's Inns. These organisations have their own methods of accreditation. Once a course is approved by HETAC does the Department go along with it, or is there a process within the Department similar to that which exists in organisations such as the Law Society to investigate whether the course is suitable for the purpose intended?

Deputy Stanton

How much time elapsed between the Department's obtaining full information and knowledge about the Hibernia course and its decision to recognise the course for the purpose of primary teaching? From today's presentation it seems the first approach was made in January 2003 by Dr. Seán Rowland, who said the college was interested in providing the course. In April 2003 representatives of the Department met with representatives of Hibernia; on 1 August it said the course would be recognised. July and August are holiday times and are rather quiet. The decision was made between April and the end of July. That appears to be an extraordinarily short period for reflection and examination. According to the INTO there was no public consultation. So much for the Minister's YES meetings. Was any in-depth research or analysis conducted over the summer period? What consultation was carried out with the teaching profession, colleges and parents? Was there consultation with anyone? Over three months during the summer the Department decided to approve the course. I have never seen the Department move so fast. If it were to move as fast on other issues which are more urgent it would be great. The committee was not even told about this development. One might expect that the Department would consult the committee about such a major change.

Chairman

Deputy Crowe indicated last week that he wished to add something about FETAC.

Deputy Crowe

Yes, but I will leave that. To stay on the subject under discussion, one of the questions that struck us at the last meeting was why approval was given to a course operated by a private company with no experience in the area, which was supposedly experiencing financial difficulties. The college now has a monopoly in the area and there is to be self-assessment.

Prior to the sanction of the new course, Mr. Eamonn Murtagh, assistant chief inspector at the Department of Education and Science, talked about the Internet as an exciting educational medium with tremendous potential in all areas of education. He went on to say that the Internet is a new medium and experience of its use to deliver substantial parts of professional training programme is limited. He stated that assertions such as "Provides a learning experience that far exceeds traditional modes of pedagogy" are offered in the Hibernia documentation without any supporting evidence and that it is therefore important that there is ongoing monitoring of students' assimilation of the course's content by way of seminars, tutorials, assignments, projects and written and practical examinations. Is there any ongoing monitoring of students' assimilation of the kind Mr. Murtagh describes? Why give a private company a monopoly? Is there any continuous assessment of the students on the course, and, if so, is that being done by people with no prior experience?

Chairman

Deputy Batt O'Keeffe's final questions refer to in-service training. Perhaps the Department officials will come back to us with answers to those rather than dealing with them today. It is an important area in which we are interested. Many committee members will recall that last year difficulties arose about the recognition of at least one third level course in one of the universities in the general health area, physiotherapy, speech therapy or occupational therapy, I forget which. There were questions about several courses, for example there is no course in podiatry here. Would the Department furnish a written brief on progress in creating additional courses in this area? One college is running a new course in pharmacy and there is a proposal that medicine and other courses become postgraduate courses. If we had a briefing document on where these stand we could consider that in our own time and how to proceed.

There are, however, some questions which are more appropriate to HETAC and there are some for the Department. In so far as they can beanswered we will proceed to them.

Mr. Bracken

I wish to take issue with the numbers about which Deputy Batt O'Keeffe asked. The INTO quoted 1,600 but by our reckoning the shortfall is in the order of 700. There are approximately 500 retirements per year, and just under 700 unqualified teachers in this school year. I do not have precise figures for job-sharing and so on but there are approximately 500 or 600 on career breaks in the primary school sector. I can confirm those figures for the committee. There are approximately 200 on secondment.

A question was raised about the planning, programming and control of the numbers of career breaks. The Department does not employ teachers. They are employed by boards of management in primary schools. An agreed career break scheme is in operation. A decision not to allow a teacher go on career break is a matter for school authorities. We expect a school authority to consider the question of being able to recruit a suitable replacement in arriving at that decision but we must be conscious that schools can be put under certain pressure and people might have very genuine reasons for wanting to go on career breaks. The Department's position is that as far as possible we should have fully qualified teachers in our primary schools. On average between 600 and 700 substitute teachers are needed per day. The shortage of teachers is in the order of 700, taking into account the number of unqualified teachers, the number of substitutes needed in a day and so on.

Deputy Hoctor asked about the ScrúdúCáilíochta sa Ghaeilge. The Minister announced a change in regard to this at Easter. At the moment those who have restricted or provisional recognition are allowed five years to get through the examination which is being changed. Previously, there were four elements in the examination and candidates had to achieve a minimum of 50% in each element. Examinations are held twice a year but with effect from the April examinations of this year, 40% is the basic pass qualification mark. Those who achieve over 70% will be qualified to teach in any school, whether Gaeltacht or Irish medium schools. Those who get 40% will not be allowed to teach in those schools but can teach Irish in English medium schools. That applies to new candidates. Those recognised under the old arrangement as being qualified to teach in any school will continue to hold that entitlement.

The Deputy asked about someone who is a very competent teacher but has not achieved the Irish requirement. Under the new arrangement an appeal board may consider an application from that person for an extension to make another attempt and the maximum period proposed is an extra two years. The INTO demanded some years ago that the period of Irish requirement be ten years. We think that is excessive. The standard is five and will remain so.

There is no question of anybody having a monopoly in running a particular course. Any organisation offering a third level qualification is, as I understand it, entitled to propose to run a course and to get that course accredited and approved. If it is approved, so be it. There is no question of it being a monopoly for one organisation.

Deputy Batt O'Keeffe seemed to suggest that people do parts of a course offered by another organisation. It would be the responsibility of the organisations to discuss whether one provides part of a course for the other. I am not sure that is what the Deputy intended. Perhaps he intended to ask why the colleges of education should not provide it instead of these private institutions. I will hand over to my colleagues to deal with other issues.

Deputy Enright

I find it unusual that the Department's presentation quoted INTO figures rather than its own figures which are available and which Mr. Bracken has just quoted for the number of unqualified teachers. While we share the Minister's concern about the number of unqualified teachers, whether it is 700 or 1,600, it appears that if one cites the latter figure it is easier to justify the existence of Hibernia because we need teachers promptly. Hibernia is not the only way to achieve that.

Even if the figure is 700 the question is what do we do now? We are going to move very quickly from undersupply to oversupply and we need to deal with what happens to the oversupply because that will soon be a serious problem. I share the concerns of others for the people who have taken the Hibernia course. We cannot ignore them in any of our discussions because they paid high fees to do a course in good faith. Whatever the conclusions of this meeting something must be done about them. It could be perceived as an effort to make the situation appear bleak and in need of a quick response and that Hibernia is the magic solution, which I do not accept.

Mr. Bracken

We did not wish to mislead the committee about numbers but we were aware that the INTO and others had made presentations here and had quoted the figure of 1,600 which we did not challenge at any stage. That was their quotation. I do not know where the figures came from. Our figure is just under 700. The majority of the first cohort of those who have completed the Hibernia College course are teachers who are currently teaching in primary schools. They would have formed part of the unqualified group of teachers that I listed. I anticipate a selection process has to be a public one with interviews. If some of those people on that course proved to be successful as teachers and earned the qualification, I presume they would have a strong chance of getting a post if there was a vacancy at the school. I cannot guarantee this because that is a matter for the selection board. I agree that we cannot forget the people.

Regarding the numbers, there was no question of agreement to accept the HETAC approved qualification for the purposes of teacher employment. It was not a "get rich quick" or "get rid of the problem" solution. This never came into it as far as I am aware. There is obviously a possibility that if Hibernia College produces a large number of teachers, there will be an over supply. There is no point in us saying otherwise. There appears to be no shortage of applications for persons to go into the teaching profession despite what the unions claim about salaries, for example. However, there is the possibility of an over supply. We can no more prevent Hibernia College, or any other private operator entering the scene with an approved course, than we can prevent an Europe-trained teacher coming to Ireland for employment as they are entitled.

Chairman

To clarify Deputy Batt O'Keeffe's question, my understanding was that he was raising a public procurement question similar to that raised by Deputy Stanton about the time scale. I know Mr. Bracken partly answered that by saying that if an institution presents to HETAC with a course it can qualify. There is a suggestion that it happened quickly and not everybody was alerted that an opportunity might arise in this area. That was the point Deputy Batt O'Keeffe was raising.

Ms Carmody

If I could respond on the general issue raised as to the status of HETAC. HETAC is an independent statutory authority, established under the Qualifications (Education and Training) Act 1999. It is ultimately answerable to the national qualifications authority which is its overseeing body. Obviously, these bodies are new and have statutory independence in their functions. The Minister nominates members to the national qualifications authority. However, they are independent of the Department since the structures put in place by the Act emphasise the need for accountability at institutional level rather than control by the Department. Part of the concern raised may relate to the reliance on the institutions themselves to self-evaluate. The detail of this is more appropriately dealt with by HETAC than by the Department. We have indicated that if there are further concerns after the committee meets with HETAC and Hibernia College, we are willing to examine them further.

The proposals for modular courses were raised. As we indicated in our presentation, we had invited the colleges of education to make proposals but disappointingly only received one. We were asked if the decision not to go with that proposal was purely a cost-cutting one. It was not but only receiving one proposal made it difficult to assess. We were not looking for colleges to compete with each other. The Hibernia College course was fully accredited and recognised in that timespan. That has affected our view of the need for modular courses for the time being. However, it does not preclude the introduction of a modular course in the colleges of education in the future if the need for it was demonstrated. This might deal with the query of disadvantage. The flexible modes of delivery are part of the new training system.

The issue of external examiners was raised. This is a matter for the institutions under the legislation. The inspectorate deals appropriately with quality issues and the standards of the courses.

Deputy Enright

Only one college replied to the modular course proposal. However, I am not sure at what stage the discussions ended. The presentation stated that the Department received a letter from the colleges of education indicating that there was a range of issues on which they wished to receive further clarification. At what stage was this? Whenever I asked the Minister on the issue, he always replied it was at discussion stage. Where did the discussions end? Were the colleges under the impression that they were still in negotiations with the Department until such time as they realised a private operator had entered?

Ms Carmody

The Deputy might appropriately ask the colleges that. We were disappointed in the response. While the colleges have indicated a willingness in principle to provide modular courses, they had not developed proposals. It made it difficult for us to assess what they were looking for.

Mr. Gearóid Ó Conlúin

I want to comment on this important question. The bigger challenge around all these questions is to sieve out the facts from the rhetoric. There has been much rhetoric. Hopefully, today's exercise will contribute to that sieving process. Discussions were held with the colleges on the concept of a modular course, including an on-line dimension. The correspondence between all parties on this can be made available. There were also telephone contacts with individual colleges. The reality is that the colleges were asked about this and it was made clear there was a chronic supply problem. The capacity for the colleges to put on courses in the traditional way was extremely limited. It was obvious that creative and different thinking was required. The colleges were to think about this and return with a proposal for the Department. Nothing was heard from them. I contacted Dr. Pauric Travers, who spoke to the committee last week, some months after these discussions took place to discover nothing had happened. I am speculating when I say that the colleges may have felt a Hibernia College would never happen.

Mr. Barry Conroy

The education centres are fully funded by the Department of Education and Science. The use of the education centres by anyone other than teachers is permitted as long as the user pays a commercial rate.

Deputy Enright

Was this happening in this case?

Mr. Conroy

Yes.

Senator Browne

When the Department looked to rectify the shortage of teachers, did it consider using the facilities available in the institutes of technology?

Mr. Ó Conlúin

It was not considered and no contact was made with the institutes of technology. Some committee members have commented on INTO statements on the Hibernia College matter. I am choosing my words carefully here. I understand that prominent members of the INTO were involved in the genesis of the Hibernia proposal and in meetings with personnel from Hibernia and HETAC. Therefore, to talk about lack of consultation and so on puzzles me.

Chairman

The INTO representatives who came here two weeks ago made it clear that anyone who attended such meetings did not do so in an official capacity on behalf of the union.

Mr. Ó Conlúin

That may well be true but it does not detract from the point that very senior and prominent INTO members were involved in those discussions. With respect, that is something the committee should probe with HETAC and Hibernia when it meets them.

Deputy Enright

It would be better if everyone were here on the one day.

Deputy Stanton

It is a pity CHOICE is not represented here today. CHOICE told us that the Department wrote to the colleges and that it responded to say it was carefully examining the suggestions of the Department and indicated the range of issues on which it sought clarification. These included entry requirements, course-assigned content, programme delivery and so on. I assume that CHOICE got such clarification. Can we be given that information? It seemed that consultation was in train.

Deputy Hoctor

Mr. Ó Conlúin spoke of consultation being made with the colleges and no response being received. Is it also true to say that the colleges have now received correspondence from the Department to say they must cut back on their BEd student intake for the coming year, though we are now giving the licence through HETAC for Hibernia to take on whatever increased numbers it may wish?

Senator F. Browne

Mr. Bracken made the valid point that many unqualified teachers are taking the on-line Hibernia course. They are clearly working during the day and doing the course at nights and weekends. It is very likely that if they pass their exams they will then get jobs in the schools in which they are teaching, so that could work in their favour. However, a person who gives up a full-time job in order to do a postgraduate course for 18 months in one of the colleges of education is at a financial loss while studying full-time. When qualified, that person might apply for the job a Hibernia student has been doing, and the latter person has the advantage because of being in the school already. Will Mr. Bracken agree that it is very unfair? It is an awkward situation, unsatisfactory for all. If I were a postgraduate student who gave up a job in order to study a specific course, and then was beaten for a job by someone because of being already known to the school's board of management and to the staff, I would not be very happy.

Deputy Enright

How does that link in with the question Deputy Stanton asked about the rule regarding not teaching in the school for the duration of the course?

Chairman

It ought to be reviewed.

Mr. Bracken

I will take those three issues together. I too would be very sore if I gave up a permanent job and found myself in the situation outlined. However, I do not see why a fully-qualified secondary teacher with a B.A and a H. Dip. or a concurrent degree, would give up a job to go into primary teaching. That would be someone's own choice. If he or she had a permanent job as a fully qualified second level teacher I would have to ask why such a person would decide to move to primary level teaching. That is a separate issue. I would be very peeved if I felt that the reason I did not get a particular job was because someone was in the job for 12 months as an unqualified teacher. Certainly I would be peeved if that person got the job.

We consider the numbers every year and the colleges section, which is based in Dublin, communicates with us in Athlone. We then indicate what we anticipate the demand will be. The situation for the next year is that the numbers in the three-year BEd course will stand at 1,000, as for the past number of years, while the postgraduate course number will be 280, the same as last year. For two years the figure for the postgraduate course was 460, I think, but that was brought back to 280 last year. That decision was irrespective of the Hibernia situation and was on the basis of our looking at the shortfalls which we reckon we will have cleared in a few years. This year, assuming that all those currently in training emerge fully qualified, some 1,300 people will graduate from the various college of education courses.

Rule 156 is there since 1965. It says for example that the training in primary teaching is a two-year course. That is not accurate since 1974. The BEd course is in existence since 1974 so that rule has been breached. Many of the rules in this booklet are way out of date.

Deputy Enright

They should be changed.

Deputy Stanton

Who is responsible for the rules?

Mr. Bracken

The Department of Education and Science draws up the rules. Prior to the Education Act being passed, Mr. Justice Costello talked about the Department ruling by circular. A great many of these rules have been amended by circular, not least the one relating to the number of pupils qualifying for teachers. Rule 156 was drawn up with regard to a full-time course and it was clear that if students were doing a full-time course they would not be available to take up teaching jobs. That and many other rules in this book need to be amended. Many sections of these rules have been removed. A great deal of time will be needed to amend the rules and currently, with other pressing educational needs the revision of this blue book is probably not very high on the order of priorities.

Deputy Stanton

What legal status do those rules have, if any? Are they mere guidelines?

Mr. Bracken

I am not a legal person but I have attended a number of court cases where these rules have been quoted, and they are regarded as legally binding. Please do not quote me as I am not a legal expert, but they have not been challenged in the courts. Clearly, with the passing of the Education Act there are items included which were not there before. As recently as three months ago I attended a case in the High Court where rules from this book were being quoted and not challenged as not being legal. I am not a legal person however and am not qualified to judge in this matter.

Mr. Gabriel Harrison

Several questions were asked about the quality of the course. That is clearly a significant matter because it impinges on quality assurance right across the board. If teachers are not properly trained in the first place, everything else falls by default. What happened in this case is that the course material was approved by HETAC. It was referred to us. I and one of my colleagues looked at the material and, post validation, made specific recommendations about how it should be improved and added to. We pointed out gaps and so on, courses which were not described, hours of course duration not being quoted and deficits in the area of special education with regard to organising teaching practice there.

However, there was little about the status of teachers currently working who would do this course and would have to be employed in a particular class or as to how they were to gain access to experience throughout a school. That would include special education. There were also issues such as the training of teachers, the assessment of pupils and so on.

All of these matters were referred to by me and brought to the attention of Hibernia. At various stages documents were to-ing and fro-ing. Finally, at the end of July, I was saying that I thought it was feasible to have an on-line course, but there would have to be certain qualifications as regards how much tuition would be on-line and how much face to face contact — to protect the type of issues that were raised here about formation as distinct from information. A considerable amount of information could be given, which might be very useful in terms of the academic side of a course. However, there might be a lapse as regards the formation part of it. These were the type of issues I was raising. They presented concerns for us, as professionals, in the Department of Education and Science. The course was already validated at that stage by HETAC.

The committee members' questions are relevant as regards what our role is in relation to HETAC. I am not so sure what it is. As professional advisers we would purely advise on matters such as content. We do not have a role as regards the content of courses in the colleges of education, universities or whatever. At times I have been asked by the colleges to sit in on an accreditation process, to look at content and so on where special education courses were being designed. I have sat in on those. They would go through the process of having internal and external people whom they regard as having expertise in a particular area. I was there from a Department point of view. I have done this a number of times with regard to courses in the special education area. I do not know what happens more generally in the colleges as regards courses.

Courses are not revived that often. On the macro level we look at matters such as theKellehan report, which was referred to here today, where a committee of experts — as interested bodies right across the board — was established to recommend what should happen as regards teacher training at primary level over the foreseeable future. The committee knows the recommendations made.

Mr. Ó Conlúin

One quality assurance mechanism that we are insisting on is what is called the "10% inspection" of college of education students in their final year. That will be applied to Hibernia, just as it has for a long time been applied to the colleges of education. Exactly what the Minister's standing as regards a legal insistence on that is, I do not know, but Hibernia is happy to co-operate. That is a fairly rigorous procedure. It does not necessarily involve plain sailing for all of the colleges every year. Detailed discussions take place with the colleges, where certain deficiencies and deficits are brought to their attention and are subsequently acted upon. That will definitely happen.

I read a transcript of the committee's meeting with the heads of colleges last week. In a sense they have overplayed the issue of supply for the future, particularly the threat or possibility, as they would see it, of undergraduate numbers being considerably reduced. We do not necessarily see it that way because we know, anecdotally, from our involvement in inspecting schools, that, traditionally, boards of management and principals show a preference for Bachelor of Education graduates as opposed to graduates from universities who have done a conversion course, whether it is the Hibernia one or some other. We imagine that this will continue to be the case and in a sense the market will vote with its feet.

The point about substitution and the problem of having unqualified personnel in the system is a real problem. The number is between 600 and 700 — sometimes more —per diem. At the moment many so-called teachers who do that type of work are not qualified. Clearly, when we talk about supply for primary teaching, it should not just be in the context of permanent positions. We have a substitute issue and ideally there should be as many qualified teachers providing that service.

In terms of the colleges of education criticisms of HETAC and its mechanisms and procedures for quality assuring the Hibernia syllabus and the application for accreditation, we took the step, proactively, as a Department, of inviting the college heads to a day long meeting to discuss their concerns. We put it to them that many of the concerns they articulated amounted to hearsay. Many of the concerns they articulated and amplified through the media were equally unverifiable. In probing issues with HETAC and with Hibernia, the committee needs to look at some of the issues the colleges have been raising and establish whether there is a basis in fact for what they have been saying. That is something that is on record, which we have said, unequivocally, to the college heads.

Deputy Enright

As regards Mr. Harrison's last point, if it saw post-validation gaps by HETAC, I presume the Department satisfied itself, before the Minister prescribed the course as acceptable, that these were all filled. The committee can invite a delegation from HETAC to attend a meeting, but if the Department saw gaps, where do we go from here? I believe Ms Carmody said the National Qualifications Authority of Ireland, NQAI, or HETAC are responsible to the Department. I do not want this to continue indefinitely, but perhaps they need to come before the committee. If Mr. Harrison says he has seen gaps, the committee has to accept that from a representative of the Department. HETAC probably will not be able to satisfy the committee that there were no gaps because Mr. Harrison in his qualified position was able to see them. It is a serious matter. This is my own opinion based on what he has said rather than on what the colleges of education or any other interest group has said.

Much has been said about the content and not being able to get access. My personal experience was that when I rang the on-line course in question, I could not get any information. I can understand where people are coming from on this.

On the specific question I was asking earlier, as regards the course content, I mentioned some area such as drama and music where we were not satisfied as regards content. Deputy Stanton listed far more. Did the Department satisfy itself that they were now available or are some of those being written up?

Mr. Harrison

On the last version I saw they were items which were missing.

Deputy Enright

They are still missing.

Deputy Stanton

It is a matter of some concern to me that the Department has acknowledged today that its own rule book has more or less been thrown out the window.

Chairman

It would also be a matter of concern to me if I was to go back to my previous employment.

Deputy Stanton

This beggars belief in some respects. It is also astounding as regards the course content that the programme was given accreditation without any information, according to the college heads. Mr. Ó Conlúin said that the heads met the Department and that their apprehensions were all based on hearsay. His colleague has just said it was not hearsay and that there were large gaps and no accreditation. If one is seeking accreditation for a course, it would be expected that elements, such as religious studies, psychology and philosophy of education would be included. Representatives from Hibernia College or HETAC are not here to defend this. I stand to be corrected, but did I hear Mr. Harrison say that some of these elements are still missing, yet the course is ongoing?

Mr. Harrison

I cannot say these elements are missing now, they were missing.

Deputy Stanton

When was that?

Mr. Harrison

Some 12 months ago, last July.

Deputy Stanton

Did Mr. Harrison not have an opportunity to check it out since July last?

Mr. Harrison

That area of work is no longer within my area of responsibility.

Deputy Stanton

May I ask who is now responsible for it?

Mr. Ó Conlúin

Let me try to clarify this matter. HETAC is the accreditation authority, and the Department of Education and Science recognises its accreditation Let me be very clear, the inspectorate in the Department were working on an outline syllabus given to them by Hibernia College and the staff commented on four drafts of the syllabus. In each draft, deficits or holes were plugged on their advice. The responsibility for the intricate detail of the course is a matter for HETAC.

Deputy Stanton

I have two questions. What is the responsibility of the inspectorate with regard to the detail of the course? Did the Department receive a final version of the syllabus with which it was happy?

Mr. Ó Conlúin

I will deal with the Deputy's second question now. We were happy with the final draft as an outline syllabus and we felt that gaps in the earlier drafts were plugged, for example, special education. I regret I have forgotten the Deputy's first question.

Deputy Stanton

It does not matter at this stage. Do the staff of the primary curriculum support programme have a role in Hibernia College? The Minister stated in a fax to the Chairman that those employed on the programme or on any other Department programme are told that any involvement with a private entity must not in any way impinge on their employment on the programme but the Department, however, cannot regulate what individuals do in their own time. Does that imply that staff from the curriculum support programme are working in their own time with Hibernia College? If that is the case, would it be viewed as a conflict of interest? I have been told that Hibernia College stated that support from the Department and in particular the primary curriculum support programme was absolutely essential. If that has been mentioned by Hibernia College, surely that can be viewed as the Department supporting its work in an official capacity? Is that the case?

Chairman

Has Deputy Enright a question?

Deputy Enright

On the original point, were the gaps in the syllabus brought to the attention of the Minister before he agreed to allow the course be a recognised course for qualification as a primary school teacher?

Mr. Harrison

I think they were all addressed. I would examine the various drafts of the syllabus and point out what was missing and the modifications would be made in the subsequent drafts. I am not quite sure if it was the third or fourth draft when I made my final recommendations on what could be improved in the syllabus.

Deputy Enright

Would the Minister have been aware at that stage that elements of the course were still outstanding?

Mr. Harrison

I cannot say that. I would have sent my views up the line.

Deputy Stanton

Did the Department receive the final document?

Mr. Ó Conlúin

Yes, I did.

Deputy Stanton

When was that?

Mr. Ó Conlúin

It would have been towards the end of last July. I will confirm that later. I do not want to commit to a date when I do not have that information at my disposal.

Chairman

My understanding from what was said at the committee two weeks ago, was that it appeared that the services of the primary curriculum support programme unit were available to Hibernia College, not the services of staff in their downtime. There was a suggestion that the taxpayer was effectively subventing Hibernia College, or at least that is what I understood, by providing this support as a core support.

Mr. Ó Conlúin

Chairman, that has been said in a number of quarters, but it is not true. There is no question that the service provided by primary curriculum support programme, PCSP, personnel was being diverted to help or bail out Hibernia College in any way. Individuals who work as PCSP personnel in the Department were approached by Hibernia College and have been providing services to it in their own free time, mainly in the area of curriculum methodology because in fact that is their role in the system as PCSP personnel. We took legal advice within the Department on the question of whether that amounted to a conflict of interest with the contract they had with the Department. The answer we got was that it was not a conflict of interest.

Mr. Bracken

I would hate to have it go out from this committee that the Department has thrown out its rule book. Let me correct that. I do not have the transcript of what I said, but I did not say that we had thrown it out. I said that I have been at court cases, where it was still very much in effect, but I am not legally qualified to say that. We certainly have not thrown our rule book out the door.

Deputy Stanton

The impression was given that a certain number of rules in the book were not being adhered to.

Mr. Bracken

I am sorry Deputy, I did not say that.

Deputy Stanton

Correct me if I am wrong.

Mr. Bracken

I did not say that. I want to correct that. Many of those rules have been overtaken by circulars and so on. There are parts of this book and sections of the rules that have been deleted by circular since 1965. The full version of the rules is a combination of the rule book plus circulars. We need to have an updated book of rules for national schools.

Deputy Stanton

What is the status of the rule we quoted today?

Mr. Bracken

The bottom line is that it has not been amended. We have not implemented it in the postgraduate course. I am open to correction as to whether it is in the postgraduate course in the college, as to whether it specifically says in the postgraduate courses in the colleges of education that rule 1563 applies. That is a full-time course. The final sentence of that rule states, "subject to the approval of the Minister". If the Minister approves it, then it is approved.

Deputy Stanton

Has the Minister approved it?

Mr. Bracken

Yes.

Deputy Stanton

The Minister has approved it. How? Is there a circular on it?

Mr. Bracken

We did not issue a circular.

Deputy Stanton

How did the Minister approve it? Was it by directive or ministerial order?

Mr. Bracken

We have not issued a ministerial order.

Deputy Stanton

How has he approved it?

Mr. Bracken

We did not formally refuse.

Deputy Stanton

How stands it then, if the Minister has not approved it in writing? My understanding is that it should be approved in writing, and that the committee can examine it. Am I correct, Chairman, in pursuing this?

Chairman

I am interested in the fact that the two year timeframe has not been amended either.

I am also astounded that somebody found it necessary to have that part of the rules at a time when teacher training was a full-time course in any event. As Senator Feargal Browne pointed out, the courses were in Limerick and Dublin. It is hard to imagine how people could be teaching full-time and manage to attend the course. It is also hard to understand the rationale for that rule in 1965 in the first instance.

Mr. Bracken

It could be argued that the postgraduate course is not a legal course, because it is of a year and a half duration and this consists of a two year course. We can be selective as to which part of the rules we want to apply. I am sure the Deputy will not want us to prevent the people in college from doing their course in education. I accept that it is an urgent need to update these rules.

Deputy Enright

How did the rules come about originally? Was there any legislation?

Mr. Bracken

I am open to correction on this, although I am in the Department since 1965 and this book was produced that year. I had nothing to do with it, but the earliest copy of this book goes back to the 1920s.

Deputy Enright

It just evolved then.

Mr. Bracken

I think they were transposed from the times of British rule and put into booklet form. I am not too sure of that, but they are there a long time. Many of them are out date and have been replaced by circular.

Mr. Harrison

I would like to comment on quality and recommendations. That would be something that we would do anyway. We made the exact same recommendations for the colleges of education that there is a need for more special education training of teachers. The kind of things I would say about this particular course, I would also say about the standard courses in the colleges of education. We stated that in the Kellehan report.

Chairman

It is also the case for in-service training, as Deputy Batt O'Keeffe stated.

Deputy Stanton

I thank Mr. Bracken for clarifying these issues. We have been told that the issue of establishing a formal forum on teacher supply has been dropped. When was this decision made by the Department? The INTO was anxious that it would happen.

Mr. Bracken

I do not have the precise details. My understanding is that the issue came up at an INTO congress, where the then president suggested that there would be a forum and the then Minister agreed. Bilateral discussions occurred after that between my current boss in the Department of Education and Science and senior officials of the INTO including John Carr. As a result of those discussions, it was decided that the forum would not take place.

Deputy Stanton

I have before me a statement by the INTO dated 23 November 2003. It called on the Minister to establish a forum on teacher supplies and to report as soon as possible on further teacher supply. The Minister has advised that the Department has no plans to establish a formal forum on teacher supply. The suggestion for the forum, raised initially by primary teachers' representatives, was subsequently superseded by bilateral discussions with them on the subject matter involved. I am curious to know as to when this decision was made.

Mr. Bracken

I am open to correction but I think it came about when Ms Ward was president of the INTO, which was two or three years ago.

Deputy Stanton

It would have been in the last year that agreement was made not to have a forum.

Mr. Bracken

It was prior to the November statement as I understand. I can get confirmation of that for the Deputy.

Deputy Enright

In evaluating the courses, did the Department compare like with like? Was the on-line course compared with the existing teacher training college courses, or were they just looked at on their own?

Mr. Harrison

It came in on its own merit. However, my experience is in validating the material of other courses. I would be well aware of the content of other courses, although we would not have determined what that content was for the traditional courses in the colleges.

Deputy Stanton

I asked a question earlier about the cost of training teachers in the colleges. Have we any information on how much it costs the Department per teacher in the postgraduate course? We can compare the cost to the Department versus the fees charged by Hibernia.

Ms Carmody

We do not have any precise figures on that. There are differing methods of payment to colleges. We did estimate that the capitation of about €6,000 per student would be paid for the postgraduate course, but that is a very rough estimate. It does not take into account other costs such as capital costs.

Deputy Stanton

It would cost much less to train a teacher on-line that it would to train someone in-house with all its overheads.

Ms Carmody

The fee charged by Hibernia is about €5,500. It is a matter for Hibernia to tell the committee the costs it has. I know it had start-up costs.

Chairman

It has been a long session, and although I am tempted to ask several questions I will resist the temptation. I thank the delegation for the presentation and for answering the questions from the members. It has been very interesting. It is very clear that the committee has not completed its deliberations on this subject. We will have to decide how to proceed in the future.

I omitted to mention that there are two EU scrutiny matters to be considered. I believe we should refer them to the working group, as they affect other items that we need to discuss. The working group should set up the programme for the first few meetings in September.

The joint committee adjourned at 1.40 p.m. sine die.