On behalf of the joint committee, I welcome Ms Norah Gibbons, director of advocacy, and Ms June Tinsley, policy development officer, of Barnardos. I draw attention to the fact that while members of the committee have absolute privilege, the same privilege does not apply to witnesses appearing before the committee. Members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the House or any official by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable.
Educational Disadvantage: Presentation.
Ms Norah Gibbons
I thank members of the committee for affording us this opportunity. I will inform the committee of the work Barnardos does and how we look at educational disadvantage, after which I will hand over to my colleague Ms June Tinsley who will go through some of the issues we consider very important and some of our recommendations.
Barnardos is one of Ireland's leading charities. It started working here in the 1970s and was founded by an Irish man from Dame Street, Thomas Barnardo. We now offer services to children and families in 30 centres in Ireland. Each year we work directly with more than 5,000 children and families. In addition, we work indirectly with 10,000 professionals and parents through our national children's information and training services.
It is universally agreed that the early years of a child's life are vital, as early learning and experience remain crucial to all later development. During childhood we learn the social, emotional and educational skills that enable us to develop into happy, independent adults. Barnardos responds to the needs of children experiencing adversity in their lives. We work with children who are born into or live in circumstances where it is difficult for them to achieve these key skills. We respond to their needs, provide services that challenge disadvantage and offer new hope for their futures. We focus on achieving real outcomes for children and their families.
We have a 12-year strategic investment plan. Barnardos set itself a challenging mission to challenge and support families, communities, societies and the Government to make Ireland the best place in the world to be a child, focusing specifically on children and young people whose well-being is under threat . We know we cannot achieve this by ourselves and seek to get to that point by working with children, families, communities and other agencies, both statutory and non-governmental. In addition to our services, we are committed to promoting change in the lives of children through promoting positive changes in policy, legislation and practice through our advocacy department, hence Ms Tinsley and I. Our work is rooted in our services and what we see there every day.
We have identified four priority issues: child protection, the misuse and abuse of alcohol and its impact on children rather than what might be construed as children's misuse of alcohol, which is also of concern, child poverty and educational disadvantage. We work to establish a lasting legacy where children's rights are protected and each child gets the help he or she needs. We chose educational disadvantage as our focus for today as we meet it every day. We see the effects of intergenerational cycles of poverty, educational disadvantage and social exclusion. We know that the loss of education affects children throughout their lives.
We have adopted the definition of educational disadvantage set out in the Education Act 1998. We welcome Ireland's positive and forward-looking definition, as it embraces everything we, from our experience, believe needs to be embraced in terms of educational disadvantage, that is, all the impediments to education arising from social or economic disadvantage that prevent students from deriving appropriate benefits from education in schools. The Constitution guarantees every child the right to an education and the UN convention to which Ireland is a signatory gives further voice to that right. Educational disadvantage limits the ability of children to reach their full potential and helps crush their hopes and aspirations for the future.
In our policy document to be published shortly, we have brought together our experiences and thoughts on educational disadvantage for the first time. We have received a considerable welcome from other players in education as they see Barnardos as coming from a community base and being an important and independent voice in education. In our document we give a voice to children and families to express their experiences and have identified five issues that we must all work on, namely, literacy and numeracy, dropping out and absenteeism, preschool and after-school services, school costs and support for children, families and teachers.
Barnardos advocates a rights-based approach to education in which each child should be facilitated to reach his or her potential. While we do not disregard its potential social or economic contribution, a child's education is of intrinsic value in itself. We take a "whole child" approach and, while we have removed certain elements of our policy document, we know that, as in a child's drawing book, the real picture only emerges if we join up the dots. Children do not begin school with equal chances of benefiting from our good education system. As a society, we owe it to all children to address their issues so that their right to a meaningful educational experience is vindicated.
We have examined the factors that impact upon a child's educational experience, such as circumstances within the home, income, educational attainment of parents, attitudes and expectations of parents for their children and parents' own experiences within the education system. The ethos, management style and teaching methodologies of schools, together with teacher expectations and attitudes, also have an influence. The principles and content of the curriculum are important and the assessment procedures and values underpinning the educational system as a whole contribute to the educational experience.
The community context is another element as some communities that are blighted by poverty and other issues may not value education in the way most of us do. Given that the issue is complex and involves an interaction of these factors, the best models of practice in combating it are programmes that are community-based, delivered to both schools and homes, accessible and flexible and involve everyone in trying to find the solution.
We welcome that in May 2005 the Government launched its delivering equality of opportunity in schools, DEIS, strategy, which will be rolled out with further detail. The strategy will involve extra teachers, greater focus on early childhood education, extension of the school completion programme and literacy and numeracy supports such as the reading recovery programme. It aims to increase partnerships between the Department of Education and Science and all other relevant Departments and agencies. In March 2006, the building blocks of the strategy were put in place in that the relevant schools were identified. While we welcome the strategy, we want to see resources put in place to ensure its full implementation, the timelines met and outcomes measured in a way that hears the voices of children and families so that we can all evaluate how well we are doing. Only through the concerted effort of all parties can a positive impact be made.
Ms June Tinsley
I will run through some of the priority concerns identified by Barnardos. Despite the roll-out of the DEIS strategy, much more needs to be done to improve children's experiences and performances within the educational system. The first area we have identified is that of literacy and numeracy. Literacy and numeracy difficulties among pupils are still a matter of serious concern as one in three children in disadvantaged areas experience such difficulties. Overall standards have not changed since 1980. The latest study from the Department reveals that up to three times as many children from disadvantaged backgrounds have serious literacy problems in comparison with the national average of 10%, almost half of learning support teachers have not completed a recognised one-year course in remedial education and learning support and first class pupils are twice as likely as fifth class pupils to be taught by a temporary, substitute or unqualified teacher.
The reasons behind these low levels of literacy lie within the family, school and society. Within the family, it is linked to socio-economic backgrounds and parental educational attainment. Other factors within the home include parents reading to their children, availability of resources such as books and magazines and parental rules about watching television. School-based factors identified as influencing the teaching of English were large class sizes, shortage of learning support teachers and an inability to adapt teaching methodology to the needs of pupils.
From the projects we have worked on and the families I have interviewed on this matter, I know of an instance in which a teacher, while recognising the difficulties experienced by a child, was unable to provide additional one-to-one support. As no resource teachers were available and the other children needed to be taught, the teacher subsequently gave the child a colouring book in the mathematics class. This is the experience of a number of the children we work with. A child's inability to read and write affects his or her ability to benefit from staying in school and going on to third level education and his or her subsequent job prospects. The cycle will continue as it impacts on the next generation, which results in considerable costs for the individuals, their families and society.
In the area of literacy and numeracy, Barnardos is making the following recommendations, namely, to reduce class sizes to 20 pupils and under for all children aged nine years and under by 2007 in line with the Government's commitment, and to recognise that smaller class sizes will not automatically produce better results for children, which means teachers must be encouraged and trained to adapt their teaching and classroom experiences to utilise other mechanisms such as group work, one-to-one interaction and different technologies, for example, computers. In-service training within classrooms to learn the different techniques could be of benefit.
The other recommendation is to promote parental involvement in enhancing children's literacy levels through a variety of measures, including improving relationships between teachers and parents to enable parents to know how they can help their children's reading abilities, for example, by using everyday reading materials such as magazines, recipes and papers. Of the families I have spoken to, parents have openly admitted that because they did not go to secondary school, they find it especially difficult to help their children do homework. As such, supports are needed.
Another area of concern is that of school attendance and early school leaving. The mandate of the National Educational Welfare Board, NEWB, is to monitor school attendance and combat absenteeism, but it is under-resourced and can only react to chronic instances of absenteeism rather than proactively offering a prevention service as envisaged in the Education (Welfare) Act 2000. There are only 83 educational welfare officers. The latest NEWB statistics reveal that every primary student misses an average of ten days in the school year but in the most disadvantaged urban areas, the average absence is 17 days per student. One in five students from disadvantaged areas misses more than 20 days in primary and secondary school in a given year. Principals recognise the difficulties of the educational welfare officer, namely, that caseloads are too heavy for them to be effective.
Absenteeism is one of the strongest factors associated with early school leaving. It also places great stress on the parents of children who are absent from school. The numbers leaving school without qualifications has remained unchanged since the 1990s. Ireland continues to have a national leaving certificate retention rate of82%. This rate varies greatly depending on gender, school type and geographic region.
Barnardos is especially concerned about the children who fail to make the transition between primary and secondary school. It is estimated that up to 1,000 pupils fail to make this transition every year. This transfer from primary school is daunting for any pupil, as the classes tend to be larger, more subjects need to be taken and there are more teachers to get to know. However, this transition is even more difficult for students who are already behind academically, emotionally and socially. These students are particularly vulnerable to falling outside the education system and at present there is no way of tracking their transition. Children from the Traveller community and those with disabilities find this transition especially difficult. Children from the Traveller community admitted they planned to leave school at or before the junior certificate. Teachers' and parents' low expectations of children must be challenged, particularly in the Traveller community.
There is no comprehensive database of primary school pupils based on personal public service numbers. Such a database has been recommended for years, most recently by the educational disadvantage committee, but despite some preliminary groundwork, there is no such database. Therefore, it is not possible to track the transition of children between primary and secondary school and, more importantly, children who drop out of school at this stage.
A secondary school pupil database exists and is based on school principals doing annual returns. The database can track the roll-over of pupils from one academic year to the next. Barnardos believes it is tragic for these children to fall out of the educational system so young and not to avail of the educational opportunities that are their right under the Constitution. The negative impact of this loss will be experienced throughout their childhood and adult lives. The wider costs to society and the State will be the loss of social insurance contributions they would have made, the potentially higher levels of drawdown of State welfare benefits, increased risk of involvement in anti-social activity and poorer physical and mental health.
Barnardos has a number of recommendations, including the full implementation of the Education (Welfare) Act 2000 to ensure that the NEWB is adequately resourced and able to make a positive impact on children experiencing absenteeism. We do not wish the NEWB and the educational welfare officers to revert to the role of school attendance inspectors as we believe this system was not successful. We also call for the introduction of a primary school pupil database as a matter of urgency and for it to be linked it to the secondary school database to track attendance and identify incidences of early school leaving. The Minister of State with responsibility for children should be the main driver of this database as the NEWB falls under his remit.
A child's preparedness for school can have a significant influence on his or her ability to settle into and succeed within the education system. Early childhood intervention programmes for children from disadvantaged backgrounds have shown improved cognitive development during early childhood, resulting in long-term improvement in learning and school success. The new child care programme announced in the budget for 2006 aims to create 50,000 new child care places and approximately 10,000 of these will be for the three to four year age group. However, these additional places will not be sufficient and the measure does little to address the matter of affordability.
Access to early childhood care and education places is largely based on the parent's ability to pay, resulting in many children from low-income families being excluded. The state of parental income at early childhood is a predictor of a child's educational outcome. Barnardos believes part of the solution is the implementation of one of the recommendations of last year's NESF report, namely, the availability of universal quality free early childhood care places for 3.5 hours per day, five days per week for all children in the year prior to attending primary school. This process should begin in areas of disadvantage.
The White Paper on early childhood education recognises provision of places is only part of the equation and that quality of service is vital. Barnardos favours a pre-school curriculum that is developmentally focused. Barnardos early years services use an established approach to early childhood care and education underpinned by development and learning theory. This approach also benefits the parents as they are involved throughout and can learn how best to help their child prepare for school and life.
Barnardos also calls for the promotion of a developmentally focused curriculum for pre-school programmes. Dispositions for learning are developed during the early stages of development and a positive disposition is a prerequisite for the child's preparedness for school. Involvement of parents is crucial so they can assist their child to learn and to be ready for school. Teaching methods should reflect the developmental stage of the child and should promote investigation, exploration, decision making and problem solving. Professional training should be provided for teachers and child care workers working with the pre-school children.
Barnardos recognises that a child's ability to benefit from all the educational opportunities on offer is affected by the household income. For parents, especially those reliant on social welfare or in low paid employment, the combined costs of school uniforms, books, sports gear and school trips can be excessive, especially at the onset of the school year. These costs often result in families getting into debt. Although the Department of Social and Family Affairs provides a back to school clothing and footwear allowance, this is inadequate to assist in the ongoing costs of the child's education. Research carried out last year indicates the basic cost of uniforms, sportswear, shoes and textbooks is €225.60 for a primary school pupil and €408.75 for a secondary school child. These costs exclude expenses during the year such as replacement of uniforms, books or school tours. The current rate of the back to school clothing and footwear allowance does not meet this.
The family income is also a factor in a child's involvement in out of school activities. A child's participation in such activities is beneficial to self esteem, communications skills and assisting in transition between schools. Such activities are also of benefit socially, culturally, psychologically and educationally. A parent to whom I spoke was involved in one such activity and told me she benefited greatly because of the low teacher-pupil ratio. Participation in the activity taught her the benefit of education and she passed this lesson on to her children.
The child care budget announced in the budget for 2006 allows for some out of school provision but we believe it is insufficient to meet demand. The working group of the national child care co-ordinating committee is a useful starting point from which to expand this infrastructure. Barnardos also recommends the extension of the school book rental scheme. The delivering equality of opportunity in schools DEIS, strategy may do some work in this area but we believe the budget is too small to make a decisive impact on schools designated as disadvantaged.
A child's ability to reach his or her educational potential can be influenced by a number of factors, including the lengthy waiting lists to have children assessed by an educational psychologist to determine if extra supports are required. This delay obviously impacts on the child's development and may mean that critical learning opportunities are lost. Only 121 educational psychologists cover the entire country. We believe early intervention is the key to success. A family explained to me that a child who was not diagnosed with dyslexia for many years fell far behind academically as a result. That had a knock-on implication for the child who dropped out of secondary school due to receiving so few supports. Another child in the family received support at an early stage and does not experience difficulties.
Other factors which affect a child's ability to reach his or her potential include the insufficient numbers of trained learning support teachers to assist children who experience literacy difficulties; insufficient supports for teachers and parents to assist children presenting with behavioural issues such as attention deficit and hyperactivity disorder, ADHD, and autism; and teaching methods, resources and materials not reflecting the culture of children coming from ethnic minority groups such as Travellers or those for whom English is not their first language.
The adequacy of teacher training is also important. It is recognised that teachers in schools designated as disadvantaged have additional challenges to face and require extra supports to teach effectively. Such supports could include the newly announced teacher sabbatical leave, but additional training is also required. Such training should be available throughout a teacher's career to challenge the stereotypes among teachers who work in disadvantaged areas and promote ways of working with parents in the child's best interests. A lack of parental involvement also impacts on the child. Addressing a parent's negative experiences or perceptions of school can lead to increased partnership between parents and schools and in turn raise parental expectations of their children.
Barnardos believes compulsory modules on educational disadvantage should be built into pre-service and in-service training of teachers. Classroom assistants should be introduced in all primary schools. The National Educational Psychological Service should be adequately resourced to ensure speedy assessments and subsequent availability of supports for children. There is a chronic shortage in the number of speech and language therapists and this should be increased. Programmes where parents become partners and mentors for each other should be facilitated by schools and community services. Such programmes could work in the areas of speech and language, literacy and behavioural management issues.
We will go to members for their questions and observations and return to the delegation for answers and comments.
I apologise for being late. I was attending the Order of Business in the Dáil. I thank the delegation for coming before the committee. I agree with almost everything MsGibbons and Ms Tinsley stated. My party published some policy documents on educational disadvantage and the cost of attending school. We agree with Barnardos' recommendations. Instead of challenging what was stated on what must be done, I will ask about Barnardos' experience.
I am aware of a number of Barnardos projects which deal with seriously disadvantaged children who face enormous challenges and are at risk of becoming early school leavers. Is Barnardos involved in positive literacy programmes? I spoke to teachers about reading recovery. They consider the one-to-one programmes to be successful. However, they cannot work if there are not enough staff members to give one-to-one attention to the children. Will Ms Gibbons and Ms Tinsley expand on their experience in that area?
A recent study on Travellers in north Dublin found the number who continued to leaving certificate to be 2% or 4%, which is frightening. The solution must be found in conjunction with that community. Has Barnardos gained experience on what is effective to encourage Traveller children to remain in school? The matter affects all communities, as statistics on the employment prospects of children who leave school early are stark.
The number of children who drop out during the transition from primary to second level appears to be static at 1,000. The National Educational Welfare Board's recent statistics bear that out. A specific cohort of young people are involved. Does the delegation have insights on what can be done about this?
From speaking with people involved, I feel if one can get parents to view school in a positive way, one is half-way towards getting the children to consider school in a positive light. The system does not make major efforts in that regard. Principals in areas where many parents are alienated from school feel that if they could get the parents to step inside the school door they could work with the children. One principal told me they meet and speak to the parents socially in the community, such as in the pub. A major issue is raised regarding parents who hated school, do not want to go near one and pass that feeling on to their children. If we found a solution to that, we would help many of these families.
I am grateful for the presentation. As Deputy O'Sullivan stated, it did not contain much with which we can disagree and it is left to us to find questions to ask. The presentation sets out what we must do and where we must apply pressure.
What level of communication is there between the various agencies involved in this area? I am concerned that too many groups provide the same services. We do not seem to have gained much during recent years. We have added more groups and pilot schemes rather than selecting those which do the best job and streamlining. How does Barnardos work with other agencies? Agencies have the same goal to help young disadvantaged people. However, money is wasted or we miss a direction.
Regarding the four priority issues identified by Barnardos, the misuse and abuse of alcohol, child poverty, educational disadvantage and child protection, I presume the reference to the abuse of alcohol includes the abuse of drugs. Will the delegation comment on which is the most important for us to examine? Is alcohol worse than drugs? It is certainly more common.
The cost of attending school was mentioned several times in the presentation. The figures given were €200, €300 and €400. I believe the cost averages at €1,000 per child on top of normal costs, if the €2 or €3 for computer classes and €3 for the gym are included. It adds up and parents in disadvantaged and non-disadvantaged areas are under serious pressure to meet this cost. The committee has raised this issue before and we must examine it. Free education does not exist if that extra burden hangs over people who cannot afford to pay it. Will the delegation comment on this? Does Barnardos find the Department of Education and Science discusses this issue or is it ignored? It is obviously a problem.
The issue of parents' expectations was covered by Deputy O'Sullivan. If children's parents do not expect anything of them and assume they will not go to college or even secondary school, it has an effect on them. They begin to believe it themselves and lose interest. What can be done to tackle this? I have visited schools that run courses for parents, which seems to work well. It gets them involved in the school and they become more actively engaged. In one school in my area, a classroom has been converted into a parents' room and is exclusively for their use. They meet there every morning when they bring their children to school and it is yielding great results.
Should we examine the option of making parenting courses compulsory? Such courses could cover a broad range of issues and should not be confined to disadvantaged areas. If a couple wants to adopt a child, they must go through 18 months of courses but birth parents can have any number of children without taking any courses or receiving any advice. Some parents might not like it but would benefit greatly from a parenting course. I do not want us to turn into a nanny State but I would welcome the delegation's views on the issue.
Very often community-based, after-school and flexible programmes are run through the community employment scheme or through fund-raising by parents and schools. There is no real effort by the Department to set up such programmes in a systematic fashion. There are one or two in place but often they are mere tokens. There appears to be no desire to provide extra staff or to reward staff who are willing to work late to support children. Who is listening in this regard? Is there any real desire to tackle this issue? I am not convinced there is any desire to do so.
The delegation spoke of the funding Barnardos receives from the Government and the amount of time and effort it spends on fund-raising. What percentage of Barnardos' budget is provided by the Government? It was said that the number of people leaving school early and those leaving with literacy problems had not changed much since the 1980s. Why is that the case? It is not good enough that improvements have not been made. The issue is much discussed but very little progress has been made.
The delegation informed the committee that pupils in first class are twice as likely to be taught by temporary substitute teachers as those in fifth class. That was also the case when I was in school, which was not too long ago. This indicates a lack of recognition of the importance of the early school years. The attitude seems to be that it is fine to put anybody into junior classes to look after the children. The early years of schooling are very important but the education experts do not seem to recognise that fact or if they do, they are not ensuring it is reflected in schools.
There is an inherent inability to adapt to new teaching methods in this country. We are very slow to change. Having said that, I heard the Minister for Education and Science, Deputy Hanafin, speak on the radio yesterday about changes to the system. Perhaps we are starting to recognise that we need to change the way we teach but real change is very slow in coming and pupils have suffered as a result.
What is the best way to tackle the problem of children leaving school early and our relatively high drop-out rate? We can have a scheme which tracks such children and shows they have left the education system, but what can we do about it? How do we encourage such children to return to school? Liaising with parents is one obvious way but what is the most significant way to deal with this problem? Perhaps making school interesting is the key. Where should resources be directed, in the delegation's view?
I have referred to parental expectations but culture is also a major problem, especially within the Traveller community where it is the norm not to complete formal education. Not enough is done to point to role models for children in the Traveller community and highlight their success. In my area, a Traveller recently qualified as a barrister but it only made the news for one day and has not been referred to since. He could be used as an example to the Traveller community of how far they can go and the fact that there is no reason they cannot achieve as much as anyone else in the country. Traveller culture needs to be addressed as well as the lack of role models.
I welcome the delegation. Why are representatives of Barnardos here? I ask that in a cynical context because Barnardos is one of a considerable number of charities and agencies that have appeared before this committee, outlined the urgent need for funding and co-ordination, only to be met with a wall of silence from the Department of Education and Science. Is the delegation here because it is optimistic or at its wits' end? Most members of the Joint Committee on Education and Science know intuitively what the problems are and what needs to be done about them and, in many cases, it boils down to the issue of investment. Are members of the delegation sick and tired of appearing before this committee, especially if they have been here before? What is their key message to the Minister for Education and Science who will be given the deliberations of this committee? They must spell it out because otherwise they will be back in two or three years' time saying the same thing and nothing will have happened. I am sorry to sound so cynical.
The financial implications of what Barnardos is seeking are not enormous. I recently took part in a debate with Deputies O'Sullivan, Enright, Crowe and McGrath concerning the implementation of the recommendations of the McIver report on the post-leaving certificate sector, the overall cost of which is €48 million. Two years ago, representatives of the National Educational Welfare Board appeared before us seeking their full funding, which was in the region of €60 million. Those two areas add up to just over €100 million but as others have pointed out, electronic voting cost €52 million and the wastage on the widening of the M50 adds up to €500 million. We have the money but it is not being targeted properly.
How much of Barnardos' funding comes from the State vis-à-vis its spending on children with educational disadvantage? How much does Barnardos raise to spend on this area? We have seen examples of the organisation’s work on educational disadvantage but in what proportion of the most disadvantaged areas is Barnardos involved? Is the slack taken up by other agencies and is there scope for more co-ordination of effort? Would Barnardos be happy to leave the area of educational disadvantage and work in other areas relating to the well-being of children if the Department of Education and Science targeted its funding on X, Y and Z and said the organisation no longer had to be concerned with those areas? Is that the ultimate aim of Barnardos, that the Department would take over the area of educational disadvantage?
The representatives argued that a child's education is of intrinsic value in itself regardless of any socioeconomic contribution. Nobody in the media or among those in the Oireachtas who are trying to make headlines gives a toss about the social benefit of education. The headline messages that come from these Houses never refer to the social benefits but focus solely on economics. For example, there is a furore over whether mandatory minimum sentences should be imposed for murder, manslaughter and other criminal activities. One is accused of being a woolly liberal if one asks what makes a person so alienated from society as to commit such crimes and in that context, the issue often boils down to economics.
The representatives have said Barnardos follows the High/Scope model in its work. The original High/Scope Perry pre-school study showed without any doubt that investment in early education pays off, not just in terms of social benefits, but also economically. I have tried to push the case in PD-speak because the Progressive Democrats Party focuses on economics more than any other party and Fianna Fáil simply tags along. The economic case needs to be made more than the social case to show that taxpayer's money is being thrown down the drain by virtue of the fact that the Government does not invest in early childhood education.
The issue of adult education needs to be addressed. Is Barnardos directly involved with literacy skills for adults who want to teach their children or does it merely support the campaign of groups such as the National Adult Literacy Association, NALA, for more investment in this sector? While my party would agree with the measures outlined to tackle issues within schools, these will fall on fallow ground if parents do not have the inclination or ability to co-operate. In some instances, children are at a disadvantage before even setting foot within the school.
A case was made to this committee by an individual, who I will not mention because I do not want to give credence to the religion or cult concerned, that allowances should be withdrawn from parents whose children do not attend school or follow educational programmes. Although I do not subscribe to that opinion, can a case be made for the payment of an additional allowance which would act as incentive to parents to become involved in literacy issues, rather than taking a stick approach?
If an extra €100 million were made available to address educational disadvantage in early years, where should it be spent? For example, educational welfare officers should be employed because they can identify the problems which other services must resolve.
I welcome the delegation. A few months ago I visited a Barnardos project in Loughlinstown and found it a well appointed facility which compares favourably with other child care centres and liaises well with local schools. The service providers there seem happy with their relationship with parents, subject to the issues raised by the delegation today. Facilities such as the one in Loughlinstown are crucial to this area.
There are concerns for the future of, Cottage Home, Barnardos' other facility in Dún Laoghaire. I understand that the home is to close but, when I visited it six months ago, it struck me as one of the most important services in Dún Laoghaire. Many of the parents involved have serious drug or alcohol problems and their children get some respite at the facility. In reference to Deputy English's question of whether adult programmes should be made compulsory, Cottage Home provides some excellent programmes for parents. I acknowledge the highly professional services delivered in my area.
Further to Deputy O'Sullivan's comments, I briefly taught in a disadvantaged school where I realised that there was no educational culture among some parents. Videos rather than books were lined along shelves, yet a box of books could be bought for €1 and put on display. That is the bottom of the pyramid because, if parents are not involved or do not have a strong culture of education within the home, we will have a real battle on our hands. Does the delegation agree with my opinion and, if so, what is it doing to address the issue?
My final point is on non-nationals. FÁS has advised that this State will need 500,000 new workers in the next ten years. Naturally, many will bring children who cannot speak English and some will fall on hard times. Evidence already exists of the grouping within towns and cities of areas of non-nationals. We will be doomed to follow the example of other countries unless we improve integration. Early childhood language learning is one of the most important means of achieving this aim. Does Barnardos hold a long-term view on how it can assist the integration of non-nationals?
It was noted that literacy levels had not improved since 1980. This committee has deliberated extensively on adult literacy issues. If this issue were to become a priority within the Department of Education and Children, where should money be injected?
Deputy O'Sullivan described parents who had bad experiences of school and other Deputies referred to the cultures of education that influence children. Unless parents can motivate children to learn, the State can do nothing.
Ms Gibbons
I will address some of the issues raised, beginning with the financial questions, and Ms Tinsley will supply further details. In 2004, the latest year for which figures are available, the total income of Barnardos was €16.1 million and total expenditure was €13.6 million. Some 59% of our income comes from statutory services and we raise the remainder. We devote many resources to fund-raising because we think it important that non-governmental organisations bring something to the statutory and voluntary mix.
I have provided members with examples of our areas of work, especially in terms of education and disadvantage. I listed the schools which partner with us and the work we carry out. We have been fortunate in that most of our work has been well evaluated and is successful. We work with children from conception and birth and throughout their time at school to offer programmes that achieve the aims we discussed.
If I was given €100 million in the morning, which would be wonderful, I would reflect on my choices before spending the money. However, I suggest three areas in which the funds should be allocated. Primary and pre-primary education is key to answering the questions that arise. If young children are not engaged in positive ways, they are all but lost. In our experience, children drop out of school because they have encountered too much negativity and too little success. If a child cannot read or write by the age of seven or eight, how can he or she manage the array of subjects taught in secondary school? The student will listen to important subjects, such as history, but will not be able to read about them. It is like introducing Shakespeare to children who cannot read "Jack and Jill Went Up the Hill". It is not surprising that, after a period spent sitting at the back of the classroom and being stared at by fellow students, a child wants to drop out of school.
Assessment is the other key area as regards investment and money should be available. It is heartbreaking for us to talk to parents whose children are waiting to get on a waiting list to be assessed, not to mention waiting to access the services they need. School principals and teachers with whom we have spoken say that even when they get special needs assistants or help for children, the most extra help any child can obtain through the system is five hours per week. That is not enough for children with severe disabilities.
Integration must mean helping the schools and teachers by putting in the extra years. As Deputy Andrews said, we must invest in the new Irish. If we do not invest now, we will add to our problems. I spoke yesterday to a school principal who said that when he wants to get a message to a particular family, he goes to the local takeaway and asks the staff to translate it. One laughs and wonders if this is what happens in Ireland in 2006. Many teachers and principals in disadvantaged areas want to give leadership but they need resources. I agree with Deputy Andrews that if we do not invest in making these children part of our society, we will pay a price later. Paying such a price should not, however, be our major concern. We should rather be worried about denying children their childhoods.
Why has there been no change since the 1980s? With the introduction of free education we gave ourselves an "up". I benefited from it half way through my secondary education and it reached most children. Since then, much money has been invested, but on an ad hoc basis and the effects were not measured. We must identify what works, mainstream it and stop funding initiatives that do not work. Barnardos will be happy if somebody can tell us what works. We always try to identify what works and then do it rather than reinventing. We would be happy to bow out. We do not anticipate that happening for a long time. A good, professional non-government organisation can bring added value to any service. While the statutory services may be concerned about a home but find it difficult to get in, Barnardos can get into homes. We do not see ourselves as an alternative to the statutory services, we work with them.
The change we seek on dealing with the three in ten children who are not learning to read and write must be detailed. Each situation is individual and requires intensive work with the children and their families. They cannot be catered for under the general methods of teaching we use. New teaching methods may benefit all children but for the three in ten to whom I refer, they are essential. We have their names and addresses, everybody knows them, the schools will tell us who they are but they need individual plans. We work with children as individuals and we never do so without engaging their families. This requires dedicated work, particularly when the parents' experiences and chosen lifestyles make it difficult. It can take months to engage them.
I do not agree with compulsory parenting courses. Such courses are excellent for most of us in that we hear new ideas and suggestions about where we may be going wrong. However, parents experiencing real difficulties cannot take advantage of courses of that nature. We must work with them on a one-to-one basis and provide resources in that regard. In the future they may be engaged in parenting courses. There are good, proven parenting courses that work with children who have many difficulties. The day when a person could make up their own parenting course is long gone. Offering general parenting courses to children who have behaviour difficulties will not work. Instead, we need to analyse the problem and offer the course that will address it. This means working in the home, as well as bringing people into groups. One can manage in a group only when one already has confidence in oneself. We must give parents that confidence and that is what we work to do.
Deputy Gogarty asked why we are here. We are positive people, dedicated to having our voice heard on a consistent basis. We believe that the committee and the Oireachtas are important. People criticise Oireachtas Members but they are our public representatives and our example of democracy. We want the Oireachtas to provide leadership in respect of educational disadvantage. The answer is not in the hands of the Department of Education and Children alone because it is a wider problem. It is also in the hands of people living in poverty. Our document outlines all the factors shown by research.
We welcomed the creation of the post of Minister of State with responsibility for children. Although we argue that this should be a full Cabinet position, with full voting rights, and we regularly tell the Minister of State this, we are delighted that he will be attending Cabinet meetings, at which he can make heard the voice of children. We hope to help shape how that voice is advocated.
Our advocacy area on drugs is a subset but we are concerned about alcohol-related issues. Although everybody knows that drugs are a problem, due to our cultural investment over the years in alcohol we find it more difficult to say that alcohol is a growing problem for us. We see it in the distress of young people coming into schools. When we hear about children and young people abusing alcohol, we say that alcohol is abusing them. As parents and guardians, we must each set an example and look seriously at doing something about our massive alcohol problem. That is why we argued that the drugs regional programmes should include the word "alcohol" in their titles. Although the industry opposes that, we have made it a key point because we believe alcohol to be a serious problem and we did not see that there was leadership on children in the system. We look to bring added value.
How do we change things? We do much work with the Traveller community, examples of which are included in our presentation. One needs to build up trust in this community. In some situations we might be the only service going into a site. We work in particular with the younger children on whom the parents can keep an eye, otherwise they will not let them come. Our services are used to attract other services to areas where there are difficulties. There is a cultural issue, particularly in respect of boys dropping out of school and not seeing the benefit of education. We have much work to do to make them welcome in schools and to make schools welcoming places for them. A number of Travellers, mostly women, work actively with Barnardos in our Traveller and non-Traveller sites and bring their culture in. We worked with these women many years ago and provided child care training for them. They have since managed to cope with official standards in training, which is one of our goals because we want the sector to be professionalised. We rely on their good knowledge and understanding of their community when we work with it.
The figure of 1,000 children who do not make the transition is a guesstimate. We do not know the true figure because we do not have a proper system in primary schools. If we cannot count and identify the children, we cannot deal with them. I ask members to recommend that this database be put in place. If we had a PPS database, we could match it with the secondary one.
One of our projects in Limerick identified a child who had changed areas after primary school, who had never registered with a secondary school and who was two years out of school by the time he came to our attention. That child lost two years' education as a result. We are engaged in intensive work with the school, gradually easing the child back into school and providing services in the school so that it will eventually embrace, help and allow him to be a child, which is what we want. With the database to which I refer, the Government could join up its thinking and identify children who are falling behind. It could do so on the basis of assessments of children's circumstances rather than on foot of guesstimates provided by principals. Children tend to fall behind where their parents are working but earning low incomes or where they are completely dependent on State benefits.
Working with parents is a consistent theme of all the projects I have outlined but success will not happen overnight. Some parents turn back when they get to the school gate. A member of staff in one of our projects, who came up through the system herself, now does advocacy work on behalf of parents. She goes into schools with them and encourages them to say what they want to say. They are afraid of principals and teachers as a result of their own experiences.
We fully support adult education and it must be improved. Parents with literacy difficulties whose children are not doing their homework do not want to go to their schools because they are frightened that teachers will ask them why they do not help their children. They are ashamed and go to great extremes to hide it. They are extremely bright but did not learn at school, perhaps for the same reasons. The last thing they want to do is tell a teacher that they cannot help their children because they cannot read, write or do maths. We are not involved in the provision of such services but we try to address this problem as part of the help we give to children.
I wish to sound a note of caution in respect of reading recovery, to which we referred to in our policy document and which will be provided to the joint committee shortly. Reading recovery has an immediate impact but some evidence from the United States, where it has been practised for some time, suggests that children fall behind again once they have made an initial improvement. That needs to be taken into account. This appears, from the research, to be a result of children returning to the same classrooms that failed them in the first place.
In-service training outside the classroom gives teachers new enthusiasm and a day out of the classroom. It should, however, be supplemented by training in the classroom. This will allow those who provide such training to assist teachers with the problems they are experience rather than merely discussing them in an abstract way. Reading recovery practitioners in this country must follow the research being done in the United States to determine whether it only brings short-term success. We must ask what needs to be done to ensure the initial success is maintained. I am not an expert in teaching methodologies, although, like some members, I flirted with the career for a while and did some teaching some time ago. We must review our methodologies and consider how we can retain the gains children make and prevent them from lapsing.
The way to stop children falling out of schools is to stop it in the early years. There has not been good leadership in the area of out of school services but we are pleased to see that happening now. Out of school services have been an opportunity missed to help children who are falling behind. We emphasise academic achievement in all out of school services, not by teaching children more of what they do in schools but by teaching the use of computers or helping them to put together a local newspaper to aid and augment their academic achievement. There needs to be much more leadership from Government and a concerted effort not to lose this valuable time with children. For children who are doing fine, it is not so important but our concern is the 30% who are not doing fine.
Many children who are not academically able and who drop out of school enter Youthreach. The latter is successful but we would like to see it recognised as an education centre. It should be brought into the education net and be evaluated as such. It should be more closely integrated into the education service and not be seen as something apart, yet should not lose its innovation and other qualities.
In the second information pack I distributed, members will see details of the other agencies with which we work. In particular, I draw their attention to a very good programme that has been running for some time, the Oasis programme in Mulhuddart, where we work with Foróige and the schools. We and Foróige identified a problem and, instead of competing for resources, we co-operated and are delivering results at primary and post-primary level. It is a good example of where we can work together. We look now for leadership from the top. Many good things are happening on the ground, although others are not so good, and the system needs leadership to pull it all together. If I have not dealt with any questions, I ask members to come back to me on them.
Ms Tinsley
Deputy O'Sullivan suggested parents become mentors and partners. The Apple project in Clondalkin targets parents whose children have speech and language difficulties and educates them on how to tackle those problems. They can then approach other parents with children with speech and language difficulties. They are seen as co-therapists in the speech and language therapy process, which is useful because, bearing in mind the shortage of speech and language therapists, the longer a child goes unaided, the bigger the impact. The project, however, operates in a piecemeal fashion at present and more work is needed to develop it and other such initiatives.
Deputy English referred to the culture of the Traveller community, where dropping out of school is part of an intergenerational mentality. I spoke to members of a Traveller community in Finglas on the question of role models. As the Deputy said, Traveller communities need to see members who have become barristers or teachers or Lord Mayor of Galway. Teachers' expectations of Traveller children also need to be managed. There is a perception that the chances of someone from a Traveller background completing school are not strong, which can lead to a negative attitude.
I agree with Deputy English about the pressures on parents, regardless of background, in respect of school costs. Parents in disadvantaged areas are under pressure, even as regards providing lunch money. No parent wants their child to be seen as different and become the victim of bullying as a result. The pressure to buy Nike shoes or a decent schoolbag is clearly evident. The families with whom we work struggle with costs on a daily basis and in some cases are obliged to resort to loan sharks, which has implications for their household budgets. Parents need to be assisted with the costs of educating their children. One mother said to me that although Ireland had free education, she had never seen it.
Barnardos is concerned by first class pupils being taught by substitute teachers. As was correctly pointed out, the younger the child the better the intervention must be, particularly at infant and senior infant stage. We recognise that under the new DEIS strategy more and better-trained teachers will be available to address this. We want experienced teachers to teach infants, particularly first class, so that the most experienced teachers will not be teaching fifth and sixth classes.
Ms Gibbons
Deputy Andrews referred to the Cottage Home facility. We were also dismayed to see Cottage Home sold and expressed our concerns in this regard. We looked around to see if we could raise money to acquire it but we were unable to do so. The market was beyond us but we are committed to keeping that service going. It is a service that works with parents who have issues with serious drug addiction and is an oasis for children who have difficulties at home. We have also been successful in our time working there in getting some of those parents to engage with the services to assist with their drug addictions and we have been able to direct them toward mainstream services. There is a never-ending need for that service and we considered keeping it going at the premises of our other service in Tivoli. However, the latter is not big enough to allow us to continue the work we do there and add to it that done at the Cottage Home child care service. Dún Laoghaire is not generally classed as disadvantaged but, as Deputy Andrews is aware, it has huge areas of disadvantage and many people who experience major difficulties. We are committed to continuing the service.
I will have my colleagues come before the committee to discuss this matter. The committee has been supportive of our work in terms of what we can do to ensure we do not lose any aspects of that very valuable service. We are committed, whatever the difficulties involved, to maintaining it. Finding a suitable area in Dún Laoghaire has proved very difficult for us in trying to retain the different aspects of the service. We are not at a point where we believe any of them is unnecessary.
I wish to elaborate somewhat on the issue of leadership to which Ms Gibbons alluded. Leaving politics aside, every member, in government and in opposition, has taken a leadership role in highlighting these issues. However, the Minister of State at the Department of Education and Science, Deputy de Valera, when asked about the funding for the McIver report, asked which area of funding should be reduced to implement the report. She did this after mentioning the spending on VTOS, Youthreach and Traveller programmes. Leadership must, in the first instance, come in the form of the Government's commitment to funding education.
I was speaking with tongue in cheek when I alluded to the reason the delegates were appearing before the committee. One of the main reasons is to send a message to the Government, preferably through the media. There is one member of the media present today and there tend to be one or two good news reports after this joint committee sits. The delegates mentioned that it was not solely to do with the Department of Education and Science but the remit of this committee relates to everything for which that Department has responsibility. Before this meeting concludes, is there anything Ms Gibbons would like to state about what the Department of Education is not doing and what needs to be done? This would be a central message.
Although I dissociate myself from the abuse that took place in residential institutions, etc., people managed to achieve basic literacy levels years ago in poverty that is somewhat similar to what is evident today. I realise that there is now a generational influence. Why is the education system failing so significantly? Notwithstanding that other factors must be considered, why is the education system not compensating sufficiently, as used to be the case despite the previous level of poverty in our society?
I missed some of the presentation but wish to inquire whether a longitudinal study been done on how the children that have gone through these services have developed or ended up in terms of the vulnerability identified at the beginning. If not, are there plans to carry out such a study because it may prove informative?
Ms Gibbons
We have not carried out such a study because we do not have sufficient funding. Our research budget is very small. I chaired Treoir when it was instrumental in pushing the notion of carrying out a proper longitudinal study in Ireland. At the time, we were hoping it would be a millennium project. Even though the new millennium began six years ago, the project is forthcoming. We are delighted about this. We hope some of the work done will highlight what services were offered to children and the difference they made. It may also highlight the children who did not receive services and what happened to them. Proper studies would take into account children to whom services were denied. Ethically, we could not buy into that and we try to get services to any children we can.
Our main message to the Department of Education and Science is that investing in children and education should not only involve providing services in schools. That has not worked. Literacy levels increased in leaps and bounds but that was a result of children previously denied second level education being placed in school in the first instance. The problem of literacy is not new. We have spoken to the parents and grandparents of affected children, none of whom could read and write but who were good at keeping this hidden.
The statistic of three out of ten for illiteracy levels has been around for a long time and we have not cracked it. Universal schemes will not crack it in the future. It is not that goodwill does not exist we must work intensively with these children. We must identify the problems and where there is a problem outside the normal issues that Barnardos or other bodies can address, we must assess the relevant child. Work can then be carried out actively with the child and its parents.
Some services may indicate that a parent did not attend at two appointments and that the services will cease as a result. We argue that an attempt should instead be made to discover what is happening, actively engage with parents and understand the reasons they did not attend. The option of delivering a service in the child's home rather than in a clinical setting should be considered. Many professionals use our facilities, delivering their services in a place with which a child is familiar and comfortable. Parents would I hope come along as a result. These services should not give up on parents and we cannot afford to give up on them or the children.
Childhood is important and children are important for our future. It could be said we need somebody to pay future pensions but I am concerned with childhood for its own sake. The Perry longitudinal research from the United States shows that for every dollar spent, $17 is saved for the system in future. That research was done with very disadvantaged children rather than with privileged children. By concentrating on the child, people are kept out of jail and in work. We all want this.
I thank Ms. Gibbons and Ms Tinsley. The next meeting of the joint committee will deal with representatives from schools in Blackrock and Northumberland Road.
The joint committee adjourned at 12.55 p.m. until 9.45 a.m. on Tuesday, 14 March 2005.