Skip to main content
Normal View

Joint Committee on Education and Social Protection debate -
Wednesday, 8 Jul 2015

National Council for Curriculum and Assessment: Discussion.

The next item on our agenda is our engagement with Ms Brigid McManus, chairperson designate of the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment, NCCA.

By virtue of section 17(2)(l) of the Defamation Act 2009, witnesses are protected by absolute privilege in respect of their evidence to the committee. However, if they are directed by the committee to cease giving evidence on a particular matter and they continue to do so, they are entitled thereafter only to a qualified privilege in respect of their evidence. They are directed that only evidence connected with the subject matter of these proceedings is to be given and they are asked to respect the parliamentary practice to the effect that, where possible, they should not criticise or make charges against any person or entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable. The opening statement submitted to the committee will be published on the committee website after this meeting. Members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that they should not criticise or make charges against any person or entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable.

The role of the NCCA is to advise the Minister for Education and Skills on curriculum and assessment from early childhood to the end of second level education and to support innovation in schools. Today we have an opportunity to engage with Ms Brigid McManus as chairperson designate of the NCCA. I welcome Ms McManus to the meeting and invite her to make her presentation to the committee.

Ms Brigid McManus

I thank the committee for inviting me to meet it today. I will outline my background and then speak about the work the NCCA has under way and will be undertaking over the next few years.

I worked as a civil servant for more than 34 years and served as Secretary General of the Department of Education and Skills from 2005 to 2012. During my Civil Service career I also worked in the Departments of Finance and Arts, Culture and the Gaeltacht in a variety of policy areas, including public expenditure management, EU Structural and Cohesion Funds, the preparation of the 1994 national development plan, the governance and funding of national cultural institutions, and national and EU tax policy. As Secretary General of the Department of Education and Skills, my responsibilities covered the full range of issues in the education sector, including curriculum and assessment policy. I have strong experience of corporate governance issues in the public sector. I was appointed chairperson of the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment, NCCA, in 2012 and I have served for three years in that role. The appointment being discussed today is for a second term.

The NCCA plays a key role in sustaining and enhancing education quality. Its remit, as the Chairman has said, is to advise on curriculum and assessment. It covers early childhood settings and primary and second level schools. While it does not have a specific role in the higher education sector, it is working closely with that sector and other interested parties on transition issues, particularly in trying to address the interaction of the leaving certificate with higher education entrance requirements, and the impact of those requirements on the secondary school experience.

The council itself is a largely representative structure, with most members appointed by stakeholder organisations. In developing its proposals, it places a strong emphasis on research and evidence, deliberation through specific representative subject specialist groups, widespread consultation, and trialling aspects of new curricula with network schools. While it is not responsible for implementing curricular change, it supports such change through developing support materials and working with those responsible.

Current NCCA work includes a practice guide for early childhood settings on implementing the quality and curricular frameworks, Aistear and Síolta. It also includes a new primary language curriculum for junior primary classes, which has just been finalised, a primary language curriculum for older classes to be finalised by 2018, a new primary maths curriculum, and a curriculum for primary schools in education about religious beliefs, ERB, and ethics. It also includes developing a new overall primary curriculum framework, the new junior cycle, which will be very familiar to committee members and which is a major undertaking, including revised curricula for all individual subjects, new short courses, advice on addressing student well-being, new school assessment tasks across all subject areas and new reporting arrangements, including the introduction of the new junior cycle profile of achievement. Our work also includes new senior cycle curricula in economics, agricultural science, applied maths and physical education, introducing a new senior cycle politics and society subject in a number of schools, supporting the trialling of new practical assessment arrangements for leaving certificate science subjects, reviewing the impact of project maths and the new oral arrangements for leaving certificate Gaeilge, and work on the transition to higher education, in particular the new grading arrangements for leaving certificate subjects.

The NCCA is very conscious of the importance of developing coherence across the education continuum and of addressing transition points such as from early childhood to primary, from primary to second level and from second level to higher education, further education or work. There are also sometimes transition points within the school system. Fundamental to the work of the NCCA is that it builds upon and recognises the importance of the classroom and the school as the site of change, the importance of teachers and school management as the principal agents in that change, and the need for the drive for change to be focused on improving the quality of the educational experience for all children and young people.

Our work must address the needs of students of all abilities and backgrounds. It must sufficiently challenge students with high ability in particular subjects and address the needs of both students who are currently disengaging from education and students with special needs. In this context, one example is the work, as part of the junior cycle reforms, on developing new curriculum programmes for students with moderate to mild general learning disabilities and special needs, which will allow their learning to be recognised and awarded for the first time at junior cycle. Increasingly, the NCCA tries to capture the student view in its work and engages with parents in supporting their children's education. For example, the NCCA website includes video clips giving parents suggestions for activities they can do with young children to help support literacy and numeracy skills.

Curriculum policy and advice cannot be addressed on a stand-alone basis. To deliver effectively on its mandate, the NCCA needs to work collaboratively across the sector. It works closely with the Departments of Education and Skills and Children and Youth Affairs, the State Examinations Commission, the Teaching Council and the teacher professional development support services across the range of its work. It also works with the Higher Education Authority, the National Council for Special Education and Quality and Qualifications Ireland on specific areas of work in which our remits overlap. It engages with all the education partners in its own work and other fora. Participating in international networks and research activity ensures the NCCA is up to date with best practice elsewhere.

The work of the NCCA is supported by the huge commitment and input of a large number of volunteers in the NCCA council, by its different subject development and working groups and by the work of its talented and enthusiastic full-time staff. It has been a great privilege to have chaired the council and overseen this important work for the last three years. I and all the members of the new NCCA council are very committed to improving the education experience of all students in the coming years.

I apologise that I had to step out and missed Ms McManus's verbal presentation, although I have read it. I will have to step out again in a minute as I am due in the Chamber for a Topical Issues matter.

On the all-Ireland basis of the curriculum, Ms McManus will be aware that under the Good Friday Agreement, both Governments are committed to harmonising policies on an all-island basis. What work does the NCCA do with its Northern counterpart, the Council for Curriculum, Examinations and Assessments, CCEA? How often do the two groups meet and do they have any joint plans, proposals or policies coming down the line?

We are seeing increasing evidence that, in Gaelscoileanna, more and more teaching is taking place through English because of a lack of Irish-speaking teachers. Has Ms McManus any comments on that? What does the NCCA hope to do to encourage more females to engage in science, technology, engineering and mathematics, STEM, subjects?

Ms Brigid McManus

On the all-Ireland basis, we work with the CCEA. I have met the chair and the chief executives of both organisations have a fair bit of contact. Our own chief executive is in one of the CCEA advisory groups. It is probably fair to say that the work is not so much about developing joint curricula which would apply in both places, as the systems are a bit different, and more about the exchange of practice. For example, we are currently doing a lot of exchange on classroom assessment for learning at primary and second level. Assessment for learning is a big theme at the moment. It is more about learning from each other's experience than developing common things. In my previous role, the Department would have developed certain common resources which schools could use in areas such as special needs and literacy. Although the curricula are a bit different in the two systems, there is a lot of joint work.

On Irish, it is a real challenge. The whole issue of qualified teachers is not quite within the remit of the NCCA. Whether we are looking at the primary languages curriculum, which we have just finalised, or Gaeilge in the junior cycle, which is out for consultation, we must address the different needs. The new primary languages curriculum is a single language curriculum, rather than having an Irish one and an English one in all schools. It has certain outcomes for L1, language one, and L2, language two. An English-medium school will have L1 outcomes for English and L2 outcomes for Irish, while an Irish-medium school will have L1 outcomes for Irish and L2 outcomes for English.

When we get to junior cycle, one of the major issues that has come up in the consultation under way on Gaeilge is that we envisaged one curriculum for junior cycle. One of the issues that has been raised with us and which we will have to examine further is whether, to be sufficiently challenging for people who have Irish as a first language, one needs to be looking at a different curriculum for people where it is language one or language two. That has implications for the senior cycle. There is no doubt there are big challenges both in curriculum design and for delivery, not so much in schools where English is language one and one does not have students coming in who do not necessarily have English as a family language, but it is far more complicated in Gaeilge for people. There are real issues around curriculum design.

On the STEM subjects, we are looking at more engagement. The primary science curriculum has been very successful in terms of student engagement. The old revised junior certificate science curriculum and the greater emphasis on practical has produced much more student engagement. Some of what we are trying to do in the new curriculum we have just developed for the three leaving certificate science curricula is to make them more engaging and modern for all students. We are hoping that will also engage girls as well as boys but there is a challenge. The practical focus in leaving certificate science means that we want new assessment arrangements so that a fair chunk of the marking will be a practical assessment. That will be a challenge for the State Examinations Commission for external assessment as it will have to be trialled in a number of schools. That has a cost. We will have to see how we can make that work. In terms of engagement in STEM subjects, there is nothing specifically targeted at girls. It is more about trying to make it modern and get into our system the best of 21st century science education that has been proven to work elsewhere.

I thank Ms McManus. As a person who has spent my working life until 2011 in the classroom, hers was a name I constantly saw on correspondence. Having often wondered what she looked like, I am delighted to meet her today. Her name was well-known throughout. I was in a second level school. It is good to put a face to the name. I congratulate her ahead of her second term.

My subject was music so I will focus my questions on what I know. In regard to the curriculum for leaving certificate music, are there plans to modernise the course which was last changed in 1999? Part of the change was on music technology, a new section which was introduced to leaving certificate music. When I heard this I was keen to keep up to date when Ms McManus referred to the NCCA engaging with other countries in an attempt to keep it modernised. Given that I was in a Border county, immediately I went North of the Border to see what was being done there in terms of music technology. Up until this year when I had a daughter doing leaving certificate music, it has not changed. The difference between music technology North and South of the Border is phenomenal. The situation has improved since 2011. When I left teaching in 2011, I did not have the Internet in the classroom. Music technology could be used for 50% of the leaving certificate curriculum and the students who did not play an instrument could do it. It is literally an examination in transcribing what is in front of them. They did not need any musical knowledge. The students felt this was the easiest part of the course and it did not give music the recognition of the work needed.

I feel strongly that in the area of music technology for leaving certificate there is huge work to be done to modernise the course. In the North the facilities are much better in terms of music software and the programmes in place. Ms McManus mentioned the volunteers. Who specifically designs these courses? Sometimes there is talk about modernising the courses. When the junior certificate was modernised, the pupils of the 2000s had never heard of the songs which were from the 1960s. They did not have a clue about Paul Simon, the Beatles and some had never heard of Queen. We need to move with the times, particularly in my subject of music, with the music they are listening to. I do not know who is in charge of this area.

In terms of the volunteers which Ms McManus mentioned, it is great to have volunteers. I would love to have had an input into where it was going. I have 25 years experience and a wealth of knowledge, have taught in different schools between vocational and secondary, and I would have been willing to give an input. I wrote to the NCCA offering my services a couple of times but never got a response. It is an area where one should listen to the teachers.

Perhaps Ms McManus would expand on the curriculum for special education. It is a great idea to give students with, say, a mild or moderate intellectual disability the opportunity to get the same start as their peers.

I welcome Ms McManus and recognise her many years of devoted service in all the various initiatives in which she has been involved. Something struck me when she was speaking. She would have noticed an education system that was static for a long time, with various established norms of evaluation and criteria for assessment. Now the world has changed so dramatically and obviously the education system must also change to reflect that. In that changing world, establishing norms and modes of assessment that have trust and credibility and are understood is a major challenge because it all happened rather quickly. How does Ms McManus think we managed that change and that challenge? Like the previous speaker, despite all the initiatives and the importance of the education system, I want to mention arts in education, particularly in the primary school. There are five beautifully written sections in the curriculum about the importance of arts in the formation of young people, the importance of performance, the discipline of learning instruments and expression but, in general, we have performed very poorly in delivering it, unlike geography, history or mathematics. It has almost been left outside the classroom door. Those enrichments that it can bring are a big gap in the formation of young people's lives. Has Ms McManus any thoughts on that and how it could be addressed?

I welcome Ms Brigid Ms McManus. I thank the Chairman for scheduling this event. I used to be a full member of this committee but, of late, I am not. I have come in deliberately because I have long connections with the NCCA. I commend Ms McManus on her long career of dedicated public service. If it is acceptable to the Chairman, there are four questions I wish to put. Can Ms McManus tell the committee about the junior cycle changes and how assessment for learning will improve, given the acrimonious negotiations that have taken place, and what in her opinion will be better as a result?

Eight or nine other educators from across the country and I visited Finland in May last and we looked at its education system from top to bottom, as in from preschool right up to higher education and beyond. We looked at senior cycle, which is children aged 16 plus, and subsequently, we had the leaving certificate here. I was struck by two features of the senior cycle children in Finland. First, they have a lot of personal autonomy. They do their courses in six-week chunks. They have to make choices and as opposed to making one's subject choice for two years, they make choices in six weeks. Second, they take their examination in either October or March each year. In other words, a student could decide to sit four examinations in March and the other four in October or to do them all on one occasion. It gave them a lot of personal choice.

I was shocked with what I learned when it came to the leaving certificate here. I had a meeting in Oranmore one evening and there were four of us, as parents, with children doing either leaving certificate or junior certificate. Of the four of us, we had five children sitting examinations and four of them had independent superintendents, for instance, for special needs which we all think of. However, it was stress mostly, and glandular fever. One child had home tuition for a year. I refer to four parents with five children. I then did some work with the Department of Education and Skills and we found out the need for independent rooms has gone up 20% since 2000. Maybe my figures are wrong, but approximately 10,000 students need independent superintendents. I suppose my question to Ms McManus is this. Has the NCCA looked at reforming the taking of examinations? I understand it is moving into senior cycle now. Would she be open to giving children more choice around doing modules for shorter periods of time? Sometimes it is difficult for children to stay the distance whereas they can be quite hot for six or eight week periods. I liked the idea of more autonomy for the students as well. As Ms McManus will be aware, we want to keep them in school. Despite the fact that early school leaving has reduced, we still have 11% doing so. The rate is high. That concept of taking the leaving certificate twice in the one year is my second question.

Others around the table might have had concerns about the third matter I raise. The National Council for Special Education, NCSE, proposes a remodelling and reallocation of resources to schools and we all have experienced a backlash locally when that was coming down the road without adequate consultation. In fairness, the Minister agreed to postpone it for a year. Postponing it for a year is fine but it will not be any better a year down the road unless we do it better. Has Ms McManus links with the NCSE? Is she discussing that with it? What will work with schools is if they get templates of how their school could be affected by the new proposed model before that is set in stone. Perhaps Ms McManus has a view on that.

My final question - I thank the Chair for the indulgence - is about Gaeilge. I note Deputy O'Brien raised Gaeilge with Ms McManus. I will raise it for a different reason. Deputy Cannon beside me might be familiar with the report published recently in The Connacht Tribune that there is ten years left in the Irish language, as we are currently do it. I always feel that while one has a language reliant on schools instead of communities it will be short term, particularly around the Gaeltacht. I have had a proposal in my head for a long number of years, which is that if we want children to be excited about the language we must have them in the natural setting of the language. Has the NCCA looked at providing a model whereby the children can be in the Gaeltacht for maybe two or three weeks during the school year? All the resources are in the Gaeltacht, such as the buildings and those with the expertise. I was thinking particularly of early first-year students. It would be an ideal time because not every child can afford to go to the Gaeltacht. Often they go to the Gaeltacht at the end of first year or second year, but there is a first-year term which would be a great break-in period.

The Senator's time is up.

I have seen schools approach parents asking them to move their child down to pass in first year, the parent begging the school to let the child go to the Gaeltacht and see how it goes, and the child liking it, but we are killing it off too soon. I would like Ms McManus's views on those four areas and thank the Chair for her indulgence.

It is great to see Ms McManus. I congratulate her on her reappointment. The NCCA is fortunate to have somebody of her calibre and experience at its helm.

First, I wholly endorse everything that Senator Moran said about music education. The curriculum is completely out of kilter with what is happening in modern music. There are an increasing number of young people one would describe as not having had any formal music education who are creating incredible music using technology and the curriculum and the examination of the curriculum needs to reflect that. I am aware from having spoken to Mr. David Hayes, the RTE music producer, arranger and general music genius who is doing either a masters or PhD in the use of technology in music education, that he would be more than willing to contribute to any work Ms McManus is doing in the NCCA in modernising the curriculum to reflect that.

We spoke about the Educational Research Centre, ERC, and, indeed, the Minister, introduced new governance structures around the ERC to us a few minutes ago and I would argue a critical part of that process is to retain the autonomy, independent and objectivity of the work that happens within the ERC. I am always fascinated by the relationship that exists between the NCCA and the Department of Education and Skills. Is there an autonomous independent role there for the NCCA in terms of steering the direction of Irish education in general or is the NCCA there solely to implement decisions taken within the Department? How much autonomy and independence has the NCCA and how often does Ms McManus exercise that autonomy and independence in terms of making a case to the Department at either informal or formal level for a change to a particular curriculum subject matter?

How often does the NCCA look at best practice abroad and seek to convince those in charge of the need to make a change in the delivery of a particular subject? I ask that question in the context of something interesting that happened in the United Kingdom yesterday. The BBC, in collaboration with the United Kingdom Department of Education and a host of ICT entities, both private and public, came together and decided to gift every 11 year old student in the UK education system with a microcomputer, which can do fairly extraordinary things and which will for the first time allow these children access to a computer that they can control. In essence, it is merely an empty shell that they can control, programme and get to do extraordinary things. It is a ground-breaking, visionary and courageous act and it ties in nicely with the introduction of computer science as a subject in the curriculum in the United Kingdom last year. I wonder whether the NCCA is observing what is happening internationally in terms of the use of technology in education. Has the NCCA drawn any conclusions on whether Ireland is, as it should be, at the cutting edge of this or is somehow tagging along on the coat tails of others? Has the NCCA ever drawn the conclusion that there is an urgent need to reassess how we deliver subject matter through the use of technology in the classrooms bearing in mind that the vast majority of the children in the classrooms are more than comfortable using that technology and often find it strange that they are told to put that same technology back into their pockets or schoolbags before they begin class in the morning? I wonder how much autonomy Ms McManus has and how courageous she has been and intends to be in using that autonomy to ask serious questions around the delivery of the curriculum, both now and in the future.

I thank Ms McManus for her presentation. I was interested to read it because education would not be my forte. However, I am aware that all around me are teachers and I will not try to compete.

As a public representative and a mother, education is all about ability and background. Unfortunately, in some parts of society ability and background are some of the least aspects that, when it comes to education, we think about. I have always been of the opinion that each child is very different and one size does not fit all.

It was interesting to hear what other colleagues had to say about music and how important it was that it be taught in schools. I have always been in awe of the music department at St. Agnes's primary school in my area in Crumlin. Sr. Bernadette has made great strides with children attending the school. I am referring to children who have found it difficult to even sit in a classroom, never mind participate, and know that music has changed the lives of many of them. It has also changed the lives of their parents because many of the children have progressed and are now involved in the senior orchestra at the school.

I am a person who has an interest in music and singing. When I watch the St. Patrick's Day parade and see the wonderful high school bands playing and marching down O'Connell Street, I wonder why we are not producing similar bands. Sr. Bernadette was probably one of the first to make the teaching of music accessible when she established an orchestra at her school. Others now teach music such as St. Ultan's primary school in Ballyfermot. Sr. Bernadette has told me that she saw the way children came alive when they were taught music and it paid dividends when they went back to their classrooms. Music greatly benefits children and it is great to see their lives change for the better. Teaching children how to play an instrument brings order and discipline which never leaves them. I ask Ms McManus, in her new role, to ensure the teaching of music is made more curriculum-friendly.

I have always had a keen interest in sport and for the past couple of nights have watched on television matches in the Women's World Cup. I also watch Gaelic games, the Wimbledon tennis tournament and everything else that is broadcast. I sometimes think we do not emphasise just how important sport is in school. We should examine the matter. I know of schools that do not even have a PE teacher, but I also know that this is probably not an issue in Ms Manus's area.

I agree with what Senator Fidelma Healy Eames said about the teaching of Irish. Because I am not fluent in Irish I left school at 14 years of age and was unable to pass my junior certificate examinations, but that is another day's work. I have suggested to the Taoiseach that free evening classes should be provided in communities to teach children and families Irish, particularly in the run-up to the 1916 Rising commemorations. I honestly believe such classes would make a huge impact, not only on the lives of parents but also on the lives of children attending school. We must do something rapidly about the teaching of Irish because it has been said Irish shall cease to be spoken in ten years time.

Unfortunately, it was not part of the Taoiseach's remit to provide such classes in time for the 1916 Rising commemorations. My suggestion offers a nice approach and would allow people to get a feel for Irish again. I know that I have deviated from the subject, but I thank Ms McManus for her attendance. I do not know her from Adam, but my colleagues do and I wish her all the best in her second term.

I, too, commend Ms McManus for her work to date and wish her the best in her next term in this role. It was interesting to hear her say:

Increasingly, the NCCA tries to capture the student view in its work and engages with parents in supporting their child's education. For example, the NCCA website includes video clips giving parents suggestions for activities they can do with young children to help support literacy and numeracy skills.

That is an important role. As far as I know, there is evidence which proves that children whose parents encourage reading and numeracy have better educational outcomes. I ask Ms McManus to expand on that aspect.

The NCCA did excellent work on the junior cycle curriculum. I hope that many of its recommendations will be delivered in the final agreement with teachers. On the thought put into the initiative and the learning outcomes of the junior certificate curriculum in encouraging critical thinking, I say, "Well done," to all concerned.

Ms Brigid McManus

Since my retirement I have chaired a second level school board of management which has given me an interesting perspective having worked in the Department. The role provides a good balance when it comes to the NCCA. I am now the person who reads some of the circulars to which Senator Mary Moran referred.

With your own signature on them.

Ms Brigid McManus

Not usually, but I suspect it is the way some teachers viewed the circulars sent at the time.

I fully endorse what has been said about the importance of music. In terms of the curriculum, it is not on one of our immediate lists. In fairness, I suspect that is because some of the subjects at which we are looking have been on the list for an unconscionably longer time. It is one of the challenges that we face. I will return to the matter of redesigning the senior cycle programme. Within current subjects, we probably have not done enough to keep the curriculum up to date, which is a resource issue. The art curriculum was revised. However, there were resource implications for schools in rolling it out. It was not implemented because there was no funding available. We have to look at the matter again as it is probably out of date. We have done a smaller job in changing some of the assessment arrangements to make the subject more modern and bring it more into line with the State Examination Commission. That is what we are trying to do in the case of some subjects. I will talk to the staff and come back to the committee on the matter.

On the specific issue of music technology, on some subjects we sit down with the subject teacher associations and the State Examination Commission. We do not conduct a full curriculum review but make the adjustments needed. To be honest, I do not know but making an adjustment might be a way to deal with the matter.

Ms Brigid McManus

The Senator asked about structures. First, let me apologise. At times we find it so hard to get people to engage with us. One of the big challenges in the consultation process is to get an input from practising teachers. I am sorry to hear that the Senator received no response when she wrote to the NCCA.

Ms Brigid McManus

It is a challenge for anybody who conducts consultations. We have a structure in place. When we design a full curriculum review, there are what are called subject development groups which used to be called subject groups or committees. By and large, people are nominated to join such groups. A group will include people such as an inspector from the relevant unit of the Department of Education and Skills or an examiner from the State Examination Commission. It will also have somebody from the NCCA and people nominated by subject teacher associations, the unions and management bodies.

Perhaps this is what the Senator was alluding to, but in 2012 we reviewed the arrangements for the subject groups and the boards a level above them. One of the issues we identified was that we were not getting more recent teachers with different experience. I use the phrase "more recent teachers" because somebody pointed out that the term "younger teachers" was probably ageist. We introduced a system to co-opt newer teachers or people with specific expertise if it was missing. Generally, if we are co-opting onto committees, we insert an ad in the newspaper indicating the expertise for which we are looking.

Generally, a background paper is produced initially. In response to an issue raised by Deputy Ciarán Cannon and others, we try to draw on what the research and experience are telling us, as well as international best practice, to identify the latest trends. Sometimes we also commission international research. It might be of interest to the committee to learn that in October we will produce a background document on an ethics programme.

Some work was done for the consultation document on what other countries are doing in this area. That will be part of the background paper that will go out for consultation, on foot of which the group will sit down and come up with the subject specification, which, when it is developed, goes out for consultation again.

As well as our online consultation, we hold consultation events. For the junior cycle we had a specific conference on English, where we invited schools to send representatives and teachers to have a discussion of the draft specification. Some of the work is done by nominated volunteers and there are permanent staff in the NCCA. It is a great team, small compared to other countries but enthusiastic. If we are working on a particular subject we will second someone in from a school with particular expertise or a university as a development officer for the subject and that person will work for us for two or three years.

Deputy Cannon raised a point about independence. We have a partnership body at council level and in all our structures, and we work in a landscape that is political with a small "p", though education is political under all definitions of the word. A really important role of the NCCA is to put evidence of research on the table and to raise ideas for discussion. Our credibility is very tied up with having that evidence. Another feature is the feasibility of what we recommend, and the network schools are quite important to enable us to try stuff because our role is to push things a bit further than might be comfortable. If we come up with things that the Department and schools say are ridiculous we will not get anywhere either, so there is a balance involved.

I agree that one of the constraints on our work is Internet and computer facilities. We have now introduced a curriculum online and over 1 million different users have accessed the NCCA website. As Deputy Cannon knows from his time working with me, I am in the Stone Age when it comes to IT and technology, but the site is amazing. We will try to continue to give a hard copy of materials to teachers, but the advantage of doing a curriculum online is that it allows one to go from the curriculum objective to samples of students' work, so it is very flexible. However, an issue validly raised by teachers is that access depends a lot on the part of the country one is in, so we also give out USB keys. This is a challenge in music and other things, though it is improving a huge amount, and the new school broadband connection has helped.

I was asked about special education. In junior cycle we do the normal level 3 on the qualifications framework because there are students with special needs who can achieve that. There is, however, a cohort of students with special needs who will not be able to do level 3 so, in partnership with NABMSE, the association for special schools, we have developed a couple of modules at level 2 so they will get level 2 awards. One of them is on a personal project which involves caring for a pet, which can be seen on the website. Another is in forensic science, based on the popularity of CSI and involving different projects in that area.

When will they come in?

Ms Brigid McManus

They are ready to be rolled out as part of the junior cycle for special schools and have already been trialled. They were piloted for us in special schools.

Is Ms McManus saying they were piloted in special needs schools?

Ms Brigid McManus

Yes. We deal largely with students in the moderate range, who are either in special units in schools or in special schools. The website has videos showing examples of students doing pieces of work. I believe the modules are due to be rolled out in 2016, although I will have to check that, but they are finalised and have been approved by council. They will be built on as well.

On arts, music and education, one of the criticisms made in my time as Secretary General was that, while music was quite strong in primary schools and primary school teachers had strong training in music, other forms of art were not so. I agree about Sister Bernadette in St. Agnes's primary school. Many years ago I was at a concert there. Her work is phenomenal and feeds back into other things. She had great persuasive powers and the number of people she managed to involve in the project was amazing.

There is an issue with resources. I was involved in the music and education project that had matched funding, one of the advantages of which was that we were able to roll out some of the pilot projects. A lot of work was done in trying to roll out the County Donegal pilot on instrumental music in individual classes. The NCCA and the Department are working on a programme on arts and education and a new website has gone live to support teachers and students. It is very important. One of the key skills in constructing the junior cycle programme is related to appreciation of the arts. One of the short courses we have developed as part of the junior cycle is on arts and performance, and it is innovative because the assessment is around a performance piece rather than a more traditional piece. This will not be without challenges as we roll it out.

Deputy Conaghan asked about the challenges in assessment. There is always a balance in the education system, and one of the strengths of the Irish system is that, unlike some places, we have not gone into every fad, so we did not have to change every year and introduce new things while we were still in the process of rolling out the previous things. One of the difficulties of the Irish commitment to the education system is a fear of change, though I would not accept that our system has stayed static, as we have made a lot of changes, such as the 1999 curriculum, the revised junior cycle and transition year. However, one of the things we learned from the earlier reforms is that if one does not change the assessment system, particularly at second level, teachers will go back to the default of what the exam examines, no matter how wonderful the curriculum.

People will teach what the exam demands as students progress through second level. It is a real challenge to try to come up with different approaches to assessment, both in terms of the State Examination Commission's assessment and in the wider assessment of learning.

In response to Senator Healy Eames's question about what we hope will be better about the junior cycle, we want assessments to be conversations between teachers and student about what the student is trying to achieve in his or her learning and how one would know something is a good piece of work rather than about the marketing scheme and how a student would get another point. In the junior cycle we are trying to get the focus more on the outputs rather than the inputs. The debate has often been around the choice of subjects but focusing on the key skills and that a school should design a curriculum around needs is about trying to state, the skills and dispositions people will have acquired at the end of the cycle. One needs to ensure that through the combination of subjects, the learning and the non-curricular learning they are doing, they are coming out at the end with that kind of output as opposed to always worrying what we are feeding in, whether we are doing enough of "x" or so many hours of "y". That is probably the big change.

I do not want to comment on where we are at now, given that the union members will vote on it in the autumn. We have done much work to date and the agreement that is on the table, with new reporting structures and parental engagement - trying to move the system in the direction of conversations among professionals in school, professionals across schools, between parents and teachers and between students and parents about how we know the student - has improved student learnings. Culture change in any organisation is a major challenge. Everybody present has been involved in different organisations, getting cultural change is very difficult. It will take time. If this were to be adopted in schools, we would not wake up on the following morning with everything different but it provides a significant opportunity in spite of all the difficulties around it. Despite all our differences, with different partners who sit around the table at council, the people involved have a passion for education and for making a difference for students. That is a big strength.

In respect of the reform of the senior cycle, we are doing things that are designed to use best practice, for example our new science curriculum, Project Maths or the ongoing updating of the curriculum, but the issue in the medium term is the type of senior cycle we want for students and whether that has changed since we first designed the senior cycle. The trends in Finland and other countries is for more individual and personalised learning. For the students over 16 years who wish to pursue a vocational curriculum, we have to consider how to manage that choice with issues such as the leaving certificate applied. We have not looked at the applied leaving certificate for some time. Issues in other countries arise on how to design the school system, whether to have middle schools and then at the upper school level, there are different types of schools. There is a number of significant questions on how one structures the senior cycle. Our work on transition has focused very much on higher education, but we must work on how apprenticeships fits with the further education sector. In other words we must consider how transition year will fit in with the junior cycle and senior cycle when charges are made to the junior cycle programme. The issue in the shorter term is ensuring the subject choice structure and the work we are doing in transition year will take some of the pressure off second level and trying to get a different marking scheme. All of the initiatives should change the experience at second level but on the issue the Senator raised about forecasting for 25 years forward and the skills that people will need when they finish their leaving certificate in 25 years time, we have to consider what we can learn from very different structures and systems elsewhere.

Gauging the learning.

Ms Brigid McManus

That is something we need to think about, but it will take a conversation on the fundamentals that will involve major research and talking to all the actors in the system. That is not something one can do in a day or two. It is a valid issue.

The Senator is correct that the well-being of students is critical because the pressure on student seems to be growing. I hope that some of the elements of the transition year programme will help with that, but it remains an issue for many students at second level.

The issue of resources for the National Council for Special Education is not relevant to my role as chairperson of the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment. I am not saying that I do not have resource issues, but thankfully one of the benefits of not being Secretary General is that my successor or Mr. Eamon Stack has to grapple with the SNAs. Our interface with the NCSE is much more in the curriculum programmes of learning space.

Deputy Cannon raised the issue of autonomy of the NCCA. I touched on this a bit earlier but the role of a policy advisory body is always tricky because one gives policy advice to the Minister or a Department but ultimately it is a political decision as to whether the advice is taken or the extent to which it is taken. The overall strategic direction of the education system is a wider remit of which NCCA may have one input. We are not completely independent but we are not in the space of being told to do this or that. We look at the issues, and will report on what we think might be the best model. People will come back, be they at the Minister's end or from some of the partners in education, and say whether they like it or not. The eventual policy comes out of a kind of democratic dialogue. We are not fully autonomous in the sense that we do not determine what exactly is in the education system but as I said earlier our credibility depends on us coming up with our best advice on an independent basis rather than just being told to do something. Obviously the overall strategic direction is set by the Minister.

The Chairman commented on capturing the views of students. What we have done is to involve groups of students in giving feedback so that the NCCA will organise student representatives not just at second level. The Office of the Minister for Children and the Ombudsman for Children will facilitate us in organising groups of students at primary level so that they can make an input.

We obviously have parent representatives on the council but I agree that the parental input has a significant impact on children's learning. We do a number of things, there are great many resources available now. When my child was small parents were told to read to them and I might have known that, but do most educated people know the activities that one must do with children around numeracy? I am not sure they do, other than counting the steps of the stairs. I do not think people know what they can do to help their child's structured thinking unless he or she is trained as an educator. I think that is a very important resource.

We developed resources around how schools would report on standardised tests, for example, at primary level. That is all about trying to ensure that schools engage with parents and engage with them in a way that parents can understand. I believe the Deputy mentioned that the capacity of parents or students to engage is influenced by background. When we do work with our network schools or anything we always try to get a mix of schools, including DEIS schools. By and large DEIS schools have a very good track record when engaging with parents, perhaps better than some other schools.

The website includes a parents' section, including resources for parents. We produce leaflets for parents. With the Department of Education and Skills on the junior cycle, we would have attended parent meetings to explain the changes involved. We do quite a range of work. The resources one for me is a really good one for people to get stuff. I think it may not be sufficiently well known by parents, but there is a parents section on it.

Our work on physical education involves looking at physical education as an examinable subject at second level, but also at a new framework for physical education even where schools are not doing it as an exam subject. There are now 400 hours for well-being under the new proposals in the junior cycle, which obviously has to include physical education. One of the short courses we developed for junior cycle is around physical education, looking at how it can be assessed differently. I agree that the NCCA needs to look at education in a holistic way. It is not just about the maths or the English, important as they are; it is about some of the other issues.

I hope I have dealt with everything there.

That was very substantial.

I have one supplementary question.

I ask the Senator to keep it short.

A question has come to me in the course of the debate. Would the NCCA support measures to prevent the extinction of Latin as a subject in secondary schools, given the widespread known benefits of Latin to our language as a basis for other languages in terms of improving literacy, vocabulary and grammar?

Ms Brigid McManus

The role of the NCCA is to give advice on different subjects and the curriculum make-up. With the exception of certain core skills we do not insist that students do French rather than German or Latin. I do not think we get involved necessarily. There is a Latin curriculum. It is taken by very few and the numbers doing leaving certificate examinations in the subject are quite small. I cannot remember what they are off the top of my head. We also have the classical studies curriculum, which does a certain amount. I do not think we would generally have a position one way or another on Latin, but I can come back to the Senator on that.

That would be useful. It was interesting that the question came in during the course of the debate, which means that people are listening.

We have a very good discussion and covered a number of issues. I thank Ms McManus for her attendance today and her presentation to the committee. I wish her well on her appointment.

Ms Brigid McManus

I thank the Chairman.

The joint committee adjourned at 2.44 p.m. until 1 p.m. on Wednesday, 15 July 2015.
Top
Share