Skip to main content
Normal View

Joint Committee on Gender Equality debate -
Thursday, 19 May 2022

Recommendations of the Citizens’ Assembly on Gender Equality: Discussion (Resumed)

I thank everyone very much for being with us. We really appreciate everyone joining us. Members have the option of being physically present or may join the meeting via Microsoft Teams from Leinster House offices but may not participate in the meeting from outside parliamentary precincts. If joining on Teams, please mute microphones and use the raise-hand function to indicate. In order to limit the risk of spreading Covid-19, please note that the Service encourages all members, visitors and witnesses to continue to wear face masks when moving around the campus or when in close proximity to others, and to adhere to public health advice.

Today's meeting will be in two sessions. In the first session, we will discuss with the Minister for Education, Deputy Norma Foley, the recommendations of the Citizens' Assembly on Gender Equality on norms and stereotypes and education, recommendations 26 to 31. In the second session, beginning at 11 a.m., we will meet with Dr. Katriona O'Sullivan and representatives of Women in Research Ireland to discuss the same topic.

I offer a warm welcome to the Minister, Deputy Foley, and her officials from the Department of Education. We are very grateful to her for engaging with us. The Minister is accompanied by Mr. Dalton Tattan, assistant secretary general, management board; Mr. Martin McLaughlin, principal officer, initial teacher education and professional development; Ms Orlaith O’Connor, assistant chief inspector, inspectorate; Ms Karen Murtagh, assistant principal officer, curriculum and assessment policy unit, and Mr. Ronan Kielt, assistant principal officer, curriculum and assessment policy unit.

Before we begin, I will read an important notice on parliamentary privilege. Witnesses are protected by absolute privilege in respect of the evidence they give to the committee. However, if directed by the committee to cease giving evidence on a particular matter and they continue to so do, 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 asked to respect the parliamentary practice to the effect that, where possible, they should not criticise nor make charges against any person or entity in such a way as to make them identifiable.

I call on the Minister, Deputy Foley, to make an opening statement. I will then open the floor to members for questions and answers. We very much appreciate the Minister joining us. We have taken a view as a committee that the 45 recommendations of the citizens' assembly will be taken as a blueprint for the achievement of gender equality in Ireland. We are taking a practical approach and hope to produce an action plan by the end of our term, which will be this December, as to how those recommendations may be implemented. We are grateful to the Minister for engaging with us on the recommendations that are specifically related to the Department of Education, that is, recommendations 26 to 31, on norms and stereotypes of education.

I am very appreciative of the work the committee is doing and of how it will feed into the entire process. I want to acknowledge that it is very positive for the Department of Education.

I am pleased to be before the Joint Committee on Gender Equality to discuss the recommendations of the Citizens' Assembly on Gender Equality regarding norms and stereotypes in education. At the outset, I would like commend the work of the Citizens' Assembly on Gender Equality that culminated in the production of this important report, setting out 45 recommendations across eight themes and successfully doing so against the backdrop of the pandemic, which was a great achievement. It is positive that the assembly and this report have done such a comprehensive and wide-ranging review of this important issue. I know the committee is continuing to engage with a number of Ministers and Departments in relation to recommendations which have been made in their fields, and I am pleased to be here today on behalf of the Department of Education. As the Chair outlined, I am joined by a number of Department officials.

A core value of the curriculum from early years to post-primary level in Ireland is equality, inclusivity and diversity. Across all levels of schooling it aims to foster inclusivity where gender equality and diversity are promoted. It must cater equally for all learners, from all backgrounds, regardless of gender, socioeconomic background, race or creed. All curricular developments use extensive engagement with stakeholders, something which has significant benefits in ensuring that as curriculums and materials are updated, they reflect latest developments and best practices across the board.

To provide for a fully inclusive curriculum in our schools, it is vitally important that we work to support our student teachers and serving teachers through teacher education programmes and supports. Our staff make our curriculum come alive in the classroom and I know they need the support to provide fully inclusive teaching and learning experiences for our children and young people based on all of the principles of equality, including gender equity.

As committee members will be aware, questions of equality, respect, and diversity are part of all elements of the curriculum, and it is for this reason the Department and the Teaching Council have now designated inclusive education as a key component of all initial teacher education provision. Initial teacher providers are now in the process of re-accrediting their programmes. The term "inclusive education" refers to any aspect of teachers' learning aimed at improving their capacity to address and respond to the diversity of learners' needs; to enable their participation in learning; and to remove barriers to education through the accommodation and provision of appropriate structures and arrangements, in order to enable each learner to achieve the maximum benefit from his or her attendance at school. Many of our teachers and teacher training colleges are already undertaking very positive and strong work in this regard, and these new standards will underpin this work.

Ensuring all students have access to positive, inclusive, and high-quality guidance is equally and hugely important. In respect of gender equality in particular, high-quality guidance can help students to see the full range of careers and options that are available to them, irrespective of their own background. In the context of developing a coherent long-term strategic framework for lifelong guidance, my Department will aim to improve on this and to promote initial and continuous training for guidance professionals and other staff with a particular focus on strengthening cultural and gender-sensitive guidance and counselling. Indeed, guidance counsellors are trained and alert to the need to promote a diverse range of gender-neutral education, training and career path options.

Members will also be aware that there is a particular focus on subjects such as social, personal and health education, SPHE, in supporting students’ holistic development and ensuring that our schools are inclusive and positive environments for all. SPHE is a mandatory curriculum subject in primary and post-primary and seeks to ensure that all students are supported in making positive choices and in developing positive and respectful relationships and respect for others. Access to sexual and health education is an important right for students. Relationship and sexual education, RSE, is required at all levels, from primary through to senior cycle. As members are undoubtedly aware, there is significant reform under way in respect of RSE and SPHE in order to ensure that these curricula reflect the needs of our students, best practice, and are inclusive of all.

The National Council for Curriculum and Assessment, NCCA, has undertaken a major review of RSE across all stages of education to ensure it is fit-for-purpose and meets the needs of young people today in modern Ireland. Establishing two subject development groups, one for primary and one for post-primary, to oversee the work in this area, the immediate focus of the work of the NCCA has been on creating support materials for teachers as part of an interim guidance toolkit, providing practical help designed to deepen teachers' understanding and skills so that they feel more confident in addressing important and sensitive topics.

In tandem with this work, preparation for the broader redeveloping and updating of the SPHE-RSE curriculum for primary, junior cycle and senior cycle is under way. A draft revised junior cycle specification is due to be agreed at the NCCA meeting in early summer, with a public consultation to follow. The final revised specification is due to be completed by the end of the year. Preparation to update the senior cycle SPHE-RSE specification has commenced. The senior cycle development will now be charged with preparing a background paper. This group will prepare a background paper and brief that will form the basis of its work of redeveloping the senior cycle specification. Work on the primary curriculum framework will be published in 2023 with individual subject specifications being introduced to schools thereafter. Learning pertaining to RSE in primary school will be addressed within the curricular areas of well-being and social, personal and values education.

The Department continues to work with the Department of Justice in formulating and implementing the third national strategy for domestic, sexual and gender-based violence. As well as the work being carried out to develop and update SPHE-RSE curricula, this will also be achieved by building on continuing professional development, CPD, and anti-bullying procedures.

The Department’s STEM Education Policy Statement 2017–2026 acknowledges the need to achieve gender balance in science, technology, engineering and mathematics, STEM, education and careers. It aims to increase the numbers of students, in particular females, taking STEM subjects at post-primary level and to ensure that all schools, learners and parents have access to high-quality information on the diversity of STEM careers. Earlier this year, I published Recommendations on Gender Balance in STEM Education. The recommendations point to the need to support equitable learner access to and experiences of STEM in order to inspire learning, foster creativity and prepare for later engagement and success. The recommendations will be included in the new STEM implementation plan for the period 2022-2026, which I expect to publish over the summer, with roles and responsibility and timelines set against each one.

As members of the committee will no doubt be aware, the programme for Government contains a commitment to establish a citizens’ assembly on the future of education, ensuring that the voices of young people and those being educated are central. We can all see the valuable insights and recommendations previous citizens’ assemblies, including that on gender equality, have given us. I look forward to the citizens’ assembly on the future of education commencing shortly.

I thank the committee for giving me the opportunity to discuss these important recommendations. I assure it that my Department will continue to work across Government to ensure that we respond to each of the recommendations.

I thank the Minister for her presentation and for setting out very clearly the work being done in the Department on these issues. It touches on quite a number of themes in the recommendations. I invite members to contribute. Deputy Clarke indicated first.

I thank the Minister and her officials for giving of their time this morning. Their engagement here is very productive and most welcome. It makes our job as a committee much more rounded and, hopefully, much more impactful as we continue our work.

The Minister and I share the same opinion on the importance of citizens’ assemblies. However, implementation is key in respect of them, regardless of the topic to which they relate. I have a few questions specifically relating to the RSE curriculum. We heard last week from the Irish Second-Level Students Union, ISSU, and from Mr. David Byrne, a research scholar in Technological University, TU, Dublin. They would have very different lived experiences from what the Minister outlined as being the plan. The ISSU's presentation stated "if a young woman is attending school and that school doesn't offer woodwork or technology or engineering, well then that young woman is significantly less likely to explore those career paths, because they're not available to her now so why could they be available to her in the future?" That statement very much captures what we have also heard from the third level education providers, namely, that there is a significant block in terms of access to more rounded options at second level for all pupils. As such, it is having a significant impact on the career options, especially of younger women where they are not eligible for a career path because they have not had the opportunity to undertake certain leaving certificate subjects and so on.

The Minister touched on STEM education. My first question is specific to that area. Why are there no all-girl Delivering Equality of Opportunity in Schools, DEIS, schools piloting the new computer science course? I find that concerning, and it is something of which we must be aware. That is obviously quite a gap. Is the way we approach these subjects impacting on how schools would apply or express an interest in piloting any new STEM course that is available?

The Minister touched briefly on the RSE curriculum. The NCCA review found that there was considerable variation in the provision of RSE across schools in terms of what is being taught and who is teaching it. We know there have been cases of schools that have not engaged in a process of providing certain levels of education. What mechanisms are in place in the Department of Education to monitor the implementation of the RSE curriculum? Does the Minister believe that the implementation of the curriculum is standardised? If not, what actions does the Department take to ensure it will be? Regarding the NCCA completing the development of the new RSE syllabus, the review found massive differences in how that is delivered. Why is that taking so long? The review has been carried out. We know what it is that needs to happen, so what is the delay in it being implemented?

Another issue that arose in a number of our engagements is that there appears to be no formal training or curriculum requirement for teachers providing SPHE or RSE or pre-service gender and diversity-related training. This issue arose at our meeting last week at which we were told by a witness that "Worryingly, it is ... apparent that SPHE may sometimes be assigned to a teacher based on their balance of available teaching hours, as opposed to their expertise in the subject." Will the Minister also address that issue?

The Deputy has raised quite a number of issues.

The Deputy raised issues around STEM. In the first instance, I want to be very clear that we all understand it is extremely important young females see themselves as being fully participative in all STEM subjects and areas. There is a strong and ambitious programme of work set out in the Department’s STEM education policy statement. I recently published the gender balance in STEM education advisory group's report. It contains a number of significant aims and objectives, including to continue to focus on gender balance and equity and inclusion in the review of all our curriculum specifications and to focus on everything from language to visuals to examples of programmes. We are involved in a significant number of initiatives, whether it be Science Foundation Ireland or the discovery primary science and maths programme, which the Department is supporting with an investment to the tune of €500,000. Also, that includes engaging with families in STEM programmes, encouraging the greatest visibility possible for our students. The Deputy specifically raised the issue of promoting STEM education in our schools. There is a major commitment in our schools to promote girls to participate in the uptake of all STEM areas.

Regarding the computer science course, schools had an option, as they will have as we move forward in terms of senior cycle reform. to become the pilot or network schools. The Deputy specifically referenced DEIS students. It is a matter for schools to put themselves forward for the pilot programmes. Specifically on the targeted encouragement of STEM education in DEIS schools, we have significant programmes such as the STEM passport for inclusion, which is very much targeted at girls in schools of disadvantage, both DEIS and non-DEIS schools. It is a significant programme, which I have observed, whereby girls are supported, encouraged and mentored into the world of STEM. That programme is anchored by Maynooth University, in partnership also with the Munster Technological University, MTU, and students have done the most terrific work in that regard. I witnessed that last week.

That is just one of the examples of flagship programmes we have specifically aimed at disadvantage and the encouragement of science, technology, engineering and mathematics, STEM.

On the review of the relationships and sexuality education, RSE, programme and how it has taken so much time, there has been a significant amount of public consultation, including with students, parents, and a wider public consultation. As members will be aware, the specifications for junior cycle will be published imminently and there will be a final round of public consultation before implementation in 2023. Work has commenced in the scoping of the senior cycle RSE programme. The primary curriculum framework will be published in 2023, subject to specifications thereafter. I acknowledge that within our schools we have very caring, very bright and very ambitious staff who want the very best for their students. Excellent work is being delivered on the ground. There is, however, an acknowledgement that we need to have a curriculum that is current and up-to-date, and as relevant to our students as necessary. This is why all of this work is going into the updating of the specifications around RSE. In the interim, a very significant toolkit of supports has been made available to our schools, covering a whole range of topics and areas of interest that are current and inclusive, and which are important in bridging the gap between what is currently there and what we envisage will be there on completion of the specifications.

I will turn now to the formal training of staff in social, personal and health education, SPHE. I come from a background of schools and have worked for a long time in schools. I absolutely understand that where staff do not have significant encouragement and knowledge of a particular topic, they will not feel they have the confidence to deliver it. I am very pleased to have announced in the last weeks a new programme to bring on stream a postgraduate programme, which will be fully funded by the Department, that will offer opportunity to our staff to be fully trained in the areas of SPHE and RSE. This is in addition to the continuing professional development that is available. Specifically, there will be a diploma qualification, funded by the Department. This will, in the first instance, increase capacity and also leadership and confidence in the delivery in this area of education. I agree with the Deputy that this has been lacking. As ever, in all things and not just in education, where we feel there is a lack then we must jump in and we must move forward. I recognise this as something that is wanted. I am very pleased that we have announced it. I am very confident that we will have a significant uptake from schools in that regard.

With RSE in our schools, it is important there would be equality in the programme being offered. We have our inspectorate, which has oversight of all that is being implemented in our schools, and which regularly inspects what is happening in our schools. Equally, I want to be very clear that access to RSE and SPHE is an absolute and important right for all of our students. The curriculum is there, the information is there, and the factual curriculum and information must be implemented, notwithstanding that we are in the throes of updating the curriculum across primary and post primary, and the different levels within that again.

I thank the Minister. Senator Pauline O'Reilly, the Vice Chair of the committee, has indicated next.

I welcome the Minister and the officials who have joined us. I am aware that this is an important issue for the Minister. She has outlined her commitment around STEM, and access for girls in particular, and I could not disagree with anything she said about any of the work that she has done in this regard.

In the past we have seen a very low take-up of apprenticeships by girls. The Minister for Further and Higher Education, Research, Innovation and Science, Deputy Simon Harris, said that 5% was the legacy for girls going into apprenticeships. I believe we need a joined up approach between primary, secondary and tertiary education. I am aware that work is under way. It would be a good opportunity to outline that with the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment, NCCA, and with the Minister's own announcements about leaving certificate reform. This would be reflected in that. Is there more work that could be done before that around having more mentorship and an approach that is more akin to transition year but going right through all of the years so that it is much more hands-on? We have a legacy in the State of, quite rightly, thinking that third level education is something we all want to have available to everyone. There is a certain image of what third level education looks like but we are a very different society now. Those would be my first couple of questions.

I am glad the Minister addressed the SPHE question. That issue strongly came up when Mr. David Byrne of the Technological University Dublin appeared before the committee last week. Mr. Byrne specifically mentioned that it did not appear to be accredited and that this was a concern. It is important to see how this is being addressed. I am very happy to see that there are times now for the conclusion of the work on the RSE programme. At this stage it is hard to say what that is going to look like, so I will reserve my comments.

Last week the Irish Second-Level Students' Union, ISSU, was quite clear that a lot of people are getting their information online and they do not feel there is enough in schools around sexuality education. Given the ages of students in secondary school, they are crying out for information to be provided in a genuine way. They are going through a change in their lives and there needs to be joined-up approach. I mentioned some of the websites available that are actually other Departments' websites. For example, consenthub.ie is a joint project between the Department of Justice and the Department of Further and Higher Education, Research, Innovation and Science. Is the Minister looking at ways we could connect with young people when they are through the education system? There is no point in having a very formalised education in schools that does not speak to young people. It must be all joined up and the information has to be current and reflective of their lived experiences.

On apprenticeships, there is a hugely important role in the area of guidance and directing our students, as in the instance referred to by the Senator with girls availing of opportunities that heretofore might not have been considered. We can never underestimate the power and value of guidance in schools. I was very pleased that one of my first acts as Minister was to ensure the provision of 120 careers guidance posts that would fully restore ex-quota allocations to our schools. I also acknowledge a programme I launched, the new national policy group, to look at lifelong guidance whereby it is not just something we think of when we are considering post-primary students, and that we very much also look at a younger cohort from preschool right up to primary and on. There must be a lifelong positive experience around guidance. The key purpose behind it is to ensure there would be equality, gender fairness and gender opportunity, and the opening up of gender possibilities for all of our students.

With regard to apprenticeships and tasters, members will be aware that we are currently looking at a redrawing of the transition year programme. It is very much my aim and objective that students would have pre-sample opportunities in the widest realm of experience of STEM and beyond that.

I visit quite a lot of schools and even as recently as yesterday I was in Longford. Some of the students there had spent time working with a construction company recently. I was speaking with one of the girls who had done her work experience there. She was full of the information on how it works and she had actually made the decision that she was not interested in pursuing that. That was fine. The important thing was that she had the opportunity to make an informed decision. This is the direction we are moving in now. Let every child and young person sample and decide for themselves.

I know how important SPHE is. It is vitally important that students get the right information from the right professionals and that they get it appropriately. As I said earlier to Deputy Clarke, this is very much the reason to build that capacity in our schools.

This new diploma programme will be introduced for that purpose.

I appreciate what the Senator heard from ISSU and I acknowledge that it has been participative in all that we are doing within the Department. It sits around the table with us as partners in education and it has been an invaluable resource to us with the experience its members have. They are the ones who are at the coalface and it is their experience of education that we need to listen to. Reference has been made to the time it has taken to bring the SPHE and RSE guidelines to the fore and that is because there was an intense consultation process that included the students. The students were clear about what they needed and they were specific, as the Senator and previous speakers have referenced, that the information should be as current as possible and should meet the lives of students in the 21st century. That is why we are putting an incredible amount of weight on what they have said and why we are looking at ways of introducing that into our curriculum. As I have said previously we have introduced the toolkit as an interim measure.

They will be delighted with me in Longford as I have to reference another experience I had there yesterday. I visited a class where the students were in the midst of a programme being delivered that covered areas that included sexual health, vaping and a variety of areas. The students were so positive about their engagement, about the type of information they were getting and about how it was being delivered and it was working seamlessly in the school. I want to point out that there is no shortage of good examples of best practice but the impetus must be to ensure that we see that everywhere. That is the focus behind the RSE guidelines and the subject specifications at all levels. It is taking time but I am adamant that we will move it at the greatest pace we can without compromising the delivery of the type of information that needs to be there. The Senator is correct and I am pleased that we have given the timelines, which we are working towards with urgency and priority. I am joined by my officials and I want to acknowledge the work they are doing in that respect.

I thank the Minister and as Senator O'Reilly has said, we had an impressive engagement last week with the ISSU. We are clear on its views and experiences and that was helpful to us. I thank the Minister for acknowledging that.

I thank the Minister and the officials for joining us; they are welcome. I have reviewed both the second national strategy on domestic, sexual and gender-based violence, DSGBV, and the 2017 national strategy for women and girls and neither make any reference to relationship and sexuality or education. What work has the Department undertaken on or contributed to the third national strategy, which will be published shortly, and to the new strategy for women and girls?

Will the Senator have any follow-up questions?

I have a few other questions so I can put them now if the Chair wishes me to do so.

Yes. Go ahead.

The Minister's opening statement paints a positive picture of the curriculum for early years' students and for those at post-primary level. It states that its core values are equality, inclusivity and diversity and that it must cater equally for all learners from all backgrounds regardless of gender, socioeconomic background, race or creed. That paints a positive picture of the situation out there but the ISSU was here last week to say that according to its surveys one in three students stated that they had not received any form of relationship and sexuality education during senior cycle. How can we make those broad statements when they do not reflect the situation for students and kids out there? How does it make the Minister feel to know that part of this generation and generations before them have gone through the education system with no reference to same-sex relationships or gender diverse students? How does that make her feel as the Minister for Education? Those are my questions in addition to my earlier questions about the DSGBV and the third national strategy for women and girls.

On the Senator's first query on the third national strategy for women and girls, my Department has had ongoing engagement with the Minister for Justice and her Department and I have met the Minister personally about the input from the Department of Education into that strategy. That is in recognition, as the Senator will appreciate, that there is a cross-departmental and cross-governmental approach to this and that it has to be so. It is a societal approach as well and there is an ownership and leadership responsibility on all of us across Departments and society, not just to put this strategy together but to make sure it can be implemented. My officials are with me and many of them are working specifically in that area. I am conscious, as I have said to the Minister for Justice, Deputy McEntee, of the role that education can play in information and in highlighting domestic and gender-based violence, in educating our young people and in playing a role, as a partner, with all the other Departments and with the rest of society as well.

On the information that is available, there is recognition that there is need for an updated RSE and SPHE programme. I am unequivocal about that and I would know that from my experience. The Senator knows that as well and he has been clear in articulating that. There is a general acceptance across society that this body of work needs to be done and we are in the midst of doing that work. In the interim, as I have referenced previously, we have the toolkit that is made available to our staff and that includes toolkits on domestic and gender-based violence. For example, there is a significant programme beginning at primary level, the gender equality matters programme, and there is a second programme supporting children and young people living with domestic violence and abuse. At post-primary level we have the SPHE personal safety handbook and a personal safety resource pack. This is to bridge the gap of information that might not be there currently and that is not available to the schools currently. That does not take away from the fact that it is important that our staff have the appropriate training and confidence to deliver it. It is for that reason that we are rolling out and funding the postgraduate diploma.

I refer to the engagement the Senator has had with the ISSU. I cannot reiterate more clearly that the voice of the ISSU is hugely important and that its experience is important but I can specifically point as well, as I have done, to examples I have seen of excellent practice around the country. I want to be clear on the following point, which I have to make. I am pleased to say that we have talented, ambitious and caring staff that want the best for their students, and there will not be much disagreement about that. I have seen best practice in information being delivered in a variety of different types of schools. Are there opportunities to do more? There are. Am I intent on ensuring that will happen? I am. It is for that reason that we are committed to updating the specifications to ensure the information is available and to work with other agencies that can provide support. There is a role for health professionals in this as well, whether they are from the HSE or whatever, in feeding into the information that needs to come into our schools. The input of the ISSU and others has been important to us but it does not take away from the fact that there are also good examples of work going on across our schools.

My concern is we will see improvement only in certain schools. We have known for so long that this is an issue.

It is particularly upsetting that we are still here. People are tired and wondering if we will ever see a standardised curriculum across all schools so students can have an equality of opportunity to access inclusive sex education, for example. There is a reason the programme for Government makes a specific reference to LGBTI relationships and making legislative change, if necessary.

With all the reviews the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment is doing good work. I know the junior cycle review is to be published soon. We could have all these reviews and improvements, however, and still have loopholes that deny the education required for gender-diverse and young people who have same-sex attractions. Does the Minister envisage a need to use that element in the programme for Government to advantage those kids?

I hear the Senator's frustration but I say that I am absolutely committed to ensuring, in the first instance, that every child and young person in our schools should feel valued, supported, happy and safe in those schools. They must receive the education that they should across a variety of curricula, and specifically as referenced here the social, personal and health education and relationships and sexuality education, RSE. I am absolutely committed to ensuring they receive the correct, factual, most up-to-date and inclusive information so that, as I reiterate, every student and child would see and hear himself or herself reflected in the information being delivered.

I understand and nobody is more challenged than me when I hear about a review of a policy or this or that. It is the implementation that is the most important aspect. I hear that. I am not quite yet two years in my role and in that time I have ensured that there would be confidence among staff to deliver the information that must be delivered. We are rolling out this postgraduate programme. The work must be done. I come from this background and I appreciate the importance of having the curriculum laid down. I must say that and it is important and the bedrock of the process. The urgency and priority around it, however, means that in the interim we must have something else. I point to the toolkit we have that is crossing a variety of areas, including consent, domestic and gender-based violence, LGBTQI rights and all of that. That interim support is being offered.

We will move at the greatest possible pace. As I stated, we have already given the timelines, whether it is for junior cycle, the new framework for primary or the senior cycle. I am cognisant of the Senator's frustration and that of others, and it is for that reason I am keen that in the interim we should have capacity, trained and confident staff. We must also have toolkits, resources and continuing professional development available to bridge the gap. For too long it has not been available and I know that. I am looking at the interim and the long term. We are doing all we can to ensure this is delivered appropriately.

I will move on because we want to bring in other speakers.

I have had difficulty with my computer this morning but I am on the campus. I heard the Minister's comments to Senator Warfield and I thank her for coming before us today. She said the facts were up to date in information and education is required for this in schools, particularly in RSE. I have not heard that sex education should not be ethos-based. I raise this because the Citizens' Assembly on Gender Equality is not the first citizens' assembly to recommend that sort of intervention in our education system being required. The Citizens' Assembly on the eighth amendment to the Constitution recommended that in 2017. It was a further or ancillary recommendation of the all-party Oireachtas committee in 2018, which is now four years ago.

I have heard what the Minister said about preparation, training and all the rest of it but does the Minister not regard the process as being extremely slow in an area where such change is urgently required? Young people in particular are having difficulty grappling with identity and dealing with harassment around identity and sexuality, for example, which I will deal with in my next question. We are still without proper sexual relationships training in our school. The Minister has said we will roll out a course and ensure staff are trained but will she put dates on the process? Will she comment on how the education should not be based on ethos?

Needless to say, there have been a number of Bills, one going back to 2016, that were put forward by Opposition groups, including mine, to try to help the Government to introduce this measure with some urgency. They have always sat there waiting for a money message and nothing has happened. Perhaps if one of those Opposition Bills had been passed, the Department might have been quicker to implement what young people require rather than seeing this as a long and drawn-out process. As I mentioned, four years ago we saw the first recommendation on this coming from the Citizens' Assembly on the eighth amendment and the Oireachtas committee. We still do not have what young people need in schools. Most of the kids from the days in which we first saw the recommendation would be in the workplace or college now.

I have a second question that has a sort of a link to the first. It relates to sexual harassment and violence in secondary schools. Rape Crisis Network Ireland has called for a study to be carried out on the rates of such violence and harassment for over a decade. Will the Minister comment on the possibility of such a study being carried out and a report made being available to all of us who are concerned about the education of the next generation and the prevalence of sexual harassment in secondary schools?

This is really important for LGBTQ+ young people. There is a finding from Dr. Michelle Walsh in 2021 that almost half of all students in secondary schools have indicated they would not know who to go to in their school if they experienced sexual harassment. That is an indictment and a half of our system.

The Deputy might come back to me if I do not respond to everything as I did not catch some of it. She mentioned the RSE framework and the timelines. We have given timelines now, and as I said to Senator Warfield, with the best will in the world I can only look at what I have done in the less than two years I have been Minister. I hear the frustration around how long it has taken to bring various specifications etc. to the fore. In that time there has been considerable engagement and reference has been made to the ISSU, parents and the widest engagement and consultation. That has fed into these programmes.

I can now say the programmes are moving and we have set those targets. For example, the junior cycle specifications will be published in the next number of weeks, followed by public consultation and implementation for 2023. The primary curriculum framework is due to be published in 2023, with subject specification following. The work has already commenced on the specifications for RSE has already commenced.

I do not wish to repeat myself but I am saying that I have recognised that we cannot wait in the long term for these dates so we have put in place resources online via the toolkit. The Deputy has referenced, along with me, the upskilling and training of staff, either through continuing professional development or the specific postgraduate diploma. The tender process for that is currently taking place and we are hoping to roll it out in the coming months, most likely the second half of the new school term.

That would be around the start of 2023.

The Deputy referred to the importance of the information being given to students. Everything done in the education sector concerning teaching obligations is based on accurate, fair, up-to-date, factual information in all areas. That is the core principle, irrespective of a teacher's subject area. Student access is the core principle here as well. I am determined to ensure students will have that access, irrespective of other considerations. When the arrangements are laid out in the curriculum — the curriculum is the curriculum at the end of the day — factual, accurate information must be delivered in the schools.

Specifically on sexual harassment and violence, we are very conscious of the matter. I referred earlier to the engagement I have had with the Minister for Justice, Deputy McEntee. Deputy Bríd Smith will be aware that a new action plan on bullying is being drawn up by the Department. We have a significant steering group working on it. It will be reporting to me very shortly. There are interim and long-term elements. The specific issues of sexual harassment and identity bullying, including gender stereotyping and gender-identity bullying both in person and, importantly, online, will be part of the review of the current action plan and the new guidelines and specifications that will be issued to schools. A considerable body of work is being done in our schools. I have seen the work in operation in schools. As recently as yesterday, I saw excellent engagement in schools regarding the delivery of programmes, covering topics of sexual health, inclusion and all the issues referred to by the Deputy. The key is to have a curriculum that includes all these aspects. We are doing the work as quickly as we can. I realise the work has taken some time. For that reason, I am pushing consistently so we will meet the targets. I have set the timelines and ensured interim availability of significant resources to schools, including continuing professional development and the toolkit. Resources are also being made available through the postgraduate diplomas.

Is that the conclusion of Deputy Bríd Smith's questions?

Could I respond very briefly?

Yes, but two more members have to contribute.

My response to the Minister, whom I thank, is that she has not answered the question I asked. I asked whether she endorses and whether it is part of her plan to have non-ethos-based sexual education in schools. The Minister mentioned everything else, such as how information should be fair, informative, accurate and scientific, but I asked her specifically about the non-ethos-based sexual education as the committee recommended reviewing the eighth amendment as part of a measure to help to reduce the number of crisis pregnancies to eliminate the need for terminations in this country. In this way, young people would be better educated, in a non-ethos-based way, as to how to be sexually active without it resulting in a crisis pregnancy. That was how it was recommended at the time, and it is probably being recommended here also, for other reasons. The Minister, within two years of being appointed Minister for Education, recognises that the examination of this area and the implementation of recommendations have proceeded at a snail's pace, so her first step should be to ask why and determine how she, as the person now in charge, can address the stagnation.

The second question the Minister has not answered for me concerns the now ten-year-old call by the Rape Crisis Network of Ireland for a study to be carried out on the amount of sexual harassment and bullying in our secondary school system. It has been reported that more than half of the young people in secondary schools would not know who to go to if they felt sexually harassed. Has the Minister two minutes to answer my questions, which are on non-ethos-based sexual education and the commissioning of the report that was called for several times?

There is a time limit on each exchange and I am trying to be fair to every contributor. There are eight minutes for each exchange of questions and answers. Perhaps the Minister can respond for two minutes, after which we will move on to the next Deputy.

On the slow pace of implementation, I want to be very clear. I was referring to the pace at which the new specifications are coming on stream and the fact that it has taken considerable time to formulate the new specifications for the new curricula across SPHE and RSE.

Specifically on the issue of implementation in respect of information in our schools, I want to be very clear, and I was clear when I last spoke to the Deputy, that the curriculum is the curriculum and that every school has an absolute obligation to implement it as laid down by the Department. That curriculum, in the areas of SPHE and RSE, will include factual, up-to-date, current best-practice information. To ensure there is oversight of that, our inspectorate operates in our schools to ensure that whatever is laid down in the curriculum is being taught.

On bullying and bullying reports, I have determined that the inspectorate, as part of its school inspections, will now include a report on issues concerning bullying, how it is handled and issues of that nature within schools. It is now being charged with that specifically. From that, there will be excellent examples of best practice in our schools. When we speak of issues of this nature in our schools, we need to be balanced. There are excellent examples of best practice in our schools with regard to how cases of bullying are being handled. There are schools that could learn from that best practice. For that reason, the inspectorate now has an oversight role in this area.

Based on the Minister's answer to Deputy Bríd Smith, could she clarify that every child will get the same technical sexual education, with no opt-outs for parents or schools?

What is laid down in the curriculum will be followed.

Is that what that means?

The Deputy has asked the question and I am answering now. What is laid down in the curriculum is and must be followed within our schools. There is oversight of that through our inspectorate.

That is the answer the Minister gave to Deputy Bríd Smith but I am asking a question seeking clarification. Does her answer mean that every child will receive an identical education, with no opt-out for parents or schools?

It means the curriculum will be followed in our schools as laid down when it comes to factual, appropriate, up-to-date information. However, on the curricula being devised, the Deputy will note there is considerable public consultation. With regard to every stage of curriculum development, including in respect of the specifications for RSE in the junior cycle, for example, the specifications are to be published shortly, following which there will be another round of public consultation. When the curriculum-----

No, I want to be clear.

No. The Minister gave this answer earlier. She did not answer my question. I asked a simple question requiring a "Yes" or "No" answer.

If the answer and the information I give the Deputy are correct the first time, they will be correct when asked for by her the second and third time, irrespective of how she frames the question.

My goodness. The Minister said a number of times to Senator Warfield that she has been a Minister for only two years and has been doing all the work mentioned in that time. She has been a Minister for just short of two years. When I asked my first parliamentary question on this subject, which I believe was in July 2020, I got a general response. I was happy enough with that at the time because there had to be follow-up. Since then, I have asked about 12 or 15 parliamentary questions on this subject and have got the same general response. I have never got specifics on the timeline. When I read the Minister's opening statement today, I saw the same general information of the same standard that I received all the way through. The Minister says nobody has been more challenged by this than her but I have not seen any output on this. I have submitted Topical Issue debate questions, for which the Minister has not been available, and withdrew them until she was available. Therefore, if I ask a question seeking clarification, which I am entitled to do as an elected Member of the Oireachtas, it is because I am trying to get a more detailed answer. Perhaps I could get more detailed answers on the timeline, because it is extremely important.

Our frustration with the Department has been ongoing for some time now. We do not have dates for anything at this point. We have generalities. For example, the Minister's opening statement reads:

Preparation to update the senior cycle ... specification has commenced. The senior cycle development will now be charged with preparing a background paper.

When will that start? How long will it take? When will the background paper be published? What does that mean? How will that feed into the next stage? How long will that take? Specifically when will there be a programme that is available to be seen? The Minister says she has been in schools where she sees excellent examples, and we hear them too. However, we also hear from secondary school students who tell us they are not getting a certain level of education, so we see a mixed picture. What the committee and Members of the Oireachtas would like to see is actual output from the Department, actual content we can see, even on a private basis, such that the Department is available to invite us in and to say this is where we are and this is what we are doing. Everybody is clearly very interested in this. The work on domestic, sexual and gender-based violence has been ongoing for the complete period of this Government so far, and these are programme for Government commitments, but we have not seen any output. As for the actual work coming out of the junior cycle, the senior cycle and the primary cycle, in what academic year does the Minister for Education expect the programmes for each of those cycles to be commenced in schools?

To be fair, we have given the information as it is available to us. We have acknowledged that there is a significant body of work involved in the specifications for each of the levels, junior cycle, senior cycle and primary school. To reiterate with absolute clarity, the junior cycle specification is due to be published in the coming weeks.

If I may speak, that is, the proposed specifications for the curriculum are due to be published in the coming weeks. It is appropriate that they go to public consultation. It is very important - and I have reiterated this a number of times - that there be an opportunity for everyone to engage across all the different levels and to feed into the specifications, whether parents, the student voice, which we have spoken of the importance of, or wider society. The specifications are due to be published shortly, in the coming weeks. They will follow public consultation, and implementation for the junior cycle will be in 2023, as we have already said. At senior cycle, work on following a similar approach has already commenced, and there will be the initial scoping work to be done. The development group is then charged with moving this on. We are looking at that work being fulfilled beginning now and into 2023, with an intention, if at all possible, of implementation in 2024. Again, I have very clearly given the date. I gave it in my opening remarks and we have given it consistently. The primary school curriculum framework will be published in 2023 and, thereafter, subject specifications. Deputy Carroll MacNeill has clear guidelines of dates in respect of 2023 and 2024 across RSE and SPHE. Equally, in the interim, we have been very clear that supports are required within our schools and we have put those supports in place. They cross a wide variety of areas, including, as I said, consent and domestic and gender-based violence. Those toolkits of support for our staff are there and include CPD and the further step we are taking to make the postgraduate diploma available to our staff.

The Minister gave me a response relating to the junior cycle consultation in July 2020. How long will the public consultation last?

The public consultation, most likely, because we will need the input of our schools, which is appropriate-----

If I may clarify-----

We can have an exchange, but I ask Deputy Carroll MacNeill to allow the Minister time to respond.

Most prominently, I think most of the work will be done while the schools are in session. That would be September. Everything is to be completed for roll-out in our schools in September 2023.

It will be delivered to all students-----

With implementation in 2023. That is what we have said. I have said that previously. It is a matter of public knowledge.

I will allow Deputy Carroll MacNeill a final follow-up question.

It is fine. The Minister says it is very easy to understand. I have been working on this for two years now and I actually find it very difficult to understand exactly what the timelines and the differences are. The Minister and I have a difference of interpretation on this. She has her view and I have mine.

I will clarify that there are three different programmes. Deputy Carroll MacNeill will accept that one cannot have the same programme for each of the three different levels, primary, junior cycle and senior cycle.

Obviously, they will be at three different stages of development.

Correct. That is why I have asked the Minister in a number of parliamentary questions-----

And that is why I gave the Deputy-----

-----about the development of the other programmes and whether they could be done contemporaneously.

I gave the Deputy the absolute timelines towards which we are working.

Senator Higgins is next.

It might be useful if we could get, even in writing, a supplementary response laying out that timeline. I think we would all like the second level programme especially to be accelerated. There is also the question of opt-outs - for example, parental opt-outs - from these subjects. Maybe it would be as useful to get responses on those matters in writing because I will focus on a couple of other topics.

As for the curriculum reviews, the citizens' recommendations refer to a broad range of subjects that counter gender stereotyping and curriculum review in the widest sense that promotes gender equality and diversity. It would be very useful to know what review is happening in respect of the rest of the curriculum. We have heard about history lessons with maybe three or four women in them, geography lessons and other lessons. Often there is an embedded gender inequality. We have gone from a world that has had very strongly unequal systems for years, and they are embedded throughout subjects, even in the examples that are given and the framing. One thing that has been highlighted is intersectionally in, for example, the way in which women from African countries are framed or the way in which Traveller women are reflected. There is a whole set of issues to be teased out. It is part of the process of decolonisation of the curriculum that has been discussed and the reframing of the curriculum in gender equality terms. I am interested in that wider curriculum review and what is happening.

To take a break from SPHE, one specific area I am really concerned about is civic, social and political education, CSPE. It has been highlighted that, very recently, just three years ago in fact, just before Deputy Foley became Minister, CSPE ceased to be an exam subject at junior cycle level. We have heard that this meant it stopped getting the same time and attention and field trips were no longer happening. If we are committed to creating a more gender-equal society, it should be not just through the relationships or the workplace but also through the wider civic, social and political space, having our young people engaging early on with issues of equality on that basis. Is the Minister considering re-establishing CSPE as an exam subject at junior cycle level? That would ensure every child would get a foundation in civic, social and political education to a known level because of the exams. That may be an opportunity in respect of the CSPE curriculum. It is one way we could do a lot to address embedded gender inequality throughout society. It is a matter of wider curriculum review.

The Minister mentioned qualifications for those teaching SPHE, which are important and needed. However, what training programme is in place for the inspectorate, who will enforce the proper teaching of RSE and SPHE? I ask the Minister to comment on the training plans for inspectorates.

Also, in-----

Sorry, Senator. The sound is not great. Will you try to speak into the microphone?

If somebody else is indicating, I can come down to the committee room in person, if that is better.

If I may ask a brief supplementary question while-----

Perhaps we will let Senator Higgins finish. Senator, if you just speak into the microphone, I think it will be fine. Then I will come back to Deputy Clarke.

I am having trouble with the microphone in my office. Perhaps the Minister would answer those first questions.

If I miss something, the Senator can come back to me.

I absolutely acknowledge the importance of CSPE. I just want to point out that while it is not an exam subject, there is a current increase to 100 hours allocation on our timetables for CSPE. It is part of the well-being framework in our schools as well. However, that is just one tool, if you like, or subject area in terms of addressing equality, gender balance and issues of that nature. We also have included the work that we do on STEM in our schools and the significant programmes that we are running, as I referenced earlier, that have proven to be very successful around the STEM passport for inclusion, as well as the work that we are doing with Science Foundation Ireland and all of that. CSPE is just one of those. I do not believe it has to be an exam subject to be successful and well delivered within the school.

Specifically, the Senator asked about our inspectorate and their training in terms of when they go out into the schools. There is an ongoing programme of internal training of the inspectorate. We have a very effective inspectorate. As I pointed out, their scope is being widened all the time in terms of what they are capturing within our schools, which is positive. I referenced that their domain now stretches to include practices around anti-bullying and oversight in the STEM programmes that we have in our schools. Specifically, what they do when they go into a school is look at patterns of uptake and what is working well in one place that could be transferred to another in terms of student uptake of particular types of subjects, which would include gender and how many students of a particular gender are taking a particular subject, or whatever the case might be.

Deputy Clarke can ask supplementary questions now if she would like. I will come down in person for my own supplementary questions.

We are due to finish the session at 11 a.m. However, Deputy Clarke can come in for a brief supplementary.

I will be very brief. To follow on the Minister's statement about the inspectors and their work being extended to include bullying, how many inspectors are there? Will the Minister's Department extend the inspectors' remit to also look at the facilities that are currently in place in schools to ensure that this systemic gender equality in accessing courses, particularly for younger women around woodwork, metalwork or whatever it may be is addressed so that there is parity of availability of these courses in our secondary schools? Is that something that she will consider the inspectorate could do? While there are many barriers to gender equality, some of them are very blatant and very much in our face, but there are others that are historic. Due to the fact that they are almost systemic at this stage, we have grown up in an environment that has resulted in us being blind to them, and one of them is physical availability. The Minister spoke of the schools putting themselves forward in relation to that computer science course in response to my question about the all-girls DEIS schools. However, that would lead me to think that there are many schools out there that simply could not put themselves forward because they do not have the facilities to be able to undertake that course.

Specifically on the last point that the Deputy raised on schools not having facilities to uptake a course where she specifically referenced computer science, an enormous amount of money has been delivered into schools in digital technology. Indeed, if the Deputy were to speak directly with the schools, they would acknowledge that. Last year alone there was more than €100 million.

That is just the example that I am using-----

I know. I understand.

I am asking about the other courses.

I absolutely appreciate what the Deputy said. I am just making the point that there is more than €100 million, and €50 million again at the start of this year, specifically for digital side of technology and all of that. On the availability of particular traditionally gender-based subjects being made available, first, the Department is absolutely committed to resourcing these key subjects. This means, in the first instance, ensuring that we have the staff available to teach them. We currently run a number of upskilling programmes that ensure that staff who have a particular qualification and wish to take a further one in a particular area where there might be a challenge can do so; that is running very well. We are committed on an ongoing basis to reduce the pupil-teacher ratio, PTR, which again helps subjects that might have a smaller cohort uptake, but an uptake nonetheless. Whether that is in areas of physics, chemistry or whatever it might be, the reduced PTR actually helps to increase subject choice within a school. Where there is a specific difficulty that a school might have in not having staffing capacity to cover a particular subject, the Department engages directly on a one-to-one basis with the school and is prepared to assist it with whatever might be required, such as additional hours or whatever else.

I can acknowledge from my own experience that there was a time where subjects were very specific to gender. That is decreasing now because of the work we are seeing coming from the Department and the resourcing from the Department.

On the role of the inspectorate, it is very important and useful to us that we have the inspectorate having an oversight of patterns of uptake so that-----

How many of them are there?

Ms Orlaith O'Connor

In the order of 150.

I am just conscious of time. I am giving Senator Higgins the last two minutes of the exchange. That will be followed by Deputy McAuliffe, who will be the last contributor.

I apologise for the difficulties with the microphone. Just to follow up, we have heard much about STEM and I do not need to hear more about that now. We have begun to hear more around that question of the other subjects, such as humanities, and the fact that one of the citizens’ assemblies also talked about supporting boys and men into other subjects. Getting everyone into STEM, including women, and getting people into apprenticeships, including women, is not the same as actually addressing gender equality. Humanities are key for that. Not having CSPE as an exam subject sends a very early signal that those other parts of life - the civil, the social, the political engagement – things that we know women end up doing, are not given the same value if they are not given an exam status at junior certificate. I urge the Minister to revisit that. It is one of the most fundamental things.

School is not just a channel to a career. It is also where you model being in the world, and that is why we have to get it right. On that modelling being in the world, I raise the issue of equality. One thing that was pointed out is there are exemptions in the equality legislation for schools. That is one of the anomalies that we have in Irish society and it is because of the ethos-based exemptions. That could be part of looking at the question of whether there should be legislative change around ethos and the equality legislation. A very simple example is that schools can have these uniform rules, which are extremely difficult for young women, and they can do that because they do not have the same constraints under the equality legislation. We should be reforming and giving that space for equality pressures by reforming the kind of ethos-based exemptions on equality.

Lastly, the gender division of schools was highlighted very strongly. Is part of the reform and shift in our programme to move towards mixed schools and away from the very strong emphasis on gender segregation that we have now in Ireland?

If it is okay, I will go to Deputy McAuliffe. Perhaps the Minister might answer Senator Higgins's questions when responding to him, just to allow us to be more efficient. That issue of coeducational schooling came up very strongly in last week's hearing.

I thank the Minister and her officials for being here today. I apologise if I repeat questions because I was at the health committee next door. I promise to be less robust here than I was next door.

It is such an interesting area because education has such an informative role in culture. As Senator Higgins said, this is not just education or career preparation, it is about culture. We had a very powerful engagement with Jennifer’s Poole’s brother, Jason Poole. She was the victim of gender-based violence and was tragically killed. Her murderer was recently sentenced. Mr. Poole is a teacher and talked about the toxic culture that develops among young men and the things that they say. Sometimes those all-male environments are places where we need to empower young men to call out that toxic environment.

It can be a really difficult thing to be a young teenage boy. We have to understand the place that the young man might be in when he is among a group of people. There might be just one individual engaging in it, but for other young men in that group to have the strength to step out of the mould and to call out that behaviour is very difficult. I am interested to hear what the Department is considering in trying to tackle that culture. We can do it in GAA clubs and soccer clubs, but there is also a role in schools and all-male schools are one environment where that happens. I am particularly interested in that.

The second area is male representation in the teaching profession. The last time I looked at numbers for primary school level only 14% of the teaching profession was male. That says something to both young girls and young boys in primary school. I was at a fantastic event yesterday in Erin's Isle GAA club where Dublin City University launched a programme to try to increase diversity in the teaching profession by including more young people from disadvantaged areas applying for teaching, particularly primary school teaching. The point made by DCU was that their diversity adds to the overall strength of the profession. With men being only 14% of the teachers at primary school level, the teaching profession is weaker because men are under-represented, in the same way as many other professions, and perhaps far more professions, are weaker because of the under-representation of women. The issue is that balance in teaching.

The last issue is subject choice. St. Mary's Secondary School in my constituency heard that I was a member of this committee and for one of their CSPE projects the students wrote to me asking me about gender equality and about subject choice, in particular. What was interesting was that they did not have enough male teachers in the school to get a good sample of data regarding whether male teachers had been impacted. That is interesting because it ties back to the last conversation. They also were not able to engage with male students because their school is an all-female school. At the very basic level of them trying to gather the data to tackle an issue, they ran into the first problem all of us encounter, which is that they did not have the opportunity to engage. Young women in an all-female school with very limited choices in science - that is some of them but there are obviously others such as woodwork and so forth - are seeking to tackle gender inequality and they run up against the first hurdle of not being able to access people of a different gender. It is such an example, and I give them credit.

Will the Minister comment on subject choices, the balance in the teaching profession and the toxic culture that often exists and what we can do in education to call it out?

Those were issues that were raised with us quite extensively in recent weeks, as were the issues Senator Higgins addressed. Perhaps the Minister will respond to Senator Higgins and Deputy McAuliffe and we will conclude the meeting after that.

On the CSPE, I know the Senator is making the point in good faith about the examinations status of CSPE. With absolute respect, I disagree with her on the importance of it being an examinations subject. I do not believe that it has to be an examinations subject to be of importance in the school. There are many aspects of school that are not examinations regimented, as it were, and they are many of the most positive and enriching aspects of school life. There is all the extra-curricular activity and the initiatives that students are involved in. I hear what the Senator is saying about-----

They do not get the same time.

I made the point earlier that there is an increased allocation of time, starting in September, for CSPE alone. It is up to 100 hours. It is a very significant allocation of time across the timetable. It is an underlining of the commitment we have to the importance of the subject. I do not believe it needs the examinations title to give it the importance it deserves. The fact that we are increasing the time allocation for it is testament to the importance we place on it.

Both the Deputy and Senator raised the issue of the gender division of schools. Some 90% of our primary schools are mixed gender and approximately 69% of post-primary schools are mixed gender. Generally, all our new schools, because they meet the demographics and the accommodation needs of an area, are also mixed gender. Somewhere along the line in the great debate about single-sex schools or mixed-gender schools, that statistic of 90% is very high for primary school. It is quite a high statistic for post-primary schools. Again, for a variety of reasons, most notably the demographic that is being served in new schools and the accommodation needs, our new schools are mixed gender also.

Regarding the teaching issue, it is almost a reverse here in terms of there not being the male role models. The Deputy referred to primary school. It is interesting to note that in the leadership roles in primary schools more than 2,000 of them are female principals and more than 1,000 of them are male principals. That is interesting in itself. A significant body of work is being done on the promotion of teaching through the Teaching Transforms programme. I accept the necessity to have an equal representation of genders. It goes back to a phrase that is used consistently, "If you cannot see it, you cannot be it", so it is very important that co-equality would exist. We are doing a huge body of work through the Teaching Transforms programme to encourage diversity in the teaching and wider education sector. It is not just the teaching sector, but all those who work within the education sector. That is not even just from the male and female genders. There is also diversity. We need to see people of all backgrounds and all ethnic groups teaching and working and being part of school communities. It was my great pleasure recently to have the opportunity to visit the graduation in Marino Institute of Education of migrant teachers, for example. They are superbly, highly-qualified individuals who are now enriching our school environment. It is a body of work to continue to encourage that.

The Deputy also raised subject choice for schools. I referred to that earlier as well. Resourcing of key subject areas is a priority for the Department, particularly areas that are a pinch point in our schools. The Deputy referred to science. We have a very strong upskilling programme, with a big uptake for it, to increase the availability of that staff. A consideration that is sometimes lost, and I referred to this earlier, is also committing to the reduction of the pupil-teacher ratio because the smaller class size number suits some of those subject areas. It also improves subject choice availability in a school. As I said, where there is a specific challenge for a school we ask the school to contact us directly to see what scope we have in terms of whatever the additional resource is that might be required to make something happen.

What about the equality question, the exemptions in the equality legislation in terms of ethos, and uniforms?

We have been very clear that where there is an issue, whatever is required to be done, and Senator Warfield referred to this earlier, up to and including legislation, that will be done.

The uniform issue was one of the issues that was flagged.

Senator Higgins brought forward the issue of discrimination in uniforms, of girls not being allowed to wear trousers in schools.

I am sorry I missed that. I appreciate that. Not every school demands a uniform but where they are requested and where they are part of the school procedure, it is massively important that all students have an opportunity to feel comfortable and be comfortable in how they are presenting in a school. Where that needs to be addressed it can be addressed. We have seen a much broader scope of that provision being made available to all students. There has been a much greater increase and improvement in that. I accept what the Senator said about work needing to be done to ensure it is across the board.

I have a question about a statistic the Minister gave. I said that 14% of teachers at primary level were men. Then the Minister gave a figure that showed that at leadership level 33% were men and approximately 66% were women.

The exact figure-----

That is a very stark contrast.

It is amazing that, at leadership level, men are doing double their strength, yet women's is reduced.

It is interesting all right. I reference this even at teaching conferences. It is hugely important that we have upskilling courses and mentoring courses, which we do have, and that we encourage those who would have a desire to become leaders to take those opportunities of mentoring and coaching courses that are available to them and that they would do it in advance even of putting their names forward for those positions. It is hugely important that we see equality of participation across leadership roles and all other roles within the education sector. As I say, it is for that reason we are doing all that we can on every side of it to see that campaigns, such as Teaching Transforms, will bring into the education sector diversity, whether it is equality in gender, ethnicity or whatever. That work is ongoing.

I am conscious we have other witnesses waiting. I thank the Minister very much indeed for her time.

Senator Higgins suggested the Minister might provide us with those timelines in more detail on the roll-out of the RSE-SPHE, given that there was such a focus on that.

And the opt-out question.

And the opt-out question. We are certainly grateful to the Minister for her engagement. I think the Minister has seen the level of commitment and engagement the committee has with these important recommendations. On behalf of the committee, I thank the Minister and her officials for their constructive engagement.

We may be back to the Minister in writing for further clarifications as we go through the writing up of our report and our action plan.

I will suspend the meeting now for two minutes to enable the Minister and officials to leave and to bring in the next witnesses for the second session of public engagement today.

Sitting suspended at 11.01 a.m. and resumed at 11.05 a.m.

We have resumed for the second session of our hearing this morning. We are engaging with Dr. Katriona O'Sullivan and with Women in Research Ireland. I am grateful to both Dr. Katriona O'Sullivan from the department of psychology in Maynooth University and Ms Emily Sheridan, treasurer and web manager of Women in Research Ireland, for joining us in person, and to Dr. Cathy Corcoran, committee member of Women in Research Ireland, who is joining us via Teams. They are all very welcome here.

Before we begin, I will read an important notice on parliamentary privilege. Witnesses are protected by absolute privilege in respect of the evidence they give to the committee. However, if directed by the committee to cease giving evidence on a particular matter and they continue to so do, 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 are asked to respect the parliamentary practice to the effect that, where possible, they should not criticise nor make charges against any person or entity in such a way as to make them identifiable. Participants in the committee meeting who are in locations outside the parliamentary precincts are asked to note that the constitutional protections afforded to those participating from within the parliamentary precincts do not extend to them. No clear guidance can be given on whether or the extent to which participation is covered by the absolute privilege of a statutory nature.

Today, we are addressing the recommendations of the Citizens' Assembly around norms and stereotypes in educations. Those are recommendations 26 to 31. The committee has been dealing in a modular fashion with the different recommendations of the assembly which we see as amounting to a blueprint for gender equality in Ireland. Our view is that we are charged with seeing how best we can implement those recommendations. We ask witnesses to address that issue of implementation in a practical sense. We also ask that they might confine their opening statement to five minutes as that will give us more time to engage. For engagement with each committee member, we have an eight-minute limit on the exchange.

I call on Dr. O'Sullivan to make her opening statement. This will be followed by those of Ms Sheridan and Dr. Corcoran on behalf of Women in Research Ireland.

Dr. Katriona O'Sullivan

I thank the committee for inviting me to submit my response to the recommendations. I have chosen to focus on female equality issues only and participation in science, technology, engineering and mathematics, STEM, as these are the ones which have the most impact in terms of participation in modern society.

Recommendation 26 talks about resourcing schools to ensure equality. There are some easy changes in schooling that can be made to ensure gender equality. All science subjects should be on offer in all schools. Women are under-represented in the emerging workforce because we are socialised and educated out of these jobs. By the age of 11, many girls have already decided science and STEM are not for them. We must make wholesale education changes to ensure young women see their potential in all areas. Science and technology subjects should be mandatory for all students in the same way that mathematics, English and languages are. This would reduce gender disparities in participation. Recent research shows that while 92% of all boys' schools have physics, chemistry and biology on the leaving certificate timetable, while only 77% of girls' schools do. In co-educational schools, it is even lower, at 62%. I recently interviewed a group of girls from a delivering equality of opportunity in schools, DEIS, school in the inner city which was moving to co-educational status. They noted that this was the first time ever they were being offered woodwork and engineering. They were really angry about this. They knew this was only because they boys were joining the school. Science for all is not only about jobs for all. It is about ensuring everyone can engage in modern society critically. When we fail to offer all sciences to all students, we fail to prepare students for modern life, the consequences of which can be seen in fear of modern developments, such as vaccines and artificial Intelligence, AI, technologies.

I would also urge the committee to consider the intersection between gender and class. Not all girls are the same. Not all schools have the same resources. DEIS schools need added support to ensure working-class girls can access all courses, capabilities and careers. I would ask the question, why are no all-girl schools piloting the new computer science programme for schools? What are the governing structures in place to ensure equity of resources across all schools? When we consider resourcing of education, we must consider the impact of gender, race, class, and ability on participation and must ensure all girls are served by education. Recommendations 26 and 27, in my view, are related. Career guidance and curriculum reform should consider what we communicate to young women about women. My research shows that young women often cannot name a female scientist from history - apart from Marie Curie - or a female leader in finance or science. With young girls' aspirations being guided by what they see in society and learn in school, we need to sense-check the curriculum content to ensure it celebrates excellent women.

If the media only speak about women in terms of their husbands or their looks, then how can we be different? Sense-checking the media would help. Career guidance is not just about the teachers in school; it is what we show young women. If girls do not relate to women in all roles, they will not try to be them.

As regards recommendation 30, a systems and strategic approach is needed to strengthen existing programmes. We have best practice examples of gender equality activities occurring across education, employment, and society. From mentoring to the Athena Swan programme, coding and computer science courses, we have excellent programmes making changes. The problem is these programmes often work in silos and compete for funding. We need to join up the system. We need to spend time identifying and evaluating programmes that support gender equality, and then scale them.

I have been funded by the Science Foundation Ireland, SFI, Discover programme to deliver the STEM passport for inclusion programme. This plugs some of the gaps in the system. It offers senior cycle girls across Ireland three key STEM resources, namely, a STEM university qualification while they are still in secondary school, a STEM mentor and STEM career guidance. Instead of working alone, we partnered with Munster Technological University, Microsoft Ireland, Teen-Turn, Accenture, RDI Hub, Dogpatch Labs and others to build a systems approach to empowering young women to see STEM as a future for them.

What I am doing is not unique. There are thousands of programmes worldwide doing some of this work. What we are doing that is different is inviting others to join us to change the system. We are inviting every university and school across Ireland to work together to build a STEM pathway for girls to get them into STEM careers and courses. What we are doing is working. Munster Technological University is awarding the STEM passport girls 50 bonus leaving certificate points which they can use towards STEM courses. Some 125 women from various companies have acted as mentors. They have been trained on how to mentor for equality. With 4,000 applicants for only 1,000 places, we see that 78% of these girls are now interested in studying and working in STEM. The STEM programme has been included as a recommendation for the national pilot in the recent gender balance in STEM education programme. What we need is joined-up thinking, systemic change and a systemic approach.

Like all other good programmes, we face challenges in trying to implement this nationally. In the context of girls in STEM courses or careers, universities are often scared to develop gender-only programmes. The conservative nature of the education system stops reform happening at the pace of societal change. I am not sure whether I should say this, but it is my view that while our leadership is primarily made up of males, we will never be able to change the dial and ensure all women are educated, employed and empowered equally. Finally, now is the time to make the changes. Women have never been more at risk of being left out of the emerging world. Covid-19 has shown that women, especially those in service roles, are at risk of entrenched poverty if we do not ensure they are prepared to participate in the technological revolution. Being STEM-prepared is no longer a workforce issue. We need to be STEM ready so we can stay connected, get educated and be part of the changing solutions for the world.

I thank Dr. O'Sullivan for her rousing words and for highlighting the STEM passport programme. It sounds exciting and addresses many of the issues the committee was just discussing with the Minister.

I invite Ms Sheridan to make her opening remarks.

Ms Emily Sheridan

I thank the Chairman and the committee for extending an invitation to Women in Research Ireland to discuss the recommendations. I am a PhD student in STEM at UCD and I am here as a representative of Women in Research Ireland along with Dr. Cathy Corcoran, a fellow Women in Research Ireland committee member who is joining us online.

Women in Research Ireland is a volunteer-run charity working towards increased representation and equality for women, non-binary and gender-fluid persons and members of under-represented groups working in research and academia in Ireland. We welcome the work of the Citizens' Assembly on Gender Equality, particularly its efforts to advance a more gender-equal Ireland with recommendations underpinned by human rights, equality, justice and fairness values. We agree with the Citizens’ Assembly on Gender Equality that mainstream gender equality considerations should become a key element of all State and Government policies and legislation. The Citizens' Assembly made a number of significant recommendations and we are here to comment on chapter 8 of the report, relating to norms and stereotypes and education.

As regards recommendation 26, despite improvement in recent years, gender gaps remain prevalent within the education system. The imbalance is influenced by societal stereotypes that suggest men and women have a biological set of natural skills that define what professions are suitable for them. Developmental studies confirm these influences come from the closest environments, mainly being family and school, but also from more distant systems such as media or cultural values. School subjects and later career choices are often heavily influenced by gender stereotypes.

Women in Research Ireland recommends that schools, in partnership with universities where possible, provide a more inclusive learning environment, celebrating diversity of both students and staff. We agree with the recommendation to provide a broader range of subjects in schools to increase participation in particularly gender-stereotyped subjects. We suggest that students be fully introduced to subject options in late primary or early post-primary education, allowing them the opportunity to explore and engage with subjects they may not have considered or encountered before. We agree that second-level schools should train their career guides and teachers on how not to associate job roles too strongly with a specific gender.

As regards recommendations 27 and 28, teaching about gender and gender-based discrimination should not be the sole remit of specialty classes but, rather, should be an important component of all subjects in post-primary education. Curriculums in all subjects can make efforts to improve the gender balance of studied individuals and groups while also incorporating discussions on who is absent and the reasons that underpin who has been considered worth studying and who has not. Women in Research Ireland suggests the delivery of a mandatory gender-sensitive teaching methods skill set module for all educators in schools and universities alongside ongoing evaluations of gender equality policies and outcomes. Women in Research Ireland commends the Citizens' Assembly on its recommendations to cover the important issues of consent and domestic, sexual, and gender-based violence within the revised relationships and sexuality curriculum. We highlight, however, the need to explicitly address the intersectionality of gender as it relates to power dynamics and violence.

In the context of recommendations 29 and 30, we note the recently published Funding the Future policy launched by the Minister, Deputy Harris, in early May includes expanding the SUSI grant system to those on part-time courses. We welcome this approach and hope to see it implemented soon. Women in Research Ireland also welcomes the recommendations for additional State funding to encourage a more diverse uptake into career paths and apprenticeships programmes through increased resources.

As regards recommendation 30, it is a case of if you can see it, you can be it. As media, including television, radio and online content, contribute to the learning and maintenance of stereotyped perceptions, media literacy programs in schools would be helpful to sensitise students to gender-role depictions. In addition, the media and advertisement sector is capable of showing young children the possibilities open to them in a variety of fields. For example, we know that women are less likely to be invited to participate on television shows and that they make up less than 20% of experts featured in news stories. Thus, television radio and news media should implement policies that guarantee equal representation.

With regard to the regulation of the media to avoid discrimination and gender stereotypes, we highlight the role of both the Government and technology companies in creating policies in the pursuit of fighting harassment, bullying and other forms of abusive behaviour that are often directed towards women and minority groups. Research shows that women drop off social media and even leave political careers due to the tremendous amount of online abuse they receive. Appropriate legislation should be introduced to regulate and prevent such behaviour, remove content and punish perpetrators where necessary.

The monitoring of compliance is essential for the success of gender equality policies. The data gathered can be used on equality grounds to identify data gaps on gender inequality and used to drive improvements in the data infrastructure, analysis and policies necessary to close those gaps. We encourage universities to make more extensive use of data from Athena Swan, which is already a rich source of data but can be used in the development of specifically targeted gender equality actions as needed.

Care is often seen as the default work of women. It is work that goes largely unseen and unpaid. In academia, the strain of care has been amplified for women due to the additional burden of home caregiver responsibilities, which has had a negative impact on women’s academic publications and grant funding, especially in the past two years. More specifically, the recommendation to improve the visibility of men performing caring roles should instead be broadened to portraying and respecting care work as valuable regardless of gender.

In conclusion, I again thank the Chairman and committee members for including Women in Research Ireland in this important discussion. Women in Research Ireland is committed to advancing equity for women and minorities. Addressing norms and stereotypes in education will pave the way for a more equitable society where opportunities are available to all, regardless of gender.

I thank Ms Sheridan. We really appreciate that.

I will now open the floor to members for questions and answers. Senator Higgins indicated first. I know she is under time pressure.

I am happy to allow Deputy Clarke to go first.

I understand Senator Warfield is also under time pressure.

I am happy for Senator Warfield to go first.

Members are being very polite.

I have an odd angle on it, so I will allow Senator Warfield to go first.

I will go to Senator Warfield and then Senator Higgins.

I was not expecting to go first. The written submissions provided by our guests, which I read yesterday, are excellent. I am particularly interested in the idea of giving students a chance to try subjects at primary level. Are our guests suggesting that secondary schools be used as a place for primary school students to try woodwork, home economics or engineering?

Dr. Katriona O'Sullivan

We have done it the other way. We have done it in higher education through secondary schools. The secondary school students are doing the subjects that are on in secondary school and they are getting a qualification. It being run in primary schools or having a link between the three is a fantastic idea. Ms Sheridan referred to combining approaches in this context to make more clear the pathways between the subjects, courses and schools so the transition is much easier.

I did art, woodwork and music in school. I did as many practical courses as possible. The idea of having a discussion on the theory side of the class about who is not there is revolutionary and has never occurred to me. I wholly support that. I commend the witnesses for introducing class to the discussion. We will reflect on that for our report.

Dr. Katriona O'Sullivan

One of the points we have made about class is that if we can solve the problem for the most under-served, the solutions can easily be transferred to those who are better served. In all our work, we try to target those with an intersection of disadvantage due to gender, class and ability. If the solution works for them, it is easier to serve those who have just one challenge. It is essential that we think about class, specifically with the shecession. Working class women are the most affected by what has happened with Covid.

Ms Emily Sheridan

Going back to the introduction of subjects, engineering was not offered to me. The Central Statistics Office has shown that, as a leaving certificate subject, engineering is mainly run in mixed schools and single sex boys' schools but not in single sex girls' schools. Only 10% of people who take up that subject in mixed schools are women. That is reflected in university, with 8% taking up the subject. It was not run in my school. I did not hear or know about it. When people chose it at university level, I did not know why. I asked what they even knew about it, because I had never heard about it before. I feel like people end up making choices about secondary school, which influences their leaving certificate decisions and their university decisions, at primary level, where they do not have any introduction to subjects at all. They can end up choosing things based on what friends choose and what is offered. People should have the opportunity to choose those subjects early on. If there is not an initial large uptake, it will still grow as time goes on. Sometimes, subjects are offered and then are cancelled after having small uptakes. They cannot continue to grow and have increased uptake if they are removed immediately.

Dr. Cathy Corcoran

I thank the committee for inviting Women in Research Ireland. As everyone has acknowledged, research has shown that girls lose interest in STEM as they get older, between ten and 12 years of age. As Ms Sheridan mentioned, sometimes that relates to peer pressure, lack of support in school or the home, or a lack of a perception of what a career in STEM might look like in the real world, bringing a practical approach to the issue. It is important that we expand that interest in education and employment in STEM and computer science.

As was mentioned earlier, there is employment and growth in this sector. Increasing the likelihood of girls and women pursuing degrees that allow them to fulfil jobs in growth areas in technology and engineering, as Ms Sheridan mentioned, is extremely important. The sooner we start that in primary and secondary education, leading into higher education, the better. As Ms Sheridan outlined in her opening statement, providing teachers with more engaging, hands-on projects that would nurture the interest of all students, both girls and boys, over the course of primary and secondary education, would go a long way to nurturing, sustaining and building that interest in the subject areas, in degrees and in employment opportunities.

The showcasing of STEM mentors and role models to build confidence was mentioned earlier in the open meeting. As Ms Sheridan mentioned, "if you cannot see it, you cannot be it". That was mentioned in the first opening statement.

A final matter which was mentioned in the open meeting and both opening statements by my colleagues is the importance of cultivating inclusive classrooms free of stereotypes and biases for all children and young people. It is essential to deliver equal opportunities for all in an unencumbered classroom environment.

The presentations were really interesting and covered interesting subjects. I am torn about what to speak on because I would like to ask about so many things. I wanted to pick up on the intersectional issue. I was glad to see it named. There are gender equality issues and also layered issues. We talked about the changing of the secondary curriculum, its decolonisation, gender-proofing and examination. The story of science, technology and engineering tells itself. It is not just about who goes into them but also how the curriculum is changed to reflect, for example, Middle Eastern contributions to maths and science, which is the kind of thing that makes it different.

I am interested into the entry routes and also how STEM needs to and can change. I was struck by Dr. O'Sullivan saying that it is not just a workforce solution but about being part of changing solutions for the world. One issue in technology is not just what happens mechanically but how it fits with society and culture. For example, how do we change artificial intelligence so it is not discriminatory? Much needs to be considered. I am interested in the importance of having diversity in STEM and how it evolves. That links into Ms Sheridan's point about care, which is not just about caring professions, but care being recognised, much as we brought in empathy examinations for medicine.

We have focused on entry points. A good point was made about the lack of people coming from DEIS schools. What about those coming into education from the social welfare system? Anecdotally, women I know are often asked if they would think of taking a course to be a special needs assistant or in childcare, which reverses a two or three-year degree in a new science or engineering field. Will the witnesses comment on that route into education and what we need to do to make sure that women are given that opportunity, including women who may not even have done science subjects in their secondary school education?

Dr. Katriona O'Sullivan

I thank Senator Higgins. A thing that frustrates me in conversations about gender or class equality is the charitable nature in which we frame this. People might say, "Oh, God, the poor women need our help." Excuse me saying, "Oh, God". Men rolls their eyes at having the conversation again. The reality is that without women's voices in technology and STEM, we are missing out on wonderful creative leaders who can change what we produce and provide in STEM, technology and engineering. When I talk to Microsoft and Accenture about working class girls, it is not a charitable endeavour. I am telling them that they are missing out on a talented pool of workers. We have all heard about seatbelts that are only tested on males or recruitment practices that are automated and move females out because the practices only use male data. There are many ethical reasons to include working class women or ethnic minorities. There is also the potential for creativity. Research shows that companies that empower women to lead their work are more profitable, more creative and have happier workforces.

This is not just something we should consider because it is fair; it is actually better for society and industry. That is one of the reasons I am so passionate about it. The Senator spoke about role models and companies. I will mention one thing we have done. The systems approach I am really passionate about is not just about changing the young women but about changing industry and society. The majority of women who are in industry are quite affluent. They have forged their way through this male-dominated path and been able to get there and succeed. We have developed a programme where we teach them about equality, diversity and inclusion. We are actually saying what it is like. You are not allowed to slag someone's accent when they walk into a room or to say "Hey, how are you? What's the story?" as if that is funny. That is classist and makes people feel separated. There is a whole piece of work to do on educating industry about how to be more inclusive. We should lead on that as a society. We should teach industry how to be more inclusive because it is beneficial for it.

I am a working-class girl and I was a lone parent. I was forced into a community employment, CE, scheme here and another one when I was living in Dublin 1. I am really intelligent and graduated with a first from Trinity College but, at that point, I was just told that this was what I was to do because that is what everyone else living in a flat in Summerhill does. However, I met a woman by accident on the street who had got into Trinity College through the access programme and thought I could do that because she was like me. That is a really anecdotal story but the truth is that, unless we see and celebrate women from every background, things will not change and we will not move those women from the social welfare class into roles and responsibilities where they can achieve. The celebration piece, showcasing what can be done and supporting women all the way through those initial CE schemes and courses until they become professional in whatever way they want is really essential.

I thank Dr. O'Sullivan for sharing her personal experience and for giving the Trinity access programme a shout-out. I have a lot of experience of it and it is super. It has been very powerful.

Dr. Katriona O'Sullivan

Well, I am here from Maynooth University now.

Well, I will give Trinity a shout-out.

Ms Emily Sheridan

I do not wish to get too anecdotal either. With regard to intersectionality and gender, we know that, while a person will have further to travel to the top because she is a woman, she will be even further down the scale if she is a woman with a disability or a woman from a working-class background. To achieve equity, all of that needs to be taken into consideration. Again, this is an anecdotal story but I have done a lot of maths grinds. I used to teach on the side, although not so much lately because I have been too busy. I have noticed a class component to people assuming their maths ability is bad. That is already a gendered thing but it is also not enforced enough. There is a wider variety of people who say "We are not good at maths." I emphasise "we". They are not just saying they personally are not good at maths but that "we" are not good at maths. It becomes a larger issue. Of course, in private schools there may be better-paid teachers and the ability to do extra grinds. It is already easier for people in those schools to get further along in these subjects.

With regard to my own personal story, I took part in the disability access route to education, DARE, scheme to get into Trinity. I would not have got into STEM in university but I got to do science in Trinity through the DARE scheme. I am doing a PhD now. I am well capable but I recognise that helping me, as a woman, to get there also meant helping me with the disability access route. You need to help the whole package of a person if you want to bring them forward rather than focusing on their gender alone.

I thank Ms Sheridan very much for sharing that personal experience and for that shout-out for the DARE scheme, which has also been very powerful.

I thank both of our witnesses for coming in. I have followed their work in different ways and am delighted to have them here. I am very much enjoying listening to them. I want to ask two things. The first is about care in the home. We have seen this issue particularly throughout the Covid pandemic but, let us face it, it has always existed. There was a really good report published at EU level about this issue. It analysed, on a pan-European basis, which women got back to work most easily and so on. It is not just an Irish issue or a Covid issue. It is a European issue and a men-and-women issue. I am interested in how we can explain to any organisation, not specifically Microsoft, the additional work that women do according to all of the reports and statistics we are familiar with and what that actually means in practical terms. In the context of rebalancing that quickly for people today without having to raise a whole new generation of people, do the witnesses have any thoughts as to how corporations or any other organisations can explain or tackle that for the men and women? It is a core part of the inequality challenge we face.

My second question is slightly contrary. I do not know what the answer to this is, but there is a balance to be struck between women spending their time trying to get ahead, do their jobs successfully and simply move on to the next stage and continue to progress, and spending their time remedying the gender inequality problem. For example, both of the witnesses are taking time out of their professional academic lives in order to be here to do this. We give our time to researchers to tell them what it is like to be a woman in politics. There are so many examples. We are very happy to do it because the very last thing we want to do is to pull up the ladder and to not provide assistance to researchers who are coming behind us in different ways. However, it strikes me that very few of my male colleagues have the same asks made of their time. Each of these engagements takes an hour or whatever it happens to be. That is just one example. Two things happen. One is the taking of your time, time that could otherwise be spent simply doing the job in order to retain it or progress in it. The second is the continuing othering involved in having the gender issue continually pointed out in a way that only happens to one gender. Again, I say this question is slightly contrary because, for as long as that continues to happen, you continue to make things different but you also continue to take from the time available to actually do the job. I am interested in the witnesses' perspectives on that because they are clearly also doing the same.

That is a great question. I think we all share-----

I am taking my life in my hands asking it.

It is not contrary at all.

Dr. Katriona O'Sullivan

It is a great question. It really frustrates me when, having been asked to present at any conference or anything else to do with gender, I turn on the screen and only see women. Realistically, it is men who need to be listening to this rather than women. I find that quite frustrating. What the Deputy has said about how we spend our time is really interesting. With regard to industry, I believe there needs to be penalties. I am one of these people who believe people need to be forced to engage with equality issues at this point because making it optional and leaving it to women to progress the agenda is not working. If we keep going the way we are going, we are never going to reach gender equality. There needs to be definite male champions and our workload needs to be recognised as part of our job because a lot of women do it as extra work. It is a really good point. I ask the question "Why are there no men here?" a lot. I know Senator Warfield is here today and I am really glad that he is but why do men not come to these events? The reality is that it does not affect them in the same way. It is really not a priority but it should be made one. People should be forced. I do not mean that in a harsh way.

The other issue the Deputy raised related to care. My research during the Covid pandemic really pointed to women being at the brink of breaking because of home schooling, work and everything being brought into the household. The research showed that mothers did a lot of this while the fathers were just going to work and getting on with it. One of the big fears I have as we move back to normality is that working from home will become the norm. Many women I know are delighted that they might be able to stay home because they can manage the extra workload that is on them because of their children, appointments and cleaning. The possibility that this is going to become the norm really frightens me. We are going to take a step back in terms of gender equality if we do not do something with regard to who is staying at home and working from home. Is that just going to be a female piece? On the care point, care should be recognised as part of our work. When I apply for a grant with the European Research Council or for a promotion, having children or, as in my own case, fostering is recognised with regard to progression. When I am applying for a promotion, that is taken into account so I am not supposed to be the same as a male or female who has not had children.

That should be everywhere and it should be much more explicit. If someone has children and cares for them or anyone else in the home, and men care for their children as well, it should be celebrated to a greater degree. There are policies in place that really do this. I have so many children that I should never have even got my PhD at this point from my last grant application because I had one so young. It is great that it gives us that recognition when we are trying to progress as females, so people who have taken maternity leave can say they have not published so many articles because they have been at home with caring responsibilities.

I am conscious that Dr. Corcoran did not get in during the last round. I think we lost the connection for a few moments.

I would like to come in for 30 seconds at the end of my slot.

The Deputy can ask her follow-up question now and we will then come back to Dr. Corcoran and Ms Sheridan.

Shortly after the election, the National Women's Council held a panel discussion with five women panellists, a woman moderator and 250 women in the room. It took three or four hours of my time. I was asking myself what the point was because everyone there was already convinced. What Dr. O'Sullivan said about working from home is really important. It is so easy to put a wash on and do all of those things but it is also so easy to retain responsibility for all of those tasks. In terms of flexibility in corporate culture, I told a story before about a friend of mine going from a five-day week to a three-day week when she had her second child. I was telling her not do it because of her pension and the possibility of promotion and saying everything would change, instead of proposing the obvious solution, which was for the couple to both work a four-day week. However, it was just not culturally acceptable in the corporate world for a couple to say they had had a second child and wanted to do a four-day week for the next three or four years. Until that is culturally acceptable in the major commercial organisations, nothing will change because every time a woman drops from a five-day to a three-day week instead of both partners moving to a four-day week, it only entrenches the position for many more years. That was the point I wanted to make.

Does Ms Sheridan or Dr. Corcoran wish to comment?

Ms Emily Sheridan

Many members of the group I represent are in academia and a lot of people are more senior than me, as senior lecturers or assistant professors. Care is such a big thing, especially since the Covid-19 pandemic. A medical article was published in Nature not that long ago. The author visited Women in Research Ireland for a talk about the increased burden of care that occurs with women in academia. Regarding what the Deputy said about self-advocacy, the same is true of the Athena SWAN awards and equality, diversity and inclusion panels. Much of the time, they are made up of women. Of course, people would like to get involved in self-advocacy but it also takes up their time. In much of academia, people are not necessarily paid for the work that takes place. To retain their job, academics write grant applications, which is not part of their nine-to-five main responsibilities such as teaching and looking after students. Writing grant applications in their spare time, reviewing papers and going to conferences, all of which can become part of it but can also be done outside hours, are quite difficult when someone has a caring responsibility at home. That can become a large part of it and this is stuff that is not going to recognised when someone is applying for grants and jobs.

There is a major problem surrounding people who take time out through maternity leave because they do not have that output and so many grants are based on age and output, not even quality of output. There is a level of quality of output but it is also quantity, so a large quantity can often outweigh output that is almost equal in quality. It is very important that care is taken into consideration. It has to be acknowledged even within universities. A lot of administrative tasks end up falling to women, even at the exact same level. Responsibility for undergraduates and additional work always falls to women and that is something that needs to be taken into consideration. To be honest, I cannot say I know what the answer is. I do not know how we can fix that or how it can be acknowledged. I do not have the answer but I know it is a problem.

I will come back to Dr. Corcoran on the next round as there is a technical hitch. I call Deputy Clarke.

Could we add that issue as it relates to students in the next session because we spoke about it as it relates to staff?

I thank all our witnesses for attending. We could be here all day discussing this issue. I am not sure what progress we would make but I am sure we could be here all day. In her presentation, Dr. O'Sullivan stated that women have never been more at risk of being left out. Never be afraid to say it, say it repeatedly, say it loudly and say it often because it is absolutely true. I am also a member of the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs and Defence. When Covid hit, the first people affected were predominantly women. We were most affected because our workplaces were the ones that closed down first. We then went to working from home with childcare closed so we were working and caring for children on top of other responsibilities. When our friends' workplaces reopened but childcare services did not, we were minding their children as well because we were in bubbles so we have been the most disproportionately affected.

As I said at the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs and Defence and this committee, it is my firm belief that if we take any retrograde steps in terms of the progress we have made for women's rights and equality, we will leave this world a much poorer place than it was beforehand. What we have seen in the aftermath of Covid in terms of gender equality and women's rights needs to be the catalyst and not the excuse to go backwards. We know what needs to happen. We have never been given a better opportunity to make it happen than we have as we emerge from Covid.

I will return to intersectionality concerning challenges around access. During our first session this morning, I asked the Minister why no all-girl DEIS schools were piloting the new computer science programme. We were told about reports, reviews, initiatives and how schools were not putting themselves forward. I know that my own constituency has very good quality clubs such as CoderDojo, science clubs and astronomy and space-based clubs. They are wonderful. However, if there is going to be a delay in the State providing access to certain subjects in secondary school because no resource is every delivered overnight and the only option to bridge that gap is one that puts an additional financial burden on the family, how do we get around that? How do we help hose who are talented and want to be involved in STEM?

No child I know does not know something about STEM. They just do not recognise it as STEM. How many kitchens have been destroyed in the making of slime in recent years? How many volcanoes have erupted in bathrooms? This is science. We just do not recognise it as such. How many bug hotels were built over the past number of years and put out in back gardens? Coming up with that design is engineering. It is not that I do not believe there is talent there and a pool to work with. I am just concerned about the delivery of additional resources - even classroom spaces - for engineering, woodwork or science subjects and meeting the needs that are there. How do we bridge that gap? Do we need to provide additional financial resources to make these courses less expensive for parents? That still does not sit very easily with me. I am interested in hearing the witnesses' opinions on that.

Regarding recommendation 31, "If you can see it, you can be it", we had this conversation with other witnesses who have appeared before us. There is a very real need to see those from under-represented communities, whether based on their racial or economic background or whatever the case may be, in the national media. This needs to be coupled with other things. Look at where we are having this conversation today. This building is male-dominated. That is just a fact. We have not made much progress over the past number of elections so there is a body of work to be done everywhere. There is a responsibility on the corporate side but also on the influencing side. If we think of the social media influencers we see at the moment, the majority of them are female and most of what they are seeking to influence does not in any way, shape or form - I do not know how to put this diplomatically and I am struggling to find a diplomatic term for it - influence younger women to focus more on an academic or research career choice. It is wonderful to see people going off on holidays.

Lord knows I am looking to going forward to going on holidays and sending a few photographs. How do we change that? How do we get people such as Dr. O'Sullivan, Ms Sheridan and Dr. Corcoran and their work out into the ether and the various forms of media?

Dr. Cathy Corcoran

I wanted to come back to the access and representation that Deputy Clarke just spoke about. The mission of Women In Research Ireland is to give a voice to the under-represented. We extended our reach during lockdown because we were able to host our webinars, talks and panels online. It is about giving researchers from minority groups and the under-represented the opportunity to present their research to the public, through Women in Research Ireland's fora. That has been extremely well received and has obviously extended our reach. We find ourselves at the table in this meeting and very much appreciate that access. Someone mentioned not pulling up the ladder. In terms of giving people that equity opportunity and an opportunity to share their research in ways that extend the reach and audience, we all have a role to play in helping each other provide that access to and reach in research in these very important areas.

I also wanted to speak about the fundamental societal and financial impetus to solving the problems we have as a society, where we know there is a dearth of qualified and skilled folks available in certain sectors. It is a growing issue. We know that jobs will be out there ten years down the line. We need to reach students today in primary school to fill those roles, regardless of gender, starting with everything Ms Sheridan mentioned in her opening statement. In ensuring that those opportunities are amplified early and often and that opportunity is provided on the education side regardless of school type, in Ireland, we really need to put our shoulders to the wheel on this. It is an absolutely vital societal need we need to address in equity and opportunity.

I am conscious of time but perhaps Dr. O'Sullivan would like to come in briefly.

Dr. Katriona O'Sullivan

I will say something controversial which I often do. What Deputy Clarke said about the influencers was very interesting. What I will put back to her is that everyone has a responsibility to sweep his or her side of the street. The bottom line is that the Government's role is to ensure the education system moves quicker and goes with the times. Rather than focusing on industry or influencers and their role, the Government should ensure that its role is working. Why is computer science not being offered in schools? It is not the choice of schools. The Deputy is not doing this. However, DEIS schools are not able to incorporate much of what is on offer from the Government because they are too busy caring for all the challenges that happening in their schools. This is not necessarily directed at the Deputy but influencers would change if society changed. There are top-down issues and bottom-up issues. The top-down issues need to be taken care of by the Government. We need to ensure that everyone has access to digital commodities. Every child should have a laptop. We should be providing that as a State, because we are in a tech revolution.

I fully agree with Dr. O'Sullivan. The reason I put that there is that the response of the Minister, Deputy Foley, was that it was up to schools to put themselves forward.

Dr. Katriona O'Sullivan

It is not up to schools. That is a cop-out in a sense. Schools, especially those that are very disadvantaged, with which I work day in and day out, are offering as much emotional and social support to their students as possible. Some of them do not have a chance to avail of these wonderful opportunities and then they get blamed for not taking them up. The reality is that we need to be stronger as a Government and a society and say everybody needs to leave school with the scientific capabilities to engage meaningfully in society. That is the Government's responsibility. Anyone who says that a school did not take up the option does not understand schools. That is not the Deputy. I am directing that at a Minister if that is what the Minister said.

I loved when the Deputy spoke about CoderDojo. I went to sign up to CoderDojo for my son years ago. One needed a laptop and to be able to drive there. It was just at the new time of laptops as well. That was my son out. We were not poor. We were okay. The reality is that one has to have the money to be able to engage in the clubs. The truth is that it is the Government's job to ensure the schools are adequately resourced and have the commodities and capabilities and that it understands how to govern correctly. Until that happens, the influencers will still be selling whatever products they are developing and getting young ones to think that Mykonos is the best place to go on holiday. That is okay-----

Are we in danger of further disenfranchising certain sectors because of a governmental delay in delivering the resources to schools? I am loath to use the term extracurricular activity because they are not hobbies. They should be provided in school. While there is a delay in the delivery of those resources, if the only option for children to engage in the likes of computer programming is through a club that operates outside of a school, are we not further disadvantaging a certain group of people who are already disadvantaged because they do not have access in an educational environment? They may not come from a socioeconomic background-----

Dr. Katriona O'Sullivan

Can I answer that one point?

There are two more members who want to come in.

Dr. Katriona O'Sullivan

SFI Discover funds many types of amazing programmes throughout the country. The issue is that we do not have enough communication about them. We are funding great programmes in places such as Clare and Athenry. They are free but the difficulty is linking them together. That is why I go back to that systems approach. Everybody needs to know what is out there and available to them. There are amazing free programmes running in universities throughout the country. There is definitely a disenfranchising piece, or a separation or an inequity that is being added to, but great funding programmes are also being run. They are just not being accessed by those who need them.

That is a very interesting point.

We could be here all day but we have two more members to come in and we will wrap it up then.

I have to be in the Seanad at noon. I apologise that I will not be able to stay for the reply. I thank the three women for their contributions this morning. We all agree with absolutely everything that has been said here today. I do not think I have ever been as frustrated with the slow pace of Government. It is not just the Department of Education, although I know we are talking about education. The slow pace is across Government with regard to the societal changes that need to be implemented. Deputy Carroll MacNeill touched on it earlier. I wonder whether we will ever get the progress in and equality of access and opportunity that we need, for all our women and men and young girls and boys, if we do not have the support of men. The root of the slow pace of change is men liking society angled and favoured towards the patriarchy, the way it has been for years. I cannot find any other reason as to why there is such a slow pace of change. Dr. O'Sullivan is a legend. She is an absolute inspiration and a real representation of what we can see, we can be. I thank her.

I apologise for the delay in bringing the Senator in.

Dr. Katriona O'Sullivan

I am a legend.

That is fair enough. We all agree.

Dr. Katriona O'Sullivan

I hope Senator O'Reilly thinks that as well.

I could hear the bells ringing in the background for the Leader of the Seanad to get in. It was great that she got an opportunity to speak. I was excited when I saw that the witnesses were coming in because it is very close to my heart. To be fair to the Minister, Deputy Foley, she was talking about schools putting themselves forward for a pilot.

I think she believes there is a commitment to roll it out across the board. I wanted to say that first. Having said that, it struck me that if our guests are finding a certain section are not putting themselves forward then, in the same way as when we are looking for women to run for election, you must find people and bring them with you. Even in pilot programmes there must be a sense in which WRI reaches out to those schools that are not putting themselves forward if there is not a proper representation. It is important to put on record the Minister was talking about a pilot there and not that it would not be rolled out everywhere. There is obviously a difficulty, no matter what Department you are in, with your ambition not matching the pace of what can be achieved. I am also frustrated with the pace of things.

I speak quite a lot about the importance of mentorship in education. It does not happen enough. Especially in these kinds of areas around innovation and research, we need to have innovation and, therefore, it almost has to be cutting-edge. It cannot be based on an education system that can sometimes creak at the seams. I would love to hear what our guests think about having more partnerships. Leaving certificate reform is one part of that but it goes right through primary, secondary and tertiary partnerships so we constantly have, as some guests touched on earlier, people in front of you who are actually doing it, so you can really imagine yourself in that role. We say that about politics quite a lot but it is the same across the board. It is about what that might look like in schools. I am also on the education committee and we are doing work similar enough to some of the work we are talking about here. An awful lot of the other questions have been covered but I thank our guests for their passion. It is important to have passion in these rooms. It motivates all of us as well.

I thank the Senator. That was a good concluding question. I will return to each of our guests in return, beginning with Ms Sheridan, then Dr. Corcoran and giving Dr. O'Sullivan the last word.

Ms Emily Sheridan

In reference to the pilot programmes idea, I find it hard to believe many schools feel they have the capacity to take on additional work so it kind of has to be something that is made available but made available in a way they can actually be taken on and not just giving them an additional workload.

On representation and mentors, as Dr. O'Sullivan said, a lot of that exists already. Of course it can be expanded but in having a combined approach, the infrastructure that is already there is very important. I do not know whether SFI itself can even keep track of what it is funding because there is so much. That is fantastic but there needs to be a package of measures to be delivered to schools and career guidance councillors who know what is available, including stuff like the STEM passport for inclusion and STEM in the classroom where you go in and visit. It is important to have a mentor, even to look up to. Of course, students want to see someone they can relate to. That is a big thing. It has to be someone who seems like themselves so they can see themselves in them but also someone they think is cool. It is a silly thing to say but science is often portrayed as something - and I am not saying that is me - very clinical or that you have to be a certain kind of person for it. Just to meet regular people who are exactly like you has a major impact.

There are programmes already out there. The money has already been spent and these are already being funded. Schools must be made aware of this. They can be expanded but without even spending a cent it has to be put together as there is an opportunity for uptake there. The mentor programmes must be expanded as well. The support and infrastructure should be expanded. Not only do we need to add extra but we need to expand the ones we have and give them the capacity to spread wider. We have done online education for the past few years and I do not know why, if there is not a teacher in a regional area, we cannot expand the libraries and computer classes to a computer programme. I do not think we need to end up hiring thousands more people to start off these programmes to get those skills into schools. We have the capacity that is within the education system at the moment and what has been built over the past two years. There are already people who do after-school subjects as optionals. It is something that exists. It can be added in. We have teachers who then do it in loads of different classrooms. Of course there is a correcting aspect and wider things but they can be expanded in a much easier way than it might seem to begin with, especially building on the capacity of the past two years.

Dr. Cathy Corcoran

I absolutely agree with Ms Sheridan on access and those opportunities to take advantage of those existing programmes and resources currently in place. I go back, and this was mentioned earlier, to the Department of Education and the focus on ensuring equity across all schools in Ireland to address the issues that are there with food poverty, access to equipment and supports in both society and the family and in schools. There is so much more to addressing the equity issue beyond technology and increasing that opportunity to pursue STEM and other careers for both girls and boys at the primary and secondary level. I thank the committee members for their time and wish them the best of luck with their work.

I thank Dr. Corcoran. Dr. O'Sullivan has the last word.

Dr. Katriona O'Sullivan

I thank the Chair. I really appreciate the Senator's comments on the mentorship piece. Mentorship can be used in so many different ways. When I talk to women in industry, it is about someone to get you up the ladder. When I talk about mentorship, it is literally about having a relationship with another person that could possibly transfer information about where they could go. We definitely need more of that across the system. We need more of it from higher education, to secondary, to primary and more opportunities for girls to see people like themselves, to talk to them and to understand. That costs money. It is not like you can build a programme and just deliver it. It requires a massive commitment to trying to change the face of it. My belief is the only thing that really moves a woman or girl from the place of thinking she is something to something else is being able to have the human capital or the skills to do the thing; the cultural capital, which is to understand the environment, and finally the social capital, which is a relationship with another person where the woman or girl says that person did it and so could I. If we consider everything from that point of view, we can definitely change things for young women.

It is like research. When you are a girl you think it is a man in a white coat and it is quite nerdy. I remember a girl from a DEIS school coming to me and saying Kim Kardashian is really a researcher. I said no, but she is something. She is a businesswoman. These girls were actually looking to who they relate to and asking who is like me and who likes what I like who I can relate to. I was not necessarily advocating her as the role model but I said it is really important we see people who are a bit like us or that we can relate to, too. I do not know whether that answers any of the Senator's question but relationships are key to everything. That is it.

I thank Dr. O'Sullivan very much. That is a good, positive note to end on.

I thank our guests so much for their engagement with us this morning and, indeed, into the afternoon. It has been really helpful and constructive. It was a good complement to the earlier session we had with the Minister, Deputy Foley, where we could tease out some of the issues that are still facing so many schools, students and parents on the ground. On behalf of the committee, I again thank Dr. O'Sullivan, Ms Sheridan and Dr. Corcoran from Women in Research Ireland for giving us their time and expertise and sharing with us their insights in their written submissions. We really appreciate that.

The joint committee adjourned at 12.10 p.m. until 9 a.m. on Thursday, 26 May 2022.
Top
Share