The Estimates of the establishments of the three main educational branches of this Department, primary, secondary, and technical, are now being presented to you as a whole for the first time. The unification of the Estimates of the establishments has been made possible by the unification of educational administration which has been carried out under the Ministers and Secretaries Act, and by the co-ordination and amalgamation of staffs that has taken place as a result of it.
When the Department of Education took over control of the three chief branches of education, primary, secondary, and technical, it took them over as separate and unconnected entities. Neither in personnel, methods, programmes, nor machinery, had there been any real connection between these branches under the former régime. One of the first steps taken by the Department of Education for the remedying of this state of affairs was the complete reorganisation of the inspectorates of the primary and secondary branches, and the creation from the reorganised bodies and the inspectorate of the technical branch, of a standing Council of Chief Inspectors. The main work of this Council consists in the co-ordination of the inspectorial staffs of the three branches as far as the different nature of the work permits, the unification or correlation of their programmes and methods, the preparation of schemes for reforming any sections of those branches that are defective or not consonant with one another, and in general the formulation of the best methods for correlating or carrying into effect as one whole the educational policy of the Department. In this connection, I may mention that a co-ordination has also been begun between the inspectors of the Department and the examiners of the Universities. This has been done in two ways. Firstly, by the association of the professors of the various University Colleges with the inspectors of the Department of Education in the examining committees that take part in the drawing up and marking of the examination papers for the Training Colleges. The second form of co-ordination has been in the combination of the inspectors of the Department and the examiners and professors of the University Colleges into committees for the drawing up and marking of the papers for the Leaving Certificate Examination of the secondary branch. This has been done in special connection with the awarding of county council scholarships.
I do not intend to take up your time by going into the details by which the various schemes of co-ordination are being carried out. The outline that I have given you will, however, show you in a general way how the various scattered educational blocks that existed apart hitherto have been, and are being, welded together into one educational edifice. The main fact is that the chief inspectors of all three branches take part in the shaping of programmes and the organisation of the inspection of teaching in the schools of all three systems, that the lower rungs of the secondary schools are linked on to the higher ranges of the primary schools, that the chief inspectors of all three branches cooperate for the organisation and inspection of work in the Training Colleges, and that all have direct contact with the University Examining Authorities in the committees which deal with those borderland regions of education, in which the University Colleges and the various branches of the Department of Education meet on common ground. It is intended that this co-ordination and mutual co-operation between the various systems of education shall be developed still more during the coming year.
So far, I have dealt with the machinery through which the Department is endeavouring to unify the educational work of the various branches. With regard to the nature of that work itself, the present Department has been fortunate enough to inherit from the Education Department of the Provisional Government a programme of primary education drawn up by a representative conference called by the Irish National Teachers' Organisation. This programme, whatever its defects, represents the first efforts of our Irish democracy to evolve a primary school programme suited to our national needs. The Department has also been fortunate enough to inherit from the Dáil Commission on secondary education a thoroughly modern programme of secondary education. Of these two programmes the primary programme has been in operation from the period of the Provisional Government. The secondary was, with some slight modifications, put into operation by the present Department during the past year. Both programmes are therefore modern ones evolved by the representatives of the teachers with the aid of other practical educationalists.
Of the primary education programme, drawn up chiefly by the teachers, it has been said with truth that it reflects more profoundly than any other public service the far-reaching character of the changes brought about by the signing of the Treaty and the establishment of an Irish Government, that as a result of its working the past three years have seen a revolution in Irish education, the full import and significance of which is scarcely realised by the average citizen, that the effect of its operation is that: (1) to-day the Irish language permeates the whole teaching life and atmosphere of the primary system in the Saorstát, that (2) the encyclopædic curriculum that was in operation in the primary schools during the former régime has been replaced by one in which attention is concentrated on the main subjects which are the groundwork of education, i. e., Irish, English and what are called the three R's—reading, writing and arithmetic. In addition to this, the courses in the top classes of primary schools have been so co-ordinated with those of the lower classes of secondary schools as to form a complete educational link between the systems. The system of primary education, in other words, at present in operation is democratic in its origin, and aims at being simple, concentrated, and national. Nevertheless, it, like its predecessors under the old régime, has been the object of criticism which has embraced not only the programme but the whole system of primary education at present in operation in the Saorstát.
The old question: "What is wrong with primary education?"—is still being asked. The question is not one that is peculiar to Ireland nor to this generation, for it is being asked in Great Britain and elsewhere at the present moment, and here in Ireland it has been asked steadily during my lifetime. In endeavouring to find an answer to this very important question, we have to take into account the three main factors in primary education, viz.: the matter taught, the people who teach it and the pupils to whom it is taught. If in any other country there is a weakness in any or all of these factors, then the quality of primary education in that country will be defective. Here in Ireland it has been stated ever since I can remember that there was a serious weakness not merely in one but in all of these three main factors.
As regards the matter taught, or the programme, as it is called, there has been a continuous outcry for the past two generations that it was unsuitable or defective in a variety of ways. In the latter part of the nineteenth century it was said to be much too narrow and rigid. When this was changed in the beginning of the present century, the new programme was criticised as being scattered, overloaded and out of touch with the life of the people of Ireland. Similar faults were found with the teachers and the school attendance. It was said that the staff of the primary schools was not as good as it should be, because the salaries of the teachers were not such as to attract good material to the ranks of the teaching profession, and finally it was said that, even if the first and second causes of weakness were removed, the lack of a proper school attendance would still operate to keep the primary system feeble and unproductive. Well, the first and second causes of weakness are being removed. As I have said, one of the first acts of the Provisional Government was to substitute for the scattered and overloaded primary programmes of the former régime the new primary programme drawn up by a commission called together by the national teachers in the year 1921.
I have said that this primary programme aims at being simple, concentrated and national. Unfortunately, it does not follow that because a primary programme is simple, concentrated and national, it is therefore the programme that best suits present circumstances. It has, for instance, been stated that the programme is still too heavy, even though it has been lightened of many of the extra subjects that made it top-heavy under the former régime. It has also been said that the change from the old programme to the new one was too sudden, and did not take sufficiently into account the unpreparedness of very many of the teachers and pupils, especially in the matter of Irish, or the bad attendance at many of the rural schools. The Minister for Education has, therefore, at the request of the Irish National Teachers' Organisation, called together a very representative conference to examine the programme in the light of the experience gained in the operation of it during the past three years, and to report what changes, if any, are necessary to make it entirely suitable to the needs and conditions of the country. This conference included representatives of the National Teachers, the Catholic and Protestant Managers, both Houses of the Oireachtas, the General Council of County Councils, the Department of Education, the Gaelic League and other important bodies. I may mention that two of the Deputies selected from this House are those who were Commissioners of National Education under the former régime, viz: Professor Thrift and Professor Magennis. Father Lambert McKenna, the distinguished Irish scholar and educationalist, has been so good as to act as Chairman. We may hope that the programme that emerges from the hands of so representative a body will be such as will suit our national needs.
However excellent the programme may be that will be evolved by the Conference, its successful operation in the school will, however, depend on the two other factors that I have mentioned, viz.: (1) the supply of an adequate and competent body of teachers, and (2) a regular school attendance which will enable those teachers to do their work. With regard to the first of these factors, namely, the adequacy of the teachers to their task, the chief causes of weakness in this respect were the poor salaries of the teachers under the former régime and the lack of a modern system of training. The first of these causes of weakness, viz: the weak financial position of the primary teachers, had been removed by the English Treasury just before it ceased to have control of our finances, and although the teachers have suffered somewhat since then in the general reduction of salaries necessitated by our financial weakness, they are, nevertheless, very much better off than they were in former days. The second cause of weakness in the teaching staff of primary schools was the lack of a modern system of training. To meet this weakness a Departmental Committee has been set up for the purpose of examining the whole question of the training of teachers, and reporting as to what reforms are necessary, in order to bring the present system of training into line with the most modern methods.
The Committee has already reformed the curriculum of the Training Colleges, and formulated a preliminary report, which recommends a more up-to-date preparation for entrance to them, by the abolition of the monitorial system and the substitution therefor of a thoroughly modern system of Preparatory Training Colleges. Detailed proposals under this head have been already put before the Minister for Finance. When the full proposals for the training of teachers have been elaborated, they will be submitted to the Irish National Teachers' Organisation and other educational bodies for the fullest discussion, and it is to be hoped that we may in this way obtain a thoroughly modern system of training.
With regard to the second requisite for a sound primary education, viz: a satisfactory school attendance, the Parliamentary draftsman has already in hands a Compulsory Attendance Bill of a drastic type which will, I think, ensure that our future system of primary education will not be frustrated at the source. It has been urged that the School Attendance Bill has been unduly delayed. The chief reason of the delay has been the lack, until quite recently, of the machinery by which the Bill could be enforced.
It is true that a Compulsory Attendance Bill, based on the local committee's principle, might have been introduced before now. In fact such a Bill was drafted and ready for introduction over a year ago, at a time when it was believed that the Gárda Síochána would not be available as the enforcing machinery of the Act. Neither the teachers nor the experts of the Local Government Department believed, however, that a Compulsory Attendance Act, based on the local committees, could be effective outside the cities. The Local Government Department pointed out that, owing to the fact that the system of Local Government was in a transition stage, a School Attendance Bill could not well be based on present conditions of local government, which would disappear, or be considerably altered, in a short time, by the new Local Government Act. Apart from this difficulty, the Local Government Department could not approve of a Bill based on local committees, since they considered that such an Act would, in operation, be cumbersome, costly, and ineffective, compared to an Attendance Act, which would use the machinery of the Gárda Síochána.
These grave objections led to the holding up of the Bill and the renewal of negotiations with the Department of Justice as to the possibility of using the Gárda Síochána as the machinery for putting the Act into operation. When it became clear towards the end of last year that the Gárda Síochána would be available for the purpose, the Bill was re-cast. The delay since the re-casting of the Bill in the beginning of the year has been due to the fact that the other Government Departments that were affected by the Bill had to consider it carefully before it could be put into its final stage, and that the drafting of the Bill by the Parliamentary draftsman has been delayed by the pressure of other measures. I think, however, that you will agree that it was worth some delay, or, indeed, considerable delay, if as the result of this a simple, effective, and almost automatic machinery can be obtained for the enforcing of the Act.
Before I leave this question of primary education, I should mention that there is one further matter—also an important factor in our quest for efficiency—with which the Minister for Education hopes to deal as soon as possible. This country has always suffered from the inadequacy of its school buildings. The disturbances of recent years have left us still more seriously in arrears in this important particular, and the operation of an effective School Attendance Act will increase still more the lack of proper accommodation for primary education. To meet this difficulty the Department of Education is having a thorough census made of the primary school buildings of the Saorstát, and when this is complete, it may be necessary to ask you to make further provision in the Estimates to bring the primary school accommodation up to the level necessary for complete efficiency.
Up to now I have dealt entirely with problems that confront us in primary education, and the solutions that we are applying to them, since they are the most important of our educational problems. I do not propose dealing at any length with the reforms effected in secondary education, beyond saying that here also a complete educational revolution has been effected by the putting into operation, during the past year, of the new programmes drawn up by the Secondary Education Commission of the Second Dáil. The nature of this revolution may be summed up in a sentence. Rigidity has been replaced by freedom. The old programmes, narrow and formal, which encouraged merely mechanical teaching, have been superseded by thoroughly modern and elastic programmes which give full scope to the teacher's gifts and to the pupils' real tastes and faculties. The old vicious method of payment by results has been replaced by a capitation grant, which gives the school a financial security that was impossible under the old system. In future, while examinations are retained, and are indeed to hold an important part in Irish education, the income of a school will not depend on the fluctuating results obtained by individual students at yearly examinations. Instead, account will be taken of the school in every feature of its life. It will have freedom to choose in a wide curriculum those branches of education most useful to the class of pupil for whom it caters. Above all, it can devote itself to all those higher imponderable factors that make up education in its true sense; since its success in future will depend on intellectual rather than financial results. In other words, the new secondary system is a great step forward in our endeavours to solve the vital question, as to what the nature of secondary education ought to be in Saorstát Eireann, with reference to the needs of the nation that we are endeavouring to create.
The Minister for Education does not desire to take to himself any of the credit for the evolution of this great change. He has merely put into operation educational reforms that were urged on the British Government year after year by the old Intermediate Board, and in addition to these, other reforms evolved and elaborated by the very distinguished body of educationalists who were brought together for this purpose in 1922 by the Second Dáil. He no more desires to take credit for having put these reforms into operation in the schools, than for the fact that he has in the primary system been the inheritor of the modern and national programme handed on to him by his predecessor of the Provisional Government. But, owing to the amount of criticism of our educational system that has taken place recently, it is necessary to make it clear that the educational programmes at present in use in both the primary and secondary systems are new, modern, thoroughly up-to-date programmes drawn up by bodies of teachers and other educationalists in council, that steps are being taken to remedy any defects that may be found in the programme, that the training of teachers for primary school work is being thoroughly overhauled, and that the first legislative measure of the next Session will be a drastic Bill to ensure a full attendance at the primary schools.
The financial provisions for the upkeep of our educational systems may not be as satisfactory as we might have made if our exchequer were overflowing, but we have at least introduced into the secondary system a scheme of financial provision for the secondary teachers which is an entirely new thing in our history, and which, when it is in full operation, will raise the position of the assistant teachers to an entirely different plane. It has been pointed out that in the first year of the new system, some teachers will be worse off financially than they were in the last year of the old. This criticism ignores the fact that last year was the highest financial rung, the summit of the old system, while this year is the lowest rung—the mere beginning of the new—that when the new system is in full operation the teachers will be in an entirely different financial and social position.
Before I close this general summary of the present educational position of our primary and post-primary systems, I should like to say a few words about the position of technical education.
The Department of Education has, as you are aware, been in charge of technical education only since the latter part of last year. Its first step on taking over this important branch was to obtain a very complete detailed report from the chief officers of the technical branch on the actual state of technical instruction. This report has, I may say, been communicated to the other Department which is closely concerned with technical instruction, viz., the Department of Industry and Commerce. It has not been published, because, although it is an exhaustive statement of the actual condition of technical education in the Saorstát at the moment, it needs, in order to complete it, a further report embodying the full scheme of reform and reconstruction which the heads of the technical branch consider necessary in order to bring technical instruction into line with the needs of the Irish people at the present day. This further report is in process of preparation. Even when it is prepared, however, and such reforms as it may suggest have been put into operation, it will only deal with a part of the problem of post-primary education, viz., the technical training of boys and girls of post-primary age for careers in commerce or industry. There will remain the great question of the provision of post-primary part-time education, or, as it is called, continuation education, for the great mass of the young people between fourteen and eighteen years of age who have to work on the land.
This is too big a question to be solved by a Departmental Inquiry, yet when our primary system has been reorganised, as I hope that it will be during the coming year, this will be the next great educational problem. No matter how good our primary system may ultimately become, it is idle to expect that the main body of our people, who live on the land and by the land, can, without a suitable post-primary education, reach such a level of intelligence and training as will enable them to think clearly and consecutively on economic and other problems, and to enter into effective competition in the markets of the world. At present the main body of Irish workers on the land leave school at the end of the primary stage, at an age when they are just beginning to think. During the very important years between fourteen and twenty, when judgement and character is being formed, they receive little aid in the development of their thinking power, or the formation of their character, or the cultivation of their tastes, or the training of their natural aptitudes in the subjects that have a bearing on agricultural life and work. Neither secondary education nor technical education touches the vast majority of these workers. Neither can the agricultural training given by the Department of Lands and Agriculture deal with them since it is specialised training, intended for adults. It cannot be given to boys in their teens with any advantage to the community, and at present it cannot be given very effectively even to adults, since whatever they may have learned at the primary school is usually forgotten during the long period between the time they leave the primary school and the time when they begin their training under the Agricultural Department.
The reforms of school attendance and school staff and school programme in the primary schools will, therefore, not meet this particular difficulty, and unless some effective method of post-primary education suited to the needs of the rural children is evolved, not only the farming community but the nation as a whole is bound to suffer severely from their backwardness. The problem is a big one, too big for any one Department to solve unaided, and it is going to be a very urgent one. It is one which a representative Commission might with great advantage to the nation investigate thoroughly, and if there is any large body of opinion in this House that agrees with the Minister for Education as to its urgency, the Government will welcome any suggestions as to the setting up of a Commission for its investigation and for the investigation (as part of the problem) of the whole question of post-primary vocational training.
