asked the Minister for Education whether he is aware that the decision to change the rule in regard to county council primary scholarships, requiring the pupil to be of a maximum age of thirteen years on the 1st April in the year of the examination, is calculated to create grave hardship, especially for primary school children in rural schools; and whether he will consider suspending this regulation indefinitely at least in respect of the pupils of rural primary schools.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - County Council Primary Scholarships.
49.
I would refer the Deputy to the reply given on 21st November, 1962, to a previous question in relation to this matter from Deputy O'Donnell. I have nothing to add to that reply.
Is the Minister aware that this rule is operating to deprive children from rural primary schools of the opportunity of competing for these scholarships on the basis of equality with children from urban schools? Under the new regulations, to sit for the scholarship examination, a child must start school between four and five. If you have one or two miles to go to school, or even three miles, you cannot start school between four and five. The children in the rural schools who go to school between five and six, because of the time limit set by this regulation, have done only half of the fifth class. They are asked to compete against children who have done half or all of the sixth class. That is not fair. I put it to the Minister that at least in respect of children attending rural schools, this rule should be relaxed in order to give them the extra year in which to qualify to sit for the examination.
They will qualify at 11 years of age. This is something which is a matter of opinion, and I think the weight of opinion is with what I have done. In the case of children who do not get started in primary schools as early as children in the towns, I feel an extra year would not give any great advantage. What most councils have done to compensate the rural community is to leave a certain number of scholarships aside for competition among rural schools only. I think that is the most satisfactory way of approaching this.
Is the Minister aware that in some cases the child attending an urban school can go into the secondary school and by getting a year there and taking two subjects, such as geometry and geography, gain an extra 200 marks, thus putting the rural child at a further substantial disadvantage? I appreciate the Minister says it is a matter of balancing opinion each way. I would ask him would he look at the problem of the rural child again and see if for an experimental period of five years he would let the existing regulations stand for urban schools and give an extension of one year for rural schools and at the end of the five year period, look at it again, and see if any discrepancies then exist.
Is the Minister aware that the General Council of County Councils met to-day and disapproved of this new regulation and they are sending a resolution to the Minister to that effect.
It is just an additional group that do not approve of my ideas. The reduction made was a reduction of five months——
That is as may be——
That is as is, and five months do not constitute a year. It is not a big thing but it is something that has caused me worry because I should like to compensate the rural child if there is a loss but I am not persuaded by people who strongly believe the change is——
If we succeed in persuading you, will the Minister have a second look at it?
I look at these things every day.
As of to-morrow then, the Minister will reconsider this matter.