asked the Minister for Education if he will reconsider the age limit for entry of pupils to recognised schools especially in view of the fact that some schools have four-year courses for the intermediate certificate.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - School Entry Age.
20.
I would refer the Deputy to the previous reply in relation to this matter which I gave in the House on the 13th November, 1969. I see no reason to change the views which I then expressed in relation to the necessity to have a minimum age limit for entry to secondary schools. I consider the present limit to be reasonable and educationally sound.
Would the Minister not agree that this limit is arbitrary, is related to physical age and has no immediate connection with the mental age of a pupil and that where there are schools with four-year intermediate courses as is the case in particular with the religious minority here, this imposes hardship? Where there is a student going to a specific school who has not reached the age of 12, he is either kept back or there is an extra financial burden on the parents.
I do not agree that this decision is arbitrary particularly when related to the education of children in general. I dealt at some length with this particular matter in reply to the debate on the Estimate for my Department. I pointed out that in other countries where this whole question has been examined carefully, the conclusion has been reached that the age of 12 or 12½ is the best age at which a child should transfer. This conclusion relates to England, Scotland and Wales. I might add that this age is higher than the age limit here.
Is the Minister suggesting there is a legal age minimum there and that children are not allowed go to these schools before reaching that age?
The arguments put forward in the Plowden Report and in other reports add up to the fact that this is the proper age at which children should transfer from primary to post-primary schools.
The Minister has not answered my question. Would he not agree that there is no such legal age limit in other countries and that it is entirely wrong to impose this limit on all children?
Whether it is legal or otherwise——
For the typical child.
——it is obvious from the various reports that have been compiled in Britain that we are doing well in relation to what the Deputy is seeking in the sense that our age limit is lower than that advocated. I would like to point out also that the Deputy seems to be concerned very much with what he would term "the brilliant child".
Among others.
I have a feeling that the people who are agitating for this particular change are not necessarily agitating for the brilliant child but rather they are agitating so that they will get grants earlier in the post-primary schools.
Does the Minister not accept——
We cannot debate this question at length.
——that what may be right for the typical child is not necessarily right for every child and there ought to be flexibility in this? On what possible grounds can he say that regardless of the mental development of the child he may not be let into a post-primary school until he has reached the physical age of 12, although many children are ready for that at 11 and some, indeed, at ten?
According to our regulations the physical age happens to be 11 years and eight months.
That does not answer my question.