asked the Minister for Education the number of schools which have been categorised as disadvantaged; the criteria used in classifying schools as disadvantaged; the additional resources which are made available to disadvantaged schools; and if the implementation of Circular 20/87 would affect the pupil-teacher ratio operating in disadvantaged schools.
Ceisteanna — Questions. Oral Answers. - Disadvantaged Schools.
5.
A total of 168 schools have been assisted to date through a programme of special educational measures for schools serving disadvantaged areas for which a special fund was initiated in 1984.
In selecting schools to participate in the programme many educational, social and environmental factors are taken into account including the following: (1) high-levels of truancy and behaviour disorders; (2) discipline problems; (3) evidence of poor application, impaired reading and maths understanding; (4) home factors such as parental problems, poor quality of home life, lack of interest; (5) high unemployment and material poverty; (6) crime and vandalism; (7) lack of community support; and (8) poor standard of accommodation.
The main benefits which the individual schools receive through the programme are: (i) special grants for books-materials (ii) the sponsorship of home-school-community liaison initiatives (iii) in-service training for the teachers concerned (iv) provision of curricular materials and (v) the supply of educational assessment materials.
My Department also operates a scheme for providing additional teaching assistance to primary schools serving disadvantaged areas. A total of 79 schools throughout the country are included in this scheme at present.
In the allocation of posts, factors taken into account include the disavantaged nature of the area, the number of pupils and the level of staffing, and any particular problems or needs which may exist in each school.
I have already announced that existing remedial posts will not be affected by the changes under Circular 20/87, nor will special posts in disadvantaged areas.
Can the Minister tell me in the list of criteria which she mentioned for the selection of an area or a school in an area which would be deemed disadvantaged if all the items listed must exist? To what extent must an area be disadvantaged in order to qualify? While the Minister said in her reply that none of the special teacher assistance or remedial teachers will be affected by Circular 20/87, will the existing teaching staff in a school which is designated as being in an disadvantaged area be affected by Circular 20/87.
In regard to the first question, the eight criteria which were listed, which should be taken into account, are included in general. There is no specific blueprint as to whether the eight should be there or what element of the eight should be there. They are based on information furnished and on inspectors' and principals' reports and visits to the schools. They would not necessarily need to have the eight components but by and large they would include a majority of those in some shape or form depending on the region and the environmental factors. On the Deputy's second point relating to remedial posts in the disadvantaged areas, particular teachers would not be affected but normal staff posts in such schools would fall. Bearing in mind that the quota review is looking at each school, then that school would fall into that category too and it might be affected. The remedial, the disadvantaged and special posts would not fall to be disturbed; the others would be up for review.
I understood the Minister to say that remedial posts would not be affected in disadvantaged schools. Can I take it that it is not because of Circular 20/87 that a school in a disadvantaged area which was promised a remedial and resource teacher in September last has still not been allocated Can the Minister tell us the reasons why a teacher has not been allocated to that school?
Because I do not have the facts I cannot comment on any one particular case, but what I can say is that if a remedial teacher had been sought last September and has not yet been allocated this would not be due to Circular 20/87. I presume it is because the case is at present being considered within the Department and if the Deputy furnishes me with the details of the case I will have it looked into.
Can the Minister tell the House in somewhat more detail if Circular 20/87 has been withdrawn or, if it has not been withdrawn, what is its present status?
There is another question on the Order Paper which relates to Circular 20/87 and we will reach that later.
In the light of the criteria which the Minister has announced and particularly in the light of the criteria in regard to unemployment, can she tell us whether she is satisfied that Granard will fall to be classified as being disadvantaged? She will be aware that I have asked her to so declare it at the request of the parents of that area.
I have to point out that I did not suddenly announce these criteria. In fact, they have been in existence for some time within the Department of Education. I am aware of Deputy Cooney's correspondence in regard to Granard and I can tell him that the matter is under consideration.
I hope successfully.
We share a common interest.
The Minister when she comes into the House to answer questions likes to keep reminding us that she has much teaching experience.
Now, now.
Can the Minister tell us if Circular 20/87 is implemented in full and a school loses a teacher whether she would accept that the school would become a disadvantaged school?
Sin ceist eile. I have already read out the eight criteria——
(Interruptions.)
I have disposed of only five questions in just over half an hour. Let us make a little more progress. I am going onto the next question. I have given Deputies every facility.
On a point of order, you took two supplementary questions from Members of The Workers' Party, two from Members of Fine Gael and one from a Member of the Labour Party.
If the Deputy had offered earlier——
I did offer earlier.
——I would have called her also. She ought not accuse the Chair of discrimination. There must be finality at some stage during Question Time. Again, I repeat that I have disposed of only five questions in almost 35 minutes. To suggest that the Chair is being unfair or is hurrying things unduly is a little bit much. Question No. 6, please.