Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Tuesday, 6 Feb 1996

Vol. 461 No. 1

Adjournment Debate. - Leaving Certificate Art Examination.

As the matters raised by Deputies Nealon and Martin are similar I suggest each Deputy make a statement to be followed by the Minister for Education who could then reply to both Deputies. Deputies have ten minutes in total and the Minister for Education has ten minutes to reply. The Deputies concerned have five minutes each.

I thank you for the opportunity to raise this important matter. As the Minister is aware a major blunder has now been revealed in the marking of the leaving certificate art examination last year. This arose initially from the disappearance of all the work submitted by students for the craft option of the art examination and it has been grossly compounded in the meantime by the inexplicable failure of the system to detect what happened.

The failure has obvious implications for the whole marking system of the Department of Education examinations and it has created major problems for students directly affected. Of those 46 students, 14 came from the Ursuline College, Sligo. The crafts component was allocated one-fourth of the marks in the art examination — 100 marks out of 400 marks — this was obviously of considerable significance to the students doing the art examination and one would assume also for those compiling the results. Yet we had the extraordinary development of the entire craft work of 46 students going missing and, more extraordinary still, this not being detected for many months afterwards despite warnings and rechecks. Were it not for the persistence of the Ursuline College, Sligo, students, teachers, parents — and one parent in particular — the blunder might never have come to light.

The craft work was sent by the Ursuline College to the examination centre in Athlone. I presume the same happened so far as the other colleges were concerned. Receipts for dispatch by registered post were obtained by the Ursuline College. We know from official documentation that the craft work from Sligo arrived in Athlone.

The next stage of this saga came with the announcement of the results of the leaving certificate examination. We can imagine the shock and consternation among the students, teachers, parents and everyone concerned. The principal of the Ursuline College, Sligo, an experienced and respected person in teaching and in examinations wrote to the Department of Education and warned that something had gone badly wrong. The Department responded that she would have to await the official recheck. All 14 Ursuline College, Sligo, students asked for the recheck, paid their money, got the rechecks and got the result — no change. For all these 14 students there was no mark for one component of the examination and still nothing was discovered.

Later when one persistent parent asked for a breakdown of the marks for the component parts the blunder emerged. Finally, the Department informed the students of the college on 21 December that each student had been upgraded without the work being found. This was too late and the damage has been done. I have two specific examples of the upheaval this has caused for the students. One student who failed to get a place in third level education directly because her craft option marks were missing is now repeating the leaving certificate. Another student is in a third level institution in Britain, an excellent college no doubt but not the college of her choice. I am sure the same has happened with many of the other 46 students.

There are two major issues for the Minister. There must be an improvement in the examination marking system which will ensure that such a blunder can never be repeated. The other question, which is of particular interest to me since the Ursuline College and most of the students are in my constituency, is what the Minister intends to do by way of compensation and making amends. For some of the students and their parents there are serious financial implications.

Is it not extraordinary that despite the fact that the craft work was dispatched from Sligo and despite the fact that it arrived in Athlone — we have the official documentation — despite the warning from the principal that something had gone wrong, despite the checks asked for by 14 students, the blunder did not surface until one parent persisted and asked that the art examination marks be broken down by their component parts? It is no surprise that the board of management of the Ursuline College, Sligo, in a statement issued after a meeting last night said it was annoyed at the unnecessary disappointment, frustration and stress caused to students, parents and the teacher as a result of what happened. It was a very strange reaction.

I wish to share a minute of my time with Deputy Coughlan.

I am sure that is in order and is satisfactory.

I, along with Deputy Nealon, raise this issue on the Adjournment to highlight the need for an immediate and full explanation as to how 46 students from 29 schools around the country received no credit for the craft work section of the leaving certificate art examination last year and how the rechecking system failed to uncover this fact.

The leaving certificate examination is an extremely important event in the life of any young person. Blunders such as this should not happen. Public confidence in the integrity of our examination system has been badly shaken. The Minister will have to take immediate steps to restore public confidence in the system. She could start by giving the full facts to the House this evening. She should publish the results of the interim internal review that has been carried out within the Department and also indicate what remedial action has been taken to date on the matter. The Minister confirmed last Friday that an internal review had taken place and that remedial action had been taken — the results of both should be published. The Minister should clarify when specifically she was made aware that this error had taken place.

Rumour is rife in the educational world concerning this issue. The Minister should use this occasion to clarify a number of points. Why did it take so long for the parents and school involved to secure an admission from the Department that something drastic went wrong? Why did the Department not take seriously the sincere protestations of a committed art teacher, a school principal and the parents involved in the first instance? The principal wrote to the Department on 1 September 1995 asking for a review of the art results for all the students who took the craft work option. The principal and the art teacher knew something was wrong. The Department refused this request and insisted that each pupil apply individually. It is extraordinary that the rechecking of the papers in question did not bring the error to light.

Will the Minister confirm that on 24 January 1996 two departmental officials came to Sligo and told the parents the rechecking was carried out by competent and experienced examiners and that they placed a note on one student's file to the effect that the practicals were missing? Apparently the officials went on to admit at this meeting that there was no follow up to that note. On the face of it, this seems incredible, and one wonders why, if this did happen, the matter was not properly investigated at that stage. Were such notes put on the files of the other students whose papers were being rechecked?

I am also aware that after the rechecking process was completed and a negative reply was sent to the parents, further correspondence was sent to the Department which, as Deputy Nealon pointed out, sought a breakdown of the component parts of the art examination results. According to my information it remained unanswered for over a month in the Department and it took further action to eventually force a reply before Christmas. It is my understanding that the particular communication with the parents suggested the results had been calculated and that the practical section had not been taken into account.

I would appreciate if the Minister would clarify these points and give a full account of what actually happened. She should take the opportunity to confirm whether any new procedures have been introduced for the handling of the crafts section of the art paper. Was the old system, developed over the years, changed in any way? It is worth pointing out that the crafts section has to be submitted in June. In addition, the Department is aware, as early as January each year, of the number of students who have opted for the section and the particular crafts chosen.

Given what has happened, a full review of the examination system should be carried out to ensure that something like this will never happen again. The students, teachers and parents have suffered enormous trauma and upset. The Minister must consider offering compensation to the students who were wronged and whose lives have been severely disrupted as a result of the error. It is clear that without their persistence we would never have known anything about this. That is most worrying and highlights the need for far greater transparency in the examination system. In the future school authorities should have access to the papers at the rechecking stage to ensure everything is in order.

I wish to voice my concern as the Ursuline College, Sligo, was my alma mater. This incident has affected the lives of the young women concerned, the board of management and staff of the school. There is a need for full disclosure. Without the persistence of a particular individual we would never have known there was a problem. The Department should have been big enough to admit there was a problem. This would have allowed us to deal with it in a more cogent way. Proper compensation should be paid to the students who have been badly affected by this blunder.

I am grateful for the opportunity to state in the House my concern at the failure to correctly credit marks in the case of some art students in 1995. Not only does it cause distress and worry for students, their families and teachers, but any failure in this area has an impact on the overall integrity of the certificate examinations.

As soon as I became aware of this problem my first priority was to notify schools and the 46 students of their revised results and to offer help and advice to those concerned. As part of this process and on foot of a request from the Ursuline College, Sligo, officials from my Department met with candidates, their parents and members of the school board of management two weeks ago. In addition, the parents of some individual candidates have been in direct contact with my Department over the last number of weeks. I wish to emphasise again the continued availability of advice and assistance to any candidates or parents seeking it. In addition, where a case to make good losses incurred by a candidate is put forward, it will be examined in a fair and even handed way.

I am concerned to secure the standing and integrity of the certificate examinations. Mr. Tommy Francis, President of the ASTI, made the point recently that these examinations involve 133,000 students in 800 schools and are supervised and corrected by 11,000 teachers. He also emphasised the dedication, efficiency and professionalism of those involved. This is a sentiment which I, as Minister, share. Given my responsibility for ensuring that the examinations retain the full confidence of parents, students and the many institutions which rely on them, I considered it essential that this problem be the subject of a full independent inquiry. This inquiry is now being conducted and I intend to publish its report when it becomes available within a matter of weeks.

This report will provide a full and detailed explanation of the circumstances which led to the failures in the running of the art examination in 1995. While it is true to say that in an operation as large as the certificate examinations some mistakes will occur, the central issue is that these mistakes should be detected by the various checks in the system.

Without wishing to pre-empt the report of the independent inquiry, I will comment in broad terms on the failures which arose. In the case of craftwork, one of four parts in the art exam, the finished materials are sent from the schools to the Department's offices in Athlone for examination. Where this work fails to arrive it should be followed up directly with the school. In addition, as part of the marking process, a missing part should be investigated. Finally, the appeals process should always detect a missing part of the examination.

In the case of these candidates the system of checks failed in 1995. There is no excusing this failure. The inquiry which I ordered and which is ongoing will arrive at the reasons for the failure. Its report will be published. The fact that this report is an external independent one will enhance both its public standing and the acceptability of its recommendations.

In addition to the inquiry which will deal with all aspects of the running of the 1995 art examination, I have asked Price Waterhouse to review the entire appeals procedure in the case of all subjects. Such a review is essential to fully secure public confidence in this process. It is my intention that any recommendations for improvements in this area will be implemented for the 1996 examinations.

The Minister's reply is unsatisfactory.

Barr
Roinn