Recent reports outline the grim truth about the number of young people who are almost totally disengaged from our educational system. The Clondalkin study shows that there is chronic absenteeism among 25 per cent of pupils, with most of them missing for more than four months of the year. The same can be said of several other areas throughout the city. A report from the Ballyfermot area indicates general absenteeism of 20 per cent, which suggests that a larger number may be absent for long periods. In recent times we have seen OECD study findings on literacy levels among the adult population. Much attention has been focused on the finding that almost 25 per cent of the population has literacy problems while there has been little attention on the fact that 17 or 18 per cent of those aged 15 to 25 years, the recent products of the school system, experience serious literacy problems. We can no longer hide from the truth that our education system is failing many of our pupils.
Most surprising about today's reports is that this information is not systematically collected in the Department of Education and Science — I am not pointing the finger at the present Minister. It is bizarre that in a country committed to compulsory legal education, where everybody must attend school up to the age of 15 years, there are no routine systems to identify the extent to which children are performing adequately, receiving the necessary support, attending school regularly and achieving literacy standards. That information is not systematically compiled. The Minister does not have access to reports on individual schools to show that problems are being redressed or that the tide is turning.
The Clondalkin report shows the problem is deep-rooted, and I do not pretend the Minister for Education and Science alone can address it. Many of the 25 per cent of children involved come from families with serious problems outside the school system. The contrast between the environment at school and the education system is so divergent that it is difficult for many pupils to concentrate on the curriculum pursued. Behavioural problems arise as a result of frustration, creating great difficulties for teachers in the classroom.
We must take seriously the recommendations of this report. An education and welfare service is needed to identify those at risk not only in Clondalkin but in areas such as Tallaght, Darn-dale and the north and south inner city. This is just one example of a serious problem. We must also expand the Early Start and Breaking the Cycle programmes. It is incredible those two initiatives are taken up by only about 3 per cent of the pupil population. At present 16 per cent of pupils are educationally disadvantaged, and those schemes only scratch the surface. Of the primary education budget, only 2 per cent is devoted to special measures for the educationally disadvantaged, and that is not good enough. There is 61 per cent unemployment among people who leave school without qualifications. The report shows that many of the particularly chronic absentee pupils become involved in drug taking and various types of delinquency and the cost to themselves, their families and the State is enormous.
To assign only 2 per cent of the primary budget to special measures for disadvantaged areas under the Early Start programme and Breaking the Cycle is not acceptable. We must also examine the curriculum to ensure it is practical and one to which people can relate. Many children who leave school with numeracy and literacy problems are well able to evaluate things that matter to them. Many of them are able to read the odds in bookie shops and to compute the meaning of odds without the favourite, which are complex mathematical computations. However, if they are taught in an alien system they will not get results. I support the call for practical goal driven education subjects.
The most important recommendation in the report is the need for specialist school based units. We must set up units in schools to deal with absenteeism and with children who are experiencing difficulties at home. Such units could deal with pupils on a one to one basis and help them get back into the school system. They could also examine activities outside the formal school system. It is obvious from the report that homework, the traditional after-school activity, is inappropriate for most of these children, but plenty of activities have been successfully developed on a pilot basis in other parts of the city which are expanding the capabilities of these children.
We must empower the areas in which the disadvantage occurs. The State spends extraordinary sums of money in areas of deprivation, but the people do not benefit from the results. Agencies must work in co-operation with communities to determine how resources can best be used. That should be our long-term objective. Innovation and new thinking will come from the communities. The traditional approach of the Department of Education and Science managing the activities of schools must change. We must build partnerships at local level. The Minister may be correct not to agree with regional boards, but he cannot avoid the need to develop the power to plan strategically and to allocate resources on a devolved basis so that projects can be selected. The local community should have the power to make those choices.
I hope the Minister sets a number of targets and that in three or four years' time the chronic absenteeism in Clondalkin will be dramatically reduced. That is the way we must tackle disadvantage, but to do that we need resources. Two per cent of the primary budget is not enough to crack the cycle.
