Vol. 620 No. 3
1 Ms Enright asked the Minister for Education and Science the proposals she will bring forward with regard to tackling bullying behaviour at schools; the way in which her Department is dealing with the changing nature of bullying behaviour in schools; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [20145/06]
I too am concerned that any child would feel upset in school because of bullying, be it physical, verbal or cyber. I am anxious that all schools have effective practices in place both to prevent bullying and to deal with cases that may arise.
As the Deputy will be aware, each school is required to have in place a policy that includes specific measures to deal with bullying behaviour, within the framework of an overall school code of behaviour and discipline. Such a code, developed through consultation with the whole school community and properly implemented, can be the most influential measure in countering bullying behaviour in schools.
My Department has issued guidelines as an aid to schools in devising measures to prevent and deal with instances of bullying behaviour and to increase awareness among school management authorities of their responsibilities in this regard. These guidelines were drawn up following consultation with representatives of school management, teachers and parents, and are sufficiently flexible to allow each school authority to adapt them to suit the needs of their school. My Department, through the National Centre for Technology in Education, NCTE, has also developed policy guidelines and advisory notes for schools and parents which deal with the issues of Internet and mobile phone bullying.
The National Educational Welfare Board, NEWB, is currently developing further guidelines for schools on codes of behaviour, as provided for under section 23 of the Education (Welfare) Act 2000. The process involves drawing up a draft framework discussion document for the guidelines, which is being used as a basis for consultations with the key stakeholders including school management, teachers, parents, and children. The board has established an expert working group for this purpose. Work on the guidelines is at an advanced stage and it is envisaged that implementation will commence in the next school year.
Once the NEWB guidelines are in place, my Department will commence the process of revising and updating its own guidelines on countering bullying behaviour. This review will take into account issues such as legislative developments, the involvement of the support services available to schools, technological advancements such as the Internet, e-mail, mobile and camera phones and the latest developments in international best practice on dealing with bullying behaviour. These guidelines, on top of those that are already in place, will provide vital guidance for schools in fulfilling their responsibilities in this issue.
The Deputy may also be interested to know that dealing with bullying has been incorporated in training for principals through the leadership development for schools programme. I have also stressed to the teacher unions the importance of not just having a written policy on bullying but of ensuring a climate in which it is not tolerated in any form and in which children know that if they make a teacher aware of bullying that it will be dealt with.
Deputies will also be aware that the education of students in both primary and post-primary schools with regard to anti-bullying behaviour is part of the SPHE curriculum. SPHE is now a compulsory subject both at primary level and in the junior cycle of post-primary schools. Its curriculum provides for the development of personal and social skills including self-awareness, respect for others, self-esteem and communication skills, all of which are important elements in addressing the issue of bullying.
While responsibility for tackling bullying naturally falls to the level of the individual school, a wide range of measures are in place to support schools in this area.
The Minister mentioned guidelines, but has she given any further thought to having a national strategy against bullying so that we can ensure it works and that it contains specific aims and targets? I am sure the Minister read the report on the results of a survey carried out in 2004. Some 90% of respondents said their school anti-bullying policy did not refer to lesbian or gay related bullying. Will the Minister send guidelines to schools to deal with homophobic bullying until there is a national strategy in place?
The Minister would agree that the nature of bullying has changed. While we still have traditional bullying, there is now text bullying and bullying on Bebo websites etc. With regard to the guidelines and the consideration of a national strategy, what regard is being given to the changing nature of bullying and to the fact that it is no longer just a schoolyard phenomenon but something that follows children into their homes after school?
When we take together the work being done by the Department, the NEWB, the NCTE, the leadership development and the curriculum, we could say it is a national strategy. However, it must be implemented at a local school level through all the elements involved and through social, personal and health education.
We can deal with the issue in two ways. We can deal with the bully and, more particularly, with the victim. We must enable victims to have the skills to cope and ensure they do not tolerate bullying behaviour. I am equally conscious that at school level children should feel that if they make a complaint, it will be dealt with and teachers will follow up on it.
With regard to the findings of the survey with regard to homophobic bullying, all bullying is wrong. School policies should be careful to include the issue of homophobic bullying. We are conscious of bullying because of race, size, background, abilities and colour, but should be equally conscious of bullying on account of sexual orientation. All types of bullying must be stamped out in the school context.
There was a time when bullying was more obvious because it was either verbal or physical and therefore it was more easily identified by a teacher. Now, it is more sinister. Young people spend too much time in isolation communicating with others through the Internet, websites and text messaging, without any personal communication. It is much more difficult to tackle bullying in this situation. The website I launched on behalf of the NCTE, www.webwise.ie, is a useful aid for everybody in recognising and dealing with issues concerned with Internet safety.
All these elements will form part of the guidelines being produced by the NEWB and will, consequently, feed into the work of the Department.
NEWB officers to whom I have spoken feel that a significant number of children do not attend school because of bullying or fear of it. The Minister mentioned four or five groups, a national strategy would tie their work together. Will she consider that to ensure we have best practice?
Some 90% of respondents said their schools do not have a policy to deal with homophobic bullying. Will the Minister contact the schools to ensure policies contain this in future?
The strategy exists in effect, but it must be implemented at school level. We should not lose sight of the fact that a policy on bullying can only work if the children, the teachers, the principal, the parents and the board of management sign up to it. Each of these must be familiar with the terms and sanctions of the policy and of how it will be implemented within the school. There is no point in just writing lofty plans. The guidelines are there, but they must be updated when necessary. The NEWB is doing this. The policy must be implemented at school level.
I am concerned that children should not miss school because of bullying. Televisions programmes aimed at children point out that children should tell and not be afraid to do so. Parents should also encourage children to tell.
Did the Deputy have another question?
I asked about homophobic bullying not being part of policy.
A policy should be all-inclusive. Whether homophobic bullying should be given specific mention is for the school to decide, but it should be clear that no form of bullying will be tolerated within the school community.
2 Ms O’Sullivan asked the Minister for Education and Science her plans to reform the leaving certificate to relieve the stress on students and their families; the timeframe for such plans; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [20108/06]
There is potential to reform senior cycle education to ensure there is an emphasis on embedding key skills, such as critical thinking and information processing, and that assessment methods match learning objectives in each subject. I am conscious that if we review the assessment methods and provide for a second assessment component, where appropriate and feasible, we could reduce exam pressure on students. I am determined to ensure we build on the strengths of the existing leaving certificate system, which is widely regarded as fair and is held in high regard internationally. There is much at stake. I owe it to our young people to take action on this issue in a measured and well-thought-out way.
As the Deputy is aware, the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment has statutory responsibility for advising me on these matters. When the council made proposals for senior cycle reform last year, I responded by stressing the objectives I have outlined. I addressed this issue when I spoke to the first meeting of the new council last week. I highlighted the need to prioritise proposals in relation to mathematics, science and Irish. The Deputy is aware of my views on how senior cycle Irish should be reformed to place a greater emphasis on the spoken language. I understand the council's recommendations in these areas should be submitted to me early in 2007. The Department of Education and Science is also exploring whether changes to examination timetabling might be feasible from 2007. A number of proposals to reduce exam pressure on students are being considered. The Deputy can be assured of my determination to take action in this regard in a careful and considered way in the interests of our young people.
The Minister said she intends "to take action on this issue in a measured and well-thought-out way". I think the pace of change is far too slow. The National Council for Curriculum and Assessment's proposals are well thought-out and can be enacted over a considerable period of time, allowing for preparation in the schools etc. Will the Minister produce a timetable for introducing the measures which were proposed in the council's report, which was published in April 2005? In the introduction to its proposals, the council states that they are designed specifically to concentrate on students who are being left out of the system and are dropping out, or are not doing as well as they should. The report states specifically that the council's proposals are designed to encourage more students from lower socioeconomic backgrounds to stay in school. Is the Minister concerned that such students are still being failed by the system? There does not seem to be any sense of urgency to do something about it. Many people acknowledge that the leaving certificate applied programme is appropriate for certain students who are not very interested in academic subjects. Will she ensure the programme gets proper recognition, not only in the CAO system which governs entry to third level education but also in the world of work generally? That is one of the most important things we need to do if all students in the system are to enjoy parity of esteem.
The standard of the leaving certificate examination is well-recognised throughout the world. I do not intend to change the entire leaving certificate system to suit 14% of students. I will try to preserve its strengths for the 86% of students who go on to sit the examination. Obviously, I have to ensure the 14% of students who tend to fall out of the system and do not get an opportunity to develop their skills are given some options. Deputy O'Sullivan has quite rightly identified the leaving certificate applied programme, which is very successful and focussed, as one of those options. It should have much more status in society because it is challenging for those students who do it. I would support any proposal to extend the programme, thereby ensuring that more students get an opportunity to pursue it. The programme can be of benefit to students who have behavioural problems. A curriculum of this nature would help not only to tackle their academic needs but also to address the matters which are giving rise to their behavioural difficulties in school.
I did not set out a timetable for the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment's recommendations because, as I made quite clear at the time, I do not agree with all of them. For example, I do not agree with the proposal to make transition year part of an integrated three-year senior cycle programme. I am in favour of transition year remaining as a stand-alone year so it can continue to offer opportunities to young people to explore other interests and areas of work, to make choices which will help them in their future careers and lives and to develop other skills. I have asked the council to prioritise the standardisation of transition year modules to encourage more schools, particularly more boys' schools and disadvantaged schools, to introduce it.
The council recommended that students should do a significant number of short courses, but I do not want them to do all the short courses. I asked the council to prioritise enterprise education, which we need to focus on. I suggested to the council that rather than looking at second components in every subject, it should focus on those subjects in which there are particular difficulties. We need to address the issues with mathematics, for example, so I have asked the council to prioritise that subject. I have also asked it to focus particularly on science areas and the Irish language. I have asked the council to get back to me quickly in respect of such priority areas. I would be interested in implementing some suitable proposals in those areas. Not all of the wide-ranging proposals which were submitted last year are ready for timetabling. I did not agree with some of them in any event.
Does the Minister accept that rote learning, which is what is primarily rewarded in the leaving certificate examination, does not serve the interests of most of the 86% of students who do not drop out of the school system before that examination? Does she agree the examination should examine other kinds of intelligences and skills, in the interests of all children and not just those who drop out?
I agree. A change in the curriculum is urgently needed, of course.
A change in the examination system is also needed.
The National Council for Curriculum and Assessment should be looking at that. It should also consider bringing about a system in which there is a second assessment point. We need to give more marks for practical or oral elements of examinations. We are moving in that direction and of course I agree with it.
Does the Minister have a timetable for that?
It is already happening. This year, for the first time, 35% of the marks in the junior certificate science examination will be awarded for practical work.
That is in the junior certificate.
It has to build up, obviously. It is already happening in respect of languages. Not only do students take an oral examination, but they now also take an aural examination. I have asked the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment to ascertain whether 50% of the marks in the leaving certificate Irish examination could be awarded for the oral examination. That would change dramatically the manner in which Irish is taught and learnt. None of the proposals can be introduced immediately because we need to bring about a sea change in teaching and learning. I have asked the council to prioritise mathematics, Gaeilge and science. I would like progress to be made in those areas very quickly.
The Minister needs to begin implementing the existing proposals, rather than asking the council to come up with new ideas.
I will start the process of implementation as soon as I get the recommendations, which will not happen until the beginning of next year. I hope I will still be around to implement them.
3 Ms Harkin asked the Minister for Education and Science if she has decided to alter the review process in any way in view of the appeals received under the DEIS process particularly in regard to small rural schools. [20171/06]
The Delivering Equality of Opportunity in Schools programme provides for a standardised system for identifying levels of disadvantage and for a new integrated school support programme. The school support programme will bring together and build on a number of existing interventions in schools with concentrated levels of disadvantage. The process of identifying primary and second level schools for participation in the school support programme was managed by the Educational Research Centre on behalf of the Department of Education and Science and supported by quality assurance work co-ordinated through the Department's regional offices and the inspectorate. As a result of the identification process, 840 schools were invited to participate in the school support programme. Some 640 primary schools — 320 urban schools and 320 rural schools — and 200 second level schools were invited to participate and I am delighted that 833 of them, or over 99% have accepted the invitation.
A review process has been put in place for primary and second level schools which did not qualify for participation in the school support programme, but regard themselves as having a level of disadvantage which is sufficient to warrant inclusion in it. The closing date for the receipt of review applications was Friday, 31 March last. The review process will operate under the direction of an independent person who will be charged with ensuring all relevant identification processes and procedures were properly followed in the cases of schools applying for a review. The reviewer will be supported by a nominated member of staff from the Educational Research Centre and an official from the Department of Education and Science. The group will be given all the information and support it needs to carry out its work by the Educational Research Centre and the Department. The review process is under way and it is anticipated that it will be completed by the end of the current school year.
The review process applies to primary schools which participated in the Educational Research Centre survey in May 2005 and eligible second level schools for which data were available from the relevant databases. The applications of primary schools which seek a review must relate to data on the relevant variables included in the centre's survey of May 2005 and to the reference date of 30 September 2004. The centre's analysis of its survey returns identified the socioeconomic variables which collectively best predict achievement. The variables were used to identify schools for participation in the school support programme. The applications of second level schools which seek a review must be based on the variables used to determine eligibility for inclusion in the school support programme. Review requests must be evidence-based and based on the variables and reference dates used in the identification process for the programme. Having completed the process for each school requesting a review, the review group will make a recommendation to the Department in the case of each such school. The review process is structured in such a way as to ensure fairness and balance and with the necessary expertise to process and review effectively the more than 300 applications received.
I thank the Minister for her answer. I have looked at the Question Paper and I assure her that my office did not refer to the Minister as "he". That typo happened elsewhere.
I have some supplementary questions. Many principals are concerned that, while some schools have lost disadvantaged status, others in the same feeder area have gained disadvantaged status. They cannot make sense of the process. The issue of greatest concern to principals pertains to schools which have disadvantaged status but which have not been invited to participate in DEIS. Will such schools lose their home-school-community liaison co-ordinator? Many principals are deeply concerned in that regard. What is the situation for new schools? Will they be left out? What mechanism is available to deal with them?
Many principals are concerned in respect of planning. The present school year has nearly finished and they want to know what their resources will be in order that they can plan for next year. There is talk of planning and monitoring within the school system and as the Minister is aware, schools need resources for this purpose. Will any additional resources be allocated to schools for that purpose?
Some schools which have been in receipt of funding to improve numeracy and literacy skills will have those funds withdrawn. What can be said to principals of such schools who will state they are being punished for their success and their efforts?
First, I will outline how some schools were included while others were not. The information was provided by the schools themselves. The list was drawn up entirely objectively based on that information. It is fair to state that while some schools and areas used to be disadvantaged, they are no longer so by virtue of changing economic, employment and demographic circumstances. Similarly, some areas which had never been disadvantaged in the past are so at present. Hence, this scheme was designed to ensure that such schools were included.
In the past, the Department operated eight different schemes and very few schools were included in all of them. It is unfair to state that schools which are not included in DEIS have now lost their status because they have not. Each participating school was informed that no one would lose anything for the coming year and that subsequently, it would depend on levels of socio-economic disadvantage. I am not in the business of penalising schools which have done well and which continue to have a considerable level of disadvantage. Obviously, I wish to ensure that children receive the supports they need and this matter will be closely examined in the next few years.
Schools need not feel they have lost status. No school has done so, although some may not have moved into this new co-ordinated programme. We have all the information provided by the schools and, depending on the level of socio-economic disadvantage in the future, we will ensure that supports are maintained for such schools.
On foot of the Minister's comments, may I take it that schools which have home-school-community liaison co-ordinators will not lose them, at least for the coming year, even if they are not in DEIS?
I have examined the indicators which were used for the primary schools. Does the Minister consider that some might discriminate against some small rural schools? In such schools, one is more likely to encounter under-employment, with small farmers, than unemployment and one will have smaller numbers of people in local authority housing. Moreover, given the location of rural schools in particular, children who want to engage in activities such as swimming must often travel for 20 km to 40 km, etc. This takes resource and so on and they will be disadvantaged as a result.
I did not answer one of the Deputy's questions regarding new schools. A mechanism exists whereby new schools can be included in the scheme. All schools have been told that they will lose nothing in the coming year. Thereafter, it will be decided in terms of their levels of socio-economic disadvantage.
The Department chose to operate distinct urban and rural schemes for the reasons outlined by the Deputy. Different circumstances exist in respect of rural areas. Hence, such schools have their own category and compete against one another and not against urban schools. The Department recognises their differences. Different elements of the scheme apply to rural schools, because one might have a number of small rural schools which did not merit extra staff in themselves, but which had a shared co-ordinator and shared facilities, etc. Another question was asked in respect of County Mayo and it is interesting to note that 20% the schools in the rural element of the scheme come from that county.
4 Mr. English asked the Minister for Education and Science the number of recommendations in respect of the national youth work development plan awaiting progression; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [20146/06]
The national youth work development plan, which was published in 2003, identifies four main goals for the development of youth work in Ireland and proposes 50 action points to achieve these goals over a five-year period.
My Department has been actively engaged in consultations with the national youth work advisory committee regarding the prioritised implementation of the plan. Based on these consultations, my Department identified a number of priority action areas for implementation and I am happy to report that progress has been made in a number of important areas.
As recommended in the plan, my Department has targeted the development and expansion of the special projects for youth scheme which supports some of the most marginalised and vulnerable young people. To date, the number of projects supported by my Department has increased from 164 in 2003 to the current level of 177. In addition, 32 single worker projects have been upgraded to two worker projects.
Significant progress has also been made in the area of child protection training for the youth work sector. A national child protection unit, which is based within the National Youth Council of Ireland and supported by me and the Department, has led and co-ordinated child protection training initiatives and assisted many youth organisations with the drafting of child protection policies and guidelines. In recent months my Department has worked with the unit and the central Garda vetting unit to agree a process for the Garda vetting of new youth work staff and volunteers. This process is due to commence in September 2006 and is a most welcome development for all involved in youth work as it will be an added safeguard in ensuring the safety of the young people involved in youth work activities.
As proposed in the plan, a committee for the professional endorsement of youth work training has been established on a North-South basis. In the first instance, the role of the education and training standards committee for youth work, which was set up following agreement between the relevant parties in both jurisdictions, is the professional endorsement of courses, programmes of education and training in youth work provided by higher education institutions in Ireland, North and South.
Two major reviews are recommended in the plan. A review of youth information provision and a review of funding of the youth work sector have been commenced and are near completion.
In 2005, I established a development fund for youth work organisations to prepare themselves organisationally for the roll-out of the Youth Work Act 2001. More than €300,000 was provided for this fund in 2005 and I will make similar funding available to national and major voluntary youth work organisations in 2006. In this regard, my Department is engaged in discussions with the various youth work interests regarding further priority areas for development for 2006.
A structure for the resourcing of vocational education committees to carry out their functions under the terms of the Youth Work Act 2001 has now been agreed, in principle, between me and the Irish Vocational Education Association.
Work is also under way on the establishment of a national youth work development unit at the National University of Ireland, Maynooth. This unit will spearhead youth research and development in Ireland. This is an especially important development in the context of the plan because 18 of its actions are in some way linked to such a unit being set up. I am confident the establishment of this unit will pave the way for the implementation of further actions recommended in the plan.
I also expect to have a youth work assessor appointed soon. Further action areas for development in 2006 and 2007 are being considered by my Department with advice from the national youth work advisory committee. Significant progress has been made and I intend to build further on this work in 2006.
I thank the Minister of State for her reply. While she stated she is satisfied with progress, this answer is almost identical to that given this time last year and I do not consider that to constitute progress. I am disappointed to tell her this, but I have last year's reply to hand. The only difference relates to the establishment of a development fund for youth work organisations. A sum of €300,000 was allocated for this purpose last year and there is talk of allocating the same amount this year.
I find this disappointing. While I do not know who is to blame for this, youth work and young people are being neglected. After years in preparation, this development plan was supposed to be the mechanism which would provide the money. Members were told it would cost approximately €37 million, to be divided over five years. However, nothing approaching that sum has been spent. Youth services need money and young people need money.
Has the Deputy a question?
What are the plans for this year? Last year, Members were told of ongoing development and the preparation of initiatives for 2006 and 2007. The Minister of State has just told me the same thing. Will she provide me with a rough idea of this year's plans? I accept there will probably be some announcements in the coming weeks. What areas does the Minister of State hope to fund and how much money does she expect to spend? Given that we are now more than two years into the plan, what is the status of the commitment of resources, originally supposed to be €40 million? Young people need our help. They are under considerable pressure and there are many social problems that we are not fully addressing. We need to treat the matter with more urgency.
I disagree with the Deputy's assertion that not much was done in the past year. The Youth Work Act and the development plan have been worked on in consultation with those involved in youth work. NYWAC is established to advise the Minister of the day. Priorities in rolling out this work are discussed through that body. The consultations with NYWAC have highlighted areas such as the targets, development and expansion of special projects for youth schemes, which have increased each year. Child protection is of extreme importance and we have supported the NYCI in this regard.
The committee of professional endorsement of youth work is another provision, which is extremely important for those working in that area. In January, I launched the endorsement of youth work with my counterpart in the North. It is most important that this endorsement procedure should exist rather than needing to look to other places such as Wales and England for such endorsement. The development fund was also established, which is very important. Some €300,000 was given to this fund in 2005 and the funding for 2006 will be similar. This decision will not be taken in isolation by me and the Department. It will be taken in consultation with youth work interests, which is how we have proceeded all along.
New structures have been agreed with the IVEA to include a number of youth workers throughout the country through the VEC system. The national youth work development unit was established in NUI Maynooth. Dr. Maurice Devlin will work in that important research unit and we will rely on such skill, knowledge and expertise. The unit will have a very positive knock-on effect for a further 18 actions of the plan. The youth assessor position was advertised in December and we will be in a position to announce the successful candidate very soon.
I am not much more informed following the reply of the Minister of State.
The Deputy may ask a very brief question.
How much money has been spent on this area? We were promised that €40 million would be spent over a five-year period. When speaking to young people they ask for facilities in which to meet, work etc. Most importantly they want centres at which to socialise. However, these have been provided in very few places. With all this consultation why can we not get what the young people want? While everything the Minister of State outlined is very important, the money promised has not been allocated.
We must move on to the next question.
Young people believe the Government is failing them.
I call Question No. 5.
The Deputy has made sweeping statements. He should talk to those directly involved in NYWAC——
I am talking to the young people.
——both the statutory and voluntary representatives on the committee, who have the responsibility in law to advise the Minister of the day on priorities. We have those consultations on foot of which I make decisions. Last year there was an 18% increase in funding, which was the biggest increase this section ever got.
It was not spent the previous year.
There was a further increase this year.
I call Question No. 5.
In the youth sector we are working to ensure that the needs of the marginalised youth in particular are addressed.
What is the total spend?
5 Ms O’Sullivan asked the Minister for Education and Science if she will introduce driver education into the school curriculum and make it widely available to young people; if she will have discussions with the Department of Transport to devise specific measures to educate young people regarding safe behaviour on the road; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [20109/06]
I have no plans to introduce driver education, in the form of driving lessons, in schools, and this is not the norm within the EU. As the Deputy will be aware, a report produced for the NCCA by an expert group which included representatives of the National Safety Council, the Garda Síochána, the Irish Insurance Federation, and the Society of the Irish Motor Industry indicated that the research available internationally was inconclusive on the benefits of teaching young people to drive at school. Particular issues highlighted include the gap arising between the time practical skills are learned initially and put into regular practice, and the risks arising from more young people taking up driving at an earlier age.
Nonetheless, schools have a role to play both in teaching students about road safety issues and in helping them to develop the attitudes necessary to promote safe behaviour on the roads. The social personal and health education programme, which is mandatory in primary schools and at junior cycle level, provides a framework under which the generic values and skills which underpin responsible decision-making, and respect for the rights and safety of others can be developed and promoted among students. SPHE has a specific personal safety strand within the programme and this provides a vehicle through which road safety issues for all can be best dealt with in an age appropriate way.
Specific materials for teaching young people about road safety have also been given to schools. At the start of the 2001-02 school year the National Safety Council, with assistance from my Department, distributed copies of Staying Alive — a road safety resource for transition year and the senior cycle — to all second level schools. This pack contained a wide range of learning opportunities and activities on topics such as personal responsibility and decision-making, environmental issues and risks and rules for road users. A CD-ROM with additional material downloaded from the Internet was included in the pack along with copies of the Rules of the Road. In the preparation of the Staying Alive resources material, views were sought from a range of organisations with interests in the promotion of road safety. Prior to its issue to second level schools, the material was piloted in 20 schools and the response from teachers in those schools was very positive. This is also supplemented by Garda visits to primary and second level schools during which the themes of crime, road safety, personal safety and substance abuse are explored as part of the SPHE programme. There were some 1,900 school visits in 2005.
Not only is there a curricular framework in place already in which the importance of road safety can be taught to our young people, but this is also supplemented by specific teaching materials and by a comprehensive programme of Garda visits to schools.
The issue of how road safety education can be further strengthened in our schools in an age appropriate way is being examined by the Cabinet sub-committee on road safety, of which I am a member.
While the measures in place are good, by and large they are only implemented in the junior cycle. Has consideration been given to the proposal of the safe driving pledge organisation to have a comprehensive programme in all schools at senior cycle level, probably during transition year? Is the Minister aware that surveys indicate that both young people and 98% of parents would favour such driver education in schools? I am not talking about students learning to drive involving cars but rather simulated activity in a controlled environment in schools. They should be broadly educated about motivation, knowledge and attitude while driving cars. I am sure the Minister is aware that tragically young people are over-represented in the appalling carnage on our roads.
Tragically it is mostly young people who are involved in the accidents taking place. Obviously we should aim to encourage anything that schools can do to support young people in learning about responsibility, self-protection and care. I also see great potential within the transition year, with perhaps a structured modularised programme covering the rules of the road. Simulated driving experience may not be possible as the equipment can be very expensive. Values, respect and responsibility are just as important in this regard. We should not lightly cast away age appropriate behaviour. The role of SPHE is important in this regard, starting from a very early age with the child walking on the street or crossing the road and building up to being the passenger in a car and the responsibilities that passengers have for their own protection. In one tragic accident recently some young people were killed. However, three other young people had refused to get into the car. They took responsibility for at least their own lives. There is much we can do in this regard.
I accept that some parents maintain that this should all be taught in school. However, those same parents are buying cars for their 17 year old children. They would be far better employed putting the money into driving lessons before buying the car. There seems to be a lack of balance between the expenditure and the accompanying responsibility. It behoves all of us to do this. My one difficulty with transition year is that not all schools offer the option. However, the SPHE programme at senior level is now being devised by the curriculum council, which will include an extension of the programme up to junior cycle. It can be tackled in a broader curricular way but I would like it to be more structured in transition year. A great deal of research demonstrates that young people do not apply what they learn at school when they leave. They have a positive attitude about responsibility on the road, yet, in a survey in 2001, they also said it was safe to speed in certain circumstances. One must consider their age before striking a balance.
That is all the more reason simulated driving modules should be provided.
I am supportive of promoting the respect and responsibility of young drivers for themselves and others in transition year.
Research highlights that, unfortunately, separating respect and responsibility from driving experience is not straightforward. While young people acknowledge the need for respect and responsibility, when they get behind the wheel of a car, their behaviour is different. That is why in other countries where simulators are used in schools, young people learn about and appreciate appropriate driving behaviour when they are behind the wheel and that makes the difference.
It is a fair point to ensure the theory matches the practice. The difficulty is how to do that, especially where a driving course is taught to a 15 year old in transition year who must wait two years before he or she can get behind the wheel of a car. I am anxious to do whatever I can within the education system to support the work of other Departments to protect young people. I am investigating whether that should involve teaching them the rules of the road or providing a computer-based programme.
