JOINT COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND SCIENCE díospóireacht -
Thursday, 24 Mar 2005

Educational Excellence: Presentation.

Chairman

On behalf of the Joint Committee on Education and Science, I welcome the following representatives from the INTO, Mr. John Carr, general secretary, Mr. Austin Corcoran, president; and Mr. Peter Mullan, press officer. The ASTI is represented by Mr. John White, acting general secretary; Ms Susie Hall, president and Ms Moira Leyden, assistant general secretary, educational research. The TUI is represented by Mr. Paddy Healy, president, and Mr. John MacGabhann, education and research officer.

I draw attention to the fact that members of the committee have absolute privilege, but the same privilege does not apply to the witnesses appearing before the committee. Members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that members should not comment on, criticise or make charges against persons outside the House or any official by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable.

I invite Mr. Carr to make a presentation on behalf of the Irish National Teachers' Organisation.

Mr. Austin Corcoran

Before Mr. Carr begins, I thank the committee for affording us the opportunity to make this submission. We value the work of the committee and are always available to bring whatever expertise we can to its attention. We have circulated our submission and Mr. Carr will take us through it quickly.

Mr. John Carr

To distill the topic of the promotion of excellence and the measurement of achievement in education into a ten minute presentation is a difficult task. Educational excellence and its assessment is not simply a matter of measuring a single input and a single output.

It is the product of all the efforts of the partners in education which is probably best viewed as a process rather than a product and a journey rather than a destination. I suspect that each person in attendance here has a different menu of ingredients which lead to the promotion of excellence and therefore the forms and timing of assessment. I use the analogy of ingredients purposely as I firmly believe that before what comes out is measured what goes in must be considered. Last year I put to the then Minister for Education and Science a four-word phrase to encapsulate current problems in primary education which was "It is class size." I explained that too many progressive and positive developments in primary education were floundering on the rock that is the second largest class sizes in the EU. In summary, I point to the many benefits of a new and exciting curriculum in primary schools being lost because of class sizes that are simply too large. Progressive methodologies such as co-operative learning, talk and discussion and learning by doing are simply not sustainable. Teachers are forced because of large numbers to adopt whole class teaching as the only possible methodology.

Smaller class sizes improve pupils' education, allow more individual attention and produce lasting measurable gains. They produce calmer classrooms thus alleviating many of the behavioural problems that prevent too many children getting a top class primary education. The greatest impact is achieved by the early reduction of class sizes. To be effective class size reductions must start in infants and ensure that classes have more than 20 pupils.

Reductions in class size at primary level must be Ireland's priority in the pursuit of excellence. If we are to measure the literacy and numeracy attainments of our pupils, let us also measure the size of the classes in which they learn. We have a world renowned education system that delivers well for most children. It does not deliver well, however, for two key groups of children, those with special needs and the children of the poor. Over recent years thousands of special needs children have had their needs assessed and resources provided. I give credit to successive Governments for this, but many more remain who, because they were not formally assessed by a psychologist and because of a shortage of teachers, have needs that are not met.

Children have only one childhood. I could not help but be struck by the eloquent and passionate appeal of Keith Duffy, a past pupil of mine, on last Friday night's "Late Late Show" to end the delays associated with identification and resource provision for autistic children. Not every parent has to face the very special need that is autism or has the connections and resources of Keith Duffy which enabled him to make provision for his child. Many parents and their children face delays in identification and provision for a variety of special needs. I confidently assert that each member of this committee knows of several. I see weekly the number of parliamentary questions submitted by Members of the Dáil. It is clear that politicians are aware of these issues in all corners of the country and their impact on families and children, whose life stories may be heard in clinics every week.

The reality is that the current level of provision for special needs children, while improved, is not sufficient to provide a fair and equitable system. In short it contributes to a failure to reach excellence for special needs children. The newly established national special education council must be fully resourced to become an advocate for the provision of the necessary teaching resources.

Turning to the second group of children which I mentioned, the children of the poor, I want to state my belief and the belief of the INTO that inequality in education is at the heart of our failure as a society to break the inter-generational cycle of poverty. Why can junior infant teachers predict with alarming accuracy educational drop-out? Why are the ambitions, hopes and dreams of some five and six year old children shattered by the time they leave primary school? Why do they not have the same chance as their advantaged peers to aspire to excellence?

Tinkering with an unfair system instead of tailoring it to meet the needs of disadvantaged children will make little difference. We need major change, not minor revisions, and the statutory committee on disadvantage should lead it.

Another issue that impacts on excellence in education is our failure to adequately resource and support early childhood education. I believe it is an opportunity that we as a society cannot afford to pass up because high quality education before a child turns five will yield significant long-term benefits. We have had the debate and we have the policy but we need to implement it if we are to maintain our place in the knowledge society of the future.

I also believe we must invest in teachers. Ireland has been fortunate to maintain the quality of its teaching force but the best returns from further investment in teacher education will come from the careful planning and construction of a nationwide induction and in-service system using the concept of the teaching career as the foundation. Fourteen years after those sentiments were expressed in an OECD review of Irish education, apart from a number of small pilot projects and the roll-out of the curriculum, the professional development needs of primary teachers have been largely ignored.

There is huge potential among State agencies to make a valuable contribution to teacher development and the enrichment of the curriculum in our schools. Agencies such as the National Concert Hall and the National Gallery could make an invaluable contribution to teacher development and curriculum enrichment. The resources of the National Museum could be harnessed to support the history curriculum. There is huge potential for the environmental information service, the health promotion unit and the national advisory committee on drugs to increase their input into education. It is important to recognise that these agencies operate within the level of available resources. I do not wish to be understood as asking already hard-pressed workers to deliver more. If more is demanded, more resources must be provided.

I want to address a single issue of our language which I believe is a fundamental part of what it is to be Irish. Primary teachers as a group are unique in Ireland in their support for the language. Teachers recognise the special place of Irish and want to teach it, but they lack fundamental supports from the Department of Education and Science. We have a new curriculum and a new start with Irish in our schools. It is an approach based on oral language and a move away from the book, writing and grammar based curriculum that has dulled if not killed enthusiasm for Irish. I call on this committee to in turn seek the support of Government for the language not just in our schools but in our society.

On the measurement of achievement I want to put on the record that the INTO supports the development of an agreed national assessment policy for primary schools. We believe that this should include the development within the school plan of every school, an assessment policy which will provide for the judicious use of standardised tests in relevant curricular areas at agreed and regular times to be decided within the context of the school plan.

Appropriate diagnostic tests should be made freely available for administering to children at senior infant level to be used where appropriate formal assessment fails to identify a particular problem. This is consistent with my earlier remarks about early intervention. However, to be consistent with meeting identified needs there must be a guarantee from the Department that appropriate intervention will automatically follow an assessment which identifies a particular need.

There must be an agreed system for transferring information between teachers, schools and other professionals with a legitimate interest and agreement on a standard structure for reporting information to parents. To measure achievement in the system there must be a structured method of using sample based surveys to monitor national performance. This might be complemented by regular thematic evaluations of aspects of the system by the inspectorate.

The INTO strongly opposed the decision of the former Minister for Education and Science, Deputy Noel Dempsey, to make standardised testing a requirement for pupils at three stages during their compulsory schooling with effect from the school year 2006-07. He stated that there is a need to have aggregated assessment data for decision making, identifying progress and the allocation of resources, but his solution to identified information deficits within his Department was the introduction of national standardised testing. National standardised testing will never supply the required information and would damage the primary education system irreparably. National high stakes testing in other countries has led to high early drop-out rates, crude measures to penalise and sanction teachers, pupils and their parents and has led to teachers in lowly rated schools leaving in droves to be replaced by teachers without experience or training. These testing regimes have produced greater failure rather than success, particularly for educationally vulnerable pupils.

Studies have shown that school scores based on these tests are extremely volatile and that large gains one year can be followed by declines the following year, particularly in small schools. The INTO has always put forward the view that assessment is an integral part of teaching and learning. The challenge is to ensure that there are forms of assessment in our schools that are appropriate to the learning needs of pupils and the information needs of the system. They must derive from the curriculum in our schools but must not dominate or derail the curriculum. Assessment data must guide curriculum reform and investment, develop high quality teaching and learning, inform parents and provide maximum time for teaching. It must be of benefit and not a burden to our pupils and their teachers.

There are many excellent features of our system. In seeking to improve other features of our system we must not lose sight of that and fail to recognise and celebrate our many successes. Our education system turns out thousands of bright, intelligent, motivated, adaptable individuals every year. That educational outcome should be the birthright of all children. Excessive emphasis on assessment and measurement will contribute little to those who miss out on that birthright. A balanced approach to assessment, underpinned by a fair distribution of educational resources is the way forward.

Mr. Corcoran

There is one small correction to the text read by Mr. Carr. It is to the last line of the third paragraph which should read:

The greatest impact is achieved by reducing class sizes early. To be effective class size reductions must start in infants and ensure that classes have no more than 20 pupils.

Ms Susie Hall

On behalf of the ASTI, I thank the committee for affording us this opportunity to place before it our priorities for education. I ask the acting general secretary to begin our presentation.

Mr. John White

I am trying to think of the best way to keep this class attentive. When I was a teacher there was a view that nobody could listen to anything for more than approximately 20 minutes without throwing things at one. I will not stick to the text but will summarise it.

We are discussing excellence and the measurement of quality in schools. One must first ask what is meant by excellence. We have answered that question under a number of headings: promotion of quality, which is about excellence and the quality of what goes on in our schools; equality of provision for all students — if we had a system in which there was wonderful quality at one level and disastrous quality at another level, that would be a faulty system of education; progression and retention of students — trying to keep young people within the education system is a measure of excellence; promotion of accountability, which is also a measure of excellence — politicians in a democratic society need to have a way of knowing what is going on within the system and nothing can be done in secret; and promotion of greater awareness of lifelong learning.

How does one measure excellence? We have also dealt with that question under a number of headings. It can be looked at in terms of the level of investment and what we as a community spend on education. It can be looked at in terms of judgment regarding the quality of the teachers within our system and, most important, the level of students' achievement, equality of access, students' engagement with the school and the quality of instruction. What we will try to do in this presentation is look at those to see how our system measures up.

The first matter we look at is levels of investment. Sadly, we come out very badly on this. We are talking to people who have been elected to our Parliament. Ultimately decisions regarding investment in education are made by such people, and that is right. However, we have done badly in terms of investment. Ireland comes 20th out of 26 OECD countries in terms of spending per second level student. That is a disastrous figure when one considers that on certain measurements Ireland is the fourth richest country. Those measurements are open to question, but we certainly are a rich country and in terms of spending on education at second level we come 20th out of 26 countries. That is something that should be of concern to people such as the members of this committee, who have the ultimate decision making in this area. A total of 35,000 Irish second level students are in classes of 30 or more. That figure comes from a recent Dáil reply from the Minister for Education and Science. I do not want to overwhelm the committee with figures, but if the members were to go away with figures, those two figures are very important.

Another vital determinant, judging the measurement of achievement, involves levels of student achievement. There are two ways in which students within our system are measured. They are measured internationally. There is an international measure conducted approximately every four years through the OECD programme for international student assessment, PISA. It administers standard tests to thousands of 15 year olds in approximately 30 OECD countries — OECD countries are mainly the wealthy countries.

The first area covered is literacy, reading and writing — speaking cannot be covered. In the area of literacy, Ireland comes third out of 39 countries. Only three countries have significantly higher scores. It is a fantastic achievement that our country is at the top in terms of literacy. Given what has been said regarding levels of investment, we can be very proud. We hear people commenting that we have a world class education system while other people say that is rubbish, which is not based on fact. This is based on the international PISA survey, which conducts the same test in 39 countries, to compare standards of literacy, and Ireland is at the top. For some extraordinary reason Finland also seems to do very well in all these tests.

Ireland is above average in science, according to the PISA report. There has been a major analysis of science provision in our schools. I am sure the committee is aware of the task force on the physical sciences, which made approximately 40 recommendations, only one of which has been put in place, the one which placed additional burdens on teachers. In mathematics we are slightly above the average.

However, schools are engaged in other activities. I once heard a senior French civil servant say that the French do not have schools in the same sense that we have in that French schools would not have football or tennis teams. The range of activities provided in Irish schools is not OECD-wide; to some extent, it is an Anglo-Irish phenomenon. In the context of the benefit of engagement in such activities, the OCED PISA report measures a sense of belonging and participation in school life. The researchers making the report asked the pupils for their views, not the teachers. We score exceptionally well on pupils having a sense of attachment to school. Members will note from the submission that we are ranked fourth out of the 27 countries surveyed in that respect and 11th in terms of participation in school life. That is the first way Irish pupils are measured.

The second way they are measured is through the examination system, which is much criticised and perhaps deserves some of the criticism. The senior cycle curriculum is being reviewed by the NCCA. It will shortly produce an advice document for the Minister. It is a well thought out document but it can only survive as a real change at senior cycle if we start to resource second level schools and move up the table from being ranked 20th out of 26 countries in that respect.

The NCCA state in this document that a high stakes examination like the leaving certificate, which had such influence on people's lives, must be transparent, open and objective. I am sure the members would not want to receive a letter from a constituent pointing out that he or she only got grade C in French in the leaving certificate and asking if they could do something about that or put pressure on the State's examinations commission to change a grade a constituent was awarded in Irish. Such intervention would be disastrous. The objective strength of the system should be retained. We need to reform the system and the NCCA proposals, which I am sure members will debate in the Dáil, advance reform in a very positive way but it must be paid for. I will pass over to the President of the ASTI.

Ms Hall

On the quality of the teaching force, Ireland has been and continues to be very well served by its second level teachers. Second level teaching is not only an old graduate profession but it continues to attract high quality graduates. This trend has been consistent over time and is much remarked upon internationally. However, we should not become complacent about that fact. We notice subtle changes.

If I may digress slightly from the submission, one area that should give rise to concern at all levels of education is the declining interest among men in teaching as a career. The absence of male role models will have a serious effect on young people in the future. It is often mentioned that young men do not have male role models as teachers. However, I emphasise that young women also need male role models. Often their fathers no longer live in the family home and, therefore, they do not have admirable male role models. Both genders need male role models.

As noted in his country report on Ireland for the OECD report on attracting, developing and recruiting effective teachers, Professor John Coolahan concluded that a key policy concern in any country has to be the retention of effective teachers in schools. We are considerably lucky that so far we have managed to attract and retain high calibre teachers. However, as people become more mobile we cannot assume that interest in the profession will continue. There is a growing trend among young people here that as soon as they qualify in a profession they will go off and travel. We should learn important lessons from the position in Britain where within five years of graduating 45% of teachers have left the profession. That is a massive waste of that country's resources and a terrible drain on its economy. We should be mindful of that trend.

We need to retain high calibre teachers across the age spectrum. It is bad to have a constant turnover of young and inexperienced people in any profession. Any staffroom needs a broad spread of teachers across the age spectrum. Young graduates bring with them youth, enthusiasm and latest ideas. That needs to be combined or blended with the experience and wisdom of their more mature colleagues. It is not ideal for individual students or schools that there would be a high turnover of staff. The committee needs to pay close attention to how we can attract and retain — the two elements are essential — the brightest and the best in the teaching profession, as well as maintaining a balance between the genders. That needs to be seriously addressed.

Professor Coolahan recommended that relevant issues which need to be considered in the Irish context include: the provision of an induction era for newly qualified teachers; inadequate investment in teaching resources and equipment; high pupil-teacher ratios; and high stress levels among teachers. The company that provides our permanent health insurance scheme advises us that more than 50% of teachers who are forced out of the profession due to ill health are diagnosed with stress related illness. Stress is the single largest contributor to teacher absence through illness but it also is the highest cause of teachers having to leave the profession. That is a consideration to be taken on board. Professor Coolahan also recommended consideration of the training of teachers arising from a policy of integration of special needs, and the ASTI supports his conclusion.

The challenge to policymakers in terms of maintaining an effective teaching force is made all the more imperative in the Lisbon Agenda for Europe. The agenda's detailed work programme for 2010 on education and training has, as its first objective, improving education and training for teachers and trainers. The objective states that teachers must be supported as their role changes and that conditions must be provided which adequately support teachers, including through initial education and in-service training in the perspective of lifelong learning.

The ASTI will use this opportunity to make the case for the introduction of supports for teachers to enable them to engage in continuing professional development, including paid study leave, sabbatical leave, work shadowing, consistent accreditation and remuneration for all professional learning. In-service trainingsuch as it exists is provided by a sort of emergency mechanism whereby if a new course is being introduced the teachers of that subject will be lucky if they get a day or two of in-service training. In a teaching career of 36 years I had only two days of such training about 20 years ago. It was on the changes in French at junior certificate level. Not one day or even five minutes training was provided on dealing with the changes societal trends brought into my classroom. This matter must be addressed.

The degree of equality of access and participation of all students to schools and the curriculum is a key test for the degree of excellence in an education system. Judging how many people attain high points in their leaving certificates is a very poor evaluation of an education system. We should examine how it provides for each child in the country to attain his or her personal potential.

In terms of equality of access to education, considerable progress has been made in school retention. Over 82% of all young people stay in school to the end of the senior cycle. The work of the National Educational Welfare Board will promote greater school attendance over time while that of the National Educational Psychological Service will serve to identify the learning and other developmental needs of young people at risk of either low educational achievement and or early school leaving. However, it must be pointed out that both services are severely constrained because of staffing issues, general investment levels, availability to schools and the lengths of time students must wait for appointments. Due to the current allocation ratio of the necessity to have a minimum of 600 students in order to secure an ex quota learning support teacher, many students with learning difficulties do not have consistent access to this vital support.

The system of identifying disadvantaged students across all schools must also be reformed. Crucial to this is the perception that, as soon as a child leaves primary education, whatever ailed them up until that point has been cured. There is no connection between the support for children with special needs at primary and secondary levels. The entire process must restart. It is necessary to reapply to have the children assessed because their dossiers do not follow them to secondary level. This is wasteful. As a year head, I am responsible for eight classes and have 210 students in my care. The work a year head must do in having students assessed when they enter into first year is a war of attrition that no one can survive. One can lose 12 or 18 months in obtaining the support the students need. That is crucial time lost to each child.

For children with no special needs, the transition between primary and secondary levels is traumatic. They move from having one teacher in the classroom all day, who knows them all very well and instructs them in what to do, into my type of system. There are over 90 teachers in my school and 1,200 students who must each make their own way. When allocated children with learning needs that are not addressed from the first day, time is lost and the experience can be negative and frightening for the child.

Another aspect of equality is that of access to the curriculum. Notwithstanding the extensive programme of curricular change that has been under way for the past decade, many schools still lack the teaching resources to diversify their curricula to meet a broader range of student needs. This issue was comprehensively examined in the report of the expert group in 2001. It concluded that, despite the introduction of a wide range of curricular initiatives in recent years, the implications for staff planning have not been adequately addressed. It also noted that a coherent curricular framework based on a notion of "curriculum entitlement" will require more teachers in schools. As demonstrated in the report of the task force on the physical sciences to which Mr. White alluded, one of the major constraints on diversifying the science curriculum is the unavailability of qualified teachers and science labs. Most schools, including mine, are forced into a bizarre and unwieldy rota system whereby one plans on a three or four-week cycle how often a science class can have access to a science lab. This is not a serious approach to the teaching of science.

As noted in the 2004 OECD report, Education at a Glance, the quality of instruction in the classroom is contingent on a number of factors across countries. A critical factor is the ratio of students to teachers. Smaller class sizes enable the teacher to use a wider range of pedagogical approaches, thereby enhancing students' access to the curriculum and creating more learning opportunities for all. If I may digress, the pupil-teacher ratio was 15:1 when I started teaching. It has never returned to that low figure. The pupil-teacher ratio now quoted includes teachers who do not teach, such as principals, deputy principals, guidance counsellors and other individuals who may not be teaching. The real ratio is far higher. It is more relevant to speak about class sizes. With regard to this, Mr. White has given the committee the figures for second level classes of over 30 students.

There has been no recognition of two changes in our education system during the past decade. First, the mainstreaming of students with special needs. I have alluded to this but such students would fall within the special resources framework. They are being taught by subject teachers within a mainstream class, most of whom will not have had five minutes of training in education of children with special needs. Many of these needs were unknown, even to medical science, ten years ago and remain poorly understood. However, teachers with no training are expected to know how to deal with a child with Asperger's syndrome, dyspraxia, ADHD, ADD and more.

They are not trained in dealing with the severe emotional disturbance that comes from societal change and the problems many students now face. Students' lifestyles have changed radically since I received my teaching diploma. They are subject to a great many pressures outside school and regularly engage in a weekend lifestyle that is wholly unsuitable for them. These difficulties are brought into schools on Monday mornings and teachers must increasingly deal with these problems, as well as ensuring that all of the children reach their potential.

They have large numbers of students whose first language is not English. One cannot assume that these students will understand the language of a geography teacher or the jargon used by a science or maths teacher. They may be able to get by in basic English but there is a sophistication of language required that is not catered for. All of this has been placed as an extra stress on teachers without any resources put in place or consideration of how it can be done. It is a tribute to teachers at second level that they are coping so willingly and enthusiastically, particularly in light of the lack of support they have received. I appeal to the committee that this cannot continue indefinitely. Under this stress, people will crack. They have limits on what they can achieve.

The expert group established by the Minister for Education and Science reported on staffing in second level schools in 2001. It recommended that 1,200 additional teachers should be allocated to schools. This report is gathering dust like that of the task force on the physical sciences. We wonder if these reports will produce anything teachers can hope for. We must revisit all 20 recommendations in this critical report to arrive at a more effective system for allocating teachers to schools. We urge the committee to address this issue in future deliberations.

Given the establishment by the Minister of the task force on discipline in second level schools, the ASTI would also underline the relationship between smaller class sizes and improved discipline at classroom level. For some students, their disruptive behaviour is associated with their inability to access curriculum in a meaningful way. Sometimes this inability arises from the learning disability. Frequently it is because the teaching methodology is inappropriate to their individual needs. Smaller classes would enable the teacher to diversify their teaching, thereby facilitating access to learning for all.

Improved discipline at classroom level would have an enormous positive impact on teachers' morale. Maintaining a motivated and committed teaching profession has many dimensions, and we should not lose sight of the fact that one of the biggest causes of demoralisation for the individual teacher is persistent low-level disruption in the classroom. While smaller classes will not be sufficient for improved discipline in schools, it is a necessary condition and one which the ASTI will prioritise in its submission to the task force.

Regarding the issue of schools meeting the objectives of educational policy, through pastoral care structures, student mentoring and leadership systems, student councils, extra-curricular activities and a focus on solidarity and global and justice issues, our schools are committed to enabling the individual student to reach their own unique potential and grow in self-confidence and maturity towards young adulthood. All too often, teachers perceive that insufficient attention is paid by policy makers to the affective domain of their work in schools.

Teachers care passionately about their students and this caring function is intrinsic to their concept of their work as teachers. Mr. White alluded to this when he spoke of the extra-curricular work that goes on in all schools, such as football and debating teams, music, art and sporting activities. There is a plethora of extra-curricular activity going on in schools. This is very important to Irish teachers and they enjoy the type of relationship they have with their students through this extra activity. A recognition of this fundamental characteristic of our teaching profession must be a feature of all educational policy. Such a move would greatly promote morale in the profession and validate the work of teachers in wider society.

At system level, the introduction of such measures as the school development and planning initiative and whole school evaluation are vital, both in providing supports to schools to meet broad educational policy objectives and in promoting accountability and transparency. The wide-ranging mechanisms in the system for partnership, at both school and system level, are also an important dimension of excellence in education and are sometimes overlooked.

The ASTI has no hesitation in stating that we have much to be proud of in our education system. International data have consistently underlined the high standards prevailing in our system, in terms of students' learning and achievements and quality of education. However, as a society we cannot afford to be complacent. It would be very unwise to envisage the continued maintenance of the current situation into the future in the absence of a coherent investment strategy for schools. As I said, no adjustments have been made for the different students now in mainstream schools. We are retaining over 82% of students until the end of second level education and over 55% of all students go on to third level. This brings us to a position which was not initially provided for. Before, only the most committed, dedicated and motivated students would carry on. Now there are large groups who may not be as motivated and they need a curriculum which caters for their needs.

The capacity of our second level schools to continue to enable students to achieve high educational standards and meet their increasingly diverse needs in a multicultural society cannot be sustained in the absence of increased investment in schools and, above all, an increase in the allocation of teachers to schools in line with the recommendations of the 2001 report.

We would all do well to reflect upon the foresight and courage of Mr. Donogh O'Malley when he took the radical step of providing access to second level education for all in 1966. He did that in a country which was relatively very poor. It was a courageous step which radically changed the economic and social life of the entire country. His policy measures secured the groundwork for the Ireland of today and enabled our country to move from the periphery to our current position as fourth richest nation in the OECD group. We need a similar vision to enable us to retain our economic prosperity and grow as a more inclusive and diverse society.

Chairman

I now call Mr. Paddy Healy to make a presentation on behalf of the Teachers Union of Ireland.

Mr. Paddy Healy

I thank the committee for today's hearing and, in particular, for its recommendations with regard to further education and its strong support of our position regarding implementation of the McIver report on further education. This is one of the great success stories of Irish education and was developed by our members without specific State help. It was developed spontaneously in response to demographic changes and the needs of young people and now caters for 30,000 students. The Minister has agreed, in principle, to implement the report and discussions are continuing. We hope it will be implemented at an early date.

The cap on further education courses was not lifted, despite the committee's recommendations. It seems incomprehensible when education is such a high priority for our people and economy that our schools should be turning away students on the basis of a mechanical cap which saves very little money. We are again seeking a follow-through on the committee's support for removing the cap at the earliest date. Our union is very grateful to the committee for the hearing and support with regard to further education.

Mr. White explained the position of educational funding in Ireland within an OECD context. We are 20th out of 26 with regard to second level and 18th out of 26 with regard to overall educational spending. Investment in education during the boom years, since 1997, provides a telling statistic. While the absolute figure has increased, the proportion of national income spent on education has dropped from 4.7% to 4.1%. That means that the priority given to education in national expenditure has declined at a time when we are all committed to developing a knowledge-based society on an all-inclusive basis. Some of the matters we will put before you today require changes in policy. However, many require funding.

My union represents teachers in second level schools, further education and third level institutes of technology. An issue of concern to us is that of disadvantage. We cater for a particularly high proportion of disadvantaged students in our second level schools. In the area of further education, we are catering for many second-chance students, students who have not progressed through the normal education system. Increasingly, a majority of students are second-chance adult students attempting to obtain qualifications to improve their level of education. Statistics available for third level illustrate the lion's share of disadvantaged students are attending institutes of technology rather than universities. The level of funding to support students in the institutes of technology is lower than that available to students in universities. In addition, in terms of general funding, the grants support mechanism is creating a situation whereby the universities are getting three times more money per student than the institutes of technology. The official figures now available show that is the case.

We are concerned about disadvantage and believe elected representatives should give serious consideration to the priority given to educational spending to tackle that disadvantage. In 1997 there was a budget surplus of £70 million. The budget surplus for 2004 was €7 billion. The priority given to educational investment is a key question for elected representatives and the population. We must ask ourselves if it is right that billions of euro should be taken by way of revenue from the taxpayers' pocket and invested in physical infrastructure while the priority given to the level of funding for education sinks.

The students now in education will be with us only once, whereas physical infrastructure, roads, broadband and so on will be with us for hundreds of years. Many European countries borrow to improve physical infrastructure. The question which arises is whether we support the disadvantaged students at first, second and third level or simply give them a little extra every year while making no real attempt to radically transform the situation. We are conscious of the need to radically transform the situation given the high proportion of disadvantaged students in our schools. The issue raises many questions in terms of economic development and humanity for the Oireachtas and the people of Ireland.

My colleague, Ms Susie Hall, dealt with the issue of recruiting and retaining effective teachers. However, I would like to make the following point. The index in the forthcoming OECD report on retaining and recruiting effective teachers in terms of a profession in a particular country is the ratio of mean teachers pay to GDP per head. Members may be surprised to hear that figure has dropped by 40% during the past ten years. Pay comparison systems do not pick this up because of their nature. The main competitor with teaching for the entry of graduates and so on is the self-employed professions. The problem identified by the OECD in terms of the drop in the relative position of teachers in Irish society cannot be picked up through pay comparison systems and would have to be addressed outside them.

We have congratulated the Minister for Education and Science on her initiative on discipline. Many of our schools are located in disadvantaged areas. Members will be aware, as public representatives, of the anti-social behaviour problem on our streets and in our estates. Schools are part of communities and one can be assured if a problem arises at night time it will come before the schools the next day. We are grateful to the Minister for taking this initiative and will co-operate fully in that regard.

I am concerned that 98% of schools in disadvantaged areas are, to their credit, retaining students until leaving certificate level at their own expense. I am particularly concerned that the discipline initiative be effective so young people and their parents will not be disadvantaged by a totally inadequate disciplinary system. I will now ask our education research officer, Mr. John MacGabhann, to make a presentation to the committee.

Mr. John MacGabhann

I am aware of the privilege it is to address the people who matter in the sense that members of the committee as representatives of the community have access to the purse strings. It is critical to us that funding for education be prioritised and that proper parameters be set for funding. I will skirt through various aspects and will not belabour points already made.

Education at national level must have policy coherence. It is not apparent to us that there is policy coherence. There is coherence in respect of particular areas of policy but there is not a sense of a unifying vision across the spectrum. One has to go to the Constitution to find it as it does not appear to translate into pragmatic policy.

We are suggesting that policy should concentrate on the promotion of excellence in teaching, the creation of appropriate learning environments for students, the development of appropriate curriculum and constant rolling review of that curriculum, the development of assessment instruments, an issue on which I will spend some time later, that are congruent with the aims of curriculum and of certification that prizes a broad range of talents, intelligences, achievements and competencies than are prized by the current system of assessment for State certification purposes. We also see public sector education — we are not alone in this notion to which I am sure everyone ascribes — at the levels we represent as part of a continuum. We do not see it in isolation from primary education or education beyond third level. Lifelong learning presupposes that education continues throughout one's life.

We also consider that support structures are necessary and that they must be provided by the State. We insist that where structures and funding are made available, that funding must in the first instance be targeted. The application across the board of the available funds is at least in some instances wasteful whereas targeted funding answers the imperatives of national policy which should be the superstructure that guides us all. I have identified other priorities but I will not go through them at this point.

I wish to pick up and develop a point made earlier about the conceptualisation of what constitutes excellence. In our view the prevailing understanding of what constitutes excellence — I must take a side swipe at the media in this respect because they add fuel to this fire — is excessively narrow and utilitarian and focuses almost exclusively on the accumulation of CAO points. That causes the focus to be removed from where it should be, on the process of education and on the broad educational experience that the students, hopefully for the most part, enjoy. It also plays into the hands of institutions or self-styled institutions that are not educational in purpose but are for-profit business corporations. It is in their interests to focus on CAO points and the narrow utilitarianism that this involves. Their area of expertise is in finessing what the public educational system has already done. They are gilding the lily and no more.

Legislation which should be our guide in terms of how we subsequently develop policy and strategies constantly advocates a broader sense of what is educationally valuable than merely the accumulation of points, important though that might be. The problem is that the implementation of legislation which has been enacted in recent times has not been properly resourced and I will refer to this at a later stage.

We know that the teaching force is of a very high quality and it is remarkable that this is the case, given the very attenuated type of provision that is made for teacher education. Teachers rely on pre-service education and for the subsequent 40 years of our careers we get very scant attention in terms of structured provision. It is only if a commitment is made at political level that funding will flow. There must be a national commitment to a system of teacher education that incorporates initial pre-service education, induction, which thankfully is now being piloted, and also continuing professional development that is career stage-appropriate. Given that problems can arise in any profession we need what every other profession and employment has, an employee assistance scheme. At present we have a Rolls-Royce but no oil and this is wrong. There needs to be a maintenance contract for the educators.

The learning environment in which we operate and, more to the point, in which students operate begins with the door through which they pass and the walls at which they look. School buildings are uninviting and uninspiring. When being designed they are almost never informed by the priorities that teachers might address. It would be a relatively simple adjustment and not a cost on the Exchequer to ask for advice from those who will occupy the building and work within it and who know the students who will also occupy it and work within it.

The other issue which has already been referred to is the challenging behaviour that is now flowing from societal change, in part from societal democratisation. There is a valid argument that for far too long, far too many students said far too little to far too many teachers. A process of democratisation is taking place that is both necessary and healthy but democratisation has a boundary with unacceptable challenging behaviour which is more manifest in schools than ever before. Legislative amendment is needed because a balance of rights does not exist in current legislation. There is difficulty for legislators; it is easier to promulgate the rights of an individual in legislation than it is to assert the rights of an amorphous collective grouping. However, there is a need for rebalance. We are not asking that rights that have been conferred on individuals be withdrawn but that a balance be struck. The behaviour of the cohort in the classroom manifestly affects the ability of each member of that cohort to make significant educational progress and therefore affects both issues of achievement and excellence.

Appropriate curriculum is clearly important and it must be kept under constant review. As has been referred to earlier, the current curriculum does not suit a significant minority of students. These students are in the classrooms because of legislation which has raised the school-leaving age to 16 and because of national policy which seeks to bring up retention to 90% of the cohort. We are telling them they must legislate for this and we therefore owe it to students to provide them with a curriculum that answers their needs, not the needs of other students. For example, the leaving certificate ordinary level syllabus and the assessment of that syllabus is simply the miniaturised first cousin of the higher level syllabus. It does not have an existence or a real legitimacy in its own right and students who have no intention of going to higher education are being let down by the inadequacy of that curriculum.

Members of the Oireachtas will shortly have an opportunity to put their money where all our mouths are by funding the proposals made by the NCCA on reform of the senior cycle. These proposals should not be cherry-picked but should be treated as an indivisible package of proposals and should be properly funded over the long-term, not by means of the inadequate system of annual budgeting which leaves everybody on tenterhooks for every year, wondering what will happen in the subsequent year.

An issue which arises from inappropriate curricula is that, in particular at junior cycle level, far too many students are tracked far too early into ordinary level study by schools under pressure. Ordinary level study at junior cycle prefigures ordinary level study at senior cycle. The opportunity does not really exist for students to move up a notch between the two cycles. This determinism is wrong.

There is a need for whole-school approaches to the achievement of excellence but this is currently not funded. There is national and international agreement that whole-school approaches to literacy and numeracy represent best practice. However, whole-school approaches require planning in school and planning time in school is not available. If best practice is to be followed, the means of implementing it must be provided.

I will not refer here to pupil-teacher ratios. In respect of those schools which have integrated classes — containing students who have been assessed as having special educational needs — in order for those students as well as the other students and the teacher to make progress, there must be a gradual reduction in class size, specifically within the integrated classroom. This must be funded through additional allocation where the need arises. We are also concerned that particular schools should not either self-select or be selected as magnet schools which attract all the students with special educational needs from within a particular area by virtue of the fact that other schools in the same area simply will not enrol those students or make it difficult to have those students enrolled. Each school should allow itself the privilege and pleasure and facility of developing within its own cohort of teachers the expertise to deal with special educational needs. In order for that to happen, the legislation needs to be enforced when it becomes operative so that schools are obliged to take students who logically and reasonably should attend those schools.

There are elements of planned provision that will promote excellence in education, the first of which is the continuum of provision from early childhood. On behalf of the TUI, which represents teachers in second and third level education, I emphasise that the continuum of education starts with early childhood education. The best time to address possible difficulty is at the earliest possible stage and the best time to involve parents is from the outset of a child's education. We support the call for concentration of resources in that area. We also support the call for early remediation of educational difficulties, in particular through interventions at appropriate early stages of primary education.

The transition from primary to post-primary has also been elaborated to a significant degree. There is an absence of congruence between the curriculum at primary and post-primary levels. That congruence can and should be achieved under the aegis of the NCCA. It is of paramount importance, as without it students get lost in the process of transfer. The three teacher unions have taken an initiative in this respect and have suggested particular measures to the Department of Education and Science, which we hope the Department will fund. We are awaiting an answer.

The committee will forgive me if I spend some time talking about appropriate assessment. Assessment of any particular syllabus should be congruent with the aims of the syllabus. The points commission and others have pointed out that this congruence is not evident between the aims of the leaving certificate curriculum and the manner in which the leaving certificate is assessed, in particular by way of written terminal examination.

Teaching is driven to a significant degree by the demands of and the format of the examination. If the examination is not congruent with the syllabus the teaching becomes distorted as a consequence. It is manifestly unfair that student achievement should be measured almost exclusively on the basis of a terminal written examination. It is ludicrous in the case of some subjects, for example modern languages where the first assessment of oral proficiency is the last assessment taking place after six years. The first time students are assessed for oral proficiency is at leaving certificate level by which time they have their heads buried so deeply in a book that in many instances they have forgotten that the language is a living entity. That is wrong and ludicrous. While the TUI considers a greater variety of modes of assessment we stipulate prudent conditions, including time for the bureaucratic work involved and, where appropriate, payment for the work involved and critically external moderation so that national standards are maintained or achieved as the case may be.

Without labouring the point about disadvantage, we need significant intervention in geographical areas of concentrated disadvantage. Currently the Department is sitting on its hands in issuing revised criteria for the determination of disadvantage. This has been promised by a succession of Ministers. The promise has not been worth a whit so far because we have got no movement. We still await the issuing of these criteria. The problem is that pending the issuing of the criteria, the Department has put on ice the development of existing initiatives, perhaps fearing that they are not the best initiatives. If they are not let us revise them and if they are let us proceed with them. When the revised criteria are published we will require multi-annual funding packages for these initiatives. They cannot be allowed to subsist in the hope that they will be funded for the following year but without any great expectation. We have seen the cutback in SSRI funding.

I mentioned democratisation earlier. We see school development planning as a means of democratising school operation by bringing into the policy and decision-making process in a meaningful way parents and, at the appropriate age, students. It is important, as it is a valid way for schools to set out their goals and to evaluate the achievement of those goals. It is a valid measurement of achievement and is considerably better than the absurd and inherently crude instrument of league tables.

Mr. Healy mentioned further education. I want to mention Youthreach, which is one of the most innovative and important services for mainstream second level schools. Youthreach caters for students who drift out of or are removed from mainstream second level schools. The problem is that Youthreach hangs by a thread. The educationalists in Youthreach are not uniformly and universally recognised as teachers because, absurdly, Youthreach is not recognised by all concerned as education. We contend it manifestly is education and to say otherwise is to suggest that the children in the scheme are uneducable, which is a concept we entirely reject. We need proper conditions for those in Youthreach. The McIver report has been mentioned.

Personal and social development is specific to a curricular area. There is provision, rightly, at junior certificate level for SPHE, which includes relationships and sexuality education. No explicit mandatory provision is made for SPHE or sexuality education at leaving certificate level, which is the precise time when teenagers are likely to become sexually active and engage in other high-risk behaviour. At that time mandatory provision ceases which is an absurdity that should be addressed.

Mr. Healy has mentioned that the obstacles to higher education do not begin at the point of entry. The obstacles to entering begin at the ages of two, three and four years. To fundamentally and organically deal with the issue of access, the continuum of provision must be planned logically. In respect of those who access higher education in the institutes of technology, there are high attrition rates among the students who come in on AQA, all qualified applicants, or on lower moderate points. However, those who enter on equal points — similarly low points in many incidences — through dedicated access programmes have an extraordinarily high completion rate as shown recently by studies in the Cork Institute of Technology. The difference is the provision of supports while the student is in the institute that allow the students to complete. There is a manifestly successful system that needs to be brought back and rolled into provision for other students.

Mr. Healy has mentioned access funding. How can State agencies intervene to assist teachers? In the name of all that is holy and much that is not, some sort of geographical regional coherence should be imposed on a system that currently lacks it. We are dealing with a multiplicity of agencies each of which separately and independently defines its own geographical empire. It is unsatisfactory for students, befuddling for teachers and even with their own corporate assistance it is very difficult for schools.

There is little point in blaming agencies, which have been established by statute and then are grossly under-funded. The agencies must be funded. The National Education Welfare Board was so under-funded in each of the past two calendar years that the general secretaries of the three unions felt it necessary in each of those years to write to plead for additional funding. It is not unreasonable that one measurement of advancement, success and achievement for schools should be increased attendance by students at school, which is intimately linked to improved performance through school. As the NEWB is the agency that monitors school attendance it must be properly funded.

NEPS, the psychological service, is similarly straitjacketed. It was promised many more psychologists than it currently has. It was promised a statutory basis. It is simply now being allowed to operate as a fire brigade agency and most ineffectively through no fault of its own.

The TUI remains to be convinced that the National Council for Special Education will be adequately funded. While I do not want to digress, I should add that the TUI is in the business of establishing lifelong learning opportunities in real terms for real people. The public broadcasters in this country do not deliver educational broadcasts. It is not right that little educational material is broadcast on radio or television. It contrasts with the set of circumstances in the UK. If one wants to access people who are working, one should access them when they are at home watching television. One has to access them in a realistic manner.

That the number of international students in this country is increasing reflects the increasing diversity of Irish society, a development I greatly welcome. I repeated my comments on this matter in another section of my document. The learning the students have already done is essentially discarded because it was acquired in many instances through the students' mother tongues, but I would like it to be used. The learning they did elsewhere is not allowed to transfer to the learning they undertake here. The students for whom English is not a mother tongue need far more intensive English language training.

The effect of part-time employment on student performance, particularly at second level, is well-documented. The current legislation in this regard needs to be implemented, but that is not happening. The TUI has great hopes for the Teaching Council, but I will say little about it at this point because it has not been sufficiently rolled out.

The Department of Education and Science has an important role. As a union that represents public sector employees, the TUI acknowledges and supports the role of the inspectorate. The increased and enhanced staffing of the inspectorate is extremely important. The TUI welcomes the increased number of subject inspections and whole school evaluations in the past 12 months. It constitutes a guarantee of quality and achievement.

I will not speak again about disadvantage, funding, curriculum review or the professional development of teachers. Some specialist services, such as speech and language therapy, are being denied to most schools and students. It is wrong that one might not receive any value from such a fundamental service because one has waited too long to get it.

The arbitrary and stupid cap on the number of people in further education needs to be removed because it inhibits lifelong learning. The development of adult education is being stymied by the failure to date to make the appropriate national and regional bodies operational.

I have set out a framework of possible measures of assessment which may be of interest to the committee. I started my contribution to this dialogue by quoting from the McGuinness report, which was informed by a number of considerations, such as the need to achieve key educational objectives, the nature and scope of school activities and the requirement to meet the needs of all students. The need to put in place a valid means of measuring and judging the progress of schools and the educational system is implicit in that. I have set out a list of systemic and school-based indicators. The systemic indicators include the gradual movement towards the national objective of 90% retention to the end of senior cycle education. We have reached 80% or thereabouts, but we have been stubbornly stuck there for the last couple of years. That can probably be attributed in some way to the availability of soft employment.

That there has been a gradual improvement in student performance is evinced in the results of the State examinations. The PISA research has been referred to. Statistical analysis is too frequently concerned only with the number of students who transfer to universities, which is a ludicrously narrow view to take. The TUI suggests that other perspectives can be adopted. It is clear that the ability to attract and retain effective teachers is important, as is the proportion of students transferring from primary to post-primary education. The loss suffered by the thousands of students who disappear from the system each year is incalculable. It is a significant haemorrhage. I am not sure if anyone knows what happens to such very young people.

I have spoken about the number of subject inspections. The percentage of new entrants to higher education from disadvantaged socio-economic backgrounds has improved marginally, but far greater improvement is required. Completion rates in higher education, as opposed to entry rates, are also of critical importance. The gradual increase in schools' retention of pupils to the end of junior and senior cycles should be judged on a school-by-school basis because they operate in different contexts. I have indicated possible ways of measuring the degree to which schools' strategies implement social inclusion policies, which are national policies. I have hinted at some tests of commitment to equity and inclusivity.

The measurement of the breadth of curricular provision within a school, especially in light of the constraints of school size, is a black and white issue. A school is white and virtuous if its curricular provision is wide, but that is not the case if a school located in an urban area or a large provincial town does not offer a wide breadth of curricular provision. If a school does not offer much more than the junior and leaving certificate programmes, one wonders whether there is something in the water that means that all students have to take one of the two programmes. One will have to consider whether there is an element of neglect.

We should try to measure the quality of schools' pastoral opportunities or structures and the opportunities afforded to students who wish to take subjects at higher level. We should consider the stage of development at which a school has arrived in its school development plan. We should also assess the holistic development of students, which is a matter dealt with by the vast majority of schools. League tables and other such crude measurements are incapable of comprehending such matters.

I thank the committee for listening to the members of the delegation, who spoke at considerable length. I look forward to the committee's active engagement with the proposals the TUI has made to it.

Chairman

I thank the delegations.

Deputy Enright

I would like to hear the advice the members of the delegation give to their students about time management during examinations. I am conscious that the delegation is here to discuss excellence and the measurement of achievement, as well as how the agencies of the State can intervene to assist teachers. I will deal primarily with such matters. I accept many of the points which were made about class sizes and resources. I ask the delegation to bear in mind, when I am making my various points, that I accept there is a need for change in such areas. If we were to deal with such issues, we would be here for a long time. I propose that the committee should deal on another day with the points which were made about Youthreach and other important subjects.

I strongly believe that we need to put in place a way of measuring achievement. I appreciate that it is not possible that a single type of measurement will work alone — we should not adopt a "one size fits all" approach. It needs to be stressed that it can take more work to get a child to sit his or her leaving certificate examinations than it takes to help another child to earn seven "A" grades in the examination. I welcome some of the comments which were made by the INTO about the development of an agreed national assessment policy for primary schools. Such a policy would represent a welcome step forward.

The TUI and the ASTI spoke about matters such as whole school initiatives, school development plans, whole school evaluation and engagement between the education partners from management and policy-making perspectives. The issue of greater accountability is related to such matters. I am conscious that it is not just a matter for the unions — it has to start at the Department of Education and Science.

A raft of programmes, initiatives and pilot studies has been put in place, but we never seem to step back to check whether the schemes are working. We sometimes decide simply to stop the programmes whereas others are retained as pilot studies for a long time. I understand that Youthreach has been a pilot programme for 18 years. I think it is working, but we have never seen statistical analysis to prove that it is achieving its objectives. The Department needs to start there, but there is a need for a greater degree of accountability in that regard.

I wish to discuss the OECD data. Some members of the delegation spoke about the historic assumption that Ireland has the best education system in the world. While some of the statistics demonstrate that it is better than average, that is not enough. The statistics indicate that we spend less than the average among OECD countries. On the 2000 OECD table, Ireland was placed fifth in reading literacy, ninth in scientific literacy and 15th in mathematics. The statistics were broadly similar in the 1995 survey. While it is better to be in these places than at the other end of the spectrum, we should still try to reach the top of the table.

Important points were made about the transfer of data among teachers, peer schools and primary and post-primary establishments. It is nonsensical that extensive information on a student can be built up and simply discarded when he or she moves to another school. Mr. MacGabhann made a point about the media in the context of CAO points and spoke about the leaving certificate examination being the focus of teachers, students and parents. While I am unhappy that the information published by the media is very crude, it is all that is available and we must deal with that reality. The information does not take into account anything other than leaving certificate results and the university, though not institute of technology, destinations of students. We must consider what other system can be put in place as the media will continue to use the current information until we establish an alternative. We must ask hard questions in trying to find a suitable alternative.

While some examples were provided, I would like more information on teacher retention. I share concerns about the number of males entering the profession. To what is the current trend attributed? Is the Irish requirement an issue? At primary level one in ten teachers entering the profession is male but I do not know what are the statistics for post-primary level. According to the statistics for 2003, only one third of pupils securing an honour in honours Irish were male. Perhaps, it is a contributory factor.

Some €500 million is spent on the Irish language per annum and we spend 13 years of our lives learning it. The INTO has mentioned changes to the primary school curriculum which I hope will be successful. What is the TUI's opinion about the teaching of Irish at post-primary level? Unfortunately, despite securing an honour in honours Irish, I cannot speak the language and probably constitute a representative example. It is a sad reality. Is the problem with the syllabus or the methodology? Fewer students take honours Irish than sit for honours in other language subjects. What can be done to redress the balance? I acknowledge that the report was published only last week and that the TUI may not have had ample opportunity to consider it. If it has views, I would like to hear them.

I submitted a question to the Minister this week on the employee assistance service. In her reply, the Minister said a steering committee had been established with departmental and union representation and indicated that she is considering an occupational scheme to deal with health and safety. An element of the scheme will be employee assistance. Does the TUI consider such provision to be sufficient or is it looking for more in an employee assistance scheme?

Chairman

I call Deputy Sargent next as he must speak in the Dáil.

Deputy Sargent

I do not know if I will even be able to stay for the replies. I will try to follow the meeting on the monitors. I am sorry that I must leave the meeting.

I take on board what was said, but I have two questions relating to matters which were not covered. While the planning of schools provision does not arise in the context of overall education spending, it should be addressed by the unions to ensure the more timely construction of facilities. As the TUI points out, class size rather than the pupil-teacher ratio is the issue. While the average class size at primary level is 24.5 pupils, it is over 30 pupils in the area I represent where schools are packed. Pupils are being driven over 20 miles into Dublin city to try to find a place. Physical limitations of space mean class sizes cannot get any larger. At second level the average is 24 pupils, but there are 35,000 pupils in classes of 30 and over. Despite being negative of itself, the average figure can be misleading and tends to underplay the extent of the problem. Can Mr. MacGabhann suggest ways to support the campaign for the more timely provision of schools? While problems such as developer-led construction are at issue, there is also a case for applying pressure from a teacher union perspective.

Having been a primary school principal, I could relate to comments about the links between the primary and secondary sector. I thought communications had improved with secondary schools seeking information on primary pupils who had been sent to them. In the context of special needs education, can representatives of primary and secondary teachers work together to arrive at an understanding which acknowledges, inter alia, the point Deputy Enright made? Problems can sometimes relate to Irish qualifications, but also to other things. I will raise on the Adjournment today the issue of whether or not qualifications are admissible in schools which, while technically in the primary sector, accommodate special needs pupils who may be 14, 15 or 16 years of age. The special education qualifications of certain teachers in the schools in question are not technically recognised as they relate to the secondary sector. Is it possible to examine that problem given the fact that despite attending primary schools, the ages of the children involved are appropriate to second level?

The link between primary and secondary schools should be examined in the context of special education, which is one of many areas in which there is a need to co-ordinate the sectors. Very good teachers are being caught out and the skills they have are not being recognised.

Deputy O’Sullivan

I welcome the witnesses who are giving us a great deal of their time despite the fact that their conferences will take place next week. I agree with Deputy Enright's point about time management and suppose that as they teach pupils to be creative, teachers must use their time in whatever way they can.

As we have covered so many educational issues, I will not ask too many questions. It has been very useful to have representatives of the three unions in attendance. We are all agreed that while we have a good education system, there are many opportunities for targeted, strategic investment which would improve it to a great extent. Witnesses have all made points in that context. As a great deal of background work has been done in many relevant areas, including class size, educational disadvantage and curriculum reform, it is now time to take action. Many promises have been made and reports have been produced, the recommendations of which are ready to be implemented. We need action in many of these areas and know what needs to be done.

I will focus on some issues on which I seek the views of the delegation. Members agree with practically everything the delegation said. I support, in particular, its position on continuing professional development to which a number of speakers referred. It is ludicrous that teachers, such as Ms Hall, who have been in classrooms for years have not been offered an opportunity to update their knowledge regarding major social changes in recent years. The joint committee should support the teaching unions on this issue in the interests of teachers but primarily in the interests of students who deserve to be taught by teachers who have received this kind of support.

As regards the thorny issue of how one measures progress and how the media reports on measurement, I reject the use of crude league tables which have done considerable damage elsewhere, particularly in Britain. It is inevitable, however, that the media will report on the information they receive, even if is confined to issues such as which schools send how many students to universities. The more holistic methods of evaluating schools are excellent. Could these be refined in order to identify a relationship between the progress made by individual students in a school and the results as we have them now? Regardless of whether we like it, the CAO system is the only mechanism for measurement available to us. Is there another way other than crude league tables of moving forward? How should we present progress in schools?

Professor Kathleen Lynch recently suggested in the media that we change the current points system by applying thresholds, for example, 450 points for subjects such as medicine with high points requirements, above which random selection would be used. What are the views of the delegation on this proposal?

Reform of the curriculum of the type proposed would probably diminish the role of the CAO points system, which I would welcome. The TUI has given strong support to proposals on curriculum reform and specifically referred to them in its presentation. ASTI probably also supports reform. Based on what is known of the proposals, what are the views of the delegation on curriculum reforms, for example, the proposal to introduce continuous assessment in schools to replace the three weeks of examinations at the end of the school cycle?

I also welcome the ongoing study on discipline. The fact that more children stay on in school for longer causes problems for the system. Has the Education (Welfare) Act and the provision allowing for the intervention of educational welfare officers to keep young people in school resulted in more children progressing from primary to secondary level? On average approximately 1,000 children fail to transfer to secondary school each year. Is the position improving?

I support the comments made regarding the problem of failure to transfer from primary to second level, particularly the views of the ASTI on the lack of resources for special needs students entering secondary school. The Education for Persons with Special Educational Needs Act, which introduced a series of measures regarding children with special needs, has not yet been implemented in schools. Will the Act improve the position by providing for direct transfer of resources from primary to second level?

With regard to discipline and curriculum, should all children be in standard second level schools? What are the views of the delegation on youth encounter and other projects for children who have difficulty fitting into the system? Should all children be educated in the same system as is currently the case and, if so, what are the effects on other children? Should alternatives be available? This is a difficult question on which the delegation may not have definitive answers but it is one to which we will have to face up, particularly if we aim to retain all children in the system. At present 82% stay in school until the leaving certificate.

Deputy Hoctor

I am pleased to have this opportunity to meet with representatives of the teaching profession. As a fully paid up member of the ASTI, I declare an interest. I welcome the representatives of the teaching unions and thank them — not in a self-gratifying manner — for the work they do. As we are aware, teachers do a tremendous job working in cramped conditions in under-funded schools. Although the statistics presented cause concern, the achievements the group recognised are largely due to the high calibre of teachers at primary, secondary and third levels.

I stress the need for holding meetings such as this. Entering the House as a newly elected Deputy who had previously worked in the classroom, I recall that the work programme drawn up by the joint committee in September 2002 included only one reference to teachers, which was under the title, "Pupil-Teacher Ratio". I insisted to the Chairman's predecessor, Deputy Tony Killeen, that the joint committee needed to examine ways of assisting and supporting the teaching profession. As a Deputy with a background in the teaching profession who knows the problems and difficulties teachers encounter, I therefore welcome this meeting.

I am not sure we addressed the issue on today's agenda. While we examined how we can work towards greater achievement and quality and teaching and quality education, I listened intently hoping to hear of ways in which State agencies can assist teachers in the classroom. While we made some progress on this area, we should have spent more time on the issue. We may have to return to it on another day, although it is possible I missed a point.

I regret the recent reporting in the national media about stressed out teachers. Perhaps it emanated from the press offices of the various teaching unions. The real point, however, is that teachers are increasingly encountering the manifestation of social problems caused by dysfunctional families. As Ms Hall stated, these problems are not left behind on a Sunday night but enter classrooms on Monday morning and throughout the week. I understand, however, that no teacher or school principal will come out and state that children in his or her school come to class every day without breakfast or for whom the only kind word each day is spoken by their teacher. These are realities but no school or teacher can afford to state this publicly because he or she would receive a rap on the knuckles from those in higher authority.

Members of the joint committee work with the Minister and must address this issue by ensuring State agencies are adequately funded to help teachers in their everyday interaction with children. One of my questions relates to access to the curriculum. I would like to hear from teachers present on this matter. Is it not true that a great deal of pressure is also put on pupils? Is it not the case that they have too many subjects at junior level? The average number of subjects is ten. Some students even strive to do 12 in their own time for the recognition of having studied so many subjects. There is a great deal of pressure on young people in schools. Would it be more effective if we were to cut down on the number of subjects on the curriculum at junior level? Even at senior level it is very demanding to study seven subjects in the detail that is required, especially of honours students. Senior level students in England take a maximum of four subjects. I do not say the English model is one we should follow but there is a great deal of stress on students, which is no doubt reflected back on the teaching profession. Teachers still teach for a similar number of hours per day although additional subjects such as SPHE have been added to the curriculum. Religious education is now an examination subject. All subjects have to be catered for within the timetable.

Section 4 of page 2 of the ASTI submission states that Irish second level teachers teach 735 hours per annum compared to the OECD average of 695. I am not sure how this can be the case, given the substantial annual leave of teachers in Ireland in comparison to other countries. I would like to hear a comment in regard to that.

Ms Susie Hall raised the continuation of special needs assistance. We should take that up with the Minister at the earliest possible date. A special needs assistant should play a diminishing role in a pupil's life. He or she should engender independence in their pupils so that they will become independent individuals. While it is assumed that a reduced level of special needs assistance would be required at second level it is far too presumptuous to believe special needs assistants would not be required at all at that stage. We must raise this matter with the Minister as a matter of priority.

Many things were not said today that I would like to be on record. Adequate in-service teacher training is required to help teachers deal with special needs and the type of disorders referred to today, such as Asperger's syndrome, dyspraxia and so on. It is presumed by the Department that teachers already know about these matters. I accept that teachers do their best in these situations.

Adequate funding should be provided to cover the cost of personal expenses for teacher training. Teachers come to Dublin to undertake resource teaching courses largely at their own expense. The funding they receive to cover the cost of bed and breakfast accommodation goes nowhere near the cost of staying overnight in Dublin. I am aware of these issues although they were not mentioned here today. If we want quality and excellence we should pay accordingly.

I am interested in hearing about the various outside agencies that could assist the teaching profession in the classroom. We want to continue to attract the high calibre people that are already in the profession. In order to do that we must continue to make it attractive to the right people. Additional funding must be put in place on a continual basis to ensure that will happen.

Deputy Crowe

I welcome the members of the delegations. I wish them well in their conferences. In the course of the conferences I hope the Minister will help clarify some of the issues raised here.

I thank the INTO for its recent briefing which was most helpful. Similar briefings have taken place around the country. One such meeting was held in a school in Tallaght, which was not designated as a disadvantaged area, but where 80% of the parents there are dependent on social welfare. Some 55 countries are represented in two schools in the area yet no additional funding is provided to them. It is a crazy system. We are supposed to be trying to achieve excellence. This matter clearly has to be addressed.

We await the Minister's proposals regarding disadvantage. Although the example of the school to which I referred is not in a designated area of disadvantage, problems exist there. In the schools in that locality, 35 classes have in excess of 30 pupils. Deputy Sargent referred to lifestyle changes. The difficulty in that area is that the population is transient. There is a great deal of rented accommodation. There is a problem with enrolment and schools have a difficulty in trying to keep up their numbers as families move around within the area.

The discussion earlier focused on the number of second level students, 82%, who completed their leaving certificate. However there is a significant problem with dropping out at primary level. When visiting schools it is not unusual to hear of 25% of pupils who miss over 20 days in the school year. The National Educational Welfare Board is in place and has a statutory obligation to follow up on cases but how can it do its job if does not have adequate resources? It is a similar case with the NEPS, which is not adequately represented throughout the country.

The cross-over between primary and second level has been referred to in terms of special needs. It is ludicrous that there is not a seamless system of transfer between the two levels. I would welcome feedback from the delegations as to how they would see the area of special needs expanding. If the process was focused on the development of individual children, it would be seamless but that is not the case. What changes does the Department need to introduce to improve this?

Reference was made to the number of people who have left the teaching profession in Britain. A turnover of 45% was referred to. What is the turnover here? Is last year's high retirement figure expected to continue? What can the Department do to encourage more people to stay in the profession? Reference was made to a stressful environment and the difficulty caused by class size.

The point was made that examination results are not a great indicator of how people do at school. Deputy Enright referred to the Irish language and so on. We all know of people who have done well at exams but a difficulty arises when people do not pass exams. Is the curriculum based on developing the individual or is it about passing exams? While exams are important the focus should be on the development of the individual.

It is clear that a large class size will give rise to problems of control and so on. Smaller classes provide a better school environment. I accept that teachers will be defensive about non-attendance and those children we are failing.

Deputy Hoctor referred to the children who are going to school hungry. The lack of investment in the education system was mentioned by the representatives. In this regard, it was stated that the amount of money invested per capita is much greater than it was in previous years but that spending is less in percentage terms. What can be done for children in schools in disadvantaged areas? Is it a question of more investment? Clearly, it is. Is it a question of the environment? No reference was made to the state of schools, the condition of the buildings and the adequacy of heating. There have been positive developments in this regard but we are still playing catch-up from a very low base, just as we are doing in respect of special needs education. What can be done in this area?

The delegates referred to the importance of role models. Do they recognise the importance of encouraging parents to get involved in education, particularly further education? I refer to women in particular. What can be done to encourage parents to get involved in further education? Is it a matter of free education or of sponsoring courses, particularly in the areas in question?

Chairman

I will ask the representatives to respond in the order in which they made their presentations. We will begin with the INTO.

Mr. Corcoran

I will solve one riddle and the solution might be of help to the committee. The three unions present are all members of Education International, as is the fourth teacher union, IFUT. Education International is the global trade union body to which we all pay our fees. It is active in approximately 168 countries out of 195 and covers approximately 80% of the world. Some 20% of the world does not have an education system. Education International has an international funding benchmark which is promoted by all the affiliated unions from Africa to the Americas and elsewhere. It advises that states should be spending a minimum of 6% of their GDP on education.

In our office, we have tracked Irish expenditure — I refer to investment rather than spending — in respect of GDP since 1990. Ireland has not invested in excess of 6% of its GDP in any of the past 16 years. One should bear in mind that the benchmark is a minimum of 6%. In 1993 and 1994 we reached 6% of GDP but this figure declined thereafter. In Y2K, the great millennium year, we hit 4.8%, and then the trend on the graph declined significantly. Investment is now at5.5%. Given the angst and debate generated when it was stated we would not meet our overseas development aid target of 0.7% of GDP by 2007, it is interesting to note that our investment in education is less than the minimum recommended investment to the tune of 0.5%.

The first recommendation that should be made by this committee is that the education budget should be appropriate. We want to start operating above the 6% line and not desperately short of it. There is a chronic lack of resources in our schools because of the continuous short-changing of children. My contribution today will be significant if we can achieve the recommended benchmark figure. Other countries have done so, including Finland. Denmark's investment in education is in the order of 10% of GDP, which is way above the figure of 6%. All the other countries are investing sufficient sums but for some crazy reason Ireland has decided not to do so. I do not know why.

Mr. Carr

I will try to be as succinct as possible while answering the questions. INTO supports the development of an agreed national assessment policy. Unfortunately, we were hoping this would be achieved in the context of a commitment by Government in An Agreed Programme for Government. We were hoping the commitment would be honoured and that we would have a Government that was willing to reduce class sizes. At the same time, we were measuring what was happening in our schools and ascertaining whether we were getting value for our buck.

I appreciate Deputy Enright's comment that measures of achievement are essential and that we must get into that game sooner or later on an agreed basis. I agree with Deputy Enright that we must be above average. Finland is at the top of the table in terms of literacy and numeracy. We should be trying to knock it from the top but if we are to do so we must be given a level playing pitch on which to compete with it. When I ask teachers in Finland the average class size, they state they do not know because it is not an issue for them. Finland is at the top of the table because it believes in input as well as output. Unfortunately, in Ireland we are talking about looking for outputs before making an input to improve the outputs.

We have been mourning the fact that there are not enough men in the teaching profession. If 90% of the people in the system were men and 10% were women, the problem would be resolved before we walked out the door because we would arrive at a formula or quota to ensure the correct balance. However, because the ratio is the other way around, for some reason we are not prepared to bite the bullet regarding this issue.

The reasons for men not entering primary teaching are complex. There are issues associated with their not achieving sufficiently high grades in the Irish language. CAO applications reflect that girls have better results than boys. Therefore, given the finite number of people who can enter the colleges, there will naturally be a higher proportion of young women in the system. Pious platitudes will not resolve the problem. If we are prepared to bite the bullet regarding this issue, we should engage in a real discussion on how to ensure we have a high proportion of men in the system.

Deputy Enright referred to the €500 million being spent on the Irish language. This is a serious issue which we must all address. In a document we produced 20 years ago, we stated clearly that the standard of Irish was not in conformity with the amount of effort we were investing at that time. Since then, while the effort has remained much the same, standards in Irish have been declining. The question of whether children feel Irish is cool is a societal issue. Let us hope the new emphasis on the spoken language, Irish tradition and literature will yield results and that children of the future will have a better standard of Irish than those of today. However, this committee should take up the issue. I would love to be in a position to address the issue of Irish and the attitude of society thereto. It is now left to the schools alone to try to revise or retain the Irish language.

Deputy Enright referred to the employment assistance service and raised the issue of the occupational scheme. There is an occupational scheme in the Civil Service and it was never extended to the public service. It is an interesting concept. The chief medical officer has raised the issue, although not formally with the teacher unions. I am interested that the Minister will be answering the committee members' questions on an occupational scheme, and that an employee assistance scheme is to be incorporated into the scheme without consultation or discussion with the very people who would be affected by it. Having said that, I believe there needs to be an employment assistance scheme. Whether it is incorporated into an occupational scheme in which the Department is involved is another matter. If it could involve putting people out of the system we must ensure there is support and that the scheme is sufficiently independent so everyone can trust it. Discussion is needed on whether the employee assistance scheme should be incorporated within an occupational scheme.

Deputy Sargent asked about average class sizes. Government policy is not being implemented in this area. I am angry that I am going to conference this weekend having convinced every Government Deputy that a problem exists but having failed to convince the people who matter — those in the Department of Finance. This Government and the State are run by the Department of Finance, particularly when it comes to young children. I cannot condone a situation where the State is prepared to buy back the West Link but when it comes to ensuring young children are in classes of less than 30, it becomes a public service tapping issue and, therefore, we cannot appoint teachers. We are running an economy rather than a society and the sooner this Government gets back to running a society and giving every child in it an equal opportunity, the sooner we will have a Government that cares and shares as it purports to do. It does not care or share when it comes to young children.

Deputy Sargent mentioned special needs education, a complex issue. There are children with various forms of special needs at primary level. Some can transfer to the post-primary sector but some might better transfer to special schools designed to cater for their needs. From a social point of view, parents will opt to have their children educated locally but when it comes to the transfer of children who are very far behind, unless the resources are put into the post-primary sector on the same basis as they are put into the primary sector, we will have a problem.

There are 300 personnel in the primary sector at present without a teaching qualification and that is a scandal that must be rectified. Another 500 to 800 secondary teachers teach at primary level; they are fully qualified and it would not take much training to enable those teachers to transfer to the primary sector.

Deputy O'Sullivan asked about educational disadvantage. This is an area that has had a great deal of lip service paid to it and more reports commissioned on it than any other aspect of society. The previous Minister commissioned at least five or six reports but no action was taken. I hope this Minister will announce at the conference that at last the Government is prepared to do something. In Castleknock, there are class sizes of 29:1 and in Deputy Crowe's area in Tallaght, there are class sizes of 27:1. People cannot tell me that is not discrimination against those from disadvantaged areas. That is an insult to the children with disadvantaged backgrounds.

There is a serious problem with league tables based on crude results. In England and elsewhere they have come to terms with this issue. In Wales, the Minister for Education has scrapped testing for seven and 11 year olds because it was unhelpful, put teachers under pressure, narrowed the curriculum and had a negative effect on teaching and learning. In Scotland, the national debate on education argued strongly that assessment for monitoring purposes totally dominated classroom activity with the result that the Scottish are moving away from testing. In England, the country that introduced high stake national testing, testing at seven is to be radically changed, with more emphasis placed on the work done throughout the year.

The decision to introduce these changes followed research in 500 schools showing that teacher assessment supported by more flexible testing was more accurate than raw test results. We must ensure there is a systematic approach to assessment at primary level, that teachers assess teaching and learning and provide information to parents and that the information gleaned is more appropriate to that level than to bringing it out of the schools and abusing it, as happened in other jurisdictions. The British discarded the crude tables because they were of no value and did not indicate the issues faced by children. I agree that there is a problem with crude league tables and we must find a better way to do things by ensuring that all teachers have a systematic approach to assessment, including standardised testing, and that the results are kept where they are most useful — in the schools.

Ms Hall

It is a shame Deputy Sargent has left because I want to answer his question about why teacher unions do not row in to a greater extent on the timely provision of schools. There are jobs teachers can do and jobs politicians can do. I live in his local area and in 1976, when my school became a community school and the newer section was built, we were promised there would be a second community school in Malahide but it has still not been provided. Since the school opened in 1976 the roof has never ceased leaking, regardless of hundreds of thousands of euro being spent on it. The staff room was built for a maximum of 30 teachers but over 90 people try to use it each day.

In the school, there are over 1,200 students, a tribute to its excellence because it is an affluent area and the parents could afford to send their children elsewhere but choose not to. The idea that the teachers, apart from everything else they have to do, should now be involved in lobbying for the timely provision of schools takes my breath away.

I visited Donabate, where there is no second level school, to address a public meeting. Traditionally, the school in Malahide accepted the children from Donabate, who came down by train. Some years ago we could no longer do that because we are bursting at the seams. Last year those children went to Portmarnock, which took 260 first years, an entire school enrolment in a rural area. Portmarnock cannot take any more children so wherever the Donabate children will go next year will be further south and further away from their homes and families. We are willing to lobby for the schools to be produced in time but there are limits to the hearing that teachers get when they ask for schools to be provided and, in the meantime, we must carry on with what we have.

Deputy O'Sullivan asked if children with special needs can be taught in mainstream schools. Perhaps not all of them but I am passionately of the view that most can be. I work in a school with a special unit for children with learning difficulties. We also have 120 students with special needs mainstreamed throughout the senior cycle. It can be done but not with the resources we are expected to use for it. The children with the learning difficulties are in their own unit but they are mainstreamed where possible so they can join in. They are registered in mainstream classes and can take part in subjects that are appropriate, such as PE, music and art. It presents no difficulties because the school is committed to that type of activity. It deals, however, with many disruptive children in the regular classes where the supports are inadequate and this causes the system to crack. While students whose behaviour is seriously disruptive may be taught in mainstream schools they may not be suitable members of a mainstream class. That must be addressed. It is possible to put special measures in place. A survey we conducted last year revealed that over 70% of all classes were disrupted at second level. Over 80% of our teachers stated that only one or two students caused this disruption.

Most second level students are not disruptive; they want to get on with their work and be allowed to do so. They too are threatened by the aggressive behaviour of their classmates and have a right to protection. While it may not be possible to accommodate every child there is room for most but maybe not always in a mainstream class. That is one way to deal with the situation.

League tables send a message to young people that if their school is not listed they are not valuable; they do not count as citizens, they stand for nothing. There are ways of evaluating schools without sending such a message to young people. For example, my school, which is non-fee paying has educated generations of students who are the first in their families to progress to third level. That is success.

There are many ways in which to assess the success of a school. Setting schools in competition with each other is not the way to do it because it creates the false notion that if one had unlimited information one would have unlimited choice, which is patently untrue. It is no consolation to a parent in Donegal to know that there is a super school in Westmeath or in Cork. Even within a limited area such as the townland of Malahide or Tallaght, there are only a few schools, most of them bursting at the seams. There is no choice unless one has money.

To imagine that if one has all this information one is free to choose where to send children to school creates a false impression. Schools should be required to reach standard national norms of excellence. Every child should be guaranteed access to a school which meets standard norms of best practice and of excellence. There is no point in demoralising people by telling them if they could afford to send their child to a school that charges €15,000 a year the child will be in an excellent school. That is no consolation and is no way to address the provision of an education service.

It is possible to establish norms by which schools can be judged without competing with each other. In the requirement that they meet certain norms there must be a recognition of the demographic realities of that school, such as problems in the locality, the level of disadvantage and so on. When these are factored in one can judge the performance of a school.

Gender quotas are not the best way to attract men to the teaching profession. Until society sees the profession as worthwhile, there will not be a good gender balance. Certain professions have no problem in attracting men, for example, the law, tax advice and accountancy. It is a question of status. It upsets me that when a student gains 600 points in his leaving certificate and opts to do primary teaching people say he could have done medicine, as if that were better. Teaching used to have cachet in society and until the State and its agencies support education and its value to society teaching will not be seen as a career of status.

Mr. White

I counted 18 questions from members of the committee. Two of those who remain gave us a rap over the knuckles for time management so I will be brief. The gender breakdown of attendance at second level is 64% female and 36% male. In regard to EDUCARE, I would be happy with an occupational health scheme which might have advantages within a broader scheme but the focus on occupational health is most important. I call on the Minister to act on that straightaway.

The State does not spend enough money on education at any level. As I said, Ireland lies 20th out of 26 OECD countries in terms of spending per second level student. When funding is available to improve class sizes and equipment it will be possible to move up to the top of the list.

Ms Moira Leyden

The news from the Coimisinéir Teanga is well-known but by costing it he gave it prominence. Teachers are aware of the dilemmas highlighted by committee members, that after almost 14 years of compulsory schooling in Irish many children leave school without a speaking competence in the language. There are no easy solutions to this problem.

The ASTI does not have a grand plan to change this but some proposals do exist. For example, after a long consultation process, the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment has produced a discussion paper on modern languages and how they should be taught, including Irish. That paper contains several interesting proposals on how to differentiate between what we want to achieve and how to achieve it.

When the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment brings this paper to the Minister — a director of the council has been with us for most of our proceedings — it behoves the committee to take a serious interest in the paper. The ASTI is open to looking at ways to ensure a higher speaking standard among students leaving school. Our basic position, however, of which we are proud, is that all students, irrespective of ability or the type of school they attend, should have access to the teaching of the Irish language. That is a cultural prerequisite to which we hold firmly. The issue of continuing professional development and financial supports is a hobby horse of mine. Over the years, we have put forward proposals to the Department of Education and Science for facilities such as paid study leave, sabbatical leave, work shadowing and ways to regenerate the skills, motivation and knowledge base of the teaching profession. It is quite extraordinary that these proposals have gone nowhere.

If one logs on to the Department website, it is symptomatic that there is no icon for professional development or for teacher professional training. That is symbolic of the lacuna that exists at departmental level with regard to ensuring that teachers are supported in taking up training. Many courses are made available. The universities do a fantastic job in providing a diverse range of courses for teachers. However, unless financial supports are provided, teachers cannot attend these courses if they are required to teach, prepare classes, mark homework at home and then do further study. That is impossible with the current workload. We have many policy papers on this issue with which we will continue to make our case.

Mr. Healy

Deputy Crowe asked about teacher turnover. Fortunately, we are still attracting first class people into education and long may that be so. We look across the water and see the effects of undermining qualifications and neglecting teachers' pay and resources. I was told recently by one of my colleagues in the faculty of education in UCD that English education authorities are now advertising on beer mats for teachers and offering incentives to join the profession. That is the sort of damage being done by misguided policies.

Regarding the ratio given by Mr. White for second level female-male teacher balance, 66:36, my colleagues tell me that the ratio for the intake to the higher diploma in education course for second level teaching has now gone to 80:20. Clearly, the higher level of achievement of females in the leaving certificate has some effect on the process, but the extent of it is such that it must be related to the index I mentioned earlier, the drop in the ratio of mean teacher pay in Ireland related to GDP per head. This is the index the OECD uses to rate the status of a profession or job in society.

There is a well established issue of teacher turnover related to disadvantaged areas. As TUI president I have deliberately visited in recent times disadvantaged schools in our major cities — Dublin, Cork, Limerick, Galway and Waterford — and listened carefully to the teachers there. The job being done by such teachers is greatly unsung, although one would expect me to say that. However, when I see our people going out there every morning, fighting a battle for literacy, numeracy and culture in the most difficult circumstances, it is amazing that the turnover is not greater. The commitment of these people to their jobs is unbelievable.

What is needed is well established. Mr. White indicated much of that in his contribution. Professor O'Sullivan from NUI Galway spoke at our discipline conference and told of his experiences in a huge disadvantaged school in New Zealand where the vast majority of students were Maori. I saw the disbelief on the faces of our delegates at the level of supports that school had — psychological services, guidance counselling and additional teachers for withdrawal. The level of supports available for disadvantaged schools in Ireland is indefensible. I welcome the fact that the Minister has committed herself to doing something about that.

The following point does not reflect self seeking. In his report, Professor McGuinness reflected what many teachers said to me. When one goes into a class with a very disadvantaged background, one needs four or five sets of class notes or teaching plans rather than one, depending on who turns up in class, for example. One might have to switch course several times during the session to maintain interest and attention. Any notion of a moment of reflection, a moment of the wandering of the mind, or anything like that is totally out of the question. One must be proactive for every second of the class period. Professor McGuinness said that in such schools, teachers should be allocated more preparation time and less class teaching time to allow them to continue to do in an even more effective manner the marvellous job they are doing.

I talked of money earlier, but this is not just about money. Money can be put into bridges and elements which will be there for hundreds of years and for which future generations will pay. These youngsters are in front of our teachers today. They are entitled to the resources which this country has to give them a chance in life and they are not getting them.

Mr. MacGabhann

Many students who come into post-primary schools with passably good Irish leave those schools with less. That has a lot to do with the curriculum available in post-primary schools which prioritises reading, writing and literature in that order above the spoken language. The curriculum is flawed and it contrasts radically with the curriculum available and the approaches adopted in respect of other modern languages.

As things stand, there is also a lack of congruence between the teaching of one language and the next. Typically, students study three languages but the teaching and learning of one does not sufficiently inform the teaching and learning of the other. There is also an issue which may become political in that all students are constrained to study a common syllabus notwithstanding the fact that a certain number of them are studying the curriculum as native Irish speakers or as young people whose parents have taken a decision to have them educated entirely through Irish. Differentiation of syllabus should be introduced which might aid that group and those who have an inappropriate curriculum.

I question the figure of €500 million. I am not saying it was plucked from the sky but it seems to me that the kitchen sink is in there. If one is qualified as a French and Irish teacher, all the cost of qualifying that person is now attributed to him or her and put as a charge against the Exchequer in respect only of Irish.

Regarding special needs, the continuity of provision from primary to post-primary will probably improve with the advent of the National Council on Special Education. We have been told for example that because employees of the council are now on the ground in the form of special educational needs organisers and that it is through them that the school will make allocations, the allocation process should be speeded up. We have also been told that the assessment process will take place in the latter stages of primary as distinct from the initial stages of post-primary education. There is no doubt there is curricular overload at junior cycle level. However, the question arises of how one addresses it. Does one cut the number of subjects, or does one cut the content within them? There is probably a very strong case for doing the latter as opposed to the former. Similarly, in the senior cycle, why take the English model when what one gets are specialists at an age when people should not specialise? One of the strengths of the system that we need is the breadth available to students in curricular coverage.

Regarding what was characterised as my swipe at the media, I acknowledge a real problem. However, it arises from the demand of the media and politicians for numerical, tabular statements of success or failure. The problem with education is that it is not amenable to being reduced in all instances to tabular statements in numerical form. One has thick, layered text that contextualises the school. The problem for the media, which I acknowledge is genuine, is that it is very difficult for them to translate wads of text relating to each school into some sort of instrument of measurement. It should not be so translated but obviously not everyone shares that view. One cannot encapsulate the functions and success of a school regarding its cohort of students in tabular form. There is an issue regarding how we present information. I accept this entirely. While criticising, I also sympathise with the press in the arduous job they have to do.

Chairman

I thank the members of the INTO, the ASTI and the TUI for a very informative meeting. We went on for some time and have just been given notice that we must vacate the room quickly since a meeting is starting straight away. I thank the representatives once again for their time. I know that they are in the lead-up to the conferences next week. We wish them well.

The joint committee adjourned at 2.25 p.m. until 11 a.m. on Thursday, 7 April 2005.