Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

JOINT COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND SCIENCE díospóireacht -
Thursday, 20 Oct 2005

Primary-Second Level Education: Presentations.

The purpose of today's meeting with officials from the Department of Education and Science is to discuss current and future developments regarding boards of management of primary schools and career opportunities at second level for recent graduates, including the over and undersupply of graduates in particular subject areas and recruitment processes and procedures. On behalf of the committee, I welcome the officials from the Department of Education and Science, Mr. Johnny Bracken, principal officer, primary branch; Mr. Dalton Tatton, legal services unit; Mr. Eamonn Murtagh, assistant chief inspector; Mr. Paul Ryan, principal officer, teacher education section; and Mr. Alfie Barrett, principal officer, post-primary teachers section.

I draw witnesses' attention to the fact that while members of the joint committee have absolute privilege, this privilege does not apply to witnesses appearing before the committee. Members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against any person outside the House or an official either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable. I now invite Mr. Bracken to make a presentation to the committee on behalf of the Department of Education and Science.

Mr. Johnny Bracken

On my own behalf and that of my colleagues, I thank the committee for inviting us to attend this morning to discuss matters relating to boards of management at primary level and the career opportunities at second level for graduates. The aim of the Department of Education and Science is to ensure that our education system enables every child to develop his or her own unique talents and abilities and to achieve his or her full potential. This means ensuring that our schools meet every child's needs in terms of literacy and numeracy, an appetite for learning is instilled in them, a suitable environment for this is created and children learn respect for others. Boards of management have a hugely important role to play in this.

Under the Education Act 1998, it is the duty of a patron, where practicable, to appoint a board of management for the purposes of ensuring that a recognised school is managed in a spirit of partnership. The composition of boards of management is agreed between patrons, recognised school management organisations, trade unions and staff associations representing teachers, national associations of parents and the Minister for Education and Science. The Education Act specifies the various duties and functions of a board. It must manage the school on behalf of the patron for the benefit of the students and their parents and provide, or cause to be provided, an appropriate education for each student in the school. It must uphold the characteristic spirit of the school and must at all times act in accordance with any Act of the Oireachtas relating to the establishment or operation of the school.

The board is required to prepare policies on admission, suspension or expulsion of students and, in this regard, is required to respect principles of equality and parents' right to send their children to a school of the parents' choice. It must respect and promote respect for the diversity of values, beliefs, traditions, languages and ways of life in society. It must have regard to the efficient use of resources and accountability to students, their parents, the patron, staff and the community served by the school.

All proper and usual accounts and records of all moneys received and expended must be kept and the board must ensure each year that the accounts are properly audited or certified in accordance with best accounting practice and that they are made available for inspection by the Minister and the parents in so far as they relate to moneys provided by the Oireachtas. In addition, the board must make arrangements for the preparation of the school plan and ensure that it is regularly reviewed and updated. Apart from the duties and functions specified in the Education Act, other legislation such as the Education (Welfare) Act 2000, the Education for Persons with Special Educational Needs Act 2004 and employment and equality legislation have placed legal obligations on boards.

Under current arrangements, the term of office of a board of management is four years. The procedures for the election and nomination of the members of boards are set out in the handbook: Boards of Management of National Schools — Constitution of Boards and Rules of Procedure. At present, apart from one-teacher schools, which have four members, the boards of management of primary schools are comprised of eight members: two nominees of the patron, two representatives of parents of pupils attending the school, the principal and one other teacher serving in the school and two community representatives.

The patron is responsible for initiating the steps necessary for the establishment of a board in a national school. The patron nominates his or her two nominees. The principal is an ex officio member of the board. The other teacher representative is elected by the permanent teachers and teachers serving in a temporary capacity in the school where the term of appointment is six months or greater.

The two parents' representatives are elected. One must be a mother, the other a father. The procedures set out in the handbook specify that the method of election of parent representatives shall be determined in consultation with the parent representatives on the outgoing board and any parents' association in the school. Two procedures can apply. One is that a meeting is called of parents of pupils enrolled in the school for the purpose of having representatives elected, the other is through the circulation of names of all parents of children attending the school to each household seeking nominations. Regarding the latter option, care must be taken to ensure compliance with the Data Protection Act 1998. In this regard, the board should not disclose information relating to parents, including their names, to other persons without parents being made aware that the information will be used for that purpose and their consent being obtained.

The patron's representative convenes a meeting of the patron's nominees and the teachers' and parents' representatives for the purposes of proposing to the patron two persons from the wider community for appointment to the board. The criteria to be applied in selecting the community representatives, who would not normally be parents of pupils attending the school, include that the person has a commitment to the ethos of the school, has skills complementary to the board's skills requirements and is interested in education and its promotion. There should be consciousness of having a gender balance on the board.

There must be unanimous agreement of the six members to the proposed two appointees. This requirement can on occasion create difficulties and in a very limited number of cases, a situation has arisen where it was not possible to get unanimity and a board could not be formed. Following discussions with the relevant interests, it is proposed to change this requirement. Where a board could not be formed, the patron, with the approval of the Minister and in accordance with the terms of the Education Act, appointed a single manager for a period.

Various grants are paid to national schools by the Department each year. The principal ones are the capitation grant and the ancillary services grant. The first, which is in respect of the day-to-day running costs of the school, is paid on a per capita basis. The standard rate of grant has been increased over recent years to its current level of €133.58 per pupil. An enhanced rate of grant is paid in respect of special needs pupils and children from the Traveller community. Grants to individual schools are paid in two moieties — the first of approximately 70% being paid in January and the balance in June — directly into the school’s bank account through the electronic funds transfer, EFT, system.

The ancillary services grant provides funding for primary schools towards the cost of secretarial and caretaking services. The scheme, by its nature, is flexible and gives boards of management discretion as to the manner in which secretarial and caretaking services are provided. The standard rate of grant per pupil under the scheme has been increased to €133 this year. The amount of grant paid to an individual school is determined by the enrolment in the school subject to a minimum grant of €7,980 in the case of a school with 60 pupils or fewer and a maximum grant of €66,500 in the case of a school with 500 or more pupils, provided the school in question does not already have either caretaking or secretarial services under an existing Department scheme. Where a school has such services under an existing Department scheme, the rate of grant payable is €66.50 per pupil and the minimum and maximum grants payable are €3,990 and €33,250 respectively. The grant is normally paid to schools in March, again direct into the schools' bank accounts through the EFT system. Other grants which are paid include the grants paid under the school books grant scheme, the grant in respect of the modern languages initiative in the schools participating in the scheme and the minor works grant.

There are six recognised management bodies at primary level: the Catholic Primary Schools Management Association, the Church of Ireland Board of Education, Educate Together, An Foras Patrúnachta na Scoileanna Lán-Ghaeilge, the National Association of Boards of Management in Special Education and the Islamic Board of Education. The total amount paid to the management bodies in the current year is €349,000. The bodies have sought additional funding and their request will be considered as part of the Estimates process.

The board of management is the employer of all teaching and ancillary staff employed in the school. Generally, it is responsible for paying the ancillary staff out of grants provided by the Department. There are a number of exceptions, these being special needs assistants and secretaries or caretakers employed by schools under the 1979 scheme.

The Department pays all approved permanent, temporary and substitute teachers through the relevant payroll systems. Once appointed, permanent and temporary teachers are included on the payroll and are paid automatically each fortnight during their periods of appointment. Currently, substitute teachers are paid directly by the Department upon receipt of a claim submitted by the boards of management. A new payroll will be introduced for part-time primary teachers next year and this, together with the implementation of a new on-line claims system for schools, will reduce the workload of schools in this area.

Mainstream staffing of a primary school is determined by reference to the enrolment in the school on 30 September of the previous school year. The actual number of mainstream posts sanctioned is determined by reference to a staffing schedule and is finalised for a particular year following discussions with the education partners. The staffing schedule is structured to ensure that all primary schools will operate to an average mainstream class size of 29 pupils. Where some classes in a school have class sizes of greater than 29, it is generally because a decision has been taken at local level to use teaching resources to have smaller numbers in other classes.

There are agreed appointment procedures which must be followed when vacancies are being filled in national schools. A redeployment or panel system is in operation and there are two specific categories of panels, namely, themain panel,which consists of permanent teachers whose posts have been suppressed and temporary teachers who have a minimum of five years' recognised teaching service in a temporary capacity in primary schools in the Republic of Ireland, and the supplementary panel,which is made up of temporary teachers who have given a minimum of three years' and fewer than five years' recognised teaching service in a temporary capacity in a primary school in the Republic of Ireland. The redeployment process must be completed in the relevant panel area before the board of management of a school in that area will be allowed go to the open market to fill a permanent post.

Generally, the panel system works well. It is in the interests of all concerned that it does. However, there can be difficulties due to delays in the clearance of the panels, as there were this year. The Department proposes to have discussions with all the interested parties shortly with a view to ensuring that the difficulties that arose this year do not recur and that the system works efficiently and effectively in 2006 and thereafter. Where a school is allowed to go to the open market to fill a post, the board of management is obliged under current arrangements to advertise the post in a national newspaper. This year on a pilot basis, schools were allowed to advertise principal posts on a recruitment website. The Department will assess how the pilot arrangement worked this year and, on the basis of that assessment, the question of allowing all posts to be advertised through this system in future will be considered.

Regarding the selection process, the procedures to be followed in the advertising of posts, assessment of applications, short-listing of candidates where appropriate, interviews, composition of selection boards, notification of applicants, etc. are set out in the handbook and these must be complied with. The Department's position and that shared by management and staff interests and parents is that pupils should be taught by fully qualified teachers. In recent years, because of the numbers of additional teaching posts created, there was a shortage of fully qualified primary teachers. That position is now changing and it is to be expected that it will only be in exceptional circumstances that an unqualified person will be proposed for appointment to a post. Where a board of management proposes to appoint an unqualified person, the Department must be satisfied that all reasonable efforts were made by the board to secure the services of a fully qualified person before approval will be given to the proposed appointment.

The suspension or dismissal of a teacher is a matter in the first instance for the board of management of the school concerned. Where a board decides to suspend or place a teacher on administrative leave, it must seek the approval of the Department. Subject to this approval, the teacher concerned will continue to be paid during the period of suspension or administrative leave while the matter on which the decision was based is being inquired into. Where a board proposes to dismiss a teacher, the approval of the patron is generally sought so that, if the teacher so wishes, he or she may make an appeal to the patron in his or her defence. Approval of the patron is a specific requirement in the case of schools under Catholic management and patronage in accordance with the terms of Maynooth statute number 262.4.

Recognition may be withdrawn from a teacher by the Minister under the rules for national schools for misconduct, rule 108, or where the teacher's work has been rated as unsatisfactory, rule 106. Before a decision is taken under rule 108, the teacher must be "afforded an opportunity of forwarding any statement he may desire to submit in his defence". A formal procedure is set out in rule 161 in respect of the inspection of a teacher's work for the purposes of determining whether the teacher is rated unsatisfactory. Rule 162 provides for an appeal to an appeal board and a reinspection of the teacher, if considered appropriate by the appeal board, before a recommendation is submitted to the Minister. If the Minister proposes to withdraw recognition, then the procedures set out in rule 106 must be followed. This process can take a lengthy period.

All complaints about schools should be directed in the first instance to the chairperson of the board of management. Most schools operate a complaints procedure that is designed to facilitate the handling of complaints from parents concerning schools and teachers. Many schools choose to use one of the standard complaints procedures negotiated at national level between school management authorities and teacher interests but the board of management of the school is free to determine its own fair procedures for the handling of complaints. In general, these procedures are intended to facilitate resolution of a complaint as speedily as possible and at the simplest level.

The Department supports the principle that complaints about schools should be resolved at school level whenever possible and will only become involved in the investigation of specific complaints after every effort has been made to resolve the matter at local level. Complainants who have failed to have their complaint resolved at local level and wish the Department to investigate the matter are required to submit a signed statement giving a clear account of the complaint, an account of how they have attempted to bring the matter to the attention of the school and its board of management and the reasons they remain dissatisfied. They must also provide a statement confirming that they agree to a copy of the complaint, together with the supporting documentation, being sent to the board of management of the school and to the person against whom the complaint has been made. Without this permission, the Department is not in a position to process the complaint.

The complaint and supporting documentation are forwarded to the board of management by the Department. The board is asked to examine the complaint and to provide a written statement to the Department on the steps that have been taken to investigate and resolve the complaint in the school to date. On receipt and consideration of the board's response, the Department may refer the matter to an inspector for investigation. The outcome of the investigation and the determination of the Department on the matter will be communicated to all parties involved in due course. In accordance with section 28 of the Education Act 1998, the Minister may from time to time prescribe grievance and other procedures. It is the Department's intention to draft this matter and consideration is being given to the drawing up of procedures, which will be done in consultation with the relevant interests.

Boards of management have responsibility for school planning and development. The inspectorate of the Department has produced a number of publications to help them in their work and school authorities have welcomed this development. The inspectorate has recently introduced the whole school evaluation, WSE, process, which examines the following five aspects of the school, namely, the quality of school management, the quality of school planning, the quality of curriculum provision, the quality of learning and teaching and the quality of supports for students. WSE involves all the different members of the school community, including boards of management and parents' associations. The process affirms good practice and helps schools to improve where needed. WSE is being undertaken in approximately 260 primary schools in 2005.

The Minister announced recently that she intends to publish the school reports arising from WSE. The inspectorate has held meetings with interested parties in the recent past and has just issued draft guidelines for the publication of inspection reports to the education partners for their observations. A final draft of the proposals will be submitted to the Minister in December. It is intended that the publication of school inspection reports will commence from January 2006 for WSE inspections carried out from the start of the next calendar year.

Funding has traditionally been provided for training of boards of management in two ways, namely, funding provided by education centres and direct funding from the teacher education section of the Department. School management bodies can apply directly to their local education centre for funding. The role of education centres is to provide local in-service support, advice and assistance to schools and their personnel in these matters. The Department funds a national network of 21 full-time and nine part-time education centres to deliver in-service support for schools and their personnel. In 2004 and 2005, the Department made a subvention of in excess of €1 million to education centres to support this work. Principals' networks, parents' organisations and management bodies would have applied directly to their local education centres for support in respect of such activities.

The education centres provide board of management training courses to schools within their catchment area, usually in conjunction with other bodies and groups. To ensure consistency of provision, the Department liaises with appropriate bodies at central level. In addition, the Department provides direct funding to a number of management bodies and other groups, such as the principals' networks and teacher unions, for support for continuing professional development.

As a replacement for these somewhat ad hoc arrangements, the teacher education section has established a new mechanism for 2005 on a pilot basis. This mechanism enables school management bodies to apply for direct support in addition to the existing support provided by the education centre network. This will remain in place pending a review of the process and as long as resources permit. The teacher education section is prepared to consider proposals and to provide support to management bodies following consultation and consideration of submissions. As announced by the Minister for Education and Science, Deputy Hanafin, at the recent Catholic Primary School Management Association, CPSMA, annual conference, the feasibility of producing a training manual for boards is being considered.

Boards of management are required to publish an admissions policy. In formulating this, a school must ensure it is lawful. In particular, it must act in accordance with section 7 of the Equal Status Act 2000. Attendance at school is compulsory for all children aged from six to 16 years. Under the Education (Welfare) Act 2000, schools are obliged to enrol any child in respect of whom an application for admission has been made except where a refusal is in accordance with their admissions policy.

The Department appreciates the work done by members of boards of management. One can understand the reluctance of individuals to get involved as board members. However, we are extremely fortunate in this country that persons are willing to give of their time and talents. I commend board members, both past and present, on their efforts.

With the Chairman's agreement, I will address the second item the committee wishes to discuss, namely, the career opportunities for graduates at second level. The teacher supply and demand issue at second level is very complex. Analyses undertaken by the Department in the past indicated that there are regional and subject variations. A further complicating factor is that vacancies in second level schools usually require specific subject combinations.

The teacher education section of the Department is responsible for teacher education and development, with particular regard to initial teacher education covering the colleges of education and the education departments in universities and colleges. A number of different courses of study are available within these institutions that lead to a qualification in teaching at second level, including the higher diploma in education in the universities, the concurrent bachelor of education courses at St. Catherine's College and St. Angela's College and the concurrent courses at a number of universities and colleges.

The Department has a role in regulating the numbers of students entering on the bachelor of education programmes in St. Catherine's College and St. Angela's College and also on the higher diploma in education courses. With regard to the higher diploma in education, in cases of clearly identified shortages or over-supply in specific subject areas, it is possible to introduce a subject specific quota which would, in time, increase or reduce numbers of teachers and deal with an under or over-supply situation. Discussions have already been held between the Department and the Higher Diploma in Education Application Centre, HDEAC, the body responsible for the centralised application process on behalf of the four NUl colleges, on this and other related matters.

The HDEAC has taken the proactive approach to introduce a quota for the number of places available for those with business related degrees which has been identified as a priority issue. This measure, which will take effect in the 2006-07 academic year, will most likely reduce the supply of graduates qualified to teach business and also increase the places available for all other subject areas. This decision was taken because there was an over-subscription of such degree holders going on to the various NUl higher diploma in education programmes in recent years. The Department and the HDEAC, will continue to keep the position under close scrutiny and will be proactive in introducing any measure that can achieve a greater balance between supply and demand in specific subject areas. Officials from the teacher education section are due to meet with the HDEAC in the coming weeks to discuss further actions. This meeting is taking place in the context of ongoing consultations on this issue with the education departments of universities and colleges.

In the case of the concurrent model in the universities and colleges, the Department has a role in the provision of funding for these institutions on an individual basis through the Higher Education Authority, HEA. However, it is a matter for the individual institutions to decide on the number of places available on the concurrent courses in a manner similar to decisions taken on the annual intake for any particular course of study. The Department does not and cannot have a direct role in the regulation of the overall number of people who opt to pursue a particular qualification in these institutions.

The Department and the HEA will continue to review the supply and demand for second level teachers. Arising from recommendations from the OECD report, Teachers Matter, and other significant recent developments in teacher education, the Department will shortly commence an extensive consultative process with the education departments of universities and colleges with a view to enhancing the system-wide response to emerging concerns such as an under or over-supply of teachers. Initial contacts with the colleges and education departments of universities have been positive.

The teacher allocation to a second level school for a particular school year consists of the allocation warranted by the pupil enrolment at the end of the preceding September, as determined by the current pupil-teacher ratio, together with approved additional posts, such as principal, learning support and guidance counsellor. The current pupil teacher ratio for appointment purposes is 18:1. A reduced pupil teacher ratio of 16:1 applies in certain programmes such as the leaving certificate applied, leaving certificate vocational programme, junior certificate school programme and post-leaving certificate courses. In addition schools may apply for concessionary posts to cater for short-term curricular difficulties, projected enrolments, special educational needs and the needs of Traveller and non-national pupils. These concessionary posts are based on enrolments for the upcoming school year.

At second level the actual pupil-teacher ratio fell from 16:1 to 13.6:1 during the period from 1996-97 to 2003-04. The actual pupil-teacher ratio refers to the ratio derived from dividing the total number of pupils in the system by the total number of teachers in the system. The reduction in the ratio was achieved through the creation of approximately 1,590 additional posts. Teacher allocations increased from 23,199 to 24,789 in this period and 1,850 posts were retained which would otherwise have been lost owing to the fall in enrolments.

To be eligible for appointment to a teaching position in a vocational school, an applicant must hold a suitable qualification at degree level or equivalent in the subject or subjects of the post as advertised. To be appointed to a permanent teaching post in a voluntary secondary, community or comprehensive school, a person must hold an acceptable primary degree or equivalent together with an acceptable training in teaching qualification, namely, the higher diploma in education or its equivalent.

In the vocational education committee and community and comprehensive schools sectors, up to 95% of the initial teacher allocation for a particular school year may be filled by the appointment of teachers in a permanent capacity. In the event of a permanent vacancy arising in a school or VEC within the agreed limit of 95% of the initial teacher allocation, it is a matter for the school authority in the first instance to decide on the subject area to be catered for and the post in question must be filled through open competition. In the voluntary secondary schools sector, the number of posts in any particular school that can be filled in a permanent capacity cannot exceed the allocation warranted by the enrolment and the approved ex quota posts of principal, guidance counsellors and learning support.

A scheme for the redeployment of over-quota teachers in Catholic secondary schools has been in place since 1988-89. This scheme was agreed between the religious authorities of the schools and the Association of Secondary Teachers Ireland. The object of the scheme was to secure the redeployment of over-quota teachers within the Catholic secondary school sector by matching identified surplus teachers to vacancies elsewhere in the sector for teachers in the same subject areas. However, the reality is that very few of the over-quota posts emerging in this sector have proved amenable to redeployment. A significant impediment under the present scheme has been the requirement that the most junior teacher in the school be redeployed. In many instances the subject area of the most junior teacher does not match the subject area of potential recipient schools.

The scheme also operates a supplementary panel which provides for the orderly appointment of temporary teachers to permanent vacancies arising in the sector. To be eligible for inclusion on this panel, a temporary teacher must have taught for a minimum of 18 hours per week for two years or more in the same school or for three years or more in separate schools participating in the scheme. Posts which cannot be filled through the redeployment scheme can be advertised on the open market.

The current procedures for filling posts in the second level sector are under review in the light of the implementation of recent legislation relating to the protection of employees. Discussions are taking place between the teacher unions, management bodies, the Department of Finance and the Department of Education and Science with a view to agreeing appropriate procedures. The majority of teaching posts at second level are filled on a permanent full-time basis. Vacancies in schools arising from career breaks, approved leave of absence or secondments and concessionary posts allocated in excess of a school's normal quota of posts may only be filled in a temporary or part-time capacity. Each school management authority is required to organise its timetable and subject options having regard to pupils' needs within the limit of its approved teacher allocation. The recruitment and appointment of teachers to fill vacancies in an individual school is a matter for the relevant school authority. The objective is to select the most suitable candidate for the post.

The Minister is the designated authority for the recognition of teachers at second level. Under the Teaching Council Act 2001, the Teaching Council will take over those functions of the Department relating to teacher recognition. Following its expected establishment in March 2006, all teachers, both primary and post-primary, will be required to register with the council.

That concludes our presentation and I hope we will be able to deal with any issues which members of the committee may wish to raise.

I thank the delegation for the comprehensive presentation. I invite members to ask questions before returning to the officials from the Department of Education and Science for responses.

Will boards of management serve the operation of primary schools as they are currently structured? Is there a need to review this structure in the context of change and development? Many people serving in a voluntary capacity on boards of management find the demands on time and effort excessive. They are reluctant to continue serving on the subsequent board when it is restructured.

I welcome the delegation. Many questions have been answered by the comprehensive presentation. Many groups identified training as a major issue for boards of management. Training requires funding and I accept the Department is considering this matter in light of the Estimates. The responsibilities on boards of management are onerous and every time education legislation is passed, extra tasks are assigned to boards. A teacher or a nominee of the patron guarantees a degree of experience of the school system. Parents often do not have these skills.

I am concerned about training for parents representatives on a board of management. Various parent bodies raised this issue with me and my colleagues. They do not have funding to provide training for their members. The parent on the board of management is not always a member of the parents association. This issue should be examined from a parent's perspective. They are seen as equal partners in education but they do not feel they have equal power on individual boards of management.

Often a board of management will have one particularly powerful person. We discussed this with bodies that came before the committee. I will give an example that illustrates the problem without naming the school involved. In that school the principal was the board of management in the sense that each year an attempt was made to form a new board of management but because of the behaviour of the principal, it was not possible. People would not remain on the board of management. It led to a situation where only seven or eight pupils were left at the school because everyone else went to a different school. That school is in danger of closing because that board of management issue could not be solved. The Department seemed to believe it was the responsibility of the bishop who was patron. The bishop felt the opposite was true. That is an extreme example but it illustrates how the influence of one individual can affect the entire board. Some changes must be made to deal with this type of situation. Does the Department have any concrete proposals for that?

This year issues were raised regarding the panels. It appears that the staffing schedules were not issued to individual primary schools until quite late. That meant they had difficulties in hiring teachers or knowing what posts needed to be filled, even though there does not seem to be a shortage of teachers. As the schedule is based on pupil numbers from the previous year, I do not understand the reason for such a delay in giving the information to the schools. Will that be addressed for next year?

Is the Department satisfied that enough national level liaison occurs between it and bodies representing boards of management and parents and between those bodies themselves to enable the smooth working of boards of management?

I attended a meeting in the constituency of Dublin North earlier this year where attempts were made to open a school. The people involved were not from a particular ethos such as Catholic, Protestant, Educate Together or a gaelscoil. The area needed a school. The people were told to find a patron but they did not know what to do. No decision had been made as to what type of school should be opened. The parents simply wanted a school. I do not have a suggestion as to what the answer in that situation might be.

Individual teachers have raised issues on the difficulty of obtaining jobs in second level schools. I requested this issue to be put on the agenda. I know a quota system exists for business studies. When people choose their subjects in college, they do not consider the availability of jobs, which is good because the perception of availability of jobs can be quite flawed. The Department stated it continues to review supply and demand. What research is done? Does the Department have a figure for the number of qualified post-primary teachers who are not employed?

Issues around interview procedures must be addressed. At county council level, staff travel from one county to another to conduct interviews to fill positions. The merits of that system should be considered for jobs in post-primary. I receive complaints about how the procedure works, such as that a person might be known to the interview panel. It does not appear to be fair. People who seem to have excellent qualifications, even in subjects for which it is difficult to find qualified teachers such as science subjects, do not get posts. I find it hard to understand. Will the Department examine that and give it serious consideration?

If a person does not get the job, he or she is entitled to a breakdown of how his or her interview went and the reasons he or she was not selected. People are not able to get that information from schools. That is a breach of employment legislation and it has happened on a number of occasions. I have concerns about that.

I received a complaint that graduates of Hibernia College start on a different pay scale to other graduates. Is that the case and, if so, why? I submitted a question on this matter but I have not yet received a reply.

I welcome the representatives from the Department. I must leave the meeting but I will return. If I am not present when my questions are answered I will obtain the information. The Chairman raised the question of greatest concern, which is the enormous level of responsibility imposed by legislation on people on boards of management and the difficulty in finding people willing to serve and who feel capable of serving. The training issue is part of it but broader issues are involved such as having that level of responsibility for a voluntary position. One or two of the delegations raised the question of whether the chairman, treasurer and others should be compensated for the amount of work and time they must invest, be it for expenses or income forgone. That is a valid query.

It was suggested by someone who contacted me that parents' representatives are often chosen at meetings attended by few parents. I note a postal ballot is possible. Does that happen in many schools? My perception is that it happens infrequently. From a reply I received from the Minister, the outgoing parents' representatives decide on how the incoming representatives will be chosen. Is that flawed and, if so, will it be examined?

The Department stated change is proposed on unanimous agreement of the six members. I do not know if that was at issue in the case highlighted by Deputy Enright but I imagine that in a situation where unanimous agreement is required, having a dominant person would create many difficulties. What are those changes likely to be?

I wish to make a plea on behalf of Educate Together. It has contacted all of us and it has genuine difficulties. Many new schools are under the patronage of Educate Together. It has limited funding and is running out of money. I do not know what the percentages are, but a large percentage of new primary schools are under the umbrella of Educate Together. People have a constitutional right to have their children educated in accordance with the ethos they choose. Traditional schools have a set-up because they are long-established. This raises a genuine issue of parental rights. I support the request of Educate Together to be appropriately funded by the Department.

The amount for capitation grants is inadequate. Is the delegation able to tell us whether it will be increased in the forthcoming financial season?

Deputy Enright raised the issue of the panel. One of the witnesses who came before the committee stated the panel was not released until 27 May. I do not know if that was for the Dublin area only or for elsewhere. It made it extremely difficult for schools to recruit and they needed to work on it over the summer. The delegation referred to this issue in its presentation and it must be addressed.

I would like clarification on the issue of dismissal of a teacher and withdrawal of recognition. The Department stated it is a matter for the board of management in the first instance and then referred to the fact that under various rules, the Minister can suspend a teacher. Does one first go through the entire board of management procedure, including appeals, before rules 106, 162 and 161 come into play or is it a parallel system? I am not clear on that.

One of the groups before the committee talked about how long it takes to deal with an under-performing teacher who is affecting a school badly. I am not clear on the procedure and I suspect the schools are not clear either. One group said that it was difficult to engage the inspectorate about the dismissal of teachers. It felt that the inspectorate should have a stronger role because it can be difficult, at a local level, for boards of management to exercise the dismissal prerogative.

It was stated earlier that the Department is drafting rules for grievances and other procedures. At what stage is that drafting process and when will the rules be available? We would all welcome training manuals for boards, which was mentioned by some of the groups with whom we had discussions.

Mr. Bracken spoke about a limit for business-related degrees. Are there any proposals to operate the quota system in reverse, whereby the Department would reserve a number of places for subjects on the higher diploma programme for which there is an under-supply of teachers or is the intention to simply limit numbers in areas where there is an over-supply?

Mr. Bracken also raised the issue of redeployment and it is one that has been brought to the attention of everyone on this committee. With the current system, the teacher who has been in a school for the shortest length of time is the one who is moved if there is an over-supply of teachers. Often, the subject needs of the school to which the teacher is being deployed are different from the subject skills of that person. There seems to be no logic to that system. We heard of a situation where one school had several teachers of a particular subject and a school close by had a shortage of such teachers. However, despite the fact that both schools were amenable to a deployment, it was not possible because of the current rules. What does the Department intend to do about this problem?

I thank the visitors for taking time out of their schedules to come here today.

The latter part of the presentation raised the issue of career opportunities for graduates at second level and that section is fairly straightforward in that I agree with most of what is being proposed. However, I do have a number of queries, one of which relates to the over-subscription to business-related degree programmes. Are there any plans to introduce a quota or to reserve places for science programmes? That is an area that has been identified as problematic. We need more science graduates and science teachers who can teach the subject at second level to enable people to find employment in science related areas.

The presentation also highlighted the fact that very few of the over-quota posts have proved amenable to redeployment. Has there been any consultation with the unions on creative ways of addressing this, given that the most junior teacher is the one who is always in line for the move, even if his or her subject expertise is not suitable? Have the unions threatened to block change or made any strong submissions on redeployment? Are they looking for creative solutions or is it a question of benchmarking or some type of payment in order to remove the last-in, first-out rule?

The current situation in teacher appointments is that the Department uses attendance figures from 1 September of the previous school year to work out the number of teacher appointments needed. This is affecting a number of schools, where a drop of one or two pupils in the previous school year has meant the loss of a teacher, even though the surrounding population is expected to grow because of, for example, a new housing estate in the area. Has the Department considered a rolling three-year system, whereby teachers are lost to a school only if the number of pupils drops consistently over a period of three years? Would that not be a fairer way of assessing the teacher requirements of a school?

As other Deputies have mentioned, concerns have been expressed to this committee with regard to training for members of boards of management. I accept Mr. Bracken's point that there are training facilities available for boards of management. However, parents associations have argued that they do not have adequate skills when they take up positions on boards of management. They have told us that they feel isolated and, while no survey has been conducted in this area, they often sense that there is a clique operating within the boards. Deputy Enright referred to a case where one principal and a board of management caused havoc in a school. Sometimes members of boards of management do not understand how a school operates and try to bring too much influence to bear. If parents were properly trained, they could make a constructive contribution at board of management level. Often they are not contributing as much as they could because they do not have adequate training. In that context, has any consideration been given to funding training courses for parents associations, for example?

While parents are recognised as partners in education under the 1998 Education Act, some parents associations have suggested that the Act needs to be amended to reinforce the role of parents as the primary educators of their children, particularly with regard to boards of management in schools. Does the Department have a view on that?

Have any representations been made to the Department regarding the skills and capabilities of the community representatives who tend to be chosen as members of boards? It is a very subjective matter as to what constitutes a community representative who will fit in with the ethos of the school but this area receives very little monitoring. Is this being monitored at all and are there plans to examine the issue of community representatives on boards of management?

I have said many times that there is a need for a specific funding channel for the management body of the Educate Together schools. While this is not the largest management body at second level, it is the fastest growing at primary level. As a training body, it could be of great assistance to the Department of Education and Science. It is in serious need of specific funding. It has created a fantastic curriculum and the ethos of the Educate Together schools is being taken on by board of other schools. In that context, some excellent work has been done but the management body of Educate Together is concerned that it will not be able to continue with this work unless Departmental funding is forthcoming.

I join my colleagues in expressing concern with performance-related issues for teachers. Given that the benchmarking process does not deal with it, how can the Department assess the performance of a teacher? There are clear-cut cases where teachers are abusive, their results are extremely poor or there are several complaints made about them by parents but what about mediocre teachers who are under the radar? While I wholeheartedly disagree with league tables for schools because they cause leakages of pupils to other schools, there seems to be no way of monitoring the performance of teachers properly. The benchmarking process is contentious; will it be reviewed at any stage to obtain constructive comments from unions, principals and parents associations on performance monitoring?

I have a query on admissions policies because I have anecdotal evidence related to a particular school which concerns me. Some children were told that, as they did not belong to a particular parish, as Catholics, they could not attend that school. Then a child of a different religious background was offered a place in the school, half-way through the term. This is purely anecdotal and I am not asking that this specific incident be addressed here but does the Department monitor school compliance with section 7 of the Equal Status Act 2000? If an admissions policy is published, how do we know it is being complied with? Is this area self-regulating or are inspections made on admissions policy?

Mr. Bracken

I will answer as many questions as I can and pass the remainder to my colleagues. On the issue raised by the Chairman of the changes in boards of management, the current boards have been in place since November 2003. Prior to any alterations in the handbook, discussions will be held between the Department and interested parties, including teachers and management bodies, on necessary changes in the establishment of boards of management.

Cases have been made, in particular by the National Parents Council — Primary, for a fundamental review of boards of management. It is intended that such a review will commence within the next few months. While there are different opinions on the matter, parents probably feel that their influence is not as strong as it should be. It was noted that they may feel intimidated or nervous about making comments. In the next few months we will enter a process of negotiation over a fundamental review with management bodies, unions, parents' associations and other interested parties.

We concur with Deputy Enright that the duties of boards of management are onerous. Life is becoming more difficult for them with the introduction of new legislation. They need to be experts in all areas. Members' involvement on boards is voluntary and we appreciate their efforts.

I am aware of the school referred to in terms of power on boards of management. The school in question faces a particular difficulty which we hope to resolve shortly. Problems can arise with regard to the domination of boards by individuals. There is the possibility also that a board of management cannot be formed, as is the case with the aforementioned school.

This year, we have encountered situations where difficulties arose in forming boards of management because patrons could not reach agreement with community representatives. One of the boards concerned appointed a single manager and, thanks to the efforts of the patron and local people, a full board of management was established which works exceptionally well. As a result of the disagreement, we met with partners to discuss the requirement for unanimity among six board members when appointing the remaining two. It was agreed that future decisions will require five of the six members and we expect this measure to resolve the problem. Obstacles to reaching agreement can come from chairpersons or other representatives. At present, however, only one school out of a total of 3,200 does not have a board of management.

Panels were issued on 27 May, which was too late. The delay in this year's panel was due to the need to make arrangements for additional posts allocated under the general allocation model for special needs. Ideally, we send circulars on staffing in March so that schools may determine their teacher allocations and whether they will have vacancies or must redeploy teachers. In situations where schools employ teachers in excess of the quota, we advise on who should go on the panel, which is then formed and distributed through the diocesan office to schools. We hope that the issuance of panels will not be delayed in future.

Within the next few weeks, we will meet with partners to begin the process for 2006 and intend to issue the schedule by March and the panels shortly afterwards. We hope all panels will be cleared within weeks and, where a case is made for going to the open market, schools will be able to fill their panels before they break for the summer. This issue has implications for temporary and newly qualified teachers because schools cannot advertise if panels are not closed. This year, interviews were held late in the year. That situation must change but it requires the co-operation of all the partners, including teachers, unions, management and the Department, to do so.

In terms of the re-deployment scheme, a situation may arise where schools do not report vacancies in the hope that the panel will be cleared and that the position can be offered to a newly qualified teacher. Teachers do not have to accept offers, have a period of time within which to make their decisions and may defer their panel rights. We want agreement from all parties that everybody must play a role in ensuring the system works properly.

At present, the second level redeployment scheme only applies within the Catholic secondary sector. No redeployment scheme exists for any other sector. Teachers in the vocational sector are appointed by the VEC and may be transferred within that sector. The Catholic secondary sector works on the basis of last in, first out. That causes problems where, for example, a school decides to teach physics and appoints a physics teacher. As the school does not want to lose that teacher, they make a case to retain him or her. Schools know where there are vacancies and which teachers are available for redeployment. Simply, the system is not working.

Deputy Gogarty raised the issue of discussions with unions, about which all I can say is that unions believe that the system is working well. Obviously, it suits a school if a surplus teacher is not redeployed but it is unfair on schools which operate strictly according to the quota. There is a need for the system but for many years we have been banging our heads against the wall in terms of changes. I foresee difficulties in persuading the unions to change the last in, first out policy. Due to subject combinations, if a teacher is available to teach, for example, Swahili but schools do not have vacancies in that area, the teacher cannot be redeployed. The primary side is simpler because a primary teacher is trained to teach at that level, whereas if a Spanish teacher is needed at secondary level, it is of no use to assign a history teacher.

Deputy Enright raised the issue of communication between management bodies and the Department. We meet with them regularly and hold regular discussions. On occasion, we contact members of management bodies for advice, particularly if we are unfamiliar with a particular area or do not recollect certain events. I have been in the primary sector for the past three years but I am not thoroughly familiar with that area. We have occasional disagreements but have no difficulties in organising meetings. Communication between management bodies is also good.

I am not sure how to resolve the issue of new schools and their patrons. The matter is of greater concern to my colleagues on the planning side. I will raise that issue with the Department but I cannot say now how we might solve it.

The Teachers Union of Ireland was concerned for years about the selection process on the vocational side and the interview boards for VECs. All kinds of suggestions were made about what was happening at interview boards. For a while the union wanted the interview process to be transferred to the Local Appointments Commission but three or four years ago the composition of the two boards was changed and people now come from outside the VECs. Therefore, that is not the issue. There will always be people unhappy with interviews.

On the primary side we receive some complaints about how interviews were conducted. I am currently dealing with one where there is a suggestion that proper procedures were not followed. If we feel there is a problem we contact the board. Complaints are generally about how the procedures were followed rather than the interview process or the final selection. One hopes the most suitable candidate is appointed but as that depends on the interview board, one can never be sure.

On pay scales for the Hibernia graduates, there is a difference because Hibernia graduates do a part-time course. All teachers are paid on the common basic scale. If one does a three year full-time training course, one starts at the second point on the scale. If one does a four year training course one starts at the third point on the scale. Hibernia graduates pursue a part-time rather than a full-time course and do not qualify for a second increment. That issue has been raised with us. We are examining it but to change it may require a formal claim through the Teachers' Conciliation Council, the body that deals with applications for salary scales. We have a scheduled meeting with one of the unions where representatives will probably want to discuss that issue. We will probably discuss it but will say that it is a matter for the conciliation council, but we will list it as one of the arguments they want to put to us next week.

What if one does the conversion course, the graduate course, in St. Patrick's College?

Mr. Bracken

One goes onto the third point on the scale because it is a full-time course of 18 months while the Hibernia course is a part-time course. There is a difference between the post-graduate courses run in the colleges of education and the on-line course run by Hibernia.

It can sometimes be difficult to get people to work on boards of management. We must also look at expenses. It has been raised by the Catholic Primary School Management Association. In the past the local curate or parish priest was chairperson of the board of a Catholic school. Because of the lack of religious and the difficulty of getting lay people involved, there are now approximately 900 lay chairpersons in the 2,900 primary Catholic schools. I do not say we will concede the issue of out of pocket expenses but we will examine it.

There is provision for a postal ballot, but I cannot say how many schools organise one. It is for the outgoing board and the parents association in the school to determine. If a postal ballot is seen as a better way, the parents association may to push for it, though not every school has a parents association. On the community representatives, we propose to go to five to one rather than a unanimous requirement.

Deputy Gogarty raised the issue of Educate Together funding. Educate Together made strong representations and received additional funding this year. I do not have the precise numbers but there are approximately 34 Educate Together schools, of which 12 were established in the last few years. We made a special contribution to Educate Together this year, over and above its allocation at the start of the year. The question of additional funding for all the management bodies will be looked at as part of the Estimates process. The capitation grants will also be looked at but I cannot say what the result will be. I do not think Deputy O'Sullivan expected me to give her an answer on that.

No, I did not.

Mr. Bracken

As always, a case will be made, but I do not know what the result will be. All management bodies have requested additional funding and that will be considered as part of the Estimates process.

The suspension and dismissal of teachers is a matter in the first instance for the board to consider. There is a formal process for withdrawal of recognition for unsatisfactory teachers but it can take years. It can become a legal situation, which delays the process. That process must be speeded up. We will discuss that issue with the INTO regarding primary teachers. For second level teachers the issue is the removal of registration. The Minister can have a teacher dismissed but that teacher must be given the opportunity to make legal representations. It can go to court and that delays the process. The process must be reviewed and made quicker but there are legal issues that if a teacher is removed, his or her livelihood is withdrawn. If teachers are not up to standard, we should try to raise their standard by training, but they should not be in the system. A bad teacher can create difficulties for pupils in later life. We want to change that situation but we must respect the rights of individual teachers.

Mr. Eamonn Murtagh will deal with the difficulty of engaging inspectors. I will ask Mr. Dalton Tatton to deal with grievance procedures. Mr. Ryan will cover the higher diploma limits. I have covered the redeployment issue. The Association of Secondary Teachers Ireland, ASTI, is involved in the redeployment process, not the Teachers Union of Ireland.

In the vocational sector there is a transfer arrangement. Teachers are all employed by the vocational education committee, VEC, and they may be transferred to other schools following consultation. There was a problem in the past where a CEO proposed to transfer two teachers without consultation.

Mr. Paul Ryan

To reiterate what Mr. Bracken and Deputies have said, the roles and responsibilities of boards of management are onerous and the Department is grateful for and appreciative of what they do.

We have had many discussions with the various management bodies and parents' associations on funding. As the committee heard from Mr. Bracken, in the past we had a "mix and gather them" way of funding through both education centres and direct funding. That was patchy, ad hoc and not very satisfactory. This year we decided to put in place direct funding. We are in the process of meeting with all the management bodies and parents’ associations to put in place a proper structure for funding for training of boards of management. From 2003 to 2004 we have given €1.4 million to management bodies, including parents’ associations and Educate Together, for in-service training for boards of management. It is a lot of money, particularly for the National Parents’ Council, where we increased funding by a third from 2004 to 2005. In 2005 it received €200,000 and we have given it a further €50,000 this week. We are trying to identify savings to give the parents and Educate Together extra money for in-service training.

As part of the overall training package we are developing a new direct funding method to be put in place in the next two years. Management will be able to forecast how much funding it is to receive and match that to its needs. We are also reviewing the training manual for boards of management. This will attempt to put all the things boards of management need to do within two covers. They already have the handbook but the manual should spell things out for them in simpler terms, covering departmental circulars, minor works grants etc. We do not want to be prescriptive about what each board must do for training purposes but to give simple guidelines and criteria and provide the money to management bodies and the NPC to carry out their training in accordance with our criteria.

We have a close relationship with the NPC that is of benefit to it. In November 2007 many of the boards of management will have changed. We want to put in place specific training for chairpersons, secretaries and treasurers of succeeding boards. We will also try to put something in place for the parents. The problem there is we can only give money to the NPC. There are many parents' associations that are not members of the NPC and it is difficult to get around that. These are public moneys and we must be accountable for them. The NPC is an open-minded association. It is not member-obligated for the purposes of training and it is willing to give assistance. Hopefully these developments should take shape in the next year or so.

As Mr. Bracken said, liaison among the various groups is working quite well. We have a close relationship with the board of management groups and will sit down in the next month or so to discuss the direct funding scheme and the manual to progress it.

We are aware of the issues pertaining to Educate Together and they are under consideration at the moment. Deputies should bear in mind that we need to be fair to the other management bodies too. We cannot go overboard for Educate Together at the expense of others. We have submitted a proposal in the context of the Estimates to achieve something with the colleges of education in the way of in-service training for Educate Together. We are trying to do something for new schools by the end of the year. We are not aware of issues that have arisen on training for community representatives but we will put out feelers to the various management bodies on that.

On the quota systems and higher diplomas, it is possible to reserve particular places or quotas for particular subjects. We have started negotiations with the HDEAC on that. It has been a particular issue for business studies in the past couple number of years where we found that 60% to 65% of higher diploma students were business graduates, which is too high. We have asked them to put in a quota and that will be in place next year. We have arranged meetings with them next week and the week after to arrange quotas for other subjects as well.

There appears to be a problem with science graduates and the higher diploma but this area is complex. Concurrent degrees in the University of Limerick and DCU also produce science graduates. As it stands we do not have any control over the figures. They can produce 100 or 200 graduates every year who enter the marketplace against higher diploma graduates in the science field.

Does the University of Limerick have a science with education degree course?

Mr. Ryan

Yes, it is a four year degree. We have started discussions with the University of Limerick and DCU not to ask for a quota or reserve places but to come to an agreement with them so that we will not have too many people graduating from the concurrent degree and too few from the science degree and higher diploma. It is easy to put in a reserve quota for the science graduates other than the higher diploma but we will have complaints from the University of Limerick that we are undercutting their graduates. We are trying to achieve a happy medium between the two sides.

There is a particular problem with chemistry in that there are very few qualified chemistry students. They are opting to go elsewhere. Has the Department of Education and Science any plans to address that?

Mr. Ryan

We can reserve places for them. It is hard because many go into industry — that is the main problem. In our discussions with the higher diploma section of the Central Applications Office we learned that a system existed whereby places were given on the basis of marks in the final exam. We have asked them to change that by increasing the marks available for teaching practice and are also trying to change the system in order that a place would be reserved for people who did not get a first or upper second class degree but who would have a background in chemistry, physics or Irish and mathematics. We cannot change anything for this year but for 2006 to 2007 there will be quotas in place for various subjects.

The Department is researching which subjects are under-subscribed and which are over-subscribed. It is complicated by the redeployment that Mr. Bracken mentioned. We also have close ties with third level colleges who provide much information on their higher diploma graduates, such as whether they have jobs. We also deal with the application centres themselves and the unions. TUI and ASTI are very helpful on the matter. It is a very complicated area to get a handle on.

Deputies will be aware that the Minister launched an OECD exercise, Teachers Matter. The Minister said she would examine initial teacher education, the bachelor of education in the colleges of education, the home economics colleges and the concurrent degrees as well as the higher diploma. Everything will be up for grabs in that review. We began meeting with the colleges last May and discussions are ongoing. We want the work to be finished in the next year and to look at the overall over-supply and under-supply of teachers. It is not a major problem at primary level, although it is complicated by a number of factors. At second level it is complicated and we are trying to simplify the system so that it will have the flexibility to allow reserve places and quotas on a year to year basis to meet the various needs of the people who use it.

Mr. Eamonn Murtagh

Deputy O'Sullivan raised the engagement of the inspectorate in the case of teachers whose performance was regarded as unsatisfactory. As outlined in Mr. Bracken's presentation there are procedures around how inspectors engage with such teachers. It can come to the attention of the inspector in two ways: when the board of management brings a case to the inspector's attention or during the course of an inspection which is carried out on the initiative of the inspectorate.

The responsibility for the quality of teaching in a school rests with the board of management. Therefore, the inspector does not go out to seek teachers who are unsatisfactory. If, during the course of an inspection, a teacher who is having difficulties in their work comes to light, the inspector follows up on the issue. This is initially done with the school, by putting supports in place for the teacher, for example. If the teacher's work continues to be unsatisfactory, the inspector follows the procedures laid down in rule 162 of the rules for national schools or Circular 43/85 for the vocational sector.

A question was raised by Deputy Gogarty on the admissions policy. Inspectors examine school plans and policies during whole school evaluations. In the past year the inspectorate has engaged with the Equality Authority in developing strategies and templates to look at equality issues in schools. These mainly occur in the application of admission policies. The inspectorate has in particular examined issues of children with disabilities, enrolment of Travellers and related areas where the evidence is quite clear. The Deputy raised the point of a child of a different religion being enrolled during the year. Unless an inspector was aware of the case, he or she could not do very much about that particular case. Part of the inspection process is examining how the school and its board applies the admissions policies developed.

The Deputy also asked about evaluation of teachers whose work is mediocre, specifically in the context of the benchmarking process. The inspectorate has no role in the application of benchmarking but there are evaluation criteria. The criteria used by the inspectorate are developed in a publication, entitled Looking at Our School, which is published by the Department of Education and Science. It is available for anybody to look at.

The last point I will make regards the inspectorate's engagement with parents in the school evaluation process. This can be onerous for parents, who may not fully understand the entire school evaluation process. We propose to publish in the coming year a guide on whole school evaluation and the role of parents in the process. We hope to have the publication available to parents' associations and representatives on boards of management by 2006.

Mr. Dalton Tatton

Mr. Bracken mentioned grievance procedures. These are currently being examined in the context of section 28 of the Education Act 1998, which deals with complaints at a local level; section 24, which provides a disciplinary process for teachers; and section 29, which allows an appeal against certain decisions of the board of management to the Secretary General of the Department of Education and Science. At the moment this deals with issues such as refusal to enroll, exclusions and suspensions over a certain period of time. It has been examined in terms of extension to cover other issues that arise and which could be appealed to the Department. We are also examining issues regarding competence and other matters of teachers in such a context.

The under-performance of teachers arises as part of the whole issue. We have had extensive discussions between the legal services unit of the Department and senior members of the inspectorate on the role of the inspectorate on the matter of under-performance. I do not know when the discussions are likely to conclude but they are being actively pursued. We will consult with education partners once firm proposals are evident. Mr. Bracken also mentioned the issue of withdrawal of recognition. The teaching council is expected to be established in March of next year and will have a statutory role with regard to right to practice.

Mr. Bracken

I have a further point on the career opportunities of second level teachers in particular. As a result of subject choice and demand, there may not be sufficient work for a teacher in a school for a permanent position. It is fair to say that part-time teachers will always exist in the second level sector, although the hours may vary.

On behalf of the joint committee, I thank the officials for giving a detailed brief, which we found informative.

The joint committee adjourned at 1.05 p.m. until 11 a.m. on Thursday, 3 November 2005.

Barr
Roinn