Seanad Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 4 Apr 1984

Vol. 103 No. 8

Education Initiatives: Motion.

Mr. Burke

I move:

That Seanad Éireann welcomes and supports the recent initiatives taken in relation to education, in particular the publication of the Action Programme for Education 1984-1987 and the establishment of the Curriculum and Examinations Board

I extend a warm welcome to the Minister. It gives me great pleasure to propose the motion. The Action Programme for Education 1984-1987 is the first major initiative in the education field since the sixties. In the sixties a major revolution in educational terms occurred in Ireland with the introduction of free education to all post-primary school students. Since then we have had an ongoing process of stop-gap measures without any degree of consultation. More important there was a continuing lack of scrutiny as to where the education plan for the country was leading us.

This plan will take education through its most difficult period. Our history shows that we had to fight for everything we got in the past. The situation today is also a difficult one. People who go through the educational process from their formative years right to third level have a continuous fight on their hands. It is even more difficult in this time of recession and scarce resources.

The return of planning and stability to the educational sector as well as to the other sectors of Government in this country is welcome. It is interesting to note that the Minister of State here tonight is probably one of the longest serving Ministers in educational circles. The instability of Government in recent times and the changing of Ministers from one ministerial job to another resulted in uncertain and discontinued educational policies. There was no concerted effort or continuing policy at all. The lack of continuity in recent years, much less planning for the future, is reflected not only in the attitudes of pupils but also in the attitudes of teachers and those who plan and run the scheme at departmental level. We look forward, therefore, to the next four years of progress.

The ad hoc decisions of the sixties and seventies, some of them for political expediency, left the educational system in a state of chaos. Planning was on a day-to-day basis and expenditure was closely monitored. At the end of the financial year resources were running short. In more recent times, drastic steps had to be taken. The fuss created last year and the previous year about announcements by the Department to curtail expenditure within the Department was unfounded and unjustified. The return from last year's measures has been in the region of £14 million which was distributed this year to very needy sectors within the educational system.

The action programme can be seen to provide a great challenge to everybody involved in education. It changes the fundamentals of education and we will see the spin-off of this in the years ahead. The action programme provides a priority list for investment and development in the years ahead. This is important at a time of scarce resources. The present demand on these limited resources is aggravated by the very simple fact that the population of students attending schools of one kind or another is probably the highest in Europe. Many of the industrialised countries in Europe have unlimited resources at their disposal while we have very limited resources and a higher proportion of the population dependent on those resources.

That challenge can be seen in how the Government are to provide for an expected increase of 20,000 extra new places required for third level institutions over the next few years. How we can best utilise the buildings which have been left idle for a considerable length of time is something that must be faced up to and requires great co-operation between the people running the institutions and those who require the education. The question is: can we afford this luxury while in other areas we have sub-standard conditions? The most vulnerable section of our population, the very young, have to be educated in classes of 40 or more. There would be a wide range of ability within that class.

Can we justifiably sustain spending £11,000 per annum to educate, for instance, a veterinary surgeon over the six years of undergraduate study and, at the same time, tolerate the situation I have just referred to? Those undergraduate studies are probably the most expensive in the country. For this reason, primary education has been made a priority in the action programme. An extra £2 million has been granted to the existing £350 million provided in the budget for the improvement and upgrading of sub-standard buildings throughout the country. Many of these small schools need repair urgently. In addition to that, the increase of £4 in the capitation grant is important in that it is the largest increase ever provided in the history of education by any Department. It is important also in that it lessens the contribution that must be made by the local community, many of whom might be unemployed and with pressing demands on their limited resources.

Another section which needs special attention has been identified and mentioned on many occasions in the House. Half a million pounds extra has been provided for the disadvantaged within that sector. Perhaps it is small in overall terms but it is an important beginning and shows that this Government have a commitment to provide for the disadvantaged within the primary sector of education in disadvantaged areas. All fair minded people will realise from what I have just said that this has been a major response to a very urgent need in difficult times. In the post primary sector where the greatest change is proposed, the need is most urgent.

I welcome the many proposals that the Minister has in mind for the post primary level, in particular the establishment of the curriculum and examination board. When we think of the massive expenditure of £405 million — an increase of 10 per cent this year — on this sector alone and realise that probably 80 per cent of that expenditure is spent on teachers' salaries and pension schemes we can see that the funds which are available for educational purposes are limited and there are very many demands on them. There has been small but significant streamlining within this sector so that money and resources are made available for other purposes, even at local level. There is a proposal in the action programme whereby the capitation grant will be paid in future to all pupils enrolling in schools rather than having the long and tedious method by which it is at present calculated by means of attendances during the various terms throughout the year. There is a high clerical content involved in that and naturally expense at local managerial level. These changes are welcome.

The reform of the curriculum away from the totally unrelated job market requirements as of the present to a more relevant and realistic subject content is very important. The traditional leaving certificate, while it served its purpose at a different time, is no longer relevant. The position of the second level curriculum is put very well in an article in The Secondary Teacher volume 13 No. 1, 1984 where it is stated that the aims and objectives of the senior cycle at second level education in Ireland are decidedly vague and give very little clear guidance regarding curriculum content. The system, it states, set up by the Intermediate Education Act of Ireland, 1878 established a system of examination which has been, from that time, a central element and a controlling mechanism in secondary education in Ireland.

All the pitfalls regarding areas where our education has been strangled over the years are outlined there. I am delighted that this action programme will release the educational structures away from that stranglehold and allow for new thinking and new requirements within education, and particularly as regards subject content. In an ERSI Report, 1974 it is stated:

Teachers devote proportionately more effort than they would like to in pursuing the one objective that is publicly evaluated.

That is the examination system.

The data provides fairly conclusive evidence that the examination system operates to divert teachers from the objectives that they consider most important. Teachers not only feel they have to devote their energies to the wrong goals but they feel also that they attain the goals they consider most important very poorly.

In the past the curriculum was geared towards the expectation of many pupils entering university level. This has bedevilled our educational system. There is no doubt but that third level institutions, particularly universities, have had their input and dominated the requirements so that the leaving certificate is now nothing more than a certificate of points for entry into university. It is for that reason that this board has a very onerous job. They must take that emphasis on third level institutions away from the leaving certificate and provide students with an overall education for life, for living and for the job opportunities that they might seek.

At second level there is unwarranted duplication between the vocational education committees, AnCO and the Youth Employment Agency. Very important and scarce finance is squandered and there is duplication of courses. Worse still, those organisations and the second level vocational education committee structure are vying for pupils. I welcome the Ministers and the Minister of State's commitment to examine thoroughly training schemes available to students at school leaving age. It is important to rectify the current situation and avoid wastage. Very often, ill-feeling creeps in between the vocational sector, AnCO groups and other training facilities. The vocational schools have to go without certain facilities which are readily available to other groups like AnCO. It is only the students who lose out in the contest that seem to be going on between them.

The Minister proposes to make the question of education for living a priority insofar as she requested the curriculum and examination board to provide, as a matter of urgency, a health education programme at post-primary school level and also at national school level. This is commendable in that it is the first time this very broad area has been tackled. The need has never been as great as it is at present because of the very great pressures on students. Not only is there drug abuse at a very young age but also alcohol abuse. These two areas are a ruination to society. People must be educated to combat the pressures they will be exposed to during the course of their lives as young people and as teenagers.

There has been undue pressure on students with regard to final attainment in examinations. This very often comes from their own desire to achieve but it also comes from the home, the school and teachers. In that area there is a tremendous need not only for co-operation between the student and the teacher but also between the parents. This action programme has allowed ample opportunity for this co-operation to be developed. Very often the teachers and school authorities are unaware of a student's background. A greater rapport between all three would be welcomed. I hope it will have an effect on schools in future.

With regard to third level education, it is important that before the floodgates are opened we have a full review of the needs in the various professions and in requirements and job opportunities. Over the past few years there has been a welcome move away from the traditional third level undergraduate courses to the more technological requirements of society. In the past we had to export graduates who were put through the system at great expense to the taxpayer. They were lost to the country and economy by emigration. At present we have a shortage of professional people within the health and educational structure. I am talking particularly about dentists. It is only recently with the dental school in Cork that we have come somewhere near providing the numbers required. There must be careful monitoring of the needs in the various professions. We blame the institutions for having high entry standards and for the lack of standardised examinations. It is hard to know where to turn to rectify that in the future. However, it must be tackled because of the high number of students who will be available to enter those institutions.

It is time we had a more flexible examination system. The intermediate certificate, group certificate and the leaving certificate served their purpose in the past but today they are a qualification for nothing. A change-over to a system of assessment throughout the school year where we can monitor the attainments and achievements of individual students, not on a once-off lucky day at an examination but on a continuous basis, would be far more rewarding in the long run. It is cruel to students to have a system where their future is decided by their performance for a few hours in writing down statistics and data on a particular day. It would be far more beneficial if there was an on-going monitoring of a pupil's ability, development and progress over a long period from entry to school until leaving.

I read the action programme at fairly great length and regret there is no reference to what is termed the "transitional year". A former Coalition Minister for Education, Mr. Burke, introduced what was known as a "transitional year". That was a year which was post-intermediate certificate and pre-leaving certificate. Students who were unable to make up their minds as to the road they might go — whether they would choose the academic road or the more technical road — got a year's break and were introduced to non-academic subjects. They had an opportunity to avail of a different scheme of education. It was very worthwhile because they had an opportunity to take stock and see what road they might take. They were all in their teenage years and it was important that instead of drifting within the educational system, as so often happens, they got time to think about the direction in which they might go. It was an optional extra in many schools.

The schools that carried out that pilot project over the years found it very satisfactory in so far as the students who availed of it were more mature when entering the leaving certificate cycle and were determined to concentrate on the road they decided to go, whether it was academic or technical. There must be some place in the action programme where a transitional year could be provided for students at some level. There will be great hassle within the board in determining whether that transitional year will be on transfer from the primary school into secondary school or at post intermediate certificate or in the third year before they embark on their final year at secondary level. Attention must be paid to the transitional year. All students should be given an opportunity to take part in that type of education within the schools environment so that they can take stock of their achievements and decide what they are most suited to do for the future.

I will conclude by saying that it is my great pleasure to propose the motion. Indeed, I ask that all concerned in this particular action programme be cooperative. The Minister and the board are available, and I believe that it is important that they make themselves available, for co-operation, consultation and also submissions that may come from various interested bodies. When one sees the history of the last year in education the whole matter was splintered by people who took the opportunity to castigate the Government's actions because of cutbacks. None comes to mind more forcibly than a fellow member of my own union who brought out through the auspices of the ASTI a full list of the cutbacks and their effect on education as they saw it.

It is regrettable that unions would allow themselves to be politicised to put forward the views of people who are trying to make progress with particular parties in certain quarters. Margaret Walsh, a former President of the ASTI, has now declared her allegiance to Fianna Fáil and her hope of gaining a place on a Fianna Fáil ticket in the future. It is regrettable that the union should be used in such a situation to divert the Government's attention from a line whereby progress is made in education. The savings of last year, through action taken by the Government, have to date been very carefully and very worthily distributed to the most deprived areas within the primary sector of education. I hope that the action programme will be debated further as it develops within this House in the future.

Acting Chairman (Mr. Browne)

Is there a seconder?

Mr. Howlin

It is my privilege to second the motion and to afford this House the opportunity of discussing the initiatives over the last 12 months in education with particular emphasis on the four year action plan in education published recently by the Minister.

It is clear, as I have stated in the past, that there are great inequalities in our society and that sections of our community are gravely disadvantaged relative to others. I have always contended that education provided a basis of combating this disadvantage and this inequality. I do not mean to suggest that we can overcome all our difficulties and all the problems of inequality through the educational process alone. That would be to ignore reality, because anybody who has been in a school recognises the roles played by housing, by nourishment, and so on. But notwithstanding that, education has a vital role to play in creating a society that is equalised and which affords all our citizens the opportunity of self-actualisation.

Any improvement in our current situation can only be brought about by clear research and planning whereby the extent of the problems is properly and accurately ascertained and the road to progress is properly mapped out and costed. One of the difficulties that we in education have experienced in recent years has been the rather ad hoc approach to education. This was partly brought about by the multiplicity of Ministers for Education which we have had over the last decade. The publication, therefore, of an action plan for education, a four year programme of action, by the present Minister is indeed to be welcomed. Equally, the clear statement by the Minister, Mrs. Hussey, to this House on 30 November last that “a major thrust of policy was positive discrimination in favour of the socially and economically deprived and that ways and means of implementing this policy be identified” that, too, is clearly to be welcomed. That stamp of positive discrimination, with the limited resources available to the areas of disadvantage, is to be seen clearly in the four year programme.

In the preamble the Minister identifies its governing principles. Among them she specifically mentions access to an education which is relevant to children's needs and to modern society. She states that education must also be available to all and should discriminate positively in favour of the disadvantaged. These principles need to be fleshed out somewhat. We need to spell out what we mean in concrete terms by accessible and available and what we mean in real terms by positive discrimination. Clearly, there are many children who do not find our current system to be available to them. I will instance one piece of research. The Wexford branch of CARE carried out a survey of schools in County Wexford regarding the numbers of children who dropped out of school between the ages of ten and 14½ years for the school years 1981/82 and 1982/83. This particular age group is of course within the compulsory period of schooling; they are required by law to attend school. Of the 110 schools surveyed 50 replied, 36 rural and 14 urban. It was found that there were 51 children under the age of 14½ who left school during these two years. That is 51 children out of 50 schools that replied, less than half. The magnitude of the problem is far greater than that.

The reasons why these children dropped out before they were legally entitled to leave are many and varied. Some simply could not cope or did not find the system of education which we provide for them to be relevant to them and their needs and their environment. A co-ordinated approach to education which does not compartmentalise the various much-needed services is required. The present system whereby various agencies, both voluntary and statutory, contribute to the overall must be rationalised and examined. Urgent services, such as speech therapy, psychology, must be made available to every community and we should have access in every town to a child guidance centre.

I will also re-echo the recent submission of the INTO to the Department of Education which stated that disadvantaged pupils and children are to be found in all parts of the country in both rural and urban areas and that support should be directed to schools serving disadvantaged children rather than schools in disadvantaged areas. There are many who are of the opinion that there are certain deprived areas within the inner city, particularly in Dublin, where all disadvantage resides, but the fact is — and any practising teacher will quickly tell you so — that in practically every school in the country we will find individual children and groups of children who are disadvantaged for various reasons, whether economically or linguistically. Even in homes that are relatively affluent in terms of finance you can often find neglected children who need special help and care.

The programme for action sets out the framework for advancement over the next four years. Under the general heading, the establishment of the curriculum and examination board is to be particularly welcomed and I hope that this board will speedily tackle the question of the subject examination centred second level curriculum and no doubt that will be one of the areas where the Curriculum and Examinations Board will focus their attention in the immediate future. I also welcome the identification of adult literacy. Many children find themselves completely at sea on transferring from the child-centred programmes which are carried on in the primary sector — carried on, may I add, almost despite the resources that are made available to them rather than because of them — they are carried on with the dedicated enthusiasm of teachers who are willing to make the best of the equipment available to them. A fresh look must be taken, as the proposer of the motion said, at the murderous examination system which categorises many of our children as failures before they even set out on the road to life. There are many ideas being floated on alternatives to the present examination system. I certainly would re-echo Senator Burke's contention that it is nothing less than cruelty or scandalous to judge somebody's entire school career and to map out his whole future role on the basis of one week's or ten days' performance.

Some form of continual assessment must be brought in as a priority and the advancement of the idea of community education in the broadest sense. The inclusion of distance learning and second chance education is also of significance. Indeed the use of the media to reach out to people who have missed the boat educationally is something that has not begun to be fully analysed in this country. Our nearest neighbour, Britain, has begun to do it very effectively, and we should use the medium of our State broadcasting agency to reach out in educational terms not only to the young but to the more senior people who want to further their own education and to occupy their time more constructively.

At primary level, the focusing-in on those children with learning difficulties in literacy and numeracy is to be welcomed. I said on the last occasion when an educational matter was discussed in this House that the most significant improvement that could be made in the primary sector was a reduction in the pupil/teacher ratio. I re-echo that tonight. This is especially so in the area of infant education. More and more research is showing the value of early education and indeed, even in resource terms, it obviously is far more cost effective to take a child early on and bring him into an educationally sound environment than to try to tackle the result of neglect later in the educational process. The cost to society as a whole of people who are neglected at an early stage is to be seen daily in terms of vandalism, anti-social behaviour such as glue-sniffing and so on.

At secondary level the action programme supports the complementary development of secondary, vocational and community comprehensive schools. The curriculum will be reviewed to allow greater flexibility, and that is a most important factor particularly in teaching the disadvantaged. Work done with family support units in the United Kingdom has shown the tremendous improvement that can be brought about with children who have been almost abandoned by the educational system. Much can be achieved if a teacher is allowed total flexibility and is allowed to bring the school to the home, is allowed to bring the child along totally at his or her own pace, is allowed to modify the curriculum to make it relevant to the environment in which a particular child lives. I am afraid even in terms of our textbooks many of the images portrayed are alien to many of the children whom we particularly want to reach. The authors of those books and in many cases the teachers in the classrooms are the products of socio-economic backgrounds that are not similar to that of the children who are most disadvantaged. I would hope that the whole idea of making our particular textbooks relevant to those children would be examined.

The Minister promises that greater emphasis will be given to pupils who are likely to drop out before they complete compulsory education or who terminate schooling at the end of the compulsory cycle. That, too, is to be particularly welcomed. Third level education is still predominantly the exclusive club of the well-off, with very poor levels of participation from lower level socio-economic students. I welcome the suggestion of cost analysis in this sector and the making available of third level facilities in terms of buildings, sport facilities and so on to the community at large. One of the problems we have in that sector is the view of many that the whole third level education sector is an ivory tower to which they can never aspire and into which they can never enter. However, I feel the importance and value of research must be underlined and not lost sight of in any analysis. I would also look with great care at the meaning of the particular phrase in the action plan which states that some courses would have to be phased out. Any rationalisation obviously might find that some courses were simply not desired by students, but I would hope that in our concern for practical improvement — and indeed obviously most of the new courses are in the technological area, and the great advance over the last decade or so of the original technical colleges bears testimony to this — we would not sacrifice the more aesthetic, cultural subjects in our striving for practical results.

In the area of teacher education I note that although the plan envisages the undertaking of a review of the Bachelor of Education course in the colleges of education, it mentions only vaguely the professional training of post primary teachers. An expansion in the skill training is required together with the provision of ongoing and carefully structured in-service training for all teachers. I welcome the identification of teacher centres as a resource within the community for ongoing teacher education and the promise of special provision by way of in-service education for teachers in coping with and identifying weaker pupils.

In conclusion may I say that for the first time we have a definite written programme that can be assessed over the next few years with quantifiable measures by which we can judge our progress and concentrate proposals to stimulate debate? For that alone the Minister for Education is to be thanked and congratulated. Much more needs to be done, not least in the realisation that education is a vital service which demands investment in real terms in terms of resource if we are to offer a real future to the children of this country.

Mr. Mullooly

Tá áthas orm deis a bheith agam labhairt ar an tairiscint seo. Is oth liom nach mbeidh am agam an méid atá le rá agam a nochtadh. Tugann an tairiscint seo deis dúinn staid an oideachais sa tír a phlé agus caithfidh mé a rá go raibh díomá orm nuair a léigh mé an plean gníomhaíochta seo atá foillsuithe le déanaí toisc nach dtugann sé aon dóchas dom go bhfuil an Rialtas in ndáiríre i leith dul i ngleic leis na fadhbanna agus na constaicí atá ag cur isteach ar chúrsaí oideachais i láthair na huaire.

The motion before us refers to the recent initiatives taken in relation to education, in particular, the publication of the action programme and the establishment of the Curriculum and Examinations Board. The wording of the motion, however, implies that, apart from these two matters there have been other recent initiatives in relation to education. These are not specified in the motion but it is implied that they should be supported and welcomed. If there have been such initiatives I am not aware of them. It may be that the people who drafted the motion were thinking of the events of last year, such as the increase in the pupil-teacher ratio, the cutbacks in career guidance and remedial teaching and the decision to phase out school caretakers and clerical assistants. In case these are the other initiatives which they had in mind, I want to emphasise that I will be confining my remarks to the action programme and the Curriculum and Examinations Board as I want to be clear about what I am supporting or welcoming.

I welcome the publication of the Action Programme for Education. On 2 November 1983 the Irish Independent published details of a programme for development of the education service which it alleged was based on a confidential memo from the Minister for Education to the Government. From the time that report appeared everyone with an interest in education was anxiously awaiting the publication of the official document. It finally made its appearance in late January when it was laid before each House of the Oireachtas. I do think anybody was too surprised to find that the report which had appeared almost two months earlier in the Irish Independent was substantially correct. On reflection, the leaking of the memo in question to the Irish Independent could be described as a recent initiative in relation to education. If so, it is not an initiative that I would wish to support or welcome.

However, I welcome the publication of the official document. I also welcome the establishment of the Curriculum and Examinations Board. Like many others, I would like to have seen a greater representation of presently serving teachers on this board. I was hoping that the imbalance would be redressed to some extent at least when the board sub-committees would be established. I was disappointed to learn that this has not happened. I understand that the teacher organisations are very unhappy with the present position in relation to the sub-committees and that they have made their views known to the Minister and to the board.

I am sure many of the Members of this House would be interested to hear from the Minister the number of sub-committees that have been established by the board and the specific areas with which each sub-committee is dealing and the number on each sub-committee. I would be interested to know the total number involved in the sub-committee and how many of these are at present serving teachers. If the situation is as I understand it to be I would ask the Minister to intervene, even at this stage with a view to having more currently serving teachers involved. At the end of the day, it will be the teachers who will have to implement any proposals for change brought forward by the board. Therefore, the goodwill of the teaching profession will be vital for the effective implementation of many of the board's recommendations. That good will is much more likely to be present if the teaching profession is given the opportunity of making an input, commensurate with its role in education, into the board's work.

When the board is being established on a statutory basis the proposed legislation should specify a minimum percentage representation of practising teachers on both the board itself and on all its various sub-committees. Guaranteeing an equitable representation of the various teaching sectors is essential and should be provided for.

I welcome the fact that the terms of reference of the board encompass the curriculum at both first and second levels. In view of the problems which arise from the transfer of pupils, from the child-centred curriculum at primary level to the subject and examination-centred curriculum at post-primary level, I hope that the board will see the alignment of primary and junior post-primary curricula as an urgent priority. Major change and reform are needed in the areas of curriculum and assessment. I wish the board every success in the task which has been assigned to it. The future direction of Irish education will depend to a large extent on its deliberations and discussions. I will now return to the programme for action in education.

This document contains a great many praiseworthy aspirations. It identifies many of the problems in education and suggests remedies and solutions to these problems. However, it is somewhat of an exaggeration to title it a programme for action, since it lacks a commitment to the positive action necessary to implement its very praiseworthy proposal. In paragraph 1.4 of the preamble, we are told that the rate of implementation of the proposals in the programme will be governed by two factors, first, the rate of progress in the economy and secondly, the priority which the Government afford to education within their programme of public expenditure. We read elsewhere that proposals will be implemented as soon as resources permit or as soon as financial circumstances permit. There are strings and conditions attached to the implementation of the vast majority of the proposals contained in the document. However, there is a very small number of proposals which we are told will be implemented within the period of the programme. I cannot help wondering if this is significant and if these are the only proposals which have a reasonable chance of being implemented within the period of the programme.

Time does not permit me to cover all the ground I would like to cover or to refer to all the sections of the document I would like to refer to. I will only be able to touch on a few of the many sections I would like to comment on. Other speakers from this side will be dealing with the chapters that time will prevent me from reaching. Section 2.3 of chapter 2 recognises the need for special attention for disadvantaged pupils. It is stated that priority in the use of available resources will be accorded to a programme to assist disadvantaged pupils. While we are told the purposes for which the funds provided will be used, the section is very vague and the number of teaching posts which will be created is not specified. Neither are we told whether or not the aid will extend to disadvantaged areas other than those in the inner city. Section 2.4 refers to the implementation of proposals contained in Bord na Gaeilge's action plan for Irish. There is no reference to whether there will be consultation with the teacher interests in relation to the implementation of these proposals. In my view, such consultation in this matter is vital.

Section 2.10 states that the nomination of women to selection boards for principals of primary schools will be encouraged. In this regard, I believe that the document should have backed the agreement between the INTO and the Catholic Primary School Managers' Association, that each appointment selection panel must have at least one woman member. In the chapter dealing with primary education, it is acknowledged that the pupil-teacher ratio in national schools compares unfavourably with that obtaining in other developed countries. This is certainly an understatement of the situation in view of the great many over-sized classes which exist in our national schools. However, the best that the document can offer is, and I quote, that: "The Government remains committed to an improvement in the position as soon as financial circumstances permit". I cannot accept that there is any commitment to the objective of reducing the pupil-teacher ratio when the intake of student teachers into the colleges of education is being reduced each year and when it is stated quite categorically in paragraph 7.3 of the chapter dealing with teacher training that this policy will be continued.

As far as second level education is concerned the reference to improving the pupil-teacher ratio is just as vague and just as lacking in commitment. Section 5.11 of the chapter dealing with post-primary education states that the Government are committed to improving pupil-teacher ratios as financial circumstances permit. It is clear from this paragraph that there is no commitment to restoring last year's cuts. We must remember that the full effects of the increase in the pupil-teacher ratio have still to be felt in post-primary education.

I welcome the recognition in section 3.9 that:

Without regular systematic maintenance of National Schools the fabric of the stock of buildings will seriously deteriorate, leading to a situation where expensive renovations and renewals will be required.

It is not good enough however, to say, and I quote:

The question of amending the existing financing arrangements for National Schools with a view to making specific provision for internal and external painting on a regular basis will be examined.

If there was a definite commitment that the financial arrangements referred to would be extended within the period of the programme, I would welcome that very sincerely. Such a commitment is not given. All we are told is that the matter will be examined.

Similarly we are told that the responsibility for national school building will be transferred from the Board of Works to the Department of Education building unit, but we are not told when this will happen. The sooner it happens the better, and I hope we will get an indication that it will be sooner rather than later.

Section 3.11 in the chapter dealing with primary education refers to the phasing out of the schemes for the appointment of caretakers and clerical assistants. The paragraph continues:

When it is possible to consider the re-establishment of these schemes, a higher priority will be attached to caretaker appointments in schools in disadvantaged areas.

I could not welcome anything less than an absolute commitment to the restoration of these schemes as a matter or urgency and priority.

The document referred to in section 2.16 concerns educational broadcasting, and it effectively rejects the report which recommended the provision of an educational broadcasting service. I regret that this is the situation. The provision of an educational broadcasting service is worthy of a separate debate and I hope we will have the opportunity to debate this very important issue fully in this House at some future date.

Section 5.8 of the programme refers to guidance posts. It states:

In future the allocation of guidance posts will be made on the basis of school needs and taking account of the range of programmes available in the school.

It is not very clear to me what exactly is meant here. It would appear that there will be no increase in the number of guidance posts in our schools. Again, this is very unsatisfactory. Neither is there any commitment in the programme to any real expansion of in-service education for teachers.

One other question that I would like to hear answered during this debate concerns the position in connection with the proposed loan scheme for third level pupils. It is referred to in section 6.18. Has this idea now been abandoned? It would appear from recent newspaper reports that the idea has been abandoned for the present. If that is the situation I welcome it.

I welcome the publication of the Programme for Action in Education, 1984-1987. I regret that it contains so little in the way of positive commitment to the implementation of the proposals and aspirations contained in it. The proposals and aspirations are in themselves very laudable and very praiseworthy, but only time will tell whether the document itself is anything more than just another exercise in window-dressing.

Mr. J. Higgins

Like the previous speakers, I would like to issue a very sincere welcome to the action plan. I support the motion:

That Seanad Éireann welcomes and supports the recent initiatives taken in relation to education, in particular the publication of the Action Programme for Education 1984-1987 and the establishment of the Curriculum and Examinations Board.

The document is a very thorough appraisal of what we have. I do not agree with the atmosphere of pessimism that is so prevalent on the other side of the House, or concur with their view that the document is vague and does not contain a positive commitment for the future development of education. There are a number of very positive aspects to the plan.

First of all, we must welcome the fact that there is a definite time span, target or achievement date — a period of four years. Within the four-year period a certain amount of what is envisaged in this plan will have to be realised, otherwise we as education administrators — I am speaking as a teacher — the Minister and the Department will stand indicted for introducing a plan which did not reach fulfillment. I am not saying that everything in the plan is realisable or achievable, but there is a great deal of merit in what we have before us. One of the primary purposes of the whole exercise stated quite clearly in the preamble is that this document, as well as setting out very definite goals and charting the educational path for the next four years, is intended to stimulate and generate debate of the type that we have initiated in this House, that we have heard recently on radio and on television, and that will undoubtedly come from the many strands and various interested parties who have a very positive contribution and input to make to the formulation of our educational system and ideas for years to come.

I do not think we should go into the theme which is re-echoed on five or six occasions in the document, that many of the desirable objectives which it sets down are dependent on the provision of necessary resources. It ill behoves the other side of the House to go into the whole issue of the provision of resources, because were we to do so we would end up in an endless whirlpool of trying to establish and apportion blame for the present economic crisis. Suffice it to say that the Minister said that she will do anything in her power to ensure that the objectives that are set down here are attainable and that the priority ones will be afforded the necessary finance in order to make them a reality.

The document is realistic and pragmatic. It states quite clearly that quick, easy solutions are not readily available. It also sets out to establish the main goals and objectives of education. Despite the fact that these have time and time again been reiterated, when we are looking forward and planning it is good to reaffirm what the fundamental purpose, aims and objectives of any educational system must be. As the document has said, they must be the development of the human being, the person, the child, in the spiritual, moral, intellectual, aesthetic and physical senses. If we are honest — politically we must all share responsibility for this — we must admit that there have been some varying defects in our educational system, with the result that those five areas of development have not always been catered for by our schools and schooling system in the past.

The education plan also identifies the need to eliminate sexism in education, to eliminate the type-cast role into which females have been set, the need also to eliminate the very clear strictures that prevail and operate in relation to defining certain subjects as being boys' subjects or the male preserve and other subjects as being the preserve of females. If the education plan achieves the breaking down of these barriers alone, it will be well worth while.

Chapter 2 mentions curriculum and syllabus development. I quote from section 2.1:

Curricula must, therefore, reflect intellectual, social, cultural and economic needs and must provide for the personal development of individual pupils.

If we are honest, particularly in relation to the post-primary curriculum, we must admit it has not done this. It is somewhat out-moded; it is archaic; it is too streamlined, too strait-jacketing and, far from stimulating personal development, to an extent, has stifled it. How can people honestly say that the post-primary syllabus, made up of a stated number of subjects, which is essentially the same since the foundation of the State, can today cope with the challenges of modern, second-half twentieth century living? There will have to be a complete reappraisal of the curriculum a thorough reexamination and a deal of soul-searching as to what is worth retaining and what is worth discarding. In relation to the whole area of the curriculum and examinations, mention in the motion of the examination board is very worth while. There is no doubt that the time is long overdue for the introduction of ongoing and regular assessment. It is ludicrous to establish a person's right to a job, category or role on a 20-hour examination. After spending one's life from the age of four years to 18 years, the final arbiter as to what one should do or the role or niche that he or she is to file in society is to rest on a 20-hour examination with no cognisance whatever of personal development, character development or achievement in the recreational or social spheres. Assessment is very worth while. In this regard I would urge the Minister not to allow financial constraints to impose any further delays in this area.

The section which mentions curricular initiatives is well worth while. Here we must allow schools, vocational educational committees and educational authorities at local level to decide what is best for their own area. Education, like any other area, should develop areas of curricula which would be based on the thesis "horses for courses". A number of the educational developments, for example, the pilot scheme in north Mayo, are showing quite clearly that vocational education committees, teachers' groups and parents' groups have a very valuable input to make and have devised quite innovative, imaginative and worthwhile curricula.

The roles of parents, teachers, teachers' unions and other education groups have been well defined in the document. One section of the document which causes me some worry is section 2.25 which mentions new accommodation and the desirability — we would concur with this — of providing permanent buildings. It also states that where permanent buildings are not provided, good temporary accommodation is envisaged. I urge the Minister to clarify this. If the intention is to go back to the provision of prefabricated buildings, the Minister would be well advised against this. Prefabricated buildings are demoralising, look shabby, have a limited life-span and in terms of cost are in the long run far more expensive than they would seem, because they are simply a short-term financial expedient.

I agree with another sentiment in this section in relation to new accommodation. It states:

...new schools in urban areas will not be provided where it is evident that sufficient suitable accommodation is available in existing schools within a reasonable distance.

I would not confine this to urban areas. Every single catchment area should be looked at with a view to appraising precisely what facilities and accommodation exist therein. We can all quote example after example of where one post-primary school in an area is in the process of closing down or about to close down or the danger signs loom very ominously and on the other hand sanction is given to another school less than half a mile away to go ahead with a grandiose, elaborate building programme. Furthermore, each and every area must be looked at very thoroughly to see what degree of co-operation can take place. Education is a very expensive business: there is a great deal of duplication, overlapping and schools within a limited area running parallel and offering parallel courses, where co-operation could achieve a great deal, in addition to the subject range it would offer, to erase the tensions that arise between different categories of post-primary schools, particularly at enrolment time.

The school transport service is approaching the critical stage that the Minister warned about last year when she introduced some limited charges. Politically I am saying something that may not carry favour with the electorate, but a number of people would be prepared to pay provided they were asked to pay a small amount. There is a general air of gloom in relation to the recession, which is not as bad as people make it out to be. People for the first time are being asked to pay for things which previously they enjoyed free, gratis and for nothing. We have a free education scheme, a free transport scheme, a free health scheme and so on, and one wonders how we have existed for so long without having to impose charges for such services.

Furthermore, the plan is worthwhile in that it writes into the education plan the whole role of the mentally handicapped. However, I do not agree with the section which deals with the mildly mentally handicapped in that it seems to refer to special schools. There is a very thin borderline between a mildly mentally handicapped child and a slow learner. Physically there is no difference whatever between a mildly mentally handicapped child and a normal child. The proper environment in which to educate such children is within the conventional school using special teachers, rather than special schools. In relation to the moderately and severely handicapped I accept that one must avail of special schools. Here, we should pay a very sincere tribute to the work done by the staff of such schools on a voluntary basis over the years.

This is a very worthwhile document, and I welcome it. The section in relation to second level education should deal fundamentally with what second level education is about and should be achieving. Far too much emphasis is put on using second level education in order to groom people for university, and the majority of people who are non-university and non-third level contenders are being discriminated against by being channelled into the narrow strait-jacket curriculum which is essentially geared to obtain matriculation. There is much merit and positive thinking in the document. If it did nothing other than stimulate debate, which is part of its stated objectives, it will have been well worth while.

Mr. Fallon

Senator Higgins in my opinion misunderstood Senator Mullooly, who clearly welcomed the publication — he underlined the word "publication"— of this Action Programme for Education 1984-1987 as indeed I do and this side of the House generally would welcome its publication, but that does not mean that we welcome all that it contains. It is no harm to have a plan for the future. We should have a programme to give us positive guidelines to tell us where precisely we are going in the field of education. Plans generally are important and necessary not just in education but in other areas of Government, in social welfare, health, agriculture and so on. Like so many other areas of government, all of these plans show commitment, concern and that something is being done, but the real, practical commitment must come in the form of financial commitments. That is where this plan falls down because it is riddled with phrases like "review", "when finances permit" and "when resources permit". When a plan is riddled with phrases like those one can expect very little action. When we talk about a plan, we know that it is an action plan. We know that action means movement, full of life, dynamic. Without proper organised funding a plan cannot be successful, and "action plan" is a misnomer.

Over the past 20 years there has been a great increase in practical development in our education system. Successive Ministers should be congratulated in that they played magnificent roles in the whole development of the educational system, going back to the late Deputy Donough O'Malley when he started the famous school transport scheme. This momentum must be allowed to continue. More than ever in the history of the State we need an educated young people and a proper educational system. So many young people are, unfortunately, out of jobs, and this is creating problems, particularly at the higher education level, and the demand for higher education is increasing more rapidly than places are available. We must continue with this programme from the Minister which I hope will set out a basic requirement, a continuation of what we had in the past, that would assist all pupils to fulfil their full potential to the best of their ability and their talents.

Much emphasis in the plan has been placed on the disadvantaged area and the disadvantaged pupil. Schools can do a good deal for the disadvantaged pupil in the area of poverty and deprivation. When we talk about helping the disadvantaged pupil we are not talking in terms of thousands of pounds and we should not be talking in terms of inner city or city development. As the INTO pointed out, it is a national problem, and disadvantaged areas and disadvantaged pupils exist in every town and village. We are not talking in terms of thousands of pounds, we are talking in terms of millions of pounds. Saying we are doing something about the disadvantaged pupils and not coming up with finance is being unfair. I find it difficult to understand what the Minister is now saying regarding the disadvantaged pupil when I examine her performance since she became Minister for Education. For example, the two-honour requirement for the RTC scholarship was taken away overnight. It was unfair and a scandalous performance, and I do not mind saying so. It was a direct blow at the disadvantaged pupil. That was only a few months ago. Now the Minister is coming up with a plan for the disadvantaged pupils when only a short few months ago she hit them a mighty blow. The increase in the teacher-pupil ratio is hitting at the disadvantaged pupil as is the drastic curtailment of the number of remedial and guidance teachers. The Minister has hit many times over the past few months the very people that she claims she is concerned about. I am not one bit impressed with her new-found interest in the disadvantaged pupil.

I welcome the setting up of the Curriculum and Examinations Board. Deputy John Wilson when he was Minister for Education played an important role in this area. I see as a great challenge for that board in the merging of the traditional education systems and the new technology that will emerge, and I wish them success. On a local level, in my own town of Athlone we have the examination branch of the Department of Education, and the civil servants therein who number about 130 are concerned at the moment about their future. They do not know what is happening. I think the Minister has been evasive, to say the least, about their prospects. A deputation of those civil servants publicly met Deputy Mary O'Rourke, the spokesperson for Fianna Fáil on education. They met a Minister, Deputy Cooney, and I think they met the Minister for Education on this matter, but all to no avail.

They do not know where they are going, and this is not very fair. I ask the Minister to consider locating the new CEO of the board and his staff in Athlone. That is the least the Minister could do at this stage.

The higher education grant is very important from the point of view of the county councillor. It is time that this whole area was re-examined. The prudent parent who works a few hours overtime in the year and who makes an extra few pounds for his family is being penalised severely. His income is based on the gross figure, in which overtime and bonuses are included. On the other hand for the farming community and self-employed there appear to be no strict guidelines. This area needs a total review and I hope the Minister will examine it as a matter of urgency.

Senator Higgins said that it is no harm to have a general debate on this matter. Debate is cheap. We are told that this is an action plan. Unless sufficient funding is given, then we have no more than paper aspirations. That challenge to education, to pupils, to parents and to teachers generally will fail unless the resources that I have mentioned are forthcoming.

Debate adjourned.

The Seanad adjourned at 8 p.m. until 2.30 p.m. on Wednesday, 11 April 1984.