Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

School Curriculum

Dáil Éireann Debate, Wednesday - 17 April 2013

Wednesday, 17 April 2013

Ceisteanna (4)

Charlie McConalogue

Ceist:

4. Deputy Charlie McConalogue asked the Minister for Education and Skills his response to the recent ASTI survey of second level teachers on the proposed reforms of the junior certificate; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [17793/13]

Amharc ar fhreagra

Freagraí ó Béal (5 píosaí cainte)

The "Teachers' Voice" is a report based on the Association of Secondary Teachers, Ireland, ASTI's consultation with teachers on the new framework for junior cycle. It is valuable to have access to these findings, which are being considered within the Department.

At the ASTI conference, the Minister, Deputy Quinn, made a point of commending the ASTI for the content of the report and the process that led to its publication. He has read the report and is listening carefully to the concerns of teachers. The Department has established an education partners consultation group to provide the partners, including the ASTI, with a formal medium for assisting in the planning of the phased implementation of the junior cycle. The group meets every four to six weeks, providing an opportunity to highlight opportunities and challenges. In addition, the ASTI is represented on the key National Council for Curriculum and Assessment, NCCA, structures responsible for the development of the curriculum, including the council and its substructures.

Teachers will be provided with a comprehensive continuing professional development, CPD, programme from autumn 2013 that will address many of the concerns highlighted in the ASTI report.

I thank the Minister of State for his response. My party agrees that reform of the junior certificate can improve it. To this end, we undertook a wide-ranging consultation when last in government. It was designed to make proposals on reforming the junior certificate. When the NCCA put them before the Minister, Deputy Quinn, he changed them significantly. Since then, he has failed to engage with and consult teachers properly, a key flaw in his approach to the issue.

At the recent ASTI conference, which I attended, its president, Mr. Gerry Breslin, stated: "What has most shocked teachers is not the content of the Minister's Framework, nor the imminent implementation deadlines, but the fact that teachers' views were not sought on key aspects of the Framework". The teaching profession is concerned by the Minister's decision to do away with oversight of national examination, as this ensures consistency in how examinations are conducted at the end of the junior cycle. According to international experience, this approach has led to an erosion of quality.

Why has the Minister not consulted adequately or significantly? Does the teaching profession not deserve to be consulted and included, given the fact that its members will be the key actors in delivering this change?

The teachers' representative organisations are part of the educational partners consultation group and provide partners, including the ASTI, with a formal medium for assisting in the planning of the phased introduction of the junior cycle. This is proof of their involvement in a consultative process. Meetings are held approximately every month. At these, the partners have an opportunity to highlight their key concerns. In addition, the ASTI is represented on the NCCA's council and subject development groups. At these meetings, the future shape of the curriculum is considered and findings are presented to the Minister.

I take the point made by the president of the ASTI. It conducted a survey of teachers, the response of whom was clear and has been acknowledged by the Minister, but Mr. Breslin stated that, while it was clear from teachers' responses that some aspects of the Minister's framework had the potential to improve the educational experience of young people in junior cycle, teachers were resoundingly stating that this potential was contingent upon assessment and certification procedures that were fair, transparent and, critically, did not undermine educational standards. There is cross-party agreement on this point, given the fact that the House has passed a motion supporting the junior cycle reforms. The Member opposite voted in favour of those reforms. There is a process of consultation.

Unfortunately, the Minister, Deputy Quinn, has refused to engage in a meaningful way in advance of publishing his framework for the junior cycle. At the Teachers Union of Ireland, TUI, conference in Galway, the Minister mentioned that this was a personal political project. That is the wrong type of language. He should engage with teachers. According to the evidence, reforms work better when implemented together. There must be a serious level of engagement, as it has been disappointing to date.

There is pageantry and choreography to these setpiece events in the Chamber. As an Opposition spokesperson, there is a little jousting and political point scoring. That is fair enough, but every Deputy acknowledges the need for junior cycle reform and wants it to go the right way and to be based on consensus and consultation. There should be proper continuing professional development for teachers if they are to embrace a new way of teaching.

The assessment aspect will be concerned with improving learning outcomes and not just proving them, if the Deputy knows what I mean. The role of the ASTI and teachers in this will be paramount. It is the most important role. We want to ensure that there is ongoing consultation with teachers and their representative organisations. There is a mechanism to this end as the junior cycle is rolled out. I do not know whether I can elaborate further.

Question No. 5 answered with Question No. 1.
Barr
Roinn