The Joint Committee met at 10 a.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Deputy Ulick Burke,  | Senator Fidelma Healy Eames. | | Deputy Frank Feighan, | | | Deputy Seán Ó Fearghaíl, | | | Deputy John O’Mahony, | | | Deputy Ruairí Quinn, | |
DEPUTY PAUL GOGARTY IN THE CHAIR. The joint committee met in private session until 10.10 a.m.  Primary and Secondary School Models: Discussion.
Chairman: This morning we will hear a presentation by Educate Together and the Irish Vocational Education Association on their respective proposals for the development and roll-out of models for primary and second level schools. I welcome the following: Mr. Paul Rowe, chief executive officer, and Ms Emer Nowlan, second level project officer, from Educate Together; Dr. Aidan Seery, School of Education, Trinity College, Dublin; Mr. Michael Moriarty, general secretary, IVEA; Ms Carol Hanney, chief executive officer, Dún Laoghaire VEC; Mr. Seán Ashe, chief executive officer, County Kildare VEC; Mr. Pat O’Connor, chief executive officer, County Dublin VEC; and all the Irish Vocational Education Association members and representatives present. I will ask both delegations to begin with a short presentation of five minutes each on the respective proposals, after which members of the committee will engage in questioning and comments. There will be plenty of opportunity for a full discourse and exposition after that. I draw attention to the fact that members of the committee enjoy absolute privilege but that same privilege does not extend to witnesses appearing before the committee. I remind committee members of the long-standing parliamentary practice that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the Houses, or an official, either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable. I invite Mr. Paul Rowe from Educate Together to make his presentation. Mr. Paul Rowe: We thank the committee for this opportunity to outline our proposals for the development and roll-out of the Educate Together model for primary and second level schools. There are now 10,000 pupils attending 56 Educate Together national schools in 18 counties. Even if no Educate Together primary schools are opened in the next five years, the number of Educate Together pupils would reach 20,000 as new schools grow to their full capacity. Involved in running these schools are approximately 17,000 parents and 1,400 staff members. Most Educate Together schools are now in new housing areas and have been established in the past five years. This is now a genuine mainstream movement with a full range of school types, many with DEIS status and assisted learning units. The model is now tried and tested and is becoming increasingly popular. While expanding from 18 schools in 2000 to 56 schools in 2009 represents significant growth, this number of schools is still far from meeting the demand for the Educate Together model of education. The organisation is working in many areas where demand has been identified and has formally notified the Department of Education and Science of its intention to apply to open primary schools in 45 areas in the next three years. The Educate Together model, of which members will be reasonably aware, is a model of patronage in the Irish system. Educate Together is a company limited by guarantee whose activities are regulated by its memorandum and articles of association and the Companies Acts and whose decisions are made at general meetings of its members. It is a modern, transparent and accountable model of patronage. Its legal foundation obliges all Educate Together schools to be multi-denominational, coeducational, child-centred and democratically run. The Educate Together schools, coming from an equality and human rights perspective, provide a complete religious education programme as part of a comprehensive ethical education curriculum, the “Learn Together” programme. This programme has four strands, moral and spiritual development, equality and justice, belief systems, and ethics and the environment. All members of the school community participate equally in this programme and no teacher is asked to teach as a religious truth a viewpoint they may not themselves hold. At the same time, families who hold specific religious beliefs and wish to use the school premises for denominational religious instruction or faith formation classes are facilitated, and these classes take place outside the school day on an opt-in basis. Carefully developed management practice in Educate Together schools ensure that the school’s ethos, values and aims are shared and clearly articulated and the whole school community is engaged in an ongoing process of evaluation and review. A fundamental feature of the Educate Together model is that schools are driven from the bottom up by parents and democratic participation in management processes. We now face the challenge to extend this model to second level and we feel that this represents a significant opportunity for the State. Calls for a new approach to second level education have come from a very wide and diverse number of sources, including State bodies, NGOs, trades unions, academics, business leaders and significant employers and investors in Ireland. Educate Together second level schools will have the same legal obligations to uphold the charter and will be based on the same values of human rights and equality as their primary counterparts. By integrating 21st century teaching and learning strategies comprehensively and purposefully into the curriculum, and by assessing not only what students learn but how they learn, Educate Together second level schools will nurture critical thinkers, problem solvers, effective communicators, creators and innovators. We intend to make qualitative change in the way the curriculum is delivered, starting specifically in the junior cycle programme. A critical distinguishing feature will be that, building on the success of the Learn Together programme at primary level, Educate Together second level schools will provide an ethical curriculum that focuses on the ethical, moral and social development of young people. In an Educate Together second level school, the inclusive and democratic principle will extend to the whole set of relationships within the school and embrace students, parents and teachers in a new and innovative way. While interest in this type of second level education stretches back 30 years, the increased number of families attending Educate Together schools and the growing demand for this model have contributed to mounting pressure to make such an option available. There are now 12 established start-up groups of parents in different parts of the country and in 2006 researchers from Trinity College Dublin carried out a feasibility study for the opening of a second level school by Educate Together. I will outline the history of our endeavours to progress this project. We wrote to the Minister in December 2007 drawing her attention to the growing demand for Educate Together second level schools and stating our intention to apply. Despite this we have receive no reply to this application. A further application was formally submitted in March 2008 and again we have had no response to this. To date, a year and three months later, we are still awaiting such a response and we have further made applications for specific schools in Waterford, Gorey, County Wexford, and Lucan, County Dublin. Taking Lucan as an example there are now five 16 classroom Educate Together primary schools in this area, meaning that when these schools are full, there will be ten sixth classes or approximately 300 children leaving Educate Together primary schools each year. There is clearly established demand in the area and correspondence exists between parents and the Department of Education and Science stretching back several years as evidence of this demand. Despite this, it emerged in June 2008 that a new post-primary school planned for the Lucan area, was to be a non-designated community college under the sole patronage of County Dublin VEC. No consultation had taken place with the local community or with potential patrons in the area. The demand for the Educate Together model of school at both primary and second level is very well established. Typically Educate Together schools are over-subscribed, sometimes to the level of receiving three to four times as many applications for places than can be offered. Educate Together has a proven track record as a patron of schools and its educational model is internationally approved. It has demonstrated its capacity to open schools in an effective, professional and cost effective manner through the rapid expansion of its network at primary level. The feasibility of opening Educate Together second level schools has been established by independent research and the opening of this type of school will not only allow parents to exercise their constitutional rights but will offer an opportunity to the education system and to society. The only factor limiting the further development of this acclaimed model of school at primary level and its logical development to second level, is the absence of a democratic process for the establishment of new schools. Educate Together is confident that with transparent processes of planning in place for the establishment of new schools, processes which involve community consultation, it can increase its contribution to society by providing more modern, high quality schools in which all children and all young people can develop the skills, values and attitudes necessary to live, work and learn together in the 21st century. It should be stressed that opening a school under Educate Together’s patronage costs the same or less than any done under any other patronage or trusteeship at primary or second level. Educate Together asks that this committee make a formal recommendation to the Minister for Education and Science to recognise Educate Together as a patron of second level schools so that it can proceed to facilitate parents who have clearly expressed a wish to educate their children in this manner. Chairman: I now invite Mr. Michael Moriarty, general secretary of the Irish Vocational Education Association to make his presentation. Mr. Michael Moriarty: I too thank the Chairman and members of the joint committee for inviting us to appear before it to make a presentation on the roll-out of primary and second level post-primary schools. I am accompanied by three chief executive officers with considerable experience in second level schools. Mr. Pat O’Connor, who is the chief executive of County Dublin VEC has responsibility also for two community national schools. As the community national schools project is very much a work in progress, it is not possible for us to be precise how these might roll out because it is a pilot project. Consequently, our submission describes what VECs are doing at primary level and suggests how they would roll out this new model should the State decide to extend it further, which VECs would like to be the case. I will highlight the three models of school for which VECs have responsibility. VECs are statutory education authorities with an acknowledged track record in the provision of post-primary and adult and further education and a developing record at primary level. More recently, County Dublin VEC has become involved at primary level through the establishment of two community national schools. Other VECs would be prepared to extend their remit to provide education from the cradle to the grave — or at any rate from the cradle to the career — where appropriate on a single campus. I will highlight the key elements of our submission. VECs were established by statute in 1930 as publicly accountable education authorities to satisfy a need for a system of schooling which could, inter alia, accommodate religious, cultural and social diversity at the time of the emerging Free State and when it appeared the new Northern Ireland state would not be able to sustain itself. VEC post-primary schools are co-educational, with a few exceptions for historical reasons; are comprehensive and inclusive in both their enrolment and curriculum; are democratically managed and publicly owned. Vocational schools or non-designated community colleges were established as multidenominational, co-educational schools in 1930. Today they are ideally suited to meeting the needs of an increasingly multi-ethnic, multicultural, multidenominational and increasingly secular Ireland. Over time VECs have evolved. In the 1970s the designated community college model which came about as a result of the Vocational Education (Amendment) Act 1970 made it possible for VECs to work in collaboration with other partners in the provision of second level education in different ethos contexts. The 2001 amendment Act broadened membership of vocational education committees to reflect the statutory requirement for accountability to students and their parents and to ensure both the VECs and their schools were managed in real partnerships with parents, teachers and local communities which now had a statutory entitlement to representation on the parent VEC committee. The evolution of post-primary education since 1970 paralleled the social, cultural and religious changes in that period. Community schools developed with shared patronage between VECs and various religious orders. From 1980 onwards a different orientation developed with VECs developing designated community colleges, under VEC patronage, with a school board of management partnership arrangement involving the local diocese. In more recent years non-designated community colleges have been developed in certain areas under VEC patronage. This recent development has seen an extension of school management representation to a wider range of interest groups in the colleges’ catchment areas, particularly to various primary school patrons. VECs have up to 100,000 students and approximately 200,000 other learners who avail of their services. In addition, we are partners in the community school model in which there are some 52,000 students. VEC managed schools aim to be centres of educational excellence and aspire to be networks of excellence. We have top academic results in the leaving certificate, gold medals in the world skills championships, young scientist award winners, young social innovators award winners, and Munster junior and senior cup winners. In addition, the Microsoft school of the future is located within the sector. More than anything else, however, VECs seek to put the student, irrespective of aptitude, background, aspiration or amenability, at the centre of everything they do. VECs have accumulated very significant expertise in the establishment and management of schools. They have also put in place structures and staffing that effectively and efficiently support school management in the development of new educational programmes, in continuous professional and curricular development, in leading teaching and learning, in supporting students with special needs, in HR, finance, building maintenance, capital projects and so on. Essentially, VEC schemes form communities of professional practice in education. This collegiality and the fact that VECs can support school leaders demonstrate the great benefit the vocational sector brings to the Irish schooling system. VECs and their CEOs are fully accountable to Oireachtas committees, the Committee of Public Accounts, the Minister for Education and Science, the Comptroller and Auditor General and others. I acknowledge the foresight of legislators who, since 1930, have constructed a VEC framework that, today and tomorrow, provides Ireland with a flexible mechanism for meeting its primary and post-primary educational needs. I hope that the three chief executive officers present and I will be able to answer the questions the committee wishes to put. Chairman: I thank Mr. Moriarty. For the benefit of non-members of the committee, we have held a rolling series of meetings to look at the role of VECs at primary level and the proposal for a second level Educate Together school. Departmental officials have spoken about the review into community primary schools in west Dublin and have answered probing questions about why Educate Together should not be allowed at second level. This meeting is a continuation of that process, so I draw members’ attention to the fact that the departmental view has already been outlined in detail and is on the record. Accordingly, I ask members to focus on the opinions of the two groups present today, which are based on what the Department has said, but to limit their comments on the role of the Department as we have already covered that. Deputy Ulick Burke: I welcome the representatives of Educate Together and the VECs. We only received the presentations a few moments ago and have not had the chance to read anything but the summary. I will start with a few questions to Mr. Paul Rowe. There has been rapid growth in Educate Together throughout the country but I am very concerned at the condition of school accommodation. I know several schools which have been set up in unsuitable accommodation just to get established, as that is the only way they can do so and parents involved are very concerned about the issue. When the delegates lobby the Minister for Education and Science and the Department for suitable accommodation are they treated in the same way as other schools, especially older ones which are also in very poor condition? It was said that 98% of current primary schools are still faith-based. Is Educate Together’s primary motivation, apart from integration and all the rest, the establishment of a broad base incorporating all faiths and ethnic groups? Does it believe this can be done within school areas where this is not necessarily available under existing structures and where the schools primarily are Catholic? The biggest difference I can discern from current structures operated by the vocational education committees, VECs, or otherwise, is that Educate Together schools are driven by the parents. What advantages does Mr. Rowe perceive in this regard? Educate Together considers the fact that it is driven by the parents to be a major plus, rather than the established set-up in respect of the VEC, whereby one has board of management representatives from the VECs, public representatives and parents, as well as other interested partners in education. I accept the vocational education committees are nationally established and have had a statutory basis since 1930. When one considers both systems side by side, could a huge overlap arise resulting in great pressure for accommodation and to acquire students? Although areas of huge growth exist at population pressure points, on the national scene there undoubtedly will be great competition between the various existing sectors for pupils to maintain already established teaching posts, whether in established religious secondary schools or in the VEC sector, to which would be added the establishment of Educate Together at secondary level. Does either delegation consider that we can afford the luxury of such competing interests at present? In respect of curriculum change, does Educate Together already have an input to the ongoing changes within the Department? In particular, does the organisation have an input to curriculum change at junior cycle level? Chairman: I thank the Deputy. Before moving on with the questioning, I emphasis that if possible, members should focus specifically on the issue of whether an Educate Together model would be useful at second level, as well as the examination of the roll-out thus far of the VEC model at primary level. To summarise Deputy Burke’s comments on this, the key question to arise is whether there already is a sufficient number of models at primary level and whether the VEC model is superfluous. Similarly, the question is whether the sought-for Educate Together model is superfluous at second level. Members are present to discuss these issues today. While other questions that have been asked warrant a response, members should focus on this specific issue, which contains much meat and bones for the joint committee. Deputy Ruairí Quinn: I thank the Chairman for this direction because the purpose of this meeting is to focus on one aspect of education. While many other aspects are of interest, they are not for discussion today. Article 42 of the Constitution gives parents, and not politicians, Oireachtas committees or anyone else, the right to choose the kind of education they wish for their children. I take it that this is accepted by all members and is not in dispute. Parents have exercised this choice throughout the history of education and Mr. Michael Moriarty has referred to the 1930 statute, as well as to the amending Acts of 1970 and 2001 in respect of the evolution of the State sector in education. This sector was vigorously opposed, in so far as they could, by the religious authorities of all denominations during the 1920s and 1930s. If one reads John Walsh’s recent biography of Dr. Hillery on the tussle he had with the bishops in respect of education back in the 1970s, one gains a good insight into what went on behind closed doors. Sr. Eileen Randles, who is a woman from a religious community and an education specialist, indicated clearly to the joint committee, in a manner that is unique to that part of our society, that those doors have not yet been opened. The Official Report will show that when I specifically asked her whether the vocational education committee colleges were non-denominational, she replied that while de jure they are, de facto they are not. I believe I have recalled her comments accurately and that is the thrust of her response. The State has acceded to the request, under Article 42, by parents for a multiplicity of different kinds of schools at primary level. The legislation is silent in respect of a body that qualifies for patron recognition at primary level or is recognised as a patron, because it does not distinguish. If one is recognised de facto in operational terms, as well as de jure as a patron at primary level, there is no indication that one is not automatically entitled to become a patron at secondary level. While I am open to correction, I understand the Gaelscoileanna movement has been recognised, first as patrons at primary level and subsequently at secondary level. At the joint committee meeting with departmental officials to which the Chairman referred, the principal Civil Service representative stated explicitly that the recognition of Educate Together at secondary level was a matter of policy for the Minister and that the Department was silent on the matter. I believe the Official Report will also show I am accurately recording this statement and she actually said it again. This is a political and not an operational Civil Service decision. At the same meeting, Mr. Richard Dolan, who is an assistant principal officer in the Department’s forward planning unit, mentioned the demographic growth being encountered. Incidentally, I do not refer to hypotheses and projections, as the children who will be entering second or third level colleges already exist. They are either already born or their mothers are pregnant. These statistical data are accurate and are available to members. As for the sector under discussion, it now includes 17,000 parents who have rights under the Constitution, 90% of whom have indicated that they desire an Educate Together choice and there is chapter and verse as to the reasons. I have two specific questions for the representatives from the VEC. I have been told in private that the Department, which is based in Marlborough Street, regards the VEC post-primary sector, to which I refer exclusively, to be the section of the education system over which it has control and ownership and that it does not wish to share it or to confuse matters and it perceives Educate Together to be a de facto competitor to the VEC sector at second level. I seek a specific response to this point because it has been put to members that a political decision has been required from the Minister since December 2007. It is now May 2009 and there has been demographic growth. While the Minister has indicated that he is not opposed to it, he is being silent in this regard. The response to questions posed is consistent and it has been kicked into touch. The Department states this is a matter of policy at ministerial level and the same Mr. Dolan to whom I referred previously stated clearly that demographic demand was such that there was room for both models at post-primary level in some parts of the country. The outgoing secretary general of the INTO, Mr. John Carr, has written in newspapers to the effect that it does not make sense from a logistical or resource point of view to have a denominational primary school or a school with an ethos of one’s choice at every crossroads in the country in the manner of having one for everyone in the audience. No one is proposing this and Mr. Dolan, the most senior person in the aforementioned unit, indicated there was a demand and a capacity in respect of population at post-primary level for both kinds of schools. Having had sight of the documentation, my concern at present is whether Mr. Moriarty and his colleagues share the view expressed by Sr. Eileen Randles. I believe Mr. Moriarty has explained that in some cases, which have worked very well, the designated community schools are the result of a merger between the VEC and religious organisations and in which, by common consent and agreement, there is a particular religious ethos. In areas where it is not the case, there is secular, non-religious involvement. Does the delegation accept that the ethos of the Educate Together parental body is not to have purely secular formal education but a system that reflects a multi-denominational, egalitarian and liberal approach? This would bring religion into the school but allow children with religious beliefs and none to explore and understand each other’s differences. The second largest denominational group, after Roman Catholics, is the one to which I belong, the atheist, agnostic, humanist, secular or non-religious group. It is also the fastest growing. My constituency, Dublin South-East, has the largest section, in percentage terms, of that demographic cohort as measured by the census. The refusal of the Department, as we have been led to believe, with or without the assistance of the VEC movement, is frustrating the right of those parents under Article 42 to have a post-primary school of their choice where there is a demand for it and where resources are available. Deputy Seán Ó Fearghaíl: Some of the key questions have been asked. I thank the two deputations for their presentations. They represent two success stories in Irish education. We all admire and support what Educate Together has done successfully at primary level. The VEC system has been an enormous success since 1930, operating in adverse circumstances and conditions. I am conscious of what Deputy Quinn said. VECs were denounced from pulpits as a Godless system of education. From the presentation by Mr. Rowe, I take it that one of the key issues is faith instruction. While the ethos of Educate Together is that faith instruction may be provided in school, it is done outside of normal class time so as not to have an impact on those who do not wish to engage in that pursuit. The addendum to Mr. Rowe’s presentation refers to meetings with the Irish Vocational Education Association to discuss the possibility of drawing up model agreements with the VECs. How far has this work advanced? Given the extensive nature of the VEC system and its established reputation as an accountable and statutorily based system, should the initiative of having a meeting be pursued? Did Educate Together come up against a brick wall? Other members referred to choice and competition. Choice is highly desirable but I do not know if competition is; I do not know if it would deliver the best return in education or value for the taxpayer at primary or secondary level. This is particularly true at a time of significant difficulties in resourcing, where the provision of buildings will be an issue for a considerable time. Accountability is a key issue. The VEC system is accountable. We see difficulties in church run schools where accountability is a problem. If a new building or site is acquired, the State will have difficulty in realising the benefits of the original site which may have been provided by the religious orders, as well as the benefits of the investment in the site made by the State for many years. We have no such problems within the VEC sector. How can the Educate Together model provide for equal and comparable accountability? Senator Fidelma Healy Eames: I welcome both groups. We are here to examine how many models of education we need. Both groups exist in their own right. Educate Together has a long history now and is growing fast at primary level. I am very familiar with the VEC at second level, having been a former chairperson of County Galway VEC. We must examine what is needed. I wish to put some questions to those representing the Educate Together model. What are the difficulties these pupils are experiencing at second level with the current models? What are the gains for these pupils and society if the Educate Together model was available at second level? Would there be new needs at third level? The delegation is facing barriers in bringing the Educate Together model to second level. Why has the Department of Education and Science not responded? What other barriers exist? I am aware that Mr. Moriarty has two or three community national school projects. Mr. Michael Moriarty: There are two. Senator Fidelma Healy Eames: These are under way. This happened in a hurry. The former Minister for Education and Science, Deputy Hanafin, was really stuck with the Balbriggan situation and jumped very fast. Nevertheless, there is a well established model at second level and I know there are real needs in provision at primary and second levels. In Galway, there is the Doughuisce project, where we are awaiting the primary and secondary schools under the VEC stewardship. An bord snip is considering amalgamating some VECs. Through the grapevine, I have heard this may include the amalgamation of Galway city and county VECs. I do not know if this is true. Would this hinder the capacity of the IVEA to roll out schools in these fast developing areas? We have 1,000 primary pupils leaving the Doughuisce area to go to different primary schools. There are no schools in the community of 8,000 people, a fast developing area. According to the Department of Education and Science, the IVEA is the answer. If an bord snip amalgamates VECs, will it hinder or prevent this? The community deserves an answer. Where else is it an issue? All three speakers alluded to the importance of choice and the reality of competition. As an educator, I have always said we should match the need of the child to the appropriate style of education. That may be found in Educate Together or the VEC model. I am aware that the VEC is a great provider for children with learning difficulties and those in the lower socio-economic groups. I am keen to know more about this provision in Educate Together schools. What percentage of Educate Together pupils have special needs and learning difficulties? What percentage are foreign nationals and how is Educate Together catering for them? Deputy Ulick Burke is familiar with catchment areas. We have torn our hair out at local level when children want to go to one school over another but this was not in the school transport catchment area. The CEO of the VEC is generally the transport officer or liaison officer with the Department. With all these educational models, how will numbers be managed and, more importantly, how will the schools co-exist harmoniously? Every time a new education provider comes to an area, teacher numbers will fall in another school with a resulting reduction in subject choice for the pupils. Getting back to the point of meeting children’s needs, providing more schools may harm the educational opportunities of children who may be happy with their current educational model. Chairman: There may be some validity to Senator Fidelma Healy Eames’s point about choice in some areas actually affecting teaching levels. So far, however, there has not been much competition between schools, particularly in rapidly developing areas. Schools have not been cannibalising each other but there is a clear and present need. |