Policy-makers and the partners in education must have regard to all of thenation's children and not just the select few, writes John White
The statistics published in The Irish Times showing that fee-paying schools and grind institutions send more students to UCD and Trinity than pupils from other schools should come as no surprise to anyone who has been following the published work of Prof Patrick Clancy detailing the socio-economic background of entrants to university.
By definition, schools which select, either covertly or overtly, by way of academic tests, by ability to pay fees, by motivation (for example, repeat students) will send more pupils to third level than schools which accept the whole social cohort of pupils.
The danger is that these tables will be misused by persons whose only interest in education is financial and who draw unwarranted inferences from them to suit their own purposes.
Of course, grind institutions will send high numbers to third level: firstly, because of the numbers doing the Leaving Certificate in any individual grind institution will be a multiple of those doing it in any individual school; secondly, because the pupils will, by definition, be highly motivated and from a socio-economic background which can afford to pay high fees. All the research, including that of Prof Clancy, indicates the crucial nature of these factors. The fact is that these statistics tell us nothing about the performance of the schools concerned despite groundless talk of the "best teachers"; they do not tell us whether fee-paying schools or grind institutions could cope with pupils who are not selected in this way.
Policy-makers and the partners in education - parents, teachers and school management - must have regard to all of the nation's children and not just the select few.
Irish schools offer a broad curriculum which focuses on the "whole development" of students. This system recognises that while academic achievement is important, skills such as being able to relate to people, managing one's own learning after second level and understanding how to develop one's own interests, talents and abilities also play a key role in students' life chances.
These factors, however, cannot be measured by a mechanism such as a college-entry table.
Furthermore, any attempt to evaluate schools by narrow comparisons which take no account of the environment in which they operate can only be damaging to our education system. Such comparisons do not contribute to school effectiveness or school improvement, which form the common objective of parents and teachers.
The publication of entry tables for two Dublin universities gives an incomplete picture of Ireland's third- level sector. Today's third-level sector encompasses a broad range of institutions, many of which offer career-oriented courses to suit students with different interests from all kinds of backgrounds. The tables also conceal the growing number of part-time and second-chance third-level students, many of whom did not or could not contemplate further education after leaving school.
The tables confirm the huge inequalities which exist among children from different socio-economic groups in terms of access to education.
While socio-economic differences exist in society even before children enter school, differences in funding and staffing between students and schools can only further enforce barriers to third-level education and career opportunities. The ASTI has long campaigned for improved access to quality education for all students.
Despite economic growth over the past decade, Ireland's expenditure on second-level education is still well below the OECD average. We are significantly behind Britain, US, France, Germany and Denmark in terms of spending on second-level students. Out of all the EU countries, only Greece spends less on second- level education.
In addition Ireland's pupil /teacher ratio is higher than it was in 1970 and this means overcrowding in classrooms and reduced interaction between individual pupils and their teachers. This has a disproportionate impact on students who require more attention in order to reach their potential.
Many schools do not have a full-time guidance counsellor, while initiatives to promote pupil retention are limited.
Education apartheid must not be allowed to fester in Irish society. The Government must ensure that schools which are not fee paying or grind institutions have adequate staffing levels, resources and facilities to meet the needs of all students.
Other countries manage to tackle educational inequality by adopting a number of strategies.
The Report of the Commission on the Points System has detailed many of these:
- adequate financial support over and above that of the current third-level maintenance grant scheme should be made available to disadvantaged students;
- a quota of at least 15 per cent of places for students entering third level aged 23 or above should be established;
- an increase in the number of part-time courses at third level is needed;
- formal access linkages, adequately resourced, need to be established between schools serving disadvantaged areas and universities, so as to increase the number of students at third level from disadvantaged backgrounds from 2 to 5 per cent within five years.
While the publication of these tables tells us nothing new, it should generate a new debate about our education service and its role in educating all the children in our society to meet their potential.
John White is deputy general secretary of the Association of Secondary Teachers Ireland