First let me say a little bit about who we are and how we came into being. The Post Primary Education Forum is an umbrella group consisting of parents, trade unions and management bodies at second-level in Ireland. We were founded in November 2007 in order to address common issues and establish a shared viewpoint on priorities for the future development of second level education. The PPEF was founded in a context where, in a time of plenty, Ireland languished towards the bottom of OECD tables in terms of investment in our schools.

 

The PPEF is a unique and significant development where the partners got together for the first time to promote the interest of children in second level schools. In the autumn of last year everything changed but we believe our role and our mission became is more important. In this time of recession investment in education is crucial for our economic recovery. Cuts already made are having a serious and negative impact in our schools and if we are truly committed to the development of a knowledge economy, not only do these cuts have to be reversed but investment in our children must be increased.

In this presentation, we will outline the effects that the cuts already imposed are having on the education of our children in second level schools. We will outline how these cuts are having the most devastating and irreversible effect on the most disadvantaged of our children. We will argue that in order to protect our economic and our social well-being, our children in second-level education must be protected from further attack.

 

The cuts already imposed:

 

So, what are the effects of these cuts? Four of our member organisations have conducted surveys of schools to find out exactly what is happening. The findings are remarkably consistent: larger class sizes; subjects dropped; amalgamation of higher and lower classes and of different year groups; whole programmes dropped and increased pressure on extra-curricular activities and pastoral care.

The surveys throw up two particularly worrying trends. The first of these is the fact that many of the subjects being dropped and amalgamated are those that are regarded as the most important for developing the ‘knowledge economy”. Among the subjects that schools have been forced to drop are Chemistry, Physics, Applied Maths, Economics, Accountancy, Agricultural Science, French and German. With approximately 10% of schools losing a modern language and 8% a science subject, it is clear that these cuts are having a negative impact on the capacity of our schools to produce the modern well-educated and flexible workforce so necessary for our economic recovery. Amalgamation of higher and lower level classes in such subjects as Mathematics, French and Business Studies is a further negative consequence of the reduction in teacher numbers.

These trends are accompanied by increases in class sizes as a result of the increase in the Pupil-Teacher ratio. Ireland is close to becoming the country with the largest second-level class sizes in the OECD.

 

The moratorium on filling middle-management posts in schools is already having a devastating effect in schools, and there is worse to come. The nature of such a moratorium means that the effect is uneven, some schools have lost up to seven Assistant Principals. Non-replacement of post-holders is placing enormous pressure on the running of schools and on the care of our children. Systems which have proven of great benefit to the provision of a safe and supportive environment for our children, such as the year-head system, are under serious threat.

 

Hitting our most vulnerable children hardest:

 

Many of the cuts are hitting the most vulnerable and disadvantaged of our children. Increases in school transport costs and the abolition of the school book grant scheme in non-DEIS schools are among the most obvious of these. Hard pressed parents are finding themselves with anything from a few hundred to more than a thousand euro in extra expenses at the start of the school year. It is very important to remember that most disadvantaged students do not attend DEIS schools.

One of the most worrying trends from the surveys is the number of schools who have had to drop programmes such as the Leaving Certificate Applied, the Leaving Certificate Vocational Programme and even Transition Year. The abolition of Leaving Certificate Applied in many schools will not only have serious consequences for those children who availed of this programme, but it will also have a negative impact on those classes that these students now join. These students will now find it more difficult to cope in the larger classes of the Traditional Leaving Certificate. Teachers will have to give disproportionate amounts of attention to students who were better suited to the LCA.

Increased class sizes and amalgamation of higher and lower level classes also have a disproportionate effect on those students who are having difficulties. Many schools have had to abolish smaller classes designed for students who are struggling with the curriculum.

 

The loss of Home School Liaison teachers in non-DEIS schools is having a particularly detrimental effect on some very vulnerable children for whom attendance at school at all is the first priority. This link with families has proved invaluable in retaining children in school and helping them to achieve their potential. It costs ten times more to provide a prison place than to support a child in a second level school.

 

Programme for Government:

 

It is only fair that we take this opportunity to acknowledge the commitments in the recently renegotiated Programme for Government. The steps taken to employ more teachers and to reintroduce some of the grants that were withdrawn in Budget 2009 are to be welcomed. The PPEF is anxiously awaiting an outline of the exact details of the grants being made available under the renewed programme for such areas as the Book Scheme, subjects and programmes. However this should not be taken as meaning that our second-level education system is adequately funded, it is not. We have lost 900 teaching posts this year. Putting back 100 in a year is a gesture. Ireland was lagging far behind our European and world competitors in terms of investment in our second-level students even in the days of the boom. The situation has worsened since then and we contend that this is a short-sighted policy.

 

Costs for Parents:

 

The education cutbacks are placing enormous financial burdens on already hard-pressed parents. Increases in the cost of school transport, loss of book grants and more pressure from cash-strapped schools are turning the provision of education for their children into a struggle for many parents. The National Parents Council post-primary has estimated that the additional burden on families arising out of cuts in education can be as much as €1,000 per child in second level education. If a family has more than one child in full-time education this cost is inevitably multiplied. These figures do not take account of changes in taxation which apply to these families.

 

In this context the PPEF is calling for proper funding to be put in place to support the work of the National Parents Council post-primary. The NPCpp speaks for the parents of 340,000 pupils attending second-level schools. It is vitally important for the future of our education system that the modest funding sought by this body is provided so that parents can have a strong and influential voice in the future development of our schools in order to fulfil their role under the Education Act 1998.

 

 

 

 

Why invest in education?

 

The arguments surrounding the importance for our economic future of maintaining a high quality education system have been well-rehearsed and we are not going to repeat them all here. However, it is worth looking at the consequences of increasing or reducing our commitment to the education of our children. If we support our schools, our teachers, our parents and above all our children at this crucial time in their lives the consequences are positive and profound. If we fail to provide this support, the consequences are unthinkable.

 

The OECD has consistently reported that investment in education provides a significant economic return both to the individual and to the society at large. It also points out that there is a significant social return from investment in education, pointing out that better educated people live longer, are healthier, more socially cohesive and are more informed and effective citizens. The stark statistic that shows that over 90% of the inmates of our prisons are early school leavers speaks for itself.

Key figures such as Jim O'Hara, Intel, Martin Murphy, Hewlett Packard and Paul Rellis, Microsoft have called on the Government for increased investment in education in general and in ICT in particular as a vital component in Ireland's economic recovery. Investment in education will always pay dividends.

 

We cannot punish a generation.

 

Finally, it cannot be emphasised enough that the teenagers in our schools today have only one chance to get the best education possible. If they are to realise their full potential it is no use coming to them in ten or fifteen years to offer them a second-level education. The damage will have been done and for many of them it will be irreparable. We understand that Ireland is facing difficult economic times. We know that money is tight. However, apart from the fact that education will be central to our recovery, we cannot punish a generation for the sins of their predecessors. More than that we owe them the best possible chance to achieve the best they can in life. These young men and women, your children and mine, will not forgive our generation if we deny them this one chance.”