Committee Reports > List of Committees > Joint > 1998 > Committee on Education and Science > Report No. 01 - Literacy Levels in Ireland

AN COMHCHOISTE UM OIDEACHAS AGUS EOLAÍOCHT

JOINT COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND SCIENCE

Dé Máirt, 3 Márta, 1998.

Tuesday, 3 March, 1998.

The Joint Committee met at 5.05 p.m.

Members Present

Deputy Michael P. Kitt (in the Chair)

Chairman: We have a quorum so I will begin the meeting. Are the minutes of the joint meeting of 17 February agreed? Agreed. At the last meeting we discussed the establishment of a sub-committee. As regards a name, I suggest sub-committee on education disadvantage. The issues we are to consider are items 2 and 3 on the work programme, involving first, educational disadvantage at pre-school and primary level and the implementation of those policies and second, the policies of the Department of Education and Science in relation to the provision of education for young offenders and extremely disruptive children. That sub-committee will report to the main committee. Is that agreed? Agreed.

I discussed the number of the sub-committee informally with some Members, who suggested three deputies and two senators. The party representation will consist of two Members from Fianna Fáil, one from Fine Gael, one from Labour and one from the Progressive Democrats. Deputy Farrelly agreed to chair the committee. The other Members will be Deputy Pat Carey, Senator Ormonde, Deputy O’Shea and Senator Quill. Is that agreed? Agreed.

The quorum for the sub-committee will be three. The powers and functions of the main committee will be devolved to the sub-committee.

Deputy Farrelly: Is that five Members including the Chairman?

Chairman: Yes.

Deputy Pat Carey: The forum on early childhood education will convene shortly. It is important this committee will attend at some of the sessions - perhaps some Members of the sub-committee. Some of the sectoral groups I thought would attend will only be represented by their governing body. We may have to meet with the lower levels of those organisations at a later date. I am anxious to get some information on the operation of the forum.

Deputy Farrelly: It is important the sub-committee does not do all the work for all the committee. The same people cannot do all the work, as Members are going from one meeting to another. The workload must be shared and that may mean having two sub-committees.

Chairman: I take that point. Items 2 and 3 of our work programme are closely related so that is why I suggested we combine the two. There may be different views. Perhaps the sub-committee will submit a work programme to the main committee and highlight its priorities.

Deputy Pat Carey: I agree with Deputy Farrelly that there are so many committees that we will be run ragged and perhaps the quality of the work will be less than what we would like to stand over. On the other hand, there is a link between both items regarded as priority issues. Some mechanism can be found, perhaps by drawing up a work programme. It is imperative we proceed quickly as there is a great deal happening, including the Education Bill and the forum.

Senator Ormonde: The transition from primary onto second level is the problem. The time span is very important as we lead into the Education Bill.

What do the terms of reference of the subcommittee’s procedures involve? I am not clear about that. I know what I want to discuss at the subcommittee but I do not know how its procedures and terms of reference will operate.

Chairman: Is it agreed that items 2 and 3 of the work programme will be combined? Agreed.

The subcommittee shall have only those functions of the main committee which are set out in subparagraphs 2(a)(i) and (ii) of the Dáil and subparagraphs 1(a)(i) and (ii) of the Seanad of the main committee’s orders of reference and it shall have all powers of the main committee, namely those contained in Standing Orders 78(a)(i)(ii) and (iv)-(ix) of the Dáil and Standing Orders 62(a)(i)(ii) and (iv)-(ix) of the Seanad. The subcommittee shall have all powers other than the examination of strategy statements and matters referred by the Dáil under standing orders and the power to establish subcommittees.

Does the subcommittee wish to meet on the issue of the work programme?

Deputy Farrelly: What is the situation in regard to the availability of rooms for subcommittee meetings?

Clerk: The position is that G24 is generally available for meetings. It would be a suitable room in which the subcommittee could meet.

Deputy Farrelly: When is the room free?

Clerk: The room is not free at set times. It would be necessary for the subcommittee to book meetings in advance. It would be easier to book G24 than G2 or G5.

Deputy Farrelly: Can Members inform us of when other committees to which they were appointed are meeting? Will it be feasible to meet on a Wednesday or Thursday? We must attempt to facilitate Members who have been appointed to other committees.

Chairman: Would Members have a preference for meeting on a Wednesday or Thursday? I realise some Members are engaged in by-election duties but perhaps Deputy Farrelly could contact the clerk in regard to the availability of rooms.

I welcome Mr. John Dennehy, Secretary General of the Department of Education and Science and departmental officials, Mr. O’Brien and Mr. Murtagh. I call on Mr. Dennehy to make a short presentation after which we will have a questions and answers session.

Mr. Dennehy: I am very pleased to be here this evening to discuss the implementation of the Department’s literacy policy. In modern society, in spite of the massive changes brought about by information and communication technologies, print continues to be the dominant medium of communication. It is imperative, therefore, that all members of society be equipped with the literacy skills necessary to cope with the demands of modern living. Low or insufficient literacy skills have profound social and economic consequences for the individuals, families and communities concerned.

Improving the population’s literacy skills is a high priority of the Department of Education and Science. During the 1990s, national and international research has provided data on the literacy levels achieved by Irish students and adults and the analysis of the data has clear implications for a variety of policy domains. I will give a brief summary of the results of international surveys of reading literacy both in the adult population and in the formal education system and their implications for the implementation of effective education strategies. I understand that Dr. Mark Morgan, the author of the report on the Irish results of the recent international adult literacy survey has already briefed the committee so I do not propose to reiterate a detailed account of the results. However, I would like to discuss some points of detail which have implications for policy implementation.

The international adult literacy survey used complex methodologies and statistical techniques which enabled comparisons of the literacy performance of groups within and between countries to be made. Ireland had the second largest proportion at level 1, the lowest category of performance, with approximately 25 per cent of the population failing to achieve a score above the level 1 category. A number of developed countries, including the United States, Switzerland, Great Britain and New Zealand had a roughly similar proportion of adults at level 1.

It has been widely reported in the media that 25 per cent of Irish adults have serious literacy difficulties. Some newspapers carried reports which stated that 25 per cent of adults are unable to read medicine bottle labels. I think an explanatory note is warranted in order to describe more accurately the population encompassed by level 1 in the survey report. The methodology for the survey included the administration of a screening test which determined whether people would be asked to undertake the complete survey. If people failed the screening test, they were not asked to undertake the survey but they did supply information about age, income, education and other aspects of their lives for the background questionnaire. People who failed the screening test were allocated to level 1 on the literacy scale and constituted approximately half of the level 1 population. Such people can be regarded as having very poor literacy skills, equivalent to much lower than the literacy level of average primary school leavers. Some of the level 1 population, while able to complete all of the level 1 tasks, was unable to complete the required 80 per cent of level 2 tasks in order to be categorised at that level. Therefore, the population at level 1 comprises a group of people who have quite a wide range of literacy ability. Some, perhaps half, are very poor readers while others are able to read reasonably simple and clearly laid out material and would be expected to have sufficient literacy to meet the normal demands of everyday life.

Retention rates at second level have increased from 20 per cent in 1965 to approximately 64 per cent in 1985 and 77 per cent in 1995. Similarly, the rate of transfer from second level to third level has increased from 11 per cent in 1965 to 28 per cent in 1985 and 50 per cent in 1995.

The census of population taken in 1991 showed that at that time only 13 per cent of the adult population had a third level qualification and that almost 37 per cent of the population had not completed second level education. Thus, the participation rates in the education system likely to lead to high levels of literacy among the adult population are only now being reached. This improving level of involvement in education will undoubtedly impact positively on literacy standards in future, but it will be quite some time before education levels are such that the literacy potential of the majority of the population has been maximised.

Chairman: May I interrupt you?

Mr. Dennehy: You may, of course.

Chairman: The Deputies must attend the Dáil for a Vote. I would ask you to wait until we have finished.

Sitting suspended at 5.22 p.m. until 5.37 p.m.

Chairman: I ask Mr. Dennehy to continue.

Mr. Dennehy: I want to turn to research on standards in the formal school system. Recent international comparative research would suggest that the Irish education system is currently performing well, and that standards have improved considerably over the past 35 years.

Studies by McNamara published in the 1960s showed that at the end of their primary education Irish children were on average one year and seven months behind their counterparts in Britain in reading development. Trends in reading development monitored by Department of Education and Science surveys 1970-93 show that there was a significant improvement in reading standards in Ireland between 1970 and 1980. After that the referred trend levelled off. The results of the 1988 and 1993 surveys indicated that we maintained the 1980 level but did not significantly improve.

An international survey carried out in 1991 by the International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement showed that nine year old children were performing as well as or better than all but eight of 28 countries surveyed.

Irish nine year old children achieved a slightly higher score than a similar population in England and Wales surveyed using the IEA test in 1996. This is the first time that Irish children achieved a higher score than British children in a comparative survey of reading ability.

The Third International Maths and Science Report-TIMSS - published in 1997 showed that Irish students are performing significantly above the international average at the fourth grade, and at about the international average at the eight grade. Thus, the achievement trend in international comparative research has been positive in the past few decades and the most recent indications are that the trend is continuing in the right direction.

An area of concern is that it is estimated that approximately 8 per cent of students leave primary school with low levels of literacy. However, low levels of literacy are also found in other developed countries in about 8-10 per cent of the population. The surveys carried out at first and second levels in reading, mathematics and science all showed a decline in the international ranking of Irish children from the ages of nine to 14. In relation to reading, the ranking of Irish children fell from 12th of the 24 developed countries at the age of nine to 20th of the 24 developed countries at the age of 14. Similarly, the mathematics and science rankings fell from above the international average at fourth class in primary school to about the international average at second year post primary.

In dealing with literacy problems it is necessary to adopt a two pronged approach to intervention and remediation. We must direct our efforts to improving the literacy and numeracy skills of school leavers. At the same time, we It is intended to go beyond the existing programmes to must tackle existing literacy problems among adults who did not benefit from the education system the first time round. Within the primary and second level sectors of education, the Department has adopted a range of strategies aimed at supporting children who are experiencing educational disadvantage. The policy is designed to help these children stay on in school for as long as possible and, while they remain, to support them fully through a variety of mechanisms. Examples of this support include: the development of early start centres; the allocation of additional resources to schools in disadvantaged areas; the Breaking the Cycle initiative; the home-school community liaison scheme; curricular reforms to allow students to make choices relevant to their abilities and aptitudes; support for junior and senior centres for travellers; the free book scheme and alleviation of examination fees for necessitous pupils.

The Department also has in place an extensive system of remedial teaching to address the needs of children in ordinary national schools. At present, there are 1,242 posts at primary level which represents an increase of 295 posts over the 1992 level. Approximately 90 per cent of primary school children have access to a remedial teaching service. In addition, since 1992, an additional 98 ex-quota remedial posts have been allocated at post primary level, bringing the total number of ex-quota posts at that level to 350. A review of remedial education is currently being conducted. Data from the research is being processed and the final report should be available by June of this year. The results of the study will inform future developments in the area of remedial education.

The provision of a range of curriculum options which address the needs of children who would not benefit from participation in the traditional academically focused curriculum is also an important part of any plan to facilitate retention in the education system. To this end, the restructuring of the curriculum at second level is continuing. Included in the restructuring are the revision of syllabuses and the expansion of innovative programmes such as the junior cycle schools programme, the leaving certificate applied programme and the leaving certificate vocational programme.

In September 1996, the new junior certificate elementary programme was introduced to cater for a small number of students whose learning needs are not adequately met by the current junior certificate. The programme was introduced in 45 centres in the 1996/7 school year. It was extended to an additional 16 in 1997/8 and it is intended to extend it to a further 20 in 1998/9. A co-ordinator and training support service based in the City of Dublin VEC curriculum development unit is in place to assist schools to implement the new programme.

The leaving certificate applied programme operates in 160 schools at present involving approximately 5.500 students. The leaving certificate vocational programme operates in 428 schools at present involving approximately 23,000 students. A total of 28,000 pupils are following new senior cycle options. This is approximately 24.5 per cent of the leaving certificate cohort.

develop a range of interventions, starting at primary level, which will identify and assist children in danger of leaving school early. These include a national forum on early childhood education and an initiative for eight to 15 year olds. The national forum will provide an opportunity for all interested parties to put forward their views on the important topic of early childhood education. Following on from the forum and based on the widespread views expressed by the parties, it is intended to produce a White Paper on early childhood education which will set out future policy in this area.

The initiative for eight to 15 years olds is an innovative programme supported by the European Union and it is aimed at those children at risk of dropping out of the education system without having achieved any benefit from it. The initiative, which will operate across the boundary of primary and second level schools, will have three distinct strands. A research strand will concentrate on identifying children at risk and will involve a major study to will help schools and the Department put in place a tracking system which will ensure that children cannot drift out of the education system unnoticed. A project strand will involve a series of pilot projects which will maximise the educational participation of children aged eight to 15 at risk of leaving school early. This will include prevention and helping those who have already left to return to school. There will be an evaluation strand which will provide information on best practice. This will inform the further expansion of the initiative.

With regard to the extension of the psychological service, the committee will be aware that a planning group representative of the partners in education and the Departments of Education and Science, Health and Children and Finance has been established and is currently working on recommendations for the development and changes necessary to ensure an effective provision of psychological service in the education system. In particular, the group is preparing proposals for a national educational psychological service. The report is expected in the next three months. In the meantime, 15 additional educational psychologists are being employed in the immediate future in order to expand the psychological service to primary schools. This is being done, in the context of the demographic dividend, in agreement with the INTO and IMPACT.

I will now deal with adult education policy in the Department. The Department’s policy on literacy development is operated at present mainly through the adult literacy and community education scheme and, to a lesser extent, through Youthwatch, Youthreach and VTOS. A thorough analysis of the ALCES scheme in 1993 found that it was run by part-time literacy organisers and voluntary tutors, providing literacy or community education courses for about 19,000 adults at a cost of approximately £500,000 in 1991. The 1993 report on the ALCES scheme concluded that the immediate needs of people seeking literacy and community education courses are rather well served but that long-term planning was needed in respect of tutor training, support structures and co-ordination of literacy provision at local level. The report also concluded that “While the present schemes may be catering for the demand, the need in the population may be greater than is now being provided for.” It is clear that In conclusion, while the results of the adult literacy survey much more needs to be done in the area of adult literacy provision and a start has been made.

The 1997 provision for literacy and community education, which was distributed among the VECs, had been £2.065 million. Immediately after the publication of the report of the survey, an additional £250,000 was made available which brought the 1997 provision to £2.3 million. In the budget statement of the Minister for Finance in December 1997, the allocation for adult literacy was increased by £2 million to £4.065 million. This additional funding represents an increase of 75 per cent over the 1997 expenditure on literacy and is nearly double the initial 1997 provision, prior to the supplementary provision in October. It has been decided by the Minister of State at the Department of Education and Science, Deputy O’Dea, that the increase will be used entirely for literacy to the exclusion of community education.

The Irish Vocational Education Association and the National Adult Literacy Agency - NALA - have been asked for their observations on how to put the additional funds to most effective use. Possible uses include extending the period of literacy courses or providing more courses, perhaps using a different approach, such as classes based in the workplace or the family circle or providing them on a full-time basis or at weekends. VECs might be invited to identify literacy projects for which specific funding would be provided. Another possible use may be catering for more students in response to demand or intensifying the courses by providing equipment and materials, particularly in the area of information technology. Another approach would be improving assessment and evaluation to better serve individuals, undertaking publicity campaigns to encourage people to come to classes who have previously been reluctant to do so or the provision of suitable premises and/or the engaging of additional professional literacy staff and training them. There is reported to be a need for more formal accreditation of qualifications for trainers and tutors as standards vary enormously at present.

There are other initiatives which are known to have beneficial results. For example, where parents have literacy difficulties researchers found that there is a 40 per cent chance that their children will also have literacy difficulties, because they come to school with a less developed state of readiness to learn to read. It is very important that this intergenerational cycle of illiteracy is broken. One of the most effective ways to do this is through family literacy projects, where a literacy tutor works with one or both parents and helps them to help their children with reading. The parents own literacy skills are also developed through this approach and it has been found to be one of the most successful ways of achieving sustained involvement in literacy tuition. Research from the Basic Skills Unit in the UK and from the US, where there are federally funded family literacy programmes, has shown that this approach has a good success rate.

The Department has had initial contacts with the Department of Education Northern Ireland with a view to co-operating with the Northern Ireland authorities in setting up a cross-Border literacy project under the auspices of the Peace and Reconciliation Fund. We hope to have further discussions on a firm proposal for a project in the very near future.

were disappointing one of the more reassuring findings was that the report showed a considerable improvement in literacy standards from one generation to the next and that the trend over time in literacy standards was positive. However, we cannot afford to be complacent about literacy standards. The main conclusion for the Department of Education and Science is that there is a significant literacy problem among Irish adults which must be addressed by effective policy measures.

Until now policy development in adult education has been limited and reflects the low level of resources devoted to adult education. It is clear that in order to foster better adult education services a policy framework is essential. The forthcoming Green Paper on adult education will provide this essential framework. Formulation of an overall policy for adult education will address the need for a broader range of courses than are currently available, especially in the literacy area of basic education. It will outline a more focused role for the various providers, which include the VECs, FÁS, community and comprehensive schools and some secondary schools. It will co-ordinate, integrate and provide a coherent structure for the programmes on offer by education and training agencies. It will improve co-operation between employers and providers in the identification of needs and in devising systems of delivery compatible with the needs of employers and learners. Each policy will be developed in order to address issues such as training and qualifications of education providers, a modular structure for courses and the role of various agencies and service providers at national level.

I have attempted to outline our serious concern at the problems revealed by the international literacy survey and some strategies to combat the problems.

Chairman: We discussed with Dr. Morgan the table on page 43 of the report which indicated Ireland and Poland at the bottom of the league. He concluded that there were other surveys in which Ireland compares more favourably with Britain and Northern Ireland. How many surveys have been done on adult literacy and what might explain the disparities?

Mr. Murtagh: The survey to which Dr. Morgan was referring was the British based part of the same international adult literacy survey. Those results were not available when the Irish survey was published - they were only published in late December/early January. The surveys of the Northern Ireland sample have also been published since then. The picture given in those surveys is that there is no statistically significant difference between the results of the Irish survey and the results of the UK mainland or Northern Ireland surveys in terms of the number of people at level one on the survey. There are some differences at levels four or five. There have been no other international surveys of adult literacy carried out in Ireland apart from that which we have been discussing.

Senator O’Toole: I thank the departmental team for giving us broad and important information. The information which surfaced in the media last September and October was unfortunate for our image abroad. It is important to note the facts as made clear today. The secretary general’s notes might be circulated if possible.

Our adult literacy levels are on a par with the UK, Sweden and some other countries. There has been an improvement in literacy standards from the 1960s through the 1980s and that is being maintained. Am I right in saying that nine year olds have a literacy level higher than their UK counterparts? We are above average in maths and reading at primary level in OECD terms and we are maintaining an improvement in science, which is informally in the curriculum.

I emphasise those elements because it suits me to do so. There is also a problem which we cannot ignore in that 8 per cent of children leave primary school with low levels of literacy. As a teacher I think that is a huge number of children and I am sure the departmental team agrees. I do not wish to have a go at the Department but it would be worth noting the number of primary schools which do not have access to remedial teachers. If 8 per cent leave with literacy problems that means that there is also a certain percentage operating below average. With the proper resources to deal with the 8 per cent the figure might be reduced to 2.5 per cent. That there are so many leaving primary school with literacy problems drags down the general average and, therefore, it is an extraordinary achievement to be above average despite the 8 per cent figure. How does that figure of 8 per cent compare with other OECD countries? What are the comparative percentages for other European or OECD countries? It would be useful to have that comparison.

Could a tracking system for pupils entering the system be facilitated with the movement towards the use of information technology in schools? It seems that we could look to an electronic enrolment of pupils at primary school level which would make tracking much easier for everyone involved. The secretary general did not refer to adult education officers. How do they fit into the system? Have they the same rights and status as every other teacher in the system?

I will not go on at length but simply restate a couple of points. Levels of literacy are high and we are beginning to deal with the problem at primary level. I hope post primary level will be dealt with and adult literacy will not go away until we make sure the figure of 9 per cent will be reduced to 2 per cent.

Mr. Dennehy: The adult literacy problem will probably never go away. The information at our disposal indicates the figure of 8 per cent is about average across OECD countries. The band stretches from 8 to ten per cent. The Senator referred to the number of schools that currently do not have access to a remedial teacher. The number involved is 741 and the Minister, in the context of the staffing needs of schools for the coming year, is conscious of the need to do whatever can be done to try and ensure as many as those schools as possible have access.

It will not be possible this year to provide all with remedial assistance, but in addition to providing remedial teachers to a number of those schools, we must look at more innovative ways of providing remedial assistance because we will end up with remedial teachers so thinly spread on the ground trying to service a huge number of school that they would spend more time travelling than teaching. We will be in a position in the near future to discuss with the INTO and others the different approaches that will assist schools to buy in remedial assistance rather than providing them with a remedial teacher. The intention

When Deputy Martin became Minister he expressed great horror at the fact that we did not have a tracking system for pupils at primary level and he publicly stated this on a number of occasions. As part of the 8-15 years early leavers project announced in the past fortnight we will immediately establish a pilot tracking system in the context of IT 2000. The equipment will be in schools with a view to setting up a national pupil database at primary level to try and ensure when a pupil drops of the system, it will be picked up immediately.

Mr. O’Brien: There is at least one adult education officer in every VEC scheme. They operate under and are employed by VECs, but are responsible for adult education in the entire VEC area, including all second level schools, for example. They are qualified teachers recruited from the teaching force and have the same salaries and conditions as teachers. They are very much part of the education sector.

In the context of PCW discussions with that group, the Department is looking at changing their conditions to those of other full-time officers taking account of the fact they would have a wider remit than teaching. That is under discussion but they are central to the adult education sector.

Deputy Farrelly: I welcome Mr. Dennehy and his staff. He said they had not decided what way this will work out. I have spoken to tutors and teachers in this area who said the time and funding available was not sufficient. On that basis, extension of courses should be a priority as well as catering for more students. If that occurs, there will then be a need for more tutors and training. That has been the case on the ground for a number of years.

I do not know how more people can be attracted. Perhaps, it can only be done through word of mouth on the ground where people may know other people in a similar position, especially in rural areas. In the event of the Department not deciding where this will happen, will comments of Members of this committee and others be taken on board?

Deputy P. Carey: I welcome Mr. Dennehy and his team. There are two aspects to the issue, one of which is preventative and needs to be focused on at primary level. There is also a curative aspect, dealing with the cadre of people who are now adults and who left school with low literacy and numeracy skills.

Senator O’Toole referred to the need to deploy further resources to primary schools. Has much thought been given to enhancing the library provision in schools because the grant available to stock libraries in primary schools is laughable? It is approximately £1 per pupil. Primary and second level schools organise book fairs, etc., to try and provide as many books as possible for their students. Mr. Dennehy stated the print media is still extremely important in his opening remarks. What is the Department’s view on enhancing libraries at primary level? An out centre of Ballyfermot library is based in Kylemore College and provides a great service to the school but I know of no other post primary school where such a service operates. We need to invest significantly in such materials. this year is to provide as many remedial teachers as possible.

I have had the pleasure and honour over the past few years of presenting word power awards to students in Finglas. I was embarrassed on a number of occasions when former students of mine who had not long left the system came up to receive basic literacy awards. It brought home the fact that we still have substantial numbers of students leaving school with inadequate skill levels.

How does one approach the issue? Contrary to other people, I believe the community education approach is important. There is heightened awareness of the need to return to the education system and Deputy Farrelly asked how does one attract people. A softly, softly approach should be used by bringing people in for other hobby related courses and then get them to a stage where they get involved in literacy training programmes. In that way one creates an ethos where involvement in literacy classes is not a stigma. It is a huge step for any adult to admit he cannot read or write and many people go through life confounding themselves that they can.

What thought has been given to expanding the role of literary organisers? Those in Dublin are extremely effective because they recruit voluntary tutors who in turn can provide much more training. That multiplier effect is important. I do not know how much professional input can be given because it drains resources and is expensive but in my part of Dublin there is an extremely gifted literacy organiser who is good at encouraging people to become involved in training, classes, etc. I would like to see that aspect developed.

There is a lack of suitable materials here - they are generally imported from the UK. Patricia Scanlon produced an excellent book in conjunction with the VEC and the Dublin public libraries last year and it became a best seller because it had a good story told in adult language. The book was sold in Eason, Waterstones and other shops and I wish there were other initiatives like that to bring people in from the margins and encourage participation in classes. Does the Department see a way to enable organisations like the VECs or public libraries to produce publications of this type and to publish more appropriate materials?

Mr. Dennehy: We take Deputy Farrelly’s points on board and thank him for his information. We welcome a submission from him or the committee on how we are proceeding in this area. The Minister of State, Deputy O’Dea, intends to publish in the not too distant future the Green Paper on all aspects of adult education, including adult literacy. The purpose of that Green Paper is to stimulate extensive debate across the country and to review all the services available at present. During the process, the Minister also intends to set up an expert group on learning difficulties and there will be further opportunities to make an input there.

A Member: Would you have to take out litigation?

Mr. Dennehy: A mere civil servant could not comment on that.

Chairman: The Minister of State is responsible for policy, not the Secretary General.

Mr. Dennehy: Both Deputies mentioned attracting and encouraging more people, which is difficult because many people with literacy problems go through life either hiding it or being unaware of the extent of the problems. The family literacy schemes I mentioned have been in use in other countries and in many primary schools. When I was principal of a school we had a paired reading project involving parents with reading difficulties, who came in and worked with their children with the intention of assisting the children for the future. That is one method we are planning for the future. The other way is through employers and trade unions and we intend to talk to both groups on this matter.

The book library scheme was 50 pence per pupil a couple of years ago but it stands at £2.15 per pupil. It is still a small amount. As Deputy Carey rightly said, the big difficulty in many cases is that the very children with reading difficulties do not have books at home or if they do they do not have suitable books. A number of schools have a mini-branch of the local library within the school, which works well with the assistance of the chief librarian and local librarian. It happens in Dublin in particular but also occurs throughout the country and is something we encourage. A survey of the school library service is being conducted at present by the Library Association of Ireland in conjunction with the Department. The survey covers availability of books and the library service to schools. We hope this will help us for the future. We will also continue to press for further resources in that area to enable us to further improve that rather small grant.

The lack of suitable books is a problem and as has been said, because of the scale of the operation, many of the books considered suitable are produced outside the country but I think things are improving. For instance, high quality books for schools are being produced in Irish by An Gúm and matters have improved considerably in that regard in recent years. We have a review group in the Department looking at school books and reading material and we are in contact with the Irish book publishers in that regard. Any advice from this committee or its Members would be welcomed.

Deputy Naughten: The additional £2 million in this year’s budget is being exclusively concentrated on literacy. A number of people, even from the constituency of Deputies at this meeting, have criticised this decision because the report highlights that people often over-estimate their reading abilities - this is discovered when they are tested. The only way to get these people into the education system is to encourage them through another course, such as flower arranging, and then get them to do literacy courses. It is wrong to concentrate the money on literacy because other courses which encourage people into the system are losing out as a result. That means we are not reaching the people who really need help, those who do not know how poor their literacy abilities are. There is a low level of participation in adult education anyway.

It is clear that many people have literacy difficulties-some 25 per cent of people are at level one, the basic level of literacy. Has Mr. Dennehy been in discussion with other Government Departments about drawing up application forms? The Department of Social, Community and Family Affairs has lots of forms and many of those issued by the Department of Agriculture and Food are hard to comprehend. Many people go to the clinics of Deputies and Senators to ask them to fill in forms which they are unable to fill. Have there been results from any contact with other Departments to make application forms easier to understand?

Senator Ormonde: I thank Mr. Dennehy and his team for a comprehensive presentation. There are new methods of restructuring education and improving the level of adult literacy. We must look at all levels of our education system to do this.

I am familiar with second level and the new LCAP and LCVP programmes which are very rewarding. They do not deal with literacy but with students who at age 14 years have a reading age of 10 or 11 years. We are talking about those entering second level with a reading age of seven or eight years. This is where the education system comes unstuck. If we do not break the cycle we will never improve the literacy of the population.

Students aged 14 and 15 years cannot be contained in a classroom. What do we do with them? They have a very low IQ and come from a background of huge educational deprivation. There should be more emphasis on this problem. We need more remedial teachers, although they are not the answer. The problem is with those students who will come into the system and not return because they have no self-esteem. They do not have the knowledge and their parents do not have any educational motivation. The environment is against that age group. We can overcome remedial problems. The problem is with those aged 14 or 15 years with a reading age of seven. When they are disruptive in school, the parents are called out and we discover they also have a literacy problem.

There are new programmes such as home-school liaison, which is a good idea and reaches out to the population. Employers, businesses and the non-educational sector should become more involved because they employ these people in local factories. They should be able to liaise with the educational sector and introduce programmes to help those with problems. Teachers should be sent to factories or they can go to a school. They will not attend classes in the evening, but perhaps at midday when younger children are in primary school. If parents recognise something is being done, it will work the other way. The two must go in hand in hand. Employers must be involved.

Senator Coogan: Deputy Pat Carey and Senator O’Toole mentioned the tracking system. The database of such a tracking system should be so detailed that a warning light will indicate a student at risk. This is a preventative aspect. I am curious about the curative aspect. I have had a little experience of literacy programmes which were mainly of a voluntary nature. Those attending were aged 25 years and upwards. From that age down, there was a void. How would one operate an intervention programme catering for that age group? They still have the same problems as when they left school and it is easier to get them back into the system than when they mature.

There is an emphasis on adult literacy while numeracy seems to be taking second place. Is there a parallel intervention programme for numeracy?

Deputy McGrath: I welcome Mr. Dennehy and his team. He mentioned his concern about eight per cent of pupils leaving primary school with low literacy levels. The alarm bells start to ring when we put that in context. It means that 40,000 in the primary school system will leave with low literacy levels, which translates as about 5,000 of children leaving primary school this year.

Senator O’Toole mentioned the role of remedial teaching in primary schools and 471 schools are still without a remedial teacher. How effective is remedial teaching? Schools with full-time remedial teachers may be doing a good job. However, what effect has a remedial teacher in a rural school when he or she is attending for a day or a half-day every week? Is that service doing any good for children? Has any research been done on the effectiveness of the remedial service, particularly in small schools where children get additional help of an hour or half an hour a week? Unless they get half an hour a day, every day, it is ineffective.

Deputy O’Shea: Does the eight per cent figure include those leaving special classes in primary schools and special schools? Is there any worthwhile research on what causes eight per cent to leave with low literacy skills? Obviously it varies from area to area and disadvantage and other factors may have an effect. Has any objective, qualitative work been done in this area? Is there an objective assessment of the level of success of the adult literacy scheme, as conducted through Youthreach and VTOS? Is there any objective research on the success rate of remediation at first and second levels and provisions for disadvantage?

Mr. Dennehy said there is great variation between the standard of voluntary tutors in the adult literacy scheme. Has the Department any plans to improve standards? How would Mr. Dennehy describe the present provision for adult education and literacy? Is it adequate, inadequate, fair or poor?

Deputy Hanafin: Dr. Morgan stated that more women than men were anxious to participate in adult education. I am not sure whether that is because they are more willing to admit they have a problem or whether they are taking on a role in helping their own children. I am sorry that Deputy Naughten has left because I hope he knows more about his own constituency than he purports to know about mine in the area of adult education. As recently as last week, the Southside Partnership and the Women’s Network were thrilled to receive extra money from the VEC. In light of the fact that women are anxious to participate in adult education, it is very important that money is given to these kinds of groups. Does the 8 per cent figure referred to break down evenly between boys and girls or is there a gender imbalance in literacy rates?

Deputy Keaveney: I welcome Mr. Dennehy. I have seen electronic tracking happen in other areas and if we are going to introduce it here, we also need to provide the necessary backing for it. We are informed that 87 per cent of children have access to remedial attention because one remedial teacher covers five schools with a combined enrolment of in the region of 1,200 children. We are all aware that figures and facts can be misleading. Funding causes many difficulties for people returning to education. People may have to leave employment and must also consider their families. I am interested in the cross-Border family literacy development. I suggest that the situation in Strathboyle be examined where a house was purchased in an estate in which a couple of teachers ran courses. Residents of the estate can attend courses during the day and can bring their children with them. The children are looked after downstairs while GCSE courses or courses in basket weaving and so on go on upstairs. I am not sure to what degree, if any, a similar scheme operates here but large communities in my constituency would love to have access to one.

The co-ordination of school books is important and the Department is going down the right road if it is bringing the county librarians on board in this area. Many people will sell books at competitive prices but their quality might not be up to standard.

Deputy Naughten referred to people’s inability to fill in forms for headage payments. Many of my own constituents have told me they are unable to receive payments as they filled forms incorrectly. When questioned, they admit someone else filled in the forms for them as they are unable to read or write. This is an issue which should be given interdepartmental consideration.

I am not sure how the remedial situation will work out unless a remedial teacher is appointed to every single school. That would necessitate a large number of teachers being employed and bigger schools would require more than one. I have taught in schools where children with a severe disadvantage has a person assigned to follow them around for the entire day. Children with slight disadvantages received computers so that if they experienced difficulties with spelling and so on, they could teach themselves. A severe injection of funding would be required to bring some of our schools up to that standard but those measures were very effective. The fact that students were allocated to track disadvantaged students not only helped the students themselves but also helped the three or four weak students who tended to sit beside them because they knew they would get help.

On the issue of innovative early intervention measures, the fact that 8 per cent of children are leaving primary schools is an indication that there are problems in this area.

I do not know whether those problems are caused by the children’s home environments, their teachers or other factors. I would never blame any one particular factor as I know many factors combine to cause problems.

In their early education, children’s co-ordination, rhythm and language is developing. In my training to become a music teacher, it was emphasised that language development, co-ordination and rhythm at an early age is assisted by music. I would like to see something constructive being done here in this regard. I do not suggest it would solve all of the problems but it may have a favourable influence on them. Music therapy is usually used for people with very severe difficulties. What level of music therapy is used in Ireland? Perhaps it would be in the nature of a remedial resource in certain circumstances. I would like to heighten the awareness of the subject at primary and pre-primary school level.

Chairman: Many questions have been asked, perhaps

Mr. Dennehy: We will probably not be able to answer all of the questions individually but we will cover as many as possible. We will gladly forward any other information Members require.

Many Members made reference to forms and I can inform them that all Government Departments are considering that issue at the moment. That is being done in the context of the Strategic Management Initiative. Prior to Christmas, all Departments were obliged to publish a customer services strategy document. In this context Departments were asked to address issues such as answering telephones, replying to letters and other measures used to make life easier for their customers. A major issue identified by both departmental staff and customers was the need to make forms more accessible and easier to read and complete. Departments are attempting to make forms more straightforward and are assessing whether the level of information requested is absolutely necessary or essential in all cases.

Senator Ormonde spoke about the LCAP, the LCVP and the Junior Certificate Elementary Programme. These programmes aim to cater for students not catered for by the normal education system in order to prevent them dropping out of it. If students have dropped out, the programmes aim to encourage them back in to follow programmes which are not the normal academic type and which place an emphasis on music, the visual arts and a range of other subject areas.

The home-school liaison scheme is also very important and the Minister has recently stated his wish to increase the number of home-school liaison teachers at both primary and second level with a view to creating the strongest possible links between home and school. The Senator also inquired about the possibility of employers becoming more involved in education. The Department is, in fact, doing that and has had a number of discussions with representatives of IBEC with a view to encouraging local businesses and industries to become more involved with pupils during school time.

There are quite a number of projects in schools in disadvantaged areas - I can think of several around Dublin - where students spend a week or a fortnight per year working in industry. There is a close link between the two. We are also involved in discussions with employers in relation to their taking on some responsibility for assisting people with low literacy skills who might require those skills for job promotion. People often only become aware of this when they are seeking promotion and need to fill in a form or read manuals in preparation for an interview.

I take the view that has been put forward by a number of people regarding the importance of establishing a database which is sensitive enough to pick up pupils as they drop out. In addition to having the database, the 8 to 15 year old programme will also examine innovative ways of encouraging people back into education. It will be aimed mainly at pupils in the 8 to 15 age bracket who either have dropped out or are in danger of doing so.

Deputy McGrath highlighted the 8 per cent figure, but I would emphasise that figure is not unique to this country-quite the opposite, in fact. However, I am not being complacent about it and I would wish to make every effort to reduce it as far as possible. In that context, Deputy Mr. Dennehy and his officials could respond to them.

McGrath also asked how effective is the remedial service we provide. We are not 100 per cent sure but we hope we will have answers towards the end of the summer. Our Department’s inspectors and the Education Research Centre, working with the partners at primary level, have been involved in an extensive review of remedial services in schools over the last 18 months. Because they dealt with this matter in more depth than they had originally intended, their report will come to us six months later than we had hoped. The report will help us to address the quality of the remedial service which is provided at the moment. It will also help us to examine whether or not we should consider redeploying some remedial teachers in large city areas where pupil numbers have plummeted.

A number of people mentioned the fact that in some cases pupils only have access to a remedial teacher once or twice a week. We regard the remedial service as part of a strategy involving all teachers in a school, particularly involving the class teachers, to assist pupils who are experiencing some reading difficulty. The Department and school principals are encouraging remedial teachers to work increasingly with staff and to do training with them on the best techniques and approaches to use with children who are experiencing some difficulty. The remedial teacher who visits a school should work out a programme with the class teacher so that there is no gap between that visit and the next one. To the best of our ability within the limit of the resources available, we want to make more time available for remedial teachers to spend with individual pupils.

Deputy O’Shea raised a number of questions relating to an objective evaluation of Youthreach and VTOS. My colleague may deal with those in a few minutes, because I am not fully conversant with them. If we do not have the information we will certainly provide it later for the Committee.

We have carried out an extensive review of remedial teaching and will continue to do so. A number of disadvantage programmes have been reviewed. The home-school links programme has been thoroughly reviewed and we are currently reviewing the disadvantage schemes at two levels. We are carrying out an in depth review of the Breaking the Cycle initiative, involving the Education Research Centre and the Department. It will be quite a protracted review but we will receive interim reports at the end of each year. The review itself will take five years. It is long drawn out with fairly extensive terms of reference.

The Department has begun a major internal review of the plethora of disadvantaged schemes that exist across the primary and post-primary level, to see if the resources are being used to best advantage. As a result of the information we gain from that review, we hope to change the emphasis on how we attempt to tackle disadvantage.

In the context of the internal review, we will also be working with our school inspectors and we will have frequent meetings with Dr. Tom Kellaghan of the Education Research Centre and others who can inform our review as it progresses.

In response to Deputy Hanafin’s question, three boys for every one girl experience the kind of difficulties we mentioned. It is roughly a 3:1 male-female ratio. Others may have more detail, but that would be the proportion.

In relation to the tracking system Deputy Keaveney mentioned. we will provide the tracking as well as the backing. The tracking system would not have been possible a number of years ago because a database needs to be set up in each school to do it effectively. With the promise that by September, but probably earlier, every primary school will have at least one computer - and probably more - linked to the Internet, we will be in a position to make real use of those for tracking in addition to a multitude of other purposes.

In relation to music, I share Deputies’ views that the more we involve the arts in schools the better for every child’s education, but particularly for those children who are experiencing difficulty.

I agree with everyone who said we need more remedial teachers. It is the Minister’s intention, within whatever resources are available, to make every effort to provide more remedial teachers for schools.

Deputy Hanafin: The ratio of three boys to one girl is an astounding figure. Is there any difference between co-ed and single sex schools, or does that figure apply across the board?

Mr. Dennehy: To my knowledge, there is no difference between them. That is right across the board.

Senator Ormonde: I would have liked Mr. Dennehy to deal with the issue of students who are so weak that they cannot be contained in a classroom structure. Is the policy one of trying to place them in a special facility or allocating a resource teacher to that school? There are many schools like that and I speak from experience. What is the Department doing in relation to the student with a reading age group of 7 to 8, who cannot be contained in the classroom? That is the real problem in my view. There is a percentage of those coming from many of the disadvantaged primary schools, to which I do not want to refer specifically by name.

Mr. Dennehy: There are a number of strategies being used at present for that particular type of pupil. Certainly, within the Breaking the Cycle schools, where there would be a proportion of the children which the Senator described, the small pupil/teacher ratio of 15:1, which exists in the junior end of those schools up to and including second class, is being examined. We would be reviewing that ratio thoroughly to see whether or not that actually works. There are two views on how effective are the smaller numbers when one reaches about 20:1.

Resource teachers are being employed by schools or schools are being given sanction to appoint them as resources permit. In schools where resource teachers are employed it has made a huge difference in dealing with pupils. Individual schools apply different strategies to try to deal with such children. If one of those pupils has dropped out of school, is not attending school or is not being accepted by a school, every effort is made to get the school to make some kind of arrangement with other schools. Where that fails, we would ask a Department inspector to look at it and see what can be done. There would be extreme cases where the Department and the schools would experience great difficulty in placing one of those students.

Senator Coogan: Mr. Dennehy did not respond to one of my questions. It related to the junior relationship which numeracy has to literacy intervention. Is it intended to have greater intervention on numeracy?

Mr. Dennehy: It would be the Department’s intention that where possible remedial teachers should deal with numeracy problems. Indeed, while remedial teachers deal mainly with literacy problems, many of them would also deal with numeracy problems. We would be advising teachers more and more that in addition to dealing with literacy problems, they would also deal with numeracy problems. Without question, the greater emphasis is on dealing with literacy problems.

Mr. O’Brien: There was a question about the efficacy of VTOS and Youthreach. In the case of VTOS, there was an evaluation carried out some years ago by a group of consultants who found quite favourably in support of VTOS. We know from our statistics that about two thirds of those who completed the two year VTOS in 1995 - and three quarters in 1996 - went on either to further study or employment. The outcomes of VTOS generally are regarded as being quite good.

Similarly, there was an evaluation carried out on the Youthreach programme by the ESF programme evaluation unit in 1996. It broadly stated that the results were good. It made a number of recommendations, however, as to how it might be improved. Those matters are being addressed now in the extension of the Youthreach programme.

There was also some reference earlier to the difficulty in getting at those between the ages of 18 and 25, and that is probably a greater problem than getting at people generally.

Interestingly, it has come to the attention of the Department, for example, that FÁS finds there are literacy problems when it is offering training courses to people in that age bracket. FÁS is referring such people to the National Adult Literacy Agency or to the VECs in order that they might improve their literacy skills. The same is true of people presenting for VTOS, so that we can now produce foundation VTOS courses to deal with the problems of literacy and, indeed, numeracy.

Chairman: I thank Mr. Dennehy, Mr. O’Brien and Mr. Murtagh for their presentation.

Before I move on to any other business, at the last meeting we decided to invite the Minister of State to outline the Government’s policy on adult education and literacy. The Minister was not available then, but I would suggest that we invite him to attend at the next meeting, which will not be until 31 March because of St. Patrick’s Day.

Deputy Hanafin: If a green paper is to be published on the matter, surely that will initiate Government policy. Maybe that would be the time to invite the Minister. We heard an excellent presentation here today. I wonder what additional information the Minister will be able to give us when there is a green paper coming shortly.

Chairman: The position is that the Minister and not the Secretary General is responsible for the policy, as I said earlier.

Deputy Hanafin: In the context of policy, perhaps the

Mr. Dennehy: The hope is that there will be a green paper well before the Summer.

Chairman: In view of the fact that we asked the Minister to come here today, I do not want to do any discourtesy to the man. I would suggest that we invite him to attend the next meeting. Is that agreed? Agreed.

Deputy Hanafin: A starting time of 5 p.m. is very difficult. I appreciate there is a demand on rooms, but it is difficult to ask visitors to attend or to stay late. There are members of this committee who for various reasons must eat between 6 p.m. and 6.30 p.m. for health reasons. I ask that the Whips get together in consultation with you, Chairman, and the Clerk to the Committee to have the meetings start earlier.

Secretary General can tell us when we might expect the green paper?

Chairman: This time has been circulated by the Whips. All we can do is consult the Whips. We can seek an earlier starting time, if not a different day. This room is booked every Tuesday. We alternate with the enterprise committee.

Deputy Hanafin: What is stopping us from meeting at 4.30 p.m. rather than 5 p.m.?

Chairman: When we arrived here this evening, this room was being used. It is a problem. I will take it up with the Whips. I cannot guarantee I will be successful.

The Joint Committee adjourned at 7 p.m.

* substitute for Senator Labhrás Ó Murchú

** substitute for Senator Fintan Coogan for part of meeting