Vol. 399 No. 8
16 Mr. R. Bruton asked the Minister for Education whether she is aware of a recent survey that shows that the level of illiteracy among children leaving the primary cycle has dramatically increased in recent years; and if she will make a statement on the matter.
55 Mr. Rabbitte asked the Minister for Education if her attention has been drawn to a recent survey undertaken by parents of children in vocational schools and community colleges, which showed that pupils were increasingly coming into second level schools unable to read or write properly; the steps she intends to take to address this problem; and if she will make a statement on the matter.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 16 and 55 together.
I am not aware that any organisation other than the Department of Education have carried out a national survey of reading attainment in recent years, nor am I aware of any evidence to support the Deputy's assertion that illiteracy among children leaving the primary cycle has increased in recent years.
National surveys of English reading have been conducted by the professional staff of my Department since 1972. The most recent survey which was conducted in May-June 1988 involved a national sample of fifth class and 11 year old pupils. The results of the 1988 survey showed that no significant change in average levels of reading attainment had taken place since 1980. Comparison between the 1988 surevy and a survey which was carried out in 1972 indicated that reading standards of primary cycle pupils improved by approximately eight months in terms of reading age during the intervening period.
The national surveys suggest, therefore, that there has been some improvements since the early seventies. However, that is not to say that I am fully satisfied with the level of improvement that has taken place. I am at present examining the report of the Primary Curriculum Review Body which made recommendations on this matter and I would not wish to make a statement until this examination is fully completed. Many recommendations were put forward in that report and a revision of the English programme was recommended taking into account from (a) to (k) under the heading of curriculum content.
Would the Minister not agree that a national survey can seriously conceal problems that may occur in particular sectors? Would she not also agree that the survey to which the question refers indicates that there is a particular problem? Would the Minister not agree that there have been recent surveys in parts of Dublin city that showed that up to 10 per cent of children were emerging from primary cycle without basic functional literacy? I would ask the Minister, therefore, to introduce something other than a national survey to identify these problem areas. Can the Minister indicate what policy will resolve the problems?
We all have our difficulties with national surveys from time to time, and yet they are a reliable guide in a national sense. I take the point that there could well be pockets where the problem is much bigger than it appears from a national survey, but to do surveys on individual areas all over the country would be a difficult task. I will, however, ask the people responsible in my Department for engaging people to do surveys to look at what the Deputy has said to see if it would be feasible.
I am not satisfied with the levels of reading skills and neither were the Primary Curriculum Review Body. They put forward ideas on how we could tackle the issue and we will be implementing their recommendations in the autumn on a phased basis. I will, however, have the question of a more localised survey looked at.
Would the Minister not agree that it is not just a matter of curriculum review but of getting resources into particular areas whose needs are not being met by the existing schemes? Would the Minister not agree that the survey showing an increase in the problem proves that what is in place now is not meeting those needs?
I said that national surveys had not shown that. It was the Deputy who put forward surveys of which he knows I have not had the opportunity to study them.
The second point the Deputy made about targeting disadvantaged areas, for want of a better word, is a very obvious one. The Deputy suggests we should provide special resources there. In the past year we have been able to do that. There is never enough done in education and there is always so much more that could be done. It is not just the curriculum, although that is part of it. Targeting is another area and putting more resources in, but here there are two problems; the need for overall resources and the need to target particular areas.
The survey that has taken place does not give causes, but surely the Minister would agree that the run down in the school psychological services, remedial teaching, counselling and class sizes must have been a major cause of the increasing problem. Would she agree that this is now seen in the vocational sector in particular, because the vocational system is non-selective it takes everybody? Therefore what are known as the problem children are coming in in greater numbers. Has the Minister any plans for expanding the whole system of remedial teaching right into the vocational sector?
The question on the Order Paper related to primary schools but I do not mind addressing the whole problem. There never was a school psychological service for primary schools. This is the first time it has been initiated in part of the Deputy's own constitutency as a pilot project for three years. Indeed, it is something that should have been introduced in schools a long time ago.
The second question was in regard to vocational education and talks are at present going on between my Department, post-primary unions and interested parties with a view to getting more remedial teachers into post-primary schools.
The Minister is saying there was no school psychological service. There was.
There was not. This year we initiated a pilot scheme for school psychological services at primary schools. There was none up to now. There was a recommendation since 1973 that there be one.
With regard to the literacy and numeracy problems that we are discussing the Minister has placed resources in disadvantaged areas. I want to take every opportunity to impress on the Minister that the disadvantaged students are not always in disadvantaged areas. In rural schools which are below a particular size there is no service available for remedial students. That problem is part of the reason the Minister must consider syllabi and that kind of thing when they come on to post-primary education because once they pass a particular age they find it impossible to get over the disadvantage that has not been tackled in time. I would appeal to the Minister again to use the resources which are becoming more available to her and which do not cause extra expenditure, such as, the fact that numbers in schools are dropping, to make remedial services available on a piecemeal part-time basis in national schools in rural areas. If the Minister did that she would be improving this whole area and dealing with disadvantaged students rather than just disadvantaged areas.
I accept that disadvantage straddles urban and rural areas. The matter Deputy Cotter addressed in the second part of his question was really one of targeting again. We will look at the question of resources and I will certainly look at the position of rural schools.
