
26 February 2016
Education
Report Card
by Joe O’Hr
Professor of Education and
Head of Education Studies in DCU
T
he Programme for Government 2011-
2016 set out a range of quite
challenging targets in Education. In
essence it sought to re-shape provi-
sion in a number of key areas while at
the same time ensuring continuity with the core
strengths of the system. This was always going
to be a difficult balance and, as was to be
expected, the record is a mixed one.
At the most basic level – that of investment
in education – the record is quite good. Prom-
ises made to maintain funding for the core
system, to prioritise building and to keep key
metrics such as staffing, pupil teacher ratios
and other key areas such as ICT infrastructure
were for the most part kept.
Another exception to this has been the
Higher Education sector which has seen budg-
ets reduced across all areas and a failure to
meaningfully address the thorny issue of stu-
dent contributions. This latter point has been
particularly contentious.
While the Programme for Government and its
annual reviews are silent on fees the failure to
address the issue of who pays for Higher Edu-
cation has been marked. Current students face
a controversial ‘Registration’ fee which stands
at €3,000 (around half the cost to the state of
providing a college place), after being increased
by €250 in successive Budgets despite pre-
election commitments to freeze it at 2011
levels.
The recent ‘Cassells Report’ proposes loan
repayments for college tuition, which would be
paid back over 15 years at €25/week, once a
student is earning a certain level of income.
Irrespective of the final balance between
student contributions and State funding arrived
at there is an urgent need to find a resourcing
model that works for a sector that is under
increasing pressure.
At a broader systems level, the Programme
recognised the need for significant change. The
‘PISA shock’ resulting from our precipitous
decline in the 2009 tracking surveys in key
areas such as literacy and numeracy was an
ideal opportunity to radically to reform how we
teach these core competencies. As a result the
significantly improved performance in the PISA
2012 would seem to suggest that the national
strategy for literacy and numeracy has had a
significant impact.
School accountability structures were also
quietly revolutionised, and a robust data-gath-
ering process at school and national levels
developed, something that will have a long-
term impact far beyond the life of this
government. Teacher education also under
-
went a radical reform in this period. Course
content was changed, programme lengths were
increased and the number of providers reduced
through processes such as the DCU ‘Incorpora-
tion’ programme.
There were a number of areas of policy over-
reach that have resulted in significant setbacks.
Two of these – reform of the junior cycle and
reform of school patronage structures – have
followed a remarkably similar trajectory. Both
witnessed confident assertions by Ministers
about the need for policy reform followed by
processes that saw the ‘great and the good’
support change.
Significant resistance was met in both cases
and despite pressure applied a combination
of strong local knowledge and skillful national
campaigns have resulted in the original
proposals being significantly watered down.
At the time of writing, junior cycle reform is
stuck in a limbo, supported by one Teacher
Union and rejected by a second. Reform of
school patronage has been glacially slow but
there are signs of alternative approaches
emerging that will perhaps address issues of
ethos and culture from an equality and proce-
dural perspective.
Issues also remain concerning the casuali-
sation of education careers across all levels of
the system and the significant hollowing out
of middle-management structures in schools.
This latter point has resulted in increased
pressure on school principals and a percep-
tion of initiative overload. At the other end of
the scale differential pay scales for new teach-
ers is a cause of real resentment and pressure
on Unions to demonstrate relevance has
increased.
In a general sense the Programme for Edu-
cation Government was quite successful in
Education, meeting most of its targets and
putting in place structures that have the
potential to have a significant medium-term
impact. This is no mean feat given the popular
attitude to education in Ireland - while many
might complain in the abstract, most are
happy enough with their particular encounters
with the system. This combination makes it
difficult for any set of policy proposals to
address both the abstract desire for change
and the innate conservatism of end-users.
This policy programme probably did as well as
could be expected given the straitened eco-
nomic circumstances.
2016 ELECTION
"B-"
"Signicant achievements
eclipsed somewhat by
failures in high-prole areas"