Examination of Witnesses (Questions 160
- 175)
MONDAY 28 NOVEMBER 2005
MR NORMAN
UPRICHARD, MR
JIM KEITH
AND MR
UEL MCCREA
Q160 Sammy Wilson: That is still
selection.
Mr Keith: Not necessarily. There
is no strategic plan. That is one of the things that worries me
about Northern Ireland, Belfast in particular. Because of talk
about demographic change and falling roles, there seems to me
to be no plan as to how we are coping with this. We knew it was
coming ten years ago and yet we are now asking the question: what
should we do? We have got schools with intakes of 12 in the secondary
sector. What are we offering those children? That should all be
addressed and should all be part and parcel of a big picture.
You cannot say it is the secondary sector's problem; they need
to deal with it. It is a big problem for all our schools and it
is not being handled. There seems to me to be no strategic plan
with regard to education in Northern Ireland.
Mr McCrea: The other thing I would
add in answer to Sammy's question is this. I think there are good
models out there already for dealing with over-subscription. You
will find them not in the secondary sector but in the primary
sector. The fact is that you reduce the need for selection by
ensuring that your neighbouring school is as good as yours, if
not better. In other words, there should not be competition. It
should be seen as in the primary sector where neighbourhood schools
are there, and we have good examples in Ballyclare where we have
two very strong primary schools. They seem to be able to cope
with this issue of over-subscription. All I am saying is that
if you deal with it on that basis you are not attaching labels
to those children who, for whatever reason, do not get into a
popular school.
Q161 Sammy Wilson: Having done appeals
for parents as well, I am not so sure the answer you are giving
is quite accurate. The fact of the matter is that we do have over-subscription
and I am asking you, and I have not heard an answer yet, how you
deal with over-subscription, apart from open enrolment, without
having selection.
Mr McCrea: There are a number
of ways of dealing with it. One would be perhaps a bit like the
Scottish model. I pause there to say that I am not sure if there
are any folks here from Scotland.
Q162 Chairman: Oh yes, we have one
Member here from Scotland.
Mr McCrea: I am given to understand
that what you have is almost contributory primary schools into
your second level education, and those parents who wish to opt
out of that can opt out, but they cannot opt out at the expense
of a neighbouring parent who wants to go into that popular school.
In other words, for me as a parent wanting to go not to my neighbourhood
school but the next neighbourhood school, it does mean—
Q163 Chairman: Speaking as somebody
with grandchildren in Scotland, it is not quite as simple as that.
Mr McCrea: Perhaps.
Q164 Sammy Wilson: 15% of youngsters
in Glasgow and 24% in Edinburgh go to private schools as a result
of that.
Mr McCrea: Yes, but, with respect,
Mr Wilson, I doubt there are many Glasgows and Edinburghs in Northern
Ireland. What you have is much more like Moffat or somewhere like
that. That would be a better example to take, perhaps, than Glasgow
or Edinburgh. I think only in Belfast and Derry/Londonderry would
you have anything of that nature.
Dr McDonnell: The issue is academic selection.
The issue is selecting children as a result of compression and
grinding through P5, P6 up into P7.
Chairman: The committee can have its
debates later.
Dr McDonnell: The reality is, Chairman,
from my perspective, and I must step in here, that we agreed this
morning, and we have been talking to all the groups here who have
given evidence, yes, selection, but that selection on a geographic
basis or selection on a slightly different model was less traumatic
to children, and really the contentious issue here, from my understanding,
is the compressed academic selection, forcing children to achieve
certain standards in certain circumstances and then marking those
who do not achieve those standards as failures.
Q165 Chairman: The other thing we
have to consider is this, that some people would argue that a
form of academic selection which brings out the best potential
in each child is the best way of conducting a child-centred education.
I think we do have to be careful, all of us, in attributing base
motives to those who take a different point of view. I speak as
somebody who was a schoolmaster for 10 years before I became insane
and so I do know a little bit about it. I think we just have to
be very careful. Gentlemen, I want to get this absolutely on the
record. You are arguing before this committee, and let us put
selection on one side, not only that academic selection at 11-plus
by means of a single exam or group of exams taken on a particular
day or two or three particular days is wrong, but also that it
would be impossible to substitute any form of academic selection
that would be acceptable from your point of view. Is that your
submission?
Mr Uprichard: First of all, I
hope we have not been guilty of suggesting base motives by anybody,
but certainly yes, I think that is our position.
Mr McCrea: It is because we believe
children do not need it. Children simply do not need it. Children
are not types. They are continuums and what we have to try and
do, rather than build an academic ladder, which we are fixated
about, is build a trellis creating educational opportunities—a
trellis, not a ladder. We want opportunities for people to go
in different directions at different times and different paces.
Q166 Chairman: Gymnasts, not climbers?
Mr McCrea: That is a good analysis.
We might use that. That is absolutely right. What we do as educationalists
is provide that structure to ensure that that opportunity is there
for children, children, children, all the time, all the time.
Q167 Lady Hermon: As a matter of
interest can I ask whether the secondary selection that you represent
is opposed to the single sex school, whether it be for boys or
girls? Is that the sort of selection that you are also opposed
to?
Mr Uprichard: From a personal
point of view I prefer co-ed. I have worked in both and I do think
that co-education is a better route, but I also served as a teacher
in Mr Keith's school for many long years. Good schools are characterised
by good teachers and a love of children, not by any particular
sector.
Q168 Chairman: You were very fair
at the beginning and you said that whilst you were each members
of the Secondary Heads Association you were not an official delegation
from them. However, you said you thought your views were fairly
representative. How representative? Do you think what you have
been saying to the committee represents 60%, 70%, 50%? How would
you characterise it?
Mr Uprichard: I could not in all
honesty put a percentage on it but I would say this: I think our
views are shared, not just by those in the secondary school sector,
but I think a lot of people in the maintained secondary sector
would feel much as we do.
Q169 Chairman: Have you done anything
to establish this? After all, Mr Pound, very understandably and,
I think, entirely properly, quoted some percentage figures from
a poll. Have you surveyed your members to find out what their
opinions are?
Mr McCrea: I am here as Principal
of Ballyclare Secondary School but I also serve as the Chairman
of the Association of Head Teachers in Secondary Schools, which
represents maintained and controlled schools. Our executive stretches
right across Northern Ireland and we have an executive group.
Our views, the views that we can again present in written form,
have been through the executive committee, have been through conferences
and are widely accepted. Numerically how strong are we? In terms
of paid-up membership we would be in excess of at least 50 heads.
It is not a union; it is an association. It is an association
purely interested in educational terms, not in any preconceived,
three-line whip terms. We are purely educationalists. If you were
looking at the grammar schools, I think over 50-odd grammar school
principals coming together would be regarded in Northern Ireland
circumstances as quite substantial, but in terms of Northern Ireland
as we know it 50-plus of non-selective heads coming together is
still quite substantial.
Q170 Chairman: Representing what?
Mr McCrea: That, I would imagine,
would represent at least a third.
Chairman: It is just helpful to have
a few steers. Do any colleagues wish to ask any final questions?
Q171 Rosie Cooper: You know that
in England "choice" is a big word. How would parental
choice overlay your views?
Mr Uprichard: It is a very good
question; it is a very difficult question to answer just like
that. Because of the many facets that there are to education in
Northern Ireland—and, forgive me, I do not wish to be patronising,—it
must be somewhat baffling to people from across the water. There
are so many different interests that have built up over the years
and then we have had the additions in more recent years from well-meaning
people, like, for instance, Irish-medium, so we get more and more
divisions taking place. It is very difficult to see how parents
can make a really educated decision based on the system we have
at the moment. As I said earlier, the grammar schools have had
a very strong lobby in the corridors of power politically and
it has swayed opinion here. I am not crying, "Oh, poor boy"
here. That is a fact that that has existed. There is a process
of education that needs to go on and there needs to be a wider
debate and we need to look at the vision. We have said our say
about selection and I would like to see the debate move on now
because it should be about children, not about institutions, and
it should be about equality.
Mr McCrea: If we are interested
in having the best educated, the most confident, the most flexible,
the most adaptable, the most enthusiastic and most valued young
people, that is the aim of the game. We should not as parents
wish that for our child at the expense of someone else's child.
Q172 Chairman: But should parents
have a choice?
Mr McCrea: I think parents have
a choice in terms of ethos, in terms of non-denominational/denominational.
Q173 Lady Hermon: Boys' schools/girls'
schools?
Mr McCrea: Yes, gender issues.
There are issues there and we are not saying one size fits all
is what it has been reduced to. What we are saying is that we
want the community to be confident in itself, that it has a range
of good schools equally valued, equally held in high esteem, but
if I wish that for my school then I wish it for my neighbours'
schools. I do not want to be selecting in any way children for
my school at the expense of another neighbouring school.
Q174 Gordon Banks: Do you see the
challenge that Costello laid down in relation to collaboration
between educational organisations and institutions as a positive
challenge or a real problem?
Mr Uprichard: It is certainly
a challenge and it certainly has a positive ring about it. What
would concern me slightly is that it is such a convoluted system
to make us co-operate with one another. Why go into all that convolution?
Why not have schools which have that sort of co-operation already
about them?
Q175 Gordon Banks: Do you show that
now in your organisation?
Mr Keith: In my school, for example,
I am all boys, and there is an all girls' school close by. Post-16
we combine to offer the children far more choice. In fact, we
offer over 20 A-level choices which we could not do as separate
institutions. That is for the good of the children and that is
how it should work.
Mr McCrea: On Wednesday, God willing,
I will be going with my grammar school colleague with two Education
and Library Board advisers to Birmingham on a study tour and the
next day we are going to Coventry to see their 14-19 pathway with
the concept that we will come back and look at our own community
and try and move together to enhance our educational provision,
particularly at 16-19.
Chairman: Perhaps it would be a good
idea if you have not read each other's evidence before you go;
it might make for a more co-operative journey! I wish you a happy
journey. Thank you, gentlemen, very much indeed. If there are
any points that you feel you ought to have made and time has not
allowed you to make, if there are any points that you feel you
wish to amplify, please let the Clerk know. We are seeing Angela
Smith on 14 December and therefore any additional submission from
you should be fairly brief and should reach us by 7 December.
What is quite clear is that you are three heads with a tremendous
commitment to education in general and your own schools in particular.
Thank you for what you do and may you continue to do it. I am
sure you do not envy us our task as we wrestle with what we have
heard.
| 
