Written evidence (dated 13 December 2005)
from the Grammar Principals' Group, Concerned Parents for Education,
Confederation of Grammar Schools' Former Pupils' Associations
and Governing Bodies' Association
POST-PRIMARY EDUCATION IN NORTHERN IRELAND
1. Having raised the issue of the Costello
proposals for post-primary education with the Northern Ireland
Affairs Committee on two previous occasions, we thank you once
again for accepting our request to investigate the matter. In
this follow-up submission we wish to clarify some of the points
made in our oral submission and to comment on some issues raised
during your questioning of the CCMS and other representatives
and during your visit to Belfast Royal Academy.
2. DEMOCRACY
2.1 It has been suggested that the Household
Survey did not provide an accurate account of public opinion because
of the campaigning work of grammar schools. This is analogous
to suggesting that a political party should not take office if
it got to power through a well-run political campaign. Even if
we set this argument to one side, it is clear that the Household
Survey was an accurate reflection of public opinion since it was
confirmed by the results of an independent "Omnibus Survey"
carried out contemporaneously with the Household Survey with a
random sample of the population. Moreover, the BBC Newsline Survey
of January 2004 and Belfast Telegraph Survey of September 2005,
both with a random sample, all indicate remarkably consistent
support for academic selection. Even the document submitted to
the Northern Ireland Affairs Committee by the CCMS recorded the
results of a survey showing that a significant majority of both
Catholics and Protestants favours academic selection while less
than a third of the population favours mixed-ability schools.
2.2 The Costello Committee, established
following the publication of the responses to the Burns Report,
was not representative of opinion in Northern Ireland. Our groups
made this point clear to the then Minister, Ms Kennedy, and predicted
the inevitable outcome, but our objections were ignored. The Committee
was used as a mechanism to subvert the will of the people. Out
of 11 members only one representative was drawn from an organisation
favouring academic selection, while a majority was drawn from
organizations on record as opposed to academic selection and it
soon transpired that the remainder held a similar view.
2.3 It is sometimes argued that some educational
interests support the Costello proposals. Included in these educational
interests are the teacher unions. A more powerful argument, however,
is that the number of teachers responding to the Household survey
roughly equates to the number of teachers in Northern Ireland's
schools and their opposition to the abolition of academic selection
reflects the view of the general population and of parents.
2.4 On 6 December 2005 Ms Smith, Minister
with responsibility for Education, published a Draft Order which,
if passed, would implement the Costello proposals. At the same
time she released the results of a consultation on admissions
arrangements which was completed six months ago. While the figures
do not appear in the document the Minister has admitted that at
least 90% of the responses to the consultation supported academic
selection. The Minister, therefore, has deliberately chosen to
ignore the outcome of every public consultation and test of opinion
on the issue over a period of more than three years and instead
impose a policy against the clear wishes of a majority of parents
and teachers.
2.5 At no time have the people of Northern
Ireland had an opportunity to influence the pattern of education
reform through their elected representatives. A majority of locally
elected politicians opposes the Costello proposals. They would
not pass if our local assembly were functioning. However, once
passed, the nature of the Assembly's voting would make reversal
of any legislation impossible.
2.6 It would be inconceivable for a government,
having promised the people their say, to impose such huge changes
in any part of Great Britain, against both the will of the people
and a majority of elected representatives in that area.
3. COST
We have already indicated our concerns about
the advisability of introducing comprehensive education, a new
progressive curriculum that reflects practice abandoned as unsuccessful
in the USA 50 years ago, and changes to the administrative structure
of the education system, some of which, by centralizing control,
move in the opposite direction to policy in England. Even if we
lay aside our concerns about the nature of these changes and about
their simultaneous implementation, there is growing alarm at the
fact that there are no estimates of the financial implications
associated with any of these changes. We believe that best practice
requires that change be made on the basis of an in-depth analysis
of the costs involved and, where possible, piloting of that change.
To proceed otherwise is to ask the people of Northern Ireland,
or indeed the British tax payer, to sign a blank cheque.
4. THE PUPIL
PROFILE
4.1 The Costello Report views the Pupil
Profile as an "integral part" of the discussion at transfer
between parents and pupils and the primary school. The "Report
on Responses to Consultation" following publication of the
Burns Report records: "It was generally felt that the Pupil
Profile should contain both qualitative and quantitative information,
including some form of standardised information on attainment
in subjects." The Department of Education has stated that
the profile, while not intended to rank pupils in the same way
as the current transfer tests, would "provide clear and objective
information about pupils' progress, achievements aptitudes and
interests."
4.2 We contend that, irrespective of the
use to which the proposed Profile is put, parents should have
the right to a valid and reliable assessment of their children's
ability. Mr Clarke in his submission to the Select Committee accepted
Dr Morrison's criticisms of the proposed Profile but dismissed
them as unimportant. Surely it is of the utmost importance if
the Costello proposals were to be implemented, as it is an "integral
part" of the decision making process. The proposed profile
purports to guide parents in making an appropriate choice of post-primary
school, yet Dr Morrison has demonstrated that Costello-type profiles
mislead rather than guide.
4.3 Mrs Martin (CCMS) asserted in a response
to a question from the Chairman of the Northern Ireland Affairs
Committee that the alternative profile proposed by Dr Morrison
would be "cumbersome" and "add to work" but
did not offer any evidence to support this assertion. The evidence
is in fact to the contrary. The pupil profile envisaged in the
Costello Report would impose a huge burden on teachers which,
like its financial costs, has yet to be quantified by the Northern
Ireland Council for Curriculum and Assessment.
5. SOCIAL INTEGRATION,
SOCIAL MOBILITY
AND PARTICIPATION
IN EDUCATION
POST 16
5.1 Receipt of Free School Meals (FSM) is
often used as a proxy for social disadvantage but it does not
provide a totally accurate picture since there is a considerable
proportion of pupils who would be eligible but for whom a claim
is not made. Anecdotal evidence suggests that failure to apply
is higher in the Protestant section of the community.
5.2 Setting aside concerns with respect
to the value of FSM figures the percentage of pupils in Northern
Ireland's grammar schools in receipt of FSM is 7%. For comparison,
in the top 200 state schools in England the figure is only 3%.
5.3 In 2004 the percentage of pupils in
receipt of FSM in England who achieved 5 A*-C grades at GCSE was
26.1%. We do not have up-to-date figures for Northern Ireland
but we do know that the figure for 1998 was 31% and that it is
now above this level.
5.4 While educational underachievement among
children from working class or disadvantaged backgrounds is not
on the same scale as exists in other parts of these islands, it
is, nevertheless, a problem that should not be ignored. More needs
to be done to tackle educational disadvantage long before children
reach the age of 11. Belfast Royal Academy (BRA) have been attempting
to contribute to a resolution of this problem in its area through
discussions with primary principals and through a scheme whereby
BRA pupils spend some time each week assisting in local primary
schools. The introduction of a pupil profile containing reliable
and valid information on each child, rather than an 11+ which
some children do not sit, would identify more children from working
class and disadvantaged backgrounds who would benefit from a grammar
school education.
5.5 Some BRA pupils were concerned about
the impression that they felt had been formed by some members
of the Committee that those selected to meet the Committee were
drawn from middle class backgrounds alone. Many of the young people
whom the Committee met are the children of working class parents
from the local area. A member of staff was also keen to explain,
in response to a remark by one Committee member about the lack
of black faces in our classrooms, that this reflected the very
much lower number of black children in Belfast compared to some
cities in Great Britain.
5.6 We are concerned that the authors of
the Costello Report have not learned any lessons from the experience
of Great Britain. In the words of Sir Peter Lampl, "The comprehensive
system was brought in to try to improve social equality, the opposite
has happened. We are supposed to have parental choice but it does
not work for those at the lower end of the economic spectrum who
do not have the income to move near the best schools or even pay
the fares for their children to get there". Moreover, Prof
Stephen Mackin, commenting on the results of his international
study on social mobility, stated with respect to grammar schools:
"They were perceived as elitist and not good for social mobility
but, actually, it has turned out that some kids from lower income
families were helped. We probably had more people through from
the bottom end to the top than we do have at the moment."
5.7 The Submission by CCMS points to the
link between social disadvantage and educational underachievement
which is commonly recognized and suggests that this is compounded
by academic selection. This argument, however, ignores the reality
of better GCSE grades for working class and disadvantaged children
in Northern Ireland than Great Britain and the very much higher
percentage of such children entering higher education in Northern
Ireland than any other part of these islands.
5.8 While many cities in Great Britain educate
a substantial proportion of their children in private schools,
and such schools top the list in providing access to higher education
in the south of Ireland, Northern Ireland currently has only one
small private school.
5.9 There is a significant differential
in the percentage of 16 and 17 year olds in education in Northern
Ireland (78%) and in England (66.6%). This may explain why a greater
proportion of our young people obtain 2 Advanced level passes
at A-E grade or equivalent than their peers in England (37.7%
NI: 30% England).
6. THE MYTH
OF A
"LONG TAIL
OF UNDERACHIEVEMENT"
It is often asserted by opponents of Northern
Ireland's education system that its excellent performance at the
top end is at the cost of a poor performance at the bottom end.
GCSE statistics confirm a long standing and significant lead for
Northern Ireland's pupils in terms of the proportion achieving
5+ A*-C grades (60% for NI and 54% for England in 2004), while
a larger proportion of Northern Ireland's pupils obtain A grades
at both GCSE (7.1% in NI as opposed to 5.6% for the UK) and Advanced
Level (30% in NI as opposed to 22.4% for England and Wales) when
compared to their peers in Great Britain. The "long tail
of underachievement" is a myth since GCSE figures also show
virtually identical results with England in terms of the proportion
achieving 5+ A*-G grades (88% NI: 89% England) and the proportion
leaving school with no GCSEs (4% NI: 5% England) of any grade.
7. POPULATION
STATISTICS
7.1 It is argued that there has been a decline
in the school population of Northern Ireland and that there will
be a major decline in the future. In a reply to a question by
Lord Maginnis, however, Lord Rooker indicated that the population
estimate for 2005 printed in the Costello Report was incorrect.
If the revised current estimate is correct, and we feel that it
may still underestimate the reality, the actual figure for the
decline of the 11-18 year old population would be 2% and not 6%
as printed in the Costello Report. If we add to this the fact
that the birth rate in Northern Ireland has been rising since
2000, the long run population estimates appear increasingly suspect,
yet it appears that they continue to be used, unamended, by the
Minister and her officials.
7.2 We do accept that there has been a decline
in pupil numbers and that grammar schools should shoulder their
share of the burden that this imposes on schools.
8. EDUCATIONAL
STRUCTURES IN
NORTHERN IRELAND
8.1 We are concerned that the Select Committee
should be aware that the education provision for Catholic and
Protestant pupils in Northern Ireland is very similar. The vast
majority of Catholic children attend either a Catholic secondary
school under the control of the CCMS or a Catholic voluntary grammar
school. The vast majority of Protestant pupils attend a secondary
or grammar school under the control of the Education and Library
Boards or a voluntary interdenominational grammar school. Grammar
schools are more likely to have a religious mix than secondary
schools. Approximately 29% of pupils attending BRA is Catholic,
while in the Catholic sector the school with the largest percentage
of Protestant pupils (31%) is Dominican College, a grammar school
in Portstewart. The Committee had asked Mrs Martin from St Catherine's
College, Armagh, about the percentage of Protestant pupils in
her school: the correct figure is less than 0.5%.
8.2 There is a small number of comprehensive
schools in the Catholic, state, integrated and Irish language
sectors. We do not have any ideological opposition to such schools
and support them where they meet local needs and enjoy local support.
Nevertheless, we do not see this model as appropriate for Northern
Ireland as a whole.
8.3 The effect of the implementation of
the Costello Proposals, and the proposals in the Review of Public
Administration, would be to re-model schools as community comprehensives
under centralised control with all schools being required to deliver
a prescribed curriculum mix of vocational and academic subjects.
This is contrary to the current direction of policy in England
where it is proposed that schools be given more freedom to manage
their own affairs and buses be used to counter the situation in
which the creation of community comprehensives has led to social
segregation with the children of working class or disadvantaged
parents being condemned to the poorest performing schools.
9. THE GRAMMAR
SCHOOL INTAKE
In a speech delivered on 23 June 2004 former
Minister with responsibility for Education, Mr Barry Gardiner,
claimed "80% of grammar schools have already sacrificed their
proudly held `academic ethos' by taking in children with Cs and
Ds in the 11 plus." The inference is that grammar schools
are already de facto comprehensive schools. The evidence, however,
shows that this is not the case. The figures for the period 1998-99—2004-05
indicate that over 90% of pupils who were accepted into grammar
schools obtained a grade A or B in the 11 plus. This is not an
all-ability intake. With respect to the small minority admitted
with lower grades some pupils obtain places on the basis of upgrades
by the schools on the basis of evidence from primary schools.
The figures do not reveal, however, the number of pupils with
lower grades admitted on decisions made by appeal tribunals, rather
than by the schools themselves. In other words some of the pupils
with low grades that grammar schools are being accused of taking
to fill their places have been imposed on grammar schools by the
decisions of Department of Education tribunals!
10. THE FUTURE
ROLE OF
GRAMMAR SCHOOLS
10.1 Several groups appearing before the
Select Committee have sought to present our education system as
ill-equipped for the challenges of the 21st century. We dispute
this contention. As we have already indicated it outperforms other
systems in Great Britain in terms of GCSE and Advanced Level results
and in terms of the relative success of pupils from working class
and disadvantaged backgrounds. We have also acknowledged that
this is a tribute to all constituent parts of our education sector
and would dispute any assertion of superior performance from any
part.
10.2 It is noteworthy that two of the CCMS
representatives who appeared before the Northern Ireland Affairs
Committee were members of the Costello Committee and their presentation,
and form of language used, mirrored closely the language of the
Costello Report. There was, however, one significant difference:
on both sides of the debate the assertion that grammar schools
can remain as grammar schools in the new system has been abandoned.
Since the Costello Proposals would require all schools to accept
an all-ability intake to provide a mixed curriculum of vocational
and academic subjects, all schools would be forced to become one-size-fits-all
comprehensive schools. Only the Minister and Department of Education
officials continue to present the people of Northern Ireland with
the assertion that the implementation of the Costello Proposals
would not create a comprehensive system.
10.3 Many grammar schools have been educating
young people for a long time, in some cases, hundreds of years.
They have adapted to changing circumstances and continue to enjoy
the confidence of the people of Northern Ireland to educate the
academically able to a high standard. Academic excellence and
intellectual rigour will be as important in the 21st century as
at any time in the past.
11. A POSITIVE
VISION
11.1 The skills fostered by academic specialism
are not out of date: the analytical and leadership skills needed
to solve novel and complex problems: the ability to evaluate material,
construct logical arguments and to communicate ideas effectively.
11.2 We have a positive alternative vision
for the future education that would build on the strengths of
our present system to accommodate better the needs, interest and
abilities of all our young people. Our groups endorse "Our
Vision for the future of Post Primary Education" issued by
Concerned Parents for Education (with the proviso that the section
on the Pupil Profile has been updated by the contribution of Dr
Hugh Morrison entitled "A Positive Alternative to the Costello
Profile.")
12. CONCLUDING
COMMENTS
Since we gave our oral evidence to the Committee,
the Minister has published proposals and draft legislation embodying
them which take no account whatsoever of majority local opinion.
The results of the most recent round of consultation are presented
in such a way as to obscure the opposition of a majority to the
total abandonment of academic criteria for selection. It strains
all credibility that, in the Minister's published statement, she
purports to assure us that she is not abolishing grammar schools
or introducing universal comprehensive secondary education. What
schools are called is beside the point; indeed many of the schools
of which we speak bear such titles as "Academy" or "College"
or "Institution" rather than "Grammar School".
We seek to defend not what grammar schools are called but what
they are—schools devoted to academic excellence and rigour.
In the face of the criteria for selection still envisaged by the
Minister, with the emphasis on geographical proximity or random
selection in the choice of pupils by oversubscribed schools, the
inevitable consequence would be the imposition of comprehensive
education.
William Young, Grammar
Principals' Group.
Peter Cosgrove, Co-Chairperson,
Concerned Parents for Education.
Sir Kenneth Bloomfield,
Confederation of Grammar Schools' Past Pupils' Association.
Finbarr McCallion, Governing
Bodies' Association.
Dr Hugh Morrison, School
of Education, Queen's University Belfast
13 December 2005
| 
