Written evidence from Mr J Keith, Mr S
A McCrea and Mr N J Uprichard
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 As a group we welcome the opportunity
to make an oral submission to the Northern Ireland Affairs Committee.
The following written submission is a short summary of our views.
1.2 In making our submission to the Committee
we do not claim to speak for the whole of the Secondary Controlled
Sector. However, we believe the views we hold and wish to express
to the Committee are broadly representative of the views held
by the majority of principals who work in the sector.
2. RECENT RESEARCH
AND REPORTS
2.1 We endorse the vision as outlined in
the Burns Report and adopted by Costello, (3.2) the education
service . . . "will recognise the individual abilities
and needs of all young people, and provide them with high quality
education, enabling them to realise their potential, to lead fulfilling
lives and to play productive and positive roles in society as
persons whose learning and development have been holistic."
Following upon this we believe the objective as stated in
Costello (3.3) is worthy of aspiring to. "To provide high
quality, flexible post primary education that develops all young
people, enables them to fulfil their potential and prepares them
to participate actively in life and work in a diverse and changing
world."
2.2 We are in broad agreement with the seven
guiding principles outlined in the Costello Report but we wish
to make it clear that choice, respect and partnership should not
be used as a means of justifying selection and segregation or
retaining the status of any one particular type of school.
2.3 We believe the system of provision for
KS4 and post 16 as proposed in the Burns Report and revised in
the Costello Report is somewhat contrived and cumbersome. The
proposals fall into the age old trap of being excessively over
content and assessment driven. At post 16 the requirement for
a minimum of 27 courses is restrictive. Far from developing the
curriculum it restricts it and ensures that only one type of institution
is ever likely to be involved in the delivery of post 16 education.
We do not believe the proposals for collaboration and partnerships
as outlined in Costello are workable or cost effective. We do
not believe these proposals will ensure equality of opportunity
nor will they develop capacity to deliver the entitlement curriculum
as proposed by CCEA. The time has come to provide a common entitlement
curriculum free of the constraints of school type, bureaucracy
and heartache which characterise a selective system.
2.4 We are concerned that the proposals
under entitlement framework (Costello 4.22), Key Stage 4 pupils
should have access to a minimum of 24 courses, of which at least
one third should be academic and one third vocational, are unworkable
in many Secondary Controlled Schools. We believe them to be unworkable
because the proposal does not take sufficient account of demographic
trends and the effect they have had on, and will continue to have
on our sector. The proposals for partnerships would inevitably
place an unequal burden of responsibility upon the smaller schools,
which in the majority of cases would be the Secondary Schools,
to ensure full entitlement.
2.5 The Gallagher/Smith research (September
2000), indicated that there are almost 15,000 surplus places in
the post primary sector. The fall in pupil numbers has had a devastating
effect on many schools in the Secondary Sector. Over the past
10 years or so our sector has had many school closures and amalgamations.
Many other schools in our sector are just about viable and many
suffer because they are left to deal with the most difficult and
or socially disadvantaged pupils in our society.
3. A SECONDARY
SECTOR PERCEPTION
ON SELECTION
3.1 Secondary schools have played a vital
role in the Northern Ireland Education System. The sector has
provided excellent service to the many thousands of children who
every year suffer the hurt inflicted upon them by the current
system of selection.
3.2 Selection has serviced the needs of
a system and not the needs of our children. Quite clearly a system
which includes grades such as A, B1, B2 etc, is designed to allow
for a pecking order to exist. Every year that pecking order is
presided over by the Grammar Schools.
3.3 Selection has for many years distorted
the curriculum, damaged the self esteem of a sizable proportion
of our school population, engendered disaffection and deprived
many schools of vital resources. It has lead to the development
of sink schools damaging the prospects of many children in some
socially deprived areas of Belfast and elsewhere in the province.
3.4 Grammar Schools which have in the past
always argued for selection on the basis that it safeguarded academic
standards have not experienced a decline in pupil numbers. Could
it be that the argument for maintenance of academic standards
is being revised to allow for all available places in Grammar
Schools to be filled? If this is the case, and there is evidence
to suggest that it is, then surely it is time to go beyond proposals
for unwieldy partnerships. It is time to be positive about developing
a truly non-selective system rather than waiting for it to happen
by default presiding over the slow decline and ultimate demise
of some schools whilst others fill to capacity regardless of the
ability of their intake.
3.5 At present many children who attend
secondary schools face a further process of selection at 16+.
These are the children who having attained high standards at GCSE
are forced to transfer to continue their studies to A level. Often
these children do find places in grammar schools but often they
do not because all available A level places have been filled by
pupils who ready attend those schools.
4. CONCLUSIONS
4.1 We accept the broad principles of entitlement
as outlined in the Costello Report and CCEA proposals for a revised
curriculum but with the reservations expressed in 2 above.
4.2 We contend that the present system of
selection is wasteful of resources, favours one sector and concentrates
problems in another. It fails to value all children equally.
4.3 We welcome the fact that the present
transfer procedures are to end by the Autumn of 2008. However,
we are unconvinced that the Costello proposals for transfer at
age 11 will address the current problems of equality of opportunity,
distortion of the curriculum, damage to self esteem, disaffection
amongst pupils, depressed schools and waste of resources. It is
our belief that selection in any form leads to unnecessary division,
resentment, upholds privilege and is wasteful of resources. It
is time for a vision which sees beyond selection at age 11.
4.4 We believe it is possible to introduce
a non-selective system, which can operate effectively for the
good of all pupils in Northern Ireland embracing the basic principles
of quality, equality and accessibility for all.
4.5 We believe that the system operated
in Scotland provides a model which could be adapted to provide
an education for the children of Northern Ireland to:
"recognise individual abilities and needs
of all young people;
provide them with high quality experiences;
enable them to realise their potential;
be fulfilling, encourage them to play productive
and positive roles in society as persons whose learning and development
have been holistic;"
provide parity of esteem;
offer a broad balanced curriculum at Key Stage
4 and post 16;
develop confident, adaptable, skilled and work
smart young people.
4.6 We believe if our education system is
to be holistic that children of all classes, creeds and colours
should be educated together. It is time to develop a vision which
sees beyond selection, protectionism and privilege and affords
equal rights and opportunities for all our children.
4.7 We believe that children should be at
the heart of any system and that it should be a seamless educational
experience from the day and hour a child enters school to third
level education.
4.8 We recognise that the current system,
divided as it is on the basis of selection, religion, gender and
preference for integrated or Irish-medium status poses reformers
with what must seem an insurmountable problem. We accept that
it is impossible in the face of such diversity and tradition to
please all interested parties. We further recognise that research
undertaken, proposals made and reports presented over recent years
have been thorough, sincere and helpful in attempting to lead
the way to a better, fairer education system for Northern Ireland.
However, we hold to the view that a community based, non-selective
system, would provide sound educational opportunities for all.
It would take account of demographic trends, maximise the use
of valuable resources, reduce bureaucracy and most importantly
it would be fair.
Mr J Keith MSc BEd Dip(G&C)
OBE
Principal Boys' Model School Belfast
Member of The Shankill Principals' Group
Mr S A McCrea BEd BA MA (Ed)
Principal Ballyclare Secondary School
Member of NEELB
Chairman of The Association of Head Teachers in Secondary Education
Vice Chairman of NEELB Education (Schools Committee)
Mr N J Uprichard BEd PGCTE
Former Principal Donaghadee High School (1995-99)
Former Principal Newtownbreda High School (1999-2004)
Former Chairman SEELB Secondary Heads' Association
November 2005
| 
