Tag Archives: education

Pay. Make It A Single Issue.

Posted on by
Reply

It’s very sad that it took a mass strike from public sector unions before the Government would come to the negotiating table.

A major stumbling block is that the Government wanted terms and conditions attached to the ‘Pay Rise’.

To call it a pay rise is frankly a bit of a joke. The net increase in public sector pay over the 2.5 years of the Public Sector Pay Agreement worked out at about 1.5% BEFORE tax. So, in real terms public service workers are no better off in terms of pay than we were in December 2023. Any pay rise currently being sought is simply to stop workers receiving effective pay cuts due to inflation.

Since the economic crash of 2008, the public sector has been under continuous pressure. Initially, there was the brutal pay cuts and increased taxes that demoralised thousands, and encouraged many highly skilled workers to take early retirement – thereby losing decades of experience.

Once the economy began to recover, a series of agreements had ‘Productivity’ built into them.

Croke Park Agreement (2010 – 2013)

  • The Croke Park Agreement (2010 – 2013)
  • The Haddington Road Agreement (2013 – 2015)
  • The Landsdowne Road Agreement (2015 – 2018)
  • The Public Service Stability Agreement (2018 – 2020)
  • Building Momentum (2021 – 2023)
  • The Public Service Agreement (2024 – June 2026)

Each and every one of these agreements has included pay increases, but at the cost of changing work practices, extra hours, and productivity.

One has to wonder at this point just how much more productivity can be squeezed from the workers. 6 agreements, each including ‘improved’ productivity. We are past the point of getting more blood from the stone.

When you change the conditions of work (hours, practices, productivity) you are changing the job. We have reached the point where peoples’ jobs have changed to the extent that it’s no longer a pay rise – it’s simply pay for a very different way of working.

The group who suffers most in this is those who started work after 2011. Their career earnings are tens of thousands less than colleagues who had the good fortune to be born a bit earlier.

Of course we have the usual loud voices to contend with at this point. Micheal O’Leary has said that the government will ‘Buckle and roll over’ to the unions – implying that any agreement would be a surrender.

And so our unions are going to the table in good faith to see a pay rise that will hopefully match inflation.

The unions should have a strong hand. After all, the main unions all voted 95% or more in favour of action.

The government will go to the same table, hoping to turn the screws and get blood from a stone.

Any agreement that comes out will have to go to the various union members for a vote.

In this vote my conscience tells me that I must keep younger members in mind. And so, any agreement that ties productivity is likely to be rejected.

Not Dialling It Down

Posted on by
Reply

Tomorrow, 14th October Public Sector workers across Ireland are going on the largest strike we have seen in 15 years.

That this action is being taken across the public sector is incredibly significant. Proof positive that the issues we are raising are faced by all. The union members have voted overwhelmingly in favour of strike action. One of the lowest responses was from the ASTI, 95%. The INMO voted 99% in favour of strike action. This is not a grey area. This is a very clear statement from union members that pay is a real concern in the face of the cost of living crisis.

Currently the unions are being met with an intractable response from the Government.

The Taoiseach has asked unions to ‘Diall it Down‘. Presumably he is implying that unions are the ones raising the metaphorical temperature. This a week after Minister Jack Chambers accused the unions of ‘not engaging in substantive talks.’ To be honest, I did snigger a bit at the accusation that teachers (of all people) were not willing to talk. (I suspect I have some students who would pay good money to have me talk less…)

At this stage, the strike is inevitable. There is an argument that actually having a strike suits both sides. Unions have an unprecedented majority mandate for strike action, and can clearly demonstrate that workers are standing together. The Government, meanwhile, can claim it isn’t caving to demands too easily.

Frankly, it’s a bit puzzling as to why we have reached this stage. The end date of the previous agreement was known in 2024. That agreement allowed for pay increases of 9.25% over a 2.5 year period. That’s 3.7% per annum as a flat rate.

The CSO Consumer Price Index Inflation tool shows inflation across the same time period as being 8%. So over a 2.5 year period public service workers effectively received a 1.25% pay rise. Taxable.

We are now facing into a winter with fuel prices dramatically increasing. The starting point of a systemic price increase across broad parts of the economy. Somehow, a 1.25% increase doesn’t seem like it will cut it.

But at the moment there isn’t even a 1.25% increase on the cards. No increases agreed since June, and the Government doesn’t want to enter talks while pay is top of the agenda.

I have a problem with this. If (as seems to be the case) pay is not the top of the agenda, then is this still a pay agreement. If the Government tags on changes in work practices, then that looks more like a change of job description, with pay being a function of that change.

In this instance, a pay rise is not a pay rise.

And so, in the morning I’ll join my colleagues on the picket line raising awareness that the government needs to enter talks about pay, and they need to be serious about addressing the concerns and needs of public servants.

The SNA Debacle

Posted on by
Reply

As they say, a week is a long time in politics, and last week was particularly long for some.

We moved from a cliff edge of cuts to Special Needs Assistant places, to the Government ‘Pausing’ these cuts on Tuesday last.

Emma O’Kelly gave a comprehensive overview here, but there is some extra context that I feel is important.

We have, for a while now, promoted the idea that the best place for certain treatments is within the community. That there would be a continuum of support for vulnerable members of our society.

Unfortunately, our funding model for schools has never really kept up with this ambition. Mainstream schools were simply never given the full resources needed to look after the narrow definition of support that was utilised by the Department of Education.

The models we use for capitation and staffing (teacher/sna/other staff) are very limited, and force principals to spend an inordinate amount of time form-filling in order to try and secure the resources that their school needs.

The fact that Micheal Martin could, last week, suggest that principals could just ‘appeal’ the decision shows just how much this model has been normalised.

Circular 0030/2014 sets out the parameters within which SNAs operate. Pages 5 and 6 give examples of “the primary care needs which would be considered significant – and which might require SNA support”

I think we can all accept that the world has changed a lot since 2014. We are only beginning to understand the psychological and developmental damage caused by the pandemic, and our mechanisms for coping with it.

There are more and more diagnoses of autism, ADHD, Emotional Behavioural Disorders or other conditions than were before. According to the American Centres for Disease Control and Prevention, 21% of children aged 3 to 17 have been diagnosed with a ‘mental, emotional, or behavioural condition’ in 2021.

That’s pretty shocking.

In real life, that means that a large number of children are suffering to the extent that they cannot function to their best in school or in life. Trauma Informed Practice confirms this. When a child is under stress, then he or she is spending energy coping with that stress, before they can focus on their other tasks.

Anybody who works in the school knows the value of SNAs. Yes, students who need special care receive it, but beyond that, the generosity and compassion of so many SNAs provides students with a friendly face who can be there for them at a number of different points of the day.

School is about more than just the academics. They are places for students to grow academically, yes, but also to grow emotionally, physically, spiritually.

And, let’s move away from our limited funding models. Let’s look after our students properly.

The New Leaving Certificate – This Is Big

Posted on by
Reply

Across the country, secondary school teachers are engaging in CPD to prepare for the new Leaving Certificate.

The new specifications for subjects are being introduced over a series of five tranches. Tranche 1 in September 2025, Tranche 2 in September 2026, and so on. The full list of tranches and subjects is at this link.

In developing the new standards, the NCCA has sought to underpin the course with three core concepts:

  • Knowledge
  • Skills
  • Values and Dispositions

As a concept, this is something that can be admired. Knowledge is an absolute prerequisite. For any subject a student will need core knowledge in order to complete any tasks, or to claim any mastery over that subject.

Skills are something we all need in different areas. Take music, for instance. You could know all the theory available, but if you don’t know how to compose, play or sing, then there’s a bit of gap in your grasp of the subject.

More interesting for me, however, is that final section. Values and Dispositions. What you end up doing with the knowledge and skills that you have developed over your senior curriculum. There is an obvious challenge for teachers in how to develop this side of the programme that they will ultimately teach in their own classrooms.

In conjunction with this there is a set of seven competencies. The concept being that these competencies are written in / baked into the syllabus specifications. In effect, they will be an integral part of any given subject.

The big concern, however, that a number of teachers are expressing is in the area of assessment.

Depending on the subject, either 40% or 50% will be assessed as an Additional Assessment Component.

In some subjects exemplars are not yet available, and in other cases the AAC brief has not yet been published. This is leading to a large amount of concern and confusion.

Additionally, there is a concern regarding crowding in the assessment calendar, and of resourcing the production of these AACs. Each AAC will need to be presented in a format that can be graded. Very often this means a digital means will be required.

And, of course, that leads to extra concerns.

Material Resources. Imagine a school with 100 students in leaving cert. Now imagine that each student has to produce an AAC for each of his/her subjects.

That’s 7 subjects (8 if the school has the LCVP programme).

So, 7 or 8 subjects, each requiring 100 students to prepare a project. Most projects will need to be typed, and some will need to be recorded. It’s hard to imagine any school having enough laptop trolleys in order to ensure that this will happen smoothly. Also, imagine the time pressure on some students who could easily have two or three projects due for completion within a week or two of each other.

This article from Emma O’Kelly of RTE proposes that schools need to move towards 1:1 laptops for students.

All well and good, but there is a huge wealth gap in this country. A number of students will not be able to afford laptops in order to meet this need. Remember, this is a country that is constantly breaking its own records for children registered as homeless. Unless the Department of Education is willing to properly fund laptops in schools there will be a gap between the wealthy and those who struggle financially.

Another concern is AI and the influence that it may have on projects.

To what extent may a student draw upon an AI platform in order to structure, research or write a project? At what point can a school say that it will not certify a student’s work? How can we verify the work undertaken, unless it is undertaken in the classroom?

Finally. Is this model of assessment going in the right direction? According to this report from France 24 news, Denmark is setting aside laptops and going back to books.

Nobody doubts that the Leaving Cert needs to be reformed. However, I do feel that we are missing an opportunity by only looking at the structure of the syllabus and assessment. At the moment the Leaving Cert Points System is linked directly to the CAO and college applications. This is a very narrow metric, and something that is putting a huge pressure on students.

Overall, the new Leaving Cert Specifications do offer a lot of opportunity, but a number of teacher questions have not yet been adequately answered.

Our Appalling Treatment of Ukrainian Refugees (IDPs)

Posted on by
Reply

Shortly after the invasion of Ukraine by Russia a flood of refugees (Internationally Displaced Persons) sought shelter across Europe.

At the time Ireland did all it could to help. Very quickly people were taken in at airports, PPS numbers were issued, and emergency accommodation was sorted. It was a moment of which I am proud.

Over the next few weeks and months we all realised that this war would take much longer than predicted, so our new Ukrainian neighbours began to integrate more into Irish society. They joined our schools, many started trying to learn the language, many more sought work and opened their own businesses locally.

In short, the Céad Mile Fáilte came into play.

As there is now a sense that the war is coming to an end, a number of Ukrainian families have made the decision to return home.

Some of those who have been lucky enough to find employment have found their own accommodation outside of the centres. A hugely positive move for those who could manage it. In the centres your space is not your own, and your privacy is limited. This option is not available to many due to the accommodation shortage across Ireland.

However the circumstances developed, the Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth has recently issued what are effectively hundreds of eviction letters to families and children across the country.

The letter is utterly devoid of compassion or humanity. The word ‘regret’ is used once, but only in relation to pets. The letter has caused an incredible amount of grief, stress and upset among those who have been unfortunate enough to receive it.

When the war began we took in traumatised people. We took in people who fled before the horrors of Bucha, we took in those who had lost their homes, we took in those who had lost family members.

We then talked about trauma informed practice, and, in schools at least, tried to keep this in mind when integrating our new students.

And now a department that is responsible for both children and integration is hurting children and undermining the integration that has been achieved. We are taking traumatised children, and retraumatising them

The letter provides the rationale that “the Department is consolidating its accommodation portfolio”. Two points here. The language in use is far beyond many of those who received the letter. Second, the department appears to be more concerned with a property portfolio than with the human beings under its supposed care.

The letter then gives a very tight timeline as to when these moves will happen.

In Youghal the residents at the Quality Hotel have been given about 2 or 3 weeks.

In Victoria Cross in Cork residents have been instructed to be available on 4th and 5th March between 10AM and 6PM with their documents. Failure to turn up will be seen as meaning that they are no longer interested in State Provided Accommodation.

Even better? They are then remined that they will be moved to temporary accommodation. In other words, don’t get too comfortable.

The damage this is doing to students is horrific. I know students who are preparing for State Exams and they don’t know where they will sit the exams. They do not even know if the town/city they are moved to will have a secondary school with the same option subjects. So they could end up not being able to complete their studies that they began 1.5 years ago for that option.

By moving students in the middle of the school year their studies are negatively affected. Even if they move quickly to a new school, the curriculum will have been covered in a different manner, different teachers have different styles, and the supports that a student benefited from are not immediately present.

The timing of this is very suspect. The Dail is currently not in session, so no TDs can make a minister answer questions in session. Was this deliberate, I wonder?

The letter appears to be unsigned – so who even is responsible for this decision?

The whole manner in which this has been done feels underhand. Again, the Department, in this action, is hurting children and undermining integration. All for the exercise of consolidating a portfolio.

There is now a series of articles being written, and more awareness about this issue. I really, really hope that something can be done to reverse this decision.

https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/munster/arid-41555347.html
Cork School Principal devestated
https://www.irishtimes.com/ireland/2025/01/14/were-very-afraid-ukrainian-refugees-in-limerick-given-48-hours-notice-of-being-moved/
https://www.rte.ie/news/regional/2025/0115/1491035-ukrainian-women-children-move-cork-hotel/

Why Well-being Gives Me Blood Pressure

Posted on by
Reply

There’s a lot of paperwork comes into schools about well-being. The different techniques one can use to preserve one’s own physical and mental health. Sometimes, we get really nice posters to hang on the wall.

The thinking appears to be – ‘these teachers are stressed, let’s show them how to manage that stress well’.

For me, there’s a step missing in the logic. The syllogism is missing a step, the conclusion is therefore faulty. (I might have the terminology wrong here. After all, I last covered logic in 1989. Gulp)

Anyway. I agree with the first part of the sentiment. Teachers are stressed or unhappy with their career. This is to the extent that there are a number of teachers who either switch careers, or look to retire early as the personal cost is too great.

There are a number of factors in the profession that contribute to this stress:

  • Changing Curriculum Requirements
  • Outside influences on student work such as AI
  • The points race
  • The hated ‘Croke Park Hours’, that were brought in as part of Austerity and never rescinded
  • Underfunding in schools
  • The cost of training for new teachers
  • Terrible contract conditions for newly qualified teachers

To suggest that all of these pressures are managed simply by providing staff with well-being is a nonsense. For two reasons.

Well-being is not a poster, it is a practise. To learn meditation, controlled breathing, or any number of techniques requires time and guidance. It requires a mentor who will guide one, in short, it requires investment. Not all can devote the time required to do this.

The second reason is more fundamental. Why should the onus be placed on the employee to manage stress when the sources of stress are external to the employee?

Many teachers feel that there is a disconnect between the Department of Education and the reality of how teachers work for their students. Any teacher I know has huge concerns about the new Junior Cycle and its methods of assessment.

There is a knock on effect in that students now enter senior cycle unprepared for the academic rigour required for those subjects which had been common level up to Junior Cycle.

This in turn leads teachers to question what will happen as the new Leaving Cert Curriculum is rolled out. One tag line does not inspire confidence “Preparing Students for the 21st Century”, when the first subjects will become active in 2025, a quarter of the way into the 21st Century.

Many, if not most, teachers see ‘Croke Park Hours’ as a punitive waste of time. These hours have destroyed much good-will due to the absolutist nature of how they are implemented: Must be on-site; must be accountable, etc. Must not be trusted.

Capitation for schools has not increased much in 18 years. In 2006 the standard capitation was €298 per pupil. (Source – Oireachtas). In 2024, the standard capitation is €345. (source: assets.gov) An increase of 16%. In that time the consumer price index shows inflation at 29.8%. Effectively, school capitation has been cut in those 18 years.

(source: https://visual.cso.ie/?body=entity/cpicalculator )

So. Next time somebody suggests I practise Well-Being. I will take the time to enlighten them as to how this covers up structural issues that need to be challenged.

My problem with Junior Cycle Assessment

Posted on by
Reply

“You’re about to enter into the best in-service training you will ever get”

Those were the words spoken to a group of us in Athlone around June 2005 as we started our training to correct that year’s Junior Cert Religion papers.

That year I was involved in correcting Ordinary Level Religion. And what an experience it was. Just about every teacher will, at some stage, correct papers for the state exams.

The process is, frankly, impressive. Old as I am, this was in the paper days. Attend the marking conference, and then drive to the department to pick up your bundle of papers. The sheer volume of papers that you would receive was a bit of a shock to the system. No on-screen marking for us!

The following two years I corrected Higher Level Religion.

A few things struck me around the fairness of the system, and the opportunities offered to students of differing abilities:

  • There was a clear difference between Higher and Ordinary Level Papers
  • Questions were qualitatively different. At Ordinary Level more weighting was given to short answers so as to allow candidates an opportunity to do well
  • Higher Level tended towards more in-depth questioning
  • The language used in each paper had enough variation to suit the candidates taking that paper

The great thing about this system was that it allowed any student to do well and receive a grade that reflected their ability and effort.

An outstanding student could have a chance of achieving an ‘A’ (remember those?), while a student with challenges could have a decent chance to pass an ordinary level paper. There was plenty of graduation built into the system.

In 2012, 27,913 students took Higher Level Maths. Of these about 15% were awarded an A grade. (Source: https://www.thejournal.ie/junior-cert-results-591703-Sep2012/ )

In 2024, across 25 subjects the average number of students achieving a Distinction was 4%. (source: https://www.irishtimes.com/ireland/education/2024/10/09/junior-cycle-results-out-today-as-percentage-scoring-highest-mark-falls-in-most-subjects/ )

I have a few problems with the Junior Cycle. The biggest problem I have is with assessment. While we still have differentiated papers for English, Irish and Maths, we have common papers in other subjects.

If the Department is so convinced that common papers are the way to go, then why have differentiated papers for these three core subjects?

Next, if we could have had such a gap of ability and results in 2012, how is it possible to give a fair assessment to a range of students on a common paper.

Finally, how is it possible that in 2012 15% of Higher Level students were able to get an A, but approximately 4% of students can now hope to achieve a distinction? This grade deflation is demoralising to those who have worked and who deserve to see their hard work rewarded.

I’m against the new Junior Cycle grading. I feel it’s fundamentally unfair to students (who don’t even like the nomenclature that goes with it). Unfortunately, as it is so new, I feel it will now be a very long time before any substantial change happens.

But before then, please have a look at the grading metrics, and allow those students who deserve a distinction, to receive that which they have worked for. 4% is not a fair breakdown in this case.

Our Own Worst Enemy

Posted on by
Reply

Education is a strange beast. It’s one of these public policy areas where everybody has an opinion – well, because everybody has some engagement with school.

Whether it’s our memories of primary, secondary, or (for some) college, we all have memories of our education that colour our perspective of what schools are, and hence, what schools can or should be.

For a number of years Irish governments have sought to provide a more empirical assessment of schools and Irish Education in general.

To this end we have the rankings from the OECD (The Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development), and its Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA)

Should a country fall back in its ranking, then there will be a huge fuss made. Programmes may be implemented, and blame may be spread.

As with many other countries, Ireland has high hopes for our Educational Attainment. This is measured in a number of ways: How many adults complete second level; what’s the combined score for reading, maths and sciences.

In 2018 PISA tested students in 79 countries. The average score for reading, maths and sciences was 488.

In Ireland the score was 505.

The PISA average for completing higher second level education is

Another key indicator for the OECD is ‘Educational Attainment’, by which they mean the percentage of adults from 18-64 who have completed higher second level education.

Ireland has an 85% rate for educational attainment, while Sweden’s rate is 83%. Close enough to identical. The OECD average is 79%, so both countries are ahead there.

Ireland’s PISA score was 505, compared to Sweden’s 503. The OECD average is 488, so both countries are well ahead.

(Source: OECD Better Life Index)

If we’re so close, why choose Sweden for comparison?

Well, the difference is in the spending. OECD has also tracked government spending in Education. As you’d expect, in Ireland we spend less than our international counterparts. (values are in US Dollar)

PrimarySecondaryTertiaryTotal
OECD Avg$10,658$11,942$18,105$40,705
Sweden$13,997$13,902$26,215$54,114
Ireland$9,589$11,379$17,400$38,368

(Source: Annual expenditure per student on educational institutions in OECD countries…in 2020, by country)

Ireland has long scrimped on spending in education. There was a brief moment of well-funded education in the early parts of this century, but the economic crash ended that. Ask any school leader and they will have stories of frustration and trying to scrimp and save in order to run their school.

So how is it that our education scores beat the OECD averages, even though we spend less on education than one of our closest matches?

Simple. As teachers we care deeply about our students, and will do anything within our power to achieve the best possible outcome for them. By refusing to let down our students, we have created an atmosphere where it is now expected that we continue to do so, despite continual underfunding. In this at least, we have become our own worst enemies.

When we are asked to compare Irish Education to Finland, then maybe we could take to heart this quote from the same OECD report:

“While teachers in Finland have always enjoyed respect in society, a combination of raising the bar for entry and granting teachers greater autonomy over their classrooms and working conditions than their peers enjoy elsewhere has helped to raise the status of the profession.”

So the next time anybody wants to talk about educational reform, here’s a radical idea.

How about funding Irish education properly?

Pesky Public Pensions

Posted on by
Reply

Those pesky public sector workers.  Them and their pensions are costing us money, and we need to sort it out.

Of course their unions are going to stand up for them, they are entitled to do so.

So runs the core of the argument by Paschal Donoghue, the minister for Public Expenditure.

It is now nearly nine years since the infamous bank guarantee, and we will be paying the cost of that mistake for years to come.  That mistake, on top of a property bubble and a global financial crisis created a financial crisis in Ireland that has cost us in an obvious business level, but also cost Ireland as a society: one just needs to look at the trolly crisis in hospitals, the cutting of resources in the Gardaí, in schools, in the broader public service.

It may have got old to say this by now, but the people being made to pay for the crisis were not the ones who created it.  The ongoing cost of the bank guarantee alone was something like €60 billion euro, with the interest costing approximately €1 billion every year. And yet, despite not being the ones to cause this crisis (it’s not over as we’re still paying the costs), members of the public service are still expected to suffer penalties.

For a while now the Fine Gael line has been that the public service bill is too high, and was part of the problem. And so, the public sector took some brutal pay cuts and changes to conditions in order to help the country as a whole deal with the mess that we, as a society, were in.

That cost has proven to be huge.

  • People have died while waiting on trollies in hospitals.
  • A&E units are swamped, leading to longer waiting times with greater stress on patients and medical staff
  • School resources cut and pupil/teacher ratios increased leading to poorer outcomes for many students
  • Longer working hours across the public service, less pay, and even less pay for those unfortunate enough to get their jobs after 2011
  • Wives and partners of those serving in the Army forced to protest because the pay is so poor

And yet, even with all this, the minister decides to push the idea that the public service costs too much and that he needs to cut where he can – with pensions the focus of today’s agenda.  Yes, we’ll finally reduce the pension levy, but must find a different way to get you to pay for the pensions.  So, um, get rid of the levy so long as we can keep the levy?

For me, there’s a premise behind all of this.  That the public service is a low-value cost, that should be cut where possible.  It’s a premise that I refuse to accept.

The public service is an integral part of Irish society, and is an excellent investment.

Just look at the work done by so many people across so many different parts of the public sector.  

  • Look at how hard our nurses and doctors work
  • Look at what teachers bring to and from their students
  • Look at the pride our navy has brought us from its mission in the Mediterranean

Fine Gael has managed to dominate the discussion of public sector pay by simplifying it to basic numbers.  An effective and healthy public service is more than a simplistic stating of the blunt cost.  The cost must be understood in context, and the value of what is achieved by the public service.  There is great value in the work being done, and it is Fine Gael that is devaluing it.

Fair and Equitable?

Posted on by
2

If one is to believe his appearances on news programmes recently, Our Dear Leader is a champion of all things ‘Fair and Equitable’.  In the government’s current spat with the ASTI Enda Kenny has resorted to a regular set of phrases designed to make the ASTI position appear to be, simply unfair (and possibly inequitable).

It really is a genius piece of spin.  Had we stayed within Lansdowne Road then younger members would benefit financially.  However, this is “contingent on the introduction of certain reform measures”  (have a look, paragraph 2 of the press release).  This all glosses over the simple fact that even with this increase, new teachers (within Lansdowne Road) are still paid a substandard starting salary in comparison to their pre-2011 counterparts.

The government is excellent at trumpeting good news in a manner to hide underlying facts.  The recent announcement regarding extra SNAs is really just a Cup and Ball Trick.

But I digress – Enda’s language got me thinking that if Fine Gael really is the arbiter of what’s fair and equitable in Education, then maybe FG policy is a shining example of how to treat the Education Sector with fairness.  So let’s have a quick recap of FG policies in relation to Education:

Repeated cuts in School Capitation

Capitation is the basis for a school budget.  Each school depends on capitation to pay the bills, hire the busses, get the books, repair the leaks, etc.  While all schools have had their capitation cut – this is inequitable.  Schools with a wealthier catchment area can rely on parents to subsidise some of the expenses.  Schools in a disadvantaged simply don’t have this option.

Increase the Pupil Teacher Ratio

In a larger classroom students don’t get the same level of attention.  It’s that simple.  Anyone who is claiming that a larger P/T ratio does not affect students is either untruthful or deluded.  Students benefit when their teacher can pay attention.

Get rid of Guidance Counsellors

It’s not easy to discern what you want to do with your life, and how to pick the best subjects and college courses for you.  That’s the job of guidance counsellors, and apparently one that the Government thinks we can do without.  Sure, they’ll argue that schools can now allocate resources as they see fit.  Really?  The choice is no guidance counsellor or yet larger class sizes.  Unless the school has the wealthier catchment area, in which case it may have the resources to fund a guidance counsellor.

Reduce supports for students with Special Education Needs

Fewer SNAs, fewer resource teachers. Think about this one – the group of students with the greatest challenges in school have had their supports cut.  How about that for fairness?

Strip resources for the National Educational Psychological Service (via the moratorium on employment)

NEPS provides huge support to schools.  One facet of this support is assessment – schools get access to a NEPS psychologist, and can provide some assessments during the year.  (Well, since the cuts, that now means ONE assessment for many schools).  Again, this is inequitable – some families can afford private assessments, some cannot.

Removal of middle management posts (Assistant Principal and Special Duties)

In any career people like to have the option of professional progression.  The removal of posts has removed that option for the vast majority of teachers.  Schools now depend on goodwill to get a number of jobs done – and this is putting more stress on principals and existing post holders.

Cut Teachers’ pay (in a number of ways – USC, Pension Related Deduction, Freeze increments)

Any teacher can look at his or her payslip and see all the extra deductions that are there.  The PRD grates as we have always paid into our pension, and have viewed a pension as ‘deferred pay’.  All workers suffer under the USC.  For a number of years we have had increments frozen.  The net affect of all of this is that teachers are still being paid less now than they were in 2007.

Cut Pay for the youngest teachers

I honestly don’t know exactly how this one happened.  Some say that the unions sold out the younger workers, and others say that this cut was done under FEMPI, beyond the control of the unions.  Maybe the unions were simply out-manoeuvred.  The simple fact is that our younger colleagues are on an inferior scale, and our government is unwilling to accept the principle that NQTs are entitled to equal pay for equal work.

Cut the rates and allowances for working for the State Examinations Commission

Just about every teacher has worked for a while correcting exams.  My first time doing it I was told I was about to undertake ‘the best inservice training ever’.  And it was.  The money was also pretty good.  However that has all been cut -and a number of experienced teachers have given up.  Come June and you will find the SEC posting ads for some positions that have not yet been filled.

Cut mileage and conference allocations

Attending conferences is good for professional development.  However, new rules mean that many of these conferences now take place on weekends, and any allowances for getting there are cut.  The fact that the conferences are still taking place is a testament to the professionalism of teachers who are giving up free time to improve their professional practice.

Change the sick pay entitlements

Nobody wants to get sick – but it is nice to know that if you get sick then there is a safety net to help. However the length of time this support is in place for has been cut.  Something that adds to the worry and stress of any teacher facing a serious illness.

 

Add to all of this we have a Taoiseach who has repeatedly been unwilling to give a straight answer to the question if he would be prepared to accept the principle of equal pay.

So, it’s a bit rich when Enda talks about his government working constantly for what’s ‘Fair and Equitable’.  His policies speak far louder than his words.  Fine Gael has overseen years of cuts in education and appears to have no intention to reverse these cuts.  Fairness and Equality have nothing to do with their policies.  The only thing that seems to matter is to balance a budget.