Council for Catholic Maintained Schools

PROPOSAL FOR TRANSFER TO POST-PRIMARY EDUCATION FROM 2010
COMMENTS BY THE COUNCIL FOR CATHOLIC MAINTAINED SCHOOLS
TO THE EDUCATION COMMITTEE

The Council policy is to seek an end to academic selection as it is educationally unnecessary and inconsistent with the principles of equality of access and social justice and does not facilitate a system of education necessary to meet the emerging needs of the economy and a more inclusive society.

The Council believes that the case for change in the organisation of post-primary education remains strong as existing arrangements continue to be a structural impediment to the raising of standards.

The Council believes that all schools should be good schools and should be characterised by academic excellence, high expectations, high performance, good behaviour and value added outcomes.

The Council believes that any system of ‘local’ transfer at age eleven should offer each child access to a ‘good’ school in the sector of his or her choice. The Council believes that this can only be assured on completion of the Area Based Planning process. Since this process is unlikely to have been completed and its recommendations fully actioned before September 2010 the Council has reluctantly accepted that some form of interim arrangement is necessary.

The Council believes that a Sustainable Schools policy is urgently needed to underpin an Area Based Planning process which respects the integrity of school owners (including transferors).

The Council fully supports an Area Based Planning process which is managed in a constructive and inclusive manner through a robust and transparent methodology informed by accurate and consistent data.

The Council does not accept that schools need time to adapt to broader ability intakes since the process of change will happen one cohort at a time and many grammar schools already have an all ability intake. It does accept, however, that the necessary arrangements to support a non-selective transfer are not yet in place in all areas and that ineffectual short-term arrangements might be detrimental to the longer term objective.

The Council believes that that no form of selective test is a reliable predictor of future performance. It accepts, however, that this proposal is intended as a pragmatic response to a an immediate and complex situation – not an ideal.

The Council accepts the diminishing proportions of 50%, 30% and 20% over the three year transition period but only on the basis that by 2013 all forms of a selective test will be ended.

The Council believes that the extent of demographic decline, the protracted timescale in responding to Post-Primary Review following publication of the Costello report and the detriment to some young people, particularly the most vulnerable, caused by limited curricular options cannot be ignored and urges all interests to address the problem of unviable post-primary schools as a matter of urgency.

The Council is mindful of the limited time to conclude a consultative and legislative process.

The Council reiterates its commitment to the Entitlement Framework to the raising of standards for all and to closing the gap in achievement.

The Council does not accept that the criterion ‘eldest / first child’ is either necessary or compatible with the principle of Area Based Planning since any child, regardless of his or her place in the family, should be admitted to a local school within the sector of choice. The notion of an “eldest / first child’ criterion seems only applicable to children living outside the area and as such is inimical to the principle of local provision.

The Council is concerned at the use of one of the ‘socially disadvantaged criterion’ concerned with ‘children entitled to Free School Meals’. Council believes that in drawing up area or sub- area boundaries this matter should be taken into account to create ‘more equal’ but not totally equal intake profiles. The Council is concerned that the management of artificial quotas could lead to the displacement of children from their natural areas through such processes as bussing. A general guideline on a social mix reflective of the area served by the school would be preferable to a fixed quota.

The Council is uncertain as to whether the term ‘bi-lateral‘ under the interim proposals is restricted to existing grammar and bi-lateral schools or open to any post-primary school which wishes to be considered as ‘bi-lateral’ during the transition phase. This should be clarified.

The Council would prefer that any test designed by CCEA should vary in nature and type from one year to the next, should not be open to coaching and preferably should not be based on literacy and numeracy as these are integral parts of the revised Northern Ireland Curriculum.

The Council is uncertain as to the meaning of the proposals on the management of cohorts, particularly in relation to collaborative arrangements.

The Council welcomes the proposal that the capital build programme will be reviewed to ensure compatibility with Area Based Planning.

The Council believes that economic or business interests should be represented on the Area Based Planning Central Group through a high level strategic nominee.

The Council regrets that as a Non-Departmental Public Body its views were not sought in the development of the interim proposals.