RESPONSE TO MINISTERIAL PROPOSALS FOR TRANSFER TO POST-PRIMARY EDUCATION

DEMOCRATIC UNIONIST PARTY

18 June 2008

The Democratic Unionist Party detects little fresh thinking in the responses received thus far from interested parties on the Minister’s proposals for transfer. Much of the material is a reiteration of the same ideological positions.

The DUP accepts the point made by Education and Library Boards that geography as a category for placing a child at a grammar school is “neither fair nor equitable”. We also support the view of the Boards regarding the “number of serious policy vacuums- no 14 to 19 policy, no sustainability policy, no outcome to the special education review, no political direction on the Bain Report or a Shared Future and only initial work on area based planning”.

Future transfer arrangements should not be considered in isolation from resolution of these other matters. We note that the Chairpersons’ Committee of the SELB “disagrees with the timescale indicated on the evidence of other policy documents and decisions still awaited; it believes a longer preparation period is required”.

The Boards also raise a number of logistical concerns about the Minister’s plan including “where will the new test be held? How would the children get there? How will the test be supervised?” and indicate that non-academic criteria are problematic: “proximity to the school could affect house prices as their application has done elsewhere and seriously affect rural dwellers. Have the proposals been rural proofed?”

The Association of Northern Ireland Education and Library Boards (ANIELB) states “We cannot reach a reasoned opinion with the dearth of precise proposals” and “There is a lack of information regarding where the test will be undertaken, the nature and supervision of the test and whether or not it will be based on the revised curriculum”.ANIELB also states “The expectation that many current grammar schools and non-grammar schools will become bilateral is unrealistic and the proposals do not take account of this possibility/ probability”.

The DUP agrees with the comments from the Council for Catholic Maintained Schools that “all schools should be good schools” and “that a Sustainable Schools policy is urgently needed to underpin an Area Based Planning process”.

The Governing Bodies Association Northern Ireland is correct in pointing out that the proposals are “transitional rather than interim” and that the Minister has a predetermined outcome in mind. However we question whether in relation to the GBA’s own proposal, sufficient information is contained within the pupil profile to distinguish between those children who would benefit from an academically-oriented education and others who might struggle in such an environment.

We note that on bilateralism the Northern Ireland Council for Integrated Education recognizes the “hybrid proposal serves only to confuse pupils and parents”. We agree with the Association for Quality Education description of bilateralism as a three year “stay of execution” for grammar schools.

The proposals from the Minister are aimed at ending within three years the placement of children at the schools most appropriate to meet their educational needs and aptitudes. Such an objective is directly in opposition to the frequently expressed wishes of the majority of the community in Northern Ireland and does not have the support of the Democratic Unionist Party.

The DUP welcomes the eventual acceptance from the Minister of the legal reality that academic selection cannot be abolished. Within the Minister’s proposals we welcome the acknowledgement that “The system must be about delivering quality education including academic excellence” and that “Academic excellence is a key plank of post primary education”. However the sentence accompanying these two statements: “The ending of academic selection will mean equal educational provision and opportunity for all children” is entirely misguided.

We welcome that the Minister has stated “The CCEA will draw up a standard test which will not distort the teaching of the Revised Curriculum”. This test should be produced and trialed as quickly as possible.

The confirmation that dozens of schools will use an independent form of assessment to match pupils to the most appropriate school, while not perfect, was inevitable. It is worthy of note that schools considered to be educating children from each of the two main communities in Northern Ireland have expressed their commitment to continue to use a form of academic assessment to match children to the most appropriate education pathway for them.

We have previously suggested that the l ogjam on transfer could be resolved simply by adding in an extra category to the admission criteria for receiving schools which would give greater freedom to Boards of Governors and permit schools with an academic ethos to match the most appropriate pupils through a validated form of assessment. It would operate as an opt-in system for pupils.

The Minister’s predilection for geographical criteria would mean those who can afford to, could effectively buy a place at popular schools. Parents would purchase homes within the catchment areas of the perceived good schools, disadvantaging the less well off.

We believe it is important that at a time of falling rolls, secondary schools should be protected by only permitting grammar schools to admit pupils reaching a certain academic threshold .

The Minister when speaking of those pupils who underachieve frequently seeks to blame the selective system. This is entirely inaccurate. The two issues are not linked and any attempt to link them is disingenuous. Indeed the underachievement in Northern Ireland, which clearly we must seek to reduce, is still much less than in the other constituent parts of the United Kingdom.

The notion of bilateral entry discriminates against pupils living a greater distance from the school. A system where a proportion of places are allocated on academic achievement but other children who live nearer to the school would be guaranteed places regardless of their aptitudes is unacceptable to the Democratic Unionist Party.

We are determined to see the grammar school ethos of academic excellence retained and prospering, and we support greater autonomy for schools regarding their admissions criteria.

The approach adopted by the Minister has made the development of an alternative form of academic assessment outside the Department for transfer to post-primary schools inevitable. The DUP does not consider this an ideal situation and we believe it best for the Department to have responsibility for any selection instrument. However, we recognize the position adopted by the Department thus far. We still maintain that consensus could yet be achieved on the transfer issue but it would require a genuine commitment from the Minister to find a realistic accommodation in the context of the existing legal position.

Addendum to DUP Party Paper

Recognition that CCEA can produce an academic test which does not hinder teaching of revised curriculum and that those from lower income families will lose out most, in the event of postcode lottery.