Transferor Representatives' Council

Submission at the request of the chairman of the Assembly Education Committee
Comment on the Minister of Education’s proposals for transfer to post-primary education from 2010
June 2008

The TRC offers the following comment on the Minister of Education’s proposals for transfer to post-primary education from 2010, particularly in the light of the update of her proposals revealed to the Committee at its meeting of 16 May 2008.

COMMENT ON THE VISION

1. The TRC seeks a system of education, which is child-focused and improves educational provision for all children. The present system has enabled notable academic success for some pupils; however, there are inequalities of outcome for many other children.

2. The TRC responds positively to a vision of education which aims to promote equality of opportunity. The selective system has had the effect of engraining social selection with only small numbers of children from socially deprived areas finding their way into grammar schools.

3. The TRC welcomes the emphasis on ‘quality education including academic excellence’ contained within the Minister’s proposals. It is important that the Minister demonstrates how academic pathways will still be available.

4. The TRC continues to believe that age 11 is too early to make important decisions which will shape a young person’s future. It is the Council’s view that political consensus should be reached to build a better education system without the need to continue with a transfer system based on the performance of children in a test at 11 years of age.

5. The principle of informed election is one which potentially offers an equitable and child-focused approach to finding the most appropriate educational pathway. The TRC seeks an educational system that is flexible and adaptable keeping options open for as long as possible.

6. The minister’s statement proposes that informed decisions about educational pathways are delayed until age 14 when pupils may change school or gain access to more appropriate provision through collaborative arrangements between neighbouring schools and colleges. However, the uncertainty and lack of clarity about finding suitable pathways is of concern to many parents. Measures to build the confidence of parents regarding the potential for good outcomes are absolutely vital.

COMMENT ON ADMISSIONS CRITERIA

7. From 2010 it is likely that certain schools, perceived as ‘successful’, will remain popular choices and will be over-subscribed. It is important that parents and schools receive appropriate advice and information to ensure that schools can meet the needs of pupils and pupils select the most appropriate school.

8. The use of geographic criteria will not necessarily result in a greater number of children from socially disadvantaged areas being admitted to the most popular schools. If distance from the school is one of the first criteria to be applied in the allocation of places it could have adverse impact on rural communities.

9. The proposed interim arrangements for transfer at age 11, from 2010 – 2013, giving grammar schools the option to continue to select a percentage of their intake on the basis of academic criteria, could help schools to better manage change to a more elective system. Consensus around this issue will be vital to prevent this interim arrangement being perceived as a threat to the ethos of certain schools.

10. If academic criteria are to be used at transfer, a test validated and controlled by the Department is a much preferred option to independently run tests. Given the nature of the religious divide in Northern Ireland’s education system, it is the view of the TRC that an unregulated system, in which a high percentage of the most popular schools from only one community select pupils on the basis of the results of a test, could result in movement of pupils across the sectors and create an imbalance in places available for pupils from one of those communities.

11. It is difficult to predict the effect of the proposals on the sustainability of individual schools, given the lack of clarity regarding the development of other policies eg the common funding formula, transport arrangements, review of special education etc.

COMMENT ON STRUCTURAL CHANGES

12. The TRC agrees that the Minister’s proposal regarding bi-lateral schools has potential as a way forward. The time-frame for adjustment and the gradation of the selection proportions are the key areas where consensus must be found. The Council asks what contingencies are in place if significant numbers of grammar schools choose not to become bi-lateral but remain fully selective?

13. The change process towards an elective system will require other significant structural adjustments to support it. These include: clear transfer procedures at age 11, 14 and 16, working collaborative arrangements between schools and colleges, funding arrangements to support collaboration, review of the transport policy, significant investment in the schools’ estate, functioning local area planning, and consensus among key stakeholders. The time for these necessary conditions to develop should not be underestimated. To forge ahead without the necessary preparation will also not achieve the high levels of parental confidence needed for such a change to take place.

CONCLUSION

14. The TRC expresses disappointment that an agreed way forward has not been achieved between the political parties regarding the issue of ‘academic selection’. The Council encourages the Minister of Education and members of the Northern Ireland Legislative Assembly to work together to find consensus on a new system of transfer and a resolution to this matter before the next academic year begins.