COMMITTEE FOR EDUCATION
REVIEW OF POST-PRIMARY EDUCATION IN NORTHERN IRELAND
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE
(Northern Ireland Council for Integrated Education)
Date: Tuesday 22 May 2001
Members present:
Mr Kennedy (Chairperson)
Mr S Wilson (Deputy Chairperson)
Mrs E Bell
Mr Fee
Mr Gibson
Mr McElduff
Witnesses:
Mr M Wardlow
Mr R Mullan(Northern Ireland Council for Integrated Education)
Mr T McMackin
The Chairperson:
Good morning. I welcome the representatives of the Northern Ireland Council for Integrated Education (NICIE).
Mr Wardlow:
I will begin by introducing Ray Mullan, who is a Department of Education nominee on our seventeen-member board, which is made up of several constituent groups. Mr Mullan is a former teacher. Terry McMackin is a development officer with the Northern Ireland Council for Integrated Education. He is also a former teacher. I come from a business and community development background.
We started off by welcoming the debate on post-primary education. One of the founding principles for integrated schools was an all-ability or mixed-ability intake. We thought that the subject was serious enough to set up a working party. The Northern Ireland Council for Integrated Education is a limited company with charitable status, and we are not a headquarters body. We had to pull in 46 integrated schools and try to get their interests represented, as well as those of the parents, teachers and trusts. It was not an easy exercise, there was a fairly consistent view on most things.
We welcomed the fact that the report stated that what we were looking for at the other end of the educational process was most important. Young people should be able to achieve their social, educational and economic objectives as a result of their education and should not simply go through the system accumulating information like tape recorders. The process must be aimed at developing them as whole young people.
We also came to the unanimous view that the current system was fatally flawed. Indeed, no one has argued for the maintenance of the transfer test based on academic ability at the age of 11. If selection were deferred to the age of 14, or any age for that matter, it would still be fatally flawed if it were based on academic ability.
The Chairperson:
Others may not be prepared to defend the examination as such, but they have not necessarily ruled out some sort of transfer procedure.
Mr Wardlow:
No one is arguing for the maintenance of the current examination at the age of 11.
The Chairperson:
No one is arguing for it in its current form.
Mr Wardlow:
After substantial discussions, it was decided that we should focus on was what was coming out the other end and that, therefore, the system should be put in place afterwards. Rather than labour over whether the Scottish, German or Austrian model is preferable, the intention of the working party was to consider principles, rather than to recommend a particular system.
The current system is based on competition for a limited number of grammar school places. Education professionals in the working party asked about the educational basis for that. In some board areas, 50% of young people attend grammar schools. In some board areas, pupils with a grade A cannot get into grammar school, but in other board areas, pupils with a grade C can get in. The current system does not offer inclusion and equality of access, contrary to what the Programme for Government, the Belfast Agreement and other papers that have been published in the past couple of years suggest. We recognise that the tail of low achievement is reducing, but a situation in which twice as many young men as young women leave school without any qualifications cannot be sustained in the twenty-first century.
There is also a need for joined-up Government. The end result of educational review, including curricular review, should be that young people can live as citizens not just of Northern Ireland, but of an increasingly plural world. The curriculum should support that, and citizenship should be included in it.
Young people tell us that they want equality of access and opportunity. It is no coincidence that today over 300 young people are talking about their experiences at the Save the Children Fund event in the Waterfront Hall. I heard some of those young people talking about going to the "stupid school". That is not just anecdote; young people are saying that on the record. In the integrated sector, we have always had mixed-ability intakes coming through the school doors. Any solution that would replace the transfer test at the age of 11 should be based on mixed-ability intakes.
It is incredibly difficult to deal with mixed- or all-ability classes. Teachers have been thrown carrots, and there are all sorts of discussions about thresholds. Ultimately, however, teachers have been given the tremendous task of dealing with curricular review. Some people are suggesting that teachers should assess the children, but the teachers and their unions are saying that it cannot be left to them. If we are to have a mixed-ability system, teacher training must reflect that. It is not sufficient to tell teachers that they must learn such-and-such. Our teachers were unanimous in saying that it is an extremely difficult subject.
There are more teachers in the profession today than ever before. That is not a coincidence. Since the local management of schools (LMS) programme handed responsibility for hiring teachers to the boards of governors, class sizes have come down. That trend should be maintained. The post-primary review should take into consideration the curriculum, LMS and local accountability for the teaching complements.
As with so much else, we inherited an English system. We inherited the transfer procedure and the 11-plus while grant-maintained schools seemed to mimic the opt-out schools. Why on earth in Northern Ireland in the twenty-first century can we not create rather than imitate? This was one of the reasons why we did not opt for any one system but for a set of principles. There is ample evidence of creativity in the Northern Ireland system. Integrated schools are an example of that; parents started the bulk of them, and 46 schools are now flourishing. There is other evidence along with our curriculum review that Northern Ireland can lead the way rather than be the subject of somebody else's history.
Although there are 17 integrated colleges and all of them have over 300 pupils, only 12 of them were established since 1995 or before. Therefore only 12 have GCSE results that can be compared to other schools. We have a model of all-ability schools that should be examined. Only five of the schools have been in existence long enough to have effective sixth forms and to turn out either the baccalaureate in Lagan, until recently, or A levels in Hazelwood and Oakgrove.
The question is often asked "What is the added value in mixed-ability schools?" The most recent statistics show that our pupils comprise not only of mixed ability and co-educational cohorts but that 20% of those attending integrated primary schools receive free school meals. The figures for the controlled sector are 17% while the Northern Ireland average is 23%. The colleges' figures are 22·5%. It means that between 1 in 5 and 1 in 4 of the young people in our schools are from areas of social disadvantage. When we refer to mixed ability we do not mean just the educational cohort. Our schools offer co-education and they include children from all social classes.
Parents, even in our sector, look at schools' results. In the 1998-99 figures the Northern Ireland non-selective GCSE average was 33%; it was 31% the year before. Of the 10 integrated colleges four have been transforming to integrated status and their statistics are shown. Brownlow Integrated College is the longest transformed and is performing above the Northern Ireland non-selective average. The other schools transformed recently and are still working through the process.
Of the six grant-maintained schools all, with the exception of Lagan College, which had 31% in that year, outperformed the average. This year Lagan College is back up to 44%, having been at 47% in 1997-98. The GCSE results show that all grant-maintained schools consistently, with the exception of Lagan College last year, perform above the Northern Ireland non-selective GCSE average.
Slemish College, in the North Eastern Education and Library Board area, was formed in 1996 and has an intake of 110. It is now the most oversubscribed school in the North Eastern Board area and has had to turn away 93 applicants. Ballymena Academy, by comparison, did not reach its quota last year. Of those children, 36% achieved grades A to C and 17 of them gained A grades in a school that is non-selective in academic ability.
Key Stage 3 results in integrated colleges are above the Northern Ireland average for non-selective schools. In Slemish College's mixed-ability intake at year 8 there is no setting, and in year 9 students are set three subjects. In contrast, Shimna College was formed in 1994 and has an intake of 80 pupils; last year it turned away 29 applicants. Its 51% GCSE grades A-C last year outperformed every other non-grammar school in the South-Eastern Education and Library Board area. It may or may not be a coincidence that Shimna College is the only integrated college that does not set its pupils until year 10. It is working towards a majority of a mixed-ability/all-ability intake right up to year 10. It only sets on two subjects. It now has a viable sixth form and we look forward to the A-level and NVQ results next year.
Lagan College, which for many is the flagship school, was formed in 1981 and has intake of 170. Twenty-eight of those young people are grade A or B 1s. It turned away 220 young people last year, and its GCSE average for grades A to C this year was 44%. The Northern Ireland average as we said earlier is 33%.
Lagan College does have a sixth form and until last year ran the international baccalaureate. It is now offering NVQ and A Level. Even at the baccalaureate, 85% of young people succeeded in this exam. In intermediate and advanced level GNVQs, 100% of the students who sat the tests received those awards. Lagan College is showing that you can have a mixed-ability intake, that you can offer A Level and GNVQ side by side and still have good results.
In closing this presentation, John F Kennedy said, the best way to create the future was to invent it. I am arguing that we owe it to our children to offer a system which will allow them to look back on their school days, not only as the happiest of their lives, but as the days in which their potential was recognised.
During Carmel Gallagher's presentation she said that when she interviewed the cohort study participants, young people aged 11 and 12 want to be:
"Personally educated, confident, self-assured, understand their emotions, health and sexuality. They want to be politically and environmentally aware, they want to be prepared for work and ICT"
It is like a shopping list. We are not saying that young people should get everything they want or indeed, that they even know everything they want - but we have got to listen to their opinions.
Parents, as well as children, are central to what we do in the integrated sector. It is no coincidence that 35% to 40% of young people at integrated colleges have not sat the transfer test. Some of them have attended integrated primaries, but some have not, and that figure stands at somewhere around 20% of those in other school sectors. We are arguing that there are schools and that they should be investigated. At the minute we have a draft report that has looked into the integrated schools, which will be part of what we are prepared to present to the Burns Committee.
The Chairperson:
Thank you. How do you think the decision about which pupils will gain places in schools that are over-subscribed should be made? Is there not a great danger of this being decided by postcode, and ought that not to be avoided?
Mr Wardlow:
Someone said it is like a lottery; 'it could be you'. Whatever word we use, there is going to be some form of selection. At the minute children are being selected out or deselected. The fact that children refer to 'stupid schools' emphasises that. At the moment it is a lottery in many schools and even in some of ours. We turn one child out of three away and that is not healthy.
There is an argument that we should be looking towards a system where children are not turned away and where there is free parental choice in transferring. It would mean larger schools, and we would get into the argument about rationalisation. Schools could set their own criteria. It does not have to be a lottery, but our argument would be that the criteria should not be based on ability alone.
Mr S Wilson:
What criteria?
Mr Mullan:
At the moment, all schools have criteria. All non-grammar schools set criteria, which can be a combination of items. These could comprise neighbourhood, family connections with the school, or parents who are teachers at the school.
Mr S Wilson:
That is the point the Chairman was making. Is that not selection by postcode, by pay packet, and by social connection? Is that any fairer than academic selection?
Mr Mullan:
It is selection by parental choice also.
Mr S Wilson:
It is not, if you have set the criteria along the lines you have mentioned.
Mr Wardlow:
Another issue is that if the schools are large enough to take everyone who want to go there, then the question of selection criteria does not occur. We are in a system where people are competing for places. We have schools where there is parental choice, and we still have to set criteria, which is usually those who have brothers and sisters at the school or those who have been to an integrated primary school. We do not use ability as a criterion.It is inevitable that there will be some form of selection if there are going to be a limited number of schools and school places.
Mr S Wilson:
Do you think that social selection is better than academic selection?
Mr Wardlow:
Those are your words. We do not see it as social selection. It is down to parental choice.
Mr S Wilson:
I am just taking the criteria that you have outlined to us.
Mr Mullan:
It seems to me that if you are going to allow ability to be a criterion then all schools should be allowed to decide on that basis - not just grammar schools.
Mr McElduff:
Do integrated post-primary schools have all-ability classes or is streaming or different types of setting or banding used? If there are all-ability classes, are they for certain ages or certain subjects?
Mr Wardlow:
Currently, all schools in year 8 have mixed-ability or all-ability classes; they do not set or stream. None of the integrated schools stream. Schools have a mixture of setting and banding; the majority will set. Shimna College, for example, waits until year 10 and sets on only two subjects. Slemish College sets on three subjects from year 9. Other schools vary between two and four setting subjects. Pupils are in all-ability or mixed-ability classes for subjects other than those three or four. That applies across the entire integrated education sector.
Mr McMackin:
The core value that integrated schools hold dear is that they do not select children on ability. Mr Wardlow's reference to the 'stupid school' underlines that. Once children are allowed into the school irrespective of their ability, some methods work well, arrived at through discussion between the principal and the staff. Those methods that seem to work well are adopted. This is about movement, from the premise that you have this core value, which is not selecting on ability.
Mr S Wilson:
The idea of the 'stupid school' is not based on evidence. The Gallagher and Smith report pointed out that the youngsters whom they surveyed were very proud of the secondary schools they attended. Most of them said that they were glad that they went there. Perhaps you are challenging the Gallagher and Smith report. However, that is not the kind of emotive language that is coming from the youngsters when they choose which school to go to. All of us would be invited to local primary schools fairly frequently. I have yet to hear the term 'stupid school' used. Perhaps you would indicate where you have gathered your evidence from, and where Gallagher and Smith got it wrong.
You have quoted statistics for individual schools. We could go into the reasons why particular schools outperform others and we could look at what people say about standards. Often the leadership in a school and its location are as important as its intake.
It seems odd that at a time when, in the rest of the UK, all-ability schools are being rubbished by the Prime Minister and the Department for Education and Employment, you seem to want to go back to the failed model of the 1960s. That model is now regarded as inadequate and, to use the terms of some of its staunchest defenders in the past, has failed a generation of youngsters. While you have quoted evidence for individual schools under your remit, how do you explain the under-performance of the mixed-ability comprehensive schools, which have caused so much concern in the rest of the United Kingdom and which they are now ditching?
Mr Wardlow:
It depends where you source your evidence. I have seen very cogent arguments for and against the Scottish system of comprehensive education. We could play volleyball with evidence. No-one is saying that we are turning the clock back. We have 17 all-ability schools that are working and are oversubscribed. There are schools in England based on mixed-ability or all-ability intake that are working. The fact that the Prime Minster may or may not say that one type is better that the other is, with respect, his opinion.
I am returning to the fact that we should be creators and not consumers. Other countries are arguing - and you have looked at some models - that all-ability intake is possible. That does not mean that you do not look at children in terms of their ability per subject, which is work setting - Mr McElduff's question comes in there - and which is what our schools do. That is often done at a local level.
The Chairperson:
What about the reference to 'stupid schools'?
Mr Wardlow:
That evidence comes from the Save the Children Fund's report. Three hundred and sixty children were interviewed. When the Save the Children Fund's report, which is being launched today at the Waterfront, is published the evidence will be there.
The Chairperson:
Could those who hold a particular viewpoint have influenced those children? I worry about the use of such terms. It does education a huge disservice to brand a school as a 'stupid school', and it puts teachers in an invidious position. Would it not be better if we were to conduct the important debate without resorting to emotive terms that could show individual schools in a bad light?
Mr Wardlow:
One third of Northern Ireland's population is under the age of 21. Perception is nine tenths of the truth whether we like it or not. Many of those young people may not have another way of saying what they feel about this. It is a fairly large cohort study and what seems to be coming across is more than anecdotal. I cannot say whether Save the Children are pushing a particular party line. However, there is evidence that young people at selected-out schools feel that they are not as worthy as their peers at grammar school. In fact the Gallagher report says that grammar-school pupils score 16 extra GCSE points because of the grammar-school effect.
Mr S Wilson:
Would it be better to have the 'poor school', with pupils selected on the basis of social background?
Mr Wardlow:
That is going back to the idea that there are only a few options. We are talking about principles. No-one can wave a magic wand and give the answer. We are saying during the curricular review, the LMS review and the educational administration review that we cannot rush this issue - it needs to evolve. Any selection based on academic ability is fundamentally flawed.
Mr McMackin:
We are offering a particular choice. I taught in St Louise's Comprehensive College, and then Lagan College. They are different types of all-ability school, and both are eminently successful. All-ability schools, whether formal comprehensives or in the sense that we are speaking about, are extremely successful. We work on the basis of inclusiveness, which is a very important value. There are various ways of structuring the system, and we are offering one way.
Mr S Wilson:
You have accepted that by laying down criteria you are dividing children. Let us not run away with the idea that you are all-inclusive. You admitted to the Chairman that you divide children - by locality, whether they have peers at the school, or whether their parents went to the school. There will be division where there is oversubscription.
Mr McMackin:
There is something particularly pernicious about dividing children according to ability.
Mr S Wilson:
It would be far worse if they were divided according to their parents' pay packet or where they live.
Mr McMackin:
We do not operate on that basis.
Mr Wardlow:
It is very simple; we need bigger schools with larger intakes and then the issue is dealt with.
The Chairperson:
We would have to increase taxes accordingly.
Mr Wardlow:
A price must be paid for the education of our children. We cannot scrimp on that. We already invest in our teachers.
The Chairperson:
The Committee is perfectly aware of its obligations. What is desired is not always easily attainable.
Mr Gibson:
I have experience of mixed-ability education. Eventually, it had to be abandoned. You said that you had mixed-ability intake, but that you also had setting. One is the antithesis of the other. Setting has to be done on some basis. One negates the other.
Mr Fee:
Is there anything unique about the integrated schools system that could be imported into the rest of the education system? I come from a place where integrated education cannot work because there are not enough Protestant children - we are all taigs there. There are other areas in the same situation. Are there elements of your approach to education that might be useful to the rest of the system?
Why are teachers so reluctant to advise parents about where their children should go? The Committee went to look at the German system. Primary school teachers there play a crucial role in giving advice. They do not determine where the children go; the parents determine that. However, over time, the teachers give an assessment of how a child is doing. I detect resistance from teachers in Northern Ireland to the idea that they should be part of that process.
Mr Gibson:
There is a lack of confidence .
Mr Fee:
I can understand why they would not want to be involved, but they are the professionals in that situation.
Mr Mullan:
Integrated schooling is based on the premise that children should not be divided by religion. Having refused to make a distinction on religious grounds, we do not think that it is logical to make a decision on ability grounds. That would be ignoring one form of segregation in order to introduce another. All the children are of equal worth and ought to be treated as such. All-ability schooling and integrated schooling go side by side.
There is no single model of mixed ability work associated with integrated schools. Our presentation showed that there was a wide range of experimentation on how integrated schools deal with all-ability intake - streaming, which is the exception, setting, bands or totally mixed-ability classes throughout. Most integrated schools operate some form of total mixed-ability teaching and some form of setting. Like Mr McMackin, I taught in a comprehensive school in west Belfast, and mixed-ability classes worked very successfully. Mixed-ability work is undoubtedly a challenge to the teacher. Teachers need to be more inventive, but it can be done. As Mr Wardlow said, teachers should receive more training in mixed-ability skills.
Mr McMackin:
In what circumstances would teachers advise parents on choice of school?
Mr Fee:
It may be advice on the choice of schools, setting or banding. If there is a way of selecting children other than by a single exam on a given day, it must be some form of continuous assessment. The direction of the child's education - at whatever age - would be determined by the child, the parents and the teacher. We will not change the system if teachers refuse to review their role.
Mr McMackin:
There is, possibly, some reluctance on the part of teachers to face the burden of deciding what happens to a child after the age of 11. Integrated schools offer a high-profile role for parents, and that could help with the relationship between the school, parents, teachers and pupils.
Mr Wardlow:
Our system makes it difficult for teachers to envisage the future. They do not want to be the arbiters of a child's future in a system that selects by ability. Teachers feel that, perhaps, they could be blamed if they advise a parent that his or her child should go to a particular school.
Any new system must take into account the fact that the burden of responsibility has fallen on teachers for too long. We owe it to teachers to show them inventive methods and to provide re-training and in-service training. That would enable them to make informed choices, as the professional in the triangle of parent, pupil and teacher. Under the present system, even if the teacher makes an informed choice, there is no guarantee that the child will get into a particular school in the board area. Teachers are reluctant to be fall guys for decisions to push a child in one direction or another. If there were more choice and if there were mixed intakes, teachers will - if properly trained - be one of three people involved in the education of a young person.
The integrated sector has parent councils rather than parent-teacher associations. That could be imported into other sectors. Parents in the integrated sector have a high level of involvement in the informal curriculum. Teachers and parents in the integrated sector take a collegiate approach. They come from the two main traditions and others; they are males and females dealing with young males and young females. It is a microcosm of what Northern Ireland society should be.
The Chairperson:
When the Committee examined the Scottish comprehensive system, we learned of a report advocating the addressing of underachievement at stage one and stage two - roughly equivalent to our Key Stages 1 and 2.
Mr Wardlow:
There are schools in the North of Ireland where there is low achievement. The level is coming down because of programmes such as the Raising Schools Standards Initiative (RSSI). However, the common curriculum cannot be suspended to help a school through a specific problem. The approach must be holistic. In integrated schools - as with every other school - there are special needs children; LMS allows schools to place the necessary teachers in those situations. Integrated schools are aware that a good partnership with the parents and the young people allows them to devise a way of dealing with mixed-ability intakes and other issues such as RSSI or special learning needs.
The Chairperson:
How can there be a parity of esteem between academic and vocational courses and qualifications?
Mr Wardlow:
Humpty Dumpty said that a word would mean whatever he wanted it to mean. "Vocational" has become a pejorative word meaning "trade". Young people, regardless of what they want to end up as in life, need vocational and academic training. The trick will be in how that is delivered. The jury is out on whether there should be a common curriculum to 14 or to 16 and then a joint choice. However, Hazelwood College and Lagan College offer A levels alongside GNVQs. Young people can do both; they do not have to be streamed into an either/or situation. We need a pluralist approach that allows for the young person's needs to be met. That will cause problems.
Mr Mullan:
We must not push children into specialising too early. The danger is that there would be two groups - people on the university route, and everybody else. People who are not going to university are told that they will take the vocational route, which becomes stigmatised. I saw it in schools 20 years ago, when vocational courses were introduced for people who could not do A-levels. Those courses soon became stigmatised. That is a danger.
The Chairperson:
Like "stupid schools"?
Mr Mullan:
That is exactly the point.
Mr Fee:
Are you suggesting that there should be an element of compulsion? Should every child do vocational and academic work?
Mr Mullan:
All students must do the same curriculum up to the age of 14. After that, there are various optional subjects. It is possible that there is greater flexibility for sixth-form students, because they are beyond compulsory school age.
Mr Gibson:
Should there be optional subjects at 14?
Mr Wardlow:
We cannot give the council's view on that. The council will respond separately to the curriculum review. I am happy to put on record what I believe, but I do not want my views attributed to the council.
It would be crazy for a student to specialise to be a medic at age 14 and choose only science subjects. We all agree that there should be core subjects. Citizenship education, for example, should not be simply about how Protestants and Catholics live together, but about how people can be active citizens and how they might live in a pluralist society. There will be a vocational element to that. To specialise academically at 14 is, in my view, crazy.
Mr McElduff:
We have often heard about poor teacher morale in the secondary sector. How would the council describe morale in the integrated post-primary sector?
Mr Wardlow:
Those who apply to us for head teacher posts will say that there are high levels of stress involved in, for example, moving into a new school that is starting from scratch. There are particular difficulties with transforming schools, where people are trying to change a culture that has been there for a long time. Teachers in transforming schools will say that it is not easy, particularly for those from the minority tradition in the school.
In the main, our teachers are working through a career path. We are not experiencing a mass exodus, or having lots of folk phoning up for stress counselling. Like all teachers, however, ours are finding themselves under consistent pressure to perform. In the primary sector, many teachers are under stress because of the coaching versus non-coaching issue. We are not any less or more stressed, and we have two or three teachers applying for every teaching post. The shortlisting procedures alone are horrendous. Perhaps, that is because they are new schools, with new challenges.
Mr McMackin:
There is a sense of being involved in a new venture. I have taught in two integrated schools. There is a helpful sense of camaraderie among staff, but that does not relieve the stress that all teachers are experiencing.
Mr Gibson:
Is there such a thing as an academic subject? Are not all subjects vocational?
Mr Wardlow:
Is that a rhetorical question? It does not matter what a subject is called, the important thing is perception.
The workforce and the further and higher education establishments dictate the requirements of the school system. There are certain given facts. For example, a student who wants to do medicine must have 3 grade As. We cannot change that, so we must ensure that young people have a rounded education. In a school with a co-educational, mixed-ability intake and with teachers and governors from both traditions, parents are highly involved. There is opportunity within and outside the curriculum to learn new subjects. We hope that what we offer a more rounded young person with a more holistic approach to education, which we believe mixed-ability schooling can deliver.
Mrs Bell:
How can we build up public confidence in the new system? We hope that whatever we put in place will be a good, all-round system. How do you deal with opposition to the establishment of a school in a particular area?
Mr Wardlow:
In our experience, it is a process, not a product. It is a journey, not a destination. If we see it as a destination, we are talking about revolution rather than evolution. We want to deliver something that best suits the young people of Northern Ireland, so that they can live together and celebrate together , but we cannot turn everything around and deliver that within a year. There must be a lead-in period.
The fact that we have an Education Committee is one of the most attractive things about what is happening here. We have representatives who are accountable for public money and know that they must balance one demand against another. People realise that we have accountable government for the first time. The people are taking decisions together. When the parties take a lead and ensure that the communities are consulted, there are no winners or losers. People feel that a compromise has been reached and that it is a win-win situation.
Ultimately, as Mr McMackin said, this is a value issue. Young people must feel that they have a place in the here and now - not just in the future. We are not arguing for a revolution, but there are instances of successful all-ability schools here, so why must we look at somebody else's system? Why can we not create something ourselves and let other people mimic us?
Mr McMackin:
Integrated schools can offer parent groups experience of working to create a school. There is a real sense of ownership.
The Chairperson:
Thank you. We hope that we will have continued contact.
Session ended at 12.28 pm
22 May 2001 / Menu