Photosales
niJobfinder
niCarfinder
Home Delivery
Propertynews
Ruane: Discrimination in academic selection inevitable
Monday, 27 April 2009
Catholic schools which retain academic selection will inevitably discriminate against some children, the Education Minister claimed today.
Many Catholic grammars have already announced they will set independent tests, while more than 30 state schools have said they will continue to use academic selection against Caitriona Ruane's wishes.
The Commission for Catholic Education has given the go-ahead for grammars in Northern Ireland to set entrance exams.
However, it also restated its position that academic selection of any kind should end by 2012.
Ms Ruane said: "The question that anybody involved in education has to ask is: 'can you test children at the age of 10 and 11, put them through high-stake, grade-determined entry into post-primary school without discriminating?'
"I don't believe we can."
In the past the minister has highlighted the potential impact of independent testing on children from disadvantaged areas, those with special needs or Irish speakers.
The final 11-plus was held in Northern Ireland's schools last November and the way in which children currently in primary six will transfer to second-level education remains unclear.
A working group was set up earlier this year to consider the issue.
The Catholic commission said that in the absence of a regulated system of transfer, academic tests may be appropriate in the short-term, particularly for those post-primary schools which are oversubscribed.
But it warned against discriminating against pupils, forcing them to sit a multiplicity of tests or distorting the curriculum.
The minister was responding today to a question from DUP Assembly member Edwin Poots in the chamber.
Mr Poots asked: "Is she going to fly in the face of the Catholic Commission, reject the views of the Catholic Commission as minister of education?"
Ms Ruane has asked schools to operate non-academic admissions criteria only.
She said if schools implemented the guidance issued by the Department of Education there was no need for any breakaway entrance tests in any schools.
Meanwhile, 46 primary school principals in the Newry and Mourne area today issued a statement opposing academic selection.
"In our professional opinion academic selection at 11 does a disservice to our children, is divisive, and distorts the primary curriculum," they said.
"As our statutory legal duty is to deliver the revised curriculum, this prevents us from using teaching time or school resources to prepare for, or facilitate, any transfer tests.
"Deployment of staff and school resources will be for the revised curriculum only. If schools were to set aside the revised curriculum in order to prepare for tests, we would be failing in our statutory duty towards our children, not withstanding the possible legal consequences."
The minister said in the past fortnight three groups representing over 150 primary schools had spoken out against academic selection.
- Text Size
.
The school principals from Newry and Mourne have embraced the ministers political agenda evidenced by their statement "As our statutory legal duty is to deliver the revised curriculum, this prevents us from using teaching time or school resources to prepare for, or facilitate, any transfer tests."
If these principals were prepared to examine the legal, factual position they would understand and admit that the revised curriculum is no different from its predecessor where English and maths are concerned. Now if the teachers teach the curriculum they would be preparing pupils to take a test of numeracy and literacy. Their refusal to do so, based on misinformation, places them in a perilous legal position. Parents should not be intimidated by statements by these groups of convenience. Let the principals name their schools and be prepared to meet parents at the school gate to their "professional opinion"
Posted by parental alliance for choice in education | 02.05.09, 11:18 GMT
Of course academic selection discriminates - that's the point; it discriminates fairly on the basis of intelligence.
Ruane wants to discriminate on free school meals... Is that fair? I think not.
Posted by David | 01.05.09, 18:33 GMT
Which is why, exasperated, we need to agree on change.
Not just inflict a system upon people and say, "This is the way you shall do things. I'm right and you're wrong. It is irrelevant that my children attend the very type of school that I am trying to abolish. I'm right and can do what i like. What do you mean I can't? What do you mean schools can use academic selection as a criterion? Oh dear my party aren't going to be too happy with me How do I save face? I know, I'll not bother. I'll just plough ahead and make life difficult for everyone, including my advisors, whom I ignore unless they say something I agree with."
Stormont is not working. We won't get anything of significance done up on the hill I'm afraid.
Posted by Primary Teacher | 01.05.09, 17:43 GMT
Stephen73 "with regards attendance, discipline and drugs problems, there is a vast difference between Grammar and High Schools in this regard. Why, because of the 11+? No, because of how children are socialised to value education."
So let me get this straight, grouping together children from the same socially disadvantaged background, many of whom have been categorised by our education system as 'second(ary)', and therefore of lesser value (as evidenced by the preferential resources and infrastructure given to the grammar 'winners'); has not caused nor contributed the differential in performance?
As a secondary teacher you know full well that grammar schools eject children who cause them difficulties, either because of attendance issues, learning styles or motivation (thankfully the secondaries are there as a 'safety net'); teachers claim such children should never have been in their schools to start with! But again this does not contribute to differential performance. Oh dear……
Posted by Exasperated | 01.05.09, 09:26 GMT
Exasperated, if you had read the contribution you would see Concerned and Dismayed P6 parent said 'Where I live' he did not say it is the case every where.
Our local secondary does not have drugs problems or such like, but very poor results, no offer of A levels either. I think there where something like 6 children who received decent GCSE results last year - that's where Caitriona Ruane wants me to send my child, while hers is at the girls Grammar in Newry! I am not anti secondary schools, in fact I know a first class secondary in Armagh, but unfortunately Caitriona is wrong when she says 'all schools are a good school', it simply is not the case. I also feel discriminated against because myself and my husband work hard all week. I have voted Sinn Fein for 18 years, as has my husband, they will never receive a vote from our house again, or any other party who is anti academic selection for that matter.
Posted by Concerned parent | 29.04.09, 22:57 GMT
Exasperated - "the entire education system ..... needs change."
Therefore any political representative worth their salt would surely have the sense to try and change the system by reaching agreement. That is the Minister's job. I believe it is also the Minister's job to listen to those who have valid points to make. The Minister says that she has met with various groups etc etc. This is different to listening!
The Minister's 'My way or the highway,' is not going to get us anywhere.
Especially as the alternative - a legal highway which is established in legislation - is the route which the Grammar schools are taking.
How would people feel about the first criterion for schools being 'all those who are not entitled to free meals'? This is just as discriminative.
If you want to change the system then have a replacement that will work!
Posted by Primary Teacher | 29.04.09, 22:54 GMT
Exasperated, don't be pedantic, you know exactly what was meant with regards attendance, discipline and drugs problems, there is a vast difference between Grammar and High Schools in this regard.
Why, because of the 11+? No, because of how children are socialised to value education. I say this as someone who went to a High School and later taught in a High School; I had no respect for education at 11 years of age, and many of the kids I worked with at the High School never learned to value education.
I worked in one of the worse performing High Schools, but I thought the teachers there did a great job, because they pushed many students through and helped them appreciate education, in a 'school for all levels', these kids will leave with nothing, getting a child who's parents have instilled no value in education to achieve 5 GCSE's is just as impressive as teaching a kid who wishes to learn how to get 9 A's at GCSE.
Ruane's reforms are just as socially discriminatory.
Posted by Steven73 | 29.04.09, 19:34 GMT
So Grammar schools don't have "attendance, discipline and drugs problems"!
Now I've heard everything.....
Posted by Exasperated | 29.04.09, 13:16 GMT
Steven 73 - I agree!
My child will have to sit the tests to try and get in to a good school - my daughter is discriminated against as both of her parents work hard to try and make a living (not much but we get by). This will at least give her a chance to get a place in a school providing a high standard of education.
There is inequality in the provision of schools - they aren't all equal not 'every school is a good school' - address this before you change the system - where I live the Grammars are the only schools that provide a high standard of education - the 2 Secondary schools have attendance, discipline and drugs problems and the results are poor. I am happy for her to sit tests.
Posted by Concerned and Dismayed P6 parent | 29.04.09, 11:12 GMT
Sinn Fein criterion for admission:
Applicants who are entitled to Free School Meals (FSME): priority to be given so that the proportion of such children admitted is not less than the proportion of first preference FSME applications received within the total number of first preference applications received.
So, if you are entitled to free shcool meals and you select a school as your first preference, then you get a place at that school.
How is this not discrimination against people who work? It's typical Sinn Fein hypocracy, one rule for us, another for them. I'm sorry, I'm from a working class background, but my wife and I both work hard, and now our kids may not get into their local school because another child gets free school meals?
It's a joke, it is nothing short of social discrimination. We have already experienced this with nursery education were our kids could not get a place, because we were not on income support? This is discrimination by another name.
Posted by Steven73 | 28.04.09, 17:16 GMT
Well said Catholic Mother and Concerned Mother.
Posted by Concerned Parent | 28.04.09, 16:20 GMT
Exasperated, I am pro academic selection and I would completely blame the secondary schools if the children are not being educated properly - where are the school inspectors!!!
Posted by Concerened Mother | 28.04.09, 16:19 GMT
Why is it supporters of Academic Selection claim that the N.I education system, and in particular their much loved test, is not responsible for underperformance in post primary schools; no, no, its "the parents lack of interest in their children" or "the over reliance on benefits", yet when it comes to Primary underperformance it IS all down to the education system and the teachers?
Underperformance is complex and not subject to simple solutions (the 11+ certainly did not solve the problem); it is a systemic malfunction of our current system. The system its self is deeply flawed and needs overhauling. 'Bits' cannot be ring fenced and said to be 'good'... the entire education system is not working at optimum efficiency and needs change.
Posted by Exasperated | 28.04.09, 11:02 GMT
Bla-Bla-Bla! Yaawwwnn! Remember folks, European elections are coming up - be mindful of which parties are anti academic selection.
Posted by Catholic Mother | 28.04.09, 08:39 GMT
I believe Ruane selected a grammar school for her child or children.
Why do we even listen to what she says?
BTW, this piece reads like a cut and paste job from a Sinn Fein press release.
Posted by J Stanley | 27.04.09, 17:57 GMT
A test, may test for ability, knowledge or understanding. It cannot discriminate, people discriminate. Is Mrs Ruane aware that the same argument could be used about all forms of testing? Interviews, driving test, GCSE O and A levels, university entrance, who should be the next Sinn Fein candidate etc
'The Commission for Catholic Education has given the go-ahead for grammars in Northern Ireland to set entrance exams'. The Catholic church is therefore condoning discrimination.
If we follow this logic all testing should be banned from schools because tests discriminate. -Bad tests!
Posted by T J McClean | 27.04.09, 17:54 GMT
Pity the primary school principals do not see teaching children to read, write and become numerate as part of their statutory duty towards children. Any child that leaves primary school with a Key Stage assessment of 3 or under in numeracy and literacy has been FAILED by their primary school. No excuse accepted. Poor performance in numeracy & literacy is down to poor teaching methods, plain and simple. Legal consequence should follow every instance where a child leaves primary school illiterate & innumerate. Where are the impotent School Inspectorate?
Posted by L Saunders | 27.04.09, 17:31 GMT