Jim Daly (Cork South West, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

It is timely that we focus on the issue of leadership in schools given their importance to society. Like the previous speaker, I have interest in this subject as a former school principal. When I was first appointed 13 years ago, a teacher advised me that the children would be fine but that I should watch the teachers. That advice stuck with me because it came home to roost. It can be an extraordinarily challenging time, as anyone working in the field would know. The children, by and large, are not the issue but managing staff is a challenge in any career area. Principals find it particularly difficult to manage a troublesome member of staff or an underperforming teacher and supports in that regard is non-existent.

On becoming principal, I took the IPPN's Misneach course and I have said repeatedly since then that it was one of the most impressive course I ever took. I took the course in Ennis and it was extremely informative and valuable. I continue to use what I learned from it. I agree with the point raised by Mr. Cottrell regarding the inability to stand down as principal. If there was one progressive issue this committee could address, that would be it. When people become tired or burned out they should be able to stand down without going to the bottom or, in all likelihood, ending up on the panel for deployment to different schools.

I cannot believe that Circular No. 16-73 remains the blueprint for the duties of principals and that it has not been updated. Given that the circular only uses the masculine pronouns, there clearly were no female principals in 1973. I note with interest that principals are given 29 tasks, the 28th of which is "he should bring to the notice of his pupils the advantages both national and personal of the habit of saving". I was not aware of that responsibility when I was principal but it might have done no harm had I put more emphasis on it. I give credit to the authors of the circular because it was fairly forward looking for 1973 when, I hasten to add, I was one year old.

The role of boards of management is an issue of particular interest for me. Boards of management can be very good but they can also be very weak. principals heavily rely on them but I am not sure sufficient effort is made to ensure there is genuine support for managers in dealing with staff. In other words, business people and others with experience in this area should be represented on boards. That expertise exists in communities but I am not sure the selection criteria for boards is sufficient to recruit it. There is often over reliance on boards that are not up to scratch in terms of the job they are given. In an era when we are examining the role of boards and the separate issue of transparency, which I intend to raise in a different context, one of the last bastions left untouched are the boards of management in schools. Everyone kowtows to the fact that they are voluntary but I do not accept that they are beyond scrutiny. What do the witnesses think about the roles and qualities of boards of management?

I think the INTO is running the management of most schools because if principals have difficulties they go to the INTO. I am not sure that is always in the best interest of the schools concerned, however, because the advice given is not always up to scratch. In my view there is over reliance on the INTO for management tasks the board of management should be supplying but there is a gap and the INTO is filling it.

As I am well known locally as a former principal, I find myself holding the hands of a considerable number of principals because, thankfully, there has been significant investment in building projects in my constituency.

The devolved building projects are a major headache for school principals. They are not architects or surveyors, they do not understand planning and do not know how to meet and greet a builder. The boards are not doing it and in many cases it falls back on the principal. The Department is conveniently using the devolved grant system, sending the cheque and leaving the schools to it. Heretofore there was more support from the Department. It is an added pressure on principals and should be highlighted because they are not qualified in that area.

Have the witnesses any views on shared leadership for small schools? It is a contentious and thorny issue. I have publicly advocated having a full-time principal for, say, four small schools. Although it has not always gone down well, I would be interested to hear the witnesses' views.