Ms Mary Nihill:

Many of the issues have been already covered by Mr. Byrne, Mr. McCabe and Mr. Cottrell. We welcome this opportunity. I know that some Members have been in the role we are now in. I have been a principal since 1993. Since then, the post has changed dramatically. Some of the issues with which we are now dealing have evolved over the years. We all recognise that society and schools have changed dramatically since 1993.

I work in the voluntary secondary sector. Many of us who work in this area are the first lay principals following the religious orders. The support structure which they had is now absent for anyone who takes over as a lay person. There was an expertise in the convent parlour or monastery that now has to be replaced by one's husband or partner. In that context, everything has changed. I am hopeful that things will change. There is a need for a fundamental change in culture around leadership and management in schools. All correspondence from the Department - this is not a criticism of the Department, which I accept is also at sea on this issue - is addressed to the principal of the school, be that correspondence in relation to the roof of the school, a maintenance grant, special needs issues or the names of students due to sit a home economics examination. That this is the case is symptomatic of the culture that needs to change. I am confident it can change.

In 1993, the role of the deputy principal at post primary level was significantly less than what it is now because the perception at the time was that this was a promotion as a recognition of long service. This is no longer the case. The combination of principal and deputy principal, which the association represents, is very much seen as a leadership duo at post primary level. I am conscious that it may not be as significant a duo at primary level. If that change can happen then the concept of teachers recognising themselves as school leaders can also evolve.

Deputy Ó Ríordáin mentioned the concept of initial teacher training and recognition of leadership in this area. One of the difficulties in our system is that formal remunerated leadership roles involve teachers leaving the classroom. This is at the core of many of the difficulties we are experiencing. In other words, teachers are promoted out of the classroom. We need to look at ways of recognising teacher and curriculum leadership. This would fundamentally change things. Senator Power asked about teacher appraisal. We need a model in this regard. In response to a question about the role of the principal, Mr. Byrne mentioned we are the people who can engage in that conversation. If genuine teacher leadership and quality teaching were recognised, it would be legitimate for that teacher to engage with a teacher experiencing some difficulty. This would symbolise what our colleagues in the Department want, namely, a more distributed form of leadership.

These are reforms that would not cost a huge amount of money. I am confident they would enable change to happen. Recognised throughout all of the research is the role of coaching and mentoring. If we were to invest in quality teaching and teacher leadership and to engage in CPD around coaching and mentoring not only for the principal, but for the teachers, it would enable teacher appraisal, which is a term not much like in the education system.