Fidelma Healy Eames (Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I thank the witnesses for their responses, which were very helpful. I have some follow-up questions on the points made. One of the witnesses mentioned a transitions project being considered to aid retention in third level. I am delighted to hear about that. When will that happen? This ties in with the response Professor Norton gave about the flexibility envisaged in the new TU model. Does he envisage an opportunity if a student makes a poor choice? Even though our retention levels are supposed to be comparatively good, it has a desperate impact on families when the student withdraws in January.

The number of children I know in this position is immense. It is almost taken as a norm but I do not see it as a norm. Will the new TU model create opportunities? Can a student who realises by Christmas that he or she has made the wrong choice get an opportunity in January to join his or her new and preferred course with guidance in-house? Why must students wait until the following year if the model is flexible? The matter was considered before when we looked at a more modular approach to education.

With regard to the funding deficit, it was stated that one of the first things that could be done is reinstate the €25 million that was cut. That leads me to my initial argument that if third level supported second level, the €25 million cut could easily be made up by the State not having to fund the cost of early drop-outs which cost more money than we have acknowledged. Mr. Boland may have the figure I seek. How much does the State invest in students who drop out every year? What is the average cost per year, which he puts into his reports, to allow for early drop out?