Mr. John Irwin:

On the first point, we have to acknowledge that there are access programmes at third level to accommodate people from lower socioeconomic backgrounds or those who may be challenged in terms of getting a college place and may find it extremely difficult. In terms of the current situation with regard to post primary, there are educational values in having a two-year professional master of education, PME, programme but it is extremely costly. It is quite a journey to go through a four-year degree, followed by a two-year PME. There is a need to provide an opportunity for trainee teachers undertaking a PME, particularly those in the second year of the course, to earn money. These are costly programmes and, on top of the cost of the programmes, the students have to be able to support themselves. We do not want there to be anything that will act as a barrier to good people who want to come into education. I know access programmes work to a degree but a lot of the opportunity dissipates once one goes into post-graduate education. A two-year post-graduate course is a significant additional cost, particularly when one is not earning. We have talked to many students on PME programmes. Before Covid, they were financing themselves by working part-time jobs in pubs at night or working in shops and everything else. They could be net contributors to the system when they are in the second year of a PME.

I am sure Ms O'Connor will agree that there is a need for greater access to PME programmes because accessing teachers in specific subject areas can be very challenging. There will have to be consideration of trying to promote diversity in the teaching profession. Mr. White described the current teacher cohort as predominantly Irish, white and middle class. I do not have the exact figures in that regard. It may be worthwhile carrying out a survey on the issue. There is a need to incentivise people from other cultures and backgrounds to engage in education. One has to incentivise it and make it attractive for them such that they see it is a profession in which they can have a meaningful career. When we were dealing with the Ombudsman recently, who has responsibility for human rights, he referred to the idea of a student being able to see his or her image somewhere within the school. Is the school a mirror reflecting what the students are? On some occasions, unfortunately, that might not be the case. We have to consider ways of incentivising participation in teaching. It may be worth looking creatively at the two-year PME, which is there for good and valid educational reasons, in the context of providing opportunities for people to make some sort of financial living out of it, particularly in the second year of the course. Those are some of the issues in that regard.

As regards the leaving certificate, I could not agree more with the Chairman. It needs to be reformed. If the pandemic has shown us anything, it is the fragility of the leaving certificate. When it was knocked for six last year, we were suddenly left scrambling. Lessons probably have been learned in the context of this year, with accredited grades and attempt to streamline the exam a little, but there really is a need to consider reforming it. There should be consideration of the need to semesterise or to have alternative forms of assessment, as well as of how inclusive the assessment models are in the first place.