Aisling Dolan (Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

Today we are hearing representations from students and teachers about matters at primary, post-primary and further and higher education levels, including PLC courses. I thank everyone for submitting their opening statements. There is a body of information there and there is an awful lot in them about the role of senior cycle reform. I thank all the organisations that are with us today, the ISSU and the USI on behalf of students, and the IFUT, INTO and ASTI on behalf of teachers and educators for giving us their time this morning. Students' experiences and future endeavours, their careers and vocations, are at the heart of our discussions regarding the reform of the senior cycle. The Minister for Further and Higher Education, Research, Innovation and Science, Deputy Harris, and the Minister for Education, Deputy Foley, have both contributed and both are very committed to reform in this area.

Our educational system adapted in the last 18 months due to urgent need. That is thanks to the educators who are here today who had to develop a system, which came down to the accredited grades and so on, to support students getting through the last year or two. We owe a debt of gratitude for the work that has been completed to date. I met locally with some of our teacher representative groups, including the INTO, which explained very clearly its perspective on the last 18 months. We have a high level of qualification among our teachers at post-primary level. We would like things to be a little bit different. So many of our second level students - over 84,000 - apply through the CAO form. It is a huge number. That is the way things are. We may wish them to be different but that is currently the way things are. The Minister, Deputy Harris, has done a lot in terms of looking at reforming the CAO form, along with Solas and the Irish Universities Association, IUA, to allow it to include apprenticeships and further and higher education places, in order to make sure that students are fully aware of all the options that are out there. The cost of going to third level has been mentioned as well and there are options for earning and learning but families and students need to be made aware of that. Sometimes it comes down to communication and having those extra options on the CAO forms will encourage students to see what other options are out there.

Some of my questions relate to the statements we received, which cover wide areas including subject choices, digital learning, assessments, well-being, access and equality. My first question, for Ms Austick from the USI, is on the high rates of drop-outs in first year for students at third level. Does Ms Austick have some detail on that? In STEM courses we sometimes see a high level of drop-outs and I have seen some figures suggesting up to 7,000 drop-outs a year at third level. How can we support students at that point? What can we do in that regard, taking the leaving certificate into account? I would pose the same question to Ms Neville. So many students are going down the track of the CAO at second level. I am sure Ms Neville sees this in the organisation she represents. In what ways can we engage with career guidance in terms of this potential reform of the leaving certificate?

My next questions are for Mr. Gillespie, Ms Ní Chéileachair and the representative from the IFUT.

Mr. Jones might speak from a further and higher education perspective, including our PLCs and Galway and Roscommon Education and Training Board. Some of the organisations might have representatives from further and higher education as well, including perhaps Mr. Gillespie from the TUI. How are they finding it, when students come to them, in terms of managing dropouts in first year? I am interested in that. I thank the witnesses.