Rónán Mullen (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I am grateful to all the witnesses for their presentations and insights. There are many questions I could ask. Before I start, however, I looked up "Promethean" and it is probably no bad thing, because it refers to "being rebelliously creative and innovative". Maybe it was the end that Prometheus came to that was on my mind earlier.

However, there is possibly something rebellious, creative and innovative about the suggestion that students could be involved in assessment. I would like to know what the other witnesses think about that proposal. At one level, it seems to make a great deal of sense because part of teaching people to understand would surely involve helping them to assess that aspect, including looking at concepts such as objectivity, checking for bias etc. We do, however, rub up against human nature in these situations as well. People are inclined to seek to advantage for themselves, inevitably. The question then is whether the suggestion put forward is doable. The proposer believes it is, and I will be interested to hear whether the other witnesses think it is necessary and possible.

The second aspect that I would like to ask the witnesses about, and I am happy to throw it open for whomever wishes to take this point up, is whether one of the biggest issues, if not the biggest issue, in this regard is that third level colleges are burdening the second level education system with the task of preparing people for CAO selection. Do the third level institutions not have enough resources themselves to undertake that job and should they not be tasked with doing it? That could include, if necessary, even postponing the beginning of the first academic year until the following new year. Does it not seem obvious, when we think of the amount of money that people spend on going to college and the amount of money the State spends funding them, that the least we would expect would be that people would have to be interviewed and assessed to see if they are suitable for the courses they are applying for? Would doing that not free up energies and possibilities for the leaving certificate examinations?

The whole narrative that we have been hearing today has been about the system being broken. I do not necessarily disagree with that perspective but again I wonder, to some degree, if we are dealing with the inevitable reality of human affairs. Is a perfect system possible? Are we demonstrably worse than all other countries in this regard? Is it just that we have problems that we must solve in this area, just as those other countries have problems they need to solve as well?

Turning to what Professor Hyland, in particular, mentioned regarding the NCCA's reform of syllabuses, I gather there is a particular concern in the area of science, such as in physics, chemistry and biology. Mention was also made of Irish and agricultural science. What I have heard from people involved is that experts in teaching and the science people in the universities and at second level are pointing out problems with a vague prescription of learning outcomes, but that the NCCA is moving on regardless. Why is this happening? How does that situation connect with the agenda that we are here to discuss? Is this a problem connected with the problem we are talking about, which is enhancing student accomplishments and the outcomes in their lives? I thank the witnesses, and I am sorry that it is a long list of questions.