Mr. Michael Gillespie:

Science is up and running with all its problems. We have to put our eggs in the basket that the rapid review of science after two years may change the things that we believe are wrong with the science aspect in terms of too much content and trying to do the additional assessment component. I will let Mr. Jones speak for himself, but as a union we do not think it is fit for purpose considering the way AI is developing and the way everything else is developing. In the way projects are being assessed, we can see already how they are moving in third level. For example, if you are doing project work it is now assessed in an oral or written exam because the project could be created in any way. We have to start taking into account for the leaving certificate what is already being taken into account by third level institutions. We hope that all this stuff would be taken into account as we move through the other tranches. As I said, the delay in English and the delay in accountancy, where we have seen a problem, is a positive sign that we are not rushing to try to implement it without the answers to the problems that are already there. We would hope this is mirrored as we go forward.

We got a promise for a workload committee, and more importantly the AI task force, and we hope these will get up and running in education and report very quickly. We cannot wait two, three or four years for this. This is coming at us like a train.