Mr. Peter Davitt:

I have personal experience that illustrates that point. I have twin boys who love computers and both decided to go on to third level. We were, of course, delighted that they went on to third level but both dropped out in the first year. It was not the road for them. It was too theoretical and it was not hands on enough for them. They were able to build PCs and do certain things. Having dropped out they went on to do further education and training in two VEC colleges are loving it. They are getting the certification and are now considering going on to do third level while they are working in IT during the summer months.

I started off as a bricklayer. My father worked in construction as a labourer. At that time he would have encouraged me to take a step up by getting a job as a trade, as one would be sure of a job for life. There are historical reasons for our focus on the next step up. The reality is that third level, excellent and essential as it is, does not facilitate the educational needs of all people. However, at the same time certain sectors of the economy, particularly with the rapid evolution and advancement of technologies, the cycle of new product development is 18 months and one needs a combination of the theoretical practice to understand the technologies but the applied practice in the workplace to keep at pace with the development and evolution. That is the reason we are suggesting the necessity for this type of model to be adopted. The individual will get the dual experience, they will have the theory and practice but they will keep up to date on a day to day basis with the changes and evolution of the technology.