Averil Power (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I appreciate the Chairman's letting me speak now. Given that the Seanad is debating education legislation at 3 p.m., I will have to leave. However, I will read the transcripts to see all the answers and other issues that arise after I leave. I thank the witnesses for all their presentations. It is good to have the different perspectives of so many groups. Both Mr. Boland of the HEA and the Dublin Technological University Alliance steering group mentioned the need for greater clarity about the criteria. The draft scheme of the Bill is too vague. The Hunt report recommended that if there were to be technological universities, different institutions would form clusters rather than one institution evolving into a technological university. It also recommended that any new technological university should be different from the existing ITs and universities. Following on from this, and the work done by the HEA on it, the Marginson report proposed a set of possible criteria to try to achieve that and indicated the standard to expected regarding scale, research and industry links, etc. Even at that there was not enough clarity for me about the difference between the technological universities, the ITs as they stand and the universities, and what exactly would be unique about a technological university.
Is there agreement for a start? At the very least theMarginson criteria or something similar should be included in the Bill. There is a need for clarity. It is too important a matter to make it up as we go. From the point of view of individual institutions and from the landscape point of view, as Senator Cullinane noted, we need to be mindful that the whole picture fits together, there is no duplication, the system works and we maximise our strengths. It is in everybody's interests and we are all on the same page regarding it. In addition to the criteria Marginson set out, what is the difference between a technological university and the existing ITs and universities? What extra criteria should we put into the legislation? We should have clarity on these so at least the institutions know the criteria on which they will be judged.
Student representation is essential in all of this, as I have said in every speech on higher education I have made in the Seanad. From a quality assurance point of view as much as any other, we must have strong student representation on all our governing authorities and good procedures for listening to students and getting feedback on the quality of lecturing. It is in everybody's interests to have this because it is good for the institutions. In some respects it challenges existing practices. Some colleges have been very good on this, some less so. Most universities have three student representatives on their boards. The Bill should provide for standard practice and set three as a minimum. I agree with the point that there is necessity for there to be a student union representative. As a former student union officer I would have grave misgivings about the idea that an institution would decide which student sits on its board. There are serious issues with this. It is essential that the student representatives be elected representatives of the student body.