Dr. Katriona O'Sullivan:

I thank the joint committee for inviting me to give my views on the leaving certificate reform process. Throughout my career in research I have developed an understanding of the challenges students and teachers face within the current system. I have also gathered a wealth of information on how education policy can impact on those who are most marginalised in the community. When I was invited to answer the committee's questions, I decided to call on my existing relationships with teachers working in a variety of schools. I surveyed 40 teachers using the questions the committee had provided. The views which emerged were similar to my own and formed the basis of my submission. They spoke to two key points, the first of which was the value of the leaving certificate applied programme as it stood. The second theme was that moving towards a skilled based curriculum which focused primarily on employability was important but that it should be approached with caution. I also contacted Dr. Delma Byrne who has worked extensively in researching the leaving certificate curriculum. She added her views on the leaving certificate applied programme which were included in my submission.

In considering the issue of reform I ask committee members to reflect on what they see as the purpose of education. Is it a means through which young people gain the necessary skills and knowledge to perform in a changing economy, or is it the tool we use to develop engaged, enquiring, creative minds empowered to live lives they deem to be valuable? For me, education should focus on the latter and the former will follow automatically. The reason I ask this question is that it speaks directly to the question the committee posed about preparing students for employment and the idea of partnering with business to ensure the skill sets which emerge from the curriculum match those needed in the modern workforce.

I have worked in this area for a number of years researching the impact a 21st century model of teaching and learning has on student skill development. I have published many papers on the subject and my work has shown that, with the correct supports, there is real potential for the leaving certificate curriculum to include a 21st century model of skills which will produce more reflective, collaborative and technologically savvy students. However, it must be approached with caution. When we invite businesses into the classroom, we run the risk of allowing marketisation to direct curriculum content. This has been seen in the United States where large corporations now "sponsor" schools, the students in which are seen as part of a conveyor belt for their industries.

When considering this shift, we must also ensure all teachers and schools will be empowered to implement the same curriculum. My research has shown great variability in the schools that can and cannot adjust to a changing curriculum. It has also shown that schools with more concentrated levels of disadvantage are less likely to adjust their teaching practices to incorporate 21st century teaching and learning models.

This is not because teachers do not want to change or that they place less value on change. It is because they lack the resources to make the adjustments. These resources include availability of time, including time to train and time away from discipline issues, in DEIS schools particularly. It also includes access to modern technology and support to implement these changes in line with the overemphasis on the terminal exams, or what has been called the teaching to the test mentality. This issue is already being reflected in the schools which are taking up the new coding course for leaving certificate. Early numbers reveal that affluent schools are the most likely to run this new option, resulting in a growing digital divide with more affluent students being prepared for the coding world while the student attending DEIS schools or coming from socioeconomic disadvantaged backgrounds being left behind.

Based on my work in this area I will make the following recommendations to the committee. The curriculum should include courses aimed at addressing the ever-changing skill sets required by businesses, but these courses should be viable for all schools to implement, not just some schools. Extra provisions should be provided for DEIS schools to implement these courses, including the new leaving certificate coding course, and these provisions should relate specifically to adequate continuous professional development, CPD, offerings, availability of technology, and teaching hours. The leaving certificate curriculum should embed these skills within and across the whole curriculum and not limit access to these experiences to the years that are considered less important years, for example, for first year and transition year students. This is what is currently happening in schools that want to reform the curriculum.

I move now to the leaving certificate applied, LCA. I have worked with excellent teachers in DEIS schools who see the LCA as an integral part of their school structure and in some ways it is the saving grace for those students at risk of leaving school early. However, the LCA, in its current form, is letting down the students who have been sold on the idea of a vocational journey through school. A recent report from Byrne and McCoy on the outcomes of LCA students and work from the ESRI show consistently that students who take the LCA are having worse outcomes than those who stay on an academic track in school, even a lower academic track. They are less likely to gain employment within a year of finishing school and never progress onto higher education. It has been suggested that only 4.6% of students currently taking the leaving certificate are on an LCA track, but looking at the numbers, 25% of DEIS school students will take LCA, which means 25% of those students in DEIS schools will end up unemployed or unemployable. Social class, gender and household employment consistently influence LCA, with unskilled manual groups being more likely to be on this track. This is also true of males relative to females and those in work-poor relative to work-rich households. The formalisation of LCA in the mid-2000s actually lead to an increase in uptake of children from semi-skilled, manual backgrounds, who were previously more likely engage in an academic track-----