Dr. Joseph Ryan:

I thank the Deputy for his questions and reflections. There has been a lot of talk about learning to the test, what that does and the fact that it is not consistent or constant with the type of learning one needs to be able to embrace when one gets into third level.

If education is about bringing out the individual and building potential, it will be very different for different people and in different ways, hence the discussion on broadening the curriculum and recognising different skill sets.

My colleague raised the question of practical education. This committee has played a huge part in the development of the technological universities. You can see the impact they will have on the future prosperity and sustainability of regions and how they will fit in with national development plan. That type of practical learning is not central to our second level curriculum. It will require self-directed learning and taking the high-stakes element out of the leaving certificate. Going back to Deputy Farrell's point, the high stakes involved is a consequence of a small number of programmes and is not the reality, yet that culture has informed thinking on this.

I will be brief because I know others want to contribute. We are trying to build a research base in this country and we should look to do more about this in second level education. I know the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment will focus on direction of exploration, which was not there during my time in secondary school. I know much has been done in that regard but it should be about increasing that. It encultures people before they enter third level education. Research is increasingly a component of undergraduate programmes. It is about the question of continuity.