Brendan Smith (Cavan-Monaghan, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 4: To ask the Minister for Education and Skills the reason he based his decision to abolish the modern languages in primary schools initiative on one line in a 2008 NCCA report called the Modern Languages in the Primary School Curriculum: Feasibility and Futures, a line which was taken completely out of context; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10384/12]

Ruairi Quinn (Dublin South East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The modern languages in primary schools initiative has been a pilot scheme involving approximately 550 schools that has operated since 1998. The decision to end the scheme took account of a 2008 report by the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment, NCCA. The report identified serious issues with curricular overload at primary level.

The NCCA's advice recommended that, for the present, modern languages should not be part of the primary school curriculum as an additional and separate subject. The advice in regard to curriculum overload predated the wake-up call on literacy and numeracy triggered by the PISA results. I am taking that advice on board with particular regard to the demands on time in school that will result from a heightened focus on literacy and numeracy.

The primary curriculum is currently being reviewed by the NCCA in the context of the national literacy and numeracy strategy. The €2.5 million in savings from this measure will go towards the cost of implementing the new national literacy and numeracy strategy. The 17% of primary schools at present in the initiative, which have had even more time demands than others in a crowded curricular space, should as a result be better placed to deliver under the literacy and numeracy strategy.

Given the priority of literacy and numeracy, I have acted on the 2008 advice about overload and could not justify either the continuation of the initiative in the existing schools or its expansion to all schools, even if funding was not an issue.

Brendan Smith (Cavan-Monaghan, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank the Minister for his reply. I note he said this initiative "has been" a pilot initiative. It is not a pilot programme because it became an initiative and has long lost its pilot status. The programme was exceptionally successful. Moreover, it had a small budget and my understanding is that it was delivered under-budget in successive years.

We submitted a freedom of information request on the matter. The only response we received was a copy of the NCCA report of 2008, a copy of the new national literacy and numeracy strategy and a Department official's summary of the 2008 NCCA report. We have all praised the Minister's admirable initiative in regard to the literacy and numeracy strategy. However, he seems to be sacrificing the modern languages programme in order to implement that strategy. That defies logic. Not only does the modern languages programme cost very little but one of the benefits in developing children's language skills is an associated improvement in literacy levels. The Department is refusing to make the link between the two.

Ruairi Quinn (Dublin South East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Deputy is correct that the modern languages initiative started life as a pilot scheme. However, there was never a recommendation or decision by my predecessors to roll it out across the entire network of 3,200 primary schools. Only 17% of that total benefited from the scheme. As an Opposition Deputy I was appalled at the implications of the PISA findings in terms of literacy and numeracy standards among students. Despite considerable increases in resources to the education system in the past 20 to 30 years under various Governments, illiteracy levels in certain sectors of our school population showed no improvement. The correlation between greater resources and better incomes was not borne out in this particular instance.

This is not a reflection on anybody. Literacy begins in the home and these findings do not reflect in any way on teachers. Nevertheless, literacy and numeracy are key predictors of future outcomes for children in the education system. That is why I had to find €19 million from within my budget to finance all the components of the literacy and numeracy strategy, including the changes required in the primary teaching degree and the higher diploma in education, with the former extended from three years to four and the latter from one year to two. The €2.5 million I saved by terminating the modern languages initiative was a significant component of that funding.

Brendan Smith (Cavan-Monaghan, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The 2008 report was extremely complimentary of the modern languages initiative. While it referred to possible overload, its recommendation was that the initiative should continue. The Minister rightly points out that the programme was never rolled out to all schools. In commentary attributed to him and to the Department there was a suggestion that a cap had been placed on an extension of the initiative. That is not correct. The cap was lifted in 2007, with an additional 200 schools joining the initiative in the meantime. There has been ill informed commentary in regard to the extension of the programme and its value and a selective excising of one comment from the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment report. That report is outdated in any case given that the NCCA is currently working on a new report on language teaching in schools.

Ruairi Quinn (Dublin South East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

All I can say is that there was no appetite among the professional educators in my Department, even before the PISA results were announced, to extend the initiative to all primary schools. I raised the question of literacy and numeracy standards while in opposition. The Deputy's former colleague, Mary Coughlan, as Minister for Education and Skills, responded to the PISA findings with an undertaking that the Department would take action. A draft programme was published while the Deputy's party was still in government, which I was happy to support. In June last year, when the national strategy was launched, I was more than happy to support it and to pledge that I would make the resources available to implement it. That is what I am doing and why I took the decision that I did.

Tom Fleming (Kerry South, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 5: To ask the Minister for Education and Skills if, in view of the importance of money management in the ordinary lives of every citizen, he will initiate a revision of the primary and secondary level curricula in order that a specific course of education in this area is built into the curricula starting at fourth grade in primary school, progressing gradually through fifth and sixth grade and following on into second level, in order that current and future generations of school attendees are given the opportunity to leave school financially literate and prepared for the complex financial world in which they will live their lives. [10520/12]

Ruairi Quinn (Dublin South East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Aspects of financial literacy are included in the curriculum at present in such areas as mathematics, home economics, economics, business and accounting, enterprise education and the mathematical applications within the leaving certificate applied programme. The programmes cover a range of skills relevant to money management. These areas will be further strengthened to the extent possible in line with ongoing curriculum reform

Get Smart with Your Money has been developed by the Financial Regulator as a specific resource for use within transition year. As part of junior cycle reform, all students will be required to cover 24 statements of essential learning. These include making informed financial decisions and developing good consumer skills. There will also be provision for school-developed short courses of 100 hours, supported by exemplars provided by the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment. Personal finance and mathematics for living and working are among the range of short courses suggested by the NCCA.

Tom Fleming (Kerry South, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I put down a parliamentary question on this issue some weeks ago and was disappointed with the response I received. The various initiatives to which the Minister referred to in his response today seem rather ad hoc in nature and are apparently confined to post-primary level. Education on money management must begin at primary level. I have suggested that it commence in fourth class so that children get a grounding in the subject at an early age. Given the current financial and economic status of this country, it is about time that money management was included in the curriculum.

Is there is any mechanism by which this matter can be reviewed? For example, is there a curriculum review committee which could examine what needs to be done? Personal money management and budgeting must be taught in a coherent and precise way, not in the current ad hoc manner. I take note of what the Minister has said, but the current piecemeal and inadequate provision is unacceptable.

Ruairi Quinn (Dublin South East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I appreciate the Deputy's concern but do not share his opinion that money management should be a specific curriculum subject starting as early as fourth class. There is certainly a need for it at transition year level when teenagers are becoming young adults and are much more open to the vagaries of advertising and the other issues associated with coming of age. Home economics - a subject which I would like to see a much greater number of students, particularly boys, taking - includes a section within consumer studies that deals precisely with budgeting and management of personal income. However, I am not prepared to include it as a specific curriculum subject.

Tom Fleming (Kerry South, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is imperative that children are taught how to read bank statements and repayment schedules, how interest on credit cards and students cards is applied, how the cost of credit works out over time, how late charges and penalties are imposed and the consequences for people who do not meet their financial obligations. We must teach the practical aspects of finance rather than focusing exclusively on theory. Two weeks ago the National Adult Literacy Agency, working in collaboration with the Educational Building Society, launched a website advising people on financial matters. EBS is a commercial financial institution that was bailed out by taxpayers. Its representatives will visit schools not because they want to teach children about financial management but in order to grow future business. It is crazy to allow a bailed out bank that type of access on the pretence of helping to develop money management skills. I am very apprehensive about having the EBS involved in this initiative, given its record.

Ruairi Quinn (Dublin South East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I do not share the Deputy's opinion. Mathematical skills are taught in a variety of different ways. Transition year is the appropriate time for linkages to be made between that and consumer consciousness, budgeting, household management and so on.