Róisín Shortall (Dublin North West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 107: To ask the Minister for Education and Science the reason her Department is still not able to supply figures for the academic year 2002-03 of the socioeconomic breakdown of new recipients of third level grants; when she expects to be able to make this information available; the action she intends to take to broaden access to third level grants; when the Student Support Bill will be published; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [13029/05]

Mary Hanafin (Dún Laoghaire, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The most recent data on participation rates at third level is that published in the HEA review of higher education participation in 2003, which showed that participation in higher education among the school leaver age cohort has passed the 50% mark for the first time. The study puts the overall transfer rate to higher education at 54% in 2003, as against 44% in 1998, 36% in 1992, 25% in 1986 and 20% in 1980. These data are based on a full census of entrants.

The study also contains findings relating to the socioeconomic breakdown of entrants in that year which are based on a sample of new entrants in 2003. It should be noted that previous studies on participation by socioeconomic group, the Clancy reports, conducted on 1998, 1992, 1986 and 1982 were based on a census of new entrants in those years. A follow up to previous Clancy studies based on a census of entrants in 2004 is under way and will provide a full picture of progress in higher education participation by socioeconomic group since 1998.

Final analysis and comparison with previous Clancy studies, together with any policy conclusions, should await the outcome of the full survey which will be available later this year. The current study nonetheless provides some interesting pointers. It suggests that participation rates of some of the lower socioeconomic groups, particularly skilled manual and semi-skilled and unskilled manual and other non-manual workers, have increased substantially.

With regard to the number of students from socioeconomically disadvantaged backgrounds in receipt of higher education grants, it is noteworthy that the number of students benefiting from the "top up" grant scheme has increased from approximately 2,300 in 2000-01 to more than 11,500 in 2003-04, of whom more than 9,000 were in higher education. In terms of spending on student financial assistance, the total allocation for the student support schemes in 2005 is in excess of €200 million. This reflects the outcome of the Government's decision in 2003 to provide a special €42 million package to improve the maintenance grant schemes, which involved an increase in payment levels and in qualifying thresholds. The maximum amount of grant support available this year is €4,855, including the top up grant, compared to just €2,032 in 1996/97.

In so far as data on the socioeconomic backgrounds of grant holders are concerned, limited data have been collected by my Department in the past with specific reference to the higher education grants scheme. For this reason, the level of data requested by the Deputy is not yet available in my Department for each of the schemes.

Looking to the future, the HEA has, at the request of my Department, been working to place the Clancy surveys on a more systematic basis. An electronic student record system is being developed in conjunction with the universities and the institutes of technology. It is intended that this new system will provide more timely and complete data, including the socioeconomic background of first time students. I have asked the HEA to examine how this system can provide more timely and reliable data on the socioeconomic background of grant holders.

With regard to the system for allocating higher education grants, in accordance with the commitment in the An Agreed Programme for Government, I propose to introduce a single unified scheme of maintenance grants for students in higher education for the academic year 2006-07. In this context, I intend to put in place, as early as possible, a more coherent administration system which will facilitate consistency of application and improved client accessibility. This is necessary if we are to ensure public confidence in the awards system and ensure the timely delivery of grants to those who need them most.

Whatever new arrangements are eventually decided upon will be provided for in new statutory arrangements through a new Student Support Bill. This Bill, which will provide statutory underpinning for the schemes, will have as a key objective the promotion of equality of access. I also envisage that the Bill will provide for an independent appeals system. The timescale for the publication of this Bill is contingent on a range of issues which are the subject of ongoing consultations.

Another significant development in the area of access to third level education was the launch last December of the national action plan prepared by the National Office for Equity of Access to Higher Education. This plan was prepared with the assistance of an advisory committee from the education and social partners. A key objective of the plan is the development of the most effective means towards increasing access and participation in higher education by learners from disadvantaged schools and communities. My Department is, in this context, in consultation with the universities and the institutes of technology about their proposals for alternative entry and retention processes to improve access opportunities for students from socioeconomically disadvantaged backgrounds.