THERE WERE SIGHS of relief in education circles last week when Micheal Martin, the Minister for Education and Science, announced that he is to appeal the decision of the Information Commissioner to release the results of the 1998 Leaving Cert exams results, school by school.
The publication of such information, as a result of applications by three newspapers - the Sunday Times, the Kerryman and the Sun- day Tribune - under the Freedom of Information Act, would certainly lead to the compilation of league tables. Following its initial application to the Department of Education and Science under the Freedom of Information Act, the Sunday Times wrote to the Department to clarify its request. "We want to report on the performance of each post-primary school in the Leaving Certificate Examinations 1998," the newspaper stated.
"We believe that a survey of this nature is in the public interest, particularly in assisting parents to make informed decisions about their children's education and the selection of a suitable school." Following the Information Commissioner's decision, the Department of Education and Science had four weeks to appeal. From the Minister's point of view, he was damned if he did and damned if he didn't. Appealing a decision of the Information Commissioner is a risky business, since it flies in the face of the spirit of the Freedom of Information Act. The Minister stressed that he had made his decision "in the best interests of Irish education".
There's no doubting that in deciding to appeal the decision, he has the support of all of the partners in education, including parents. There's considerable irony in the fact that while the Sunday Times argues that it is working in the public interest and that its endeavours are of particular benefit to parents, parents themselves appear to be singularly unimpressed.
Indeed, the National Parents Council (Post-Primary) has joined a group which includes representatives from the ASTI, the TUI, the IVEA, the Joint Managerial Body, The National Association of Principals and Vice-Principals and the Association of Community and Comprehensive Schools to oppose the publication of league tables. Had the Minister decided against appeal, it's likely that this group would have opted for its own appeal to the High Court.
By now, the arguments against the publication of league tables are well rehearsed. A major problem with such tables is that they fail to compare like with like. How, for example, can you compare the exam results achieved in a highly selective fee-paying school where the parents are mostly ambitious high-achievers, with the results obtained by children in a school in a disadvantaged area of high unemployment, where little value is placed on education and the major concern is where the next meal is coming from? Which teachers work harder, which school performs better?
Educators argue that the publication of league tables will change the ethos of our education system forever. Schools will become more competitive and therefore more selective and less inclined to admit a broad mix of students. Less academically able students and those with disabilities will find it increasingly more difficult to obtain places in our second-level schools.
The issue, for many people involved in the education sector, is less about league-table rankings and more about the accountability of schools and access to rounded information for parents.
"Parents are looking for information on a whole range of issues," Fionnuala Kilfeather, who in national co-ordinator of the National Parents Council (Primary) told Education & Living last week. These include "facilities, how a school interacts with parents, the guidance counselling provision, interaction with the local community, student and parent councils, the range of curricular options and the availability of learning supports".
There are signs, though, that things are beginning to change. In the near future we can expect more information about schools to come on stream. Under the terms of the Education Act 1998 (section 21), for example, school boards are required to produce annual reports on the operation and performance of their schools, "with particular reference to the achievement of objectives as set out in the school plan". This report is to be circulated to parents, teachers and other staff and the student council.
At last week's press briefing, the Minister stressed that he was "absolutely committed to ensuring that our education system is accountable" and described league tables as "a distraction from the achievement of real accountability".
For once, all the partners in education, including the Minister, are on the same side. How long this compatibility can last, though, is another matter.
AS PROOF of his commitment to accountability and high standards, Martin pointed to recent initiatives, including the pilot Whole School Evaluation programme, which he intends to mainstream, and school development planning.
"They can help our schools to raise standards, inspire excellence and affirm good practice," he said. Whole School Evaluation - originally called Whole School Inspection - is a particularly thorny subject for many teachers. Despite the fact that it is regarded by some commentators as a much watered-down version of the original, it is still being resisted by many teachers, who are opposed to classroom inspection. A more positive attitude on the part of teachers to Whole School Evaluation could go a long way to allay public fears that teachers are resistant to accountability.
There's no doubting that the teaching profession has been involved in huge changes in recent years. Last week, the three teacher unions agreed to submit a claim for a review of teachers' salaries. Teachers wish to have their contribution to the changes wrought in our education system recognised and rewarded in their pay levels. While there are very good arguments for this, the question of accountability remains unresolved.
If the Minister is genuine in his commitment to accountability and high standards, he could hurry up and implement the Education Act and push schools for their annual reports.
