In 1983 Gemma Hussey, then Minister for Education, changed the pupil/guidance counsellor ratio from 250 to 500 pupils per guidance counsellor. In that one swing of the educational axe she deprived well over half of the second-level schools in the State of the services of a full-time guidance counsellor.
The only change since then was the Department's allocation in May 1995 of the following:
0.5 of a guidance post to schools with an enrolment of between 250 and 500 pupils
0.4 of a post to schools between 200-249
0.3 of a post to schools between 150-199
0.2 of a post to schools between 100-149
It is quite extraordinary that, in a time of major curricular change and unprecedented economic growth, no significant reduction in the ratio has taken place. The present Minister. Micheal Martin, has correctly put much emphasis on providing additional remedial help in the primary and second-level sectors.
Why not do the same in the guidance and counselling area? Are schools with a pupil enrolment of less than 500 pupils to continue being disadvantaged? The existing service in such schools, if one exists, has to be funded from school resources and with the goodwill of the rest of the teaching staff who voluntarily provide cover when the guidance counsellor is necessarily absent. At best the counsellor can only provide a "fire brigade" service.
The guidelines for the operation of a guidance and counselling service prepared by the National Centre for Guidance in Education (NCGE) and approved and launched by the Minister are just pious aspirations in most schools. Is it fair to parents and students to create expectations which the schools cannot deliver? I believe it is unjust and dishonest.
Since 1983 guidance counsellors have been involved in the delivery of many curricular changes. They teach modules in Transition Year and in the Leaving Cert Vocational and Leaving Cert Applied Programmes. In schools of fewer than 500 pupils most, if not all, guidance counsellors have subject teaching in one or more areas. How can such teachers deliver a comprehensive service to all pupils?
In addition to this they are supposed to provide a counselling service. The demand for such a service has been well documented and highlighted in various surveys on substance abuse, family breakdown and a range of other social problems. It's time for all those involved in second-level education to say "Stop" to the Minister and insist on the necessary resources to implement the guidelines set out in the NCGE Report.
It's time for the teaching unions and the Institute of Guidance Counsellors to mount an effective campaign to rectify this glaring injustice. A comprehensive guidance and counselling is a "right" for all our children.
Gerry Flynn is a Guidance counsellor, Loreto Secondary School, Clonmel, Co Tipperary
