'Free fees' have made a huge contribution towards reducing the scale of educational disadvantage, but a lot more remains to be done, writes James Wrynn.
The recent report on participation in higher education by the Higher Education Authority contains a wealth of information. The headline figures on the overall increase in participation and the socio-economic composition of participation have rightly received the most attention. But a key ingredient in these welcome developments gets the slightest of mentions: so-called free fees.
Free fees were not, of course, the explicit remit of the report, but it is nevertheless astonishing that there is only a single passing reference to free fees - and that by way of cursory mention in the introduction. Even in the conclusions, which contain suggestions for further research on participation in higher education, the role of free fees is not in that suggested list.
One can be forgiven for thinking that the opposition of much of the higher education establishment to free fees at the time of their introduction - and their concerted support for the failed attempt to abolish them some years ago - has influenced this meagre attention to the issue.
Free fees have made a huge contribution to reducing educational disadvantage and they have lifted a huge financial burden from middle-class parents.
Most people associate free fees with the initiative of Labour's Niamh Bhreathnach as minister for education in 1996 in relation to degree courses. These, in fact, account for 70 per cent of entrants to higher education, the rest taking certificates and diplomas. Thus her initiative is rightly remembered as the major achievement in this area of access to education. However, in the 1980s, a very limited scheme of free fees was introduced in institutes of technology for certificate courses but not for degree courses.
After the introduction of these limited free fees in the late 1980s there was a big increase in participation by lower socio-economic groups from very low base figures. For example, between 1986 and 1992 the participation rate for children of skilled workers doubled, going up from 13 to 28 per cent.
This figure then stalled between 1992 and 1998, only rising to 32 per cent. However, between 1998 and 2004, with the introduction of free fees for degrees, the figure jumped to 50 per cent (just short of the national average of 55 per cent). This pattern is also observable in most other lower socio-economic groups.
Overall there has been an impressive improvement in participation by lower socio-economic groups, and the gap between these groups and the better-off groups, while still unacceptable, has narrowed significantly.
What is really rewarding about the figures is the increase in participation in areas where going to third level was a rarity 15 years ago. For example, the participation rate in Dublin's north inner city has increased from 9 to 23 per cent.
Many teachers in second-level schools will tell you that the topic of going to college is now a normal part of discussion in schools, whereas such talk in the early 1990s would most likely have attracted peer isolation. This shift to third-level education as an option has also taken place in an economic context where good employment prospects for Leaving Certificate students acts as a pull against going to third level.
A great psychological barrier has been broken in attitudes towards third-level education. Free fees have removed a major financial barrier and, in turn, have contributed to reducing psychological barriers for families with no tradition or experience of third level.
There is still a long way to go in eliminating educational disadvantage at third level, but part of that work has to be done at primary and second level. Many of the existing measures on disadvantage are either focused on too few schools or are under-resourced.
A key instrument in disadvantage is pre-school education. Research all over the world shows that this pays huge dividends. Yet the current provision, initiated in 1994 on a pilot basis, but only modestly expanded since, barely touches the issue.
The psychological service, a key element in early intervention for children with difficulties, is very under-resourced. A psychologist in Irish education has, on average, to cover the needs of over 6,000 students. In many European countries, the figure is 1,000 or less.
Because of the inadequate and overstretched service, schools often have to try to pay privately for necessary basic psychological assessment, and very often this is beyond their resources.
One of the shifts in relation to third level has been a worthwhile cultural shift about higher education among some groups in disadvantaged communities. But what we need is a broader fundamental shift within communities about education and its importance at a very early stage. This may need the widespread development of something like the pioneering work of the North Wall Education Forum in Dublin's inner city, which seeks to create a strong education ethos in the local community.
The capping of places on Post-Leaving Certificate courses, which are very important in providing further education for students with weaker Leaving Certificates, more of which are from disadvantaged situations, is neither a helpful measure in dealing with disadvantage nor an expression of belief in the knowledge economy.
The investment in free fees has been a major success. Its annual cost is about 0.2 per cent of GDP. Although we are one of the wealthiest countries in Europe, our educational expenditure is still one of the lowest. Carefully-selected and well-managed expenditures can yield huge benefits in education.
James Wrynn lectures in the Faculty of Business at DIT. He was programme manager to Niamh Bhreathnach from 1993 to 1995.