The Teachers’ Union of Ireland welcomes the carrying out of the audit of second level school enrolment and the publication of the summary report arising from this audit. However, the Union must also note its regret at the limitations both of the survey and of the report.

The Union regrets that the survey was limited to those schools that do not overtly charge fees and that participate in the so called free education scheme, thereby excluding from any scrutiny schools that most overtly select students on economic grounds.

Furthermore, the Union regrets that the published survey does not name and shame those schools which engage in this odious practice of educational apartheid. We call for this as a future step in this process. In addition we note that the audit was conducted by Regional Office Services of the Department of Education and Science itself and hence cannot be described as an independent audit. Future audits should be independently conducted.

The TUI draws one simple conclusion from the audit - that there are schools which carry out overt and covert selection practices, in effect they engage in educational apartheid. Such practices take many forms and are designed to exclude those pupils perceived as difficult or requiring special and additional support.

The Union is firmly committed to the principle /concept of freedom of access to education and to an education system that is free to the student at the point of entry and beyond. Such principles demand that schools be non-selective in any respect, whether that is on grounds of ability to pay, on perceived academic ability or on religious, social or ethnic factors. The Union therefore condemns any school which practices any element of national or school based policy which is in conflict with this principle.

In the relatively brief time available to respond to the published report, the Union will make a number of proposals which it believes, if implemented, would lead to a much greater level of equality of access.

I) Information to parents/guardians
Any proposal to make additional information available to parents/guardians regarding this issue is to be welcomed. Parents/guardians of primary school children should, at the right time, be provided with information relating to their rights in regards school enrolment. However reliance on the use of Section 29 appeals of the Education Act is not, in the view of the union, going to significantly improve the situation. Anything other that an acceptance of a pupil by a school should be considered as a refusal. In this instance the school should immediately be obliged to provide advice relating to Section 29. Schools currently tend to avoid giving a blunt refusal thus evading/ avoiding the need to advise of the rights under Section 29. The Department of Education and Science should undertake a publicity campaign to inform parents/guardians of a young person’s entitlement to access all publicly funded second level schools. Simple approaches to do this would include designing and distributing leaflets to all sixth year primary school students and organising an information campaign through the national and regional media. Parents/ guardians should also have access to regional/local information services that would provide independent advice on enrolment practices and related issues.

II) Admissions Officer
Provision for Admissions Officers would be welcome. However, to obtain maximum effect the role must include strong statutory powers to monitor enrolment policies of schools in an area ensuring that acceptable policies exist and are adhered to. The power to audit enrolments and to advise the Minister in regard to adherence to acceptable policies would be essential. The Minister should be statutorily obliged to establish acceptable enrolment policies by way of general direction to all schools. An admissions officer independent of schools should be empowered to apply this statutory obligation to all schools by way of specific direction to schools as necessary. In keeping with the previous point above Admissions Officer should have a strong information and publicity role within an area as well as an investigatory and monitoring role.

III) Other issues for regulation
The union strongly urges that significant action needs to be taken in addition to those referred to above. In particular the use of Section 29 is not seen as significantly improving the situation; nor can a voluntary process be seen as adequate. The principle of equality of access must be enshrined in statute without delay and appropriate policies introduced to bring this into effect. The following are put forward to this end.

a) Catchment Areas
The Union favours the introduction of mandatory catchment areas for each school. The intended effect is that a school within a catchment area has an obligation to the children living within that area. Any child living within the catchment area must therefore have the right to enrol in the school in question subject only to the limitation in size of the school. In the event, but only in the event, of there being insufficient pupils within the catchment area would the school be in a position to admit pupils from outside of the catchment area. For clarity we are not suggesting that there be any compulsion on parents to send their children to the particular school in the catchment area but that they have the right to do so. In certain areas where there are several schools and catchment areas are likely to overlap the union would favour a common enrolment date for the schools in the area in question. This could be overseen by the local admissions officer.

b) Enrolment Day
The Union favours enrolment taking place on a specific enrolment day. This would entail a day being set aside for this purpose at a reasonable time, probably early in the calendar year. This day would need to be well advertised within the catchment area and in particular within relevant classes in the primary schools in the area. There would be a complete restriction on any enrolment prior to this date and on the reservation of any places for any children enrolling prior to this date. This would eliminate the selective processes by which siblings are guaranteed a place in the event of one family member gaining access to a school. The Union believes that any form of enrolment in the school prior to the enrolment day should be prohibited and in particular the practice of putting a child’s name down for a school many years before the date of enrolment would be prevented. It is well known that this practice occurs frequently on the birth of a child. Also prohibited would be the practice of “feeder schools” being utilised to draw students in on a selective basis. It is understood that some second level schools currently guarantee places to a number of students from specific primary schools, camouflaging selective admission practices. In the event of there being an excess of pupils seeking to enrol in a school in a given year, admission would be on the basis of a lottery. Such a lottery would have to be independently administered in an open and transparent manner. The administrator of the admissions lottery (who could be the Admissions Officer referred to above) would have the responsibility to locate places for the students who lost out in the lottery in adjacent schools.

c) Entrance Requirements
The Union would prohibit entrance tests on the basis that schools should not be in a position to select on the basis of perceived academic ability. Such a form of selection flies in the face of equality of access. No form of academic assessment should be held or be taken into consideration, whether this is administered by the school in question or on the basis of a report from the primary school. Academic assessment should only feature after enrolment date and after the child in question has been granted a place within the school. The union has no difficulty with the concept of assessment after the enrolment date for the purpose of ascertaining the ability of the child, when such a test is conducted with a view to their assignment to a particular class and determining the learning and special support desirable. (The Union is aware that there is a debate around the issue of whether or not classes should be put together on the basis of ability, i.e. streaming, or on the basis of mixed ability. The Union will not enter this debate at this time). Other entrance requirements such as the payment of an enrolment fee which may limit access to some must also be prohibited.

IV) Enforcement and application
The union would see all schools in receipt of public funds being covered by these policies. While the union favours statutory obligations in respect of the policy on school enrolment it also favours the “carrot and stick” approach. Schools need to be resourced to meet the demands and support needs of the pupils enrolling from the area. This entails all schools having, for example, a Special Needs Allocation. Absence of such allocation has been used in the past as a means of offering “advice” to parents that another school would be better for their child. Schools which are found to be evading their responsibilities in regard to enrolment and which manage to “discourage” students that require additional supports should suffer in terms of funding while those which meet their obligations should be rewarded.