Illogical savings in education with no thought to consequences

WITH almost a third of the country’s 4,000 schools awaiting funding for building projects, it could be many decades before the country’s stock of classrooms is up to modern standards.

It was a little surprising, then, to see Bord Snip Nua’s heavy tome of gloom and doom suggest how massive staff savings could be achieved by shutting about 1,000 small primary schools with fewer than 100 pupils each. There is clear merit in considering the economies of scale that could be achieved if Ireland did not have so many small rural schools, dotted around the countryside, many of them with part-time secretaries, caretakers and specialist teachers visiting occasionally to give children extra assistance with language or special educational needs.

At first glance, it would seem to make sense – amalgamate 650 schools that have 50 children or fewer with larger schools in their areas, and also merge 850 schools with 50 to 100 pupils (meaning closure of up to half that number). Because many of these smaller schools have pupil-teacher ratios well below average, about 500 teaching posts would be lost at a saving of €27 million, the report argues.

It acknowledges that it could take three to four years to achieve and that related costs of accommodation and school transport would arise. But does a group of economic experts really believe that the 2,700 classrooms the move would require can be built in that time?

All the value for money in the world wouldn’t allow the Department of Education to rent the 1,000-plus prefabs it would need to fund the measure for less than €10m a year, and at current progress rates in the school building programme, it would surely be at least a decade before the necessary extensions were made to the expanding schools to cater for at least 50,000 new pupils.

But reading Bord Snip Nua’s report suggests that the experts think these costs and the related additional cost of carrying thousands of extra pupils on school buses to their new schools could be covered with a “paltry” €2m.

This measure gives just a small taste of what appears to have been a raft of illogical savings, which take little account of the consequent price of many of the board’s recommendations.

And not just the economic costs, either. Successive ministers are never slow to praise how every primary school in the country reflects the sense of community in its own area, but much of that would be lost almost overnight if the Government decided to shut a third of our primary schools – although they might, indeed, add some saving by losing the need for patchwork on many dozens of century-old buildings.

No commentator would offhandedly question the credentials and the expertise of Dr Colm McCarthy, the economist who chaired the board’s deliberations and has gained much respect for his objective views on the economic crisis. Indeed, as an academic, his report was not afraid to probe the time spent with students by the most senior figures in the universities and institutes of technology.

And, yet, his grasp of a key education statistic during a radio interview yesterday raised eyebrows among many in the sector. He rejected claims that Irish primary class sizes are high but went on to describe how they calculated pupil-teacher ratios, which are often confused with class sizes but are entirely different.

Let’s hope, as the civil servants and politicians sit down to choose from Mr McCarthy’s unappetising menu, that they choose carefully and look out for any hidden extras.