Education cuts will prove to be short-sighted and counter-productive

SINCE 2009, educationalists have dreaded the annual budget.

Governments change but the message is the same each year, with the budget invariably heralding deeper cuts in the allocation of educational resources that are essential to ensure that the children of this country can achieve their full potential. The increase in pupil-teacher ratio, the moratorium on middle-management posts of responsibility, the withdrawal of Traveller resource teachers and English-language support teachers, the reduction in special needs assistants, the cut in the special needs education budget and other cuts to funding in recent years have already taken their toll.

This year, due to the dire fiscal backdrop, our expectations were particularly low, and schools have been bracing themselves for this day for some time. The National Parents’ Council articulated the fears of parents in their pre-budget submission where they stated that: “Further cuts will push schools to the breaking point”, signalling that it is a “a misperception to think that after three years of cuts that all schools can cope”. While we all acknowledge that the Government must make difficult choices about the use of resources, we consider the consequences of these choices for education and our young people.

The requirement that post-primary schools manage guidance provision from within their existing pupil teacher ratio allocation will have the dual effect of reducing the availability of much-needed pastoral support for students and increasing the overall pupil-teacher ratio in schools. In 2010, the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment identified guidance, counselling and pastoral care as essential dimensions of the Junior Certificate experience.

One of the most widely anticipated measures in this year’s budget was the reduction in resources allocated to third level. The combination of increased student contributions and reduced maintenance supports for post-graduates may have an impact on the accessibility of further education for some students. With this year’s increase in the student contribution to be repeated in the years to come, fees will ultimately be sanctioned by the back door.

Another key change announced is the reduction in capitation grants to schools by 6% over the next four years. Capitation allocation is the primary source of income for most schools, and these cuts added to the capitation cuts in 2010 will put enormous pressure on schools, already struggling to cover basic overheads.

Mr Howlin placed great emphasis on the three guiding principles of “fairness, jobs and reform ” and whilst the fairness of the measures introduced in education, and their long-term contribution to jobs is dubious, he has at least allocated specific resources for reform. The allocation of €10 million for the implementation of the Literacy and Numeracy Strategy, Junior Cert reform and the phased roll-out of high-speed broadband will go some way to funding these key policy initiatives. The additional resources required to implement such changes should not be underestimated, however. The partial lifting of the moratorium does not go far enough to resource the implementation of these new initiatives.

Mr Howlin stated that the Government remains committed to building “a socially inclusive and fair society”. Ironically, there is a very real prospect that the inequities in second-level provision will be exacerbated by the measures announced yesterday. Cuts do not impact on schools uniformly and some schools can be protected from cuts by supplementary funding from parents. Yesterday’s proposal to confine the direct increase in pupil-teacher ratio to fee-paying schools appears to represent an attempt by the Government to spread the pain more evenly.

The equities or otherwise of the subsidising of fee-paying schools by the State have been well aired in the past. However, the blunt differentiation between non-fee-paying and fee-paying schools is also questionable, given the huge variation in resources available to and challenges faced by schools within both sectors. A more nuanced approach would be more equitable in terms of giving students equality of access to educational opportunity. In terms of achieving inclusivity, the reduction in supports in guidance and counselling, the removal of 428 posts from areas formerly designated as disadvantaged and the consolidation of the cuts in special educational will all do their part in undermining inclusivity.

Schools will now have difficult choices to make as they endeavour to meet the challenges posed by this budget. The reality is, however, that with diminished financial resources, it will simply not be possible for schools to maintain the current level of service required by students, parents and communities. Furthermore, the ability of schools to respond to the forthcoming comprehensive range of reforms in education, including the Junior Cert reform and implementation of the Literacy and Numeracy Strategy will be greatly diminished. We had hoped that education would be spared, that the mistakes of recent years would not be compounded and that this country would prioritise the education and development of the next generation, but the minister has made his choices. The fair-minded will acknowledge his dilemma, but will ponder on the wisdom of the decisions made and their long-term impact in terms of fairness, jobs and reform.

* Pat Kinsella is principal of Coláiste Choilm, a second-level school of more than 1,200 students in Ballincollig, Co Cork