Asked the Minister for Education the average number of pupils per class in primary schools in the Dublin city area; and the number of classes currently containing more than 50 pupils.

General statistics in relation to national schools are compiled annually on the basis of a census taken on 30th September, and the latest figures available to my Department on class sizes relate to 30th September, 1976. The average number of pupils per class in national schools in Dublin city on that date was 37. The number of classes in Dublin city containing more than 50 pupils on the same date was six.

Is the Minister satified with the rate of reduction in the number of pupils per class? Presumably that comes into another question. Is he satisfied with the rate of reduction in the size of classes?

No, I am not satisfied and, consequently, have spent most of the time since I took office trying to devise schemes to reduce the ratio still further.

22.

asked the Minister for Education the measures that are being taken to reduce class sizes in primary schools.

23.

asked the Minister for Education when he proposes to reduce the pupil/teacher ratio in national schools; by how much the ration will be reduced; and the means he proposes to employ.

With the permission of lthe Ceann Comhairle I propose to take Questions Nos. 22 and 23 together. The Fianna Fáil election manifesto undertook to treat the reduction of the pupil/teacher ratio in primary schools as a top priority, particularly in disadvantaged areas, and immediately to set about reducing all classes to 40 with a final objective of 32. The Deputies will be aware of the proposals which have already been made in this matter and the difficulties which have arisen. I shall be making a further statements on this at an early date.

Is the Minister now accepting the fact that, in spite of this pladge in the manifesto, there will be no unexpected reduction in the pupil/ teacher ratio in primary schools this year?

The Minister is at present trying to get teachers trained who will reduce the pupil/teacher ratio.

Can the Minister tell us whether these suitably trained teachers will be in the schools, at the very latest, at the beginning of next year and whether he has now completely abandoned any hope of getting them in this year?

The Deputy will realise as time goes on that the Minister does not abandon things easily and he will, at the very latest, have them in the schools at the beginning of the next academic year.

My difficulty is that there are some later question in respect of the Minister's old plan. Has the Minister an alternative plan to the emergency one he introduced in respect of the attempt to provide courses for graduates so that they might help him in his attempts to reduce the size of classes? Has he any other proposals? Can he say when he will be in a position to make those proposals public? When he says "a short time" what does he mean? Does he mean weeks, Months years?

I am working on the plan about which the Deputy makes the inquiries. It will be within the very, very near future.

Has the Minister made any contact with or given any explanation to the special graduate teachers he recruited and whom I understand do not now know where they are going or when they will get employment?

I am very glad the Deputy asked that supplementary question because a newspaper report indicated that I had not met any of those trainee graduates. The report is wrong; I did meet them and I will have further contacts with them in the near future.

Has the Minister given them any indication as to when they will be able to get some remuneration? Is the Minister aware that he is under a moral obligation to employ those people? They are entitled to an undertaking on the part of the Minister that this will be forthcoming.

In answer to the Deputy I want to say that the words "moral obligation" were those I used when speaking to the representatives at the meeting to which I have referred already, and I consider I have such a moral obligation.

Would the Minister not agree that had this sorry matter been handled more expertly we might now have extra teachers in the schools?

With the Chair's indulgence I would like to say that the matter was handled with full expertise and consultation with the democratically elected executive of teachers' organisation, the only people with whom I could consult in mid-summer.

Would the Minister consider, particularly in city centre schools-where there has been a drop in population and where teachers have been withdrawn-looking at the matter and giving it sympathetic consideration?

I am afraid that is a very different question.

I know what the Deputy is referring to. It is quite true to say that in central city schools, and often in areas that are disadvantaged in certain ways, the pupil/teacher ratio was good. In fact I think that is what the Deputy is referring to. I would like to maintain the good ratio there, and even give extra help wherever possible. Therefore, I can assure the Deputy on that.

Might I ask the Minister what is his projection for the achievement of the 32 ration?

If the Deputy means a time projection——

Yes.

I could not say because there are so many variables and, as the Deputy is aware, one meets with difficulties.

Five years, ten years?

I cannot allow the Deputy to tie me to time but it will be as soon as I can achieve it.

If the Minister is there long enough.

Thank you.

Could the Minister indicate if the graduate teachers he has recruited will be employed in the primary schools sector?

That is my intention.

Next question.

I shall be very interested to see the outcome of that. In this regard I wish the Minister well.

Thank you; I knew the Deputy would say that.

I have called the next question.

24.

asked the Minister for Education how he proposes to define a disadvantaged area for the purpose of according schools in such areas priority in reducing pupil/teacher rations.

For the purposes of deciding such priorities, disadvantaged areas are being defined as areas in which the educational progress of all or of a considerable proportion of the children is seriously impeded by poor social and economic conditions in their homes and neighbourhoods.

Is the Minister saying that class size has no bearing on educational disadvantage because that was not mentioned specifically in his reply?

The question asked me how I proposed to define a disadvantaged area and I answered that question.

In the Minister's reply he mentioned specifically social disadvantage. He did not mention any question of class size. Would the Minister agree that large class sizes, irrespective of the social and geographic environment of the school, constitute disadvantage, or would he not?

It has nothing at all to do with the question as put down. But I will say to the Deputy that I do think it is a serious disadvantage although, to tie in with the supplementary of Deputy F. O'Brien, the facts are that very often, in such areas-from the statistics I have studies-the pupil/teacher ration is quite good. There fore, it is not exclusively the pupil/ teacher ration.

Arising further from the Minister's reply——

There is another question coming further on from the Deputy on that.

Question No. 25.

Did the Chair call the next question?

Yes, No. 25.

26.

asked the Minister for Education the teacher/pupil ratio in primary schools in each county and county borough, exclusive of principals and remedial or special teachers; and if, in the case of Dublin County Borough, a more localised breakdown is available.

The information sought by the Deputy in so far as it is available is set out in the form of a tabular statement which with the permission of the Ceann Comhairle, I propose to have circulated with the Official Report.

Figures of pupil/teacher ratio as compiled for the purpose of the Department's statistical information include the principal teacher in the case of all schools. On this basis the information sought by the Deputy is set out in the table.

Following is the statement:

Teacher/Pupil Ratio-by County.

NOTE: Statistics are only compiled on a county basis. A more localised breakdown is not available for the Dublin County Borough.

Might I ask is that by any chance the replies to Nos. 25 and 26?

I had called No. 25.

No. 25 I have here.

Might I ask the Minister whether he could be more specific in relation to the statement he issued from the Government Information Services in which he said that he would secure, within a few years, a reduction from 45 to 40 in the maximum class size in national schools? Could he indicate what he means by within a few years?

I have more respect for the intelligence of the Deputy than to attribute to him that he does not understand the question he asked. I was asked the question regarding the pupil/ teacher ratio in primary schools in each county and county borough.

That is wrong. The Minister is referring to Question No. 26.

I am sorry.

25.

asked the Minister for Education the teacher/pupil ratio in (i) primary, (ii) secondary, and (iii) tertiary education.

The average teacher/ pupil ration in primary schools is 1 : 30.7. The teacher/pupil ratio approved for secondary schools for the current school year is 1:19. In the case of vocational schools the teaching staff are allocated to each vocational education committee on the basis of one teacher for every 16.5 pupils.

In the case of the second-level schools the rations exclude the principal, vice-principal and guidance teacher, in the schools where enrolment exceeds 250 pupils. In tertiary education, there is no formal staff/student ration prescribed and having regard to the variety of institutions and courses involved the calculation of such a ratio would not be meaningful.

Will the Minister explain the difference between the ratios in secondary schools and in vocational schools?

That is a separate question.

Surely the Minister knows the reason why the ratios are different in those schools.

I know the reason the ratio is now one for every 16.5 pupils in the vocational schools. It is because I reduced it to that. I know also why it is 1:19 in secondary schools. It is because I reduced it to that figure.

Of course we will give credit to the Minister where he does good work. That is not the question I asked. I asked for his explanation for the difference in the ratio for secondary schools and for vocational schools. It was a straigthforward question.

It will get a straightforward answer. The distinction was in existence before I reduced the ratio. I reduced by one in each case. Now it stands at 16.5:1 and 19:1. I imagine that originally the advantage went to vocational schools. They probably had more difficulty in the actual teaching.

I accept the mathematical differences; I can see them for myself. Will the Minister not agree that as the vocational schools sector has expanded and is now on a par with secondary schools there should be more equilibrium in the two ratios at the lower level?

Is the Deputy suggesting that I raise the ratio for vocational schools to 19:1?

I said at the lower figure.

For example, there are woodwork and metalwork subjects as well as other subjects taught in vocational schools so that classes have to be broken up into smaller units. That is one part of the problem. I said there was more difficulty in dealing with vocational teaching.

Is it the Minister's intention or desire to reduce eventually the pupil/teacher ratio in secondary schools to 15:1?

I have not published any policy on that. I know that it existed at 15:1 at one stage. Of course I am depending on the goodwill of many people. I shall try to improve the ratio as best I can.

Will the Minister tell the House when the pupil/teacher ratio went from 15:1 to 20:1?

I think the Deputy knows the answer to that question.

I should like to get it on the record that it was a previous Fianna Fáil Minister who did that. The Minister has told us that he reduced the ratio in both secondary and vocational schools since he took up office. Can he tell the House how many graduates have been employed as a result?

If the Deputy will put down a question I will get the information for him. I presume he means teachers in both sectors? I do not think the statistics are compiled as yet but in any event it has nothing to do with this question.

Is the Minister sure he has not got the information there? The Department of Education must have changed considerably in four months if they do not provide all information.

Perhaps the Deputy will put down a question. I find the Minister for Finance quite liberal so far. I shall probably get the bullets later on, but no matter.

Question No. 26 has been answered already.

If the House wishes, and with the permission of the Chair, I should be happy to repeat my answer.

It would be of help.

26.

asked the Minister for Education the teacher/pupil ratio in primary schools in each county and county borough, exclusive of principals and remedial or special teachers; and if, in the case of Dublin County Borough, a more localised breakdown is available.

The information sought by the Deputy in so far as it is available is set out in the form of a tabular statement which with the permission of the Ceann Comhairle, I propose to have circulated with the Official Report.

Figures of pupil/teacher ratio as compiled for the purpose of the Department's statistical information include the principal teacher in the case of all schools. On this basis the information sought by the Deputy is set out in the table.

Following is the statement:

Teacher/Pupil Ratio-by County

NOTE: Statistics are only compiled on a county basis. A more localised breakdown is not available for the Dublin County Borough.

Will the Minister tell the House if there is a localised breakdown for Dublin?

No. I have figures only for County Dublin and Dublin County Borough.

The Minister has said the principals and special teachers are included in the ratio ——

I said that only principals were included in these statistics.

The Minister referred to principals and special teachers in an earlier question.

In answer to a previous question I said that the principal, vice-principal and guidance teachers in schools where the enrolment exceeds 250 pupils are excluded.

Is it possible for the Minister to indicate the area of greatest gravity?

Some people have a touching faith in statistics but I do not share that faith. On glancing through the statistics it appears that Waterford city and County Kildare seem to be the worst. The national average is 31.9. It is not very revealing.

Does the Minister accept that there is a great variation in areas throughout Dublin?

Yes. Deputy O'Brien indicated that in areas where one might be inclined to think the ratio would be bad it was found to be quite good.

Is the Minister prepared to reconsider the present situation whereby a remedial teacher is only given to schools on the basis of one for every school with at least 250 pupils? Would he not consider it more equitable to give a remedial teacher for every 250 pupils where there are larger schools?

The Deputy's supplementary question does not relate to the question I was asked. We are not dealing with remedial teachers. I will try to deal with the remedial situation and improve it as best I can. That is one way it might be improved. In the smaller school there is less danger of someone getting lost.

The Minister mentioned the relatively good aspects of certain areas in terms of ration. Would he accept that in many cases it is a serious financial disadvantage in the context of the capitation system?

It would not be particularly true of the schools about which Deputy O'Brien was asking a question. They are largish schools. It would be in small schools in rural areas.

We will chat about that later.

The Minister has been very helpful.

The remaining questions will appear on the Order Paper for the next sitting day.