A quite stunning victory over the Irish educational bureaucracy was finally achieved in 2008 by an Irish Parents Group. It will be of major benefit to future generations of children attending the European School and is an illustration of how seemingly impossible obstacles can be overturned by sheer persistence and determination.
The Irish authorities had signed up to a Euro convention in the year 2000 guaranteeing that the children obtaining the European Bac (EBAC) would be treated equitably on a par with children taking the Leaving Certificate (LC).
Moreover, as regards standards, the results of the well-respected OECD 2003 PISA study, indicated that the European School in Luxembourg had the highest standards in OECD. This very high standard was once again confirmed by the results of the latest 2006 OECD PISA study, which convincingly demonstrated that the earlier study’s finding was not just a ‘once-off’ result. Moreover, research has indicated that the EBAC students do very well in UK and Irish universities.
Disregarding these considerations, the Irish universities had been carrying on hefty discrimination against EBAC students by placing obstacles to entry. Where LC students had requirements set at Matriculation and Course Entry of 55% -59%, marks of 80% were required from EBAC students. The NUI system of evaluating the EBAC results for competitive also handicaps EBAC students as, most importantly, the overall EBAC mark, rather than the six best subjects, is chosen for calculating competitive points.
The universities admissions officers subsequently admitted that they had never carried out a comparative study of EBAC and LC standards before imposing the discrimination.
In late 2005 a group of Irish parents in Luxembourg with children in the European School mobilised in response to the longstanding discrimination being practised by the Irish universities against the Eurobac students.
Early contacts with the DES in Brussels in 2005 proved unhelpful and the misleading information received from the DES inspectorate about a possible meeting of the university admissions officers in Dublin, via the Irish Universities Association (IUA), convinced the Group that a more forceful approach was needed.
The Parents’ Memorandum, which is accessible on the website of the Parents Association of the European Schools (APEEE) in Luxembourg http://www.apeee.lu/docs/En/EB.pdf, was drawn up according to a tight schedule, following a number of intensive discussion sessions, with each group member bringing her/his own particular expertise to bear. It was completed and circulated by Easter 2006 to everybody considered relevant in the third level educational sphere, from University Chancellors downwards, as well as to the Minister and Secretary General of the Department of Education and Science (DES).
The initial strategy of both the IUA and the DES was clearly one of administrative delay in the expectation that the particular Parents’ Group would lose interest. When the delay in reacting to the memorandum was queried, an effort was made by the IUA and DES, working in combination, to disparage the Parents’ case and to try to intimidate them into silence.
This policy backfired as some members of the Group launched a campaign which resulted in Parliamentary Questions being asked in February 2007 both in the Dáil (by Deputy Joan Burton) and in the European Parliament (by Seán Ó Neachtain, MEP) .
The Minister for the DES tried to stonewall in answering the Dáil Question by delivering non-sequiturs and then attempted to shift all the responsibility for the matter to the University Admissions Officers. The Irish Parents quickly reminded the Minister by letter that it was her responsibility to ensure that Government policy in this matter was being implemented.
The European Parliament Question obviously discomfited the DES; even though they managed to avoid an explanation for the discrimination, signs of uneasiness were obvious about having to answer before a European forum for a policy which was plainly unjustifiable and un-European.
A highly placed Irish official in the Commission then got involved, using contacts in the Taoiseach’s Department, and in April 2007 the meeting which had been refused a year earlier with the IUA and the DES, suddenly became possible.
The arrival of an able and far-sighted new CEO of the IUA was undoubtedly a helpful factor. At this meeting he proposed that a comparison of the EBAC and LC syllabuses should be carried out.
The outcome of this comparison, which was revealed in May 2008, was that Trinity (which previously had the highest barriers in place) is now treating EBAC students on a par with LC students. The NUI have also considerably reduced their barriers, with the chief exception of their refusal to mark on the 6 best subjects.
In summary, the result must be regarded as a major victory against a seemingly implacable bureaucracy, which had apparently assumed that it was immune to outside criticism and free to pursue a policy which ran contrary, not alone to the evidence of the high standards in the European School, but also was in breach of the Euro commitments made by the Irish authorities. Moreover, the general impression which the Parents’ Group got of the educational establishment was one of which might best be termed as a ‘Fáilte Towers’ method of operating. While initially making a pretence of being neutral, the DES was covertly supporting the discrimination and only changed tune when the political pressure made this position impossible. The Admissions Officers were unable to make any coherent defence of their stance. Their threatened ‘joint response’ to the Parents’ Memorandum, used as a delaying tactic, never saw the light of day.
It might also be added that no assistance was received by the Irish Parents from the secretariat of the European School in Brussels. The secretariat was in fact unhelpful, openly vouchsafing the opinion that the Irish educational establishment was not in breach of its Euro commitments and inter alia providing it with statistics which had been refused to the Parents’ Group.
- Login to post comments