Madam, - This college recently celebrated the achievement of a young man who enrolled five years ago without having sat the Leaving Certificate. Just five weeks ago he received a master's degree at Trinity College Dublin.
He would not have merited inclusion in the Irish Times school league tables. Thousands like him nationally would have been placed, de facto, in the failures column for their schools.
Where in the league tables do we find those who go to the further education (FE), agricultural, art, dance and other colleges, the apprentices, those happily gone to employment, those who cannot afford to go to third level, those travelling the globe and those who have chosen to defer - or terminate - further academic progression? Why does The Irish Times, a paper with a proud tradition of promoting fair inquiry,focus on such a narrow indicator of success? If The Irish Times seeks to advance the debate about education, it should be more honest about the value of such tables.
Just why did FE, sometimes but inadequately described as PLC, not merit a single mention in your recent "Feeder Schools" supplement? The FE sector, catering for over 30,000 learners, is unique in the history of Irish education in that it was not centrally planned by Government, but grew from the efforts of teachers and administrators.
Over 20 years, hundreds of thousands of learners have had their career paths and lives enhanced in this sector. FE offers a second chance to many for whom second-level school brought only failure. It offers a pathway to professional qualifications to many returning to work after years in the home. It offers career changes for many stuck in dead-end jobs. It offers a way back for those dropping out of college.
And for many more perhaps the majority - it is their first-choice college, offering specific qualifications not offered elsewhere. In short, it has been and continues to be a unique success story in Ireland's educational provision.
Perhaps you can be forgiven for ignoring FE, given that the Government has yet properly to recognise its educational, economic and social value. The Government-commissioned McIver Report, charting a way forward for FE, has gathered dust for two years, with much more set to accumulate. Incredibly, it did not merit mention in the recent budget estimates or ministerial briefing, thus confining FE within the wholly inappropriate shackles of second-level structures and funding.
The argument is not about teachers' salaries or conditions. It is a moral argument for the proper resourcing of FE learners and for recognition of the level of educational achievement possible in FE.
If you report information, let the public be given much more information, including real admissions (and exclusion) policies. What about the socio-economic backgrounds of learners, parental support, learner supports, learner improvement, special needs provisions and additional sources of funding? Let those schools which proudly detail their Leaving Cert results on their websites display this information just as prominently.
In the meantime, given that the chattering classes, described as such by Breda O'Brien (Opinion, November 26th), demand league tables, may I suggest you attach a health warning, in a proportion similar to that on cigarette boxes and using similar graphics? - Yours, etc,
BARRY O'CALLAGHAN,
Principal, Senior College,
College of Further Education,
Dun Laoghaire,
Co Dublin.