Sharing Education in Northern Ireland
DRAFT Policy Briefing
Colin Knox
School of Criminology, Politics and Social Policy
University of Ulster
Shore Road
Jordanstown
BT 37 OQB
2nd August 2010
A segregated education system
In the academic year 2009/10 there were 152,552 primary school children and 147,759
post-primary pupils in Northern Ireland, an overall school population of 300,311 pupils.
These figures exclude pre-school, nursery education, special, hospital and independent
schools which account for 29,146 pupils, making an overall school population of
329,457. See table 1 for details.
Table 1: Pupils by management type and school type
Controlled
Catholic
Maintained
(includes Irish
medium)
Integrated
Voluntary
Catholic
Voluntary other
Total
Primary schools
(years 1 – 7)
71,080
73,367
Secondary
(non-grammar)
31,701
41,515
8,105
12,099
152,552
85,315
Secondary
(grammar)
14,885
Total
117,666
114,882
27,545
20,204
27,545
20,014
62,444
20,014
300,311
Source: Calculated from DE schools statistics 2009/10
The Northern Ireland Education system is highly segregated along religious lines (see
table 2 below and figures 1 – 3, appendix 1) denoted by various school management
types as follows:
Controlled schools (de facto Protestant) are managed by the Education and Library
Boards through the Boards of Governors which comprise representatives of transferors
(Protestant churches), parents, teachers and the education and library boards.
Voluntary (maintained) schools are managed by the Boards of Governors which comprise
representatives of trustees (Catholic churches), parents, teachers and the education board
and library boards. Responsibility for Catholic maintained schools rests with the statutory
body, the Council for Catholic Maintained Schools (CCMS). Voluntary (non-maintained)
schools are mainly voluntary grammar schools managed by the Boards of Governors.
Integrated schools are schools which include pupils from both the Protestant and Catholic
communities. The Department of Education accepts a balance of 70:30 (with 30%
coming from whichever is the smaller religious group in the area) as the minimum
required for a new school to be recognised as integrated.
There are also a number of Irish Medium schools (mostly in the primary sector) where
children are taught through the medium of the Irish language. These are owned and
2
managed by the Boards of Governors, supported by Comhairle na Gaelscolaiochta
(CnaG) and funded by the Department of Education.
Table 2: Pupils by management type and religion
Protestant
Controlled
Catholic
Maintained
(includes Irish
medium)
Integrated
52,520
761
Controlled
Catholic
Maintained
(includes Irish
medium)
Integrated
26,161
240
Controlled
Voluntary Catholic
Voluntary other
Total
11,412
253
13,108
113,346
3,220
5,671
Catholic
Primary schools
3,645
71,399
Others
14,915
1,207
2,974
1,911
Secondary schools (non grammar)
563
4977
40,923
352
4,495
1,933
Secondary schools (grammar)
1,035
2,438
27,051
241
2,072
4834
154,157
32,808
Total
71,080
73,367
8,105
31,701
41,515
12,099
14,885
27,545
20,014
300,311
Source: Calculated from DE schools statistics 2009/10
Cohesion, Sharing and Integration
Figures 1 – 3 (see appendix 1) graphically illustrate just how segregated our primary and
post-primary schools are. Government policy, as outlined in the Programme for
Government,1 makes clear the commitment ‘to working towards a shared and better
future for all.’ The consultation document Cohesion, Sharing and Integration (CSI, 2010:
10-11)2 sets out suggestions to realize this commitment. Specifically it aims ‘to make a
difference to both people and places’ by supporting (inter alia) sharing in education and
cites evidence that 62% of people indicated that they would prefer to send their children
to mixed religion schools. CSI notes that one of the key aims of empowering the next
generation is ‘focusing in education and promoting greater understanding of shared
values.’ The role played by the Department of Education so far in this regard includes:
 Exercising its statutory duty to encourage and facilitate the development of
integrated education.
1
Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister (2008) Programme for Government 2008-11.
Belfast: Northern Ireland Executive.
2
Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister (2010) Programme for Cohesion, Sharing and
Integration: consultation document. Belfast OFMDFM.
3
 The development of a new Community Relations, Equality and Diversity in
Education Policy (CRED).
 The introduction of Personal Development and Mutual Understanding (PDMU) in
the primary sector curriculum and Local and Global Citizenship in the postprimary sector have provided more opportunities to develop the pupils’ awareness
of the need to respect and value the views of others.
CSI also makes reference to the Department’s co-operation with the International Fund
for Ireland [IFI] in the Sharing Education Programme (which is co-funded by Atlantic
Philanthropies [AP]) on projects ‘which promote reconciliation and community
relations.’
Sharing Education Programme
The model
The Sharing Education Programme, to which CSI refers, has been in operation since
2007. Queen’s University, School of Education, began to work with 12 partnerships
based on specialist schools which collaborated on a cross-community basis to share
classes and activities in order to improve education outcomes for pupils. The programme
has a curriculum focus but because it is offered on a cross-community basis there are
reconciliation benefits for participants, teachers, parents and, in the long term, the wider
community (see figure 4). The programme is demonstrating that sustained and
‘normalised’ collaborative contact will allow substantive relationships between peers and
school communities to evolve across the traditional divide. This creates
interdependencies between the schools and real reconciliation effects result.
The Queen’s University Sharing Education Programme completed a 3-year phase one in
June 2010. Given its success the programme has been rolled out for a further 3 years and
is being replicated throughout Northern Ireland by two other providers: the Fermanagh
Trust and the North Eastern Education and Library Board which started related projects
in September 2009. Overall, the Sharing Education Programme represents an investment
by funders (IFI and AP) of over £10.5m.
Figure 4: Sharing Education Model
Establish
partnerships
Build
collaborative
links
Shared
classes
and
activities
Promote
reconciliation
outcomes
4
Programme Activities
The Sharing Education Programme3 involves a large number of pupils engaged in
sustained cross-community school activities:
 Queen’s University: there are 48 primary and post primary schools participating
in this project involving 3,500 pupils per year.
 The Fermanagh Trust: there are 45 schools and 4,250 primary and post-primary
pupils actively involved in this project.
 The Northern Eastern Education and Library Board: there are 30 primary schools
and 4,500 pupils involved in this project.
[PROJECTS TO CHECK THESE DATA]
The range of activities include:





Year 14 students completing ‘A’ level subjects in cross-community classes
Year 12 students completing GCSE subjects in cross-community classes
Jointly provided and accredited vocational training courses
Combined citizenship and PDMU classes
Science mentoring classes - primary schools children from mixed backgrounds
attending science classes in a post-primary school
 Collaborative ICT projects through face-to-face contact and web-based learning
 Joint schools drama production as part of the GCSE curriculum
 Foreign languages training for mixed primary schools
[PROJECTS TO SUPPLEMENT THIS LIST]
The Queen’s University Belfast (QUB) (www.schoolsworkingtogether.co.uk); The Fermanagh Trust (FT)
(www.fermanaghtrust.org), and the North Eastern Education and Library Board (NEELB)
(http://www.neelb.org.uk/schools/piee/).
3
5
What is the case for sharing in education?
There are significant economic, societal and educational benefits arising from the Sharing
Education Programme as follows:
Economic benefits:
The Department of Education will spend £1,915m in 2010-11. With declining rolls there
are significant economic benefits in schools collaborating. The Department of
Education’s Sustainable Schools’ Policy (2009)4 shows how, when school size reduces,
support funding calculated on a per pupil basis rises sharply. The Department has now set
minimum enrolment numbers for new schools as follows:
 Primary schools: 140 pupils in urban areas and 105 in rural areas
 Post-primary: years 8 - 12 should have a minimum of 500 pupils and a sixth form
minimum of 100.
The Department indicates that there are 326 primary schools (out of a total of 879) which
have 100 pupils or fewer in which each pupil is costing £604 per year more than the
average cost for all primary schools. In the post-primary sector there are 107 schools (out
of a total of 228) with fewer than 600 pupils where each pupil is costing £124 more than
the average cost for all post primary schools. The ‘solution’ to the issue of sustainability
offered by the Department includes: amalgamation, confederation, federation, co-location
and shared campus options for schools below the enrolment thresholds. The Bain report5
Schools for the Future (2006: xxxiii)6 spelt this out clearly when it stated ‘proposals for
new schools, or reorganization or rationalisation of schools should demonstrate that
options for collaboration and sharing on a cross-community basis have been considered
and fully explored.’ This is endorsed by DE’s sustainable schools policy (2009: 42) in
which it concludes: ‘given surplus capacity and falling rolls, it is important that
opportunities for sharing both across and within sectors are fully considered and
evaluated to improve current educational standards, to make better use of resources and
to serve even better the needs of young people and those who teach them.’ In short, there
are sound economic reasons for the reduction in the number of small schools. Achieving
this reduction should include cross-community options which have additional educational
and reconciliation benefits discussed below.
4
Department of Education (2009) Schools for the Future: A Policy for Sustainable Schools. Bangor: DE.
The Bain Report (2006) Schools for the Future: Funding, Strategy and Sharing. Belfast: Independent
Strategic Review of Education.
6
Department of Education (2009) Every School a Good School: A Policy for School Improvement. Bangor:
DE
5
6
Educational benefits:
One of the indicators of effective performance in schools (as cited in DE’s policy Every
School a Good School (2009:14)) is that ‘a clear commitment exists to promote equality
of opportunity, high quality learning, a concern for individual pupils and a respect for
diversity.’ How schools perform in this regard will be a key part of the Education and
Training Inspectorate’s assessment which, in turn, will be used to determine how best to
provide support services to schools. The Education and Training Inspectorate (2009: 12)7,
reporting on the quality of community relations work taking place in schools, noted that:
‘the investment in this area has yielded benefits, yet current structures do not ensure
appropriate levels of progression and quality outcomes for all.’ The Inspectorate (2009:4)
argued that the introduction of PDMU in the primary sector has encouraged teachers to
engage with community relations issues but the links at post-primary level to Local and
Global Citizenship ‘is perceived as an add-on rather than integral to the curriculum.’
A recent report by the Good Relations Forum entitled Ensuring Good Relations Work in
our Schools Counts (2010:22)8 also makes the case for improving young people’s
educational outcomes by promoting a schools’ sector that is more socially cohesive
across its many boundaries. The report (2010: 22) noted: ‘schools’ citizenship and wholeschool programmes can positively shape children and young people’s attitudes and even
protect against negative influences, such as racism and sectarianism.’ They suggest a link
between educational outcomes and cross-community learning: ‘there may well also be a
relationship between achieving a harmonious school environment and driving up
academic attainment, as students are more confident in themselves and at ease with a
diverse world’ (2010: 35).
Research on inter-school collaboration9 has found that the contact generated through this
process was mainly curriculum based, particularly in relation to the revised
curriculum/entitlement framework. Curriculum based cross-sectoral contact also ensured
that contact was regular and sustained throughout the school year. This, in turn, ‘reduced
pupils’ anxiety, increased the potential for friendships and promoted greater
understanding and perspective taking of the other main religious group’ (Hughes et al,
2009: 12).
7
Education and Training Inspectorate (2009) An Evaluation of the Quality Assurance of Community
Relations Funding in a range of Formal and Non-formal Education Settings. Bangor: DE.
8
The Good Relations Forum (2010) Ensuring the Good Relations Work in our Schools Counts. Belfast:
Community Relations Council and Equality Commission for Northern Ireland.
9
Hughes, J., Donnelly, C., Gallagher, T. and Carlisle, K. (2009) Inter School Collaboration in Northern
Ireland – Interim Report. Belfast: Queen’s University.
7
Societal/reconciliation benefits:
At the end of the first phase of the Sharing Education Programme there has been an
assessment of its impact.10 Key findings include the following:
 Those engaging in the Sharing Education Programme felt more comfortable in
having contact with people from a different community.
 There was a greater willingness amongst participants to make more friends with
pupils who belong to a different community background, both in school and
outside of school.
 Participation in the programme resulted in pupils gaining new experiences and
skills and increasing their level of confidence.
 Teachers concluded that participating on the programme provided direct
educational benefits for pupils and afforded opportunities to build relationships
with pupils from different community backgrounds and cultures.
 Curriculum development has been enhanced as a result of the programme.
In a qualitative study11 of teachers delivering the Sharing Education Programme one
comment captures a wide range of views held by those at the chalk-face:
The impact of SEP is that it gives our kids an ongoing cross-community
opportunity to meet regularly, to get to know each other, and to lift the clouds of
suspicion that may have existed. They now believe that it is okay to be different
and that it is okay to be yourself. I am convinced that those involved in the
programme will be more likely to challenge prejudices either in their homes or
beyond (Knox, 2010: 31).
Teachers also highlighted the many common issues that young people face regardless of
their community background, which SEP can build on. Young people, for example, face
pressures around drugs, alcohol and social relationships. These issues transcend ethnic
identity and can become a unifying platform to develop trust between pupils and a
foundation for exploring more sensitive issues.
10
FGS McClure Watters (2009) The Sharing Education Programme Consultancy Report. Belfast: FGS.
Knox, C. (2010) Sharing Education Programme: Views from the White Board. Jordanstown: University
of Ulster.
11
8
What are we recommending?
The policy changes we are trying to effect are as follows:
1. To incentivise ‘sharing over separation’ in two ways. First, within Area Learning
Communities cross-community partnerships should be incentivised by the
Department of Education in the implementation of the Entitlement Framework
which will have a statutory basis from September 2013.
2. Second, LMS (local management of schools funding) Common Funding Formula
should be re-examined to include a financial weighting in favour of crosscommunity collaboration. At present school budgets are weighted by a number of
factors: pupil numbers (age weighted); school premises (size and pupils
elements); maintenance (voluntary grammar & grant maintained integrated);
targeting social need (social deprivation and educational need element); and small
schools support factor etc. The formula should include a weighting for crosscommunity schools collaboration.
3. To actively promote cross-community collaboration in addressing sustainability
of schools. The Department’s Policy for Sustainable Schools (2009: 42-43)
encourages amalgamations and various forms of clustering and cooperation. The
Department should incentivise schools tackling sustainability to examine models
of collaboration on a cross-community basis.
4. To build capacity in teaching training (new and in-service) on issues around:
diversity, community relations, equality and mutual understanding. This will
better equip teachers to address cultural diversity both at leadership level and in
the classroom.
In summary, the Department of Education has a real opportunity, faced with declining
school rolls, public expenditure cuts, and statutory curriculum changes which require
schools to work together, to incentivise cross-community collaboration as an explicit
policy change. Not only will this assist in addressing these pressing education issues but
it will also go some way to meeting the wider societal goals of Cohesion, Sharing and
Integration.
9
APPENDIX 1
SEGREGATED SCHOOLING IN NORTHERN IRELAND
10
Figure 1: Primary Schools
100%
80%
Catholic
60%
Protestant
40%
Others
20%
0%
Controlled
Maintained
Integrated
Catholic
3645
71399
2974
Protestant
52520
761
3220
Others
14915
1207
1911
11
Figure 2: Secondary Schools
(non-grammar)
100%
80%
Catholic
60%
Protestant
40%
Others
20%
0%
Controlled
Maintained
Integrated
563
40923
4495
Protestant
26161
240
5671
Others
4977
352
1933
Catholic
12
Figure 3: Secondary Schools
(grammar)
100%
80%
Catholic
60%
Protestant
40%
Others
20%
0%
Controlled
Voluntary
Catholic
Voluntary
Other
Catholic
1035
27051
2072
Protestant
11412
253
13108
Others
2438
241
4834
13