Name of Student: Luke Bowden G00286640

Article/Reading: A Blueprint For Educate Together Schools, 2009.

1. CONCISE SUMMARY OF READING
This article is a policy document written to provide a clear vision of
what an Educate Together school would look like. This document was
published by Educate Together following studies that proved the need
for multi-denominational secondary school on the back of 30 years of
Educate Together national schools (A.Seery, 2008). As of the publishing
date of this document there were over 10,000 students across 18
counties in 56 Educate Together national schools, non of which had an
opportunity to continue their secondary studies in a school with the
same vision, ethos, design and culture because no Educate Together
secondary schools existed. This document provides a clear introduction
to what an Educate Together school is, the ethos and vision, the
curriculum, leadership and management in an educate together
school and the importance put on the design of the school
environment and the design process as an educational tool.
Defined by its mission and vision an Educate Together secondary
school is working towards and Ireland in which all people have access
to an excellent education irrespective of beliefs, race, ethnicity, class,
culture, gender, language, lifestyle and ability. Its mission is to be an
agent for change in the Irish State Education system and to see that
parents have a choice of education for their children based on

inclusive intercultural values and respect for all. Value is placed on

preparing children for life and becoming active caring members of a
culturally diverse society. Children are put at the centre of the
education process encouraged to collaborate and work in the
democratic environment of an Educate Together school.
The curriculum of an Educate Together school must fall in line with the
national curriculum however the document expresses a clear desire to
push the boundaries within that state curriculum. References are made
to the proposed changes to both the Junior Certificate (2015); (2011)
and Leaving Certificate curriculum and assessments (Department of
Education and Skills, 2005). There is a belief that the proposed changes
will further allow Educate Together schools to provide students with
greater opportunities to enable learners to become not only successful
in school, but also responsible members of society and effective
workers capable of lifelong learning. The document references Howard
Gardeners Theory of Multiple intelligences (2011) and how this theory
will play a role in how the school delivers its curriculum. This falls in line
with the schools ethos of inclusion for all and providing the opportunity
for each student to learn in their own way.
Professor Tom Collins of NUI Maynooth has stated,
They [second- level students] think like PowerPoint. They find it
difficult to construct a narrative; they return exam scripts in bullet
points. Second-level education is not training them to link their
ideas, to tell a story. They come to university singularly
unprepared for the intellectual challenge of adult life.
(Collins, 2007)
To adequately prepare students for adult life they will be encouraged

to conduct self directed learning and assessment with the ultimate

goal of developing transferable skills and not just becoming a knower
The formal and informal curriculum in an Educate Together school will
also encourage individuality and creativity. In order to provide for such
a rich learning experience the organisation of subjects and delivery of
content will be adaptable and innovative in Educate Together schools.
Subjects will be delivered in co-operative collaborative manners where
possible, smaller learning groups will be created with small teams of
teachers working together will specific groups to develop relationships
and further learning opportunitys. Flexibility within the timetable and
creative use of a variety of teaching strategies and methods will exist
to provide a holistic education. To counteract the issues surrounding
the vast level of content which is present on the syllabi for Junior
Certificate subjects Educate Together schools will individually decide
whether or not students will sit their Junior Certificate examination or to
what number of subjects they will be examined in. One of the main
statements made in the Curriculum aspect of this document is that
Educate Together Classrooms will not be streamed. This curriculum
however doesnt stand on its own interwoven into it is what Educate
Together refers to as the Ethical Curriculum.
The Ethical Curriculum is both individual specific classes and a
curriculum which must be displayed throughout all subjects and school
activities. Broken down into four strands of Moral and Spiritual; Justice
and Equality; Belief Systems and Ethics & the Environment this
curriculum is a follow on from the primary curriculum. The aim of this
curriculum is underpinned by core values such as respect for self and
others, knowledge of difference, gender, equality, respect for the
environment and responsibility as a citizen. With a view to providing
students with knowledge of other societies, cultures, races, religions
and beliefs the hope is that combating ignorance within the school

environment can influence change in society as a whole. However

these values and this Ethical Curriculum must stem from the leadership
and management in the school.
The leadership and management of an Educate Together secondary
school is responsible for ensuring that the school community is built on
the four core principles laid down by the Educate Together charter of
1990. The school must be multi denominational in character ensuring
that children of all social, cultural and religious backgrounds have
equal access and rights within the school. The school must be coeducational encouraging children and young people to learn and live
together. The school must be child centred, including and respecting
individual student abilities to learn in unique ways. Finally Educate
Together Schools are run on a democratic basis encouraging active
participation by parents and students in the daily life of the school
whilst positively affirming the professional role of teachers. These four
principles will be clearly identifiable in the management structure,
policies and practices in each school. Central to Educate Together
schools are the voice of the students, students are expected to not
only share their opinions on student councils but to also engage
formally in regards to such things as curriculum and assessment, lesson
structure and also with the Board of Management on matters age
appropriate to them. One area that the policy highlights the important
role of students in the design and layout of the school building itself.
The policy document expresses that the Built Environment is of extreme
importance in developing a positive learning environment for the
school. They believe that the design influences ethos and culture and
can play a role in influencing academic performance. This is for all
students not just those who may have Special Educational Needs
which require specific adjustments to the learning environment. It is

believed that a suitable environment for education is an adaptable

one, an environment that can be changed and manipulated to suite
the needs of the students and the learning that is occurring at that
time. The Sorrel Foundation in the UK also provided insight as to how
important the input of the students is when designing a school
environment (Sorrell Foundation, 2008). Students desired design aspects
such as calming colours in the classroom and vibrant colours in social
spaces, flexibly learning spaces with good ICT, dinner halls designed for
efficiency and sheltered social spaces with adequate seating. The
document outlines how involvement in the design process improves
students ability to think creatively, problem solve, research, investigate
and make decisions. It also expresses a belief that the design process in
general should be an important aspect of Educate Together schools.
There is a clear statement that the building and the landscape of the
grounds should serve as a resource for learning. Where possible
aspects of the construction should be displayed so students can
comprehend how the building is put together, where possible student
truth windows should display the construction behind the wall,
caballing ducting etc. and the outside environment should allow for
active learning in the fields of geography and science. The clear
statement that an Educate Together school must have a more
interactive and engaging environment than traditional school buildings
in Ireland cannot be missed.
In conclusion this document is a guiding policy for the foundation of
new Educate Together schools. It highlights the ethos, values, mission
and purpose of an Educate Together school. The document explains
the curriculum of such a school and how its desire to create and
inclusive innovative educational environment extends past the
traditional curriculum in Ireland. Ethical and moral development is of
equal importance as content of a subject matter. The environment

and the design of the school are as essential to the learning process as
the structure of the lesson being delivered. Collaboration within the
school, from teachers to students to parents and within the wider
community is at the forefront of an Educate Together school and the
responsibility falls on the leadership of everyone involved from the
classroom to management to ensure that the four main principles of a
school which is multi-denominational, co-education, child-centered
and democratic are upheld. An Educate Together school is a school
that will provide each student with the tools they need to deal with an
increasingly complex world.

2. CRITICAL REFLECTION

This document is a fantastic insight into the educational philosophy and

ideals of Educate Together. As a guiding document for new Educate
Together secondary schools it is very well structured providing a clear
outline in the areas of curriculum, teaching and learning; explaining
the ethical curriculum; highlighting the leadership and democratic
structure of an Educate Together school and lastly addressing the
important role that the school environment and design plays in
creating the most ideal learning environment. The document opens by

setting great context for Educate Together philosophies in its foreword.

It recognises the existence of good practices already in the Irish
education system whilst also stating the belief that current and future
generations will be faced with new and existing challenges that we as
educators need to prepare them for. There is a clear reference
towards the changing educational landscape in Ireland at this current
time. The document smartly references the proposed Junior Cycle
Reforms and proposed changes to the Leaving certificate course.
While doing so it proposes a viewpoint that regardless of national
curriculum and assessment, there are great opportunities for schools
and teachers to push the boundaries of the status quo and provide
students with a greater opportunity to become learners and not just
knowers. Although it is stated that some of the proposed changes will
further allow the Educate Together students to thrive, the statement
that each school is encouraged to choose whether or not to allow
their students to take Junior Certificate exams or restricting how many
exams students sit appears to be a statement of contempt for the
Junior certificate.
This document draws large comparisons from international education
systems. Finland in particular is used as a benchmark for what we
should be aiming to achieve with our education system (Vlijrvi,
2002). It is stated that no streaming, no mandatory testing, freedom of
curriculum and highly qualified teachers are largely the reasons for the
flourishing system in Finland. 95% of students achieve their equivalent to
the Leaving Certificate and of that 70% go to further education. While
no direct comparison can be made because of the streaming of the
Irish system and other differences it can be noted that the 2015
Leaving Certificate produced failure rates of 4.2% in higher; 7.6% in
ordinary and 5.6% in foundation in the subject of Maths alone (Hosford,
2015). Although not a direct comparison to Finland some conclusions

might also be drawn from the number of enrolments in undergraduate

degrees between September 2014 and January 2015. A total of 18,446
new enrolments of students under the age of 19 took place during that
period (Higher Education Authority, 2015). However, this does not
account for other third level colleges and there are a number of other
variables but a total of 56,990 students received leaving certificate
results in August of 2014 which can provide some level of context to
those figures (Bohan, 2014). It must be noted when reading this policy
document there is desire for this issue to be addressed and there are
clear attempts from Educate Together schools to do their part in
narrowing the gap between our system and the benchmark set by
Finland.
Educate together schools plan to focus their teaching and learning
strategies on providing students with the skills and abilities to succeed in
adult life. They plan to engage students in cooperative learning, focus
on each students individualities and encourage creativity and
problem solving. They express a clear desire to step away from building
up content knowledge which is then regurgitated for an exam, instead
focus is put on holistic education and the needs of the students. This is
an admirable statement however it is my belief that it shouldnt require
an entire new school in the form of Educate Together schools for these
things methodologies to exist. There are many teachers out there who
adopt these strategies and many of the younger generation of
teachers especially, who are coming out of college plan lessons with
active learning in mind, holistic education at the core and teaching
methodologies which are in line with those expressed by Educate
Together in this document. For example formative assessment is
becoming a greater part of the Irish system and our own FIP modules
through Battelle For Kids (2015) in professional studies and the content
required for our lesson plans are evidence of such philosophies (GMIT

Letterfrack, 2015). There is even a correlation between multicultural

inclusion in our schemes of work and the ethical curriculum of
Educate Together schools.
The Ethical Curriculum is essential in supporting and promoting the
ethos of the Educate Together schools however many of the aspects of
the curriculum exist in other Irish schools. Between religion studies, the
fact that we as teachers are expected to uphold and promote the
ethical values stated in the Code of conduct for professional teachers
(2012) and the existence of school programmes such as LCVP and Life
Skills classes it is my belief that the ethical curriculum already exists in
schools. It is possible the promotion and focus given to ethics in
Educate Together schools might be improved in comparison to other
schools. This brings me to the question, Educate Together schools wish
to be a multi-denominational inclusive school integrated into the
community without a focus on any specific religious belief and
welcoming and inclusive to all. If that is so, what is a community
school? Is and Educate Together school not of the same ethos as a
community school but ran by a private non government organisation?
The document also appears to imply that currently the school system
does not promote engagement with the community. I disagree with
this concept especially given my experience from Teaching Practice 1
in a school where the mission statement expresses intent for bringing up
young people is both a civic and a spiritual activity (Moyle Park
College, 1956-2015). Also common knowledge of the sheer number of
secondary school students registered to local sports teams and
societies would further contradict any implied statement that poor
level of community engagement exists in Irish teenagers. In regards to
Leadership and Management the documents explanation regarding
the democratic structure in Educate Together schools bring rise to a
number of questions.

Students are expected and encouraged to engage democratically

with teachers, parents and school management in regards to areas
from curriculum and planning to assessment and even to board of
management matters which are age appropriate. Steaming from John
Deweys concept of a democratic classroom outlined in the book
Democracy and Education (1997), I do believe in some benefits to this
democratic system however I can see a number of issues which may
arise. Students will benefit from greater responsibility, they will feel more
involved and in control of their own education and therefore are more
likely to engage in the learning process. They will also gain leadership
skills and experience in such formal tasks. It must not be ignored
however that teachers and school management are highly qualified
people, typically holding at least a level 8 (hons.) degree in their
subject matters and pedagogy. How much of their work is being
undermined by allowing students and parents too much of a voice?
Ultimately is it implying incompetence in teachers ability to plan their
own lessons and adequately facilitate for the education of the
students in their care? There is the possibility that this focus freedom of
speech and a school based too much on democracy could lead to
teachers being alienated and undermined by a conflict between their
beliefs and that of the students and parents involved. One aspect of
this policy that is not up for debate is how important the design of
school environment is in creating a positive learning environment.
This policy lays out clear ideals for the design of an Educate Together
school these were addressed in the summary. However, questions do
exist about the effectiveness of some of the ideas suggested for an
engaging environment. In reality do students actually get the
opportunity to engage with the learning environment they are in
outside of the classroom? Did the truth windows come to exist in the

4 secondary school buildings that are currently operational (Educate

Together, 2015)? Do students have the flexible timetable to allow them
to interact in the social spaces? Are the learning environments flexible
and is the flexibility of the spaces explored?

Most importantly how

does the environment effect classroom management and general

management of the school? Given the clear design for flexible
learning environments and the fact that policy express a desire for
cooperative team teaching and smaller groups being formed within
the school which interact more closely with a small group of teachers
do these strategies actually exist in reality and how effective are they?
Unfortunately without first hand experience or the existence of
sufficient secondary evidence because of how new the schools are
these questions will have to go unanswered for now.
In conclusion this policy document is a great outline for Educate
Together schools. It provides a clear ethos and message along with
sufficient content and suggestions in order to achieve this vision. It
highlights the deficiencies the Irish Education system has in comparison
to some of the worlds best such as Finland. It also proves to be a very
eye-opening read for any teacher or student teacher. They will quickly
come to realise that much of what is suggested for Educate Together
schools are adaptable to any school in the country. One of the main
themes I took from this policy was an underlining lack of confidence in
what has been our education system for a significant number of years.
Although some positives are taken from proposed changes there is an
implied belief that the DES and teaching council have failed to
adequately provide education for our children from the environments
to curriculum to the leadership structure it appears to fault a lot of what
is currently in existence. I am aware of the acknowledgement of good
practices in existence in the foreword but the rest of the document
seems to contradict this initial statement.

3. LIST OF REFERENCES

Bibliography
A.Seery. (2008). Feasabilty study for the opening of a second-level school by Educate
Together. Trinity College Dublin. Dublin: Trinity College Dublin.
Battelle For Kids. (2015, Oct). Determine what students know, identify possible
gaps in understanding, and modify instruction where needed. Retrieved Oct 19, 2015,
from www.battelleforkids.org:
Bohan, C. (2014, Aug 13). In the numbers: Leaving Cert results. Retrieved Oct 19,
2015, from http://www.thejournal.ie/leaving-certificate-results-numbers-1615927Aug2014/:
Collins, T. (2007, Jan 16). Universities rely on institute intake to keep 'elite' status.
(K. Holland, Ed.) Irish Times , N/a.
Department of Education and Skills 2015. (2015). Framework for the Junior Cycle.
Dublin: DES.
Department of Education and Skills. (2011). A framework for the junior cycle.
Dublin: DES.
Department of Education and Skills. (2005). Proposals for the Future Development of
Senior Cycle Education in Ireland. Dublin: DES.
Dewey, J. (1997). Democracy and Education. New York: Free Press; Later Printing
edition.
Educate Together. (2015, Sept unk). our-schools/second-level. Retrieved Oct 19,
2015, from www.educatetogether.ie: http://www.educatetogether.ie/ourschools/second-level
Gardner, H. (2011). Frames of Mind (Vol. 3). Cambridge, Massachusettes: Basic
Books.
GMIT Letterfrack. (2015, Sept Unk). Sample Lesson Plan. Lesson Plan Samples .
Galway, Connacht, Ireland: GMIT Letterfrack.
Higher Education Authority. (2015, Unk. Unk.). www.hea.ie. Retrieved Oct 19, 2015,
from http://www.hea.ie/node/1557: http://www.hea.ie/node/1557
Hosford, P. (2015, Aug 12). Heres how students got on in the Leaving Cert.
Retrieved OCT 19, 2015, from Thejournal.ie: http://www.thejournal.ie/leaving-certresults-data-2265233-Aug2015/
Moyle Park College. (1956-2015, Sept. Unk). Mission Statement . Retrieved Oct 19,
2015, from http://www.moyleparkcollege.ie/mission.html:

Sorrell Foundation. (2008). The pupils brief. London: Sorrell Foundation.

Teaching Council of Ireland. (2012). Code of Conduct for Professional Teachers.
Dublin: Teaching Council of Ireland.
Vlijrvi, J. (2002). The Finnish success in PISA - and some reasons behind it .
institute for Educational Research, University of Jyvskyl .