Annual Dunleath Lecture  11 March 2015

Professor Alan Smith

“Shared Future or Separate Development? The Political Economy of Education Policies in NI?

The Dunleath Lectures were started in 1997 by All Children Together, in honour of Lord Dunleath, to promote public debate on the issues facing the integration of Northern Ireland school pupils. Lord Dunleath strongly promoted the Education (Northern Ireland) Act, 1978, which permitted representatives of the Roman Catholic church to take a role in the Protestant-dominated state school system. This was the start of the journey for integrated schools.

Last night’s issue for Professor Alan Smith to address was the force of politics in influencing educational policy. Northern Ireland has a government that has been influenced by 30 years of conflict. Conflict resolution has been important during those 30 years. However, Prof Smith would argue that conflict resolution only begins in earnest when the violence subsides. This then is the time for political parties to really engage in regeneration. There is an acknowledgement that in some sections of Northern Ireland society this has happened, for example power sharing and the PSNI. Though, some would argue that this regeneration has not yet reached though who most need it and there has not been enough sustained attention given to the causes of violence and to the needs of those most affected.

Education is one area that regeneration has not been seen to any great degree. Prof Smith argued that to understand this resistance from education it might be useful to consider a political economic analysis (PEA). PEA is concerned with the interaction of political and economic processes in society, the distribution of power and wealth, and the processes that influence the relationships over time. This is important because blockages for effective reform in education may be political, and technical solutions alone may not be enough. Technical solutions to creating change may sound very logical on paper but once implemented in a politicised society they can become distorted. The key aspect is the interaction between politics and the education sector as this may have a critical impact on sector policies and services.

Professor Smith has been working on an analytical framework to enable transformation and social justice. One of the key issues within the framework is the building of trust and confidence between institutions. Current education policies would suggest that we do not have the trust between institutions to be sufficiently innovative to sort out the issues. The key elements of this framework are: redistribution (addressing inequalities); recognition (respecting difference); representation (encouraging participation); and reconciliation (dealing with past, present, and future injustices). This framework is to sit within a changing context of: cessation of violence; devolution; constraints of current government arrangements; and symmetrical versus asymmetrical policies. Research into the implementation of education reforms concluded that reforms are implemented by government when they:

1. promote values congruent with those of the political system and
2. have a symmetrical impact (both sides benefit)

In order to promote education reform Prof Smith argued that we need to decide where our energies are best focused. In relation to a stakeholder analysis, for too long we have focused on interpersonal relationships within our children and young people. When maybe our energies might be more effective if directed towards systemic and institutional development. Focusing on children is hugely expensive. It might be more cost-effective to focus on building trust between our institutions and political parties. Currently our political system has failed to move forward and innovate on several policies including; Education Bill and establishment of ESA; changes to teacher education; teacher certification and employment; Irish Language Act; and unequal priority and support given to integrated and shared education.

What are the implications for Integrated Education? Professor Smith argued that there may be several:

1. shift of thinking from being defined as a sector
2. develop integrated education in ways that have symmetrical impact
3. focus on systemic change in key policy areas
4. press government to ‘promote’ not simply ‘facilitate and support’ IE
5. highlight the economic as well as social necessity for change in international forums

Prof Smith ended with a note of encouragement from Lord Dunleath to keep going as we are going to make it, we shall do it because we are determined to succeed.

The question time at the end allowed for some influential debate regarding some of the issues that Prof Smith had raised. These included:

1. The viewpoint of catholic voters regarding the problem of loss of culture if children attend an integrated school.
2. The possibility if developing a system of integrated schools that has symmetrical impact and what that might look like.
3. The importance of incentives and the possibility of creating financial incentives for schools with a diverse workforce and governance structures.
4. Use of the SOLO taxonomy (http://www.johnbiggs.com.au/academic/solo-taxonomy/)
5. Parents selecting schools for employability skills

Click on link to view Professor Alan Smith’s power point:

https://www.nicie.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/Alan-Smith-Dunleath-lecture-11-mar-2015.ppt