Oral question AQO 1851/22-27
Oral question by Mr Mark Durkan on .
- MLA
- Mr Mark Durkan
- Party at the time
- Social Democratic and Labour Party
- Date
- 27 March 2025
- Type
- Oral question
- Assembly reference
- AQO 1851/22-27
- Department
- Department of Education
- Business
- To the Minister of Education
- Assembly identifier
- Document 434583
Read the official Assembly record Open Data source
Text
To ask the Minister of Education, further to the publication in 2022 of a Queen’s University of Belfast research paper, Is academic selection in Northern Ireland a barrier to social cohesion, to outline whether his Department will take any action to abolish academic selection.
44 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Follow-ups by the same MLA in the Chamber
These were assessed together with this record:
- 7 April 2025 – We all desire the flourishing of our young people; however, you will not see many, if any, reports that say much that…
- 7 April 2025 – — on so many parents and children and creating an uneven playing field?
Assessment
Jev’s structured answers met the documented threshold for “not flagged”.
- Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.17 (flagging needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not flagged).
- None of the five culture-war criteria was met (each was below 0.60).
- Assessed as legitimate policy scrutiny (0.89).
- No identity-based framing was identified (0.96).
- Subject area: Education structures, integration and community division.
- The overall probability was at or below the not-flagging threshold.
This is an AI-generated assessment of the text, made against published criteria. It is not a finding of fact about the MLA or their intentions. The Assembly record itself is the fact.
Jev’s structured answers
| Question | Probability | Met? |
|---|---|---|
| Identity framing | 0.09 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.03 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.06 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.09 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.89 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.17 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.96 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.02 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.00 |
| Adopts it | 0.02 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Education structures, integration and community division | 0.92 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.06 |
| Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations | 0.02 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 08:28 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.
Disagree with this assessment?
Classifications can be challenged. A person reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.