Debate contribution: RAISE: Failure to Tackle Educational Underachievement

Debate contribution by Mr Danny Baker on 5 November 2024.

MLA

Mr Danny Baker

Party at the time

Sinn Féin

Date

5 November 2024

Type

Debate contribution

Business

Private Members' Business

Heading

RAISE: Failure to Tackle Educational Underachievement

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 4631875

Read the official Assembly record

Text

Go raibh maith agat, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle.

A chairde,

I want to open by thanking the many outstanding school teaching and non-teaching staff and our community and voluntary sector who strive daily to help children and young people reach their full potential despite the disadvantages that many pupils face. A wide range of research shows that there is a strong link between persistent educational underachievement and socio-economic background. Young people who do not succeed at school are more likely to be unemployed, to suffer from poor health, to die young, to be a victim of crime or to have to deal with addiction. That means that tackling educational underachievement is vital in improving the outcomes of our most disadvantaged young people. It is also fundamental to improving our society. At present, the North has a long tail of underachievement. That is the context in which the RAISE programme will be rolled out. It is clear from today's debate that many opinions exist in regard to the RAISE programme and how it aims to tackle underachievement. Any objective analysis demonstrates that the Minister and his Department, regardless of his facts, are reallocating funds in a manner that punishes poverty and rewards wealth.

Absolutely. Among that list, two thirds of grammar schools could avail themselves of the funding. Absolutely. I have deep concerns about the data and the indicators that were chosen to identify the localities in which the programme will operate. They are flawed and not fit for purpose. Due to the cuts imposed from London, our education system has limited resources, and we should target any additional funding on where it is needed most. The need to tackle poverty, social inclusion and patterns of deprivation on the basis of objective need is woven into the Good Friday Agreement. However, it is evident that the Department is moving away from targeting objective need by putting less emphasis on the tried, tested and trusted indicator of socio-economic status: free school meal entitlement. That is despite the fact that research commissioned by the Department recommended that the use of free school meal entitlement should not be replaced as the primary indicator of disadvantage. The RAISE programme promises a whole-community approach to reducing educational disadvantage. However, that is clearly not the case when many of the most disadvantaged communities have been left out. The Minister has focused on directing much-needed funding away from communities and children and young people who need it most. The emphasis on geography has been to the detriment of an emphasis on objective need. There is also a concerning over-reliance on GCSE results in determining eligibility for the RAISE programme, even though a wide range of evidence demonstrates the value and importance of early intervention. If we are serious about tackling educational underachievement, we first must accept that poverty is the biggest indicator of it. The RAISE programme does not have that principle at its core. We still do not know who came up with the new formula. The expert panel has been referenced several times. I would like to know what role it had, if any, in designing the eligibility formula.

I agree 100%. We did not get those answers at Committee either. We need a comprehensive plan that will deliver on objective need by giving poverty and deprivation the weighting that they deserve in determining what areas are eligible for funding or inclusion. Ultimately, the Minister must ensure that children and young people who need help and support most get it. No one here is advocating that the funding should go by the wayside or that the programme should be scrapped. As my colleagues have said, it is time for the Minister to go back to the drawing board. The new formula is flawed, and we all know it. We still do not know what the Minister's plan is, because labels are not facts.

646 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not qualifying

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 11:30 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 reviews every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.

Challenge this classification