Debate contribution: Supporting Learning Pathways for our Young People
Debate contribution by Mr Pat Sheehan on .
- MLA
- Mr Pat Sheehan
- Party at the time
- Sinn Féin
- Date
- 4 February 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Private Members' Business
- Heading
- Supporting Learning Pathways for our Young People
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4779625
Read the official Assembly record
Text
Go raibh maith agat, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle.
I do not intend to detain the House for any longer than is necessary, so I will not go over comments that Members made in their contributions to the debate. However, I thank all Members who contributed today. The discussion has made one thing clear. Our current per-pupil funding model for sixth-form colleges needs to be looked at. Our society and economy would be better served if we could get our young people on to pathways that are suitable for them and where they can learn, upskill, train and, ultimately, reach their full potential. We have heard compelling arguments about the pressures that schools face in trying to offer a broad and balanced curriculum. We need to get to the point where we can match the opportunities that are available to students with their ambitions, talents and potential. At the moment, we have system that is not designed for success. It often limits choice, restricts pathways and, in many cases, prioritises the system's needs over young people's needs. One of the issues that was not touched on greatly today is careers advice. The Minister mentioned that he sort of took the wrong pathway when he was 16. If he had got the right careers advice, that might not have happened. If he had been made aware of what was actually involved in what he thought that he wanted to do, he might not have taken that route. Similarly, other people want to take certain career pathways, but they do not get the right advice, so they do not necessarily do the right subjects.
That is also an issue.
Having spoken to a lot of young people, as a member of the Education Committee, I find that careers advice has not greatly changed since I was at school, and that was not today or yesterday. It seems to be the case that if a teacher has a few free periods or free time in school, they are often assigned the role of a careers teacher when they are not properly trained and properly informed, and people from the workforce are not being brought in. Competition between our schools and our further education colleges has been raised as an issue. We have heard, at various events, that further education colleges are not allowed to come into schools to speak to the students. That is competition coming in rather than what should be there, which is collaboration. We must move towards a funding model that is fair, flexible and future-focused. We have seen from international examples that a better approach is possible: one that ensures that funding goes where the need is, recognises the value of vocational as well as academic pathways and supports collaboration between schools and FE colleges, rather than forcing them into competition. The Chair of the Committee mentioned that the gold standard is still that you go to upper sixth, finish your A levels and then go on to university and get a degree. There are large numbers of young people out there with degrees who do not necessarily get into the careers that they want.
Certainly.
Yes, I absolutely agree with that. The Chair of the Committee used a phrase that I have often used about the relationship between further and higher education: FE is often seen as the "poor cousin" within our education system. That really needs to change. This is not just about numbers on a balance sheet. It is about real opportunities for young people and about ensuring that a young person, regardless of their background or postcode, can access the subjects and training that will positively shape their future. It is about giving our schools and colleges the resources that they need to do what they do best: educate, motivate, inspire and prepare the next generation. Our education system faces a multitude of challenges, but we cannot ignore this. If we are serious about addressing skills shortages, supporting our educators and giving our young people the best possible start in life, we must act. The motion calls on the Minister of Education to assess the funding model, as an essential first step towards meaningful reform. I urge all Members to support the motion. Let us send a clear message that we are committed to having an education system that works for everyone, and let us ensure that every young person, whatever their chosen path, has the opportunity to reach their full potential.
745 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
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: 0.02 (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 (0.95).
- No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
- 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 | 0.02 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.02 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.03 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.95 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.02 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 1.00 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.00 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-related subject | 0.51 |
| Education structures, integration and community division | 0.31 |
| Irish language, Ulster-Scots and language policy | 0.16 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.02 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 11:53 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.