asked the Minister for Education the number of primary and post-primary schools that have classes for slow learners.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Slow Learners.
15.
Classes for children who are referred to as slow learners are conducted in 104 primary schools and 132 post-primary schools. In addition there are 250 teachers serving in 30 special schools for mildly mentally handicapped children who are generally included in the category "slow learners".
How many of the post-primary schools mentioned are vocational schools?
I have not got a breakdown.
Does the Parliamentary Secretary know if there are any?
I presume there are.
The Parliamentary Secretary has on previous occasions evinced sympathy towards the problem of dyslexia and indicated that it was proposed to have in-service training courses for teachers to enable them to identify dyslexia. Has any progress been made in this regard?
This would seem to be a separate question.
Slow learners. It is the same thing.
In relation to in-service training for teachers to qualify them in remedial teaching very significant progress indeed has been made. The number of primary teachers who attended the special course for remedial teaching in 1971-72 was 25; in 1972-73 this rose to 50; in 1973-74 it was 100, and this year 147 primary teachers are taking a special course in remedial education——
In-service?
——which, I think the Deputy will agree, is significant progress. In relation to post-primary teachers the equivalent figures are 1971-72, 25; 1972-73, 50; and 1973-74, 79. These are related to remedial problems in general. They are not solely confined to the identification of dyslexia.
May I ask the Parliamentary Secretary to keep in mind the special need to have the problem of dyslexia identified and to proceed with much more comprehensive in-service training courses in this regard? It sounds impressive to quadruple the number of these courses but when you realise that there are still only 100 teachers involved it is pretty inadequate.
Each successive output from the course is continuing to operate in the schools and each new course represents an addition to the total volume. There are technical problems in relation to both the identification and the remedy of dyslexia on which I think academic opinion is not as yet totally unanimous.
Can the Parliamentary Secretary tell me where the courses for the post-primary teachers are being held?
I do not think I have the detail the Deputy is looking for. It is some distance away from the original question.
It comes in under the next question.
16.
asked the Minister for Education if his Department, in consultation with the Association of Remedial Teachers, will structure a course for slow learners in post-primary schools.
It is open to individual schools to structure courses suitable for the needs of slow-learners and to submit them to the Minister for approval.
Needs vary from school to school and from area to area and especially from pupil to pupil. It is doubtful whether one single prescribed curriculum for slow-learners would be suitable for every single school. Apart from the question of meeting needs it might be regarded as "second best". However, this is a matter which is being studied. A number of curriculum development projects are being carried out and while these are not concerned primarily with slow-learners the results should yield useful information. A number of individual schools have submitted, and have had approved, programmes for slow-learners. One of these programmes is being studied in some detail. In addition the Department initiated, last May, a survey of all second-level schools, providing remedial education in order to obtain information on numbers needing and receiving help, the type of methods and programmes used and the materials used, and so on. The data obtained and being processcd at present should be of considerable help in reviewing the situation of remedial education at second level.
17.
asked the Minister for Education when he will make funds available to secondary schools for facilities and equipment for the teaching of slow learners by remedial teachers.
All second level schools which have recognised teachers engaged in remedial education may receive grants to enable them to purchase test materials for use in remedial education work. Vocational education committees and the boards of comprehensive and community schools may, within the limits of their sanctions, spend money on recommended materials for remedial education purposes. The Department have provided these authorities with lists of recommended equipment and materials.
How many post-primary schools are in receipt of such grants at the moment?
I do not think I have that information but I gave, in response to an earlier question, information as to the second-level schools which have remedial teachers recognised. In relation to the first part of my reply, those schools will be receiving the test material. In relation to the money for material, I do not have that information. I imagine the grant might not necessarily be a recurrent grant because when material would be bought in one particular year with the grant given in that year it would last for a number of years. Therefore, the reply for any given year might not be as significant as it might appear.
Have any of the schools, either primary or post-primary, which have been conducting these remedial classes been asked to cut down on them this year?
Not to my knowledge. The reply, of course, relates to secondary schools since that was the question posed.
Would the Parliamentary Secretary indicate if grants for equipment for remedial teaching are made on the basis of so much per pupil involved?
I presume there would be a relationship between the number of pupils involved and the grants given. The Department have a list of recommended material.
I know that.
This list is currently being reviewed. The total cost of the list last May was £150. I imagine that material would serve for a number of pupils.
Is it not the position that the grants for the purchase of this remedial equipment are made on the basis of so much per pupil involved, that the amount is completely inadequate and that remedial teachers generally would assert at any time that they cannot really carry out effective remedial teaching without equipment and that the position in regard to the provision of this equipment is completely unsatisfactory?
A survey of the teachers is being carried out at the moment, asking them to indicate the problems they have. It may well be that problems such as those disclosed in the Deputy's supplementary may be revealed in an objective fashion in this survey. If so, action can then be taken in relation to the matter. I have not received particular representations on the lines referred to in the Deputy's supplementary.
Question No. 18.
Would the Parliamentary Secretary keep in mind, whatever may be the financial stringencies imposed on the Department this year, that this is one area where a comparatively small amount of money spent would give enormous returns and that the position at the moment is totally inadequate and unsatisfactory?
Both the Minister and I have demonstrated a conscientiousness about this particular problem, as evidenced in the results which are shown to date, and will continue to do so.
The Minister and the Parliamentary Secretary may have demonstrated an awareness of the problem but I think their actions speak for themselves.
18.
asked the Minister for Education if he will award a certificate attesting progress, application and attendance to slow learners who have completed a recognised slow learner course.
The committee on the form and function of the intermediate certificate examination submitted among their recommendations a proposal for a school certificate for every secondary pupil leaving school. This proposal, as well as the others made by that committee, is being considered at present and the position of the slow learner will receive careful consideration in that context. Again I would stress that it is not considered entirely desirable that there should be too much formal separation of the slow learner from his fellow pupils.
Seeing that the Minister has already stated that a certificate will be given to the normal learners, showing the degree and the subjects attained, would the Parliamentary Secretary not think that it is especially necessary to give such a certificate to the slow learner, whose achievement may be much greater although he may not have reached the same standard as the normal learner?
There is no reason why the same certificate should not cover all categories of pupils recording their individual achievements.