Vol. 562 No. 4
226 Mr. Wall asked the Minister for Education and Science the reason a person (details supplied) in County Kildare assessed by a psychologist, recommended and paid for by his Department, has had the recommendations of the psychologist withdrawn by his Department; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6137/03]
The principal of the school attended by the person applied for extra resources for him in respect of specific learning disability. In general, schools are expected to provide for children with this type of difficulty by means of their learning support service. In certain cases, this may be deemed insufficient and extra resource hours may be allocated. My Department's Circular 8/02 stipulates that resource teaching for 2.5 hours per week may be allocated to children whose test results fulfil the following criteria for specific learning disability. Such children have been assessed by a psychologist as: 1. being of average intelligence or higher; and 2. having a degree of learning disability specific to basic skills in reading, writing or mathematics which places them at or below the 2nd percentile on suitable, standardised, norm-referenced tests.
Children who do not meet these criteria and, who in the opinion of the psychologist, have a specific learning disability are more properly the responsibility of the remedial teacher and/or the class teacher.
My Department requested the assistance of NEPS psychologists in reviewing the most recent round of applications for extra resources. NEPS psychologists were not disputing the findings of other psychologists, but rather checking that the test results quoted in the psychological reports complied with the criteria laid down in the relevant circulars. It appears that, in this case, the test results did not conform to the criteria quoted above.
227 Mr. Wall asked the Minister for Education and Science the savings to his Department by the decision of NEPS to withdraw educational needs for children who were assessed by psychologists nominated by his Department and had made recommendations in regard to their assessments. [6138/03]
It is not correct to characterise the review carried by NEPS as resulting in the withdrawal of necessary supports from children with special needs. The object of the NEPS review was to identify the needs of the children in question and the nature and level of the required educational response. Recommendations arising from the review were based on the professionally assessed needs of the individual children and the resources required to fully meet those needs have been allocated.
228 Mr. Wall asked the Minister for Education and Science the criteria which were used by NEPS in assessing assessments for children when they had been assessed by psychologists before 9 December 2002; if the NEPS sector examined the children involved; if they contacted the schools of the pupils involved; if they contacted the psychologists who carried out the assessments of the children; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6139/03]
My Department requested the assistance of NEPS psychologists in reviewing the most recent round of applications for extra resources. NEPS psychologists checked that the data supplied and quoted in the psychological reports complied with the criteria laid down in my Department's Circular letters 7/02 and 8/02. Schools were notified in writing to expect to be visited by NEPS psychologists and the reports were examined in the school setting.
NEPS psychologists did not re-examine children who had already been interviewed by other psychologists as there was no dispute with their findings. However, the criteria for eligibility for the allocation of additional resources under the two circulars must be complied with, in the interests of equitable distribution of the available resources. In general, NEPS psychologists did not contact the private practitioners unless there was a query about the exact test results.
229 Mr. Wall asked the Minister for Education and Science the reason children assessed before 9 December 2002 have had their assessment reviewed by NEPS; the number of children involved; the number who have had their assessment altered or withdrawn; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6140/03]
As part of its evaluative role, my Department's inspectorate recently conducted a sample survey of 25 primary schools that had been allocated resource teacher and special needs assistant support. This review highlighted significant misapplication of the terms of the relevant departmental circulars. Arising from these concerns, arrangements were made for the National Educational Psychological Service, NEPS, to carry out a review of a further 788 applications for such support on hands in my Department. The 788 applications in question involved a total of 1,590 individual pupils in respect of whom support was sought.
Of the 1,590 individual pupils involved, the review concluded that the applications in respect of 948, or 60%, of these pupils conformed to departmental circulars and the resources sought have been allocated. In the remaining 642 cases, the key deficiencies identified were: situations where the level of support sought in respect of individual children in a particular disability category did not conform to the support levels identified in the circulars as applicable to the disability category in question; and situations where the relevant assessment reports required to support the application were not available at the school for inspection by NEPS.
Where possible in these latter cases, NEPS made a recommendation as to the nature and level of the resources which should be provided and such resources have since been sanctioned.
230 Mr. Wall asked the Minister for Education and Science if the assessments by departmental psychologists have been changed when such assessments took place before 9 December 2002, as is happening in regard to private psychologists recommended by his Department and paid for by his Department in regard to their assessment, as happened in relation to a person (details supplied) in County Kildare; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6141/03]
My Department requested the assistance of NEPS psychologists in reviewing the most recent round of applications for extra resources. NEPS psychologists checked the data supplied in all the available professional reports associated with the applications, including reports supplied by NEPS psychologists.
NEPS psychologists did not change assessments. They merely checked whether the level of resources sought accorded with the entitlements specified in the relevant Department circulars.
231 Mr. Wall asked the Minister for Education and Science the Act or guideline under which his Department passed on the assessment of a person (details supplied) in County Kildare to NEPS for further assessment; the number of sections of his Department which dealt with this assessment; the confidentiality clauses there are to ensure such confidentiality for the person and parents involved; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6142/03]
In late 1998, my Department announced that primary school children with special educational needs would have automatic entitlement to additional resources. Shortly after that, circular letters to schools were issued, describing the roles of resource teachers and special needs assistants and quantifying the level of resources to be allocated in respect of each category of disability. The current versions of these circulars are 7/02 and 8/02.
When a school principal receives a professional report that indicates that a child may be eligible for additional resources, she/he makes application to the special education section, using forms SER 1 and SER 2. The professional reports are retained in the school. However, the school principal signs a declaration stating, among other things, that the application has been discussed with the parents/guardians of the children involved and that the application is based on relevant assessment reports that are available for inspection by the Department.
Before Christmas, a survey conducted by the Department's inspectorate indicated that there was a significant number of anomalies in the applications for extra resources. My Department therefore decided to review the most recent round of applications. In view of the confidential nature of professional reports on individual children, NEPS psychologists were asked to conduct this review.
