Joint Committee on Disability Matters debate -
Wednesday, 18 Oct 2023

Implementation of Inclusive Education in Schools: Department of Education

An Cathaoirleach

The purpose of today's meeting is to discuss the implementation of inclusive education in schools. On behalf of the committee, I welcome Ms Martina Mannion, assistant secretary, inclusion division; Mr. Brendan Doody, principal officer; Mr. Frank Hanlon, principal officer; Mr. Martin McLoughlin, principal, special education section; Ms Jill Fannin, principal officer, teacher education section; and Ms Gráinne Cullen, principal officer, social inclusion unit.

Before we begin, witnesses are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the House in such a way as to make him or her identifiable. If they are asked to cease giving evidence, it is imperative they comply with that direction.

Members are reminded of the same parliamentary practice and also that members can only contribute to the public meeting while within the precincts of Leinster House if they are participating remotely.

In view of the possibility that there may be votes during the meeting, I propose the opening statement from the Department is taken as read and that we will go straight to questions from members, if that is okay with everyone.

Deputy Pauline Tully

Good evening. Will the Department paint a picture of inclusive education from its point of view? The opening statement mentioned that the National Council for Special Education, NCSE, produced a document some months ago that is being considered by the Minister. I would like to know what it looks like because the United Nations Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, UNCRPD, and the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child, UNCRC, both want inclusive education, but it makes some parents nervous, especially parents of children with profound or complex disabilities.

Did any consultation take place with parents or children around that or will it? I attended a the launch of a report by AsIAm yesterday, titled Exploring the School Experience of Autistic Children and Young People. The CEO of the NCSE was there. I am not sure whether anyone from the Department attended. It was interesting. Young autistic adults gave their opinions about school, what the school experience was like for them and the different challenges they come up against. Even something as simple as uniforms can present difficulties. They have sensory issues, so uniforms should not always be of one type. That should be taken into account. They talked about staff misunderstanding what autism is. Staff training on awareness and understanding of autism is extremely important. One student said a special needs assistant, SNA, told her she did not look autistic. A parent told me that she told her daughter's primary school teacher that she thought her daughter might be autistic and that she was going to have her assessed. The teacher responded: "but she speaks". That shows a clear misunderstanding of autism by people in the education sector who should know better. Will the Department expand on how it plans to roll out more understanding and awareness of disability in general and autism, in particular, as the prevalence of autism is increasing dramatically?

Does the Department see a situation in which it can move away from the expensive assessments required to get into school for children on the spectrum or children with additional needs? Those assessments are very difficult to access at the moment, and parents are paying out large amounts of money, up to €1,500, maybe €2,000, to have their children assessed just in order that they will get into an autism class or a special school and be able to access the supports they need. Without that money, parents cannot access them at the moment. Is there any way we will ever move away from that, or is there another way of doing this such that parents do not pay out so much money, especially when the children's disability network teams, CDNTs, are in what I would term disarray?

I do not want to hog the floor but I am very interested in the Department's social inclusion model. I have said that before. I know the Department says it will be rolled out. I would like the witnesses to expand on how that will be done. The Department says it will be done among the NCSE staff and support staff. From what I hear from the NCSE, the model has worked well in the schools where it has been piloted, and the biggest difficulty has been getting staff because it was a pilot scheme and, therefore, there was lack of permanency around the positions. Will that change? Will the model be properly assessed and will it be rolled out on a larger scale?

I have several other questions but I will let other Members come in. Will there be an opportunity to come back in later as well?

An Cathaoirleach

Absolutely. Ms Mannion, do you wish to respond?

Ms Martina Mannion

On behalf of the Department, we are delighted to be here and to have the opportunity to deal with the issues the committee would like raised. Deputy Tully covered a lot of issues there so, if it is okay with her, I will try to go through them one by one and then hand over to some of my colleagues, who will be able to give her a little more detail.

As regards inclusive education and painting the picture of what we see, the Deputy is correct in that the concerns of parents of children in special classes and special schools are legitimate. The Department fully recognises those concerns. We are very conscious that our special schools play an enormously valuable role in our education system. We value them hugely. We have opened seven new special schools, as the committee will know, in recent years. We are increasing the number of places in existing special schools. From the Department's perspective, we see an incredibly valuable and ongoing important role for our special schools in the education system. When we look at inclusive education, it is important to say that 97% of all our children are educated in mainstream settings with teachers and SNAs. We have almost 40,000 staff, between special education teachers and special needs assistants, supporting those children in our mainstream settings. We have increased significantly the number of special classes in our mainstream schools; we have almost 3,000. A special class involves teachers and SNAs working within a mainstream building. That can and should be a very inclusive environment. Our definition of success there is for the children to spend the maximum amount of time possible within the mainstream setting, acknowledging that they should obviously avail of the support of the special class as they need it. We would love to see children being able to access as much of the mainstream with their peers and their siblings as possible, acknowledging that that will not work for everybody. It is really important, in looking at a future vision, that we do not look to do away with the parts of the education system that work really well. Our special schools are central to that important work, and we want to make sure we support people. When we talk about a vision for the future, then, a longer-term plan, we acknowledge now the value in our school system of our mainstream and special classes and special schools. We are very much holding on to that.

As to what engagement there has been with parents and children, that initial work was undertaken by the NCSE. We have ongoing engagement with parents and young people. We have a new parent-and-learner unit within the Department that focuses on the voice of the child. We can talk to the committee a little about the groups we support, namely, advocacy and parents' groups with which we have established engagement in the Department. It is particularly important to flag to the committee that capturing the voice of everybody in the system on the value of education has been in our review of the Education for Persons with Special Educational Needs, EPSEN, Act. As the committee will know, we commenced a review of that Act recently. It has been an incredibly positive experience. We have put a huge amount of work into capturing the voice of all the stakeholders in order that we are talking about people currently in the system - staff and children - and children who have left the system. We had over 28,000 responses to our online consultation. My colleague, Mr. Hanlon, can talk a little more about that. That really ensures we capture the voice of children and young people.

As regards our staff training and ensuring that staff in schools are very much aware of the need to support children and young people with disabilities, particularly autism, my colleague, Ms Fannin, might talk a little about our initial teacher training and then the supports the NCSE and our continuing professional development, CPD, teams have in that regard.

We are very conscious that the prevalence of autism is growing significantly. As regards our forward-planning provision, we had initially been working off a figure of 1.8% from the Department of Health back in 2018 and 2019. We see that there are significantly greater figures internationally. In our forward-planning processes, about which I know we have talked to the committee a little previously, on ensuring we have enough special school class provision, we are working off much higher percentages to ensure we have enough special schools and classes. We have had enough special schools and classes in recent years to meet the need.

As regards the assessments, we are very conscious that the children who are in our special schools and special classes have complex need. We want to ensure that the children who access those classes are the children with the most complex need. We acknowledge that there is an importance in their having access to assessments from the HSE. Their needs are greater than education; they need speech-and-language and occupational therapy and respite. We are looking internally at what we can do to move away from the assessment. We have moved away from assessments for all our mainstream provision, so the only component that still requires an assessment is our special schools and classes. We are looking at better ways to support transitions for people who already have assessments and at alternative ways to get in. We can talk to the committee a little about our school inclusion model as to how it can be rolled out.

Conscious of the time, however, I might first ask Mr. Hanlon to give us a quick update on the EPSEN Act. Then Ms Fannin might talk about the initial teacher training and Mr. Doody might give the committee a quick update on same, if that is all right.

Mr. Frank Hanlon

As regards the EPSEN Act review, we are going through a huge consultation phase at the moment, and the kinds of things the Deputy talks about, including engaging children with autism and other disabilities, are a really important part of that. We had our online consultation and had 28,000 responses to it and a huge number of open submissions as well. We have gone through the online submissions and have taken on board the submissions we have received from a huge number of stakeholders and groups. They will now feed into a range of focus groups, and that will be the critical part of the review because the most important part of those focus groups is getting the voice of the child and the voice of people who actually live through the experience of being in school every day and finding out exactly what their thoughts are about it.

We have, as part of the EPSEN Act work, an advisory group that has been really important and informative for us in working through the best way of doing this. We have engagement with many stakeholders from disability groups. Deputy Tully mentioned AsIAm. We are working closely with AsIAm on best accessing those children with autism, for instance, who can give us a real insight into what it means to live under that legislation. When we are finished those focus groups, that will feed into the overall recommendations we want to put forward as to what the EPSEN Act might look like in the future. It is likely to be early next year when we have that report ready. There are so many submissions in the consultation phase that we just want to take our time and make sure that we get all those voices heard and get the best possible input into what will happen with that legislation in the future.

Ms Jill Fannin

The committee will be aware that quite a number of higher education institutes, HEIs, in Ireland provide initial teacher education for qualification and subsequent registration as a teacher at primary and post-primary levels. All those programmes of initial teacher education provided by the HEIs have to be accredited by the Teaching Council and meet certain standards. In 2020 the Teaching Council developed a new set of standards for initial teacher education. That is called Céim. Building on the previous set of standards, which were probably about ten years old or thereabouts, it sets out to develop further the strengths and skills teachers on qualification need to have. The Céim booklet sets out seven core elements which are supposed to underpin all aspects of programmes of initial teacher education. One of those is inclusive education. There are others, such as global citizenship education; professional relationships and working with parents, which is quite important in this context; professional identity and agency; creativity and reflective practice; literacy and numeracy; and digital skills.

It is clear that inclusion must underpin all aspects of initial teacher education programmes. Individual higher education institutions, HEIs, will give effect to that in different ways. Each programme will vary depending on the method the provider has decided to put in place. All of the programmes are at a very advanced stage of accreditation. Some have already been accredited under the Céim standards and the remainder are being done now. At the end of this year, we expect to have all programmes through the revised accreditation process under Céim.

Céim requires an inclusive approach to teachers' practice which recognises the diverse needs that teachers will encounter throughout their career, including additional learning needs, for example, autism, dyslexia and dyspraxia, as well as needs associated with linguistic, socioeconomic and cultural backgrounds. That is the broad brush approach to inclusion.

Earlier this year, the Minister published the initial teacher education policy statement. It sets out to build on the Céim standards and to consider how HEIs are putting into practice the standards set out under Céim. There are a number of actions in respect of inclusion and strengthening the student teachers' experience around inclusion. Some of them relate to having a school placement in a special education setting. As well as that, the Teaching Council will report to the Department and the Minister in the fist half of 2024, after all the programmes have been through their accreditation cycle, on how that element of inclusive education is being embodied in those programmes. That is the up-to-date position. We have approximately 2,000 primary and 2,000 post-primary initial teacher education students going through the system and graduating each year.

Mr. Brendan Doody

It is disappointing to hear teachers' remarks around young people with autism. It is an indicator of how we need to progress the model of inclusion in our system. It is a deep and philosophical question to ask what we mean when we talk about an inclusive education system. I am Ireland's representative on the European Agency for Special Needs and Inclusive Education. I have quite detailed conversations with colleagues from a whole range of jurisdictions about the systems in place in their jurisdictions, how they are progressing and moving and so on. It is interesting to note that even in systems which we would regard as being far more inclusive than the Irish model, taking for example those in Portugal, Malta or Italy, the latter of which does not have special schools, it is not that children with severe or profound listening disabilities are to be found in mainstream classes, for example. That does not meet anybody's needs. Those countries retain specialist provision. Even in fully inclusive or more inclusive education systems, there are specialist provisions. They call them resource centres and not special schools but for all intents and purposes, they are special schools that are staffed by specialist teachers who are well supported by a range of therapists and others as deemed necessary.

The Deputy is correct that some parents would be fearful of a model of inclusion that would result in children with more complex special educational needs being with their peers in mainstream classes and surrounded by adult supports and so on. I do not think that is what we are talking about because that approach does not serve the purposes of the child, the teachers or the other students in the school. Whatever model of inclusion emerges must be agile and capable of responding to the individual needs of the children and young people so that the programmes in education are tailored to the needs of those children. That is important to note. Clearly, we have a way to go but as Ms Mannion said, there has been massive investment in special education in recent years. The challenge for us is to build on that. We have 20,000 teachers working in special education, most of whom did not work in special education 15 or 20 years ago. There are 20,000 special needs assistants, SNAs, and so on and so forth. There has been considerable investment in training teachers and all that type of thing. There is a lot to be built upon. That is one of the things we would bear in mind. What we would consider a model of inclusion must meet our system needs and so on.

There is another aspect of inclusion. There is sometimes a feeling abroad that all of the expertise around special education resides in special schools. There is the notion that children with additional needs have to go to special schools because that is where all the expertise remains. That is frequently true but is not always true. The policy position of the Department in respect of meeting the needs of children and young people is that where possible, they would attend mainstream provision. Where that is not possible, special classes or special schools are provided in order to assist them and meet their needs.

It is important to note that the social inclusion model, SIM, comprises constituent elements beyond the provision of therapists. The Deputy rightly referred to challenges in finding sufficient therapists. There are 39 sanctioned posts, for example, in the National Council for Special Education, NCSE, for occupational therapists and speech and language therapists. It has been difficult for those posts to be filled, possibly because they have been filled on a year-to-year basis. That may be one of the challenging issues.

We are working through a proposal at the moment that was submitted by NCSE in respect of scaling up one element of SIM. I can talk about other elements. There was a nursing element to SIM. There was an SNA element, a National Educational Psychological Service, NEPS, element and a therapy element. Specifically in respect of therapy, there was a proposal that would see scaling up as a first phase. It was around the scaling up of a national therapy service to mainstream schools. We are engaging with our colleagues in the Department of Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform on that. We do not know whether we will be able to progress it but from the Department's perspective, the wind is behind that particular model. Entirely coincidentally, I happened to bump into an inspector in the office at lunchtime. She recounted that she had been in a school in rural Wicklow, one of the 75 pilot schools. She referred to the extraordinary impact of having an occupational therapist available to the school. That impact was not on the children specifically but in respect of collaborative work with the teachers as a means of building their capacity to meet the needs of the children. There was also a strong emphasis on the development of fine motor skills in a way that teachers simply would not have been prepared for or trained to do. That is the fundamental basis on which we have our speech and language classes, for example. We recognise the benefit of a co-professional relationship between teachers and therapists. There is a mutually beneficial relationship to be developed in that regard. The challenge for us is how to build the capacity of teachers more generally. Ultimately, that is our challenge.

The other elements of SIM are equally important, including additional NEPS support for schools. The committee is probably familiar with the NEPS model of service of 80% assessment and 20% capacity building. Having four additional NEPS psychologists available to schools has also proved beneficial.

The nursing pilot as originally envisaged as part of SIM has morphed. It does not look as it was proposed. It was originally proposed just for the SIM area. When we engaged with the HSE, the numbers simply were not there. We have developed that. I do not know if the committee is familiar with our nursing pilot but we have expanded it to a national focus as opposed to focusing just on SIM. When we went to the HSE, it crunched the numbers and came back to us. There are approximately 25 children in the country, according to the HSE, who require nursing supports in order to attend school. We have put in place a separate programme to progress that.

Deputy Pauline Tully

Are those children all in special schools?

Mr. Brendan Doody

They could be in any school at all. Some of them may be in special schools. Those students might include somebody who is recovering from a car accident or something like that and who requires support.

The main criterion for access to the programme is 20 hours of what is called a paediatric home care package, PHCP. Once the child has been sanctioned for that by the HSE, they can then apply for additional nursing support to be provided in a school setting. It is in its early stages but it is beneficial.

Ms Martina Mannion

If the Chair does not mind I might add that the Deputy raised a very important question about the teachers who are already in the system, and how they are supporting the children. Ms Fannin talked a little bit about the initial teacher training but obviously, the continuing professional development and training is for the teachers in the system. Our national agency is now Oide. This was previously our Professional Development Service for Teachers, PDST, our Junior Cycle for Teachers, JCT and education centres. They are now in a single entity called Oide, which is providing ongoing continuing professional development, CPD. It provides online and face-to-face courses. There is also funding for 295 teachers per year to pursue a level 9 postgraduate diploma in special education. That includes block release for eight weeks for face-to-face engagement. There are 18 places on the Dublin City University postgraduate certificate for pupils on the autism spectrum. There is also funding for 25 teachers on the St Angela's College, Sligo postgraduate certificate and diploma in professional development. Separately, the NCSE provides a lot of training. In 2022, over 5,226 teachers participated in professional development and learning with the NCSE.

My point is we are not just focusing on the initial teacher training. Obviously that is very important but we want to ensure that we are finding a way to support all the teachers in the system as well.

An Cathaoirleach

I thank Ms. Mannion. Deputy Tully can come back in later on if she wants. Deputy Feighan is next.

Deputy Frankie Feighan

I thank the witnesses for taking the time to come in here today. I appreciate the great work they are doing in the Department of Education.

I have gone through the opening statements and there are a few questions I wish to ask. On the budget, a further 5% of the total education funding brings the area of special education to €2.7 billion. It also provides for an additional 744 special education teachers and 1,216 SNAs to be recruited in 2024. Funding is also provided for another 2,700 special education places in special classes. Is the Department happy with that? Is that enough, or is there ever enough? Is that what the Department has looked for or did it want to look for more? I know, as I have been a Minister. Normally, the Department knows what it is looking for. That is one aspect.

On the pilot programmes, I think it was said that there were 75 different pilot areas with 300 students involved. I know that has been articulated but maybe the witnesses could articulate how they are going and how they are going to be rolled out.

This committee is always talking about the consistent poverty disadvantage experienced by disabled people. A lot of the Departments are working in silos because they are so busy, and it is very difficult but I know that since the Covid-19 pandemic, they are beginning to collaborate a little bit more. How is the Department of Education working with the Department of Social Protection on addressing the cost of disability in Ireland?

A specific module on career guidance as part of training for teachers in special schools was talked about. How is that working out as well?

Ms Martina Mannion

I thank the Deputy for his kind words about the work of the Department and I will certainly pass that on to my colleagues.

On the budget, at a figure of over €10 billion it has been a very positive budget for education. The special education package is €2.7 billion, which is up €113 million on last year's figures. The Deputy has identified the areas with regard to teachers and SNAs that were covered on the special education side. It also includes €20 million for the summer programme, and I know we have talked previously about the value and importance of the summer programme. It allows us to run that expanded summer programme again this year. Uniquely this year, it includes €11 million for a special schools package, and it shows our commitment to the special schools. We recognise that for children in special schools, and the staff working there, there are unique challenges associated with working in those schools.

This special school package does two things. It ensures that all special schools catering for children with special educational needs can now have a deputy administrative principal. That is very important because it recognises that staff in special schools are managing large numbers of children with complex needs. They are engaging with their parents and with the HSE, and so it recognises there is a lot of work to be done for the staff in special schools. The other thing that the budget secured was 100 additional posts for special schools to recognise that now over 57% of all children in special schools range from between four and 18 years of age. Greater numbers of those, 57%, are at post-primary age. That is a change to the demographics in special schools, in that there are bigger numbers of children coming in at post-primary age, so we want to offer additional supports to those children.

There are other measures that are arguably but maybe not directly special education measures. Obviously, children will benefit from them. There is a €4 million school leadership package. There is an additional €5 million for counselling, which includes the continuation of the pilot in primary and secondary schools. There is €92 million for school transport.

On the issue the Deputy raised around poverty and disadvantage, the €80 million that has gone into the capitation, and the expansion of the free schoolbooks scheme to children up to junior certificate age, are measures that the Government has taken with regard to poverty.

Overall, we see huge value in the measures that have been adopted. We know that those special education teachers and SNAs are going to be used to support our most complex children. We are very happy that we have that additional budget and we are very grateful to have got that resourcing. We are very happy that summer programme and the special school package are there.

On the issue the Deputy raised regarding the pilot, I take it that he is talking about the school inclusion pilot programme in the 75 schools. I might ask Mr. Doody to come in with a little bit of detail on that.

On guidance, the position of the Department is that there are guidance counsellors in all of our post-primary schools. They ensure that all students have access to appropriate guidance in line with their needs. The Department is currently developing a national framework on lifelong guidance to ensure that everyone can have access to lifelong guidance to make meaningful, well-informed and conscious decisions. The themes of access, inclusion and universal design are all part of that framework. On supporting children with disabilities in the area of guidance, the policy at present is that it is a whole-of-school support, whereby all teachers who work in our schools support children in their educational and career choices in their daily interactions with them. Guidance counsellors will provide comprehensive support around applying to the higher education institutions, HEIs, including for the disability access route to education, DARE process. They will link in with students and external agencies, helping them with daily life and preparing for transitions. We might talk a little bit about the transitions programme as well, which we think is of huge value. Guidance counsellors will also liaise with the student support teams, and they ensure that any recommendations and reports on personal learning plans are implemented. That is specifically on career guidance. We are conscious, though, that because these career guidance counsellors are in post-primary schools, we have piloted a number of very important transitions pilots in the area of special schools. I might let Mr. Doody talk a little bit about that.

On our work with other Departments, we obviously work very closely across Government on a range of issues. We work with our colleagues in the Department of Social Protection and have done a lot of work with them with regard to the DEIS programme, including around the HP index and the identifiers for deprivation, to ensure that our students in those DEIS schools are getting the best supports. On the colleagues we work with, we work closely with the Departments of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth and Health, the HSE and other Departments and Government agencies with regard to providing supports for disabilities right across the spectrum. The Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth is the lead Department in the area of disabilities, and we work closely with it on a number of initiatives it has come up with, including the national disability strategy and the autism strategy.

We could talk all day. That is a broad overview. Perhaps Mr. Doody will come in.

Mr. Brendan Doody

The Deputy referred to 300 participants in the pilot programme. Will he clarify whether he is referring to the transitions programmes?

Deputy Frankie Feighan

Yes, I think so.

Mr. Brendan Doody

I was before the committee in April when we indicated that they were new so we certainly have an update. To put it into a broader context, the fact we have these programmes speaks to the importance we place on the concept of transitions. I have been involved in the area of DEIS and social inclusion for quite a long time, going back to 2005 when DEIS was introduced. At that point, and for quite a few years, our concern was whether the students make a transition. Our thinking has developed considerably since then and our focus is now on the quality of the students' transition. Let us look at what is in place now that was not in place many years ago. The National Council for Curriculum and Assessment, NCCA, has put together an education passport for young people to support their transition from primary school to post-primary school. Equally, on the early years side, there is the Mo Scéal programme, meaning my story, the purpose of which is to inform practice in primary schools. There is a lot going on in the space around transitions. For example, we are collaborating with colleagues in the Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth around their development of a policy on transition. There are a lot of moving parts.

Specifically with respect to our two programmes, the first and obvious question is why we have two programmes. The answer is that one arises as an action directly from the comprehensive employment scheme, CES, for people with disabilities. We have a specific action to put in place, which is to support young people to make an effective transition from school to the best post-school option for them. For example, we are conscious of the significantly high rate of unemployment among young people with disabilities in comparison with their peers. There is a lot of work to be done in that space. We know the post-school options for some young people with complex educational needs are more limited, but we want to support them to make the best choice possible. In some instances that may mean a supported employment offering; in others it may mean a further education placement to allow them to try it; in some instances, it may even mean a higher education placement; and in others the provision of adult disability services. Whatever the option is, we want all options to be explored in great detail.

Our CES transitions pilot involved 20 schools until recently. Unfortunately, one has pulled out and I will explain why in a moment. They are in two clusters, one of ten schools in Galway and one of ten schools in Dublin. One of the schools in Dublin has unfortunately found it difficult to source a teacher to work with students and it has unfortunately pulled out for the time being. We will continue to work with the school to try to support it to continue as its staff were positive about their engagement with the scheme.

In respect of what is expected of the schools, each school gets an additional 12 hours of teaching. It is very much a teacher-led programme, designed to ensure whatever barriers are blocking the best option from being available to the young person will be removed. Teachers work with students to identify the best pathway for each student. The programme has two core themes, one is to identify and progress the skills necessary for life and the other is how to support young people to make the best informed judgments. They are the two core themes. Business in the Community is involved in this programme which is proving successful. It has not previously been involved with special schools and a number of the 20 schools are special schools. Most of them are post-primary mainstream schools. The target audience for this is students who are in the final two years of their senior cycle. We have included a small number of students in transition year as well. As work placement is a key element of transition year, the students have opportunities. The student voice was mentioned by Deputy Tully and it is important in this programme. In programmes such as this we use the Lundy model to weave the student voice into the work so that, to the greatest extent possible, the students lead on what they need and what supports they can benefit from. Ideally, we are talking about a bespoke response at an intense level as the schools have 12 teaching hours to work with the students.

As I said, we only started in April. We are still in the early days of the programme but it might be helpful to give the committee an idea of what some of the students are doing. Bear in mind that the focus is on teaching the young person. The additional hours allow for specific focused attention on teaching things like transport training, which is coming up in a lot of the schools. It involves, for example, making sure the young person knows how to take a bus, how to use the Leap card if they are in Dublin - I am not sure whether there is a Leap card equivalent in Galway; that shows my ignorance - and how to use the bus and other public transport safely. Living skills such as sorting and tidying sequences are another example, that is teaching students how to look after themselves. Social skills and social norms are taught and mock interviews are part of an approach being followed for some young people. It is wonderful to see that some young people are being supported to gain Safe Pass certification. Schools may not have been able to support them at the level of intensity required to get a Safe Pass without the programme. That has been beneficial. CV preparation and career preparation are also taught. The programme is in development. We have a co-ordinator who is doing a fantastic job. The NCSE is involved in guiding the programme and will evaluate it as it goes on. The programme is teacher-led.

The second programme is along the same theme but is quite different in its approach. It involves a collaboration with an NGO based in Walkinstown called WALK, which is new for us. It looks after young people and older people with intellectual disabilities. Walk focuses on the same target group, mostly in special schools. This programme is a prepared programme with a manual. It is WALK's peer programme. It is an off-the-shelf programme delivered by facilitators employed through WALK. The facilitators do some of the same initiatives but one key difference is that it is not teacher led and the second key difference is that the peer programme continues to support the young person for three years post transition. That is important. The support that may be required to retain a young person in an employment or further education setting continues for three years. On the CES transitions programme, there is a possibility of some further follow-up with a student who has left school, but teachers do not have the same capacity to engage with all the students for three years, as they do in the WALK programme. The WALK programme has been in place for a number of years. The schools in which WALK is working are mostly special schools. They are mostly in Dublin, but there is one in Cavan and one in Mullingar. The programmes will be subject to evaluation and all the outcomes of both programmes will feed into policy development of how best to support young people with complex special educational needs to ensure they make the best transition possible from school.

Senator Erin McGreehan

The witnesses are welcome to the committee.

We often speak about education. Education is the great liberator, as we all know. It is a path for people to achieve or do whatever they want to. Going back to our topic, what is the Department's view of what inclusive education is? Different countries have different models. What is the Department of Education's inclusive education model? To me, it is an education that suits the child and allows the child to thrive, and not just to survive. We often see that so many of our children are surviving and not thriving. We know we do not have a fully inclusive system at the minute. What is the Department's plan in moving towards that? Has the Department spoken to educators, children and parents about what they feel the best model for inclusive education is?

A number of parents contacted me after seeing the agenda for this evening's meeting. They asked me about several different issues. Underlying them for me was how the Department supports schools when there are instances of bullying and assaults, and the use of isolation and seclusion. Mammies come to me and tell me that the child who has been isolated is the victim. Sometimes this is done because it is just easier in the school. How is the school supported in that? How are the parents supported? They often do not want to rock the boat with the teachers and principals in that school.

Another instance brought to me by a few parents is if their child is in a clearly unsuitable school. I heard a terrible story this week about a young boy who was in a class of six kids. He was moved out of it into a larger class and is not coping. Everyone knows the child is not coping. That wee boy drank bleach in a classroom in a school this week and spent time in Crumlin. It is devastating. What support is there for parents when their children are in a class that is wholly unsuitable for them? The classroom is clearly not set up for that child. Obviously, bleach was not sitting out. He got into a space which he should not have got into. The school is not the right place for this young boy.

When the topic came up, I was called by the mammy of a young woman who spoke to our committee a while back, Niamh Kilcawley, who is visually impaired and needs accommodations to do exams. She fought and fought to get her junior certificate supports. Now she is back at square one again, fighting for the inclusive education that we are fighting for. She is coming up against huge barriers to getting adequate supports, extra time to do her exams, and indeed training to use the equipment. We are talking about inclusive education when we do not have inclusive examination. Where is the Department's section on that?

Ms Martina Mannion

The Senator has covered a lot there.

Senator Erin McGreehan

I appreciate that.

Ms Martina Mannion

We want to make sure we can answer it as fully as possible. The Senator hit the nail on the head with her earlier description of how we want children to thrive and not just survive. That is, in essence, the definition of a fully inclusive system. It is really at the heart of what we do. We want to make sure that every child is in a placement that meets their needs and that the placement is resourced and supported to meet the individual needs of children.

The important thing about the special education system is that we are really trying to ensure that, wherever the placement is, in line with what the parents wish, it is best supported. For example, in mainstream, there are teachers and SNAs who support the 97% of children in mainstream settings. We talked earlier about the big increase in special classes and special schools. My colleague Mr. McLoughlin can talk about the work that we have done on forward planning and the very large increases in those classes. We hate to hear stories of children in placements that are not working and that break down. Children are obviously in dire straits when, as the Senator described, they end up in hospital. That is absolutely not a system that anybody wants to be involved in. We want to make sure we support children. I might talk about how we do that. I will ask Mr. McLoughlin to give the Senator some information on how we have expanded our additional special provision so that any child who needs a special class or special school can get it.

The Senator spoke about how we support parents. It is important to talk about the role of the NCSE. It is truer today than ever before that the NCSE needs to have bodies on the ground. They are people who can engage directly with parents and schools. That is the role of the SENO. In budget 2023, we had a significant increase in funding. We increased the number of staff in the NCSE by 161. We almost doubled the budget. The thinking behind that was that when the NCSE was set up in 2003, it had the same number of SENOs as in 2023, even with the increased incidence rate of autism and the growth of special education. In effect, it was nigh impossible for those SENOs to get to every parent who needed it.

Right now, there is a big recruitment campaign going on for additional SENOs across the NCSE. The Minister of State, Deputy Madigan, announced that maybe a week or two weeks ago. That will get those additional people in on the ground. That is the support that a parent will have. That is where parents will be able to go to ensure that their children who need a special class, special school, or support in mainstream have a dedicated resource outside the school system to support them to do that. The benefit of that is that there will be more people on the ground. That will be felt more acutely as we go through. I might ask Mr. Doody to talk about how we will support those behaviours of concern that the Senator talked about.

The Senator spoke about reasonable accommodations. Today is an exciting day because 70,000 children have received their junior certificate results. There was great excitement in houses around the country. The reasonable accommodations at certificate examinations, RACE, scheme is an important component of supports for children who are doing the State exams. As the Senator knows, that scheme was changed in 2017. It moved away from a diagnostic-based process and is now driven by the school. It is about the needs of the child, in line with our broader special education policy, and ensuring those accommodations are carried across into our system. For example, a wide variety of reasonable accommodations are available depending on the needs of the child and whether children are visually impaired, hearing impaired or have dyslexia, including enlarged versions of papers, modified papers, Braille versions, individual readers, reading assistance, exam pens, word processors and additional time. I am just giving a flavour of the kinds of additional supports that are available.

The number of candidates availing of the RACE scheme has increased significantly. In 2019, 17% of candidates availed of the RACE provision across junior certificate, leaving certificate and leaving certificate applied. That was 20,000 candidates. In 2022, it went up to 25,000 candidates, or 19% of the total. This year, our colleagues in the State Examinations Commission state there are now over 34,000 accommodations going to 28,000 candidates, which is 22% of all students, in addition to the 9,000 special centres. The important thing about the RACE scheme is that the accommodations that people get at junior certificate now carry through to leaving certificate. That is important because, previously, people had to reapply, which was obviously a great source of concern for parents.

Senator Erin McGreehan

On that, I refer to accommodations for Niamh Kilcawley.

She gave me permission to use her name today. Why is Niamh finding it so difficult to progress with the leaving certificate? Ten minutes extra are provided across the board. Previously, she was given ten minutes extra per hour. The provisions do not match those she had for the junior certificate. No training was provided for the assistive technology that she received. She got assistive technology but there was no one there to train her or support her. It is a big ask of a leaving certificate student.

Ms Martina Mannion

Obviously, I do not want to comment on an individual case where I do not know the details.

Senator Erin McGreehan

I am looking for advice that I can bring to the Kilcawley family.

Ms Martina Mannion

I will give the Senator a broad outline of the Reasonable Accommodations at Certificate Examinations, RACE, scheme. We know that accommodations granted at junior certificate can be reactivated at leaving certificate. I obviously do not know the detail of the individual case. The best thing for a parent to do is to engage with the school which in turn engages with the State Examinations Commission, SEC, and all of this can be gone through. As the Senator is aware, if a school, candidate or a parent is unhappy with any decision in relation to reasonable accommodations, they can access the independent appeals committee which is entirely separate to the SEC. That is probably the best course of action to take in response to a specific request for a child. Mr. Doody might have something to add.

Mr. Brendan Doody

I am speaking as a former manager of the visiting teacher service for the hearing and visually impaired. The visiting teachers are all over the RACE area. A really strong focus of their work is on ensuring that the children who need that support, get it. I will not go into the individual detail, but certainly if a parent of a child with a visual impairment or a hearing impairment is concerned about their child accessing a reasonable accommodation, they certainly should be talking to their visiting teacher.

An Cathaoirleach

Perhaps the Senator can discuss the matter with the Department to get the best possible guidance for the family. I call Deputy Ellis.

Deputy Dessie Ellis

I thank the witnesses for their input. They mentioned the EPSEN Act, which is currently under review. Part of the review covers expulsions, suspensions, the use of reduced timetables and restraint and seclusion practices in educational settings. I am curious about expulsions and suspensions in cases where a child develops even more behavioural problems, then we find that the school is threatening to put them out or is asking them to go somewhere else. Is there not some sort of a rapid assessment that could be done if that child has not been properly assessed? Is there some quick way of getting that child assessed, instead of forcing the parent to go looking for another place or another school, even a special school? That could help in the situation.

The witnesses mentioned mainstream education. Obviously, the vast majority of children with disabilities are in mainstream education. I am curious about the home tuition grant scheme as an interim measure, where children are unable to attend school. Is there any indication of how many children are involved in the scheme or are accessing it in some way? Is there a provision for special help for them? How are applications for home tuition assessed? I am sure some families have a thing about their kids going into mainstream education and have an objection to it, as it were. I am curious as to how that is assessed and approved. Are we recruiting people to do those assessments? Is this part of the recruitment to get more people to assess children's needs when in different areas, in particular in cases where they are troublesome or have behavioural problems. Are we recruiting more people to address that?

Ms Martina Mannion

I might just start at the end and work my way back, if that is okay. My colleague, Mr. Hanlon, will be able to provide more detail on the home tuition scheme. The Deputy talked about home tuition versus the right to home education and assessments. I want to make the distinction. Obviously, the Constitution recognises parents as primary educators. If parents wish to educate their children at home, that is provided for. The position is that parents need to register with the alternative education assessment and registration service, AERS, which is part of the Tusla education and welfare system. Parents must register with AERS and are required to ensure that their children are getting a certain minimum level of education. I will park that, because it does not pertain the home tuition scheme. Parents are allowed to do that and are supported under the Constitution to educate their children at home.

In relation to home tuition, we want to be very clear that we see it as something that is a short-term temporary measure to assist people who, for various reasons, may not be able to go to school or have difficulty accessing school. There are a number of different strands under the home tuition scheme. The biggest cohort of people who access home tuition are children with an autism diagnosis, who are between two and a half and three years of age and who could benefit from early intervention. There is also a cohort of children who are aged over three have the same diagnosis, who are accessing the early education system or the access and inclusion model, AIM, but are being topped-up by additional home tuition supports. They are very big numbers in that cohort. There is a small number of children who access the scheme who have medical conditions and cannot go to school, for example because they have cancer, and need short-term support. There are numbers of children who have mental issues, include those who potentially cannot face going into school. We also have very small numbers of children who are having home tuition because they do not have a school place. In earlier years there would have been bigger numbers of children who did not have a school place because our forward planning processes had not identified the sufficient numbers of special schools and classes that we needed. Those were the children that were effectively being forced into home tuition because we could not get the places. We believe we have a very robust forward planning process or special school and class places. We have opened seven new special schools and 300 special classes. We have opened new special classes for 2023-24 in every county. We are very hopeful that we have a methodology to support anybody who is looking to avail of home tuition while waiting on a special school or class place. Those are the broad brushstrokes of the home tuition piece. Perhaps Mr. Hanlon wants to add to that.

Mr. Frank Hanlon

Just to give a flavour of the numbers for the Deputy, we have around 1,400 children availing of the home tuition scheme every year through the different schemes that Ms Mannion has mentioned. Obviously, the largest cohort are in the preschool area. We provide additional hours for children with autism to supplement the ECCE scheme or in cases where they not have an early intervention class place. That accounts for the vast majority of them. They do that for a couple of years until they are ready to go to school. There are around 400 children availing of home tuition for various periods due to mental health or anxiety issues. As Ms Mannion said, people avail of it when they have issues with attending school, usually for short periods.

There have to be multidisciplinary team meetings and there has to be planning in place for that child to return to the school before that home tuition can be granted again. We are very clear that that has to be short-term. There are a number on the medical scheme as well. Last year, 186 got some hours, maybe because a medical condition or illness. We had a case recently of a car crash. It is that kind of thing. It is compensatory to try to make up for any time lost in the previous year or the current year. There are also a small number we categorise as not having a placement who have special educational needs. This year, the figure is 69. The majority of those kids are in a preschool setting and are probably going to turn six during the school year but the parents wish to keep them in that setting until they are ready to go. We have others who are transitioning into other settings, such as special schools or special class settings. It is to prepare them to make that move into those settings.

As regards how it is approved, it is something we do collaboratively with the NCSE. If somebody applies for home tuition, it has to be assessed. It may need a report from a psychologist or potentially a GP. We work with parents and schools to make sure we can get that done as quickly as possible. Ultimately, the hours are sanctioned by the Department.

Ms Martina Mannion

I might just ask Mr. Doody to come in on this because we are doing a lot of work in the area around behaviours. There is a whole block of work also being done as part of the Cineáltas programme and the anti-bullying plan around the code of behaviours with Tusla. It would be helpful for the committee if Mr. Doody could give a flavour of that.

Mr. Brendan Doody

We are progressing guidelines for schools on behaviours of concern. This work has been under way for a couple of years at this point, although it was interrupted by Covid. There are particular reasons why we have developed the guidelines, one being that it was a recommendation in previous NCSE policy advice from 2018. Equally, we are listening to special schools in particular. Those schools are telling us clearly and unambiguously that they need extra support and guidance in respect of managing behaviours of concern. That work is at a very advanced stage. We established an expert working group with representatives from NEPS, academic experts in the area, the NCSE, Tusla's education support service, the inspectorate and so on. I am sure I am leaving somebody out but there was a very broad range of people with a great deal of expertise and experience in this area. It was a really extensive consultation. About 2,600 submissions were received, which had to be analysed and parsed. More recently, we have had very extensive consultation with stakeholders, advocacy groups and so on in respect of the guidelines we will be putting out into the system. Part of the work involved reviewing what is in place in other jurisdictions to see if we are aligning ourselves with what is in place there, particularly in respect of things such as restraints, which the Deputy referenced. It is critically important that how we guide schools is sound both legally and educationally. We have done that. We have done those checks. We would hope to be in a position to make this available to schools in the near future.

Deputy Dessie Ellis

What I was trying to ask about is the issue of mainstream schools, where a child starts developing the behavioural problems and has not been properly assessed. Is there not some fast-forward way of dealing with that? It seems an awful burden to put on a parent. Some get the child privately assessed. It is a real block for them to overcome this. Do we not have a fast-forward option? Surely when something like this happens, there must be a quick mechanism to try to deal with it.

Ms Martina Mannion

Apologies, that was another issue the Deputy raised. In the first instance, we have an education system where we are trying to move away from children having to be assessed to get the supports they need. It is based on their needs. As the needs present at any point in time, that is what the system, the Department and the schools need to be in a position to respond to. I will come back to that.

On the recruitment of additional psychologists into the system, there are over 200 psychologists working in NEPS. Last year we got funding to recruit an additional 54 psychologists into NEPS. We had a recruitment campaign over the summer, we have people on panels and we are taking them on now. There is going to be an increased number of educational psychologists in the system. One of the things this has allowed us to do, and we are very pleased about this, is for the first time ever to have educational psychologists available to all of our special schools. Prior to that they had been targeting schools in the mainstream with special classes. Now they are going to be available to all of our special schools. That is important.

When a child is expressing themselves in a way where the behaviours are causing problems resulting in suspensions or expulsions, we want to ensure that in the first instance the child is in the appropriate placement to meet the needs. Being in an inappropriate placement is more likely to lead to challenging behaviours. Increasing the number of special classes and special schools and ensuring children can get the appropriate placement is a very important part of this process. There are a range of people available in the NCSE to support schools where there are behaviours of concern. There are behaviourists and analysts assigned to the NCSE who work alongside the existing speech and language therapists, occupational therapists, SENOs and team leaders. The whole idea there is that schools are getting the benefit of a holistic, full team that is available to schools and that can ideally step in. Since the increase in the number of special schools and classes, the number of children having to go through the section 29 process looking for school places has reduced for those categories because we are now opening enough of those special schools and classes.

To answer the Deputy's question, we want this to be based on need and not assessment. We want to have teams of people in the NCSE who can come in and help schools. We would then align that with the initial teacher training, the ongoing CPD and the behaviour programme that Mr. Doody has talked about. Built into that will be further training on behaviours and also the drawdown of expert behavioural support that schools will be able to avail of. We are hoping that will result in significant benefits as regards the challenges the Deputy has outlined.

Deputy Seán Canney

I thank the witnesses for their contributions so far. I have a few questions. The witnesses talking about wanting to roll out the SIM model. The Department's written submission states:

... we are currently working with NCSE on a proposal to expand the in-school therapy element of the SIM programme. As an initial step, the proposal involves using the current allocation of therapist posts to support schools across the rest of the NCSE ... Officials in the Department are engaging with the Department of Public Expenditure, NDP Delivery and Reform in that regard.

Is that a budgetary issue or has money been provided in this year's budget to do this?

Ms Mannion said that another 50 educational psychologists are going to be taken on and that the recruitment process in this regard has been completed. How many of the 50 are in place?

We all get things into our constituency offices from people who have issues. I know a family who have a child who will be finishing national school next June, with the help of God, and then going on to secondary school. The child is not fit to go into a mainstream secondary school but there are no special secondary schools that have the capacity to take on additional numbers. They are oversubscribed at the moment. I have had representations from the parents and also from the schoolteachers who have been engaging with the child. They are saying that if this child is not taken care of properly, she will end up opting out of education within six months because she will not be able to cope in a mainstream secondary school. How do we deal with that? How do the parents deal with that? I am talking in general, rather than the specifics of it.

The last aspect is about education and language. We give an awful lot of exemptions from studying to people now. Are we excluding people with disabilities from learning Irish by whatever means, or whatever limited means, they can? It is an opt-out, rather than training people to teach them whatever element of Irish they can take on board. We are leaving them out. There is a policy document generated by a number of groups, including Conradh na Gaeilge. It is called a policy for Irish in the education system from early childhood education to third level and applies right across the board. Are the officials familiar with it and engaging with it?

My last question is a simple one. Why do we call schools "special schools". A fine school has been built in Tuam, St. Oliver's, which opened two years ago. It is a brilliant school. Up on the wall is "Special School". It is a reminder to parents going in every day. It is about the connotations. Is that something that is just there? Has anyone ever asked the officials before why we use the term "special school"? Why do we not just say "St. Oliver's School" as opposed to "St. Oliver's Special School", or any other special school?

Ms Martina Mannion

I thank the Deputy. Again, I am starting at the bottom and working my way up. I am very conscious the Deputy asked us the question when we were here before about the titles of schools. Language and having the right language is very important. One of the questions that was in the EPSEN Act is going forward, how do we want to support people in using the language they want? That is part of the big engagement and consultation process we are going through with people. In engaging with special schools, they are rightly very proud of the work they do and in many cases would not want the name "special school" removed from them. Equally, we want to move into the future in acknowledging that all our children with special educational needs must be supported in the best and most inclusive environment. In that regard, things we are doing in our forward planning piece include a campus solution where we colocate special and mainstream schools, so over time people come in the same gate and then go to the setting that most meets their needs. That goes back to earlier questions about what an inclusive vision is, and it is things like that. I give reassurance that in the EPSEN review we are looking at all those things around language and how describe what we do. We want to ensure it is appropriate and the people who are impacted by it have a very big say in that. We are talking about new legislation and all the learnings from it. When we come back to the committee, I am absolutely sure there will be learnings about how we identify our schools.

The Deputy raised a very important issue with respect to Irish language provision. We are very conscious of ensuring children with additional needs can access education through Irish. We have special classes in our Gaeilscoileanna. We also know there are children who have secured exemptions on foot of the fact they have special educational needs or are in special schools or classes. We are, in the first instance, trying to ensure we have enough provision across our Gaeilscoileanna and our English-medium schools. We are working with our colleagues in the curriculum unit and those in the Irish language policy section, who are dealing with the documentation the Deputy referred to. We are familiar with it. We have moved from a place where we were just focused on getting enough provision open. As Mr. Doody and other colleagues have said, we have moved beyond that now to the quality of it, and the Irish-language medium comes into that space.

I will ask Mr. McLoughlin to talk a little about the provision in Galway and how we can support the child the Deputy referenced.

On the educational psychologists, it is an ongoing recruitment process. It is being operated via the public appointments system. All these people obviously have to be Garda vetted, so they come through in individual numbers. My understanding is small numbers came through initially; certainly it was under ten. I have not got the exact figure, but we will come back to the Deputy on how many people are currently there. On the first issue about same, it is not a budgetary issue, in that we have the funding from within our allocation to support the roll-out. The issue is the model of provision to date has been based in one area because that is where the SIM pilot started. Our proposal is that those therapists be embedded across the NCSE staff. When we move from a model as originally envisaged that got approval from the Department of Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform to a different model we still have to engage with that Department, even if there is no budgetary impact. That is where are at the minute.

Mr. McLoughlin might talk a bit about the provision we are making in Galway and what we propose to do there.

Mr. Martin McLoughlin

The Deputy's example is a very good one because, without getting into individual details, from the data analysis and the forward planning work we do with the NCSE, there is something happening the children at that transition point from the primary special class, so that for whatever reason a significant cohort are going the special school route rather than the post-primary special class route. That raises two questions for us as a Department and for the NCSE. In the short term, we absolutely need more special school places and we are determined to do that and are planning around that. Deputy Feighan asked earlier around the 2,700 additional special education placements for next year. Some 300 of those are in the special school sector, so we are planning with the NCSE to provide an additional 300 special school places next September. We had a fairly intensive day with the NCSE recently around where those places are needed around the country. While the focus in the last few years has maybe been on opening new special schools in Dublin and Cork, we realise now we need to broaden that out to larger urban areas like Limerick, Galway, the commuter belt and the areas surrounding the cities. We need to look at expanding provision. While our first preference is to expand provision in existing special schools, if that is not just viable in terms of accommodation or bringing schools along on that journey, we will absolutely look at opening additional special schools over the next few years where they are needed. In the short term, I advise that the Deputy ensure the case has been brought to the attention of the NCSE at local level. I think it has been. That will then feed into our planning and work with the council on providing the 300 additional places and making sure they are in the right areas, such as Limerick, Galway and the commuter belt.

Deputy Seán Canney

I thank the officials.

Senator Eileen Flynn

The officials are welcome to the committee. I recognise some of the faces from my two years of being on the committee. I love this committee because of the cross-party support, but also because I do not think any member of the committee sees people with disabilities as "them". We really are about change.

From some of the questions I am hearing around the table, many of the Senators and Deputies are very being honest about their experience on the ground. That is not to run down the Department in any way, shape or form but to talk about an old-fashioned system that unfortunately, in some cases, still exists. We are all trying our best collectively to change that and that is very welcome. What really struck me from listening to the presentations and to some of the answers given to members is that we are talking about poverty, people on the margins of society and also about the best outcomes for people with disabilities in the context of the budget given this year. We do not know how the budget was spent last year, where that money was drawn down. If we take SNAs or special classes, how much was spent? The officials may not have that today, but if we could get it we would very much appreciate it. With this committee, I always look through the lens of being a member of the Traveller community and bringing that in.

The two areas are obviously different but when you are from a minority group and treated as an other, you have a similar experience. Three weeks ago, a report was produced on reduced timetables for children from the Traveller community in special schools. Twenty-four percent of children from the Traveller community were put on reduced timetables in special schools. Considering that we are also talking about behaviour this evening, my reading of the report suggests many children from the Traveller community are put on reduced timetables because they are regarded as bold or misbehaving. To me, that form of punishment should be long gone. It punishes the parents as well. I am still waiting for the Minister, Deputy Foley, to get back to me about a meeting on this. My focus for today's purposes is the 24% of Traveller children in special schools who are being put on reduced timetables.

From our conversation today, I note schools are seeking to recruit 50 counsellors. I mean no disrespect to the departmental officials in front of us in referring to our mental health services being unable to provide the 50 counsellors. I do not see this in mainstream schools. What are the latest figures? Where are the counsellors? Are there 50 qualified to go to the schools? From my experience over the past year and a half on both the education committee and this committee, whose remits overlap a lot, I believe we have major issues with mental health services in schools and getting mental health support for students. I am interested in hearing the guests' views on that.

Consider the support that a home–school liaison officer could give parents with children with additional needs. The Children's Rights Alliance, in its budget submission, was seeking an increase in the number of home–school liaison officers to support parents at home.

Full inclusion in our education system is nowhere to be seen. Where do we see people with special or additional needs on boards of management? Where are the parents of children with special needs asked to be on boards of management? I do not see this. The delegates may have a different opinion on this or different stories. That is absolutely brilliant; I would welcome them.

Three weeks ago, I spoke to a woman in Ardara, County Donegal, whose child has bad dyslexia. She is looking for a special needs assistant. Additional supports for special needs assistants in rural schools are not evident on the ground. I mean no disrespect to the officials attending this meeting in saying that although I have written to the Department on behalf of the woman so her child can get additional supports, unfortunately I have not even got a reply. I wrote in the middle of September. The woman is just looking for a little extra special needs assistance. Why are we not recognising and valuing our special needs assistants in the education system, including in special education?

I have not really put a question but am making comments on the basis of having listened to what the delegates have said. I apologise if I come across as a little bit hard but, to me, appropriate, genuine inclusion is having people with disabilities on boards of management and having schools that are fit for purpose, even in respect of how they are built and the services put in place. I thank the delegates for coming in. As always, they give us great information that we can bring to the Ministers and use as ammunition when we need it in our work and that of the committee.

Ms Martina Mannion

We really appreciate the opportunity to engage with the members. We absolutely believe it is right and proper that they tell us where they believe there are challenges and where we need to do better. We have put much work into improvements in many of these areas but by no means believe the system is working exactly as it should for every child with special educational needs. We are the first to acknowledge that. We are here to try to ensure members can see we are making progress, but we acknowledge as officials that we have a lot more to do. That is very important.

The first question the Senator asked was how we can know exactly where the money was spent last year. She asked for reassurance. We have the breakdown of the figures. The vast bulk of money spent in the special education area is on salaries for teachers and special needs assistants. Funding goes to the National Council for Special Education and there is funding for assistive technology. As part of our accounts and outturn processes, we have to account for every penny we get. We can give the Senator absolute reassurance that all the money provided for special education is going into that area. We are able to get that and provide it.

I will start by going backwards a little because some of my colleagues will respond on the other issues. On making our schools and system as inclusive as possible, the universal design for buildings is the basis upon which our school buildings are predicated. I am aware that the Senator is on the education committee, which my colleague from the planning and building unit attended recently. There is a centre for excellence in universal design that includes specific advice on design to ensure school buildings are as inclusive as possible. In addition, the building unit recently updated school design guidance on special needs accommodation in mainstream schools. We are also producing a new design guide for special schools. We want to ensure our school buildings are as inclusive as possible. Within that, and having regard to providing sufficiently for children in our new school builds, we are factoring in the ancillary accommodation, such as the central activity space, the multi-activity room, quiet spaces, secure play areas and sensory gardens. Therefore, we are trying to ensure that we provide a very positive, holistic space. We are conscious that schools are not just four walls but also include the outdoor area, the play space and the multisensory space, which are so important for children with special educational needs.

In the context of the question on counsellors, we were talking about the National Educational Psychological Service, NEPS, psychologists whom we were talking about recruiting. The counselling pilot also came up at the committee meeting. It was announced last year and comprised an important additional support. It entailed €5 million in addition to the funding provided to NEPS. That funding will provide for two important strands related to counselling in schools. The first involves one-to-one counselling in seven counties where we have worked in NEPS to identify counsellors qualified and appropriately trained to begin work with small numbers of schools doing one-to-one counselling with children. That is an important initiative. We got funding in the budget this year to continue with that into the next year, which is important.

The second strand, the one we regard to have been very valuable, concerns the role of the mental health practitioner. We are recruiting people who have psychology degrees, including Master's degrees, and people who have an interest in this area. We want them to join as part of the student support teams in schools. We are piloting that. We recognise the great importance of mental health and well-being supports in our schools. We have a mental health and well-being policy as part of our junior cycle. Apart from that, what we are really trying to do is ensure there are enough mental health supports in our schools.

With regard to the first strand, the relevant counties are Cavan, Laois, Leitrim, Longford, Mayo, Monaghan and Tipperary. With regard to the second, the regions are Cork, Carlow, Dublin 7 and Dublin 16. The strands are going to be piloted with the money we got last year and can continue into next year.

That will make a real difference on the ground.

I want to come to the issue of the reduced school day which the Senator has spoken about. I will ask some of my colleagues to join me in this response who will be able to give the Senator some more information. The most important thing to note in the context of the reduced school day is that we were very clear when we published the guidance that this is to be a benefit for children to reintegrate them into school and is never to be used as a sanction or a behaviour management tool.

Now, having published those reports, where the Senator has identified children from both the Traveller community and children with special educational needs who are on the reduced school day, this guidance is now ensuring the NCSE and Tusla are working together to make sure that those children are on those reduced school days for as little time as possible. I will ask my colleague Ms Cullen to provide some further input on how we are supporting the children in the Traveller community, both on the reduced school day and more broadly, because I know the Senator has talked to us at these committees about this area and it is very important we are able to give the Senator that reassurance.

Ms Gráinne Cullen

I thank the Senator for her questions. I will follow up on the diary of the Minister, Deputy Foley, to set up the meeting she has looked for as I was not aware of it. Among other things, I am responsible for the Traveller and Roma strategy. I am sure the Senator and I will be seeing each other.

As the Senator may be aware, the guidance on the reduced school days came into effect in January 2022. This first ever report is the first set of data we have on reduced school days. Just to mention in respect of the Traveller-Roma piece, we worked with the Traveller-Roma community and produced a video that people from the community helped us to produce, and starred in, to help Traveller parents to understand and know their rights around when a child is put on a reduced school day, and what they can and should expect from the school in respect of a child being put on a reduced school day.

As this is our first set of data, which we are starting to look at now, we are also beginning to investigate behind the numbers. We are very conscious that behind every number there is a child. We want to find out the reason the child is on the reduced school day, the length of time they are on it, and whether the school is really working with the guidelines. One of the things the numbers showed is an over-representation of the Traveller-Roma community. This continues in the special education setting also. I am more involved with the broad Traveller-Roma community whereas Mr. Hanlon is more involved with the special education side of this area. The figures show a decrease in the number of what are called "episodes", which is the number of times a child is put on the reduced school day throughout the year. Again, we need to get behind those numbers to see what is happening with them.

There have been many mentions of the types of interventions in the various-----

Senator Eileen Flynn

If Ms Cullen would like, I can easily contact her outside of this committee.

Ms Gráinne Cullen

Yes.

Senator Eileen Flynn

It strikes me children with special and additional needs and members of the Traveller community are put on these reduced timetables. Two weeks ago, a mother from a halting site came to me in tears. Her little boy has attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, ADHD. She was so upset as she told me that the teacher kept saying to her that he would have to leave the school. The child goes in at 8.50 a.m. and is back out at 10.30 a.m. - this is no word of a lie - and at that point his school day is completed.

I will contact Ms Cullen through the Committee on Key Issues affecting the Traveller Community. I do not want to say any more at this point because the focus of this committee is on children with special needs-----

An Cathaoirleach

There is no issue with that, Senator. Please continue.

Senator Eileen Flynn

-----and it is important we think of that. Again, this is something that needs to be addressed. I am delighted that I have been able to talk to Ms Cullen because it is so important that we set up that meeting with the Department and look at this issue. It is the same for children with special additional needs. This should not be allowed in the Ireland of 2023. A mother is saying that her child, who has special and additional needs, goes into school at 8.50 a.m. and is finished - that is it - at 10.30 a.m.

Ms Martina Mannion

My colleague Mr. Hanlon may be able to talk a little about how we are trying to support those children also.

Mr. Frank Hanlon

As my colleague has said, we need to hear these examples. It is important for us to hear the stories behind the figures. As Ms Cullen has said, we have received the first set of data and it is a case now of looking behind the data and at individual stories to learn why children are on reduced school days, how long they are staying on them and what it should look like into the future. There is a great range of reasons, some of which are quite positive. In many cases, certainly with children with special educational needs, it can be a positive experience for the child to be on a reduced school day, or there can be a very practical reason to be on it. It could be associated with transitioning into a new environment, etc.

Two important points to note are, first, that reduced school days are not about "punishment", which is the word the Senator mentioned. These days are absolutely not supposed to be about that. Second, these days are about short-term interventions. Ultimately, if schools are continuing with reduced school days, it is important from the guidance perspective - I have spoken to Tusla about this - that the schools must have a student support plan in place, must consult the relevant support services, and must look for advice and assistance before it can be considered. It is very important that all of these steps are taken by the school. Reduced school days are now driven by consent. Previously, it may have been the case that schools put children on reduced school days. We have to work with agencies and with the NCSE to ensure that, collaboratively, within the Department, with NEPS and with the inspectorate, we are looking at individual cases and are giving the best supports to these children.

Senator Eileen Flynn

Mr. Hanlon just mentioned the word "consent" and suggested that these reduced school days are based on consent. I can honestly tell him right now that according to the majority of people I know - many of these children happen to be members of the Traveller community with additional needs - there is no permission involved. The parents are very worried and are told that the child is put on the reduced timetable and that is basically it. I can get evidence for Mr. Hanlon. I can ask parents to come in who would be willing to speak to him at a private meeting to discuss the fact that they are just being told that their children are being put on a reduced timetable. I would not like to engage in a back-and-forward debate. I am just saying that this is what I know, whereas Mr. Hanlon is saying how it should be. For me, to have that information is so important.

Mr. Frank Hanlon

When we issued a set of guidelines in this regard, it was very clear that schools need the consent of the parent or the guardian in order to do this. That is something we will be following up on.

An Cathaoirleach

I would appreciate if Mr. Hanlon would liaise with Senator Flynn in this regard as it is very important.

Senator Eileen Flynn

I thank the Cathaoirleach very much.

An Cathaoirleach

There are a number of issues I wish to raise. The NCSE comes from the policy section in the Department. Over the past number of years, there had been great engagement with SENOs on making decisions in the principal's office after being out in the school. That power seems to have waned. I am aware that SENOs are under tremendous pressure and are covering a great deal but there are now more layers of bureaucracy, for want of a better term, and bigger challenges for people to get decisions made at the school gate or when a visit is made to the school. Is the Department hearing that with regard to empowering the SENOs to make decisions? The vast majority of SENOs would have come through the education system in any event and would know the challenges from the classroom or indeed from a parent's point of view. We should be empowering them.

I came across a situation recently involving a school in a rural setting that successfully set up two ASD units. Because of the lack of facilities in the area, the school now has enough demand for a third classroom. That third classroom has been turned down on a number of occasions even though the demand is there. That means we have children travelling 40 minutes or more to get to an ASD unit. I am trying to understand this. If there are two ASD units in a school and the school is looking for a third one, the school obviously has the expertise. Parents would not be bringing their children to the school unless it was seen to be doing its job well, so why is there a difficulty with the third unit?

Six or seven years ago, SENOs seemed to have been empowered to make decisions almost on the day. Now they are reporting over and back, and there are more engagements and challenges for them to contend with when they are seeking to make a decision on an issue. This leads to frustration from the point of view of schools and parents.

Some of the members raised issues about people with disabilities or, indeed, their families on boards of management. That is something that should be looked at fundamentally from a policy point of view. We have the boards of management set up where there are community representatives, patrons' representatives and parents' representatives. In schools where they are providing additional places, maybe it is something that should be looked at. I am not sure whether that has to be done by statutory instrument or by primary legislation, but it is something that needs to be looked at. The Department might respond to those.

Ms Martina Mannion

The Cathaoirleach has identified there the way that the allocations process happened prior to 2017. Prior to 2017, every child who needed any resource, be it within mainstream or elsewhere, needed a diagnosis and a psychological assessment and then the special educational needs organiser, SENO, would allocate, let us say, five hours for childhood autism. At that time, that was the model whereby one needed an assessment in order to trigger the resource. In 2017, we moved away from that model. We went to the special education teacher allocation model. That, effectively, is a model that identifies broadly the level of need in the school system and ensures that there are enough special education teachers in the mainstream classes in each of the schools around the country to meet that need. The role of the SENO then changed. They were then dealing, I suppose, with more complex cases - the classes for special classes - and also they were doing something which was part of the special education exceptional review process for both the special education teachers and the special needs assistants, SNAs.

I might ask my colleague, Mr. Frank Hanlon, to talk about that because one of the things we are trying to do with the National Council for Special Education, NCSE, is to streamline the processes. We are conscious of the workload on teachers so we are trying to streamline the processes so that the paperwork, as the Cathaoirleach has described it, that has to come back into the NCSE or into the Department can be made easier. In ensuring that the SENOs are out there and are no longer having to allocate hours based on a diagnosis, it frees them up to spend more time with parents and more time working in the schools to support the individual children based on their needs.

I might touch on the second issue that the Cathaoirleach talked about there, the huge success of a school with two autism spectrum disorder, ASD, classes, and maybe it is not having a third. In the Cathaoirleach's own constituency, there has been a huge increase in the provision. Mr. Martin McLoughlin can talk about it. We are trying to avoid a situation where one school or two schools in an area become the default school or schools for all children with special educational needs. If a school has two autism classes, it would be our preference that another school in the area would also open autism classes so that it does not become anti-inclusionary. The services for special educational needs for children who need special class provision should be spread across the county. The disadvantage of having them all in one area is that the children are then travelling long distances.

I might in the first instance ask Mr. Hanlon to give the committee a short update on how we are trying to streamline that process, and then Mr. McLoughlin to tell the committee a little about what we are doing, particularly in relation to ensuring that bigger spread of provision in our forward planning piece.

An Cathaoirleach

Before Mr. Hanlon takes that question, as a public representative engaging with parents and schools for a long number of years, I would have to say that the new system since 2017 is more frustrating for parents and for schools. There is not a battle, but a discomfort between the SENO and the boards of management or the school management because they perceive that there is not enough provision. Is it time to look at how the Department changed that process in 2017 and to go back to it because there was, in my opinion, a better service delivery prior to that?

Ms Martina Mannion

Part of the frustration that has been felt by parents and schools is the fact that the current process is perceived as cumbersome and involves a lot of paperwork. That is what we are trying to change. Truthfully, going back to requiring everyone to have a report, an assessment and a diagnosis is anti-inclusionary. It goes against the United Nations Convention on The Rights of Persons With Disabilities, UNCRPD, and it is not in the best interests of children. People will see the benefits of the process that Mr. Hanlon will outline.

Mr. Frank Hanlon

We are currently reviewing that 2017 model and we will have a version of it to go out for September 2024. What we are trying to do is allocate resources to schools based on the need in that school. It is not a simple thing to do, obviously, but it is trying to best reflect what is the need of the school so that we can allocate the resources as best we can; that it does not have to be complex and that there does not have to be that conflict between boards of management, SENOs, parents, etc.; and that schools get what they require. We also want people to understand why they are getting the level of resources they are.

This is a model covering 4,000 schools. One of the things it cannot do is look at individual children. However, it will look at particular inputs and particular metrics that support why a school would need additional resources. We are working with the NCSE in terms of its review process. In other words, if a school thinks it needs more resources, we want that process to be as simple as possible. The NCSE has done a lot of stakeholder engagement and consulted with schools on this. One talks about bureaucracy. We want it to be as straightforward as possible for schools so that it is a system that works for them and is as quick as possible.

It is important we get these resources to schools and try to anticipate what the level of needs will be for the school year coming rather than looking at maybe what it has been previously. It is a matter of trying to get all the correct metrics in place to get that done as realistically as possible for that school so that it has what it needs for the following September based on the children who are coming into the school.

An Cathaoirleach

The other thing-----

Ms Martina Mannion

I will ask Mr. McLoughlin to give the committee an update on how we are trying to deal with that issue that the Cathaoirleach identified there.

Mr. Martin McLoughlin

Any school is to be commended if it has two classes and is willing to open a third. That is the first point.

The Chair is correct that the more we centralise our forward planning, look at data, etc., maybe we are removing a small bit of that local power the SENO had in the past. We are conscious that there is data coming now that there are vacancies in certain parts of the country in primary special classes and the question is whether one opens a new class or looks to fill the existing classes where there are experienced teachers, SNAs, etc., in place.

There is also, obviously, the planning and building unit side of things. If there is an additional accommodation aspect to a new special class, that probably has to be looked at. There is significant pressure on modular accommodation and additional accommodation from demographics at post-primary, accommodating Ukrainian children and international protection applicants as well.

Having said all of that, in larger counties, such as Cork, distance does come into it. If the Chairperson wishes, we can look at that particular example and maybe talk to the NCSE. I merely flag some of those additional issues that have to be looked at when making a call, either at local level or through ourselves and NCSE, around approving individual special classes in particular schools.

An Cathaoirleach

I will liaise with the Department on that.

Finally, from the point of view of social inclusion and additional needs, are the officials constantly in contact with the building unit? The biggest challenge we have is post-primary. As I see it, going into the future it will be a major issue. Ms Mannion might say a word on how she engages with the building unit for any schools that are getting additional funding, when the Department is allocating extra resources to building.

Ms Martina Mannion

I thank the Chair. I could say the single biggest area of the Department that we engage with is the planning and building unit. We have a hugely collaborative relationship. Obviously, we are all colleagues working in the one Department. They have been strategic in working with us and ensuring this forward planning piece. We have enhanced arrangements using the geographic information system, GIS, system ensuring that we have buildings to meet the special educational needs. We have updated technical guidance for building projects to ensure that there is special education provision built into them.

We are future-proofing at post-primary level, ensuring there are four special classes in all new 1,000-pupil post-primary schools and it is pro rata for other post-primary school numbers.

We have had strategic engagement at patron level on the special education need on all school sites, including post-primary schools in the fee-charging sector because in parts of Dublin the number of these exceeds the number of non-fee-charging post-primary schools. We have a modular accommodation framework put in place by the Department in early 2021 to ensure we can get additional special classes on site as needed. We have expansion of the existing planning exemptions, which allows us to increase our school sizes without planning permission. The bulk of those are being used to support children with special educational needs. We have expanded project management support for schools. This has been hugely beneficial this summer. It means there is project management identified which can work directly with the schools to avoid school principals having to do all the work required in getting modular accommodation on site. We have a simplified process for reconfiguration work in schools.

To give reassurance on delivery, between 2018 and 2022 nearly 900 school building projects were delivered. There will be €5 billion spent between 2021 and 2025 on school buildings. There are currently 300 projects at construction, including 40 new schools, at a cost of over €1 billion, and 72 projects at tender, for a further 27 new school buildings. Building in special education provision is key. The forward-planning work Mr. McLoughlin spoke about has been an intensive collaboration over the past two years between special education, the planning and building unit and the NCSE and it has delivered the 300 new special classes, the seven new special schools and our plan to continue at that pace of special education provision.

Deputy Pauline Tully

I appreciate the witnesses are here a long time at this stage. Deputy Canney mentioned the Irish language and I was going to raise that issue as well. Some 11% of post-primary pupils in 2021-22 were exempt from studying Irish. I recognise some of those students came to the country after the age of 11, but there would be some who are exempt because of additional learning needs. Deputy Canney also referred to the policy document that is with the Department and Minister at the moment. Are the witnesses familiar with the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages, CEFRL? It is a different way of looking at teaching and assessing a language. Instead of being based on the written, which would be difficult for somebody with a learning difficulty, it would be based on their oral. Whatever their proficiency, there would be a different assessment. Let us face it, the way the Irish language is taught in this country is disgraceful anyway. I went through 13 years of school but, excepting those who go to a Gaelscoil, most of us cannot speak the language. It needs to be revised, as our national language, to allow children with additional learning needs to learn some aspects of it, whether it is a little bit of the spoken language or whatever.

Parents of gifted children have been in touch with me. We have over 30,000 children who are gifted or exceptionally able in this country and there is no additional provision for them unless they have a learning difficulty as well. That ties in a little bit with children who have dyslexia, dyspraxia or dyscalculia. If their academic ability is above a certain percentile, they do not qualify for resources or assistive technology, even though it might be recommended by the assessment. That is unfair. These children are struggling. They might be very willing and interested in learning but it is difficult because they are not getting additional support to cope with their dyslexia. Parents tell me the child is masking at school. That goes for neurodiversity as well. They mask the fact they are not keeping up with their classmates but it takes a toll on them. Can that be changed? No matter your academic ability, if you have dyslexia or whatever it is, you deserve support.

Summer provision has not been mentioned. It is so important to the families and children with additional needs but it has reached the point that the children with most need are not getting the provision. The special schools and special classes parents group sent on testimony from parents about the effect this had on their children and families over the summer. Some families got no provision at all and it was a hectic eight, nine or ten weeks. Some got two or four weeks and they said it was brilliant but the remaining month of August was very difficult for them. There is significant funding allocated to summer provision but many schools are not willing to offer it. I was part of the autism committee and we tried to push this issue. We saw an increase in the uptake by schools but not all schools offer the full four weeks, or offer summer provision at all. Even some special schools do not offer it.

Ms Martina Mannion

I am conscious in relation to the Irish language that my colleagues from the curriculum and assessment unit and Irish language unit would be better able to describe how we are approaching this, including for children with special educational needs. With the Chair's permission, we will come back to the Deputy in writing on that issue. It is important, given the range of work being done, that the people who can best describe it and are not here today come back on that. I will ask Mr. Doody to respond on gifted children. It is something we are very conscious of. When we come to committees and discuss children with complex needs, it tends to look like we are focusing on the children in special schools and special classes and children with more complex needs but our work concerns all children with special educational needs. About 25% of children in our school system have a special educational need of some kind, so we want to ensure the resources and supports we provide meet the need across that. That includes, for example, children with dyslexia. In talking about gifted children, Mr. Doody may touch on how our mainstream supports are working.

On the summer programme, we appreciate the work the autism committee did in this regard. It brought a focus to the summer programme which was helpful to us. Mr. Hanlon works closely with open special schools and classes and all the advocacy groups. Those groups' focus was on the summer programme for the past year and that will be the case again. We got funding in the budget which will allow us to have that very expanded summer programme again this year. That is important. Half of all special schools are now providing it and that is where the children with the most complex needs are. We have seen an increase of over 300% in the number of children participating in the programme since 2019. We know there is more to be done but we have seen a big increase in numbers. Mr. Hanlon will talk about that.

Part of what we have tried to do in acknowledging not all schools do the summer programme is to look at other ways to help parents access it. We have had small group providers and made changes where we worked with certain co-ordinators for the special school. I reassure the Deputy we have come at this in an open-minded way. We have not just used the old tactics to increase capacity on the summer programme but introduced a number of innovative processes last year which we think helped and will help this year. I ask Mr. Hanlon to provide that information and then Mr. Doody will talk about gifted children and dyslexia.

Mr. Frank Hanlon

I thank the Deputy. I read the same report and met the group in question on the issue. We discussed some of the positive things and some of the experiences. It is good we hear from those parents. We had a 50% increase in special schools taking part in the scheme. That was a real focus this year. We ran a pilot for special schools and looked at the practical and resource elements needed to assist schools in the programme. Participation jumped from 39% to 59%, which is the highest number ever. That is really good. The intention is to continue that for next year.

I agree with the Deputy that the focus is on getting all those children some sort of access to the summer programme. As Ms Mannion said, we have already started engaging on next year’s programme. We would like to get it out even earlier than last year, which was February. We want to get it out as soon as possible and are talking to stakeholders about looking at other groups which can take on the summer programme. Our preference is for it to be in a school at all times and for the school to run it but if that is not possible, we will look at other options. We will look at them quickly so we have things in place as soon as possible for parents because it is important they get some sort of educational programme.

The Deputy referred to the programme being run for two weeks and four weeks. Our preference is to run it for four or five weeks. Some schools dipped their toe in the water. Many special schools ran it for the first time this year and ran it tentatively for two weeks.

From talking to some of the inspectors, I have learned that the schools have had really positive experiences. They have been able to draw down many of the staff from the portal we put in place this year. That will continue to grow next year. Staff was not an issue. The schools were able to draw down staff across the country in the various locations. We hope to create synergies with the Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth regarding the services it provides on top of the summer programme. We are talking to all the stakeholders again. We want to see this for all the children, just as the members do.

Mr. Brendan Doody

Twenty years ago, I had a conversation with a young person about the novel War and Peace, including its plot development, characterisation and the usual elements. The child was eight and in second class. Therefore, there are definitely children with exceptional abilities. Under the education Act, children with special educational needs are defined as being at both ends of the academic spectrum. We hope and expect that, in a school setting, a teacher’s response to the identified need of a young person with exceptional ability or giftedness would be appropriate and that differentiation of questioning and all the usual things would be the norm in a teacher’s engagement with the young person. However, the key principle that underpins the additional supports provided to schools through the special education teaching, SET, model is that the child with the greatest need should get the most support.

To return to the issue of the young child I came across, I remember having a conversation in which I learned the principal was concerned about him, not because of his academic ability – he was streets ahead of everybody else in the school – but because he had difficulty fitting in. He had difficulty in engaging with his peers. The school was allocating some of the additional supports to meet that need. The need was associated purely with social programmes. The support did not relate to academic skills because that was not necessary at all. We hope and expect that schools will adopt this type of approach.

This is a matter that we are focusing on in the Department. We established a working group recently on the provision of support and guidance to schools in respect of children with exceptional abilities. When talking about exceptional abilities, we are not talking about academic skills alone. There are young people with exceptional ability in music, art, sport and a whole range of other activities in schools. I do not know whether members are aware that a draft guidance document was issued to schools in 2007 by the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment. It was only ever a draft, however, so we have asked the group to examine this guidance in particular. Bearing in mind that we have had so many reforms in the system since 2007, the guidance certainly needs to be updated. I hope one of the outcomes of this work will be the provision of specific guidance for schools in this area. That would mirror what is done in other jurisdictions.

An Cathaoirleach

Thanks a million. No doubt we will be engaging with the guests again. We appreciate their honesty regarding where the various challenges lie and we look forward to further engagement. The guests might correspond on the couple of points raised by Senators Flynn and McGreehan. I might talk to Mr. McLoughlin about the other matter. The guests have to get back to Deputy Tully on the Irish language.

The joint committee adjourned at 7.44 p.m. until 5.30 p.m. on Wednesday, 25 October 2023.