Dáil Éireann Debate, Tuesday - 23 November 2004
432 Mr. Perry asked the Minister for Education and Science if the resource help for a person (details supplied) in County Leitrim will be continued after 2005; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [29763/04]
View answerThis pupil's special educational needs, or SEN, are in the high-incidence disability category, and it would be expected that pupils in that category would have their SEN met from within the resource or learning support teaching allocation available to the school. The school's current staffing is a principal and one assistant teacher. In addition, the school has the equivalent of a teaching allocation of approximately 14 hours for the support of pupils with high-incidence SEN and those with learning support needs, that is, functioning at or below the tenth percentile on a standardised test of reading or mathematics. The school had an enrolment of 22 at September 2003.
In the context of the proposed new system for resource teacher allocation, I am conscious of difficulties that could arise, particularly for children in small and rural schools, if it were implemented as currently proposed. Accordingly, I will be reviewing the model to ensure that it provides an automatic response for pupils with common mild learning disabilities without the need for cumbersome individual applications, while at the same time ensuring that pupils currently in receipt of a service continue to receive the level of service appropriate to their needs. The review will involve consultation with educational interests and the National Council for Special Education before it is implemented next year.
It is important to emphasise that applications may be made for specific resource teacher allocations for pupils with lower-incidence special educational needs regardless of the gender of the pupil or status of the school.
433 Mr. Ferris asked the Minister for Education and Science if the decision of circular 09/04 regarding special education teachers will be amended in order that the ratio of 1:140 pupils is applied to mixed schools and all girls’ schools. [29777/04]
View answerAs the Deputy will be aware, the proposed new system for resource teacher allocation involves a general teaching allocation for all primary schools to cater for pupils with higher-incidence special educational needs, that is, borderline mild and mild general learning disability and specific learning disability, and those with learning support needs, that is, functioning at or below the tenth percentile on a standardised test of reading or mathematics. It will also allow for individual allocations for pupils with lower-incidence special educational needs.
The proposed allocation mechanism is as follows. In the most disadvantaged schools, as per the urban dimension of giving children an even break, a teacher of pupils with special educational needs will be allocated for every 80 pupils to cater for the subset of pupils with higher-incidence special needs. In all boys' schools, the ratio will be one teacher for every 140 pupils. In mixed schools, or all girls' schools with an enrolment of greater than 30% boys, it will be one for every 150 pupils. In all girls' schools, including schools with mixed junior classes but with 30% or less boys overall, it will be one for every 200 pupils.
The rationale for a pupil-teacher ratio of 150 pupils for every teacher in mixed schools to support pupils with higher-incidence special educational needs and learning difficulties or delays is that the pupil-teacher ratio for a learning support teacher was approximately 300 pupils; 10% of pupils would be expected to have learning difficulties in the fields of literacy and numeracy and, on that basis, approximately 15 out of a group of 150 pupils would be expected to have learning difficulties. This is considered half of a teacher's caseload. A further 3%, or four to five pupils, in that cohort would be expected to have higher-incidence special educational needs and would expect to receive 2.5 resource teaching hours per week. This would account for the other half of a teacher's caseload.
The rationale for the different pupil-teacher ratios in boys' schools, 140:1, and girls' ones, 200:1, is twofold. International literature on the incidence of disability indicates that, across all disability types, there is a greater incidence in boys than in girls. International and national surveys of literacy and numeracy have found that those difficulties are more common among boys than girls. The rationale for the level of support proposed for schools in areas of urban disadvantage is that evidence shows that there is a significantly higher incidence of literacy and numeracy difficulties in urban disadvantaged compared with other schools, including those in areas of rural disadvantage.
It is important to emphasise that applications may be made for specific resource teacher allocations in respect of pupils with lower-incidence special educational needs regardless of the gender of the pupil or the status of school. I am conscious of difficulties that could arise with the proposed model, particularly for children in small and rural schools, if it were implemented as currently proposed. Accordingly, I will be reviewing the model to ensure that it provides an automatic response for pupils with common mild learning disabilities without the need for cumbersome individual applications, while at the same time ensuring that pupils currently in receipt of a service continue to receive the level of service appropriate to their needs. The review will involve consultation with educational interests and the National Council for Special Education before it is implemented next year.
