Professor Sue Buckley:

Can I add something else? A question was asked about assessment. I have seen a number of examples although I am not the expert here. Assessment seems to be a little hit and miss. Some children seem to be going to school based on an assessment done when they were between two and three. That is hopeless but members know what I mean. One cannot predict on that basis.

It appears that when a child gets into school at five, what was said when he or she was two and a half suggests he or she might not need extra help. One cannot actually get another assessment; they are restricted. I have been told one can have only so many assessments in a school in a year and that a child will not get one. Is that not all back to front? There needs to be an assessment at an appropriate point. If there is a scarcity of money and an assessment is to be carried out only once, it is better to carry it out at five, not two. It may not be very obvious at the age of two how delayed language will be at five. Therefore, issues arise over assessment.

I have seen some lovely, beautifully written and very positive assessment reports from professional teams describing the child properly and sensitively and recommending resource allocation on the basis that the child should be low incidence. They do not receive their allocation.