Ms Orla Hanahoe:

I welcome this opportunity to speak about my views on reduced timetables. I am a primary school principal in Cnoc Mhuire senior school, Killinarden, Tallaght. I have been principal for 11 years in my current school and before that I taught for ten years in a junior school. I have a diploma in special needs education. As part of this diploma, I spent time in various special schools, so I have extensive experience on the ground which I would like to share with the committee.

In my 11 years as principal, I have put reduced timetables in place for six children. This was always the last resort. In my experience and from talking to other principals, when a reduced timetable is put in place, it is always to act in the best interests of the child. Generally, the timetable is put in place because the child cannot cope with a full day in school and requires a lot of one-on-one attention for the time that he or she is in school. The child might not be succeeding in a large class and may need one-on-one or small group teaching, which cannot be sustained all day, because we do not have sufficient resources. We have an allocation of hours for special needs teaching. This is to cover everything, including children with emotional and behavioural difficulties, learning difficulties, assessed syndromes, speech and language difficulties, autism spectrum disorders, physical disabilities, hearing and visual impairments and children with exceptional ability. These hours have to be divided among all the children with needs in the school, including the child who needs intensive support. We have to ensure that the rights to an education and to special needs teaching hours for all children are not compromised because of the needs of one child. It is a matter of balancing resources.

I will provide examples of real cases in which reduced timetables were put in place. I hope this will illustrate the complex issues that schools face. Having listened to the witnesses from other schools speak, I should say that we have a process in place. We record these cases, consult the parents and the child would also be involved. In my school, we have very clear procedures in place in this regard, as we have with everything in the school.

Last year, we decided to put a child on a shortened day because of the difficulties he was experiencing in the afternoons. This included violent and aggressive outbursts in which other children and staff members were placed at risk. He used to run around the school, banging walls and doors, hitting other children he encountered, upending furniture and engaging in general out-of-control behaviour. A reduced timetable was put in place in an effort to reduce suspensions as he had been suspended for these outbursts. We wanted him to experience success in school and not end each day on a negative note. The reduced timetable was a temporary measure, which was reviewed every six weeks with the involvement of the boy's mother.

We had another child engaging in violent and aggressive behaviour and self-harm. He really benefited from a reduced timetable. He has been on a waiting list for child and adolescent mental health services, CAMHS, for approximately a year and was not getting any other supports. When he had one-on-one attention from the teacher or special needs assistant, SNA, he was manageable but when the adult stepped away anything could happen. The tension and apprehension in the class caused by his unpredictable behaviour was distressing for the other children. We eventually got him placed in a special school for children with emotional and behavioural needs. I am still in touch with the family and he is thriving. Now that he is not in the classroom, it is calmer because the threat of violence is gone. The children feel more secure and the SNA has more time to give to the other children in the class with SNA access. The teacher feels she is making more progress in the classroom because she used to spend a lot of time and energy with this child.

One of my colleagues has a child in her class on a reduced timetable all year around. The boy, who is in junior infants class, is the child of two addicts who had been neglected. Social workers were involved in the case. The boy had never seen a school building as he had only spent time at home and was not used to other adults or children. He came in afraid every morning and tried to escape. He was terrified. He punched, hit and kicked every adult and child he met. This was terrifying for him and all the other little four and five year olds in the class. The position was unsustainable as the whole school was in chaos every morning when the child arrived, which was terrible for him and the other kids. With the foster mother and social worker, a reduced timetable was put in place. The boy started on one hour per day before moving to 90 minutes, two hours and then three hours. I believe he is now coming in until 1 p.m. every day. He still cannot do the full day but the reduced timetable has helped him.

A child in sixth class in a neighbouring school was refusing to go to school. He had extreme anxiety about school and did not want to be there. Since he had missed so many days in school, an agreement was made with the child, parents and educational welfare officer that if he came in, he would be allowed to go home early every day. This got him in to school and eased his anxiety.

We do not have the resources to meet the complex and extreme needs of some children. We are, therefore, balancing this with the duty of care we have to all the children in the school. Reduced timetables are a minor issue. We need to look at what leads to a reduced timetable for a child. I urge the committee to focus on the other agencies which should be supporting schools and parents in managing the most vulnerable children, with a view to ensuring alternative placements are provided for children who cannot cope in a mainstream school. By the time a child gets to a reduced timetable, he or she has been failed. There are many layers involved and the issue is complex.

I firmly believe that the issue is not the reduced timetable. I agree that there have to be simple guidelines, not loads of paperwork for schools, but a checklist or such to have in returns at the end of the year with information such as the number of children on reduced timetables. It could be a nice, simple exercise for schools because we are flooded with paperwork. Something could easily be worked out. The committee needs to look at the complex factors that contribute to a child needing a reduced timetable in the first place and the lack of services and supports for children in need. The needs of one child have to be balanced with those of the other children in the school. I see quiet children who should be succeeding more in literacy, numeracy and everything else but do not get the necessary attention or time from the teacher because resources are directed to other children. I urge the committee to look at the big picture.