Ms Teresa Griffin:

On that issue, schools which have brand new designated autism classes are allowed additional school closures to facilitate whole-school training. It does not necessarily happen at the beginning of the year, but it is agreed. All school staff can attend this training, which is provided at the moment.

I apologise for reading more than I normally would in response to members' questions. The National Council for Special Education only assumed responsibility for this issue last year. In terms of special classes and the training that is provided by the special education support service, SESS, there were 4,696 training days given to special class teachers last year. For special education some 21,339 days were dedicated to training. It is not a question of the training not being in place. There are also principal seminars where the principals of schools which are opening new special classes get together. I attended such a seminar two weeks ago when some 120 principals met in Portlaoise. There was a general presentation in the morning, and the afternoon was divided between primary and post-primary schools. I attended the post-primary element. The presenter emphasised the need for kindness, to have a kind heart and to created the required atmosphere of empathy around the school, and the important role of leaders in doing that.

Deputy Byrne asked why we have concerns about the appropriateness of the current model at post-primary level. In our consultation processes around special classes we found that the hours allocated for special classes are used as timetable fillers. For example, a woodwork teacher may only be timetabled for 17 hours a week but is employed for the full 22 hours. Five hours of the special class would then be given to that teacher, regardless of whether the children were doing woodwork. We were concerned about that. In other cases, schools decided that the hours would be spread out across as many teachers as possible, believing that it promoted inclusion. However, it actually promoted a disconnect that hampered continuity in terms of what the children were studying. We have identified this issue but do not have the answers at this stage. We have to do more work in this area, which is why I raised it as an issue. Post-primary schools are very complex because of the range of subjects and levels, between junior certificate level one through to leaving certificate honours level.

The question of whether inclusion should be optional arose. The NCSE is very strongly of the view that it should not be an option. Schools exist to educate all the children in a community. A society would not find a proposal to refuse to educate red haired children acceptable, and in the same way schools should not be able to pick and choose. Schools should be for all children. The fact that it is perceived as being optional is part of the issue. It is part of the culture of some schools which see themselves as academic. That barrier should be removed, and it should be made very clear to schools that they are actually providing a resource for all of the children in that community. Schools should be told that they cannot pick and choose.

In terms of whole-school training, I have said already that an extra day off is provided. We are hopeful that our new schools NCSE support service, when it is fully funded and up and running, will include parents as part of the training provided, because we believe that continuity between home and school is essential.

That is one of our aspirations, as opposed to realistic aims, but we hope to be fully up and running in the next few years.

It was mentioned that perhaps teachers should be trained before they take up their special class posts. This is something the Department funded a number of years ago. Special permission was given to schools to recruit special class teachers in April and May, or in May and June if it was a primary school. A two-month training programme was put in place for all new special class teachers. However, the learning from this was that teachers need to engage with kids to make it real. We have moved away from that and gone to the other extreme. We may need to revisit that approach. The training was certainly very positive but it fell away because unless one comes across a number of children who have, say, autism or another level of need, it is hard to put it into practice. It was interesting, however.

We are very concerned that the policy of restraint and isolation rooms may still be being applied. We highlighted this a few years ago in our autism policy advice. It definitely should not be allowed in schools. Schools using restraint are in a very uncertain space as to how appropriate it is for them to do so, certainly without the proper training, certification and so on. Schools should not go near that area.

Deputy Catherine Martin raised the definition of capacity. The issue is that, depending on the special class, a minimum number of students is required to establish a special class. For example, with children with autism, one might need one child to establish a special class, whereas with other children, seven or eight might be needed, depending on the disability. This is set out.

To respond to the Chairman's questions, we are absolutely concerned about there being insufficient places at post-primary. We have struggled with this issue, which is the reason we asked to be given the authority to open special classes. However, we are happy that the Minister or some entity will have the authority to do so. Once it is known that someone has this authority, we do not believe schools will tilt against it because they know that eventually they will not win. There are very significant challenges around planning for post-primary because of all the soft barriers that can be put in place. However, in case members conclude that the current position is all bad, it is not and we are successfully making inroads. I spoke at the afternoon session of the 2016 conference. The chairperson of the JMB at the time gave part of his presentation for the following year's conference over to the fact that it was unacceptable for any JMB school to refuse to set up special classes or baulk at doing so. Regarding the setting up of a post-primary special school, there is an issue with school holidays. Post-primary schools have much longer school holidays, which parents do not always welcome. It is a matter of striking a balance.

Regarding forward planning and how we are improving, we have set up a working group to examine how the National Council for Special Education and Department could improve planning for special classes. The forward planning section is now a member of that group. We hope this will lead to a much more coherent structure for forward planning. How do we identify classes? Essentially, the SENOs would be aware of the number of children coming through special classes who would generally need to go on for further special classes, but it is not an exact science. Some students will go on to special schools. Ms Corr of NABMSE and I did some research a few years ago that showed that the most frequent reason given was not a student's academic ability but social pressures and communication issues. Parents believed their children would feel more comfortable fitting in at post-primary level. This area is a concern, but one which the NSCE has highlighted.

Regarding how SENOs are challenging fee-charging schools, they are not because the Department's policy is that special classes should not be established in fee-charging schools. The SENOs are not doing anything in that regard. There are a number of reasons for this. I do not speak on behalf of the Department, but there is one reason of which I am aware A special class opened by a school might have three children. Let us say it is autism. It should have six children which means there are then three empty spaces. Our SENOs will then say: "One, two, three, you are going to that school." In a fee-charging school, the position is slightly difficult. Do the fee-charging schools make those places available free of charge to the children? It is a little more complex and something the committee might need to think about a little more.