Mr. Colm Kelly:

The TUI represents more than 17,000 teachers and lecturers employed by education and training boards, ETBs, voluntary secondary schools, community and comprehensive, C&C, schools and the institutes of technology. We also have a small number of members teaching in special schools. The TUI welcomes this opportunity to make a submission to the committee on the delivery of services for students with Down's syndrome. Some 0.18% of all children are diagnosed with Down's syndrome, which equates to approximately 1,600 students in primary and post-primary schools. We are not aware of any specific data for the post-primary sector alone.

Data clearly show that students with special educational needs, SEN, such as those with Down's syndrome, are far more likely to attend ETB and C&C schools than voluntary secondary schools. The TUI believes that all students should be able to access mainstream schools unless the needs of the students are so serious that they could not cope in a mainstream school. For this to happen, it must be supported by the resourcing of both schools and support services.

Staff who pursue additional qualifications in the area of SEN must be recompensed. It is important to note that the role of the teacher is to support the education of the child while the SNA, if applicable, can cater to the care needs of the child. All schools should accept students with SEN.

A commitment to implementing the EPSEN Act 2004 is essential if provision for students with SEN is to be adequately and appropriately addressed. However, full implementation will only be possible when sufficient resources are allocated. More than ten years ago, the TUI emphasised that schools were not sufficiently resourced to implement individual education plans for SEN students. The TUI has been calling for the full implementation, and resourcing, of the EPSEN Act for almost 15 years. We have reiterated that call four times in the past year alone. However, we have been told by successive Governments that the funding is not available to enact the remaining provisions of the legislation. In the absence of appropriate resourcing, TUI members cannot be required to implement individual education plans. To do so would create the false impression for parents and guardians that a school has a developed capacity to deliver the level of service promised in the EPSEN Act. It is the moral and legal responsibility of the State, acting through the Department, to provide the necessary resources. The TUI cannot, and will not, countenance an opportunistic transfer of that responsibility, or of any associated culpability, from the State to teachers. We have informed members that our objection to a medicalised, administratively heavy individual education plan process does not apply to normal, professionally appropriate and sustainable classroom planning by teachers for differentiated teaching and learning that takes due account of the strengths and needs of the students they serve and of the contexts in which they teach.

We would like to make the following recommendations to the committee: recent changes in guidance provision, Circular 12-2017, and middle management posts, Circular 3-2018, are not enough to support fully students with SEN. A much larger move in terms of restoration of both is also needed. Teachers should be able to access continuing professional development, CPD, to best support students with SEN; schools should be able to access support from the significantly under-pressure support services. Education, at all levels, should be available to every child, the deciding factor being what is in the best interests of the child.

The Department of Education and Skills must make clear, once and for all, if it ever intends to fully implement and resource the EPSEN Act. If it cannot implement and resource EPSEN as originally intended, then will it join us in examining a more appropriate method of supporting students with Down's syndrome to achieve a better outcome for the students?