Tim Lombard (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

People would have some hope that there will be changes when the review begins. If we go back to the reports from 2000 or 2008, we can see how society, technology and the world has changed in the interim. The 2008 report has been mentioned. Right or wrong, pieces can be picked out of it to support my argument or that of the witnesses. Technology was not a key factor back then. Things have changed completely. That is the key issue. The world has moved on. The iPhone I have in front of me would have been a superstar of a machine 20 years ago. It would have been like something from NASA. This is how the world has moved. Technology is a part of the solution. It is a really important instigator to allow us to ensure that we can get more appropriate accommodations, to make sure we get students through the school cycle in an appropriate way.

In the context of the proposed changes, are there timelines for these reviews? In the next few months, approximately 140,000 students will sit State examinations. Of those, 10% have some level of dyslexia. Where is the pathway to make sure that they will perhaps have a review at some stage that might be of benefit to them? The timelines relating to this are very important. I appreciate that Covid threw out of whack in the context of the relating to assistive technology. The pandemic happened a few years ago now. Can I have clarity on when these reviews will happen, the timelines relating to them and when their findings will be implemented? Will Ms Feeney give an indication as to the who, when, where and what of the consultations involved? Will they be open and face to face or will it be a roadshow model? How are we going to have those engagements? That engagement is very important. I admire in so many ways parents for their ability to advocate for their dyslexic children. They fight for them day in, day out, and will do so until their children have completed third level. This is about trying to make sure that those children can reach their potential. When a basic barrier is put in front of them it becomes very emotive. Can I have some clarification about matters stand in that regard?

Another issue that should be looked at in the review is when clearance is given for the granting of reasonable accommodations for examinations. If a student going into first year has to wait until the start of third year to get clarification on whether they will have a reasonable accommodation granted, that is still a stress for the parent and the student. They have no idea where they are for the first two years. The reasonable accommodations are assumed. Students are told that it will be okay, but they get nothing in writing to that effect. The commission only kicks in in the third year because that is a State examination year. That does not work and it needs to change. This is a fundamental issue that needs to be looked at.

There is also a need to consider that to which I refer in the context of maths. Maths has been forgotten in this debate. When people talk about dyslexic children, they talk about reading, English and the Irish waiver. They do not understand the implications of wordy maths questions and the difficulties they pose for children with dyslexia. This has been totally forgotten by the Department. A completely different focus is needed. It has been proven to me continuously that this needs to be looked at. I am not sure if the will is there to do so. I would like clarity on this. I fundamentally believe that this is really important for us. The maths question is the fifth leg of the stool. It has not been addressed. In fact, it has been forgotten.

When it comes to additional time, nobody can tell me that a person with a C-Pen reader can do it at the same level as a person who can read it perfectly. It basically does not work. The C-Pen is a fantastic and wonderful tool, but it does not operate at the same speed. Students are being taught to use these pens because it is about using them faster. We are teaching students to work C-Pens faster, because they cannot read the maths, so that they can do their junior certificate examinations. We cannot do this. They should be learning maths instead of trying to operate the technology that allows them to read faster.

There is much that can be changed quickly. That is why the review is so important. I ask Ms Feeney to come back to me with indications as to when we will have meaningful progress.