Barry Andrews (Dún Laoghaire, Fianna Fail)

I wish to share time with Deputy Cregan. I am delighted to be able to address the House on this issue. As a former school teacher I have had direct experience of disruptive behaviour. As a former pupil, I have also had direct experience of it as have many other Members, I am sure.

It is a curious time to introduce this topic on Private Member's Business by virtue of the fact that the final report has not been published. The interim report has been published but this has the feeling of half-time entertainment while the real event is waiting to be rolled out. A great range of types of behaviour is in danger of being described by this motion, from so-called messing, natural high spirits and exuberance that one would expect of young people right up to violent behaviour that is the real concern of many. While acknowledging this range of behaviour, we must also acknowledge that it is only at the very top end of the scale that a problem exists. The rest is manageable by teachers, or at least should be, as part of their professional abilities.

The stress that disruptive behaviour places on teachers can be very difficult to bear. I have seen the damage it does to their private and personal lives when they are targeted by children who see a weakness in them. It is an issue that must be taken seriously and for that reason, I welcome this debate.

I have noticed a common problem in that a set of students is well behaved for one teacher but badly behaved for another. This demonstrates that often the teacher in question will require some help to avoid disruptive behaviour within the classroom. The continuous professional development of teachers has attracted an increase in funding of 15%, to €27 million. I was surprised to see the TUI so critical of the funding that has been secured for this area, when the task force finally reported. There are so many other investments in this area, for example, the money being spent under targets for home, school, community liaison and the school completion programme. There is no doubt all of this investment will eventually filter down and result in better behaviour in classrooms.

Many parents complain about the damage done to other students when disruptive behaviour occurs but that can be overestimated. It is somewhat like the anti-social behaviour issue. At a low level, it is ordinary children having a laugh, but at a higher level, as was seen on "Prime Time", it is criminal behaviour. Anti-social behaviour has become a catch-all description for so many things and the term "disruptive behaviour" has the same capacity to describe a large number of things. We must be careful and acknowledge that we are dealing with a reasonably limited number of problematic situations.

When I was a teacher some time ago teacher counsellors were introduced. I am not sure if they are still in place following the pilot scheme that was introduced in the late 1990s.

One of the TUI recommendations is to separate children when they are recognised as being disruptive but that should be a last resort, if a resort at all. I strongly recommend that students should be dealt with within their own schools. Otherwise, one is simply transferring the problem and stigmatising children when it is the duty of a school to try to deal with such problems itself and not to separate children out or send them to other schools.

What stands out for me is the need to have a flexible response to the problem of disruptive students. One could set down codes of behaviour and strict requirements for parents, teachers and students but ultimately, every situation is different and every school should be able to respond with flexibility and within a framework. I hope the report from the task force is published soon.

See this speech in context