Maureen O'Sullivan (Dublin Central, Independent) | Oireachtas source

Cuirim fáilte roimh obair an choiste, roimh an tuarascáil atá á phlé againn agus roimh na rudaí a bhí le rá ag an Aire. I read the report and I was especially interested in the submissions and presentations. I have one question for the committee in that regard. Were there any presentations from teachers and students?

We are very conscious of health and safety regulations in every walk of life, including in schools. I refer, for example, to the type of doors, windows, flooring and locks, or the number of students who can be in a teacher's car if a teacher is bringing them to an event. They all have to do with physical health and it is time that we did the same with the mental health of students.

As the Minister said, it is important to acknowledge the really good work that has been going on for many years. A variety of programmes is in place, some drawn up by schools themselves, such as the Meitheal system, mentoring, the Big Brother Big Sister buddy programmes and older students looking out for the younger students. When new initiatives are proposed in the well-being, wellness and mental health area I often wonder why they do not take account of the good work that has been going on in schools. When I hear the term child-centred education it is almost as if was almost discovered in recent years but from my long experience in schools and the work of my colleagues I know that the child has always been at the centre of education.

I was looking at what we have been doing and it became a trip down memory lane for me. The school where I taught was a pilot school for the On My Own Two Feet programme. Caithfear aitheantas a thabhairt do na múinteoirí agus do na scoileanna a ghlac páirt sa chlár sin. Eight schools were involved with between five and 11 teachers in each school and we trained for up to 120 hours in order to be able to deliver the programme. Those hours were done outside school and at weekends because we were committed to the programme.

It was devised by the psychological services in the Department of Education, the health promotion unit in the Department of Health and the Mater Dei Counselling Centre. It was launched in 1994 – I can hardly believe it now. Reading back through it last night, I was struck by how progressive it was and how advanced it was all those years ago. It was about developing personal and social skills. While it was designed for the prevention of substance abuse, it was an overall life skills programme as well. The aim was to enable students to develop their ability to take charge of their health and, specifically, to make conscious and informed decisions. There were five books covering the areas of identity and self-esteem; understanding influences; assertive communication; feelings; and decision-making. There was a handbook on the methodology. The formal evaluation of the programme found that it had a significant effect on attitudes, beliefs and behaviours relevant to substance abuse. That was part of the substance abuse programme.

We are talking about the same thing now. At the time, teachers made some recommendations. One related to how vital it was for training for teachers to deliver these programmes. The recommendation was for 50 hours of training. At that time in the 1990s other courses were being carried out through developmental group work. The main point I wish to make is that in the 1990s and even before then this work was being carried out to support students personally and socially to enable them to make informed decisions. I am reminded of the phrase that a rose by any other name would smell as sweet.

A great deal is demanded of schools and teachers. Our experience from the 120 hours we gave was that we did it willingly, but that was in a different environment. The environment today is making it difficult for teachers, especially given the amount of paperwork they have to process. This had started in 2007 and 2008 when I was still teaching but it has increased more and more since. The problem is with all the "Ps", namely, policies, plans and procedures. Teachers are inundated with the associated paperwork. No sooner is a policy agreed and ratified by a board than it is up for review. I realise we need policies and plans but not to the extent that we have them today.

From what the Minister was saying it looks like there may be more paperwork. My question is whether all of that is improving the quality of teaching. It is taking up an inordinate amount of teachers' time. That time could be spent more productively on training in the courses needed to deliver the programmes we are all committed to and which contribute to positive mental health.

In spite of all the paperwork, teachers are doing their best with their students. Not only are they teaching the academic subjects but they are with their students in stressful and difficult times too. I saw a submission from the theatre group for aesthetic engagement which referred to the core experience. It reminded me of TEAM Educational Theatre Company, which did such invaluable work back in the day. However, it lost its funding and that was the end of that group.

I wish to raise one point about the school timetable and the pressures on it. A certain number of hours must be given for each of the academic subjects. There has to be a given allocation for physical education and a class for social, personal and health education or well-being or whatever we call it. If a teacher needs an extra class for an academic subject, the SPHE class will be the first to go. If a teacher is taking an SPHE class but she is either unwilling or does not want to be there or the class is simply being added on to make up the hours, she will be willing to give up that class.

I wish to make a point about religious education classes. Contrary to what some believe, they were not indoctrinating classes. They were times for students to have discussions. They were time for debate, meditation and for the issues that were important to students.

There is a role for outside agencies from the community coming in to schools to deliver certain programmes. Some of the agencies I know in Dublin Central are community-based and work in the areas of drugs, alcohol, gambling and sexual health. They are welcomed by the schools because the people who come in have training and skills. It is vital to allocate time for this. This is where the religious education classes played a role in allowing students' voices and opinions to be heard. I was involved in an initiative in the north inner city through the drugs and alcohol task force. We had four conventions of transition year and fifth year students. These were roundtable discussions and the facilitators were the youth leaders. The conversations were about their opinions on drugs and alcohol but of course the conversations opened out into other areas. It was a question of engaging with young people on their terms.

The point is that children and teenagers in the north inner city and one or two other urban areas are living in a reality that is altogether different from the majority of areas in the country, urban and rural. They see open drug dealing every day. They can step over drug paraphernalia on their way in and out of school. They can see people in addiction shooting up. They know about fear and intimidation through drug debt. They see the normalisation of alcohol misuse and abuse. Of course they see the emergency response unit on the streets as well. The schools and youth projects are doing great work but when a programme is rolled out for the entire country it should take into account the specific and particular needs of young people who are living in these environments.

Well-being, mental health and the associated skills and strategies are vital to those who are most in need. One strong finding from the convention was how young people relish the opportunity to sit down with their peers and the facilitators to discuss these issues. We had another conference with teachers, youth leaders and some young people. We produced another report entitled Let's Get Specific, which the former Minister for Education and Skills, Deputy Bruton, launched. One key recommendation was on proper staffing and the training of teachers as well as connecting the teaching with the external support groups. Another related to involving parents in the training and the need for continuous feedback from young people on the effectiveness or otherwise of the strategies. This was an interagency collaborative report.

One of our recommendations was that SPHE would not be treated as an add-on subject. I am using the example of SPHE but the point applies to well-being too. There is danger in confining the class to one or two 40 minute periods per week. I have discussed the matter with the Minister's predecessors. This type of learning should pervade the whole day. There must be a whole-school, holistic approach. Every class should have the young person's sense of well-being at the heart of it. This means creating a positive learning environment, encouraging each student to achieve his or her potential and valuing each achievement. This should be the case regardless of whether the student achieved 200 points, 600 points or no points in the leaving certificate or he or she becomes an apprentice or a doctor. It is about challenging and stretching students to reach their potential and not giving up on them. Shane Martin made a submission suggesting that schools need to empower their students with the toolbox for coping during the inevitable crises and challenges in life. The word "inevitable" is important. We cannot eliminate all stress and anxiety from young people's lives but we can show them how to cope. That is why it is so important. This is where I see a role for mindfulness in schools but it has to be delivered by people who have had some training in the area.

One of the recommendations from the committee related to the provision of psychotherapy training. I know guidance counsellors who have done this as well. They have done the three year training course and built up the hours. There are no shortcuts to that end. I was struck by how that point came into the recommendations. Recently, recommendations on supervision of guidance counsellors were introduced and that was welcome.

It was good that the submissions acknowledged that schools at primary and secondary level are responsive to the issues of poor mental health and that they are proactive in supporting and preventative approaches. We should not throw out the baby with the bath water. We have good programmes that are working and they can all be built in. The ethos of the school is important. We tried to emphasise all the time that we were a telling school and that people talked about things. We celebrated diversity and highlighted that there was nothing wrong with being different.

Some programmes have proven successful over the years. Programmes need to be well designed and teachers need to be trained. There needs to be timetable commitment. There needs to be managerial support and parental support. If such programmes are implemented, they can have positive impacts on the academic and well-being outcomes of students and can reduce the anxiety and stress. It does not matter whether we call it mindfulness, SPHE or well-being. We are all talking about the same strategies to help young people to cope.

See this speech in context