Tom Sheahan (Kerry South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

"Let no man write my epitaph; ... no man ... knows my motives ...". This is very pertinent to the current Minister for Education and Science. The parents of special needs children cannot understand his motives for removing special needs classes. My colleague, Deputy Michael Ring, spoke about rural transport and removing necessary services from the elderly. This appears to be the route the Government has taken - it is hitting the most vulnerable in society. It tried to take the medical cards from people over 70 years of age and now it is removing rural transport.

A society is judged by how it treats its most vulnerable members. Special needs children are undoubtedly the most vulnerable members of our society. The removal of classes is a budgetary measure. I am disappointed the Minister is not present tonight. What will be saved by removing classes from special needs children? We take great pride in the aid we give to foreign countries, yet our own people are suffering. Not very long ago these children would have been locked away in attics and the back rooms of houses or put into mental institutions.

A special needs class is being removed from St. Oliver's national school in Killarney. I can stake all my input into political life that the school is a centre of excellence. Children travel from every corner of County Kerry and even from beyond the county boundaries to the school because it is a centre of excellence. Does the Minister realise the consequences of his action and the consequences for the children concerned? Many parents have approached me to ask that this action be stopped. Some of them are parents of children who have left St. Oliver's, gone on to mainstream secondary schools, have done well and now have jobs. Some are parents of children who are currently in St. Oliver's. I have also met parents who are seeking a place in St. Oliver's for their child, which will not be available with the removal of this class.

The principal is put in the position of having to decide who is and is not entitled to a place in this centre of excellence. That is an awful predicament. Will we have to appoint a Minister for Education and Science who has a special needs child to deal with this and to realise what is involved? Another parent called to my clinic recently. I am as tough as any man in this House but this woman brought me down to size. She told me her son is paralysed, has minor learning difficulties and is fitted with a feeding tube. She asked where her child could go when he does not get a place in St. Oliver's. I could not answer. I would hate to be in that position or for any of my constituents to be in that position.

This is due to a budgetary measure by the Minister. Where will the money be saved? The child I mentioned is entitled to one hour of special needs education per day in his national school. The centre of excellence in St. Oliver's must be retained for the people in my constituency. I am sure this is an issue in every other constituency. The savings are minimal. A child with only mild learning difficulties would be able for mainstream education if they had an I.Q. of between 50 and 70. However, this is not the case and it is up to the principal to decide who gets the places and who does not. The only savings will be in school transport. The parents of the children I am representing would be more than willing to bring their children to this centre of excellence if the class is retained.

John Curran (Dublin Mid West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank Deputy Tom Sheahan for raising this matter and apologise on behalf of the Minister for Education and Science, Deputy Batt O'Keeffe, who could not be present. I am pleased to have the opportunity to clarify the position on the matter raised by the Deputy.

The Deputy will be aware that allocations to schools typically increase or decrease depending on pupil enrolment. In the case of special classes for pupils with a mild general learning disability, MGLD, the normal pupil teacher ratio that applies is 11:1. The Department of Education and Science, however, allows for a small reduction in this number and permits schools to retain a teaching post where it has a minimum of nine pupils in the class. The school in question has three special classes for MGLD. A total enrolment of 31 is required to retain the three classes. The enrolment in the three classes as returned by the school in September 2008 was 21 pupils. The minimum enrolment required to retain the third class has therefore not been fulfilled and the school no longer qualifies to retain the third special class.

The school in question appealed the Department's decision to suppress the class. The Department has considered the appeal and has advised the school that the decision to suppress the third class remains.

Tom Sheahan (Kerry South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Shame.

John Curran (Dublin Mid West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

However, it would appear that some of the children who are enrolled in the MGLD classes in the school in question may fall within the low incidence disability category and may qualify for resource teaching support through the National Council for Special Education, NCSE. Officials in the Department have been in contact with the NCSE and I understand that the school has initiated contact with the special educational needs organiser, SENO, in this regard. I understand also that the SENO will convey a decision to the school as soon as this process has been completed.

The pupils in the class being suppressed will continue to receive additional teaching support through the teaching resources allocated to primary schools under the general allocation model. Schools decide how best to use this allocation based on the needs of the pupils and how to adjust their support in line with the changing needs of pupils as they mature. The Department issued a circular SP ED 02/05 to all schools to assist them in deploying the general allocation model resources.

The Department of Education and Science promotes a continuum of assessment and intervention. These interventions range from support from the classroom teacher to support from the resource/learning support teacher. Where a school considers that these interventions are not meeting the child's needs, it should seek the advice of its National Educational Psychological Service, NEPS, psychologist. Schools without an assigned NEPS psychologist can avail of the scheme for commissioning psychological assessments. Advice may be also sought from the local special educational needs organiser. The Deputy will be aware of the unprecedented investment in providing supports for children with special needs in recent years. There are now about 19,000 adults in our schools working solely with children with special needs. There are more than 8,000 resource and learning support teachers in our schools, compared with just 2,000 in 1998. More than 1,000 other teachers support children in our special schools. Some 86 classes for children with mild general learning disability are being retained where there are nine children or more in these classes.

The Minister for Education and Science wishes to emphasise that priority will continue to be given to provision for children with special educational needs. The establishment of these classes for mild general learning disability pre-date many of the developments in special education policy in recent years and we now have a system for providing schools with supports for children with high incidence special needs through the general allocation model.

In raising the matter, the Deputy specifically asked whether there was a need to appoint a Minister who has a special needs child. The Minister of State responding to him tonight has been in that position and had a child in that situation who availed of mainstream education. As a conscientious parent, I did not have an opportunity to avail of this class. However, I can say that the services provided through the other supports provided me, my family and our daughter with a very positive educational experience.

I thank the Deputy again for giving me the opportunity to clarify the position with regard to this matter.