Fidelma Healy Eames (Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

It is great to have the Minister here in the Seanad. I concur with what Senator Mulcahy has said. I, too, enjoyed her presentation at the INTO conference and was quite touched by it.

In terms of what the Minister has said in this debate about the new interim service, we could be on to something good if we do it right. About six weeks ago she headed off what was potentially a huge minefield that was about to blow in terms of bringing in the new proposed model without adequate consultation. Her approach and the way she listened has worked in her favour.

The Minister can tell me if I am wrong about the following. She has said that the new interim service is for training, guidance and interventions with teachers.The Minister should use the time she has with the teachers now to consult them about the proposed model she wants to bring in. We held big meetings on this with 100 parents and teachers present when it was mooted that the proposed model would begin in September 2015. It came through clearly that we need exemplars. For example, I sent a school’s profile to the NCSE, listing the number of children on the general allocation model, GAM and the number receiving resource hours. In so far as she can, the Minister needs to give schools examples of how the new model would affect them. That would make a difference in the negotiation.

I take it that a psychologist’s report will not be needed. That sounds great because I know how much that costs etc. but as a former educator I am confused. Often the psychologist’s diagnosis is critical for giving direction to the tuition. I understand that the teacher’s job is to meet the needs but needs appear as symptoms and the cause is often not known. A psychologist gets at the cause. If we miss the cause will we give the proper supports? Will the Minister verify that?

Is the Education for Persons with Special Educational Needs, EPSEN Act 2004 forgotten? Was it thrown out by this Government and the previous one, which carries the greatest sin on its soul for its failure to implement the Act? It is an amazing Act and has not yet been implemented in full.

The way the Minister will connect with the Health Service Executive, HSE, about complex needs is very wise. I agree with Senator Mulcahy about early intervention. That is vital. If we do not do that all our kids will lose out. There has to be a smooth transition between the levels. The mother of a child with special needs, whose teacher sometimes does not handle the child well, worries and feels alone. Every parent knows in his or her gut that there is a critical moment for intervention. Senator Hayden’s point was relevant on this point. The Minister responded to the Down’s Syndrome issue. Parents know that if we intervene and invest early we can catch those children and help them develop, which means they will likely cost less to the system as they move on. Parents will then have faith in the system. That is why we may be on to something good with the interim measure support service. Today is the first time I heard about this.

I often thought about children with special needs and how to help them more effectively. I came up with the idea of a weighting service. If in a class of 30 there are four children with special educational needs and some with second language needs, the teacher is disadvantaged. If the child with autism is weighted as equivalent to six or four kids, the child with Down’s syndrome to two children, the ratio should come down. That teacher is managing an incredible load. Equal number does not mean equal number: every 30 kids are not the same. In the class example I gave, 20 kids could be equal to 30 who do not have specific learning difficulties or requirements. Will the Minister ask the NCSE to examine this? If I had the time and resources I would like to invest in this. I compliment the Minister on her work and wish her well.