Finian McGrath (Dublin North Central, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 151: To ask the Minister for Education and Science if she will take action regarding the notations that are currently being put on pupils' leaving and junior certificates, who have dyslexia, indicating their grading was subjected to their disability. [40923/06]

Mary Hanafin (Dún Laoghaire, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

As the Deputy will be aware, this Government has shown an unrivalled commitment to ensuring that children and young people with special needs get the extra support they need in order to reach their full potential at school. We have dramatically expanded investment in special education in recent years and we have improved access to the state examinations for young people with special needs.

A range of accommodations are provided to enable students with disabilities to access the Certificate examinations. For example enlarged print, Braille translation, modified questions, use of a scribe, a reader, a personal assistant, a tape recorder or word processor, may be allowed depending on needs.

The scheme was expanded in 2000 following the report of an Expert Advisory Group, to provide opportunities for exemptions where a candidate was not in a position to demonstrate achievement in a core area of assessment. In keeping with the advice of the Expert Advisory Group, a system of annotation was applied to any case where a student was exempt from a core area of assessment, or where the mode of assessment used had the same effect.

This change, for example, enabled a hearing impaired student to be exempt for the first time from the aural component of language subjects. His/her marks on the balance of the examination would be grossed up proportionately towards 100%, and the certificate would include a note to the effect that all elements of the subject were assessed except the aural component. Spelling and grammar waivers in language subjects were provided to cater for students with dyslexia on a similar basis, with annotation of the certificates.

The aim of these changes was to facilitate the operation of a responsive and flexible system which enables all candidates to demonstrate their achievements, while preserving the integrity and fairness of the exams by ensuring that special arrangements are operated in a transparent manner.

The introduction of the expanded scheme was seen as important in widening access and promoting the optimum participation for students with disabilities. Since then the number of students availing of accommodations in the certificate examinations has grown dramatically. 4,438 accommodations were granted in 2002, including 39 component exemptions and 1,945 spelling and grammar waivers. By 2006, this number had increased to 12,136 accommodations, including 987 component exemptions, and 5,450 spelling and grammar waivers.

An annotation only applies where a core element of assessment in a particular subject is not assessed. This is used to ensure fairness and integrity vis a vis other students who have been assessed in these components, and in order not to mislead the end user of the certificate.

In relation to the Equality Tribunal's recent findings, the legal position is that they must either be implemented in full or appealed within the specified timeframe under the Equal Status Act 2002. My Department has examined the findings and is concerned both that the widening of access through the use if exemptions coupled with annotations has not been fully understood in this case and that the fundamental nature of the accommodations being provided has been questioned. It has therefore been decided to appeal the findings.

I have also asked the State Examinations Commission to re-examine policy and practice in this area. I am determined to ensure that our system continues to evolve in line with best practice, promoting high standards of quality and integrity, while ensuring access, participation and benefit for all our students.

Given that this case is to be appealed to the Circuit Court, it is not appropriate that I make any further comment in the matter.