Thomas Byrne (Meath East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

104. To ask the Minister for Education and Skills the reason the new DEIS identification and designation process does not directly measure schools differing student intake profiles (details supplied). [21171/17]

Richard Bruton (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The DEIS review process was informed by extensive engagement with Education Partners and other key stakeholders, including engagement with relevant academics and practitioners, to explore the potential for innovation in future interventions in schools which cater for pupils at highest risk of educational disadvantage and of not reaching their full potential by virtue of their socio-economic circumstances.  One of the many aspects addressed in this wide-ranging consultation was the identification process.  Submissions received from Education Partners in June 2015, which are available on my Department’s website, included a range of recommendations relating to the development of a new identification process.  These include the variables referenced by the Deputy.

This extensive consultation indicated clear consensus on the need for a new approach to the arrangements for the identification of schools for additional supports.  A key demand voiced during the consultation with various stakeholders was for a process that is fair, transparent and responsive to demographic change in a schools situation over time. These views were taken on board in coming to a final decision on the methodology adopted.

As I have detailed previously to the Deputy the approach taken for the assessment of schools under the new DEIS identification process utilises CSO Small Area data as represented in the Haase Pratschke Index of Deprivation (HP Index) combined with DES Primary and Post Primary data supplied by schools. The key data sources are the DES Primary Online Database (POD) and Post-Primary Online (PPOD) Databases, and CSO data from the National Census of Population as represented in the Pobal HP Index for Small Areas which is a method of measuring the relative affluence or disadvantage of a particular geographical area. Variables used in the compilation of the HP Index include those related to demographic growth, dependency ratios, education levels, single parent rate, overcrowding, social class, occupation and unemployment rates. This data is combined with pupil data, anonymised and aggregated to small area, to provide information on the relative level of concentrated disadvantage present in the pupil cohort of individual schools.

I am satisfied that the new DEIS Identification Model used to assess the level of disadvantage among the pupil cohort of a school has been applied fairly using centrally held data adopting an objective and scientific approach which has been uniformly applied for all schools.

I also wish to inform the Deputy that a communication to all schools will issue shortly to provide information on the identification model including details of how the datasets are used to determine a schools level of disadvantage; the importance of data quality to the process and the need for detailed and up to date information from schools.

It is important to note that DEIS supports are just one of a suite of supports provided by the Department of Education and Skills and by other Government Departments and agencies to assist schools in meeting the identified educational needs of their pupil cohorts.  These include supports for children with special educational needs, English as an additional language (EAL) supports, Educational Welfare Services and School Meals schemes. DEIS Plans includes specific actions in relation to each of these areas.

It is also important to consider that in addition to supports under DEIS additional resources, to support SEN, EAL and Travellers, are allocated across the school system both in DEIS and non-DEIS schools.

Furthermore it is important to note that as part of my announcement in February in launching DEIS Plan 2017, I made it clear that we would continue to conduct further analysis to examine other strong predictors of educational disadvantage in the context of resource allocation.  In view of this, as set out in both the Report on the Review of DEIS and DEIS Plan 2017, the Technical Group will continue its work, supplemented as necessary by additional research and data expertise.

A key objective of DEIS Plan 2017 is to achieve a more dynamic and tailored process for the assessment of schools which will more closely match resources to identified need.