11.4 Inclusion and diversity

11.4 Inclusion and diversity

Allocating resources to schools for special education needs provision

A number of very significant reforms in special education have been introduced in our system since the last Chief Inspector’s Report. Perhaps of most importance was the introduction in 2017 of a new allocation model for special education needs teachers (SETs). This new model is designed to ensure a more equitable distribution of resources to schools with the greatest level of need and, perhaps most significantly, it removed the need for parents to seek a psychological assessment in order for their child to receive additional support. The model is rooted in the principle of autonomy for schools and recognises that schools are best placed to both identify the needs of children and to subsequently work to meet those needs. The evidence, as set out in Chapter 6 of this report, indicates that most schools met the challenge of structuring support for pupils/students in a manner that is consistent with one of the key underpinning principles of the SET allocation mode; that which states that the child with the greatest level of need should receive the greatest level of support. Looking to the future, teachers at post-primary level, in particular, who start as subject specialists will require additional support and training opportunities to ensure that their programmes of work can be differentiated appropriately to take account of the broad range of educational needs in their classrooms.

Better alignment between teaching and therapeutic supports: School Inclusion Model

The development of the School Inclusion Model and its roll out to schools in the HSE’s Community Health Area Seven is another significant and welcome development in our education system. The School Inclusion Model, which seeks to ensure better alignment between teaching and therapeutic supports, potentially offers our system a blueprint for its future development, given that it recognises the need to ensure a more joined up approach to the delivery of supports for children. It is unfortunate that some of the early momentum that was associated with the model was lost, arising from the redeployment of therapeutic supports to COVID-related tasks. The Inspectorate is keen to ensure that learning from schools’ engagement with School Inclusion Model is identified and shared with other schools and this will be a focus of our work in the coming years.

Special schools and special classes

The Inspectorate published a number of important composite reports in the area of inclusion over the lifetime of this report. The 2020 report on the quality of provision for children with autism attending special classes in mainstream schools raised some significant issues for schools and for the system more broadly. In the context of Ireland’s ratification of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD), and the possible implications of Section 24 (Part 2) in particular, it would be worthwhile for policy makers to examine if the current configuration of special classes is the most effective model to fully include all learners in school life. Specifically, if full inclusion or ultimate enrolment into mainstream classes is to be viewed as the index of success, the current system of special classes appears to be having limited success for many learners who enrol in a special class.

In looking to further developments and reforms that will apply to the delivery of supports for students with special educational needs, the Inspectorate awaits the completion of policy advice by the National Council for Special Education (NCSE) in relation to future provision in special schools and special classes. The NCSE published interim policy advice in 2019, which points to the need for our school system to be structured in a more inclusive manner. In that regard, the Inspectorate is aware of the desirability of ensuring that the delivery of supports to our students with special educational needs aligns to the terms of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of People with Disabilities.

Curriculum provision for children with special educational needs

From a curriculum perspective, the benefits of junior cycle reform have also been experienced by students with special educational needs. Facilitating students with more complex needs to pursue a junior cycle programme at level one or level two has proved to be very successful and rewarding for

both students and teachers delivering the programmes. However, the success of the programme highlights the lack of a specific curriculum progression pathway from Junior Cycle into Senior Cycle for students with complex educational needs, and accentuates the need for the development of senior cycle level one and level two programme.

Tackling educational disadvantage

As this report was being prepared for publication, additional schools were admitted into the DEIS programme. This is a welcome development for those schools and for their students who are most at risk of educational disadvantage. We know the DEIS programme works; the cumulative impact of the range of supports available to schools and to pupils/students has been positive in many aspects of the DEIS programme. There remain, however, some significant challenges. While retention of students in DEIS schools is better now than in previous years, further progress has been slow in this area. The greater availability of data and information in DEIS schools is a positive. However, through DEIS evaluations, the Inspectorate has identified the need to further develop the capacity of DEIS schools to use this data and information purposefully. This is most evident in post-primary schools’ use of examination outcomes to identify trends and areas for improvement and to specifically tailor supports and teaching interventions for individual students.

Pupils/students at risk of underperformance

The effectiveness of schools in using student data to track children at risk of underperformance and to tailor educational interventions to address their needs is not just an issue in DEIS schools, but is relevant for the system as a whole. It is good that evidence from the OECD’s PISA studies shows that we have a relatively low between-school difference in the performance of Irish students. However, PISA also shows that within schools, differences in the performance of students remain and that socio-economic background remains a significant factor in determining students’ educational attainment, as well as their social and emotional skills and wellbeing. This makes it all the more important that schools identify, track and intervene appropriately to support students at risk of poor performance.

The granting of additional dedicated resources to schools through an expanded DEIS programme is a welcome policy response to this issue. The challenge for the schools, and those who advise and evaluate them, will be to ensure that the additional resources provided are targeted appropriately. Tailoring teaching and learning approaches and the wider curricular experience for pupils/students at risk of underperformance is challenging: professional development for teachers, adequate time for teacher collaboration, effective use of assessment, coherent planning within the school, and excellent leadership are all prerequisites.

Contribution of evaluation

The Inspectorate has focused on the quality of provision in DEIS schools in a more comprehensive manner in the period immediately following the publication of the Department’s revised DEIS plan in 2017. The Inspectorate doubled the number of DEIS inspections and conducted some of these on a cross-sectoral basis, resulting in more detailed system-level information being gathered and analysed. At the time of writing, a composite report on the quality of provision in DEIS schools arising from inspections conducted between 2017 and 2020 is in final preparation for publication.

The Inspectorate will continue to support schools in the DEIS programme to achieve better outcomes. The importance of highly effective leadership, governance and oversight in our schools is raised in Chapter 8 of this report. This is especially true in schools where our most vulnerable pupils/students are to be found. The inspectorate’s engagement with clusters of boards of management of DEIS schools and with the various school management bodies has been positively received and has proved to be beneficial in supporting boards in particular to develop a better understanding of their governance and oversight role of DEIS action planning for improvement. The Inspectorate will continue to provide this level of support and will focus, in particular, in supporting those schools which are new to DEIS.