National Disability Authority paper to Oireachtas Committee on Education and Skills Dec 2010
National Disability Authority paper to Oireachtas
Committee on Education and Skills
The provision of special needs education in Ireland
The National Disability Authority (NDA) is the independent statutory advisory body to
the Government on disability policy and practice. The NDA works closely with, and is
represented on the Board of the National Council for Special Education.
The National Council for Special Education in addition to its operational role in assigning
resources to schools, has also carried out extensive research which will be very useful
in guiding further improvements in inclusive education, and on which the NDA has
drawn in its own advice.
This short paper summarises recent policy advice, and work in progress, by the NDA,
on the topics of

preschool education for children with special needs

inclusive schools

special needs assistants
Pre-school education
Include children in mainstream pre-schools, and target supports at capacity
to include the child
The NDA is currently looking at best practice and research findings in pre-school
education for children with disabilities. While this work is not yet complete, the
emerging evidence is that mainstream pre-school education is the favoured route in
other countries, and the policy emphasis is on supporting mainstream pre-schools to
cater for children with disabilities and special education needs. More recently, the
direction has been to move away from models where one adult is responsible for
supporting one child with a disability to models where additional resources are targeted
at including the child in the group with his or her peers other than by one-to-one
support.
The research literature on pre-school inclusion, which is largely based on US studies,
shows that children with disabilities do at least as well developmentally in good quality
inclusive preschools as in segregated settings and make more gains in terms of social and
behavioural outcomes, and that children without disabilities do no worse
developmentally in inclusive settings and score higher on tests relating to acceptance of
people with disabilities. Studies looking at the cost effectiveness of inclusive versus
segregated pre-schools, while lacking robustness, do suggest that inclusive pre-schools
are more cost effective.
1
National Disability Authority paper to Oireachtas Committee on Education and Skills Dec 2010
Inclusive schools
Include children with disabilities in mainstream schools and classes and
consider reverse inclusion in special classes
The NDA advises that the international evidence base strongly supports the policy
objective of inclusive education. The weight of the research evidence supports the view
that on average children with disabilities and special education needs do better in
mainstream settings than in segregated settings, and that children from across the
spectrum of disabilities have been successfully included in mainstream settings.
However, the NDA also acknowledges that the evidence base shows that due to a
range of factors - disability-related factors, individual and family related factors, school
related factors and supports provided - not all children with disabilities and special
education needs do better in mainstream settings.
The available evidence base does not support children being in segregated classrooms
for almost the entire school week. The evidence, though limited, suggests that children
should be in mainstream classrooms (not just mainstream schools) with appropriate
supports for as much of the school day or week as they will benefit from.
The NDA observes that specialist education does not necessarily have to mean
segregated education. Reverse inclusion or reverse mainstreaming (bringing children
without special needs into centres which previously catered for children with special
education needs only) has been used extensively as a mechanism to deliver inclusive
pre-school education in the US. It has also been used by at least one special school in
Ireland. Given demographic and fiscal pressures, it may be worth further investigating
whether some special schools could become well resourced specialist but inclusive
schools. Also, some mainstream schools have, over time, become centres of excellence
in inclusion in response to interested parents, teachers, principals or boards of
managements. There are opportunities therefore to develop (or recognise) new models
of specialist but not segregated schools on the continuum of special education support.
Special Needs Assistant Scheme
Give SNAs a wider and more flexible role
There was a very rapid expansion of the SNA scheme in the decade 1998 to 2008. The
NDA advises that the current significant state funding for Special Needs Assistants
should be retained but should be deployed in a flexible way to support children with
disabilities to attain their potential, in the context of the Education for Persons with
Special Educational Needs (EPSEN) Act 2004.
The formal job description for SNAs has remained unchanged for a third of a century,
although successive published research studies and preliminary findings of NDAsponsored research currently underway have shown that in practice the role has
developed beyond that formally set out. The NDA advises that continued
appropriateness of this prescribed role for SNAs needs to be reconsidered given the
changed policy landscape over this period, and in particular in the context of the
2
National Disability Authority paper to Oireachtas Committee on Education and Skills Dec 2010
National Disability Strategy, of the Education for Persons with Special Education Needs
(EPSEN) Act and of the Disability Act 2005. The NDA advises that the job description
for special needs assistants should be a modern flexible one which enables them to
deliver assistance to support the development and learning of the child with disabilities
in the context of the modern classroom.
Internationally, roles similar to the SNA role in Ireland have evolved over time from a
care support role to an education support role. Such changes have led to the need for
programmes to upskill SNAs. The NDA advises that special needs assistants should have
appropriate ongoing training to enable them to satisfactorily meet the job roles they are
assigned. Entry level qualifications and training routes for the role of SNA would need to
change in this context too.
The NDA also advises that teacher training should recognise that some teachers may
never teach in a classroom where they are the only adult. Joint working and joint
planning between teachers and SNAs to cater for the needs of all the children in a
classroom is likely to be required in very many classrooms. It is not clear that teacher
training in Ireland has adapted to this new reality of joint working and staff management.
The outcomes achieved by the SNA scheme should be monitored and benchmarked
against national and international standards.
Preparation for life
The NDA advises of the importance of linking education at school level to further
education and training (including vocational training) and adequate planning at school
stage for transitions to the next stages of life.
3
National Disability Authority paper to Oireachtas Committee on Education and Skills Dec 2010
Background Papers
Paper 1 - Best Practice in the Provision of Inclusive
Preschool Services
Introduction
This background paper has two objectives:

To summarise research literature on early childhood pre-school inclusion, which is
mainly based on US studies

To summarise the recommendations from relevant Irish literature - a mixture of
policy documents, literature reviews and reports on good practice based on
stakeholder consultation
The next step proposed is to gather more detailed administration and, if possible, basic
funding and resources information, on a number of countries identified as having good
practice in the area of including young children with additional support needs in early
childhood education and care settings. A framework for how this information is to be
collected is presented in appendix 1.
What are the main findings of the academic literature on
pre-school inclusion?
There is consensus in the academic literature that high quality pre-school programmes
have lasting positive effects for children and society, particularly for children from low
socio-economic backgrounds1 and for those at risk of developing learning or behavioural
difficulties at school.2 There is a general consensus in the literature on early intervention
for children with disabilities and special education needs indicating that while outcomes
from early intervention vary, that early, intense interventions significantly effect
children's development.3
This paper does not attempt to synthesise the literature on the aforementioned topics.
The focus of this brief review is the available literature is on the inclusion of children
with disabilities and / or special education needs in mainstream early education and care
settings.
1
Barnett, W. S. (2008). Preschool education and its lasting effects: Research and policy implications.
Boulder and Tempe: Education and the Public Interest Centre & Education Policy Research Unit.
http://epicpolicy.org/publication/preschooleducation
2
Melhuish, E., Quinn, L., Hanna, K., Sylva, K., Sammons, P., Siraj-Blatchford, I., & Taggart, B.
(2006) Effective Pre-school Provision in Northern Ireland (EPPNI) Summary Report
3
Guralnick, M. J. (1998). The effectiveness of early intervention for vulnerable children: A developmental
perspective. American Journal on Mental Retardation, 102, 319–345.
4
National Disability Authority paper to Oireachtas Committee on Education and Skills Dec 2010
Inclusive early education is increasingly government policy
Inclusive early education is the policy ambition of most but not all developed countries.
Recent surveys of early education models across developed countries show that
generally there is a policy ambition to ensure that pre-school children (3 - 5) are
included in settings with their typically developing peers.4 However, for many countries
where pre-school inclusion is the policy aim, specialist pre-schools services for preschool children still exist and there is limited data on the extent to which children with
disabilities are included in mainstream pre-school settings. The US is the main exception
to this as preschool inclusion has been government policy for thirty years and it has a
well developed body of research and two longitudinal survey programmes on young
children with disabilities and special education needs.
One US study found that between 1985 and 1990 the number of pre-school services in
its study which had at least one student with a disability had almost doubled,5 another
found that 5% of preschools in its study were inclusive settings prior to 1990 while 78%
of the same settings were inclusive ten years later6. 2007 data from the US Department
of Education indicates that the majority of states continue to make progress in
developing inclusive pre-school programmes and that 36 of the 59 states and territories
were serving more than 50% of pre-schoolers in receipt of disability supports in
mainstream settings.7
It should be noted that in the US this sharp increase is driven by legislation. Under Part
B of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) support must be provided in
the least restrictive environment8. Table 1 below provides a picture of where US preschool children received additional supports.
4
OECD (2006) Starting Strong II: Early Childhood Education and Care. EECD: Paris
Wolery, M., Holcombe-Ligon, A., Brookfiel, J., Huffman, K. Schroeder, C., Martin , C. G., Venn, M. L.,
Werts, M.G., Fleming, L., A. (1993) The extent and nature of pre-school mainstreaming: A survey of early
educators. Journal of Special Education, 27, 222 - 234
6
Lieber, J., Hanson, M.J., Beckman, P.J., ODOM, S.L., Sandall, S.R., Schwartz I.S., Horn, E, & Wolery, R.
(2000) Key influences on the initiation and implementation of inclusive preschool Programs. Exceptional
Children 67 (1) 83 - 98
7
Buysse, V. & Hollingsworth, H.L., (2009) Program Quality and Early Childhood Inclusion:
Recommendations for Professional Development. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education 29 (2) 119
- 1128
8
Part C and Part B of the IDEA Act refer respectively to birth to 3 years services and 3 to 5 years.
services
5
5
National Disability Authority paper to Oireachtas Committee on Education and Skills Dec 2010
Table 1 - Mean hours per week that young children who received preschool
special education services spent in various educational settings, by age
cohort and school year: School years 2003-04 and 2004-05
Setting
Regular education classroom
Special education setting
Therapy setting
Non-special education setting outside the classroom for
remedial or special assistance
Home instruction
2003- 04
2004 - 05
8.2
8.0
0.8
0.2
15.0
6.2
8.0
0.2
0.2
0.2
Source: US Department of Education, 2008, Report from the Pre-Elementary Education Longitudinal
Study (PEELS)
Evidence of outcomes for children with disabilities in early
education settings
Arguably the most important question regarding the evidence base for pre-school
children in mainstream settings is whether outcomes for children with disabilities are
better or worse in inclusive versus segregated, specialised settings. The major reviews of
the empirical literature comparing children with disabilities across the two setting types
conclude that children do at least as well in inclusive settings in terms of development
outcomes and do better in term of social and behavioural outcomes in inclusive
settings9. Table 2 below, which is adapted from Buysse and Bailey (1993), who
systematically reviewed the findings from the comparative literature in the field up to
the early 1990s, bears this out. The findings in the more recent literature have largely up
held these findings.
9
Buysse, B., & Bailey, D.B. (1993), Behavioural and development outcomes in young children with
disabilities in integrated and segregated settings: a review of comparative studies. Journal of Special
Education 26, 434 - 461; Lamorey, S., & Bricker, D. D (1993) Integrated programs: effects on children and
their parents In Peck, C., Odom, S. & Bricker D Integrating young children with disabilities into
community-based programs; from research to implementation. Baltimore: Brookes; Odom, S. L., &
Diamond, K. E. (1998). Inclusion of young children with special needs in early childhood education: The
research base. Early Childhood Research Quarterly.13(1), 3-25.
6
National Disability Authority paper to Oireachtas Committee on Education and Skills Dec 2010
Table 2 - Integration Outcomes Along a Continuum of Studies with Strong and Weak Designs
Studies from strong to weak
Esposito & Koorland (1989)
Field, Roseman, DeStefano & Koewler (1981)
Hecimovic, Fox, Shores & Stain (1985)
Martin, Brady & Williams (1991)
Stain (1984)
Beckman & Kohl (1984)
Guralnick (1981)
Jenkins, Speltz & Odom (1985)
Jenkins, Odom & Speltz (1989)
Vandell, Anderson, Erhardt & Wilson (1982)
Beckman & Kohl (1987)
Fenrick, Pearson & Pepelnjak (1984)
Cole, Mills, Dale & Jenkins (1991)
Soderhan & Whiren (1985)
Guralnick and Groom (1988)
Garden-Smith & Fowler (1983)
Fewell & Oelwein (1990)
Novak, Olley & Kearney (1980)
Rulw, Stowitschek, Innocenti, Steifel, Killoran, Swezey & Boswell (1987)
Federlein, Lessen-Firestone & Elliot (1982)
Cooke, Ruskus, Apolloni & Peck (1981)
Harris Handleman, Kristoff, Bass & Gordon (1990)
Developmental
Outcomes
No difference
No difference
Social Behaviour
outcomes
Positive
Positive
Positive
Positive
Positive
Positive
Other behavioural
outcomes
No difference
Positive
Positive
Positive
Mixed
Mixed
No difference
Positive
Mixed
Positive
No difference
Positive
Positive
Positive
Mixed
No difference
Positive
No difference
Positive
No difference
Mixed
No difference
Source: Adapted from Buysse and Bailey (1993)
7
Positive
No difference
National Disability Authority paper to Oireachtas Committee on Education and Skills Dec 2010
The US literature is in general agreement that mildly disabled children can be included in
inclusive programmes quite easily, while children with moderate to severe disabilities
will require more "active programming"10 - i.e. additional supports and more
individualised instruction. This has led some of the leading researchers to caution against
too much focus on setting type at the expense of considering how interventions and
programmes meet the needs of individual children.11
The above findings need to be interpreted in an Irish context with some caution.
Inclusive pre-schools used in the US comparative literature tend to be exemplar settings
in terms of overall quality, e.g. model facilities attached to universities. Also, children
attending state funded pre-schools, who are assessed as having a disability or special
education need under Part B on the IDEA Act, have the right to supports required to
enable them to participate in state funded pre-school programmes. As local education
authorities are the lead agency for administering supports to enable pre-schoolers (3 5) to participate in education, service delivery structures have tended to develop from
existing school-age special education support systems.
The role of overall setting quality and support provision will be discussed in more detail
below. However, it is possible to conclude that several decades of US research shows
that outcomes for children with disabilities in good quality inclusive pre-school settings,
which have access to appropriate supports, are at least as good as for their peers
attending specialist settings.
What conditions and supports are necessary for successful
inclusive pre-school programmes?
Quality of early education
There is a large body of research literature on the importance of individual factors that
contribute to the quality in early education and care settings. To summarise, there is
generally agreement that what constitutes quality is lower children to adult ratios, the
education level of staff, class sizes and salaries of staff,12,13. One key study, which is very
10
Buysse, B., & Bailey, D.B. (1993), Behavioural and development outcomes in young children with
disabilities in integrated and segregated settings: a review of comparative studies. Journal of Special
Education 26, 434 - 461
11
Bricker, D. (1995). The challenge of inclusion. Journal of Early Intervention, (19) 179-194.
12
Cost, Quality, and Outcomes Study Team. (1995). Cost, quality, and child outcomes in child care
centers: Key findings and recommendations. Young Children, 50, 40-44; Vandell, D., L., & Wolfe., B
(2000); Child Care Quality: Does It Matter and Does It Need to be Improved?
http://aspe.hhs.gov/hsp/ccquality00/ccqual.htm; Barnett, W. S. (2008). Preschool education and its lasting
effects: Research and policy implications. Boulder and Tempe: Education and the Public Interest Centre &
Education Policy Research Unit. http://epicpolicy.org/publication/preschooleducation; Barnett, S.W &
Ackerman, D.J., (2006) Costs, Benefits, and Long-Term Effects of Early Care and Education Programs:
Recommendations and Cautions for Community Developers Community Development: Journal of the
Community Development Society. 37 (2)
8
National Disability Authority paper to Oireachtas Committee on Education and Skills Dec 2010
frequently cited in the research literature found that there is great variation in preschool quality across and within states but that they were medium to poor on average.14
Parent and stakeholder perceptions of inadequate overall programme quality have been
identified as a major barrier to the development of inclusive programmes.15
Programmes scoring poorly on standardised quality measures are seen as likely to be
inappropriate settings to attempt to include children at risk of poor educational and
social outcomes,16 including children with disabilities and special education needs.17 That
said, some of the limited research comparing quality in segregated and inclusive early
childhood education and care settings using the same instrument shows that the average
quality ratings are in fact broadly similar ("moderately good") in both setting types,18
while other research has found that overall programme quality is moderately better in
inclusive settings.19
The majority of the research on the impact of quality early education and care on
outcomes looks at group quality and group outcomes or group experience. However,
there is limited research on the effect of global classroom quality, (i.e. the quality of the
education offered to all children), on the experience of individual children with
disabilities. This research shows that global classroom quality is the greatest single
predictor of the quality experience of an individual child with a disability but that
presence in a high quality class itself does not ensure a good quality experience for an
individual child.20
13
There are a number of quality rating scales which have been widely deployed across the US.
Infant/Toddler Environment Rating Scale (Harms, Cryer, & Clifford, 1990); Preschool Assessment of the
Classroom Environment Scale-Revised (Raab & Dunst, 1997); Early Childhood Environment Rating ScaleRevised (Harms, Clifford, & Cryer, 1998); Practices in Early Elementary Classrooms (Hemmeter, Maxwell,
Ault, & Schuster, 1997).
14
Peisner-Feinberg, E., Burchinal, M. (1997). Concurrent relations between child care quality and child
outcomes: The study of cost, quality, and outcomes in child care centers. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 43 ,
451-477.
15
Buysse, V., Wesley, P., W., Keyes, L (1998) Implementing Early Childhood Inclusion Barrier and Support
Factors. Early Childhood Research Quarterly 13 (1)
16
Burchinal, M.R., & Cryer, D. (2003) Diversity, child care quality, and development outcomes. Early
Childhood Research Quarterly, 18, 401 - 426 ; Loeb, Fuller, Kagen & Carroll, 2004 Peisner-Feinberg &
Burchinal 1997
17
Bricker, D,. (2001) The Natural Environment: A Useful Construct? Infants and Young Children 13 (4)
18
La Paro, K. M., Sexton, D., & Snyder, P. (1998) Program quality characteristics in segregated and
inclusive early childhood settings. Early Childhood Research Quarterly. 13 (1)
19
Knoche, L., Peterson, C. A., Edwards, C. P., & Jeon, H. J. (2006). Child care for children with and
without disabilities: The provider, observer and parent perspectives. Early Childhood Research Quarterly,
(21) 93-109
20
Clawson, C., & Luze, G., (2008) Individual Experiences of Children With and Without Disabilities in
Early Childhood Settings. Topic in Early Childhood Special Education 28 (3)
9
National Disability Authority paper to Oireachtas Committee on Education and Skills Dec 2010
Other research, which looked at the association of various factors with inclusive preschool practices, found that disability specific training of centre managers and teachers
had a greater association with inclusion than any of the individual elements associated
with overall quality.21
The above findings notwithstanding, some researchers have raised questions about
whether global quality standards and measures are subtle enough to measure good
quality inclusion.22 In this regard, it should be noted that 5 of the 14 US states that have
fully mandated a state-wide early education and care Quality Rating and Improvement
System23 have included standards which specifically address the needs of children with
disabilities in their suite of standards.24 Also, in both the US and Canada instruments
have been developed to specifically measure the quality of inclusion in early education
and care settings.25
Conditions and supports required in addition to overall quality
There is agreement in the inclusive pre-school literature that overall programme quality
is absolutely necessary for successful inclusion but that it is not sufficient.26 A much cited
study by Lieber et al highlighted the elements which they found to be most important to
developing inclusive programmes at the service level.27

Support from key personnel Buy in from regional administrators or centre
managers was found to be key to initiating inclusive practices.

Shared vision All stakeholders involved in delivering an early education services
having a clear understanding of how inclusion would be facilitated.

State and national policies Part B has been implemented differently in different
states with some states ensuring that all children with disabilities are educated with
their typically developing peers.

Training and external support Training in inclusive early education and exposure
of programme staff to successful inclusion programmes
21
Essa, E. L. Bennett, P.R., Burnham, M.M. Martin, Sally, S.S. Bingham, A., Allred., K (2008) Do Variables
Associated with Quality Child care Programs Predict the Inclusion of Children with Disabilities; Topics in
Early Childhood Special Education 28 (3)
22
Gallagher, P. A. & Lambert, R. G. (2006) Classroom quality, concentration of children with special
needs, and child outcomes in head start. Exceptional Children 73 (1)
23
This should not be confused with minimum licensing and health and safety standards.
24
Buysse, V. & Hollingsworth, H. L. (2009). Program quality and early childhood inclusion.
Recommendations for professional development. Topics in Early Childood Special Education 29 (2)
25
The Quality of Inclusive Experiences Measure (QuIEM; Wolery, Brashers, Pauca, & Grant, 2000); Irwin,
S.H. (2005) SpeciaLink Child Care Inclusion Practices Profiles and Principles Scale. The National centre for
Child Care Inclusion. http://www.specialinkcanada.org/home_en.html
26
Note that Essa et al show that a variety of settings include children
27
Lieber, J., Hanson, M.J., Beckman, P.J., ODOM, S.L., Sandall, S.R., Schwartz I.S., Horn, E, & Wolery, R.
(2000) Key influences on the initiation and implementation of inclusive preschool Programs. Exceptional
Children 67 (1) 83 - 98
10
National Disability Authority paper to Oireachtas Committee on Education and Skills Dec 2010

Organisational structure
At a service level this involves agreeing a structure where early childcare special
education teachers (often peripatetic posts in the US) communicate early
education service staff and with parents
 At a regional level, interagency agreements between early education services and
agencies providing special education or therapy inputs
The National Early Childhood Technical Assistance Centre28 has identified the
conditions necessary for inclusion at the classroom level to allow staff to individualise
instruction to meet the needs of children with disabilities and special education needs.
These conditions include the following:


Teachers need to have training about teaching individualised goals in ongoing
activities and about children with disabilities.

Teachers needs frequent assistance from specialists and experts, which involves the
specialist observing the class, providing suggestions, showing the teacher how to use
interventions, and giving feedback.

Teachers needs regular time to talk with specialists and plan activities and
interventions.

The child-to-staff ratio must be low, either by reducing the number of children or
adding in-class adult assistance.

Teachers need to use individualised intervention strategies for the children with
disabilities and monitor the child's progress frequently and adjust the strategies as
needed.

The class should have adequate space, equipment, and materials and be accessible to
the child with disabilities.

Parental participation should be encouraged and welcomed
Is there detailed information in the research literature on ideal staff to child
ratios in inclusive settings?
There is data on the maximum child to staff ratios required by states for licensing
mainstream pre-school settings. For example:

23 states require a child:staff ratio of 10:1 for 3-year-olds. An additional 9 states
require 9:1 or lower
28
NECTAC is the national early childhood technical assistance centre supported by the U.S. Department
of Education's Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) under the provisions of the Individuals with
Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). NECTAC serves Part C-Infant and Toddlers with Disabilities Programs
and Part B-Section 619 Preschool Programs for Children with Disabilities in all 50 states and 10
jurisdictions to improve service systems and outcomes for children and families. NECTAC and its
predecessor have thirty-nine years of technical assistance excellence in early childhood services.
11
National Disability Authority paper to Oireachtas Committee on Education and Skills Dec 2010

17 states require a child:staff ratio for four-year-olds of 10:1

15 states require a child:staff ratio for five-year-olds of 15:1. An additional 7 states
require ratios of 10:1 or lower29
However, there is not an ideal ratio for inclusive settings identified in the research
literature in the sense of an identified ratio being demonstrated to be ideal for all
children with disabilities. In fact the legislative framework which has underpinned the
push towards inclusive early education and care is very much framed in terms of
individualised supported solutions being decided on by a multidisciplinary team on a
case-by-case basis. The nature of supports provided also varies from state to state and
can also vary from one Local Education Agency to the next.
The above comments not withstanding, much of the literature on the child development
and social outcomes accounted for by early childhood care and education - particularly
for those at risk of poor educational and social outcomes - is based on a number
longitudinal studies of targeted early education programmes which had an overall child
to staff ratio of 1:6.30 In one comparative study by Holahan and Costenbader, there was
a child to staff ratio in segregated settings of 1:4 and 1:5 in inclusive settings31. In Buysee
and Bailey, 9 of the 22 studies reviewed reported on staff ratios, 6 were similar across
both setting types (mean 1:4.6) though others had differences as great as 1:3 versus
1:20.32 Buysse, Skinner and Grant studied 19 inclusive programmes found a mean child
to staff ratio of 1:6 and a range of 1:4 to 1:9.33
A study by Le Paro, Sexton & Synder34 of 29 segregated settings and 29 inclusive settings
in one metropolitan area found a child to staff ratio of 1:2 and 1:8 respectively. This
study found that there was no major difference in quality between the two settings
types despite the differences in child to adult ratios but noted that this finding, which is
at odds with much of the earlier research, may represent a convergence in practices
across setting types.
29
National Child Care Information Center. Child Care Center Licensing Regulations: Child:Staff Ratios
and Maximum Group Size Requirements in 2007. http://nccic.acf.hhs.gov/pubs/cclicensingreq/ratios.html
30
Barnett, W. S. (2008). Preschool education and its lasting effects: Research and policy implications.
Boulder and Tempe: Education and the Public Interest Centre & Education Policy Research Unit.
http://epicpolicy.org/publication/preschooleducation
31
Holahan, A., & Costenbader, V. (2000) Comparison of Developmental Gains for Preschool Children
with Disabilities in Inclusive and Self-Contained Classrooms; Topics in Early Childhood Special Education
October. 20 (4)
32
Buysse, B., & Bailey, D.B. (1993), Behavioural and development outcomes in young children with
disabilities in integrated and segregated settings: a review of comparative studies. Journal of Special
Education 26, 434 - 461
33
Buysse, V., & Skinner, D., & Grant, S. (2001). Toward a definition of quality inclusive child care:
Perspectives of parents and practitioners. Journal of Early Intervention, 24 (2)
34
La Paro, K. M., Sexton, D., & Snyder, P. (1998) Program quality characteristics in segregated and
inclusive early childhood settings. Early Childhood Research Quarterly. 13 (1)
12
National Disability Authority paper to Oireachtas Committee on Education and Skills Dec 2010
The next phase of the work looking at policy in individual jurisdictions will examine
further this issue of the staff ratio, and any differences in staff ratios or resources where
a child with a disability is in a pre-school class.
Is there information in the research literature on how special education or
therapy supports are delivered to children with disability or their teacher /
carer in inclusive settings?
No, not in the sense that there is an identified model of best practice identified in the
literature in terms of linking a single teaching strategy to best outcomes. States
implement and administer the requirements of interagency cooperation under Part B
and C of IDEA differently. There are some studies in the literature which describe some
of the working models across a number of US regions, which will be discussed below.
Generally, there appears to be an acceptance that much of the intervention for children
with disabilities (support and guidance from specialists) can be blended into the activities
naturally occurring in the classroom but that some specialised activities may be required.
The balance of these two approaches will depend on the particular child concerned.35
As table 3 below shows Pre- Elementary Education Longitudinal Study (PEELS) data does
provide some insight into the overall picture how additional interventions are provided
to children with disabilities in the US.36
35
Odom, S.L. (2000) Preschool Inclusion: What we know and where we go from here. Topics in
Earlyhood Special Education 20 (1); Frea, W., Craig-Unkefer, L., Odom, S.L., & Johnson, D. (1999)
Differential Effects of Structured Social Integration and Group Friendship Activities for Promoting Social
Interaction With Peers Journal of Early Intervention 1999 22 (3)
36
Markowitz, J., Strohl,J., & Sheri Klein Characteristics of Educational Services and Providers. Markowitz,
J., Carlson, E., Frey, W., Riley, J., Shimshak, A., Heinzen, H., Strohl, J., Lee, H., and Klein, S. (2006).
Preschoolers’ Characteristics, Services, and Results: Wave 1 Overview Report from the Pre- Elementary
Education Longitudinal Study (PEELS)
13
National Disability Authority paper to Oireachtas Committee on Education and Skills Dec 2010
Table 3 - Percentage of preschoolers and kindergarteners with disabilities
ages 3–5 whose IEP goals and objectives were addressed in regular classes
using various service delivery models: School year 2003–04
Total
Not applicable – the child is not in a regular education classroom.
Not applicable – this child’s IEP goals are not addressed in the regular education
classroom; they are addressed elsewhere.
The special education teacher or aide works individually with the child on special tasks.
The regular education teacher or aide works individually with the child on special tasks.
Related services personnel work individually with the child on special tasks.
Related services personnel work with the child in group activities.
The goals and objectives are embedded in common classroom activities.
5.0
14.4
10.5
9.8
12.4
39.3
8.5
Source: Markowitz, J., Strohl,J., & Sheri Klein Characteristics of Educational Services and Providers.
Markowitz, J., Carlson, E., Frey, W., Riley, J., Shimshak, A., Heinzen, H., Strohl, J., Lee, H., and Klein, S.
(2006). Preschoolers’ Characteristics, Services, and Results: Wave 1 Overview Report from the PreElementary Education Longitudinal Study (PEELS)
How are additional supports organised at a system level
A study by Odom et al reviewed 16 programmes, representing an approximate national
diversity pattern in terms of geography, socio-economic indicators, culture etc, etc,
across four states.37 This study categorised and described the diversity of inclusive
service models - as shown in table 4 below - but did not measure the relationship
between the different models and different group outcomes.
37
Odom, S. L., Horn, E. M., Marquart, J., Hanson, M. J., Wolfberg, P., Beckman, P. J., Lieber J., Li, S.,
Schwartz, I., Janko, S., Sandall, S. (1999). On the forms of inclusion: Organizational context and
individualized service models. Journal of Early Intervention, 22 (3), 185-199.
14
National Disability Authority paper to Oireachtas Committee on Education and Skills Dec 2010
Table 4 - Models of individualised services in inclusive preschool settings
Models of Individualised Services
Peripatetic TeachingDirect
Service Model
Peripatetic TeachingCollaborative/
Consultative
Model
Team Teaching Model
Early Childhood
Teacher
Model
Early Childhood
Special
Education
Integrative/Inclusion
Activities
Services are provided on a regular basis in early childhood education settings by
special education teachers and related service personnel. Peripatetic special
education teachers or other related service personnel visit the settings rather
than being housed there permanently. Educational or therapy goals for individual
children are not systematically embedded in the curriculum activities or
classroom routines by these specialists.
Special education teachers and related services personnel work with the early
childhood teacher to systematically embed individualized educational goals for
children in curriculum activities and classroom routines.
An early childhood teacher and a special education teacher both occupy teacher
roles in the same classroom. They may collaborate in planning, jointly implement
educational activities, and share classroom space. Related services are provided
in the setting.
An early childhood teacher assumes the primary responsibility for planning,
implementing, and monitoring classroom activities for children with and without
disabilities in his or her classroom with little contact with other special
education or related services personnel.
An early childhood special education teacher assumes primary responsibility for
planning, implementing, and monitoring classroom activities with little contact or
collaboration with an early childhood education teacher. Children without
disabilities are brought into the classroom.
Children with disabilities and children without disabilities spend a majority of the
day in separate classes but participate in joint activities for a portion of the day,
then return to their respective classrooms. The majority of special education
and related services are provided in the separate classroom
Source: Adapted from Odom, S.,L et al (1999) On Forms of Inclusion: Organizational Context and
Individualised Service Models. Journal of Early Intervention 22 (3)
Are therapies delivered in or out of class rooms?
Individual studies show that therapeutic supports in inclusive early education and care
settings are delivered along a continuum of approaches ranging from segregated (out-ofclass) to integrated (in-class) and there is no conclusive evidence outcomes for either
approach but there is a professional ethical preference for in-class delivery among many
practitioners.38 Parents and professionals see regular communication between classroom
teachers and therapists as crucial to effective inclusive experience.39 In this regard it has
been shown that when therapies are delivered in-class they lead to four times as much
38
McWilliam, R.A. (1996) Rethinking pull-out services in early intervention: a professional resource.
Brookes: Baltimore
39
Scott, S., McWilliam, R. A., & Mayhew, L. (1999). Integrating therapies into the classroom. Young
Exceptional Children 2 (3)
15
National Disability Authority paper to Oireachtas Committee on Education and Skills Dec 2010
communication between therapist and mainstream early educators as they do as when
therapy is delivered out-of-class.40
A much cited study of inclusion of children with significant disabilities showed that
majority of therapy supports were delivered in-class.41 Moreover therapists who
delivered out-of-class sessions only did so because time constraints or the intensity of
the therapy required it. Therapists who opted for out-of-class interventions provided
instructions or demonstrations for regular classroom teacher for strategies for
curriculum and daily routines.42 However, this study was based on a very small sample
size.
Is there information the research literature on challenges of interagency and
interdisciplinary cooperation?
The main focus of the literature on interagency cooperation tends to focus on when the
child is making a transition from one system to another. For example, the transition
from early intervention service to publicly funded pre-school services administered by
Local Education Agencies. The IDEA legislation mandates that the lead agency for Part C
(early intervention services) collaborate and plan for children opting to transfer to Part
B preschool services (where the local education authority is the lead agency).
Nevertheless PEELS data and other sources suggest that these transitions have not
been without difficulties. 30% of children who had received early intervention services
had a gap between the end of Part C services and the beginning of preschool services.
The average gap in services was 4.6 months.43
The above comments notwithstanding, PEELS data shows the efforts which teachers or
programmes made to assist children with disabilities move across programmes. These
activities are covered in table 5 below.
40
Cross, A. F., Traub, E. K., Hutter-Pishgahi, L., & Shelton, G. (2004). Elements of successful inclusion for
children with significant disabilities. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education 24 (3)
41
ibid
42
ibid
43
Carlson, E & Shimshak, A. (2006) Transitions from Early Intervention to Preschool and Preschool to
Elementary School in Markowitz, J., Carlson, E., Frey, W., Riley, J., Shimshak, A., Heinzen, H., Strohl, J.,
Lee, H., and Klein, S. (2006). Preschoolers’ Characteristics, Services, and Results: Wave 1 Overview
Report from the Pre- Elementary Education Longitudinal Study (PEELS); Fowler, S. A., Donegan, M.,
Lueke, B., Hadden, S., & Phillips, B. (2001). Community collaboration in writing interagency agreements on
the age 3 transition: An evaluation of the content and process. Exceptional Children 67 (1)
16
National Disability Authority paper to Oireachtas Committee on Education and Skills Dec 2010
Table 5 - Percentage of preschoolers and kindergarteners with disabilities
ages 3–5 whose teachers or programs used various strategies to help
students transition into new schools, programs, or classrooms, by age
cohort: School year 2003–04
Activities undertaken
%
70.0
69.7
80.7
77.1
90.8
81.7
32.3
32.2
45.9
78.4
67.0
2.8
Received children’s previous records
Sending programs provided information about children
Provided parents with written information
Called the children’s parents
Parents/guardians encouraged to meet new staff
Children’s families visited the classroom or school
Visited children’s home
Visited children’s previous settings
Met with staff of sending programs
Participated in children’s IEP development
Developed child-specific preparatory strategies
Other
Source: Adapted from PEELS Transitions from Early Intervention to Preschool and Preschool to
Elementary School Elaine Carlson and Amy Shimshak
In terms of interdisciplinary cooperation the main focus of the research is on the ability
of the various professionals to cooperate with each other in the classroom. As
mentioned above collaborative teamwork is seen as one of the most important
elements of successful pre-school inclusion.44 One much-cited study showed that
inclusive preschool failures (settings that re-segregated after being inclusive for a period)
were more likely to be a result of conflict relating to a adult roles than outcomes for
children with and without disabilities.45
By their nature, inclusive pre-schools require significant levels of cooperation between
mainstream early education and care professionals. One study which sought to examine
factors which would mitigate against these conflicts identified two issues which would
contribute to enhancing cooperation. Firstly, settings where programme philosophy and
design was developed jointly by various professionals tended to be more successful.
Secondly, training for all professionals needed to be changed to reflect the reality of the
44
Hunt, P., G. Soto, J. Maier, N. Liboiron, and S. Bae. (2004) Collaborative Teaming to Support
Preschoolers With Severe Disabilities Who Are Placed in General Education Early Childhood Programs.
Topics in Early Childhood Special Education 24 (3); Guralnick, M., J. (Ed). (2001)Early Childhood inclusion:
Focus on Change. Baltimore: Brookes; Odom, S.L. (ed). (2002) Widening the Circle: Including Children
with Disabilities in Preschool Programmes. Teachers College Press: New York
45
Peck, C., Furman, G. & Helmstetter, E. (1993). Integrated early childhood programs: Research on the
implementation of change in organizational contexts. In Peck, C., Odom, S., & Bricker, D. (Eds.),
Integrating young children with disabilities into community programs: Ecological perspectives on research
and implementation. Baltimore: Brookes.
17
National Disability Authority paper to Oireachtas Committee on Education and Skills Dec 2010
modern inclusive classroom. In inclusive pre-school classes adults are likely to be coteaching for most or part of the day, though training rarely addresses this adult to adult
relationship. Special education personnel who are often working in a peripatetic or
consulting role in inclusive pre-schools are more likely to be coaching or instructing
other adults how to embed learning strategies than working with individual children
directly. As mentioned above, therapists tend not to engage in out-of-class sessions and
so are likely to have to work with the child with a disability within the context of a
group of typically developing peers. The various professional training routes have not
adequately responded to this new reality multi-professional collaboration.46
Is there research literature on issues relating to including children with
specific disabilities in inclusive settings?
As stated above the ability of early education teachers - with the assistance of special
education or therapy inputs - to embed developmentally appropriate learning
opportunities for the child with a disability into the daily routine of the classroom is key
successful inclusion. There is body of research covering the strategies for pre-school
inclusion for children with different disability types.47 This paper has not reviewed that
literature.
Is there information in the research literature on teacher education?
PEELS provides comprehensive data on the education levels (shown in table 6 below) of
these delivering pre-school services to children with disabilities. However, this data is
not broken down by inclusive versus segregated settings. The breakdown of qualification
by discipline raises question about how representative these figures are of mainstream
inclusive preschool settings.
46
Lieber, J., Beckman, P. J. , Hanson, M. J., Janko, S., Marquart, J. M., Horn, E and Odom, S. L.(1997) 'The
Impact of Changing Roles on Relationships between Professionals in Inclusive Programs for Young
Children', Early Education & Development, 8(1)
47
Antia, S. D., Kreimeyer, K. H., & Eldredge, N. (1993). Promoting social interaction between young
children with hearing impairments and their peers. Exceptional Children, 60, 262-275;
D’Allura, T. (2002). Enhancing the social interaction skills of preschoolers with visual impairments. Journal
of Visual Impairment and Blindness, 96, 576-584; DeKlyen, M., & Odom, S. L. (1989). Activity structure
and social interactions with peers in developmentally integrated play groups. Journal of Early Intervention,
13, 342-352; Lefebvre, D., & Strain, P. S. (1989). Effects of a group contingency on the frequency of social
interactions among autistic and nonhandicapped preschool children: Making LRE efficacious. Journal of
Early Intervention, 13, 329-341;
McEvoy, M. A., Nordquist, V. M., Twardosz, S., Heckaman, K., Wehby, J. H., & Denny, R. K. (1988).
Promoting autistic children’s peer interaction in an integrated early childhood setting using
affection activities. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 21, 193-200; Schwartz, I. S., Carta, J. J., & Grant,
S. (1996). Examining use of recommended language intervention practices in early childhood special
education classrooms. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 16(2); Stahmer, A. C., & Ingersoll, B.
(2004). Inclusive programming for toddlers with autistic spectrum disorders: Outcomes from the
Children’s Toddler School. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 6(2).
18
National Disability Authority paper to Oireachtas Committee on Education and Skills Dec 2010
Table 6 - Percentage of preschoolers with disabilities whose teachers
completed various educational degrees by level and qualification: School year
2003–04
Qualification level
High school diploma or GED
Associate degree
Bachelor’s degree
Graduate degree
Qualification discipline
Special education
Early childhood special education
Elementary/secondary education
Early childhood education
Speech or language pathology
Child development
Other
%
2.9
4.9
37.6
54.6
%
35.8
31.3
30.7
28.1
17.1
7.3
16.1
Source: Adapted from PEELS Transitions from Early Intervention to Preschool and Preschool to
Elementary School Elaine Carlson and Amy Shimshak
Other studies - which are admittedly based on far smaller sample sizes - in the research
literature do provide a picture of educational qualifications in mainstream inclusive preschool settings. For example, a survey by Knoche et al (2007) had a sample size of
2,02248 across four states compared training and experience status of providers in
inclusive and non-inclusive settings. Table 7 provides an overview of experience, salaries
and training across both setting types. The finding that specific child development
training is greater in inclusive settings is statistically significant at p<.01.
48
2496 providers were drawn randomly from an initial pool of 39,473 licensed and subsidy receiving
providers.
19
National Disability Authority paper to Oireachtas Committee on Education and Skills Dec 2010
Table 7 - Description of providers by inclusion status
% of providers who reported
5 or more years experience
Annual income of at least
$20, 000
CDA^
Specific child development
training
First aid training in last 2
years
CPR training in last 2 years
BA degree of higher
Teacher certificate
Inclusion status
Non-inclusive %
(n 1,294)
43.7
13.7
Inclusive %
(n 728)
44.4
20.6
Odds
ratio
1.20
1.77
95% confidence
interval
(0.65, 2.22)
(0.81, 3.88)
9.8
58.5
18.9
73.9
1.01
2.84**
(0.45, 2.24)
(1.30, 6.18)
80.3
89.1
1.40
(0.56, 3.47)
77.7
12.5
8.3
89.7
19.9
17.7
1.33
1.10
1.43
(0.53, 3.33)
(0.51, 2.33)
(0.61, 3.34)
^ CDA (Child Development Credential) is a competency-based, nationally-recognized credential awarded
by the Council for Professional Recognition in Washington, DC.
** p<.01
Source: Knoche et al (2007)
As mentioned above, Essa et al found that centre directors and teachers having
disability-specific coursework was the most robust predictor of inclusion when
compared to other factors associated with quality including having an early childhood
education qualification.49
Is there evidence in the research literature that children with
disabilities are at a risk of isolation or rejection in inclusive preschools?
Yes. One of the most replicated findings in the research literature is that children with
disabilities engage in social interaction less than typically developing peers in inclusive
early education and care settings.50 Children with disabilities are also at a greater risk of
peer rejection than typically developing peers.51 More recent research suggests that
49
Essa, E. L. Bennett, P.R., Burnham, M.M. Martin, Sally, S.S. Bingham, A., Allred., K (2008) Do Variables
Associated with Quality Child care Programs Predict the Inclusion of Children with Disabilities; Topics in
Early Childhood Special Education 28 (3)
50
Guralnick, M.J. (1980) Social Interaction among preschool handicapped children. Exceptional Children
46 248 - 253; Guralnick, M.J. O' Connor, R.T. , Hammond, M.A., Gottman, J.M., & Kinnish, K. (1996)
Immediate effects of mainstreamed settings on the social interactions and social integration of preschool
children American Journal on Mental Retardation 100, 359 - 377; Kopp, C.B., Barker, B. L., & Brown,
K.W. (1992) Social skills and their correlates: Preschoolers with development delays. American Journal on
Mental Retardation. 96 357 - 367
51
Odom, S. L., Brown, W. H., Schwartz, I. S., Zercher, C., & Sandall, S. R. (2002). Classroom ecology and
child participation. In S. L. Odom (Ed.), Widening the circle: Including children with disabilities in
preschool programs (pp. 25–45). Teachers College Press: New York
20
National Disability Authority paper to Oireachtas Committee on Education and Skills Dec 2010
these findings may only apply to children with more severe disabilities.52 However, these
findings should not be confused with the finding that children with disabilities make
more progress on social and behaviour development in integrated pre-school settings,
which as discussed above, is a finding on which there is a high level of consensus on in
the literature.
However, the research also suggests that adult/ teacher strategies in the classroom can
mitigate against such an outcome. For example, research shows that a number of
strategies can increase the social interactions by children with disabilities in inclusive
settings, such as:

focusing on groups of children with and without disabilities rather than an individual
child with a disability53

creating peer buddy systems54

using mixed age groupings55

using a mix of environmental arrangements, peer-mediated instruction, incidental
teaching of social skills, friendship activities, social integration activities, and explicit
teaching of social skills56
Is there any evidence in the research literature of positive
outcomes for non-disabled children from inclusive pre-school
settings?
There is no evidence that typically developing children in inclusive classrooms have
lower outcomes than their peers in non-inclusive settings. In addition a number of
studies have shown that children without a disability participating in inclusive preschools scored higher in tests on positive attitudes towards people with disabilities and
social acceptance of people with disabilities57
52
Clawson, C., & Luze, G. (2008) Individual experiences of children with and without disabilities in early
childhood settings - Topics for Early Childhood Special Education 28 (3)
53
Hundert, J., Mahoney, B. and Hopkins, B., (1993) The relationship between the peer interaction of
children with disabilities in integrated preschools and research and classroom teacher behaviours. Topics
in Early Childhood Special Education. 13 (328 - 343)
54
English, K., Goldstein, H., Shafer, K. y Kaczmarck, L. (1997). Promoting Interactions among Preschoolers
with and without Disabilities: Effects of a Buddy Skills-Training Program. Exceptional Children, 63 (2)
55
Roberts, J.E. Burchinal, M.R. and Bailey, D.B. (1994) Communication among preschoolers with and
without disabilities in same and mixed aged classes. American Journal of Mental Retardation 99 (231 - 249)
56
Lau, C., Higgins, K., Gelfer, J., Hong, E., & Miller, S. (2005) The Effects of Teacher Facilitation on the
Social Interactions of Young Children During Computer Activities. Topics in Early Childhood Special
Education 25 (4)
57
Diamond, K. E., Hestenes, L. L., Carpenter, E. & Innes, F. K. (1997) Relationships between enrolment in
an inclusive classroom and preschool children’s ideas about people with disabilities,
Topics in Early Childhood Education, 17, 520–536; Favazza, P.C. & Odom, S.L. (1997) promoting Positive
Attitudes of Kindergarten-Age Children toward people with disabilities. Exceptional Children 63 405 - 418
21
National Disability Authority paper to Oireachtas Committee on Education and Skills Dec 2010
Is there robust information in the research literature on the costs
of inclusive pre-schools?
There are a few studies of costs which compare costs of placements for children with
disabilities in inclusive settings to segregated settings but there does not appear to be
any studies comparing the costs of disabled and non-disabled children in inclusive
settings.58 A brief summation of the available literature is that inclusive preschool places
are cheaper, but not significantly so, overall than segregated placements (and the costs
are also borne by different actors depending on placement type).59 The figures in Odom
et al (2001) were $ 3,312 or $ 5.99 per instructional hour per child in inclusive settings
and $3,928 or $6.28 per instructional hour per child in segregated settings.
Odom and Buysee (2006) looked at costs, quality and outcomes for inclusive settings.60
They looked at the costs for children with mild, moderate and severe disabilities.
Unsurprisingly they found that costs varied by between mild severity of disability on the
one hand, and moderate and severe severity, on the other (as table 8 below shows).
They also found that costs varied by setting type between blended and other settings
but that quality ratings were marginally higher, but not statistically significantly so, in the
most expensive setting type. The most expensive programme type (Blended) was
associated with inclusive classroom teachers having state-recognised teacher
qualifications. The cheapest programme type (Head Start) were characterised by
peripatetic special education teachers providing required inputs. As the standard
deviation from the mean costs is large it would advisable to treat the average figures
with caution.
58
Odom, S.L., Hanson, M. J., Lieber, J., Marquart, J., Sandall, S., Wolery., R., Horn., E., Schwartz, I.,
Beckman, P., Hikido, C., & Chambers, J. (2001) The Costs of Preschool Inclusion. Topics in Early
Childhood Special Education 21 (1); Odom, S. L. & Buysse, V Early Childhood Inclusion: Cost Quality and
Outcomes; http://www.nectac.org/~docs/calls/2006/preschoollre/cqo02-08-06.doc ; Odom, S. L., Parrish,
T., & Hikido, C. (2001). The costs of inclusion and noninclusive special education preschool programs.
Journal of Special Education Leadership, 14, 33-41
59
Odom, S.L., Hanson, M. J., Lieber, J., Marquart, J., Sandall, S., Wolery., R., Horn., E., Schwartz, I.,
Beckman, P., Hikido, C., & Chambers, J. (2001) The Costs of Preschool Inclusion. Topics in Early
Childhood Special Education 21 (1);
60
Odom and Buysee (2006) op cit
22
National Disability Authority paper to Oireachtas Committee on Education and Skills Dec 2010
Table 8 - Mean annual cost of inclusive pre-school place by severity of
disability
Degree of disability as
measured by the
ABILITIES index
Mild
Moderate
Severe
Mean cost per child
Standard deviation
$3,883
$8,717
$8,413
$2,711
$5,003
$6,085
Source: Odom and Buysse (2006)
Table 9 - Cost of annual preschool inclusion by programme type
Programme type
Blended
Community based
Head Start
Public School
Mean core cost
$10,541
$3,954
$3,123
$4,144
Standard deviation
$5,633
$2,042
$1,520
$2,223
Source: Odom and Buysse (2006)
Summary of findings from research literature

Preschool inclusion is increasingly a policy aim in advanced countries

Legislation mandating supports for children take place in Least Restrictive
Environments has very significantly increased the number of inclusive preschool
settings

Children with disabilities do at least as well developmentally in good quality inclusive
preschools as in segregated settings and make more gains in terms of social and
behavioural outcomes

Children without disabilities do no worse developmentally in inclusive settings and
score higher on tests relating to acceptance of people with disabilities

Children with more severe disabilities will need more "active programming" in either
setting

High overall programme quality is important factor in including children with
disabilities

Disability related education and training for preschool manager and teachers is
important to successful inclusion

Preschool inclusion requires therapy and special education inputs to be available to
early education and care settings. Ideally these are delivered in-class and early
education and care staff advised and supported to carry on intervention between
specialist visits
23
National Disability Authority paper to Oireachtas Committee on Education and Skills Dec 2010

The inter-agency and interdisciplinary cooperation required to make preschool
inclusion successful is challenging for professionals but collaborative planning, interagency agreements and training which recognises the requirement of adult-to-adult
cooperation in the classroom to in deliver inclusive preschool programmes can
mitigate this

Children with disabilities, and more severely disabled children in particular, have less
social interactions in the inclusive classroom than their typically developing peers
and are at greater risk of peer rejection than their typically developing peers.
Various strategies have been shown to mitigate this problem.

The information on costs is limited but it suggests that the costs in inclusive preschool settings vary be severity of disability and by programme structure. It also
shows that the costs of an inclusive pre-school place may be less than a similar place
in a segregated setting.
Issues for inclusive pre-school education highlighted in the
Irish policy and practice literature
One of the objectives of this background paper is to very briefly summarise the Irish
policy and practice literature. The primary source for identifying relevant Irish
publications was the CECDE publication Audit of Research on Early Childhood Care
and Education in Ireland 1990-2006.61 Details of the publications covered in table 10 are
contained in appendix 2. This literature is limited and of a mixed nature. There are some
statutory documents, there are literature and evidence reviews by a statutory body
(Centre for Early Childhood Development & Education). There are also a number of
reports, for the most part based on consultation with relevant stakeholders, that seek
to identify good practice and which provide an insight from those working on the
frontline in an Irish context. Table 10 below summarises this material.
As the table 10 demonstrates, there is a degree of consensus around the principal
elements of what needs to happen to support Irish pre-schools to be more inclusive.
There is an acknowledged need for training, for improved structures for inputs from
specialist personnel, for coordination of service provision, for a more child and familycentred approached to support delivery and for improved service quality.
61
CECDE (Walsh, T., & and Cassidy, P. (2007) Audit of Research on Early Childhood Care and Education
in Ireland 1990-2006
24
National Disability Authority paper to Oireachtas Committee on Education and Skills Dec 2010
Table 10 - Recommendations for inclusion in the Irish policy and practice literature
X
X
Dublin
X
Westmeath
Roscommon
D. Burns (NDA
Conference 2007)
X
X
DESSA
X
X
CECDE (2005)
CECDE (2004)
OECD Country
Note
National Childcare
Strategy
White Paper
Training
Accredited SEN training
Disability awareness training for childcare staff
Personnel
Area-based childcare inclusion facilitators
Multi-disciplinary teams should contain Special Ed teachers
Special ed teacher main link between childcare staff and multi
disciplinary
Develop information and support resources for childcare
providers / staff
Regular education intervention should begin from birth
Expand resource teacher service to children 0 - 4
Specialised teacher input for children with SEN
Lower staff ratios required for inclusive classes
Coordination of service inputs
Interagency co-ordinated
Link clusters of ECECs to specialist services
Key agency responsible for inclusion in childcare
NCSE and DoHC ensure that pre-school children have access
to multi-disciplinary team including special ed teachers
National system of early years services
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
25
X
X
X
X
X
National Disability Authority paper to Oireachtas Committee on Education and Skills Dec 2010
Dublin
Westmeath
Roscommon
D. Burns (NDA
Conference 2007)
DESSA
CECDE (2005)
CECDE (2004)
OECD Country
Note
National Childcare
Strategy
White Paper
Child and family centred
Individualised support
Child - / family- centred planning process
Support to adapt curriculum on the basis of needs
Multidisciplinary development of IEPs
Develop information and support for parents
Quality assurance
Support global quality improvements
External assessment of inclusion practices
Other system level changes
Develop national policy on inclusive childcare
Ringfenced budget for inclusion of children with additional
needs
Free universal access for all 3 year olds with special needs to
appropriate services
Priority enrolment
Development of special classes for disability sub-groups aged
3-4
Improved data systems
Other setting level changes
Referral and support for those with undiagnosed SEN
Greater focus on accessibility of premises and equipment
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
26
X
X
National Disability Authority paper to Oireachtas Committee on Education and Skills Dec 2010
Framework for the NDA to gather more detailed
administration and resources provision information
While there is a degree of consensus in the academic literature and to a certain extent
in the Irish policy and practice type literature about the type of things that need to
happen at the point of frontline service delivery to develop an inclusive pre-school
system, there is much less clarity about how this might be achieved from the point of
view of policy implementation and administration. For example, the literature would
seem to suggest that it should be possible to include children with disabilities in
mainstream pre-school services and get at least as good outcomes for marginally lower
costs. However, from a policymakers' and administrators' point of view, more detail is
needed about how the various administrative systems involved in delivering supports to
children in inclusive preschools can, in a coordinated way, release just enough resources
to meet the needs of individual children.
The academic literature, which is primarily focused on the efficacy of frontline service
delivery, is of limited use in this regard. To attempt to answer these questions the NDA
proposes to investigate a number of jurisdictions for the principal purpose of identifying
their relevant administration structures but also some relevant context information.62
Table 11 in appendix 1 proposes a set of questions aimed at capturing relevant
administrative structures.
62
The plan is to cover a US State, an English local authority, Norway, Finland, New Zealand and the
Netherlands
27
National Disability Authority paper to Oireachtas Committee on Education and Skills Dec 2010
Appendix 2
List of Irish Policy Documents cited in table 10 (pages 22 & 23
above)
Burns, D, 2007, Continuing the Integration of Preschool Children with a Mild and
Moderate Intellectual Disability Into Community Preschools: Support and Resource
Requirements. Presentation to the NDA conference 2007
Centre for Early Childhood Development and Education (CECDE), 2005, Early Years
Provision for Children from Birth to Six Years with Special Needs in Two Geographical
Areas in Ireland
Centre for Early Childhood Development and Education (CECDE), 2004, Making
Connections - A Review of International Policies, Practices and Research Relating to
Quality in Early Childhood Care and Education
Department of Education and Science, 1999, Ready to learn. White paper on early
childhood education
Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, 1999, National Childcare Strategy:
Report of the Partnership 2000 Expert Working Group on Childcare
Dublin City Childcare Focus Group, 2004, Accessible Childcare for All: A study of
access to early years services for children and parents with additional needs Dublin
North West area.
OECD, 2004, Ireland Country Note. Department of Education and Science (2004)
OECD Thematic Review of Early Education and Care Policy in Ireland
Roscommon County Childcare Committee,2008, A model of best practice for the
inclusion of children with special needs and/or disability into mainstream pre-school
services (An Evaluation)
Westmeath County Children Committee, 2004, including Children with Special Needs
in Mainstream Childcare.
28
National Disability Authority paper to Oireachtas Committee on Education and Skills Dec 2010
Background Paper 2 - Review of the role of Special
Education Schools and Classes – NDA response to NCSE
questionnaire
Review of the role of Special Education Schools and Classes
Questions for discussion
Given the provisions of the EPSEN Act and in particular the commitment to the
inclusive education (Section 2) the following questions arise.
1. Should special schools continue to exist as part of the continuum of provisions
for pupils with special education.
Firstly, the NDA believes that the evidence base strongly supports the policy objective
of inclusive education. The weight of the research evidence, supports the view that on
average children with disabilities and special education needs do better in mainstream
settings than in segregated settings, and that children from across the spectrum of
disabilities have been successfully included in mainstream settings, However, the NDA
also acknowledges that the evidence base shows that due to a range of factors disability-related factors, individual and family related factors, school related factors and
supports provided - not all children with disabilities and special education needs do
better in mainstream settings63.
63
Significant reviews of the literature tend to find mixed though overall positive findings on the effects of
inclusion for students with special education needs compared to special settings. Though the literature
reviewed in these reviews also points out that there are major gaps in the evidence base around the
effects of how inclusive teaching practices is implemented and why and how certain factors mean that
inclusion better for some children then other. See for example: Baker. E.T., Wang, M.C. and Walberg, H.J.
(1995) The Effects of Inclusion on Learning., Educational Leadership, 52 (4); Lipsky, D. K. & Gartner, A
(1996) Inclusion, school restructuring and the remaking of American society, Harvard Education Review,
66 (4); Ruijs, N.M. & Peetsma, T.D. (2009) Effects of inclusion on students without special educational
needs reviewed, Educational Research Review, 4.
Generally, the research literature points out generally positive effects of inclusion are more likely to hold
true for children with less severe disabilities. However, in a review of the available studies on the effects
of inclusion on children with severe disabilities Hunt and Goetz found that on balance the evidence
suggests that children with severe disabilities can benefit from inclusion. The authors of the review do
however acknowledge that the available evidence base is largely based on small scale children and used
diverse methods. Hunt, P & Goetz, L (1997) Research on inclusive educational programs and practices,
and outcomes for students with severe disabilities, Journal of Special Education 33 (1).
In recent years large scale longitudinal data sets, which allow comparisons across instructional setting and
/ or model types, have become available. The PRIMA cohort studies in the Netherlands and SEELS data
form the USD in particular stand out. Studies based on the PRIMA data largely substantiate earlier findings
that children do no worse in inclusive settings and overall do better academically. However to date
29
National Disability Authority paper to Oireachtas Committee on Education and Skills Dec 2010
It should be borne in mind that the vast majority of the evidence base comparing the
benefits of inclusive education compared to segregated education is only a decade and
half old. As the research evidence base (international and ideally Irish research too)
continues to untangle the individual and school related factors which contribute to a
minority of children not doing as well in mainstream settings it should allow Irish policy
makers and educators to make supports in inclusive settings more flexible and targeted.
Given what the evidence on outcomes for children with special education need and the
limitations of that evidence base there are many questions about the efficacy of different
models of provisions that we don’t have a strong evidence to answer at present. In
answering Question 20 below we provide views on what changes need to take place in
mainstream schools to foster better outcomes for children with special education
needs. However, understanding how well mainstream schools overall, mainstream
teaching practices, additional special education supports in mainstream classes are
performing and how they might be improved holds many of the answers to what role
special schools should be performing in the coming years. The NDA therefore believes
that the answers to many of the questions in this survey cannot be addressed separately
from addressing the performance of mainstream schools to deliver good quality inclusive
education by way of research and reformed practice.
The focus of special education policy overall should therefore be:
o That all children are in mainstream classes for the maximum amount of time
per school day / week as is beneficial to their education and developmental
progress
o That improving the ability of mainstream teachers and schools to support
children with disabilities and special education needs continues
o That special school expertise and resources are used to the greatest extent
possible to supporting children with disabilities and special education needs
published studies analysing the PRIMA data have focused only on comparisons of children with less severe
disabilities. Peetsma, T. et al (2001) Inclusion in Education: Comparing pupils development in special and
regular education, Educational Review, 53 (2); Karsten, S. (2001) The Dutch policy of integration put to
the test: differences in academic and psychological development in pupils in special and mainstream
education, European Journal of Special Education 16 (3).
SEELS data also found that students with disabilities overall did better in both the academic and social
domains and that outcomes for children in the Cognitive and Severe Disability category had a less strong
association with inclusion in mainstream classes and that the relationship was more varied and complex
than for other groups of students with special education needs but that it was positive overall
nonetheless. Wagner, M & Blackorby, J (2007) What We Have Learned, in Office of Special Education
Programs U.S. Department of Education, What Makes a Difference? Influences on outcomes for students
with disabilities.
30
National Disability Authority paper to Oireachtas Committee on Education and Skills Dec 2010
to partake in inclusive settings to the maximum extent which is beneficial to
their education and developmental progress.
Until the evidence base is stronger, and consequently supports in mainstream schools
are more individualised and flexible, education delivered on site in special schools is
likely to be required for some children for all or part of the week or for short, intensive
periods of the year. In time, as research demonstrates the efficacy of different forms of
supports in mainstream Irish schools, the NDA believes that special schools should be
supported to re-orientate their delivery model so that a major part of their core
function is to support children to access mainstream schools by delivering outreach
services and consultancy services to mainstream schools, supporting networks of
mainstream schools, delivering training and providing intensive placements. Ideally,
special schools will move to a centre of excellence type or resource centre model over
time. However, as the evidence base shows that a minority of children don’t do as well
in mainstream settings, any meaningful consideration of the future role special schools
needs to equally take into consideration what role mainstream schools can and should
play.
For now, in addition to directly supporting children with special education needs, the
role of special schools should be:
o To develop the capacity to provide centre of excellence supports to mainstream
schools
o To contribute to developing the evidence base around supporting students to
access mainstream schools for as much of the school week as they will benefit
from by collaborating with and building links with mainstream school and
research partners
o To support individual students to access mainstream schools for as much of the
week as possible by supporting dual enrolments type arrangements and intensive
placements
o To provide a safety net for those students whose development has not benefited
from a placement a mainstream setting (though ideally not for the whole week
and with the intention of supporting the student to re-access a mainstream
setting)
Special schools were set up as part of the primary schools system. As special schools
increasingly cater for children of post-primary age it is important that this function is
acknowledged and that access to post-primary curriculum is available to those students.
This will be discussed in more detail below.
The NDA observes that specialist education does not necessarily have to mean
segregated education. Reverse inclusion or reverse mainstreaming (bringing children
31
National Disability Authority paper to Oireachtas Committee on Education and Skills Dec 2010
without special needs into centres which previously catered for children with special
education needs only) has been used extensively as a mechanism to deliver inclusive
pre-school education in the US64. It has also been used by at least one special school in
Ireland. Given demographic and fiscal pressures, it may be worth further investigating
whether some special schools could become well resourced specialist but inclusive
schools. As will be taken up below in response to Question 20, some mainstream
schools have, over time, become centres of excellence in inclusion not in response to
national policy but because of interested parents, teachers, principals or boards of
managements. There are opportunities therefore to develop (or recognise) new models
of specialist but not segregated schools on the continuum of support.
In much of the NDA’s work we deal with adults with disabilities, their families and
carers and those who provide support to adults with disabilities. One frequent
comment about students who have graduated from special schools is that they can lack
certain independent living skills due to the sheltered and segregated nature of special
schools. A focus on developing independent living skills should be a focus of special
schools, particularly for older students.
2. What should the role of special schools be in the future?
The future goal of education policy for students with disabilities should be developing
evidenced based support systems to include all children with disabilities in mainstream
schools. The NDA acknowledges that progress towards this goal will need to be
incremental. Progress towards this goal would increasingly see special schools taking on
the role of centres of excellence to support mainstream provision.
3. Should special classes continue to exist as part of the continuum of provision for
pupils with special educational need?
&
4. What should the role of special classes in mainstream schools in the future with
particular regard to the principal of inclusive education as described in Section 2
of the Education for Persons with Special Educational Needs (EPSEN) Act
(Government of Ireland, 2004)?
NCSE research report65 shows that the numbers of students in special classes grew very
rapidly the 1970s and 1980s but that changes in special education provision in Ireland in
recent years – the introduction of the resource teacher model, and the introduction of
64
Carta, J.J. & Kong, N.Y. (2007) Trends and issues in interventions for preschoolers with development
disabilities. In Odom, S. et al Handbook of Development Disabilities
65
Ware, J et al (2009) Research Report on the Role of Special Schools and Classes in Ireland
32
National Disability Authority paper to Oireachtas Committee on Education and Skills Dec 2010
GAM - have meant that the proportion of children mild general learning disabilities has
decreased in recent years.
As Stevens’ research, cited in NCSE research report, shows the level of shared activities
between mainstream and special classes is low and has fallen over time. This raises
questions around whether or not special classes facilitate inclusion in practice. The
research literature in relation to development of students with disabilities doing better
on average in mainstream classes by and large refers to comparisons to special schools.
However, the US SEELS studies provide data on outcomes based on a number of
factors, including how much time is spent in mainstream classes. That data shows that
positive outcomes are associated with the percentage of time a student spent in
mainstream classrooms.
Therefore, there is a clear need for research in an Irish context comparing outcomes
for children with special education needs supported in different ways in mainstream
schools, including outcomes for those children placed in special classes.
The NDA does not believe that there is an evidence base to support children being in
segregated classrooms for almost the entire school week. As stated above the evidence,
though limited, suggests that children should be in mainstream classrooms with
appropriate supports for as much of the school day or week as they will benefit from.
At the level of the individual, child placement in a special class should be based on
documented evidence that continued inclusion in a mainstream class with appropriate
supports had / would lead to the child falling further behind his or her peers. Referral to
or placement in a special class should not be automatic for children with any type or
degree of disability. Pupils requiring some aspect of the curriculum to be delivered by
way of tuition in a special class should be included in the mainstream class for as much
of the rest of the school day or week as possible.
At the system level research comparing outcomes (academic and social) for children
supported appropriately in mainstream classes and those in special classes should play a
key role in determining the extent to which special class provision is maintained as part
of the continuum of supports. At present the research base to justify the continuation of
special classes is very small however that is not to say that research will not prove that
special classes do have a role on the continuum of supports for children with special
education needs.
Educating children up the age of 18 in special classes in mainstream primary schools is
not appropriate. Children with disabilities and special education needs should be
educated with their peers.
5. Which children should attend special schools and classes?
33
National Disability Authority paper to Oireachtas Committee on Education and Skills Dec 2010
As stated above, the research literature concludes that children on average do better in
mainstream settings more research is needed to untangle the reasons why a minority of
children with special education needs do not do as well in mainstream settings.
Therefore the focus of research and practice needs to be on developing the evidence
for how all children can be supported to participate in mainstream classes. While the
research literature does allow certain generalisations, such as those with less severe
disabilities are more likely to benefit from mainstream classes, it by in large does not
allow us to predict in the abstract which children will struggle in a mainstream class.
6. Who should have responsibility for making decisions regarding placements of
children with special education needs?
Clearly parents need to decide what is the best approach to the education of their child.
In order to facilitate parents making decisions principals, teachers and other
professionals involved in the assessment and referral process need to be committed to
adapting supports to suit the individual child. The IEP process as described in the NCSE
guidelines provides a good framework to do this. Given that the research supports the
view that on average children with special education needs do better in mainstream
settings, the focus should be adapting supports to keep children in mainstream
classroom for as much of the school week as possible.
7. How long should a child stay in special school/class?
As the research shows that on average children with special education needs do better
in mainstream settings, but that not all children make more progress in mainstream
classes, the length of time that a child should spend outside a mainstream class will
depend on a number of family & individual and school factors. This highlights a need for
a person centred approach and the need for more research to better understand the
needs of children with more complex disabilities.
What would be useful in an Irish context is greater clarity around how children are
declassified from special education and how their transition into mainstream classes, or
to spending more time in mainstream classes, is planned and supported.
8. Should special schools cater for specified categories of special education needs
or a broader / full range of special needs and what implications do changes in the
spectrum of special needs over time have in this regard?
The research literature shows that on average children with special education needs do
better in mainstream settings but that a minority of children with special education
needs do not do as well in mainstream settings. As a number of number of individual &
family and school-related factors result in this minority not doing as well in mainstream
settings there is insufficient research evidence to say which in advance what children will
not make progress in a mainstream class in advance. Certainly the evidence base for the
successful progress of children with less severe disabilities in mainstream classes is
stronger than it is for children with greater degrees of support needs.
34
National Disability Authority paper to Oireachtas Committee on Education and Skills Dec 2010
As the NCSE research states, the international trend is for special schools to cater for
children with more severe disabilities and more complex needs and that there is
certainly a perception among stakeholders that this is the case in Ireland. The impact of
this is that special schools will need to acquire or develop a more specialised skills set.
This will be true regardless of whether the special school model remains the same or
develops into a resource centre or centre of excellence model.
9. What issues arise in relation to the transfer of post-primary aged pupils to
special schools and how should that be addressed by the system.
As stated above all children should be facilitated to access the mainstream curriculum as
far as possible. The NCSE research report shows that many special schools offer very
limited access to mainstream post-primary curriculum. All post-primary aged children
who wish to should be supported to access mainstream curricula. This obviously will
have implications for the skills mix required in special schools. It may be that the most
effective way for students with special education needs to access mainstream curricula is
through collaboration with mainstream providers.
10. Should special classes cater for specified categories of special needs of a broader
/ full range of special needs?
As stated above the research base on the efficacy of special classes is too thin at present
to make strong conclusion about what categories of students would benefit from this
placement type more then from a placement in an inclusive setting.
11. What is the range and nature of supports required by children within special
schools and classes?
Child with special education needs and disabilities will require access to mainstream
teachers, subject specific teachers at post-primary level, special education expertise and
allied health professional inputs. Whether children are in mainstream classes, special
schools or special classes, individual planning by way of Part 2 or an IEP should
determine what supports an individual child needs and provide a framework for
coordinating these supports.
12. How can equitable access to the curriculum and certification options be made
available to pupils in special schools and classes?
As discussed above the issue of addressing the appropriate access to mainstream
curricula for post-primary students should be a priority. As mentioned above the
evidence suggests that in addition to placement in mainstream settings, receiving
mainstream curriculum instruction is positively related to outcomes for students with
disabilities (SEELS data). However, this would require a policy decision on the merits of
whether increased access to mainstream curriculum instruction would be achieved by
special schools acquiring the skills to offer post primary curricula, or by supporting post-
35
National Disability Authority paper to Oireachtas Committee on Education and Skills Dec 2010
primary children to access mainstream schools or a combination of both. If greater
levels of inclusion is the long term policy goal, then perhaps providing greater access to
mainstream curricula should be achieved though students being supported to access
mainstream schools.
13. What linkages are required between the delivery of Health and Education
supports?
Both the Individual Education Plans under the EPSEN Act 2004 and the Service
Statements under Part 2 of the Disability Act 2005 provide a mechanism for the
coordination of Health and Education supports. Obviously the deferral of the
implementation of the EPSEN Act 2004 and the deferral of the roll out of Part 2 to
school aged children means that less school aged children are receiving supports under
these frameworks than was anticipated. However, not insignificant numbers of children
with Part 2 service statements are now of school age and children have had IEPs
developed on a non-statutory basis in many schools. While there is a Cross-Sectoral
team of health and educational authorities planning the roll out of EPSEN and Part 2 to
school aged children at a national level we know relatively little about how these
mechanisms have facilitated cooperation between health and education at the level of
the individual child. Other countries that the NDA looked at as part of the six country
study of contemporary disability services had a variety of mechanisms to drive
cooperation of required by similar mechanisms such as inter-agency agreements, joint
regional management meetings, regular joint plan review meetings conducted by
frontline staff and examples of where information technology has been used to enhance
cooperation of all staff working with a from different organisations.
14. Is there a need to review the structuring and funding of service delivery to
children in special schools
&
15. What model should be in place for resourcing special schools and classes?
There is relatively little research done on what makes up the cost of special school and
class provision in Ireland and how the costs of special provision compare to inclusive
provision in Ireland. This work has been done elsewhere, notably in the US, and
unsurprisingly shows that segregated provision is more expensive than inclusive
provision. As these studies don’t control for level of need the cost ratios are of limited
use, though the data gathered under the Resource Cost Model framework showing
what factors contributed to special education costs may be useful in considering an
36
National Disability Authority paper to Oireachtas Committee on Education and Skills Dec 2010
appropriate resource allocation model for special education schools and classes in
Ireland66.
What may be more useful in considering how fit for purpose the current Irish resource
allocation model is, is the work of the Center for Special Education Finance (US) and in
particular the Criteria for the Design of a State Special Education Funding Formula.
These Criteria are based on the finding that State funding schemes for special education
produce different outcomes because they produce different incentives for local districts
to pursue mainstreaming. The Criteria provide a framework to reduce incentives for
segregated settings to avoid promoting mainstreaming. Therefore, if we see a future role
for special schools and classes as supporting children to be in inclusive classes for as
much of the school / day or week as they would benefit from, we will need to look at
how the funding system can drive that. The work of the Center for Special Education
Finance would be instructive in this regard and contact with the Centre might prove to
be useful in developing the Policy Advice paper67.
16. What should the professional qualifications of the teaching staff in special schools
and classes?
Ideally all teaching staff in special schools and classes would have relevant teaching
qualifications and additional special education qualifications. Having additional
qualifications in special education needs may be even more relevant in the situation
where special schools begin to move towards providing more supports to mainstream
schools. For example, part of the transition from a special school model to a resource
centre model in Norway involved staff being required to upskill and being given a paid
time-limited opportunity to do so. Certainly any move from a special school model to a
centre of excellence or resource centre model in Ireland would need to consider the
skills that would be required to deliver the new model and provide opportunities for
existing staff to upskill in order to be part of the new service delivery model.
17. How many special schools should there be and where should they be?
The answer to this question is largely dependent on the future model of special schools
that Ireland develops in the coming years. Certainly, a resource centre or centre of
excellence model may require a smaller number of highly expert centres. The
Norwegian transfer to a resource centre model involved keeping only 20 centres
moving from being special schools to becoming resource centres. These centres have
66
Moore, M.T., Strang, E.W., Schwartz, M., & Braddock. M. (1988). Patterns in special education services
delivery and cost. Washington, DC: Decision Resources Corporation; Chaikind, S., Danielson, L. C. &
Brauen, M.L. (1993) What do we know about the costs of special education? A selected review - Journal
of Special Education, The Journal of Special Education. 26 (4)
67
Parrish, T (1994) Fiscal Issues in Special Education: Removing Incentives for Restrictive Placements.
Center for Special Education Finance. Policy Paper Number 4
37
National Disability Authority paper to Oireachtas Committee on Education and Skills Dec 2010
disability specific as well as region specific remits. It would certainly be instructive for
the current review to seek to understand the success or not of other jurisdictions
which have made the transition to models of service based on a smaller number of
centres providing more expert support to mainstream schools.
18. How can special schools act in a co-operative way with mainstream primary and
post-primary schools to provide enhanced service to pupils with special
educational needs and their parents? In particular is there potential for special
schools and mainstream schools to exchange expertise and services in relation
to the education of pupils with special education needs?
Again the answer to this question is largely dependent on the future model of service
provision that Ireland develops in the coming years. Certainly, other jurisdictions have
turned their special school system from a primarily centre-based segregated model to
primarily a mainstream support model in a relatively short space of time. Making this
transition would involve restructuring and upskilling of the special school sector but
would also demand restructuring of supports in mainstream schools. In short, there is
significant potential for special schools to develop a greater role in supporting the
inclusion of children with special needs in mainstream schools.
19. How is the term “dual enrolment” understood?
Dual enrolment is a form of cooperation mainstream and special schools where a child
is registered in both schools and attends both schools some of the time. The evidence
base for the efficacy of dual enrolment appears to be quite thin though that is not to say
that dual enrolment does not have positive benefits. There are obvious organisational
challenges to dual enrolment but any placement of children with significant special
education needs in mainstream classes will involve good planning and coordination.
Dual placements may be one way in which special schools could support students to
attend mainstream classes. Though the practice should be compared and evaluated
against other forms of support for inclusion.
20. What are the implications of inclusion for Mainstream Schools?
As stated at the outset, the evidence base supports the policy of inclusive education,
children from across the spectrum of special educational needs make progress in
mainstream classes though as of yet not all students do better in inclusive settings. The
research literature also shows that developing a whole school approach, teacher
attitude, teacher skills, the support that teachers receive, teachers ability to collaborate
with specialists and utilise support staff all a play very significant part in determining how
38
National Disability Authority paper to Oireachtas Committee on Education and Skills Dec 2010
successful or not inclusion will be for students with special education needs in
mainstream settings68.
To take just one example from the list above, though the literature is clear that the way
in which in-class support personnel are utilised is an important variable for successful
inclusion practice, little is known about actual performed role of SNAs in Irish schools
and there is little by way of guidance to optimise these resources (e.g. training and
guidance on joint teacher-SNA lesson planning). There is therefore not an
inconsiderable amount of work, both in terms of developing an evidence base and
changing practice, to maximise the opportunities for inclusion in mainstream Irish
classrooms.
As mentioned above in response to Question 1 some mainstream schools have become
de facto centres of excellence of inclusive practice. It would considerably add to the
evidence base if such schools were identified and the factors which helped them become
successfully inclusive schools were identified. It may be useful to recognise the role such
schools play, as specialist but not segregated, on the continuum of support is more
formally recognised.
The future role that special schools can and should play on the continuum of supports is
linked to how well mainstream schools can deliver on providing appropriate supports to
children with special education needs. The limited available evidence suggests that
different forms of inclusion produce more or less successful outcomes for children with
special education need69. Therefore, evaluating and improving our mainstream schools’
ability to include children with more complex needs is crucial to deciding what role
special schools should play.
Therefore, it may be more useful to consider of the role of mainstream and special
provision as a whole rather than redesigning special provision when mainstream
provision may or may not be fit for purpose.
68
Kugelmass, J. W. (2001) Collaboration and compromise in creating and sustaining an inclusive school.
International Journal of Inclusive Education, 5 (1); Baker. E.T., Wang, M.C. and Walberg, H.J. (1995) The
Effects of Inclusion on Learning., Educational Leadership, 52 (4); Lipsky, D. K. & Gartner, A (1996)
Inclusion, school restructuring and the remaking of American society, Harvard Education Review, 66 (4);
Scruggs, T.E. & Mastropieri, M. A. (1996) Teacher perceptions of mainstreaming / inclusion 1958 – 1995: a
research synthesis, Exception Children 63 (1); Stevens, R.J. & Slavin (1995) The cooperative elementary
school: effects on student’s achievement, attitudes and social relations, American Educational Research
Journal 32 (2); Zigmond, N., & Baker, J.M. (1996) Full inclusion for students with learning disabilities: too
much of a good thing? Theory into Practice 35 (1); Farrell, P (2000) The impact of research on
developments in inclusive education. International Journal of Inclusive Education. 4 (2)
69
Markussen, E (2004) Special Education: Does it help? A study of special education in Norwegian upper
secondary schools, European Journal of Special Education 19 (1); Wiener, J., & Tardif , C.F. (2004) Social
and emotional functioning for children with learning disabilities: does special education placement make a
difference? Learning Disabilities Research & Practice 19 (1)
39
National Disability Authority paper to Oireachtas Committee on Education and Skills Dec 2010
Background Paper 3 - NDA paper to the Department of
Education and Science’s Value for Money and Policy Review
of the Special Needs Assistant Scheme
Background and context
The National Disability Authority
The National Disability Authority is the independent state advisory agency on disability
issues, providing independent expert advice to Government on policy and practice. It is
a major strategic priority for the National Disability Authority to support government
and public bodies on the implementation of the National Disability Strategy.
The National Disability Strategy
A central element of this strategy is independent assessment of the health and education
needs of people with disabilities, followed by arrangements to deliver appropriate
services, within resources. The interlinked arrangements for independent assessments
and service delivery to school-age children with disabilities are set out in the Education
for Persons with Special Educational Needs (EPSEN) Act, 2004, and Part 2 of the
Disability Act 2005, but implementation has been deferred.
Summary of NDA recommendations

The significant state funding for Special Needs Assistants should be retained and
deployed in a flexible way to support children with disabilities to attain their
potential, in the context of the commitment to implement the EPSEN Act

The job description for special needs assistants should be a modern flexible one
which enables them to deliver assistance to support the development and
learning of the child with disabilities in the context of the modern classroom

The profile of assessed needs of school-age children with disabilities and special
education needs should be the starting point for the Value for Money review.

The Review should focus on the most appropriate and efficient way that SNAs
could work with children and their teachers in meeting that need.

The Review should take full account of future requirements for school-aged
children under the Part 2 of the Disability Act, 2005 and of the EPSEN Act, 2004.

The Review should deliver clear policy and guidance material linking objectives,
outcomes and outputs of the SNA Scheme to the profile of assessed needs of
school-going children.

Outcomes of the SNA scheme should be monitoring and benchmarked against
national and international standards
40
National Disability Authority paper to Oireachtas Committee on Education and Skills Dec 2010

Special needs assistants should have appropriate ongoing training to enable them
to satisfactorily meet the job roles they are assigned
Context of the Special Needs Assistant Scheme
Expansion of Scheme
The Special Needs Assistant (SNA) Scheme has grown significantly in recent years. In
1998 there were 299 SNAs. As of December 2008 there were roughly 10,000 SNAs.
This major increase is attributed to the announcement in 1998 of an automatic
entitlement to resources of children with special education needs.
Expenditure
The SNA scheme now costs €323.5 million (Primary €267 million; Post Primary €56.5
million). Working hours and the working year are normally linked to the school day and
the school year. The annual cost of providing an SNA is about €32,000 a year.
Job description
The application procedure for SNAs was reformed in 2002 in Circular 07/02 (see
Appendix 2 for role profile of SNA as set out in Circular 07/02). This circular also set
out for the first time the prescribed role of an SNA. However, the role of the SNA as
described in this 2002 Circular is in fact unchanged from the role set out in 1976 for
Childcare Assistants (who looked after physical care in special education schools). 70 So
effectively the formal job description has remained unchanged for a third of a century,
although successive published research studies and preliminary findings of NDAsponsored research71 currently underway have shown that in practice the role has
developed beyond that formally set out. The continued appropriateness of this
prescribed role for SNAs given the change in the policy landscape over this time needs
to be reconsidered, in particular in the context of the National Disability Strategy, of the
Education for persons with Special Education Needs (EPSEN) Act and of the Disability
Act 2005.
Any change of job description would need to be accompanied by appropriate training to
ensure that SNAs can satisfactorily fill the roles they are being assigned.
Number of SNAs in International Context
The rapid expansion of SNAs in Ireland is not out of line with international trends as
education systems across the developed world have moved to mainstream education
provision for children with special education needs, The ratio of SNAs to total pupils is
1 to 93.1 in Ireland, 1 to 50.4 in England and 1 to 46.1 pupils in Scotland.72 The numbers
70
O’ Neill, A, 2004 ‘Special needs assistants’ Frontline vol. 57 (Spring)
Bergin, M. An examination of the role, function, definition and training needs of classroom and special needs
assistants in primary and secondary settings in Ireland. Ph D thesis in preparation, NDA research scholarship
72
see Appendix 3 for details of these calculations
71
41
National Disability Authority paper to Oireachtas Committee on Education and Skills Dec 2010
employed in SNA-like roles have increased internationally over the past 20 years.73 For
example, the number of classroom assistants grew:
Scotland - Between 1998 and 2007, from 1,000 to 15,000.74
Finland - Between 1995 and 2003, from 2,000 to 7,000.75
England - Between 1997 and 2006, from 61,000 to 162,900.76
NDA Comments on the Review
SNA Scheme Review in the Context of the EPSEN Act
The NDA views it as critical that any major changes that take place in the organisation
of special education provision prior to the full commencement of the EPSEN Act will
positively contribute to special education on commencement of the Act. The NDA is
concerned that the Education for Persons with Special Education Needs Act 2004
(EPSEN) is not specifically mentioned in the Terms of Reference of the review group
(see Appendix 1).
The NDA advises is that the Government’s National Disability Strategy is best advanced
by retaining the existing financial resources expended on the Special Needs Assistant
scheme for the benefit of children with disabilities in this age group, but deploying this
resource in a flexible way through redefining job roles and tasks to address the
children’s assessed health and education needs. The NDA advises the starting point of
the current review should be that the €323.5 million expenditure currently allocated to
the Scheme could be deployed for relevant supports for children with special
educational needs at school level.
73
Giangreco, M and Doyle M.B., 2007, “Teacher assistants in inclusive schools” in Florian L. (Ed.), The
SAGE handbook of special education
http://www.uvm.edu/~mgiangre/Chpt32SAGEGiangrecoDoyle2007.pdf
74
Equal Opportunities Commission Scotland, 2007. Valuable assets: a general formal investigation
into the role and status of classroom assistants in Scottish schools
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/30_05_07classassistants.pdf
75
Giangreco, M and Doyle M.B., 2007, “Teacher assistants in inclusive schools” in Florian L. (Ed.), The
SAGE handbook of special education
http://www.uvm.edu/~mgiangre/Chpt32SAGEGiangrecoDoyle2007.pdf
76
Rose, R, 2008, “The Changing Roles of Teaching Assistants in England and special Needs Assistants in
Ireland: A Comparison” Reach Journal of Special Needs in Ireland, Vol. 22 no.1
42
National Disability Authority paper to Oireachtas Committee on Education and Skills Dec 2010
Given deferral of the original timetable of October 2010 for commencement of the
Disability Act provisions in respect of children aged 5 to 18 and of EPSEN, the NDA
advises that the existing resources for disability within the school system could be
deployed as far as practicable to advance delivery of those elements on a non-statutory
basis.
For example, an SNA could play an important role in supporting the speech and
language therapist or the physiotherapist in assisting the child with different prescribed
exercises.
The Government announced in the April 2009 Supplementary Budget that funding
would be made available to enable every child have a year’s pre-school education. As
some children with disabilities may require additional care assistance in order to benefit
from that opportunity, the NDA advises that their care needs be factored in to the
Review of Special Needs Assistants.
While there are some indications that Ireland’s ratio of special needs assistants to pupils
is lower than in comparable jurisdictions, in the event that the review were to
demonstrate that fewer SNAs would be required, the NDA advises that any such freedup posts and money be retained for the benefit of children with disabilities and used to
address the shortfall in therapy and other posts required to advance the simultaneous
implementation of the EPSEN Act and Part 2 of the Disability Act for 5 to 18 year olds,
and to support participation in pre-school education of children with special education
needs.
When the independent assessment of health and education needs occasioned by the
disability to take place under the Disability Act (Part 2) and the EPSEN Act have been
commenced for the 5 to18 age-group, the services to be delivered to individual pupils
will be specified in resultant Individual Education Plans and in Service Statements under
the Disability Act.
Current role has diverged from prescribed one
While there is limited research literature on the role played by SNAs in the Irish
education system, there is agreement that a gap has emerged between the prescribed
and actual role of Special Needs Assistants.77 Preliminary findings of NDA-sponsored
77
O’ Neill, A, 2004 ‘Special needs assistants’ Frontline vol. 57 (Spring); A Logan, A 2004; ‘The role of the
special needs assistant’ Frontline vol. 57 (Spring); Lawlor, L and Gregan, A, 2003, ‘The Evolving Role of
the Special Needs Assistant: Towards a New Synergy’ REACH Journal of Special Needs Education in
Ireland vol. 16 (2); Carrig, M, 2004, ‘Changing Role of the Special Needs Assistant: Perspectives of a
Special School Staff’ REACH Journal of Special Needs Education in Ireland vol. 17 (2); O’ Neill, A and
Rose, R 2008, ‘The Changing Roles of Teaching Assistants in England and Special Needs Assistants in
Ireland’ REACH Journal of Special Needs Education in Ireland vol. 22 (1)
43
National Disability Authority paper to Oireachtas Committee on Education and Skills Dec 2010
research on the role of SNAs78, which was based on interviews with approximately 340
SNAs and 30 teachers, are as follows:

A significant minority of SNAs (40%) routinely perform a teaching assistant type
role in addition to their prescribed care role

SNAs are concerned about the gap between their prescribed role and their
actual role within schools.

SNAs are concerned by the absence of guidance for SNAs in performing even
their prescribed care role within schools. For example, guidance around personal
care and dealing with challenging behaviour is required

Individual teachers acknowledge the changing role that SNAs are performing in
schools but are concerned that some SNAs do not possess the skills to
adequately perform the teaching assistant role that many SNAs are routinely
being asked to perform

Many teachers believe that fewer but more highly trained and skilled SNAs could
contribute more to supporting special needs students than the current model of
provision and expertise.
Narrowness of current remit
Special Needs Assistants are funded from the education budget to do a care job in
support of pupils with special needs, but are expressly precluded from engaging in
educational activities such as listening to pupils with their reading or supervising a
classroom when the teacher is absent. The terms of reference for their role appear to
have been framed with the explicit aim to avoid encroachment on a teacher’s
professional activities. As resources are scarce in relation to children with disabilities, it
is worth exploring how best SNAs might be deployed to deliver a combination of care
duties as required and relevant classroom supports in any down-time from their physical
care duties. Information is not readily available on how many pupils require constant
hands-on support, how many pupils require constant attendance but intermittent handson support (e.g. assistance with the bathroom) or how many pupils require assistance at
specified times only (e.g. getting into and leaving the school or lunchtime), but the
evidence shows that significant numbers of SNAs are currently engaged in education
support roles in the down-time from their care duties.
In terms of the overall support to educating a group of children, including children with
special needs, it may be sensible to allow an SNA to work with other children in the
classroom (e.g. hearing their reading) if the class teacher needs to catch up on details of
a lesson with a special needs child who has had to take an extended break from class
time for care reasons.
78
Bergin, Máíre (Ph.D work in progress) An examination of the role, function, definition and training needs of
classroom and special needs assistants in primary and secondary settings in Ireland.
44
National Disability Authority paper to Oireachtas Committee on Education and Skills Dec 2010
If the role of SNAs were to remain one exclusively focused on care, the rationale for
limiting their place of work and working day/year to those of the school system would
require re-examination. If the primary purpose of the scheme were to be interpreted as
addressing the care needs of children with disabilities rather than supporting these
children to participate in education, it should be acknowledged that those care needs
extend beyond the school day and the school year.
The National Council for Special Education Needs has published details of the
categories of assessed need of those for whom an SNA was applied for in 2004 and
2005. For example, in 2005, 36% of SNA applications were for children with emotional
and behavioural difficulties.79
However, there is a dearth of published information which analyses SNA provision for
students with different categories of assessed need. The job description and training of
SNAs, now working within a job description which was designed to deal with the
physical care needs of children in special schools, requires revisiting in light of the range
of needs that they now find themselves dealing with.
Therefore, there is a need not only to develop guidance for teachers, schools and SNAs
both around the education support role that SNAs are in fact playing but also for their
currently prescribed care role. The NDA would be glad to contribute towards
developing guidance in relation to the care role; guidance around the education role
would primarily be a matter for the NCSE.
As Ireland’s current economic situation is unlikely to sustain the growth in SNA
numbers that has been witnessed in recent years, there is a strong case for the current
Review focusing on whether or not the SNA Scheme in its current design is meeting
children’s assessed need and whether better use could be made of currently available
resources, through training and upskilling of SNAs. Future full commencement of EPSEN
and Part 2 of the Disability Act is likely to place further scrutiny on the efficacy of the
division of care and education support roles performed by SNAs.
SNA role in an International Context
As well as the increase in numbers of SNA-type roles the following themes are
identified in the international literature:
79

Teacher assistants have been specifically identified as a support to assist the
participation of students with disabilities in inclusive classrooms

Teacher assistants engage in a wide range of roles (for example, clerical tasks,
supervision of students, personal care and mobility support, behaviour support,
instruction)
National Council for Special Education, 2005, Annual Report 2005
45
National Disability Authority paper to Oireachtas Committee on Education and Skills Dec 2010

There is ongoing disagreement and confusion about what constitutes
appropriate roles of teaching assistants

There has been a shift in the roles of teacher assistants from primarily
instructional to increasingly instructional functions

Teacher assistants tend to receive inadequate orientation, training and
supervision
non-

Teachers have mixed reactions to using teacher assistants; some recognise them
as valuable contributors, while others are concerned about having another adult
in the classroom80
Ireland, therefore, is not in a unique position by having increased numbers rapidly
without developing suitable role profiles, management and planning structures and
training infrastructure.
Shift from care to education support role – the English experience
England provides an example of a country which has witnessed the actual and
acknowledged role of teaching assistants (TAs) move from an exclusively care role to
include a significant instructional-support role.
The education support element of the TAs role in England was acknowledged in 1999
and guidance was published in 2000.81 In 2001, the Code of Practice further defined the
role of TAs in the classroom in relation to students with special educational needs.82 In
2003, Raising standards and tackling workload: a national agreement was
agreed which set out a framework for changing responsibilities and workloads within
classrooms and within schools. England and Wales have published guidance for schools
on implementing this policy.83
80
Giangreco, M and Doyle M.B, 2007 “Teacher assistants in inclusive schools” in Florian L. (Ed.), The
SAGE handbook of special education
http://www.uvm.edu/~mgiangre/Chpt32SAGEGiangrecoDoyle2007.pdf
81
Department of Education and Skills, 2000, Working with Teaching Assistants – A Good practice
Guide
82
Bergin, M., 2004, “Comparative Analysis of the Special Needs Assistance Approach: Ireland, England &
Sweden”, NDA Conference Paper [Student Journeys: The Special Education Routes]
http://www.nda.ie/website/nda/cntmgmtnew.nsf/0/8F45C3FF02655CAE802570F2004774C5/$File/student_
journeys_13.htm
83
The Welsh Assembly Government, 2006, Raising Standards and Tackling Workload: A National
Agreement. A Resource Pack for Governors in Wales
http://wales.gov.uk/docrepos/40382/4038232/403829/4038293/403829/raising-standards-tackling1.pdf?lang=en; Training and Development Agency for Schools, 2005, Headteachers and the National
Agreement – a summary,
http://www.tda.gov.uk/upload/resources/pdf/h/headship_pack.pdf
46
National Disability Authority paper to Oireachtas Committee on Education and Skills Dec 2010
In 2003 a higher grade role (Higher Level Teaching Assistant) was created which
allowed those with a higher qualification to become more involved planning, monitoring,
assessment and class management84. Differentiated training structures have been
developed with teacher assistant qualifications ranging from certificate to degree on the
National Vocational Qualification Awards (NVQ) system.
The reform process in England may be too recent to draw strong lessons from.
However, the process of developing role profiles, re-examining responsibilities within
classrooms and within schools and reforming training opportunities accordingly, may
provide a starting point for discussions on how Ireland could reform our SNA Scheme.
A recent comparison of the SNA role in Irish schools and Teaching Assistant (TA) role
in England shows that both carry out quasi-education roles such as assessments, lesson
planning and taking classes although the English Teaching Assistants more often take on
a more extensive role. Nevertheless the similarities are interesting, given the differences
in their prescribed roles. Some of these comparisons are presented in the table below.85
84
Rose, R., 2008, “The Changing Roles of Teaching Assistants in England and special Needs Assistants in
Ireland: A Comparison” in Rose, R Reach Journal of Special Needs in Ireland, Vol. 22 no.1
85
Figures based on Rose, R., 2008, “The Changing Roles of Teaching Assistants in England and special
Needs Assistants in Ireland: A Comparison” in Rose, R Reach Journal of Special Needs in Ireland, Vol.
22 no.1
47
National Disability Authority paper to Oireachtas Committee on Education and Skills Dec 2010
Teaching
Assistants
Special Needs
Assistants
England
-Ireland
“Sometimes” take a whole class
74%
26%
Plan lessons alone “every day or often”
28%
-
-
31%
22%
28%
Plan lessons alone “sometimes”
Involved in assessment ‘often’
NDA recommendations on information deficits
The NDA recognises that a significant information gap exists around the role, function,
management and training of SNAs and advises that the following information should be
collected to enable an effective and comprehensive review to be conducted:

Breakdown and analysis of the nature of assessed need - as identified in
professional assessment reports attached to schools’ applications for SNAs - of
students who currently receive support from an SNA

Whether some or all those children’s assessed needs could be appropriately met
using technology (for example by recording lessons, or wider use of computers)
and or alternatively-designed school organisational systems

Analysis of
o support requirements written into those students’ Individual Education
Plans (where these are available)
o the extent to which students’ need for support is for continuous handson support, for on-call support (e.g. for bathroom breaks), for support at
specific times and with specific tasks, e.g. getting off a school bus, help
with feeding
o the actual role being performed by SNAs
o the training and experience the SNAs supporting those students and
what training and upskilling they would be require to meet needs as
assessed
o whether guidance documents on both the care and education support
elements of the SNA role provide an adequate framework for SNAs to
48
National Disability Authority paper to Oireachtas Committee on Education and Skills Dec 2010
work with students with the range of assessed needs which they are
currently working with
o whether SNAs working with individuals and / or groups have contributed
to the inclusion of children with special education needs and
consideration of whether a “whole class” approach to student support
might better promote inclusion
o schools’ managerial and planning capacity to effectively use SNA
resources to support those students’ assessed need
The NDA would like to contribute to and support the Review Group in its work in any
way deemed appropriate.
Appendix 1
Terms of reference of the review
The terms of reference for the review are as follows:
(1) Identify the objectives of the Special Needs Assistant (SNA) Scheme and the role
of an SNA.
(2) Examine the relevance and continued validity of these objectives and role as they
relate to the objectives of the Department’s Strategy Statement in “providing a
range of resources and supports for learners with special needs”.
(3) Define the outputs associated with the SNA scheme and examine the duties
allocated to and undertaken by SNAs in the context of the objectives of the
scheme.
(4) Examine the extent to which the objectives of the SNA scheme have been
achieved and the effectiveness with which these objectives have been achieved.
(5) Identify the level and trend of costs associated with the SNA scheme and
comment on the efficiency of the scheme.
(6) Evaluate the degree to which the objectives warrant the allocation of public
funding on a current and ongoing basis and examine the scope for alternative
policy or organisational approaches to achieving these objectives on a more
efficient/effective basis and make appropriate recommendations for change, if
necessary.
(7) Specify potential future performance indicators that might be used to better
monitor the performance of the SNA scheme.
(8) A VFM review should not, as a general rule, recommend an increased resource
allocation for the programme concerned. Where, in exceptional circumstances,
it is proposed to recommend such an increase to deliver better overall VFM, the
Department’s/Office’s overall Steering Committee (or MAC) should be
consulted in advance and should identify possible savings and/or additional
income on other lower priority programmes (for the Department/Office
49
National Disability Authority paper to Oireachtas Committee on Education and Skills Dec 2010
concerned or another public body) that would be sufficient to meet the
additional costs involved: full details of these offsetting measures should be
included in the VFM review report.
Appendix 2
Role of the Special Needs Assistant as set out in Circular 07/02
Their duties are assigned by the Principal Teacher in accordance with Circular 10/76:
"Duties and responsibilities of Principal Teachers" and sanctioned by the Board of
Management. Their work should be supervised either by the Principal or by a class
teacher.
Those duties involve tasks of a non-teaching nature such as:
1. Preparation and tidying up of classroom(s) in which the pupil(s) with special
needs is/are being taught.
2. Assisting children to board and alight from school buses. Where necessary travel
as escort on school buses may be required.
3. Special assistance as necessary for pupils with particular difficulties e.g. helping
physically disabled pupils with typing or writing.
4. Assistance with clothing, feeding, toileting and general hygiene.
5. Assisting on out-of-school visits, walks and similar activities.
6. Assisting the teachers in the supervision of pupils with special needs during
assembly, recreational and dispersal periods.
7. Accompanying individuals or small groups who may have to be withdrawn
temporarily from the classroom.
8. General assistance to the class teachers, under the direction of the Principal,
with duties of a non-teaching nature. (Special Needs Assistants may not act
either as substitute or temporary teachers. In no circumstances may they be left
in sole charge of a class).
9. Where a Special Needs Assistant has been appointed to assist a school in
catering for a specific pupil, duties should be modified to support the particular
needs of the pupil concerned.
50
National Disability Authority paper to Oireachtas Committee on Education and Skills Dec 2010
Appendix 3
Ratios for SNA type roles to pupils in Scotland, England and Ireland
Scotland (2007) 692,21586 / 15,00087 = 1: 46.1
England (2006) 8,215,69088 / 162,90089 = 1: 50.4
Ireland (2006) 805,23790 / 8,64691 = 1: 93.1
Note on ratios: The SNA / TA / CA figures refer to the numbers of individuals
involved and not the number of WTE. Therefore, only a certain amount can be read
into these ratios.
86
Scottish Executive, 2009 Results of Pupils in Scotland Census 2008
http://openscotland.gov.uk/Publications/2009/04/01090908/3
87
Valuable assets: a general formal investigation into the role and status
of classroom assistants in Scottish schools
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/30_05_07classassistants.pdf
88
Department of Innovation, University and Skills, 2009 ‘Schools and Pupils in England’
http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/rsgateway/DB/SFR/s000682/'Table 12'!A1
89
Rose, R “The Changing Roles of Teaching Assistants in England and special Needs Assistants in Ireland:
A Comparison” in Reach Journal of Special Needs in Ireland, Vol. 22 no.1
90
Department of Education and Science (Key Statistics About the department’s Costumers)
http://www.education.ie/home/home.jsp?pcategory=17216&ecategory=17241&language=EN
91
Rose, R “The Changing Roles of Teaching Assistants in England and special Needs Assistants in Ireland:
A Comparison” in Reach Journal of Special Needs in Ireland, Vol. 22 no.1
51