Access Undone: The Collapse of Special Education [Episode 3]

Welcome to access on Dawn. The collapse of special education. A special podcast from onshore.net. This is Simon Lewis, a teacher and principal for over 20 years. And this series, I look back over the short history of how children with additional needs have slowly but surely been cast aside by the education system. I argue that much like the crimes of the Catholic church on children, where the scandal of the 20th century, that how the state is treating children with additional needs will be the scandal of the 21st. In the last episode you have been introduced to an organization called the N C S E. And you're going to be hearing a lot more about them now. And I'm going to try and charge how they went from supporting all children to only helping those with the greatest need. Ed Carti in the Irish independent wrote an article around mid 2013. Claiming that special needs children were being excluded from schools. It uncovered evidence of mothers and fathers being told by schools. They wish to enroll their child in that another school might be more suitable or that the resources were simply not available for their child. The report also claimed that this made parents feel they had to fight for a placement and that their child was being enrolled on sufferance. The article provided no examples from families. It provided no stories and parents who claimed they were told to find another school. And it was a really unusual article because over the years I have learned that if you. You want to get. Get an article. Published. In the media. In. General. It needs to. To share a personal experience. And this didn't. This read more like a summary. Have a press release. Or a report. And it was. And who wrote it? The N C S E. The very organization who you might remember very much welcomed, the 15% cook to resources for children with additional needs. The article, which I've linked in the show notes continued with the NCSE complaining that some schools erect, avert or soft barriers to prevent or discourage parents from enrolling children with special educational needs. And then there was this sentence again, quoted from the NCSC. We consider that schools are funded and resourced to provide an educational service to all children in their locality. And it made some recommendations and it's worth having a read of them. Because I don't think I'm being paranoid here, but they don't seem to target the purse strings. How to listen to these recommendations. Every child with special educational needs is protected from enrollment practices or policies with overt or covert barriers that block his or her access to enrollment in the school. Every child with special educational needs that may enroll in the nearest school that is, or can be resourced by the NCSC to meet his or her needs. School most enroll a student with special educational needs. If so, directed by the special educational needs organizer on the basis that the school would be provided with resources in line with national policy. Just note in line with national policy, not in line with the child's needs. And lastly, a school must establish a special class if so, requested by the organizer. They're basically claiming all of this. It's the school's fault, despite the cuts, despite the lack of supports, despite the increases in need, despite no specialized training, despite offering nothing of merit to schools. In relation to the last recommendation where a school must establish a special class, if so, requested by an organizer. That's the CNO. Despite the fact that no teachers would have specialized training and working in working in these specific classes. Ah, I don't know. It seems that it was going to be a mess. And we'll come back to that again. It's just one of many issues with special classes. However, before that, I want to look at the changes that have happened since this time, when it came to resourcing children with special educational needs. I want to charge what's happened since 2013, roughly. I was watching a clip from a political show on Virgin media TV, just before I was writing this episode on a social Democrat politician was talking about the fight after fight, the parents have to go through to get their child into a school. And I was left thinking of two things. The first was that the politician was almost aping. The introduction I wrote for a podcast episode about two and a half years ago. Nothing has changed at all. And secondly, I realized that another thing that had changed dramatically in the last 15 years was once they got into a school, the fight would only just begin. And as the years are going on that fight. Is getting worse and worse. Here's exactly. What I said in that episode two and a half years ago. If you're a parent of a child with additional needs, you're used to going into battle for whatever reason, whether that's spending years on waiting lists for speech and language therapy, or trying to get an appointment, to see a child psychiatrist. It seems that as a nation, we are unable to provide any service to children in a timely manner. The HSE is usually the main culprit of this. In recent times, parents are not battling to ensure their child has the basics of a place in a school. Unlike the politician though. I lay the blame, not particularly at Faena for Faena Gail or any political party. I said instead. The agency that's absolutely responsible for all of this is the national council for special education. Back in 2022. When I wrote that episode help, my NCSE has turned into the HSC. It was shortly after the then minister for special education Josefa, Madigan was celebrating, getting through an NCSE policy, which gave them the powers to open up special classes. In any school. They wished the department decided as well to publish a list of schools that had quote, refuse to open special classes. Even though this wasn't true. And I've linked. An article from RTE about that. In the show notes. Madigan claim the schools had been ignoring correspondence from the NCSE regarding the opening of special classes. Now, when it turned out that this wasn't actually true. Madigan refuse to back down. And I'm not quite sure who she blamed, but it wasn't herself. Apparently she said she'd been misinformed. However it didn't stop. The single minded idea that the solution to special education in Ireland was to open as many special classes in as many schools as possible. No matter what. There was no care in the world that they were the right solution. Nevermind the best solution, because the only basis for opening these classes. I was the collective agreement of middle Ireland. A group of people who seem to believe that all ills in society should be and can be fixed by lazy teachers, whether that's preparing their children for sacraments. So they don't have to do it themselves. The cost of uniforms and school books to schools being responsible for preventing them from buying smartphones for their children out, of course, in this case, simply opening up classrooms for children with particular needs, without giving them any support or resources to help the children sitting in these costumes. Some of which were described by the schools as converted storage areas. It just must have been music to the ears of the national council for special education. As far as the general public were concerned, open as many special classes as possible, and the problems would be over. It is a playbook. The Irish population must be used to. We seem to have a perceived problem in our society. What do we need to do to covered it? Up. It's a question we've asked for years on years. And we seem to answer it in the same way on married mothers could be put to work as slaves and laundries. Girls and women who felt pregnant could secretly travel to England's. Priests could be moved around to different places. If enough people were publicly worried about them sexually abusing their children. And if we simply create places in schools for autistic children and call them units and not provide these children. with train staff or the resources and supports they need. As long as they're dumped somewhere, it doesn't matter what happens once they aren't causing trouble for the powers that be. And yes, I am making comparisons with the mother and baby homes as just see from Madigan did when she was talking about special classes, it was one of her dafts that I actually had some sympathy with, but I said for a different reason and look. I get this comparison is highly controversial and I don't for one minute, believe that children in special classes are being systematically abused by the staff. My comparison is with the state outsourcing its responsibilities to some quango and turning a blind eye when things inevitably go wrong and then simply claiming no responsibility when that happens. I'm aware I'm walking a tight rope with this, and I am aware how deeply hurtful it might be to people who experienced the abuse in the hands of the Catholic church. And don't believe the way that we treat children with additional needs is comparable. But please understand that this comparison is not with the actions of the people in the system, but it's with the system itself. And while of course I am horrified by the actions of the clergy that abused children. And women. I am disgusted by the people that let it happen and stayed silent or brushed it under the carpet. In essence, what I believe the NCSC is doing supported by government policy is basically. Let's not think of any ideas of how we should really support children with additional needs. Let's dump them in a classroom and call it a unit. An Irish solution to an Irish problem. As we discussed in the last part of this series. The NCSC didn't start off like this. It was a simple organization at the very beginning. And a consisted of 72 special education needs organizers or see knows. Or say knows. As some people used to like to call them. And as I said before, third job was to ensure that schools received whatever supports were recommended by educational psychologists. This was until the recession hit and everything changed. There was a 15% cut to all resource hours for children with additional needs. That was surprisingly very much welcomed by the NCSC and around the time the NCSE wanted extra powers. One of which was the sat allocation model, which was introduced in 2017. It's mentored the 15% cost to support for children with additional needs. And it's never been reversed. The recession lives on for children with additional needs. Recent research from the national principal's forum in 2022, calculated the children with additional needs had an average of 21% fewer teaching supports than they would have had back in 2007, 15 years before. You might not have caught. Caught that. So I think bears. Repeating. Children with additional. Needs are receiving. 21% fewer teaching supports than they did in 2007. And that statistic alone is shocking to me. And this is thanks to the NCSS new allocation model. The one they were designing while Rory Quinn made the 15% court. This is why the special allocation model that was designed in 2017. To be a batter on fairway was sold to the public and supported by all of the stakeholders as a better model for allocating those resources. I should say the stakeholders might not have actively supported the new model. But they definitely didn't stand in its way. There was absolute silence from the chief special education representative group. You might not have even heard of them. They're known as NABS. Annie or N a, B S M E. I don't know if they deserve a mention in this podcast because I don't know if I have a lot to say about them. I guess that just goes to show their effectiveness. What I do want to do. Is I need discuss the set allocation model, which started in 2017 and replaced the general allocation resource hours model. I remember clearly when it came out that I was very worried about what it would mean for the children in my school. The idea was that instead of children being allocated resource hours, the school would receive a total allocation based on some algorithm. And this algorithm we were told would be made up of five variables. Our enrollment. The gender makeup of the school, standardized test scores in literacy and numeracy. Complex needs data from the HSC. And you're whether you had a dash status or not. But by some amazing trick of mathematics. School seemed to end up with around the same amount of hours as they had in 2016 in this model. Now, I don't know about you, but if I invented an algorithm that could allocate hours using a very simple formula, And it managed to somehow match all of the 3,200 plus schools is a previous year's allocations. I would probably be looking for a Nobel prize in mathematics. And then another beautiful coincidence. If one was to ask for every skills breakdown of hours by a freedom of information requests, like I did. This data is exempt from that. And in some ways it's no bad thing because inevitably that would have meant the start of league tables and primary schools. However, the downside is there is no way to compare schools, allocations. However, I thought of a way that could give a reasonably good indicator of whether this algorithm made any sense. Logically. I would have thought. That if one took every school in every county and then got an average allocation per child in each school in each county. Each county should have around the same allocation. And ultimately as it happened, There was no logic. Every county was anything between 0.3, two hours to 0.5, two hours per pupil. I know only seven counties. I came within 2% of the average. Now, some might argue that's the testing alone doesn't prove anything. And if I saw that, I probably say you need more proof. And in fairness, If I hadn't decided to check the data over a six-year period. Maybe that had something, but that's exactly what I did. And you can have a look at my entire data set by using the link in the show notes because every second year, the sash allocations are recalculated using this magic algorithm. And amazingly when schools started suspecting their. Allocations weren't right. For a variety of reasons. It turns out they were probably right. The biggest example of this were schools that were growing in size and these schools are known as developing schools. I decided to compare every developing school to every school that wasn't developing and see how they fared. And the Sasha allocations from year to year and despite growing their enrollments by an average of 27%. Developing skills set allocations per capita went down by over 15%. And on the contrary skills that didn't grow on average went down in enrollments by just over 3%, but somehow gained over 2% in their set allocations. I'm going back to comparing counties. There were three sets of sat allocations calculated after the 2017 allocations. And you'd expect that counties would either gain or lose roughly the same percentage of allocations per pupil. Each time. However again, there was no rhyme or reason. There is no pattern. For no reason whatsoever allocations in county awfully went up by nearly 11%. But in Roscommon, they went down by 39%. It was clear that the data being used was at. Best junk. How was it? But on unbelievable that the algorithm using five variables could allocate so closely to the previous model. 'cause it was unbelievable. The data was nothing but fantasy. No better than plucking figures out of thin air. Some people point to one of the five variables for this. The complex needs variable. In fact, the department of education decided to get rid of it in its allocations in 2024, because they claimed they were only getting about 5% of this data from the HSC. And somehow this admission that they are only getting 5% of the data that they needed to allocate resources properly. Didn't seem to ruffle anybody's feathers. Schools had been allocated resources with 95% of HSE information completely missing. There wasn't a single mumble from anyone about that. As I said, when it came to 2024, the department of education decided to drop that complex needs variable from their algorithm. They also dropped the gender variable for obvious reasons, which I won't distract you with. So this meant that the sole variable that would affect a school's allocation was the scores children got in standardized literacy and numeracy tests. These tests I should tell you are an indirect result of another Rory Quinn decision. Back in 2011, Rory Quinn forced schools to upload their literacy and numeracy standardized results to a government database. And at that time they were promised they would only be used for statistical purposes. Fast forward, just over a decade. They are now being used as one of the sole variables to give resources to children with additional needs. One might wonder. Why that's a bad thing. Literacy and numeracy scores. Are a good indicator of. The child's ability and the resourcing they should need. But the thing is for anybody that has, half an idea about working with children, you don't even have to be a teacher to know this literacy and numeracy scores do not tell the full story of a school's needs. There are plenty of children with huge needs that do fine. And these tests on essentially, if you can score well in a one-off annual test. You're just going to be penalized for it. So in the blink of an eye or a flick of the pen. Allocations for special education in schools are now based on a random, meaningless task, as well as some random adjustments to ensure schools don't fall off a Clair for on the other hand, get a big jump. In short, the data is still based on absolute junk and I'm no statistician, but even the most gentle of scratching, the figures shows there is no logic to the hours being allocated to schools and thankfully people on the ground didn't do nothing. The big message that came through from everyone was that the dropping of the complex needs variable needed to be reversed. For woods people came out and said, this is wrong. On this set of allocations debacle, as it became known as raged on and on, on the department of education, tried everything they could to bury the ongoing protests from parents, schools and advocacy groups through spin and statistics and denial. And when now none of that seemed to be working and faced with a petition from over 700 primary school principals through the national principal's forum, things took a baffling twist. When a joint statement was released from the IPN, the NAPD, which is the second level version of the YPN. And. The national parents canceled. The statements that was released. He states that through the commentary about set allocations, there have been a number of what they described as misconceptions. I'm being careful not to name any group in particular, for fear of giving them any recognition. The IPPF categorically stated. It is important to be clear that children with complex needs have not been excluded from the allocation of hours at schools received. The department of education, by the way, even admitted themselves, they dropped complex needs as a criteria because they didn't get the data from the HSC. So it was a rather bizarre statement in the first place. But the statement went on further to explain how they'd come to this conclusion using frankly baffling analysis and language, including a lovely word, which I have to quote. Even if this, even if the actual statement didn't really say much at all, because it's such a bizarre word. Given that the revised allocations model is now underpinned by more accurate data provided by schools. It is hoped that the quantum of hours allocated to schools will better enable children with additional and complex needs to achieve and thrive in their mainstream settings. Quantum. So baffling, they actually use the word three times in their statements. What in God's name is a quantum. So for those of you don't know, I looked it up. So a quantum is a word. It usually using physics rather than teacher allocations on. It's a weird word to use in a statement because it's not one that an average person would use. Nevermind. Three times in the same statements. And my favorite definition of quantum. It was from the Cambridge dictionary. Which is the smallest amount. Or unit of something, especially energy. It could probably define the IPP and representation of its own members in this case, the smallest amount or unit of something, especially energy. Basically the IPN, try to pull the same fast one that the department of education tried a few days beforehand saying that the revised allocations model is now underpinned by more accurate data provided by schools. Sadly. Rather than backup the voices of principals and parents, the IPN decided to back the department of education. And NCSC, and one has to wonder why. Yes, they receive financial support from the department. Perhaps that's a possibility. I think it's best to leave the question hanging. But I will say this about the IPPF. For the last few years. The IPN has been sharing their research on the wellbeing of principals in a sustainability project. In all areas of the research, it shows burnout, stress, sleeping, troubles, depressive symptoms, somatic stress, and cognitive stress. And they've all increased in principles from 2015 to 2222. And all of the conclusion state that it's getting worse every year. I isn't it ironic that when 700 of their members make a very public cry for help. The response was to tell them that they were wrong. Just one more thing before we move on from this. Have a quick look at the board of directors of the NCSC. Maybe you'll find the answer lies in there somewhere. Okay. Let's move on slightly because I want to add one other variable to special education provision in the last decade. Some people might not realize that the supports that were being given to children in 2007 were mainly literacy and numeracy supports. Essentially, if you were a special education teacher in 2007 or resource teachers, they were known then. 90% of your work. Was literacy and numeracy. And these were the resource hours in general. And the Alec general allocation model. Anything around emotional behavioral needs tended to be allocated to S NAS. However these days, support teachers are now being used for anything from anxiety, social skills, emotional supports, behavioral supports, all sorts of sports that were being covered by SNS in the past. In fact, it's become almost comical if it wasn't so serious. This is an example of what a special education teacher or a teacher is supposed to do that an SNA is no longer allowed to do. And here it is. It's circulation at the moment on I think on Twitter, but it comes from the SNA toolkit from 2022. I just to highlight how mad things have become, and it's in the area of toileting. Now, not that long ago, if a child had a toileting issue, they will be eligible for SNA support. No questions asked and as he probably acts. And as you probably expect, this meant that the SNA would try and help the child independently use the toilet without any issues. I'm when this happens, the SNA would no longer be required and they could be redeployed. However these days, it's not as simple as that. And as I said, the following is from the SNA toolkit, which again, I have shared in the show notes, the link is there. The SNA is now not allowed to prompt a child to use the toilet. They're only allowed to deal with the aftermath of a toileting incidents. And even then the SNA isn't allowed to prompt the child to wipe themselves. They're also not allowed to arrange clothing after the toilet. In fact, unless the toilet is outside the classroom, the SNA can't even escort the child to the toilet. Instead the class teacher or sat teacher is responsible for a minding. The child's use the toilet. Where's the Ash as Google has to prove exactly how often a child's soils themselves over a long period of time in order for deployment to be in place at all. And this may be where the comparisons to those institutions I spoke about there. A few minutes ago, ring. True. To me. This is abuse. It's own forgivable it's on it's there in black and white since 2022. And that S and a toolkit. To me, as I said, it's abusive and unforgivable and I would hazard a guess that we are lucky. Really. The people who work in schools are in general, more moral than the people making the rules. As I say, it's the systems that are abusive. The SNA toolkit is a good example of how crazy things have become. And it has gone down the road where I would say it is abusive. I don't know if I can repeat that word more. More, more often than I am, but. I can't think of another word for it. Other than abuse. Speaking of S and A's not only has there been a reduction in teaching supports for children with additional needs. It's also become much more difficult for schools to apply for SNA support if they need it. Essentially, a school's allocation of fascinates has been frozen since the 20 19 20 20 school year. It's now called the front loading model. I started on the board of directors of the IPPF at the time, when we were informed about these front load and models, I was going to come along. And the era of resignation. In the room when we were told about this helps me make the decision to leave the board almost immediately. It was my first. Board meeting. I'm my only regret was. I waited a few more months to step away. Yeah. I am the George Lee. Of education, basically the NCSE froze the allocation of SNS and primary schools, as they try to figure out some sort of random arbitrary algorithm to allocate to schools rather than to children leaving the principal to make choices of which children in the school will receive supports which will not. It's only four and a half years later, they have a new revised model, which has already over complicated and over bureaucratic. And the only way to compare it to what it's been for the last four and a half years is it's like someone who's been punching you really hard for four years. And they decide to punch you a little more gently. Now. But still punching him. Naturally the IPP and have welcomed the new model because the mantra still is that those with the gracious need should have the greatest amount of support. Unless, of course you are a school stop. You don't get any support at all. And if you're a principal, don't forget, you are merely just one quantum. As you can see, despite it being very obvious, the NCSE have been allowed to reduce supports, and they've been ably supported by those who are in power. But what I want to really, to. Is gash inside the doors of the N C S E. And. I want to give you. An interesting statistic. Off the 62. Or so Surenos. That were employed by the NCSC in 2021. So just three years ago that there was off the 62 and a bit of them. 31 of them. I left the NCSE between 2021 and 2023. Now, any organization that loses half of their staff. Within a couple of years. Most raise questions. And the reason I'm saying it now. Is because I love to hear from any of those 31 CNAs or even the ones that didn't leave. I want to know what happened to them. Perhaps you're one of those former Nose or perhaps you're someone who's still in the NCSC or outside of the NCSC that knows. More than I do. And as I said, I'd really like you to get in touch. And I can assure you confidentiality if necessary. Because that's where I think we might travel to in our next episode. To the CNAs. One of the only front facing elements of the NCSC. And as of this time of this recording, I've already heard from two former CNAs. Who've told me of the rot within. Hopefully before we get to the next episode, some more will come forward. And I'm hoping that I'll be able to tell their stories, or maybe they'll be able to tell them themselves. In fact. I might take a bit of a chance here. I'm make a decision closer to the time. Because I might give it another few weeks. Just in case these people need. To get advice of whether it's safe enough to talk. And I might talk about another scandal caused by the NCSE. If I don't hear from enough people. Hopefully one or two may be brave enough to tell their stories. But I don't want to post people under pressure. Because that's not fair either but we do know. The same on, it's a famous saying the bad things happen when good people. Do or say nothing. The onshore dot Nash. Podcasts is written and produced by me, Simon Lewis. If you'd like to hear more of my thoughts on primary education and art, and you should subscribe to my mailing list on shot.net/subscribe. And if you've enjoyed this podcast so far, Please consider reviewing it on your favorite podcast player as it will help other people find it more easily. Until next time. Thanks so much for listening.