SNA cuts come at a huge cost to all children.

Lady Chatterton

Last week, I read a report about a little five year old boy called Christain who was hoping to start school in September but the school have had to refuse him entry as they have not been given an SNA or teaching resource hours for him.

http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/stopped-in-his-tracks-157926.html

I'm not aware of the exact circumstances in the school mentioned in the article but I do understand why the school might feel that they might not be able to cope without having extra resources. I'm sure that there are a lot of children through the country like Christain who are being deprived of an opportunity of being educated in their own community with their siblings, neighbours and friends because of these cuts.

It is agreed that in a large precentage of cases, children with special needs or special educational needs thrive in a mainstream environment as once as there are appropriate supports in place. In the case of autism, parents often report improvements in speech and language and social skills as children tend to learn from their peers. If a child isn't given access to a mainstream school it doesn't automatically follow that they will be given a place in a special school. There are lengthy lists for most special schools and their resources have also been cut.

During the "Celtic Tiger Years", integration was king and SNAs were appointed and there was a great buzz when the "Special Olympics" was hosted in Ireland. Things weren't perfect but the government had made a start on including the marginalised.

Where did it all go wrong?

Einhard

It's tragic alright, but where does the OP propose we get the money? Every single cut or tax increase announced so far has had adverse effects, and groups agitating on behalf of those impacted. Is Christian more deserving than Mary who is waiting months to see a specialist in Crumlin, or James waiting to see a speech therapist?

Lady Chatterton

Einhard wrote: »

It's tragic alright, but where does the OP propose we get the money? Every single cut or tax increase announced so far has had adverse effects, and groups agitating on behalf of those impacted. Is Christian more deserving than Mary who is waiting months to see a specialist in Crumlin, or James waiting to see a speech therapist?

If children with special needs are successfully integrated and receive an education it will save the state more money in the long run.

Nijmegen

MrsD007 makes a fair point - in cases where the cost/benefit proves that we make long term savings, making cuts is stupid.

This is the problem with the inflexible, voluntary only, downsizing of the public sector. You can cut posts, such as these, that don't carry tenure. So they get cut versus other roles.

Same story for the funding of Jack & Jill kids - the government hasn't repudiated, and I don't see them being able to, the math and logic that the cost of taking care of special needs babies and children through the foundation is far less than having to take them into acute state care.

Penny wise, pound foolish. All to keep Jack O'Connor & Co happy.

They've been quite silent on these topics, haven't they?

nesf

MrsD007 wrote: »

It seems to me that a few bankers went on gambling spree with our money and the financial regulator who was paid to protect us let us down and now we are all paying a very high price.

I am saddened to live in a country where bankers come before children. No one has gone to jail for what has happened but if children with special needs are prevented from going to school because they don't have access to an SNA, then their homes become jail to them.

Parents need to be aware that cuts in SNAs will affect all children if teachers are left to cope alone without proper resources.

I would really encourage all parents to voice their concerns about these cuts.

I was sympathetic towards your post until this point. The bankers have little to nothing to do with the cutting of SNAs. It's a simple budget deficit that's the issue here. The State takes in 2/3rds in tax of what it spends, that's why things like SNAs are being cut. SNAs are being cut because the State cannot cut the wages of teachers in general. So instead of all teachers and SNAs being paid somewhat less and SNAs being kept we have SNAs being cut because money has to be saved somewhere.

If you want to direct your anger at someone here forget the bankers (they deserve it for other reasons but aren't relevant here) blame the unions and their insistence on no pay cuts. No pay cuts means services like Jack and Jill and SNAs need to be cut instead. It's an absurd situation but that's what we've got right now.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

jimmycrackcorm

I think it's so ironic that when the boom was getting underway it was attributed to the quality of our education system.

Yet, prior to the boom there was no such thing as SNA'S. How did we manage before when we couldn't afford these?

Lady Chatterton

nesf wrote: »

I was sympathetic towards your post until this point. The bankers have little to nothing to do with the cutting of SNAs. It's a simple budget deficit that's the issue here. The State takes in 2/3rds in tax of what it spends, that's why things like SNAs are being cut. SNAs are being cut because the State cannot cut the wages of teachers in general. So instead of all teachers and SNAs being paid somewhat less and SNAs being kept we have SNAs being cut because money has to be saved somewhere.

If you want to direct your anger at someone here forget the bankers (they deserve it for other reasons but aren't relevant here) blame the unions and their insistence on no pay cuts. No pay cuts means services like Jack and Jill and SNAs need to be cut instead. It's an absurd situation but that's what we've got right now.

Nesf, I understand your upset at the unions and I agree with some of the points, the whole Croke Park agreement makes my blood boil. However, unless I have been living in another country or something it is having to bail out banks that has done the real damage.

I remember a time when my bank were offering me €10,000 loans every six months, money I hadn't asked for, yet the banks were pre-approving. The same lender offered me a mortgage of seven times my salary. Thankfully, I didn't take the bank up on their offer, if I had I'd be defaulting like lots of other poor misfortunates. Where was the financial regulator? I think it is incredibly unfair to blame everything on the unions.

Nijmegen

MrsD007 wrote: »

Nesf, I understand your upset at the unions and I agree with some of the points, the whole Croke Park agreement makes my blood boil. However, unless I have been living have being living in another country or something it is having to bail out banks that has done the real damage.

I remember a time when my bank were offering me €10,000 loans every six months, money I hadn't asked for, yet the banks were pre-approving. The same lender offered me a mortgage of seven times my salary. Thankfully, I didn't take the bank up on their offer, if I had I'd be defaulting like lots of other poor misfortunates. Where was the financial regulator? I think it is incredibly unfair to blame everything on the unions.

The banking crises is related to, but not the same as our deficit crises.

Both were caused by a slowdown in the economy and the collapse of the property market, with the deficit being effected by the large amounts of tax that relied on house sales.

In the here and the now, cutting all funding to the banks would still leave us requiring a deficit reduction exercise in the order we face today.

You don't borrow 66% over what you take in in tax revenue and not need to change that.

The unions are at the square center of why your SNA's are being cut: Because tenured public sector jobs elsewhere cannot be touched.

MrsD007

MrsD007 wrote: »

Nesf, I understand your upset at the unions and I agree with some of the points, the whole Croke Park agreement makes my blood boil. However, unless I have been living have being living in another country or something it is having to bail out banks that has done the real damage.

I remember a time when my bank were offering me €10,000 loans every six months, money I hadn't asked for, yet the banks were pre-approving. The same lender offered me a mortgage of seven times my salary. Thankfully, I didn't take the bank up on their offer, if I had I'd be defaulting like lots of other poor misfortunates. Where was the financial regulator? I think it is incredibly unfair to blame everything on the unions.

Given some of the history of the dept of education and budgeting -
http://www.herald.ie/national-news/school-pays-out-8364120k-to-rent-836450k-prefab-classroom-2040748.html
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2010/1230/1224286488484.html
(two very quick and small examples) - I would not be so quick to blame the bankers for everything, not at all.

The unions are at the square center of why your SNA's are being cut: Because tenured public sector jobs elsewhere cannot be touched.

This is it, really

Lady Chatterton

Nijmegen wrote: »

The unions are at the square center of why your SNA's are being cut: Because tenured public sector jobs elsewhere cannot be touched.

Thank you for your post. Just to clarify, I'm not directly affected by the SNA cuts but I am a parent and I have done volunteer work with children with special needs before.

20Cent

Nijmegen wrote: »

The unions are at the square center of why your SNA's are being cut: Because tenured public sector jobs elsewhere cannot be touched.

Em the public service can be touched and already has.

nesf

MrsD007 wrote: »

Nesf, I understand your upset at the unions and I agree with some of the points, the whole Croke Park agreement makes my blood boil. However, unless I have been living in another country or something it is having to bail out banks that has done the real damage.

I remember a time when my bank were offering me €10,000 loans every six months, money I hadn't asked for, yet the banks were pre-approving. The same lender offered me a mortgage of seven times my salary. Thankfully, I didn't take the bank up on their offer, if I had I'd be defaulting like lots of other poor misfortunates. Where was the financial regulator? I think it is incredibly unfair to blame everything on the unions.

Bailing out the banks is a whole separate problem to our budget deficit. Our budget deficit is why we're cutting SNAs and similar services, not the banks. The banks are a burden on the economy but in a different way and aren't directly affecting our budget. I'm not saying only the unions are to blame in general, only that in this particular instance you can lay it at the door of the unions.

maynooth_rules

Speaking as a Teacher I can safely say that some of you would be shocked at the little amount of work some SNAs do(I stress the word some, there are obviously tremendous SNAs out there). In the 4 secondary schools I have been in to date, up to half of the SNAs I have had in my class have been quite poor with the students, with one in particular only helping the child write his homework in his diary, and sitting twiddling her thumbs for the other 35 minutes. I am in no way a specialist on the matter but I have to question how some kids get SNAs. The numbers of SNAs has gotten absolutely crazy in the past 5-8 years and its hard to justify the massive rise. The salaries of 2 or 3 SNAs will pay for a new teacher in the school, IMO that is much more important. I am aware that I will probably get a lot of abuse for my comment but I have first hand experience of working with SNAs and I really do not feel many of them are value for money for the Department of Education. And again I come back to the point of the incredible rise (I believe 900%) in 8 years.
Personally I believe some students who have SNAs will benefit from teaching assistants in the classroom, much like they have in the UK. This teaching assistant will work with a number of pupils during class time and move around the class helping the pupils, thus helping the teacher, thus not stuck in the same seat like so many SNAs do be for the entire class. Also these teaching assistant jobs could be given to the large number of unemployed graduate teachers who are crying out for experience in the classroom.

Lady Chatterton

nesf wrote: »

Bailing out the banks is a whole separate problem to our budget deficit. Our budget deficit is why we're cutting SNAs and similar services, not the banks. The banks are a burden on the economy but in a different way and aren't directly affecting our budget. I'm not saying only the unions are to blame in general, only that in this particular instance you can lay it at the door of the unions.

Thanks for your posts. I actually started this thread in the "Parenting forum" as I wanted to raise awareness of the whole SNA cutbacks issue but the thread was later moved here by one of the Mods

If no one has any objections, I will remove the last paragraph of my original post as I don't want the thread to continue on along the bankers V's unions vein. I've read everyones post and I understand the budget deficit a bit better now

Lady Chatterton

maynooth_rules wrote: »

Speaking as a Teacher I can safely say that some of you would be shocked at the little amount of work some SNAs do(I stress the word some, there are obviously tremendous SNAs out there). In the 4 secondary schools I have been in to date, up to half of the SNAs I have had in my class have been quite poor with the students, with one in particular only helping the child write his homework in his diary, and sitting twiddling her thumbs for the other 35 minutes. I am in no way a specialist on the matter but I have to question how some kids get SNAs. The numbers of SNAs has gotten absolutely crazy in the past 5-8 years and its hard to justify the massive rise. The salaries of 2 or 3 SNAs will pay for a new teacher in the school, IMO that is much more important. I am aware that I will probably get a lot of abuse for my comment but I have first hand experience of working with SNAs and I really do not feel many of them are value for money for the Department of Education. And again I come back to the point of the incredible rise (I believe 900%) in 8 years.
Personally I believe some students who have SNAs will benefit from teaching assistants in the classroom, much like they have in the UK. This teaching assistant will work with a number of pupils during class time and move around the class helping the pupils, thus helping the teacher, thus not stuck in the same seat like so many SNAs do be for the entire class. Also these teaching assistant jobs could be given to the large number of unemployed graduate teachers who are crying out for experience in the classroom.

I must say that I think the idea of teaching assistants is a good one. At the moment SNAs sole function is to look after a child's care needs, (i.e health and safety and toileting) they actually are not allowed to have any involvement in teaching the child.

I'd say that teaching assistants would be more expensive than SNAs though. I believe SNA's receive €15 per hour (approx.).

irishh_bob

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

I think it's so ironic that when the boom was getting underway it was attributed to the quality of our education system.

Yet, prior to the boom there was no such thing as SNA'S. How did we manage before when we couldn't afford these?

special needs kids went to special schools , where they belong !

the primary school closest to where i live has 24 pupils in the entire school , thier are two teachers plus a special needs assitant for one single pupil , i know this kids family quite well , this kid suffers from epilepsy and is a very disruptive child , i have no doubt that this causes problems for other students , political correctness has resulted in a number of things in this country , one of which is that special needs kids come ahead of the other dozen kids in the class , im sorry but life isnt fair , special needs kids are not regular kids , they should be in special schools , what we had during the boom was tantamount to employing a private home tutor for kids with epilepsy , down syndrome etc

byhookorbycrook

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

I think it's so ironic that when the boom was getting underway it was attributed to the quality of our education system.

Yet, prior to the boom there was no such thing as SNA'S. How did we manage before when we couldn't afford these?

Children were usually in special schools, SNAs were introduced to help children integrate into mainstream.Many children who are now in mainstream are doing well, with the support of an SNA. Pupil teacher ratios in special schools are much lower, so ironically special schools cost the state more.

harr

irishh_bob wrote: »

special needs kids went to special schools , where they belong !

the primary school closest to where i live has 24 pupils in the entire school , thier are two teachers plus a special needs assitant for one single pupil , i know this kids family quite well , this kid suffers from epilepsy and is a very disruptive child , i have no doubt that this causes problems for other students , political correctness has resulted in a number of things in this country , one of which is that special needs kids come ahead of the other dozen kids in the class , im sorry but life isnt fair , special needs kids are not regular kids , they should be in special schools , what we had during the boom was tantamount to employing a private home tutor for kids with epilepsy , down syndrome etc

so your telling me that my kid should not have the same rights as other kids just because he has special needs and what has political correctness got to do with anything for one thing there has never been a case where my kid has been put before another child i have to fight for everything even to get him into school our nearest special school is over 60 miles away why should he have to sit on a bus for 4 hours a day?I have had to give up work to look after him and to try to give him the best possible life he can lead.Grow up and i hope your life goes all to plan and you dont ever need any extra help from the state because comments like above can have a way of coming back to bite you in the ass...

maynooth_rules

MrsD007 wrote: »

I must say that I think the idea of teaching assistants is a good one. At the moment SNAs sole function is to look after a child's care needs, (i.e health and safety and toileting) they actually are not allowed to have any involvement in teaching the child.

I'd say that teaching assistants would be more expensive than SNAs though. I believe SNA's receive €15 per hour (approx.).

I believe they get paid 70 pounds a day in the UK, but obviously wages are that big less over there

Lady Chatterton

harr wrote: »

so your telling me that my kid should not have the same rights as other kids just because he has special needs and what has political correctness got to do with anything for one thing there has never been a case where my kid has been put before another child i have to fight for everything even to get him into school our nearest special school is over 60 miles away why should he have to sit on a bus for 4 hours a day?I have had to give up work to look after him and to try to give him the best possible life he can lead.Grow up and i hope your life goes all to plan and you dont ever need any extra help from the state because comments like above can have a way of coming back to bite you in the ass...

Well said Harr! I agree with you 100%.

None of us know what life will throw at us. I remember someone I worked with once who was complaining when the local planning authority made a wheelchair accessible entrance to his house and a downstairs toilet a condition of his planning permission, he was furious.

Unfortuately, a member of his family later became a wheelchair user and he was damn glad that the house was accessible,

irishh_bob

harr wrote: »

so your telling me that my kid should not have the same rights as other kids just because he has special needs and what has political correctness got to do with anything for one thing there has never been a case where my kid has been put before another child i have to fight for everything even to get him into school our nearest special school is over 60 miles away why should he have to sit on a bus for 4 hours a day?I have had to give up work to look after him and to try to give him the best possible life he can lead.Grow up and i hope your life goes all to plan and you dont ever need any extra help from the state because comments like above can have a way of coming back to bite you in the ass...

i didnt say special needs kids should be denied an education so i dont know where your coming from with the rights issue , if i ever have kids and one of them is different , i wont expect them to be given thier own private tutor , kids with down syndrome or other disabilitys require specialised attention , thier presence in a regular school creates a disturbance , thats just a reality

Lady Chatterton

irishh_bob wrote: »

if i ever have kids and one of them is different , i wont expect them to be given thier own private tutor

No one is talking about one to one tuition, we are talking about SNAs. And if your child isn't assigned an SNA, your child may not be able to attend the local national school.

irishh_bob

MrsD007 wrote: »

No one is talking about one to one tuition, we are talking about SNAs. And if your child isn't assigned an SNA, your child may not be able to attend the local national school.

the primary school closest to where i live has one special needs pupil and one special needs teachers , if that pupil was in a special school , the special needs teacher could be employed to teach many special needs kids

gizmo555

maynooth_rules wrote: »

Speaking as a Teacher I can safely say that some of you would be shocked at the little amount of work some SNAs do(I stress the word some, there are obviously tremendous SNAs out there).

Having read this recent piece in the Sunday Business Post, I'm not surprised at all:

Hundreds of schools may face the loss of special needs assistants after a government report found that the scheme is being hugely overused and that costs have exploded by almost 1000 per cent in the past decade.

The assistants offer support and assistance in the classroom to students with special needs, usually on a one-to-one basis.

However, the report - which has been seen by The Sunday Business Post - finds that ‘‘the role of the SNA in schools has been extended far beyond the scheme’s objectives’’.

There is also evidence of ‘‘over-allocation’’ of SNA posts and that professionals are coming under pressure to classify students as having special needs in order for the school to receive an SNA post.

Some professionals have told the Department of Education that they were ‘‘pressurised’’ to say students meet the terms of the special needs scheme ‘‘when it is clear that they do not’’.

In 2001, there were less than 3,000 SNAs - today, the numbers have been capped at just under 11,000.Part of the reason for this, the report finds, is that when students with special needs move on from their school, the school often retains the SNA job.

‘‘An over-allocation of SNA support has been identified in primary, post-primary and special schools," the report finds. The over-allocation in primary and post-primary schools amounts to over a quarter of all SNA posts.

Total annual spending on the scheme amounts to some €350 million.

A spokeswoman for the Department of Education said that there is ‘‘now a need to restate the SNA scheme, so that all stakeholders, especially schools and parents, have a clear understanding of the care role of the SNA and how this resource should be allocated.

‘‘We need to ensure a situation where the valuable work of the SNAs can continue to support students whose care needs require an SNA but at the same time ensuring that the resource is not misused," she said.

byhookorbycrook

irishh_bob wrote: »

the primary school closest to where i live has one special needs pupil and one special needs teachers , if that pupil was in a special school , the special needs teacher could be employed to teach many special needs kids

Sorry, horse manure. No school emplloys a full time teacher for one child. You really do not know what you are talking about. The teacher you speak of is a learning support /resource teacher and will give learning support to any child on or below the 12th percentile in maths and or literacy. Do you honestly believe the DES would allow a teacher have just one child???Do you know what the general allocation model is?Do you know what portion of the school going population need support??NO???Thought not.

byhookorbycrook

gizmo555 wrote: »

.


There is also evidence of ‘‘over-allocation’’ of SNA posts and that professionals are coming under pressure to classify students as having special needs in order for the school to receive an SNA post.

Some professionals have told the Department of Education that they were ‘‘pressurised’’ to say students meet the terms of the special needs scheme ‘‘when it is clear that they do not’’.

In 2001, there were less than 3,000 SNAs - today, the numbers have been capped at just under 11,000.Part of the reason for this, the report finds, is that when students with special needs move on from their school, the school often retains the SNA job.

‘‘An over-allocation of SNA support has been identified in primary, post-primary and special schools," the report finds. The over-allocation in primary and post-primary schools amounts to over a quarter of all SNA posts.

Total annual spending on the scheme amounts to some €350 million.

A spokeswoman for the Department of Education said that there is ‘‘now a need to restate the SNA scheme, so that all stakeholders, especially schools and parents, have a clear understanding of the care role of the SNA and how this resource should be allocated.

‘‘We need to ensure a situation where the valuable work of the SNAs can continue to support students whose care needs require an SNA but at the same time ensuring that the resource is not misused," she said.

Rubbish, SNAs are hard fought for and not often won. Even if an OT, psychologist or other relevant professional would be so unprofessional to bow to this pressure(from who??)the SENO can and does overturn the decision .

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

desaparecidos

The concept of a special needs kid in a "mainstream" school with a full time assistant is ridiculous.

If parents want their special needs child to attend a standard school then let them pay for the SNA themselves, otherwise the child should go to an appropriate school where their needs are properly looked after.

sollar

Einhard wrote: »

It's tragic alright, but where does the OP propose we get the money? Every single cut or tax increase announced so far has had adverse effects, and groups agitating on behalf of those impacted. Is Christian more deserving than Mary who is waiting months to see a specialist in Crumlin, or James waiting to see a speech therapist?

A very serious crackdown on welfare fraud with severe penalties might pay for it.

byhookorbycrook

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

It's rubbish to say that nameless professionals are allegedly under pressure from schools (I presume?)Anyone au fait with the system knows that the SENO makes the call on whether a child gets an SNA or not.Also,each year a school must make returns to the the DES on the number of children with particular needs in the school and how many have left, so there is no way a school can retain an SNA if the child the SNA was appointed to has left.

I should say at this point that I am teaching for 25 years, 10 of which I have spent in learning support/resource so am pretty much in the know, more so perhaps that other here.

Dude73

Mrsd007: firstly the school Refused to apply for an sna that would ensure this kid a placement. There was a 2nd article in the paper with more details. All the kids reports said he should go to mainstream but the board didn't accept any reports or agree with them. They refuted the opinion of professionals and refused him a placement.
Also desaparecidos: there is something called the epsen act in Ireland that states that children with disabilities have the right to access mainstream education with adequate support.
It's important to understand that sna's are not teacher assistants. They only help with practical stuff. I don't understand why they are paid so much. They only need to go to a 2 month course and that's it- you are an sna. Yes part of the blame are the unions - teachers and public servants have to reduce their salaries. It's not right that a hse secretary earns 150000!! That's like an university
lecturer! There's something wrong there..

Lady Chatterton

Dude73 wrote: »

Mrsd007: firstly the school Refused to apply for an sna that would ensure this kid a placement. There was a 2nd article in the paper with more details. All the kids reports said he should go to mainstream but the board didn't accept any reports or agree with them. They refuted the opinion of professionals and refused him a placement.
Also desaparecidos: there is something called the epsen act in Ireland that states that children with disabilities have the right to access mainstream education with adequate support.
It's important to understand that sna's are not teacher assistants. They only help with practical stuff. I don't understand why they are paid so much. They only need to go to a 2 month course and that's it- you are an sna. Yes part of the blame are the unions - teachers and public servants have to reduce their salaries. It's not right that a hse secretary earns 150000!! That's like an university
lecturer! There's something wrong there..

Thanks for the extra info Dude73. I was going on what was in the article I saw. However, I did state I was not aware of the school's position. The thing is that there are definitely schools out there who do genuinely want to enrol special needs kids but feel unable to when resources are not being provided by the department to support the child.

byhookorbycrook

EPSEN has not been enacted.

gizmo555

byhookorbycrook wrote: »

It's rubbish to say that nameless professionals are allegedly under pressure from schools

Are you saying the report's authors are lying? Are you also saying they are wrong when they say SNAs allocated to schools for specific children are retained by some schools after those children and hence the associated resource requirement has moved on?

Whether you believe the allegations or not, there's no gainsaying the basic fact that the scheme's cost has gone up
1,000% in ten years. What explanation could you give for this, since you're so au fait with the issues?

byhookorbycrook

The numbers in primary schools have hugely increased.
The numbers of special needs children in mainstream have also increased.
One SNA to a class of 30 is cheaper than the pupil teacher ratio in special schools by far.
No class has two SNAs, no matter what the needs,they do not get sanctioned.

Yes, I am saying it is rubbish that schools retain SNAs ,at least in primary.it is impossible to do so,once the child leaves the SNA's post is terminated.If a child moves from one school to another, the new school has to re-apply for an SNA, go through all the hoops once more and wait until the powers that be sanction or refuse the post.

SNA provision is constantly reviewed and cut. I know of a blind child who was asked to justify why they needed an SNA ,wasn't even a done deal that she would get one.

born2bwild

maynooth_rules wrote: »

Speaking as a Teacher I can safely say that some of you would be shocked at the little amount of work some SNAs do(I stress the word some, there are obviously tremendous SNAs out there). In the 4 secondary schools I have been in to date, up to half of the SNAs I have had in my class have been quite poor with the students, with one in particular only helping the child write his homework in his diary, and sitting twiddling her thumbs for the other 35 minutes. I am in no way a specialist on the matter but I have to question how some kids get SNAs. The numbers of SNAs has gotten absolutely crazy in the past 5-8 years and its hard to justify the massive rise. The salaries of 2 or 3 SNAs will pay for a new teacher in the school, IMO that is much more important. I am aware that I will probably get a lot of abuse for my comment but I have first hand experience of working with SNAs and I really do not feel many of them are value for money for the Department of Education. And again I come back to the point of the incredible rise (I believe 900%) in 8 years.
Personally I believe some students who have SNAs will benefit from teaching assistants in the classroom, much like they have in the UK. This teaching assistant will work with a number of pupils during class time and move around the class helping the pupils, thus helping the teacher, thus not stuck in the same seat like so many SNAs do be for the entire class. Also these teaching assistant jobs could be given to the large number of unemployed graduate teachers who are crying out for experience in the classroom.

You're right. I would say the ratio of helpful, effective SNAs to semi-literate wastes of space is about 50-50.
Having said that, in my place, that ratio applied to the teaching staff wouldn't be that different.

astrofool

I am sure the teachers in the school would take pay cuts (bringing them closer to international norms) to allow for the extra staff needed to allow this pupil to enrol.

byhookorbycrook

born2bwild wrote: »

You're right. I would say the ratio of helpful, effective SNAs to semi-literate wastes of space is about 50-50.
Having said that, in my place, that ratio applied to the teaching staff wouldn't be that different.

SNAs work under the direction of the class teacher. They are only meant to help with care needs or if the student is a danger to himself or others. Many SNAs choose to help their student and others in the class academically,but that is not part of their job.

irishh_bob

astrofool wrote: »

I am sure the teachers in the school would take pay cuts (bringing them closer to international norms) to allow for the extra staff needed to allow this pupil to enrol.

but why should teachers have to face more pay cuts when it wasnt them who ruined the country :pac:

#15

astrofool wrote: »

I am sure the teachers in the school would take pay cuts (bringing them closer to international norms) to allow for the extra staff needed to allow this pupil to enrol.

Are you in favour of bringing their workload closer to international norms too?

On topic - this is exactly the type of issue that highlights the problems in parts of the PS. Areas of need remain underfunded because overstaffed areas cannot be cut.

gizmo555

byhookorbycrook wrote: »

Yes, I am saying it is rubbish . . .

Repeatedly saying that facts and points of view that don't coincide with your own are "rubbish" or "horse manure" doesn't invalidate those facts or points of view.

Having seen the report that another, as you put it, "nameless" education professional was pressured to certify requirements for SNAs unjustifably, you yourself post anonymously here not merely to deny the allegation, but to deny that any such allegation occurred. Bit of a sense of irony failure there . . .

The numbers in primary schools have increased - but not tenfold in ten years, which is what the cost of SNAs has increased by. According to this report in today's Examiner, primary school pupil numbers stand now at 510,000. In 2002, they were at 432,000, having fallen steadily from 557,000 since 1986. If an 18% increase in pupils in 9 years from a relatively low base is "huge" by your standards, what do you call a 1,000% increase in ten years in the cost of SNAs?

byhookorbycrook

Ok, once more.

More children have moved from special schools to mainstream. In a special school the pupil teacher ratio can be as low as 6-1. In a regular classroom,the PTR is 30-1.

So the cost of one SNA in maistream is far less than the cost of 5 teachers in a special school.Hence- SNAs provide value for money and also allow children to be educated in their own areas.

Why should a blind or deaf child have to travel as far away as Dublin to be educated?

As to nameless officals,why not say 10 ed psychologists in Munster ?Might have a ring of truth then... The piece in the Business Post is the equivalent of the tabloid "sources close to the royal family" crap.

gizmo555

byhookorbycrook wrote: »

Ok, once more.

More children have moved from special schools to mainstream. In a special school the pupil teacher ratio can be as low as 6-1. In a regular classroom,the PTR is 30-1.

So the cost of one SNA in maistream is far less than the cost of 5 teachers in a special school.Hence- SNAs provide value for money and also allow children to be educated in their own areas.

Why should a blind or deaf child have to travel as far away as Dublin to be educated?

This doesn't address the main points of the article. The SNA scheme is in principle a very good thing. A scheme that's allowed to mushroom out of control consuming scarce resources unjustifiably is not.

byhookorbycrook wrote: »

As to nameless officals,why not say 10 ed psychologists in Munster ?Might have a ring of truth then... The piece in the Business Post is the equivalent of the tabloid "sources close to the royal family" crap.

The report is by a reputable journalist in a reputable newspaper and has, in my opinion, a greater ring of truth than a nameless poster on an Internet forum. For example, you claimed this in an earlier post:

byhookorbycrook wrote:

Yes, I am saying it is rubbish that schools retain SNAs ,at least in primary.it is impossible to do so,once the child leaves the SNA's post is terminated.

Stephen O’Neill, assistant general secretary at IMPACT trade union which represents SNAs disagrees with you:

In the past, a SNA would have been assigned to a particular pupil on the basis of the pupil’s needs and would have worked with the pupil throughout his or her school years. When the child exited that school, the need for the SNA was gone and the job wasn’t there anymore. That situation has changed, says O’Neill.

“If a situation arose where a SNA brings a child through education and then the child moves on, then the assistant is available to take another child through,” he explains. “In other words we need to build a pool of this expertise. It’s hugely popular with parents and very popular with the educational establishment.”

How can that be reconciled with your categorical claim that each and every SNA post is tied to a specific child and the post is terminated when that specific child leaves the school in question?

Lady Chatterton

byhookorbycrook wrote: »

Yes, I am saying it is rubbish that schools retain SNAs ,at least in primary.it is impossible to do so,once the child leaves the SNA's post is terminated.

gizmo555 wrote: »

Stephen O’Neill, assistant general secretary at IMPACT trade union which represents SNAs disagrees with you:

In the past, a SNA would have been assigned to a particular pupil on the basis of the pupil’s needs and would have worked with the pupil throughout his or her school years. When the child exited that school, the need for the SNA was gone and the job wasn’t there anymore. That situation has changed, says O’Neill.

“If a situation arose where a SNA brings a child through education and then the child moves on, then the assistant is available to take another child through,” he explains. “In other words we need to build a pool of this expertise. It’s hugely popular with parents and very popular with the educational establishment.”

How can that be reconciled with your categorical claim that each and every SNA post is tied to a specific child and the post is terminated when that specific child leaves the school in question?

I agree with byhookorbycrook, when a child with special needs leaves a school the SNA leaves too. However, in our local national school, children have left but because new children with special needs started in the school the SNAs were retained.

However, this year a child who had a fulltime SNA is leaving and their is a child with Downs Syndrome starting in September but his parents have been told that because of the cutbacks he won't be entitled to an SNA.

Godge

MrsD007 wrote: »

I must say that I think the idea of teaching assistants is a good one. At the moment SNAs sole function is to look after a child's care needs, (i.e health and safety and toileting) they actually are not allowed to have any involvement in teaching the child.

I'd say that teaching assistants would be more expensive than SNAs though. I believe SNA's receive €15 per hour (approx.).

http://careeradvice.loadzajobs.ie/industry-insight/healthcare/special-needs-assistant-job-in-ireland-sna-job-889


Special Needs Assistants are paid on a scale ranging from €21,500 to €34,000 according to the link. The qualification required is the Junior Cert.

Someone can correct me if I am wrong but my understanding is that at primary level, they work for the school year plus two days before and after each term, giving them about 10 weeks annual leave.

The working week is about 28 hours.

At the top of the scale the hourly rate of pay is therefore around €23.50. If you exclude the holidays, the real hourly rate is close to €30. Not bad for someone who only has a Junior Cert.

Lady Chatterton

Godge wrote: »

http://careeradvice.loadzajobs.ie/industry-insight/healthcare/special-needs-assistant-job-in-ireland-sna-job-889


Special Needs Assistants are paid on a scale ranging from €21,500 to €34,000 according to the link. The qualification required is the Junior Cert.

Someone can correct me if I am wrong but my understanding is that at primary level, they work for the school year plus two days before and after each term, giving them about 10 weeks annual leave.

The working week is about 28 hours.

At the top of the scale the hourly rate of pay is therefore around €23.50. If you exclude the holidays, the real hourly rate is close to €30. Not bad for someone who only has a Junior Cert.

I have been studying Child Psychology part-time for the last year and through my work experience I've met quite a few SNAs. The minimum educational requirement is Junior Cert. but most SNAs have a FETAC 5/6 qualification in childcare or special needs education, they would also have First-Aid qualifications.

Some SNAs (and I'm not saying all) would have completed FETAC 5/6 courses on challenging behaviour, understanding dyslexia, play therapy etc.

Some would have PECS training, which is a picture exchange language system used by non verbal children or children with autism.

Some would have Lamh training which is a type of sign language.

Very few of the SNA's I met had just Junior Cert level education. However, I did meet a couple of women in their fifties who left school after their Inter Cert (Junior Cert) but had extensive personal experience of caring for a child or a sibling with special needs and who worked as part time SNAs.

maynooth_rules

In the two primary schools and two secondary schools in my town, most of the SNAs are middle aged women who got the jobs I believe mainly on contacts. On of the women who is an SNA in one of the schools is a retired teacher on a pension from the other primary school. You couldnt make it up

Godge

maynooth_rules wrote: »

In the two primary schools and two secondary schools in my town, most of the SNAs are middle aged women who got the jobs I believe mainly on contacts. On of the women who is an SNA in one of the schools is a retired teacher on a pension from the other primary school. You couldnt make it up

A familiar story. Of the 6,000 SNAs, probably the first 4,000 were recruited as a result of contacts and fit your description. Things did improve thereafter. Ironically, because of the last-in first-out rule the more recent better-qualified SNAs will be the ones to lose their jobs.

Godge

MrsD007 wrote: »

I have been studying Child Psychology part-time for the last year and through my work experience I've met quite a few SNAs. The minimum educational requirement is Junior Cert. but most SNAs have a FETAC 5/6 qualification in childcare or special needs education, they would also have First-Aid qualifications.

Some SNAs (and I'm not saying all) would have completed FETAC 5/6 courses on challenging behaviour, understanding dyslexia, play therapy etc.

Some would have PECS training, which is a picture exchange language system used by non verbal children or children with autism.

Some would have Lamh training which is a type of sign language.

Very few of the SNA's I met had just Junior Cert level education. However, I did meet a couple of women in their fifties who left school after their Inter Cert (Junior Cert) but had extensive personal experience of caring for a child or a sibling with special needs and who worked as part time SNAs.

The point I am trying to make is that the salary is very high for the job involved. If you take the rate for the job and adjust for a 40-hour a week job and four weeks leave, the annual rate is about €50,000. That is a huge salary even if you are correct about the qualifications. In most European countries the job would attract normal terms and conditions and the salary would be less than €20,000. That is why they can afford better services than we can. That is also why we have to let SNAs go.

gizmo555

maynooth_rules wrote: »

In the two primary schools and two secondary schools in my town, most of the SNAs are middle aged women who got the jobs I believe mainly on contacts. On of the women who is an SNA in one of the schools is a retired teacher on a pension from the other primary school. You couldnt make it up

Godge wrote: »

A familiar story . . . Ironically, because of the last-in first-out rule the more recent better-qualified SNAs will be the ones to lose their jobs.

They're not "better" qualified - they're over qualified, given the pretty basic and constrained duties involved, as described in this thread. Indeed, it could well be that the middle-aged women sneered at above would make a better fist of the job, with their maturity, life experience and probable experience as mothers than young graduates with qualifications far beyond what the role demands.

Godge wrote: »

The point I am trying to make is that the salary is very high for the job involved.

Which is precisely why the job is in such demand among candidates who are vastly over qualified for it.