This chapter examines policies to strengthen the support that is provided to foster equity in both DEIS and non-DEIS schools. It reviews the supports provided by the DEIS programme, highlighting its different areas of intervention, from academic to well-being supports. The chapter also provides an overview of the collaboration with parents and communities, the costs of schooling for families and the local responses to different needs. The chapter identifies strengths and challenges related to each of these policy areas and provides policy recommendations to address them. The overarching question addressed by the chapter is how to strengthen schools’ ability to respond to the needs of their students, in particular those at risk of educational disadvantage, whether they are in DEIS or non-DEIS schools, and foster equity within each school.
OECD Review of Resourcing Schools to Address Educational Disadvantage in Ireland
5. School-level interventions to address educational disadvantage
Abstract
Context and features
Challenges faced by disadvantaged students and their families
As discussed in Chapter 1, Ireland, similarly to other OECD countries, exhibits a socio-economic gap in academic performance in PISA1 results. Moreover, data from Ireland show that a performance gap exists between Delivering Equality of Opportunity In Schools (DEIS) and non-DEIS schools, and in particular between DEIS Urban Band 1 and non‑DEIS urban schools (Nelis and Gilleece, 2023[1]). Indeed, according to Ireland’s National Assessments of Mathematics and English Reading (NAMER) 2021 results, the gaps between the scores of students in non-DEIS urban schools and those in DEIS Urban Band 1 schools were approximately twice as large as the differences between students in non-DEIS urban schools and DEIS Urban Band 2 schools (ibid.). Yet, there is also evidence suggesting that gaps between DEIS and non‑DEIS schools, after taking into account a range of factors including socio‑economic background of students, are decreasing over time, although this result only holds for mathematics and not reading in NAMER (Karakolidis et al., 2021[2]; Karakolidis et al., 2021[3]), and in mathematics and science in Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) (Duggan et al., 2023[4]).
To analyse the effectiveness of the supports for disadvantaged students and their families, and support their learning, it is key to understand the context in which schools operate, and the challenges that some households are facing. An overview of these issues is provided in a survey2 from 2018 (Table 5.1) (Weir, 2018[5]). Emotional and behavioural problems among students were a common concern among the respondents, with three-quarters (74%) of the 319 interviewed Home School Community Liaison (HSCL) Coordinators specifying that this was a substantial issue in their schools. Over 90% of respondents reported encountering issues like persistent student absenteeism, inadequate nutrition, bullying/cyberbullying, poor oral language skills, family substance abuse, unemployment, substandard housing, parents' literacy/numeracy problems, and general family dysfunction. Significant challenges included deficient oral language skills (57%), community unemployment (56%), family dysfunction (55%), and on-going student absenteeism (53%). In contrast, organised crime (9.8%) and ethnic conflict (6.5%) were significant concerns in only a small minority of schools.
In line with the documented surge in homelessness in Ireland (see Chapter 1), particularly child homelessness, over two-thirds of respondents (68%) indicated that homelessness was a challenge faced by students and families in schools, with 53% acknowledging it to some extent and 16% recognising it as a significant issue.
Table 5.1. Prevalence of various challenges among students and families
Percentages of interviewed HSCL Coordinators indicating the extent of problems among the students/families served by the school (%).
Note: Based on 319 respondents among Home-School-Community Liaison (HSCL) Coordinators in primary and post-primary schools in Ireland.
Source: Weir (2018[5]), Partnership in DEIS schools: a survey of home-school-community liaison coordinators in primary and post-primary schools in Ireland, https://www.erc.ie/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/HSCL-report-2018.pdf (accessed on 3 January 2024).
A further challenge that students face relates to hunger and food insecurity. PISA 2022 data show that 7% of 15-year-old students in Ireland had experienced food insecurity, as they “did not eat at least once a week in the past 30 days, because there was not enough money to buy food”, similar to the OECD average (8%) (OECD, 2023[6]). In particular, 4% of the 15-year-olds reported not eating every day or almost every day due to a lack of money for food, compared to 3% on average across OECD countries (ibid.). Hunger appears to be a challenge also for students in primary school, as data from Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS) 2021 found that just over one in ten students in Ireland (11%) felt hungry every day on arrival at school, and a further 11% experienced this almost every day (Delaney et al., 2023[7]).
A focus on early leaving from education and training, retention and attendance
In Ireland, the Education (Welfare) Act (2000[8]) emphasises the promotion of school attendance, participation and retention. Section 22 mandates every school to have a statement of strategies to encourage regular attendance among students, and to keep attendance records for all their students. Ireland has implemented policy efforts to increase attendance and retention rates over the past decade. Early leaving from education and training (ELET) rates have been falling progressively in Ireland, from 9.9% in 2012 to 3.7% in 2022 (Eurostat, 2023[9]). This is substantially below the Europe 2030 national target of 9% and the European Union (EU) average (9.6%). However, certain groups, in particular Irish Traveller and Roma students, still have high ELET rates. Under the Irish National Traveller and Roma Inclusion Strategy (2017-2021) (Department of Justice and Equality, 2017[10]), a set of actions are underway to close educational gaps for these groups, including establishing a multi-disciplinary pilot project to improve school attendance and retention.3
The improvement of retention and attendance rates is seen as a central aim of the DEIS programme and is the responsibility of each school, supported by the School Completion Programme (SCP) and HSCL Scheme, described further below (Smyth et al., 2015[11]; Weir et al., 2018[12]). The DEIS planning process requires schools to set targets for improved attendance rates and to devise and implement strategies to achieve these targets.
According to the Chief Inspector report (Department of Education Inspectorate, 2022[13]), as of 2020, there had been little progress in increasing retention rates in DEIS Post-primary schools. This on-going trend has driven the inclusion of a key goal in DEIS 2017: to improve retention rates in DEIS Post-primary schools to match the national average by 2025. Yet, more recent data show some improvement in this regard. In 2014, the retention rate in DEIS Post-primary schools was 82.1%, and 85.0% in 2022 (Table 5.2). During the 2014-2020 period, the gap in retention to Leaving Certificate between DEIS and non-DEIS schools oscillated. While it decreased until 2016-17, the gap increased in 2019 (up to 9.3 percentage points) and subsequently subsided in 2022 to 8.4 percentage points (Deparment of Education, 2023[14]).
Table 5.2. Retention rates in DEIS Post-primary schools: 2014-2021
Source: Department of Education (2023[14]), Education Indicators for Ireland 2022, https://www.gov.ie/en/publication/055810-education-statistics/#latest-statistical-reports (accessed on 1 February 2024); Department of Education (2024[15]), Education Indicators for Ireland 2023, https://www.gov.ie/pdf/?file=https://assets.gov.ie/289901/66bf9068-8a83-4bf8-86d4-d3aba60ef7d1.pdf#page=null (accessed 22 April 2024).
Attendance is also a key focus area of the DEIS programme. The Department of Education (DoE) collaborates with the Tusla Education Support Service (TESS) in relation to the promotion of school attendance, participation and retention among primary and post-primary students. TESS comprises three strands: the statutory Educational Welfare Service4 (EWS) and the two school support services: the HSCL Scheme and the School Completion Programme (described in the section below). To strengthen these measures and combat the dropping rates of school attendance post‑pandemic, TESS launched a national school attendance campaign in partnership with the DoE (Department of Education, 2023[16]). The campaign is underpinned by a webinar series with six sessions running throughout the school year 2023/24. Sessions are focused on attendance and consist of a collaborative initiative led by TESS including NEPS, the Inspectorate, DoE, school principals, with the support of international experts (ibid.).
The analysis of school attendance by TESS raises concerns, particularly in relation to DEIS schools. A report based on 2018/19 data found that non-attendance, 20-day cumulative absences, expulsions and suspensions were highest among DEIS Urban Band 1 schools (when compared to DEIS Urban Band 2 schools, non-DEIS urban schools, DEIS Rural schools and non-DEIS rural schools) (Tusla, 2022[17]; Department of Education Inspectorate, 2022[13]). DEIS Urban Band 2 schools generally had the second highest rates on these measures. In relation to post-primary schools, the report found that non-attendance, 20-day absences, expulsions and suspensions were significantly and substantially higher among DEIS Post-primary schools compared with non-DEIS post-primary schools (ibid.). As of 2020, school attendance in DEIS primary and post-primary schools remained a concern (Department of Education Inspectorate, 2022[13]).
Attendance data are mandatorily reported by schools twice a year for those students with serious attendance issues that have been identified during the current academic year; i.e. students who were absent for a cumulative total of 20 days or more falling within the following categories (TESS, 2023[18]):
Illness
Urgent Family Reason
Holiday
Suspended
Other
Unexplained
Schools should not report children with fewer than 20 days of reported absences (TESS, 2023[18]). Only children aged six years old or older and children who have not reached the age of 16 years or have not completed three years of post-primary education, whichever occurs later, should be reported. In addition, many schools monitor their attendance data through the school’s on-going pastoral care support and frequently have attendance as a priority among the duties of the school management members (Government of Ireland, 2000[8]).
Greater learning needs in DEIS schools
DEIS schools accommodate a higher concentration of students with greater learning needs compared to non-DEIS schools. According to principal reports in PISA 2018, almost a quarter of students in DEIS Post‑primary schools (one-seventh in non-DEIS post‑primary schools) had special educational needs5 (Nelis et al., 2021[19]). Three-fifths of students in DEIS schools (one-fifth in non-DEIS schools) were reported by principals to come from socio-economically disadvantaged backgrounds. When considering the PISA ESCS6 index, data confirm the gap between DEIS and non-DEIS schools: while two-fifths of students in DEIS schools were in the lower ESCS quartile, only one-fifth of students in non-DEIS schools had scores in this range.
Moreover, principal reports highlighted learning challenges linked to complications in student behaviour (Nelis et al., 2021[19]). Compared to their counterparts in non-DEIS schools and the OECD average, principals in DEIS Post‑primary schools were more inclined to report that aspects of student behaviour posed obstacles to learning. Over three-quarters of students (as opposed to half in non-DEIS post‑primary schools and over one-third on average across OECD countries) in DEIS schools had principals indicating that unauthorised student absence hindered learning. Widespread hindrances in DEIS schools included students not being attentive (67% in DEIS schools, compared to 34% in non-DEIS schools, and 59% on average across OECD countries). Moreover, for about one-fifth of students in DEIS schools, principals identified student use of alcohol and drugs, lack of respect for teachers, and bullying as impediments to learning (ibid.).
The Inspectorate identified, through student surveys, another barrier to learning: a considerable decline in enthusiasm for learning between primary and post-primary for students attending DEIS schools (Department of Education Inspectorate, 2022[13]). Only 50% of students in DEIS schools at the post-primary level reported that they liked coming to school, while the corresponding figure for students in DEIS schools at the primary level was 68%.
Supports available to DEIS schools
As discussed throughout this report, the DEIS programme aims at providing resources to the schools with the largest concentration of disadvantaged students. To do so, the programme provides a range of supports aimed at addressing the various needs that are driven by socio-economic disadvantage. The various supports are outlined in Table 5.3. This section describes those that target and support students directly at the school level. For this reason, planning, administrative and professional learning supports are not a focus of this chapter specifically.
Table 5.3. DEIS supports across different Bands
Note: The table aims to provide an overview of some of the main supports, not an exhaustive nuanced list. HSCL = Home School Community Liaison (see Chapter 5 for more information). Administrative principals (AP) are exempt from teaching duties. The enrolment threshold for appointing a deputy principal (DP) exempt from teaching duties is set at 573 students for other than DEIS Urban Band 1 schools. Chapters 2‑4 provide additional details about these supports.
Source: Department of Education (2023[20]), DEIS Delivering Equality of Opportunity In Schools, https://www.gov.ie/en/policy-information/4018ea-deis-delivering-equality-of-opportunity-in-schools/ (accessed on 1 December 2023).
Some measures, such as the smaller class size, apply only to DEIS Urban Band 1 primary schools (Department of Education, 2024[21]). While the primary staffing schedule operates on the basis of a general average of one classroom teacher for every 23 students for the 2023/24 school year, a lower threshold applies for DEIS Urban Band 1 schools. Staffing arrangements in DEIS Urban Band 1 primary schools for the 2023/24 school year are 17:1 for junior schools, 19:1 for vertical schools and 21:1 for senior schools. This follows three improvements in the staffing schedules for schools since 2021. Detailed information on the allocation of teachers to schools is published each year (Department of Education, 2024[21]).
While in non-DEIS primary schools an administrative principal is appointed on an enrolment of 169 students, in DEIS Urban Band 1, the appointment is for every 113 students; for DEIS Urban Band 2, for every 136 students (Department of Education, 2024[21]).
The Home School Community Liaison Scheme
The HSCL Scheme, initiated through a pilot programme in 1990, has been extended several times since then (1991, 1999, 2005 and 2017) under DEIS (Tusla, 2021[22]). Introduced as a pilot project, funding was initially allocated for the appointment of 31 teachers as HSCL Coordinators in 55 primary schools in disadvantaged areas (Weir et al., 2018[12]). The scheme aims to improve educational outcomes for the students most at risk of poor attendance, participation and retention. This is achieved by working with the parents or guardians of students who are experiencing, or are likely to experience, educational disadvantages. Indeed, the HSCL Scheme promotes partnerships between parents and teachers to enhance students' learning opportunities and retention in the education system. The programme also puts great emphasis on collaboration with the local community (ibid.).
Operational responsibility lies with TESS, while the DoE funds and allocates HSCL Coordinators. An integrated services model combines the HSCL Scheme with the School Completion Programme and the Educational Welfare Service. Professional learning for HSCL Coordinators is described in Chapter 4.
As of 2020, there were 415 HSCL Coordinators in post-primary and DEIS Urban primary schools. In the 2022-2023 school year the number of HSCL Coordinators increased from 418 in 521 DEIS schools to 528 in 688 DEIS schools (Department of Education, 2024[21]). In addition, HSCL provision was expanded to schools with non-DEIS status for the first time in the scheme’s history. Ten HSCL Coordinators in 14 non-DEIS schools were appointed with the aim of providing support to schools with significant Traveller and Roma populations (under a pilot project described in the Strengths section of the chapter). This brought the total number of HSCL Coordinators to 540 and schools to 702 for the 2022-2023 academic year.
The primary role of the HSCL Coordinator is to work with the salient adult(s) in the child’s life, in order to improve educational outcomes for the child (Weir et al., 2018[12]). The focus of the role is to improve the attendance, participation and retention of children in the education system, by providing both universal and targeted supports. An HSCL Coordinator is a teacher from a participatory school who is released from teaching duties, for a maximum of five years, in order to work intensively with and provide support to parents and guardians. They engage in full-time liaison work between the home, the school and the community. The scheme operates in a spirit of partnership and collaboration with parents and teachers, while at the same time, being part of an on-going and wider integrated services approach to children’s educational welfare (Weir et al., 2018[12]).
The five main aims of the HSCL Scheme are (Weir et al., 2018[12]):
1. To maximise active participation of the children in the schools of the scheme in the learning process, in particular those who might be at risk of failure;
2. To promote active co-operation between home, school and relevant community agencies in promoting the educational interests of the children;
3. To raise awareness among parents of their own capacities to enhance their children’s educational progress and to assist them in developing relevant skills;
4. To enhance the children’s uptake from education, their retention in the education system, their continuation to post-compulsory education and to the third level and their attitudes towards life-long learning; and
5. To disseminate the positive outcomes of the scheme throughout the school system generally.
The HSCL Coordinator assumes multiple responsibilities aligned with fostering collaboration between parents and teachers, implementing innovative strategies to address educational disadvantage, and incorporating parental involvement into the school development process (Tusla, 2021[22]). The principal duties of the HSCL Coordinator encompass establishing frameworks to identify parental needs, compiling and regularly reviewing a targeted list in consultation with relevant stakeholders, and actively involving parents in supporting their children's education. The coordinator plays a pivotal role in facilitating smooth transitions across various educational stages, spanning from early childhood to primary, primary to post-primary, and post-primary to further and higher education.
To establish trust and enhance parental engagement, the HSCL Coordinator conducts home visits, encouraging parents to actively participate in their child's education and disseminating information about school and community services (Tusla, 2021[22]). Additionally, the coordinator monitors the efficacy of interventions in line with the schools’ DEIS plan and identifies potential parent leaders who can contribute to the activities of the HSCL Scheme and serve as valuable resources for other parents.
School Meals Programme
In Ireland, the School Meals Programme is under the remit of the Department of Social Protection and provides funding towards the provision of food services to some 1 600 schools and organisations benefitting 260 000 children (Department of Education, 2024[21]). The objective of the programme is to provide regular, nutritious food to children to support them in taking full advantage of the education provided to them. The programme is an important component of policies to encourage school attendance and extra educational achievement (Department of Education, 2024[21]). Schools need to apply to the School Meals Programme, and priority is given to schools that are in the DEIS programme.
As of September 2023, all DEIS primary schools are entitled to a hot meal, while DEIS Post-primary schools receive a cold meal daily7 (at the school’s choice of either lunch or breakfast). The Hot School Meals Programme was introduced in 2019 as a small pilot of 30 schools. The Minister announced that from April 2024, that this scheme would be offered to all primary schools. Approximately, 900 primary schools applied for inclusion in the Hot Meals Programme, which will bring the total number of schools receiving hot meals to 1 400 (Department of Social Protection, 2023[23]).
The School Completion Programme
The DEIS programme has a strong focus on the attendance and retention of disadvantaged students. The SCP is a targeted programme of support for primary and post-primary children and young people who have been identified as potentially at risk of early leaving from education and training, or who are out of school and have not successfully transferred to an alternative learning site or employment (Department of Education, 2024[21]).
The desired impact of the SCP is retention of a young person to completion of the Leaving Certificate, equivalent qualification or suitable level of educational attainment which enables them to transition into further education, training or employment. SCP, together with the HSCL Scheme and the statutory EWS, focus on improving children’s school attendance, participation and retention.
There are 121 SCP projects nationally, providing support to DEIS schools in Bands 1 and 2, and to DEIS Post-primary schools (see Table 5.3). Each project is staffed by an SCP Coordinator and Project Worker(s) and managed by a Local Management Committee, comprising of principals and other education and/or community stakeholders.
SCP projects provide a broad range of evidence-based and evidence-informed programmes, practices and supports to children and young people at risk of educational disadvantage, together with individualised responses to educational welfare needs. SCP provides support to children and young people in primary schools, post-primary schools and to those not in full-time education/not in school. SCP offers three distinct types of interventions: targeted interventions for children and young people with significant educational welfare needs; brief interventions for those requiring immediate short-term support; and evidence based and evidence-informed interventions at a universal level for whole classes or large groups.
To support young people at different stages of their learning, SCP supports are provided in different settings: in-school, after-school, out-of-school and holiday provision (see Table 5.4). Interventions in all settings aim to address the educational welfare needs of children and young people and to promote regular school attendance, engagement with the curriculum and the school community, and retention within the education setting.
As shown in Table 5.4, in-school supports concern different activities, such as transition programmes between school levels or targeted attendance tracking. After-school supports focus on strengthening academic performance and well‑being through homework, sports, clubs, and other activities and programmes. During holiday time, SCP Coordinators run activities such as summer or other holiday programmes. Outside of school, for instance, SCP Coordinators provide individualised support, and collaborate with the community and other agencies to support the students.
Table 5.4. Supports provided through the School Completion Programme, by category
Source: Department of Education (2024[21]), OECD Review of resourcing schools to address educational disadvantage: Country Background Report Ireland, Department of Education, Dublin, Ireland, https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/govieassets/296017/4d1ac422-5475-470e-b910-4c80a83c43bc.pdf.
School Books Grant Scheme
A further support provided through the DEIS programme is the enhanced rate of funding under the School Books Grant Scheme.
Schools in the DEIS programme were always allocated a higher rate of funding to support the purchase of schoolbooks. As part of Budget 2023, the DoE launched a programme of over EUR 50 million (euros) to provide free books to primary school students within the Free Education Scheme8 from September 2023 (Department of Education, 2024[21]). This measure aims at eliminating the cost to these families for all schoolbooks at primary school, including workbooks. It delivers on the Programme for Government commitment to extend the free schoolbook pilot, currently in 102 DEIS primary schools, as resources permit. The primary free School Books Grant Scheme benefits up to 540 000 students in approximately 3 240 recognised primary schools, including over 130 special schools. Moreover, the Budget 2024 allocated an additional EUR 67 million to provide free schoolbooks and classroom resources for Junior Cycle students in recognised post-primary schools in the Free Education Scheme for the school year 2024/25 (Department of Education, 2023[24]). This Junior Cycle Schoolbooks Scheme will remove the cost from families of funding schoolbooks, including eBooks, and core classroom resources for all Junior Cycle students in post‑primary schools in the Free Education Scheme (Department of Education, 2024[25]). This will benefit some 212 000 students and add to the 558 000 children in primary and special schools who benefited from this initiative in the 2023/24 school year. DEIS post-primary schools will continue to receive a higher rate of schoolbook grant funding for Senior Cycle students (Department of Education, 2024[26]).
Literacy and numeracy programmes
DEIS is the first mainstream programme for disadvantage that has an explicit focus on providing literacy and numeracy supports to the students involved in it, and data collected suggest that the uptake of literacy and numeracy programmes has been universal and successful among DEIS schools (Weir et al., 2017[27]). The programme that DEIS offers targets early interventions in literacy and mathematics for students that are performing poorly. These interventions are: Reading Recovery; First Steps; Maths Recovery; and Ready, Set, Go Maths. These four programmes are based on international research and practice to incorporate effective practices in the classroom (see more in Table 5.5).
Table 5.5. Literacy and numeracy programmes accessed through DEIS
Source: Professional Development Service for Teachers (n.d.[28]), DEIS Literacy and Numeracy Programmes, https://pdst.ie/node/378 (accessed on 21 December 2023).
Access to the Leaving Certificate Applied
While not exclusive to the DEIS programme, access to the Leaving Certificate Applied (LCA) is considered an important support measure for students in DEIS schools. The LCA Programme serves as an alternative pathway designed to cater to diverse learning needs, and targets particularly students at risk of early leaving from education and training (Department of Education, 2024[21]). The LCA leads to a two-year Leaving Certificate, available to students who wish to follow a practical or vocationally oriented programme. The LCA is made up of a range of courses that are structured round three elements: Vocational Preparation, Vocational Education and General Education. The programme emphasises cross-curricular work, tasks and projects, along with personal and social development. A minimum level of attendance is required for the LCA programme, and this is intended to encourage young people following the LCA programme to attend regularly (Curriculum Online, 2022[29]).
Well-being supports
A broad range of supports, resources and professional learning opportunities are provided to help schools promote well-being and resilience by the DoE support services, including by the NEPS. The services assist schools in providing universal support at the level of the whole school or classroom, more targeted support for some children and young people who may be at risk, and more individualised support for those with the greatest need.
DEIS schools receive priority access to some of the programmes delivered by NEPS to improve student well-being. While these training programmes are not provided exclusively to DEIS schools, they are an important part of the support that DEIS schools receive. The two main programmes, prioritised by NEPS for delivery to DEIS schools, are the FRIENDS Resilience programmes (Fun Friends, Friends for Life and My Friends Youth) and the Incredible Years Teacher Classroom Management Programme (IYTCM) (see Chapter 4). The FRIENDS programmes are school-based anxiety-prevention and resilience-building programmes, while IYTCM is a classroom-based prevention and early-intervention programme designed to develop effective classroom management skills, reduce challenging behaviours and promote children’s pro-social behaviour (Department of Education, n.d.[30]). In relation to the FRIENDS programmes, data show that these programmes are indeed more accessible to students in DEIS urban primary schools than non-DEIS urban schools. While 88% of sixth-class students in DEIS Urban Band 1 schools and 100% of those in DEIS Urban Band 2 schools had principals reporting having access to these programmes, 80% of the students in non-DEIS urban schools had access (Gilleece and Nelis, 2023[31]). This percentage decreased to 50% when considering access to IYTCM for teachers in non-DEIS urban schools, compared to 81% and 82% for teachers in DEIS Urban Band 1 and DEIS Urban Band 2 schools (ibid.).
The Continuum of Support
Ireland recognises the learning needs of diverse students in its education system, and has established learning supports beyond the DEIS provision. The Continuum of Support is the official DoE approach for both primary and post-primary schools. The Continuum of Support framework is used by schools to guide the identification of children and young people’s strengths and needs, and to monitor their response to intervention (Department of Education, 2017[32]). It recognises that children and young people require different levels of support depending on their identified educational needs, and those needs may change over time. Using this framework helps ensure that interventions are incremental, moving from class-based interventions to more intensive and individualised support, and that they are informed by careful monitoring and review of response to intervention (ibid.).
Using the Continuum of Support framework helps ensure flexible and timely allocation of supports, so that those children and young people with the greatest level of need have access to the greatest level of support. A diagnosis of disability is not required to access supports, and both DEIS and non‑DEIS schools operate under the Continuum of Support policy.
The foundational three distinct school-based processes, can be summarised as follows:
Whole-School Support-All involves a whole-school approach to responding to the needs of all children and young people in primary and post-primary schools, including those with special educational needs, using universal, preventative and proactive approaches.
and
Classroom Support-All is the first response, led by the class teacher, when concerns emerge in relation to a child or young person’s learning, well-being and/or social-emotional development. The provision of Classroom Support-All is the responsibility of the class teacher.
School Support-Some involves the provision of additional targeted teaching and learning supports in response to the special educational needs9 of small groups and/or individual children and young people.
School Support Plus-Few involves the provision of highly individualised, intensive, targeted and specialised additional teaching and learning supports for children and young people, whose special educational needs are enduring, and significantly impact on their learning and participation in the school environment.
The three-tiered structure of the Continuum of Support is outlined in Figure 5.1.
Figure 5.1. The Continuum of Support
Source: Department of Education (2017[32]), Guidelines for Primary Schools – Supporting Pupils with Special Educational Needs in Mainstream Schools, https://www.gov.ie/pdf/?file=https://assets.gov.ie/86911/e2ab0e65-f360-45a4-8075-37a4123838c3.pdf#page=null (accessed on 24 April 2024).
The Continuum of Support serves as a problem-solving model for assessing and intervening in educational settings, allowing schools to collect, analyse and respond to the diverse needs of all children and young people (Department of Education, 2024[21]).
The framework facilitates incremental interventions, starting with mainstream, class-based support for mild or transient needs and progressing to more intensive levels at the School Support and School Support Plus tiers. It emphasises continuous progress monitoring, with targeted intervention plans documented in student support files at all levels (ibid.). A four-step, cyclical problem-solving process is the approach used by schools to identify needs, plan, monitor and review response to intervention, where concerns arise in relation to a child or young person (Department of Education, 2017[32]). The problem-solving process is applied across the Continuum of Support to ensure that interventions and supports are aligned to the identified needs of the child or young person, and are reviewed regularly. A collaborative approach is adopted, involving the whole school community, including children and young people, teachers, and parents/guardians working together proactively. External agencies, including NEPS, National Council for Special Education (NCSE), and allied health professionals, may also be involved, where appropriate, in this collaborative process.
As per current guidance, the primary responsibility for student progress and care rests with the classroom teacher, supported closely by special education teachers (SETs). Since the 1980s, a core principle in the DoE provision for children with special educational needs is that the classroom teacher is considered the lead practitioner supported by other staff. NEPS and NCSE provide resources to aid schools in implementing the Continuum of Support, enhancing teachers’ capacity for evidence-based interventions in literacy, numeracy, and social and emotional aspects (Department of Education, 2024[21]).
Since 2017, the Continuum of Support has been increasingly integrated into teachers’ planning practices for both groups and individuals. Schools employ various support models, including withdrawals and in‑class support, based on the identified needs of each child or young person (ibid).
Strengths
Ireland’s system of school-based support possesses several strengths that can be leveraged to help students in reaching their full potential and promoting greater equity and inclusion among both DEIS and non-DEIS schools. The following are particularly relevant to the promotion of equity and inclusion at the school level.
The supports provided by DEIS are highly regarded and sought after by schools
The OECD review team met various stakeholders across education levels (outlined in Annex C), to gauge perceptions of the DEIS programme and broader opinions on supports for students at risk of educational disadvantage.
Evaluations have demonstrated that many of these supports significantly enhance student outcomes, reflecting their beneficial impact on learning (see more in the next sections). Programmes like Reading Recovery have been shown to enhance literacy skills among the least proficient students, offering both immediate benefits and sustained improvement over time (Holliman and Hurry, 2013[33]), although more recent evidence on the programme is questioning the long-term validity of the intervention (Gilleece and Clerkin, 2024[34]). Similarly, initiatives such as the Math Recovery and the Incredible Years Teacher Classroom Management Programme have demonstrated substantial gains in numeracy and positive behavioural changes, respectively (Smith et al., 2013[35]; Tang et al., 2022[36]). These findings underscore the programmes’ roles in effectively supporting students’ academic development and well-being, aligning with broader educational objectives to improve learner outcomes as part of the DEIS programme.
Moreover, through the interviews, the OECD review team gained the impression that the supports provided through the DEIS programme are highly regarded and sought after, not only by teachers and principals, but also by families. Families’ attitudes towards the DEIS programme, however, are not universally positive, as discussed in Chapter 6 in relation to the stigma that is at times associated with the DEIS label. Yet, the overall response of schools to the DEIS programme has been positive, in that schools have placed high value on the supports provided through the Plan, along with developing actions in line with the Action Plan (Weir, 2018[5]; Nelis, Gilleece and Dinh, Forthcoming[37]).
The supports that the DEIS programme provides to schools (with differences across Bands, as described above), are quite comprehensive and aim at ensuring schools a range of means to support their students’ learning, along with their well-being (Department of Education, 2017[38]). The OECD review team gained the impression that school staff appreciated the various DEIS resources, both in terms of the flexibility provided by the grant and by the targeted resources provided through the other supports. While stakeholders often referred to the HSCL Scheme as a significant driver of change, other advantages mentioned included the provision of hot school meals in primary schools, and the value of the literacy and numeracy supports (Weir, 2018[5]).
The next sections provide more detailed evidence on the perception of the stakeholders towards the more prominent of the DEIS supports, including any existing evidence on the effectiveness of these supports.
The Home School Community Liaison Scheme
The HSCL Scheme is widely appreciated within the education system. This programme, outlined above, had some promising results already in the 1990s. These included “improved behaviour, improved school attendance, improved scholastic achievement, greater care in their schoolwork, and more positive attitude to school and teachers, to themselves and to their parents” (Archer and Shortt, 2003, p. 76[39]).
The HSCL Coordinators have an important role in supporting parents and the wider community, and are able to increase parents’ involvement in various school-related activities. The OECD review team was informed by parents and schools that HSCL Coordinators were able to arrange for activities that would encourage parents to visit the school more often, support them in learning different skills and address challenges at home, and help with scholastic activities. A survey of HSCL Coordinators10 (Weir, 2018[5]) supports this view, with more than 95% of the coordinators reported that parents’ involvement in all but two of the ten parental involvement activities included in the question had been positively impacted by HSCL Coordinators’ efforts, either to some extent or to a great extent (Table 5.6). For instance, 83% of Coordinators indicated that, to a great extent, parents felt less threatened by school and teachers as a result of the HSCL Scheme. The majority of Coordinators also indicated that, to a great extent, parents were more aware of their contribution to their children’s education (66%), had a new interest in what is happening in school (62%) and visited the school more (62%) as a result of HSCL Coordinators’ efforts. Unfortunately, a confirmation through parental surveys on the contributions of HSCL Coordinators, or other data that would measure the HSCL Scheme’s objective involvement, are not available.
Table 5.6. Perceptions of HSCL Coordinators in regard to the extent of the impact of the HSCL Scheme on parents’ involvement in activities
Percentage of HSCL Coordinators
Source: Weir (2018[5]), Partnership in DEIS schools: a survey of home-school-community liaison coordinators in primary and post-primary schools in Ireland, https://www.erc.ie/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/HSCL-report-2018.pdf (accessed on 3 January 2024).
Moreover, in the survey, the Coordinators were also asked to indicate the extent to which their efforts had impacted the local community in a number of ways. In relation to all but one of the listed potential effects (as shown in Table 5.7), over 90% of Coordinators indicated that the HSCL Scheme had impacted these to at least some extent. For example, 92% Coordinators indicated that there was greater community spirit as a result of HSCL Coordinators’ efforts, either to a great extent (34%) or to some extent (58%). A somewhat lower proportion (70%) agreed that transfer of students to third level had increased as a result of the Scheme, with an additional 24% indicating that they did not know whether this had been the case. While these data cannot provide an objective portrait of the impact of HSCL Coordinators on families and communities, they can provide an indication of the areas that the Coordinators are able to influence. Moreover, their own perception of effectiveness can also suggest areas for improvement or focus for future developments in school.
Table 5.7. Perceptions of HSCL Coordinators in regard to the extent of the impact of the HSCL Scheme on the local community
Percentage of HSCL Coordinators
Source: Weir (2018[5]), Partnership in DEIS schools: a survey of home-school-community liaison coordinators in primary and post-primary schools in Ireland, https://www.erc.ie/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/HSCL-report-2018.pdf (accessed on 3 January 2024).
The OECD review team was also informed of the general appreciation of the work of the HSCL Coordinators by teachers, principals and parents in DEIS schools. Furthermore, staff in non-DEIS schools often noted that HSCL Coordinators are a very desirable asset, in particular in those non-DEIS schools that host a sizable disadvantaged population. Schools especially appreciated how the Coordinators can take a neutral and supportive role towards families, by virtue of their independent position contrary to classroom teachers, principals and welfare officers. In particular, home visits allow them to fully grasp the challenges that students and families are facing, and report back to teachers so that they can understand struggles that these students may incur into. Moreover, their connection with other services allows them to support the families in addressing challenges beyond the education system, such as those linked to housing and healthcare. This holistic approach has been described as fundamental to reach the most disadvantaged families in DEIS schools.
The School Completion Programme
The SCP is highly regarded by various stakeholders, such as HSCL Coordinators, post-primary school principals and other members of local management committees. This appreciation is linked to various strengths of the programme, such as its flexibility in the supports it provides, which allows individual schools to adapt their offer, and its ability to provide immediate help to children during times of crisis (Smyth et al., 2015[11]). SCP was also appreciated as it allows for a provision of small sums or subsidies to schools, so that the needs of socio-economically disadvantaged children could be met. More recent evidence on the SCP will be released in an upcoming Economic and Social Research Institute report, due for publication in 2024.
Calls for greater supports provided through the SCP were raised in 2015, when stakeholders mentioned concerns related to damaging effects of funding cuts to the SCP over the past number of years, which led to a lack of long-term planning and uncertainty about the future of the programme (Smyth et al., 2015[11]). Since then, the overall funding increased from EUR 24.7 million in 2016, to approximately EUR 35 million in 2024 (Department of Education, 2024[21]).
Evidence-based literacy and numeracy programmes are at the core of the DEIS programme
DEIS is the first programme of its kind to provide literacy and numeracy programmes to the students involved in it. Data collected suggest that the uptake of literacy and numeracy programmes has been universal and successful among DEIS schools (Weir et al., 2017[27]). The DEIS programme targets early interventions in literacy and mathematics for students that are performing poorly. These interventions are Reading Recovery; First Steps; Maths Recovery; and Ready, Set, Go Maths. These four programmes are based on existing international research and practice, as to incorporate effective practices in the classroom (see more in Table 5.5 above). While the adoption of these programmes is long-standing, in recent years the evidence on some of these programmes is mixed. Some international studies demonstrate Reading Recovery’s effectiveness in improving literacy among the lowest-attaining students, with long-term benefits that outweigh the initial costs by reducing future needs for special education and remedial programmes (D’Agostino and Harmey, 2016[40]; Pratt, Franklin and Kenward, 2018[41]). Children not only catch up with their peers but sustain and enhance their literacy achievements over time (Pratt, Franklin and Kenward, 2018[41]). However, other pieces of research have raised some questions on the soundness of the evidence behind the programme (Gilleece and Clerkin, 2024[34]). Critiques of the aforementioned literature have noted methodological limitations to some studies (Institute of Education Sciences, 2013[42]), as well as relatively weak evidence of any long-term positive impact (May et al., 2023[43]). Particularly, researchers have pointed out that specific evidence pertaining to the results of the Reading Recovery programme in schools in Ireland is lacking, compared to other countries (Gilleece and Clerkin, 2024[34]).
Research also showed that Math Recovery improves teachers’ instructional strategies and students’ numeracy outcomes, with evidence pointing to both immediate and sustained gains in student performance across various educational settings (Tabor, 2019[44]). Specifically, meaningful progress in numeracy skills was achieved in areas such as quantitative concepts, applied problems and arithmetic strategies (ibid.).
Research suggests that without DEIS funding, the implementation of these programmes would not have been possible (Weir et al., 2018[12]). The OECD review team was informed by teachers and principals that they appreciated the professionalisation of interventions provided through these programmes; a school that just recently joined the DEIS programme appreciated the possibility of taking part in these initiatives as they had previously applied to receive training in Reading and Maths Recovery but had not been selected.
A review by the Educational Research Centre noted that in the schools that experienced constant increases in reading and mathematics scores from 2005 onwards, principals attributed the improvement, among other things, to the use of specialised literacy and numeracy programmes, along with the setting of numeracy and literacy targets and the positive attitudes among students (Weir et al., 2017[27]).
A further confirmation of the value of these programmes for DEIS comes from the Chief Inspector’s Report (Department of Education Inspectorate, 2022[13]). Between 2016 and 2020, planning and implementation of strategies for literacy and numeracy were overall positive. Across all DEIS evaluations, both of these elements were found to be good or very good in 76% of schools. The percentage of schools with very good planning and implementation in numeracy was almost the same as in literacy – 74% for planning and 72% for implementation. However, fewer schools were rated as very good in numeracy compared to literacy (ibid.). Moreover, the report notes that some aspects of numeracy do require attention, particularly learners’ enjoyment of mathematics.
To support efforts towards the adoption of evidence-based practices, NEPS has developed various guidance documents for primary and post-primary schools, which aim to improve teachers’ professional practice and to build capacity by providing information on evidence-based, response-to-intervention approaches and strategies in the area of literacy.
DEIS supports take a holistic approach that centre on student well-being
The DoE approach to supporting well-being and mental health is set out in the “Wellbeing Policy and Framework for Practice (2019-2025)” (also discussed in Chapter 2) that proposes a preventative, multi‑component, whole-school approach to supporting well-being that includes both universal and targeted actions (Government of Ireland, 2019[45]). It focuses on four components:
To provide children and young people with opportunities to be part of a school environment and culture that feels physically and psychologically safe, where they feel a sense of belonging and connectedness, where their voice is heard, and they feel supported;
To provide children and young people with opportunities to experience supportive relationships within the school community;
To give children and young people opportunities to experience success and a sense of achievement in their learning, and to develop and build core physical, social and emotional skills and competencies; and
To ensure that approaches to supporting well-being and resilience are embedded in all of the school’s policies and practices.
In line with this general approach, DEIS offers students support that is holistic in nature, and, as such, focuses not only on students’ academic outcomes but on their physical and psychological well-being.
The School Meals Programme is one of the elements that fosters student well-being from several viewpoints and is well complemented by a number of initiatives that support students’ psychological and socio-emotional development.
School Meals Programme
Literature has provided evidence on the importance of nutrition for academic performance (Glewwe, Jacoby and King, 2001[46]; Winicki and Jemison, 2003[47]). As hunger and food insecurity affect children from more disadvantaged backgrounds, the provision of meals at school can help strengthen equity within education systems (Gordanier et al., 2020[48]). Overall, the reasons for education authorities to provide school meals – whether at a cost or for free – are multiple: to improve academic outcomes of students, improve the nutrition of students by providing healthy food options, and support less advantaged families by reducing their food-related expenses, among others (OECD, 2023[49]).
As of September 2023, all DEIS primary schools are entitled to a hot meal, while DEIS Post-primary schools receive a cold meal daily (at the school’s choice of either lunch or breakfast). However, DEIS Post‑primary schools can provide hot school meals if they have the facilities to accommodate them and can leverage other funding to cover them.
In Ireland, the School Meals Programme is under the remit of the Department of Social Protection and following the expansion of the programme in recent years, some 2 600 schools and organisations, covering 443 000 children are now eligible for funding (Department of Education, 2024[21]). The objective of the programme is to provide regular, nutritious food to children to support them in taking full advantage of the education provided to them. The programme is an important component of policies to encourage school attendance and extra educational achievement (Department of Education, 2024[21]). Schools currently need to apply on an annual basis to the School Meals Programme. Entry to the Programme had been initially limited to DEIS schools in addition to schools identified as having a high concentration of disadvantage that would benefit from access, but now includes both DEIS and non-DEIS primary schools.
The School Meals Programme was introduced in 2019 as a small pilot of 30 schools. The Minister of Social Protection announced that from April 2024, 900 additional non-DEIS primary schools would qualify for the Programme, which will bring the total number of schools now eligible for hot meals to 2 000 (Department of Social Protection, n.d.[50]). In addition, the Minister of Social Protection has announced that any remaining primary schools who have not yet joined the scheme can now express an interest to receive school meals.
Some schools – DEIS and non-DEIS – have initiatives in place to engage parents and the wider community
Research has shown that the involvement of parents or guardians and communities in the learning of their children plays a pivotal role in students’ educational achievement and broader well-being (OECD, 2019[51]; Rutigliano and Quarshie, 2021[52]). Engaging local communities, parents, guardians and families is, therefore, important for schools who seek to create inclusive and equitable school environments (Cerna et al., 2021[53]). The participation and involvement of parents, guardians and the broader community can be promoted through school governance structures and initiatives and mechanisms that relate to fostering a positive school climate (OECD, 2023[49]).
Research has further shown that parental and family engagement can have a positive impact on students’ educational outcomes (OECD, 2019[51]), as well as their overall well-being (Koshy, Smith and Brown, 2016[54]; Rutigliano and Quarshie, 2021[52]). Parental or guardian involvement can be particularly important for disadvantaged and marginalised students, or students who are otherwise at risk of not achieving their educational potential (OECD, 2019[51]).
In Ireland, there is recognition of the importance of family and community engagement with schools. In line with DEIS school planning requirements to promote partnership with parents, students in DEIS schools had a significantly higher mean score on the index of school policies for parental involvement in PISA 2018 (Gilleece et al., 2021[55]). This scale was based on parents’ responses to items related to the availability in the school of parent education or family support programmes, the school’s provision of information on helping with homework and school activities, the existence of an inviting atmosphere in the school for parents, effective communication by the school, and parental involvement in decision making. The mean score on this index in DEIS schools was about one-third of a standard deviation above the corresponding OECD average (ibid). In 2022, 14% of students in Ireland were in schools whose principal reported that during the previous academic year, at least half of all families discussed their child’s progress with a teacher on their own initiative, compared to 23% in 2018 (OECD, 2023[6]). While the breakdown is not available yet among DEIS and non-DEIS schools, this decline indicates that some schools are more successful than others in engaging parents and families. However, COVID-19 restrictions – such as parents not being allowed in schools – may have played a role in this dynamic.
An example of the commitment to parent and community engagement is the Partnership Schools Ireland (PSI) initiative, which aims to improve outcomes for children by fostering partnerships between schools, families and communities (National Parents Council, 2022[56]). This initiative, a collaboration between the National Parents Council Primary and the Irish Primary Principals' Network, is partly funded by the DoE. Each participating school forms an Action Team for Partnerships (ATP), comprising 8-16 members, including the principal, staff, students, parents and community members. The ATP sets and works towards four annual goals: two academic, one behavioural and one focused on creating a climate of partnership. The ATP receives free training and on-going support, enabling them to create and implement a One Year Action Plan for Partnerships. The ATP collaborates with the school community to enhance the school's work, inform all stakeholders about their activities, monitor progress, overcome barriers, involve others in their initiatives, evaluate benefits and celebrate achievements.
Moreover, the Government published the Charter Bill in September 2019, which is currently awaiting an order for Committee Stage. This Bill aims to enhance engagement within the school community by mandating that all schools have a Charter (Government of Ireland, 2019[57]). This Charter, developed according to guidelines from the Minister, will involve feedback from students and parents on school plans, policies and activities, fostering a listening culture in schools.
In general, different strategies can be adopted to engage families and communities in the lives of schools. The OECD review team was informed of several different practices and strategies. In certain schools, staff members including principals, vice-principals and HSCL Coordinators regularly greeted children and their parents at the school entrance each day. This practice aimed to cultivate a friendly and inviting atmosphere while offering parents opportunities to discuss relevant matters or ask questions. Additionally, some schools organised activities designed to involve parents in their children's learning. For instance, one school introduced literacy and numeracy games to allow parents to participate in learning activities with their children and establish a broader connection with the school community. Another school offered adult classes and family sessions covering various topics such as family baking, art, cooking and woodwork, alongside well-being sessions designed to familiarise parents with the school's efforts in student well-being and mental health. This approach was particularly tailored to support a community facing challenges related to trauma and poverty, providing a secure environment for parents as well. Furthermore, the OECD review team was informed of initiatives like coffee mornings or breakfasts with parents as means to further foster engagement.
Looking at education more broadly, a significant majority of students attended primary schools where principals reported sharing resources (e.g. reading lists or websites) with parents (Gilleece and Nelis, 2023[31]). Over 85% of second-class students in both DEIS and non-DEIS schools had principals who utilised this approach to support parents in assisting with English reading at home. Similarly, high percentages of sixth-class students had principals reporting the use of resource sharing to aid parents in supporting their children's learning in mathematics, with percentages exceeding 75% across DEIS and non-DEIS schools. Between one-third and two-fifths of second-class students in both DEIS and non-DEIS schools had principals implementing programmes (e.g. multiple meetings with the same parents) to assist parents in supporting their child's English reading. For mathematics, these percentages ranged from 16% in DEIS Urban Band 2 schools to 39% in non-DEIS urban schools (Gilleece and Nelis, 2023[31]).
Initiatives to target local needs are developed and piloted by the DoE and local authorities
The Irish education system has a long-standing practice of developing pilots and projects to respond to local needs. These pilots allow the DoE to address local needs and verify the effectiveness of different interventions, evaluating the potential for mainstreaming certain programmes or initiatives. Indeed, research evidence in education can serve as a compass, directing stakeholders towards informed choices that maximise student outcomes and drive educational progress (OECD, 2023[58]).
These pilot projects span over different areas, and often aim at supporting disadvantage throughout the education system. This includes, for instance the City Connects pilot project – developed by the Boston College and operated by TESS – in North East Inner City (NEIC) (Dublin), which is implemented in ten DEIS Urban Band 1 primary schools (Walsh and Higgins, 2022[59]) (see Chapter 4 for more information). The aim of this evidence-based project is to provide a comprehensive system of student support to ensure that every student, regardless of background, receives the necessary services and resources to succeed academically and thrive personally. City Connects, guided by developmental psychology, recognises that if schools are to make significant inroads into equity of educational outcomes, they need a systematic approach to identify and meet the strengths and needs of every student across four domains: academic, social and emotional, family and health. City Connects’ core practice culminates in a tailored support plan for every student. It seeks to ensure that the right supports are offered to the right student at the right time (Walsh and Higgins, 2022[59]). Another relevant example of the DoE work in the NEIC was the establishment of the Multi-disciplinary Team project (MDT). This project entailed the development of multi‑disciplinary teams in ten primary schools in the area, which provide direct services to children, school staff and families within the schools. The NEIC MDT has three clusters, with one NEPS psychologist, one speech and language therapist and one occupational therapist in each team, and the schools are divided into three corresponding cluster groups. A Health Service Executive (HSE)11 psychologist works across the three clusters/ten schools.
Some of these targeted initiatives and pilot programmes concern specific student groups. For instance, in 2019, under the National Traveller and Roma Inclusion Strategy, the DoE established a pilot programme operated by TESS to target attendance, participation, retention and school completion in specific Traveller and Roma communities: the Supporting Traveller and Roma (STAR) pilot project (Northside Partnership, n.d.[60]). The four STAR pilot projects were rolled out incrementally across Ireland in Cork, Galway (Tuam), Wexford and North Dublin. Fifty-five schools are involved in the pilot. The pilot teams are working together with parents, children and young people, schools, Traveller and Roma communities and service providers to remove barriers impacting on Traveller and Roma children’s attendance, participation and retention in education. The pilot is co-funded by the DoE and the Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth (DCEDIY) at a cost of approximately EUR 1.1 million per year, which involves the provision of additional HSCL Coordinators and the support of Education Welfare Officers in each pilot area, and the provision by DCEDIY of two community education workers at each pilot site. Other key stakeholders in the project include Tusla Education Support Service and Traveller and Roma representative organisations (Advisory Committee on the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities, 2023[61]).
An independent evaluation of the STAR pilot project is currently nearing completion. This will fulfil the commitment in the Programme for Government to evaluate the project, and it will provide detailed and timely information that will feed into the development of the National Traveller and Roma Education Strategy. The evaluation, which commenced in May 2023 and is being carried out by the Centre for Effective Services, has involved engaging with a wide range of stakeholders and collecting a diverse set of data, including from over 30 focus groups with children and young people and their parents, interviews and workshops with those involved in the project, and school questionnaires.
Another targeted initiative that supports the needs of Traveller and Roma students was established using Dormant Accounts Funding (Department of Education, 2022[62]). Using this fund, the DoE funded ten new HSCL Coordinator posts in 14 non-DEIS post-primary schools with a high concentration of Traveller and Roma students. Their role is to work primarily with Traveller and Roma families and students to improve school attendance, participation, retention, progression and outcomes.
One of the most prominent examples of an initiative to respond to local needs is the Limerick Regeneration Framework Implementation Plan (Box 5.1). While the initiative spans far beyond the education sector, it includes a key educational component.
Box 5.1. The Limerick Regeneration Framework Implementation Plan
The Regeneration Programme
The Regeneration Programme was developed as the Irish government recognised the need to address the root causes and symptoms of social and economic exclusion in Limerick's regeneration areas. These areas face various challenges, such as high unemployment rates, poverty, lack of skills, early leaving from education and training, and issues related to physical and mental health (Limerick City Council, Office of Regeneration, 2013[63]).
The Limerick Regeneration Framework Implementation Plan aims to address these challenges through a comprehensive approach, focusing on physical, social and economic aspects (Limerick City Council, Office of Regeneration, 2013[63]). The plan includes measures such as removing infrastructural barriers, promoting community safety, constructing new housing, improving education and learning initiatives, enhancing health and well-being, and fostering economic engagement.
Strengthening communities is a priority, and the plan highlights the need for strategic and considered rebuilding, recognising existing strengths in each area. The revitalisation process aims for adaptable and flexible solutions, with on-going analysis and evaluation to assess the impact of various measures.
The plan also emphasises the importance of implementation and delivery of the plan, with a multi-level structure involving community participation, local partnerships, a national Program Delivery Group and a Limerick city-level partnership. The plan's success will be measured through specific performance indicators based on independent evaluation and monitoring of key data sources. The overall goal is to create a revitalised city with connected and vibrant neighbourhoods.
The role of education in the regeneration framework
Education is one of the key elements of the Regeneration Programme, and some expected outcomes and impacts that concern it are categorised under the “social regeneration” part of the framework (Limerick City and County Council, 2016[64]). Reflecting the broad scope of the social regeneration programme, outcomes sought include educational elements: improved educational attainment, reduced absenteeism at school and in other more intensive programmes of support, and the re-integration of adults and young people at risk of early school leaving into education and learning, among others.
While the impact of the social pillar of regeneration will require time before it can be fully established, the preliminary information on the programme points towards positive results (Limerick City and County Council, 2016[64]). For instance, 16 projects under Education & Learning reported improved educational attainment (children and young people at school or in alternative education provision) or qualification (adult learners); 14 projects reported improved school attendance and attendance at courses in further education and training; and 11 projects presented quantitative evidence of improved attainment and improved attendance/reduced absenteeism. Similarly, three initiatives reported improved school readiness among young children as they start primary school while five projects reported positive results in supporting young people to re-engage with education having been at risk of early leaving from education and training or school exclusion (Limerick City and County Council, 2016[64]).
According to a 2016 report, there had been a notable decrease in early leaving from education and training, and an enhancement in retention rates up to the Junior Certificate, currently standing at nearly 96%, whereas the nationwide average is 97% (Limerick City and County Council, 2016[64]). Similarly, retention rates for the Leaving Certificate have improved, reaching 89%, compared to the national average of 90%. The improvements observed in Limerick City align with national trends, but they also indicate a closing gap with state averages over recent years.
A noteworthy rise in the number of students took place from disadvantaged schools in the city, specifically DEIS schools, progressing to third-level education. While substantial differences persist, there was discernible evidence of narrowing the gap with non-DEIS schools in the city between 2010 and 2014 (Limerick City and County Council, 2016[64]). However, the gap increased in the data of the latest year available, 2015.
Challenges
In building on these strengths, Ireland will need to address a series of challenges related to the implementation of policies for promoting equity and inclusion at the level of schools.
Non-DEIS schools often do not have the means to supply additional school resources for their disadvantaged students
Extra-curricular activities: from breakfast to sport and music clubs
In Ireland, the provision of certain services, such as afternoon activities and clubs, or the establishment of homework clubs is under the responsibility of individual schools. Most primary and post-primary schools provide some form of extra-curricular activity, such as sports, drama and music (Department of Education, 2024[21]). Data from PISA 2018 also show that, according to principals’ reports, the provision of extra-curricular activities is very similar between DEIS and non-DEIS schools. All students in both DEIS and non-DEIS schools reported to have access to extra-curricular sporting activities (Nelis et al., 2021[19]). Many schools in the DEIS scheme use their DEIS grant, and the Schools Meals Programme, to assist in the operation of homework clubs after school, other after-school activities and breakfast clubs aimed at groups of children deemed to be at most risk of educational disadvantage (Department of Education, 2024[21]).
Non-DEIS schools, in contrast, need to find the space in their budgets to organise such activities. The OECD review team was informed that non-DEIS schools, in particular those that might have fewer opportunities of raising funds through their communities, often do not have the budget to finance these initiatives. Some schools rely heavily on fundraising and philanthropy from the more advantaged families in their schools, and on parents and teachers volunteering their time to run these activities (more on volunteering in the next section).
There are several objectives that schools target through extra-curricular activities, homework clubs and breakfast clubs. On the one hand, these initiatives support parents and guardians as they provide a safe environment for students before and after their regular schooling day. On the other hand, these initiatives can improve students’ performance, but also their attendance and punctuality, as they motivate students to go to school on time (Adolphus, Lawton and Dye, 2013[65]; Hoyland, Dye and Lawton, 2009[66]). In Northern Ireland (United Kingdom), for instance, evidence shows that the provision of breakfast clubs does not only support working parents, but can improve student performance, attendance and punctuality (Northern Ireland Government Services, 2021[67]). Similarly, evidence from England (United Kingdom) found that schools involved in a programme run by the DoE and a charity, Magic Breakfast12, perceived important benefits from having a breakfast club (Graham, Puts and Beadle, 2017[68]). Indeed, evidence from a randomised controlled trial carried out by the Education Endowment Foundation (2016[69]) showed that breakfast clubs provided through the Magic Breakfast programme boosted the reading, writing and mathematics results of the second year of primary education students by the equivalent of two months’ progress over the course of a year. The evaluators reported that the students’ concentration and behaviour improved too. Their results suggested that for students in relatively disadvantaged schools attending the breakfast club, not just eating breakfast, leads to academic improvements (ibid.). This could be due to the nutritional benefits of the breakfast itself, or the social or educational benefits of the breakfast club environment. The provision of pre‑school or after school activities can also improve student relationships and reduce victimisation (Defeyter, Graham and Russo, 2015[70]).
DEIS schools receive additional funding that can support the establishment of these initiatives, through the DEIS grant, the School Meals Programme or the School Completion Programme provision. Non-DEIS schools, as mentioned, need to have the space in their budgets to organise these activities. For instance, the OECD review team was informed that some schools have sufficient budget only to run a breakfast club for a limited number of weeks each year.
Non-teaching staff: educational psychologists, play therapists and more
The funding from the DEIS programme allows schools to hire specialised personnel to target specific needs that arise in their classrooms. During the OECD review visits, the OECD team saw various examples of schools hiring very specific profiles to fill an unmet need by the education system. For instance, some schools had hired play therapists to support their students dealing with anxiety and trauma. These therapists were integrated within the school staff and supported mainstream and special education teachers to address the needs of these students. The OECD review team was informed that some schools use the funding from the DEIS grant to set up an art and play therapy programme for students in specific educational levels.
While the flexibility of the DEIS grant allows schools to respond to very specific needs in its context, this practice has some limitations. The investment that schools make towards the hiring of psychologists, therapists or other staff, takes away from investments in other potential areas of need for the school. This becomes a limitation when this investment is made necessary by a lack of provision of certain services from the central administration, as discussed in more detail below.
Indeed, the fact that DEIS schools may have to use these funds to fill a gap in services that are on paper provided by the central authority – e.g. healthcare services, social services, etc. – but at time not in practice due to capacity issues, creates a challenge to the system due to the lack of similar opportunities for non‑DEIS schools. While non-DEIS schools have a lower concentration of disadvantaged students, many do have a disadvantaged population. For instance, in PIRLS 2021, in non-DEIS primary schools, 19% of fifth‑class students were in the lowest socio-economic quartile and 29% were in the highest (Delaney et al., 2023[7]). These students do not have access to the same supports as students with similar needs in DEIS schools. The disparity in the offer among schools, combined with the lack of support from national services create a challenge in the equality of the education system. This is one of the issues that raises concerns on whether disadvantaged students not attending DEIS schools are receiving enough support, compared to students in DEIS schools.
Many schools have to rely on teachers or parents volunteering their time to ensure the provision of certain services
As mentioned in the previous section, schools can run extra activities in good part thanks to the volunteering of teachers, parents and caregivers. This phenomenon seems pervasive of the education system, beyond the distinction between DEIS and non-DEIS schools. Indeed, while the OECD review team noted that non-DEIS schools relied on volunteering to run activities such as breakfast clubs, contrary to DEIS schools, most schools that the OECD review team visited had some form of volunteer-run activities.
Indeed, the OECD review team was informed that after-school activities such as homework clubs, sports, music classes and other hobby-related clubs, were generally run by teachers volunteering. The time that teachers dedicate to such activities is not remunerated but added on top of their formal working hours. Some principals flagged concerns for the additional strain that this poses on teachers and highlighted the risk of them incurring in burn outs or fatigue, due to the increasing workload.
Nevertheless, the OECD review team gained the impression that in most schools there is an expectation for teachers to volunteer a certain amount of time to run any of their school clubs or activities. Yet, interviews reported that many teachers put themselves forward to volunteer to support afterschool clubs without necessarily expecting remuneration.
Data from the Association of Secondary Teachers in Ireland (ASTI) from 2018, show that, on average, teachers spent over 20 hours per week on a range of non-teaching activities (ASTI, 2018[71]). They reported that a typical working week of a full-time teacher extended beyond 41 hours, on top of which teachers undertook additional duties. While most of these additional hours were spent on lesson planning, marking homework and preparing for teaching, teachers reported spending an average of four hours per week on additional school activities. These included extra-curricular activities, such as sport clubs, game clubs, musicals and more. While these data are not directly comparable with TALIS 2018 (OECD, 2019[72]), as Ireland did not take part in the survey, on average across OECD countries with available data the number of hours teachers report having spent on engaging in extra-curricular activities is 1.7 hours, which shows a large difference compared to the four hours reported through ASTI data. This comparison should be taken with caution due to the different data sources, but it can provide an idea of the magnitude of the commitment of Irish teachers to support extra-curricular activities in their schools, compared to the average in other countries.
There are significant costs for families at the school level
Despite the right to free education being enshrined in the Irish constitution, some stakeholders feel that there is a financial burden on families linked to voluntary contributions, along with costs associated with classroom resources, books (from 2024/2025 only for Senior Cycle), extra-curricular activities and other fees. This section builds on the point developed in Chapter 3.
Voluntary contributions
Voluntary contributions (VC) are one of the forms that school fundraising activities can take. While the DoE has provided guidelines for schools to reduce the cost of education on parents, schools can request a contribution from parents towards the running of the school. Yet, while schools may request a voluntary contribution from parents, guidelines stress that it must be made expressly clear that there is no requirement to pay this cost (Department of Education, 2024[21]). According to the Admissions Act 2018 and Circular 32/2017, voluntary contributions may only be sought from parents, where it is made clear to parents that there is no compulsion to pay and that a child’s place in the school or continued enrolment is not dependent on a willingness to make a contribution. The manner in which such VC are sought and collected is a matter for school management. However, their collection must not create a situation where parents or students could infer that the contributions are compulsory in nature. Under Section 64 of the Education Act (2018[73]), no fee can be charged for instruction in any subject of the school curriculum or for recreation or other activities where all students are expected to take part. The Charter Bill, introduced in 2019 and currently awaiting an order for Committee Stage (Government of Ireland, 2019[57]), will require schools to provide information to students and parents regarding VC that are sought and how they are spent.
As mentioned in Chapter 3, while official data regarding the level of voluntary contributions do not exist, other analyses reveal that, on average, these contributions amount to EUR 140 per child (Society of St. Vincent de Paul, 2023[74]). The range can span from EUR 30 to EUR 550 per child, providing some insight into the scope of VC and the variation in amounts requested by schools (ibid.). Indeed, 86% of survey respondents stated that their children's schools requested VC. Data from NAMER 21 found that sixth-class students in DEIS Urban Band 1 or DEIS Urban Band 2 schools had principals who were significantly less likely to indicate that the school requested VC from parents, compared to non-DEIS urban schools (Gilleece and Nelis, 2023[31]). While two-thirds of students in non-DEIS urban schools had principals who indicated that VC were requested, the corresponding values in DEIS Urban Band 1 and DEIS Urban Band 2 schools were about 22% and 30%, respectively (ibid.).
Furthermore, while DEIS schools generally report lower contribution rates, the importance of these contributions for funding resources and extra-curricular activities poses a risk of depriving disadvantaged students of essential services, perpetuating educational inequality.
The impact of VC on parents and students is of fundamental importance. Contrary to the notion that these contributions are optional, survey responses reveal that they are often perceived as mandatory, causing stress to families (Society of St. Vincent de Paul, 2023[74]). The parents that were interviewed expressed concerns about potential stigmatisation or denial of access to activities for non-payment. For instance, parents reported the assignment of lockers or homework notebooks/diaries to their children being linked to the payment of VC. Similar information was also referred to the OECD review team during the parental interviews. The report (2023[74]) stresses that financial strain can lead to difficult choices between education and basic necessities, impacting food poverty, new debts and unpaid bills. Of the 1 477 survey respondents, more than 550 expressed a general difficulty in paying the VC or other charges; 142 noted an impact on their spending on groceries, family activities, or discretionary spending; and 96 reported it impacting their ability to pay, or causing the non-payment of bills.
Besides the impact on parents and families, a major concern revolves around schools' reliance on VC and other charges. Feedback from schools and parents indicates that funding from the DoE is insufficient for essential services like photocopying, assessment fees and classroom resources (Society of St. Vincent de Paul, 2023[74]). Although schools have the authority to impose fees for these resources, and some indeed do, the obligatory nature of these fees could potentially prevent families unable to afford them from accessing the services. The report also notes an increase in costs for resource-intensive subjects, exacerbated by uncertainties and rising energy prices. Extra-curricular activities depend on VC. Schools may have local arrangements in place for enabling disadvantaged students to participate (ibid.). Nonetheless, the reliance on school-raised funds may limit opportunities for disadvantaged communities, contributing to inequality in educational experiences. Extra-curricular activities are deemed crucial for developing social, emotional and leadership skills.
Transition Year
Transition Year (TY) can entail significant costs for families. TY is an optional one-year programme that is designed to act as a bridge between the Junior Cycle and the Leaving Certificate programmes. During TY, students find themselves immersed in an alternative learning environment where the focus is on more socio-cultural and experiential learning styles (Moynihan, 2015[75]). The TY mission, as set out in the current Transition Year Programme Guidelines, is “to promote the personal, social, educational and vocational development of pupils and to prepare them for their role as autonomous, participative, and responsible members of society” (Department of Education and Science, n.d.[76]). However, a new Transition Year Programme Statement is currently being finalised and the DoE is planning to introduce it in schools in the near future (Department of Education, 2024[77]). Overall, the TY programme brings high levels of satisfaction among teachers, parents/guardians and students, for how it supports learning and the all-round development and maturity of students (Department of Education, 2020[78]). TY is valued for the variety of learning experiences that it offers students and is seen as contributing in significant ways to the broad skill development of the student population (ibid.).
The teaching and learning methodologies adopted by each school through TY are varied, under the curriculum defined by individual schools. Schools have the freedom to decide, in accordance to the requirements set out in the Guidelines, what specific subjects to offer and what modules to develop depending on the skills of the teaching staff, the general resources of the school and the access it has to outside expertise in the community (Department of Education and Science, n.d.[76]). Opportunities and resources available in the local and national community, such as those offered by employers, further and higher education institutions, and other organisations, also inform the design of schools' TY programmes. Some of the activities that can be offered along with more traditional learning during TY are, for instance, work experience, foreign travels, field trips, guest speakers interventions, and social outreach projects. Activities such as foreign travels, while often offered by schools, are not necessarily a formal part of the TY programme and are at the discretion of each school.
Formally, the programme is available to all schools, but while most choose to offer it to students, not all students have the opportunity to access the additional year in practice (Clerkin, 2018[79]). TY represents a substantial investment, in both financial and human terms for both schools and students. Previously, research found that small schools and schools that host a higher proportions of students from socio‑economically disadvantaged were less likely to provide TY, often due to resource constraints or lack of student interest (Clerkin, 2013[80]; Jeffers, 2002[81]). However, there has been a significant expansion in the availability and uptake of TY over the last decade. Based on a survey completed by schools, the DoE advises that as of the 2023/24 school year, 99% of post-primary schools offered Transition Year, which indicates that the offer is present in almost every school. The total number of TY students in 2023/2024, according to forthcoming data from the DoE, was 58 701, corresponding to 80.8% of students enrolled in the final year of Junior Cycle in the 2022/23 school year.
The OECD review team was informed during school visits that TY is linked to significant expenses for families. While evidence is limited, a 2014 analysis by the Irish Second-Level Students’ Union (ISSU) showed that the majority of surveyed students found that TY was an expensive year (ISSU, 2014[82]). According to the student responses, the contribution fund for Transition Year varied from school to school from EUR 150 to EUR 900 with the average being EUR 300 (ibid.). Recently, the Society of St. Vincent de Paul published a report on the expenses that families can face in the education system (Society of St. Vincent de Paul, 2023[74]). This report included a case study of six schools, which suggested that participation in TY can be costly. While these consultations may not be representative of the post-primary sector as a whole, they provide a general indication of the perception of families within the education system. In the case study, respondents reported paying fees ranging from EUR 320 to EUR 470, in addition to costs relating to trips abroad, which can cost upwards of EUR 500 per student (ibid.). Despite these high fees, money collected from the charges does not fully cover the expenses associated with running the programme. One DEIS school within the study reported that departmental funding for the programme amounted to only EUR 95 per student. This amount refers to the Transition Year Grant, which is a TY specific grant that is received by schools to support the costs of the programme, on top of the standard capitation grant (EUR 316 per student in 2023/24, which will increase to EUR 345 in 2024/25 (Financial Support Services Unit, 2023[83]; Financial Support Services Unit, 2024[84])) and funding relating to teachers’ salaries and school building. Concerns were raised that a lack of funding can create a risk of exclusion for disadvantaged students or from schools in impoverished communities, resulting in a lack of equality in educational experience (ISSU, 2014[82]). Furthermore, the varied levels of funding can result in a wide‑ranging quality of the TY experience for students, for instance in terms of guest speaking activities scheduled by the schools, or on whether they take part into national or international trips that their school organises. While more recent data would be needed to confirm that these challenges are still occurring in the system, the available data from 2014 showed that students emphasised the need for increased transparency in regard to TY expenses and contribution funds (ISSU, 2014[82]).
Given the prevailing social and economic conditions, financial constraints can be a challenge for some families, limiting discretionary income for unexpected TY expenses. For instance, students pointed out that financial difficulties could prevent certain students from participating in the optional trips that can be organised during TY (ISSU, 2014[82]). Yet, the majority of students interviewed in the survey who did not take part in TY, provided a reason other than costs as the main reason for not participating (ibid.).
The DoE is aware of the challenges related to access to and expenses for participation in TY. Indeed, the Minister for Education has committed to making TY universally available, so that every student in every school who wishes to participate in the programme can do so (Department of Education, 2023[85]). The DoE is currently working on how schools can be supported in the provision of the programme to all students wishing to take part in it, and this work includes examining the costs to families of participation in TY and other potential barriers to participation (ibid.).
Examination fees
Students who are taking or repeating the Junior Certificate, the Leaving Certificate or the Leaving Applied Certificate pay examination fees to sit the exams. The standard fee for a first time Leaving Certificate or Leaving Certificate Applied examination is EUR 116 (while repeat is EUR 301) and EUR 109 for the Junior Leaving Certificate (The Leaving Cert, 2020[86]). This expense can be significant for students and families and constitutes a potential barrier to their access to certifications. Other OECD countries do not charge examination fees or charge lower amounts. For instance, in Italy students are required to pay an examination tax of EUR 12 to take part in the assessment that takes place at the end of upper secondary education (Ministry of Education and Merit, 2019[87]). New Zealand, instead, removed National Certificate of Educational Achievement examination fees in 2019, to ensure students receive their qualification and are able to access their chosen learning or employment pathway (Ministry of Education, 2019[88]). Overall, data collected for the OECD School Resources Review suggests that it is very uncommon among OECD countries to allow public schools to charge tuition fees beyond pre-primary education or to charge fees for services related to teaching (OECD, 2017[89]).
An exception is granted if the students or their parents/guardians hold a medical card. While DEIS schools have a higher concentration of students from medical card holding families (Chapter 1), there is no specific exemption to examination fees for students in DEIS schools. In 2017, the most recent year for which data are available, approximately one third of students in non-DEIS schools came from medical card holding families, compared to 62% of students in DEIS schools (Weir and Kavanagh, 2018[90]).
The examination fees have not been charged since 2020, due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Moreover, recognising the challenge that this additional expense can entail for students and their families, the Government announced in 2023 a range of once-off measures to assist with increased cost of living pressures, includes the continuation of the waiving of the 2023 examination fees (State Examinations Commission, 2023[91]). This temporary waiving has also been extended to 2024 (Department of Public Expenditure, NDP Delivery and Reform, 2023[92]). However, this waiving is not yet confirmed for the following academic years. This may constitute a source of financial difficulties for families in the future, along with an inequity in the system between the students whose fees were waived, and ones that would have to pay it again in the future.
School uniforms and textbooks
In addition to voluntary contributions, expenses for TY and examination fees, other schooling costs, such as school uniforms and textbooks, can present significant challenges for many families, particularly disadvantaged ones. The DoE has requested school authorities to implement cost-effective measures to lower the expenses associated with uniforms (Department of Education and Skills, 2017[93]). These measures include allowing the purchase of uniform elements from various stores, using only "iron on" or "sew on" crests, favouring generic over branded items, providing a list of required items with estimated costs from value stores, and ensuring exclusive supply arrangements are tendered regularly (ibid.). Additionally, schools are advised to consult with parents every three years and annually review and communicate the costs of necessary items to the school community (ibid.). Nevertheless, school uniform costs for many families rose in 2023. Despite the DoE guidance, surveyed primary and post-primary school parents spent on uniforms an average of EUR 117 and EUR 204, respectively, attributing high expenses to the requirement of purchasing crested/branded uniforms (Barnardos, 2023[94]). The Back-to-School Clothing and Footwear Allowance is designed to alleviate the financial burden on families for school-related clothing and footwear costs (Department of Social Protection, 2024[95]). Eligibility hinges on receiving a qualifying social protection payment, participating in approved programmes, and meeting income and residency requirements, with payments ranging from EUR 160 for younger children to EUR 285 for older students. While the scheme supported over 130 000 families in 2023, some parents thought the threshold for entitlement should be lowered (Barnardos, 2023[94]; Department of Social Protection, 2024[95]).
Similarly, England (United Kingdom) has introduced statutory guidance to mitigate the financial impact of school uniforms on families (Department for Education, 2021[96]). It emphasises the importance of affordability, urging schools to limit branded items and to consider the overall cost to parents (ibid.). It also recommends transparency in uniform policies, competitive tendering for uniform contracts to ensure value for money, and the facilitation of second-hand uniform schemes (ibid.). Ireland is also discussing a new Bill with regulations mandating that schools develop uniform policies that are publicly accessible and clear on the requirements of each uniform element while ensuring affordability by allowing purchases from various retailers and limiting the use of branded items (Houses of the Oireachtas, 2022[97]).
In regard to textbooks, Ireland has recently extended the Free Schoolbooks Scheme to all children in primary and special schools (Department of Education, 2023[98]), and students up to Junior Cycle in post primary schools from the 2024/25 school year (Department of Finance, Department of Public Expenditure, NDP Delivery and Reform, 2024[99]). However, families with students in Senior Cycle in post‑primary schools often face significant costs associated with textbooks. Recent non-representative surveys suggest that the average cost could have reached between EUR 218 and EUR 393 in 2023 (Barnardos, 2023[94]; Zurich, 2023[100]). Furthermore, despite Book Rental Schemes in many post-primary schools, less than half of the surveyed post-primary school parents had access, and many still contributed over EUR 100, indicating a significant financial burden on families (Barnardos, 2023[94]). Moreover, the surveyed parents spent an average of EUR 48 and EUR 147 on digital expenses in primary and post‑primary schools, respectively (ibid.). To alleviate some of these costs, DEIS post‑primary schools receive enhanced allocation for books (EUR 39 per capita compared to EUR 24 per capita in non‑DEIS schools) (Department of Education and Skills, 2013[101]). Additionally, the DoE is encouraging schools to establish textbook rental schemes and provides guidance on how to develop them (Department of Education and Skills, 2012[102]).
Unmet need for assessments and therapies for children and young people
As mentioned in the context section of this chapter, student needs are more acute in DEIS schools. This includes an estimated quarter of the students having special educational needs, compared to one seventh in non-DEIS schools (Nelis et al., 2021[19]). Moreover, socio-economically disadvantaged students are one of the groups at increased risk of mental health disorders (Joint Committee on Education, Further and Higher Education, Research, Innovation and Science, 2023[103]). Heightened needs in this area are also recognised by the “Young Ireland (2023-2028)” policy framework, which has identified groups of children and young people who may face additional challenges13 and focuses particularly on three areas in which they are most at risk: child poverty and well-being, child and youth mental health and well-being, and disability services (Government of Ireland, 2023[104]).
While a focus on students’ special educational needs is outside of the scope of this report, the heightened needs in DEIS schools make it relevant to flag shortcomings in the assessment of and provision of service for student needs within all schools, and DEIS schools in particular.
The role of the healthcare system
Healthcare services for children and young people in Ireland, including assessment and therapy services, are largely provided by the Health Service Executive (HSE), via three service streams: primary care teams (whose first-tier services include physiotherapy, occupational therapy, psychology, speech and language therapy, dietician services, social work and public health nursing), children’s disability network teams (for children with disabilities), and child and adolescent mental health services (which provides assessment and treatment for young people experiencing mental health difficulties). There are currently large waiting lists to access these services, which compound difficulties that families experience in ensuring that their children receive the supports their need. Moreover, the OECD review team was informed that there appears to be a lack of clarity among families and schools on how children can access the services they need.
Furthermore, a statutory right to an Assessment of Need14 (AON) exists for children and young people with a disability. There are long waiting lists for access to the AON process (Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth, 2024[105]). The process is separate from the provision of health and social care services and is not a gateway to such services. Nor is an AON required to access education services.
While a diagnosis is not needed for students to receive support in mainstream schools, as they operate under the Continuum of Support and have a frontload allocation of special education teachers, it can be helpful for schools, teachers and families to clarify the needs of the children and decide how to best support them. In addition, a diagnosis is currently required for students to enrol in a special class/special school. Some schools reported to the OECD review team that they often support families in seeking assessments for their children's needs through the HSE, but anticipated significant delays, possibly spanning years. Some expressed concerns that students deemed urgently in need of assessment might complete primary school before receiving a diagnosis. This can lead families to refer to private assessments to bridge this gap, through an expensive process that not all families are able to afford. This challenge may place children with heightened needs and socio-economically disadvantaged backgrounds at an additional disadvantage. These challenges in the timeliness of meeting the need for assessments and therapies for children and young people within the healthcare system create additional demand for supports provided through education. Indeed, families often turn to schools to receive support and services for their children, increasing the pressure on schools’ capacity.
The Government and the HSE recognise the challenges linked to the current delays and have made an explicit commitment to the improvement of children’s disability services (Health Service Executive, 2023[106]) and of other services for children through the implementation of the national policy for children and young people “Young Ireland (2023 – 2028)” (Government of Ireland, 2023[104]).
The role of the education system
NEPS is the psychological service of the DoE and provides educational psychological support to primary, post-primary and special schools. Each of the 227 psychologists that are employed by NEPS is assigned to a group of schools. The NEPS Model of Service supports schools to respond to the well-being, academic, social and emotional needs of all students, and includes a casework service for individual children and young people and a support and development service for school staff (Department of Education, 2024[107]).
The purpose of this model is to support schools to identify and respond to the needs of all students, including those with special educational needs, while also building school capacity to provide evidence‑informed prevention and early intervention support as part of the Continuum of Support framework (discussed in the Context and features section above). The focus of the NEPS casework service is to use a consultative approach, to promote better understanding of the child or young person’s strengths and needs, to suggest interventions that may be helpful to include in the Student Support Plan, and to assist schools to implement, monitor and review those interventions. This work is done in partnership with school staff, parents and the child or young person themselves (Department of Education, 2024[107]). The focus of NEPS support and development work is on building capacity, enhancing systems, policies and practices, to maximise a whole-school approach to creating environments which are inclusive, flexible and responsive to the needs of all children and young people (Department of Education, 2024[21]). This includes universal approaches to promote academic, social and emotional competencies and skills, as well as targeted interventions in response to identified need.
Despite the fact that NEPS provides enhanced service time allocation to DEIS schools, the OECD review team received feedback from several visited schools indicating that the allocation of time of NEPS psychologists is not adequate to fully provide for a comprehensive educational psychological service. The OECD review team was informed that it may be difficult for schools, in certain instances, to best respond to the needs of a child without further professional support, including from NEPS.
The challenges in accessing support may reinforce families’ reliance on private assessment services, and pose an additional burden on socio-economically disadvantaged households. Moreover, there are challenges for both the healthcare and the education system in recruiting qualified psychologists and other health and social care professionals including speech and language therapists and occupational therapists, as the country faces a shortage of personnel in these areas.
NEPS and other sections of the DoE are aware of this challenge and the need for provision of services within schools, to complement the services outside schools that are the responsibility of the HSE. For this reason, Budget 2023 provided for an additional 54 psychologists for NEPS (Department of Education, 2022[108]). In addition, the Government introduced a pilot programme that is running from 2023 to 2025, which has established counselling and mental health supports within the schools of a selected number of counties (Box 5.2). The counselling service provided under the pilot programme is not a substitute for services provided by HSE Primary Care Psychology and/or Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services, nor does it replace the role of the NEPS psychologist within a school. The pilot programme is an interim measure intended to supplement these services and meet current urgent needs for counselling and well-being support for primary school students. The pilot will run until 2025 and will be evaluated to gather valuable learning that will inform future policy and provision in this area.
Box 5.2. Counselling in Primary Schools Pilot 2023-2025
The goal of the project
The Counselling in Primary Schools Pilot 2023-25 project is an initiative aimed at providing counselling support to several primary school children, within a selected group of Irish counties. This programme has been designed to complement existing services in the area, and to ensure that children’s mental health and well-being in primary school are addressed.
There are two strands to the pilot:
Strand 1 is the provision of one-to-one counselling to support small numbers of children in all primary schools in seven selected counties (Cavan, Laois, Leitrim, Longford, Mayo, Monaghan and Tipperary). The counselling service does not replace the services provided by the HSE Primary Care Psychology service or the Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services, and children attending these services should continue to do so.
Strand 2 involves the establishment of education well-being/mental health teams to support schools in four cluster areas, and the introduction of education well-being practitioners into schools, under the direction and supervision of the NEPS.
The implementation of the project
Strand one of the pilot programme is intended to provide an opportunity for children to meet with qualified and experienced counsellors to work through any issues they may have.
The process is as follows:
NEPS establishes county panels of preapproved private counsellors to provide inperson onetoone counselling to support primary school children in schools in the selected counties.
Participating schools are allocated blocks of up to eight counselling sessions per child for a small number of children in the school. Sessions are bookended by a pre- and post-session meeting with parents/guardians and school staff (in addition to the six sessions for the child). Participating schools are advised centrally of their specific allocation.
Schools, in consultation with a NEPS psychologist, and guided by the Continuum of Support (described in the context session of this chapter), will identify and prioritise children who will access counselling support (subject to parental/legal guardian informed consent).
Schools are responsible for commissioning counsellors from the panel to provide the counselling under the pilot.
The allocated blocks of counselling under the pilot, if not used, may be carried over into a new school year.
Schools will agree a number of hours per week with the counsellors, subject to their allocation. The counselling will be provided by the counsellor in the school during school hours.
Guidelines on the pilot have been provided to schools, stressing the importance of integrating recommended strategies into the child's school and home life to ensure on-going support.
Strand 2 of the pilot will see education well-being/mental health teams providing the following supports in selected schools:
Strengthening whole school preventative approaches to promoting well‑being and mental health;
Providing psycho-educational support for parents and teachers; and
Providing early intervention to groups of children or individual children with mild/emerging need, using low-level therapeutically-informed approaches.
Source: Department of Education (2023[109]), Department of Education Counselling in Primary Schools Pilot (CPSP) 20232025, https://www.gov.ie/pdf/?file=https://assets.gov.ie/276744/707880a1-9a8c-48b1-b27a-c2804864a4a4.pdf#page=null (accessed on 15 January 2023).
Schools do not often have the resources and capacity to engage families and local communities
Family engagement is an important factor in student development, both from an academic (OECD, 2019[51]; OECD, 2023[49]) and a well-being perspective (Koshy, Smith and Brown, 2016[54]; Rutigliano and Quarshie, 2021[52]). This can be particularly important for disadvantaged and marginalised students, or students who are otherwise at risk of not achieving their educational potential (OECD, 2019[51]). Moreover, evidence also indicates that engaging with families can bring new ideas and encourage schools to reflect on how to more effectively welcome diverse identities into their communities and develop more inclusive ways of working (Guthrie et al., 2019[110]; Rojas Fabris, 2016[111]; Calderón-Almendros et al., 2020[112]; OECD, 2022[113]). In addition, local communities can play an important role in educating young people and contributing to their overall well-being, including through supporting parents in creating safe and positive home environments (Cerna et al., 2021[53]; Smith et al., 2017[114]; OECD, 2023[49]). Alongside school-family partnerships, community-centred approaches have been recognised as effective tools in helping all students achieve their educational potential (Matthews and Menna, 2003[115]; OECD, 2019[51]; Rutigliano and Quarshie, 2021[52]).
In Ireland, giving voice and agency to children, young people and their parents is a key element of partnership. The importance of such partnerships is recognised officially in public policies and documents, as well as in national strategies (Department of Education Inspectorate, 2022[13]). Not only do DEIS schools have planning requirements to promote partnerships with parents (The Inspectorate, 2015[116]), but the focus extends beyond the scope of DEIS. Indeed, the quality frameworks for inspections for primary, post‑primary and special schools state that “leaders should build and maintain relationships with parents, with other schools, and with the wider community” (Department of Education Inspectorate, 2022, p. 206[13]; Deparment of Education, 2022[117]).
Despite some notable initiatives in DEIS schools, there are still challenges for schools to engage successfully parents and families. The OECD review team gained the impression that various schools struggled with engaging all parents, and in particular parents of the most disadvantaged students. A recent report found that the levels of parent engagement are rated less favourably by principals in DEIS Urban schools (Gilleece and Nelis, 2023[31]). About 10% of students in DEIS Urban Band 1 schools and just over 25% of students in DEIS Urban Band 2 schools had principals who rated as high or very high parental support for student achievement. The corresponding value in non-DEIS urban schools was 84.2%. Parental involvement in school activities was regarded as very high or high by principals of just 1.8% of students in DEIS Urban Band 1 schools, principals of 12.3% of students in DEIS Urban Band 2 schools and principals of 48.8% of students in non-DEIS urban schools. In spite of the strong focus on partnership with parents in the DEIS Plan 2017, NAMER 2021 shows that this remains a challenging area for at least some DEIS schools (ibid.).
Lack of access to the HSCL Scheme
The OECD review team heard that one reason that limits the schools’ ability to engage parents and communities more systematically in non-DEIS schools is their lack of access to the HSCL Scheme. While the data presented above show that non-DEIS schools generally have higher rates of engagement with parents, they often host a sizable population of socio-economically disadvantaged students. The OECD review team was informed that several schools struggled to find the time and resources to engage more extensively at-risk families.
HSCL Coordinators are a highly appreciated resource in schools and are considered an effective tool to engage families. Many of these schools could potentially benefit from the allocation of an HSCL Coordinator that would target this group of students. The schools, principals and teachers interviewed by the OECD review team referred that an HSCL Coordinator would be their main wish if their schools were to be attributed some of the DEIS resources. They were also open to the idea of a shared HSCL position among schools as a way to extend the reach of the Scheme, although this would pose limitations to the capacity of the Coordinator. This would be particularly relevant to rural schools, including DEIS Rural schools. While initially all DEIS primary schools, both urban and rural, were included in the HSCL Scheme, after the 2008 crisis and as part of the National Recovery Plan 2011-2014, DEIS Rural schools were excluded from the allocation. Specifically, the rural posts were withdrawn from schools with effect from August 2011 (Department of Education, 2024[21]). The rationale for the decision was on the basis that there was no evidence that additional teaching staff in smaller rural schools provided an additional impact. DEIS Rural schools performed on a par with non-DEIS urban schools in NAMER. Studies by the Educational Research Centre also reference the impact of higher parental engagement in rural schools as a reason for better educational outcomes (Weir, Errity and McAvinue, 2015[118]).
However, according to the Irish National Teacher Organisation, this change created a gap for DEIS Rural schools who have specific needs and would benefit from improved home-school links (Irish National Teacher Organisation, 2017[119]).
Infrastructural limitations
The OECD review team was informed that some schools have limitations linked to their material resources, when planning their family and community engagement strategies. Some of the gaps that were mentioned in the course of the interviews related, for instance, to school spaces. Principals and teachers mentioned the lack of a separate room where they could meet privately with parents, or in which they could organise some activities or workshops.
PISA 2018 showed that higher percentages of students in DEIS Post-primary schools, compared to non‑DEIS post-primary schools, had principals who indicated that material resources hindered the school’s capacity to provide teaching. Among the different resources, physical infrastructure was identified as a problem for similar percentages of students in DEIS (55%) and non-DEIS (41%) schools, both higher than the OECD average of 33% (Gilleece et al., 2021[55]). While these results do not concern specifically resources that can be leveraged to engage families, a shortage in teaching activities can suggest similar limitations for parental engagement activities.
Similar findings relate to the use of school infrastructure beyond the academic week. Data from NAMER 2021 show that principals in DEIS Urban Band 1 schools were less likely than principals in non‑DEIS urban schools to report that buildings and facilities were available to the local community during weekends or out-of-term time (Gilleece and Nelis, 2023[31]). The Educational Research Centre suggested that it may be worth considering how the development of school-community links could be facilitated by the opening up of school buildings and facilities outside of school time.
Some support measures can limit the future opportunities of students
The OECD review team understands support measures to assist diverse students with their specific learning needs. The OECD review team noted that some of the support measures may actually be hindering their future educational and professional opportunities. The supports in question are the exemption to Irish language classes, and the use of reduced timetables – the latter in particular for Traveller and Roma students.
Exemption from the study of Irish
Irish is a mandatory subject in the curriculum, but exemptions may be granted to students under certain circumstances (Department of Education, 2024[21]).
Parents or guardians, as well as students over 18, can apply for exemptions through a process involving discussions with school officials. The decision to grant an exemption is made by the school principal, taking into account various factors outlined in the DoE circulars (Citizens Information, 2023[120]).
Eligibility criteria for the exemption can include circumstances such as:
Moving from a different country without previous experience of learning the Irish language;
Experiencing significant literacy difficulties which are an obstacle to learning across the curriculum; and
Experiencing a high level of multiple and persistent needs that are a significant barrier to participation and engagement in learning and school life.
Special schools and classes may automatically exempt students, although there is an explicit expectation for these schools to provide opportunities for Irish language and cultural activities. The guidelines for the exemption stress that exempting a student from the study of Irish is an important decision that should be considered only in exceptional circumstance as it has implications for a student’s future learning (Department of Education and Skills, 2020[121]).
Available data show that the proportion of students holding an exemption to the study of Irish rose quickly from the end of the 1990s until 2016 (Figure 5.2).
Recent unpublished figures show there has been an increase in the number of students with special educational needs securing exemptions, but a decline in the students from abroad securing exemptions. For example, the number of exemptions granted at post-primary level under the special educational needs categories has increased from 5 073 to 6 685 between 2018/19 and 2020/21, while the numbers from abroad are down from 5 465 to 4 412.
Figure 5.2. Proportion of students holding exemptions from the study of Irish relative to the post-primary student population 1999-2016
Source: Inspectorate (2018[122]), Review of policy and practice in relation to exemptions from the study of Irish, https://assets.gov.ie/30515/68a5644a015c4ee18fab3c9ed8a8ff0d.pdf (accessed on 15 February 2024).
The main limitation linked to the exemption from the study of the Irish relates to access to certain paths in higher education, and some professions later on. Indeed, some third-level courses require a student to have a certain grade in Irish at the Leaving Certificate examination. In some cases, if a student has been exempted from Irish at school, they may be exempted from the third-level requirement for a course. However, this is a decision matter for each higher education institution. Moreover, while some courses have an Irish requirement, there are generally some alternative paths to enter certain professional avenues or careers.
Some professions, too, have a requirement for Irish language. The most relevant case is that of primary education teachers: primary school teachers must be able to teach the Irish language and the range of primary school subjects through Irish (see more in Chapter 4) (The Teaching Council, n.d.[123]). Some roles in public service also have a similar requirement, in line with the government objective of having 20% of the public staff proficient in Irish by 2030 (Department of Tourism, Culture, Arts, Gaeltacht, Sport and Media, 2022[124]).
Reduced School Day
A reduced school day is implemented when a child starts their school day later than other students, ends it earlier than others, does not learn specific subjects, or does not attend school for the full school week. The consequence of reducing the school day is to reduce the breadth of the curriculum and interrupt the continuity of tuition in some subjects (Houses of the Oireachtas, 2019[125]).
The OECD review team heard that the Irish Traveller Movement, along with other national and local non‑governmental organisations (NGOs), lobbied for review of the unmonitored practice by schools, given its disproportionate impact on Traveller and Roma students, and leading to worsening outcomes in their education. In 2019, a Parliamentary Oireachtas Committee agreed to undertake hearings on the matter and issued an interim report (Houses of the Oireachtas, 2019[125]). This report refers that a survey of 101 parents with children on reduced school day showed the negative consequences of the implementation of this policy (ibid.). These findings show that nearly two-thirds of these children attended school for less than three hours per day, with 12% receiving only one hour or less. In the survey, many parents expressed concerns not only about their children falling behind academically, but also about the emotional toll that this practice has on their children, including their experiencing of stress and shame. It was also reported that an additional challenge of this policy is due to the fact that some families face a financial burden when parents must give up work and seek social welfare allowances, to support their children on reduced school days (Houses of the Oireachtas, 2019[125]).
This report influenced the subsequent introduction of guidelines and monitoring. In September 2021, the DoE issued Reduced School Day Guidelines to all schools on the procedures to be followed when reduced school days are put in place for students. These Guidelines came into effect in January 2022. They are meant to ensure that the use of reduced school days is limited to only those circumstances where it is absolutely necessary and, that where such usage occurs, schools follow best practice with the interests of the student to the fore (Department of Education, 2023[126]). They also require the use of an RSD by a school to be notified to TESS on the first day of use and that any extension of use after a six-week period is renotified to TESS. When this concerns students with special educational needs, TESS informs the NCSE.
Yet, some concerns still remain within the system. The OECD review team was informed that Traveller and Roma groups are concerned that families are not well-informed on this practice. Indeed, interviewees raised concerns with the OECD review team that Traveller parents were not sufficiently aware of their rights, as these guides were issued to schools only. Moreover, a longstanding concern is linked to a misuse of the RSD. Indeed, the OECD review team was informed that Traveller and Roma organisations received several reports from parents about the inappropriate use of RSD. These reports indicate that reduced school days are being used outside of their original purpose, mainly as a behavioural management tool.
The DoE has recognised the need to support Traveller and Roma families in this area, and collaborated with Traveller and Roma organisations to disseminate information to parents and families. This included the development of a video for parents of Traveller and Roma children to inform them of their rights in respect to RSDs, such as their right to refuse an RSD, and contact details to get in touch with TESS welfare officers in case of need (Department of Education, 2023[127]). Since September 2023, the DoE publishes an overview of the frequency of the use of reduced school days in the system, also disaggregated by educational levels and student groups (students with special educational needs, and Traveller and Roma students) (Department of Education, 2023[126]). The data show that a total number of 1 044 first notification of students on a reduced school day during the 2022/23 school year, which represents 0.11% of total student population. Of these 1 044 students:
485 (46.5%) were from primary schools (94 DEIS, 259 non-DEIS);
460 (44.0%) from post-primary schools (82 DEIS, 129 non-DEIS); and
99 (9.5%) from special schools.
Of the total number of students, 684 (65.5%) had special educational needs (that is students in a special school, enrolled in a special class in mainstream school or attending a mainstream class but with significant/complex additional learning needs). Ninety were Traveller and Roma students. It should be noted that the data on Traveller and Roma students could be underestimated, as ethnicity is reported only on a voluntary basis. TESS has also confirmed that 342 second notifications (i.e. extensions of the reduced school day period) were received, of which 238 (69.6%) related to students with special educational needs. A total of 43 (12.6%) were Traveller and Roma students (where consent was given to indicate ethnicity).
This monitoring effort is an important step in determining the magnitude of the problem, and the data suggest that the DoE should maintain this analysis to ensure that the use of RSD for students with special educational needs and Traveller and Roma students in particular is appropriate. The data collection could help identify cases of misuse of the reduced day options, such as in the case of students with long-term RSDs, rather than temporary ones. Moreover, then OECD review team was informed that the DoE is committed to investigating any claim of improper use of an RSD that is reported to them or Tusla.
Policy recommendations
Strengthen equity in the provision of additional resources across schools
Ensuring that access to additional resources (e.g. breakfast clubs, sports activities and music clubs) is equitable across different schools is key to strengthen learning opportunities for all students. This may entail ensuring that highly disadvantaged students can have the same access to resources, regardless of their enrolment in DEIS or non-DEIS schools (following the principle of horizontal equity, as defined in Chapter 3). Indeed, disparities in the capacity for provision of these resources across non-DEIS and DEIS schools can exacerbate inequalities among students from different socio-economic backgrounds. To address this challenge, the DoE should consider how the differences in funding across DEIS and non‑DEIS schools may impact the provision of these resources and consider options to tackle this gap.
A first step would be to conduct a comprehensive review of the costs associated with breakfast clubs, sports activities and music clubs in schools that are able to offer them, to have an estimate of the expenses that institutions face to provide such services. This review should also encompass an examination of the financial burdens faced by families, particularly those from disadvantaged backgrounds, in accessing these resources when offered by schools. Such an evaluation would need to account for variations in the offers among schools. High-cost extra-curricular activities may be offered in certain schools, while others may focus on core, less expensive activities. Moreover, some activities may be aimed at delivering more fundamental services, such as breakfast clubs. These should be considered on a different level, compared to more costly sport or recreational activities. While the ideal scenario would be to provide free access to a range of additional resources (e.g. breakfast clubs, sports activities) for all students, budgetary constraints may necessitate a more nuanced approach. Therefore, policy makers should prioritise promoting affordable access to these resources, particularly for families experiencing financial hardship. This could involve offering discounts for disadvantaged families or seeking partnerships with community organisations to offset costs and enhance accessibility.
To address the costs associated with the provision of these additional resources, policy makers should explore the feasibility of integrating these expenses into the capitation grant (for more information, refer to Chapter 3). By incorporating these costs into the capitation grant framework, the DoE could reduce financial barriers for schools and families, enriching opportunities for all students. In particular, these efforts would counter-balance the possible gap in support and resources for disadvantaged students across DEIS and non-DEIS schools. Alternatively, the DoE could consider incorporating funds to cover these resources in the context of a potential reform of the Bands. In such case, resources to cover for these additional supports could be allocated to a selected number of bands based on an assessment of different schools’ needs.
In conclusion, by reviewing costs, integrating expenses into capitation grants, prioritising access for disadvantaged students, and promoting free or affordable access to additional resources, the DoE can provide students with equal opportunities to thrive and succeed academically and socially, regardless of their socio-economic background.
Review volunteering commitment of teachers and the impact on their well-being
The OECD review team was informed that most schools are able to organise extra-curricular activities exclusively thanks to the volunteering of teachers, parents and caregivers. This phenomenon seems pervasive of the education system, beyond the distinction between DEIS and non-DEIS schools. The reliance on teachers by the schools may become a challenge when it impacts teacher well-being, by increasing their workload and the unpaid time they spend on these activities.
As discussed in Chapter 4, Ireland is facing a shortage of teachers, which is impacting the whole education system. As recommended in Chapter 4, analysing the causes for attrition would be an important step to identify the drivers of this phenomenon. Within these efforts to analyse the causes of the shortage, the DoE should include the amount and requests for volunteering commitments and their magnitude. Information on this practice could clarify its role on the well-being and satisfaction of teachers, if any.
Strengthen the coordination of educational services with the health and therapy service provision to increase support for schools and families in meeting students’ needs
The provision of timely and appropriate services to support students’ needs is fundamental. The institutional supports for students with special educational needs or with mental health needs are under pressure in Ireland, facing challenges from both the side of the DoE and the Department of Health. Better planning is needed so that there are adequate numbers of personnel available to provide support within both sectors, and ensure that existing resources coordinate effectively in delivering support to the students. It would be important, for all of the relevant governmental departments – Health, Education and Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth – to collectively deliver on national policy, including on the “Young Ireland 2023-2028” policy framework. Aligning adequate supports and resources for children with additional needs, while simultaneously working to improve the system of support so that barriers to access are removed, is fundamental.
This is particularly important for disadvantaged students, as their families may not be able to afford private assessment or therapy services. Moreover, it would help relieve pressure from schools, as they invest a significant amount of time to help families navigate the support system, for instance, by helping them fill out the forms.
As discussed in Chapter 2, Ireland should strengthen the coordination and integration of services across departments to better support students at risk of educational disadvantage. For this specific issue, this entails ensuring that the services of the relevant Departments – Education, Health, and Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth – are aligned, coordinated and complement each other. This would require stronger co‑operation between departments. Ireland has begun work in this area following recommendations from the Sharing the Vision national mental health policy. This policy aims at enhancing the provision of mental health services and supports across a continuum from mental health promotion to special mental health service delivery during the period 2020-2030. Recommendation 10 in the policy states that “a protocol should be developed between the Department of Education and HSE on the liaison process that should be in place between primary/post-primary schools, mental health services and supports such as NEPS, general practitioners, primary care services and specialist mental health services. This is needed to facilitate referral pathways to local services and signposting to such services, as necessary (Department of Education, 2024, p. 31[128]).” A Working Group was established to follow the recommendation, and improve liaison processes and information sharing between schools and mental health services. This work was further strengthened by the development of the “Young Ireland 2023-2028” policy framework, which explicitly recognised inter-agency coordination as an issue in the services for children and young people and an area to be strengthened (Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth, 2024[105]).
A whole-of-government approach to children’s needs and health would be key in developing this collaboration and could help both services avoid competing for resources and personnel. Clear pathways to services that are well resourced can also ensure that no child falls through the cracks, and that their learning and well-being needs are prioritised. Social services should also be involved in these collaborative efforts, as they can provide an additional, fundamental angle on student well‑being, the challenges and hardship they may be facing, while also supporting parents and families through these processes. An example of a comprehensive and holistic policy approach to child well-being, including mental health needs, is that of the United Kingdom’s Every Child Matters policy (Box 5.3). This policy aligns with Ireland’s “Young Ireland 2023-2028” policy framework, as they share similar outcomes.
Box 5.3. Every Child Matters policy in the United Kingdom
An example of a long-standing, holistic policy that focuses strongly on child well‑being is the Every Child Matters policy, which emerged as a result of the Children Act 2004. The core principle behind this policy is to ensure that every child in the country has the opportunity to achieve their full potential and lead a healthy, safe and fulfilling life. The policy is based on five key outcomes, which collectively form the foundation for supporting the well-being of children:
Being healthy: focuses on promoting physical and mental well-being. It aims to ensure that children have access to necessary healthcare, a healthy diet, and opportunities for physical activity. Mental health and emotional well-being are also emphasised to foster resilience and coping skills.
Staying safe: involves safeguarding children from harm and ensuring they grow up in environments free from abuse, neglect and exploitation. The policy emphasises the importance of creating safe spaces both at home and in the community.
Enjoying and achieving: underscores the significance of providing educational opportunities that allow children to enjoy learning and achieve their full potential. It encompasses academic success, personal development and engagement in extra-curricular activities.
Making a positive contribution: encouraging children to make positive contributions to their communities is a key aspect of the policy. This involves fostering a sense of responsibility, empathy, and active participation in social and civic life.
Achieving economic well-being: focuses on equipping children with the skills and knowledge needed for future employment. It also addresses issues related to poverty and aims to break the cycle of disadvantage.
A key element of this Act, whose scope is broader than children’s mental health and learning needs, is that it provided boundaries to the different services and help to local authorities, schools and other entities involved in the care of children to better regulate official intervention in the interests of children.
Source: HM Treasury (2003[129]), Every child matters: Presented to Parliament by the Chief Secretary to the Treasury by Command of Her Majesty, https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a7c95a4e5274a0bb7cb806d/5860.pdf (accessed on 13 February 2024).
The Every Child Matters policy is also a framework that guides the work of professionals and organisations involved in the welfare of children, including education, healthcare, social services and law enforcement. It promotes multi-agency collaboration and coordination to address the diverse needs of children comprehensively, ensuring that no child falls through the gaps in support and services. This example could support Ireland in strengthening the coordination of the relevant departments when providing educational and therapy services to children and young people.
Review additional costs of education to families to improve the accessibility of provisions
While education in Ireland is formally universally free, families can face significant costs as their children progress through education. Voluntary contributions, fees to access TY, examination fees, book costs, are all expenses that families may be facing to ensure their children stay in education. Official data on the overall amounts that families spend on these are not available at the national level. It would be important to obtain such information to understand the impact of this phenomenon on schools and potentially also families. This would allow verifying whether significant disparities exist among schools, for instance, if participation in these provisions in non-DEIS schools entails greater expenses for families, and also to monitor eventual school-level exemptions for disadvantaged students. Thus, a thorough review should be developed on all these additional payments that families face to monitor the effective costs of education and the inequalities among schools. The DoE should also consider specific steps in regard to the different costs.
Voluntary contributions
An additional element that should be reviewed, and addressed by the DoE, is whether the provision of voluntary contributions is linked to services that the government would consider essential to a student’s education. It could happen, for instance, that the provision of homework notebooks is tied to the payment of a voluntary contribution. Such mechanism is incompatible with the – in theory – voluntary nature of these contributions, and schools should not be allowed to enact them.
The DoE should also take into consideration that schools often establish specific amounts they expect for voluntary contributions, which contradicts the principle of voluntariness associated with such contributions. The DoE could evaluate the possibility of not allowing schools to set specific amounts, as a measure to alleviate the burden on families that, as reported above, feel forced to pay significant amounts that impact their household finances. Moreover, it should be investigated whether schools treat students that do or do not pay these contributions differently.
The request of “payment of fees or contributions (however described) to the school” cannot be considered by schools when deciding on student admission, according to the Education (Admission to Schools) Act 2018 (2018[73]). As this regulation focuses only on student admission, the DoE may want to consider further financial and monitoring measures to guarantee free basic education for all.
The DoE should also account for the role that these contributions play in the funding of schools. It would be key to analyse data on how the contributions are used, what range of expenses they cover, and if they are necessary for the schools to provide what the DoE would consider the necessary standard of education provision. If such an analysis were to reveal that schools do rely on these funds for their daily activities and to be able to provide a high-quality education, the DoE should consider if the capitation grant is sufficient, in particular concerning non-DEIS schools (see Chapter 3 for more information).
Transition Year
The DoE is currently conducting a review of access to and provision of Transition Year, which will include consideration of associated costs for both schools and students. As discussed previously, there are neither official data on the costs for families to enrol their children into TY, nor guidelines on how much schools should charge for it. While participation in TY is optional, this does not apply to all Irish schools, as some may make this year mandatory, although rarely so. The DoE review is part of the Department’s work to implement the commitment that in the future, TY will be available to every student who wished to partake in it.
The DoE may consider two steps in regard to TY: first, it would need to complete the aforementioned review, with particular attention to the costs of the programme for both families and schools. The DoE could also consider developing guidelines to indicate to schools some ranges for the fees they charge for TY, based on the different activities they decide to provide. This exercise would have to take into account the autonomy that schools have in designing their TY programmes and provide different options to schools based on their capacity. While these guidelines would be advisory in nature, they could, for instance, suggest ranges for the costs or identify caps in the costs of different activities that can be offered as part of TY. Such guidelines would acknowledge that costs may vary in different geographical areas or depending on the size of schools or classes. They could also provide some clarity for families on the potential expenses entailed in TY.
Second, depending on the results, the DoE should examine how to support disadvantaged students that may want to enrol in TY. These supports could be both financial and non-financial, as well as provided at the level of the individual student or school. As this programme can help students develop socially, academically, and in choosing their focus for the Leaving Certificate (Established or Applied), being able to participate in it can be beneficial for socio-economically disadvantaged students. However, if the costs for taking TY are too high, students may miss out on an important developmental opportunity. Centralised financial support for disadvantage students to undertake TY in all schools, both DEIS and non-DEIS, could further foster equity within the Irish education system.
Examination fees
Lastly, the DoE should re-evaluate examination fees. According to the governmental response to the pandemic and the cost-of-living crisis, the examination fees have been waived since 2020, up to the 2023/24 academic year. The DoE should take stock of the initiative and evaluate whether this policy has had any significant negative financial impacts on the education system, considering the benefits it brought. If this has not occurred and the policy appears to be financially sustainable, the DoE should consider removing such fees completely, to strengthen the system’s free education principle.
New Zealand made a similar choice in 2019. The Government recognised that the National Certificate of Educational Achievement (NCEA) fees created barriers to access for many New Zealanders working towards the qualification. Thus, Budget 2019 provided funding to cover the cost of NCEA assessment fees for all students, with the goal of supporting equity of access to NCEA qualifications and increases residual incomes for low-income families (Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, 2019[130]; New Zealand Government, 2019[131]).
Promote promising models and examples of engagement and collaboration with parents, families and communities
Research has shown that the involvement of parents or guardians and communities in the learning of their children plays a pivotal role in students’ educational achievement and broader well-being (OECD, 2019[51]; Rutigliano and Quarshie, 2021[52]). Engaging local communities, parents or guardians and families is, therefore, important for schools who seek to create inclusive and equitable school environments (Cerna et al., 2021[53]). As discussed in this chapter, some schools have flagged that a lack of appropriate resources impede them from effectively engaging with families and communities. This challenge tends to affect more often non-DEIS schools, as the DEIS programmes includes specialised resources to facilitate this process, such as the HSCL Coordinator, the SCP Coordinator and SCP Project Workers.
Promote and facilitate the sharing of successful community and parental engagement practices among schools
One way in which education systems can support schools in this respect is by providing schools with guidance on how to involve parents and guardians from all backgrounds in the school community (Guthrie et al., 2019[110]; Santiago et al., 2017[132]). The DoE could incentivise the sharing of practices, leveraging the experience that several schools have successfully developed. For instance, the DoE could take advantage of the experience of specific schools that were particularly successful in tackling student absenteeism or disengagement, or that designed innovative initiatives to engage parents and families. The DoE could rely on the support of the Inspectorate both to identify good practices in schools, and to circulate information and examples that can be of help to other schools (as suggested also in Chapter 2). The Inspectorate would be best placed to identify virtuous examples through their evaluations, and, at the same time, they could relay these examples to schools that they identify as needing support in the area of parental and community engagement.
Support can also be provided in relation to the engagement for specific groups of students (OECD, 2023[49]). Recommendations on steps schools can take to engage with refugee parents and families are, for example, included as part of guidance published by the Department of Education in New South Wales, Australia, on how schools can support students from refugee backgrounds (Cerna, 2019[133]; New South Wales Department of Education, 2016[134]). Similarly, a guide for “working with Roma Families towards achieving the success of their children at school”, was developed in a transnational project across Bulgaria, Hungary, Romania and Spain, with the support of the European Commission’s Lifelong Learning Programme (Arbex et al., 2013[135]) (see Box 5.4).
Box 5.4. International expertise: a guide for working with Roma families towards achieving the success of their children in school
This guide represents a comprehensive methodological tool developed from the collective expertise of education professionals engaged in working with the Roma population across Bulgaria, Hungary, Romania and Spain. Drawing from the experiences gleaned in each participating country, the guide synthesises insights from national seminars and reports to formulate effective intervention models.
The primary objective of this guide is to furnish practitioners with a flexible framework for engaging with various types of Roma families, especially those grappling with challenges related to school dropout rates and academic achievement among their children. While the guide does not adhere strictly to any single theoretical model, it draws upon diverse theoretical principles to inform its methodology.
The guide’s approach
At its core, the guide underscores the importance of conducting individual assessments for each participating family and devising tailored intervention plans, that they call Family Work Plans (FWPs). It also emphasises on-going evaluation to gauge the efficacy of implemented strategies.
By delineating a spectrum of strategies, methods, and actions, the guide empowers practitioners to make informed decisions aligned with the unique circumstances of each family and the context of intervention. While the examples provided aim to illustrate common scenarios, they do not contend to encompass all potential situations encountered in practice.
The guide also offers insights into the main factors influencing the academic success of Roma students across the participating countries. It explores theoretical frameworks that underpin interventions aimed at supporting Roma families within the educational landscape.
Key steps to engage Roma families
A pivotal component of the guide is its delineation of a methodological tool comprising seven key steps for intervention with Roma families in school settings:
1. Analysing the environment and dissemination of the programme.
2. Attracting and recruiting families and partners.
3. Approaching families and creating a bond with them.
4. Conducting initial assessments.
5. Designing an FWP and creating a work alliance.
6. Implementing the actions foreseen in the FWP.
7. Conducting follow-up and assessment of the planned intervention.
In conclusion, the guide serves as a comprehensive resource for education professionals seeking to enhance the educational outcomes of Roma children and adolescents. By following its methodologies and recommendations, practitioners can foster more inclusive and supportive educational environments for Roma families across diverse socio-cultural contexts.
Source: Arbex et al. (2013[135]), Guide for working with Roma families towards achieving the success of their children in school: A transnational methodological proposal for professionals, https://romafamiliesgetinvolved.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/guide_roma_families_en.pdf (accessed on 14 February 2024).
Consider the expansion of the HSCL Scheme to schools with particular needs
HSCL Coordinators are considered a key component of the DEIS programme, and more specifically of the schools’ efforts to engage parents, families and communities. Having a dedicated staff member who can focus on connecting the school with families is a fundamental resource for the schools that were seeing challenges with parental engagement, and student performance, attendance and well‑being.
The OECD review team was informed that both DEIS and non-DEIS schools generally appreciate the programme. In particular, non-DEIS schools stressed the difference in establishing a rapport with families that having an HSCL Coordinator, among the various DEIS resources and supports, could make for their schools. HSCL Coordinators appear to be particularly sought after by non-DEIS schools and a potential solution for needs in the area of family engagement and support.
The DoE could consider a partial expansion of the Scheme, or its general mainstreaming, depending on the financial sustainability of this reform. A partial expansion of the Scheme could focus on schools that have a particular need for this support, and should be developed in line with an eventual decision from the DoE to extend the supports to all students defined as disadvantaged, as discussed in Chapter 3. This could entail, for instance, providing an HSCL Coordinator to schools that host a sizable, disadvantaged population, even if they did not qualify for the DEIS programme. The expansion could also consider DEIS Rural schools that were excluded from the programme since 2011. The DoE could also consider specific indicators to identify schools most at need for this specific support: high levels of absenteeism in certain schools, low academic performance and more. As discussed in Chapter 4, a potential extension of the HSCL Scheme could be facilitated by relaxing the qualification requirements for HSCL Coordinators, given the current shortage of teachers in the system.
Provide mediators for Traveller and Roma students and families
Cultural mediation is a well-known concept and widely used strategy among a variety of institutions and organisations in OECD countries (OECD, 2022[113]; OECD, 2023[49]). Cultural mediators can support schools and teachers to reach out to specific groups of students and their families, facilitate successful communication and promote positive relationships. For instance, the Department of Education of the state of Colorado (United States) uses cultural mediators to connect with parents and families, including within its Head Start programmes, which seek to promote the school readiness of infants, toddlers and preschool‑aged children from socio-economically disadvantaged families (ibid.).
A group that may particularly benefit from cultural mediators in Ireland are Traveller and Roma students. In the European Union (EU), the use of cultural mediators with a Roma background is considered to be one of the most effective practices for bridging potential gaps and fostering connections between Roma communities and public institutions (OECD, 2022[113]; Rutigliano, 2020[136]). Cultural mediators with a Roma background are employed in the education systems of several European countries to build trust and sustained relationships between schools and Roma families, and to support the learning of Roma students. Czechia, Finland, Romania and Spain were among the first countries to use members of the Roma communities to improve Roma children’s chances of succeeding at school (Council of Europe, 2017[137]). Similarly, Nordic countries have included the support of cultural mediators in their policies to support Roma students and their families (Rutigliano, 2020[136]; Helakorpi, Lappalainen and Sahlström, 2019[138]). Cultural mediators have proven successful in improving the well-being and academic performance of Roma students as well as promoting the inclusion of the community as a whole (OECD, 2022[113]; Rutigliano, 2020[136]).
Cultural mediators could be considered as partners to HSCL Coordinators in situations of particular needs, or to schools that do not have an HSCL Coordinator to foster their engagement with Traveller and Roma families. This would be in line with the practices that are being developed, for instance, under the STAR projects, which employ members of the Traveller and Roma community to facilitate engagement in the initiatives. The same principle can be adopted for schools with a high concentration of students with an immigrant background, who may need specialised personnel to engage effectively their families and support them in their educational experiences.
References
[65] Adolphus, K., C. Lawton and L. Dye (2013), “The effects of breakfast on behavior and academic performance in children and adolescents”, Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, Vol. 7, https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2013.00425.
[61] Advisory Committee on the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities (2023), The Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities - Fifth Period Report, https://rm.coe.int/ireland-s-fifth-periodic-report-under-the-fcnm/1680abedda (accessed on 29 February 2024).
[135] Arbex, C. et al. (2013), GUIDE FOR WORKING WITH ROMA FAMILIES TOWARDS ACHIEVING THE SUCCESS OF THEIR CHILDREN IN SCHOOL: A transnational methodological proposal for professionals, https://romafamiliesgetinvolved.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/guide_roma_families_en.pdf (accessed on 14 February 2024).
[39] Archer, P. and F. Shortt (2003), REVIEW OF THE HOME/SCHOOL/COMMUNITY LIAISON SCHEME, https://www.erc.ie/documents/hsclreview03.pdf (accessed on 12 January 2024).
[71] ASTI (2018), Teachers’ Work: Work Demands and Work Intensity, https://www.asti.ie/document-library/teachers-work-work-demands-and-work-intensity-march-2018/ (accessed on 18 December 2023).
[94] Barnardos (2023), The Real Cost of School in 2023, https://www.barnardos.ie/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Back-to-School-Full-Report-2023-final_cover.pdf (accessed on 14 February 2024).
[112] Calderón-Almendros, I. et al. (2020), “Educational inclusion and equity in Latin America: An analysis of the challenges”, PROSPECTS, Vol. 49/3-4, pp. 169-186, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11125-020-09501-1.
[133] Cerna, L. (2019), “Refugee education: Integration models and practices in OECD countries”, OECD Education Working Papers, No. 203, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/a3251a00-en.
[53] Cerna, L. et al. (2021), “Promoting inclusive education for diverse societies: A conceptual framework”, OECD Education Working Papers, No. 260, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/94ab68c6-en.
[120] Citizens Information (2023), Exemption from studying Irish, https://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/education/the-irish-education-system/exemption-from-irish/ (accessed on 21 January 2024).
[79] Clerkin, A. (2018), “Who participates? Predicting student self-selection into a developmental year in secondary education”, Educational Psychology, Vol. 38/9, pp. 1083-1105, https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2018.1504004.
[80] Clerkin, A. (2013), “Growth of the ‘Transition Year’ programme nationally and in schools serving disadvantaged students, 1992–2011”, Irish Educational Studies, Vol. 32/2, pp. 197-215, https://doi.org/10.1080/03323315.2013.770663.
[137] Council of Europe (2017), AD HOC COMMITTEE OF EXPERTS ON ROMA AND TRAVELLER ISSUES (CAHROM): FINAL THEMATIC REPORT, https://rm.coe.int/cahrom-2017-16-thematic-report-on-roma-mediation-with-a-focus-on-schoo/16809681da (accessed on 12 February 2024).
[29] Curriculum Online (2022), LCA, https://www.curriculumonline.ie/senior-cycle/lca/ (accessed on 29 February 2024).
[40] D’Agostino, J. and S. Harmey (2016), “An International Meta-Analysis of Reading Recovery”, Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk (JESPAR), Vol. 21/1, pp. 29-46, https://doi.org/10.1080/10824669.2015.1112746.
[70] Defeyter, M., P. Graham and R. Russo (2015), “More than Just a Meal: Breakfast Club Attendance and Children’s Social Relationships”, Frontiers in Public Health, Vol. 3, https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2015.00183.
[7] Delaney, E. et al. (2023), PIRLS 2021: Reading results for Ireland, https://www.erc.ie/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/PIRLS-2021_Reading-Results-for-Ireland.pdf (accessed on 9 February 2024).
[14] Deparment of Education (2023), Education Indicators for Ireland 2022, https://assets.gov.ie/246753/731464a9-5859-400a-86f1-c3417b1d910e.xlsx (accessed on 1 February 2024).
[117] Deparment of Education (2022), A Guide to Inspection in Primary Schools and Special Schools, https://www.gov.ie/pdf/?file=https://assets.gov.ie/25257/0325129729314c5089d321c4cc197fb5.pdf#page=null (accessed on 22 December 2023).
[96] Department for Education (2021), Statutory guidance: Cost of school uniforms, https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/cost-of-school-uniforms/cost-of-school-uniforms (accessed on 14 February 2024).
[105] Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth (2024), Minister Rabbitte secures Government funding to accelerate an Assessment of Need (AON) waiting list initiative, https://www.gov.ie/en/press-release/826ed-minister-rabbitte-secures-government-funding-to-accelerate-an-assessment-of-need-aon-waiting-list-initiative/ (accessed on 31 May 2024).
[15] Department of Education (2024), Education Indicators for Ireland 2023, https://www.gov.ie/pdf/?file=https://assets.gov.ie/289901/66bf9068-8a83-4bf8-86d4-d3aba60ef7d1.pdf#page=null (accessed on 22 April 2024).
[107] Department of Education (2024), National Educational Psychological Service (NEPS), https://www.gov.ie/en/service/5ef45c-neps/#overview-of-neps-service (accessed on 25 April 2024).
[21] Department of Education (2024), OECD Review of resourcing schools to address educational disadvantage: Country Background Report Ireland, Department for Education, https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/govieassets/296017/4d1ac422-5475-470e-b910-4c80a83c43bc.pdf.
[26] Department of Education (2024), Schoolbooks Grant - Guidance for Post-Primary Schools 2024/25, https://assets.gov.ie/286443/3d4d1f02-42c5-4932-9ebd-6541a3a977a0.pdf (accessed on 26 April 2024).
[25] Department of Education (2024), Schoolbooks Scheme for Junior Cycle in Post-Primary Schools, https://www.gov.ie/en/publication/5652a-schoolbooks-scheme-for-junior-cycle-in-post-primary-schools/ (accessed on 26 April 2024).
[77] Department of Education (2024), Senior Cycle Redevelopment, https://www.gov.ie/en/publication/f53c6-senior-cycle-redevelopment/?referrer=https://www.gov.ie/seniorcycle/ (accessed on 30 May 2024).
[128] Department of Education (2024), Sharing the Vision: A Mental Health Policy, https://assets.gov.ie/76770/b142b216-f2ca-48e6-a551-79c208f1a247.pdf (accessed on 2 June 2024).
[20] Department of Education (2023), DEIS Delivering Equality of Opportunity In Schools, https://www.gov.ie/en/policy-information/4018ea-deis-delivering-equality-of-opportunity-in-schools/ (accessed on 1 December 2023).
[109] Department of Education (2023), Department of Education Counselling in PrimarySchools Pilot (CPSP): Guidelines for Schools, https://www.gov.ie/pdf/?file=https://assets.gov.ie/276744/707880a1-9a8c-48b1-b27a-c2804864a4a4.pdf#page=null (accessed on 15 January 2024).
[98] Department of Education (2023), Free Primary Schoolbooks Scheme, https://www.gov.ie/en/publication/933a9-free-primary-schoolbooks-scheme/ (accessed on 14 February 2024).
[24] Department of Education (2023), Main Features of Budget 2024 Department of Education, https://assets.gov.ie/273435/c77f2daa-d3f5-468c-a894-bb8931dd513b.pdf (accessed on 12 February 2024).
[16] Department of Education (2023), National School Attendance Campaign 2023 /2024, https://www.gov.ie/en/press-release/6a6a0-minister-foley-launches-campaign-to-encourage-school-attendance-and-additional-funding-for-schools-to-support-attendance/ (accessed on 9 February 2024).
[126] Department of Education (2023), Reduced School Days: 2022/23 School Year, https://assets.gov.ie/271111/eb501915-54d3-47b4-a074-80af6ec7e7a9.pdf (accessed on 23 January 2024).
[85] Department of Education (2023), Senior Cycle Redevelopment, https://www.gov.ie/pdf/?file=https://assets.gov.ie/278800/961699c7-645a-4a79-9c64-43316c78c978.pdf (accessed on 26 April 2024).
[127] Department of Education (2023), The Use of Reduced School days, https://www.gov.ie/en/publication/63545-the-use-of-reduced-school-days/ (accessed on 28 May 2024).
[62] Department of Education (2022), Minister Foley announces 2022 Dormant Accounts Funding to provide targeted supports to improve educational outcomes for Traveller and Roma students, https://www.gov.ie/en/press-release/a3674-minister-foley-announces-2022-dormant-accounts-funding-to-provide-targeted-supports-to-improve-educational-outcomes-for-traveller-and-roma-students/ (accessed on 18 December 2023).
[108] Department of Education (2022), Ministers Foley and Madigan announce details of €9.6 billion education funding in Budget 2023, https://www.gov.ie/en/press-release/8ba6b-ministers-foley-and-madigan-announce-details-of-96-billion-education-funding-in-budget-2023/ (accessed on 3 June 2024).
[78] Department of Education (2020), Returning to School Transition Year 2020/21, https://assets.gov.ie/83326/3d94da23-d993-4059-a917-c1eb48b4023b.pdf (accessed on 3 May 2024).
[38] Department of Education (2017), DEIS Plan 2017, https://www.gov.ie/pdf/?file=https://assets.gov.ie/24451/ba1553e873864a559266d344b4c78660.pdf#page=null (accessed on 30 November 2023).
[32] Department of Education (2017), Guidelines for Primary Schools - Supporting Pupils with Special Educational Needs in Mainstream Schools, https://www.gov.ie/pdf/?file=https://assets.gov.ie/86911/e2ab0e65-f360-45a4-8075-37a4123838c3.pdf#page=null (accessed on 24 April 2024).
[30] Department of Education (n.d.), The Incredible Years Teacher Classroom Management (TCM) Programme, https://assets.gov.ie/41215/90a7cb8701ab475cada4a20860dbcd73.pdf (accessed on 12 January 2024).
[76] Department of Education and Science (n.d.), Transition Year Programmes – Guidelines for Schools, https://ncca.ie/media/2512/ty_transition_year_school_guidelines.pdf (accessed on 22 January 202).
[121] Department of Education and Skills (2020), Exemptions from the study of Irish: guidelines for primary schools (english-medium), https://assets.gov.ie/38345/a1f5107800ca4e508c9b2c0a5b887737.pdf (accessed on 11 January 2024).
[93] Department of Education and Skills (2017), Measures to be adopted by schools to reduce the cost of school uniforms and other costs, https://circulars.gov.ie/pdf/circular/education/2017/32.pdf (accessed on 14 February 2024).
[101] Department of Education and Skills (2013), Allocation to schools for books, https://www.gov.ie/en/circular/0f30adef861f4c589e920fd2ae456fa6/ (accessed on 15 February 2024).
[102] Department of Education and Skills (2012), Guidelines for Developing Textbook Rental Schemes in Schools, https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/govieassets/227088/2a5b7109-5a91-42dc-91d1-9837a0ee46e5.pdf (accessed on 15 February 2024).
[13] Department of Education Inspectorate (2022), Chief Inspector’s Report, https://www.gov.ie/pdf/?file=https://assets.gov.ie/232560/fac408b3-689b-44cb-a8f1-3cb090018a05.pdf#page=null (accessed on 4 January 2024).
[99] Department of Finance, Department of Public Expenditure, NDP Delivery and Reform (2024), Budget 2024, https://www.gov.ie/en/campaigns/budget/ (accessed on 15 February 2024).
[10] Department of Justice and Equality (2017), National Traveller and Roma Inclusion Strategy 2017 – 2021, https://www.gov.ie/pdf/?file=https://assets.gov.ie/43310/d7d54fbff0f4418982856e7dddaf78c1.pdf#page=null (accessed on 4 January 2024).
[92] Department of Public Expenditure, NDP Delivery and Reform (2023), Statement by Minister Donohoe on Budget 2024, https://www.gov.ie/en/speech/65152-statement-by-minster-donohoe-on-budget-2024/ (accessed on 22 December 2023).
[95] Department of Social Protection (2024), Back to School Clothing and Footwear Allowance, https://www.gov.ie/en/service/41eb8b-back-to-school-clothing-and-footwear-allowance/ (accessed on 14 February 2024).
[23] Department of Social Protection (2023), Minister Humphreys announces 900 additional Primary Schools approved for Hot School Meals, https://www.gov.ie/en/press-release/f1d0d-minister-humphreys-announces-900-additional-primary-schools-approved-for-hot-school-meals/? (accessed on 15 January 2024).
[50] Department of Social Protection (n.d.), Taoiseach Simon Harris and Minister Humphreys announces rollout of Hot School Meals to additional 900 Primary Schools, https://www.gov.ie/en/press-release/4449a-taoiseach-simon-harris-and-minister-humphreys-announces-rollout-of-hot-school-meals-to-additional-900-primary-schools/ (accessed on 23 April 2024).
[130] Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet (2019), Removal of National Certificate of Educational Achievement (NCEA) fees, https://www.childyouthwellbeing.govt.nz/actions/actions-outcome/removal-national-certificate-educational-achievement-ncea-fees (accessed on 14 February 2024).
[124] Department of Tourism, Culture, Arts, Gaeltacht, Sport and Media (2022), New era for Irish language courses in the Civil Service, https://www.gov.ie/en/press-release/05afc-new-era-for-irish-language-courses-in-the-civil-service/ (accessed on 11 January 2024).
[4] Duggan, A. et al. (2023), “Trends in educational inequalities in Ireland’s primary schools: an analysis based on TIMSS data (2011–2019)”, Large-scale Assessments in Education, Vol. 11/1, https://doi.org/10.1186/s40536-023-00188-2.
[69] Education Endowment Foundation (2016), Breakfast clubs found to boost primary pupils’ reading writing and maths results, https://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/news/breakfast-clubs-found-to-boost-primary-pupils-reading-writing-and-maths-res (accessed on 12 December 2023).
[9] Eurostat (2023), Early leavers from education and training, https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=Early_leavers_from_education_and_training#Early_leavers_from_education_and_training_.E2.80.93_today_and_a_historical_comparison (accessed on 4 January 2024).
[84] Financial Support Services Unit (2024), Financial Guideline 2023/2024, https://www.fssu.ie/app/uploads/2024/03/22-24-Financial-Guideline-Grants-VS-2024_2025-incl-Irish-updated_rev.pdf (accessed on 28 May 2024).
[83] Financial Support Services Unit (2023), Financial Guideline 2022/2023 - 23, https://www.fssu.ie/app/uploads/2023/03/23-23-Financial-Guideline-Grants-2023_2024_incl-Irish.pdf (accessed on 28 May 2024).
[114] Frawley, J. and S. Larkin (eds.) (2017), What Do We Know About Community Engagement in Indigenous Education Contexts and How Might This Impact on Pathways into Higher Education?, Springer Open.
[34] Gilleece, L. and A. Clerkin (2024), “Towards more robust evaluation of policies and programmes in education: identifying challenges in evaluating DEIS and Reading Recovery”, Irish Educational Studies, pp. 1-29, https://doi.org/10.1080/03323315.2024.2334704.
[55] Gilleece, L. et al. (2021), Beyond Achievement: Home, school and wellbeing findings from PISA 2018 for students in DEIS and non-DEIS schools, Educational Research Centre, https://www.erc.ie/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/FINAL_Web_version_ERC-PISA-DEIS-Report-II_May-2021.pdf (accessed on 18 December 2023).
[31] Gilleece, L. and S. Nelis (2023), Ireland’s 2021 National Assessments of Mathematics and English Reading: Exploring the home backgrounds, classrooms and schools of pupils in Urban DEIS schools, Educational Research Centre, https://www.erc.ie/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/NAMER-21-DEIS-Context-Report-Final-Online.pdf (accessed on 12 January 2024).
[46] Glewwe, P., H. Jacoby and E. King (2001), “Early childhood nutrition and academic achievement: a longitudinal analysis”, Journal of Public Economics, Vol. 81/3, pp. 345-368, https://doi.org/10.1016/s0047-2727(00)00118-3.
[48] Gordanier, J. et al. (2020), “Free Lunch for All! The Effect of the Community Eligibility Provision on Academic Outcomes”, Economics of Education Review, Vol. 77, p. 101999, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2020.101999.
[104] Government of Ireland (2023), Young Ireland: National Policy Framework for Children and Young People 2023-2028, https://www.gov.ie/pdf/?file=https://assets.gov.ie/280807/66d25198-b019-4734-b516-0014a119e261.pdf#page=null (accessed on 31 May 2024).
[57] Government of Ireland (2019), Education (Student and Parent Charter) Bill, https://www.gov.ie/en/policy-information/student-and-parent-charter/ (accessed on 31 May 2024).
[45] Government of Ireland (2019), Wellbeing Policy Statement and Framework for Practice 2018-2023, https://assets.gov.ie/24725/07cc07626f6a426eb6eab4c523fb2ee2.pdf (accessed on 24 April 2024).
[73] Government of Ireland (2018), Education (Admission to Schools) Act 2018, https://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2018/act/14/enacted/en/print (accessed on 29 February 2024).
[8] Government of Ireland (2000), Education (Welfare) Act, Governemnt of Ireland, https://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2000/act/22/section/21/enacted/en/html (accessed on 16 May 2024).
[68] Graham, N., E. Puts and S. Beadle (2017), Evaluation of Breakfast Clubs in Schools with High Levels of Deprivation, https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a81cd62e5274a2e8ab55e78/Evaluation_of_Breakfast_Clubs_-_Final_Report.pdf (accessed on 3 December 2023).
[110] Guthrie, C. et al. (2019), “Strength through diversity: Country spotlight report for Chile”, OECD Education Working Papers, No. 210, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/058bc849-en.
[106] Health Service Executive (2023), Roadmap for Service Improvement 2023 – 2026: Disability Services for Children and Young People, https://www.hse.ie/eng/services/publications/disability/roadmap-for-service-improvement-2023-2026.pdf (accessed on 26 April 2024).
[138] Helakorpi, J., S. Lappalainen and F. Sahlström (2019), “Becoming tolerable: subject constitution of Roma mediators in Finnish schools”, Intercultural Education, Vol. 30/1, pp. 51-67, https://doi.org/10.1080/14675986.2018.1537671.
[129] HM Treasury (2003), Every child matters: Presented to Parliament by the Chief Secretary to the Treasury by Command of Her Majesty, https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a7c95a4e5274a0bb7cb806d/5860.pdf (accessed on 13 February 2024).
[33] Holliman, A. and J. Hurry (2013), “The effects of Reading Recovery on children’s literacy progress and special educational needs status: a three-year follow-up study”, Educational Psychology, Vol. 33/6, pp. 719-733, https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2013.785048.
[97] Houses of the Oireachtas (2022), Education (Affordable School Uniforms) Bill 2022, https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/bills/bill/2022/73/ (accessed on 14 February 2024).
[125] Houses of the Oireachtas (2019), Interim Report on the Committee’s Examination on the Current Use of Reduced Timetables, https://data.oireachtas.ie/ie/oireachtas/committee/dail/32/joint_committee_on_education_and_skills/reports/2019/2019-07-04_interim-report-on-the-committee-s-examination-on-the-current-use-of-reduced-timetables_en.pdf (accessed on 11 January 2024).
[66] Hoyland, A., L. Dye and C. Lawton (2009), “A systematic review of the effect of breakfast on the cognitive performance of children and adolescents”, Nutrition Research Reviews, Vol. 22/2, pp. 220-243, https://doi.org/10.1017/s0954422409990175.
[122] Inspectorate (2018), Review of policy and practice in relation to exemptions from the study of Irish, https://assets.gov.ie/30515/68a5644a015c4ee18fab3c9ed8a8ff0d.pdf (accessed on 15 February 2024).
[42] Institute of Education Sciences (2013), Beginning Reading Intervention Report: Reading Recovery, https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/Docs/InterventionReports/wwc_readrecovery_071613.pdf. (accessed on 26 April 2024).
[119] Irish National Teacher Organisation (2017), Submission to the Joint Committee on Education and Skills: on the Home School Liason Scheme, https://www.into.ie/app/uploads/2019/07/201711_Submission_INTO_Oireachtas_HSCL_Nov17.pdf (accessed on 15 January 2024).
[82] ISSU (2014), Transition Year: Exploring the Student Experience, https://www.gov.ie/pdf/?file=https://assets.gov.ie/25098/c30d2eb46971472a95979f55e049b822.pdf#page=null (accessed on 12 December 2023).
[81] Jeffers, G. (2002), “Transition year programme and educational disadvantage”, Irish Educational Studies, Vol. 21/2, pp. 47-64, https://doi.org/10.1080/0332331020210209.
[103] Joint Committee on Education, Further and Higher Education, Research, Innovation and Science (2023), Mental Health Supports in Schools and Tertiary Education, https://data.oireachtas.ie/ie/oireachtas/committee/dail/33/joint_committee_on_education_further_and_higher_education_research_innovation_and_science/reports/2023/2023-01-25_report-on-mental-health-supports-in-schools-and-tertiary-education_en.pdf (accessed on 31 May 2024).
[2] Karakolidis, A. et al. (2021), “Educational inequality in primary schools in Ireland in the early years of the national literacy and numeracy strategy: An analysis of national assessment data”, Irish Journal of Education, Vol. 44/1, pp. 1-24, https://www.erc.ie/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/Karakolidis-et-al.-2021-IJE.pdf (accessed on 6 December 2023).
[3] Karakolidis, A. et al. (2021), “Examining educational inequalities: insights in the context of improved mathematics performance on national and international assessments at primary level in Ireland”, Large-scale Assessments in Education, Vol. 9/1, https://doi.org/10.1186/s40536-021-00098-1.
[54] Koshy, V., C. Smith and J. Brown (2016), “Parenting ‘gifted and talented’ children in urban areas”, Gifted Education International, Vol. 33/1, pp. 3-17, https://doi.org/10.1177/0261429414535426.
[64] Limerick City and County Council (2016), Review of the Limerick Regeneration Framework Implementation Plan, https://www.limerick.ie/sites/default/files/media/documents/2017-05/limerick_regeneration_framework_implementation_plan_review_0.pdf (accessed on 10 December 2023).
[63] Limerick City Council, Office of Regeneration (2013), Limerick regeneration: Framework Implementation Plan, http://www.limerickcity.ie/media/Limk%20Regen%20FIP%20Med%20Res.pdf (accessed on 10 December 2023).
[115] Matthews, D. and R. Menna (2003), “Solving Problems Together: The Importance of Parent/School/Community Collaboration at a Time of Educational and Social Change”, Education Canada, pp. 20-23, https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ661644 (accessed on 19 December 2022).
[43] May, H. et al. (2023), “Long-Term Impacts of Reading Recovery through 3rd and 4th Grade: A Regression Discontinuity Study”, Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, pp. 1-26, https://doi.org/10.1080/19345747.2023.2209092.
[88] Ministry of Education (2019), NCEA Change Page 2019 Overview, https://conversation.education.govt.nz/assets/Uploads/NCEA-Change-Package-2019-Web.pdf (accessed on 14 February 2024).
[87] Ministry of Education and Merit (2019), Tasse scholastiche e contributo scolastico (school taxes and educational contributions), https://www.miur.gov.it/tasse-scolastiche/contributo#:~:text=Tassa%20di%20diploma%3A%20la%20tassa,quello%20dei%20conservatori%20di%20musica. (accessed on 14 February 2024).
[75] Moynihan, J. (2015), “The transition year: A unique programme in Irish education bridging the gap between school and the workplace”, International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, Vol. 8/2, pp. 199-210, https://iejee.com/index.php/IEJEE/article/view/108 (accessed on 8 Febuary 2024).
[56] National Parents Council (2022), Partnership Schools Ireland, https://www.npc.ie/partnership-schools-ireland/about-partnership-schools-ireland#:~:text=Partnership%20Schools%20Ireland%20(PSI)%20aims,schools%2C%20families%20and%20wider%20communities (accessed on 3 June 2024).
[1] Nelis, S. and L. Gilleece (2023), Ireland’s National Assessments of Mathematics and English Reading 2021: A focus on achievement in urban DEIS schools, Educational Research Centre, https://www.erc.ie/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/B23572-NAMER-DEIS-report-Online.pdf (accessed on 15 January 2024).
[37] Nelis, S., L. Gilleece and T. Dinh (Forthcoming), Principals’ initial perspectives of action planning in new DEIS primary and post-primary schools. Report to the Department of Education.
[19] Nelis, S. et al. (2021), Beyond Achievement: Home, school and wellbeing findings from PISA 2018 for students in DEIS and non-DEIS schools, Educational Research Centre, https://www.erc.ie/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/FINAL_Web_version_ERC-PISA-DEIS-Report-II_May-2021.pdf (accessed on 19 December 2023).
[134] New South Wales Department of Education (2016), Supporting students from refugee backgrounds: What schools can do, New South Wales Government, https://schoolsequella.det.nsw.edu.au/file/f42b320b-8db4-467f-9dd5-ca1fae71133e/1/Supporting-refugee-students-what-schools-can-do.pdf (accessed on 19 August 2022).
[131] New Zealand Government (2019), Removal of fees and a stronger NCEA, https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/removal-fees-and-stronger-ncea (accessed on 14 February 2024).
[67] Northern Ireland Government Services (2021), Study support, breakfast and homework clubs, https://www.nidirect.gov.uk/articles/study-support-breakfast-and-homework-clubs (accessed on 11 December 2023).
[60] Northside Partnership (n.d.), STAR, https://www.northsidepartnership.ie/education/star/#1606221749326-88847dca-f299 (accessed on 12 January 2024).
[49] OECD (2023), Equity and Inclusion in Education: Finding Strength through Diversity, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/e9072e21-en.
[6] OECD (2023), PISA 2022 Results (Volume I): The State of Learning and Equity in Education, PISA, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/53f23881-en.
[58] OECD (2023), Who Really Cares about Using Education Research in Policy and Practice?: Developing a Culture of Research Engagement, Educational Research and Innovation, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/bc641427-en.
[113] OECD (2022), Review of Inclusive Education in Portugal, Reviews of National Policies for Education, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/a9c95902-en.
[51] OECD (2019), Education Policy Outlook 2019: Working Together to Help Students Achieve their Potential, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/2b8ad56e-en.
[72] OECD (2019), TALIS 2018 Results (Volume I): Teachers and School Leaders as Lifelong Learners, TALIS, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/1d0bc92a-en.
[89] OECD (2017), The Funding of School Education: Connecting Resources and Learning, OECD Reviews of School Resources, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264276147-en.
[41] Pratt, N., J. Franklin and T. Kenward (2018), Assessing the impact of the Reading Recovery programme, https://www.ucl.ac.uk/reading-recovery-europe/sites/reading-recovery-europe/files/pro_bono_economics_assessing_the_impact_of_reading_recovery_-_an_economic_analysis.pdf (accessed on 14 February 2024).
[28] Professional Development Service for Teachers (n.d.), DEIS Literacy and Numeracy Programmes, https://pdst.ie/node/378 (accessed on 21 December 2023).
[111] Rojas Fabris, M. (2016), Inclusión social en las escuelas: estudio de prácticas pedagógicas inclusivas y proyecciones para enfrentar un escenario sin copago y selección escolar (Social inclusion in schools: study of inclusive pedagogical practices and projects to address a ...), Fondo de Investigacion y Desarrollo en Educacion (Ministry of Education), https://centroestudios.mineduc.cl/wp-content/uploads/sites/100/2017/07/INFORME-FINAL-F911429.pdf (accessed on 19 December 2022).
[136] Rutigliano, A. (2020), “Inclusion of Roma students in Europe: A literature review and examples of policy initiatives”, OECD Education Working Papers, No. 228, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/8ce7d6eb-en.
[52] Rutigliano, A. and N. Quarshie (2021), “Policy approaches and initiatives for the inclusion of gifted students in OECD countries”, OECD Education Working Papers, No. 262, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/c3f9ed87-en.
[132] Santiago, P. et al. (2017), OECD Reviews of School Resources: Chile 2017, OECD Reviews of School Resources, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264285637-en.
[35] Smith, T. et al. (2013), “Evaluating Math Recovery”, American Educational Research Journal, Vol. 50/2, pp. 397-428, https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831212469045.
[11] Smyth, E. et al. (2015), Review of the School Completion Programme, https://www.esri.ie/system/files/publications/RS44.pdf (accessed on 20 December 2023).
[74] Society of St. Vincent de Paul (2023), The role of voluntary contributions in post-primary schools in Ireland, https://www.svp.ie/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/Grant-Thornton-The-role-of-voluntary-contributions-in-post-primary-schools-in-Ireland-St.-Vincent-de-Paul-2023.pdf (accessed on 22 December 2023).
[91] State Examinations Commission (2023), Examinations 2023 Financial Matters, https://www.examinations.ie/misc-doc/EN-SC-40814669.pdf (accessed on 1 March 2024).
[44] Tabor, P. (2019), Math Recovery Efficacy and Effectiveness Research, https://www.mathsrecovery.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/MR-Efficacy-and-Evaluation-Research-White-Paper-15Feb2019.pdf (accessed on 14 February 2024).
[36] Tang, S. et al. (2022), EVALUATION OF STARS: INCREDIBLE YEARS TEACHER CLASSROOM MANAGEMENT, https://d2tic4wvo1iusb.cloudfront.net/production/documents/projects/STARS-Incredible-Years-Final.pdf?v=1709030199 (accessed on 27 February 2024).
[18] TESS (2023), Reporting Absenteeism, https://www.tusla.ie/tess/tess-ews/reporting-absenteeism/ (accessed on 19 December 2023).
[116] The Inspectorate (2015), Looking at Action Planning for Improvement in DEIS Primary Schools: Inspectorate Evaluation Studies, Department of Education and Skills, https://assets.gov.ie/25273/0771d5663800429eaab15f8897ea164e.pdf (accessed on 15 January 2024).
[86] The Leaving Cert (2020), Leaving Cert Fees, https://theleavingcert.com/leaving-cert-fees/ (accessed on 12 December 2023).
[123] The Teaching Council (n.d.), Irish language requirement (ILR), https://www.teachingcouncil.ie/register/registration-with-conditions/irish-language-requirement-ilr/ (accessed on 28 February 2024).
[17] Tusla (2022), School Attendance Data Primary and Post-Primary Schools And Student Absence Reports Primary and Post-Primary Schools 2018/19, https://www.tusla.ie/uploads/content/TESS_School_Attendance_Absence_Returns_2018.2019.pdf (accessed on 22 April 2024).
[22] Tusla (2021), Information Booklet for DEIS schools participating in the Home School Community Liaison Scheme, https://assets.gov.ie/225679/65a18e3e-909e-4211-b7fe-9d013e7c7b3e.docx (accessed on 3 January 2024).
[59] Walsh, M. and A. Higgins (2022), City Connects: An evidence-based system being piloted in 10 DEIS primary schools in Dublin, https://irelandseducationyearbook.ie/downloads/IEYB2021/YB2021-Primary-04.pdf.
[5] Weir, S. (2018), Partnership in DEIS schools: a survey of home-school-community liaison coordinators in primary and post-primary schools in Ireland, https://www.erc.ie/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/HSCL-report-2018.pdf (accessed on 3 January 2024).
[118] Weir, S., D. Errity and L. McAvinue (2015), “Factors associated with educational disadvantage in urban and rural areas”, The Irish Journal of Education 40, pp. 94-110, https://www.erc.ie/documents/vol40chp6.pdf (accessed on 26 April 2024).
[90] Weir, S. and L. Kavanagh (2018), The evaluation of DEIS at post-primary level: Closing the achievement and attainment gaps, https://www.erc.ie/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/Weir-Kavanagh-2018-DEIS-post-primary.pdf (accessed on 3 January 2024).
[12] Weir, S. et al. (2018), Partnership in DEIS schools: A survey of Home-School-Community Liaison coordinators in primary and post-primary schools in Ireland, https://www.erc.ie/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/HSCL-report-2018.pdf (accessed on 13 December 2023).
[27] Weir, S. et al. (2017), Addressing educational disadvantage: A Review of Evidence From the International Literature and of Strategy in Ireland: An Update Since 2005, https://www.erc.ie/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/Addressing-Educational-Disadvantage-2017.pdf (accessed on 12 January 2024).
[47] Winicki, J. and K. Jemison (2003), “Food Insecurity and Hunger in the Kindergarten Classroom: Its Effect on Learning and Growth”, Contemporary Economic Policy, Vol. 21/2, pp. 145-157, https://doi.org/10.1093/cep/byg001.
[100] Zurich (2023), The Cost of Secondary School Education 2023, https://www.zurich.ie/savings-and-investments/education-costs/secondary/ (accessed on 14 February 2024).
Notes
← 1. PISA measures reading, mathematics and science performance of 15-year-olds.
← 2. The survey involved 319 respondents among HSCL Coordinators in primary and post-primary schools in Ireland. Focusing on HSCL Coordinators, the survey concerns almost exclusively DEIS schools.
← 3. These actions are part of the STAR pilot, currently in its 5th year and being evaluated by the DoE.
← 4. EWS is the statutory arm of TESS charged with ensuring that all children aged 6 to 16 are in school and through a welfare approach supports parents to ensure their children attend school. Where parents fail to ensure their child attends school, as a last resort, a parent may be prosecuted under the Education (Welfare) Act, 2000.
← 5. The PISA items do not address the complexity of special educational needs or the supports offered to students with these needs.
← 6. Economic, Social and Cultural Status (ESCS) index is a composite score based on highest parental occupation, parental education, and home possessions. It measures an individual’s social and economic status relative to their peers in society and can be compared within and between countries and across PISA cycles.
← 7. DEIS Post-primary schools may also receive a hot meal daily, rather than a cold one, depending on the decision of the school management.
← 8. The Free Education Scheme is established under the Free Education Act of 1967, and only schools that do not charge fees are included under its umbrella.
← 9. Children with special educational needs can have a range of identified needs in areas such as literacy, numeracy, language, social interaction, emotional development and self-regulation, among other needs.
← 10. In 2017, the Educational Research Centre surveyed HSCL Coordinators as part of the formal evaluation of the DEIS programme. 413 coordinators received the survey, and 77% of them returned a compiled questionnaire. Among other questions, the coordinators were asked to give an indication of the extent to which the HSCL Scheme had impacted on the involvement of parents in the educational lives of their children, if at all (Weir, 2018[5]).
← 11. The HSE is the publicly funded healthcare system in Ireland, responsible for the provision of health and personal social services.
← 12. 106 English primary schools with higher-than-average numbers of disadvantaged students took part in the trial, which was delivered to 8 600 students by the charity Magic Breakfast.
← 13. Groups who may face additional challenges include those with a disability, with mental health challenges, living in or at risk of poverty including homelessness, who are members of the Traveller or Roma communities, who are members of the LGBTI+ community, who have suffered abuse or neglect, seeking international protection, from minority ethnic backgrounds, migrant children and young people, living in a single parent household, living in care or aftercare, who are young carers, living in a household with substance misuse, or with a family member in prison.
← 14. The Assessment of Need (AON) is a statutory process under the Disability Act (2005) whereby the HSE reports on the health needs, and the education needs of a child/young person. All children/young people born on or after 1st June 2002 are eligible to apply to the HSE for an AON under the Disability Act (2005). The AON process is provided for under the Disability Act 2005 and is under the remit and responsibility of the HSE. The AON process commences when the parent/guardian makes an application for their child to the HSE. Assessment Officers working under the remit of the HSE are charged with arranging an AON which culminates in the provision of an Assessment of Need Report and Service Statement for those who apply under the Disability Act. The Assessment Officer coordinates and completes the Assessment Report and makes a determination as to whether or not a child or young person meets the definition of disability detailed in the Act.