Non-English speaking pupils failed by schools

SCHOOLS need to improve how they cater for pupils whose first language is not English, a review by the Department of Education has found.

But it says that rather than focusing solely on dedicated language teachers, greater focus and training for all staff is needed, particularly at second-level.

The cost of increased resources for language services for newcomer children rose from €10 million a decade ago to around €140m in 2009 in response to rising immigration. Around 10% of primary students are non-Irish and slightly fewer at second-level, where there are more than 24,000 such students.

At the same time the number of English as an additional language (EAL) teachers rose from 260 to more than 2,100, and account for the vast majority of the cost of catering for these students.

Every school was allowed up to two EAL teachers up to 2007 when an upper limit of six staff was sanctioned, but the original cap was reinstated due to cutbacks in 2009, meaning service losses in around one-in-six second-level schools.

However, the Department of Education value for money review, which included an examination of EAL services in 45 schools, recommends a new method of allocating resources.

The effectiveness of EAL resources was found to be greater in primary schools, largely due to the fact that younger pupils are more receptive to language learning; primary teachers are trained to teach language, pupils have just one class teacher rather than many subject teachers, and constraints are placed on second-level schools by timetabling and demands on teachers and students relating to exams.

While many good practices were highlighted, the review found that the current spending programme, developed from an ad hoc solution for smaller numbers of EAL students, is not effective for quality teaching and learning.

“It is not efficient or effective to continue current practice with the limited available resources,” it concludes.

It recommends instead that new ways of allocating resources be developed to reflect the different needs of primary and second-level students, and based on each student’s language needs as assessed by schools. All schools were sent assessment kits in 2008 and 2009 to help language support teachers determine migrant students’ language proficiency, but the review said use of the resource should be prioritised to find out if EAL students are acquiring the knowledge, skills, understanding and confidence to become proficient in English for communication and academic purposes.

It also suggests a higher proportion of EAL budgets should be spent on continuous training for all teachers, including guidance counsellors and principals, and not just language support teachers, as part of a whole-school approach, and more focus on working with a diverse student population during initial teacher training.