Análisis

Although the topic of pupil independence has featured strongly in national policy documentation, a review of the literature highlights that research in this area is only beginning to gather momentum in recent years, particularly in an Irish context. A review of early studies related to the SNA scheme revealed that the topic of ‘independence’ was either overlooked or subsumed within much larger research questions. For example, some early, small-scale Irish studies pointed to issues of pupil over-dependency, learned helplessness, and overreliance on the SNA, as deduced through a range of interviews with SNAs, mainstream class teachers, pupils and parents alike (Elliott, 2004; Keating & O’Connor, 2012; Logan, 2006; Shevlin et al., 2008). In particular, the latter study pointed to perceived difficulties with individual pupil-SNA assignment, deemed by some SNAs as a means of fostering over-dependence in the child and referred to as the ‘velcro’ model (Shevlin et al., 2008, p. 147). In addition, participants alluded to the potential stigma that could arise for pupils with SEN whereby the presence of the SNA could lead to the child being treated differently to his/her peers. Additional data obtained by Kelly, Devitt, O'Keeffe, and Donovan (2014) also expanded on such findings. Specifically, 54 special school principals outlined how SNA over-dependence was deemed to be a central issue in posing academic and social-related difficulties for adolescents

80 transferring from mainstream to special schools, in addition to adjustment and integration problems. In contrast, data from Shevlin et al. (2008) highlighted opposing findings, such that some SNAs sought to maintain a ‘caring’ yet supportive distance from target children. Within this study, some SNAs were reported as attempting to promote independence for children, especially in the transition towards second-level school systems by working predominantly at the group level with pupils. Nonetheless, concern was expressed by the SNAs with regard to the minimal support they had received in devising strategies to enhance pupils’ independence.

More recently, research conducted by Rose et al. (2015), as part of Project IRIS, provided more comprehensive data on the topic of pupil independence in an Irish context. This longitudinal study of the experiences and outcomes of pupils with SEN in Irish schools focused explicitly on ‘pupil independence’ as a measure for assessing pupil progress over time. A review of findings showed high variances across pupils in terms of their development of independent skills, spanning primary, post-primary and special schools. Focusing explicitly on primary schools, findings revealed that SNAs were seen to contribute to pupil independence over time by helping pupils stay on task, thus enabling them to be ready for working independently. In contrast, some pupils were seen to have become overly- dependent on SNA support, whilst others demonstrated a preference for working independently. Based on overall findings, Rose et al. (2015) highlighted the need for schools to assess the broader aspects of the curriculum, including happiness- and independence-related outcomes of pupils. In addition, they emphasised the need for pupils to develop appropriate levels of autonomy, such as by offering SNA support in a flexible manner. This was deemed particularly necessary in cases where pupils require full-time SNA support and as pupils mature and develop. Such recommendations were endorsed in the national evaluation of education provision for students with ASD (Daly et al., 2016) whereby the developmental nature of care needs was acknowledged. At primary level, data pointed to the benefits of rotating SNA support at a whole-school level, placing emphasis on the role of school leadership in this regard. Akin to previous research, some teachers and principals recognised dependency-related issues with SNA support, with one principal stating how some SNAs “don’t always have the ability to pull back” (Daly et al., 2016, p. 85). Based on such findings, the need for additional training and CPD for SNAs in this domain was advocated. Nonetheless, the methodological limitations of the latter

81 study must be acknowledged when interpreting the findings, particularly in terms of the small sample size at the primary school level.

In addition, research conducted as part of the comprehensive review of the SNA scheme (NCSE, 2018), in collaboration with the ‘National Disability Authority’ (NDA) explored issues of pupil independence (NCSE, 2017). Firstly, data focused on how well young people with disabilities are prepared for life after school. In particular, the study explored the SNA supports that the young people had received in school and the level and adequacy of the same in enabling the young people to prepare for life after school. On one hand, findings showed that some schools had a policy to reduce dependence on SNA support through a staged withdrawal of support and encouragement of young people with disabilities to become more independent in everyday activities. SNA rotation between young people with disabilities was deemed a positive strategy to reduce the formation of an unhealthy dependence on the SNA. In addition, some schools had placed strong focus on individualised pupil planning, whereby independence-related targets had been pre-agreed with the parents and pupils to support pupils’ movement towards related outcomes. On the other hand, findings highlighted that some young people had become overly dependent on SNA support during their schooling and as a result, were not adequately equipped for life in post-school environments. In particular, this was highlighted in cases where intensive one-to-one support had been provided for the individual. The need to encourage pupil independence from a young age was noted, with a particular focus on adopting a structured plan for pupil independence in terms of personal development, social development, self-management skills and life skills (NCSE, 2017).

Coupled with the NDA report, findings from the NCSE (2018) also showed variances across pupils in their development of independence over time, with due regard for the role of the SNA. Based on a review of reports compiled by Special

Educational Needs Organisers on 291 sampled pupils, findings showed that 11% of

pupils no longer required SNA support; 39% of pupils required reduced support; 10% of pupils required increased support; and 40% of pupils retained the same level of access to SNA support. Based on such findings alongside those previously outlined, the literature clearly points towards variances in practices across Irish classrooms in relation to the support of pupils’ care needs and the impact of such support on pupils’ development of independence.

82