Plan de acción

A ‘shock to the system’ was how a teacher described the initial enrolment of ME students in her school. This sentiment was shared by the majority of teachers who took part in the focus groups. The source of this ‘shock’ stemmed from the reality that for the first time teachers encountered students with little or no English. The challenge for teachers was that some students had no English at all. The comment below illustrates that even a Tittle’ English would have sufficed. It is further echoed by others (Appendix 1).

They shouldn’t be here is what we were saying. Like fire them on to somebody else kind of thing and when they have a little English let them come back (Teacher, School 2).

This frustration was exacerbated by the fact that many ME students who initially enrolled were older and thus, for age appropriated reasons, placed in Leaving Certificate (LC) classes. The result was that teachers were trying to deliver a curriculum to students who did not have the ‘basics’ in English let alone a grasp of a particular LC subject. A teacher’s comment below demonstrates this point.

It was one of the biggest challenges for teachers and they would be very unhappy with it a lot of the time. They are trying to deal with these various

132

people within the same class. Sometimes they would come in at 6th year and that would be very difficult. Teachers are trying to deal with history, geography, business and students do not have the basics in English (Teacher, School 3).

There is evidence that the students’ limited command of English affected teachers in the classroom and impacted adversely on staff morale. There was a belief that it also impacted on academic standards in the classroom (Appendix 2). It was not necessarily that teachers did not want these students in their classes; it was more that teachers felt ill-equipped and uncertain of how best to teach the new students they encountered. On the one hand, teachers expressed a natural sympathy for students with severe English-language limitations yet, on the other hand, they questioned why they were ‘taken in’ in the first place. This is noted by a teacher below and echoed by others (Appendix 3).

I rem em ber kids being taken in and they should never have been taken in because they had no English at all (Teacher, School 4).

The irregular enrolment of ME students further compounded the challenges pertaining to language. In one academic year in School 1 over sixty students enrolled between October and May of that year. This ‘drip feed’ effect hampered principals’ efforts in obtaining additional student resources, as their teacher allocations were based on the number of students in October of that year. Students were likely to enrol in one of the four schools very quickly upon entering Ireland (Appendix 4). As noted in the comment below, the challenge of teaching students with little English became more onerous as a result of their sporadic enrolment.

I rem em ber teaching and the problem was they w ere walking in at all times o f the year and some o f them had no English. I rem em ber this was a big problem and ju st as their politeness boosted staff m orale this one negatively im pacted on it (Principal, School 2).

Additionally, teachers in School 1 raised the issue that during the early stages of enrolment they were given no information about students. One teacher claimed that they ‘were just thrown into class’. As evident by teachers’ comments (Appendix 5), the lack of relevant information about new students made teaching ‘unbearable’, in particular with respect to students who may have had psychological issues. The absence of information also meant that teachers were unaware of any impact they might have on students when teaching particular topics. Two such examples are offered in Appendix 6 where the religion teacher spoke about the massacre in Rwanda and the history teacher was about to teach on the conflict in Bosnia. Both

133

teachers were unaware that, not only did they have students from those countries, but students who suffered as a result of those conflicts. Furthermore, teachers not only felt ill-prepared in working with students with limited or no English; individual teachers in School 1 echoed a concern that they were ill-equipped to deal with students who had suffered trauma (Appendix 7).

4.1.1.1 Teaching and Learning in School 1

While teachers in all four school experienced a ‘shock5 to the system, there is evidence that this shock was more formidable in School 1. The reasons for this might be the fact that they were the only teachers to raise issues around the absence of information; however, it might also be explained by the precipitous volume of ME students who initially enrolled in this school. As illustrated in Graph 3c in the previous chapter, the ME student population in this school rose from nine percent in 2001/02 to thirty six percent by 2002/03. The other three schools experienced a more gradual increase in ME student enrolment. Thus, for teachers in School 1, the ‘shock5 was more acute given they were encountering a higher volume of ME students with little or no English arriving at irregular intervals during the school year.