Procesos y resultados educativos

The support of an SNA emerged as the main way in which curriculum access is afforded to the young pupils with SEN in this study. This raises some concerns in the light of recent research on teaching assistants in England reported in Chapter 3 (Blatchford et

al, 2009; Alborz et al, 2009); in the final report of their longitudinal study of the role of

support staff, including teaching assistants, in schools in England and Wales, Blatchford

et al (2009) raise major concerns about the effectiveness of teaching assistant support

provided to children. These can be summarised as follows:

1. Children, particularly low attaining children and those with SEN have more contact with teaching assistants than they do with their teachers, and often this is provided in small groups.

2. Teacher assistant support, although it has a positive impact on attention, has a negative impact on children’s progress (in English, mathematics and science). Nasen (formerly National Association for Special Education) has also expressed concern about vulnerable children being supported by unqualified staff (House of Commons Education and Skills Committee, 2006).

The research evidence is also clear that children with SEN do best when they have access to expert teachers (Ofsted 2006; Alexander, 2009; Rose; 2009). One role of such expert teachers is to direct the work of teaching assistants appropriately.

The role of the SNA in Ireland does not equate with that of the teaching assistant in the UK, and we rarely saw SNAs working with groups of pupils. However, given the high percentage of the time that children were being supported by an SNA in our study it seems possible that in Ireland, as in England, some children have more contact with an SNA than with their teacher. Although there is some research on the role of the SNA in mainstream primary classrooms in Ireland (Shine, 2005; Logan, 2006; O’Neill and Rose, 2008; Rose and O’Neill, 2009), none of these studies looks in detail at the amount of time which individual pupils with SEN spent with an SNA rather than a teacher. • Further research is needed to establish the extent to which children with SEN in

mainstream classes interact with SNAs rather than with teachers.

The findings of the current study in relation to the variety of tasks undertaken by SNAs in mainstream classrooms are in accordance with other recent Irish studies (e.g. Logan, 2006; O’Neill and Rose, 2008). While dealing with the care needs of the child was one key task for SNAs, particularly for children with physical disabilities or for those on the

autistic spectrum (who for example required supervision at break times), they also played a key role in helping the child access the formal curriculum within the classroom. Two aspects of the role played by SNAs are of particular note. First, in many instances SNAs redirected the child’s attention to the lesson, ensuring that they were focused on learning. Second, we frequently observed SNAs repeating and simplifying the content of the lesson for the children they were supporting. This was also a finding from the interviews, both with the SNAs themselves and with teachers. In addition, SNAs used alternative pedagogy and resources with the pupils they supported in a number of instances. These practices were both reported as being successful in enabling curriculum access, and appeared to be so from our observations. It is not clear, however, that such activities fall easily within the role of the SNA, as currently defined.

The research literature referred to above supports the use of SNAs to maintain on- task behaviour. We know of no research which explicitly examines the effectiveness of teaching assistants simplifying or re-explaining lesson content. However the review conducted by Alborz et al (2009) suggests that this practice may not always be beneficial, as they found some evidence that intensive one-to-one relationships may lead to the dilution of teaching goals, ‘due to an emphasis on task completion at the expense of skill development’ (2009, p3). On the other hand, these authors report strong evidence that the use of well-trained and supported teaching assistants to provide focussed interventions (especially in literacy) can enhance pupil progress. The same authors emphasise the importance of appropriate training for teachers in collaborative working if assistants are to be deployed as effectively as possible.

In view of these recent research findings, we suggest that it is important that teachers are made aware of the evidence on effective ways of deploying teaching assistant support. We also suggest that the activities undertaken by SNAs are reviewed to ensure that they are consistent with research findings on effective deployment of teaching assistants.

Recommendation 4

All activities undertaken by SNAs in support of children with SEN should be clearly under the direction of a teacher, and should be consistent with the research evidence on the effective deployment of teaching assistants. The role of SNAs should be extended to include maintaining on-task behaviour for children with SEN under the direction of a teacher. The minimum educational standards required for SNAs should be reviewed and SNAs should receive appropriate training for the roles they undertake.

Another issue in relation to SNAs is the extent to which they should be attached to specific children. This is an issue in which some tensions emerge in the research evidence. For example, some studies suggest that individual allocation can interfere with social contact with peers (Alborz et al, 2009), while others suggest that well-directed assistant support can enhance this (Fox et al, 2004).

• Given the roles we saw SNAs fulfilling, we suggest that further consideration should be given to the most effective way to allocate SNAs.