IPPN

Published: 01 May 2004

"Leading in a Culture of Change"

• Tuesday 11th May 2004 - Anner Hotel, Thurles, Co. Tipperary and
• Wednesday 12th May 2004 - Bloomfield Hotel, Mullingar, Co. Westmeath

Prof. Michael Fullan has earned international respect from principals for his outstanding writing and teaching on educational leadership and school improvement.

Some quotes from last year's workshop participants:

• "Helped me to focus my personal and professional priorities"
• "Inspirational, it gave me hope"
• "Informative, thought-provoking, practical, realistic and encouraging"
• "Very positive, meaningful and pertinent to the Irish education system"
• "Excellent handbook and bookmarks, great to have the book to dip into afterwards"
• "Learned strategies to address negative responses about change from staff"
• "Well paced and enjoyable; challenging cutting edge change ideas"
• "Heartening to listen to such positive fellow professionals"
• "I feel energised after the experience

Prof. Michael Fullan's Workshops in 2004 will enable participants to:

• Identify key strategies for managing change under chaotic conditions
• Deepen understanding of educational change
• Participate in learning activities based on real school leadership situations
• Develop greater capacity for effective school leadership

If you wish to take part in either of these workshops, please complete the application form and return it asap with a cheque for €100 to the address on the form.

Read more ...

Published: 05 April 2004

This Bill is due to come before Dáil Éireann soon and will shortly afterwards be enacted in law. The implications of this legislation will have a profound impact on you as principal. Consequently, IPPN continues to make every effort to affect change to this Bill while it is still possible. Having lobbied public representatives extensively in early January, IPPN has been successful in bringing about three key amendments - see below. However, there are still several aspects of this Bill which are seriously flawed and unworkable from the principal's perspective.

Whilst fully conscious of your enormous workload, I ask you to consider the future implications of this legislation and suggest that you write to Minister Dempsey, in your capacity as a principal teacher, urging him to take heed of the considered opinions of those who manage special needs education on the 'front line'. Any law is only as good as the extent to which it can be successfully implemented. Unless the Special Education Needs Organiser's (SENO) role is appropriately defined, the additional workload and responsibility allocated to principals will lead to an unworkable situation with even greater frustration for parents and teachers.

Click here to review the E-Scéal outlining the thrust of IPPN's proposed changes to the legislation.

I trust you appreciate the importance of this matter and thank you for your support.

Is Mise Le Meas,

Seán Cottrell Director

Read more ...

Published: 01 April 2004

This Bill is due to come before Dáil Éireann soon and will shortly afterwards be enacted in law. The implications of this legislation will have a profound impact on you as principal. Consequently, IPPN continues to make every effort to affect change to this Bill while it is still possible. Having lobbied public representatives extensively in early January, IPPN has been successful in bringing about three key amendments - see below. However, there are still several aspects of this Bill which are seriously flawed and unworkable from the principal's perspective.

Whilst fully conscious of your enormous workload, I ask you to consider the future implications of this legislation and suggest that you write to Minister Dempsey, in your capacity as a principal teacher, urging him to take heed of the considered opinions of those who manage special needs education on the 'front line'. Any law is only as good as the extent to which it can be successfully implemented. Unless the Special Education Needs Organiser's (SENO) role is appropriately defined, the additional workload and responsibility allocated to principals will lead to an unworkable situation with even greater frustration for parents and teachers.

I include below for your convenience a number of documents outlining the thrust of IPPN's proposed changes to the legislation.

I trust you appreciate the importance of this matter and thank you for your support.

Is Mise Le Meas,

Seán Cottrell
Director

Background and Rationale:

Following IPPN's oral and written submission to the Joint Oireachtas Committee for Education & Science, we have prepared a number of amendments to the Bill which we feel are necessary for the successful implementation of this important legislation.

In the attached document you will find the aforementioned amendments.

The rationale for these amendments is based on the following points:

• If the rights of children with disabilities are to be meaningfully addressed in this Bill, the role of the Special Education Needs Organiser (SENO) must be defined so as to carry primary responsibility for co-ordinating the various services, facilities and resources required. The SENO's role must be defined so as to give it sufficient clarity and authority to act on behalf of the best interest of any child with special education needs. The SENO must provide 'a one-stop-shop' service for parents and principals in relation to the educational needs of children with disability. Placing an impossible burden of responsibility on principals is to design a system which cannot and will not work.
• 75% of all Principals are full-time class teachers and consequently it is humanly impossible to carry out the responsibilities allocated to principals as currently defined in this Bill.
• There is universal agreement that the principal teacher's role is severely 'overloaded' and 'lacking the necessary supports and resources to effectively deliver existing functions', (see HayGroup Report, 2002 pages 35 - 37).

Important achievements from earlier lobbying by Principals:

1. Section 18 - The principal can delegate functions of 'the principal' to other teachers. This is a very significant change as the power of delegation was not in the original Bill.
2. The original Bill stated that a school, when transferring a pupil to another school, was responsible for ensuring that the new school had adequate resources and IEP for the pupil in question. This requirement has now been dropped.
3. The definition of Educational Disability has been altered to include the possible further designation of other disabilities such as ADHD, Dyslexia and Dispraxia.
4. Following a request by a principal, if the Special Education Council refuses to arrange an assessment or prepare an IEP, Section 3 (12) now includes a provision empowering the principal to appeal that decision to an independent Appeals Board.

---

CONTACT DETAILS Minister Noel Dempsey, TD, Newtown , Trim, Co. Meath Telephone: 046 94 31146

---

Education for Persons with Disability Bill 2003 IPPN's Proposed Amendments:

PARAGRAPH A of this document refers to IPPN's desire to be actively involved in the Special Education Consultative Forum. In our capacity as a professional association dedicated to primary school leadership, IPPN requests that we are represented on the appropriate committees, independent of / in addition to the relevant trade unions.

PARAGRAPH B refers to the specific amendments required to clarify the role of Special Education Needs Organiser which is not defined in Section 26. It is important to note that 75% of all primary school principals are full time class teachers. In expanding the role of the Special Education Needs Organiser the committee should review the adverts placed in the national media a numbers of weeks ago for those positions. A more clearly defined job specification should be incorporated in to Section 26 of the Act.A) IPPN SEEKS MEMBERSHIP OF THE CONSULTATIVE FORUM

SECTION 21 (3) (b) before appointing persons to be members of the consultative forum the council shall consult with - "recognised trade unions and staff associations representing teachers and principals of schools". B) EDUCATION FOR PERSONS WITH DISABILITY BILL 2003 SPECIFIC AMENDMENTS

SECTION 3 - PREPARATION OF EDUCATION PLANS BY SCHOOL (Including steps preliminary to such preparation)

Subsection (4) Delete reference to "the principal" and replace with "the Special Education Needs Organiser

Subsection (8) Delete reference to the principal and replace with Special Education Needs Organiser.

Subsection (9) Delete term principal and replace with Special Education Needs Organiser.

Subsection (10) Delete principal and insert Special Education Needs Organiser.

Subsection (12) Delete Principal and insert Special Education Needs Organiser.

SECTION 9 - CONTENT OF AN EDUCATION PLAN

Subsection (8) Delete "Principal of the first - mentioned school" and replace with Special Education Needs Organiser.

SECTION 11 - REVIEW OF THE EDUCATION PLAN

Subsection (1) Delete principal and replace with Special Education Needs Organiser.

Subsection (2) Delete principal and replace with Special Education Needs Organiser.

Subsection (4) Delete "Principal" and insert Special Education Needs Organiser.

Subsection (5) Delete "Principal" and insert Special Education Needs Organiser.

Subsection (6) Delete "Principal" and insert Special Education Needs Organiser.

Subsection (7) Delete "Principal" and insert Special Education Needs Organiser.

SECTION 26 - THE SPECIAL NEEDS ORGANISER

The SENO shall be the point of contact for parents/guardians of children with disabilities and special education needs.

The SENO shall liaise between the parents/guardians, the school, the Department of Education & Science and the Department of Health & Children, on behalf of the child.

The SENO shall in consultation with the parents/guardians and the principal teacher, make arrangements for the relevant educational, psychological or developmental assessments as required

The SENO shall facilitate and advise in the provision of appropriate Individual Education Plans (IEPs).

The SENO shall facilitate and advise on the appropriate reviewing of Individual Education Plans.

The SENO shall facilitate and coordinate any appeals arising from the needs of a child with a disability/special education needs.

Read more ...

Published: 01 March 2004

The issue of child custody as it applies to the right of either parent/guardian to collect their child(ren) from school is often highly charged with emotion and great pressure put on principals.

The classic scenario presents where one parent will inform the principal that there is relationship breakdown with the added hypothesis of the likelihood that the estranged parent may collect the child and abscond. Such a scenario is quite frightening and presents nightmare images. However, from the principal's perspective there is no basis for the class teacher or principal to deny either parent or guardian the right to collect his/her child from school unless there is a Court Order instructing the school otherwise. A solicitor's letter is not a Court Order. Anyone can ask a solicitor to write a letter on their behalf but is has no legal imperative.

Some recommendations:

1. Inform the parent/guardian that requests denial of access to the other partner, the inability of the school to pass judgment on rights of access/collection.

2. Suggest that if there is a serious concern along the lines of abduction or leaving the country with the child(ren), then the parents/guardian should request their solicitor to seek a Court Order instructing the school and any other carers of the child(ren) re rights of access/collection etc.

3. Meanwhile, the school can offer maximum cooperation and support to the concern parent/guardian along the lines of:

• that the principal assures the concerned parent/guardian that maximum awareness and attention will be given by class teacher and others in the school who are involved in the care of their child(ren) with respect to all aspects of parent-school communication and collection of children
• in the case where the estranged parent/guardian is not known to the class teacher (often the case in larger schools) that the concerned parent/guardian would provide a family photograph enabling the class teacher identify the person in question
• that the class teacher/principal will inform the concerned parent/guardian immediately if the other partner contacts, calls to, or seeks to collect the child(ren) from the school.

These practical measures can in no way deny either parent/guardian access to their child(ren) but are based on basic humanitarian support for a distressed parent/guardian. Ultimately only a Court Order can change the existing rights of both parents/guardians.

Is mise Le meas,

Seán Cottrell
Director

Read more ...