Ordinary Schools are DifferentThe Pobal HP Index of Affluence and Deprivation (Haase and Pratschke,

2012):  a systematic approach to targeting

resources towards greatest needMargaret Egan

MIC Research Showcase 2013

1

Background

Problem space – Anecdotal evidence formulated the…Research Questions

Needs/resource match dilemmaInclusiveness of Inclusive Schools

2

Inclusion

Methodology

3

ConceptualFramework

Ontology

Epistemology

Methodology

Critical Pragmatism

Claims unearthed from the Thesis Claim One: Discursive features of policy text

provide ‘Spaces for Manoeuvre’ to recreate policy intention

Claim Two: Context of Practice: Where Policy Text is Captured – Policy Intention is RecreatedSegregation: “withdrawal is just the norm”Distribution of students from LSES differs

across ordinary schoolsIntersectionality between Social Class and

Special Education Placement Demand on the GAM differs due to SES

Claim Three: A Dilemma within the Dilemma – today’s ‘solutions’ tomorrow’s ‘problems’Need to systematically target resources at

greatest need 4

Claim Two – Ordinary Schools are DifferentIntersectionality of LSES and Special Education

5

School Population

Lower SES in overall population

Special Education

Special Education Caseload & LSES

Lower SES in Special Education

A: Boys’

Raw Score

%

98

100%

30

31%

37

38%

28

76%

p<.001

28/30

93%

B: Girls’

Raw Score

%

105

100%

32

31%

36

34%

30

83%

p<.001

30/32

94%

C: Mixed

Raw Score

%

418

100%

52

12%

60

14%

26

43%

p<.001

26/52

50%

6

2011 DATA

Relative Index Score

Lone Parent ratio

Children with SEN -3.01 26.41 16.08 28.95 32.48 20.33 19.02School Catchment 0.53 22.33 14.13 35.66 26.38 15.89 10.53SEN Relative to Catchment -3.54 4.08 1.95 -6.71 6.10 4.43 8.49Proportion SEN Relative to Catchment 17.17 22.18 -20.19 14.91 10.30 27.442006 DATAChildren with SEN -3.56 23.62 21.58 26.69 9.38 6.54 14.95School Catchment 7.34 21.08 15.87 35.71 6.91 5.78 8.37SEN Relative to Catchment -10.90 2.53 5.71 -9.02 2.47 0.76 6.58Proportion SEN Relative to Catchment 12.02 35.97 -25.25 35.74 13.21 78.652009 Reference YearSchool Catchment 3.93 21.71 15.00 35.68 16.65 10.84 9.45Children with SEN -3.29 25.02 18.83 27.82 20.93 13.43 16.99SEN Relative to Catchment -7.22 3.31 3.83 -7.86 4.28 2.60 7.54Proportion SEN Relative to Catchment 13.23 20.33 -28.26 20.47 19.34 44.37

Values from the HP Index (Haase and Pratschke, 2012)

Summary: Policy Intention is Recreated in the Context of Practice

Policy is ‘enacted’ by the social professionals in the Context of Practice

Social professionals have the power to order children in school.

Local constructions of dis/ability’ is based on a psycho-medical perspective which is underpinned by teacher habitus (Bourdieu, 1984), and is

built on faulty assumptions that pathologises Margaret Egan. MIC

7

Social Class

Local Notions of Dis/Ability

School Ordering

Overrepresentation – Why? Local Construction of Disability

‘you are supposed to start with what they know and build from there, whereas what you found was that they know so little’ Mary, Principal Girls’ School

“…they come from homes where they haven’t been taken to developmental clinics… it’s a lack of education on behalf of the parent….A huge amount of parents here would not be aware of the level a child should be at…”

Eibhlín, Principal Boys’ School,

8

Deficit Discourse“they need so much extra help because they

are not getting any help at home” (Carmel, L.S. Teacher Girls’ School)

“…having significant difficulty…going back generations, I would have whole family histories and I would say to the class teacher give them simple work…” (Áine, L/S teacher, School C, Mixed School)

“… not having anyone who thinks that education is important…” (Mairéad, Principal Mixed School)

… They may have the ability but there is no expectation from home… (Freda, the L/S/Resource teacher in School A, the Boys’ School)

Margaret Egan. MIC 9

School and Home are Two Worlds – Home/School Discontinuity is not Disability“…..it’s a bit like Roddy Doyle, you nearly have

to come from their world…the curriculum is a middle-class curriculum and that’s it…”

“…….a middle class environment and all the wonderful work and all the wonderful ideas, you were really rocking with them… Oh even their stories were so creative because they read so much… and I see how easy it is for them to learn and be in the system”

Margaret Egan. MIC 10

Contribution to Theory

11

Contribution: Local Construction of Dis/Ability based on Faulty Assumptions grounded in Deficit Discourse

12

A norm is constructed in the system.‘Non-normative’ students are provided with the

EXIT RAMP

The Challenge for Inclusion‘The mix between socioeconomic

backgrounds… you have far more work to do if you are trying to marry the children who deserve to have a more challenging curriculum and the children who need to be supported with the basic curriculum… there is more need for teacher input, there is far more need for some recognition of that need, allocation on the basis of that need’

M.E. ‘Is it marrying the children with SEN or marrying the children coming from differing social classes?’

‘The two social classes, absolutely, it’s very difficult’.

13

Support to Harmonise the Disconnect“Parental Employment, living in, owning your

own home, and all those kind of things… How many of you read to your child … Those factors have a huge, huge, huge bearing… I know myself this year I have a 6th class that come from that type of background environment, where education is cherished and promoted… and I have the opposite scenario in my fifth class – they are lucky to get in the door in the mornings… and maybe have a lunch… and half a uniform… I consider that those children need support from us

(Mary, Principal Girls’ School)Margaret Egan. MIC 14

A Different Type of ‘Ordinary’“We can take pupils up to the 40th and then review it and see how they are getting on… I suppose we are lucky too Margaret, we are in a very advantaged school and honestly we wouldn’t have that many that would be going out in accordance with the circular, about three or four at most scoring below the 10th percentile out of 418 pupils overall” (L.S. Teacher, Dec.2010)

Margaret Egan. MIC 15

Contribution to Policy: Ordinary schools are not the same“…the disadvantage of the GAM is that it is a

"general" allocation to every school and does not depend on the needs of a particular area, you have no say in it, the school itself has no say in what hours they can get… Schools are all different you can't just say a general allocation for everybody.....” (L.S. Teacher Girls’ School).

‘Allocation of special needs resources in schools should be based on the research’ (Irish Times, Aug. 15th 2013), which evidences need. 16

Directions to Negotiate DilemmasRecommend use of Pobal HP Index to target

resources towards greatest needFocus on Home/school discontinuity –

transition programmes/ community-based programmes to rebalance agency

Social arena of context of practice is complex. Recommend ITE and CPD to ensure that the social professionals are competent to engage in critical practice to negotiate dilemmas, critical reflection of their own habitus/the field

Consider Policy as an evolving cycle, more flexible, dynamic approach to provide for multi-sectoral interconnection and community based services with feedback loops to inform each ‘reframed context’

17