Debate contribution: Support for Deaf Children
Debate contribution by Mr Paul Givan on .
- MLA
- Mr Paul Givan
- Party at the time
- Democratic Unionist Party
- Date
- 21 October 2024
- Type
- Debate contribution (made as a minister)
- Business
- Private Members' Business
- Heading
- Support for Deaf Children
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4604187
Read the official Assembly record
Text
Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. I thank Members for bringing attention to this important issue. In particular, I thank Mr Robbie Butler for tabling the motion. I express my appreciation to him for not just that but his time on the Education Committee. The value and expertise that he brought to that role were very much appreciated by me. I wish him well in his new role. I am sure that he will serve farmers well in the Committee for Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs, as well as dealing with all the important environmental issues in that particular role. I will begin by paying credit to the staff of Jordanstown School, Cregagh Primary School, Integrated College Glengormley and in the Education Authority's sensory service, who do a wonderful job to provide specialist support to deaf children and young people. I also extend my appreciation to staff in mainstream schools, which are attended by around 77% of the deaf school-age population. As Members know, my vision for all children is that they are happy, learning and succeeding. That must apply to children with hearing loss. Currently, there are at least 1,428 deaf children in Northern Ireland. They are supported by a range of professionals across education and health services. The Education Authority sensory service was established as a regional service in 2018. It employs teachers of the deaf and education audiologists who are at the forefront of early intervention and play a key role in ensuring that deaf children achieve good language and communication skills, make good progress in school and make a successful transition into adulthood. I agree with the motion that every deaf child and their family should have access to a qualified teacher of deaf children and young people as early as possible. I am pleased to confirm that that is already the case in Northern Ireland. Indeed, I agree that, were there to be a lack of specialist teachers of deaf children and young people, it would have a negative impact on deaf children and their families. It is some comfort that every child does have access that is equal to or better than nationally used standards throughout the United Kingdom. The Consortium for Research into Deaf Education Northern Ireland report 2023 — the CRIDE report — provides theoretical average caseloads. I am pleased to say that Northern Ireland's peripatetic teachers of deaf children and young people have the smallest caseloads in the four nations. I know that there are still challenges in respect of that issue, but there are challenges across the UK. Whilst, in Northern Ireland, we want to do more, and it is not of much comfort to those who want us to do more, we are in a better position than other parts of the UK in respect of the issue. In Northern Ireland, teachers of deaf children and young people have a caseload of around 59. In comparison, in Scotland, the figure is 118; in Wales, it is 230; and, in England, it is 332. I can also confirm that every deaf child has access to an education audiologist, who is uniquely qualified and skilled to improve access to learning for deaf children through their acoustic evaluations and advice on acoustic enhancements of the school environment. The sensory service works in partnership with parents of deaf children and young people to help them to support their child's development. The service provides support to deaf children and their families from the point of identification in the home and later on in the classroom. The motion calls for early access. I can inform the House that teachers of deaf children and young people work with newborn babies and their families. The newborn hearing screening programme in the health and social care trusts refers babies to the service, which aims to respond within two days, as recommended in the National Sensory Impairment Partnership (NatSIP) quality standards for sensory services. That partnership, working with health professionals, ensures that families have access to that support at the very earliest opportunity. From referral to first contact, for deaf or hard-of-hearing babies, the service works to impressive deadlines: within two days for a preschool child and five days for school-age children. The target time frame for the first visit from a teacher of deaf children and young people is four weeks, which ensures access to that very early intervention. The commencement of support is, of course, family led, so achieving the target time frame may be impacted by family readiness to engage with support. That having been said, contact with the service is always maintained throughout the process. The support needs of young deaf children are assessed using the NatSIP early years eligibility framework and information from health service audiology and ear, nose and throat services. The views and needs of parents and carers are all considered. That framework provides the service with a nationally used guide for levels of support and intervention, ranging from annual intervention right up to several interventions per week, depending on the individual needs of the child. Service staff use their professional judgement to apply flexibility, depending on the needs of the child. Sensory service staff work in partnership with parents to support children and families, focusing on the child's development in language, communication, literacy and mathematics, as well as social and emotional development and fostering independence. They also provide information and advice to education settings on the implications of deafness and, of course, strategies to promote access to the curriculum and inclusion, including bespoke training for staff. The specialist support that we are discussing today is carried out by specialist staff in schools and by sensory service staff, who deliver individually tailored intensive supports and outreach for deaf children throughout Northern Ireland from birth and throughout their education. That is an essential aspect of the service. It ensures a child-centred approach, which I am sure that Members will agree is of utmost importance. I note the reference to specialist support professionals. It is essential that our trained professionals remain highly skilled throughout their career so that they can provide the best support possible to our children. The sensory service provides professional development for teachers of deaf children and young people so that they can enhance outcomes for deaf children and young people. In line with inclusive practices, around 77% of school-age deaf children are educated in mainstream schools. I emphasise the importance of the need for specialist staff, as mentioned in the motion. Where a classroom assistant is required to support a deaf child using sign language, the sensory service advises that those assistants should have at least level 3 in British sign language. Whilst I am proud to speak today about the excellent support that we have for deaf children in Northern Ireland, there is always room for improvement. One of the areas for focus that was identified through the end-to-end review of special educational needs is on ensuring the sustainability of the sensory service, which will require workforce planning to address the ageing profile of teachers of deaf children and young people and the consideration of the need for those specialist teaching assistants. Members may be aware that the National Deaf Children's Society has recently commissioned independent research to review the support for deaf children and young people in Northern Ireland. I look forward to receiving that report in the coming months. I have no doubt that it will be helpful in informing how we can improve educational support for deaf children. Once again, I thank Members for highlighting the needs of deaf children. I trust that it is now clear that every deaf child and their family has access to a qualified teacher of deaf children and young people, and other specialist support staff, as early as possible. I will touch on a couple of issues that Members highlighted. Kellie Armstrong spoke of the need to work with the Department of Health on adult learning disability services. That is certainly something that I will follow up on with my Department. There will be no resistance on my part to making sure that my officials engage in that area. The EA sensory service engages with Auditory Verbal UK to consider what improvements can be made to services in that area. That is an area of work that we are continuing to look at. Mr Mathison said that the qualification to become a teacher of the deaf is not available in Northern Ireland. Although he is right, the course is available as a distance learning course, but I take the Member's point about having a Northern Ireland course. I thank Members for speaking on this issue. It is one that, rightly, we need to give attention to. We will continue to pursue these issues in due course.
1,465 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Assessment
Jev’s structured answers met the documented threshold for “not flagged”.
- Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.03 (flagging needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not flagged).
- None of the five culture-war criteria was met (each was below 0.60).
- Assessed as legitimate policy scrutiny (0.91).
- No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
- Subject area: Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits.
- The overall probability was at or below the not-flagging threshold.
This is an AI-generated assessment of the text, made against published criteria. It is not a finding of fact about the MLA or their intentions. The Assembly record itself is the fact.
Jev’s structured answers
| Question | Probability | Met? |
|---|---|---|
| Identity framing | 0.03 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.01 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.02 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.02 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.91 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.03 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 1.00 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.00 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits | 1.00 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.00 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
| Irish language, Ulster-Scots and language policy | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 11:25 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.
Disagree with this assessment?
Classifications can be challenged. A person reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.