Debate contribution: SEN Reform and Classroom Assistant Provision

Debate contribution by Mr Peter Martin on 9 March 2026.

MLA

Mr Peter Martin

Party at the time

Democratic Unionist Party

Date

9 March 2026

Type

Debate contribution

Business

Opposition Business

Heading

SEN Reform and Classroom Assistant Provision

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 5453528

Read the official Assembly record

Text

Thank you, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker. I thank the SDLP for tabling the motion. I start by acknowledging the absolutely vital role that classroom assistants in Northern Ireland play, which is exactly the contention of the motion:

"this Assembly recognises the vital role that classroom assistants play".

However, at the heart of the motion is how we utilise classroom assistants in Northern Ireland. We have a system that increasingly relies on classroom assistants who, sometimes, are present in classrooms in sizeable numbers. I have been in classrooms where there have been seven or eight classroom assistants, plus a teacher. It goes back to making sure that we have the children's best interests at heart, especially those of children with special educational needs, and deploy the resources that we have in the best way possible.

I will indeed.

I thank Danny for his intervention. The Education Authority clearly has to place children somewhere, and it does that to the best of its ability, given the resource challenges that, we both know, are present in Northern Ireland. That is why the Education Minister has set out the SEN reform agenda, with half a billion pounds to be spent over 10 years to ensure that children are placed in the right setting. The Sinn Féin Member for West Belfast who is sitting to the left of Danny has asked the Education Minister a couple of times in the Chamber for evidence on educational policies, and the Member for Foyle just referenced that in his speech, so I took some time to look at the evidence base. University College London carried out extensive research on classroom assistants and their deployment.

"The research showed that the more support pupils received"

from classroom assistants,

" the less progress they made. This was especially true for those with SEN. It was not the pupil characteristics... or what the" —

classroom assistants —

"were actually doing that were the determining factors, but rather how schools prepared and deployed"

them. The Education Endowment Foundation (EEF), which is a well-known and respected educational charity in England, said something similar, but I do not have time to read that out. None of what I have just said demeans the role of classroom assistants in Northern Ireland. They make a significant impact on our children when deployed correctly. They are absolutely invaluable to the education that we provide, but a question remains over how they are used. The Education Minister has recognised that. In fact, he wants classroom assistants to have greater responsibility and a more clearly defined career path. The early years SEN assistant training project commenced two months ago, with 114 classroom assistants completing accredited special educational needs-specific training across our five FE colleges. A further 240 assistants will be offered training over the next couple of years. The Education Minister has been crystal clear in the House that any child who requires one-to-one support will be guaranteed that without question. My understanding is that a SEN budget will be introduced and will provide funding directly to schools. In fact, such funding is in place in a number of schools in Northern Ireland. I understand that the Belfast Boys' Model School, which I know well, trialled that in the first place. I also did some research on the effectiveness of how we support our special educational needs children by looking at the Finnish system, which, I know, is a favourite of some folk in the SDLP and is well quoted by the Sinn Féin Member for West Belfast. When I looked at the Finnish system, which is heralded as the pinnacle of how to do education in Europe, what I found was really interesting, because it is not a one-to-one system. Finland has an integrated system that is similar to our specialist provision in mainstream schools (SPIMs), and special educational needs children are very much in mainstream schools there.

In fact, they have found that the deployment of one-to-one support is not the most effective way of supporting children. I thought that that was interesting, because, sometimes, when we look at these things and look at changes — the Member for Foyle has referenced this — people are worried about what the research says and what other countries have done. I know that the Education Committee is looking at a SEN inquiry. As I prepared for the debate, I found that the evidence base is clear. When we approach something like this, we have to make sure that we have the best interests of the child at heart at all times, especially for our most vulnerable children.

We often hear criticism in the House, and journalists point to a lack of legislative ambition. They point to the fact that there are not policies flowing out of the Departments. However, here we have a Minister who is delivering change, enabling positive reform and delivering a pathway to better support children at the heart of our education system. That is exactly what the Chamber should be doing. It is frustrating to hear those criticisms when we have a Minister who is making a change that, I believe, is positive. I encourage Members to support our amendment.

864 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 15:06 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.

Challenge this classification