The next item of business is a members’ business debate on motion S4M-11628, in the name of Kenneth Gibson, on educational disadvantage and deaf children in Scotland. The debate will be concluded without any question being put. I invite members who wish to speak to press their request-to-speak buttons now.
Motion debated,
That the Parliament recognises that the National Deaf Children’s Society (NDCS) is an organisation of families, parents and carers, providing emotional and practical support for families with deaf children and is the leading provider of impartial information and individual advocacy on every aspect of childhood deafness; is aware that NDCS estimates that there are up to 3,850 deaf children in Scotland; understands that about 80% of school-age deaf children are taught in mainstream schools and that 31% of teachers of deaf children are not fully qualified to do so, suggesting that the statutory duty to provide minimum levels of teachers qualified to work with deaf children is not being fully implemented; further understands that there is a significant gap in educational attainment for Scotland’s deaf learners, including in Cunninghame North, which develops early and is evident through to school leaving age and beyond; notes calls for investigation into the causes for this significant gap in attainment, particularly around the provision of support to children and families, the provision of additional support for learning to deaf learners, and the emotional health and wellbeing of deaf children and young people, and considers that this is an urgent problem and that action is required to address and close this gap for deaf children and young people, to ensure that all are ready to succeed when leaving school and have an equal opportunity to contribute to their own and Scotland’s economic future prosperity.
12:35
First, I want to recognise the National Deaf Children's Society, without whose tireless work advocating on behalf of the members, families and carers of the young deaf community we would not be having this debate today. I also thank all MSPs who supported my motion.
The NDCS is the leading United Kingdom charity for deaf people and it has been very successful in campaigning to reduce barriers and ensure equal access to opportunities for young deaf people. I believe that, given early diagnosis and a healthy, supportive environment, deaf children and young people are capable of achieving and accomplishing as much in life as anyone else is. Working in areas such as my own Cunninghame North constituency to educate families on how to support a child with deafness, the NDCS hosts a variety of events to promote deaf children’s healthy social and intellectual development and provides access to support groups and hotlines to ensure that help is available to all families with one or more deaf children when and however they require it.
Besides putting on events and providing resources in communities, the charity runs a variety of campaigns, targeted specifically at policy makers, to raise awareness of the problems that are faced by the young deaf community and to ensure that their educational standards and employment opportunities are and remain a priority for the Government. In this debate, I will highlight the educational attainment gap for young deaf learners in Scotland and its negative impact on their future achievement.
Earlier today, Máire McCormack from the office of Scotland’s Commissioner for Children and Young People contacted me to point out that article 29(a) of the United Nations Conventions on the Rights of the Child notes that the
“education of the child shall be directed to ... The development of the child’s personality, talents and mental and physical abilities to their fullest potential”.
The implication of that article is that we must ensure that children who use British Sign Language as their main—indeed, often sole—language receive access to quality education from someone who is proficient in that language, but many children are failing to have the right met because local authorities are unable to provide a curriculum that is accessible to them.
As is made clear in the NDCS report “Close the Gap: Promoting positive post-school transitions for deaf young people”, which was published earlier this year, there is a distinct and unfair marginalisation of deaf students in the Scottish educational system. With 80 per cent of deaf students currently attending mainstream schools, research from the deaf achievement Scotland project found that, compared with non-deaf pupils, pupils with any degree of deafness consistently score lower and leave school with fewer to no qualifications. Surveys of the 2012-13 academic year show that nearly 10 per cent of students with hearing impairment left school with no qualifications, compared with a figure of less than 1 per cent for those who do not have additional support needs. The research also found that children who are only mildly deaf also consistently score well below the average. Because those students often possess better speech skills, serious learning problems can be easily overlooked.
Of course, there is no reason why children with any degree of deafness should achieve any less than their hearing counterparts. Deafness is not a learning disability; it does not inherently cause any mental health issue or involve any cognitive impairment. The failure to meet these children’s educational needs lies with our education system, with regard to both the social environment and, indeed, the interaction with home life.
First, on the school environment, studies found that up to a third of teachers of the deaf are underqualified or lack the knowledge and skill set needed to educate hearing impaired children adequately. Beyond that, over the past three years there has been a 16 per cent decrease in the number of teachers for the deaf in Scotland, and it is expected that more than half of the remaining specialist teachers will retire within 15 years. The basic educational support system for deaf children is lacking in both skill set and number. That is especially concerning while the number of deaf young people grows steadily in Scotland.
We see further problems when examining the socialisation aspect of school. Deaf children are especially vulnerable to isolation, bullying and low self-esteem, and they are more than twice as likely to be abused as other children. Although deafness does not innately predispose an individual to mental health problems, deaf children are 60 per cent more likely to experience mental health issues than non-deaf children are. Therefore, addressing the social needs of young deaf children is just as vital to their overall health and success as meeting their academic needs.
Regarding the home environment, with 90 per cent of deaf children born to hearing families, the need for active and mutual communication between school and home is especially important to ensure that the child’s requirements are being met. Parents are the primary advocate for their child and, in the case of a hearing impaired child, that role becomes pivotal to the child’s intellectual development.
Unfortunately, as the deaf achievement Scotland project found, communication between teachers and parents of deaf children is poor or non-existent. Teachers are often unsure how to communicate learning issues to parents, specifically in cases dealing with families from deprived communities. In nearly half of cases, researchers found that parents consistently held low expectations for their child’s development, which negatively impacted on their academic performance.
The Scottish Government has taken decisive steps to provide support in the early development of deaf children through such approaches as getting it right for every child, which helps to focus on what makes a positive difference for children and young people. We can also act to deliver those improvements through the see hear strategy, which provides a framework for meeting the needs of people with a sensory impairment.
Although such initiatives provide an excellent grounding, there is a definite need for policies that outline more specific standards and monitoring systems to ensure that the young deaf community has access to the same educational opportunities as other children. That said, I will make three final points on how to reduce the educational attainment gap.
The first is a need to address the overall lack of information that the Government has on the issue. Good policy requires accurate and relevant data, but even when determining those affected by deafness, the numbers vary. A common standard for assessing and counting the number of children with deafness is required. The best way to move forward on improving the educational outcomes of deaf children is to gain a clear understanding of the struggles that individuals face and then, from that, to create specific and effective policy.
Secondly, I hope that the Parliament will support the passage of the British Sign Language (Scotland) Bill. I note that many families with deaf children struggle to gain access to resources that would help them best teach and communicate with their child. I trust that, with the bill’s passage, those resources might be made more easily and widely available.
Thirdly, I point out that the attainment gap does not end when deaf children leave school; it carries almost directly over into employment. According to the deaf achievement Scotland project, the employment rate for young deaf people is consistently and significantly less than for young non-deaf people without disabilities. Educational deficiencies early on have lasting, damaging effects on the success of the individual. I ask the Government to do all in its power to ensure that everyone has an equal opportunity to contribute to their own and Scotland’s economic future prosperity, not least young deaf people.
12:43
I congratulate Kenneth Gibson on securing the debate.
For my fellow Education and Culture Committee members, our visit to Falkirk high school on Tuesday will be fresh in our minds. Although it was primarily to explore issues in relation to Mark Griffin’s British Sign Language (Scotland) Bill, the visit also provided us with the opportunity to consider many other issues, including the challenges facing deaf learners—and their families—who find themselves in a mainstream school setting. I thank the pupils and staff who took the time to meet us.
Earlier this year, I was lucky enough to meet the National Deaf Children’s Society and one of its young activists as they sought to highlight the findings of the research into the post-16 outcomes achieved by young people. That young person was engaging and articulate and gave me ample insight into what she wanted to see changed for her and her peers.
Unfortunately, the experiences of many deaf young people do not match their aspirations as they encounter barriers from employers or in accessing higher education. I am grateful that the Cabinet Secretary for Fair Work, Skills and Training was able to respond when I raised such issues during yesterday’s portfolio question time. I look forward to seeing how the Scottish Government takes on board the challenges in responding to the recommendations of the Wood commission.
Most recently, the educational needs of deaf learners have been brought home to me through my correspondence and meeting with a constituent in Fife who raised the issue of teacher qualifications to properly support deaf children who are in mainstream schooling.
Across the Fife local authority area, more than 300 deaf children are registered with the sensory support service. The majority of them are in mainstream placements across 75 primary schools, 19 secondary schools and four special schools. In the week in which the latest statistics on full-time equivalent teacher numbers were published, it is interesting to note that those 311 learners are supported by just 13.6 teachers of the deaf, one educational audiologist and just 6.5 pupil support assistants.
It will be interesting to see how local authorities and the Scottish Government respond to such challenges in the current financial climate. I hope that the Education and Culture Committee continues to give its full attention to that matter.
My constituent raised an interesting proposition about the need to change the law on the minimum level of qualifications and British Sign Language skills required by those who teach deaf pupils. They are keen that a teacher of the deaf or pupil support assistant must have a minimum of a level 3 BSL qualification, with a view to advancing to level 6 over a period of time.
It seems a very interesting proposition that the current minimum BSL language requirement of level 2 may not be sufficiently advanced to effectively deliver the curriculum and support learners who are undertaking national 5s or highers. That is certainly my constituent’s view, and I would be extremely interested to hear from the minister on that point. If that is true, surely that is part of the problem that we face. We cannot assist pupils in increasing their attainment levels if the teaching and support staff are not in place or are not properly equipped to enable them to achieve their full potential.
Other members have highlighted the stark warnings about the 6 per cent decrease in the number of teachers of the deaf over the past three years, but we should also reiterate the potential time bomb in education services across the country. It has been estimated that more than half of all teachers of the deaf are due to retire within 15 years. There is a recruitment nightmare just waiting to happen, let alone the impact that that will have on the support that is available to deaf children and young people in education across Scotland.
I thank the member once again for securing the debate and I look forward to hearing from the minister.
12:47
I, too, thank Kenneth Gibson for lodging the motion and commend his speech. I was very pleased that he mentioned mental health with regard to deaf children, as that issue was raised last week in the cross-party group on mental health.
As the debate clearly demonstrates, the attainment gap is not just a socioeconomic issue; it is also a serious hurdle for deaf Scottish children. There are nearly 4,000 deaf children in Scotland who face significant barriers to obtaining school qualifications and accessing further and higher education opportunities and employment. However, as I learned on the Education and Culture Committee’s visit to Falkirk this week, there seem to be various opinions on a proper definition of a child or person who is deaf.
The recent report entitled “Close the Gap: Promoting positive post-school transitions for deaf young people in Scotland”, which was produced by the University of Edinburgh on behalf of the National Deaf Children’s Society, brought forward quite a few issues in that regard. It said:
“researchers found support to be particularly lacking within the college sector, which is concerning given that this is the chosen post-16 destination for 38% of deaf school leavers in Scotland.”
It said:
“The research revealed a marked difference in support available for deaf students between the college and university sectors. This raises concerns about disparities in funding across sectors, and particularly how colleges are resourced to address student support needs.”
Given the recent cuts in further education, it is deeply worrying that that also has a significant impact on people with learning impairments.
That brings to light another aspect of the report. It highlighted the lack of support for transitional planning that deaf children receive in schools, despite the statutory requirements in the Education (Additional Support for Learning) (Scotland) Act 2009 code of practice, as Kenny Gibson mentioned. As he and Jayne Baxter both said, on top of that, the number of posts for teachers of the deaf has reduced by 15 per cent in the past two years alone, and another 50 per cent are due to retire in 15 years.
When we were in Falkirk, we also heard about the serious difficulties and barriers that are faced by teachers who want to learn BSL as part of their continuous professional development. One of the witnesses talked about paying £2,800 for her daughter to learn BSL. I find that one difficult to understand when we have free tuition. However, we are only at stage 1 of the bill.
The debate is timely, given the committee’s visit to Falkirk high school, where we heard about the excellent support for school pupils and their whole family.
Kenny Gibson has brought forward this debate. To make progress on issues, we need champions not only in the Parliament but locally. I do not think that any member of the committee could have been left with a more positive impression of a local champion than that given by Alan Sanders, who not only came along to give evidence but helps parents, the police, the national health service and so many others.
I commend Mark Griffin for his bill. I have no doubt that it will raise awareness and highlight issues that have been raised today. I appreciate that we are at the early stage of consultation on it, but I am already worrying about whether it really will go far enough to address the issues raised by Kenny Gibson and Jayne Baxter, which I am sure that others, too, will raise, to ensure that deaf children across Scotland are not educationally disadvantaged. I welcome the bill. It is a step forward, but I think that we should all be asking whether it goes far enough.
12:51
I am happy to join today’s debate on educational disadvantage and deaf children in Scotland, and I thank Kenny Gibson for securing it.
In primary schools, children are recognised for their talents and for the mental and physical conditions that might need to be supported in order to ensure that their development happens at the same pace as that of other youngsters in the class. Students who are hearing impaired need access to additional support in the classroom, but in many cases that help is not provided by the teachers—up to 30 per cent of teachers are not trained to provide it.
According to research conducted by the National Deaf Children’s Society, 90 per cent of deaf children are born to hearing-able parents who have minimal experience in communicating with people who are hearing impaired and struggle with how to provide appropriate support to their children.
If a child struggles to communicate, they might not develop language or communication skills, hence the Scottish Government should find additional ways of supporting youngsters who fall behind due to the lack of resources in schools and in their communities.
The shortage of resources in Scottish schools for children with a hearing impairment can create an educational attainment gap for those children—regardless of the fact that deafness is not a learning disability—who might fall behind and not achieve their full potential.
Some voluntary organisations, such as the National Deaf Children’s Society and Deaf Action, and specialist projects such as the Asian deaf club and Ishara, which focus on ethnic-minority communities, are trying to fill the gap that the Government leaves. I thank all those organisations for the wonderful work that they do. It is always true that not all classrooms are able to fulfil our children’s full requirements, so those organisations play an essential role. All those organisations strive to provide support to hearing-impaired children and their families. It is essential that the Government supports the organisations to stay afloat and supports them financially and morally so that they can continue to carry out their work.
It is easy to say that schools must reach their targets, but the fact is that 30 per cent of our teachers are not able to support deaf youngsters and it takes time to train teachers. It also takes time to train people in communities to support such youngsters.
I think that we sometimes overlook how community organisations support family members to overcome their difficulties in this area. It is essential that people who have disabilities are supported to such a degree that they do not suffer when they go to university or, in particular, into employment. People who are hearing impaired need to feel that they are part of the community, and they should not feel undermined in any way. I therefore suggest that the Government continues to support the community organisations that support people in the community at large.
12:56
I thank Kenneth Gibson for bringing this debate to the chamber, and I welcome our guests in the public gallery. I suggest that this debate is not only about them and their aspirations but about how we as politicians can—I hope—meet their needs.
Kenneth Gibson was right to say that being deaf does not mean that someone has a learning disability. We have to get away from the perception that deaf children are different—they are not. However, if we are to aspire to getting it right for every child and getting curriculum for excellence right, we need to ensure that we treat each child as an individual. That means that even from the pre-school stage we need to be able to identify their specific needs.
Too often, we look just at the support in school for children who are deaf or hard of hearing, but we need to extend that to look at what is happening at home. For instance, do their parents have appropriate language skills, such as BSL? Do their peers or siblings have those skills? It is all very well saying that we need more teachers who are appropriately qualified in the language skills—I agree, though, with the members who have spoken about that—but we need to ensure that that kind of support is taken home as well.
The responsibility to offer support perhaps belongs to not just the school and parents but health visitors and others working in the community. If we work together in a co-ordinated way, we can do much better for deaf children, because if we get it right from the start they do not have to be disadvantaged or attain less than other children.
On school pathways, I had the privilege yesterday of speaking here in Parliament to children from Finzean primary school. When I told them that I was coming to this debate, one of the young children said that her sister who is deaf attends Aboyne academy, which is in my constituency. I will not go into the details but it is apparent that the majority of children who are deaf or, indeed, have any sensory loss are in mainstream schools, which is right. It might not be right for every child, but it is right for most, because they are part of the community.
Ensuring that children in schools have the language skills to interact with children who are deaf is also very important. Some children are isolated and perhaps bullied in school because of others’ lack of knowledge and awareness.
Therefore, when we move forward, it is important that we ensure that, from a young age, our children do not treat children who are deaf as different but treat them as having a different language that they must, should or can learn. It is also important for us to remember that people who are deaf who come to this country, perhaps from eastern Europe, might not have British Sign Language as their first language either.
We have a lot to learn, but the Scottish Government is committed to getting it right for every child, and the curriculum for excellence will ensure that every child moves forward through the pathway of education and then the transition from school to college, university and work. However, all too often, deaf children are still left behind and deaf adults do not get a job. That needs to change. With a debate such as this raising the awareness and with champions such as Kenneth Gibson, we will move forward.
13:01
I join others in congratulating Kenneth Gibson on, and thanking him for, bringing the debate to the Parliament.
As Jayne Baxter and Mary Scanlon indicated, the debate follows on from a visit that the Education and Culture Committee made to Falkirk high school earlier in the week. That visit was made in the context of not only the work that we are doing on the British Sign Language (Scotland) Bill but work that we plan to do in relation to attainment for deaf children and young people. It was exceptionally helpful in that regard.
Educational outcomes and access to education for deaf children and young people are poor and, as Kenneth Gibson indicated, that rolls on into employment opportunities. It is absolutely right for us to be clear at the outset that, as Dennis Robertson reiterated, there is no reason why the outcomes for deaf children and young people should be any different or why their aspirations should be any less.
That point was reiterated to me in a recent meeting with the National Deaf Children’s Society. I pay personal tribute to the society’s efforts on behalf of deaf children and their families. At that meeting, I was joined by Jonathon Moir—I think that I see him up in the public gallery and I am delighted that he is joining us for the debate—who was able to give a personal perspective on the challenges at school and subsequently with finding employment, which Kenneth Gibson and others outlined. Those were reinforced by the pupils and, indeed, staff whom we met at Falkirk high school earlier this week.
Falkirk Council, in collaboration with Stirling Council, is doing comparatively well but, even there, there are gaps. However, the NDCS has confirmed that there are particular problems with meeting the needs of deaf children and young people in rural areas. It is not necessarily difficult to understand that, and I am sure that the minister will appreciate it more than most. However, I understand that Highland Council might be bucking that trend. I do not know the reasons for that or whether there are lessons that can be learned from it.
A point that was illustrated in some of the briefings for the debate is that any level of deafness can affect attainment—the level does not matter. That was very much in evidence at Falkirk. There was no difference in communication skills between some of the pupils, but their levels of communication and attainment varied enormously.
That also points to the importance of the home environment and providing suitable support there. However, the point has been made that, when it is not detected, mild hearing loss can also result in disruptive behaviour and a reduction in attainment. Therefore, those who are profoundly deaf are not the only ones who need support.
Rachel O’Neill, a lecturer and researcher in deaf education at the University of Edinburgh, has talked about the need to improve school acoustics. I understand that standards exist in England but not yet in Scotland. Bad acoustics will clearly have an effect on all children in a classroom. Perhaps the minister could pursue that.
The importance of early identification has been reiterated by Jonathon Moir, Falkirk high school pupils, the NDCS and Rachel O’Neill. Ms O’Neill suggests that attainment gaps go back to the pre-school differences in language skills.
The Scottish sensory centre has developed early years standards, with the aims of responding to the newborn hearing screening—which is pretty comprehensive—and putting in place programmes of language development, whether for speech, for signing or for a combination of both. Where such measures are used, the results appear to be good, but they are clearly not being implemented across the country.
Education Scotland is not inspecting early years services for deaf children. However, Falkirk high school was very complimentary about its engagement with Education Scotland. One point is that the approach is not systematic enough, and that relates to the point about the qualification of teachers, which Jayne Baxter quite rightly focused on and which we need to get to grips with.
I again thank Kenneth Gibson for bringing this important debate to the chamber. I applaud the work of the National Deaf Children’s Society. While acknowledging that the Scottish Government has made significant strides in a number of areas, I echo the comments of Dennis Robertson that there is clearly much more work that we still need to do.
13:06
I thank Kenneth Gibson for securing today’s debate, and for his continuing support for this issue.
Last Saturday tea time, I was transfixed by a TV programme that I ended up watching quite by chance. It was Channel 4’s “Unreported World”, reporting from Nigeria, I think, about the lack of education for deaf children. The programme followed three or four children and their lives. The children had been born deaf and were not able to communicate with anyone at all—not even their own parents—because they had never been taught how to sign.
We can come across such things serendipitously. That programme struck me as a stark reminder of the importance of BSL and communication for the deaf, and of the world that that opens up.
Thankfully, here in Scotland, we are light-years ahead of that. As convener of the cross-party group on deafness, I very much enjoy the work that I do with the deaf community, and especially with organisations that represent children.
I commend Kenny Gibson for his motion, which acknowledges the National Deaf Children’s Society’s most recent findings and its campaign to close the gap for deaf children in Scotland, which I helped to launch earlier this year.
As we have heard in the debate, the gap in educational attainment continues to challenge the lives of deaf and hard-of-hearing children in Scotland. The “Close the Gap” report found that almost 10 per cent of deaf children leave school with no qualifications, and that only a quarter of them enter higher education. A quarter of school leavers move into employment, but only one sixth of deaf young people do the same, which further affects their employment opportunities later in life. Liam McArthur referred to the recent study from the University of Edinburgh, which found that the employment rate for deaf young people was only 31 per cent, which is incredibly lower than the national average of 53 per cent.
That attainment gap does not come from a lack of ability or inherent learning difficulties; it is a result of the ability or otherwise of local education provision to deliver the right quality, quantity and scope of support to allow a deaf child to flourish. The NDCS also recently found that the gap in educational attainment comes from a lack of trained teachers—a problem that will only get worse, given that half of all teachers of the deaf who have been correctly trained are due to retire in the next 15 years. That highlights a problem: there needs to be regulation and monitoring to ensure that there are adequately trained teachers of all ages throughout our system to support our deaf and hard-of-hearing children. I ask the minister to address that point in his closing speech.
The attainment gap during school years has an even bigger impact when we look at college education. The NDCS has found that deaf children flourish in further education but, with increasing college cuts and fewer places, that avenue is starting to narrow—and to narrow quickly.
During my time as convener of the cross-party group on deafness, I have seen some changes. In particular, the British Sign Language (Scotland) Bill, which was brought to the Parliament through the hard work of my colleague Mark Griffin and is now at stage 1—is a huge step towards securing the place of BSL as a recognised language in our society. I have been heartened to hear members of the Education and Culture Committee say in the debate that they are scrutinising the bill very closely because there is still much to be done and, unfortunately, the attainment gap continues to widen.
It is imperative that, as policy makers, we continue to tackle the barriers that face deaf and hard-of-hearing children in accessing the help and support that they need. I am happy to support today’s motion. I thank Kenneth Gibson for lodging it and I hope that we can tackle the challenges together.
13:10
I congratulate Kenneth Gibson on securing today’s members’ business debate on education for children and young people with hearing impairments. I say at the outset that I recognise—as do other members—that there is much more to do. Mr Gibson rightly drew our attention to that.
However, working together, I believe that there is no reason why we cannot create in Scotland an education system that lives up to all our aspirations and unlocks the true potential of all our pupils. To achieve that, we need to raise levels of attainment and achievement for every pupil, not least young people with hearing impairments.
The latest Scottish Government data shows that the average tariff score for deaf learners has increased by 5.4 per cent; the number of deaf pupils going into employment has increased by 2 per cent; and the number of deaf leavers who are unemployed has fallen by 6.3 per cent. All that said, I accept—as I have accepted previously—that an attainment gap exists for deaf people that we need to work to close.
As Mr Robertson stressed, in most cases—although not in all—mainstream schools will be the setting for the education of young people with hearing impairments and the place where we need to work to close the gap. We want all children and young people to get the support that they need to reach their full potential and, as Mr Gibson pointed out, to reach the international standards that are expected.
Does the minister accept that it is also important that we have the right pre-school system in place for deaf children? We expect children who are not deaf to learn language skills before they go to school, and deaf children require support at pre-school level—at that early stage of language development.
Yes, I agree that through GIRFEC and lots of other interventions, we need to ensure at the earliest possible point that not just individuals but families have the skills that they need to promote communication. Indeed, as Mr Robertson stressed, the different people have different needs, and our approach has to be very personalised.
Curriculum for excellence supports that personalised approach and is all about ensuring that young people make the most of the educational opportunities that are available to them, to enable them to reach their potential. On that point, Jayne Baxter raised questions about qualifications in BSL. It is worth noting that the Requirements for Teachers (Scotland) Regulations 2005 say that
“where ... an education authority employ a teacher wholly or mainly to teach hearing impaired pupils that teacher”
must
“possess an appropriate qualification to teach such pupils.”
As Hanzala Malik said, we cannot change the qualifications of all teachers at once, but we must work to improve the qualifications of all teachers who are teaching the deaf.
Does the minister know what percentage of teachers who currently teach deaf children have the appropriate qualifications? What targets has he put in place for that percentage to improve?
In a mainstream secondary school, the number of teachers who are involved in a young person’s life is significant. I do not have the figure to hand, although I will try to get it for Jenny Marra.
Questions have been raised about the data. For example, Mary Scanlon and others have raised questions about the absolute number of pupils who have a hearing impairment. I can confirm that 2,534 pupils are recorded as having a hearing impairment, and that 42 are recorded as deaf-blind.
In 2011, the then Minister for Public Health and Sport formally announced the Government’s recognition of BSL as a language in Scotland. As someone who has an interest in languages, I think that that really is an important point for people to understand. BSL is not English in another form; it is a very distinctive first language for many people.
The Government continues to recognise the importance of BSL to the deaf community in Scotland, and the wider contribution that it makes to the rich and varied experience of language in Scotland today.
It is worth mentioning, as others have done, the British Sign Language (Scotland) Bill, which, as members will be aware, was introduced recently as a member’s bill by Mark Griffin. The bill’s main purpose is to promote the use and understanding of British Sign Language in Scotland. Among other things, it requires the Scottish ministers and listed public authorities to prepare and publish BSL plans.
I am delighted to announce today that the Government supports the principles of the bill. We share Mr Griffin’s view that it will help to promote the use of BSL in Scotland, and we feel that it is consistent with our commitment to build a fairer, inclusive Scotland with opportunities for all.
I have offered to work with Mark Griffin to explore ways of simplifying and streamlining the reporting and review processes. We believe that that would strengthen the bill’s provisions.
In answer to Mary Scanlon’s question, I note that the support that is provided at college and university is important. The Government is committed to ensuring that, throughout their time in education, whether they are in college or university, all students with a disability are offered targeted support, through measures such as the disabled students allowance.
Will the member give way?
I fear that I am in my last minute.
The minister is indeed in his last minute.
It is a point of clarification.
I am sorry, Mr Robertson.
There are many things that we can be proud of. However, like Mr Gibson, l know that, although there is an improving picture, we cannot be complacent, as there is more to be done.
I believe that Mr Gibson has done deaf people a service by raising the issues today. Like him, and like others who have spoken today, I want to put an end to the days when those with hearing impairments disengaged from learning through lack of support. There is no reason why every child and young person should not receive the help and support that they need to grow and prosper. That is their entitlement, and the Scottish Government will do everything in its power to make that a consistent reality across Scotland.
13:18 Meeting suspended.