Leadership + Issue 142 - April 2026

Leadership

THE PROFESSIONAL VOICE OF SCHOOL LEADERS

IPPN Advocacy in Action

Signposts

ISSUE 142 | APRIL 2026

Donal Kerins and Angela Lynch IPPN Leadership Support

Group Mentoring: Learning, reflecting and not knowing it all

Karen Donnelly Principal of St. Kevin’s GNS, Kilnamanagh, Dublin 24

A tribute to Dearbhla Gill

Principal of Scoil Náisiúnta Réalt na Mara, Rosses Point, 2000-2025

Daniel O’Connor

Principal of St. Columba’s BNS, Douglas, Cork

School Attendance

– Deirdre Kelly, IPPN President

The Silent Cost: What Irish Primary Principals Carry –and Why It Matters

Matthew Johnson CEO and President of the Australian Special Education Principals Association (ASEPA)

No Instruction Manual: Administrative Leadership in Special Schools

Fiona Byrnes Professional Learning Leader, Oide Leadership (Primary) Division

2 14 18

Results of the IPPN survey on Special Educational Needs

– Brian O’Doherty, IPPN Deputy CEO Curriculum Change: Time for the Teabag Test

- Paul O’Donnell, Principal of St Patrick’s NS, Slane, Co. Meath Droichead clustering process changes 2026/27

– Myriam Gately, DEY

The benefits of being part of a Local Support Group On Your Behalf And much more…

Irish Primary Principals’ Network, Glounthaune, Co. Cork 1800 21 22 23 • www.ippn.ie

Editor: Geraldine D’Arcy

Editorial Team: Geraldine D’Arcy, Brian O’Doherty and Deirdre Kelly

Comments to: editor@ippn.ie n Advertising: Sinead O’Mahony adverts@ippn.ie

ISSN: 1649-5888 n Design: Brosna Press

The opinions expressed in Leadership+ do not necessarily reflect the official policy or views of IPPN

Group Mentoring Learning, Reflecting and not

knowing it all!

KAREN DONNELLY PRINCIPAL OF ST. KEVIN’S GNS, KILNAMANAGH, DUBLIN 24

When I first stepped into the role of principal, I felt proud and ready for the challenge. What I had not anticipated was how quickly you are expected to have all the answers, or at least how to guide others towards finding them. Staff look to you for clarity. Parents look for reassurance. Boards expect assurance and compliance. The wider school community is eager to get to know you and hopeful about what your leadership will bring. All these expectations are valid, but they carry an assumption: that you will deliver, lead confidently and maintain standards from day one. Even when an issue is complex or unfamiliar, there is an expectation that you will know what to do. For the first time in my career, I could no longer ‘pass the buck’ up the line. The responsibility stopped with me, and that realisation can be humbling.

My journey into group mentoring followed a very positive experience of individual mentoring in my first year. That one-to-one space allowed me to speak openly about challenges, test my thinking and build confidence. It highlighted the importance of structured professional support, encouraging me to continue into group mentoring in year two.

By my second year, I was still learning but had some experience behind me. I had completed a full school year cycle and had faced new situations. I was still new enough to remain enthusiastic by the possibilities of the role yet experienced enough to understand its complexity. Group mentoring brought together colleagues at this same stage, creating an immediate sense of shared understanding.

Year two also brought one of the most difficult challenges of my career: the sudden death of a colleague.

My journey into group mentoring followed a very positive experience of individual mentoring in my first year. That oneto-one space allowed me to speak openly about challenges, test my thinking and build confidence.

Although shocking, I knew to seek support and guidance. Thanks to year one mentoring, I was reminded of the value of seeking advice from the right organisations; CPSMA, INTO, IPPN, NEPS, Department of Education. I credit that meaningful mentoring guidance for reassuring me that I do have the skills to manage, lead and navigate even the most difficult situations.

What makes group mentoring especially powerful is its reciprocal nature. In year one, I leaned on my mentor and walked away with invaluable learning. In year two, I can

In year one, I leaned on my mentor and walked away with invaluable learning. In year two, I can both receive support, offer it and share my perspective. Our leader mentor facilitates the sessions with skill, ensuring discussions are reflective and purposeful.

both receive support, offer it and share my perspective. Our leader mentor facilitates the sessions with skill, ensuring discussions are reflective and purposeful. Thoughtful contributions are acknowledged and validated, strengthening our confidence, and affirming that we have valuable insight to contribute.

Group mentoring is a place where I can, metaphorically, ‘pass the buck.’ It is a confidential space where I can admit uncertainty without fear of judgement, often leaving with practical guidance; a policy to consult, a person to contact, or an approach to consider. At other times, I leave reassured that my thinking is sound; both outcomes are equally important. Mentoring continues to remind me that, while I hold the unique position of principal, I am human first. I will not always have answers, and I will experience doubt and that is normal.

I love my job, and I don’t want the natural complexities of the role to make me doubt my ability. Participating in group mentoring keeps me focused and maintains my confidence, allows me to trust myself and others, and strengthens the networks that are so vital in this job.

I’d highly recommend principals going into Year Two to avail of group mentoring. It brings clarity, confidence, and a sense of community, reminding you that strong leadership is about learning, reflecting, growing together and not knowing it all!

Karen can be contacted at kdonnelly@stkevinsgns.com if you would like to get in touch with her in relation to this article.

EDITORIAL

IPPN Advocacy in Action

Submissions

Over the past few months, IPPN has taken the opportunity to make submissions to the NCCA, the Inspectorate, the National Convention on Education and the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Children and Equality. The purpose in doing so is to share school leadership perspectives on the work of these key stakeholders and to progress IPPN’s advocacy priorities in support of our mission ‘to create the environment in which school leadership can flourish’.

Additional Needs

Supporting and strengthening provision for special educational needs remains a key priority for IPPN. We sincerely thank the more than 1,000 school leaders who took the time to respond to IPPN’s survey on leading inclusion in mainstream schools. Their feedback was invaluable and critically important in ensuring that the voice and lived experience of school leaders informs our work and advocacy in this area. The results are set out on pages 10 and 11 and were used to inform our advocacy on SET and SNA allocations with the NCSE and the Special Education Section of the Department of Education.

In relation to the recent issues concerning SNA allocations and redeployment, IPPN has consistently stated that the extent to which schools can meet the additional needs of children is limited by the funds allocated for special education in the DEY’s annual budget. That budgetary allocation is not based on accurate, up-to-date data in relation to the level of additional needs presenting in schools.

To compound this under-resourcing of SEN, the care needs described in Circular 0030/2014 are too narrow and do not reflect the increased complexity of need that schools are trying to support or the invaluable work that SNAs do in relation to assisting regulation and responding appropriately and effectively to behaviours of concern. School contexts have changed utterly in the 12 years since that circular was published and allocations to schools should reflect that.

In terms of overall staffing, at the time of writing, we still await publication of the staffing circular. The data shared with us by school leaders indicates that approximately 18,000 SET posts are required to meet the actual level of need that presents in schools as opposed to the approximately 15,000 SET posts that are sanctioned for 2026/27. To partially

LEADERSHIP+

EDITORIAL TEAM

offset that shortfall, IPPN has proposed that teaching posts, due to be lost as a result of a decline in enrolment and no change in the pupil teacher ratio, should be retained within those schools in order to increase the capacity to meet the actual level of additional need that presents in the schools. Retaining teaching posts within schools that were due to lose such posts, would go some way towards addressing the significant under-allocation of SET posts within the system.

From the perspective of Supports & Services, the IPPN Guide for the Leadership of Inclusion is in development and will be launched in time for the city/county network meetings early in September. The aim of the Guide will be to promote reflection on and scaffold leadership practice in the area of inclusion.

Podcast

Another episode of Leading for Impact: The IPPN Podcast has been released. Professor Patricia Mannix McNamara explores why leaders deserve the opportunity not just to cope, but to flourish in their roles and what that might look like.

This issue offers articles on a wide range of topics, mostly written by your fellow school leaders. Sincere thanks to all of the contributors for their insights. As always, feedback and suggestions are welcome to editor@ippn.ie

You can access all IPPN submissions and position papers on www.ippn.ie on the Advocacy menu.

Geraldine D’Arcy Deirdre Kelly Brian O’Doherty Editor President Deputy CEO

Teacher is Awarded €40,000 Compensation for Unfair Dismissal by the Board of Management (BOM)

Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) 18/12/2025

This case involved the Complainant (a teacher) taking a constructive dismissal case against her school’s Board of Management (BoM). Constructive dismissal places the burden of proof on the Complainant to prove that her resignation from the staff constituted unfair dismissal.

The Complainant in question was appointed as a designated liaison person (DLP) in circumstances where she did not hold any leadership position in the school. This role was discharged in a voluntary capacity.

Bullying and Harassment Complaint against another Teacher

The Complainant believed that she was bullied and harassed by another teacher because she carried out her role as DLP. The Complainant initiated a number of complaints against the said teacher under the Bullying and Harassment procedures as provided in the ‘Working Together’ document. The complaint was escalated to stage (4). The Complainant had been on sick leave for an initial period and was advised by Medmark not to return to school whilst the issue remained unresolved. In the interim the Complainant availed of four consecutive career breaks. This was undertaken to facilitate a break from the school according to the Complainant or, as contended by the BOM, to pursue other qualifications and work with the HSE. A barrister was appointed by the BOM to conduct an investigation, which took over four years to complete. A report of almost 600 pages was compiled. The BOM contended that they communicated with the investigator on over 50 occasions. The investigator found in favour of the Complainant on only one of the many complaints lodged

and recommended disciplinary proceedings be considered against the other teacher. The BOM decided against holding disciplinary proceedings on foot of the findings.

Failure to follow Child Protection Procedures

The Complainant formally submitted a complaint against the same teacher for her repeated failure to follow child protection procedures. The Complainant emphasised that the complaint was separate to her bullying and harassment complaint. The Complainant further noted that, to her knowledge, no formal investigation or actions have been taken to address these concerns by the Principal. The BOM were of the view that training was provided to staff. A Dignity in the Workplace policy incorporating anti bullying was put in place by the BOM. This was disputed by the Complainant who lodged a subject access request to the BOM. The Complainant also wrote to Tusla and the Teaching Council.

Grievance Against the Principal

The Complainant initiated a grievance against the Principal regarding his alleged failure to act on child protection concerns, raised by the Complainant in her capacity as DLP, and relating to the other teacher’s conduct. The grievance escalated from stage 1 to stage 4. The BOM appeared to rely on the outcome of the investigator’s report in lieu of dealing with the separate issue of the grievance against the principal. The Complainant alleged that the Principal and the BOM not only failed in their duty to protect her but frustrated her attempts to protect herself and ensure the safety of students of the school. The Complainant said that her trust in the ability and willingness of the

BOM to protect her at work has been irrevocably damaged, and she did not feel she could return to work.

Finding of the Adjudicating Officer

‘The delay of nearly five years was an extraordinary one which is inexcusable and unacceptable and represents a clear violation of fair procedures on the part of the employer. I cannot accept the BOM’s proposition that the matter was with the external investigator whom the BOM had no control over. It remained the BOM’s responsibility to deal with the complaint in a timely manner. The Complainant’s relationship remained with the BOM and not with the investigator and the BOM failed her on a fundamental level. I find that the manner in which the BOM dealt with the Complainant’s complaints was inadequate and the BOM’s conduct fell well short of the reasonableness required under the Act and the principles of natural justice. While the standard for workplace investigation is not perfection, I am of the view that the BOM’s response to the Complainant’s concerns was lacking to such an extent that the Complainant was justified in resigning her employment. I find that the Complainant was unfairly dismissed. Considering all of the foregoing, I award the Complainant compensation of €40,000 which I deem to be just and equitable having regard to all the circumstances.’

If you would like to get in touch with David in relation to this article, you can contact him at david.ruddybl@gmail.com

Every School Day Matters: A School Leader’s Perspective on Attendance in Ireland

DEIRDRE KELLY IPPN PRESIDENT

Regular attendance is not simply a statistic, it is a gateway to knowledge, belonging and opportunity. When children are present in school, they access not only the curriculum, but the full experience of growing up within a supportive school community. They build friendships, develop confidence and benefit from steady routines that foster resilience. Yet levels of absence remain alarmingly high in Ireland.

Data from the Tusla Education Support Service (TESS) shows that, in 2023–24, more than one in five primary pupils missed 20 or more days of school – the threshold for chronic absenteeism. Nationally, children missed approximately 8 per cent of all school days. These figures represent more than lost hours; they reflect lost opportunities.

Behind every statistic is a child. A child who may have missed a key early literacy moment that could have unlocked confident learning. A child who may have missed a maths explanation that would have helped everything else fall into place. A child who may have missed a small but vital moment of friendship that strengthened their sense of belonging.

The long-term consequences of frequent absences are increasingly clear. New research published by the Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI), produced in partnership with TESS and drawing on Growing Up in Ireland data, provides the first Irish evidence of the lasting effects of school absence at ages 20 and 25.

Persistent absence in early adolescence is associated not only with weaker academic outcomes, but with lower life satisfaction in early adulthood. Young adults who experienced higher levels of absence are more likely to report elevated stress and depressive symptoms, poorer physical health, fewer close relationships and lower levels of general trust.

Behind every statistic is a child. A child who may have missed a key early literacy moment that could have unlocked confident learning.

Even moderate levels of absence matter. Consistent attendance contributes to the development of resilience, coping skills and confidence. Adults who attended primary schools with high overall absence report lower levels of trust later in life. Attendance is not solely an educational issue; it is a wellbeing and equity issue with implications far beyond the classroom.

National action has begun. The DEY has launched a national attendance campaign, introduced the Anseo Framework, and strengthened reporting requirements under the Education (Welfare) Act 2000. These are welcome steps. However, policy alone will not reverse entrenched patterns.

From a school leader’s perspective, there is a hard truth: we do not currently have the time or resources to address the scale and complexity of poor attendance effectively.

Attendance management is not a simple administrative task. It involves daily data analysis, early identification of patterns, sustained engagement with families, documentation and coordination with external agencies. It requires sensitivity, persistence and professional judgement. In many primary schools, principals are also fulltime teaching principals. Even in larger schools, leadership teams are stretched across inclusion, wellbeing, curriculum leadership, child protection, staffing and governance. Attendance work is added to an already full portfolio.

We are committed to this work. But commitment alone is insufficient. Structured support is essential. Earlier intervention thresholds are needed. Waiting until 20 days of absence before escalation allows patterns to become embedded. Educational Welfare Officers require increased capacity to provide preventative, relationship-based engagement rather than crisis response.

Integration with mental health services must also improve. A growing proportion of absences are linked to anxiety and emotional distress. Schools cannot provide therapeutic services; timely access to external supports is critical.

Targeted supports for disadvantaged communities remain vital. The HSCL service demonstrates the power of trusted relationships in strengthening attendance. It is available to DEIS urban schools but not to DEIS rural schools. Expanding preventative, familyfocused provision would significantly improve attendance.

Every day a child walks through the school gate is a day of learning, connection and growth. When days are missed repeatedly, the effects echo far beyond primary school into qualifications, employment, health and happiness.

School leaders stand ready to lead this work, but we cannot do it alone. With strengthened early intervention, expanded welfare and mental health supports, and meaningful investment in leadership capacity, we can ensure that every child in Ireland is present to benefit from the opportunities school provides.

Our children deserve nothing less.

Deirdre.Kelly@ippn.ie

Personal Preparation for Conflict as a School Leader

Leading a school is a contact sport. School leaders interact with pupils, teachers, parents, SNAs, ancillary staff and others every day. Conflict is inevitable, particularly as schools are reflective of societal pressures and anxieties.

For leaders, the challenge is not to eliminate conflict, which is impossible; nor is it to avoid conflict, which always makes the eventual reckoning worse. Rather, it is to anticipate, prepare for, and manage it in a way that sustains relationships, supports learning, and upholds the values of the school. Effective preparation for conflict is a core leadership competence.

Preparation begins with developing the right mindset. Conflict will occur; it is not a failure of leadership; it is a test of effective leadership in that it presents an opportunity to resolve problems through de-escalating emotions and focussing on issues. Leaders who approach conflict with self-confidence, grounded in a true sense of their own identity and dignity and who are cognisant of the dignity of others, are best positioned to reduce tensions and reach constructive outcomes.

Emotional intelligence and self-awareness play a central role. School leaders must be aware of their own emotional triggers. Unresolved personal reactions can intensify conflict. They must aim to be models of calmness, composure and respect under pressure. Through developing a ‘listening heart,’ s/he will

This is the first of a series of articles on Dealing with Conflict and is aligned with the Resource Bundle of the same name, which is available on ippn.ie.

DONAL KERINS AND ANGELA LYNCH IPPN LEADERSHIP SUPPORT

Conflict will occur; it is not a failure of leadership; it is a test of effective leadership in that it presents an opportunity to resolve problems through de-escalating emotions and focussing on issues. Leaders who approach conflict with self-confidence, grounded in a true sense of their own identity and dignity and who are cognisant of the dignity of others, are best positioned to reduce tensions and reach constructive outcomes.

recognise and acknowledge the emotions of others and thus immediately signal authority and build trust. When people feel heard and understood, conflict is less likely to escalate.

School leaders must develop practical skills for managing conflict. Active listening, questioning, assertive communication and negotiation are not innate abilities for most people; they require practice and reflection. School leaders benefit

from engaging in professional learning, mentoring and local support groups where they can rehearse difficult conversations and reflect on real scenarios. Preparation means knowing what to say, how to say it, and when to pause or seek support.

Leadership is about relationships. Building trust with everyone in the school community creates a culture where issues are more likely to be raised early, before developing into conflict. Visibility, approachability and open communication normalise professional dialogue and difficult conversations. When relationships are secure, challenging messages are more likely to be received with openness rather than resistance.

In summary, it is the person of the school leader who can exert the most positive influence in a conflict situation. It behoves us to prepare accordingly.

If you would like to get in touch with Donal or Angela in relation to this piece, you can contact them at Donal.Kerins@ippn.ie or at Angela.Lynch@ippn.ie

19,000+ education related jobs annually

4,000+ registered schools

Over 120,000+ active education professionals Every role. Every level. Every school. Explore dedicated noticeboards SNA Substitutes Summer Provision Job Share And more, designed to meet real school and educator needs

info@educationposts.ie

The Advertiser can now view all Applicant details throughout the application process. Online Applications Portal

Curriculum Change: Time for the Teabag Test

So, our fourth curriculum in 100 years has been launched by the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment (NCCA). Given that I left college with the two 1971 curriculum books under my oxter, this will mean that I can be convicted of crimes against education for three different curricula. And I probably should be.

Full disclosure from the outset: I am a current member of the NCCA Social and Environmental Education Development Group and have been a guest on an NCCA podcast about leading curricular change in schools. If I have learned one thing from being at the fringes of this process, it is that complexity is easy, but simplicity is hard. I did not envy the task of the NCCA staff for a single second.

The new curriculum feels more evolutionary than revolutionary, but there are distinct changes. It has less content and more outcomes, a repackaging of current subjects and some shiny new ones. The Primary Curriculum Framework (PCF) also attempts to ensure that aims, principles and competencies are consistently embedded across all subject areas.

While there has been extensive research, consultation and piloting of subject specifications in schools, we are now at the pinch point of the process: what rugby coach Eddie Jones calls ‘the teabag test.’

You can pick the finest tea leaves by hand in the most ideal conditions and locations, and dry, blend and package them in the most exquisite pouches. However, it is only when each teabag hits

You can pick the finest tea leaves by hand in the most ideal conditions and locations, and dry, blend, and package them in the most exquisite pouches. However, it is only when each teabag hits boiling water that the exact quality of the tea is revealed. The same can be said about the process of curriculum change.

boiling water that the exact quality of the tea is revealed. The same can be said about the process of curriculum change.

There was a lot of tea spilled out after the launch of the Primary Language Curriculum, that’s for sure.

But I do believe that lessons have been learned. The new mathematics curriculum implementation process was very well designed by Oide and schools were well supported. It is as good a template to follow as we could get.

In addition, the publication Supporting Systemwide Primary Curricular Change maps out all the elements required for full implementation. I hope that not only the Department of Education, but also all others great and good in education read it and take notes.

Ultimately though, schools are the places where the teabag hits the boiling water. During the first year of mathematics curriculum implementation, I counted 30 essential projects our school was involved in. The mathematics curriculum was only one of them. So much for leading teaching and learning.

I would argue that we need more time, space, agency, professional support and resourcing to engage with and implement this new curriculum. It should include additional administrative leadership time as part of the implementation process. We could also do without a new parallel cycle of School Self-Evaluation and any other new Department initiative, which will drain us of badly needed time and energy.

Curricular implementation will look different in every school and so it should, if promised teacher agency holds true. But nobody has a clue what it is going to look like yet. Our school is running around like a headless chicken as much as any other. But, as a starting point, we have come up with our priority subjects for implementation. Our In-school Management Team has also formed sub groups to collectively lead each subject implementation process. We have also decided to pare initiatives back to the bone. The fluffy stuff will have to wait.

It’s time to put the kettle on. Barry’s or Lyons anyone?

If you would like to get in touch with Paul in relation to this piece, he can be reached at donegalpaul@gmail.com

Be Well, Lead Well –Burnout Prevention

What is it?

School leaders cannot lead as effectively as they would like to, if they are not well enough to do so. As part of IPPN’s Be Well, Lead Well campaign and to further promote your wellness, IPPN commissioned accredited psychotherapist, coach and mental health consultant Sinéad Kennedy to develop a digital series exclusively for IPPN members.

Entitled Be Well, Lead Well: Burnout Prevention – it is a 9-step digital series that can be digested at your own pace, whenever it suits you to engage. More than 450 school leaders have registered for the series and feedback has been very positive.

To find out more, it’s worth listening to Leading for Impact: The IPPN Podcast – Episode 2 Sinéad Kennedy: Saying No to Burnout, which you can access on ippn.ie under Events & News – IPPN Podcast.

Why engage with it?

1. The emphasis is on prevention, but it is also helpful for those already experiencing burnout

2. Recognise the signs and symptoms of stress and burnout

3. Avail of practical tips and downloadable resources.

How to access it?

You can find it on www.ippn.ie (you’ll need to log in first) under Supports & Services – Be Well, Lead Well – Burnout Prevention.

The 2026 SNA Review: 3-Point Compliance Checklist

Student Support File: Aligned to the NEPS Continuum of Support?

Care Needs Profile: Updated for 2026 NCSE allocation criteria?

Log of Actions: Drafted daily with zero data retention

Access Compliance Templates: Scan to download the 2026 Log of Actions (Excel)

www.senscribe.ie/resources

hello@senscribe.ie

SET Allocations

IPPN Survey on Additional Needs in Mainstream Schools: What you told us

BRIAN O’DOHERTY IPPN DEPUTY CEO

Is the school’s allocation of SET hours sufficient to meet the needs of the children who present with additional learning needs?

Last year, as part of the process to develop our new strategic plan, we issued a survey to members. In your responses to that survey, you identified school leader burnout and inadequate supports for children with additional needs, as the two greatest challenges facing you in your roles. Accordingly, to inform and progress our continuing advocacy in the area of inclusion, we sought input from principals and deputy principals of mainstream schools by way of a further survey. The following is an overview of the quantitative data that over 1000 school leaders shared with us.

SNA Allocations

Is the school’s allocation of SNA posts sufficient to meet the needs of the children who present with identified care needs?

Special Class Provision

Please indicate the number of special classes in your school.

The average percentage of children in schools who are availing of either School Support or School Support Plus (as per the continuum of support) from a Special Education Teacher is 38.64%

This is in excess of the 25% estimated figure used by government to inform the budgetary allocation for Special Education

78.44% said that their school’s allocation of SET hours was not sufficient to meet the needs of the children who present with additional learning needs

As a result of this insufficient allocation, 83.75% reported that there were children in the school who required the support of a Special Education Teacher but were unable to avail of such support

The average percentage level of increase in hours that would be required to sufficiently meet the needs of the children who present with additional learning needs is 22.03%

This would indicate that 18,000+ SET posts are required to meet the actual level of need that presents in schools as opposed to the 15,000+ SET posts that are sanctioned for 2026/27.

The average percentage of children in schools who have an identified care need with which they need support from a Special Needs Assistant is 23.38%

61.58% said the school’s allocation of SNA posts was not sufficient to meet the needs of the children who present with identified care needs

85.76% reported that there are children in the school who require the support of a Special Needs Assistant, but who are unable to avail of such support

The average increase in the number of SNA posts that would be required to sufficiently meet the identified care needs of the children in schools is 1.85 posts.

55.22% reported having at least one special class in the school

92.06% of the schools, who reported having at least one special class, have a special class for autism

10.83% report having an ASD Early Intervention class

5.05% report having a Specific Speech and Language Disorder class.

...you identified school leader burnout and inadequate supports for children with additional needs, as the two greatest challenges

Responding to Behaviours of Concern

In the last 12 months, has a staff member had to physically restrain a child in responding to a crisis situation where there was imminent risk to the child or to others?

Statements about meeting SEN

In response to a set of statements regarding provision for Special Education Needs:

89.81% agreed that equal access to quality, inclusive education for all children must be a system priority

92.03% agreed that the extent to which schools can meet the additional needs of children is limited by the funds allocated for special education in the DEY’s annual budget

11.90% agreed that the budgetary allocation is based on accurate, upto-date data in relation to the level of additional needs presenting in schools

98.21% agreed that additional needs are either met or they are not and, if not, there is a consequential impact not only on the child with additional needs but also on the other children in the class

Who is Leading Special Educational Provision?

Who co-ordinates special educational needs provision in the school (acts as SENCO)?

In the last 12 months, a staff member has had to physically restrain a child in responding to a crisis situation in 60.84% of schools

In 64.65% of cases, the staff member in question had not received any training in relation to responding to crisis situations and the use of restraint, prior to the incident

In the last 12 months, a staff member has been injured when responding to a behaviour of concern / crisis situation in 56.58% of schools

37.37% reported that staff members had been injured on 5 or more occasions when responding to a behaviour of concern / crisis situation, in the last 12 months.

Additional Points to Note

The survey data provided by school leaders has already been used to inform IPPN’s advocacy work in relation to:

• Teacher allocations and redeployment

• SNA reviews and allocations

• Discrete time for leadership

• Funding for Special Education provision.

10.32% agreed that school staff have access to the requisite training, supports and resources to equip them to work effectively in a special class setting

61.08% agreed that special classes are the most effective way of providing a quality, inclusive education to children who meet the criteria for placement in such classes

10.05% agreed that school staff have access to the requisite training, supports and resources to equip them to respond effectively to behaviours of concern

97.71% agreed that the staff member who co-ordinates special education provision in the school should have an allocation of discrete leadership time (non-teaching time) to enable them to be more effective in the role.

868 freeform responses were also received, as part of the survey. Analysis of this qualitative data is ongoing and is being undertaken in consultation with the Advocacy & Communications committee of our National Council

We deeply appreciate the commitment and engagement of all of those school leaders who took the time to participate.

Respondents reported that the person co-ordinating special education needs provision in their school was as follows:

10.41% = Administrative Principal

22.55% = Teaching Principal

42.26% = Deputy Principal

12.44% = AP1

09.00% = AP2

03.34% = Other member of staff

This means that in 67.04% of schools, the person leading inclusion has no allocation of leadership time.

If you would like to get in touch with Brian in relation to this survey, you can email him at brian.odoherty@ippn.ie

COURT REPORT: Why schools might win or lose a personal injury claim

Emma Coughlan, Allianz Claims Relationship Manager, reviews how simple accidents occur in schools and how court decisions can vary.

Case 1:

“Teacher sustains injury after falling from chair”

A teacher was in their designated classroom. While attempting to close a window using a manual winding mechanism located on the wall, the teacher stood on a chair to access the mechanism. After completing the task, they began descending from the chair. As they placed one leg on the ground, their ankle gave way, causing them to fall and sustain an ankle injury. It turns out the teacher fell over a student’s school bag when descending from chair.

Liability Assessment

We did not believe there is any basis for negligence on part of the board of management in this incident. The classroom and its layout was the teachers sole responsibility, the teacher had occupied this class room and used the winding mechanism since 2008

There was no defect in the winding mechanism.

The teacher made the decision to use a chair to access the mechanism, despite its accessible height from the ground. It was unnecessary to use the chair.

• Luckily the injury wasn’t caused by the use of the chair itself as that would have been a significant exposure. We would strongly advise against the use of chairs and/or tables to access heights of any nature.

The teacher should have ensured students moved their school bags before accessing the area. Given that the teacher was responsible for the layout of the classroom and the decision to use the chair, it is reasonable to conclude that the teacher contributed to the circumstances leading to the incident.

Conclusion

Based on the above facts, we were happy to run this case in court. Our key witness’s, the school principal and caretaker, were happy to present in court and give evidence.

This case ran before the courts who found in favour of the board of management, the key findings from the judgment were;

Both the engineers and the plaintiff provided honest accounts of the incident, agreeing that the fall occurred because the teacher tripped on a school bag.

The teacher was fortunate not to have suffered more serious injuries, as the situation could have been worse if they had hit their head.

The teacher was responsible for designing the layout of the room. If the teacher had clear access to the area, they could have opened the window from the floor.

The judge concluded that the plaintiff was ultimately the author of their own misfortune.

Case 2:

“Student suffers injury prior to school opening”

This case arises from an incident that occurred on the premises of our insured primary school. It is alleged that at approximately 8:50am, the Claimant was in the school yard when another child, who had brought a hurl to school, swung it behind their shoulder, striking the left side of the Claimant’s forehead, resulting in injuries. It is further alleged that there was no school supervision in the yard at the time of the incident.

During the investigation, the principal confirmed that the incident occurred at 8:50am. They also stated that their Supervision Policy specifies there is no supervision provided before 9:10am and school starts at 9.20am

The principal further confirmed that students are verbally instructed not to play in the school yard in the morning. Students are only permitted to play during scheduled playtimes when teachers are assigned to yard duty. The school confirmed that a supervision policy is in place; however, it is only provided to parents upon request.

When the matter was considered in full we believed we had to settle the claim on the best possible terms due to:

1. The supervision policy only being available upon request. This policy should have been available on their website and parents

notified about its existence. This should be regularly communicated as required.

2. Inaction addressing repeated incidents of students accessing school grounds before the supervision time. While the stated supervision time was 9.10am, the fact students regularly accessed the grounds before this, and it was not addressed, it then essentially became an accepted school practice.

“Stay Vigilant Against Online Fraud”

We have seen an increased frequency of school contacting us regarding fraud scams they have been victim of. Here is a sample of some, please stay vigilant.

Case 1

Over the summer, a school completed construction works and had been liaising with their architect via email throughout the process. As part of this communication, the school received a payment link for the architect’s fees, which appeared to come from the architect’s genuine email address. Acting on this, the school proceeded to pay a large sum of money via the provided link. Unfortunately, it was later discovered that a fraudulent email had intercepted the correspondence between the school and the architect, making it seem legitimate at a glance and creating a fraudulent payment link to the fraudster’s account. Despite efforts, the funds were deemed unrecoverable.

Case 2

The school bursar was contacted via email by someone impersonating the chairperson of the school. Believing the request to be legitimate school expenses, the bursar transferred funds to two separate bank accounts in Dublin using internet banking as directed by the email. Shortly after, the bursar realized the email was fraudulent and immediately contacted the bank and filed a report with the Gardaí.

The fraud squad attempted to recover the payments. Unfortunately, no funds were recovered from this account as it had already been emptied.

Case 3

The principal of a school was in ongoing email communication with a company who the school had engaged to provide a significant amount of goods. During this process, the principal’s email account was compromised, and a fraudulent email imitating the company intercepted the conversation. The scam email replicated the original email thread, including authentic-looking email signatures, invoice formats, and believable responses, making it appear as though the school was still communicating with the legitimate company.

The scam began when the principal received an invoice from the fraudulent email, which included an IBAN and BIC for a UK bank account. The principal questioned the UK account details via email, unknowingly corresponding with the scammer. The fraudulent email explained that the company’s Irish accounts were under audit and

that their UK sister account was being used temporarily. Convinced by the explanation, the principal transferred monies to the UK account. This continued for the following two weeks with additional monies transferred.

The principal contacted the company directly to clarify when goods would be delivered to discover that they had no knowledge of the transactions or correspondence. It became clear that the school had been the victim of a sophisticated email scam over the course of four weeks. The bank issued a callback request for the funds, but the outcome remains uncertain.

All three incidents highlights the increasing sophistication of email-based fraud, where scammers exploit ongoing communications and convincingly replicate legitimate correspondence. It underscores the importance of verifying payment details through independent channels, such as phone calls, especially when changes to account information are requested. Organisations need to prioritise staff training on recognising phishing and fraud attempts, implement robust payment verification protocols, and consider cybersecurity measures to mitigate the risk of such incidents. It also highlights the need for robust internal controls, such as dual authorisation for payments.

If you are insured with Allianz directly and would like to discuss any potential liability issues in your school, then please contact your local Allianz CRE. If you are otherwise insured, then you should contact your intermediary.

The Silent Cost: What Irish Primary Principals Carry – and Why It Matters

MATTHEW JOHNSON CEO AND PRESIDENT OF THE AUSTRALIAN SPECIAL EDUCATION PRINCIPALS ASSOCIATION (ASEPA)

‘You don’t realise how much you’re holding until the day you can’t put it down.’

VIGNETTE 1

Primary Principal, Rural Setting

‘I can teach a lesson, manage a staff issue and deal with compliance. What stays with me are the conversations that end with a child saying they don’t feel safe going home. You drive away at night knowing you’ve done everything you can, but it still sits in your chest. There’s no switch for that.’

In the ASEPA–Deakin study, over 70% of principals reported being the first point of disclosure for highrisk student trauma, including abuse, self-harm, and family violence. More than two-thirds reported that they regularly manage trauma-related issues alone, without immediate professional support.

Principals are required to make high-stakes decisions under legal, moral and time pressure, often with incomplete information. They must coordinate external agencies, manage parental distress, support staff wellbeing and maintain operational stability – sometimes simultaneously. Throughout all of this, they are expected to regulate their own emotional responses in order to reassure others.

Education systems rarely provide formal trauma training, structured psychological debriefing or protected recovery time for leaders. Fewer than 15% of school leaders in the study had received training on secondary trauma, and less than 10% had access to routine professional debriefing after critical incidents.

Instead, principals often move directly from safeguarding conversations to staffing decisions, from crisis management to compliance reporting, carrying the emotional residue with them.

The work beneath the work

Long after the final bell rings and the corridors empty, the work of school leadership often continues quietly and unseen. For Irish primary principals, the visible demands of the role – teaching and learning, curriculum leadership, staffing, governance, compliance, and accountability – are only part of the story. Beneath these sits another layer of work, rarely named and even more rarely supported: the emotional and psychological burden that comes from sustained exposure to the distress of others.

This is The Silent Cost of leadership.

This phenomenon has been examined through a major international research program led by Dr. Adam Fraser, in partnership with Deakin University, and commissioned by the Australian Special Education Principals Association (ASEPA). The 2025 Silent Cost study is the largest of its kind globally, drawing on 2,285 educator survey responses, 1,068 qualitative comments, and 107 indepth interviews with school leaders and teachers across multiple jurisdictions.

While conducted in Australia, the findings resonate powerfully with the lived experience of Irish primary school leaders and align closely with IPPN’s own evidence on wellbeing and leadership sustainability. This article brings these two bodies of work together. It uses the Silent Cost research to name and explain what secondary traumatic stress looks like in school leadership and holds that lens up to the Irish context using IPPN’s Wellbeing of School Leaders position paper and Sustainable Leadership research. Together, these sources tell a remarkably consistent and increasingly urgent story.

Naming the Silent Cost

The Silent Cost refers to the hidden psychological impact experienced by educators and leaders who are repeatedly exposed to the trauma of others. In research literature, this is described as secondary traumatic stress (STS) – the

stress that arises not from experiencing trauma directly, but from hearing about it, responding to it, and carrying responsibility for it over time.

In the study, almost 60% of school leaders recorded STS scores in the moderate to high-risk range, a level comparable with frontline health and emergency service professions. Yet, unlike those professions, education systems rarely acknowledge this exposure as an occupational hazard.

In schools, trauma does not arrive neatly or predictably. It arrives through disclosures of domestic violence, neglect or abuse. It appears in children who are hungry, frightened, dysregulated or hypervigilant. It surfaces through family breakdown, addiction, poverty, homelessness, serious illness, sudden death or community crisis. Each incident demands care, judgement and emotional containment. What makes the cost silent is not any single event, but the accumulation of many over months and years.

School leaders experience secondary trauma in a distinct and intensified way. Principals are disproportionately exposed because they sit at the intersection of care, authority and accountability. The Silent Cost research identifies consistent, measurable patterns among school leaders exposed to high levels of trauma.

Exposure to high levels of trauma

There are consistent, measurable patterns among school leaders exposed to high levels of trauma:

Burnout: Leaders with high trauma exposure were 2.3 times more likely to report clinically significant burnout than those with low exposure.

Sleep disturbance: Over 65% of principals reported frequent sleep disruption, compared with 28% in the general working population.

Cognitive overload: More than 60% reported difficulty concentrating, forgetfulness or mental fatigue during the working day.

Rumination: Nearly three-quarters

‘You keep going because it matters. That’s also what wears you down.’

of school leaders reported replaying difficult conversations or decisions long after the event, often late at night. Compassion satisfaction: One of the most important findings in Dr Fraser’s research is the role of ‘compassion satisfaction’: the deep meaning, pride and fulfilment leaders derive from supporting children and families through difficulty.

VIGNETTE 2

‘People assume the hardest part of the job is behaviour or workload. For me, it’s the constant exposure to what children are living with. You hear about violence, addiction, fear – and then you’re expected to walk into the next meeting as if nothing’s happened.’

Leaders with high trauma exposure were 2.3 times more likely to report clinically significant burnout than those with low exposure. Over 65% of principals reported frequent sleep disruption linked to rumination about student or staff issues, compared with 28% in the general working population. Nearly threequarters described replaying difficult conversations long after the event had passed.

These outcomes were not confined to leaders in disadvantaged or specialist settings; the Silent Cost was evident across mainstream primary leadership.

The Irish picture: a familiar pattern

IPPN’s Wellbeing of School Leaders position paper presents compelling Irish data that mirrors these international findings with striking consistency.

IPPN-commissioned research found that: rates of burnout among Irish school leaders were almost double those of the healthy working population sleep disturbance and cognitive stress were more than twice as prevalent workload volume and lack of time for teaching and learning were the strongest predictors of poor wellbeing.

While the IPPN research does not explicitly use the language of secondary traumatic stress, the symptoms, patterns and consequences described align closely with the Silent Cost framework. Irish principals are already reporting the outcomes of sustained emotional labour, even if the cause has not always been named.

In effect, the Irish evidence confirms what the Silent Cost research makes explicit: principals are not simply busy. They are carrying other people’s trauma as part of their professional identity.

When trauma meets workload

The impact of the Silent Cost is magnified by workload and role expansion. IPPN’s Sustainable Leadership research shows that 97% of school leaders believe the sheer number of tasks and responsibilities diverts them from their core purpose.

Dr. Fraser’s research demonstrates that high trauma exposure combined with low recovery time is the strongest predictor of leadership burnout. When emotional exposure is layered onto excessive administrative and governance demands, recovery becomes impossible. There is no space to process what has been absorbed.

This combination explains why wellbeing initiatives that focus solely on individual coping strategies often fail to gain traction. The problem is not a lack of resilience; it is a lack of structural protection.

Implications for leadership retention

The Silent Cost has profound implications for leadership sustainability. In the 2025 study, almost 40% of principals with high STS scores indicated a likelihood of leaving leadership roles within five years. This aligns closely with IPPN concerns about shrinking leadership pipelines and reluctance among teachers to apply for principalship.

VIGNETTE 3

Teaching Principal, Small School ‘I love my job. That’s the problem. You convince yourself that being exhausted is just part of caring. You don’t call it damage. You call it commitment.’

In the Silent Cost study, over 80% of principals reported high levels of meaning and purpose in their role, even among those with elevated burnout and secondary traumatic stress scores. While this sense of purpose is often celebrated as resilience, the research shows it can also mask risk.

Leaders who derive strong meaning from their work are more likely to normalise exhaustion, delay helpseeking and persist in unsustainable conditions. As one principal interviewed in the study observed, ‘You don’t notice how much you’re carrying because you believe it matters.’

Leadership attrition is not simply a workforce issue. It affects school stability, continuity of improvement and community trust. When experienced leaders exit prematurely, the cost is borne by students, staff and systems alike.

Moving beyond resilience narratives

Both IPPN and the Silent Cost research challenge the tendency to individualise wellbeing. While exercise, mindfulness and personal boundaries matter, they cannot compensate for a system that routinely exposes leaders to trauma without recovery mechanisms.

Continued overleaf...

WHAT WE OFFER...

• Commitment to Fresh, Wholesome Food

• Industry-Leading Health Standards

• Small Enough to Care, Big Enough to Deliver

• Educational Engagement

• Robust Sustainability and Safety Practices

The Silent Cost: What

Irish Primary Principals Carry –and Why It Matters

Sustainable leadership requires structural responses: explicit recognition of emotional labour as part of the role; trauma-informed leadership development; access to professional psychological support; realistic workload expectations; and governance models that do not place disproportionate responsibility on individual principals.

IPPN’s emphasis on shared responsibility – between individuals, boards, employers and the system – aligns closely with the conclusions of the Silent Cost research.

Making the invisible visible Irish primary school leaders lead their schools with extraordinary commitment, compassion and moral purpose. The Silent Cost of that leadership has been carried quietly, professionally and often alone.

The ASEPA–Adam Fraser research gives us the language to name what has long been felt. IPPN’s research provides the local evidence that confirms its relevance. Together, they point to a clear conclusion: leadership sustainability is impossible while trauma remains invisible.

Naming the Silent Cost is not about complaint or weakness. It is about honesty, responsibility and care for the people who hold schools together.

Protecting school leaders’ wellbeing is not an optional extra. It is a system responsibility – and an essential condition for the long-term health of Irish primary education.

Matthew Johnson has been a principal of five special schools and settings for over 26 years. As well as CEO of ASEPA, he is also the General Representative on the Executive of the International Confederation of Principals (ICP).

In Memory of Ms. Dearbhla Gill

PR INCIPAL, SCOIL NÁISIÚNTA

RÉALT NA MARA, ROSSES POINT, 2000-2025

‘I have fought the good fight to the end, I have run the race to the finish, I have kept the faith.’

(2 Timothy 4:7)

The Staff and Board of Management of Scoil Náisiúnta Réalt na Mara, Rosses Point, were deeply saddened by the passing of our esteemed Principal, Ms. Dearbhla Gill, in December. Her death marks an immeasurable loss not only to our school community, but to primary education in Sligo and beyond.

Appointed Principal in 2000, Dearbhla led our school with distinction for twenty-five years. A graduate of St. Patrick’s College of Education, where she studied from 1987 to 1990, she brought to the role a strong foundation in educational leadership and pedagogy. From the outset, she demonstrated exceptional competence and clarity of vision. Over the course of a quarter of a century, she guided Scoil Náisiúnta Réalt na Mara with integrity, intelligence and steadfast dedication, shaping its ethos, its standards and its sense of community.

leadership was rooted in the values of Catholic education, always mindful that each child is made in God’s image and likeness. She combined high expectations with genuine care, ensuring that pupils were both challenged and nurtured.

Within our school community, Dearbhla was an exceptionally supportive leader. Her door was always open. She gave her time generously to staff, parents and pupils alike – listening attentively to concerns, celebrating achievements and offering thoughtful guidance. She had a remarkable memory, never forgetting a name or a detail, a gift that made every individual feel seen and valued.

If you would like to get in touch with Matthew in relation to this article, you can contact him at asepanational@gmail.com

Dearbhla possessed an extraordinary depth of knowledge across curricular areas, and a comprehensive understanding of educational policy and practice. She was widely respected within the profession and was frequently relied upon by colleagues for her insight, balanced judgement and practical wisdom. Her contribution extended beyond her own school, as she generously shared her expertise and supported fellow school leaders and teachers throughout the region. Despite her many professional strengths, Dearbhla remained, at heart, a teacher. She adored her role as both principal and educator. Her

Having grown up in Rosses Point, Dearbhla was deeply embedded in the life of the community she served. She cared passionately about its history and traditions, and she understood the central role of the school within that community. Her leadership reflected that deep sense of belonging and responsibility. Dearbhla’s legacy is one of faith, scholarship, commitment and humanity. The impact of her twentyfive years of service will continue to be felt in the lives of the countless pupils she educated, her colleagues and the community she strengthened. As we mourn her loss, we are profoundly grateful for her life’s work and for the example she set as a principal, teacher and leader.

May she rest in peace. Ar dheis Dé go raibh a hanam.

JACKIE O’REILLY IPPN MEMBER SUPPORTS & SERVICES

If you have made the decision to retire or step back from leadership in 2026, we wish you every happiness and fulfilment in the future. We would like to thank you sincerely for your professional contribution to colleagues and to the IPPN network of school leaders. Please email jackie.oreilly@ippn.ie with your retirement date and any information that you can provide on the new school leader.

We would appreciate it if you would please ask the incoming principal / deputy principal to contact IPPN Support Office. This will ensure that they can avail of the various supports and services from IPPN from the very start of their appointment.

Croke Park School Tours

No Instruction Manual: Administrative Leadership in Special Schools

FIONA BYRNES PROFESSIONAL LEARNING LEADER, OIDE LEADERSHIP (PRIMARY) DIVISION

What the transition to administrative leadership in special schools reveals about supporting new leaders

Becoming an administrative school leader is often described as a promotion or something to aspire to. In reality, it can feel more like a disorienting relocation from the classroom into a role that is essential, demanding and still undefined.

In September 2024, Administrative Deputy Principals (ADPs) were appointed into newly sanctioned roles in special schools. My 2025 Master’s research explored what that transition felt like in practice. What emerged was a story of capable professionals navigating new leadership roles with limited system guidance and supports.

School leadership is under unprecedented pressure, yet the way new ADPs are introduced to leadership remains largely unstructured. Across the study, leadership was experienced and shaped through relationships, school context and emotional demands. The challenge was not the work itself, but the lack of shared understanding about the new role. Becoming an ADP involved a significant shift in identity, authority and relationships, not just an increase in duties.

No instruction manual

A consistent finding was role ambiguity. ADPs described ‘figuring it out as we went,’ with expectations shaped less by formal role definitions and more by school history, local culture and the leadership style of the principal. The issue was not competence or readiness, but becoming an ADP without clear or shared signals about decision-making authority.

Leadership negotiated, not assumed Leadership was not automatically granted just through appointment. It had to be built, recognised and sustained through relationships. The principal–ADP relationship emerged as central in every case. In the absence of formal induction structures, principals became the main guides and informal

gatekeepers of deputy leadership, not by design, but by default.

Where leadership was explicitly shared, ADPs settled more quickly and grew in confidence. Where expectations were less clear, leadership learning became cautious, fragmented and heavily reliant on personal resilience. Leadership legitimacy depended more on relationships than on role or title alone.

The emotional load

Alongside role ambiguity sat a significant emotional burden. Moving from classroom teacher to administrative leader required renegotiating relationships with former peers, leading difficult conversations and carrying responsibility without always having full authority. In special schools, where leadership is deeply relational, this load was intensified. Many ADPs described carrying this weight in isolation.

This was not a lack of resilience or professionalism. It reflected a structural reality. Role ambiguity, role overload and emotional labour are now common features of school leadership, not personal shortcomings.

Beyond special schools: what this means for schools and the system

While this research focused on special schools, the leadership challenges it highlights are not unique to them. Special schools act as a magnifier, highlighting pressures that are increasingly present across all school settings. ADPs stepped

into roles where responsibility outpaced preparation, authority had to be negotiated rather than assumed, and leadership was enacted through relationships before it was supported by structures.

For school leaders, this research highlights the importance of deliberately supporting new leaders not just by outlining tasks, but by clarifying authority, expectations and leadership identity. Role clarity, relational trust and visible support for deputy leadership are not optional extras; they are core leadership practices.

For the system, the challenge runs deeper. Creating leadership posts, even when necessary and overdue, is not the same as building leadership capacity. Without shared expectations, structured induction and sustained professional learning, leadership development remains uneven and overly reliant on goodwill. If we are serious about sustaining leadership, particularly in complex school contexts, we must pay attention not only to what leaders are asked to do, but to how they are supported as they grow into their leadership roles.

Fiona Byrnes is principal of St. Anthony’s Special School, Castlebar, Co. Mayo, and is currently seconded as a Professional Learning Leader with Oide in the Leadership (Primary) Division. She recently completed a Master’s in Educational Leadership and Management through Mary Immaculate College. Her research focused on the experiences of newly appointed Administrative Deputy Principals in special schools.

Fiona can be contacted about her research at fionafcb@gmail.com

Benefits of Joining an IPPN Support Group

IPPN Support Groups offer school leaders a safe, confidential, and collaborative space to share challenges, exchange strategies, and draw strength from those who truly understand the realities of the job. Here are the key benefits of being part of an IPPN Support Group.

A Safe and Confidential Space to Talk

School leadership can often feel isolating. Many principals carry concerns quietly because they cannot share sensitive issues with staff or parents.

IPPN Support Group provides:

A confidential environment where members can speak openly

The reassurance that others face similar difficulties

A non-judgmental space to seek advice or simply be heard

This sense of psychological safety is one of the group’s greatest strengths.

Shared Experience and Practical Solutions

Support Groups bring together leaders with diverse backgrounds, school types, and experiences. This collective knowledge becomes a powerful resource.

Members benefit from:

Proven strategies for managing common challenges

Practical ideas on curriculum, staffing, behaviour, wellbeing and leadership

Insight from leaders who have “been there before”

The ability to tap into real-world experience saves time, reduces stress, and leads to more effective decision-making.

Emotional and Professional Support

The role of school leader is emotionally demanding. Making difficult decisions, managing expectations and supporting your school community can take its toll.

IPPN Support Groups help leaders:

Reduce feelings of isolation and overwhelm

Build resilience and confidence

Share the emotional load with peers who understand

This peer connection strengthens personal wellbeing, which directly supports better leadership.

Professional Growth and Leadership Development Support Groups function as informal but powerful professional learning networks.

Members gain:

Exposure to diverse leadership styles

Opportunities for reflective practice

New perspectives on school management and strategic planning

These interactions challenge leaders to grow, develop and reflect continuously.

Stronger

Collaboration and Community

IPPN Support Groups foster a strong sense of collegiality among school leaders, helping create a support network that extends far beyond group meetings.

Leaders who participate often: Build long-lasting professional relationships

Collaborate across schools

Advocate more effectively for their communities

This sense of unity contributes to a stronger, more connected education system.

Reduced Stress and Improved Wellbeing

Numerous school leaders cite their Support Group as one of the main reasons they remain energised and focused in their role.

Support Groups help reduce stress by:

Offering reassurance and perspective

Preventing burnout through shared solutions

Supporting leaders in navigating complex issues

When leaders feel supported, the entire school benefits.

A Community That Strengthens Leadership

In a role as challenging and impactful as school leadership, no one should have to work in isolation. IPPN Support Groups offer a unique blend of emotional support, practical guidance, and professional learning that strengthens leaders and enriches school communities.

Whether you are new to the role or an experienced leader, joining a Support Group can be one of the most positive decisions you make for yourself and your school.

Opportunities Beyond the Group

Joining a Support Group is just the beginning. You can grow further as a Support Group Leader, Group Mentor, IPPN National Council Nominee or IPPN Board Director. Each role offers new experiences, meaningful connections, and the chance to shape the future of education.

IPPN

Facilitator Training Available

IPPN is pleased to offer Facilitator Training for those interested in leading Support Groups. Whether you’re an experienced school leader or new to facilitation, this training will equip you to make a meaningful impact in your Support Group. For further information, please email info@ippn.ie

Leading a school is one of the most rewarding roles in education – but also one of the most demanding. Principals and deputy principals are expected to balance instructional leadership, staff management, parental engagement, compliance, wellbeing and the day-to-day complexities that arise in every school community. In such a multifaceted role, having access to a trusted network of peers is no longer a luxury – it’s essential. Empower yourself. Support your colleagues. Strengthen your school community.

TRUSTED BY 500+ IRISH SCHOOLS

LEADING DROICHEAD IN YOUR SCHOOL

Key changes from September 2026

MYRIAM GATELY OIDE PRIMARY SENIOR LEADER

Droichead is the integrated professional induction framework for newly qualified teachers (NQTs) and is central to the continuum of teacher education in Ireland. First published in 2013, the current iteration of the Droichead Policy was ratified in 2017 and since then has become embedded in school practice nationwide. In 2023, the Teaching Council initiated a full review to ensure that the framework continues to provide the most relevant and effective support for NQTs, professional support teams (PSTs), principals and school communities. This review drew on commissioned research (DEEPEN Report, 2022) and quality assurance processes (Teaching Council DQA Reports 2017 – 2022), to identify areas for refinement. The process concluded in March 2025, and the reviewed Droichead Policy will come into effect on 1 September 2026.

The Role of the School Leader School leaders play a crucial role in highlighting the importance of the induction process to all staff, while also providing strong support to both the PST and the NQT throughout their engagement in Droichead. The principal, or a nominated member of the management team, retains oversight of Droichead and actively engages by providing guidance or support when needed. The reviewed Policy reinforces the principal’s role in cultivating a school culture where induction is valued and where PSTs are supported in delivering high - quality professional learning experiences.

Principals of base schools are responsible for overseeing induction for NQTs working in Supply Panels and Principal Release Time posts. Oide is available to provide support to principals via primarydroicheadsupport@ oide.ie in this regard.

New Cluster Meeting Requirements

The reviewed Policy has brought notable changes to the cluster meeting requirements for NQTs engaging in Droichead. From September 2026, all NQTs – regardless of the duration of their Droichead process – must complete an Online Webinar, a General Cluster Meeting and a Focused Cluster Meeting.

Online Webinar: NQTs will first complete an introductory online webinar which outlines the steps in the Droichead process. It is a requirement that NQTs complete this introductory professional learning module before they register to engage in cluster meetings.

General Cluster Meeting: Each NQT will attend one face-to-face General Cluster Meeting. This meeting will focus on broad aspects of professional practice and induction. These General Cluster Meetings are usually facilitated at local Education Support Centres.

Focused Cluster Meeting:

In addition, all NQTs will engage in one online Focused Cluster Meeting that explores professional topics tailored to their individual context or needs. For the 2026/2027 academic year a choice of two Focused Cluster Meetings will be available, allowing NQTs to choose the event that best aligns with their learning requirements.

Reflective Practice

(Taisce)

in

the Droichead Process

Continuation from Initial Teacher Education (ITE): Droichead extends the use of Taisce, the portfolio-based learning approach employed throughout ITE. NQTs use

Taisce to reflect on their practice and document their professional learning. Using Taisce across ITE and Droichead supports strong reflective habits and helps teachers recognise emerging strengths and needs. NQTs determine the format of their Taisce. It remains a private professional learning tool and is not used for assessment.

Sharing a Focus Area: NQTs engaging in Droichead from September 2026 will be required to share one specific element of their Taisce with their PST, centred on a professional learning need they wish to address. The NQT is required to select a relevant existing piece of research to support the discussion.

This shared element from Taisce together with the relevant research will inform a structured professional conversation between the NQT and PST. Insights gained with the support of the research article will help identify a suitable Strand B Professional Learning Activity aligned with the NQT’s needs. Oide provides practical support for both NQTs and PST members in maintaining and using Taisce effectively.

Support materials for principals, PSTs and NQTs are available at www.oide.ie/droichead

For any queries, please contact primarydroicheadsupport@oide.ie

OnYourBehalf

GERALDINE D’ARCY IPPN ADVOCACY & COMMUNICATIONS MANAGER

MEMBER FEEDBACK & CONCERNS

The following were raised by members via email to advocacy@ippn.ie since the last issue of Leadership+. The information provided supports IPPN’s advocacy with key stakeholders.

Child protection procedures and resources

SNA reviews and cuts to allocations Parents as partners

Mainstream vs special class support for children with additional needs.

SUBMISSIONS

Draft Circular on Behaviours of Concern

Autism Good Practice Guidance (AGPG)

Review

Draft Circular and FAQs on SNA Redeployment

NCCA Strategic Plan 2026 – 2029

DEY Inspectorate Statement of Strategy 2026 – 2029

National Convention.

PRESENTATIONS

IPPN presented at the following events Joint Committee on Children and Equality on “Technology, social media and children”

LEADING FOR IMPACT: THE IPPN PODCAST

Two further episodes have been recorded and are now available on ippn.ie and wherever you access podcasts:

Professor Patricia Mannix McNamara, former Head of Education at UL, now Interim Director Human Rights/EDI at UL

Róisín Coughlan of Mantra Consulting, who conducted several stakeholder, Board and staff interviews re. IPPN’s strategic plan and has worked with for-profit and non-profit leaders across multiple sectors.

MEETINGS ATTENDED

IPPN Board of Directors

IPPN National Council

DEY National Development Plan –

Sectoral Investment Plan

Teaching Council Stakeholder

Engagement Consultation – SEN School Placement Period

Primary Education Forum

ESRI launch of the report

‘The long-term outcomes of school absence’ Traveller and Roma Education Strategy/ STAR Project

The following activities have been progressed since the last issue of Leadership+:

Global Village Programme Overview and Update

Educate Together Principals’ Conference

DEY/NAPD – Teacher Supply

NAPD Symposium

Oide Leadership Collaborative Forum INTO Annual Congress 2026.

SOCIAL MEDIA X/Twitter

As of 10th February 2026, IPPN is no longer posting updates on X. This decision follows recent developments on the platform and concerns about its lack of alignment with the mission and values of our organisation. We are committed to engaging respectfully and professionally with our members, stakeholders and others, and will continue to share updates on our LinkedIn account and on Instagram @ippn_education. We hope to see you there.

LinkedIn and Instagram

There has been growth on both platforms, with 2,361 followers on LinkedIn and 2,257 on Instagram. Our new Digital Communications intern will help to keep both platforms updated with all key communications across business units.

IPPN REPRESENTATION ON STAKEHOLDER ORGANISATIONS, BOARDS, STEERING GROUPS & WORKING GROUPS

We sincerely thank all those who bring the school leadership perspective to all of these organisations, boards and groups.

Barnardos Childhood Domestic Violence

Regina Halpin and Abuse Group

BeLong To Belong To Forum

Department DEIS Advisory Group

Rory Healy

Louise Tobin of Education Project Advisory Group on the Brian O’Doherty & Youth (DEY) Administrative Executive Pilot

Consultative Group for the Digital Bryan Lynch Strategy for Schools to 2027

Summer Programme Steering Páiric Clerkin

Group Chairperson

NTRIS Pilot Oversight meeting

Jack Durkan

Primary Education Forum (PEF) Brian O’Doherty & Páiric Clerkin

Consultation sub-committee Brian O’Doherty of the PEF

DE Charter Bill

Deirdre Kelly

Working Group to review Deirdre Kelly

Circular 32/2017

Exemptions from Study of Irish

Bryan Collins & - Appeals Committee

Arthur Geraghty

Working Group 1 – Caroline Quinn

Review and Development of the SNA Role

Working Group 4 – Páiric Clerkin

Supporting SNA Recruitment, Retention and Diversity

Working Group 5 –

Development of a Communications Strategy

Brian O’Doherty

Department Irish in English Medium Schools

Bryan Lynch of Education Action Plan & Youth (DEY) Small Schools Action Páiric Clerkin

Research Project

DEY/ NPC/ Partnership Schools Steering Group Páiric Clerkin IPPN/ NAPD

DCU Stakeholder Consultative Forum Páirc Clerkin

ESCI / IPPN Local Support Group Project Deirdre Kelly

Education Centres

European School Board of Directors Jack Durkan

Heads Association Scrutiny Finance Committee Nora Peters (ESHA)

ICP European Representative Damian White

Irish Aid Global Village Schools Eddie Fox (DEPT Foreign Affairs)

NABMSE Executive Committee

Caroline Quinn

NCCA Early Childhood and Primary Board Catríona O’Reilly

NCSE Consultative Forum Brian O’Doherty

NCSE/ CPSMA/ Stakeholder Representative Forum Páiric Clerkin

IPPN

Oide Leadership Committee

Páiric Clerkin

Brian O Doherty

Data Collection re School Leadership Páiric Clerkin

Brian O’Doherty

PDSL Monitoring Group Brian O’Doherty

Tusla Code of Behaviour Steering Group Kathryn Corbett

Lessons from Toronto A Principal Exchange that Changed Perspective

DANIEL O’CONNOR

PRINCIPAL OF ST. COLUMBA’S BNS, DOUGLAS, CORK

Earlier this year, I packed my bags and flew to Toronto for what turned out to be one of the richest professional experiences of my career: a principal exchange. My partner in this venture was Pat Li, the principal of Fairport Beach Public School in Pickering, Ontario.

Pat is a veteran of exchanges, having visited schools in Denmark, Norway, Italy and now Ireland. His own visit to us coincided with Seachtain na Gaeilge and St. Patrick’s Day, and he threw himself wholeheartedly into the festivities. But beyond the cultural immersion, what struck me most was the quality of our professional conversations. With no ‘skin in the game.’ Pat could ask the simplest yet most powerful of questions: Why do you do it that way? The time carved out for those reflections was priceless – and my staff noticed it too.

Two months later, it was my turn. I flew into Toronto, where Pat and his family kindly hosted me in their home in Ajax. Before even stepping into his school, I was treated to a whirlwind weekend of Canadian culture – from a Toronto FC match to Niagara Falls to my very first baseball game with the Blue Jays. By Monday morning, I was ready to see what day-to-day leadership looked like in Pat’s world.

Fairport Beach Public School caters to students from Kindergarten right through to Grade 8. Walking in, I was struck by the similarities: the energy, the chatter, the quirks and the challenges of children are universal. Monday mornings were, as Pat explained, particularly lively – school being the safe rock for many of his students. But within minutes of the day beginning, the calm routines and support systems clicked into place.

What really stood out in Ontario was how principals were freed from administrative overload. In Durham, for example, the District Board centrally managed staffing, caretaking, compliance and finances. This left principals with the time and space to focus on leading teaching and learning. Could Ireland mirror this through our existing patron structures? Patrons could take on that wider resource management role, while principals concentrate on being true head teachers – a real win–win.

Timetabling in Durham also offered an interesting model: teachers had four hours of planning time built into their timetable each week. This was made possible by specialist staff – such as a librarian, drama and music teachers and a French teacher – who worked with every class. While children benefited from high-quality subject teaching, class teachers gained almost an hour a day to plan and refine lessons, and principals had time to meet with staff.

Could we pilot something similar here? The new MFL programme seems like a perfect opportunity. Having a specialist language teacher could give pupils a richer experience, while also giving teachers valuable planning time. Imagine native Irish speakers delivering Gaeilge in the same way – strengthening both outcomes and relationships. It could be a real gamechanger for the new Primary Curriculum.

Principals still have their responsibilities, of course, but the mountain of ‘other jobs’ that consume so much of my time simply weren’t there. The knock-on effect was obvious: Pat had more time to lead teaching and learning, to support staff and to be the head teacher in practice as well as name.

This contrast hit home. In Ireland, we often talk about leadership development, reflection and professional growth as lofty ideals. But without structural supports, they remain luxuries squeezed into stolen moments. In Toronto, I saw a system where those supports were built in – freeing principals to focus on the heart of the job.

The exchange didn’t just give me professional insights; it gave me perspective. Seeing another system up close made me question the ‘givens’ of our own practice: Do we really need to do things the way we’ve always done them? Are some of the burdens we carry actually unnecessary? Could centralisation, specialist teaching and timetabled planning time – so often dismissed here – be part of the answer?

By the time I boarded the plane home, I felt both refreshed and challenged. Refreshed by the reminder that school leadership can be joyful, stimulating and sustainable. Challenged because I know that unless we push for real change, many of my colleagues will continue to leave the profession burned out.

The Principal Exchange was more than a trip. It was a mirror held up to my own practice and a glimpse of what might be possible for us in Ireland. If we truly want principals to be head teachers again – and not head cleaners, fundraisers and compliance officers – then we must learn from systems that have found better ways.

Because in the end, leadership isn’t about surviving the workload. It’s about having the time and space to actually lead.

If you would like to get in touch with Daniel in relation to this article, you can send an email to danieloconnor@stcolumbasbns.ie

1. The AGSMB unit photograph, taken at the National Forum in Athlone, is [Left to right] Seán Ó hAdhmaill, Yvonne Ní Mhurchú, Pádraig Mac Fhlannchadha, Donach Ó Lonargáin, Odhrán Ó Súilleabháin, Micheál Ó Caoilte; 2,3,4 BEACONS event in Radisson Limerick (pupils, teachers and parents from Primary and Post Primary Schools); 5 the launch of the action plan in Gaelscoil Bhrian Bóroimhe/Swords Educate Together schools.

Plean Gnímh don Ghaeilge i Scoileanna Meán-Bhéarla

Action Plan for Irish in English-Medium Schools

An tAonad Gaeilge um Scoileanna Meán-Bhéarla (AGSMB) Irish Language Unit for English-Medium Schools, DEY) Cad é?

D’fhoilsigh an Roinn Oideachais agus Óige Plean Gnímh don Ghaeilge i Scoileanna Meán-Bhéarla nua i mí na Samhna. Tá an plean dhá bhliain seo (2025–2027) deartha chun cabhrú le curaclam na Gaeilge a mhúineadh agus chun múineadh na Gaeilge a dhéanamh níos tairbhí agus níos éifeachtaí, le béim láidir ar scileanna teanga labhartha na daltaí a fhorbairt.

Tugann an plean tús áite do:

Dearcthaí dearfacha a chothú i leith na Gaeilge

Deiseanna chun an Ghaeilge a labhairt agus a chloisteáil a mhéadú

A chinntiú go bhfuil rochtain ag gach leanbh agus duine óg ar fhoghlaim na Gaeilge

Tacaíochtaí comhtháite a sholáthar do mhúinteoirí agus do scoileanna.

Is cuid thábhachtach den phlean uaillmhianach seo, a chinntiú go mbíonn níos mó deiseanna ag leanaí agus ag daoine óga an Ghaeilge a úsáid le linn ceachtanna Gaeilge agus an Ghaeilge a bhlaiseadh mar theanga bheo lasmuigh den tseomra ranga.

Tacóidh an Plean Gnímh le scoileanna agus le múinteoirí aonair úsáid na Gaeilge a mhéadú ar fud na scoile. Díríonn gníomhartha eile ar thacú le húsáid na Gaeilge ag múinteoirí, tuismitheoirí agus leanaí agus daoine óga lasmuigh de shuíomh na scoile trí, mar shampla, tacú leo páirt a ghlacadh i ngníomhaíochtaí Gaeilge agus rochtain a fháil ar acmhainní úsáideacha, amhail iad siúd a sholáthraíonn TG4 agus suíomhanna eile Gaeilge.

Cén fáth go bhfuil sé seo tábhachtach?

Is teanga bheo í an Ghaeilge, agus cabhróidh an plean seo le seomraí ranga a chruthú ina mbeidh daltaí muiníneach agus spreagtha chun an Ghaeilge a úsáid gach lá.

Cad a tharlóidh anois?

Chun é seo a chur i gcrích, tá acmhainní agus tacaíochtaí nua le teacht. Oibreoidh foirne tiomnaithe in Oide agus COGG go díreach le scoileanna, ag tosú sa bhliain nua. Idir an dá linn, tugaimid cuireadh duit an plean gnímh a léamh ar https://bit. ly/40edT22.

Tá tacaíochtaí ar fáil ó Oide chun tacú le scoileanna agus le múinteoirí chun feabhas a chur ar theagasc, ar fhoghlaim agus ar úsáid na Gaeilge, chomh maith le chun eispéiris foghlama níos tarraingtí agus níos luachmhaire a sholáthar do leanaí agus do dhaoine óga. Tá físeán le cur síos ar roinnt de na tacaíochtaí sin ar fáil ar https://vimeo.com/1143379399.

Má tá tuilleadh eolais uait, déan teagmháil leis an Aonad Gaeilge um Scoileanna Meán-Bhéarla ag AGSMB@education. gov.ie. Go raibh maith agat as do thacaíocht gcur chun cinn na Gaeilge i do scoil. Le chéile, is féidir linn difríocht mhór a dhéanamh.

What is this Action Plan?

The Department of Education and Youth published a new Action Plan for Irish in English-Medium Schools in November. This two-year plan (2025–2027) is designed to help with teaching the Irish curriculum, and to make the learning of Irish more rewarding and impactful, with a strong focus on developing pupils’ oral language skills.

The plan prioritises:

Building positive attitudes towards Irish

Increasing opportunities to speak and hear Irish

Ensuring every child and young person can access Irish learning

Providing integrated supports for teachers and schools.

Ensuring that children and young people have more opportunities to use Irish during Irish lessons, and experience Irish as a living language outside of the classroom is an important part of this ambitious plan.

The Action Plan will support schools and individual teachers to increase the use of Irish throughout the school. Other actions focus on supporting the use of Irish by teachers, parents and children and young people outside of the school setting through for example, supporting them to participate in Irish language activities and to access useful resources, such as those provided by TG4 and Irish language websites.

Why?

Irish is a living language, and this plan will help create classrooms where pupils feel confident and motivated to use it every day.

What happens

next?

To make this happen, new resources and supports are on the way. Dedicated teams in Oide and COGG will work directly with schools, starting in the new year. In the meantime, we invite you to explore the action plan at https://bit.ly/4096FMO. It’s full of practical ideas and strategies to bring Irish to life in schools.

Oide is providing supports for schools and teachers to improve the teaching, learning and use of Irish, as well as to provide more engaging and valuable learning experiences for children and young people. A video describing some of these supports is available at https://vimeo.com/1143379399.

For further information, you can contact the Irish Language Unit for English-medium Schools at AGSMB@education. gov.ie. Thank you for your support in promoting Irish in your school. Together, we can make a real difference.

And Finally…

QUOTATION

Two things to remember in life: take care of your thoughts when you are alone, and take care of your words when you are with people.

Lorde

“Tell me and I forget. Teach me and I remember. Involve me and I learn.”

Benjamin Franklin

Ciall Ceannaithe Empowering Leadership, Supporting Leaders

About the course:

School leadership is a key determinant of school effectiveness and of better outcomes for children. The role is multi‐faceted, the responsibilities are diverse, and it demands a broad range of skills and competencies.

This summer, Ciall Ceannaithe offers you the opportunity to explore what effective school leadership looks like, and to reflect on and strengthen your own leadership capacity, your effectiveness as a leader, and the sustainability of your role.

This online course provides convenient and practical professional development tailored to the needs of all school leaders—whether you are considering applying for a leadership position, stepping into a new role, or already leading and wishing to reflect on your experience.

Course Includes

5 modules (20 hours).

Fully interactive online lessons with audio/video.

Discussion forums with expert moderators & facilitators.

Individual feedback on all submitted assignments

Online reflective learning log.

Innovative technology-enhanced learning.

www.ippn.ie

online@ippn.ie

Who should participate?

Newly appointed principals. Aspiring school leaders. Deputy principals.

Experienced leaders who wish to reflect. on their current leadership practice.

Module Topics

Sustainable Leadership. Policies & Child Protection. School Self Evaluation Process. Relationships.

Essential Information.

Registration

Course registration will be available on ippn.ie from April 2026.

Course will be open on July 1st. Registration fee is €95.

Online Summer Course for full course information see www.ippn.ie

Course dates July 1st - 31st