To think that every eleven year old who gets less than a level 3 in their SATs should have a statement and see an ed pych to see how thier needs are best met.

(52 Posts)
ReallyTired Thu 19-Sep-13 12:51:21

My son has a friend who was disapplied from SATs. The boy was given the key stage 1 paper and got a level 2 on teacher's assessment.

The child is not statemented inspite of being on the SEN register for his entire primary career. I feel this child has been badly let down by his primary. Thankfully the secondary school is organising high quailty SEN support and the child's mum says that he is making excellent progress in the 3 weeks that he has been at secondary.

I feel that a child with such low achievement should have been statemented long ago. I feel low achieving children should be referred to the ed pych by law and the schools should be fined if they don't make the referrals.

noblegiraffe Thu 19-Sep-13 14:12:04

Something needs to happen to make primary schools get their arses in gear. At the moment it seems to be the loudest parents who get the statements for their kids, rather than the kids most in need of support.

I taught a boy in secondary who needed to count his fingers to tell you how many he had. Scored single figures in his SATs. God knows what the primary did with him, but they'd never bothered to apply for a statement, and the first year of secondary was wasted trying to sort it out.

I think some primaries think that they can deal with the kids themselves, with TAs in class etc. But then that child gets to secondary, and if there's no statement, there's no funding and they are left to flounder.

Sirzy Thu 19-Sep-13 14:13:48

Yanbu but something needs to be done much earlier than 11 before the damage is going to be harder to reverse.

Schools should have much more money and manpower available to help support pupils who are struggling.

Spinkle Thu 19-Sep-13 14:34:31

Statements of Special Educational Need are for children who have had the full gamut of interventions available in school and through outside agencies. The Statement ensures systematic monitoring of progress of the child particularly with transitions to other schools or phases.
It outlines a programme for the child's support.
They do not provide the school with extra money.

If every child who did not meet level 4 in year 6 required such a thing then frankly I would need an army of assistants to apply for them and trust me, the LEA would knock them back.

Not all children will achieve the average despite having bazillions of pounds thrown at them in support and interventions. That is a fact of life.

Schools really are trying to help all children.

OP, why?

What do you think at statement will do?

'But then that child gets to secondary, and if there's no statement, there's no funding and they are left to flounder.'

Firstly, statements don't come with funding.

Secondly, if the child needs a statement at secondary, why don't you apply for one?

ReallyTired Thu 19-Sep-13 14:41:06

Spinkle
I am referring a child who is working at level 2 not the dizzy hieghts of a level 3.

"Not all children will achieve the average despite having bazillions of pounds thrown at them in support and interventions. That is a fact of life. "

That is not a reason not to try or an excuse for the primary doing nothing. Arranging for a child who as made zero progress to see an ed pych is hardly spending "bazillions of pounds". Its making sure that an intervention or money is focussed and more likely to be sucessful.

Working at level 2 of the national curriculum at the age of eleven is not just below average, but a lack of achievement that is on a different plane to most children.

gordyslovesheep Thu 19-Sep-13 14:42:04

yes 1. what would a statement do? 2. even if you shout loudest you still only get a statement if your child needs one 3. ask for one

You don't need a statement to have access to an EP.

What do you think a statement will achieve?

cranberryorange Thu 19-Sep-13 14:45:49

YANBU. We are currently fighting the school for support for Ds in year 1.

He scored the lowest possible score on his Early years assessment because he didnt reach the expected level in any of the 17 categories but the school have shrugged their shoulders and said dont worry about it.

He's on school action plus, has loads of reports stating what his needs are but still the school refuse any additional support because he is well behaved.

They are about to get a rocket shot up their arse as they are so bloody arrogant they havent worked out we are now evidence gathering to apply for statutory assessment. Its a good thing they keep insisting they are implementing the recommendations even though we are well aware they arnt because it shows they have tried everything and he is still very behind!

Anyone would think its in the schools interest to not identify a childs needs now that they have to foot the first 6000.00 every year for additional support but i'm sure no school would put money before a childs educationhmm

cranberryorange Thu 19-Sep-13 14:48:51

Should add that Ds has been diagnosed with mild cerebral palsy, SLI, SPD and GDD.

OctopusPete8 Thu 19-Sep-13 14:50:37

Poor little kid, he'll have spent a long time feeling behind already sad

glad to hear he's getting help now though.

mrsjay Thu 19-Sep-13 14:53:35

not statements as far as I know in scotland no STATS either my dd got all the help she needed at school and even more in secondary I dont see or probably understand what a statement would do,

noblegiraffe Thu 19-Sep-13 14:54:44

Firstly, statements don't come with funding.

How come the kid with a statement gets 1-1 support and the kid without gets nothing if there's no money attached? confused

Secondly, if the child needs a statement at secondary, why don't you apply for one?

The school did, it took a whole year to get the evidence because the primary school had done bugger all. This was a student who was so severely behind that the need for a statement was obvious.

ReallyTired Thu 19-Sep-13 14:55:00

"He's on school action plus, has loads of reports stating what his needs are but still the school refuse any additional support because he is well behaved."

cranberryorange your son sounds like a younger version of my son's friend. The problem is that the gap just widens as the child get older between the child with learning difficulties and the rest of the class.

A year 1 child may well be obvilous to being behind, but a year 6 child will have their self esteem absolutely shattered.

"What do you think a statement will achieve?"

A statement would give the child the legal right to the inteventions that he so desperately needs. (Whatever the ed pych thinks is best, maybe one to one lessons with a qualified teacher, or a TA or even special school for example) Schools hate statements as part of the money comes out their budget.

The secondary school this boy attends is organising a statement, but I feel it should have been done years ago.

'How come the kid with a statement gets 1-1 support and the kid without gets nothing if there's no money attached? confused'

What kid?

A child with a statement will have their needs, and the provision required to meet their needs written down in law and the school obligated to deliver it. Finance does not come into it. Schools are given money in their budget to cover SEN in a broad sense and if they can't cover a child's provision as they are duty bound by law to do, they need to see an accountant or tell the LA that they are failing the child and ask for help.

The difference between child A with a statement, and child B without is that child A has an entitlement by law to school resources.

Child B doesn't get 1:1 because the school chooses to spend their remaining SEN budget on a vegetable garden to attract the MCs. Child A does because the LA can be taken to Judicial Review if the provision in his statement isn't delivered.

daftdame Thu 19-Sep-13 15:01:07

You can throw all the money in the world at a school but it is how effectively it is used that counts...

Some SENs do not require expensive interventions, just understanding teachers and support staff. Some interventions are more expensive.

Although cost is the only true quantifiable aspect of an Additional Need genuine compassion and sensitivity is free and IMO would help a great deal in a lot of cases.

Like the example of a child with hyper-mobility problems whose teacher had a problem with them sitting on a chair in assembly.

Spinkle Thu 19-Sep-13 15:01:56

The statements makes the school provide 1:1 for the child, as a legal requirement. No money is attached to the statement.

Level 2 is not not an unusual as you would think in year 6.

Of course we have high aspirations for children and provide as much support as we can but there will always be pupils would cannot make the grade.

No matter what that hit Gove thinks.

Spinkle Thu 19-Sep-13 15:02:12

*git

kim147 Thu 19-Sep-13 15:05:13

spinkle

Are you sure you didn't miss an "S"

daftdame Thu 19-Sep-13 15:05:23

Often the 1 to 1 is not used to support the child they are assigned to. Often the children end up been (in)effectively being taught by TAs.

There has been a piece of research used to justify the removal of TAs which show that like for like children with TAs perform worse than those without.

So technically the boy mentioned in the OP could have achieved LESS with a TA than he did.

But statements are not for TAs. A child can have a TA without a statement if it is a priority for the school. Statements are for resources or interventions not ordinarily available to the school and some of these might even be free or simply a matter of training.

Spinkle Thu 19-Sep-13 16:00:57

1:1 TA is not the 'gold standard' people can assume. It is not a cure-all. It can build an over reliance.
It can be very difficult for the adult to work with the same child all day also.

daftdame Thu 19-Sep-13 16:17:12

I agree the 'gold standard' is not 1 to 1 TA.

However Statements often specify 1 to 1 TA 'support', which, in practice means the child works in groups with a TA. However this means also that the TA supports those other children and unless this is made clear in subsequent paperwork this can distort a child's actual additional need. They are not accessing 1 to 1 support but 1 to 6 or 1 to 8 , which is much cheaper. Thus the funding that has been designated for them is not being used solely for them.

This distortion of need is wrong. However it does go on because schools want the extra resource. That child's designated funds should be spent on provision for them. If in practice it is not with a 1 to 1 TA the funding should be spent on something else. In some LAs some Statements still do attract additional funding.

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now