Teachers do not adhere to Statemented 1 to 1 support, do not believe in sub-levels, make APP assessments up....How much of what parents are told by schools about teaching is a box ticking exercise?

(1003 Posts)
Regards Tue 24-Sep-13 14:05:51

Following on from this thread:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/primary/1859219-Im-a-teacher-and-happy-to-answer-any-questions

and this:
community.tes.co.uk/tes_primary/f/36/t/381051.aspx?pi2132219857=1

I realised I was incredibly gullible when my DC first started school. What exactly should we believe concerning what the teachers tell us, how much is a PR job to cover up the ugly truth?

stripeyslippers Sat 28-Sep-13 14:23:25

There are several special schools available where the model is full time 1:1 for each and every child.

Generally, the model works well, and the children there make more progress (real, well documented progress, not hothoused tutored rote learning that cannot e applied elsewhere) than was ever expected from them at previous educational establishments.

Full time 1:1 does not mean full time dependence, btw, and it is very and narrow minded (although typical of most ms teachers, ime) to think it does.

zzzzz Sat 28-Sep-13 13:33:21

It is not noisy/loud/obsessive/selfish/pushy or rude to want your child to receive the support written into their statement, any more than it would be for you to want the drugs itemised on a prescription to be filled accurately.

Trigglesx Sat 28-Sep-13 13:33:14

no nenny - i just think the needs of ALL individual children need to be met and not just the individual children of the noisiest parents.

Let's be clear. If those parents didn't have to fight for every little damn thing for their children, maybe it wouldn't be that more support goes to the children of the "noisiest parents." Maybe ALL the children would get the help they need.

Maybe those noisy parents that succeed in getting support for their children will highlight an issue so that more children in their area receive better support. Are parents just supposed to "not say anything" simply because another parent is not willing enough or informed enough to stand up to the school or the LA? hmm

tbh if ms school was for my son the equivalent of being blindfolded and deaf and left on the side of train track in a busy station i would not send him there. the presence of a poorly trained adult on 9k a year next to him would not change my mind.

nennypops Sat 28-Sep-13 13:31:23

Swallowed: "no nenny - i just think the needs of ALL individual children need to be met and not just the individual children of the noisiest parents."

I can't see anyone on here who is disagreeing with that. But taking away support from children who need it just because others aren't getting it is hardly the way to achieve it.

As a parent, I would assume that my child's 1:1 was sufficiently supervised by the teacher and trained to NOT mollycoddle.

Do teachers not ensure this?

So now we have to police the provision as specified AND the teacher's capability of ensuring that the TA 1:1 hours are effective?

Really?

Trigglesx Sat 28-Sep-13 13:30:43

however it is not unreasonable for people who went into a job thinking it was x only to find they've been redeployed into situation y which they don't feel qualified for or like they have an affinity for to be a bit resentful.

Really? You think that people should be okay with a teacher that only wants to teach the "normal" kids and not the SEN kids? Wow. Maybe the teacher needs to understand that they cannot be mollycoddled, and need to just get on with their job.

no nenny - i just think the needs of ALL individual children need to be met and not just the individual children of the noisiest parents.

nennypops Sat 28-Sep-13 13:28:10

swallowed: "just a shame you had to insult the disabled and infantilise them to make your point star."

She didn't. And I really don't think personal attacks are in any way a helpful contribution to this discussion.

section 313(2) of the Act, which imposes a duty on LEAs to have regard
to the provisions of the Special Educational Needs Code of Practice
(2001), paragraphs 8.36 and 8.37 of which make clear that statements
should specify the special educational provision necessary to meet the
needs of the child, detail appropriate provision to meet each identified
need and normally quantify the provision.

lottieandmia Sat 28-Sep-13 13:27:38

Most parents I know who have successfully fought for their child's provision are also more than willing to help others who need advice to achieve the same objective.

nennypops Sat 28-Sep-13 13:26:45

Swallowed: I have read the thread and I really don't see where you get your belief that parents of children with SEN on here want their children put ahead of everything and everyone. It does seem to me that that is your interpretation of repeated posts saying that they simply want schools, teacher and local authorities to comply with the law. You demonstrate that by virtue of the fact that, for instance, you try to make fun of a perfectly straightforward and correct statement such as "Blanket policies are illegal", and indeed the fact that you seem to think that blanket policies which ignore the needs of individual children are OK.

just a shame you had to insult the disabled and infantilise them to make your point star.

i totally understand your point triggles however it is not unreasonable for people who went into a job thinking it was x only to find they've been redeployed into situation y which they don't feel qualified for or like they have an affinity for to be a bit resentful.

the situation that was referred to in that comment was one in which ms and ss had been put on the same site and teachers who were not sen specialists were finding themselves essentially teaching in ss at times. it wasn't people saying oh god i don't want to teach sen kids at all - it sounded to me that it was teachers finding themselves expected to provide a very specialised level of provision for classes with significant numbers of very high need sen that had not been what they felt they had been trained to do or had come into the profession to do.

a nurse who wanted to work with children and specialised in that might well resent being made to go and work with geriatrics.

that comment was in a context.

Regulation 16(b) of the Education (Special Educational Needs) (England)
(Consolidation) Regulations 2001, which provides that the statement
must contain the information specified in Schedule 2 to those
Regulations, which requires educational provision to be specified in terms of "any appropriate facilities, equipment, staffing arrangements and curriculum...")

zzzzz Sat 28-Sep-13 13:24:31

"presumably you won't be sending your 8yo to catch trains on his own any time soon though"

Well of course I won't.

What on earth do you mean?

YOU catching a train without your sight and with your hearing limited by music would give YOU similar obstacles to getting to your destination as my son would have negotiating a lesson in school without adult support. Is that clear?

confused

Absolutely. Mollycoddling TAs should be sent on training courses.

Or perhaps you could help the parents ensure that it is clearly specified that the TA must do no such thing, and detail what he/she MUST do.

Regards Sat 28-Sep-13 13:23:55

Except replace the child's needs with their own career.

Regards Sat 28-Sep-13 13:23:12

Swallowed Ditto regarding teachers but where does that get us?

regulation 16(b) of the Education (Special Educational Needs) (England)
(Consolidation) Regulations 2001, which provides that the statement
must contain the information specified in Schedule 2 to those
Regulations, which requires educational provision to be specified in terms
of "any appropriate facilities, equipment, staffing arrangements and
curriculum...")

nenny you only have to read this thread and things some parents have said on here to find out that actually they do want their child put ahead of everything and everyone.

just because not everyone shares that attitude doesn't undo what has been said by those who do.

Trigglesx Sat 28-Sep-13 13:21:35

Inclusionist thank you. The fact that you are saying that you do not agree with this and do not feel that way is nice to hear. I wasn't sure because of the way you'd put it initially, but I was under the impression you felt it was okay for them to think this. Some respect to you for being clear that you don't agree with it. I don't agree with you on some things, but thankfully in this we agree. Teachers that feel this way should not be teaching.

Regards Sat 28-Sep-13 13:20:17

If you met me you'd know I'm not into mollycoddling!

maybe i was responding to others regards - there are others you know.

nennypops Sat 28-Sep-13 13:19:40

swallowed: "i can only see that it creates a competitive and selfish attitude and 'classes' children with sen into those with loud articulate parents and those without. with the former group wanting to hog all resources for their own children at the expense of the latter."

Why is it selfish for the parent of a child who is already at a massive disadvantage by virtue of having SEN to want that child to have the support which he needs and which is set out in his statement after full assessment? The whole point of a statement is that the child isn't getting support at the expense of other children, there is funding specifically allocated for it. What you seem to be saying is that actually that child should sacrifice some of the support everyone agrees he needs for the good of others.

I am prepared to bet that there is no "loud articulate parent" who is demanding support for his or her child at the expense of other children: in my experience, what they want is adequate support for all children, including theirs, to get the support they need.

This thread is not accepting new messages.