Here some suggested organisations that offer expert advice on SN.
IBP and useless targets(12 Posts)
One of DS2's long-term targets is "I will keep my hands, feet, mouth and other body parts to myself".
Thank you both for the very valuable advice, since I was last on. I shall be gathering all relevant details together, then asking everything suggested on here.
I have double checked with another person involved and it's definitely a behavioural reason - why do they automatically class the dc as naughty, if there needs to be external agencies involved.
IEP (IBP) should be something you agree with ...so your imput is required..........Please do question what the goals are trying to address, what the school are going to do to support DC developing the skill to meet the goals, and how they will measure success (they should be developing SMART goals - Specific, measurable, attainable , realistic, timely).
You many want to help them define appropriate goals that meet his needs more specifically which would also include what they will be making note of to record success/progress/, how that is going to be organsied and managed in the classroom, make sure its something that can actually be done in the classroom and something DC can achieve, and give reasonable expectations ( how many times will he 'get it right' 50%, 80% of the time?) and reasonable time to achieve the goal.
If you feel there is something in the IBP that simply cannot be met because its either impossible to measure, or just too unrealistic, then say so.
Tried and failed strategies should be challenged (the new teacher may not realise this is the case), as should the assertion that DC is choosing not to behave as desired.......... no-one 'chooses' to be in trouble all the time. What justification do they have to assert that?
If DC fidgets, can he be given something to fidget with that stops the wider disruption?? This is what is done to support my DC to go to assembly, with his fidget toy (something that he can twist and pull and tie up) he will sit quite happily and quietly with the class for the 20-30 minutes required causing no disruption what-so- ever (and despite the distraction for himself he IS listening)...without it he is poking other children, taking his shoes off and playing with them, turning round, talking, laying down, and worst of all breaking into song (on the one hand hilarious as its usually something very inapproriate like Lady Gaga, by terribly unwelcome and very diruptive)
You might assume that the SENCO and teachers would have lots of experience at doing these things and should be instructing you on how they work..........dont assume anything, you need to use your own resources to make this the best it can be for your DC (what do you do at home for example, what actually works??)...question everything (in a supportive way).
Expect to give lots of input, push back on what is suggested if needed, offer alternative solutions if you can, and then make sure they are actually doing what has been agreed (the next stage of frustration in many cases).
How often are these plans done - suggest that they are done with you present in a termly meeting where you review whether it works or not, and how to proceed. I would suggest that the plan should only last a term and be something that can be achieved in that time.
The things you need to be asking them are how they are going to help him achieve the plan and how they will measure if it has succeeded. If it hasn't you ask questions about what happened - was the planned target too difficult? Did he get all the help he needed (and ask them what this was). At that point you and the teacher decide whether to rewrite that target or to move on to something else.
Thats really helpful Keepon, thank you very much for the guidance. I'm going to google some adhd and sensory issues, iep targets and take it from there.
If an intervention (like warning cards) has been tried previously and not been successful they should not be expected to work this time around and the strategy needs to be changed in order that DS can succeed. If the targets are not met the support needs to be adapted or increased. So it is not in the school's interest to set targets that can't be met. Where targets are not SMART school's move the goalposts eg failure to meet a target just means that it is repeated on the next plan because you need to try it for longer.
NASET (national association of special educational teachers) have examples of IEP goals and objectives for ASD. eg 'DS will develop an understanding of the relationship between his verbalizations and actions/effect on others 4/5 opportunities to do so'. Google others for ADHD.
Also ask for the draft IBP to be sent to you a couple of days before the meeting - at the end of my first review I was handed the back-sheet of the IEP to sign and had not even seen the whole document. It's OK to be tricked once but never twice. I think it is a common tactic at the end of a meeting for them to suddenly remember that they need you to sign something.
Sorry, the 10 disruptions are between september and december. So, they set this up to fail. His previous teacher 'got' him and gave him what he needed, without the cards as they were clearly not working.
His teacher this year is a male and he's got so much respect for men but he's gone really downhill since september already. I want to make sure this doesn't continue.
Thank you starfish
They seem really odd to me. They don't explain anything at all, and I was given a copy after school and had to sign it very quickly, without first understanding what it even meant. So I realise some of this is my fault, however, I would like it to be specific like your ds's maybe. I just don't have a clue what i'm doing.
Thank you Keepon
DS is very twitchy, fiddly, wriggling about, he plays with things in his hands, he will try to answer the q's before the teacher has finished speaking and generally show lots of adhd traits in class. However, his teacher this year, isn't as understanding as last year and feels that he CAN behave, But chooses NOT to behave. I personally think this is him having good/bad days as we all have them.
I understand he needs to be respectful, safe and not disruptive but they are not taking anything they've been told into account.
The warning cards he is getting are purely to do with the fidgeting, distracting, wriggling and anything else i've mentioned - to me, how can they punish him without working on the cause for this or when they know he's got clearly identified difficulties.
Of course it is ok for you to ask the school questions about this, targets should be set jointly anyway.
I don't see any implication that they think he is "just being naughty" in what they are suggesting, even though the things that he does (disruption, not turn taking in diuscussions) may be linked to his SN, they can still work on him gaining those skills.
My ds is at a ss where targets and steps are small but here is an example of one of his, which is similar to the first one in nature, but more achievable (for him) - he was in y4
Target: For X to be able to get on with a task for 5 minutes without calling out to adults for attention all the time
How it will be achieved : At the start of the day he will be given a motor skills task (another target!) to perform independently. He will be given assistance at the start of the task and then left for 5 minutes. Stickers for success
Success criteria when x can quietly get on with an activity for 5 minutes on his own
For the second one when DS was constantly jumping in with answers & not turn taking; he had this target - this was y7
Target: To remember to put his hand up when asking questions and wait his turn
How it will be achieved: verbal reminders from staff
Success Rate: to remember to put his hand up 70% of the time
But the bit about accepting responsibility for his own actions just seems plain odd. How are they going to measure that??
The targets and success criteria miss out the crucial bit - the strategies that are going to be employed to meet the targets. Do you think warning cards will be sufficient? The success criteria should allow the objective measurement over a defined period of time - is that 10 disruptions per day, week, month, term etc?
The second one seems a bit strange - conversational turn-taking and accepting responsibility are different things. So they don't put improved social communication as a target but then sneek it in. Plus why this target if he was 'social' during ASD assessment? The target should include measurable objectives over a defined period (eg DS will engage in conversational turn-taking with others across 3-4 conversational turns, 4-5 opportunities to do so). Also misses out how this is going to be achieved - the strategies.
DS1 doesn't ask for help as is common for some DC on the spectrum but his target was always simply just to ask for help with no recognition that it was not sufficient to simply put this on his IEP but necessary to teach specific strategies.
DS has recently been assessed as possible adhd and has sensory issues. ASD has been ruled out as he was 'social' during assessment.
I want to query his IBP, which says the following:
Target - To work in class without disruptions
Success Criteria - 10 or less incidents of disrupting a lesson (warning cards)
Target - To accept responsibility for own actions
Success Criteria - To politely listen to others in turn. And to accept responsibility when described back to him
To me, this seems like they're insinuating he's just being naughty - or am I resding too personally?
Join the discussion
Please login first.