Rules about a TA teaching(79 Posts)
My son is out of school because he has Asperger's and is unable to cope with his setting.
School and all the professionals supporting him agree he should be taught at home.
We are currently paying for tutors and the hope was LA would take over this. They are in breach of their duty to educate as they are doing nothing despite the fact he has a statement.
They have now said they want school to send a TA to teach him at home until January when they will review.
His head is not happy and is seeking advice as he believes a TA should not be teaching.
I am sure this must be right but what is the law on this?
If you want home education (s319 ea act 1996) then you are entitled to request it at tribunal. Your lea will not offer it to you, but if all experts agree that your child needs it then I don't see any problem.
Are you in a position to appeal to the ftt? If so appeal and send in all the documents supporting your case. It's all about needs... If your case merits home education I think you could make that case without much difficulty.
My daughter is partly home educated and her aba tutors all have post graduate degrees as that is what was agreed.
Please do get in touch
Thanks. They do just apply in school but you could argue that if the law thinks TAs in school, where they can be far more easily supervised and directed, should not be teaching save for when specific criteria are met, how can TAs out of school become 'suitable' educators? Especially when the criteria required in school are not even met.
It must be.
Have been looking at the 2012 Specified Work Regulations again (as the original q you raised was about TAs). They talk about the conditions that must be fulfilled for education 'in a [maintained] school'. I am not sure they would apply to out-of-school situations, but they might: your barrister will be much better placed to give a view. I think the body of law on SEN as applies to Local Authorities will be your trump card: at the end of the day, it's this that seems to be being contravened. The school sound really good and co-operative.
Thank you for your support. I really appreciate. It is like living in the Twilight Zone!
Oh, I really hope they pull their finger out soon. It's shameful, the battles that parents of children with SEN have to go to to get the appropriate provision (not special, just what everyone has a right to expect e.g., a reasonable education)
You seem to know a lot about this issue, which can only be a good thing for your son.
One last suggestion - have you tried your MP? Even if they are not of your political persuasion they may be able to advocate on your behalf. Also, the press? They might be interested ...
I am not home edding!!!!!!!
He is on the school roll. He has not been deregistered. We are looking for a package out of school under s 319.
There are no schools available. The 60k a year school won't take kids until Y7.
Yes, they will be stalling you if the most appropriate provision costs £60k.
That is nothing, highly specialist provision can be £200k p/a.
If they can't provide an option that fully meets your DS's needs in the maintained sector thay have to fund independent provision and transport to it.
You have let them off the hook with this Home Ed thing, they are probably rubbing their hands in glee!!
OP have you spoken to IPSEA? Or an Advocacy team? I am in Wales and Snap Cymru help families of children with Additional needs as they know the law and how what and who to use to get results for the family.
We have looked and there is nothing that would suit. But I suspect this is what the LA are dragging their heels about too.
The nearest possibly appropriate school is an independent special school which charges 60k a year!
He has other physical disabilities and complex needs and we are not sure any kind of school would suit him.
I think he needs to do things differently and flexibly but the system doesn't work like that.
I would be carefull being in so much agreement that he should not be in school, what you need to be pushing as far as I can see is that spcialist provision is to be explored. I just fear that your agreement will eventually lead to him coming off role and you agreeing to home ed him, which may not be in his best interest either.
What social provision is there locally?
I haven't read the whole thread (apologies). Has a specialist setting been ruled out?
How close is the nearest specialist setting that would be able to meet his needs?
I should add school has done everything they can. It is not in his interests to be in school and they would not stop him returning if they thought it was. We are in complete consensus that he needs something else.
The LA are failing to educate him by not putting something in place. The TA thing is an attempt to fend off a JR action for this.
If he comes off the roll, he loses all the provision in the statement but it is the LA's fault he remains on the roll as they want provide any education.
Sorry about typos- I'm reduced to working weekends at present so fingers are giving up with two days of solid typing.
Thank you so much for your input.
We tried very hard to keep him in school but it clearly wasn't in his best interests and he was becoming very distressed. So we had two lengthy meetings to consider alternatives and agree something.
The problem is that it then went to the so-called 'SEN Panel' who just ignored teverything and said effectively - we are considerinf reintegration and want more assessments and an interim arrangement until they are obtained under which he is educated by a TA.
My son has loads of people invpolevd with him and has been assessed and tested to within an inch of his life.
Further, all those involved, including us, absolutely believe that that reintegration would be against his best interests and damaging to him mental health.
LA don't care, they are playing for time - every month's delay in sorting out a package, is a month of costs saved.
So they would rather force a vulnerable child through loads of unnecessary assessments and threaten reintegration against everyone's clear advice (including the EP) than sort this out.
I'm still unsure about the status of the situation .. the OPs says it is a joint agreement but as there is nothing in place for her son and she has employed a tutor it seems unlikely that anything has been officially agreed with the LEA hence dragging feet and reluctance. It's unlikely a school or LEA would use their budget to employ a tutor in my experience.
So does the LA have to have the final say in weather it's a TA or tutor though, if a tutor is cheaper can the a the school not employ a tutor, or are the LA suggesting just send an dieting TA, therefore no extra costs?
The school is responsible for paying the TA as long as the OPs child is on roll
From my point of view race, but that is just a point of view and think you having a barrister involved is right. But my point of view and my understanding of the law is that what is happening is not exactly lawfull.
You say you haven't been forced, but it seems neither have you had your sons rights fully explained to you. Like I said I'm no expert and as always the law is interpretable. But I fear that this has been sold to you as a joint decision, and there being no alternative right now. Because otherwise the school would have to exclude him and follow the exclusion guidelines to the letter, no doubt they feel they have their hands tied by the LA who do not seem to have your sons needs fully understood, but the schoo at the moment remain responsible for his provision.
I would not be so confident that because it is a multi disciplinary decision that is within the law, because it does sound very dubious, they are all lucky all round that they have your backing and sadly that happens all too often with illegal exclusions, is that parents don't often recognise it as such and it can be explained away as being the only option.
I'm not sure about the TA thing, who is responsible for picking up the bill? I'm assuming it is the school? Do they need the LAs final say in wether they provide a TA or a tutor? Why does the LA need to have the final say?
I think the use in going to school is that this will push the matter back into the hands of the school and the LA and I'm sure the results will be faster reached well before the next ousted inspection as I'm sure they would be asking pertinent questions to see a pupil being educated by his parent in the corridors indefinitely.
Sorry mrz, missed that.
The end of term is very far away, and suggests that no reintegration back into school has been planned. In which case, what is the longer term plan? Where do they see him at the end of the academic year? Next year? For the rest of his primary education?
Any plan needs to consider this.
The LEA has said the TA arrangement is until the end of term tethersend which in my opinion is a long time for this kind of arrangement.
Since your son has a statement, the school will struggle to permanently exclude him on the grounds of the needs he is statemented for. However, they can say that they can no longer meet his needs- and this is the truth.
A TA working 1:1 with him at home is unlikely to meet his educational needs in the long term; so either a long term plan needs to be made involving a team of tutors (at least one of whom is qualified, although this may not be a legal requirement), or a long term plan involving reintegration into school. Only the latter would justify 1:1 sessions with a TA IMO.
Since nobody seems to be recommending reintegration (what did they recommend as a long-term plan, BTW?), then it is clear that the school cannot meet his needs and another provision needs to be named on his statement. When was his last Annual Review?
Is it an "official" joint agreement in writing with all the ts crossed and i-s dotted because I was warned that keeping my child home effectively let the school/LEA off the hook.
It is very common for TAs to provide this type of home "education" under the direction of a teacher (ie the teacher tells the TA what to do and the TA reports back)
The school are involved because the LA are trying to force them to send a TA when they do not want to and don't see it as being in his best interests or lawful.
I think we will end up in a judicial review. But what a waste of public money. Tutors cost less that the TAs wages.
We have not been forced, we have decided, with all the other parties, that it is in DS' best interests to be educated at school.
If I continued to take him into school and sit in a corridor with him, how would that help? The LAS would be perfectly happy to let me waste my time doing that and he would be getting nothing out of it.
More than that it would be very damaging to his well-being.
This was a joint decision, taken when an alternative had been identified - an out of school package.
The LA seem to think this means a TA. I think the law is against them on this.
Join the discussion
Please login first.