Here we go...

[hoxtonbabe]

Hi All,

So had my sons appeal 2 weeks ago (still waiting for decision), SENCO and LEA lied something rotten about being able to meet DS needs, even as far as saying the IEP she NEVER produced got lost in the post, forgetting that the LEA have already acknowledged in a previous letter that she has not produced any this was acceptable?!?!

Anyhoo the latest one is that the SENCO said at both the hearing and noted in the annual review paperwork that the detentions my son receives for getting low marks on his homework or classwork grades (this is a child with a statement, and been diagnosed with SLT for 10 years by the way) is not detention and infact "work support" it is funny how for 3 years they have been logging it as detention until the annual review I mentioned they are skating very close Disability discrimination...When questioned about this by both myself and the panel, she insisted the "work support" was up for negotiation, and it does not have to be held after school and can be lunch time, mornings, etc.. (he should not be getting it at all) but I said fair enough.

Last week my son got 4/10 on his ICT work, and the teacher decided to give him this "work support" session after school. I then sent a firm note to the school stating they are not to keep him behind as it was stressed that this was negotiable, and would prefer it to be at lunch time. As far as I am concerned they would simply have to find a way around it...they have been insisting and fighting they can meet his needs and I expect that to be between 9am and 3.30pm.

The deputy head sends me a very rude reply basically telling me, it is school policy and the school only agreed to the lunch time sessions if the teachers could fit it in etc...I then sent a reply bascially saying my son has 13 hours LSA support in his statement, this is what should be used to support his needs (hence the statement!!!) if this is not enough they need to be requesting to the LEA that they need more funding, but they should not be keeping him behind school to support him becasue it fits around their schedule, and nor can I see it on their school policy where it states "boys will be forced to stay after school to receive help"

Now i know this lot...they will try and keep DS at school against his or my wishes and i want to know where I stand. From what i have gathered unless it is for detention/behaviour issues, they can not keep my son behind by force for something like this especially as he has a statement with 13 hours LSA support, this to me is not making reasonable adjutments, and I have planned to collect my son after school on Monday, I have a funny feeling there will be a stand off, but I am quite prepared to call the police to get him out of the school if need be.

All this grief I have been getting over the last year with the school telling the LEA and Panel they can meet his needs and as soon as everyones back is turned they show they can't...

[Veritate]

Brilliant response to the deputy head. I think you're right, they can't keep him in, and you're equally right to look at calling the police in. That's the beauty of them having backtracked from calling it detention - they can no longer insist on it happening after school. You could also point out that if they're saying they lied in the evidence they gave in the tribunal that's a very serious matter which you feel you should draw to the tribunal's attention. I doubt that it would make much difference to the tribunal, but it might make the SENCO sweat a bit.

[hoxtonbabe]

Thats just it, no matter how one looks at this they are screwed...giving him detentions for not fully understanding the work is simply not on, and now saying it is to support him with his work, then it should not be held after school when the chiild in question has a statement with additional hours written into it! crafty toads!

If my appeal is not sucessful and I can prove they have lied about certain things that the panel took into account when coming to their decision, I can get it back in. For a start the SENCO said my son was getting extra support in ICT and History with an LSA for him in the class, this was part of her evidence, he is already struglling in most subjects, and yet this so called support that should have been in place has not been put in, I realise that particular support is not written into the statement, but they school said this is what he would be getting upon year 10, he has not had squat diddly, then we have this new one of keeping him behind, she said he has a fiddle toy to keep in less distracted, I knew darn well he did not have this, but I double checked with him and he said no way have they ever provided him with such a thing, so another thing they lied about. they said all their LSA are trained in SLT, yet in the same breath she says they are trainee teachers, so they are just getting to grips with being in a school, and somehow they are highly skilled with SLT impairments also...yeah right! Even one of the panel members looked at her as if she was crazy

[Veritate]

Just wondering why you say that particular support is not written into the statement? That is precisely what is supposed to happen. If the school allegedly has an LSA for him, then they are acknowledging that that is what he needs, and really if they are ordered to issue a statement you have a good case for insisting on that.

[hoxtonbabe]

There was an issue about his class size, and the LSA support regarding those 2 specific classes/subjects and should now be written in his statement for it to really stick. He has specified hours in his statement but the 2 subjects I mentioned is a seperate issue which technically will need to be written into the statement.....long story so may not be making much sense right now.

[auntevil]

Have you asked for the school's behaviour policy and homework policy?
Quite often you will find little nuggets of 'misuse' to throw back at them.
4/10 doesn't sound bad to me - not an excuse for staying after school.

[hoxtonbabe]

Aunt evil (lol, that name makes me chuckle)

I have not gone into the nuts and bolts of the behaviour or homework policy as it is irrelevant in this circumstance, the issue is he didn't do so well with the work (not that he did not do it, or he was rude or misbehaving), he did not fully understand it, and the school need to be making reasonable adjustments as he has a statmentent.

From what I saw on their policy it does not say anything about forcing the boys to stay behind but I know this is something they do and expect parents to follow, BUT what the school seem to be forgetting is that my son has a statement, and that changes things slightly, as he has the statement as we all know and agree he will struggle without the support, although I am sure on Monday the headteacher will send me another one of his rude replies, with some nonense about the rules and policy, and send me something, overlooking the fact that if/when this gets to court (again) the first thing the judge will ask is "well why are you forcing him to stay behind when he has a statement with specified support hours?"

If they can not make the adjustments to allow him to get the support in school/class, then they need to fess up and say they cant meet his needs, but they can't have it both ways by saying we can meet his needs, but when he needs help, he will have to stay after shcool to give him the help, it defeats the object of the statement.

[auntevil]

I have looked carefully at a lot of the school's policy where DS goes. Quite often it mentions SEN/SN in policies other than discrimination and SEN policy.
Quite often ime, behaviour policies have 'clauses' in them that say whilst every child is subject to the same behaviour policies, that there are reasonable adaptations that should be made to take into consideration the level of understanding.
It's always handy to have copies of all the policies that might apply as it always looks so much better when you write to complain when you can quote where school policy has not been followed.
It's always the rule of thumb with any kind of officious organisation. People and personality/circumstance don't win arguments, failure to follow procedure has them running. It always stinks of poor training and management.
The very fact that the HT will send you a rules and regs type reply shows that this is the type of management that you are dealing with. Play them (because I'm sure that they think it is a game of trying to outwit their 'opponents' ) at their own game. Quote letter of the law. it's the only thing that they care about.

[hoxtonbabe]

Cheers AuntEvil, you are right. The latest has been they have decided to drag my son into this by saying "you do realise the work support/detention is not negoiatable" why are they burdening him with this, so now he is getting peeved off with it all.

They have given him a detention on thursday for talking in assembly (even though they placed him next to a boy that distracts my son and vice versa) , I have told my son that if they try to give him any "work support" he is to keep note and tell me, as I have a funny feeling what they will now start doing is giving him regular detentions but really doing the work support, which they should be doing in class...eitehr way, if he suddenly gets lots of detentions I will be questioning them.

[auntevil]

Sounds suspiciously like that's when they have the staffing to cover the work support!