I cannot stand how shocked and outraged I am!!!!

[MoonlightMcKenzie]

I'm sorry I have mentioned this on another thread but my ds, diagnosed with HFA two weeks ago, known to the Autism service and preschool for 4 weeks has just had the education section added for his proposed statement.

It says:

'National Curriculum to be modified for pace and progress'.

Well they can fuckity fuck the fuck off. I EXPECT them to be falling over themselves to ensure that pace and progress is as fast as everyone elses. Yes it means hard work, yes it probably means intensity and resources. Could this be what is meant - no, - not if you read the rest of the report that is full of factual inaccuracies. He's not even 3 ffs, and it will be reviewed in 6 months time so this isn't set in stone. How DARE they have such low expectations of him at this time.

[magso]

Don't suppose it means they expect him to be talented/ advanced in some subjects and less quick in others?

[sodit]

agree with magso, i have had iep's for kids (teacher many moons ago) who are on the gifted and talented list with the same sort of wording. People forget special needs are different needs not just for those falling behind so they all have to be taken into account.

[MoonlightMcKenzie]

I don't actually mind pace and progress as words, - I suppose I am seeing them in the context of the general attitude of LA staff who have told me my expectations of ds are too high.

I suppose it does make sense to suggest that his pace and progress at imaginary play will be slower than building blocks.

But for that line to be the ONLY one under the national curriculum.? Perhaps it is because I have a problem with the author though.

Thanks for your perspectives. I'm a bit calmer.

[ChopsTheDuck]

I think its quite standard tbh. Teachers have to modify the curriculum according to pace and progress for every child to some degree, inc those who are nt.

I can imagine what it oculd sound like in the context of a generally crap approach though.

Is he teacher very good? I find it seems to vary hugely between different teachers as to preconceptions and expectations.

[MoonlightMcKenzie]

It's only preschool, but the relationship between me and them wasn't the best (because the professionals warned them about me) but is getting better.

The leader and 1:1 came bounding up to me today excited because ds has made huge progress on a target that I set for him at preschool to compliment the work we are doing at home. They had to disregard the 'expert's' target to do it so it's tough on them being caught in the middle, but they seem to be keen to work more with me than blunt weirdo 'experts' who appear to know nuffing and who patronise them and me.

[flyingmum]

Moonlight, what else do you expect them to put. They can't go into detail. he isn't at the literacy and numeracy target. Virtually every statement has a sentence like this on it. It is wide because the curriculum is vast. He's only little. He hasn't really got to the curriculum and this is a document that has to last him for a long time. Don't sweat the small stuff so much. It's not an indicator of low expectations. If he is autistic he is not going to get certain things at the same speed as another child who isn't. Likewise some things he might well do more quickly than a child who isn't autisic. The phraseology of a statemnt - particularly one issued to such a young child has to be wide. My son's first statement under 'what can the child do' section 'X can play with sand, water and paint'. It really riled me at the time but they couldn't put that he could tell the time at aged 4 and could count to 20 in French and knew his alphabet and was reading basic words because he wouldn't have got the statement so easily. The thing is until you get any child in a classroom you just can't tell. You'd be shouting if the curriculum wasn't modified at all. I don't think there is any implication that people have low expectations of your child and I know it is pissoffing because I am in that situation with my eldest who isn't achieving what he could because he is not being pushed but then if he were pushed he would be very very anxious and not achieving at all because it sends him more autistic.

[MoonlightMcKenzie]

LOL, - thanks.

The author of this particular report has told me that my ds has no chance of catching up with his peers because they are on a steep learning curve, and I need to have realistic expectations, and 3 hours play therapy is the maximum they can offer and sufficient.

I think I'm probably annoyed because of the context and the person.

I do however, feel that more specific input could have been mentioned though. I.e. NC indicated free play, - which is totally inappropriate for autistic children. They could have mentioned that at least. Or after 20 mins ds to be offered a choice of two alterative activities to move him on and widen his experiences. That is what I would have written anyhow.

[lou031205]

OK, the phrase isn't specific. But the intention is that they will modify the NC to match your son. He has barely been exposed to pre-school, so who knows what his potential is? And free play isn't totally inappropriate for all autistic children. Free play can be modified, also. DD has a 1:1 who helps her to choose activities within free play, and encourages her to stick with them using a sand timer.

[daisy5678]

I actually think that you will have a nervous breakdown if you continue with this intensity. Fight, fight, fight - but please please pick your battles. I'm not saying this warning flippantly: it nearly happened to me and I had to ease off, probably around the time of trying to get the first Statement in place. Use your anger and passion usefully - if you throw it at every little detail, you will not keep up the energy for this fight.

I don't read that as having low expectation of him, tbh. I think it's good that they recognise that the NC will need to be modified, which it will, however bright he might be. J's NC is not in need of modification and differentiation according to that section of the Statement, though it bloody well should be.

Differentiation does not mean 'expect crap work'. I think you're over-thinking this and you cannot expect any more detail than that until he starts the NC!

Not trying to be patronising, but I wish someone had reminded me to pick my battles when I was first starting out. If I'd lost the plot, I would have been screwed, as would you. DS needs you fighting for him on things that a) matter - i.e. provision or what will drastically affect provision and b) are winnable. He doesn't need you stressed and angry and spitting and complaining about any other details.

[FranklyIDontGiveAMam]

'Differentiation does not mean 'expect crap work''

Nope, - but the IEP written by this same person does.

Thank you everyone. I'm refocussed. This thread was started after having opened the 3rd piece of unfriendly post.

It's horrible reading the reports isn't it?

[madwomanintheattic]

lol frankly, i had an hour like this yesterday. school called me and said 'we would like to refer dd1 to the provincial programme for gifted children, but we need your approval for her to be assessed.'
me:' are you sure you mean dd1? only, of course i think all my children are obviously brilliant but, um, dd1 is the only one of the three that wasn't on the g&t list in the uk. she's bright and all, but...' (tails off)

school: 'oh yes, mrs madwoman. we do know that dd2 is exceptionally able, but they have to be able across the board and dd2 can't write.'

dd2 has cp. clearly, however bright she is, and however well she can type, she won't be able to access the able kids programme here, whereas her nt sister (who is a darling, and the kindest most loveliest child, but nowhere near as switched on as her brother or sister) can.



tis enormously frustrating.

all i would say, is, dd2's 1-1 was very useful in our school in the uk. she was statemented for her physical difficulties, but having the 1-1 meant that her work was automatically differentiated, which allowed her to move at a much faster pace (figuratively rather than literally lol) than her peers.

[ouryve]

Moonlight, my DS's statements have words along the lines of adapting the curriculum to their needs and modifying the delivery. If you are intent on fighting this corner, perhaps this is the sort of wording you should be fighting for.

As it's turned out, DS1, in year 1 is up with the rest of his class, now on things like PHSE and ahead on literacy and numeracy, like up to year 3 expectations in many strands of those areas. The wording is perfect, because his Y1 teacher has leanred that he has low tolerance for carpet time with the rest of hs class unless they're using the interactive whiteboard and just guves him extra maths worksheets to get on with when they're doing whole class numeracy because he is so far ahead that he's not motivated to work against his aversion to carpet time to join in. What she is doing is true to his statement in every way and far from writing him off because he throws a huge screaming fit if expected to join in with his peers. It meets his needs.