Progress 8 - less focus on C/D borderline and consequences for grade 4 students

I am fuming. I am going to quote noblegiraffe from above
"With intervention, I suppose it depends on whether you see some students getting intervention as a positive for those students, or a negative for the others who don't get it."

I have now seen NG on a different thread this morning claiming that "My DS has been assessed by an OT ... We were given exercises to do at home and they also saw him in school and made suggestions for adjustments (school also have put a program in place for him, he is taken out to do some motor skills work each week)."

So she likes it when her DS gets extra support but gets annoyed when she is expected to do the same for other peoples' DC and was very sneering to a another teacher who did make the effort.
I know that it is considered bad form on MN to 'stalk' from one thread to another but I couldn't let this breath-taking hypocrisy lie.

Training on SEN really is minimal, please don't blame teachers for not spotting something that it takes professionals to diagnose.

I try to teach classes as though all the students have special needs, my PowerPoints are usually plain blue with sans serif text, unless I have a student who needs a different colour or font, then the slides will be for that student's preference (not yet had two students wanting different colour backgrounds but I'm assuming I will at some point).

My handouts have all the essential information in, or gaps for that information and I ensure they are filled before students leave.

Videos are subtitled if possible, if not then I try to get a transcript or at least a written summary.

Can you tell I'm dyslexic?

There is no reason all teachers cannot do this with their resources. You have to create them anyway so they might as well be inclusive.

It's not my job to diagnose, but it is my job to get my knowledge out of my head and in to the student's, along with the skills to analyse the information.

As for progress 8 - well teaching should be about enabling all students to reach their potential and giving them the skills to continue with the next stage of their life/education.

Unfortunately league tables, stats and various measures do not allow for this.

IDK

Yet these are the people who are the biggest supporters of Comprehensive education. You can't say that you want to include the whole spectrum but then say that you are not able to be on top of an issue (I repeat: in this case, that affects 20% of the cohort).

It's the autistic kids who are unable to participate in lessons that are most let down by the system. There are very few places in special schools available for them. They would be much better served in a specialised environment rather than the top 10% who are coping perfectly well in their top sets.

I think our SEN kids are fairly well catered for: tested for access arrangements, given TA support, time outs, extra time, separate seating, readers, scribes, laptops, blue paper, large fonts, etc. My DS was more let down at junior school than secondary.

I think IDK's son was failed by a grammar school......

With identifying SEN, I think it is very hard for secondary teachers because they only see a child for a few hours a fortnight, even at GCSE level. They don't get to see how the pupil is performing in other subjects. They don't see how hard they revise or try over their homework. So they may notice a disparity between engagement in class and written work or test results, but they won't be able to tell if that is due to a SpLD or idleness.

Only the parent (and only if engaged) can see a cross section, and can see issues appearing consistently across subjects.

I don't blame DD1's school for not picking up her SpLD earlier (though tbh I do think her English teacher took her eye off the ball), but I do massively appreciate the support she got from the English department once the effect it was having on her English Lang paper was recognised.

noble You missed out recognising signs of neglect or other abuse.

IDK - I repeat, my db was in a grammar school which wasn't on top of the issue of barriers to learning, despite excluding the majority of the spectrum. What on earth makes you think selective education would improve this issue? Would you rather your ds had been failed by a grammar school?

Who is going to pay for 20% of children to have a detailed assessment by an educational psychologist, possibly a developmental paediatrician, occupational therapist, psychiatrist, physiotherapist etc, etc?

Which makes it less easy, rather than more easy to identify, surely? If 1 in 5 kids has a special need, then how obvious is it going to be?

I give up.

IDK See what I mean when I say that the attitude still prevails!
Yes. Because it's that simple for the majority of children without additional needs. Intervention culture in some schools has gone mad. I've got friends who ring up parents to discuss little Timmy's performance and behaviour and are met with "but we think he has attention issues and he needs to be sat here in the class and what 1-1 are you offering him"... this is for a child who the teacher is saying isnt workinh in class. Why should they work extta hours for no pay?

Now if we want a discussion about funding and screening for SEND that's a totally different issue. Similar to children not being able to get mental health support because CAMHS has had funding slashed. I have massively struggled to get children refered for screening who i thibk need it. Its not a case that teachers cant be bothered. Services simply are pushed. I've done 6 refer forms this year.

On the flip side, we also meet parents who insist there are issues and in our judgement there aren't and actually telling the child endlessly that they have an 'undiagnosed issue' is more unhelpful.
I can think of a few times where parents pushed and pushed for assessments for an array of changing needs and my schools have had reservations about it, listened to the parents, got the children tested and qualified educational psychologists found nothing. No need at all. One parents then said they were annoyed at the assessment team coming in and it was "just unlucky" that a team of assessors couldnt see what the parent said was the issue. Came into parent evening and was right in my face about it.

ranging from the severely autistic who struggle to even get into class, to the A* students, plus everything in-between. It is simply impossible for them to be on top of every issue.

Yet these are the people who are the biggest supporters of Comprehensive education. You can't say that you want to include the whole spectrum but then say that you are not able to be on top of an issue (I repeat: in this case, that affects 20% of the cohort).

IDK My DS is the same - v bright but with dyslexia - scores all over the place, from very top to bottom 7% yet average at school and so no red flags. I have had similar battles. I used to feel the same way as you until I started working in schools and saw the reality. All the teachers I work with are extremely professional and hard working and they genuinely care about all their students but they are extremely over worked and have 100s of students to worry about, ranging from the severely autistic who struggle to even get into class, to the A* students, plus everything in-between. It is simply impossible for them to be on top of every issue.

Teachers teach loads of lazy arse kids who need to pull their finger out who don't have any SEN, so the one who does can be hard to spot.

Even when the parent flags up a problem?
It isn't "the one" anyway. SEN is somewhere between 10-20% of the cohort.

And if we all came out and told it how it is, there would be a massive domino effect.

And I don't just mean the off HT saying that resources are stretched. I mean come out and admit that we are, through no fault of our own, failing some children.

And it is, IMVHO, those 'middling' children that are most let down by the state system.

I have no doubt whatsoever that many well behaved, academically average kids who come out with a handful of Cs and maybe the odd B at GCSE could have achieved As in the independent sector simply because there would have been support and extension activities in place for them.

In recent years we have moved more towards breadth and extending sideways but by and large, extension and support exists only for those at either end of the attainment spectrum.

I'm assuming that the A/A kids get the taught lessons that they are entitled to and aren't just left in a corridor?*

Noble, but surely all the children were getting their allocated lessons and nobody was left in a corridor?

There is a prevailing ideology in state secondary schools that what little resources they have should be ploughed into ensuring a C for those who may just achieve it. Their reasoning wasn't just based on ensuring published data was acceptable but also a genuine belief that helping those kids to a C could be life changing by allowing them access to FE etc.

I don't disagree that the effect for those children is huge. I do disagree with the sentiment that it's no big deal in the wider scheme of things in Johnny gets an A rather than an A* or a B rather than an A. Because it's a big deal for Johnny. And if needs must and all that then why don't we have it in our literature? Why, as teachers working in the state sector, aren't we honest about the limitations.
One of the reasons I got out was after the fall out of a parents eve where I basically told some parents that there 'middling but superbly behaved and consistent try hard' children simply weren't reaching their potential in my class because virtually all my time was spent on either crowd control or trying to endure my low achievers left primary school with a L4. Of course they got attention. Of course I tried my best to stretch them but they could have done oh so much better with a bit more targeted support and adult direction.

Training on SEN really is minimal, please don't blame teachers for not spotting something that it takes professionals to diagnose.

I'm not a professional. As a total amateur, I spotted that something was not right. My concerns were ignored as pushy parenting.