Dd has a statement of SEN (our LEA is well behind the timescales for transfer to EHCP and so dd's statement is unlikely to transfer until y11) and is in y9.
Dd's statement is a decent statement and specifies the need for extra time in all assessments because she has processing difficulties and her recording speed is slow.
I was led to believe that extra time in all assessments would provide evidence of need for her GCSEs and up until this year's exams she has received extra time, been seated with a TA outside of the exam hall etc.
When I asked about the arrangements for this year's exams I was told by the SENCo that dd reporting she hadn't finished would be sufficient and so she wouldn't be receiving extra time.
I would argue that she should receive the provision in her statement, that the extra time would mean a better assessment of her abilities which in turn would protect her self esteem and if I push the point then she will get the extra time.
What I want to know though should I have to do this? Shouldn't the extra time be a given because of the provision in her statement and is that really true that it is sufficient that dd just reports she ran out of time? This is problematic in itself in non essay based exams as dd works through the paper doing the ones she finds easiest first and so might well complete the last question on her first sweep of the paper. Wouldn't this perhaps be used to indicate she had in fact finished?
The other question I have is dd should have been sitting the higher tier exam papers (as she is predicted 7 to 9 in GCSE). Due to some incompetence in Learning Support mix up she has sat foundation papers and so has to re sit. Is it reasonable to expect that the re sits are sat over the course of the week like they would have been rather than pushed into gaps in her timetable as the SENCo suggests? The gaps have other purposes again detailed in her statement and so not free periods like the SENCo implies.