Daughter being excluded from prom

Well, what the OP has admitted is not surely the issue? Parents don't get a lot of choice especially parents of send. They have to agree to most things.
There a confusion right there in your post between ' didn't deserve to' and ' couldn't possibly attend safely' which is running right through this discussion. They are not the same thing. A school can conduct a risk assessment of any particular pupil attending a prom. If safety is genuinely at risk then have measures to mitigate it or exclude. No one wants people's safety at risk.
I'm saying that with this particular thing - proms- schools shouldn't be deciding who ' deserves ' it.

At the end of the day, we’re looking at a borderline case here. The OP has admitted that her daughter’s obstructive behaviour 18 months ago meant she didn’t deserve to attend the prom then. From the school’s perspective and for other students’ safety, you can’t assume someone who was seriously disruptive and a risk will suddenly behave well. You argue the school should give her an automatic pass simply because the prom is important to her, but what if she acts the same way again? Can you really give that guarantee? Of course, the school might be wrong, and she might genuinely have changed. But does she have third-party evidence, such as a letter from a doctor, supporting her situation? So this is all about probability, not certainty. I don’t think it’s a clear-cut case you are suggesting.

Again. I'm afraid you're making this all about you and your experience. Which is bad but sounds very different to the OP. I know we all do that but you're really stretching to extend vast amounts of what you've been through, which the OP appears not to.

Can you not see that?

If you stop extrapolating and actually go with what is said, it's actually not very indicative of any bad actions on the part of the school. In fact, it's more indicative of an awful lot of patience.

If you have ever attended meetings for a SEN child you would understand how little movement and how utterly frustrating and depressing it is to go to meetings. Discuss all the unmet needs and the impact both short and long term for that person.
BUT nothing changes, nothing improves, any adjustments can take so long to be implemented and then if they are helping and child starts to thrive - the adjustments are removed to see if they are still needed - back to square one wait and see if the become resilient we will wait and see if we need to reinstate the adjustments
AND several more meetings are needed and they will want to retry all the things that don't work before they will even consider reinstating the one thing that has.

Then by the time they do reinstate it is no longer effective as pupil has lost so much ground and confidence. BUT this worked so even know it isn't working now we have to give it longer and wait and see.

We do not know the ins and outs of this case. We all respond based on how we interpret the OP post and with our own experience

Punishment at this stage is only going to negatively impact the pupil being able to focus and do well with GCSEs it's not going to improve behaviour in school now as they have nothing to aim for.
It's not realistically going to make a positive difference long term as it's not like a prom happens again and next time a pupil will adjust behaviour if they can.

Their are no consequences to schools or the LA for continuing to not support SEN needs. Those consequences are only impacting the pupil and family.
Where are the LA being punished for their failures to support?

The other kids know who has disrupted their lessons for years! They've had to sit quietly and politely waiting for them to stop mouthing of or squaring up to the teacher. They've had to keep working while these kids storm out or blunder in, and then refuse to get their work out, or refuse to remove their coat. They've had to sit and wait for the lesson to take place while the teacher calls for slt back up and hands the dksrupter over. They've had to wait while the teacher talks to whoever they've sent out in the corridor. They know for sure. Their time in school has been impacted by them for years. They know.

Everyone knows who isn't going to prom. The kids who aren't invited shout it from the roof.

Disproportionately affects girls how?

The poor behaviour will have been repeatedly addressed in school, hence discussions of PRU for the OP. Ime kids banned from prom have a raft of FTEs and other in school consequences. This is a final NO to them. Again it's 1-2% per year so 2-3 children in your average secondary. Those children don't deserve to be there. They've made life awful for students and staff for 5 years.

You are assuming the other kids know. Who tells the other kids then? I mean- for your idea to work they'd have to be told. Is naming and shaming at the end of their school career party part of the deal?
So you are acknowledging it a ' big consequence' and it's mainly about staff morale? Rather than being ' a lesson' for that child's benefit? And when I said it's some kind of mad ' gocha' I was told off. A previous poster squarely denounced me for thinking such a thing?
You are confused as to why it's happening. It disproportionately affects girls but punishing them by not inviting them to an ending party is unacceptable for any pupil who isn't a serious risk in that situation. The poor behaviour has gone on for 5 years and was never addressed and teachers only feel it's being addressed if a pupil can't go to a party? That is the definition of a weak SLT.

But again. If she was getting repeated behavioural points for a medical condition with a weak bladder, which has not been shared by the OP, don't you think the OP might have raised something earlier with the school?

And if the child has a pass but is choosing to "appear like a rebel" instead, then that's how she's being treated.

Again. Even if it's either of those scenarios, wouldn't you, as a parent, seeing all of these behaviour points coming in, have called up school to understand why she's getting so many points for this? Rather than wait till she can't go to the prom?

Not necessarily.. we had medical evidence but schools wanted to wait and see how they managed first before issuing a pass.

Also a pass in it self can be a barrier with the pupil not wanting peers to know they have a pass. Having to show this in front of everyone can be mortifying for teens.
Walking out makes you look like a rebel - which for many is better than looking like a dweeb with a small bladder pass

But what is stopping the parent employing that gentle 1:1 ta approach at home?

Why is school being expected to do everything. If you know your child is struggling at school and it's a simple as spending a Bit of time 1:1 with them each day why wouldn't you do this at home as a parent?
This also has the advantage that the child doesn't miss more of what's happening in class. Time spent with a TA 1:1 is time missing the lesson the rest of the class are participating in which results in more gaps /areas the child is a bit behind in.

People seem to think it's dead easy to catch a child up who's struggling but if it was as easy as you think schools would not have the issues they do. It's already very common practice to do small group interventions regularly with the children who are a bit behind, 1:1 with all the children struggling a tiny bit would be incredibly costly as its usually about 20% of the class who struggle!

But if the decision was justified, why should the school go back on it?

I think the OP is just looking for practical advice on how to appeal the prom exclusion, rather than wanting people to question if the decision was justified in the first place. You are right that she might be being vague on purpose. As such, any analysis here is strictly hypothetical, as none of us participating in the discussion actually know the real truth.

The way the OP put it is very vague. One of the things was ‘reminders’. From experience that won’t be reminding her to bring a pen (that would usually be called something like ‘missing equipment’), it’ll be reminders about basic behaviour more than likely. OP has been asked this and hasn’t elaborated - therefore I’m assuming the vagueness is to make everyone think it’s minor things when it isn’t.

The way the OP put it makes it seem like minor issues, such as uniforms or toilet breaks. Without further evidence, we just have to take the OP’s word for it. The OP also admits that her daughter’s behaviour 18 months ago warranted a sanction regarding the prom, but she claims the girl has improved significantly and now only faces minor issues. Again, we are just taking her word for it. There isn’t much else to comment on.

Everyone is still assuming going to the toilet without permission is because she needs the toilet. Teachers and other school staff keep telling you that when it crops up on behaviour charts it’s usually not. It’s a pattern of behaviour where the child says they need the toilet but actually want to wander about/meet friends/potential worse, like vandalism or bullying. Nobody gets massive amounts of behaviour points for occasionally needing a wee in lesson time. The issue with regard to prom, as Jas been said many times, is that if she tends to wander off without permission it becomes a safeguarding issue in a public place.

Edit: you and others are also assuming the points system hasn’t already been adjusted for her needs.

"For behaviours beyond a child’s physical control, like needing the toilet unexpectedly, those should not be counted against them or should be dealt with more flexibly"

If this were true, the daughter would have a reasonable adjustment I.e. a toilet pass given to her.

With young people there is not always a clear distinction between punishment and reward. One thing can be both a reward for those who behave and a sanction or punishment for those who do not behave. Human behaviour and attempts to control it are often a mix of push and pull.

Before prom we had (and still have) end of year trips to theme parks, year 6 often have end of year trips to outward bound centres, there were a range of activities. However, these have stopped in many cases because schools couldn’t choose who goes. Many of the more exciting activities were slowly dropped as burnout teachers couldn’t be bothered fighting with parents whose children couldn’t behave at school but could absolutely be trusted on (for example) a cross channel ferry.
Parents who only have to manage the behaviour of one or two children see things like going to the toilet and not being supervised as a small thing while it fills teachers with cold dread. So the events stop.
Also, this event which is voluntary and meant as a treat becomes yet another way to criticise teachers, giving up your own time, effort, caring and money isn’t enough. If you don’t organise to the exacting standards of every parent you are bully who lacks professionalism. So the treats stop.
Threads like this are straws on the camels back that are shrinking the world of schools, it’s everything done perfectly or nothing at all. Enjoy your nothing.

This is just what the adults are telling themselves. It's an ending it's a important cultural ritual it's a method of transition a mark if development. There's no going back if you are barred. You might not see that but there are precious few of these type of things nowadays.

"Parents should teach their children to view it as a proper lesson",
Adults setting up a farewell party with the intention of not inviting people?
But there's no follow up? It's more like a kind of ghosting?

No way I'd be explaining that to my distraught autistic daughter if I were the OP. If she were likely to injure someone/ subject to some kind of serous risk assessment it'd be different obviously. If school.were nervous she'd leave unexpectedly I would offer to support the school by remaining there on hand. The rest I don't believe in it I don't really even like the concept of proms much - never having had to do all that myself- if what I do believe is it's inappropriate use of power, adults deliberately choosing to leave 15 year olds out of a party why would I trot all that out. It's nonsense. I'm.astonished at this whole idea.

@Warmlight1
Actually, I think the real issue lies with the behaviour points system itself. The main problem is that it doesn’t include reasonable adjustments for SEN students. For behaviours beyond a child’s physical control, like needing the toilet unexpectedly, those should not be counted against them or should be dealt with more flexibly.

If those kinds of points were adjusted properly, her score would probably reach the 90% threshold, she could attend the prom, and there would be no problem at all.

When did an adult ever say I'm glad I was excluded from the prom it really taught me a lesson? @Warmlight1

No one llikes to be punished or sanctioned, whatever you call it. But that doesn't mean it can't be beneficial when looking back years later. How you frame this punishment in context is crucial. Parents should teach their children to view it as a proper lesson, rather than feeling mistreated by the school and growing resentful, which I worry that the OP tends to do.

much more focus on meeting needs.

True, but we also have to consider the needs of other students, especially the need not to be distracted by kids with behavioral issues.

Yes I do support that. But why do schools need me to suggest an alternative? Why can't they just do the things they did before there were proms as incentives? People on this thread are even confused as to whether it's a punishment or a sanction. Goodness knows how the kids see it. It's bizarre We are in this situation. We are back to the idea that this as a sanction has come to be seen as meaningful for kids when it's actually probably not. When did an adult ever say I'm glad I was excluded from the prom it really taught me a lesson?
I think you've made your own argument. Something she really cares about. Really wanting to be at a prom is sold to girls by our culture- US culture predominately-: as an idea, as hype. Being socially excluded is used more with girls. ( I read that somewhere)- bullying is also heavily tied up with social exclusion. The sanction would disproportionately affect girls which is another thing. Are schools struggling with girls more than boys?
I'd also concur with the other poster who is saying there needs to be much more focus on meeting needs. Taking a girl who is making progress and doing that to her just bespeaks a lack of responsible relationship

Most consequences used in school are social exclusion, missing break time, missing lunchtime, excluded from trips.

Do you agree that kids' bad behavior should be punished to some degree, and that this is also good for their own development? Unless you believe the behavior points system is deeply flawed, punishment based on such points shouldn’t be a problem.

The thing is, there should be some form of punishment to let the girl know that bad behavior has consequences — something she cares about, but not something essential to her education. So some might think prom is a suitable choice.

Whether prom exclusion is an appropriate punishment is debatable. Personally, I don’t have a strong opinion either for or against that. But if you’re truly against it, you should support a national ban on schools using prom as a punishment tool and offer a good alternative.

The OP post child was not on a behaviour plan.
Generally children are excluded from all sorts of things. If incentives are offered such as - eg tea with the head or a special trip out with peers who are excelling- or certificates- not all children could expect that. But the possibility is still there throughout their school life.
I've already said there should be red lines for safety etc. making a distinction between what a child is likely to do in a prom which actually affects their safety or that of others. Those things should be risk assessed. A child who has epilepsy- you'd liaise with the parent/ have staff awareness- if strobe lighting affected them you might dispense with it. A child who has meltdowns- likely to be very specific circumstances and you'd know what they were. A child who bullies- you've often years of experience and opportunities to deal with and challenge- so it'd be very strange to suddenly start dealing with it at 15 and over that particular thing. What would you be trying to achieve that wasn't possible before? If you let go of the idea schools are dispensing justice through the prom you will realise the only good reason to exclude is actual safety in that event. Some of what you describe might come under that. Are they likely to deal drugs? Not a good idea. Shoplifting? Judgement call- is it going to manifest in the prom? Unlikely. Aggression to staff? Is it likely to occur? Not a good idea then. Going to the toilet?
They will all be doing that. Uniform- non issue.

And teachers complaining about children in their classes or parents complaining about their child education being disrupted by SEN pupils, people complaining about SEN kids costing too much money is not pushing their own situation?

🤔

Interestingly I really didn't want to bring personal examples into the thread but people didn't seem to think beyond their own narrow viewpoint. People also actually stated that x y z wouldn't happen so yes I used personal experience from my family and from others I know

But now that isn't relevant