NewlySingle - the IEP doesn’t have to be called an IEP. School do though have to provide a document that’s fit for purpose.
You should have a copy and be involved with the termly review. That way everyone can see what has been agreed. What’s worked or not.
It should reflect the current DC age or working age, what they can do now and short to medium goals. Always keeping in mind what you would like (if possible) for the end goal ie eat at table using knife and fork. So you would break that down into small manageable sections.
- Stay at table 2. Stay at table and eat agreed food with fingers. 3. Stay at table, eat agreed food with a spoon etc…
The same with educational, behavioural and social areas of difficulties.
One of the main problems in the educational bit is separating out the age related learning difficulties (what targets the average kid should be hitting at a given point) from the learning difficulties difficulty. So, is your kid not understanding because they have not hit a maturity level yet (ie young in year), or a general lower level of understanding or because of their SpLD / ASD.
Tricky, but not impossible to assess ie viva rather than written tests.
Clear English - no double negatives, no ‘feelings’ interpretation etc…
Lower level maths / physics is a corker for this. At GCSE and below, maths and physics can be very wordy. More like an English comprehension test. This disadvantages DC with SpLDs / ASD. I’m not sure how many teachers really appreciate this. Then the child can get pigeon holed into ‘not good at maths’. When perversely, this child then flys with higher level maths - if they get good grounding and are given the chance.