To be HORRIFIED by this school's actions to become an Academy

[diaimchlo]

Came across this: www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/midlands-news/probe-launched-after-30-pupils-11128470

If this is the lengths that schools will go to to achieve Academy status I fear for children's education in general and the discrimination of those who have been diagnosed with disabling conditions especially with all the cuts that this Government have put in place.

SEND was an issue in Swedish Free Schools and one of the things cut back on in order for chains to make a profit.

It's going to be a good period to be an education lawyer.

It doesn't surprise me.
BEWARE - rant coming!

DS started aan academy secondary in September. Was on 15.5 hours basic support plus extra when needed. Academy senco woukdnt even attend non statutory statement transition meetings. In fact woukdnt acknowledge DS needs at all.
Changed his Sen needs within 2 weeks of him starting. Wouldn't discuss etc. Just kept answering with sales pitch about what they do - avoiding firect questions about specific targeted support and monitoring and recording for DS.
Then offered some of the support needed - after school. So when everyone else had gone home/was at clubs.
Finally agreed to do it in school time.
Told me he was having an intervention. When I emailed to ask what it was and outcomes etc so I could support it at home/when doing homework they suddenly emailed back "we noted DS needs support with X so we will cut current intervention he has for an hour to 40 minutes and do other one for that 20 minutes".
Everything is worded in a way that I look unreasonable if I disagree.
First meeting for review senco was an absolute bitch to me. When I mentioned an incident, sad DS wasn't upset by it but return to previous behaviours we'd got him out of, she replied by saying I was lying and she'd prove me wrong with CCTV. She also called me anxious in response to any direct questions and threw a piece of paper back at me when I asked her opinion on it.
I decided to go for EHCP as DS has regressed badly and it's clear MS isn't the best place for him.
She didn't return the form on time - in fact still hadn't sent it when I asked why I'd not had a decision 5 days after the decision deadline. She didn't meet. The original deadline and the use of language to describe DS was insulting and no way professional.

What i don't understand is when I said I was applying for EHCP they couldn't ask me quick enough if I'd found an alternative school! So why continue her obvious dislike for me (no one knows why!) and make it harder to move DS?!

They've up their game on starting to work towards excluding DS though. But they aren't very bright!
They've sent me an email of an incident, naming the 2 pupils involved, going in and on and on! about how the other students didn't want DS to get a detention but they had to give him one because he used his feet. (Kicked someone).
They've brushed passed and barely acknowledged the fact that yes he did, yes he's wrong - but he kicks the pupil who was holding his arms and pinning them down. Ds is autistic and has sensory processing difficulties re touch.

Oh and they said he has to attend touch typing after school. He's been doing it at school club since he started. But because he does drama he hasn't attended the touch typing 6 week programme and was told last week they will take his laptop away if he doesn't attend the next one.

They clearly have NEVER heard or disability discrimination. Or they don't give a shite

Reading all these posts justifies me feeling horrified. My empathy goes out to all the posters who are in the positions of having to fight for everything their little one's need to be able to lead a fulfilling and independent lifestyle.

The school my GCs attend is so obviously going towards being an Academy, a lot of the parents are scared for their children's futures. When they approach the school regarding their children being diagnosed as being on the Autism spectrum they are told that the consultant has a history of over diagnosing and that their child is not Autistic at all. To one parent the said they didn't have Senco and yet another parent they said they had.

dia ds school advertise specialising in ASD on local offer. Their issue is that they have experience and I shouldn't be involved in what they provide. Except they aren't providing what he needs and therefore he's regressed. Except they say I'm lying and he's fine.
Oh and the school with supposed expertise in ASD wrote on EHCP form "it's fair to say miniyouare is socially immature and he does sulk and storm off when he doesn't get his own way".
Ok, technically the description is true!
But ..... "Miniyouare has a dx of ASD. Therefore he's functioning below his chronological age socially. This causes him to misunderstand situations and can get frustrated quickly when he can't get his needs met or communicate his needs. He gets so overwhelmed that he usually walks away quickly or becomes so distressed he runs off and hides. This results in him needing a higher than usually provided for a child that age staff input to his school day".

But the issue is they won't admit his behaviour is a fleet ion of their actions and would rather describe him as a brat!

I don't think this is a problem about acadamisation per se.

Pre-acadamisation I was, very pointedly, asked if I wanted to keep my DC at the current Primary, on receiving a Statement of SEN. The Statement came with plenty of funding, enough for a full time 1 to 1, too. However I had already named the school on the paperwork, it was local and my child had settled there. Tbh I did not see why my DC should be ousted from the local school.

Despite the 'concerns' voiced my DC stayed and guess what? The dedicated TA was often redeployed to cater for other children's (often conflicting) additional needs. In class my DC was always placed in a group (supposedly by ability) where all the children had some significant additional need or other (I knew their parents). These parents were told the TA was there to help their children, I kept quiet at the time as this was very telling information. It was especially galling when in year 4 my DC was given reading books at the same level as they were given in reception. My DC's group were also told they did not have to do the same reading assessments as the rest of the class. They were reading books below what would be expected for their age. For context my DC could read well, had no problem understanding texts either. My DC could read on school entry and now is attaining above average in English at secondary.

Despite all this, my DC was able to overcome any more challenging difficulties and I helped ensure the Statement was ceased. The upshot was, that it was only when it was ceased, that my DC's attainment came on leaps and bounds, probably as, at last, it was not being 'managed' in order to keep the additional funding. (Funnily enough my DC did a reading assessment, not long after the Statement was ceased and achieved above average.)

Nibs just remembered that when old HT joined ds current school it was maintained. She made the papers for the number of exclusions she made.
Then they became an academy.

Going against the grain here, but becoming an academy is the best thing ever for my asc daughter. She has come forward 2 school years in under 6 months. I am overwhelmed with the amount of support her new academy gives her. It's like private education.

It was the new funding formula for additional needs that even allowed us to challenged what additional support my DC actually received. Before this, support did not have to be quantified, which meant a school was not really held as accountable with regard to the support they actually provided, for the additional funds received, in order to meet a child's needs.

Sadly this extra accountability seems to mean schools are excluding. Children with additional needs and a funded Statement or ECHP, no longer come with the incentive of additional funding which the school can do what it likes with.

I'm wary of trusting anything in that article, as mentioned above it is only-one sided. It is not easy to PEX a child...

One of the main problems is that the Academy may get a lot of support for the exclusions from parents of children without disabilities or behavioural issues.
'I'd be glad to see the back of him' was the feeling among several parents at my son's primary school.

I have no doubt other parents want to support the exclusion of disruptive children, but this is not only in academies, and is very unlikely to influence the school's decision.

Is there any data or research that suggests academies are excluding more than LA schools? Many schools strongly avoid exclusions, as a high level will prompt a visit from Ofsted. Sometimes, if a failing school has become an academy, the new leadership have to take fairly drastic action early on, otherwise the school will not improve and all children will suffer.

In my opinion, there are too many children with complex issues coming up from primary school, whose behaviour hasn't been challenged or investigated, who cannot cope in a mainstream secondary where the environment and routine is totally different. I'm talking more about serious behaviour issues, SEMH and children with attachment disorder specifically. Unfortunately, it is not always easy to get an EHCP/statement which is what these children often need. I've seen countless children make it just months into year 7, racking up a long list of fixed term exclusions before being permanently excluded. They they usually end up in alternative/specialist provision where they thrive. I do wonder whether if strongly action was taken when these children were in primary, whether the outcome for that individual would be better.

Personally, informed by the experiences I have outlined above, I think one of the more pertinent issues is often not so much about making special provision for individual pupils as it is about making mainstream education more like nclusive for those with additional needs.

There are a lot of reasonable no cost adjustments which can be done but all too often schools refuse to do. Examples are allowing easily fastened shoes onto the uniform list - no need for special exceptions then for those with fine motor skills problems. In primary, allowing children to sit on seats for story time for example when there are hypermobility issues. Not expecting children to wait in line until everyone is still and silent before they are allowed into class - very difficult for those with concentration issues. Allowing children to go to the toilet when they request it....etc etc

^ inclusive. Typo.

apple my DS left juniors receiving 15.5 hours targeted support a week. This wasn't all 1:1 but was small group/nurture unit based as well.
He started secondary and doesn't get this. He hasn't changed. His needs haven't changed. The attitude of the school towards him and me has changed from what they sold to what they give.

I may be cynical but I suspect they sell anything to get bums on seats - they currently only have 650 odd pupils and can take 1000.

Youarentkiddingme I think you are right! I was referring more to the children whose behaviour (whether down to SEN or not) warranted exclusion.

I do find it frustrating that everything is chucked at the anti-academisation bandwagon, when it is often not the real issues. These problems have been around much longer, and many many academies are doing a fantastic job and really improving outcomes across the board.

Sadly this happens all too often and I expect it is likely to increase.
Ds's school who were apparently 'fully inclusive' decided that they didn't want ds there (ASD). I later obtained records that showed they were trying to get rid of him.
There were a large number of illegal exclusions before they engineered an incident that led to his permanent exclusion. When we complained we were threatened with 'legal action' for daring to imply that they had acted inappropriately. They later withdrew the permanent exclusion but refused to have him back so in effect still permanently excluding but not showing it on their records
They were subsequently found to have committed multiple accounts of discrimination against ds who has been badly affected by his experience there. Ofsted however considered them to be 'outstanding' and they have now become an academy. It stinks but these people can do what they like as they are accountable to nobody. I am glad that ds will be out of education altogether soon.

notsurprisedbythis DS was assessed by a leading paediatrician a few weeks back as his anxiety levels are extreme even by the standards expected with autism. She said that his time at this Outstanding academy - which was only 8 months - caused his brain to re-adjust in terms of levels of stress hormones, similarly to someone with PTSD, and that we need to work concertedly to reduce all forms of stress on him so his brain can recalibrate at a more normal level now he is in a safe environment. I can't tell you how that feels, to be told your child has some of the symptoms of PTSD because of a school you chose for him, and which OFSTED raved about. Their report admiringly says it is a school "where excellence is the norm" and that it is "superbly led". All these damaged little people tell a markedly different story.