To be angry, and even a little bewildered on how to tackle this with the school?

[MaddyHatter]

DS has SN.. he has Autism, ADHD, Sensory Processing Disorder and Dyspraxia.... it makes for some very complex needs, a big one of which he CANNOT process emotion or self regulate and will go into a meltdown very suddenly.

One of the outcomes of him getting upset and frustrated and having a meltdown is that he lashes out during them, and can hurt the people near him. The school are aware of this, there are strategies in place to help him try to manage his feelings.

One of these strategies is the provision and freedom to go to a room called the Calm room, which is painted with calming colours and has cushions and bean bags...etc.

There was an incident today. Ds isnt having a good week and there is a piece of work he is flat refusing to do, and they keep trying to make him. Today they tried again and he began to get upset. The Learning Mentor tried to get him to go to her classroom to calm down, but his auditory processing issues meant he didn't understand and he thought she was going to try and make him do this work, and he lashed out.

He has been suspended, which i nominally support, even if i'm not happy, as in my eyes they're punishing him for part of his disability..

However, i asked DS why if he was getting angry, didn't he ask to use the Calm room (its right opposite his classroom) and he told me he wasnt allowed in there because some of the yr6 girls were using it as a PE changing room.

WTF?!?!

Now.. i appreciate at 10/11yo the girls may not wish to change in the classroom with the boys, and an alternative should be provided... but WHY THE FUCK are the school letting them use THE CALM ROOM which is there for children like my son to use as and when they need it?

I am so fucking angry... we spent AGES getting it through to him that he could remove himself from a situation and go to that room if he felt the need to help prevent him going into meltdown, and now, he has to check if its being used as a fucking changing room and isn't allowed in there if the girls belongings are... and has now ended up having a violent meltdown and hit a teacher and got suspended.

I just don't know how to tackle this or even where to start.

And who are you going to include and exclude?

Exclude those who can / are violent seems like a fair starting point. That isn't apportioning blame to anyone, least of all the child, but it seems like a reasonable stance. Children who's behaviour has a negative impact on other children, beyond what's reasonable. Don't jump on this using logical fallacies to mis-interpret me and say I'm advocating locking difficult people away and out of sight; that's not what I want for a second.

What about children whose educational needs can't be met in a specialist school?

And what about those who's emotional or mental needs can't be met in a regular school? Nearly every argument that explains how their needs can be met in a regualr school can be turned on its head and used to explain how their academic (I assume synonymous with 'educational' in this context) needs can be met in a specialist school.

Children who's behaviour has a negative impact on others beyond what is reasonable already do get moved from mainstream. There is already law regarding this.

I had a year 4 boy a lot like yours except he would hurt himself (mainly head butting walls) when it all got too much. It is very, very hard to explain to parents of children who don't struggle with these issues. I think the fact that it really affected my sons learning 'benefitted' him as school were really on to it at that age and he had 1:1 help. I never thought he'd go to 'big school' but he did and has done so much better than we ever thought possible. Hang on in there .

He has learned coping strategy on top of coping strategy but I did notice him doing some of his self settling hand wafts (along with a tell tale piece of super soft ribbon poking out of his pocket) at a big event we attended this week. (He is 16 now) Sometimes it makes your heart feel like bursting when they find the big wide world so much harder yet look 'normal' and people have such expectations of them.

One of the things I like about accommodating SEN children in mainstream schools is the way that the NT children see, understand, and develop acceptance of others who may need alternative or different ways to handle things. I think it's a bit of a shame if you think something unusual = interrupted learning. It's not really, is it? Unless of course you think the only useful lessons from school are on the curriculum.

OP, I do hope you get some positive action. It does seem rather like they made it impossible for him to manage, then punished him for not managing.

So, her sons private room was unavailable but another room was. The boy didn't like it or didn't understand and assaulted the teacher.

Precisely, *herecome". The school hadn't done its job in terms of a Plan B if the calm room wasn't available. Put that in succession to the chain of entirely avoidable events leading up to the meltdown, and it does tend to suggest he shouldn't be punished for the consequences of the school's failures.

I suspect the other classroom had a lot of windows which defeats the object of a private changing room.

Pure guesswork. I doubt that a learning mentor has the luxury of a large room with lots of windows. I suspect the other room had blinds or curtains, or they could very easily have been covered.

Why should one child's rights or entitlements override anothers'?

They don't override. Children get assistance to bring them to an equal level to others.

Either way, she is getting 1:1 teaching for a lot more than other students.

Why does that matter? Other students don't need that. Children with SEN need a TA just to help them keep up with what other students can keep up with anyway. If you think being taught by an unqualified TA is some sort of luxury, you can't know what a TA is.

I believe in inclusion when it's right for the child and adequately funded. On average an ch need more time due to individualised planning, resources, paperwork, meetings, etc etc.
Now wondering where on earth Sen funding had come from if not reducing mainstream support time. Macademisasion? Teacher salary manipulation that resulted in teachers leaving in droves. Again, not saying it wasn't correct path. Just wondering. Goodness know what's going to happen to all these guys when academies take over.

Exclude those who can / are violent seems like a fair starting point.

Except (see monkeymamma's post above) sometimes 'lashing out' is a response to predictable and preventable circumstances.

What is a violent child? Do children with ASD and children who have emotional difficulties because of their home life have anything in common because they both sometimes lash out? What about children who have just been taught that it's normal for boys to have a bit of a punch up? How violent do you have to be before you are a 'violent' child?

Nearly every argument that explains how their needs can be met in a regualr school can be turned on its head and used to explain how their academic (I assume synonymous with 'educational' in this context) needs can be met in a specialist school.

Not really. Because of the variety of needs in a specialist school, it is difficult to provide the breadth of educational opportunities that would be provided in a mainstream school.

It's going to cost quite a bit more to provide 1:1 teaching from a variety of teachers visiting a specialist school than providing a support assistant.

A picture for the fucking fools who can't fucking well get it.

Herecome: you said, to another poster "I think one of the differences between you and me is I put thought into my posts". I don't think you're in a position to complain about "sly digs".

No, I can't imagine what it's like to be autistic.

And you're apparently not prepared even to try. I referred upthread to a scenario when you're feeling massively stressed, don't understand what is going on, have a lot of demands and noise coming at you, and you're deprived of the refuge where you know you can calm down. Can you really not think about what that is like?

Can you stretch your imagination to think what it may be like being a headmaster or teacher, or TA and confronted with various impossible demands and be under-resourced?

But this wasn't a question of being under-resourced. They had advice on how to avoid a meltdown which they didn't follow. They had available a Calm Room constructed out of funding specifically for SEN and they chose to use it for another purpose. They could have worked to prepare OP's son for the eventuality of the room being unavailable, and didn't. None of that was impossible, and all of it was part of the school's statutory duty.

You are rating the OP's son's needs above others and blaming the school for his violence.

No, I'm not rating his needs above others. I'm saying the school should use the funds and resources allocated to it specifically to meet the needs of children with SEN (which take nothing away from NT children) and the proper use of this would have meant that the violence didn't happen.

I'm saying that there should be a more balanced approach, thinking of the needs of all children ; the ones who shouldn't be sidelined because they don't lash out at others.

They aren't being sidelined. If anything, it is the children with SEN who are sidelined by being shoved off in a corner with an unqualified TA.

To my mind, inclusion is failing. We seem to agree that prevention is better than a cure ie. spend on education to avoid problems long term. At the same time, where should all this extra funding come from and it it fair to spend so much more money on one member of society at the expense of others?

It isn't spent at the expense of others, any more than money spent on hospitals is at the expense of well people, or money spent on schools generally is at the expense of adults without children. It's an investment which we as a society have rightly decided to make. And what do you propose instead of inclusion that would involve less expense, given that special schools are considerably more expensive to run?

Significantly more of the prison population come from working class backgrounds. Should they have more money spent on their education to keep them out of "worst case scenario" prison?

Probably, given that a disproportionate number of the prison population have unrecognised and unaddressed learning difficulties.

City what would be the alternative? Are you talking about mainstream inclusion?

What should happen to Sen children who mainstream isn't appropriate for and who doesn't recieve appropriate funding?

U.K. Schools really do need to review a lot of their provisions for pupils. When I was at primary school the whole class changed in the classroom now the need for privacy is accepted. That privacy shouldn't be the toilets or a storage cupboard. Likewise a necessary disability adaption shouldn't be a old storage cupboard either.
LEAs etc need to really need to start improving school premises. Please note I am not blaming the school SLT or any teachers etc.

City, I don't know how your school operates, but most of that is done by my son's 1:1.

As I have said, DS is clever, he is capable of doing the work, his issues are around adapting the lesson to a way he can manage it. So, as a for instance.. When working from a projector or lesson on the white board, DS will have a personal print out and his TA will help him with moving from the board into planning the work in his book, because he can't do that.

There is no extra time taken from the class teacher at all.

Now wondering where on earth Sen funding had come from if not reducing mainstream support time

That's a bit like arguing that you can't get a GP appointment because the NHS is spending too much money on intensive care units.

Spending money on one doesn't mean that money isn't needed for the other. However cuts to intensive care units wouldn't necessarily result in more funding for primary care services, and increased funding for primary care wouldn't make spending on intensive care less necessary.

Equally the lack of funding in one part of the NHS wouldn't justify questionable practices in another because we should all be grateful for whatever we can get.

In this instance failure to use the planned strategy will have caused more disruption and arguably more cost.

There was, so to speak, an emergency exit that couldn't be used in an emergency. No amount of clever argument will make that acceptable and the OP is right to be angry. However, threads like these inevitably turn into discussion of SEN provision more generally where posters attempt to draw general conclusions from a specific example and I can't see the point in that.

Exclude those who can / are violent seems like a fair starting point.

Why, when violence can be avoided by providing properly for the child's learning difficulties. Children with ASD aren't violent for the sake of it, they are violent because they become absolutely overwhelmed and stressed. What on earth would be accomplished by putting them in a school composed entirely of other violent children?

What about children whose educational needs can't be met in a specialist school?

And what about those who's emotional or mental needs can't be met in a regular school?

So what's your solution, herecome? If the child's needs can't be met in a mainstream school, then yes, they need a specialist school, albeit that we don't have enough specialist school places. But if they can be met in a mainstream school provided that that school obeys the law, and uses the funding allocated for the purpose properly, why shouldn't that child be in the mainstream?

Goodness know what's going to happen to all these guys when academies take over

There, CitySnicker, we can agree. The prospect of what will happen to children with SEN with full academisation is terrifying. The answer, of course, is not to go down that path.

Nearly every argument that explains how their needs can be met in a regualr school can be turned on its head and used to explain how their academic (I assume synonymous with 'educational' in this context) needs can be met in a specialist school.

What about the child in this report who had what was then a Statement of SEN due to cerebral palsy and had achieved an A* in GCSE maths at the age of 11, and was at the highest primary school levels in all other subjects? What special school do you suggest could meet his needs, bearing in mind of course that it would have had to be local to Hackney?

Maddyhatter - If you are not doing so already, you need to start keeping a written record of everything that happens at school. While it is fresh in your mind write down everything that has led up to your son being excluded. When schools know their actions are being watched and recorded they tend to be more mindful of disability law.

OP, I am just wondering how old your DS is and how many more years he has at the school? Is it worth the effort to try to prod the school onto understanding his needs better, or is your effort better spent getting him into the best secondary situation right now?

I am assuming that he must be a little older because a really small boy lashing out might be viewed differently and not excluded. (From experience at our primary, it tends to be older boys who are punished for hitting. Rightly or wrongly when the infants do it, it isn't taken as seriously.)

The cupboard / calm room is a ridiculous solution to Year 6 girls changing. You can't fit 15 girls in a cupboard no matter how nice and calm it is painted. What is undoubtedly actually happening is that the 2 girls who are most vocal about not wanting to get changed are getting changed in the calm room and the other 13 (who are equally bothered but more shy / less vocal) are stuck getting changed with the boys.

My (nt) Dd is in a class with a little boy (call him "Sam") who also has complex special needs and a full time 1:1. So I guess you could say that I represent the "other 29" in the class.

As with Op's ds Sam has a number of strategies implemented in order to:-

1. Enable Sam to access learning
2. Enable the "other 29" to not have their lessons disturbed by Sam struggling

I don't know the details (as I only get to hear about it as part of my dd's rather sparse "school today" reports and these generally focus more on whether Olivia M is still best friends with Olivia C) but many of these solutions seem to be very cheap and simple. (For example during carpet time Sam sits on a chair rather than the carpet as if he sits on the carpet he quickly gets up and runs around the room screaming.)

However, I firmly believe that the school has a responsibility to my Dd (as part of the "other 29") that when they have found strategies that work with Sam that they should implement them. If the school took away Sam's chair to give to a volunteer and Sam then trod on Dd whilst running around the room then I would be very angry with the school.

Forgetting the Op's son for a minute - the school seriously let down the "other 29" yesterday by putting them at avoidable risk of injury by taking away a child's method of coping.

Looking - Maddy has already said he's 9 and in year 4

Oh, sorry! I've been catching up on the thread and must have missed a page. Worth the effort to push then, I'd say.

Well.. i have seen the offending piece of work, and unless im missing something, i can understand why it stressed him out.. it made my stomach turn when i realised i had to help him with it...

Its a 2 page comic strip, a section from what appears to be a longer story. The instruction is "Write a play script based on this section of the story"

There is no worksheet provided to tell him how to format the play script, what elements it should include or how it should be presented. I asked him if they'd been shown any examples and he said no.

Am i missing something here?

i feel like just putting a big red cross through the bloody thing and writing "How is a 9yo Autistic/Dyspraxic child supposed to do this without any guidelines or signposts"

Its FAR too vague.. its like saying 'go tidy up' and him just standing there not knowing where to start.

FFS