about those on the autistic spectrum in mainstream schools?

[OverbearingHouseSitter]

Basically I've read so many threads recently about those on the autistic spectrum being completely let down by teachers and senior staff in schools.

I mean punishing those on the autistic spectrum in incidents when it is entirely inappropriate, and the lack of understanding of some teachers that you cannot use the same behaviour strategies on some children who require a different approach due to SEN.

And then there are times when punishment should not be given at all, such as when a child who is on the autistic spectrum behaving in a way that the teacher doesn't like, yet the teacher not seeming to realise that this behaviour is part of their SEN!

My mother was a teacher and I realise how hard being a teacher is. She got signed off sick with stress... it's a bloody hard job. But AIBU to think that some teachers and school staff- NOT all- seem to be consistently failing those on the autistic spectrum and those with other SEN, whatever these may be?

This is not just from this forum either! There have been instances from people I know I've heard about and with friends kids.

For example, a friends child was recently punished as he did not understand something the teacher said, ie, it was some form of light sarcasm the teacher used, friends DS with SEN did not register this, did what the teacher told the pupils sarcastically not to do and was then mortified and confused when the teacher punished him.

So AIBU?

I also apologise if I have used an language around people with special needs that you do not like/prefer not to use. My friend prefers the term "on the autistic spectrum" opposed to "autistic child" but if I have said anything wrong please tell me!

I went on a short training course and the tutor had an autistic son. I learned an awful lot

I know my students with ASD need structure, clear explanations, and a calm working environment

Really, can this only be provided by a Special School?

The lack of inclusion, across society generally and schools, could easily tempt a person into despair. Putting every child with an additional need into Special School is not the answer. If people were more flexible, compassionate and responsive, generally, the world would not be such an anxiety ridden place. People need to learn how to, successfully, get along with each other. Removing anyone deemed different to a separate 'special' place is not really inclusion is it?

I appreciate that some needs do need special provision. I also think, though, these needs are made more impactful through the sheer rigidity, harshness and lack of compassion from schools and society at large.

My children's primary school was very inclusive-and they benefitted hugely from it. But there were lots of reasons why it could do things that maybe other schools couldn't. The first was huge amounts of space. I can't tell you what a difference that made......

"I do NOT think that lack of funding is the issue, at all."

It's not THE issue. It's most certainly AN issue. And of course you will have had discussions about funding in regard to your NT children. That's what conversations about which GCSEs are available, whether there is music, drama, extra curricular activities, trips, triple science, lack of teaching staff and TAs, cover staff and 1001 other things are about. It only become specific when you're talking about a particular child with particular needs.

Bertrand, I can see that 'space' might be useful to cater to some types of additional need but by no means all. That would be a cliche.

My DC did not need extra space, at all. They just needed encouragement, in terms of their abilities (primarily in reception) and a small amount of extra supervision at key times (tops 5 mins) when in the infants. That also would not have been needed, if the school had not insisted on an extremely lengthy lining up protocol. Yet they had significant extra funding for the majority of primary - which, by the time they were in the Juniors, was not needed and was not being used on any constructive additional provision for them

They did not need extra space for separation, or quiet. Funding supposedly was spent on some but the room ended up being used primarily as a 'meeting room'.

Most lovely, was my DC's preschool. They did not have endless space. Just brilliant, compassionate, kind, staff.

Also you can have the plentiful funding, my DC did. However if it is not used effectively it potentially becomes detrimental to the quality of their education.

And my child goes to a large Comp now. Loves it, is thriving. Organisation, is what is key, in terms of space and numbers.

Space is important, as is recognising the signs that a child is struggling to cope rather than acting out. A wider understanding and training about the autistic spectrum and myth busting would be a huge start too.

"Bertrand, I can see that 'space' might be useful to cater to some types of additional need but by no means all. That would be a cliche"

That's why I said that the space was ONE of the reasons.........

I've not commented yet because I'm still reeling from things said by a pp who thinks their experience as a HT and SALT qualifies them to disregard a paediatric diagnosis.

However, ponderingprobably, you said:

"The lack of inclusion, across society generally and schools, could easily tempt a person into despair. Putting every child with an additional need into Special School is not the answer. If people were more flexible, compassionate and responsive, generally, the world would not be such an anxiety ridden place. People need to learn how to, successfully, get along with each other. Removing anyone deemed different to a separate 'special' place is not really inclusion is it?"

I quite agree, but those changes aren't going to be made in time for children who need them right now.

My ds2 has a dx of HFA and has been suffering in mainstream since nursery, he's now in yr 2. Many 'reasonable adjustments' have been made for him and yet he's still had many fixed term exclusions, culminating in going onto a short timetable.

Once we got the Ehcp stating mainstream was not appropriate and naming an alternative (mainstream with ASC Hub) his 1-1 was removed. The assumption being he would be moved to the school named in the plan. Unfortunately said named school have refused admission (I haven't been told why) and the LEA are seemingly just sitting on it (I've been told to only contact current school for info - they want me to disappear I think). From March until end of summer term he was being babysat by a senior staff member, when they were available, for 3hrs per day - not being taught at all, just looked after.

So now, due to the LEA's inability to secure a school placement, my son is being home tutored which is paid for by current school. My son who was agitated, aggressive, prone to elopement and resistant to learning in a busy school environment is now content; behaving perfectly and performing to a very high academic standard. The tutor is wonderful, kind, patient and is very impressed.

I'm now looking at a specialist ASC school many miles (and a motorway or two) out of area.

The impact this has had on my family is pretty damaging - my son is more socially isolated than ever and I am unable to have a job, so we're skint too.

Our whole family has been sacrificed on the altar of inclusion.

I quite agree, but those changes aren't going to be made in time for children who need them right now.

I appreciate that, Working. I would probably be looking at the same, in your shoes. Additional needs as well as Autism is a broad spectrum.

I just get quite cross when people spout that all children with additional needs need to be in Special School and mainstream can't cater for them. Unusually as an excuse to not alter what is already being done. This should not be an aim. Sometimes the can't is also a won't.

pondering - I agree with your most recent post too. The one size should fit all approach is staggeringly bone headed.

Ds1 is in yr 5 and was referred for assessment at the end of last summer. His autism (if he gets a dx at all) presents completely differently and any support needs could easily be met because he manages (masks probably) very well at the same school that can't help ds2.

Working my worry is that we will end up where you are.

It strikes me that the system of EHCP is a mess. As i said above we're likely to struggle to get one for dd. In class she can do the work easily. She needs simple cheap adjustments - not being asked to speak in front of everyone, some visual aids removing, a discreet method of asking for help, having her own attenuating ear plugs to hand etc. She needs a refuge at break for when it all goes wrong. She doesn't need 1:1.
But without an EHCP we are at the mercy of the system. All the specialist schools have that as the first requirement. Without it we have to take our chances in the admissions process.

By my last post I mean that mainstream schools seem very happy to admit any child so long as that child can fit in without too much hassle. The notion that a school may have to make wider changes for the benefit of all seems to be anathema to many HTs, but LEAs etc.

Sirzy

I'm also a BSL user, but in some schools / colleges you are not allowed to directly sign to a student, you have to use the interpreter even if you know the interpreter has got it wrong.

Anecdotally a SENCO I was talking to said she felt ASD diagnosis went up partially when classrooms changed from children sitting in rows facing the front to tables with children sitting round and bright displays on every wall.

As a teacher I feel my job is to get information from my head into a child's head in a way that they understand it and that might be 20 different approaches depending on the child.

Totally agree with square pegs and round holes.

GrockleBocs, the whole system sucks hairy balls IMHO. It's a hellish catch-22: got needs? Tough shit if you want them met without an Ehcp. Want an Ehcp? Tough shit, we've found a spurious non-reason to duck out of issuing one.

It it piss-boiling in the extreme.

Yanbu op. I've seen myself both ends of inclusion, the amazing and the atrocious. But I do think in many cases it is more complex than that, and some teachers and schools can be doing everything within their means but some dc are still not having their needs fully met.

Dd's primary were great, but I can imagine the same teachers and slt in different circumstances wouldn't have had the same result. Along with above average Sen they had above average fsm, so had more funding to start with. Plus, round here it's 'just' rural poverty, so the majority of pp dc don't have the complex social/ home problems that often go hand in hand with fsm, which allows more options for how it's spent. We also have space, and dd's primary was never at full capacity, with longstanding staff. The ht wasn't bothered about skating on thin ice with ofsted to meet every kids needs, but I can quite see why a younger headteacher, who didn't plan to retire at that school, thrown into a school ofsted weren't happy with, wouldn't have been in a position to take the risks with ofsted ours did.

Ditto at dd's secondary. It's a selective independent, and in many ways it's ideal for Hfa, even before any specific adjustments. I know one of dds friends (stereotype of the Hfa professor) would do equally well in a state selective, or in a good comprehensive that had mainly well behaved pupils and a reasonable amount of high achievers. She'd absolutely sink at another comprehensive that from all accounts is brilliant with most Sen, and lower achievers both sn and nt, despite the fact the staff would be making far more effort to accommodate her needs.

Dd has a friend from primary who has sn, (not autism), only requires ft 1-1 if the academic pitch of the lesson doesn't meet her needs, but who can be disruptive as a result of her sn, even when she's having a good day. To someone like dd, nt and with no other issues, zoning out for a few minutes whilst a ta diverts her friend makes no odds. Even a full meltdown would be nothing more than a minor distraction. But put primary friend and secondary friend, let alone a child with higher needs asd together, and I can quite see why even the most amazing teacher would need immediate 1-1 from an experienced ta for each dc to prevent both having full meltdowns. And even if every class had that level of staff, whilst those two ta's were engaged, another child who needed the ta for a less pressing issue would be overlooked.

I do think that some of it is the variation of needs, asd needs differ so much even before you include other Sen or problems nt children might have. One child's minor agitation can be another childs loss of routine/calm/ rules, and short of huge piles of money I'm not sure how you solve that.

Anecdotally a SENCO I was talking to said she felt ASD diagnosis went up partially when classrooms changed from children sitting in rows facing the front to tables with children sitting round and bright displays on every wall.

I can easily imagine this happening. Probably due to lack of referral rather than children completing the diagnostic process, though.

The thing is, how education is managed can have a huge impact on how (additional) needs manifest. If those needs are catered for, as a matter of course, those needs, whilst present, will not be manifested so will not cause people to see them as out of the ordinary.

This does not mean diagnosis is invalid just that the impact of what are considered impairments varies widely according to environment.

It's why rigid views in education seem so unfair. Why is having round tables more valid? Who does it benefit? Incidentally my DC has began to really thrive in Secondary. When you look at the way lessons are structured differently, you can see how this really benefits some children.

grockle you really need a diamond senco.
My DS has one. She doesn't claim to be all knowing, she works in partnership with parents. He has managed without an ehcp because what he really needed was "mindful teaching", some task adaptation, and a safe space. He got them.

I train teachers about autism as part of my job. I talk about the dyad/ triad and sensory needs but I don't talk about effing visual timetables or social stories. I tell my teachers that they need to know their student's autism and how it affects them. At secondary this means proper advice to staff with 3 or 4 key bits of advice rather than a generic "this student is autistic and has social and behaviour difficulties" which is as much use as a chocolate fireguard to a busy teacher. It takes the senco little more time to meet with the student and parent to find out the impact of their autism' and what the student would say helps. Compare the generic statement above with "Sophie has autism. In her case she becomes highly anxious about ambiguous or open ended tasks and dislikes any form of gentle touch. Sophie says that the most helpful teachers are those who provide writing frames and worked examples for open ended tasks and ensure that she can sit and move in and out of the class without being jostled".

It's not rocket science or about every child needing high levels of individual support. It's about personalising, pre planning and listening in many cases.

I'm going to repeat what I said up-thread: What we currently have is not inclusion. If we really had inclusion, mainstream schools would have adopted many of the stand-out features of special schools - particularly small class sizes and higher adult:child ratios.

Without those two things, a lot of the other features of special schools (child-centred learning; environmental adaptations; timetable flexibility; individual modifications) become near-impossible to put into place.

What we have at present is SEND children being forced into environments that don't meet their needs and teachers being told that the solution is their individual responsibility - when this is clearly a structural problem.

It's a low-cost solution - which is going to become more low-cost as school budgets are cut.

The costs are being paid by parents and children - workingclasshero 's experience is one that no-one should have to undergo - and, I suspect, teachers and those working trying to shore up a structural problem.

I believe passionately in inclusion. I think the poster who says it will lead to more positive outcomes, and a more inclusive society, in the long-term is correct. However, in the short-term, I think we have to push for real inclusion.