Is this illegal exclusion?

[ClaryFray]

I need some advice, my son is currently being flexible schooled due to his SEN needs. He currently has no EHCP or diagnosis, both due end of the month. He's currently being taught in a small group of 8 pupils and 2 TA's.

There was an incident on Monday where he hit a teacher who prevented him from leaving the room (wrong I agree) however, he'd got himself so worked up he was asking for me. And the Senco refused to call me, later reasoning that he was misbehaving so she didn't want to reward him with what he wanted (ie me). He is very frustrated at school, he can't do the work, we've had issues of the work not being differentiated as per the EP report. And he feels stupid. Has school aniexty around the place, and has a mental and emotional age of around 5 when he is 8. (Think crawling round the floor, running around school, and making baby noises)

I was called in Monday after this incident and agreed to flexi school him. I was upset at the time at the end of my rope, and confused about where to go next. The senco kept talking about exclusion saying, we should exclude him for this incident but won't. Do you want to flexischool him? I was given no thinking time, no cool off period. And the contract was ready for me to sign in the meeting. So between hearing about it and signing paperwork took 30 minutes. I wish I'd been more proactive and asked for time to think but I was scared he'd be expelled and I'm still in probation at work so it's the last thing I wanted.

The senco also keeps mentioning special schools, despite my desire to keep him in mainstream. His EHCP should be agreed the end of the month and they don't want to be the named school. To me it seems obvious they wanted him gone.

Today I arrived to collect him at 1:30pm as per arrangement, to find him in a melt down state. Saying he didn’t want to come home. The reason transpired that they were doing a fun activity. Which he had seen the other children start, yet he was being sent home. This caused him to run off around he school, and get very upset.

I’m at the end end of my teacher but I can’t afford to homeschool completely, I'd lose my job, because I can’t afford childcare.

My questions are:

Is this illegal exclusion?
And AIBU to expect either the activity to be postponed until he had gone home? Or him to be removed to another room so he doesn't witness the fun he's missing out on?

I think for the sake of your son, you need to be looking at a special school who can manage your child's behaviour. You are lucky he wasn't excluded, most child would have been. Instead of focusing on the flexi timetable, I think you need honest discussions about a specialist provision.

It doesn’t sound as if your child is coping in a mainstream school environment. I’d have a look at available special schools if I were in your situation . If you can’t stop him running around the school playground how do you expect the teachers to .

There will be other children whose education is suffering because your son is not in the correct educational setting .

The very best decision I ever made was to send two of my children to a special school. Obviously not an easy process, but it was worth every second of fighting the education authority.

The biggest mistake of my life was to keep another of my children in a mainstream school.

Now as a foster carer I have looked after many children and teenagers with special needs and in EVERY SINGLE CASE changing from mainstream to a special school was the best possible thing for them.

Walking into a special school knowing every single member of staff knows everything about your child's issue, and never having to explain or negotiate when difficultiies arrive, is wonderful for everyone. I can't explain how different the atttitudes between the schools are, because in my limited experience, even SENCOs try to make the child confirm, in a special needs your child's particular issues are understood and a situation such as you descrbe would never happen.

I wish you luck whatever you decide, and I know my opinion may be unpopular, but for me and my children/foster children they all thrived and grew in a special school in a way that was never possible within mainstream.

Is this illegal exclusion?
No. It is a temporary measure instead of exclusion. YOU are taking responsibility for teaching him for part of the timetable. If you think this might help, then do it. If you have changed your mind, and don't want to, then don't.

And AIBU to expect either the activity to be postponed until he had gone home? Or him to be removed to another room so he doesn't witness the fun he's missing out on?

Yes. Hugely.

he hit a teacher who prevented him from leaving the room (wrong I agree) however, he'd got himself so worked up he was asking for me.

Teachers have a right not to be assaulted at work. A child in a mainstream school needs to be able to get through the day without mum.

Funding for schools is plummeting. This school has done more than many schools could afford to. Frankly, the fact that they have put this in place before an EHCP is well above the minimum expected. Schools have no funding to run small groups for behavioural needs (only for educational needs). That money is coming from other kids.

That said, it's not your job to care about the school's problems (unless you voted for it, or didn't vote). It's your job to advocate for your son. So:

1. What is his SEN?
2. Why do you think he can't access the work? A lot of kids who 'can't' do work really can, but there are other issues going on.
3. You certainly can insist on his staying in mainstream, but you need to figure out how to make that work. What is causing these violent outbursts? What has been tried to stop it? What's the next intervention?

You have a very powerful effect on your child's behaviour and on his attitude to school. If you post some details you will find good advice here. I think you would be better answering those questions on the education board than AIBU. You will get a lot of unhelpful replies on this thread.

P.S. That post was a bit dry. I can only guess how hard things are at the moment. I've never been through what you are, but I've seen it many, many times.

Don't give up. Kids change, circumstances improve. Your child will be a better person with a happier life for having a fab mum who cares, fights for him and keeps trying. Parent's really do make all the difference.

Will he get funding for a 1-1 do you think? If not, he is not going to cope after the EHCP is finalised because they are already doing everything they can for him.

If a child hit a teacher in my school they are out immediately, some permanently.

I've worked in mainstream and special ed. It does sound like special school with specifically for behaviour issues is where he needs to go. Sometimes they can go part time or temporary and go back to mainstream if their behaviour improves

Yes it is an illegal exclusion.

Your DS's needs are not being met in school and they are looking to reduce the time they are responsible for meeting his needs in order to avoid having to do so.

If a school cannot meet a child's needs, they can't do it for a reduced timetable. It sounds more likely that they could but they don't want to fund the provision he needs.

Inform them that you do not wish to continue with the flexi-schooling as your son is entitled to a full-time education. The school must put in place the support required to prevent him from getting so distressed that he lashes out. If they need additional funding in order to do that, this is a matter between them and the LA. This should also be used to inform the content of his EHC Plan.

It is perfectly reasonable to expect that the school would care for him in such a way that he wouldn't be distressed by seeing the rest of his class having fun. This is easily achieved by supporting him in a different room while waiting for you.

There are far too many occasions on which children are denied support by the offering a part-time timetable instead of properly recording the child's needs and taking measures to support them.

The school must put in place the support required to prevent him from getting so distressed that he lashes out. If they need additional funding in order to do that, this is a matter between them and the LA.

Don't forget they need to order the magic pixie dust too.

Most schools aren't funded through LAs anymore- this is the main mechanism by which the state education system has been dismantled.

There are far too many occasions on which children are denied support by the offering a part-time timetable instead of properly recording the child's needs and taking measures to support them.

I agree with this. The support available to children with behavioural difficulties and additional needs is far below what I would wish to see; but...

.... wishful thinking won't help. It's irresponsible to give bombastic, inaccurate advice when you clearly don't understand how the system works.

It's irresponsible to give bombastic, inaccurate advice when you clearly don't understand how the system works.

I understand full well how the system works and how the law works.

It is the school's responsibility to put support in place and apply for additional funding if this is required. Reducing the child's access to educational provision is inappropriate and can be used to mask the fact that the school is not putting appropriate support in place.

Telling parents that they cannot meet a child's needs is also a regularly employed tactic to protect SEN budgets (which are not ring-fenced) by reducing numbers of children whose additional needs could be met from within the schools resources.

I am painfully aware that resources in schools are stretched to breaking point but that doesn't remove their responsibility to follow the code of practice.

Special school places are also massively over-subscribed, partly because mainstream schools push children out whose needs they should be able to meet.

The whole situation is appalling but forcing children into part-time schooling is just a way to paper over the cracks.

If they need additional funding in order to do that, this is a matter between them and the LA

What are the school supposed to do in the meantime?

OP says their dc doesn't even have a diagnosis yet. What if there is no additional funding?

The school already put him in a 4-1 group. If they don't have the money for more staff, what else can they actually do?

The school already put him in a 4-1 group. If they don't have the money for more staff, what else can they actually do?

That depends on what advice they have sought/received from other professionals, whether they have implemented that advice, what outreach services are available in their local area, what other provision is available, etc.

If they have followed every avenue open to them, the next step is to call a multi-agency meeting which include the professionals who have assessed him, the LA case officer and his parents to work out next steps.

If they have followed every avenue open to them, the next step is to call a multi-agency meeting which include the professionals who have assessed him, the LA case officer and his parents to work out next steps.

I agree. OP has there been a TAC meeting yet?

Telling parents that they cannot meet a child's needs is also a regularly employed tactic to protect SEN budgets (which are not ring-fenced) by reducing numbers of children whose additional needs could be met from within the schools resources.

I agree that is too often the case.

If you really do understand how these things work, you must see from the OP that :
a) the school are making some effort if they are already putting in small group support.
b) there is nowhere near enough info to say the school is avoiding it's responsibility or not supporting the child- we don't even know what the SEN is.

c) there is no way of saying what support would work, or whether funding might be available.

OP is clearly already feeling pretty negative. That may, or may not be reasonable, but it won't help.

a) the school are making some effort if they are already putting in small group support.
I agree that they are making some effort. For some reason, that isn't enough and it doesn't justify imposing a part time timetable.

b) there is nowhere near enough info to say the school is avoiding it's responsibility or not supporting the child- we don't even know what the SEN is.

The school is avoiding responsibility by using a part time timetable to illegally exclude the child. They may well have involved every professional and followed all advice. Credit to them if they have. The next step is a multi-agency meeting, not illegal exclusion.

c) there is no way of saying what support would work, or whether funding might be available.
That's a matter for the school to address with outside professionals and the LA.

Don't get me wrong. I fully appreciate the awful position schools are in and the difficulties in obtaining funding. However, it isn't appropriate to problem solve by handing children back to their parents for long periods when they should be in education.

The school is avoiding responsibility by using a part time timetable to illegally exclude the child.*
Or the school has a child who doesn't (as yet) have an EHCP or diagnosis, where they have them in a class of 8 with 2 TAs (and I assume a teacher too so 3 adults to 8 students) which they don't actually have to.
The child has meltdowns in that already specialised teaching set up (which is not typical in mainstream so school are already demonstrating they are trying to support students). The child has been violent to a teacher and the school would be well within their rights to fornally exclude the child.
Had they done formal exclusion then there may be another thread saying i am waiting on diagnisis for SEND needs. AIBU to think school shouldn't have excluded my DC for violence to staff and to exclude is discrimination?

However, they understand that they are waiting on diagnosis feedback so have proposed a solution where the child does not get excluded but has a reduced timetable in order to try and ensure time in school is more effective and to help the child manage.

Meanwhile, people have a pop at school and think that there's a magic money tree to fund all sorts of extras (ignoring that a preferencial staffing set up like a class of 8 pupils and 3 members of staff is already drawing resources), that mainstream staff should be trained to deal with any element of SEND out there at any level and get irritated when mainstream teachers aren't SEND specialists for all levels of SEND and think that it's perfectly fine to let a child off violence towards a teacher, the other kids in the class should just suck up having their learning disrupted and the child with potential SEND needs should keep being forced into a full time mainstream route just because.

I don't want to join the debate about the exclusion, but do want (as a former mainstream secondary senco) to ask why you want to keep him in mainstream? You haven't told us what his send is other than aged 8 but mental age 5 which covers several different possibilities. Is he likely to stay at age 5 or be three years behind his peers or something in between?
The thing about mainstream, is it is just that. It is essentially one size fits all, and like a pp said there's differentiation and differentiation. If he is so far behind his peers that to access the curriculum he needs a whole new curriculum then what is he gaining from being in mainstream? Particularly by the time he gets to secondary school - 1:1 in a room on his own, away from all his peers therefore socially isolated (because a child getting to grips with phonics isn't going to be taught with the rest of the GCSE group doing Shakespeare). Socially also by secondary as his peers are maturing and talking about/doing things that teenagers do, he would be likely to have fewer friends as he would not be able to join in the conversation. I know it is difficult to think of your little boy as an adult but in ten years that is what he will be and he needs to be in the best position he can be to face the world; special schools can do this as they offer a tailored curriculum and give children the skills and education to help them become employable independent adults. So please do think about that. It sounds as though the school has put quite a lot in place already. While i don't like the way in which the flexi was presented, i don't think they are trying to get rid of him but are looking more at the bigger picture and what is right for him. Ignore the name "special school" and view it as just a different provider. The language around SEND is not good (i don't know what word should replace special but I don't think special is the right word but that's a whole other debate!) xxx

There seem to be some ill informed opinions masquerading as fact here. (And lots of good advice as well) However his school have got around the illegal exclusion by getting you to agree to a part time time table. Obviously they want to keep their exclusion figures down, but if your son is artificially being kept from hitting the trigger points because he isn't registered as excluded, he's registered as educated off-site, it is masking the severity of the situation. Are you familiar with the send code of practice? My knowledge is out of date, but that's where I'd start! (And a multiagency meeting / team around child meeting)

Well it's certainly not best practice to threaten exclusion to force your hand re the reduced timetable but a short term reduced time table isn't necessarily a bad thing while support is being put into place/advice sought/top up funding applied for etc. Short term is the key here though as he is entitled to a full time education in a mainstream setting unless he has needs that make that impossible. 1-4 teaching with a ta not working doesn't mean that he wouldn't be able to cope in mainstream with 1-1 support and appropriate strategies in place.
You say his echp is due at the end of the month. Is that the final draft or is he only being assessed then as assessment can be a drawn out process and having him on a part time timetable for that length of time isn't acceptable.
It is funny how schools manage to find money from the 'magic money tree' when they have to. I fought for 1-1 support for my son and was repeatedly told he didn't need it and they didn't have the money. I applied for an Ehcp asssesment myself and when the school had to give account of how they were meeting my sons needs they told the assessor that they were putting one to one support in place for him with immediate effect.

And it's ridiculous to say that he will be still getting to grips with phonics in secondary school because he is behind his peers at age 8. In some countries children are only just starting formal teaching at that age!
I have seen children who are struggling with their learning flourish once they have the support they need in place.

BlueMirror
It's not a case of threatening exclusion to force someone's hand.

If a child is violent to another child they get excluded in most schools.
If a child is violent to a member of staff they get excluded in most schools.

They have offered a solution for now at least to an exclusion.

On thr occasions a student has been violent to me I refused to have them in my class for a period of time because I don't come to work to be assulted. It's that simple.

Without knowing all the details it is impossible to give precise advice ob the OP's situation.
However people (in general here not this thread) pushing the 'keep in mainstream at any cost' agendas and berrating mainstream schools for not having the funds, staffing ir training to deal with more severe SEND needs is just unreasonable. Even with Special Education, staff tend to teach in schools with different SEND specialisms because it's such a specialist area of knowledge and yet what some seem to think is that mainstream staff shpuld be able to do it all and teach another 28 children in a class. There is a reasonable level of adjustment and good schools (like mine) take a number if students who may otherwise be in special ed. We have a SEND base and nurture groups and SEND literacy ahd numeracy boosters but not all have TA support. But we wouldn't be able to cater for a student who rolls around on the floor and has meltdowns like that and is violent to staff. Our entire school isn't set up for that and we couldn't plan 1800 students around the needs of 1 or 2 children.

I'm in a very similar position, OP.

Can I ask where/how you find specialist provision? Parent Partnership said our rebranded CAMHS would advise, but they said they wouldn't/couldn't. I found a National website for special schools but nothing came up for my area + child's difficulties. I think there will be an exclusion before our ehcp is written - do the school continue with the application in those circumstances?

I certainly don't think that children should be in mainstream regardless of their needs but just because 2 tas (not sure why you've added a teacher into the mix as the op hasn't mentioned one) aren't able to manage 8, likely difficult, children between them that doesn't mean that the ops child wouldn't thrive in mainstream with the correct support in place. That 'strategy' seems like firefighting to me rather than meeting any of the individual children's needs.
Maybe the ops child isn't going to be able to be educated in a mainstream setting but I would wait until his needs have been assessed and appropriate support is in place to make that call.

And I find it is quite the reverse on here. I've never seen anyone say that all children should be educated in mainstream settings. There is clearly a place for specialised settings for children with very severe/medical needs that can't be managed outside of a specialist setting. But I do see a lot of people saying that children with Sen should only be able to attend mainstream settings if they need either no or very minimal support. That is clearly some people's view but the law states that all aside from the most severely affected children should be accommodated in mainstream and if they need 1-1 support then they are entitled to it. I have never known an occasion where a school literally didn't have the money to put in place the support a child needs and I know a lot of parents who have fought for additional support for their children and top up funding or an extra branch of the magic money tree or whatever you want to call it always miraculously appears in the end. I guess it must really be a magic money tree as there's no money and then like magic there is. Very much like when the government pulled money out of their backside to prop up their government despite there being 'no magic money tree' so it really is a very apt comparison. The conclusion I have come to is that schools don't want to allocate large chunks of resources to individual children if they can possibly avoid it.