To think they may as well say "don't send children with additional needs back in September"

[drspouse]

The current plan is:
All in bubbles of 30
All in the classroom together
All facing the front (WTF has that got to do with virus protection)
No use of shared spaces except at your rota time and after it's been bleached.
Teachers at the front, 2m away
AND focus on behaviour.

My DS has an EHCP and needs a space to escape to when the classroom gets too much. He's often been using a work space outside the classroom. We just looked round a lovely mainstream primary that has a behaviour base and a nurture base. Oh and a library and an ICT suite that children can access at lunchtime.
His previous school had very little space and the corridor was the library etc.

So how are schools supposed to cater for children who need time out of the classroom to prevent meltdown?
This includes children who are having a hard time at home, can't cope with playground noise etc. Not just those who have a diagnosis of SEN.

And children like my DD who have small group teaching outside the classroom most days - you can't do that with 2m separation and all facing the front even if you can disinfect the break out area.

So I'm guessing nobody really wants a child like my DS in their child's classroom if he's not allowed to go out to his calm down area when he needs to?

Well, I guess I knew the government didn't really want to deal with inconvenient children who don't fit their mould, but this confirms it.

I really feel for teachers, yet another impossible task.

"The lack of understanding from some posters is really upsetting."

I find this last sentence quite rude. Lack of understanding of what? Perhaps you need to look to your own understanding, because that's quite upsetting to others.

My DC has an echp and is back full time, they’ve made loads of adjustments to suit his needs.
Talk to your child’s school and ask them about it.

So because your kid is back full-time, OP must not be doing enough?

Mine has an ECHP but can’t return because there isn’t anyone to provide 1 to 1 to him for the two days that they are having his reception class in session. His usual key worker is also in the vulnerable group. Not everyone is so lucky.

@TabbyMumz maybe not lack of intellectual understanding ... more lack of emotional empathy. Is that better?

Thanks -KeepOn I appreciate that. I am going to take a step back. Good luck everyone getting the support they need for their children in place. I wish everyone well.

"TabbyMumzmaybe not lack of intellectual understanding ... more lack of emotional empathy. Is that better?"
No, sorry that's still rude. Absolutely nothing wrong with saying that I thought salts couldnt work, because that's my understand and experience. Got nothing to do with empathy. Wheres your empathy for me. Rude, just rude. So because your salt is working and I didnt know that, I had a lack of empathy?!

Given there have been 4 deletions from 3 different posters I'm not surprised WellTidy thinks some posters lack understanding.

At the daily briefings the scientists said that sitting side to side or back to back is best in situations where social distancing isn't possible. That's why schools have adopted the facing forward at individual desks idea. (It also reduces the risk that kids will share equipment or touch each other's lunchboxes etc)

Your concern about your son's needs not being met is perfectly valid though.

At my children's secondary school, not all classes are single desks facing the front. Many are arranged in a U and others are rows (too small for individual desks)

but again, as the desks are a temporary solution during a pandemic and they are not against the best interest of the class, why does it even matter

I'd rather school focusing on opening and giving an actual education to the children than bickering about the way the desks are facing... when it traditionally never hurt anyone.

It matters, as I've said several times, because it's being combined with a rigid behaviour policy. To some children even the position would be difficult, and to my DS any rigid seating position is difficult.

If it was just the desks alone that would be one thing but when you read the proposals then it shows a focus that very much tries to push away from any nurturing for the children and just pushing them to be numbers and results with very little flexibility.

But what do you suggest drs? I mean that genuinely, not trying to sound goady?

I haven't read the whole thread but have you looked at special schools op, specifically SEMH schools for him?

I cannot see how my ds is going to manage in September, and stay safe (he is shielding at the moment). The whole thing is a shit show.

..of course speech and language therapists can work at the moment. There are challenges to that, of course, but it’s not impossible. Many, many people are working remotely and have done through all of lockdown. Therapy can be delivered remotely.

I have had phone calls with SALT, and she has contributed to virtual meetings, but ds has not been able to have direct Speech Therapy since March - myself and one of his sisters are trying to deliver what we can on his targets, which are normally worked on 4 times a week at school. He needs updated targets but we are unable to do them without a face to face session.

Virtual/video appointments don't work for a lot of children with complex needs, and in ds's case his shielding status means he can't have an appointment in person.

@Rhubarbpink I assumed they were going to make school non-compulsory and/or part time - so they'd have smaller bubbles and parents who weren't confident could keep their children home (I did already say this, see above).

@LucilleBluth yes thank you we have.

The trouble is if you allow parents that aren't confident not to send children to school, you leave a lot of children that desperately need to be seen for safeguarding reasons with valid excuse not to bother.

There are thousand of children at risk of serious harm that aren't currently attending school and they need to get back ASAP.

Jesus wept, some of the comments on this thread are genuinely upsetting. I am staggered that some people think that vulnerable children with disabilities shouldn't have provisions in place- provisions that have been mandated simply to make them less disadvantaged and allow them the same opportunities as other children.

Covid is a shit show for everyone. You would be very welcome to swap places though and have my child's SEN place at school, if you'd like to take on the massive long term challenges that come with it.

121s for SEN are recruited for a particular child and a significant proportion of their cost is funded by the LEA. If the SEN child wasn't in school you wouldn't have that member of staff on the roll anyway to use for bubble staffing or whatever so the point about 121 support not being realistic is a moot one.

They'll have to make some sort of provision for children not at school though based purely on the (current) rules around self-isolation which will contribute to a high absence rate. For example: DC1 comes down with a high temperature so is going to be absent from school for at least seven days which means DC2 and DC3 are going to be absent for at least fourteen days. DC2 goes back after the fourteen days and a week later develops a persistent cough so is off again for a minimum of seven days while DC1 and DC3 are off for fourteen days. In ths space of five weeks those children have had 3-4 weeks of absence. Based on how often children get coughs and fevers in the winter months, schools are going to need contingency plans.

as the desks are a temporary solution during a pandemic and they are not against the best interest of the class, why does it even matter

Because the law does not state that children have the right to an education based on what is in the best interests of the majority class, it states that all children as individuals have the right to an education and that provision must be made for children with disabilities and/or SEN to ensure that they are not at a disadvantage compared with their peers, they also have the right to have any disadvantages removed/managed/adjusted for in order to provide them with equal access to the same opportunities and experiences as their peers.

You may not think it's a big deal having desks facing the front and all the children sitting apart while facing the teacher but for some children with disabilities and/or SEN this is not a suitable learning environment and will be detrimental to their wellbeing as well as placing them at a significant disadvantage.

I don’t think that at all strawberry

It’s difficult and really hard to know what’s best. But I do know that safety has to be paramount.

Because the law does not state that children have the right to an education based on what is in the best interests of the majority class, it states that all children as individuals have the right to an education

currently HALF the children are denied an education full stop.
Unless the child is in reception, Y1 or Y6, they are mostly completely denied the right to any education.

Steps are being taken (too little and too late but steps nevertheless) to provide some education back, and all these children are in situation detrimental to their well being, their mental health, and putting them all at ridiculous disadvantages to the ones given a full education - private, overseas...

So the point is that either we have front facing desk to start or we have what we have now: NOTHING

WHAT do you suggest? Balancing it by denying education to ALL until we go back to normal? Denying education for all until they all have the support they need? Who in their right mind would think that's ever a solution?

@WellTidy if the provision is specified in section f, it is the la that is responsible for making the provision. If they need to get independent SLT's in so be it, could be worth getting some details of some that could start with your child. I'd give sossen a call tomo before you contact the senco (they have a free helpline), you could ask the la to make up for the lost provision also so you may get salt over the hols (we did this last year). Sossen cando a discounted preaction protocol letter too! (Save your small fortune if you go down that route).

If you have a look at the link: www.gov.uk/government/publications/changes-to-the-law-on-education-health-and-care-needs-assessments-and-plans-due-to-coronavirus/education-health-and-care-needs-assessments-and-plans-guidance-on-temporary-legislative-changes-relating-to-coronavirus-covid-19 it gives examples of how the provision canchangedue to covid. It clearly states speech via video link. If your DC needs it and you have it clearly stated he should be getting it. Our nhs ot and slt discharged my son due to to capacity. As it was inspection f we now get (better) independent therapists paid for via section j. They've been amazing through lockdown. Have a good look at chasing it and good luck xx

Please excuse typos, I'm shattered and on my phone juggling a child

WHAT do you suggest? Balancing it by denying education to ALL until we go back to normal? Denying education for all until they all have the support they need? Who in their right mind would think that's ever a solution?

Where did I say I was offering that as a solution?