AIBU to now want to go above my DC's school and take things further

[ballerina1971]

I am very angry with my DC's school. My youngest DC, age 13 has an EHCP with 24 hrs support. last summer when it was exam time it came to my attention my DC did not have a TA for support in lessons when I raised it with the the school they stated all TA'S were helping with exams for 2 wks
• I advised that my DC TA was funded for them through the EHCP, a legal document, not to be used elsewhere DC wasn’t to be without TA again. The school stated they had always done this, I advised this didn't make it right. I had the conversation with the SEN Department, Assumed the matter had been dealt with. My DC then came home in September stating there was no TA again As they were being used for the year sevens, I rang the SEN & insisted that my DC had the
• TA in lessons & having had this conversation with them I didn’t expect to be having it again. A few weeks later my DC came home asking why I had been complaining about the TA’s I was quite shocked by this and I said why are you asking, my DC told me the TA had said to her during a lesson that she better not do ,anything wrong (the TA ) as your mom has already been on the phone complaining to the school about the TA’S! Then earlier this year after my child had stated the teachers seemed to be being nice to her, the same TA said to my DC it’s because they’re scared of your mom she’s notorious around here and laughed. WTAF! This is wrong in so many ways such as, unprofessional, breach of confidentiality. now I’m fuming this is just another incident in a long list of incidents that have occurred since my DC have started there. I’m not talking minor, insignificant things, as I would let those things go I’m Not someone who feels the need to complain at every little minor thing. Very significant things such as overdosing my child on paracetamol and not advising me as per their procedures that they had given paracetamol just to give one example. There are only so many apologies I can receive from the school before I have to take it further. I’ve now had enough, I want this to stop. AIBU to now take this further and not go through the Complaints procedure again. I have followed the school’s complaint process on everything and now I’m sick of it I wish to go to the Local Authoritytand further. The school needs to be accountable for what they're doing I don’t feel at the moment they are. I get a sorry but then they go on to do something else

@Perzival but if there are no other staff, what do schools do?

They've got a year to find people. It is extremely difficult to believe that, over that period, they really cannot find anyone at all in the entire community who is interested in taking on an invigilation job or one as a reader or scribe.

Plus, of course, it's not the duty of either OP or her child to solve this.

Despite the many posters telling you, from first hand experience, that we cannot find anyone.

If a school claims it is this difficult, I would really want to know what they have done to try to recruit. Have they tried, for instance, local retired people, students who have finished their exams, people who are part time working, their own part time staff, parents of their own pupils, local job centres and employment agencies, notices in libraries etc etc? How much have they advertised over the year since the last outside exam period?

@crumblingschools
Truthfully, I can suggest things which I've seen used but they may not work for your setting (study leave to free teachers and TA's from the exam years timetable, group classes from other years to free teachers, temps/agency staff). It is not reasonable to remove provision from a child with send that is specified in an ehcp.

Cheers for your advice, we've never tried any of those 🙄🙄🙄.

Seriously, we've sent emails to friends and relatives begging!! We advertise year round on the range of media platforms.

High schools can't employ enough TAs. No one wants the job for few hours, temp contracts and no holiday pay. Sadly some TAs have no filter and blur boundaries.

What your describing is usual unfortunately.

No, anyone reasonable would obey the law. The child sitting the exam doesn't have to have a TA, minimal training is required for exam scribes and readers.

One of the salient points here is that it's not a one-off, it is happening regularly. A child who is already struggling can't keep losing support and being expected just to catch up somehow. What if one of those days their TA has been diverted is the day he is really struggling and he ends up becoming completely overwhelmed, having a meltdown and getting excluded? What if it's the final straw that tips him over the edge into EBSA, clinical anxiety, or a full breakdown? That's not as easily reparable as you suggest.

This isn't a TA job. A retired friend of mine has a regular casual arrangement with a local secondary school to invigilate and/or provide SEN exam support. She's had the necessary training which didn't take long. For her, it's quite an interesting few days out of the house, and a chance to earn a little supplement to her pension. She quite enjoys seeing what children are doing in schools and even testing her own brains. When I retire, I will probably look for similar opportunities. It seems to me a win-win deal.

Thats how it happened. The school said no. The parents appealed and would be given a place. It was very unusual for parents to lose an appeal when they had an EHCP.

A lot of kids with SEN have a zero IQ for the purpose of being assessed on exams such as these. So it is an easy win at appeal.

But if the school can’t find people after a year of advertising, as is the case for some schools, how do they provide the support then?

But it is reasonable to remove provision from dozens/hundreds of other students?

In big letters to help you…

THERE
ARE
NOT
ENOUGH
PEOPLE

Enforcing their child’s EHCP does not make parents unreasonable.

Nobody is saying that. It is unreasonable not to consider the logistical impossibilities schools face.

If the only way to enforce your EHCP was to take provision away from another SEN child, would you?

Let's not even start on the days when you don't even had enough TAs for all the EHCPs and exams on top.... Bloody nightmare.

Suppose we should have advertised for a year for the day three TAs were off sick.

"No, anyone reasonable would obey the law"

Even the government have admitted breaking the law in a "specific and limited way."

It may be that due to lack of funding and staff "breaking the law" becomes inevitable and the school management have to decide "break the law" in a such a way to cause the least harm possible. Plenty of people " broke the law " during lockdown after risk assessing harms to them balanced against those for others.

Ultimately, given all public services including inspectorates and the courts have suffered real term cuts for years what will the consequences for this breaking of the law.

Many schools relied on retired people to invigilate exams. Since COVID, many of these people don't want to do this, partly because they don't want to be surrounded by germy teenagers but also due to the ever increasing issues with behaviour.

If enforcing the EHCP meant my child got the provision they are legally entitled to and need then yes I would and have enforced it. Provision for other DC is not my DC’s problem.

It wouldn’t be taking the provision away from another child with SEN. In the OP’s situation the provision is already with her DC. It is being taken away from them.

Anyone reasonable would give the TA to the child who has most to lose by not having the support. That is always going to be the child sitting an exam. Anything else can be caught up with later.

This implies parents who enforce their DC’s EHCP isn’t reasonable. “anything else can be caught up with later” isn’t true. Trauma from unmet needs can have a devastating effect on some DC. So much so they become unable to attend school at all.

The consequences for LAs and schools acting unlawfully are JR, DD claims, LGO claims and often a higher burden (financially, educationally and on the health and social care systems) to the state in the longer term caused by unmet needs.

The school has to use a lawful reasonasvi detailed above, if they don't then it is easier for parents to challenge because well the law. Just saying "no" isn't good enough.

If parents have been through tribunal they will have had to prove that the school was able to meet their child's needs and show that the school the la named couldn't. If they are both essentially not sen schools this can be difficult to do. If the school has used one of the lawful reasons then it has to be shown that this isn't true. Most parents won't send their child to a school that doesn't want then. Tribunals are usually expensive.

"A lot of kids with SEN have a zero IQ for the purpose of being assessed on exams such as these. So it is an easy win at appeal" would you mind explaining this a little more please? How fo you know they have a zero IQ? Did an EP assess them all and then deem that an IQ was appropriate? If so that in itself would prove the school couldn't meet need as this would show a severe learning disability and these children clearly wouldn't be suitable for a mainstream school let alone a grammar. Even some of the most notorious LA'S would have an easy job with that one.

Yes if that provision is in section f of an ehcp.

I have a zero IQ. I was at a selective private school and a grammar school. I got into both by passing the tests rather than on appeal. My LD’s only diagnosed at university.

It is an IQ rating an EP can give in the report which excuses you from intelligence testing. So if you have a zero IQ the 11 Plus will be deemed not to apply as it is not an accurate reflection of intelligence. Unfortunately, the reality is that the 11 Plus is a pretty good barometer of whether you’ll succeed in a grammar.

It also exists in the other child’s F but the school has only been able to recruit one person.

It also exists in the other child’s F but the school has only been able to recruit one person.

Then the school needs to work with the parent of the other pupil to support them to enforce their child’s EHCP not remove the provision from the OP’s DC.

The majority of access arrangements aren’t in F of an EHCP, though.

I see what you mean in regs to zero iq, I've never seen it phrased like that only ever as something similar to "an iq wouldn't be suitable due to the difference in subsets" (usually wisc where the iq score wouldn't be indicative of true intelligence and therefore unhelpful).

Again though if an ep has assessed a child they would usually perform various tests to inform the report, an iq test isn't usually one test but many different assessments to show where someone's ability in various areas related to learning. The report should detail the child's needs and provision to meet them. If a child has needs that are such that would make exam taking unsuitable even with provision then it's difficult to see how a parent could show a grammar school to be suitable and easy to see how an la can show it's unsuitable especisally at tribunal.

If an ep says a child flat out can't take exams then a grammar school with formal testing is highly unlikely to meet need. I can't imagine any parent winning at tribunal with that, even if the odd one did and the placement was failing why didn't the school detail the failing at AR?