SEN betweeners

[sunshine244]

I've seen a few good posts on social media recently about the concept of 'SEN betweeners' - children that can't cope with mainstream school but aren't eligible for/suitable for established special needs schools.

I have an AuDHD child that fits this category. Huge anxiety and sensory overload led to burnout and school refusal. There are a lot of adaptations in place but ultimately mainstream is too loud, busy and overwhelming. But the special needs schools locally aren't suitable either as they are aimed at children with severe physical and learning disabilities. My child wouldn't get a place anyway.

Aibu to think that mainstream just isn't suitable for some children and that there needs to be a middle option of some sort? I don't think it's good for anyone when there are children struggling so badly in mainstream.

Also I read this on Facebook this morning, from Dr Naomi Fisher. I couldn't agree more.

I was talking to a grandmother last week about schooling. ‘I can see the difference’ she said. ‘When my children were young, primary school was relaxed. If the weather was good, they went outside and ran around. If they were sick, they stayed at home. Now with my grandchildren they are seated in desks for more of the day and if they are ill, they are worried that they’ll lose their 100% attendance for the term. The pressure is on to pass their phonics test when they are six and then to learn their times tables at speed by the time they are nine. They feel it and and their parents feel it too’.

There’s lots of talk about SEND (special educational needs and disabilities) at the moment, and how increasing numbers of children are being identified as SEND. It’s less common to ask questions about what SEND really means, and whether the education system creates more children ‘with SEND’ as it becomes more pressured and rigid.

For what SEND really means is that a child cannot learn in the way which mainstream education expects. They cannot keep up with expectations, either for academic work or for behaviour. SEND is something which happens in the interaction between a child and the education system. In a system where no 6-year-old is expected to sit still and learn to write their name, then a 6-year-old who just wants to run around outside isn't a problem. In a system where everyone is meant to be able to read by age 6, then they are.

We know from research that if a child is young in their year, they are more likely to be identified as ‘having SEND’. We know that summer born boys are far more likely to be identified as ‘having SEND’ than autumn born girls. We know that the impact of this immaturity resonates through the years, with the youngest in the year doing less well at GCSE. We know that the number of children ‘with SEND’ is going up year on year.

It's not really plausible that more children each year have difficulties in learning, nor that being born in August makes you more likely to have learning problems than if you are born a few weeks later in September.

It’s far more likely that in the push to ‘drive up standards’ the education system is becomes less, not more, suited to how children develop and learn. It’s more likely that the system is penalising immaturity – and children are inherently immature. That isn’t a lack or a defect, it’s a defining part of childhood.

As the education system becomes more rigid and pressured, we’d expect more children not to be able to manage without adaptations. This is exactly what we see. Those children are holding up the flag for all the others, saying that this system is not child-friendly and doesn’t take account of developmental needs and differences.

What if, instead of having higher expectations of the children, we had higher expectations of the education system? What if those expectations were of flexibility, reducing pressure and prioritising lifelong learning and wellbeing instead of short-term testing?

What if we saw the increasing number of children ‘with SEND’ as a sign that the system isn’t working for the many ways in which children develop, rather than a sign that more and more children have learning difficulties? We’ll never sort the ‘SEND crisis’ until we start looking at SEND as an interaction between children and the education system. The more rigid the system is, the more children it will fail.

I had to laugh at the news this week about schools using therapy dogs and treats to entice struggling children into school. It's still failing to support the children in the classroom.
DD's school has offered a theme park visit if pupils attend a certain number of GCSE revision sessions. The last place DD would like to go. Schools still don't get it.

I think the drive to push up standards and achieve higher results also has had an impact. I have been in education a long time. Every minute now is spent on cramming as much content in as possible. The mantra is teach to the top with scaffolding for less able students. In reality this means kids who need a slower pace and more enrichment don't get what they need. They are then disengaged and not having their needs met. There is no money for ta support unless you have a v tight ehcp. I think people have what they asked for years ago - higher standards and expectations, more rigorous schools. They wanted Ofsted holding schools and teachers to these high standards. They sought places at these high performing academy schools for their children but they now don't like where it has taken them.

One to one support in a mainstream setting is a third of the cost of a special needs school place. Also, there aren't enough special needs school places.

There is such a lack of adequate education in most countries. I really would like to see research internationally to identify and implement the best education provision for all children.

In Ireland we have seen an increase of Supported class parallel to mainstream. This appears to work for some of the children who are closer to mainstream profile. But there is huge gaps at the very complex and moderate needs.

There has been some positive improvements locally at secondary level. They upgraded to a parallel class at each year and a separate class again for those unable for any integration. But it is taking a lot of resources and school community support.

Some of the things they could do are free/ very cheap. They won't do that.

To be fair though, EHCPS were only introduced in 2014, and the first of those were given to post 16 students, as the previous Statements usually ended at 16, and EHCPs go up to 25.

Councils were I believe instructed to move those children to ehcps as soon as they turned 16, and so that number of 50,000 may have been largely 16-25 year olds (I'm speculating here). Before 2014 there were over 200k children in England with statements.

So, naturally, in the following years the children with statements would gradually be moved over to ehcps as per the legal guidelines, which contributed to the huge increase, as did the new requirement to provide that support up to age 25.

Also, the overall numbers of children considered to have special educational needs in England was about 1.5 million and now it is 1.8 million which is not a shocking increase considering how much more awareness there is of autism and other conditions.

Not trying to deny your point about funding and the types of needs but I wanted to clarify the thing about ehcps and some of the possible reasons for the huge increase).

There is not really a choice. The nearest schools to us are not high performing academies but they are academies.

This is the most interesting post I have ever read on this subject! I never saw it this way before. I had no idea that the education system has changed so drastically

All schools are striving to be the kind of businesses that people are now criticising. They are judged on their attendance statistics and their progress 8 scores. If these two stats are not good they are deemed to be failing. They put plenty of money into pastoral support and well being etc to try and keep kids in their schools but the fact is that the packed and high demand curriculum and drive for high expectations and standards, large classes etc feed into the problems that neurodiverse kids and others have in our schools. Schools cannot change in the current climate and be successful in terms of reputation and results.

Most secondary schools are criticised heavily by parents of children with send and mental health problems. Those whose children are high or middle attaining without additional needs are generally happier with the schools. Their criticisms are usually around the behaviour of students either being not strictly managed enough or being too strictly managed if their child falls foul of the rules. Schools are set up to work best for the majority. If we want schools to work equally well for those who have higher needs we need to accept that the education of the rest will be impacted in some ways. I am not saying that's wrong but it needs to be accepted as without huge amounts of money and / or a change in emphasis I am not sure schools can do more.

Or UK schools could just stream by ability much more than they do? I grew up in a country which was much more willing to stream and I never quite get why the UK seems so resistant?

Some schools have a asd class/unit on site but few and far between.

We had a asd school open near us for kids working at age related but struggling in mainstream but sadly it's become an overflow for the sen schools

Streaming doesn't help when you have a potential high achiever with ASD or other problems. DS was capable of excellent GCSEs and A levels once he was in the right environment.

Streaming is problematic though. There are a lot of children like mine with high intelligence but way behind their potential due to lack of support. Do you stream by results or by potential?

Yes but there are lots of options inbetween. You could have classes for children who need taught in smaller groups but don't need 1:1 care. My child does really well in small group teaching but only gets this once a week as the class TA is now only working with one child.

I don’t like the phrase “SENbetweeners” because i feel it minimises the needs of the children who are not being served. Having severe mental health needs for example is not a “mild” problem, and some of the kids falling through the gaps will end up suicidal, self harming or missing out entirely on education.

The reality is that all special schools have their own criteria and cater for different types of need, some may require children to be within the normal range of academic ability, others require them not to be aggressive, some are set up for severe physical disabilities or mental health needs. It isnt just a sliding scale of “severe SEN” to “mild SEN”.

Excellent post by @rainfallpurevividcat and a good example of this is phonics. My DS was struggling at age 4 because he could not say or hear all the letter sounds. Because of this he also could not reliably read or write those sounds. But speech therapy told us he was within the normal range - because it is normal not to be able to distinguish or copy every sound at age 4.

So we are basically pathologising a large group of children by telling them they are “behind “ when their development is normal.

My DS went on to achieve greater depth in reading SATS and is an avid reader.

Thanks @FumingTRex DD1 was picked up a few times at school for not getting the tripod grip properly - she got there in the end but quite late I think. I was never particularly bothered as her handwriting was neat and we were on NC levels then - she was generally two years ahead on the average expectations for her age. She got into a super-selective grammar and is now at the best university in the country for the subject she's studying. DD2 on the other hand, teachers never raised any concerns and she always seemed about average academically. I suspected ADHD and dyslexia but she enjoyed school and so it didn't seem worth following it up- we did pay for a tutor for Maths and English though which really helped. Just did not get on with secondary school at all so then pursued a private diagnosis and she is doing GCSEs at home with online school and tutors - expensive but hope it will just be enough to get her over this hurdle and into further education college. Her anxiety levels and mental health are so much better than even a year ago when she was still at the local school.

And my anxiety levels are quite a bit better too, not being threatened with fines and a criminal record for failing to get her into school.

You don't need the school to apply for an ehcp you can apply yourself.

It's a tricky question isn't it. I think you have to stream by what level they are working at, but ideally that would go along with all children having access to the support they need, and have the possibility to move between sets as appropriate.

My DS's school doesn't set at all until y10. It's been a nightmare for him in terms of behaviour as there are disruptive kids in all his classes. That's a huge source of stress for him to the point he is unable to go to some lessons.

The senco keeps saying it'll get easier when he's in y10 next year as those really disruptive kids won't be in his set.

One school we looked at varied class sizes for the different sets - so e.g. top set might be 30, middle sets 20, bottom set 15. The lower sets get more support. That sounded like a good idea for a start, not sure if that's common.

I think it is pretty common to have smaller lower sets. I'm primary but had to observe a day in secondary whilst training. I felt dreadfully sorry for a couple of quiet girls in bottom set maths; they clearly weren't very confident in the subject but the chances of them learning much were pretty low given the disruptive behaviour of around 70% of the class, the vast majority of whom were boys.

I completely agree with you. I have DD16 who hasn't set foot in school for nearly 3 years, ASD and SPD keeping her away from noise and busy-ness, has 1:1 sessions plus online teaching to ensure she can get GCSEs - my DS is similar, being diagnosed for ADHD (poster boy!) and ASD. Neither could cope with a special school, I've been to one before and albeit more teacher : child support, it's too much of a sensory overload too
EOTAS I think is probably the only route for kids who arent supported by their school

@Itsrainingatlast your post has confirmed my suspicions that school now suits so few pupils.

So many lives damaged, kids and parents alike.

I worry about this for my children when they are older. I went to an average sized secondary school with 700/800 pupils up to Y13 in 1991. 1000 pupils was regarded as a large school.

In the city I live in there no sixth forms so the schools are only Y7-Y12. All the schools are over 1,000 pupils. One school in a nearby town is over 2,000 pupils. Almost all of the schools in my city have been monopolised by a very strict MAT. My autistic son is not able to give eye contact nor will he be able to respond quick enough to their commands (slow verbal processing) and he is clumsy and slow so would be frequently punished for not getting from class A to B in the allotted 2 minutes.