Awaiting _____ diagnosis

[Bozzul]

I work in a school and we obviously have pupils with SEND, who have certain strategies we use with them and a number of others to monitor and trial things to include them.

All of them have attached documents to let staff know what's needed, but there's currently a trend for adding a sentence to say huge numbers of pupils are awaiting a diagnosis - awaiting dyslexia diagnosis, awaiting ADHD diagnosis etc.

They're not. They're still awaiting being assessed, and often because someone unqualified to judge has decided it's possible or suits them. But it might not be the case that a diagnosis is made (I'm thinking that the chances our school have such numbers compared to national data aren't high)

I'm all for doing what works for each child, and if they have tendencies that are normally addressed in a certain way, then of course these things can be used to help them too, but I don't think it's helpful to staff or pupils to imply issues which haven't been diagnosed.

Edited, helpful TO either staff or pupils

Pardon?

What isn't clear?

It should say awaiting assessment.
All of ours say assessment.

Surely it's helpful to the school to know which diagnosis they are looking into?

Why is it not helpful to list the suspected condition? Doesn’t it help guide the SENCO towards the strategies and accommodations most likely to work for the pupil in question?

I feel like leaving it blank would be less helpful.

I can’t quite tell what you’re trying to say? That the waiting lists are so long or that you feel children are going for an assessment when they don’t need to?

Are you a teacher? 'Work in a school' is often code for 'busybody with admin job who decides s/he knows all about SEN'.

It's not helpful because it's the vast majority of kids. There's no way that many have these particular needs. It's just labelling them with things they don't have.

Some aren't even on a path to being assessed and some don't seem to be updated for years (which might say more about the assessment system than our recording system). Meanwhile, there are kids who really do need certain adjustments, but there are so many individual suggestions for the rest of the class, that they're not actually getting anything different from the norm, even though they're already disadvantaged.

Why isn't it helpful? What's the alternative?

I agree with you that the process for assessment and diagnosis should be much faster. Waiting times are terrible across all services. Even once they are diagnosed they will be on more waiting lists for CAMHS or other support.

When waiting lists are 2 to.3 yrs long you have to meet need and put in support without official diagnois. Otherwise we are in danger of children going through most or all their educational years without support.

It maybe possible pupils are given support who will never get a diagnosis but if staff and parents think support is needed then there is reason behind that thinking.

Awaiting diagnosis or awaiting assessment -

both work well to be short hand for ‘has traits of X’ surely?

No, I'm not a class teacher, I'm a TA and cover supervisor. I deliver planned lessons (which don't cater to these supposed needs) to these children and plan interventions and carry out classroom support. I need to read the suggestions, but it seems like there's something for each child whether they need it or not.

No one is putting children forward because for shits and giggles OP. The child has been identified as needing adjustments / assessment. Would you rather we just ignore them?

So how many kids in a class on average do you think are awaiting a diagnosis of some form of autism/dyslexia etc? In your school

I don't ignore them, but some do. Because the sheer numbers seem almost to the detriment of the ones who have a definite established need.

They're not. They're still awaiting being assessed, and often because someone unqualified to judge has decided it's possible or suits them. But it might not be the case that a diagnosis is made (I'm thinking that the chances our school have such numbers compared to national data aren't high)

But you know this is untrue. Nobody unqualified has decided it’s possible nor that it suits them. To reach the criteria to join extremely long waiting lists there must be significant concerns and evidence that the child most likely has the condition to be assessed. Only professionals (SENCO, SALT, HV etc) can make referrals and must evidence these concerns.

Why would it matter if they are given adjustments & support before diagnosis?

I'd say most of the harm to my DC came in-between knowing there was an obvious problem & being diagnosed.

It's not like you are giving medication with harmful side effects without diagnosis. Every child should have their support needs met regardless of diagnosis.

You are unqualified to comment .

There were 17 in one class I covered yesterday. All had a little dot on the seating plan to say there was something I needed to know. And there were a mix of awaiting diagnoses.

This is on top of 1 diabetic, three slcn and and one eal pupil, which seems about average info over the years and for the ability profile.

I'm not saying they've definitely been referred, because lots haven't. This 'awaiting' is like saying expected at some point in the future, maybe...

So what’s your solution OP?

Is the concern that allocating resources to DC who have yet to be assessed diverts capacity from DC with diagnosed and established needs? That unfortunately support capacity is finite and inadequate and that providing it to DC who may not require it takes it from those that definitely do? (Not sure thats how it works, just trying to understand where OP is coming from.)

In a situation of limited resources, I think you put most resources towards those with the strongest confirmed/diagnosed needs first.

It’s been a minute since the last goady ND thread. Are you snowed in and bored OP?

Is it either because you don’t believe they ‘have’ anything or is it because you’d prefer the wording to be something along the lines of: ‘awaiting assessment for possible [autism]’?

if you’re treating a child as though they are dyslexic for example surely you’re going along with the fact they’re very likely dyslexic no?

The wait times as I assume you must know are long at the moment.