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

Hi OP,

I completely agree with you. I am a psychologist and I work in a team who assess young people, generally those who are in specialist school provisions and it really can be so damaging. I am absolutely furious at some of the things I’ve heard being said to families in schools before they have even been assessed, sometimes whilst I’ve been sat in meetings. When challenged the people saying this stuff (eg this child is definitely ADHD) are very quick to back down and say ‘I’m not an expert though’ , but it’s clear that this isn’t how things are being said when I am not there.

In my service we have particular schools that we know often tell other staff and families that a child ‘is’ ASD or ADHD, without any proper training to make that call or any expertise to say that to families. It has been incredibly damaging to a number of families I’ve worked with. Of course, sometimes they are right, but actually I think it would surprise people how often people can get it wrong. I hate that children are being labelled with something that isn’t actually a fit for them. For instance, we often see great confusion in schools between ADHD and learning needs, particularly when in specialist school settings, where a child may be functioning at a much younger developmental age than their chronological age.

Schools are supposed to be needs led anyway, there is absolutely no reason why the assumed label needs to be written on their school care plan. It actually works against what education are trying to achieve as we are trying to move away from the labelling. Whilst there are specific strategies that fit with different diagnosis, actually we usually are drawing on a whole lot of ideas when making recommendations. For example, a lot of young people in specialist settings have communication needs, regardless of what assessment they are waiting for. This requires communication to be adapted to meet the needs of that child, and it really doesn't matter what the overall diagnosis is with regards to this. Yes basic training in different diagnosis are helpful, but we absolutely do not want a cookie cutter approach to working with children.

@BertieBotts you make a good point about setting in secondary schools. There will be higher percentages. E.g. in DD2's & DD3's school, 100% have EHCPs, and 100% have 1:1 support, and 100% will have some sort of exam access arrangement. It's just the nature of the school. Most kids have bounced around other schools who have not been able to meet need until they land there. We've been lucky that for our 2 children who are there, it's been Mainstream>X school, and Mainstream>failed Independent SEN School>EOTAS>X school. That's a relatively short route.

At school, DD2 can choose what level of support she has, where she sits, what the lighting is like, whether there is music, where she learns, and her timetable is set for her specifically. In mainstream, all the kids are grouped by age, and sometimes ability. That's it. It's no wonder that some of them just don't cope with the classroom set up. DD2 has fairly 'minimal' needs at her new school, because all the barriers to learning have been removed. If she was back in mainstream, she'd be out of school within weeks.

30% getting extra time is pretty ridiculous.
Extra time shouldnt make any difference to most children - provided the test timing length is done correctly...
So is it wrong? Perhaos i mean i almost never ran out of time on any exam i sat 30years ago.
My own dd has slow processing that schools havent identified because she can read well but maths she literally doesnt finish so her results (y7/8) would actually be up to 30% difference.

Some of the kids i know of arent struggling academically or socially or in anyway but have gotten a diagnosis. And frankly it isnt making any difference which is hardly surprising.

Being able to sit where they want to at least in some subjects would help so much!
We never had seating plans except in equivalent of tutor group.

It would help with working with others. Social skills to make new friends.

And also switching classes up in primary is harming asd kids (imo) they only seem to lose friends until they end up isolated. As they dont talk to new people. And they less often see people outside of school

I don't know why you're being so dismissive of being a TA. Of course I understand data and figures, I can see them and notice changing patterns. Perhaps I can't say for certain what's causing the trend, but I can obviously see what is happening better than someone who doesn't have access to the data.

So definitely nowhere near 70 percent of kids in total then? So I'm right they these figures are disproportionately high. And it's interesting that 5 established reasons for a medical break, a reader, extra time or bilingual dictionary in a class makes more sense than twenty odd.

OP its staff like you are your reference to ‘supposed needs’ that contributed to my Son expressing suicidal ideation due to complete failure of school to recognize his ADHD presentation and continued to ‘manage’ him like a neurotypical person.
Technically you may be correct that ‘awaiting assessment for X’ may be correct but in my opinion its hardly relevant and what really pisses you off is ‘all these supposed needs’. Horrible.

I'm saying that it really seems like with the combination of our school, SENCO and parents (whoever is at fault), you really can just say 'I think my kid is autistic’ without evidence and it gets recorded for all staff to see, and to start a process of 'evidence' for later.

I think that's presumptuous, because it's happening in so many cases and doesn't seem reflective of any other cohort or time in the past.

17 in a class having a dot next to them because they have SEN does not equal all 17 being entitled to extra time, though. Not all DC with SEN are eligible for extra time.

And as others have explained, there are factors that can mean some classes and schools have higher than average rates.

I'm not sure how so many on here are telling me how hard it is to be taken seriously with SEND and having to fight for it - I agree and it's those kids I think are being done a disservice in this situation.

"It actually works against what education are trying to achieve as we are trying to move away from the labelling."

I just don't understand this @Helloahs . I don't understand why a term that groups a set of needs should be removed. We don't do that in other settings. For example, medicine. We don't say 'oooh let's not call them migraines. Let's outline the challenges that all just seem to happen at the same time...nausea, headache, fatigue, brain fog, concentration difficulties....' No, we call them migraines. Now, some people who have migraines vomit, some don't. Some have a need to sleep, others don't. Some get visual disturbance, some don't. So it's not perfect, and we still might need to clarify what 'migraine' means for us, but it's helpful to know that it's migraine that we're talking about.

DD2 is autistic. It's why she can seem confident in some situations and is unable to talk in others. It's why staff get confused that she can tell them how she feels sometimes, and is texting me for help at others, and I have to phone school on her behalf. Having 'autism' as a label helps the school to understand.

Exactly this. I’ve got a child who has been screened and presents with a clearly dyslexic profile. All of his teachers believe he is dyslexic, and did before screening. But he is awaiting diagnosis- we haven’t had a formal diagnosis because the LA will not provide one for love nor money, and waiting times for private dx are also long.

so my child would be one of those with a “little dot” and a note. But he does need adjustments if he is to
succeed. He’s a bright child with a learning difficulty. He deserves to access his education, despite the system moving at snails pace.

Thankfully he has supportive TAs and teachers.

Frankly, who are you to decide which children are 'those kids' though? DD2 was a child who everyone thought was ok. Every time I raised difficulties, I was accused of being neurotic, a helicopter parent, etc. The HT of DD2's 3rd school, who was the only one who realised she was autistic, was still flabbergasted that she needed a specialist setting in year 10. Because DD2 didn't make a fuss, and she disappeared into the crowd. So much so that a girl in year 9, who had been in class with her for 2 years already, turned to her and said 'are you new?'

The kids who need the most help aren't always the most obvious.

I don't think I decide, I just know it's not doctors or educational psychologists in most of these cases. It's nothing more than the SENCO instructing an admin assistant to log it based on conversations with parents.

Loads of them, all of a sudden, because word has got round.

OP, you need to read the SEND code of practice. Support is not contingent on diagnosis but whether a child has significantly greater learning difficulties or a disability. Your SENDCO can advise you on this. Ignoring the SENDCO or the SEND code of practice would be unreasonable.

Shocking. Not least for the complete lack of respect for the qualifications of the SENDCO, as well as for parents and children.

It is not down to you to say a child shouldn’t be recorded as having SEN or receive SEP. That is based on needs, not diagnosis. It is for the school to decide that in line with the legal definitions of SEN and SEP, the statutory guidance in SENCOP and in conjunction with parents and any other professional/agency involved. Pupils aren’t recorded as having SEN purely because a parent says they have SEN.

I literally said in my OP it was being recorded as awaiting diagnosis, when it's actually not. Which I don't think I have no right to point out.

I also said I understand, and agree with, using strategies according to need without formal diagnosis.

Having an opinion that something dodgy is going on at my school doesn't negate my ability to read, analyse data, do my job or care about kids as individuals.

I've had rudeness on this thread for being 'just a TA' as if I must know nothing. I'm not so inferior I can't question a manager's conduct and integrity based on noticing unusual activity and the way it's being received in my workplace.

You can tell me all you like these specific things don't happen like I think, but that's showing real naivety.

If you believe the school is guilty of exam malpractice, why have you not reported them?

But as I said previously, just because you don’t understand or agree doesn’t make it malpractice.

Because whatever is going on has only just started to become apparent (and I wouldn't have noticed had I not looked at the profile of so may different classes as the cover teacher over the last few weeks) and one of those things that lots of people turn a blind eye to. I am aware I won't have the full picture, and I can be subjective as I think others are being. But it doesn't make sense and I don't think it's in the best interests of all the children, so even if you're mocking me, I'm asking because I think it needs flagging up.

It doesn’t need to make sense to you. And it isn’t relevant whether you think it is in DC’s best interests or not. It is not your responsibility to make the decisions. But if you think there is actual malpractice, report it.

I haven't tried to make any decisions, so don't be so rude.

I've got a concern based on the information I have. Every member of staff in the building from head to a lowly member of support staff like me has a responsibility to the children and the only people who can report even low level concerns are those who are there and notice something isn't right.

It isn’t rude to point out you don’t need to understand the reasoning behind who is classed as having SEN/needs SEP. It is true. It doesn’t need to make sense to you because you are not the one who is responsible for deciding who has SEN/needs SEP/or what SEP they require.

You have decided some pupils don’t need what the school is doing/providing.

So you are not a SEND specialist but you are undermining the view of the school's SEND specialist because...?

Tbf a ta is as qualified to judge as most of the Sencos or HVs we've encountered. To say that I'm less than impressed is a bit of an understatement.