To think children are being excluded from school too easily?

[RibbyJumper]

Children and their welfare come first in any school - surely?

My DC had an EHCP before DC started reception. The school wanted to refuse DC’s placement. After a fight DC is in the mainstream school with extra funding (9 til 3 daily). DC can do Maths/Reading/Writing, has friends and is no behaviour problem. DC is very quiet and easily overlooked.

I’m so cross that they ever tried to exclude DC before DC had even started school.

DC is now in year 1 and there is no way DC gets his allocated provision. They’ve used it to fund other things.

However I now hear that the school have essentially excluded two other children in Year 1 in the afternoons. They stay for the morning and go home at lunchtime.

This is wrong isn’t it? What the hell is happening in our schools??

@CarefulN0w

I am in my fifties. 1994 I was teaching.

Another Mum same age as me in DC’s class. You’d be surprised.

The 9 year old we PX'd last week had done it in double figures

are you saying it's on the families to just suck it up that the child has been off rolled? In many cases, school dont even try as it's easier to just push children out. Mine was excluded due to an eating disorder. Her bulimia was classed as a health and safety issue for the whole school. Boom, out of school we found us (all we needed was a bit of supervision after lunch). but it was easier and cheaper to throw us under the bus. School also refused to apply for an EHCP. I did that myself in the end and we are now waiting for a specialist setting. It should have never come to that point. it's all too easy to ask this frankly ignorant and naive question of what people suggest schools should do. Many only engage in offrolling. It shouldn't be allowed. And then we also have tons of posters who advocate the banning of home schooling. Where do those people suggest children with Sen get an education if neither at home, nor at school???

OP, have you complained to the local authority that your child's EHCP is not being followed? I don't know if it's different for every area, as this is new to me, but I was told by our local authority that the school gets £9000 per year for every child on the SEN register at the school (they don't need to have an EHCP, just acknowledgement that they need some form of additional support), then the EHCP will state an additional amount (provided by the LA) to cover any specific support the school are required to provide as part of the EHCP, like 1:1 support, tutoring etc. As our school is in significant financial difficulty due to the actions of the previous principal, I asked the LA if the school could use the funds for another purpose and was told very clearly, no, they must use it for the child the EHCP has been awarded to, and they must provide the support in the EHCP. If they don't, I was told to complain to the LA. I was told that, where 1:1 support is provided, funding is rarely enough to cover 1 pupil, so if there are 2 children requiring 1:1 support, for example, that ringfenced amount will be combined to cover 1:1 support, at separate times, for both those children. Money for other things specified, like tutoring, can't be put towards anything else or pooled with any other child's funding. (Support for my DS was supposed to start in Oct, but there's not a peep from the school yet...they've been chased by another support provider and, after I follow that up, I'm giving them until after Christmas before I start complaining.)

No.
I'm literally asking what schools are practically supposed to do when they simply don't have the resources required to meet the need.
I'm sorry to hear about your daughter's situation and hope things improve for her.

@hopelessholly1

That’s appalling. My New Year’s resolution is to fight and not let this happen, The law is on our side and I’ve found organisations like IPSEA and SOSSEN to be useful for advice.

@C152 This is my next step. I did actually send an initial email this morning, and got the usual out of office/respond in 5 working days rely. But I’m not going to let this go.

@Nolegusta

I’m not so sure, when I see a shiny new event space being built next to the school car park. Perhaps it’s more about ensuring the funding is being spent properly.

Maybe they should turf out a cohort of non-disabled students to meet the need of the SEN kids. why does everyone always justify denying disabled students an education. why not the other way round? How about that @Nolegusta ? Would love to hear your thoughts on excluding the other side.

I'm asking what you think schools should practically do regarding the extra resources needed? The extra requirement for resources is directly related to specific children needing those resources. Should schools accept pupils they cannot provide resource for?

Schools often have the resources about decide not to use them properly. My DC needed an EHCP. school couldn't bother to apply. She just needed a bit of lunchtime support in the SEN room. No extra cost. Easier to turf us out. It's an academy and the head's salary is over 230k. Its not even a MAT and the CEO (on top of the head) banks a similar pay check. None of this is normal nor justified. If the heads and CEOs of academies would prioritise students of filling their own pockets, the situation would be very different. EHCPs come with funding. School needs to apply. But it's easier to roll people off. I can only assume you are not an SEN parent given your ill informed and tone deaf posts.

That won’t cover the cost of a full time level 1 TA when you include NI and pensions.

You need to focus on what the actually wording on the ECHP and if he isn’t getting it you need fo follow the school’s formal
conplaints procedure.

what are your thoughts in admitting less students without SEN so that those with Sen can be better catered for if money doesn't stretch to teach both groups. You never ask this question. All your questions seem to imply that is is ok to refuse an education for those with SEN? Can you elaborate please where this thinking is coming from?

Your question is completely illogical.
Surely you have to see that? The extra funding is directly related to the extra need. As for being tone deaf, that's a tad ironic.

Presumably the event centre came from different funding?

I knew you would behind some nonsense like that. poor..

Indeed.
Regardless of why they are dangerous, they are still dangerous.

It's not nonsense to speak logically.

I don't think anyone thinks children with a disability shouldn't get an education.

The debate is around the practicalities - whether the funding allocated by LA's is enough (it isnt) to meet the child's needs, how to get enough funding (difficult when so many equally deserving demands on public funding) whether a mainstream setting is appropriate for many children who are placed there (it isnt), why there is such an increase in demands on specialist school places, as fast as new schools are built they are filled, the borough I work in has doubled the number of places in the last 5 years but still over 600 children waiting for places.

As a health care professional (OT) working with children with disabilities, I can see resources being stretched thinner and thinner across education and the NHS, each trying to push the responsibility for funding onto the other, with the children trapped in the middle.

A standard school place costs around 5k, some special school places cost over 100k, the balance is shifting with less children able to access school without support than ever before, and more children needing support than ever before. This is a crisis which no government seems able to solve, and it's getting worse year on year. The amount of money which used to be able to fully meet SEN needs now barely touches the edges, and to get more money it has to come from somewhere else. The NHS? Social care? Police?

Of course everyone's own child is their priority, and rightly so. But those in power have difficult decisions to make, you can only slice a pie so many ways.

Yanbu op but people will defend it. A huge proportion of excluded children have sen. They're excluded because needs aren't met (not their fault), informally excluded all the time with PTTT before all other measures have been tried and being sent home informally. Then you will get people say exclusions are the only way to get help (bollucks).

Nope.
You've yet to answer the logical question I asked?
What should school leaders/staff do when they know they will not have/be provided with enough resource to support a child who clearly needs lots of support? Your answer so far has been that a large group of children should no longer be educated, and the resource actually intended for them directed towards the needs of one child. That's not logical and I've yet to meet a SEN parent who'd support that either.
Also, did you mean to call me disablist?

Focus on the provision detailed, specified and quantified in F rather than the funding or the school’s own internal provision map. If provision detailed, specified and quantified in F isn’t being provided, you can enforce the provision, via judicial review if necessary. Ultimately, it is the LA who is responsible for ensuring provision detailed, specified and quantified in F is provided. That includes ensuring there is adequate funding. EHCPs can be fully funded, but LAs won’t do so unless forced.

Schools raising concerns during consultations made during the EHCP process aren’t exclusions. Sometimes the objections aren’t even about the individual child but are more nuanced, political and about finances.

Unless the school is wholly independent, the LA must name parental preference unless the LA can prove:
-The setting is unsuitable for the age, ability, aptitude or special educational needs (“SEN”) of the child or young person; or
-The attendance of the child or young person would be incompatible with the provision of efficient education for others; or
-The attendance of the child or young person would be incompatible with the efficient use of resources.
The bar to do prove this is higher than many LAs and school admit. If the LA can’t do this, the school can, and legally must, be named even if the school objects. On its own, being full is not enough of a reason to refuse to name the parent’s preferred school. The LA must prove the school is so full placing DC there is incompatible. There is a point LAs can do this, but it is a far higher bar than they admit.

If the parents of the DC only attending part time want their DC to attend full time, they can unless the school has formally suspended their DC. The number of days schools can suspend for is limited, so they wouldn’t be able to lawfully suspend every afternoon for the whole year. Often sending DC home at lunchtime is an informal exclusion, but parents can put a stop to that. Alongside this, the parents can request an EHCNA or, if their DC already have EHCPs, an early review. They can also request, and enforce if necessary, alternative provision. IPSEA has model letters to request each of these.

YABU for lumping all children together
and you are being VERY unreasonable for bringing up teaching 30 years ago.

@Nolegusta

As a teacher, my reaction would be what can I do to help. That the child’s needs come first. My feelings, body language etc will have a direct impact on what this child will get out of school. If I’m negative or attempt to ‘other’ them then I am not going to get the best out of that child. It needs kindness.

The specialist school that I think DC would have been put forward for has a very high turnover of staff, has waiting lists and is some distance away.

So what then? DC has a journey on top of the schooling, probably needs a school bus, could well be out of education until a place becomes available. DC has made friends at school which are SO important. So, so important. You’d advocate removing DC from those friends and placed in a specialist school where there is also inadequate funding, high turn over of staff and no local connections.

And why exactly? DC is not disruptive and is learning?
Are we trying to create perfect schools where someone who doesn’t quite fit the mould can be weeded out? Are shiny new event spaces more important than the children’s needs? So long as the children who fit in that perfect box are fine, it’s completely fair to ship off the rest??