SEND - children’s needs to be reassessed from year 6 2029?

[missbish]

Are they taking the piss? After the struggles parents have trying to secure support for their child, they’re then going to threaten to take it away once they’re due to go to secondary? Ds goes to secondary this year so I don’t think it will effect him but I am so angry for those it does effect.

The 25-26 cohort (the ones that have started this year) will have been born in 2020-2021.

I would assume that those children, and any older than them, are affected either by a lack of early socialisation, or lack of access to EYFS provision.

I wouldn’t expect to see an end to the impact of Covid on education for at least another decade.

@Peridoteage - schools educate the whole child now, it’s 2026. Pastoral education plays a huge part in child development and learning.

It will take over a decade for any real impact to be seen

(Due to the right things being put in place earlier on)

Covid lasted 2 years.

WW2 lasted 6, and nobody in my grandparents 90 something cohort seem as anxious and unable to do things as teens now.

Im sure it’s had some effect, but I think you’re overblowing it.

Thousands of children in mainstream are expected to lose their EHCP's.

I agree. Our whole education system is underfunded and unfit for purpose. The reform is needed there. Reform that and many of the current send issues will sort themselves. Reforming send support is just a sticking plaster.

What’s been declared so far is:

• By 2035, EHCPs will be reserved for only the most complex special educational needs
• Children who currently have an EHCP will keep them until they reach the next stage of their education
• Children will be reassessed for EHCPs as they move up to their next stage from 2029
• Under the changes, the government projects that the proportion of children with SEND on the current highest level of support in school will start falling each year from the end of the decade

100% this.

i hate that a child needs a diagnosis to get their needs met but there we are, many people who are teachers either lack the skills, training or compassion to meet certain needs.

if a child is struggling in an identified area there should be interventions already on site to utilise.

I teach in SEND and all the children who came to us early made the most progress, even being able to transition to mainstream during teen years.

Early speech and language interventions are the most important and impactful approaches. No other learning can happen really till that has been worked on

I can see how they can build SEND hubs in large secondaries, but a lot of primary schools are still one or two form entry. So will the hubs only be in the larger primary schools, like 3 form entry plus? And will this actually work in all areas. It is an important question because a lot of parents who suspect SEND will automatically opt for a smaller primary environment, thinking it may be softer on the child.

Latest from BBC as funding due to be reserved for extreme cases from 2035:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/c98q9j04q39t

There’s FAR too much focus on curriculum content at ks1 and 2. It’s pushed out more important things and too many teachers rely on TAs to deal with a child with send. TAs are fantastic but are not trained teachers.

specialist teachers should be focusing all their efforts on those children.

So where do you suggest they go when they can no longer attend a mainstream setting? These able bodied normal IQ children as you put it, will be adults who can pay into the tax system in the future given the right support now. So how will writing them off and denying them an education benefit anyone?

also what's your beef with children/people with asd and adhd? Do you think only this with physical disabilities are actually disabled?

Yes, this is happening already because LAs are directing mainstream schools to take pupils who are unable to set foot into a mainstream classroom. They are shoved in any space the school has available-with some wobble cushions and a tent-and because the funding is woefully inadequate have one LSA for 2/3 children.

This is not quality SEN provision with a qualified teacher! It may be local (to save on transport costs) but I don’t think anything about this is inclusive.

But many wont. OP’s son is in special school and therefore given a high level of support and she sounds doubtful at best that he will live an independent working life. It isn’t as straightforward as ‘spend now; save later’. I’ve seen many such cases and sadly only a minority go on to live a life without significant state support in some form.

I don’t have ‘beef’. It’s pointless mud slinging and trying to make me out to be a bigot or a fascist of some kind, firstly because I’m not, secondly because we’re discussing the public purse, not individuals.

And I completely agree with you

I am already having to fight for my child as it is, no specialist can meet needs the only one that can was an independent provision but instead he will have to go to the Local mainstream school.
He has not set foot in a classroom in 2 years, has not had a any education,hardly any friend ships.
He can not cope with the very small primary he is in and they can not meet his needs even with a 1 to 1!
And he only goes in 20 mins a day.
He is behind socially and mentally, he still drinks from a babys bottle!
Can not dress himself,tie shoelaces.

I have no life what so ever (I love my child dearly) but im at breaking point to.

I have to find 1000s to fight this system but with this new one parents by the looks of it wont even be able to fight!

Do you think send tribunal find in parents favour just because they feel like it?

We have been so let down time and time again!
And I wont even go down the route of what some parents have done because they could not get any help!

So please the people who this will not impact but going on about money.
What do you suppose I do with a child like mine?
Just give up on him?

Nope-nearly all primary schools around here are starting them, whether they are one form or bigger. It’s in the library, or the ICT room, or a demountable!

Small space + LSA + EHCP children.

The teaching unions will respond to this. Be interesting to see what they say.

More people having children later in life. The jury's still out on whether being an older parent is a risk factor for autism and other LD or whether autistic people find it harder to meet people to settle down with so have their children later-neurodiversity runs in families, so that's a factor.

As medicine gets better, we save more premature babies who are more likely to be disabled and have lifelong needs. The way our noisy, fast-paced, aggressive and internet centered world is now makes it harder for neurodiverse people to cope when perhaps they would have in previous generations.

And certainly in London, intermarriage is a factor. In one of the boroughs near me, 1 in 5 SEN children is a result of cousin marriage.

@Playingvideogames

If you believe that “able bodied children with normal IQ” shouldn’t be in specialist, to meet their emotional and social needs - will you be happy when they’re all back in mainstream?

I worked in alternative provision, with some of our LA’s hardest to engage kids and real challenging behaviour. If their EHCP’s and support packages are streamlined, they will end up in onsite provisions in mainstream schools, and will not cope.

We see on here all the time that people don’t want their children going to school and witnessing meltdowns, or violence to others, or destruction - which is fair enough. But, when those children are either shoehorned back into mainstream, or lose their EHCP in favour of “targeted support,” they will end up back with your kids.

Sure, it’ll save some money, but the impact on education and engagement won’t just stop with our SENd kids.

“Small space + LSA + EHCP children.”

So unqualified staff, providing simple childcare, in an unsuitable setting? That is pretty outrageous! And at a time when the brains and bodies of those children are still malleable and they could make the most progress with the right sort of specialist intervention.

A lot of the schools around here have opened specialist provisions within the mainstream schools. These allow children to have hybrid provisions, within the "hub" when needed, within the mainstream classroom when possible. The idea is to allow a return to mainstream when possible. Schools have been given funding to create the specialist provisions (including a very high adult to child ratio of teachers and money to secure the premises to keep the hub separate if needed). This is actually beneficial for undersubscribed primaries with space in their buildings and also for councils paying millions towards transports for children going to specialist schools.

So if they won't work or live independently they should just be written off and be given no suitable education?

Or is that only the asd/adhd/semh children that need to be written off? Because you seem to believe those with the 'most severe' needs and learning disabilities should have special schools and EHCPs, despite the fact they're far less likely to live independently and will cost the state a lot more as adults.

So basically it's ok for some disabled people to have the support they need but not others? Those who could potentially contribute should just be written off because there might be uncertainty, but those who will never contribute are hunky dory. Because that's how im understanding your view atm (based off another post I saw you on yesterday where you said EHCPs should be reserved for those with learning disabilities and significant physical disabilities).

And you do know that some specialist schools do in fact offer GCSEs and A levels and other qualifications right? Being in a Specialist school in and of itself doesn't automatically mean someone will never contribute to the tax system when older.

When you say 'if we spent some of the money on smaller class sizes'.... Do you have any idea at all what that would cost?

Probably the whole 4 billion if not more. The capital costs alone to modify schools so that there were more classroom spaces, and then the billions on training and paying say 10-20% more teachers in the system, and that would be just to reduce class sizes to say 24 or 25 instead of 30. People spout this stuff without any idea the massive, massive cost

In some ways I feel quite optimistic about this. My experience with EHCPs hasn’t been good and making sure the support detailed is given can often be a huge job. The application process is stressful too.

If the right support was there in mainstream it would be better and not having to jump through the hoops to get it would mean earlier intervention and better outcomes.