To think that NT children miss out in school inclusion policies.

[empee47]

To think that inclusion policies in primary schools are almost never geared to helping academic, NT children get the best out of their education? They’re almost always designed to help the underdog - not denying this is necessary - but those at the top end of the spectrum don’t get the chance to shine as bright as they might otherwise do.

I’m glad at least someone agrees with me. Your post is spot on!

What spectrum are you talking about?

It’s an insane question. You’re questioning why children who don’t need inclusion policies aren’t the focus of them?? What?

An academic child without any additional needs will be able to access the curriculum as it stands and benefit from it. If the teaching is not stretching that child it is nothing at all to do with the measures put in place to support children who have additional needs. It’s like asking why a gifted athlete isn’t the focus of policies put in place to help physically disabled children access PE.

You’re lucky that her school provides this. Ours doesn’t yet spends a lot on forest school, a chill out zone etc

It is certainly true however that some inclusion policies help no one, including the children they are meant to help.

I would expect an inclusion policy to include all children. The spectrum I am referring to is academic ability ie at the top of the ability range if you object to the word ‘spectrum.’

In my experience high achieving children are mostly ignored at primary school.
However, my DCs have been challenged, and rewarded, for their achievements and hard work at secondary school.

@Brownwithnopezazz my child has an Autism diagnosis, an EHCP and the support of a TA in the classroom. He hasn’t yelled or walloped anyone let alone every day. He isn’t a fox amongst pigeons, that is so hideously upsetting to think that people think like that about him.

In my experience the “inclusion” policy is a cost-cutting exercise by government and fails ALL children. It’s great in theory but it is not being adequately resourced (with people!). I can only speak from an Irish, primary school perspective. My school has an unusually high percentage of SEN pupils. Our two special classes are excellent and the 10/12 children in these classes are thriving. But there are many others who don’t qualify for these special classes and are failing in mainstream. We have small class sizes. Last year one out of 18 children in my class took up so much of our time, they were violent and unpredictable and after 3 years of having this child in the class the other 17 children are noticeably suffering. There is another child in the school where the situation is the same in their class. We could not complete the basic maths and English curriculum last year due to the amount of time taken up by handling this child’s “episodes” and then helping the rest of the class to regulate afterwards.

So I agree with OP!

Absolutely. Has been my experience with my DD14. DD10 is currently in primary school.

Inclusion policies prioritise including people who are typically less likely to be included. Your question makes no sense but essentially you are saying that your child is being disadvantaged because others are taking up their 'space to shine'. Honestly I'd say be grateful that your child's journey at school is as easy as it is.

I think you’re talking about a totally different issues, ie kids who can’t cope at all in mainstream school and/‘or are disruptive

Some kids are disruptive without any SEN!

I think this thread is about kids who learn in a slightly different way/ need a few reasonable adjustments.

I hate the way SEND, low attainment and poor behaviour are conflated. I have an Autistic academic well behaved child and if you look at masking and fawning behaviours, that isn't unusual. In primary she needed accommodations for misophonia, and struggled with assembly so was allowed to sit out by the end. She went through an attempted school refusal stage and had the odd meltdown but none of this was aimed at anyone except herself. In her secondary they get s3

What the government wants is all children to meet certain targets so school polices have to be geared to maximising the number of children that reach those targets. This means that children who will reach these targets need to be given the least support even if they need support in other ways, while children least likely to meet these targets need to be given the most support, even if they are better at other aspects of the curriculum.

DS was high achieving, well behaved and autistic, he was definitely a pigeon in amongst the foxes by year 6!

Unfortunately too many kids really struggle with school and aren't given the support they desperately need - which may well include needing to be in a much smaller class than 30 kids. Inclusion should be about what's best for each individual, not sticking round pegs in square holes because it's cheaper.

Don't worry, teachers have to demonstrate what they are doing for more able children as well as those with SEN. They are expected to ensure that all children make progress. It's just a little bit difficult when there is only one adult to 30 kids, you can't teach and make sure every child across the range of the abilities can access the lesson and deal with another child's meltdown whilst simultaneously trying to deal with the poo accident on the carpet. Well, you can, but no one is going to make much progress. It's not as if the class is full of 28 NT children who will sit quietly whilst the ND issues are dealt with. In any one class in my ( leafy green suburb) primary school, you'll find maybe one or 2 children with autism, 4-6 with ADHD of varying degrees, one or 2 with GLD ( needing more support to help them learn) 2 or 3 with dyslexia who need additional input for reading and writing tasks, and maybe 5-6 more able children who can help themselves when pointed towards additional resources which will stretch them. In some schools, there are many more children who need additional support.
Some children need more help than others. They don't need equal time- some children are very independent in their learning and pick things up very quickly and can practise at their own speed, getting support from their peers if needed, or looking things up. But some children, even in Y6, can't write a sentence without an adult sitting next to them keeping them on track. These kids have such different needs.
The sad thing is the that funding is so minimal that resources have to be directed to those who need it most. Yes, it would be great to have extra stimulation for the more able, but on the whole they can motivate themselves.

I really think that most people do not get how pared back school funding is.
As an example, I've prepared scaffolded worksheets this week to support some children, but they need to be printed and then glued into their books. So if we are out of printer ink and paper, and there are no glue sticks left, and the new exercise books we need haven't been ordered yet because there is a moratorium on ordering anything because the school is 100k in the red,( we've been told to wait till September for new supplies) how do I make that work?We've had 2 members of staff longterm sick, that has cost over 100k, ( or 3-4 TAs if you want to look at it that way.) There is no money there to pay for the recommendations on EHCPs, that is why schools are not encouraging parents to apply, as it will cost the school money they have not got to comply.
So if this is something you feel strongly about, please contact your MP. Schools need more funding. Soon there will not be enough teachers, they are leaving in droves. The expectations are so unrealistic, nobody is going to want take that on unless something changes.

State schools have limited funding and resources so can’t be everything to everyone. Thats why they focus on trying to level the playing field for those who struggle.

My DS has some SEN but is academically fairly gifted. He mostly teaches himself the examination curriculum whilst his teachers focus on the less achieving kids.

With the advent of the internet, it can be done at home. This is so much easier than it was in my day when I had to traipse to the town library - an hours walk each way just to do my homework. I left school at 16 as I hated it there and ended up a few years later doing 2 degrees part time whilst working full time. Since being diagnosed as Autistic, I now understand why I felt so out of place at school.

As the parent, I think it’s up to me and his dad to help DS develop his talents which in his case, is music. So we choose to go without other stuff to pay for him to have extra music lessons and provide him with decent quality instruments. His mate in his band has parents that don’t value music so we’re trying to support him too.

This, most schools do not currently provide anything meaningful for more academic DC. Mine has been bored at school for years because everything in certain subjects (maths in particular) is too easy. It is not in state schools interest to challenge/stimulate bright DC as they want to "close the gap" with the less able not allow it to grow.

Maybe you're point is should school be about using finite resources help everyone achieve 80% of their potential, or should all resources be focused on helping those who struggle achieve 90% of their potential while those who don't struggle as much are required to rely on family support alone?

Are the "average plus" students not helped to excel as much as the struggling ones are to reach average standard? I personally feel this is the biggest issue.

Those whose children benefit from a lot of support will, as this thread demonstrates, shout loudly that it takes away nothing from others and that able students will always have an advantage and do better anyway.

The first point is untrue. Factually, when finite resources are directed towards a certain group, the other group gets less and does less well than they could have.
It's a choice. The right choice for the country ss a whole? I don't know. Economically? Almost likely not, ethically maybe / probably.

Those who are the beneficiaries just can't bear to verbalise that there are tradeoffs to supporting their children. Of course there are. Just own it and say "it is more important for x to be helped by school reach their potential than y".

It may be true but it's disingenuous to pretend there are no drawbacks.

My phone is playing up but I was trying to say they get objectively numerically scored on behaviour in secondary and she's consistently top 2% so not just a "Mum" version of well behaved.
The odd accommodation for sounds and smells doesn't mean a kid shouldn't be educated in mainstream!

Getting 9 or 10, grade 9 GCSEs is plenty for a 16 year old to begin a journey of shining bright

Just push them at home and research A’level places which want quite high entrance GCSE grades. Then they will get pushed just at the right time.

In the meantime give them lots of things that aren’t academic outside of school. Just for enjoyment.

@empee47 if they are very academic you can let them shine by sitting their 11+. If you feel they are not being educated to that level due to the primary school’s priority on ‘inclusion’ get a private tutor to prepare. Grammar secondary have high expectations of all kids, whether NT or ND to reach their full potential.

So work towards getting them into a better school to suit their academic ability.

Because that's not how state education works. The point is to educate the entire population to a level they can go out and contribute to society (when you boil it down). That means inclusion is needed for the kids who might not achieve this or might suffer discrimination in other ways. The point isn't to let every child fulfill their max potential, though of course it's a goal many schools do have.

Some have gifted and talented programmes for the very top.

But yeah if your kid is pretty top, not gifted and talented top but could be top with extra help... your options are tutoring (with a third party or just done yourself), enriching activities or private school.

It's always been the way that high achievers aren't supported in school, it has in state schools in my area anyway. My DS who's now 18 was one. I asked at primary if he could be given work from the year above and they said no. This was all before a lot more SEN children were put in mainstream. The only class that had a TA when my 18yo was in primary was Reception class. It was just teach to the level that would pass the standard test. I'm on the other side of it now with a SEN 5yo who's class has 2TAs.
If there isn't even enough funding for SEN children to achieve a basic level of education, where would we find the money to give extra support to high achievers? I'd prefer it goes where it is needed. Parents can support high achievers, there are plenty of online resources that a bright and focused child could easily use. Teaching SEN children is a lot more challenging and usually requires trained professionals.

@Iris2020 it is a choice to spend money on children with additional needs. I am sorry if you think that I’ve shouted anyone down on this thread. As a parent there is nothing that I can do to divert the money from my child with SEN to your child without. If it isn’t spent on my child it isn’t put back into the general funds for each child as you’ve said. Clearly most people think it shouldn’t be spent, or at least that children that aren’t neurotypical are removed from mainstream schools and we return to the policy of keeping those children well out of the way of others so there’s no way that your neurotypical child could be affected negatively by a child like mine.