Dyslexia, private schools, sharp elbows... Is this true?

[ZeroSomeGameThingy]

Radio 4's Today programme has been talking about whether private school pupils with dyslexia are more likely to get extra time in exams.

This is entirely counter to everything I've read here - where its generally argued that only state schools do this properly.

It is just more likely that parents who are as invested in education enough to pay although it ignores the fact that many parents are just as invested in education but lack the means to pay ...

Of course it does, mrz. I am know that loads of parents are. I thought I was till I discovered mumsnet and realised just how uninvolved I was by comparison. Still didn't make me someone who watches Jeremy Kyle or whose child was anything other than I model pupil.

I would be very interested in knowing at what point the DCs at private school are being assessed and diagnosed for learning difficulties. I wonder if there are any obvious trends e.g. a particular point prior to main exams.

One example already given states that the diagnosis was sought after the DC had already sat GCSEs and had not attained, what the school obviously felt was, the best grades they could. Unless the DC had joined only a short time prior to sitting their GCSEs the question has to be raised as to why the diagnosis was not made sooner.

At our school pupils start to get flagged up from year 8/9 as evidence needs to be collected especially for those who may need extra time. e.g. they are given extra time in school exams but change the colour of ink when normal time ends. This shows how extra time helps them. Then in their GCSE exam year extra tests (depending on their difficulties) will be given by the SENCO and those with standardised scores below 84 with be given extra time of varying amounts. Teachers refer DCs to the department if they think there is a problem too. Obviously evidence will be collected differently for those with medical needs that affect their access arrangements. So I appreciate that this is only one school but as our SENCO is qualified to carry out these tests (otherwise schools have to pay for the service) the ability of parents to pay doesn't come into it.

DS1's new Year 7 tests (independent school) included proof-reading and handwriting speed.
One obvious reason why the child with the A grades was seeking a dyslexia diagnosis after GCSEs is that they changed schools for sixth form. Although only 7% of dcs up to age 16 attend private schools in the UK, 18% of sixth form students do.
I understood that all universities screened undergraduates for dyslexia simply because so many dyslexics go through school undiagnosed.

I'm being told be those who professionally assess that children must be below the 1st centile to be considered for statutory assessment and even then it must be in multiple areas
That can't be right! Do you mean below 1 standard deviation i.e. 84, as per goinggetstough's post?

How did he pass the academic entrance exam? The school would see a contradiction ... a child who successfully passed the exam yet performed poorly in class.
You'd think, wouldn't you.

One example already given states that the diagnosis was sought after the DC had already sat GCSEs and had not attained, what the parent school obviously felt was, the best grades they could. Unless the DC had joined only a short time prior to sitting their GCSEs the question has to be raised as to why the diagnosis was not made sooner.
Again: you'd think, wouldn't you. But if the pupil is still getting respectable A and B grades instead of A* and A grades why would they be bothered. They probably didn't care because, by then, he was a PITA - partly I feel due to the bad relationship caused by their lack of professional insight. They should have spotted that he was playing up because he was struggling; they were the adults in that relationship.
He is at University now where they support his disability. He is loving it and is as keen as mustard. Shame about the school years.

Well a child on the 0.1 percentile (meaning 999 would score higher) was refused a statement IDK

I think the confusion lies between what the DC is being assessed for. Mrz is talking about getting a statement and I was discussing access arrangements for exams. There are very different cut offs between these two.

www.jcq.org.uk/exams-office/access-arrangements-and-special-consideration/regulations-and-guidance/access-arrangements-and-reasonable-adjustments-2014-2015

My dyslexic /dyspraxic Dd got extra time in exams under the new regs, the key criteria was being in the below average range for processing / working memory. I forget which percentile she was, 9th?, but I seem to remember that the below average range is below the 14th centile ie 86% would score better. However that is the criteria which automatically grants extra time, the SENCO types in the scores and assuming an Ed Psych report and evidence of need is also available then extra time is given. Obviously evidence of need and Ed Psych reports can be reviewed on a case by case basis but certainly it has become harder to succeed with that sort of special consideration. The new regs actually discriminate against very bright dyslexics, as OFQUAL acknowledges, since their processing /working memory scores could fall in the average range and still represent a disability, the latest regs were to placate the Daily Mail readers perception that getting a diagnosis is easy, and are a move away from the principle of levelling the playing field. Ed Psych are furious because it actually grants extra time to pupils whose processing scores are below average because that is what you would predict for someone of below average ability. It is certainly NOT the experience of my DDs peers whether in state or private schools that getting a diagnosis is easy.

My DD is 18 so I have experience of children with SpLDs going through the school system. As others have said some private schools are very bad at dealing with SpLDs, some are adequate and some specialise in it. I simply do not believe that a selective private school that does not specialise would have 50% of pupils getting extra time. The private sector around here (London suburbs) educates around 30 % of pupils and all identify SpLDs in around 10% of pupils, which reflects the proportion in the general population regardless of ability. Selection tends to be on ability and potential rather than attainment so you would expect them to find that proportion in the pupils they select. Of course there are specialist private schools, our LEA actually buses 30 boys to one and pays their fees because it's own units do not serve their needs, where 100% will be diagnosed.

In the state sector the problem tends to be that the resources are focused on those pupils whose attainment is below average, a pupil whose attainment is above average, even if it is below their potential will struggle to get the benefit of limited resources and as others have said often those parents, if they recognise the problem, end up paying, whether for an Ed Psych report, or for private education. To that extent, yes, money talks.

There is limited coverage of SpLDs in teacher training so you are also dependent on schools recognising the need for it to be covered in further development, and so the ability of teachers to recognise SpLDs and for schools to have processes in place that will lead to diagnosis is very variable. That is true for both state and private.

Shooting, that is true about the new rules. My dyslexic daughter got extra time in A levels under the old system and needed it (but she's very bright). Our dyspraxic older son also had extra time and typed his papers and he definitely needed it. Again he was under the old system.

Their youngest sibling has just been refused it because he's quite clever and compared to many in his private school managing fine. That's fair enough. We can accept the rules and I am sure he will do okay, but he definitely would have had extra time or a chance to type his papers under the old system and he does have difficulties which the new system does not recognise. He actually said to me he is being penalised because he works hard compared to others with similar problems to his who do nothing at school ever and get the extra time as they are always behind, don't do the work etc. None of us are too bothered about it as there are lots of ways to manage things, but it's certainly a change between a few years ago and now. It was all done now on the basis of what his teachers said to the special needs lady at school rather than what the independent psychologist had written in her report of a few years ago.

Greengrow there always was a requirement to have evidence of need from teachers. I assume it was never actually formally actually looked at by the exam boards and many schools tended to automatically proceed on the basis of an Ed Psych report. My DDs school was very hot on having evidence of need as well as formal diagnosis and there was a bit of a rebellion when some of the pupils with a diagnosis who were denied extra time because teachers felt they could achieve without it (my Older DD had been one) realised that were they at other nearby schools they would be getting it. The school then started a more transparent process with extra time being given to all pupils with a diagnosis in school exams and then changing the colour of the pen used for extra time to assess how much they used it and would need it in public exams. The tightening up of regs made all schools realise they had to have much tighter processes for gathering evidence of need. My older DD now gets extensive support at uni, extra time and software to help her with note taking in lectures, her problems really started to have an impact at uni.

I think any idea that schools were handing out extra time to anyone who could pay for a diagnosis (because clearly all Ed Psychs hand out diagnoses like lavatory paper ) is rather undermined by the fact that university's own testing processes result in many students getting extra time and other support that were not diagnosed at school. I have rarely heard of a student losing their diagnosis after testing at uni. The number first getting the support they need to achieve their potential at uni is sure to now rise, assuming they can overcome the disadvantage and get to uni.......

That is what is irritating about the new regs, they are not based on best practise as seen in unis, or their requirements, they are based on pandering to prejudice.

Yes, I don't think it was ever handed out like sweets. It was always hard to get. Two of my graduate children had extra and/or typed exams and genuinely needed it. It will be interesting to see if the rule change means their younger sibling under the new system suffers as a result of the change. The school has said as A levels are different it is worth their assessing in the sixth form if he might need help then.

So just to clarify, can Sencos still allow extra time based on a child's history of need, or do they have to be assessed in school by a senco ( with the Access Arrangements Practising Certificate), or by an ed psych?

In the past children at KS2 could have extra time on the basis of need alone, without a formal assessment by an ed psych.

KS2 is different to GCSE

I know.
Do Sencos still assess for KS2 then?

For KS2 school needs to show child normally receives extra time or reader or other support no formal diagnosis required

Hmmm.... Honestly, I'm still finding this confusing. And I'm frankly (obviously ignorantly) astonished that children can go through their whole school lives and not be diagnosed until university.

Is the diagnosis invariably of significant value at that stage? Would the child not have indicated that they were struggling before then? Or can you be diagnosed with dyslexia if you have not previously been struggling? What I mean is might it not be akin to the discovery of a tumour that isn't going to kill you before you die of old age?

Sorry if that is a clumsy question - I started the thread thinking that it wasn't an issue that would affect me personally. The answers here suggest that I may not be sure of that for years.

Some may have had some form of early intervention which has enabled them to learn to read and get by well enough to achieve results, others may have underperformed , others simply accepted that is how things really are or developed their own coping mechanisms. It doesn't mean that given the volume of work and reading required at uni level they wouldn't benefit from assessment even at that late stage.

My goddaughter was diagnosed at uni. She'd been in 2 indy schools- both very good- but because her dyslexia was mild, it had not been picked up.
It was only when she struggled with long essays that alarm bells rang. At school they just thought she was bright but slow when it came to written work and she had to put in 150% effort compared to others.
she came out of uni with a 2:1 Geography and was given extra time in exams.

The problem is that many bright dyslexic children perform at an average level - when in fact they ought to be performing 2-3 years ahead if they are top 2-3 percentile. usually they present with strengths and weaknesses across the curriculum and this tends to go unnoticed , compared to children who are not so able .

I listened to the Radio 4 prog and the point being made by Dyslexia Action was that smaller classes in indy school usually mean that any child with any kind of problem is identified sooner whereas in larger classes in state schools they aren't. Also, parents of children at indy schools tend to be able to afford private assessments more easily, are sometimes better educated themselves and know what to ask for .....

doesn't always work this way- I've personally known a good number of children at indy schools slip through the net, but on balance they tend to be identified and supported more.

My son was in touch with the university people over this and they were very helpful. In fact he and they gave me access to his on line time table which sounds appalling for an adult (I am a very uninvolved parent and did not even look at any GCSE course work of the children) but in fact that got him his degree. He needed someone to say okay today at 2pm you have to be at XYZ place, by 2 April you have to submit ABC piece of worked. It worked (that was what you might call dyspraxia not dyslexia). I would imagine most cases are like my son - they had extra time and typed exams at school and they go to the university and request it and that continues if it is felt justified.

We never knew with my daughter if her very mild dyslexia was so bad as to need much extra help or not so I have tended to leave it to the children to decide as public exams approach if they feel they need anything extra or not. My daughter even had extra time or typing the exams (I forget which) in post grad exams.

My older daughter was diagnosed at an indie, in spite of a family history I actually missed it and put her spelling and grammar down to having gone to an international school overseas. However she was bright enough to have developed her own coping strategies and there was insufficient evidence of need for extra time. She had a session with a tutor but had actually started using all the coping strategies that she had to offer! However once at uni she found taking effective notes on all the complex technical content in lectures, she studies Science, very difficult let alone getting it all down in exams. So she has software and extra time. Ironically I found uni, studying an arts subject, easier than school, suddenly all my skills in understanding issues holistically came into their own and my uselessness in terms of remembering detail (unless in the context of larger themes) spelling etc less of a handicap.

Everyone is different though, SpLDs isn't one set of symptoms but a range covering all sorts of learning difficulties with different sorts of memory and processing, motor control, literacy, numeracy etc etc

I am a pushy parent whose child in a state school got extra time in exams (It was the working memory score that was a shocker for my DS apparently Shooting.)

School never found him a problem beyond very poor spelling, as his reading looks fine (I knew he was not able to pick out detail in less familiar words so that he should never be your pharmacist!)

His MFL teachers thought it must be laziness but I think it was only as a parent that I could see something was amiss overall and pushed the SEN teacher to test again. Then phoned to see if they were requesting extra time. I also kept on repeating the working memory / mild dyslexia report to the subject teachers at parents evening.

I know my parents would have just said never mind we can't all be good at school. This still happens and kids with bright minds but who operate a little differently slip through the net.

funny, similar to those of my children with the working memory issues - they get/ got very good grades in lots of subjects but as soon as it came to memorising off by heart a list of French, German and Latin words it took them ages and was very hard. They did keep up and get one language GCSE but it was definitely the hardest for them.

I think part of the difference is down to being able to pay for assessments. If a state school has a limited budget then quite reasonably they need to focus on those with the severest difficulties. I could see why the money would be used to help a child who might get no qualifications to get Ds at GCSE rather than to push my bright dyslexic from a B to an A for example.

My DS are in a Private school and I paid for their assessment which was around £1000 for two assessments. A lot of people don't have that money to spare. The school has specialist learning support teachers that have been doing structured phonics on a one to one basis since Y1 with my DS. DS1 is just going into Yr7 and has been having touch typing lessons before school so he can move to using a laptop.

I strongly suspect that some of this support is put in early because the boys will sit their first sets of competitive exams either for 11+ or 13+ and the reputation of the prep school is affected by which senior schools the boys get into.