Number of children with additional needs in son’s class

[Sazzle12345]

DS is starting school in September. He is going to a lovely local CofE primary and has a number of friends from pre school in his class. It is a 30 child per year intake.

I have zero experience of teaching and am hoping that someone can put my mind at rest.

I know approx half of the class, and of those that I know 4 have additional needs - likely ADHD / autism (but too young for formal diagnosis). I know 2 of the children very well and their parents are of the view that their children won’t be able to remain in the class for long periods and will need one to one support. Both of them struggle with aggression when in large groups.

Whilst not wishing to sound in any way insensitive to the needs of those children (I appreciate life must be very tough at times for them and their parents), my concern is for my DS.

The class has one teacher and one TA. I don’t understand how the rest of the class will be able to be cared for, let alone given any sort of teaching when at any one time there are likely to be at least 2 children that need to be outside the room and others who will need extra hand holding beyond what is normal in a reception class.

Am I worrying unnecessarily? Do teachers have super powers that I am oblivious to? Or is this sort of number of children with additional needs the norm in a class of 30?

I have tried to phrase this sensitively as I genuinely do not wish to be in any way rude or insensitive to any SEN children or their parents.

The fact that your children have needs that could effectively be met in a mainstream classroom doesn't negate the existence of children whose needs cannot be met. Or are you suggesting that all the parents who are fighting for specialist for their children have somehow got it wrong and all children's needs can be met in mainstream

My DS has SEN. DS ‘coped’ in primary but struggled when he started secondary.
He never hurt and lashed out at anyone else. He was not violent or aggressive. He did however take up a lot of his teachers time. He was highly anxious and would become upset easily, the staff would them need to calm him. He would leave the class so would need a member of staff with him to keep him safe. He’s severely dyslexic so needed support with writing, the school initially made accessing a laptop difficult. By the end of DSs time at mainstream I was having weekly meetings with the sendco which then took his time away from helping others. DS was time intensive, that took time away from everyone else.
When there are multiple children with SEN in one class it does impact on everyone for various ways.

@CoffeeWithCheese your children can cope in a mainstream classroom filled with 29 other children. Thats great and they absolutely should be there!

But it's the children that you have described as rampaging mini psychos who will ruin my snookum's education that are the ones we are talking about.

And like it or not they are having an negative impact 29 other children's education.
Why should the needs of one child trump the needs of 29 children?

As most posters have stated most schools appear to have a few SEN children in many classes my DD was used for a year to help keep a child with SEN calm as he would happily sit next to her and listen to her ! the SEN child was at least a year younger but the school had 2 years per classroom. My DD was bright but never really encouraged at school !

@Vinvertebrate those schools do exist. Two of my three sons attended special Ed schools with sixth form provision and did well academically (both went to uni)

Don't give up!

The point is, @Billabongo, that in a workplace employees will have the developmental capacity to regulate their behaviour towards others, and are accountable for this, including in law. This is not the case for four year olds entering an educational establishment. They all depend on the provision of varying degrees of adult support to stay safe. If that is inadequate, and people are getting hurt, then that absolutely is not acceptable, and the responsibility, and legal liability, sits with adults who are responsible, not with the small children.

If necessary provisions aren't made by the adults, and instead disabled children are excluded, or blamed, for behaviour arising from an impairment, this is likely to constitue disability discrimination, which thankfully has been outlawed in many forms in the UK. Until institutions comply with their legal responsibilities everyone will suffer.

Thank you @Stomacharmeleon - we’ve identified a school that we think will work for DS, but the LA is not willing to pay, so off to Tribunal we go! The waiting is insane… but I love hearing about ND kids like your sons who have done well. It feels as though I’m just expected to be complicit in my son being written off, and I won’t do it. X

No one has at any point blamed children. You are also mistaken in your belief that adults are all developmentally at a stage where they can regulate their behaviour. It’s one of the reasons why men with ADHD for example are so massively over represented in the prison population. You seem unable to accept that for some children the necessary provisions CANNOT be made in a mainstream setting and they therefore need a different type of setting. If a child is in an inappropriate setting and despite all reasonable adjustments being made they continue to hurt people then they absolutely can be excluded. Rightly or wrongly that is sometimes the catalyst for LAs to find the right provision or in some cases for parents to realise their child cannot manage in a mainstream setting. It is a common misconception that if a child’s behaviour is due to their SEN they cannot be excluded, this is based on an erroneous understanding of the law.

@Vinvertebrate why does everything have to be a battle?

I absolutely agree about the complicit statement. I used to hear ' but he is not failing' about my eldest as though it was the pinnacle of my expectation for him.

Makes me so angry!

I completely agree with you, but I also agree with the pp who mentioned the colleague. Of course it's not the child's fault - it has been pointed out again and again in this thread that people understand the fault lies with the LA and lack of funding.

For most children the necessary provisions can be made but are not being. And that is unlawful.

If the legally required provisions were in place, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

Most children are not having violent outbursts and causing huge disruption but we are talking about the ones that are. The fact that most children have needs that can be met in mainstream does not for a moment negate the fact that there are a significant numbers of children who have needs that can’t. It is not unlawful for a school to not be able to meet needs.

That is very naive. Even if the perfect provision is on offer parents are not obligated to take it and can insist upon mainstream.

What is this world where parents demand stuff and get it? I’ve been in SEN world for 14 years. I just dont recognise what’s being described here.

Do you have examples of parents demanding mainstream provision and being refused it? Because that’s what I am talking about on that post.

@jenandberrys even if it states 'special educational setting' on ehcp?
What happens then? Both sides are in limbo but surely no school (mainstream) would take a child under those circumstances ?

Expecting the law to be followed is reasonable. The law requires adjustments and provision to be based on the child needs.

Most legally required adjustments and provision are in mainstream. Because mainstream is the right place for most children with SEND needs. The point is to faciliate participation and end arbitrary exclusion because it is discriminatory.

It needs to be put in place, which requires it to be funded.

They get directed by the LA.

There are many many children in mainstream whose parents are desperately fighting for specialist provision often alongside schools who despite trying their best know that they cannot meet need. This is an awful situation that LAs are responsible for.

There are also children in mainstream because that is the parental preference despite all professionals agreeing that mainstream is not able to meet needs and specialist provision being in offer. This is an equally awful situation that parents are responsible for.

Its not as simple as parents good, schools and LAs bad.

The one thing everyone should be able to agree on is that the system at present is deeply dysfunctional and children are being failed

Who said anything about arbitrary exclusion. The vast vast majority of children with SEN are in mainstream and will remain there, literally no one is suggesting that shouldn’t be the case. You just seem to not believe that there are any children for whom mainstream provision isn’t appropriate.

I haven't said that.

My point is that many behavioural problems in mainstream would be resolved in mainstream if the right adjustments were made and adequate provision put in place. Very often this is not happening. It doesn't mean mainstream is the wrong place, it means the law needs to be complied with in mainstream.

That is sometimes the case and sometimes not the case. Your assertion that 'many' issues would be resolved and 'very' often this isn't happening is somewhat subjective. You also don't seem to acknowledge that the law is an abstract concept and it is not actually based in what is possible or available. The resource blind nature of the law is not particularly helpful if it's not based in reality. You can have an EHCP that states that your child needs a place in a specialist therapeutic placement no more than 30 minutes drive from your house, but if no such setting exists it is not going to suddenly appear because the law says so. If the EHCP says that your child needs 1:1 support from someone trained in x, y and z but that person doesn't exist or they do exist but don't want the job, then the fact the law says it is largely irrelevant. It's like when Labour said that they had set a legally binding target of reducing child poverty to a certain level, just making it a law didn't make it happen.

I don’t have any examples of parents demanding anything and getting it. It simply isn’t what happens.

It's not in the slightest bit subjective. Parents win 97% of first tier tribunals.

Provision that would enable children's needs to be met is being unlawfullly withheld.