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.

When parents request mainstream rather than special they always get it. It's often cheaper which LAs love and it's also the one part of the law that LAs are happy to go along with. You don't find many LAs and parents going to tribunal about it as it's one of the things that LAs will happily go along with, no matter how many times a school says they can't meet needs.

The vast vast majority of children with SEN don't have EHCPs so it would be highly unusual for parents to go to a tribunal. Or are you suggesting that parents are frequently taking schools to tribunal for a lack of reasonable adjustments? You didn't say you were only talking about children with EHCPs so naturally I assumed you were talking about children with SEND across the board.

I don't think we actually disagree about the fact that there are thousands of children whose needs aren't being met, you just seem determined to try and make out that I think all children with SEND should be excluded, which is about as far from the truth as you could get.

I’m afraid I have never come across an example of parents demanding something an LA didn’t want to give and getting it without taking them to tribunal. It simply isn’t how things work.

I have said perfectly clearly that it is something that LAs 99% of the time are willing to give. It's the schools that object and they get overruled and directed by the LA.

I broadly agree with @AgathaSpencerGregson. I can only speak from my own experience and that of my friends, but our LAs all seem to specialise in offering precisely what the parents and child don’t want and need. DS1 attends a special school and we got it without tribunal (the LA conceded shortly before the tribunal date), by my god it took a huge battle, months and months, and thousands of pounds that we don’t have (expert witness assessments and reports and legal representation) to achieve. And then we had to go through the same bloody palaver again for him to stay at the same school for sixth form. The LA’s games over the years have included repeated lies, “losing” our paperwork, and mysteriously not submitting their own ed psych report to the tribunal because the report wholly supported the need for our choice of special school.

It’s also worth mentioning that DS1 is quite severely autistic and attends a specialist autism school. We are lucky that this school is (only) an hour away from us and in our county. There are very very few schools in the UK that are autism specialists. A lot of people seem to believe that ‘special schools’ cover every type of special need (or perhaps that every special need is the same (!)). DS1 would not have achieved the education he deserves in a school for pupils with severe learning difficulties and wouldn’t have lasted two minutes at a school for students with complex behavioural needs. All special needs are not the same.

You just don't hear about the cases where things run smoothly in the eyes of the parents or the LA.
But here is an real life example:
My DD currently works in a primary school as a teaching assistant to 10 children in an inclusion class.

She sometimes she has to do 1:1's with a clearly autistic boy who is in y1 in a 30 children classroom.

The school has said on numerous occasions that he needs an assessment in order to get funding for an 1:1 or a place in a specialist school. As he's not coping in the allocated class. He's been excluded, had reduced hours and is getting 1:1's as and when the school can provide it. Parents don't listen or care. They often drop him off and then fail to pick him up early if required. Social services not interested as he's in school during school hours.

Parents refuse an assessment and LA not interested as they provide a school place that is, on paper suitable.

That leaves the school & his fellow pupils to pick up the pieces.

The system is well and truly broken, not just for children with additional needs but also for the schools and pupils who have to deal with the issues every day.

Have to say I am really impressed you have LA EPs still able to operate ethically and produce a report that doesn't faciliate the LAs preferences.

@MrsLamb they seem to be a very mixed bag at our LA but the two EPs who have been involved with my DS have actually both been really good. I know anecdotally that many many others are not though.

The parents who are concerned and will try and work with the school, know there child is struggling and battling the system are not the problem- the parents who ignore the needs of their child, don't bother - those are the ones where other parents should be frustrated.

All mainstream schools and some independents have disruption in some of their classes. If you have a bright child and secondary school set in lessons they will avoid it for their secondary years, if they are average/ low academic your child will suffer the impact of others behaviour.

In reception it is play based learning and even moving in to year 1 that continues, so disruptive behaviour is going to be similar to pre-school, which if you know them, know what that will be.

Thing is, it isn't that simple. Kids struggle, and families seek help, and their concerns are dismissed by agencies starved of time and resource. Parents are blamed and given inappropriate strategies in lieu of assessment. It causes desperate damage to family relationships, sometimes results in trauma, which is one of the things sometimesbeing expressed in distressed behaviours. Unmet needs sit at the bottom of this.

Even naice middle class families who know how to operate within burreaucracies, and can liquidate savings to spend on assessments that are required to be provided by the state, but aren't, are screwed over with impunity.

What chance do families living in conditions of adversity have? They are not the architects of the problem. The issue is what little priority is afforded to familiy health and wellbeing and the resultant crises in support and assessment services. Parents and children are the victims of this and are living blighted lives as a consequence. Victim blaming is to be avoided.

Parents can still care about the behaviour of their child and the impact on the class - sen or not - those who don't care about the impact of their child and others are a problem in school and out.

I have fought for 2 children, not disruptive, but still had an impact on the learning of others in the class, because they took up time and resource disproportionately from the rest of the class. It took 5 years plus, indicated that there was no problem, doing what they could etc, any family in this situation should not be criticized by others - but as in the person I quoted, I know of families who deny their child who is struggling appointments with Ed psych, mentoring etc, because they think the issue is the rest of the class, being victimised, but definitely anything but their child - then I find it frustrating (mine didn't have any disruptive behaviour in their class, but their was significant SEN, which impacted the progress of the whole class, because they needed support - but that is life and state education- teachers are not miracle workers, they can only work at the pace of the majority.

@Takeachance18 Thank you!

We need more parents who think like you.

In a class of 30 children, 30 children are failed by the LA - not just the SEN child.

My experience of having a child with SEN in a class throughout primary where 25% of the other students had a diagnosed SEN is that if your child is both NT and without any SpLd then they will probably be fine.

If, like me you have a DD with both ADHD and an SpLd then expect it to be an issue.

Despite the Ed Psych telling school that DD needed to be sat in front row and away from disruptive students, that wasn't possible as they had so many who had the same recommendations; and as a well-behaved child (but vvv fidgety and unfocused) she was invariably used to help separate the more disruptive elements in the class.

As a result DD was failing primary to the extent I told the HT I would be withdrawing her from all SATS as I'd rather she had no record following her around than one where she failed everything.

This is the problem and reality in many primary classes. Adjustments are made with the expectation that all other children can adjust in the way most (not all) NT children can. When 20% of the class have various SEND and different needs, it becomes very tricky. Two children with ASD might need opposite adjustments which are mutually exclusive. Sometimes a child is very settled until another child with additional needs joins the class. Schools also get reputations as being 'good with SEND' and end up with unusually large SEND registers which isn't much good for anyone. There might not be enough break-out or sensory rooms to accommodate them etc. Which is why all schools should be better supported to provide for ALL children, so children with SEND don't need to move unless it's to specialist provision.

Not always the case at all... having just sat through a parent's evening where they explained that despite having an 8/9 as GCSE target they are moving my child to a much lower set as in her year it's the top sets with the disruptive clever kids.

And even if you KNOW that your child has a problem, actually getting any help put in place is a massive battle. If your child is also doing well (even if well below their potential) you have no chance of getting any help.

Private schools won't want them because it's too much effort when they can fill the places with high ability non-SEN kids, and state are busy focusing on the disruptive and those who may not pass.

That is another reason to avoid SATs if you have a child who is bright but not reaching potential. Otherwise they will be making the progress required and schools don't have to do much more.

We've been lucky that DD has some amazing teachers who recognise the problems, but in terms of concrete help for her SpLd and SEN we're yet to be offered anything at all.

That makes no sense, moving a child out of top sets because of disruptive kids, to much lower sets, surely means they wont achieve predicted grades and therefore negative progress. So more negative for the school than a child with no SATs, if predicted 8/9, where else can the school go, 9 is the top grade, there is no potential to go higher - if predicted 4/5, then there is potential to go higher. That is unlucky if the top sets are full of disruptive children that stop learning, but there are always exceptions.

@ANonnyMice I would be saying 'not my daughters problem' and she remains in the set most suited to her academic ability (clearly the top). The school need to deal the behaviour.

I am narked on your behalf.

I have just finished a term in a reception class. Fairly affluent, with quite a few awaiting EHCPs. As it stands I was employed as a general reception TA and not specifically assigned to any child in particular.

The reality is, your child will get less assistance and the TA will be very much focussing on the children with special needs.

It isn’t fair really. NT children who just need a little bit of help, guidance, care (as most 4 and 5 year olds need) simply just don’t get it.

Are you aware of the Public Sector Equality Duty @MissPop?

@MrsLamb

Nope. And I don’t care. I would still hold the same views. NT kids are suffering too. There are no winners here but we can’t pretend that NT kids are getting all their needs met. They’re not. I certainly wasn’t able to provide any sense of duty to all children in that class. It was absolutely the kids with SEN who took over.

Places you under a legal obligation to promote good relations between people with protected characteristics and people in other groups.

@MrsLamb

Who said I didn’t though? My time was very much taken up by those children with SEN much to the detriment of the other kids. I have an opinion on that. So what.

I think you've just made my argument for me.

@MrsLamb

Don’t be daft.

@MissPop you sound like you resent ND children ??