New head wanting to move away from good SEN reputation

[yoshiblue]

We are currently looking at a number of secondary schools for my DS in Year 5 and has ADHD. One of our options is a non selective secondary who recently has had a new head.

I’ve heard through the grapevine that the head is trying to move the school away from having a reputation for SEN and attracting EHCP pupils.

For those who work in education, I’m keen to understand the reasons for this. It’s my assumption it’s probably to do with lack of money/resources to support these children? Maybe even an EHCP doesn’t bring the actual money it should to support a child? Is it down to pressure for results too? I know the school has joined a MAT a couple of years ago.

My son generally has low level SEN needs but obviously want him to be understood and supported. Sadly where we live, there are a lot of grammar schools and the other catchment comprehensive isn’t great so it is one of our main options.

Advice most appreciated.

I don't think anyone would agree with your immediate option to be honest. Especially if their child was about to be harmed. These are the moments when the laws clash. In this case safeguarding and EHCP provision. Safeguarding prevails to keep children safe.

Again, other pupils’ SEN is not a lawful excuse.

I'm tapping out. You've clearly not been in a classroom and seen the reality of what goes on. Teachers and TAs are trying their best all day every day for students with SEN. You live in a dreamworld.

I'm frustrated with myself getting drawn into another discussion with someone who has no idea of the real situation. It's easy to sit in an ivory tower and claim all schools are shit and illegal. The reality is so so different.

Get angry at the government. Not the people trying their hardest every single day. Stop telling us we're wrong to do what we can to best support students in our care. Stop telling us the LA process is quick (it isn't). Stop belittling people online.

I have not stated “all schools are shit and illegal” or ‘belittled’ anyone. Just because I don’t agree with you, doesn’t mean I don’t know what goes on or understand the reality. As I posted previously, one can blame the government and also not condone schools aren’t unlawfully. JR to enforce EHCP provision does not take years. Have a look at SOSSEN for the explanation of the timescales.

This. It's simply not possible to work with my 1:1 while all hell breaks loose in the classroom. In my experience, 1:1 TAs are rarely funded for completely full-time hours anyway. My 1:1 is funded for 18 hours, the school has to fund the difference so am I supposed to time myself to work those 18 hours and then leave him to his own devices? Schools are massively understaffed - no school could function if everyone was a jobsworth. We have to all muck in where it's needed or the whole precarious system would just collapse. We all do what we can to provide the very best education we can for children with wildly differing needs and very limited resources and teachers are my heroes.

If you mean section F states full-time but the LA’s funding doesn’t cover full time, the pupil is still legally entitled to full-time hours, and the LA can be forced to fully fund the EHCP (no, it doesn’t take years).

It is not being a jobsworth to enforce provision pupils have been deemed to need and are legally entitled to.

JR to enforce EHCP provision does not take years

I don't know why you keep repeating this. The 1:1 is in the room, but they aren't going to sit and watch other children get harmed.

To get an EHCP, funding or anything (if needed) for the other child would take months and more likely years.

Suggest how people day to day can do any better?

Again, the other pupils’ SEN is irrelevant, especially to my last post which was about 18hrs of funding rather than full-time funding, nothing to do with any other pupil. I have repeated it because it is accurate and in response to others saying it takes a long time. If 1:1 is detailed, specified and quantified in F and isn’t being provided it can be enforced regardless of the reason.

@YellowRosesWithRedTips I have been through,the system to a tribunal. lA’s and school’s flout the law daily and what you don’t mention is that JR can be financially ruinous if not done with proper legal advice. I have threatened it myself and used pre action protocol letters. Unfortunately unless a judge or yourself is physically in the classroom you can’t guarantee your Ehcp will be honoured. In my ds class there were at least 6 children who needed Ehcp’s, one was violent but parents were in denial or didn’t have the will to apply and school certainly didn’t help by saying their children would not qualify as they didn’t want to do the paperwork. When I did an SAR it was astonishing the lies school told to cover themselves and until the culture of the LA’s change and there is proper investment into SEN nothing will happen sadly.

@User2346 JR (which of course you would ‘do properly’, it’s not something one decides to do on a whim) to enforce provision in an EHCP would not be ‘financially ruinous’ because, as I have explained, the case (not including the PAP letter) itself is brought in the child’s name therefore they can be eligible for legal aid in their own right. I do this day in, day out. I know exactly what goes on. I know LAs and some schools act unlawfully day in, day out. I also know DC whose parents advocate and enforce their DC’s rights get better provision.

@YellowRosesWithRedTips I can assure you that I advocate for my child’s rights on a daily basis. I am well aware of the JR process and have seen it go very tits up for some parents not getting proper legal advice.

I didn’t say you didn’t. I was pointing out DC whose parents advocate and enforce their rights get better support. I did not say you didn’t advocate. If you are aware of the JR process you will know the cases are brought in the child’s name and therefore they can be eligible for legal aid so it won’t be/isn’t financially ruinous.

@YellowRosesWithRedTips CAN be eligible for legal aid, not all children are. Are you a lawyer or an advocate?

@User2346 I did say can be, several times. The majority of children are eligible because they are assessed on their own finances. Neither, I haven’t stated I am either.

@YellowRosesWithRedTips ah ok you said you do Ehcp’s every day?? I help parents too and ALWAYS signpost towards IPSEA or SOSiSEN if parents can’t afford a lawyer. Sometimes the wrong advice can do more harm than good and I prefer beyond initial encouragement to let the experts take care of the families.

@User2346 I did say that because it is true, I do. I work for a charity who supports parents of disabled children, including in the enforcement of EHCPs.

I am often seen directing posters on MN (and in IRL) to IPSEA and SOSSEN, particularly SOSSEN for help with a pre-action letter.

Yes, the wrong advice can do more harm than good. I spend my days unpicking myths such as the provision in EHCPs doesn’t have to be provided, you can’t do anything about it, we are allowed not to provide it because we don’t have the funding, it’s OK DC get some of the provision and we can decide what to give, DC doesn’t really need it, JR takes years… when EHCP provision can be enforced.

@YellowRosesWithRedTips - I hadn't heard of that but it says it's "integrated co-teaching" which is the term I'd heard.
All the info I'm getting is from parents of children with SEN on US groups for various SEN, some have experienced this as parents, some just heard about it from other parents or have been teachers in this type of setting.
The word was it varied considerably between states. So this would just be one way of running it. The Nest programme seems to be just for ASD but other parents have said it exists for other needs.

The school my niece went to actively discouraged parents of children with SEN from applying because they would bring the exam results down. It's a school run on Michaela lines & all they care about is league tables & exam results. I know of parents of children who were only diagnosed after starting & the school were openly hostile towards them, trying to persuade them to move their children elsewhere, these aren't children in nappies or wheelchairs, just autism & ADHD.