Pupils' right to one-to-one catch-up tuition ended

[telsa]

Oh great. First they come for the students......and then the little ones.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-11718968

Loudlass dd is severely disabled so I don't tend to go into SEN threads as I have no knowledge, that is why threads like this are interesting as I didn't realize it was like that, I assumed if you had SN you got extra help from a separate budget. I realize that SEN covers a lot more different "problems" that are not SN(hope that makes sense but I don't see SN and SEN as being the same)

In theory, I'm not against the idea of scrapping 1-1 tuition. Parents should be expected to take an active role in their children's education, but sadly far to many parents do just think 'it's the schools job'.

Loudlass, my DS has AS, and is also on SA+. He gets excellent grades, but struggles to stay on track sometimes and struggles especially with English tasks that require imagination, as they frequently do in yr6. so he has has alot of extra support from the TA's at his school, who have helped him enormously. It sounds like there is more of a problem when it comes to statementing. Your dd clearly should have one, it seems completely wrong that she is on the same programme as my ds who even without extra help would achieve above average grades.

If they sorted out the statementing system and children were automatically given extra help to deal with their SEN's then this 1-1 help would be given to those children that need it for that reason. But I don't think it should be provided just because some parents won't spend time reading with their children. That is not what taxpayers money is for.

I said all children have the right to a good eduction but not private tuition. All children are taught to read and write within the normal teaching system. How many of us had free private tuition? I didn't - and neither did anyone at my school. What's happened in the last few years to make kids need all this extra help? Did labour put something in the tap water?

It's madness - we can't AFFORD it !

And that's the government saying it - not just me.

I've read in many places that those who leave school without basic literacy/numeracy are much more likely to end up turning to crime (disclaimer: obviously this is a big generalisation and illiteracy is far from the only factor)

So it's presumably worth investing in these children young?

Have to say I do agree that people shouldn't feel entitled to all the help in the world when they can't be arsed to parent their kids. And there are parents like that. But we can't let those kids suffer just because they have lazy uncaring parents.

is someone going to explain the fact that more kids are now in ms that used to be in sn schools??

Right, so now all pupils who have received help through the scheme are the offspring of lazy parents who don't support their children, are they? And your evidence is??????

And since when has one hour per week become "all the help in the world" anyway?

Sometimes children don't learn even though their parents put in the time. My youngest is a case in point. I have 2 DC go through the same primary school and do really well. My youngest is struggling. he has struggled with reading, and writing, both of which are, in Yr 3, improving dramatically. But his numeracy is still appalling. We do lots of practice with him at home, both DH and I are very numerate and find it so frustrating that he can't understand! But that is DS. The school are giving him one-to-one are in constant contact with us telling us what we need to practice at home. The alternative is what? Leave him to sink ? Who will that benefit?

Orm - have you thought of sending him outside to play football?

(Tongue firmly in really cross cheek, just in case you haven't read entire thread, would hate to offend!)

Dammit clenched! Never though of that.

ClenchedBottom
That's not what I meant at all! :(

I meant there are some people who do expect all the slack to be picked up for them. I didn't say (and didn't mean to imply) that all parents with struggling kids are like that!

BTP, it is sad to hear of children that think so little of themselves when they are so young. But would an hour a week of 1-1 tuition really change that? He feels that way because of his parents, and whether we like it or not, disinterested parents have as much influence on their children as those of us that would walk to the ends of the earth to give our children the best possible chance in life.

It's just a fact that some parents are going to bring their children up badly, and tbh, I'd rather the money was spent on those children who have SEN's and need the help because of the way they are programmed, rather than children who need the help because their parents won't do anything to assist their learning. I know that sounds very harsh, but I say that because the outcomes for children with uninterested parents are simply not going to be that different because of an extra hour a week during term time. Their parents are always going to be a much bigger influence.

"If headteachers think this is worthwhile then they will be able to spend the money on one to one tuition but they can spend it on something else if they think it would be of greater benefit."
I entirely agree with this statement. I have been working as a 1:1 tutor. Some of the children have made fantastic progress. some have not - partly due to the way the 1:1 has to happen. It has to be 1:1 if using the ring-fenced money. Some of my tutees would have done better with another child there - obviously one at the same level with similar needs - but that was not allowed under this scheme. When the headteacher decided to fund additional sessions out of the school budget(which they did as they saw it produced results - so may well do again), we were allowed to be more flexible. If scrapping the 1:1 scheme leads to more flexibility then I think it is a good thing.
Overall, for me personally, I will probably lose out - like another poster I had been doing supply until cover supervisors effectively took over that job. But 1:1 is not the be all and end all. Hopefully my local headteacher will want to continue to fund 1:1/ small group tuition as he has seen it working.
And to DP - you are spouting rubbush as usual.

curlymama - why why why why are you assuming that the only children getting help through this scheme are those with parents who 'won't do anything to assist their learning' ?????? What is your evidence for this?

I've already said this once, but the scheme was widened out and is used to provide support for many pupils with SEN. From what I've read on this thread I'm thinking that you're all talking about a different scheme set up exclusively for pupils with parents who don't care about their education, so therefore those pupils are to be condemned to low achievement and all that brings with it.

I agree that greater flexibility would be good, but some pupils do need the 1-to-1, if only for a short time. It's the lack of ringfencing that worries me, because I think it will be used to show that schools are not having their budgets cut, as opposed to having to use this funding to make up for shortfalls elsewhere in the budget, IYSWIM.

Because if a child has specific learning delays or disabilities, or any SEN's at all then they should get help they need because of that.

If a child only needs 1-1 help for a short amount of time, then it is probably something that their parents, or a TA could provide.

"then it is probably something that their parents, or a TA could provide"
Perhaps a TA might, but certainly a few of my tutees' parents would have struggled to provide. Partly due to the changes in the way things are taught - I don't know many parents who can teach a wide variety of methods for multiplication/ division which are needed for some children to understand and achieve. Sometimes chidren can get a block on something that a short term (ie 10 sessions) boost can make a huge difference to.
"I think it will be used to show that schools are not having their budgets cut, as opposed to having to use this funding to make up for shortfalls elsewhere in the budget" but I do think you are right about this.

Examples like those you provide, needing extra help with learning multiplication, these are things that should be included in the normal school budget. Headteachers should not have to apply for extra money for something like that, surely that is something that needs to be catered for anyway? It must be a given that some children are going to struggle to learn things like that and may take more time. I know I always did at school when it came to anything mathematical. That's what sets are for, the children that learn these concepts more slowly are taught in a group separately to those that learn more quickly.

' DP - you're spouting rubbish as usual'

Says the totally unbiased private tutor.

reads thread, amused by clenched bottoms curtains point, wonders if we do the same job.... thinks sen money should be ring fenced as some (a few) secondary heads aren't that interested in giving it to sen kids...thinks that whatever the tories say school budgets are going to be cut - becuase of all these projects.....slopes off....

"Because if a child has specific learning delays or disabilities, or any SEN's at all then they should get help they need because of that.@

They should, but often they don't. For some pupils with SEN this is the only personalised support they will ever have received.
Plus often pupils need to have fallen significantly behind before they qualify for any additional SEN support, by which time it is 'too late' as there is a huge gulf between them and their peers, and the pupil may well be disillusioned and turned off the idea of learning anyway.

One positive of this story is that at least the government will be able to fire the public sector bureaucrats that adminster these schemes. That would be a genuine saving.

ClenchedBottom, I know you are right about that, but imo, that's what the problem is, that they don't cater properly for SEN's. Not that they want to cut 1-1 tutition.

Some children, like those with AS, need extra support at school that parents couldn't provide, like creating socialisation groups. These are things that are non academic, still vital, and have to be provided withing the school environment out of the school budget. That's one reason why I feel that children who simply learn things more slowly should also be catered for out of the school budget, because there are going to be children like that in every school.