Conservatives plan to make 'failures' resit last eyar of Primary

[Peachy]

yes, because my poor SN DS1 needs to be amrked out as a 'failure' at 11, separated from his friends and held back with his younger (NT) bother....

Cue, I suspect, one angry child who becomes even ahrder to teach and engage

Does anyone think after school clubs run by outsiders would help? I was thinking along the lines of Kumon type of learning. All the local schools could nominate the pupils they think would most benefit (with parental agreement of course) and the funding would be shared by the participating schools. I sometimes think primary school learning with just one teacher doesn't work for some pupils and outsiders might just kick-start an understanding or interest.

Free free to ignore me - just musing

Roisin, it was the same way in my countrym you fail you stay in the same grade until you pass (no idea if this has changed with new targets, etc). Yes, it was sad, but it helped children to do well what they needed to do well in order to have a good chance to do well in the next grade.

Sometimes it seems to me, that passing them to the next grade when they are not ready for it, it is just passing the problem forward without properly dealing with it, and perhaps, by the time someone decides to do something about it there would be much more to work in than the contents of a single grade, perhaps by then, would be already to late.

I'm here also talking about NT children.

Wheresthehamster, if one lot of kids got free Kumon maths the parents of the rest would be up in arms. Besides, the school day is long enough.

At dd1's school I know two boys are repeating Reception and one is moving straight from Yr 1 to Yr3. But it is a small school with only four classes so maybe that makes for more flexibility.

I wouldn't have any issues with ds1 attending, for example, a summer school. But labelling him as a failure because of something that isn't going to change I couldn't accept.

Ironically, I fought with the LEA to get them to allow DS3 (more severe SN) to redo his Nursery year, they point blank refused due to a blanker policy, the argument was that he would then reach his penultimate school year aged 16 and could just walk out without any exams (the likelihood of ds3 taking exams is pretty low!). So how come that wouldn't apply to this as well?

Interestingly, ds1 got level 1 on all his Yr2 tests BUT school upgraded him to a 2 for 'efort' , now I see why, if they're scared of what will happen when resulta are known.

Another question: limited numbers in a primary class,right? 30 iirc. So what if child A fails but all the classes, as most are, are full?

I don't think that children with a reading age of less than nine should be allowed to attend a mainstream primary school. Its unfair on them, unfair on the other kids and the teachers.

What is the point of trying to teach a child keystage 3 science if they haven't mastered keystage 1 reading skills. Rather than putting such child in primary school, I would favour setting up range of special schools.

Prehaps there should be state funded special schools for bright dyslexic kids. With tiny classes it would still be possible to teach such kids keystage 3 science and how to read at the same time.

I would not be against making truely bone idle non speical needs kids repeat a year in secondary school if they fail end of year exams. Other countries have that kind of policy.

Just thinking, if a primary school has failed to teach a kid to read, then the primary school has failed as much as the kid. Surely it makes sense for the child to go to a different type of school that might be able to teach him/her to read.

The 30 limit only applies to infant classes, not junior.

Really tired- children of less than 5 attend a mainstream primary, not sure how the 9 thing works? (did you eman Secondary)

The SN schools don't exist any more, sadly. All closed down.

But staff in secondary schools very often don't know how to teach children how to read.

My understanding of phonics has been gleaned from reading the press and nothing else.

I'm trained to teach kids science, not reading and writing. I just don't have the skills needed.

What of children who do repeat and still fail to meet the "standard" afterwards. It is perfectly possible for a child of 11 to be 2 years or more adrift

Peachy, we still have special schools, for EBD and SEN. Some of them are even boarding 365/24

though, there are not enough places in them, and few children are getting statemented in Primary

I've been thinking about this all afternoon.

If at the end of primary NT children have not mastered the basics - i.e. not got level 4s in SATs; maybe there should be a special programme/curriculum for them in yr7 at secondary focusing on learning the basics maths/english in small groups with specialist teachers.

Then at the end of that year they could be re-assessed and as appropriate either:
a) put onto a programme to continue their secondary education focusing on improving basic skills and also vocational/practical options (but not studying foreign languages, Shakespeare, molecular physics, etc.), or:
b) transfer into the year below and start yr7 with a regular class.

Really tired- children of less than 5 attend a mainstream primary, not sure how the 9 thing works? (did you eman Secondary)

Sorry I meant secondary. Oops!

Good reading skills are required for every area of the secondary school curriculum. The reading and writing demands of secondary school are incredibly high. To make it worst, support for non readers is truely pathetic in many mainstream schools.

I think the problem is that secondary schools are large places. A typical secondary school teacher might teach 300 children in a week. It is quite a feat for a teacher to know the same of every child he/she is teaching. In depth knowledge of the special needs of a vast number of children is just not humanly possible. There jsut isn't the time.

Classes often have 30 kids in with no LSA. There are a range of reasons why a child can't read. In some schools lower ablity sets are smaller and might have an LSA, but there is still the fundermental problem of too many kids

Often bright children who can't read end up in bottom sets. They are treated as stupid and then become disruptive and unhappy. It is a major waste of potential.

My cousin has SEN and was sent to a special school where the crap was beaten out of her by the boys in her class, every single day. The teachers made it clear that she had no future except to be on benefits. She's now a TA and her dd, who has teh same syndrome as her, is thriving in mainstream education. She danced in the streets the day her old school closed. But, that doesn't mean SEN schools are a bad thing if properly run, it just seems to me that a lot of the old-style onjes had to go.

Okay, have just read Dave's article and the main points are:

heads being allowed to kick out unruly pupils;
no more special schools closures;
Teaching by ability in all schools;
either a summer school to catch up or 'even' repeating a year;
free up teachers from papaerwork and targets;
parents free to set up own schools;
boosting the City Academies;
giving extra funding to children from poor backgrounds.

Agree with you roisin but with continuous assessments primary schools know who those children are long before the end of yr 6.

At the end of yr 5 all children who haven't achieved level 3 in n & l should be helped as you suggest.

Could someone tell me what NT stands for please?

There are good special schools and bad special schools. Plenty of special needs kids have the cr@p beaten out of them in mainstream. In particular children with autism can have a terrible time in a large secondary school.

The reason special schools have been closed is that they are expensive. It costs a lot to have a child in a class of seven children with an LSA than in a class of 30 with no support.

Maybe there is a lot to be said for having special units within a mainstream school.
The child would not have the stigma of being sent to a school for thick kids. It would also make integration back into mainstream easier if the child did learn to read. They would still be able to see their friends as well.

NT is Neurotypical ie. not SEN

I think that for some children with SEN, school based units would be fantastic. the children could be integrated in lessons where integration was meaningful, and taking out for specialist help as appropriate. For some kids, the SEN is to profound for any inclusion to be meaningful, and special schools are still vital for them to reach their potential.

but that also assumes that their SEN are appropriately identified and assisted early enoug to make a difference. With Dyslexia for example, it is often not looked into until aged 6/7 by which time NT kids have a year or more's start and how many others slip through until much later .

I agree, MB, when I was at college I made a film for the local council about putting SEN pupils on work experience placements and some of the kids we interviewed were brighter than some of my old schoolfriends whilst others clearly couldn't have integrated into mainstream education. It made no sense for them all to be in the same school.

I think something needs to be done. Holding back is difficult on a social and practical level, but for some kids, it would be the kick up the backside they need.

I think there is lots to be said for summer school, but I don't think you could leave it till the end of Year 6.

Where we lived in the US, the school district had summer school for literacy and numeracy. We were in a very affluent area and there was no social stigma in this. It was also reasonable for kids to repeat 4th grade, so they would remain in primary school for an extra year instead of moving up to middle school. I think the same thing existed for 8th grade. Had we stayed in the US, we would have had DS2 repeat 4th grade for social reasons (he was already up a year, so this would bring him down to his chronological age group).

Sorry MB, you're right- was over stating it and forgot I was on MN rather than accompnied by facial expressions!. But there are not enough places in Sn schools for children with SN, because so many ahve transferred to MS. And aIs aw a report last week that ASD rates are rising now upwards from the 1% figure- thats a LOT of specialist provision!

Just as an example- ds3, placed into MS with 50% 1-1 which can be delivered (and will be) in a small group environment: ie nto specific to him (thats what happened to ds1- they put the slower kids on a table to share the 10 hours support he gets).

DS3 is officially undiagnosed but clearly ASD. he has a working level of one language unit.... that means if you say please put the bowkl in sink, he just understands the initial unit- ie Bowl. He cannt communicate in any useful way. He ahs language now, but its of the level of pidentifying an object. He was due to start school tomorrow until we held him back. he is still wet (schoola nd LEA refusing to change na[ies, gess is being good with advice but atm even LSA says no tot hat job). He cannot draw a face, hold a pencil properply, eat with a fork, walk in busy palces of reins.

LEA expect him to start MS class of 30 tomorrow.

So really, its no wonder some kids fail!! Some kids never were going to do anything else! labelling them isn't going to change it.

DS1 is less severe and very bright in terms of verbal skills- 16-21 age range at 7. Writing and reading continue to be a hige issue for him, and LEA refused voice recognition software. Building realtionships is a bigger issue for him, and holding him back would destroy the hardest won thing he has- a comradeship with his classmates who ahve learned to adapt to his ways. I would love a place at a summer school from any age for him, but as that would be LEA run its not going to happen..