Rules about a TA teaching

[racetothebottom]

My son is out of school because he has Asperger's and is unable to cope with his setting.

School and all the professionals supporting him agree he should be taught at home.

We are currently paying for tutors and the hope was LA would take over this. They are in breach of their duty to educate as they are doing nothing despite the fact he has a statement.

They have now said they want school to send a TA to teach him at home until January when they will review.

His head is not happy and is seeking advice as he believes a TA should not be teaching.

I am sure this must be right but what is the law on this?

[racetothebottom]

Mrz - I am not assuming I am the only one and I am sorry that happened to your son but it is unlawful to treat a child like that as they are not having their needs met.

I was trying to keep info limited as, bizarrely, LAs have been no to pick up info from these boards.

But this has been going on since February. I effectively gave up work for three months last academic year - I freelance - to take my child into school every single day.

He then sat, in a corridor, or staffroom, with me, trying to work.

He wouldn't speak to or play with any children. He couldn't access the curriculum. He would not work with anyone but me.

The decision that school was damaging his mental health was taken by a multi-disciplinary meeting. They agreed he was not accessing the curriculum, he was being excluded in an inclusive environment and that an alternative placement should be sought.

This decision was also supported by medical evidence. CAMHS agreed he needed his educational setting sorting.

So, we looked at schools. Nothing suitable. So a meeting of all professionals, school and us, decided to try tutors. This worked really well and a recommendation was made to the LA.

Their response: send a TA home and go back to CAMHS.

So - I don't have any choice. He can't go to school because he can't cope (agreed by all parties) and there is nowhere else.

[Canthisonebeused]

This is illegal exclusion OP, as it sonds like you have been forced into this decision. I know it's not ideal but I'm afraid I would be taking him to school OP even if you are staying with him.

[Canthisonebeused]

Basically the LA are putting the ball in the schools corner and the school are shifting it your corner, I fear the whole time he is at home it's no ones problem but yours. If you have him in school it remains the schools problem and they can shift it Back to the LA but currently the school and the LA have a win win situation and you are in the meantime coping alone with this whole situation.

[racetothebottom]

We have not been forced, we have decided, with all the other parties, that it is in DS' best interests to be educated at school.

If I continued to take him into school and sit in a corridor with him, how would that help? The LAS would be perfectly happy to let me waste my time doing that and he would be getting nothing out of it.

More than that it would be very damaging to his well-being.

This was a joint decision, taken when an alternative had been identified - an out of school package.

The LA seem to think this means a TA. I think the law is against them on this.

[racetothebottom]

The school are involved because the LA are trying to force them to send a TA when they do not want to and don't see it as being in his best interests or lawful.

I think we will end up in a judicial review. But what a waste of public money. Tutors cost less that the TAs wages.

Its lunacy.

[mrz]

Is it an "official" joint agreement in writing with all the ts crossed and i-s dotted because I was warned that keeping my child home effectively let the school/LEA off the hook.
It is very common for TAs to provide this type of home "education" under the direction of a teacher (ie the teacher tells the TA what to do and the TA reports back)

[tethersend]

Since your son has a statement, the school will struggle to permanently exclude him on the grounds of the needs he is statemented for. However, they can say that they can no longer meet his needs- and this is the truth.

A TA working 1:1 with him at home is unlikely to meet his educational needs in the long term; so either a long term plan needs to be made involving a team of tutors (at least one of whom is qualified, although this may not be a legal requirement), or a long term plan involving reintegration into school. Only the latter would justify 1:1 sessions with a TA IMO.

Since nobody seems to be recommending reintegration (what did they recommend as a long-term plan, BTW?), then it is clear that the school cannot meet his needs and another provision needs to be named on his statement. When was his last Annual Review?

[mrz]

The LEA has said the TA arrangement is until the end of term tethersend which in my opinion is a long time for this kind of arrangement.

[tethersend]

Sorry mrz, missed that.

The end of term is very far away, and suggests that no reintegration back into school has been planned. In which case, what is the longer term plan? Where do they see him at the end of the academic year? Next year? For the rest of his primary education?

Any plan needs to consider this.

[Canthisonebeused]

From my point of view race, but that is just a point of view and think you having a barrister involved is right. But my point of view and my understanding of the law is that what is happening is not exactly lawfull.

You say you haven't been forced, but it seems neither have you had your sons rights fully explained to you. Like I said I'm no expert and as always the law is interpretable. But I fear that this has been sold to you as a joint decision, and there being no alternative right now. Because otherwise the school would have to exclude him and follow the exclusion guidelines to the letter, no doubt they feel they have their hands tied by the LA who do not seem to have your sons needs fully understood, but the schoo at the moment remain responsible for his provision.

I would not be so confident that because it is a multi disciplinary decision that is within the law, because it does sound very dubious, they are all lucky all round that they have your backing and sadly that happens all too often with illegal exclusions, is that parents don't often recognise it as such and it can be explained away as being the only option.

I'm not sure about the TA thing, who is responsible for picking up the bill? I'm assuming it is the school? Do they need the LAs final say in wether they provide a TA or a tutor? Why does the LA need to have the final say?

I think the use in going to school is that this will push the matter back into the hands of the school and the LA and I'm sure the results will be faster reached well before the next ousted inspection as I'm sure they would be asking pertinent questions to see a pupil being educated by his parent in the corridors indefinitely.

[mrz]

The school is responsible for paying the TA as long as the OPs child is on roll

[Canthisonebeused]

So does the LA have to have the final say in weather it's a TA or tutor though, if a tutor is cheaper can the a the school not employ a tutor, or are the LA suggesting just send an dieting TA, therefore no extra costs?

[mrz]

I'm still unsure about the status of the situation .. the OPs says it is a joint agreement but as there is nothing in place for her son and she has employed a tutor it seems unlikely that anything has been officially agreed with the LEA hence dragging feet and reluctance. It's unlikely a school or LEA would use their budget to employ a tutor in my experience.

[racetothebottom]

Thank you so much for your input.

We tried very hard to keep him in school but it clearly wasn't in his best interests and he was becoming very distressed. So we had two lengthy meetings to consider alternatives and agree something.

The problem is that it then went to the so-called 'SEN Panel' who just ignored teverything and said effectively - we are considerinf reintegration and want more assessments and an interim arrangement until they are obtained under which he is educated by a TA.

My son has loads of people invpolevd with him and has been assessed and tested to within an inch of his life.

Further, all those involved, including us, absolutely believe that that reintegration would be against his best interests and damaging to him mental health.

LA don't care, they are playing for time - every month's delay in sorting out a package, is a month of costs saved.

So they would rather force a vulnerable child through loads of unnecessary assessments and threaten reintegration against everyone's clear advice (including the EP) than sort this out.

[racetothebottom]

Sorry about typos- I'm reduced to working weekends at present so fingers are giving up with two days of solid typing.

[racetothebottom]

I should add school has done everything they can. It is not in his interests to be in school and they would not stop him returning if they thought it was. We are in complete consensus that he needs something else.

The LA are failing to educate him by not putting something in place. The TA thing is an attempt to fend off a JR action for this.

If he comes off the roll, he loses all the provision in the statement but it is the LA's fault he remains on the roll as they want provide any education.

[Inclusionist]

I haven't read the whole thread (apologies). Has a specialist setting been ruled out?

How close is the nearest specialist setting that would be able to meet his needs?

[Canthisonebeused]

I would be carefull being in so much agreement that he should not be in school, what you need to be pushing as far as I can see is that spcialist provision is to be explored. I just fear that your agreement will eventually lead to him coming off role and you agreeing to home ed him, which may not be in his best interest either.

What social provision is there locally?

[Canthisonebeused]

Special provision that should be

[racetothebottom]

We have looked and there is nothing that would suit. But I suspect this is what the LA are dragging their heels about too.

The nearest possibly appropriate school is an independent special school which charges 60k a year!

He has other physical disabilities and complex needs and we are not sure any kind of school would suit him.

I think he needs to do things differently and flexibly but the system doesn't work like that.

[Dwinhofficoffi]

OP have you spoken to IPSEA? Or an Advocacy team? I am in Wales and Snap Cymru help families of children with Additional needs as they know the law and how what and who to use to get results for the family.

[Inclusionist]

Yes, they will be stalling you if the most appropriate provision costs £60k.

That is nothing, highly specialist provision can be £200k p/a.

If they can't provide an option that fully meets your DS's needs in the maintained sector thay have to fund independent provision and transport to it.

You have let them off the hook with this Home Ed thing, they are probably rubbing their hands in glee!!

[racetothebottom]

I am not home edding!!!!!!!

He is on the school roll. He has not been deregistered. We are looking for a package out of school under s 319.

There are no schools available. The 60k a year school won't take kids until Y7.

[Ragusa]

Oh, I really hope they pull their finger out soon. It's shameful, the battles that parents of children with SEN have to go to to get the appropriate provision (not special, just what everyone has a right to expect e.g., a reasonable education)

You seem to know a lot about this issue, which can only be a good thing for your son.

One last suggestion - have you tried your MP? Even if they are not of your political persuasion they may be able to advocate on your behalf. Also, the press? They might be interested ...

[racetothebottom]

Thank you for your support. I really appreciate. It is like living in the Twilight Zone!