Teachers do not adhere to Statemented 1 to 1 support, do not believe in sub-levels, make APP assessments up....How much of what parents are told by schools about teaching is a box ticking exercise?

[Regards]

Following on from this thread:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/primary/1859219-Im-a-teacher-and-happy-to-answer-any-questions

and this:
community.tes.co.uk/tes_primary/f/36/t/381051.aspx?pi2132219857=1

I realised I was incredibly gullible when my DC first started school. What exactly should we believe concerning what the teachers tell us, how much is a PR job to cover up the ugly truth?

the best he could at the time, bearing in mind all the other needs within the school.

but next year/soonish statements go don't they?

Will be replaced by EHCP's though for High Needs Pupils. They are supposed to detail the whole of an individual's provision on one document.

If my child had a statement that specified 1:1 support, and the school had told me that they could not deliver that which is protected by law, I would take the Local Authority to court and the HT may or may not be called as a witness.

It will be the Local Authority that gets charged, not the school. However there is something very morally wrong with a headteacher who doesn't fulfil his statutory responsibility and then hides it from the parent to prevent them from taking the Local Authority to court, or from enabling that child, when they are16 to take the Local Authority to court themselves and be awarded substantial compensation.

I am not suggesting that your DP would do this. I know a whole bunch of schools who DO hide the fact from parents that their children are not getting the provision as specified in their statement. In fact a number of teachers on here have said that they wouldn't tell the parents and found all kinds of justifications.

There ARE no justifications for covering up illegal activity in order to protect your boss. How could there be?

starlight you are very idealistic. but honestly to be a HT, I think you have to focus on what you can do. and forget the rest. otherwise you would have to leave the job.

DS2's primary have started using APP grids to calculate sub-levels in a supposedly more objective manner that, in the interests of parents and small children understanding 'levels' better. DS2 has very high (99th percentile) and will engage in 1:1 assessment but his output in the class is minimal. Hence the teachers are not able to highlight skills as having been mastered as they have to witness them on 3 separate occasions. Along come KS2 SATs and he passes the level 3 maths paper. Is he given level 3? No. Teacher assessment overrides exam performance and he does not work at that level in class and so he was given a 2A. Does he work at that level in class? No.

Appears arbitrary until you remember that this enters the official stats and is the measure of adequate progress used by Ofsted. If DS2 had been given a level 3 he would have been expected to make at least two flat levels by KS2 (ie a minimum of 5C). Recording it as 2A means that he is only expected to achieve two flat levels of progress by KS2 and so achieving level 4C would be viewed as adequate progress.

The underlying rationale to using a statemented child's 1:1 for another child makes perfect bureaucratic sense. ime the children that get support are those that are either disruptive to the teacher and learning of the other DC and/or are in danger of not making adequate progress and/or achieving the minimum level of attainment. Unfortunately, this is the case whether or not the child has a statement. We all know that this is not done for the benefit of the child. Perhaps that's why teachers come across so aggressively defensive.

All this talk of how 'disabling' 1:1 support is and how fantastic 'nurture groups' are is a crock. Again, ime, it is amazing how there are only nurture groups in year 2 (KS1 stats) and year 6 (KS2 stats) and that the criteria used for selection is not the level of need of the child but the impact they will have on the stats if they don't get a particular level. In year 6 support was 'diverted' from the statemented child that was exempt from the tests to support nurture groups that were based on the need of the school not the child.

Idealistic?

Pessimistic you mean. How on earth can you make a conclusion that a parents fight for her child to receive an 'adequate' education and be prepared to fight in court to ensure this happens ever be described as idealistic.

Idealistic would mean that my child has any chance of reaching his potential. I've long given up on that hope.

I'll settle with getting through his education not being the 1 in 5 children with High Functioning Autism who have attempted or succeeded at suicide before the age of 25.

DP has spent 20 years helping hundreds of people's children reach their potential, as best he can.

but he cannot fix SN provision. nor can he fix child welfare.

he can fix one school. by every year, making it one step better than it was before. but the starting point was low. the needs are high. and budgets decreasing.

but it is not simple or easy or by any means perfect.

KeepOnKeepingOn1 My child's KS1 SAT paper was 'moderated' down by the teacher assessment too!

YouAre, it sounds to me as if your local authority is acting unlawfully in several respects. If DP's school cannot provide 1:1 support for an individual from its budget, it is open to it to apply for top-up funding and that is what it should be doing. If it cannot do that, or if it is refused, the school should refer the parents to education lawyers who can take action on legal aid to enforce the child's legal entitlement. Doing nothing should not be an option for any responsible Head or SENCO.

zzzzz Although my DC no longer needs 1 to 1 (and has not received it for a long time) we have been waiting an age for the Statement to be updated / ceased, I may be at the opposite end but I feel your frustration.

I would quite happily pass on the funds....I just want the accounting and reporting to be correct...

ALL THESE LIES AND COLLUSION DOES NO ONE ANY GOOD!!!!!!!

The mismanagement of assessment, as described by KeepOnKeepingOn1 does not help matters either.

Of course the TES thread (which some claim is largely fictional - I don't think so) shows mismanagement of more than just assessment.

It is week 8 of term for me and I am completely and utterly exhausted. I am so sick and tired of reading that I am feckless/ lying/ don't give a flying f@ck about kids/ lazy/ generally worthless. I do the very best I can with the lousy support provision I am given. I am currently worried sick about a huge group of kids who are absolutely miles behind and who all need a huge amount of SFL that they are simply not getting as there is no budget for it. My TA tells me I will feel better when I share my concerns at Parents' Night. I don't know that unburdening will make me feel any better.

I don't work in England so I don't work within the same legal framework. However, here's my reality. 21 kids, 6 have EAL. Only 2 of them have any support from EAL staff- 40 mins a week shared between 2 kids. 1 child with significant learning and physical needs. They have 1 hour a day TA support. 6 kids are in need of significant SFL input. They get 40 mins, 3 times a week as a group. There are a small group who have significant emotional problems. They have some, often erratic and crisis led, support from outside agencies. On top of that I have 2 highly able kids who also need teacher input. Then there are the rest of the class. I cannot do anymore than I am doing. My LA have no money for any extra funding. Nothing.

When I have had/ have a 1:1 I use them in a range of ways. Sometimes I will use them to sit with and support the child in order for them to access the curriculum. Other times they will take a small group, including the statements child, and work with them. Yes, this means your child is sharing their time with someone else. But it also means they are having the opportunity to work successfully with their peers. Sometimes my TA is no-where near your child, I am. I am working with them because I'm their teacher and I need to know what they can do/ teach. In these situations my TA will be with another child, possibly even one with no audited hours. Audited hours are like hens's teeth- not having them doesn't mean they don't need them.

I am not setting out to scupper your child's future. I got into teaching because I believe in the power of education. However, as the years go on, there is less and less support for the children who need it. A full time TA and appropriate curriculum does not always stop a child from hitting adults and classmates. I don't think it is okay that colleagues are assaulted not do I think it should be regarded as less important than a child staying in school. I'm horrified that some posters don't see this as a huge concern.

I have several times told parents when their child's support has been directed elsewhere. I always make it clear to them I will deny I told them if they say it came from me. But I do it because it is the right thing to do. The vast majority of teachers are trying the bloody best they can, in trying circumstances, with no resources.

*nor do I think

'It is week 8 of term for me and I am completely and utterly exhausted. I am so sick and tired of reading that I am feckless/ lying/ don't give a flying f@ck about kids/ lazy/ generally worthless.'

Goodness me, stop reading whatever it is you're reading. Also, consider moving to England where resources for children with statements is protected in law so you won't have so little resources to work with, for them at least.

And as a teacher/school you can put in applications for statutory assessments for any child you feel requires additional resources that the school can't manage, and if successful guarantees that those children get provision that CAN'T be removed.

If it were only that simple. We put lots of requests in and they are always backed up by Ed Psych. However, this doesn't mean we get the hours. A request for 1:1? You will be lucky to get 10 hours.

Even the title of this thread suggests we are all lying and lazy and hoping to somehow make life worse, not better for our kids.

Also, consider moving to England where resources for children with statements is protected in law so you won't have so little resources to work with, for them at least.

but in reality you would not have funding for full resources.

indyandlara
Even the title of this thread suggests we are all lying and lazy and hoping to somehow make life worse, not better for our kids.

The title for the thread makes sense if you read the links to threads. Teachers on the TES thread admit to all of these things. You have admitted to hiding the truth.

I have several times told parents when their child's support has been directed elsewhere. I always make it clear to them I will deny I told them if they say it came from me

Do you expect parents to be happy about this? I am sympathetic but I should cannot support wrong doing. Someone had to let people know...

indy I am sorry for you, sorry for children like mine, sorry for children not like mine. ALL this is no good!

'but in reality you would not have funding for full resources.'

You would have full resources because the law requires you to. Can you imagine saying you don't have enough funding for protective helmets on a building site?

It is never about funding but priorities. If you can't fulfil the legal requirements of a job you don't just shrug, say you are doing the best you can and hide the fact from your clients or your employers (i.e. taxpayers), you raise fecking HELL!!!

so how successful has your hell raising been?

I haven't been forced to break the law, put vulnerable children at risk of never living independently or encouraged to lie about pilfered provision. I'm really not sure of your point.

Furthermore, my paid employment, funded by the taxpayer does not require me to adhere to any such laws.

so how successful has your hell raising been?

It remains to be seen....Raised the profile of these issues though and you have had the opportunity to contribute.

I am more resolute in my own mind as to what is out there. I certainly was not imagining it all....