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?

whatever you do won't be good enough indy for the two teacher bashers on here.

Whatever you think of me Swallowed my child is blameless in all this...

Children are not paid, they have not cheated the system. Yet they are the ones which suffers due to this. These are vulnerable children in many cases yet once again they lose out.

Incidentally I have expressed my sympathy time and time again for teachers on this thread. I have also thanked them for their comments and appreciate greatly those who have been very frank.

However like it or not teachers are professionals and part of our education system. They are paid to be accountable. It is their job to teach within the law.

If teachers hadn't been 'interfering' with the official records of need by moving resources around illegally, Local Authorities would not have the picture they now do of schools resource needs.

but a teacher would not be 'breaking the law'.
they are not personally obliged to provide extra support in any way.

YouAre Statements are enshrined in law and are legally enforceable.

I would have thought official records are meant to be truthful, lying on them would be tantamount to slander, it damages a child's reputation.

but that does not mean the teacher is breaking the law.

they cannot conjure up an extra TA.

^I mean libel

If I steal because I have no money it is still stealing.

And libel is against the law.

but the teacher is not legally bound to meet the statement.

They are legally obliged to tell the truth on a child's records.

what are the policing going to arrest them? (criminal law)
could you sue them personally? (civil law)

YouAre I possibly could...sue that is.

Not the point though, a law is still law with or without enforcement.

yes you could sue but not the teacher or school. you could take the LA to court. they are responsible for statements.

so DP would not be breaking the law. nor would any teacher or HT.

YouAre May be (I'm not sure) but I am sure a teacher would be breaking the terms of their employment if they were responsible for deception preventing the adherence to a Statement.

Added to which consider this, if a police officer is involved in corruption or a doctor or anyone commits fraud, they can be personally prosecuted.

YouAre And I don't see why you are trying to defend illegal actions.

I thought you said your DP does adhere to Statements of SEN since the ones children have at his school are non specific enough to allow for flexibility?

YouAre Not worried for him are you?

I think that parents have been very restrained on this thread given the awful experiences that many of our children have had and the damage to their well-being that has been sustained collecting evidence of failure. DS1 is now placed in OOC Indi ss so hopefully the damage caused can be healed and he won't end up with severe mental health problems or dead.

This is not all 'systemic' or structural. Individual teachers/sencos/heads can make a huge difference.

For example, I have personal experience of head and Senco making an unfounded emergency referral to SS. This is a deliberate waste of public resources and means that social workers have to waste time and resources. Is this legal?

I also have personal experience of a wonderful head (3rd school m/s primary) who took early retirement and was replaced by a bureaucrat.

'yes you could sue but not the teacher or school. you could take the LA to court. they are responsible for statements.'

How could a parent take the LA to court for failure to provide the provision in a statement when the school pretend that the statement provision is going ahead?

But are you really saying that it is okay to break a law that will put a vulnerable child at risk of making it to adulthood, or to adulthood with enough skills to survive it, because it can't be traced back to you as an individual?

Are you saying that?

I'm feeling decidedly queezy....

Why isn't the MN campaign on this?

^because it can't be traced back to you as an individual?

Are you saying that?^

no. you are confusing different people's roles and responsibilities.

How do you do that then, Star?

YouAre You really need to explain then. What you have said is not coming across very well at all...

Maybe you should get your DP to post -straight from the horse's mouth so to speak?