Progress 8 - less focus on C/D borderline and consequences for grade 4 students

[noblegiraffe]

So we are now all about progress 8, it's progress that counts and getting a B to an A is as valuable as getting a D to a C (except for slight quibbles about numeric values). This is seen as a good thing, all pupils will get support to reach their targets.

What I'm seeing: There is a limited amount of maths intervention available to help students - 1-1 and small group tuition at tutor times and so on. Previously this was focused on C/D borderline kids to help them get the magic C grade and boost the school headline figures. Now it is given to students who are falling well short of their target grade, who need the double weighted boost of an increase in a maths grade to improve their overall score.
I teach several students who are sitting on a 3, and with extra support could reach a 4 - the key grade where they won't have to resit in sixth form, and which will ensure access to certain college courses. Getting a 4 would be extremely important to them. They are not on the intervention lists, and not getting the help that they would have got in previous years, instead it's going to other, higher (and lower) achieving students. The grade that is important to them is no longer important to the school.

In practice 'more support for all' seems to mean 'less support for those to whom it really matters'.

Failing kids compared to the private sector is obvious, otherwise people wouldn't bother to spend vast amounts of money on private education.

With intervention, I suppose it depends on whether you see some students getting intervention as a positive for those students, or a negative for the others who don't get it.

All students deserve a basic standard of education. We can't afford to give them all a 'private school' level of education, so should we not give any of them anything extra? PP kids? Kids with SEN? Kids with cancer who miss a bunch of school?

SEN is somewhere between 10-20% of the cohort.

Which makes it less easy, rather than more easy to identify, surely? If 1 in 5 kids has a special need, then how obvious is it going to be?

ranging from the severely autistic who struggle to even get into class, to the A* students, plus everything in-between. It is simply impossible for them to be on top of every issue.

Yet these are the people who are the biggest supporters of Comprehensive education. You can't say that you want to include the whole spectrum but then say that you are not able to be on top of an issue (I repeat: in this case, that affects 20% of the cohort).

IDK See what I mean when I say that the attitude still prevails!
Yes. Because it's that simple for the majority of children without additional needs. Intervention culture in some schools has gone mad. I've got friends who ring up parents to discuss little Timmy's performance and behaviour and are met with "but we think he has attention issues and he needs to be sat here in the class and what 1-1 are you offering him"... this is for a child who the teacher is saying isnt workinh in class. Why should they work extta hours for no pay?

Now if we want a discussion about funding and screening for SEND that's a totally different issue. Similar to children not being able to get mental health support because CAMHS has had funding slashed. I have massively struggled to get children refered for screening who i thibk need it. Its not a case that teachers cant be bothered. Services simply are pushed. I've done 6 refer forms this year.

On the flip side, we also meet parents who insist there are issues and in our judgement there aren't and actually telling the child endlessly that they have an 'undiagnosed issue' is more unhelpful.
I can think of a few times where parents pushed and pushed for assessments for an array of changing needs and my schools have had reservations about it, listened to the parents, got the children tested and qualified educational psychologists found nothing. No need at all. One parents then said they were annoyed at the assessment team coming in and it was "just unlucky" that a team of assessors couldnt see what the parent said was the issue. Came into parent evening and was right in my face about it.

Which makes it less easy, rather than more easy to identify, surely? If 1 in 5 kids has a special need, then how obvious is it going to be?

I give up.

IDK you say 'oh teachers should be on top of an issue that affects 20% of the cohort' like it is a simple thing that just needs a quick training day to sort. Do you have any idea what you're talking about when you mention that 20% figure?

Who is going to pay for 20% of children to have a detailed assessment by an educational psychologist, possibly a developmental paediatrician, occupational therapist, psychiatrist, physiotherapist etc, etc?

Here's what people want teachers to be good at:

The subject that they teach
Teaching - actually getting that subject across to the students
Behaviour management - controlling the children well enough to be able to teach
Data management - tracking the kids, identifying issues, using data to focus on weak areas
SEND - all of them, from autism, to ADHD, to ADD, to OCD, to SpLD, to physical disabilities which covers hearing and sight impairment, epilepsy, lack of limbs, inability to walk, pacemakers, chronic fatigue and on and on. Teachers should be able to instantly not only deal effectively with these students but also diagnose them.
Mental health - spot self-harm, depression, suicidal tendencies and so on.
All society's problems - sorted through teaching PSHE.

We are having problems hiring teachers who even know their subject.

IDK - I repeat, my db was in a grammar school which wasn't on top of the issue of barriers to learning, despite excluding the majority of the spectrum. What on earth makes you think selective education would improve this issue? Would you rather your ds had been failed by a grammar school?

With identifying SEN, I think it is very hard for secondary teachers because they only see a child for a few hours a fortnight, even at GCSE level. They don't get to see how the pupil is performing in other subjects. They don't see how hard they revise or try over their homework. So they may notice a disparity between engagement in class and written work or test results, but they won't be able to tell if that is due to a SpLD or idleness.

Only the parent (and only if engaged) can see a cross section, and can see issues appearing consistently across subjects.

I don't blame DD1's school for not picking up her SpLD earlier (though tbh I do think her English teacher took her eye off the ball), but I do massively appreciate the support she got from the English department once the effect it was having on her English Lang paper was recognised.

noble You missed out recognising signs of neglect or other abuse.

I think IDK's son was failed by a grammar school......

Oh yes Teen, and identifying those at risk of radicalisation!

IDK

Yet these are the people who are the biggest supporters of Comprehensive education. You can't say that you want to include the whole spectrum but then say that you are not able to be on top of an issue (I repeat: in this case, that affects 20% of the cohort).

It's the autistic kids who are unable to participate in lessons that are most let down by the system. There are very few places in special schools available for them. They would be much better served in a specialised environment rather than the top 10% who are coping perfectly well in their top sets.

I think our SEN kids are fairly well catered for: tested for access arrangements, given TA support, time outs, extra time, separate seating, readers, scribes, laptops, blue paper, large fonts, etc. My DS was more let down at junior school than secondary.

Training on SEN really is minimal, please don't blame teachers for not spotting something that it takes professionals to diagnose.

I try to teach classes as though all the students have special needs, my PowerPoints are usually plain blue with sans serif text, unless I have a student who needs a different colour or font, then the slides will be for that student's preference (not yet had two students wanting different colour backgrounds but I'm assuming I will at some point).

My handouts have all the essential information in, or gaps for that information and I ensure they are filled before students leave.

Videos are subtitled if possible, if not then I try to get a transcript or at least a written summary.

Can you tell I'm dyslexic?

There is no reason all teachers cannot do this with their resources. You have to create them anyway so they might as well be inclusive.

It's not my job to diagnose, but it is my job to get my knowledge out of my head and in to the student's, along with the skills to analyse the information.

As for progress 8 - well teaching should be about enabling all students to reach their potential and giving them the skills to continue with the next stage of their life/education.

Unfortunately league tables, stats and various measures do not allow for this.

sashh but you have only described how you teach as though your classes are dyslexic.

I am fuming. I am going to quote noblegiraffe from above
"With intervention, I suppose it depends on whether you see some students getting intervention as a positive for those students, or a negative for the others who don't get it."

I have now seen NG on a different thread this morning claiming that "My DS has been assessed by an OT ... We were given exercises to do at home and they also saw him in school and made suggestions for adjustments (school also have put a program in place for him, he is taken out to do some motor skills work each week)."

So she likes it when her DS gets extra support but gets annoyed when she is expected to do the same for other peoples' DC and was very sneering to a another teacher who did make the effort.
I know that it is considered bad form on MN to 'stalk' from one thread to another but I couldn't let this breath-taking hypocrisy lie.

Er, IDK I think it should be fairly obvious that there's a big difference between academic intervention in order to boost a DC over a GCSE grade boundary and an SEN intervention in order to help a DC access the curriculum.

And actually yes, it is pretty fucking rude to take a poster's supportive post about SEN on one thread and try to use it to point score on a different thread in a totally stupid and illogical way.

I agree with Noble here, there is a clear difference between SEN-intervention, here of a predominanly physical/medicall nature and involving not only SENCO but also external OT/assessment, and academic support. Re-read the OP, and that should be quite clear. And stop the squabbling, please.

fairly obvious that there's a big difference between academic intervention in order to boost a DC over a GCSE grade boundary and an SEN intervention in order to help a DC access the curriculum

You said earlier that you couldn't identify SEN (because it's too common? still can't get my head around that). So how do you know which pupils need academic intervention and which need SEN intervention?

Oh that's who you are. You were complaining that your kid's teachers didn't spot they had issues because they were doing ok relative to their peers at school.

My DC was referred for assessment because he is not doing ok at school. Obviously kids on the lower end of the SEN spectrum will be easier to spot. That should be obvious.

We know he needs SEN intervention because he was assessed by professionals. The teachers did not diagnose.

Is there any further nosy info you would like about my DC on this thread about academic intervention?

Obviously kids on the lower end of the SEN spectrum will be easier to spot. That should be obvious.

My DS scored 5th percentile on one test. You think it would be obvious to his teachers but, no, they never spotted all the spikes in his profile.

this thread about academic intervention?

No-one on MN 'owns' any threads. Threads can run any which way they want. In your OP you said "In practice 'more support for all' seems to mean 'less support for those to whom it really matters'." Who are you to say that my DS's underachievement doesn't really matter - it matters to him!

My DS scored 5th percentile on one test.

So? You do realise that there are SEN that are rather more visible?

No one owns any threads, but as you said yourself, it's bad form to stalk posters and drag posts from one thread into a completely different discussion on another. So how about you don't?

So? You do realise that there are SEN that are rather more visible?

Did you really just say that.

Ok so you've got two kids. One is obviously behind their peers in primary school and the other has processing difficulties which means that they will eventually be awarded extra time. The second kid is so bright and hardworking that they are able to mask their processing difficulties and get a string of top grades at GCSE.

Which SEN do you think is easier for teachers to spot?